Full Version: Astral Space, Essence, and the Awakened
| QUOTE |
| For clarity's sake this sounds like a good idea, but the primary value would be organizational, and we can't exactly do a full print of SR3R. |
I am relatively sure that we cannot do a full reprint, but I would love to try and rewite as much of it as possible, or sumarize it so that we can publich it.
Oh, hey
5) SPELL RANGES!
Can't believe I forgot about that one.
5) SPELL RANGES!
Can't believe I forgot about that one.
Elaborate?
I don't like the idea of giving spellcasting an innate range, but we do need to clarify certain issues. For instance, if you're standing on the earth (Background Count 0) casting a spell at the Moon (BC 8) through space (BC 10), what penalties do you take?
~J
I don't like the idea of giving spellcasting an innate range, but we do need to clarify certain issues. For instance, if you're standing on the earth (Background Count 0) casting a spell at the Moon (BC 8) through space (BC 10), what penalties do you take?
~J
Well there's a few issues here:
A) casting at things too far away to see. Since things like fog, soft cover and darkness and other visual modifiers apply when casting a spell, I think that distance should also have a factor, for the same reason. Unfortunately "vision" doesn't have a range increment yet, does it?
B) casting through background counts. I have no idea how to deal with this. Maybe treat them like casting through astral barriers?
A) casting at things too far away to see. Since things like fog, soft cover and darkness and other visual modifiers apply when casting a spell, I think that distance should also have a factor, for the same reason. Unfortunately "vision" doesn't have a range increment yet, does it?
B) casting through background counts. I have no idea how to deal with this. Maybe treat them like casting through astral barriers?
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Elaborate? I don't like the idea of giving spellcasting an innate range, but we do need to clarify certain issues. For instance, if you're standing on the earth (Background Count 0) casting a spell at the Moon (BC  through space (BC 10), what penalties do you take?~J |
it depends on what spell you are going to cast.... you tn might be so freaking high that you will not be able to affect things anyhow... ie ... what are you going to cast at the moon? fireball ... I am pretty sure that will not be effective....
even if you had a super high magification scope... and you saw the astronaught on the moon walking around .... the magic will travel to the target via metaplane. I would just use the higher of the two background counts... if you are in a high bgc, then it will make your concentration tougher... if the target is in a high bgc, then your magic will have more magic debris or astral static to pass through. That is at least how I see it.
and BC between is moot ... just like barriers and spirits.
So your opinion is to use the higher of the two endpoints?
This seems workable, and doesn't have the problem of using one endpoint (resulting in being able to cast either to the moon from Earth or to Earth from the moon without penalty), and the places where it potentially breaks down aren't present in Shadowrun canon, but let's address them anyway in case someone uses the ruleset for a futuristic game.
What if someone surrounds the moon in a clear bubble and fills it with an atmosphere and biosphere sufficient to produce a Background Count of 0? With a sufficiently powerful telescope can you Stunbolt someone walking around up there without penalty?
~J
This seems workable, and doesn't have the problem of using one endpoint (resulting in being able to cast either to the moon from Earth or to Earth from the moon without penalty), and the places where it potentially breaks down aren't present in Shadowrun canon, but let's address them anyway in case someone uses the ruleset for a futuristic game.
What if someone surrounds the moon in a clear bubble and fills it with an atmosphere and biosphere sufficient to produce a Background Count of 0? With a sufficiently powerful telescope can you Stunbolt someone walking around up there without penalty?
~J
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| So your opinion is to use the higher of the two endpoints? This seems workable, and doesn't have the problem of using one endpoint (resulting in being able to cast either to the moon from Earth or to Earth from the moon without penalty), and the places where it potentially breaks down aren't present in Shadowrun canon, but let's address them anyway in case someone uses the ruleset for a futuristic game. What if someone surrounds the moon in a clear bubble and fills it with an atmosphere and biosphere sufficient to produce a Background Count of 0? With a sufficiently powerful telescope can you Stunbolt someone walking around up there without penalty? ~J |
Correct, I would say that the higher of the two will affect you.
if the moon has a BC of 0 it would not matter that there is emptiness in between.
Magic would travel the metaplanes then manifest at the other point. Magic states that spells originate within the target.... this would follow that logic.
Here's a question for you, then… what about elemental manipulations? They travel through space. Likewise, what happens if you cast Levitate and then start levitating straight up out of the manasphere? Do you keep track of your die rolls and drop successes as each TN is exceeded?
That method works, but is heavy on bookkeeping.
~J
That method works, but is heavy on bookkeeping.
~J
Elemental manipulations and the Levitate spell do not work the same way (levitate specifically in your example). Elemental Manipulations do not 'originate within their target', they originate from the magician and travel the intervening distance to the target where they take effect. Hence casting a stunbolt at a guy you can see in a mirror will knock the guy out, but casting a lightning bolt will break the mirror. If you cast levitate on yourself and leave the manasphere, you suffer all the effects of moving into BGC10 (as well as the entire 'no atmosphere' respiration and pressure problems), which will likely kill the spell anyways. You CAN, however, use the telescope to cast levitate on the guy on the moon, and then move him around in the area you can see via this telescope.
Two thoughts:
IIRC, magic doesn't travel through the metaplanes, its the manipulation of mana (a medium permeating both both astral and physical planes, as well as the metas), so the interveneing Manawarp should effect it, like a phone call routed across a bad circuit. No conductive medium, no effect.
