Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Fetishes
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
almost normal
It's annoyed me for some time at how cheap and available a fetish seems to be, especially for how powerful they are.

While making a character in PACKS however, I noticed something interesting; Deluxe Mage Gear gives you more fetishes then you could ever possibly use.

Specifically, it allots 19 Fetishes. Even if you were to use one fetish per spell, You'd need a starting magic of 6, and then learn SEVEN more spells in game!

Is it possible that RAI might have been to make these extremely underpriced tools one time use only, thus justifying their existence at such a low cost?
Glyph
It wouldn't have called them "reusable", then. Having spares makes sense for a mage because they are basically carrying these items into combat zones, where they are just as susceptible to damage as any other gear. I wouldn't read too much into the PACKS kits; multiples of stuff is the norm for them.
phlapjack77
I kind of see your point, but I don't see that fetishes are so cheap. 500 for a healing one, 300 for manipulation, 200 for combat - this gets expensive pretty fast if the mage casts any spells at all using these as one-timers. Limited spells can't be cast without the fetish. If fetishes were one-time-only, maybe also need to add the idea that a spell can be cast with or without a fetish, so a fetish can be used when a mage really needs to make sure he doesn't take (a lot of) drain.

Plus as Glyph said, I can see the point of having spares. Many characters I make have one set for carrying on the mage's person, another set at their primary home, maybe another set at their bolt-hole...
Yerameyahu
I mean, how many spells are you talking about? If they're reusable, that's pocket change even if it's 500¥ * 12 spells. If they *were* disposable, then yes, that 'ammo' would add up kinda fast. Even a Full Burst of Ex-Ex is only 100¥, after all. So… seems like a good balance. Cheap, but not disposable-cheap.
almost normal
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 2 2012, 11:17 PM) *
I mean, how many spells are you talking about? If they're reusable, that's pocket change even if it's 500¥ * 12 spells.


Right. Assuming you've got 6 spells, which is enough to cover all your bases with a fluff spell or two, It'd take one run to have all the fetishes you'd ever need for you, your safehouse, and your pet cat. One run for a permanent +2 bonus to avoid the only real drawback of mages is pretty damn crazy. Making them one shot items, I dunno, It would make a lot of sense to me.
Yerameyahu
It's not a bad house rule. You might have to tweak the prices, or maybe not… it depends on your players. Playtest.

Ooh, maybe they have a chance of breaking on use, based on Force. biggrin.gif Sort of half-disposable.
Aerospider
And here's me allowing my players to use the same fetish for multiple spells, since IIRC exclusivity isn't mentioned.

I don't see it as a big concern though. Sure, drain is the key balancing factor for SR magic, but we're only talking two dice and the prices are comparable to those of armour. And if you lose your armour you're not suddenly incapable of firing your gun.
Umidori
I know it's hardly any kind of authority on actual RAW or RAI, but I can't help but be influenced by the SNES adaptation of SR. nyahnyah.gif

There, when you got your fetishes for your spells (what would be limited spells in actual SR), they were freely reuseable. You just needed to have them in your inventory to benefit from them.

~Umi
Thanee
QUOTE (Aerospider @ Aug 3 2012, 10:43 AM) *
And here's me allowing my players to use the same fetish for multiple spells, since IIRC exclusivity isn't mentioned.


And that is perfectly correct.

QUOTE
Fetishes are available for sale from talismongers or other magicians, and are made for a specific category of spells (combat, detection, and so on). A given fetish can only be used for spells of that category.


Previous editions had one-use fetishes and reusable fetishes (with a lesser bonus).

But in SR4 there are only the reusable fetishes.

QUOTE
fetishes—reusable objects with minor enchantments appropriate to the magician’s tradition.


Bye
Thanee
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Aerospider @ Aug 3 2012, 01:43 AM) *
And here's me allowing my players to use the same fetish for multiple spells, since IIRC exclusivity isn't mentioned.

I don't see it as a big concern though. Sure, drain is the key balancing factor for SR magic, but we're only talking two dice and the prices are comparable to those of armour. And if you lose your armour you're not suddenly incapable of firing your gun.


