Hello Folks,

I am just coming back to SR from a long hiatus and just picked up the anniversary edition. One thing I notice is the new rule on the +1 DV for the net hits on direct combat spells. In searching the forums I see this was a recent addition to the game (being put in the anniversary edition). Do most people games ignore this rule or go with it?

Thanks.

The extra drain only applies if you choose to use the hit to raise DV on the spell.

Really, I see no need to nerf combat spells. Sure, they're powerful, but not much more so than an SMG. That people choose to treat Reaction as a more important attribute than Willpower isn't my problem. Also, combat spells can be counterspelled as well. So I tend to ignore it.

every game and group I'm in, uses this rule. Except one game, where we banned Direct Combat Spells at all

How many of your combat casters overcast and multicast?

While I won't argue for or against nerfing combat spells (last having played SR 2), I'd say that's not really a balanced comparison. Reaction is much cheaper to boost than willpower, and (unlike willpower) can be taken to augmented max pretty easily without any undesired side effects. In sr1-3 (with variable TNs), a 6 willpower was decent defense against many spells; not so much in Sr 4. Similarly, vision obscurement (smoke, flash packs) are not as effective as it used to be (though that goes for anti-bullet defense as well).
As for counterspelling- sure, yah, combat spells might face counter spelling, if you have mages on both sides. Bullets, however, face armor, which is much more common.

Unless they just dont know about multicasting i would guess 100% them multicast and 100% those who don't know about multicasting overcast every time.

If Gm i played with suggested that we should use this optional rule, i would hit him in the head with the Anniversary corebook and then when he gets out of daze explain to him why that rule is one of the stupidest optional rules in the whole game.

Thus the rule of +1 DV per used net hit is dumb.

"Hmm...3 extra damage for 3 DV, or... +1 DV, then doubled, to do twice as much damage...and I resist drain twice....hmmm..."

Hell, you can multicast overcast sunbolts fairly efficiently under those rules.
(F7 -> 1 drain, IIRC?)

Don't forget the OTHER drawback of multicast: You split your pool... thus making spells resistable again.

Say we have Mr. McWillstrong (Will 6) and you want him down: Do you cast one sure spell with your 14 dice or do you split your pool? If split he may (depending on how you do it resist one surely or maybe even has a chance at soaking both.

Pfft.
First off, spells are so ridiculously hard to resist in the first place this doesn't even matter.*
Second, if the target does appear to be shrugging off spells ("I got 4 hits, there's no way he resists that without help") you stop slugging multicast spells at him and go back to big-dice-pool nukers.

Or you spend a point of Edge on your next multicast.

Voila.

*Average willpower stat is 3, with counter spelling you can get to 9 (max is 6 natural, 9 augmented bringing the best ever up to 12 and 15 with counterspelling). Average casting pool is over 9, generally 14, and can hit 17 pretty easy.

Correct.

The rule I've been toying with is swapping the drain code for Direct and Indirect spells - the one in the sidebar from Street Magic. Basically -2 Drain Value from all Indirect and +2 DV on all Direct. That keeps balance, makes sense, and makes Indirect more attractive while still letting Indirect have their niche.

Thats why my combat caster have about 14 dice per spell when casting 2 combat spells.

If I'm casting with 14 dice on a single spell, with a spellcaster built for multicasting, I'll probably be rolling 9 on the multicating attempts, for combat spells anyway. Without gear.
Edited for correctness:
An F5 Spell Focus would make that 19 dice on the single cast, 14 and 14 on a double-cast, or 13, 12 and 12 on a triple-cast. Or heck, if we're cheesing it anyway, 17, 10 and 10 on an unevenly split triple-cast. All the way up to (Spellcasting) times 10 dice, if you're feeling confident about the drain.

Do remember that modifiers are only factored in after the split, for each separate roll. Spec + Mentor + Focus makes for a nice modifier.
It's cheese, yes, but these kind of rules tend to enforce that, in my experience.

only one focus may add his dice to a single test.

Whoops. My bad, let me correct that.

I find that optional rule to be wholly unnecessary. IMO direct combat spells are balanced. They are powerful yes, but not without cost. Let's look at an example.

Runner A(Casting Force 5 Mana Bolt): 13 Dice (5 magic + 6 skill + 2 specialty) = 4.33 average hits
Runner A Drain: 3(base) - 10(5 in each drain attribute) = average 0 drain

Average Damage = 8.33(force 5 + 4.33 hits - 1 hit on defender resistance)

Runner B(Using Ares Predator IV): 17 dice (7 agility + 6 skill + 2 specialty + 2 smartlink) = 5.66 average hits = 4.66 average net hits(1 average hit on defender dodge)
Runner B Damage = 7(5 base + 4.66 net hits - 2.66 defender hits(assuming 3 body and armor vest))

So assuming these two fairly standard started characters, the mage does an average of 1.33 damage more than the pistol user....but the pistol user can attack twice, and even though the magician will usually take all the drain, there is always that risk which does not exist for gun users. Furthermore, while the magician can be optimized a little more at start(using a few higher numbers/relevant qualities), that gun user could be a lot better, with much higher numbers, and better automatic weapons. It is possible for a starting character to use a ares alpha to make a long burst and a short burst with no recoil and do more damage than even an overcasted manabolt, without any real drawback or cost(and overcasting is always dangerous). And while it is true armor can reduce the effectiveness of guns, counterspelling, wards, and background count can reduce the power of magic by a lot.

