Eratta changed that for SR4 as well...

A force 4 power foci is way too expensive for a magician to get a creation without serious hampering themselves in other areas, especially considering that magicians don't have much else to spend then nuyen on during play when compared to their team-mates. For the same price you'd spend getting and binding the foci, you could get good at gunplay. I never discounter specilizations or mentor spirit bonuses either, I simple noted that while a specialization for a weapon skill is a given when doing math, it's not for spellcasters, as they have many viable options that are not combat spells.

Also, as mentioned above, specializations and foci are added before the dice pool is split for multiple spellcasting, the rules say that pretty clearly.

Where does it say that in the rule books?
Even the FAQ says that foci are not added before the split. Unless you interpret that as they are never added, they must be added afterwards

Foci are included in



This ain't rocket science.

So it's Rocket Surgery?

Rocket something, for sure.

So, your argument is that a force 4 focus isn't powerful or versatile enough when you can get gunplay instead? Last I checked, gunplay is only good for shooting people in the face, an ability which is frankly kinda redundant when you can already melt faces with your mind. Meanwhile, a Force 4 power focus can buff your primary magician shtick, be it Summoning or Spell Casting while bootstrapping your secondary shtick up to competence even if you've only taken a rank or two in it. It's actually one of the cheaper ways to throw 10+ dice in both Sorcery and Conjuration. You will really only be "seriously hampering" yourself if you try having a Force 4 power focus AND high skill in Sorcery AND Conjuration. Buying and bonding to a Force 4 power focus in play isn't necessarily a slam dunk either, given that it'll set you back 100k and 32 karma. That's not chump change between living expenses and presumably wanting a couple initiate grades as well. At the very least, it's far enough into the future that making some concessions to being powerful before you hit that point is pretty reasonable.

To be added before the split something has to add to the pool AND NOT be a dice pool modifier. According to RAW this can only be Attribute Modifiers and Skill Modifiers, but Foci clearly are dice pool modifiers and "cerain augmentations" is vage enough so that you cannot be sure whether the items in parentheses are supposed to be examples for dice that are added before or for those that are not added before.

Foci don't raise Attributes or Skills, but provide a dice pool modifier to the Skill Test.

With Power Foci this is especially important. Would such a focus indeed raise the Magic Attribute you would get all sorts of additional benefits (higher maximum Force, higher Force without overcasting, etc.)

Why do you insist on banging your head against the wall when you are wrong. When the book explains what is and is not a "dice pool modifier" foci are specifically noted as adding to the base dice pool and not being a modifier. There really isn't any room for debate any more. It's written right there in the book, and once you find that entry there is no room for misinterpretation.



First, a mage is BAD at melting people in the face with spells by default when compared to using a using 4 ranks in pistols with a specialization. That's 18 BP to be good at gunplay, which is not redundant because 90+% of runs involve some combat. As an added bonus, pistols are a hell of a lot more subtle than spells. Getting a rank 4 power foci, on the other hand, requires you to purchase a special quality that gives you no other bonus than the ability to purchase the power foci, but then you need to pay BP to get the nuyen to buy the power foci, then of course the BP to bind the thing. So you're using up some of you 20 Bp remaining of positive qualities(that could be spent on better thing like focused concentration and mentor spirits), and all in all spending almost a 10th of your BP just for 1 item you can just as easily buy with nuyen after a few runs, nuyen that, mind you, you don't really need cause you don't need to constantly upgrade your 'ware and programs.

I'm not saying that someone should never start with a power focus, I'm just saying is kinda silly in the grand scheme of things, and it's bad form to use it in an example when trying to compare a starting magicians damage output to a starting gunners, especially when the starting gunners damage dealing ability is better without strong twinkery.

Please find it for me, I never read those lines or even heard of them other than in the erroneous FAQ. As I quoted before, foci add their rating to a dice pool and there are only Four options to modify a test (SR4A p. 61 "A Note on Modifiers"):
- Threshold Modifiers (irrelevant in this discussion)
- Attribute Modifiers: They raise an Attribute directly (e.g. Muscle Toner, Increase/Decrease Attribute etc.) creating an Augmented Attribute Rating
- Skill Modifiers: They raise an Attribute directly (e.g. Reflex Recorder, Dodge Bonus from MBW, Improved Skill Adept Power etc.) creating a Modified Skill Rating.
- Dice Pool Modifiers: They add or subtract dice from tests not Attributes or Skills (Specializations, Foci, Conditions, Enhanced Articulation etc.).
This section even goes as far as saying that if there is any doubt a modifier is one of the first three, you should consider it a dice pool modifier.

