At the same time, what if I want to transfer over my Glamoured Elf Face/Sam who's sitting at about 1.7 ESS?

Just do it?
Or, in other words: How do you know, that these 4,3 lost essence impair him in such a way that he'll be unable to fulfill the face role? Maybe it reduces his limit by, lets say 1 per 2 full points of essence lost? Maybe Glamour gives him a higher limit? Maybe his Pheromone ware gives a higher limit to offset the loss?

We'll only know once the final product hits the shelf, although I strongly suspect that metagenetic qualities probably won't be included in the core book.

I'm not sure how much I'm allowed to say, but I think if your build is anything like it should be, you'll be fine.

It all depends on how strong the influence of Essence is, yes. What I'm saying is that it is sensible to worry about that limiting factor because if it is too strong, it could cause a problem with existing concepts.

And yeah, Glamour probably wouldn't be in the core book,

Sensible ... Well, one might discuss the sensibility of porting over a character concept that's heavily reliant on specialized ware or qualities

It is perfectly natural for characters not being able to be converted between editions.
For example, my namesake dwarf merc suddenly died from biosystem overstress between 2nd and 3rd, so I had to rebuild him in a different way.

I probably won't be able to convert ANY of my current characters, because all use either 'ware from Augmentation, adept powers from Street Magic or qualities from Runner's Companion. It is very likely that only some or even none will be possible to convert with only the core book. I 'worry' about this more than how new mechanics will influence them (after all, one of them is really really talented in close combat ... but with a mere 7 in the skill, he's suddenly only on a good average, despite all his karma ).

It's a point of thought, IMO, sure, but essentially it's just idle speculation.

Edit: to make sense.

Yeah, but if you're shifting an existing game over, it's not like you can't houserule in the missing elements until they actually exist in the new edition.

It is one thing for a concept to use rules that haven't been put into the new edition yet. It is another thing entirely for the new rules to make the concept impossible.

Extrapolating from current edition core rulebook content, that would require me to 'house rule' (rather: write):
Runner's Companion (for qualities, SURGE, lifestyle rules), Augmentation ('ware, serious wounds), Arsenal (drugs, martial arts, optional rules), Unwired, Street Magic, Way of the Adept, WAR! (yes, I use RIG, SoftWeave and some other items, shaddup ) and a few more.

No thanks. I'll stay with 4th until at least the core books are out. And even then, I'll evaluate the decision based on the quality of those books

I'll probably buy the main rulebook either way, but the rest will have to rely on the impression that one makes on me.


Sure. But again: Too many variables to allow more than stabs in the dark. And panic, of course, but you're always allowed to panic.

SETI at home.

Folding at home.

I do donate chunks of my computing power, thanks. (Also, thanks for reminding me to download one or the other to the new PC.)

And if Dell (Evo), Black & Decker (Horizon), and Microsoft (Aztechnology) hard-coded in the processor sharing to every product (both hardware and software) that they sold and you purchased without you having any choice in the matter, what would you do then?

Welcome to the world in 2057+, everything you own is actually controlled by someone else.

I'd make my own changes - nothing stopping me from building my own computer, anyways.

Your own computer sure, but how about your refrigerator, microwave, toaster, trideo, etc.?

Yeah, you're right - it's perfectly possible to build a viable melee troll, even one that isn't a one-trick pony. That wasn't my point (to be fair, my last post was focused more on CC's problems and was unclear). My point was that as is, Attributes shouldn't be costed the same, because investing in Str is far less valuable than investing in other stats like Agi, Int, hell even Log. Possible solutions could be having Str cost less or combining Str and Bod.


If there is a decision developers must make between making new (interesting, balanced) rules, and worrying about existing characters transferring over to the new edition...I hope they err on the side of the new rules.


It's hard to do this when even the basic components you use come from the manufacturers with the features baked right in from the get-go. You'd basically have to manufacture every single component yourself to ensure that there's nothing extra.

aside: not trying to pick on you here, your posts were just the ones I wanted to respond to

I feel like there's a Dos Equis Guy meme to be made here...

1: As for the disproportionate value of attributes, it's a much better fix to adjust the actual value of them. Physical Limits will probably do this for Strength, in some part.