Indeed, as it should be... The fact that you need the Fetish to cast the spell is its own drawback. Fetish link all your spells, and then get captured. No Fetish, no Spell. smile.gif

Seems like a good thing to "Call Shot" on, if you notice it. smile.gif
Speed Wraith
They couldn't pay me to use 'em.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Speed Wraith @ Aug 3 2012, 06:41 AM) *
They couldn't pay me to use 'em.


I have a few concepts that use them. For some, it makes sense. smile.gif
Yerameyahu
It depends on how often you get captured and lose your stuff. Some people beat on this point a lot, but it's never happened to my characters. It just depends.
Kesendeja
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 3 2012, 10:02 AM) *
It depends on how often you get captured and lose your stuff. Some people beat on this point a lot, but it's never happened to my characters. It just depends.


In twenty three years of gaming its happened exactly twice.

But I agree that the cost of fetishes seems a bit cheep, but don't favor the idea of making them disposable. Maybe up the cost or give them a chance of failing on overcasting and needing to be replaced.
Yerameyahu
Yeah, it would amuse me. Perhaps an Edge-based test?
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 3 2012, 07:02 AM) *
It depends on how often you get captured and lose your stuff. Some people beat on this point a lot, but it's never happened to my characters. It just depends.


Happens occasionally at our table.
Enough that we plan for it.

Of course, most of the Characters at our table do not fight to the death, either. A disturbing trend that I have seen at other tables. *shrug*
Thanee
When I use limited spells, I generally have some key spells (usually also some with low Drain Values) without the fetish-limit, so you are still capable of doing something, even without them.

Bye
Thanee
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Thanee @ Aug 3 2012, 07:49 AM) *
When I use limited spells, I generally have some key spells (usually also some with low Drain Values) without the fetish-limit, so you are still capable of doing something, even without them.

Bye
Thanee


That is usually how I do it too. I usually only use fetishes forf higher Drain Spells, most of the time. Generally, anything with +2 or More to the Drain. I also use a lot of "Self Only" Limited Spells (Only Caster Benefits, generally Detection and Health Categories, though occasionally Manipulation) as well. Helps with the Drain, if I am not playing a Buffing Mage, which I do not generally play.
Speed Wraith
Yeah, I am a bit reactionary there. The frequency of being without gear is far lower than my expectation of being without gear. I could possibly see myself using them under certain circumstances or with a specific character concept in mind, but in general, I just don't like the possibility of being cut off from what is ordinarily an innate ability, even if the chance of that is low. Besides which, the more magically active gear you have to juggle, the worse it can be for you. One of the appeals to magicians for me is the idea that I don't need much beyond armor and a few burners.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Speed Wraith @ Aug 3 2012, 08:04 AM) *
Yeah, I am a bit reactionary there. The frequency of being without gear is far lower than my expectation of being without gear. I could possibly see myself using them under certain circumstances or with a specific character concept in mind, but in general, I just don't like the possibility of being cut off from what is ordinarily an innate ability, even if the chance of that is low. Besides which, the more magically active gear you have to juggle, the worse it can be for you. One of the appeals to magicians for me is the idea that I don't need much beyond armor and a few burners.


I get that. Probably 2/3 of my magician characters do not take advantage of the Fetish option (or do so on a Very Limited basis). The other 1/3 are generally designed with that particular option in mind. All depends upon the concept I have going in to character creation. smile.gif
Umidori
Concepts like a pornomancer with the mass orgasm spell, limited such that it requires a dildo fetish AND a geas of being aroused? nyahnyah.gif

~Umi
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Umidori @ Aug 3 2012, 09:49 AM) *
Concepts like a pornomancer with the mass orgasm spell, limited such that it requires a dildo fetish AND a geas of being aroused? nyahnyah.gif

~Umi


*Shakes Head* Horrible... Just Horrible...
Sadly, we had one of these at our table recently. frown.gif
Cain
Check me on this, but aren't fetishes visible to astral perception? So if you're trying to sneak into a place with good astral security (like an assensing mage or spirits) as if you're Joe Mundane, wouldn't carrying those fetishes give you away?

I've designed characters both with and without fetishes, and while nice, their bonus can be limited if you're forced to go into a heavy disguise.