These are four distinct Mechanisms. Any Modifier can only be one of those. Why don't you see that the rules, as in the actual rule books, clearly state that Foci and Specializations add dice to tests and not to Attributes or Skills?

With firing two weapons at once the rules also clearly state that dice pool modifiers are added after the split, multicasting or attacking more than one opponent in melee don't say how to handle modifiers. You could of course argue that since they don't mention it you can do whatever you like, but it would of course be easier to use the same mechanism for all such instances.

By now you should see that the answer in the FAQ is indeed a rule change and not a "clarification" and as such has no business in such a document. Rules changes belong in Errata.

On a related note, how do you handle positive dice pool modifiers that do not apply to both tests like "superior position", Tracers etc.? Do you add them before or after the split?
If you add them before the split, it is weird that both tests would profit from them (at half value). If you add them afterwards, you are just making an arbitrary distinction between dice pool modifiers that is not in the rules.

Maybe you should actually make this hypothetical pistol using magician - it would probably be easier to demonstrate how that character could dump their weapon skills, invest more in magic, and be able to fight more effectively than that character would with pistols, or possibly it would be clear that they are indeed best off using pistols.

I think this can only happen if you're not primarily a magician (for example, you're a Mystic Adept or you have less than 5 magic, or are cybered), but maybe I'm wrong.

Good to know i'm not the only one who finds it really wierd that he keeps on toting that guns are better for a combat mage then combat spells, while intentionally gimping his casting potential to pick up gun kills instead.

so from the thread i have come to the conclusion that a combat mage dosent actually use combat spells but a gun instead, hell i may as well make a wired gun bunnie who dresses like a mage...

also that foci are a must, summoning/spellcasting is what i want the highest as these will help me kick ass and take name, go for a magic style that is using intuition to cast so my initiative doesnt suffer too much, magic should be brought at 5 not 6, and will at 1 less then racial max

I would rather make mage that uses combat spells, but dresses like a wired gun bunny, as you dont want to stand out from the rest of the team.

The combat mage notion (particularly according to the archetype in the BBB) is indeed a fusion of spell-slinger and gun-bunny, but fusion part is the important bit and alot of this thread has been either/or. More often than not a gun will be all you need to take out the target, but what about when it isn't? You should have something to resort to, especially if you're not the best gunman in the group.

Combat spells do have some advantages over firearms:
– You can't be caught in 'possession' of a spell
– It doesn't cost actions to 'draw' and 'ready' a spell and it won't scare the public
– Ammunition is not an issue
– No silencer required
– Spells can't be confiscated (unless fetish-bound)
– Spells can't be damaged by water, electricity, heat or a glitch (the glitch may be worse, but you won't have to buy a new spell)
– Spells can get around annoying things like armour
– No range penalties
– No Immunity to Normal Weapons problems
– No problems with the Regeneration power
and probably more I haven't thought of.

In short, combat spells can't be written off as a universally inferior choice to firearms but there are great benefits in a combat mage who actually is proficient in combat.

Oh, and for the record, none of the traditions actually require one to wear full ceremonial regalia to use magic. 'Runners who break into compounds festooned with all the hallmarks of their tradition/religion/group aren't very hard to ID, so the rest of the party should really be encouraging them to blend in like they do. The only thing getting in the way of this is foci/fetishes, but these can be carried and used discretely (usually) and since they could have been created by any enchanter anywhere they don't give away your tradition.

Well... Some of your points are very wrong indeed.

