Had this one bouncing around in my head for a while, and I figured I'd share it with you guys in case anyone finds it interesting / useful.

OK, so we have the five types of spell; Combat, Manipulation, Health, Illusion, and Detection.
The idea with this rule is that we limit magicians to picking their spells from just 3 categories. To make up for this, one of those 3 gets to be their Favoured type, which they get cheaper spells from (2BP during character gen, 3 Karma during play).

So, for example, you could pick Illusion, Manipulation, and Health as your categories, with Manipulation as your Favoured. The character cannot learn any Combat or Detection spells, but they can buy all Manipulation spells for 2 BP each during character gen, and 3 Karma each later on.

As an option, players can choose to play a Focused mage; they get 2 Favoured categories, but all other types are barred to them. So they buy all their spells for 2 BP / 3 Karma, but they can only buy from the two categories they chose.

My thinking here is that we're not really nerfing mages; indeed, we're giving them a nice price break to make up for the added restrictions. Instead, we're killing off the standard mage build, which cherry picks the best spells from each category and ignores the rest. By reducing the spread of spells people can choose from, we make players go deeper into the categories available to them when selecting their spells, resulting in more interesting builds. I'm particularly fascinated by what happens when a player gives up access to, say, Combat spells.

Anyways, use it, change it, ignore it, post your thoughts, have fun with it, whatever.

Rather like aspected mages of previous editions - On the whole I like the idea, I've thought about re-introducing them into my game, but haven't gotten around to doing the rules for it, so I always enjoy seeing what others thoughts are on it. Making spells that small amount cheaper is a pretty minor bonus compared to loosing access to to that many spells though - I'd actually be tempted to change the cost of Magic attribute in some way to encourage this sort of action. Earlier editions using the point build system encouraged it by making aspected magicians Priority B, which now that I think about it may be more in line with your thoughts of reducing spell cost, as I at least always used that to let me have priority A resources for the 50 spell points ;-}

Lucy

The thing is, the limitation on spell selection doesn't actually make mages less powerful per se; it just stops any one mage from using all of the possible abuses. It forces the player to pick and choose which things they want to be good at, but still allows them to be just as good at them.

Yes, part of the intent here is still to reign mages in a little, but in a way that makes for more interesting characters, instead of just nerfing them.

Another idea is to make it a ladder of spells. A mage could go in the order of Manip then Illusion then Health then Detection then Combat and then get a +3 +1 +0 -1 -3 modifier when using those spells be it for costs or dice pools or whatever you think is best. It encourages mages to specialize thru positive reinforcement instead of outrite restricting them.

Both are great ideas, I like them.

I really don't think the spell discount is worth the added restrictions.

Why not? What makes you look at it and say "Nope, Not worth it?"

Keep the Faith

Crushing loss of versatility in exchange for a 'moderate' discount on spell purchases? Its like breaking someone legs and giving them discount crutches.

But, it is perfectly viable if it fits the character concept... Not all Magicians are Uber-Versatile, and many tend to concentrate in a more refined selection of spells... I see this as a perfectly acceptable option for such a Magician... it has flavor...

I am guessing that you would never actually play a mage with limited access to spells... You should try it sometime, it is very fun... I have a perfectly good magician who specializes in a single School of Magical Thought (Manipulation)... he has accumulated more than 20 Spells, and not one of them is a Combat Spell (with another 20+ waiting in the wings for me to acquire the requisite amount of Karma to purchase them)... and you know what? He is a joy to play, and is very versatile indeed... One of the more versatile characters in the group actually (more so than the other mage we have in the group)...

Keep the Faith

That's not a refined selection, that's a limited selection.

Really, I'll tell you what. You play that mage, and I'll play a A.I. in an otomu, and we'll see who's more versatile. You're one trick pony equates to absolutely nothing in any situation where they do not have direct access to a mind. So against a done, gravity, poisons, injury, pain, bullets, or anything else for that matter you're pretty much screwed. All the power to you though.

Didn't know it was a contest.

I just find the claim that a single tool in your tool box makes you more versitle then someone with access to the whole hardware isle in target a little surprising.

...when all you've got is a THOR shot, orbital bombardment sounds like the answer to all kinds of problems.

Seriously. Mages have enough ways to powerfully screw with your day, that dropping some of them seems like a non-issue to me.

Especially if it's just an option. You want to be the omni-mage swiss knife? Go nuts. You want to specialize and have more spells in one area by giving up others, also cool.

I guess I didn't quite explain the intent here. This is not supposed to be an option that GM's offer to players, but rather a house rule that applies to all mages, as a way of reigning in the more abusive / boring mage builds a little, and making players think about mages in more creative ways. The discount is not intended as a balance so much as being a spoonful of sugar.