In past editions, they had "fetish foci"-- one shot foci that added more dice, but were also expensive. While cheaper than normal foci, the cost added up quickly if you relied on them too much. That might be a good compromise to start with: you have both one shot and reusable fetishes; the one shot provides a higher bonus and costs less, but the price adds up quickly.
Neraph
QUOTE (almost normal @ Aug 2 2012, 09:54 PM) *
Specifically, it allots 19 Fetishes. Even if you were to use one fetish per spell, You'd need a starting magic of 6, and then learn SEVEN more spells in game!

[nitpick]
Starting spells are based off of your higher Spellcasting or Ritual Spellcasting, not Magic rating.
[/nitpick]

I'd only take fetishes on duplicate spells. The inability to cast a spell because I lack gear is unsettling.
Umidori
Is the inability to fire bullets because you lack a gun unsettling?

Some people rely on their guns just as much as others rely on their spells. But I think mage players are so used to having the power of a gun, but with the benefits of not needing ammo or even a weapon in their hand, and then when they lose that power they feel more wronged than the gun user would.

If a gun bunny is forced into a situation where they lack their firearms, they feel vulnerable, but they can accept the situation because deep down they always knew that their guns could be taken from them. But when a mage loses their magic, either through a broken gaes, a missing fetish, or even just background count, they feel not only vulnerable, but as if they've been robbed of something.

It's an interesting psychological effect, no?

~Umi
Neraph
Not entirely true, but interesting nonetheless. There are very important differences between a spellcaster with fetishes and a gunbunny. For example, the spellcaster chose to limit its spells with fetishes, whereas the gunbunny is required to limit thier bullets to guns. A more fitting analogy for BC would be for an unarmed fighter being cocooned with restraints.
Umidori
We're talking players here, though, not character archetypes.

You choose to play a gun bunny just as much as you choose to play a fetish mage. But fetish mages aren't as popular as normal mages, and consequently aren't chosen as often, because normal mages get a bigger bonus out of not needing fetishes than the benefits you derive from having a fetish. The problem is that normal mages are simply a more attractive choice.

If fetishes were the default, rather than the optional choice on the side, I think people would have very different opinions about mages. It's like the difference between an Opt-Out and an Opt-In system. Getting junk mail that you have to Opt-Out of sucks. And having a political system where voting for President is an Opt-In scenario, you end up with the vast majority of eligible voters not voting. If mages were required to use fetishes normally, and they could pay some sort of reasonable price to be able to cast without them, it'd be a whole different ballgame.

~Umi
Halinn
Gunbunnies can also choose to have cyber-weapons.
Umidori
Which can still be 1) detected and 2) removed or deactivated. So they don't exactly compare to non-limited spells, really.

Still, you've provided me with a good comparison. The standard gun bunny doesn't use "hidden" cyber-weapons. Why? Because the benefits do not outweigh the costs. In contrast, a standard mage does us "hidden" spells. Why? Because the costs do not outweight the benefits.

~Umi
Halinn
QUOTE (Umidori @ Aug 5 2012, 12:08 AM) *
Which can still be 1) detected and 2) removed or deactivated. So they don't exactly compare to non-limited spells, really.


Mages can be detected and equipped with collars that shock them every time they try to use magic.
Umidori
Mages can mask their auras, and need either to cast a spell, or be checked by other mages to detect them. Cyberware cannot be masked, is easy to see with 3 hits on a perception check even when disguised, and can be checked by anyone.

~Umi
Grinder
Anyone can check for cyberware... if he has access to a scanner.
Umidori
Unless it's a cyberlimb. They come in two varieties: Obvious, and Threshold (3) on a Perception Test.

Someone may not have a scanner, but they may still deny you entry just because you have a cyberam which MIGHT contain a hidden gun or blade. It's kind of like walking through security with an x-ray shielded briefcase. They're going to want to see what you have inside it, and if you are unable or unwilling to open it up and show them they aren't gonna allow it.

~Umi
Mäx
QUOTE (Umidori @ Aug 5 2012, 11:36 PM) *
Unless it's a cyberlimb. They come in two varieties: Obvious, and Threshold (3) on a Perception Test.

Someone may not have a scanner, but they may still deny you entry just because you have a cyberam which MIGHT contain a hidden gun or blade. It's kind of like walking through security with an x-ray shielded briefcase. They're going to want to see what you have inside it, and if you are unable or unwilling to open it up and show them they aren't gonna allow it.