2: I think this is actually a false dichotomy. Interesting new rules don't have to mean that old concepts can't work with them. However, it may mean that the rules relating to that concept have to be notably altered in order to make them fit - for example, perhaps part of the benefit of Tailored Pheromones would be to offset Limit Loss due to Essence Loss - I say part, because I do still think they should do something more than just that so that there's a reason to get those in and of themselves.

3: Those sorts of features would be an element of software - it is the role of the operating system to control the hardware, and not all operating systems are of commercial development. This goes back to the conceptual problem that it's hard to believe that the corps would have the kind of control that certain cyberpunk tropes require them to have; it's an area where suspension is required.

Dos Equis Guy - not familiar with that. I'll take it as something positive

1. Could do.
2. It's not a false dichotomy, only that IF there is a conflict between new rules and existing characters, the consideration for existing characters should be secondary (imo).
3. Software doesn't have complete control. Look at all the attempts nowadays to control video streams using the hardware to keep a person from "stealing" movies. Software runs on hardware, and so is dependent on the hardware to do what it asks. If there's hardware DRM built in, it's just physically impossible for software to do something without altering the hardware.

Which may well be a large part of the justification for 'decks. If your standard commlink is forced by hardware to mesh itself with GOD or something, circumventing that would be the highest priority for a decker.

+1

Or making Strength do more.

Armor encumbrance? Strength + Body.

Melee combat? Strength for most Blunt weapons, and Axes. Agility for most Blade weapons, and stun batons. Character's choice for Unarmed.








This might also be the case for "commercially available" cyberdecks - some or all of the chips would have to be replaced by a "deckmeister" anyway, to lose the giant "come hit me now" targeting reticle your own deck would end up painting on you, otherwise.

Every decker worth their salt should have a high Hardware skill to represent this. Just buying off-the-shelf components and lego'ing them together probably won't cut it.

It also wasn't "for a few years" at all.


As for the hardware telling on me? First, again, billions of customer devices submitting their reports, who's to look for hidden illicit activity there? Second, just use the hardware from the previous generation where it doesn't.

In fact, there are rules for designing and burning yoru own chipsets and such in 4E - and there have been similar rules in EVERY edition's Matrix-focussed splatbook(s).

It's a set of beer ads that's gone absolutely memetic.

1: Should do - it's a good opportunity to help with the balance on it.
2: Perhaps, but it's unlikely for it to become truly impossible for a concept to be somehow transferred - there is a difference, after all, between concept and specific implementation.
3: That's perhaps a little outside my area, but I suspect that's circumstances where the hardware and software are provided by the same entity or at least 2 entities with the same goals. In any case, things like the assignment of processor cycles ARE completely the domain of the operating system.

The Most Interesting Man in the World: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Most_Inte...an_in_the_World

Collection of Commercials: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U18VkI0uDxE

Stay Thirsty, my Friends.

1. I only say "could do" because your proposal is one of many possibilities. So yes, we agree something should be done to fix the imbalance of the Attributes.
2. Now I'm confused - why did you initially ask about whether your cybered/glamoured elf would be viable with the new Ess/Limit rules? You seem to be saying here that of course it will be possible.
3. It's also a little outside my area, but I think you'll find that you're being too narrow in your view of who works with who. There are vast consortiums deciding hardware specs and controls, it's no little collusion between 2 entities (unless your definition of entity here is including a massive consortium of companies). Doesn't seem that hard to believe it'll continue into 2070+. And the OS can only request cycles on the processor. So for the software side of things, only the OS can assign cycles. But on the hardware side if the processor doesn't have a reason to honor the request, it won't. Suppose the processor has it's own on-chip logic for cycle assignment.

3a. Annnnnnndddd this is getting into real-world computing, something we should stay away from for SR.

1: Yeah, there's a lot of possibilities, but I think we can agree that they should do something to make Strength more valuable.
2: My concern is the STRENGTH of the effect. If Essence Loss takes too much off the limit, there's not gonna be much getting around it, and thus the cybered Face vanishes.
3: Suffice it to say that would cause some serious problems in OS development. I could see some machines using such hardware, but there'd be a serious market for processors without such restrictions - even if the AAA's don't sell them, the AA's would.

3a: I know, it just frustrates me - it SHOULD make sense in modern terms or at least have some sort of excuse as to why it doesn't; it's not really all that hard to do the latter, since you can just retcon in some new model of computing being proposed after the first Crash. I'm inclined to assume this is the case just because it bothers me less.