As for Open Tests, I'll repost this idea in the main thread, but I was thinking it depends on what you decide you want to model with these test. I can't post a probability list like some, but open tests do seem to run the gamut of probable results. To produce more normalized results, consider making this change to open tests.
A: Eliminate the Rule of 6 for open tests.
B: Roll a number of dice equal to your skill rating and take the highest result. (as normal)
C: Add the highest die result to your skill rating for the result.
Example: Sly Cat has Stealth 5, and wants to hide in a dark ally from the gangers chasing him. He rolls an open test for stealth, rolling 5 dice he gets a 01, 01, 03, 04, and a 05. The 5 is the highest die result, so he adds that 5 to his skill rating in Stealth (also a 5) for a result of 10. the TN then for the gangers to spot him is 10.
If your problem with Open Tests is the many rules in one book problem, this really doesn't help though.
IIRC, magic doesn't travel through the metaplanes, its the manipulation of mana (a medium permeating both both astral and physical planes, as well as the metas), so the interveneing Manawarp should effect it, like a phone call routed across a bad circuit. No conductive medium, no effect.
As for Open Tests, I'll repost this idea in the main thread, but I was thinking it depends on what you decide you want to model with these test. I can't post a probability list like some, but open tests do seem to run the gamut of probable results. To produce more normalized results, consider making this change to open tests.
A: Eliminate the Rule of 6 for open tests.
B: Roll a number of dice equal to your skill rating and take the highest result. (as normal)
C: Add the highest die result to your skill rating for the result.
Example: Sly Cat has Stealth 5, and wants to hide in a dark ally from the gangers chasing him. He rolls an open test for stealth, rolling 5 dice he gets a 01, 01, 03, 04, and a 05. The 5 is the highest die result, so he adds that 5 to his skill rating in Stealth (also a 5) for a result of 10. the TN then for the gangers to spot him is 10.
If your problem with Open Tests is the many rules in one book problem, this really doesn't help though.
Eliminate Magic Loss from Deadly wounds. This never really made sense. The only time the Magic Attribute should be reduced is if Essence itself is permanently affected through such things as cyber implantation, dismemberment, etc.
I agree with this a little. No magic loss from Deadly wounds themselves, but I think you should still have make a save for improper medical treatment of said wounds.
Even though in SR4 magic loss from stim patches has been removed, I don't completely agree with that, but think you should still be wary of over using stims to counter drain/stun damage. Keep the threat of magic loss, but lower the chances a little.
Even though in SR4 magic loss from stim patches has been removed, I don't completely agree with that, but think you should still be wary of over using stims to counter drain/stun damage. Keep the threat of magic loss, but lower the chances a little.
To elaborate on this, it would be a huge benefit to Adepts since they are more likely to physically go toe to toe in combat (and more prone to taking that deadly wound). I always believed that losing actual abilities is a lot harsher than not being able to toss that force 6 spell.
I can see a botched surgery (which does cause a reduction in Essence) as another way magic attribute can be adversely affected.
I can see a botched surgery (which does cause a reduction in Essence) as another way magic attribute can be adversely affected.
5) Spell ranges: Spell ranges should be subject to certain visual modifiers, also spells should not be able to be cast out of the manasphere.
6) Magic loss from deadly wounds: drop the rule, it has the potential to be used against physads more than other types (IMHO)
Alright now for my contributions,
7) Drop Sustaining Focuses, and bring back spell locks and ground.
8 ) New Metamagic technique that allows a spell caster to give up sorcery pool dice to sustain a spell.
6) Magic loss from deadly wounds: drop the rule, it has the potential to be used against physads more than other types (IMHO)
Alright now for my contributions,
7) Drop Sustaining Focuses, and bring back spell locks and ground.
8 ) New Metamagic technique that allows a spell caster to give up sorcery pool dice to sustain a spell.
| QUOTE (Chance359) |
| 5) Spell ranges: Spell ranges should be subject to certain visual modifiers, also spells should not be able to be cast out of the manasphere. |
Does that include spells being cast from a manasphere, through a mana void, and into another manasphere? The idea that the spell "travels" through all intervening astral territory?
| QUOTE |
| 6) Magic loss from deadly wounds: drop the rule, it has the potential to be used against physads more than other types (IMHO) |
Even if this is true, why is this an argument for dropping the rule? Not saying that it isn't, but I want your reasoning.
| QUOTE |
| Alright now for my contributions, 7) Drop Sustaining Focuses, and bring back spell locks and ground. |
Why? What does this do for us that you want?
| QUOTE |
| 8 ) New Metamagic technique that allows a spell caster to give up sorcery pool dice to sustain a spell. |
Basically, same general idea. Why?
It's not that I can't think up justifications for all of these, mind you (and counters for many of them)—I'm interested in why you think they're a good idea.
~J
5) On page 86 of MitS, it gives a brief description of spell casting in a mana warp. If a caster is trying to send a spell from point a to point c through a manawarp, that spell should have to overcome the effects of the warp.
Imagine throwing a baseball through a fine screen net. You can see the person you're playing catch with, but you'd have to over come the strength of the net to get the ball there.
6) I was mostly agreeing with Kyoto Kid and Catsnightmare on this one. Just seems like physads risk more using their abilities the other magical active characters. Other magically actives (generally) get to stay back and try and use range and circumstance to avoid taking deadly damage. Physads on the other hand (generally) are a part of the fighting.