1. ALL SPELLS Require LICENSES (as do Firearms). Caught casting a spell, you better have a license. Caught casting a deadly spell, it better be in self defense and not as an attacker (and you still better have a license). So yes, you can be caught in possession of a spell. Not to mention that unless you are entirely anal about cleaning your spell signatures up, you leave evidence that YOU are the one that cast that spell... Caught in possession of said spell indeed.
2. Spells take Complex actions, and Yes, they do scare people.
3. I will give you this, but Ammunition does not cause Drain either.
4. Unfortunately, the more powerful the spell, the more likely it is to be seen/felt/whatever. That Pistol with the High-Quality Internal Silencer will probably never be heard (Subtracting from Perception a minimum of 6-7 Dice after all, and can go above 9 with Subsonic Rounds). That Spell at Force 4+ is LIKELY to be noticed (the more powerful, the easier it is to notice. Force 6+ is automatically noticed).
5. Wrong, Background count effectively neuters the mage, dependant upon BCG Strength. Guns ignore Background Count completely.
6. Give you this one.
7. So can the right ammunition and weapon combination, or Combat Option.
8. Can't remember the last time Range Penalties was an actual concern for my Cyberlogician. Range Penalties are rarely a concern, especially for the non-mage. And honestly, the Gun Bunnies have a better time with this than the Mage does, as he has to actually be able to see at distances WITH NATURAL SENSES. Gunbunnies do not have that limitation.
9. ITNW is rarely an Issue (again, the right ammunition for the right job) unless it is concerning Spirits above Force 7. So situational at best.
10. Have yet to actually see Regeneration cope with the Gunbunny. A Single test at the end of the combat turn to attempt to bring the victim above lethal overflow damage (which is normally where they end up over the course of the 3-4 passes the gunbunny has). Has never happened at our table. It is useful for highly resistant creatures who take little to no damage, but agian, have yet to see that at our table, so meh.

I will agree that it greatly behooves a magician to be somewhat proficient with the niceties of combat outside of spellcasting, as it can keep them alive when the magic fails them. As for any Enchanter crafting for any tradition. What makes you think that that is how it is? Spells do not cross Traditions, Why would Foci? Now, that being said, it is trivial to acquire equipment aspected to your tradition. But I would say that it is absolutely necessary.

Anyways...

While spells do require a license, there is no way to catch someone knowing an unlicensed spell without seeing him cast it. Possession of a firearm in some cases is already illegal we are not talking about taking such a firearm out on the streets and using it. A firearm can be found in the person's belongings, house or on his person.

Not until the spell is cast. That was Aerospider's point.

The ruling is not clear here. Initially this roll was just for the CASTING of the spell, not for the spell itself. SR4A unfortunately introduced sparkles which must come from the spell and not the caster. Hiding the caster is easy.

Except for the Mana Static Spell or a bunch of kittens and a blender you cannot create BC at will. Searches are a lot more likely tactic for Law Enforcement than using the Kittenblender.

Those options are less effective though.

Don't forget the Simple Action it takes to zoom in.

Yeah Regenration is not that great. Still with spells you never have to worry about it.

a) because it is mentioned for spells and not for foci.
b) Because the personalization of the Focus only happens when someone binds it, spell formulae are already adapted to a certain tradition.

I prefer the more organic method. If spells differ, then so do supplies. Again, it is a trivial difference, But an interesting one, if you have a Tradition that is not indigenous to the campaign surroundings. The Unified Magical Theory makes crafting Traditions Easy Peasy, but there are functional differences that are not mimicked by the mechanics of the game. At our table, those differences actually mean something.

"At our table" is the important part there. I only commented on the RAW of it.
I wonder who could actually make Foci for a living if they were tradition specific. This won't be a very large customer base locally or even globally (my estimate 1,000,000 worldwide).

Well, you could still make a living at it, it would just be a niche market. Hermetics and Shamans would have it easier than most I would bet, but there are a lot of places where other traditions dominate. Wuxing, Voodoo, Shinto, and Buddhism, to name a few, would all have vast followings.

Just a disclaimer, my recommendation on not maxing out that last point comes from a min-maxing point of view. A good portion of players do not min-max. In the end, the point of a game is to have fun, and if you want to max out a stat right off chargen, that in itself can be fun too!