Direct damage spells are good, but honestly, guns are better, and the optional rules in SR4A makes direct combat spells pretty worthless.

House rules for Direct Combat spells and their increased drain can be found here (for using that optional rule at all), here (for discussion of the edition changes) and here (for diluting them).

wow, TheOOB, you got it so wrong...

Runner A(Casting Force 9 Stun Bolt): 17 Dice (5 magic + 6 skill + 2 specialty +2 mentor +2 power focus) = 5.66 average hits
Runner A Drain: 3(base) - 12(5 in each drain attribute +2 fetish) = average 0 drain

Average Damage = 14.66 stun (force 9 + 5.66 hits - 1 hit on defender resistance)
with the benefit of not getting prosecuted for murder


i corrected your example

.
No, no you didn't, and don't act like you did. That is a very optimized spellcaster that you are unlikely to see at character creation. There is still a notable risk of drain damage, and said damage would be physical...which is bad.

And you forgot the optimized gun character.

20 dice: Agility, 6 Automatics, 2 specialty, 2 smart link, 1 reflex recorder = 6.66 hits = 5.66 net hits.
Assuming enough recoil compensation to cover all recoil with ares alpha, it is possible at creation, and more likely than a force 2 power foci

Using EX explosive rounds pre resist damage is: 16.66/13.66(6 base, 1 ex-explosive, 5.66 net hits, +5/+2 long/short burst, -1 dodge)

Post resist damage(assuming 3 body and armored vest for average net hits of 2.33 on resist) is : 25.66((16.66 - 2.33)+(13.66 - 2.33))

Guns win, and didn't even risk any drain.

nub5, the rule you are referring to is an optional rule, one which was very poorly thought out. Even if you think direct combat spells are overpowered, there are much better ways to fix them than a rule that penalizes you for success, encourages overcasting (which is the area where mages can potentially get overpowered), and generally nerfs what should be a combat mage's bread-and-butter spells into uselessness.

And how.

If you must nerf spells, make it so drain must be healed naturally

It's an optional rule? I only have the anniversary edition and I did not see where it stated that was optional. I appreciate all the feedback on this subject and I"m not optimized for spellcasting so I will look into treating it as other spells (ignore the +1 Drain DV per hit).

It's not optional since SR4a.

From the SR4A Changes Document:

It was originally not an optional rule in the pdf copies, but they changed it after the outcry.

I assume that you both know how unlikely it is to roll no misses with 10 or 12 dice and simply left the expectation calculation out of your sums for brevity, but even so it is notable that averages don't get you off the hook with drain resistance. You can average more successes than the drain value and still build up drain damage over time because scoring surplus hits on your drain resistance roll doesn't counteract drain damage you suffered on poorer rolls. In other words, your calculations might average out but your condition monitor won't.

In this example, 12 drain resistance dice will achieve the necessary 3+ hits about 82% of the time. About 13% of the time only two successes will be rolled (resulting in 1 drain), about 5% of the time only one success will be rolled (resulting in 2 drain) and about 1% of the time (oh the perils of rounding) no successes will be rolled (resulting in 3 drain). So for each cast you will average something close to a quarter of a drain. Not much admittedly, but it is non-zero and in this case physical.

In TheOOB's version it comes to something in the region of 0.44 drain damage per cast. Again, might not seem like much but you might cast it four times in a single combat if the enemy is multitudinous and diffuse, maybe more, and now your average drain for the encounter is near to two boxes that can't be healed magically on top of any damage sustained from enemy actions.

In my copy of the book it is, in both the printed Copy and the PDF... You might want to look a bit more closely...

Ahhh... but a simple shot from a Medkit will reduce that to nothing (assuming a good roll for the medic, of course)... Not that I agree with that, but that is how it is...

I think the reason why this rule was put into the game was to limit direct spells to only doing their base damage (DV = Force Rating).
SR4 wanted elemental indirect spells to have more variable effects, and for direct spells to have more precise effects.
The simplest fix is to limit direct spells to only doing base damage.
As long as the mage has positive net hits on the opposed test, the spell is successful and only inflicts base damage (DV = Force Rating).

In my pdf version, it isn't. Checking on the print version thankfully reveals differently though. Thanks for the pointer.

No Worries... The PDF was updated, you should be able to obtain an updated copy from wherever you downloaded it originally...

One thing I've learned is that using this rule tends to strongly, strongly, strongly favor overcasting. And, in other words, does not "fix" direct combat spells (especially stunbolt) at all.

Quoted for Truth...

Belive you me, I know that drain adds up. I mentioned that there is always a risk of drain, but thank you for including math. Honestly, guns are far more effective at killings things for far less investment in magic, and barring a critical glitch you never need worry about damaging yourself with them. Adding that there are so many effective counters to magic, many of which are very nasty(background count, drones, counterspelling, mana static spell), I don't think direct combat spells need a nerf.