Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Adept Improved Ability. Chummer wrong?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Community Projects
drakir
I have a mystic adept with improved ability. I have a total magic of 4 (2/2). If I have 6 in a skill I should be able to get 3 extra with improved ability regardless of only 2 Magic appointed to Adept abilities. Chummer will not let me. (Or raise 2 if I have one adept Magic point).

What Chummer will let me that I should not be able to is to Improve Ability Magical skills.

Canīt find anything with the search-function (read use) here but someone should have seen this before.

Is Chummer wrong or my rules? In most cases I actually trust Chummer more...

Thanks for a fantastic program.
/Drakir
Ooops wrong place, can someone move it. I donīt know how.
Yerameyahu
:/ Is it the case that you can only have max 2 ranks of the power because you only have 2 'adept' Magic points? I can never remember when you use the full and when you use the split amounts, and the whole FAQ/debate about it doesn't help. smile.gif
Halinn
I believe it is the case that Chummer uses the FAQ ruling for how mystic adept magic works, rather than the SR4A book's contradictory stance on that matter. IIRC, there's a way to toggle it to use the SR4A rules.
ChatNoir
Here's the FAQ entry :
QUOTE
Though mystic adepts must split their Magic between Magic-based skills and adept powers, it says that for all other purposes, including the limits of adept powers, the mystic adept uses his full Magic attribute. Does this mean that a mystic adept with Magic 6 who has allocated 2 points to Magic skills and 4 points to adept powers can cast Force 6 spells without flinching?

The Magic points allocated towards Magic-based skills counts for all aspects of those skills. This includes: Magic-linked skill tests (Summoning, Spellcasting, Enchanting, etc.), maximum spell Force, overcasting, etc.

For a mystic adept’s adept powers, only the points allocated towards adept powers apply. This includes powers that require Magic Tests like Attribute Boost, the maximum rating of leveled adept powers, etc.

For all other purposes—i.e., non-Magic-linked skills—the mystic adept’s full Magic attribute is used: pressing through astral barriers, initiation grade limit, Masking metamagic, being assensed, etc.

So for the example above, a mystic adept with Magic 6 with 2 points devoted to Magic skills and 4 points to adept powers, the maximum Force he can cast at is 4, and anything over Force 2 is Physical Drain. His adept powers are limited to rating 4 or lower.

So yeah, if you limit you "adept magic" to 2, you're stuck with level 2 power at max.
drakir
The rules say clearly "for all other purposes, INCLUDING the determination of the maximum level for adept powers, the characterīs FULL Magic attribute is used." (page 187 SR4, p 195 SR4A)

"Such a character will not have as many adept powers, nor will they be able to cast spells with the same SKILL as true magicians"

The only interpretation I have is that a mystic adept has fewer points for buying powers (of course) and fewer DICE in Magic based skills. All other uses count Magic attribute at full value. In my opinion even Force.

There's even the example of Roxanne the mystic adept (page 187 SR4, p 195 SR4A) who allocates one point to powers and three points to Magic skills and then buys 4 levels of rapid healing. (Which Chummer will not allow).

/Drakir
Can someone move this to rules or Chummer. I feel bad about it being in the wrong place....
drakir
@ Chat Noir. Who writes these answers to FAQs? And where do I find the latest? All I can read about them is that they are not very good.
When I read your FAQ entry, I canīt undestand how they interpret "including the limits of adept powers" as ...
I guess not reading it?

IMHO there's only one way to interpret that. Adept power levels are maxed by FULL Magic attribute.

It does not say anything specific about Force of spells but "all other purposes" is pretty clear to me.
KnightAries
ChatNoir's link is the latest faq.

http://www.shadowrun4.com/game-resources/f...sked-questions/
Halinn
A bit of background to that FAQ entry: it was written before SR4A changed the rules, but the FAQ entry was not removed. Since the FAQ has an update date later than the release of SR4A, it counts as errata to some.
SpellBinder
QUOTE (Halinn @ Aug 11 2012, 05:10 PM) *
I believe it is the case that Chummer uses the FAQ ruling for how mystic adept magic works, rather than the SR4A book's contradictory stance on that matter. IIRC, there's a way to toggle it to use the SR4A rules.

There is. Options > House Rules > "Max. Spirit Force and Mystic Adept Power Levels based on total MAG Attribute." Check that, click [OK], close & restart Chummer, and it'll be in effect.

As for the FAQs, I'd suggest taking them with a kiloton of salt.
Glyph
QUOTE (Halinn @ Aug 12 2012, 05:38 AM) *
A bit of background to that FAQ entry: it was written before SR4A changed the rules, but the FAQ entry was not removed. Since the FAQ has an update date later than the release of SR4A, it counts as errata to some.

SR4A didn't change that particular rule, though. It was the same in SR4 (including an example of a character with 1 power point in adept abilities using it to get 4 ranks of a power).

I love how the "fix" in Chummer is to activate the actual RAW as a house rule. rotfl.gif
KarmaInferno
To be fair, the FAQ author has expressed that the bit about splitting Magic ratings in the FAQ is intended as outright errata. Given Catalyst's track record on issuing errata, putting it in the FAQ may have been the only way he had to get it out in any official capacity.


-k
Glyph
I'm sure the FAQ author was going on things he was told, but if they actually intended to change the rules, they must have changed their minds afterwards, since they left it as if for SR4A. It's a shame, because it undermines the authority of an FAQ that has some decent rulings and answers in it.
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