7) Probably because I simply liked the way grounding worked from an IC point of view. Spelllocks could give you a huge edge, but you never knew if there was a mage lurking in the astral, ready to send a hellblast through your 'lock. Perhaps keeps Sustaining focuses and bring back just grounding?
8 ) After reading through the Idiots guide to the matrix thread, I liked how Deckers were about to use hacking pool dice to suppress IC. I've never really cared for how a sorcerer has to either have a foci or take penalty to all other castings while sustaining a spell.
New metamagic (need better name)
A magician is able to give up dice from his sorcery pool to sustain a spell. The conversion rate is one die of sorcery pool for every 3 force points the caster wants to sustain. However, this creates a link from the sustained spell to the caster that astral ententies would be able to follow. (Like a string from the ball of yarn to the the knitters rod)
Imagine throwing a baseball through a fine screen net. You can see the person you're playing catch with, but you'd have to over come the strength of the net to get the ball there.
6) I was mostly agreeing with Kyoto Kid and Catsnightmare on this one. Just seems like physads risk more using their abilities the other magical active characters. Other magically actives (generally) get to stay back and try and use range and circumstance to avoid taking deadly damage. Physads on the other hand (generally) are a part of the fighting.
7) Probably because I simply liked the way grounding worked from an IC point of view. Spelllocks could give you a huge edge, but you never knew if there was a mage lurking in the astral, ready to send a hellblast through your 'lock. Perhaps keeps Sustaining focuses and bring back just grounding?
8 ) After reading through the Idiots guide to the matrix thread, I liked how Deckers were about to use hacking pool dice to suppress IC. I've never really cared for how a sorcerer has to either have a foci or take penalty to all other castings while sustaining a spell.
New metamagic (need better name)
A magician is able to give up dice from his sorcery pool to sustain a spell. The conversion rate is one die of sorcery pool for every 3 force points the caster wants to sustain. However, this creates a link from the sustained spell to the caster that astral ententies would be able to follow. (Like a string from the ball of yarn to the the knitters rod)
I missed this thread during my sojourn. Yay for necroforia.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| we're rejecting modern psychology and the biological model for personality. |
I think the personality being a complex supernatural force that living bodies have and dead bodies don't makes more sense than saying it is a partially opaque overlay of conditioning and forgetting which exists merely in glial cells and perhaps neurones in the brain. SR trees having a faint aura which steel and concrete lacks would be congruent with this.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| When a projecting mage leaves his or her body, they lose contact with it entirely. |
That would explain "while you were out" and having to take a test to track down your own body if it was moved while you were projecting (or you projected from a moving vehicle).
So how would you handle if a projecting mage received deadly stun, perhaps from a stunbolt or from stun damage inflicted in astral combat? Would you have the essence of the mage just hang there, stationary, vulnerable in astral space unable to do anything? Or would he "snap back" to where his body had been at the start of his projection (how?) and may still be... and if it's not there he'll have to make the "find my meatbod" test once he regains consciousness?
So how would you handle if a projecting mage received deadly stun, perhaps from a stunbolt or from stun damage inflicted in astral combat? Would you have the essence of the mage just hang there, stationary, vulnerable in astral space unable to do anything? Or would he "snap back" to where his body had been at the start of his projection (how?) and may still be... and if it's not there he'll have to make the "find my meatbod" test once he regains consciousness?
| QUOTE (Dawnshadow) |
| When a mage projects, all stun damage remains as physical damage on the astral self. Spells cannot be cast at force higher than magic on the astral -- and all drain is "physical". When the mage returns to the body, all the physical damage on the astral form replaces the stun damage on the body-- and stun damage on the astral form is added to it. |
I like this idea. That way you can return to your body but if your "physical" damage plus your stun damage (from drain and/or taking damage from stunbolt spells) exceeds 10 boxes, you go comatose as soon as you return to your body and the overflow is expressed as physical damage. If you keep the magic-loss check every D stun, though, you'd be checking for magic loss more often this way. And how does taking deadly physical damage upset your essence? Does it hurt your feelings? Might one of your parents dying or a romantic relationship gone wrong impose temporary penalties on your essence?
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| The idea would be that everyone has an astral form (aura), but that only mages can detach it from their bodies. Thus, the question of which "half" holds Essence is only important for projecting mages. |
I think this is a good / appropriate mechanic. It would explain why shapeshifters always look like an animal on the astral (where their true identity of self is) and can look like an animal or a human on the physical plane (the biological systems that provide their essence with oxygen and nourishment). And it would explain how someone can assence a mundane person: they're like a letter inside an envelope (or a brightly coloured card, if you like) and you can see colours and borders and lines and words showing through the envelope. A projecting character is a card having left its envelope behind, and can be read more easily, and is brighter.
Come to mention it how would you explain shifters having 8 essence? Or would you say they have 6? If they have 8, would they get 8 magic too? Reasoning? How about vampires: if they essence drain by consiming the (physical) bodily fluids of their victim how does that equate to a transfer in 'self' from one individual to the other? If a nosferatu at 6 drains a human at 4 right down until the human is 0 and dies, and the nosferatu is 10, it has absorbed all the 'self' that that human had had... so does the nosferatu now suffer from multiple personality disorder? What if it drained (to death) hundreds of sammies with 0.1 essence each?
