Dumpshock Forums > 1E SR to 4E SR Magic

Tashiro

Feb 11 2011, 06:59 AM

For those who remember 1E Shadowrun, there were a few things I liked, and which I found absent at around 3E. The first was Anchoring -- you might have seen it in 3E and 4E as a one shot type of thing, a fetish where a detection spell triggers an effect. Each time it's triggered, it needs to be re-enchanted to ensure it can work again.

Well, in 1E, it was re-usable. This was, essentially, a form of enchantment: If X happens, then do Y. The thing is, if spell Y had Concentration, it could remain active as long as X was occurring. If Y didn't have a duration, it would trigger once, but each time the detection spell 'pinged', then it would trigger again. It was a really nifty thing, and one I enjoyed quite a lot. I'm really hoping it comes back at some point.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Edit: Removed thoughts on Combat Spells -- I missed that they fixed that with 4E.

Silly me.

Sephiroth

Feb 11 2011, 07:10 AM

QUOTE (Tashiro @ Feb 11 2011, 02:59 AM)

The other thing however, was Combat Spells. Back in the day, they were allowed to have elemental effects, and I thought that was pretty cool. Combat Elemental Spells were the 'if you can see it you can hit it' sort, while Elemental Manipulations were 'you don't need to see it to hurt it, but you have to aim to hit'. I liked the variety between these two spell types, and it allowed some depth in Combat Spells. Right now, Combat Spells seem very, very limited:

Physical or Mana
Wound or Stun
Area of Effect or Not
Specific or General

That pretty much covers the gamut of combat spells once they removed the elemental spells. I really think they should have kept the elemental combat spells in, just to help add some variety. One of my favourite spells was "SHC" 'Physical Spell, Wounding, Fire Element, Single Target, Human Only'.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I have never played SR1E (far too young for that), so I cannot say that I can speak with certainty on the subject. However, those things I highlighted are very much still in 4E, both in the various elemental effects given in SR4A and SM for combat spells and in the 'have to aim to hit, but don't need to see your target' function of Indirect AoE combat spells. And Sound is probably the niftiest combat elemental effect there is in SR4.

phlapjack77

Feb 11 2011, 07:30 AM

QUOTE (Sephiroth @ Feb 11 2011, 03:10 PM)

I have never played SR1E (far too young for that), so I cannot say that I can speak with certainty on the subject. However, those things I highlighted are very much still in 4E, both in the various elemental effects given in SR4A and SM for combat spells and in the 'have to aim to hit, but don't need to see your target' function of Indirect AoE combat spells. And Sound is probably the niftiest combat elemental effect there is in SR4.

I think what he's saying is, there's direct combat spells, the "if you can see it you can hit it" spells. But those can't have elemental effects.

Then there's indirect combat spells, which are the "aiming" kind, those can have elemental effects.

Me, I still get confused on the Physical/Mana and P/S damage. I always think Mana = Stun damage. Not sure I like that a Mana spell can do P damage.

Tashiro

Feb 12 2011, 07:52 AM

Basically, yeah. I'm wondering why they removed elemental effects from Combat magic -- it looks like the right place to put them. Sure, Manipulation as well, but why not both? They're fundamentally different but should be able to do the same thing.

Eratosthenes

Feb 12 2011, 12:59 PM

QUOTE (Tashiro @ Feb 12 2011, 02:52 AM)

Basically, yeah. I'm wondering why they removed elemental effects from Combat magic -- it looks like the right place to put them. Sure, Manipulation as well, but why not both? They're fundamentally different but should be able to do the same thing.

As they said above: they didn't. The very first spell listed for Combat spells is "Acid Stream".

Doc Byte

Feb 12 2011, 01:38 PM

QUOTE (phlapjack77 @ Feb 11 2011, 08:30 AM)

Me, I still get confused on the Physical/Mana and P/S damage. I always think Mana = Stun damage. Not sure I like that a Mana spell can do P damage.

It's quite easy: Mana spells can only affect living beings while physical spells can a affect both living beings and dead matter.

phlapjack77

Feb 12 2011, 02:33 PM

QUOTE (Doc Byte @ Feb 12 2011, 09:38 PM)

It's quite easy: Mana spells can only affect living beings while physical spells can a affect both living beings and dead matter.

Hehe - yeah, I get the distinction...it's just that I keep thinking a "Physical" spell will do "P"hysical damage, so that must mean Mana spells wouldn't do P damage...plus Mana seems so much more "stun"-like...