Well, if the extent of the limit isn't that harsh that old mixed faces will be obviously underpowered, then I think it'll be able to work out. If it's just a minor penalty(every 1.5 FULL points perhaps), then it won't be bad at all; If anything it might be just that little something that symbolizes that a heavily cybered person-even if a lot of it isn't visible-is just that tiny bit 'off.' I have concerns as well, as I mentioned-Limits are, IMO, a good idea that need to be handled carefully. Too much and then the game becomes too Points AND Gear dependent(I already do, as I said, fear for lower skills this time around, if the hit or target number system isn't tweaked.) Too little and it won't be noticed. There's a sorta sweet spot that should be hit without making any one thing too important/split the 'veterans' to the 'beginners' too much in terms of how successful a character is.

As for reasons to want to convert characters, because some people have long running favorites, or just favorites in general? I of course can see favorites wanting to copy over. (Though to be fair, Monster may take a few books or using old ones at the table which we've been known to do-he's a king-size fomori with strength metagenic qualities bringing him to amusing levels. Then again with Strength actually possibly becoming more important I hope that won't overpower him beyond our usual level-if anything, the tiny benefit to having Strength be nearly useless in 4e was the fact you could stack it for character purposes and not throw the game off. )

The sam-face I have as well; But seeing that sentence(my fella is around 2 essence I think), makes me a little more relieved I'll be able to bring him back too. My Bear Shifter dude will likely have to sit out a couple of books, but I really liked 4e's shifter rules(3e's were just...no just no), but we can probably mix and match the books for awhile with that as well.

There has always been characters that been lost between editions.

I had a human martial artist, with adept powers, high attributes, medium skills and low resources.

He was first created under SR1 rules with The Grimoire rules added.

It was no problem converting him to SR2, and I could even re-created him and it would essential become the same character. He retired before 3rd edition was published, but he could be created under SR3 and would be the same character.

But when SR4 was published it was impossible to re-create him. The restraint that you could not use more than 200 points on attributes made it impossible to start with the high attributes that you could start with under SR1-3. So does that make SR4 a bad system, just because them won't let me make the character I could make in previous editions?

So maybe your cyber-face will be less effective under SR5, but what about all the other types of characters? Play something else and get on with having fun roleplaying, instead of rollplaying.

Where did 'rollplaying' come into this? There's a big difference between 'being able to play a concept somewhat useful to the team that I really like' and 'JUST playing for the numbers'

If I had wanted to optimize, I would not have been a sam/face mix in the first place and instead optimized for one or the other. If i wanted to Optimize I'd have dumped strength for every
character instead of actually 'wasting' points on it. If I'd have wanted to optimize I definitely wouldn't have played a Bear shifter Mystic Adept for a character, whose points were split in between and whose combat pools were lowered due to his natural low Agility cap. There's a million in one concepts I would have done instead of some of my favorites if I wanted to just plain 'rollplay.' My method is generally pick a concept I like, do SOME numbers playing to get that concept solid and workable, and then run with that, not milk every die in the world out. And I too have retired characters between editions, of course. But I also managed to keep a favorite going from here to there(a couple from 2 to 3, and I managed to get one or two going from 3 to 4 as well). Not all, but it's always *nice* to do it.

Sorry if I sounded snappy, but the term 'Rollplay' is on my pet peeve list of phrases that get utterly overused/misused. I think it's a term that CAN be used but it gets used way too much, too often, for the wrong things. Just because someone is concerned about a concept, and may actually want to play certain concepts, does not mean they are the textbook definition of a 'rollplayer' who only cares about numbers. (I don't think you were quite implying that, but again, I don't think what I was speaking of is 'rollplaying.' It's 'Seeing if I can take some favorite concepts and still manage to have them effective for their chosen job.')

Edit: It may be that I just have a different definition of 'rollplaying.' For me, it's when a person completely guts and discombobulates a concept for the sole purpose of squeezing out more dice.

Thanks for the parameters.
Wow, That is somewhat Distrubing...

...excuse me?

Just because the mechanics are important to someone, does not mean they are rollplaying.

::angry::

AYup. Her ANime friend is mostly done with make-up, but Human Barbie is a lot like the "Real Catgirl" from a few years ago who went heavy on the plastic surgery.