Come to mention it how would you explain shifters having 8 essence? Or would you say they have 6? If they have 8, would they get 8 magic too? Reasoning? How about vampires: if they essence drain by consiming the (physical) bodily fluids of their victim how does that equate to a transfer in 'self' from one individual to the other? If a nosferatu at 6 drains a human at 4 right down until the human is 0 and dies, and the nosferatu is 10, it has absorbed all the 'self' that that human had had... so does the nosferatu now suffer from multiple personality disorder? What if it drained (to death) hundreds of sammies with 0.1 essence each?
| QUOTE (Sharaloth) |
| Also, Though I have no real problems with 2, it does present an interesting point about cyberware. If Essence is an attribute purely of the Astral Form, why do mundanes die when they get more cyber implanted than their essence limit? Why Cybermancy? Obviously, Essence is tied to the body in some way as well. |
Quite. If essence is to do with the astral form (whether or not it is currently melded with the physical form) how come it is easier to heal a character (with a spell) with high essence than it is to heal one with low essence since you can only heal physical damage? And if essence is to do with the astral component of a living being, why is there no Heal Stun spell? I don't think that saying "well, someone with low essence has little of their astral form remaining intact, so therefore mana spells cannot affect them as easily" would work, or else trucking up on 'ware would make you immune to stunbolt, etc.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| The fundamental issue being addressed here is simple: mundane countermeasures to magical intrusion. As it stands, you can't counteract astral projection without magic, The problem we were trying to address was that this was a "you can't fight fire with anything but fire" situation. There were, and are, no non-magical countermeasures to astral projection. |
This is true, but inline with other archtypes.
| QUOTE (Sharaloth) |
| mundanes ARE just helpless to astral scouting, just like the average citizen is HELPLESS against a malicious decker, or a vicious Cybered-up killer! But unlike the first two, the worst an astral scout could do is WATCH them |
Right. If we are going to try and introduce nonmagical ways to protect against astral surveillance, then we need to invent parallel systems in other areas too. For example, mages ought to be able to cast some kind of electrical static spell that radiates EM waves in precisely the same way that an ECCM module (rating equivalent to the spell's force) hinders a rigger's surveillance. You could have a quickenned Lazer spell sitting in your server computer, so that there is a non-electronic defence against some decker breaking into the system. And as for protecting mundanes from cyberpacked sams... perhaps whatever new thing we're inventing to stop astral forms from entering houses will prevent all illegal cyberware from passing through it too? I think Sharaloth is right. Mundanes are peons that will fall to the scythe whether it's cyber, drone, a decker exploding your microwave, or an unwelcome teenage mage manifesting beside you making love and asking questions about your technique, or letting you know she's got some disease showing on her aura... completely spoiling the moment.
On the other cyberhand, runners and corps have stuff to hide and the money to hide it (and therefore the motivation for Johnsons to uncover it (or pay runners to do so)).
On the other cyberhand, runners and corps have stuff to hide and the money to hide it (and therefore the motivation for Johnsons to uncover it (or pay runners to do so)).
| QUOTE (Taran) |
| The other problem with this approach is that it leaves any dual-natured PCs out in the cold, as they can't enter the target building without tripping all the astral security. |
That is the nature of Flaws. Go anywhere with a ghoul or shifter character and astral security will know which alarm wards you've touched, if you've forced your way through an astral barrier, and if you're about to get your soul ripped out as the elevator goes past the 13th floor...
Sure SRC tries to dress it up as one of the "bonuses" of being a shapeshifter, but it isn't. Really it isn't. Being kicked in the head at night on the astral as you're trying to get to sleep on the physical by some awakened ganger with time to kill and your starting 5000
wasn't enough to buy you some wards. In exchance for what... no +2 TN when performing nonmagical activities while astrally perceiving? How often would that come in handy?
Sure SRC tries to dress it up as one of the "bonuses" of being a shapeshifter, but it isn't. Really it isn't. Being kicked in the head at night on the astral as you're trying to get to sleep on the physical by some awakened ganger with time to kill and your starting 5000
wasn't enough to buy you some wards. In exchance for what... no +2 TN when performing nonmagical activities while astrally perceiving? How often would that come in handy? | QUOTE (Sharaloth) |
| Astral scouting is exactly as it should be. You get locations, possibly cyber content, possibly awakened-ness (but neither necessarily), ward locations and emotional/health analysis. Other than that, nada. Very little non-magical information is acessible from the astral. No secret documents can be read, no cameras can be shut off, no computers hacked into, no doors opened, etc, etc, etc. |
You can read sensitive documents, punch in pin codes, knock security camera directions or cut their feeds, open doors, let air out of tyres, yank power leads out of alarms etc etc while astrally projecting if you take along your trusty ally spirit with you (and it can materialise with decent strength). This is not something on the list for change; perhaps it should be since it brings mages up to par with, say, a cybered up sammy who bursts into a building, obliterates security cameras and explodes the alarm system and then... you get the picture.
| QUOTE (Chance359) |
| a sorcerer has to either have a foci |
What is it with plurals? One cactus and two cacti, one focus and two foci, one aquarium and two aquaria, easy peasy.
| QUOTE (Bodak @ Aug 27 2006, 02:27 PM) |
| So how would you handle if a projecting mage received deadly stun, perhaps from a stunbolt or from stun damage inflicted in astral combat? Would you have the essence of the mage just hang there, stationary, vulnerable in astral space unable to do anything? Or would he "snap back" to where his body had been at the start of his projection (how?) and may still be... and if it's not there he'll have to make the "find my meatbod" test once he regains consciousness? |
I'll address everything else later, but this is a non-issue. I'd pondered over it a great deal when I first went to write this thread, thinking it overly harsh to condemn a stunned individual to death, when I realized that astral forms can't suffer stun damage. There is no astral stun damage, you just hit deadly (meta)physical and start dying.