Dr. Fun, I think it has enough merit that some players will take it anyway as an option. As Mordinvan demonstrated, however, it could lead to lots of player bitching if you impose it unilaterally.

Additionally, you could make a pretty good argument that the fluff for SR (LOTS of magical tradtions, etc) could easily support a "generalist" able to do all types of spells. I suppose if you wanted to really go all out to encourage it, you could make all spells for a generalist cost 1 extra karma (which ends up being double the specialist), but I wouldn't go further than that.

...and honestly, most of the REALLY borked things mages can do are a result of summoning, rather than spells.


Not trying to sound too critical, I actually rather like the idea. Just want to point out some counter-thoughts.

Yep, and then because I didn't take combat skills I have to mind control all my opponents now, and then you'll get tried of that really fast. Without combat spells, the only way to be effective in combat is to make opponents hurt themselves and each other, which you'd do through mob mind, and perversions of the mask spell.

That is not true at all. My mage doesnt know any combat spells at all. There are lots of spells that dont rely on killing people and you dont even have to focus on killing people at all. Thats what guns are for if you really need to. If anything is boring its playing the same old mage using the same old combat spells in every single confrontation.

Ok, so someone is reaching for their smg, and their about 10m away from you in an open room. What spells would you cast at this guy? You can't use combat spells.

Petrify, bind, shapechange, turn to goo, mist, glue, barrier, armor, invisibility, phantasm, orgasm, agony, bugs, confusion, & hot potato off the top of my head.

Why are you making an assumption that I am a one trick pony? Have I ever stated that? I am pretty sure that I have not... as for hurting the Ottomo... you don't need mind oriented spells to do that... any good physical illusion could screw you six ways from Sunday if the mage is even a little bit intelligent about it... as for the strictly Manipulation Spells, ever heard of Levitate? or Petrify? or Turn to Goo? or Ignite (that body will eventually burn after all)? Those are all in the base book... there are a ton more in Street Magic that are also very useful... Physical Spells are just as much a theat to Machines as they are to Living Organisms (And the character I was describing has access to more of the Physical Manipulation Spells than the Mental Manipulation spells)... Not to mention the useful things that a Spirit can bring to the Table... If you listen to Dumpshock here, Spirits are vastly overpowered, and though I do not necessarily agree with them, they are at least very useful, even if they are below Force 6 in Power.

And as for what a human (or metahuman) is susceptible to, whether or not I am a mage is irrelevant, as most of Metahumanity is susceptible to the same things, so it is not really singularly applicable to my situation anyway... And yes, Drones are somewhat immune to such things... However, a drone is not immune to having something dropped on them, nor are they immune from the damage taken from falls if they are significant enough (through a simple Levitation spell afterall).

Every character has strength and weaknesses... your AI has a lot of weaknesses compared to a living, breathing Metahuman, though most of them could be said to be fluff reasons rather than Mechanical Reasons... But the biggest that I can see is that you are Software... Your disadvantages are somewhat more subtle, though, I will give you that... It does not mean that you cannot be destroyed though... Drones are not the end all, be all of invulnerability...

And further more, just because I am a Mage does not mean that I do not have access to technology that can harm you... MAgic is not the end all, be all of a well designed character... I have jkust as much access to things like weapons, programs and yes, even Drones that are just as useful as your Otomo... Don't make the mistake that I am a one trick pony... I tend to build well rounded characters, and do not rely upon "One Trick" to stay alive in the Shadows.

Anyways... It is definitely an interesting debate... I like the option to have access to a limited number of "Schools" of magic for the tradeoff of a cheaper Spell cost... it is intriguing, and I might bring that to our GM for consideration... You, of course, see it as a Gimped option, and that is your perrogative... I do not tend to create characters with the sole purpose of having the most Uber Character that I can... I tend to create living, breathing characters that are playable... Would you call them gimped? Probably... But many of hte Players at my table think that hte characters I make are extrememly interesting, and they often can do things, where the Specialist would have trouble... Again, here on DUmpshock, if you are not playing something with a Dice Pool close to , or over, 20 Dice, tehn you have not created your character correctly. Those kind of characters are very specialized at what they do, make no mistake, but they are not all that versatile at all... They relyu upon other to cover their weaknesses. On the other hand, I tend to create a character that had a life before Chargen, and as such, you cannot rely upon the mysterious "Invisible Friends" to cover things... my dice pools may be less (and sometimes significanlty less in the cases of the Pornomancer, Climbing Master, Optimized Technomancer, Ultimate Healer, and Ultimate Gunbunnies), but then again, I do not subscribe to the crede that you need 30+ Dice to succeed (as most of those builds possess)...