Back to SR5, Strength is given more importance. It being well known as the go-to dumpstat for years bugged me a lot, and it looks like I wasn't the only one, which is good. "Team Big Guy" is a classic role that sort of vanished over the years, which was sad. Sometimes, you just need a guy who can scoop up a wounded teammate, kick open a door, and one-punch a security guard on the way out. That's just *cool*.

Got a Troll that does just that. Started in 3rd Edition and Jumped the Shark to 4th Edition. He is quite the bruiser.
Got an Oni that does that too.

There's a Human Ken Doll around as well. He's not QUITE to the extent of Human Barbie but he's pretty unsettling.

As for the Strength stat, hell, that's my Bear shifter dude and the human-looking(well, in the face-he still has horns and is over ten feet tall) Fomori. I love playing the big dude, I just sucked up the inherent disadvantage of it this time around. They basically exist to kick down doors and carry a lot of stuff for their team-mates(and the Bear shifter also exists to give answers to questions like if a team-mate asks 'Does a bear s&% in the woods?' 'Well, actually, I prefer my restroom with a magazine.')

Now, at the same time-I wouldn't want to see Strength end up back where it was in SR3. It was far too important there, I felt-it's link to melee combat was a bit too strong-as I said, I like the option of being an equally good strong OR fast fighter(or balanced, hell) because people have different tastes. My other buddy at the table likes the 'fragile speedster' melee types for example. If it can get a happy medium between SR3 and SR4 for the Strength stat, I think that would be about perfect. In my book, a happy medium is 'Not punished for wanting to focus on the stat, but ALSO not punished for NOT wanting to make the stat your main focus.)

Btw-Logic needs love as well, being the *second* dumpstat.

Really? Logic has a ton of skills attached to it, and in SR4A, at least, if you use the optional rule for Hacking (Skill + Attribute, Cap by Program) it is necessary for a hacker to do his job well. Rarely do I see the Logic Stat just "Dumped." In fact, I see Charisma dumped more often than Strength is. Though that is likely play style, more than anything.

Different places are different-I actually see Logic dumped a bit more than Charisma(but neither as much as Strength.) I mean I guess in the end, those are the 3 stats I see dumped more often than the rest, usually in order of Strength>Logic>Charisma, though I imagine some places see it other ways around. (For some reason some folks who I've played with actually LIKE the Charisma stat and actually try not to 'dump' it if at all possible, which I know other tables have as their big dumpstat.)

I think there's always going to be an obvious dump stat for each character. Thog the Troll Smasher isn't going to need a lot of Logic, while Wizzy the Wizard doesn't always have much use for Strength. And when the system encourages specializing (which I think it does), that's definitely going to happen. But I think it's also important to have a consequence for dumping any given stat, so that there isn't an obvious dump stat that everybody takes.

The latter part is more what I'm speaking of. I think it's perfectly fine to have a character who doesn't need one stat as much(or perhaps as a part of the character), but it's just the line between making a stat so crippling to dump it discourages certain concepts(like a Superbrain character with little in the way of Charisma), but at the same time avoiding making a stat an obvious dump for MOST concepts.

It's all about the usefulness across the concepts field. Whoever you're making, you want high Agility and Reaction, and preferably Willpower and Body as well. Everything else is useful only to a handful of archetypes, while those are useful pretty universally.

Which is why I hope those are stats do not increase limits by much.

Thing is-it's going to be tough to deflate the value of Body, Reaction, and Willpower. Those stats keep you alive. . People like to stay alive, and depending on how lethal the game is at the table(regardless of what the book lethality is-I mean for example, we play a more 'cinematic' game that isn't terribly lethal if we aren't total idiots), but still, The Big Three as I call them pretty much have a lot of baked-in value.

Yes, being smart keeps you alive too, but it's a pen and paper game at a table(or wherever), and sometime, somewhere, no matter how smart you are, you're going to have to likely roll dice to stay alive. Dice are finicky little )&"¤(/& who don't always do what you need them to at the moment, so people-unless they're playing a very specific concept that has the character extremely sickly, weak-willed or have the reaction time of a slug-often like to at least tip the odds in their favor.

Go ahead and show me a roleplayer who likes the idea of their character ceasing to exist for out-of-game reasons.

Seriously, that comment is both inaccurate and out of line.