~J
When I first joined DS back on the old site I put forward the same idea, that I thought there was only a single damage track for an astrally projecting mage, but I was told that was not the case by several people.
For example, if a projecting mage casts Stunball at another projecting mage, sure the caster might get (physical) drain but the target (if it doesn't resist) will take stun damage. No?
For example, if a projecting mage casts Stunball at another projecting mage, sure the caster might get (physical) drain but the target (if it doesn't resist) will take stun damage. No?
@#$%#$@$ing hell…
Maybe it was SR2 where there wasn't Stun? Anyway, as it turns out there's no astral attack that does Stun damage, but astral damage may be Physical or Stun at the option of the dealer.
So in the situation above, if the separate-entities model is being used, I'd say the mage hangs there helpless until he or she dies or regains consciousness.
~J
Maybe it was SR2 where there wasn't Stun? Anyway, as it turns out there's no astral attack that does Stun damage, but astral damage may be Physical or Stun at the option of the dealer.
So in the situation above, if the separate-entities model is being used, I'd say the mage hangs there helpless until he or she dies or regains consciousness.
~J
My interpretation when I'd read the books before asking questions on DS was that the mental attributes and the stun track were part of (what this thread is calling) the essence. And the physical attributes and the physical damage track were part of the body. Hence the augmented attributes resulting from possession, for example, and the "physical" attributes of a projecting mage. And hence the reason physical damage such as bullet wounds, vehicle collisions and elemental spells are resisted with the body, whereas essential effects such as manabolt and invisibility and mind probe are resisted with the essence (will or int). If you take full boxes damage of physical, your physical component gets switched off (dead body) and if you take full boxes damage of stun, your mental component gets switched off (unconscious essence).
So for most creatures which have their essence bound to their bodies, they have two damage tracks permanently. Even DN critters or perceiving adepts. But when a mage projects, the body lying on the couch only has a physical damage track and the essence takes the stun track off into the astral plane somewhere. I would think therefore that if you cast stunbolt or mindprobe on the inert body it would simply fail (in the same way casting those spells on a living potplant would) because there is no essence present to be the target of such spells. Similarly, casting usually causes drain on the stun track (because that's the essential track while you're on the physical plane and have both) but when you're projecting you only have one damage track (since you've left behind your body, and therefore the choice of which track to resist using) so if you get drain, it only has one track to be applied to. If you fill up your whole damage track and you've only got one, then you get switched off. So for all intents and purposes, it's equivalent of physical drain on the physical plane.
This made sense to me when I read the books, and before I asked that question on DS. Since then I've been a bit addled as to how the different tracks work or what they represent and kind of assume everything has two tracks and not really know what the rationale is behind it (although I do say Watchers have only one track with a number of boxes available on it equal to their Force, to limit the use of Watcher Pack Attack). So your Revised model makes a lot of sense to me.
So for most creatures which have their essence bound to their bodies, they have two damage tracks permanently. Even DN critters or perceiving adepts. But when a mage projects, the body lying on the couch only has a physical damage track and the essence takes the stun track off into the astral plane somewhere. I would think therefore that if you cast stunbolt or mindprobe on the inert body it would simply fail (in the same way casting those spells on a living potplant would) because there is no essence present to be the target of such spells. Similarly, casting usually causes drain on the stun track (because that's the essential track while you're on the physical plane and have both) but when you're projecting you only have one damage track (since you've left behind your body, and therefore the choice of which track to resist using) so if you get drain, it only has one track to be applied to. If you fill up your whole damage track and you've only got one, then you get switched off. So for all intents and purposes, it's equivalent of physical drain on the physical plane.
This made sense to me when I read the books, and before I asked that question on DS. Since then I've been a bit addled as to how the different tracks work or what they represent and kind of assume everything has two tracks and not really know what the rationale is behind it (although I do say Watchers have only one track with a number of boxes available on it equal to their Force, to limit the use of Watcher Pack Attack). So your Revised model makes a lot of sense to me.
My apologies for the late reply, I'm still playing 'catchup' from years of inactivity (quite surprised to see I still hold the 32nd place on 'mostest postests' 
First a question. Since you seperate Astral and Physical, would that affect casting spells while Astrally Projecting? I think it should, the idea of Physical damage for casting a spell from spirit form always rubbed me wrong. In our game, Psionicists always take Stun Damage from spell casting while Astral, but I think it should be all magic.
Next, I would really like to see caps on Initiation. Our own House Rule is that you can not initiate to a grade higher than your uninitiated Magic rating. So, if you take 2 essence of cyberware without a Geasa, you will never get past Initiate grade 4 for a Magic total cap of 8. 5 and 10 if you take a Geasa to offset magic loss at some point.
We also have a magic house rule that you can only ever geasa 1 point of Magic Loss at a time. (Too much abuse in our group with alot of geasa and bioware in our mages/adepts), but not sure that should be a Global house rule.
Also, for the record, I think maintaining only 1 type of astral damage makes the mostest sense.
First a question. Since you seperate Astral and Physical, would that affect casting spells while Astrally Projecting? I think it should, the idea of Physical damage for casting a spell from spirit form always rubbed me wrong. In our game, Psionicists always take Stun Damage from spell casting while Astral, but I think it should be all magic.