Ultimately, I play this game to create interesting and intriguing stories... Stories do not rely upon Dice Pools, they rely upon Personality... Your character is not a group of statistics, it is the Personality that is the main focus; the statistics are just there to cover any "Mechanical" necessities that are needed from time to time...

Keep the Faith Mordinvan...

You really do have a rather limited opinion of Mages it seems... You do not need Combat Spells to Be effective... they are just a "Tool" in your toolbox is all... some people rely upon those types of spells to get where tehy want to go, and others do not, and yet they arrive at the exact same point... Unrestricted use of Combat spells causes just as much in game repercussion as unrestricted use of Mental Manipoulations do...

If you are not seeing any consequences for unrestricted magic use in your game, well, then I can understand your point of view... why be subtle when even the overt stuff has no consequences... on the other hand, if magic use in general nets you consequences, just like shooting off a Panther Assault Cannon will net you consequences, then the option (Houserule) described above makes a lot of sense.

As with all things, though, Your Mileage May Vary a great deal depending upon the preferences of your table. I would welcome the above approach, even if it was enforced as a HouseRule rather than an Optional Rule...



This cannot be said enough...



Other than the list of spells that General Pax just used (Note: Shapechange requires a Willing Target, by the way, so not useful in this situation; And also notice, Not one Mental Manipulation in the list), you also have the option of: Taking Cover, Drawing your own weapon and using it, having your spirit use an ability against him, etc. There are myriad ways of moving past any obstacle placed in your path in Shadowrun... Which returns me to a previous point in that Over specialization leads to its own set of consequences.

Keep the Faith

I cast "pull out my silenced Predator IV from it's fast draw holster and shoot the fucker in the head with gel rounds". This has always been an option for Shadowrun mages. That's why the fact that people don't really use 99% of the awesome Shadowrun spell list makes me a sad panda. There's no need for mages to tote around massive amounts of combat spells, and when the total number you can learn is so tightly limited it seems like a real waste.

But if you really want some examples of spells that could ruin that guy's day; Agony, Bugs, Orgasm, Fling, Levitate (my SMG now), Chaos, Hot Potato, Animate (force the gun not to fire), Bind, Control Actions, Control Thoughts, Influence, Shape [Metal], Physical Barrier, Petrify, or Turn To Goo.

It could be reasonably argued that many of these spells would be a more sensible response than a manabolt/stunbolt, since a reasonably tough guy might survive that and still shoot you. Several of the responses on that list remove his ability to shoot you completely.

However that's not even my point. My point is that forcing players to limit their spell selection to just three categories (yes, I'm taking away your toys, cry me a river) makes for much more interesting characters, and much more interesting runs. Every single spell on that list has another legitimate use, aside from just killing people in your way, which means that a mage in this situation is reasonably likely to have at least one of those options available to them. It may not be the best option, but it's an option, and it's much more interesting than the mage just chucking combat spells all day.

And if the mage has decided to focus down to just Health and Detection spells? Then they pull a pistol (using their magical improved reactions) and cap the guy. It's that simple.

I think spells is the area of mages that actually generally works out. Well accept for direct combat spells I think those are borked. Summoning is the bag of tricks that needs the limitations IMO. If you want players to think about mages in creative ways, use the NPC mages in creative ways. The players will want the cool new toy.

I see what your intention is, but I don't think limiting spell selection will have the desired effect. Under the current rules, mages might take the same "essential" spells, but they will possibly take the occasional different spell. Your rules make it less likely that they will do so.

They will be like "Okay, I have manabolt, stunball, heal, increase reflexes, and improved invisibility. I have enough points for two more spells. Maybe I'll get diagnose, to be a better healer, and fashion, because it's a fun spell. Whoops, wait, I can only do Combat, Health, and Illusion spells. Hmmm. Guess I'll just take powerbolt and stealth, then."

I would definitely not want to impose a system like this on all mages. In earlier editions the option to play an aspected mage vs. a full mage gave the ability to have a specialist who was great in his/her area, but had full mages who would look down on them as inferior due to their limitations. Good for mechanics and role-playing. By eliminating full mages you loose just as much of that as they did by eliminating aspected mages. The more I've thought about it, the more I think your cutting costs for spells is probably the right way to do it, and provides plenty of incentive. I almost never played a full mage in SR2, and the incentive for playing an aspected mage was entirely extra spell points at chargen (or whatever else you wanted to use Priority A for). Give it as an option and I bet you have people take it.

Lucy