As to Logic, given that Matrix stuff is moving to Attribute+Skill, it's going to be fine. If Strength contributes substantially to Physical Limit and armour moves to Body+Strength (or some other Strength-involved calculation, perhaps one tying back to Physical Limit), that will do a lot to make it more valuable. Intuition is already made plenty valuable between the new Initiative and the fact that it is a factor in dodging (which will buff Intuition based traditions, perhaps making them the definitive combat mages; personally I'd like that as it suits a character concept I'm playing currently quite nicely). All in all, this would leave attributes pretty nicely balanced - you can use Intuition or Reaction (or both), Strength or Body for armour (or both) witch further benefits from each (higher limit versus being tougher, IE, more damage versus being tougher)...

Intuition always has been the go to munchkin tradition for combat mages. It's the reason why it's one of my flags for 'munchkin' self-made traditions.

It covers initiative.
It covers defense from astral attacks. (intution + dodge/astral combat).
It defends against physical illusions and is the second stat used to resist most things after willpower.
It covers perception... and perception is critical for any combat type.
It's harder to buff... but if your'e a mage you're probably going to quicken/sustain focus/have a spirit sustain an increase intuition on you anyhow after you get will buffed.

You generally only need 2 or 3 logic anyhow for active foci limits... and you get your free knowledges off intution as well.


So no... it doesn't only just make it the go to combat mage tradition stat now.


I've yet to see if the mage problems are going to be addressed... the single biggest is that for most mages every skill comes down to spellcasting + intuition once you have a spell to replicate the needed skill. (or a spirit/spirit power meaning the second most needed skill is summoning... not necessarily binding).

Spellcasting + Magic, Falconer, not Intuition. And while it is certainly a one-skill for mages, the flipside is that if that were changed (perhaps to a skill for each spell category, with groups being Combat/Counterspelling/Manipulation and Health/Detection/Illusion/Ritual), the other things you need as a mage would have to get less expensive. A lot of SR4A mage builds can't fit anything in, skills wise, save for their magic skills.

And I disagree with your assertion that Intuition is the one true combat mage stat. Given that you can augment your Drain Resistance through Cerebral Booster and still have a decent chunk of Essence left over, Logic traditions can do extremely well for themselves in building combat mages. Similarly, Charisma based traditions get all their extra spirits to work with, potentially acting as a miniature squad in their own right. Intuition seems, in a lot of ways, to be the odd one out (more, perhaps, for streams than for traditions), because while it does augment Initiative, a great many people don't care all that much about Astral Combat in general, and the perception bonus is maybe a few dice - a hit, or at best 2. Perception bonuses are easy enough to get, anyways.

What can I say I had intuition on the brain...


For any primary combatant... initiative is of prime importance. Going before the street sam is the difference between him filling you full of lead and you bolting him down. Even against other casters... the dice are loaded in favor of the offense. For any powergamed character in this game of eggshells w/ sledgehammers... attacking first is attacking last generally.


A spirit can go from nowhere in sight to right in your face ripping it off astrally before you can do a thing about it.
Astral defense is a mandatory problem for any combat mage. Especially as regards astral combat a mage does not have first strike capability with spells. Winning initiative is no defense against this. (exmple... spirit on the other side of a wall... comes screaming through it on his action at astral speeds). So no, a combat mage cannot get away without any astral combat ability if he wants to be able to effectively fight spirits.


Once again... all those direct combat spells people love for their low drain against living/magical targets... only work if you can see the target. You can't see the target unless you can make the perception/assensing test. Once again... intuition. Same goes for things like avoiding ambushes... assensing/perception intuition.


The only thing going for logic tradition in combat mage is that it's easy to boost logic with cyber or bio. What are you gong to do activate 9 foci at once?! Each of questionable strength....

Charisma again hard to boost... only thing going is it's extra spirit space... Easy to use spirit(s) to cast and maintain increase attribute spells on you to boost drain stats. But it's also extremely expensive... bound spirits cost big $$$$. You're reliant on your spirits to fight for you... because once again... you have limited defense against astral spirits in your face... low initiative on your own... and limited perceptive capabilities in comparison.

But any attribute can be boosted by magic... without sacrificing essence and magic to go with it. So no... drain pools aren't all that much different.


So no, your argument is almost completely baseless and ignores all the important bases for a combat mage.

Agreed. It is absolutely possible to roleplay AND keep an eye on the mechanics / build a competent character.

Roleplay does not equal character incompetence.