Next, I would really like to see caps on Initiation. Our own House Rule is that you can not initiate to a grade higher than your uninitiated Magic rating. So, if you take 2 essence of cyberware without a Geasa, you will never get past Initiate grade 4 for a Magic total cap of 8. 5 and 10 if you take a Geasa to offset magic loss at some point.
We also have a magic house rule that you can only ever geasa 1 point of Magic Loss at a time. (Too much abuse in our group with alot of geasa and bioware in our mages/adepts
), but not sure that should be a Global house rule.Also, for the record, I think maintaining only 1 type of astral damage makes the mostest sense.
| QUOTE (Sphynx @ Dec 12 2006, 06:04 AM) |
| We also have a magic house rule that you can only ever geasa 1 point of Magic Loss at a time. (Too much abuse in our group with alot of geasa and bioware in our mages/adepts ), but not sure that should be a Global house rule. |
I was under the impression this was already canon.
Alright, I've gone through our magic and essence section. I've broken up comments into three blocks for easier reading. I've included a few of my own suggestions, as well as suggestions from other threads. One that I think needs to be specifically introduced in regards to countering magical threats through mundane means:
Introduce more dual-natured plants or allow mundanes to be able to enact wards. This allows mundanes to be able to create astral defenses, fixing the 'you can ONLY fight fire with fire' problem at the most basic level, and greatly increases the number of places with the most basic magical defenses (I consider warding like locking your door. Sure it's only useful against the 1% of the population who might consider breaking in illegally, but that 1% can cause enough damage that it pays for itself.) Everything should be warded, and in my games, it is. There are regularly wards within wards. Anyway, without further ado...
Astral & Essence
A) Astral scouting is overpowered
1 Introduce more dual-natured plants for magical defense
2 Wards can be created by mundanes
3 Astral forms cannot hear the material world
4 Astral bodies cannot pass through other astral bodies (including the earth)
5 Current rules for spirits finding intruders in a building are overpowered
6 We need more explanation on how stealth works against astral perception
7 Range modifiers apply to perception & spellcasting
B) Magicians and adepts can take cyber without serious penalty
1 Reduce cost of initiation, but it does not increase the magic rating (to combat cybered mages)
2 Geasa taken against magic loss from cyber or bio counts against all adept powers, not just one point
3 Essence is an attribute of the astral form, essence reducing drugs & cyber are reflected in the form (although do not reduce the form's functionality)
4 By canon, a form whose body has died will already die in Essence hours
! We need to define what 'essence' is!!
i Why are higher essence characters easier to heal?
5 Remove geasa as a game option
6 Eliminate magic loss from deadly wounds and stun
C) The connection between an astral form and its body is unclear
1 When projecting, the mage is completely unaware of the condition of his body and wounds it receives, and the body does not show any damage when the astral form is attacked.
2 When the mage projects, all stun damage becomes physical damage on the astral self. When he returns, astral physical damage
i Explanation: the mind is essence, the body physical, so when separated, each has one damage track (back to 'define essence')
2b When the mage projects, all drain is stun
3 Explation of canon: Silver cord - there's a microscopic line connecting the form to its body that allows for a sense of the bodies condition and for the form to track the body
X How do we handle an astral form who is knocked unconscious while projecting? Does he hang in astral space until he regains consciousness or dies? Does he 'snap back' to his body?
D) Astral combat should be based on either the Astral Combat skill or the appropriate melee skill
E) Astral "vision" needs to be better defined. Is it possible to see through transparent objects while astrally projecting? What about transparent liquids?
Spells
A) Detection spells should be broken into direct and indirect categories. Direct spells (mind probe, detect (object)) are resisted, indirect (night vision) are not
B) Drop invisibility and improved invisibility, replace with concealment or SEP field (adds successes to TN to spot)
C) Spell defense is an oddity and should be straightened out
1 Make it solely a function of spell pool
2 If spell defense is being limited like this, allow for it to be spontaneous
D) What is the result of casting THROUGH a background count?
1 Use the highest of the two endpoints (not the middle)
2 For elemental manipulations, use only the caster's BG, since the spell travels in the physical
3 Use the highest rating between the two endpoints inclusively
E) Spell ranges
1 Should suffer range modifiers (and therefore benefit from scopes and binoculars
2 Should not be castable outside of the manasphere (you can't hit the moon)
F) Manipulation as a category is too broad
1 Move elemental manipulation to Combat spells
2 Break Manipulation into two new categories, Physical Manipulation (elemental, telekinetic and transformational) and Control Manipulation (as it stands)
G) Remove spells that create matter to avoid having to debate laws of conservation of mass and energy (this only impacts two or three spells and spirit powers)
Problems
-Spell TNs should be better defined, especially in relation to essence
-Make sure all spell effects are linked to force
Other magic:
A) Let elementalists cast appropriate elemental manipulation spells
B) Ritual tracking should be available to a group of 1
1 Allow the caster to cast a "harmless" spell through std ritual sorcery (which requires only a material link, no spotter), sustain it for a few hours, then astral track your own spell
C) Initiation, like cyber, should have a concrete cost (beyond cash & karma). Currently, magic is always "good", cyber is "bad" (but very, very useful)
1 To join an initiation group, candidate rolls Magic or highest magic skill vs. TN 4 + (size of group/10) + 1 per pt of magic lost - 1 per initiate grade. Group may spend karma pool on behalf of candidate.
i Alternatively - divide size of group by 5
ii Alternatively - increases based on the highest grade within the group
iii Alternatively - allow for EITHER above and first idea based on style of group(cult of personality vs. communal paradise)
iv Alternative 6 which lost me (TN based on Group Size Factor, based on highest Initiate Grade/2 + grades of highest graded individuals/2)
v Alternatively, Mag. Theory or Etiquette(Magic) roll vs TN of 4 + members of group/5, +2 for not being initiated
2 You cannot get more initiate grades than your original magic rating (natural max of 12, 10 with 1 point of cyber, etc.)