Personally, I would suggest leaving the main gun totting to the street sams or psyads who will likely do much better than you. Guns can be very useful to a mage, but they are ultimately only a complimentary skill as I see them. Unless you are playing with higher build points, a mage's selling point is still magic. Otherwise, you might as well play a street sam or gun bunny as you said.

Combat mage is still a mage at its core. Do things that other chars can't. A simple stunball or 2 into a room/corridor full of generic rent-a-cops still does wonders. Especially if you want to keep things quiet and avoid alerting other security teams. Opposition that are still standing normally are those with high willpower, like other mages. This is where you pull out your gun or let the real gunners come in to "mop up".

Other nice spells that fit into the combat mage theme - Manabolt, Manaball, Powerball, the traditional Fireball, Ball lightning, Hot Potato, Stench, Slow (from War!), Detect enemies/life, Increase reflexes, Heal etc.

Best way to make money via enchanting is to make oricalcum. 44,000 nuyen worth of radicals of gold/silver/copper/mercury required. Gives up to 8 units of oricalcum worth 400,000 nuyen (50,000 nuyen each). Fencing it at base 30% still gives 120,000.

Older SR versions limited a fenced item's selling price to only 50% of the actual value, but they did not add this in SR4.

Play a talismonger and make it your day job

Well, not exactly. Let's have a look at my posted combat mage after 150 virtual karmapoints (and 200k extra Nuyen):


Out of 750 Karmagen:



With 150 extra karmapoints:



Being a combat mage is much more than merely toasting enemies by sheer force of will. The mage knows how to survive a combat while supporting the gunslingers. This includes knowing how to use a gun and most certainly wearing appropriate armour and using tactical gear. Remember, every runner is part of a team! And a mage stumbling around a combat zone is no help but a burden.

Those people would be very rare and would charge a lot more than the listed price. IMHO it would be far more likely that enchanting will be taught as a mandatory part of the magical curriculum and everyone would craft their own foci.

If very few people would buy that stuff, I doubt the price would be that high.

This only works if you get an actual Day Job instead of the Quality of that name. In the latter case you would be employed and get a wage according to the quality. An actual job would probably mean shifting the focus of the story away from shadowrunning. I'm not sure if everyone at the table would like that, it could work though as a non standard campaign. It reminds me of Orichalcum Out The Wazoo LLC.

You really want sustaining FOCUS for a Combat Mage.

You want to sustain Combat Sense, and Improved Reflexes at the very least.
2xforce 3 sustaining focus is a good start:
Though for Combat Sense, you really wish you could get a force 5 or 6, but oh well.

Combat Sense I can see but you should decide whether you want Increase Reflexes at all. Synaptic Boosters work as well or even better.

LOL "Orichalcum Out The Wazoo", I never read the thread before, thanks for the link!

Welp, there goes my plan for world domination by using an army of ally/task spirits to churn out obscene amounts of orichalcum every month.

Well the spell is good:
Force 3 (3 threshhold) give you +2 Initiative +2 IP.
Force 4 (4 Threshhold) give you +3 Init, +3 IP. Getting 3 successes on a spellcasting+magic isn't THAT hard, you only need a 12 to autobuy, and a 9 to be fairly confident.

It costs you a Force 3 sustaining focus, (which is better than quickening it) because of Wards.
Sustaining Focus bonding is only 6 karma. (and is cheaper via BP) and 30K at 12R (that doesn't even require a restricted Gear quality).

That's really reasonable, compared to: Wired Reflexes2, costing you 3 essence.

That reminds me of when the guy at the customer service counter at Walmart tried to tell me the defective external hard drive I was returning wasn't a computer component it was part of a computer. If it adds to the dice pool what can it be except a modifier? It modifies the pool by adding dice to it.

A skill modifier. It still boosts the dice pool, but only because the skill rating is added to the dice pool. You are literally correct, but where most systems wouldn't bother with a distinction SR definitely does and so 'dice pool modifier' means more than the sum of those three words. For example, muscle replacement modifies lots of dice pools but it is not termed a dice pool modifier.

I agree with you on tradition-specific foci for fluff reasons. It doesn't seem right that a heretic mage would be fine and dandy wielding a tribal mask covered in feathers and pseudo-philosophical poetry. If there is enough of a link to tradition that the form of the focus is entirely dependent on it then it makes sense that the link runs deeper.