Only if they notice your cyberlimb, threshold(3) test isn't exactly easy.
Krishach
QUOTE (Umidori @ Aug 4 2012, 04:10 PM) *
Is the inability to fire bullets because you lack a gun unsettling?

Some people rely on their guns just as much as others rely on their spells. But I think mage players are so used to having the power of a gun, but with the benefits of not needing ammo or even a weapon in their hand, and then when they lose that power they feel more wronged than the gun user would.

If a gun bunny is forced into a situation where they lack their firearms, they feel vulnerable, but they can accept the situation because deep down they always knew that their guns could be taken from them. But when a mage loses their magic, either through a broken gaes, a missing fetish, or even just background count, they feel not only vulnerable, but as if they've been robbed of something.

It's an interesting psychological effect, no?

~Umi

it's true. As a mage, I carry low-skill options just for such occasions, even if it's just something I can hope to get away with, like a Narcojet grenade (chem protect and a big stuntrack!), flashpak, anything that I might have a chance of resisting or using to get my ass out of the fryer without spells. As a GM, I've frustrated our non-creative gun bunny group member several times by messing with his ability to use his guns. You don't even have to take them away first.

We had a close call on friday, though I was the one of the group who got away from K.E. when it all blew up. I stayed back to help, trying to remain unseen, but they had 3 other mages: 2 astral and 1 physically present. They had gotten a VERY good look at my spells/spirits during the unfortunately dirty getaway. I used my alt options to help my team-members without using spells. It avoided trumpeting the fact that the shadowrunner mage was still there.

It wasn't a situation where I was prevented from using spells. Even so, the GM was surprised and impressed that we got away after being cornered (and one person in cuffs) without using more magic, and without killing officers. So we aren't wanted for killing Knight Errant officers, and our troll is wanted for questioning, nothing more.


On the fetish angle, I've never taken fetishes except for on my highest base drain spells. Our GMs DO like to take them away, so that balance remains very pertinent for us.
Midas
QUOTE (Umidori @ Aug 5 2012, 08:36 PM) *
Unless it's a cyberlimb. They come in two varieties: Obvious, and Threshold (3) on a Perception Test.

Someone may not have a scanner, but they may still deny you entry just because you have a cyberam which MIGHT contain a hidden gun or blade. It's kind of like walking through security with an x-ray shielded briefcase. They're going to want to see what you have inside it, and if you are unable or unwilling to open it up and show them they aren't gonna allow it.

~Umi

Not necessarily, and definitely dependent on how you play at your table. It certainly depends on how prevalent a given GM thinks cyberlimbs are in the world of the 2070's. Sure, security might be keeping an eye on the guy with a cyberlimb (with the likelihood increasing in the case of 2+), but they are also going to be keeping an eye on the guy with WR and the awakened guy (who doesn't happen to have Masking and Extended Masking, natch). Refusing entry for someone with a cyberlimb probably isn't going to be very common at all in the 6th world.

I am not fond of people nerfing 'ware such as cyberguns. Given their cost and capacity, I play it that they have been designed to look like part of the working parts of the cyberlimb in question. Even then, they are almost non-existant in the campaign I run. If detecting a cyberweapon is a no-brainer for cyberware scanners, ain't noone going to be fool enough to get one installed.

The same goes for things like Tailored Pheremones - if a simple chemical sniffer can detect their usage (and this is a big IF, people emit pheremones at differing levels all the time, and there is certainly a case that chemical sniffers could give false positives if, for instance, the person in question has just had sexual intercourse), then people will just not bother taking the 'ware ...

As to fetishes, remember that a fetish is going to be an obvious signal that the character is a mage and invoke the "Geek the mage" adage in opponents. As I am not in the habit of knocking my characters unconscious and taking away their gear all the time, the way I play it the mage can use a visible fetish immediately, or keep a hidden fetish which they can ready with a simple action. I admit this is a house rule, but YMMV.

almost normal
QUOTE (Midas @ Aug 6 2012, 04:52 AM) *
As to fetishes, remember that a fetish is going to be an obvious signal that the character is a mage and invoke the "Geek the mage" adage in opponents.