Bye
Thanee

And the other side of that coin: character competence does not necessarily preclude roleplay.

And that is the rub... you talk of powergamed characters, and not everyone plays that way. *shrug*



Which only matters if you care about Astral Space. Again, not all spellcasters do. Spirits can do nothing to you from Astral Space, if you do not interface with it. They must manifest to have an effect. And guess what, the pass they manifest, THEY DO NOTHING ELSE, and are fodder for EVERYONE in the physical realm until they can act. So, No, Spirits are not a big threat to Mages, unless the Mages are stupid enough to travel Astral Space a lot.



Perception Rolls for the obvious are not needed. And regardless, Perception Rolls are the easiest to raise. *shrug*



Why are your foci of questionable Strength, exactly? And there is nothing wrong with having many active foci, if that is what is needed at the time. Of course, you won't be too stealthy unless you are a high grade initiate with Extended Masking, but...



I have seen many a Charisma Tradition Mage, and Few of them rely upon their spirits to fight for them. Not saying it does not happen, just that it does not happen often at our table. There are other things they can be doing.



I think that you put too much stock in Intuition as a must have for Mages, Falconer. My experience shows more Logic and Charisma Mages than Intuition Mages. In Fact, Charisma Mages far outstrip the others from my experience, but many of those mages dual-function as Faces, as well, so, again, that may be a play style thing.

I did rather well with Charisma tradition casters. Elf/Pixie + SuRGE (Metagenetic Improvement CHA), Exceptional Attribute, and Magic boosts. Tell me THAT doesn't give a good drain soak. It also makes you at LEAST a passable face (40 BP spare for Influence SG, 16 BP for Intimidation which should be included imho, and the Empathy Sensor Software for good measure). It's one of the reasons I'm trying to stay away from anything approaching traditional spellcasters with my latest crop of characters.

So your point TJ is that you completely cede the astral... you're no combat mage if you can't control the astral. Sorry but that's just pure simple... the job of a combat mage is to provide the magical equivalent of air superiority. You don't provide that by not even putting up a fight.

Also contingent with that because assensing is *NOT* the easiest skill to boost. Only mundane perception has a ton of bonuses (and also a ton of penalties... chameleon... camo... sneak suits... and everyone's favorite concealment so effectively you end up with a ton of bonuses offset by a ton of penalties for anyone seriously interested in stealth).

Good luck being a good combat mage when you're not even good at piercing Masking to detect threats. That's another sub-job which requires a serious assensing skill & pool.


You have minimal defense against astral attackers to your self... so your answer is to not control the astral one of the prime jobs of a combat mage.

You ignore the point about initiative altogether.

And yes... what are you packing 5 active strength 2 foci? See my point... if you're using sustaining foci they generally need to be reasonably high force (3-5 or so each). Some like power foci at force 2 work well out of chargen... others like centering & shielding foci again also can work. But generally I find most mages end up with a power focus and two sustaining foci. If they do go for multiples... typically it's a mix of force 2 oddball foci like a weapon focus, centering focus, shielding focus, power focus... none of the others tend to do much. At magic 5... that's 3 force 2 foci & one force 4 sustaining active at once... and it's easy enough to switch off one as a free action when you ready (simple) your weapon foci and activate it (simple) when you need it. Nowhere near the 9 boosted logic will get you... even if you do dumpstat logic to 2 or 3.... that's 2 force 5 foci... or a force 4 and 2 force 3's... so it's simply less variety of foci active at once... but the ones which are active are stronger.



I didn't say the others couldn't fight. Just that when building an optimal 'combat mage'... intuition tends to be the best attribute bar none. And I think I presented a viable argument that makes it far from a weak drain attribute given all the secondary uses intuition ties to. I believe anyone who argues otherwise has only had their GM's play softball with their casters.

You can hide this about not everyone plays 'optimal'... which is fine... but that does not mean that intuition is not a very strong drain attribute already without any other buffing coming in SR5.