That said, I play this one RAW because I believe that works better. Otherwise players are going to be heavily dissuaded from playing the more obscure/foreign traditions for fear of their supply options being limited to non-existent. On top of purchasing issues they would have more trouble selling their old foci (a rare but not unheard-of desire) and any foci they gathered from fallen foes and B&E jobs would be of no interest to them besides the nuyen value. I think it's a lot more interesting to separate them from traditions - still have a broad range of styles and forms that covers all known traditions and then some, but instead of a talismonger's customer saying 'But that's a Wuxing focus!' they'd say 'Have you got one that's a bit less ... Chinesey?'


PS - Thanks Dakka Dakka; that's almost exactly the rebuttal I would have written!

It's more like the distinction between "computer component" and "computer accessory." They're calling a RAM module a mouse.

The writers used imprecise language. You perform two main steps in figuring out how many dice to roll. First, you construct the dice pool out of attribute, skill, specialization, some augmentation bonuses, foci, and probably others I'm not thinking about. Then, you modify the dice pool with situational bonuses and penalties -- visibility, range, some other augmentation bonuses, reach, smartlinks or laser sights, and pretty much anything else that exists in a table.

The problem is that the Shadowrun-specific phrase "Dice Pool Modifier" means the stuff on the situational modifier tables, but it can also be read literally as "anything that adds to or subtracts from the dice pool." Basically, it's the fault of equivocation.

And see, this is where most people who disagree with you do so.

1. Does the XXX modify the Skill Directly? Then it is a Skill Modification. (Some Augmentations, Some Adept Abilities, Magic)
2. Does the XXX modify the Attribute Directly? Then it is an Attribute Modification. (Some Augmentations, Some Adept Abilities, Magic)
3. Does it add DICE to the Pool? Then it is a DICE POOL MODIFIER. (ANYTHING ELSE)

By the book (Ignoring the FAQ), Foci add Dice, not Attribute points or Skill points. Specialties add DICE, NOT SKILL. Smartlink ADDS DICE (If, as you contend, that a smartlink is a dice pool modifier, then so are Foci, since they perform the same function). Visibility Modifiers Remove DICE... These all have to do with DICE, not Skill or Attribute. As such, they are Dice Pool Modifiers.

Seeing a trend here?

Well there's your problem.



Smartlinks are irrelevant, because they can't be used during a split. Comparing something to a smartlink doesn't really work.

For the vast majority of the system, it doesn't matter if a bonus is to an attribute or skill or if it's a dice pool modifier. There are only two clear instances where you split your dice pool. It doesn't matter if your bonus to Athletics is added to the skill rating because of a Reflex Recorder or is a +1 dice pool modifier from having comfortable shoes. You'll never have to split an Athletics pool.

So the very small part where they should have tightened up the language, they didn't. They say things like "provides a bonus." They do not use precise language like "provides a positive dice pool modifier equal to its rating." It's ambiguous.

The FAQ clears up their intent. You're ignoring the developers' intent in order to gain additional power at the table.

And you're doing it in a ludicrous way. Math via your reasoning:

Let's say you have Magic 6 and Spellcasting 6. You take a Specialization in Combat Spells and buy a Power Focus at rating 4. That's 16 dice to cast one spell. Well, you can split that dice pool 6 ways. That gives you 2 dice per spell, plus 6 to each for the specialization and focus, so 8 dice per spell.

Without the rating 4 Power Focus or specialization, you'd have to come up with Magic + Spellcasting = 48 to replicate that. What's the Karma value of that?

Drop the power focus. Just consider the specialization. You split the pool 6 ways again, so you have 6 pools of 4. That's the equivalent of Magic + Spellcasting 24. Not bad for 2 Karma.

Or you could do it the right way, and make people buy multiple foci if they want to do some serious multicasting.

You can't even come close to hitting that kind of abuse with guns. Defending it is ridiculous.

I think automatic weapons and shiva arms with specialties, reflex recorders, and high levels of recoil compensation come close. Getting bonuses to split pools is easier with melee.