Problem is, a fetish can be *anything*. Try noticing the acorn clenched in the fist of a druidic shaman while he's got a gun in the other hand.
Halinn
QUOTE (almost normal @ Aug 6 2012, 04:18 PM) *
Problem is, a fetish can be *anything*. Try noticing the acorn clenched in the fist of a druidic shaman while he's got a gun in the other hand.

Or the silver necklace worn under the shirt. Or something in a pocket.
Neraph
Or the fetishes taped to their body under their clothes. If (big if) I ever used them that's what I'd do. Taped to me, under my FFBA, with my pants tucked into my boots and my shirt tucked in. They are definately not getting away easy.
almost normal
QUOTE (Neraph @ Aug 6 2012, 11:43 AM) *
Or the fetishes taped to their body under their clothes. If (big if) I ever used them that's what I'd do. Taped to me, under my FFBA, with my pants tucked into my boots and my shirt tucked in. They are definately not getting away easy.


Right. It's the right thing to do. It's just that the right thing to do is also pretty goofy. I wish the wording read something along the lines of actually casting *through* the fetish, like it was a magic rod of some such.
Neraph
Fetishes also make smuggling compartments for cyberlimbs or the skin pouch Bioware attractive.
Draco18s
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 3 2012, 10:15 AM) *
Yeah, it would amuse me. Perhaps an Edge-based test?


I was going to suggest a simple d6. On a 1 it burns out.
Often enough to matter, rare enough to not cause undo damage to one's wallet or casting ability.

(The "oh shit, I just burned out both of them in two initiative passes and didn't bring a third" happening rare enough to be a Plot-Driving Event).
Yerameyahu
Yeah, Draco18s, I just meant that it's nice for Edge to actually be used for 'luck' rolls (like Suppressive Fire, etc.). It would depend on the overall likelihood, whether this is workable. smile.gif
Draco18s
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 6 2012, 12:51 PM) *
Yeah, Draco18s, I just meant that it's nice for Edge to actually be used for 'luck' rolls (like Suppressive Fire, etc.). It would depend on the overall likelihood, whether this is workable. smile.gif


Luck-rolls, for most players, is going to come down to either a largely meaningless roll (their luck is so high, or the condition (e.g. "a glitch") is so rare even with low-edge values).
Yerameyahu
That's something that should be fixed. smile.gif Personally, I see a fair number of people with 3-4 Edge.
Draco18s
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 6 2012, 03:16 PM) *
That's something that should be fixed. smile.gif Personally, I see a fair number of people with 3-4 Edge.


Right, as do I. I think my personal minimum is 3, but I aim for at least 4, and attempt to soft-max as often as possible.
(With the 3, I ran out of points; I had more things that I wanted to have 1 or more ranks higher than I could count on both hands).

At 3-4 edge, the odds of a glitch are fairly insignificant. 1 in 36* and critical glitches are almost unheard of.

*Three dice:
1
1
[any number]

Four dice is the same:
1
1
[any number]
[any number]
Krishach
QUOTE (Neraph @ Aug 6 2012, 03:51 PM) *
Fetishes also make smuggling compartments for cyberlimbs or the skin pouch Bioware attractive.

We had a munchkin player who kept insisting that his could be a tattoo. I ALMOST wanted to say sure. Because I would be skinnin' his ass on the first damn run.

There never seems to be any rules for how Fetishes are used, nor fluff. I also do not see how a fetish under clothes would draw attention. Here is a question though. Assensing seems to work through clothes (otherwise a lot of cyberware and 90% of bioware could never be seen). While a Fetish may not be in view, could the mages aura tweak to a fetish present (like a foci) that is concealed, if Assensing rolls high enough? This would then make a more pertinent reason to take Extended Masking.
Yerameyahu
You're seeing the missing/odd Essence flows, not the 'ware itself. A fetish isn't 'active' like a focus, though, so you can't see it in the same way as a focus. :/
almost normal
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 6 2012, 10:18 PM) *
You're seeing the missing/odd Essence flows, not the 'ware itself. A fetish isn't 'active' like a focus, though, so you can't see it in the same way as a focus. :/


RAW says to treat it like a focii. As it says nothing more, its easy for me to assume that it is indeed active, and easy to spot as such.
Yerameyahu
Oh, it really says that? I misremembered, then. Where, exactly, does it say 'treat it like a focus'?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012