D) Add metamagic to allow a caster to sustain a spell with spell pool
E) Remove sustaining foci for spell locks and grounding (at worst, it's an overpriced grenade)
Problems:
-Immunity to normal weapons currently means attacker is invincible or generally far too easily beaten
-Make psionics and voodoo useful
To again respond to my own comment...
I feel like there are two overarching problems.
Firstly, as I've said elsewhere, magic and cyber is an uneven dichotomy. While cyber is generally seen as a trade-off and ultimately bad for you, eating away your human soul and resulting in your not getting invited to parties, magic is (as far as PC options are concerned) always good, environmentally friendly, powerful, limitless, and usually invisible to most people. I don't feel like Shadowrun magic jives well with the cyberpunk setting. Magic should not be benefits with no drawbacks, it needs to be a trade like cyberware is. Mages should become more ungrounded, bring the horrors closer or something. This may be out of the scope of SR3R, but I hope it isn't. It's so fundamental to the system that I don't feel that it could be addressed in any other forum. If I'm the only person who feels this way, I'll drop it though.
Secondly, essence has come up twice as being a major point of contention. It will continue to be a problem as we move into the gear section and turn to focus more on spells. We need to decide what essence is first, then fit the rules to fit it after. I propose that all rules pertaining to the character's essence are temporarily left out until this issue is settled.
Having said that...
Astral & Essence
A) Overpowered scouting
1 More dual-natured plants: yes
2 Mundanes creating wards: yes
3 No hearing on astral: undecided, leaning towards yes
4 Astral bodies cannot overlap: yes
5 Reduce spirit searching: yes
6 Um... This isn't a rule, sorry. But yes, we need more concise language.
7 Range modifiers: yes
B) Essence penalties don't hurt
This relates back to the essence question, so I don't feel ready to answer any yet.
C) Connection between astral form & body
Again, this relates back to essence, and so should be tabled for now.
D) Astral combat is a melee skill: yes
E) Astral perception defined: yes
Spells
A) Break up detection: sure. Night vision shouldn't be resisted and this seems an easy way to fix it
B) Fix invisibility: definitely. Invisibility leads to too many fights. We need to figure out a more logical spell.
C) Spell defense: I don't use it enough to have an opinion
D) Casting through BG count
1 Use highest endpoint: no
2 Elemental manips use caster's BG: yes
3 Use highest count in path: yes
E) Spell ranges
1 apply range modifiers: yes
2 limited to manasphere: yes
F) Manipulation as a category is too broad
1 elemental manips go to Combat: yes
2 Break manipulation into two groups: yes
G) Remove 'create' spells: yes
Other magic:
A) Elementalists cast related elemental manip: yes
B) Ritual tracking & 1: yes
1 follow your own spell: sounds canon, let's make sure we mention it
C) Initiation should cost more: yes
1 Complex initiation rolls: this gives me a headache and doesn't solve my personal complaint, so no opinion
2 Initiation cap: yes (caps apply to every other attribute!)
D) Sustain w/ spell pool metamagic: no (or put it in SOTA65), out of scope
E) Return spell lock, grounding: yes
I feel like there are two overarching problems.
Firstly, as I've said elsewhere, magic and cyber is an uneven dichotomy. While cyber is generally seen as a trade-off and ultimately bad for you, eating away your human soul and resulting in your not getting invited to parties, magic is (as far as PC options are concerned) always good, environmentally friendly, powerful, limitless, and usually invisible to most people. I don't feel like Shadowrun magic jives well with the cyberpunk setting. Magic should not be benefits with no drawbacks, it needs to be a trade like cyberware is. Mages should become more ungrounded, bring the horrors closer or something. This may be out of the scope of SR3R, but I hope it isn't. It's so fundamental to the system that I don't feel that it could be addressed in any other forum. If I'm the only person who feels this way, I'll drop it though.
Secondly, essence has come up twice as being a major point of contention. It will continue to be a problem as we move into the gear section and turn to focus more on spells. We need to decide what essence is first, then fit the rules to fit it after. I propose that all rules pertaining to the character's essence are temporarily left out until this issue is settled.
Having said that...
Astral & Essence
A) Overpowered scouting
1 More dual-natured plants: yes
2 Mundanes creating wards: yes
3 No hearing on astral: undecided, leaning towards yes
4 Astral bodies cannot overlap: yes
5 Reduce spirit searching: yes
6 Um... This isn't a rule, sorry. But yes, we need more concise language.
7 Range modifiers: yes
B) Essence penalties don't hurt
This relates back to the essence question, so I don't feel ready to answer any yet.
C) Connection between astral form & body
Again, this relates back to essence, and so should be tabled for now.
D) Astral combat is a melee skill: yes
E) Astral perception defined: yes
Spells
A) Break up detection: sure. Night vision shouldn't be resisted and this seems an easy way to fix it
B) Fix invisibility: definitely. Invisibility leads to too many fights. We need to figure out a more logical spell.