My thoughts and experiences with Logic-Intuition-Charisma mages:


-I actually find, due to Cerebral Boosters, that Logic IS pretty much a bangin' stat for a stereotypical 'combat mage' (which I see as a mage who can mix it up in combat with melee, guns, or whatnot as well.) You can, say, purchase a reasonable Logic(4), and boost that up. Now that doesn't mean the drop Intuition, but in this case, if I were to be trying to optimize a mage like this, I'd probably hit up Logic and Intuition 4, boost Logic to 6 with boosters(you could go to 7 if you take Restricted Gear or don't bother with Availability limits at chargen at your table, but 6 is the book-legal), and take a Logic tradition. The 4 intuition is still solid(and if you have a sustaining focus with Reflexes or synaptic boosters-those are costly, yes, but for an optimizing mage they're golden-which a lot of combat mages take anyway, you're pretty much good to go.) Cerebral Boosters are not too expensive themselves, as well as being light on essence.

My Mystic Adept is a Druid-based tradition of Oak, and uses Intuition. It's a 4. He does quite fine with it. I picked the tradition because bear shifter+druid+Oak really seemed to fit nicely.

-Generally, if they want to go the no-ware Combat Mage route, then Intuition at that point becomes indeed probably the likely way to go, though their Drain stats will NOT be as high, unless they want to splash for the 6 intuition, which is unlikely, so they're probably running with a 5. If they go the sustaining focus route for Initiative, either the Logic or the Intuition mage can end up with similar initiatives. Hell, if Logic Mage decides to splash for the natural 5 after all, his main stat is now a 7.

-Charisma is generally used for people who want to maximize their Spirits and/or Astral Combat. Thing is, the Logic or Intuition mages above are unlikely to even bother with this past something like a 3 to get them by in Astral Combat, if they don't want to sacrifice their Physical attributes(which, for a combat mage, they may actually want some okay scores of.)

-For a flat pew pew casty mage who doesn't care much for combat, I still think Logic is the best bet for them if they go cyber, or Intuition if not, unless, again, they want the Charisma goodies.

I don't know-I just don't see Intuition as THAT much *obviously* better, unless it's a very specific situation of a mage who A. Doesn't much care for having a spirit army, and B. Doesn't want any cyber. In the event of the mage, regardless of 'pewpew' or 'both physical and spell stuff', who wants cyber, Logic's going to win out for Drain, though they won't *drop* intuition. (Again, they can actually save points here-they can invest in the 4 logic and get a 6 Drain Stat out of it.) So even if it's hypothetically a tiny bit better-it's not THAT much so, I don't feel. Going early on is important-but here's the catch. 1 point of Intuition is not going to break it. Can Initiative order be 1 point different? Sure it can. But if a mage REALLY wants to go first, they're going to be loading up on that Sustaining Focus with Level 3 Reflexes to get the edge there I think instead of stacking Intuition, or they'd be getting more out of it.

Edit: I also wanted to make clear I don't think Intuition is a WEAK Drain Stat, and I don't know many people who dump the stat anyway regardless if they're playing a Logic and Charisma mage, but that's probably why I feel this way. Even Logic/Charisma mages I've seen are packing a least a 4 in the stat anyway. Yes, in theory, an Intuition mage can dump Logic, where a Logic mage doesn't necessarily want to dump Intuition, but the Logic mage can buy a reasonable Logic skill and then further boost it.

Elfenrir:
When it comes to astral combat... it's not so much the ability to engage in it offensively. Cha3 is generally good for 3 strong bound spirits. Most characters don't even care about their ability to do astral combat damage... since a manabolt in most cases works far better than trying to pimp slap a spirit or ward.

The primary concern for mages in astral combat is defense... not getting their face ripped off by opposing spirits. So they can survive one round to nuke the spirit with a spell. Most players are right... their spells are their primary offense... the problem is that pure offense gets you killed when you have no defense and the other side can hit you first.


I also tend to roll on the assumption that generally after a few months every mage is going to have a way to max out both their willpower and their drain stat. A favorite trick for this is a spirit of man with increase wil & increase int... have the spirit cast both at force 6... you've softmaxed both at 5 most likely... 4 successes on 12 dice... and you've maxed both out. (possession types have an easier path to power... possess themselves with a force 9 spirit and laugh as it's attributes replace theirs... especially if they've boosted their logic prior to possession). Spirit sustains the spell... you're golden for two services... you leave your health sustaining focus free to pack an increase ref.


As far as the last... I tend to find that most of my chars in SR4 have either dumped logic or they've dumped intuition but not both. Either the character is book smart with a lot of knowledge skills... or intuitive smart with a lot of street knowledge type skills for the free knowledges.

Then there is as always... place for the 'Mungo smart' chars as well :). Did you hear an ice cream truck?