Agree to disagree then, because I've had plenty of characters start that way in my games and they did just fine. I also prefer guns over spells for dealing damage, but guns are so narrow in application that I don't think the situation is as ridiculous as you are making it out to be.

According to their other posts, specialization would be a Skill Modification instead of a Dice Pool Modification, so wouldn't those not be used anyway?

That's the very argument at hand. The book says DP modifier, the FAQ says skill modifier, opinion is divided.

And here where you not understanding how the system works shows it self, there's a big difference between those too sources of bonus dice, name the fact that first one is limited by skill*1,5 augmented maximum while latter isn't, meaning if you have skill of 6 the latter can be combined with improved ability power at level 3, while the former caps that power to level 2.

If specialization is a skill modifier and not a dicepool modifier, then you actually need a mimimum skill of 4 to actually get the full +2 benefit and i kinda think thats somethink they would mention in the rules if in fact specialization was a skill modifier like you claim.

Even ingnoring that, adding spec before split can lead to some very wierd situations:
For example my gunslinger has both pistols and automatics at rating 4 with specialisations for semi-automatics and machine pistol respectivly, so now if all he has are non smartlinked pistol and machine pistol, he can actually get 1 extra dice for shooting his machine pistol if he also shoots at something with his pistol at the same time(The pool doesn't have to be split in half, so you can use only one dice for shooting that pistol)

oh, I thought they were only divided about the Foci, not the Specialization.

Actually, it is yours...

Because the rules are so ambiguous, and because there examples do not matrch up, a FAQ is not the way to go. The FAQ actually CHANGES the rules that are right there in the book, as many have said before. Changes are not the domain of an FAQ, but of Errata. Until an Errata comes out, this argument will continue every 2-3 weeks, on one topic or another, because the issue has yet to be FIXED...



Wrong again... You must split pools if you are doing two things simultaneously. Here is an example. Driving and shooting a gun at the same time. You use the LESSER of your Dice Pool, and then split from there. Some towards the Driving and some towards Shooting. Same for Athletics, when you are jumping and shooting at the same time. Split Pools. There are a lot of instances where you may be called upon to split the dice pools. You just apparently do not recognize them as such. As for the Smartlink. A Smartlink will apply to a single target shot, even if you are splitting your pools between shooting and Driving, so it is a relevant point.



No, I am ignoring their attempt to change the rules with a FAQ. Big Difference.



And again you are wrong. As you forget to take into account the drawbacks of splitting those pools. 6 Spells, at a minimum of 7 Drain Each... Please have that character cast those, I really want to watch that character stroke out... You provide examples, without including all the facts. The reason that casters do not split pools 6 ways is because of the Drain, not because they can't.



Just Remember... FAQ's CANNOT CHANGE RULES, ONLY ERRATA CAN...

Is that a rule, or just your own personal FAQ?

Interesting analysis, the numbers make a strong case but they're not enough on their own. Just because option A is greatly more efficient than option B where action X is concerned one can't conclude that one of the options must be erroneous. There are always better and worse ways to do things.

And whilst the ratios presented in your example are extreme, it is an extreme example (that few would survive at reasonable Force) of one sub-aspect of magic. Ultimately it makes for a small incongruence in a very few occasions of a less than usual action. Which is not enough to so conclusively deduce it mustn't be permitted.

Joke all you want, but it is an established fact in the industry.

Guys, we're just talking in circles right past each other, at this point. Is it fair to just say "opinions differ" on this rule, and call it a day? 'Cause personally, I don't see TJ or Epicedion changing one anothers' minds any time soon, and everyone else reading (without a dog in a fight, who may have had their mind changed by this debate) has already read both arguments about six times.

It's how these think work.
Errata is for changing the rules and will always be included into the next printing of the book.
FAQ is for answering question about the rules, based on the rules in the books, sadly this isn't the case with SR4 FAQ, so it's not worth a damm.

Critias, which do you think is better for a combat mage:

Sustaining Focus R3, and the Increased Reflexes spell

Or Wired Reflexes 2

Point Taken Critias... consider me chastised...

Synaptic Booster?
Wireds cost like 3 times more essence than you can afford to loose

Synaptic Boosters cost you 1 essense, for 160K

That's a LOT of BP/Karma