C) Spell defense: I don't use it enough to have an opinion
D) Casting through BG count
1 Use highest endpoint: no
2 Elemental manips use caster's BG: yes
3 Use highest count in path: yes
E) Spell ranges
1 apply range modifiers: yes
2 limited to manasphere: yes
F) Manipulation as a category is too broad
1 elemental manips go to Combat: yes
2 Break manipulation into two groups: yes
G) Remove 'create' spells: yes
Other magic:
A) Elementalists cast related elemental manip: yes
B) Ritual tracking & 1: yes
1 follow your own spell: sounds canon, let's make sure we mention it
C) Initiation should cost more: yes
1 Complex initiation rolls: this gives me a headache and doesn't solve my personal complaint, so no opinion
2 Initiation cap: yes (caps apply to every other attribute!)
D) Sustain w/ spell pool metamagic: no (or put it in SOTA65), out of scope
E) Return spell lock, grounding: yes
Spells:
a: yes
c: what's the issue?
e: Grimoire had penalties for extreme ranges due to visibility.
150 m or less: no penalty
151-300m: +2
301-600m: +4
601-1250m: +6
1251-2500m: +8
2501-5000m: +10
5001m: no valid target
While it is based on near-ground viewing, at least everything under 5km is a reasonable penalty for even just identifying a metahuman sized targetin optimal weather conditions.
f: only if you add more elements to cover the new divisions
g: no
other:
a: sure
b: isn't that what a watcher spirit is good at?
c: no
d: yes
e: no, maybe make it an option for use of the metamagic in d, but do not make grounding and spell locks the standard
-make psionics and voodoo useful:
not sure about the voodoo, but there are only two limits on psionics:
1) players who do not know enough to justify any spell as an effect of the mind (or just scratch that rule)
2) limited conjuration
To enhance the conjuration, I would suggest some way to enable a psion to exchange standard thought form powers with other spirit powers. Maybe also start with another base attribute variety so they can conjure one utility form and one combat form before any power switching. The current thought forms would be the "cunning" and the others will be "rage."
"Rage" thought form:
B: F + 3
Q: F x2
S: F + 1
Init: F + 10 + 1D6 (+10 more astral)
Powers: Materialization, Guard, Confusion
For the power shuffling, my current thought is a magical theory test vs. the force of the spirit + the number of power changes desired. Each success is one power that can be changed to one of the ones the psion wants instead. No drain for this part, but it can only be attempted once each conjuring.
a: yes
c: what's the issue?
e: Grimoire had penalties for extreme ranges due to visibility.
150 m or less: no penalty
151-300m: +2
301-600m: +4
601-1250m: +6
1251-2500m: +8
2501-5000m: +10
5001m: no valid target
While it is based on near-ground viewing, at least everything under 5km is a reasonable penalty for even just identifying a metahuman sized targetin optimal weather conditions.
f: only if you add more elements to cover the new divisions
g: no
other:
a: sure
b: isn't that what a watcher spirit is good at?
c: no
d: yes
e: no, maybe make it an option for use of the metamagic in d, but do not make grounding and spell locks the standard
-make psionics and voodoo useful:
not sure about the voodoo, but there are only two limits on psionics:
1) players who do not know enough to justify any spell as an effect of the mind (or just scratch that rule)
2) limited conjuration
To enhance the conjuration, I would suggest some way to enable a psion to exchange standard thought form powers with other spirit powers. Maybe also start with another base attribute variety so they can conjure one utility form and one combat form before any power switching. The current thought forms would be the "cunning" and the others will be "rage."
"Rage" thought form:
B: F + 3
Q: F x2
S: F + 1
Init: F + 10 + 1D6 (+10 more astral)
Powers: Materialization, Guard, Confusion
For the power shuffling, my current thought is a magical theory test vs. the force of the spirit + the number of power changes desired. Each success is one power that can be changed to one of the ones the psion wants instead. No drain for this part, but it can only be attempted once each conjuring.
...Seems the consensus is in favour of dropping the MA loss rule for deadly wounds.
Another area I have difficulty with is astral tracking. In a scenario I ran a while back, it seemed like the watcher summoned to do the search was almost infallible. I basically had to set up wards (suggested by the SR FAQ moderator) to attempt to confound the spirit which by the rules seemed like a sure bet to succeed. Not very logical considering the cost of setting wards up.
I also feel that some mental manipulation spells, particularly Mindprobe, need to be toned down a bit as well. Magic should be useful, but not so overpowering that it upsets game balance and renders aspects such as roleplaying legwork and interrogation almost useless.
Another area I have difficulty with is astral tracking. In a scenario I ran a while back, it seemed like the watcher summoned to do the search was almost infallible. I basically had to set up wards (suggested by the SR FAQ moderator) to attempt to confound the spirit which by the rules seemed like a sure bet to succeed. Not very logical considering the cost of setting wards up.
I also feel that some mental manipulation spells, particularly Mindprobe, need to be toned down a bit as well. Magic should be useful, but not so overpowering that it upsets game balance and renders aspects such as roleplaying legwork and interrogation almost useless.
| QUOTE |
| Astral & Essence A) Astral scouting is overpowered |
I disagree about it being over-powered. However, I've always disagreed with mages starting the game with the ability. I think it'd be much more interesting if it was a Metatechnique instead. After all, in what game ever has Astral Projection been easier than any spell casting? Usually, it's a very high-level, hard to attain spell.
| QUOTE |
B) Magicians and adepts can take cyber without serious penalty |
How about the one I already suggested? Cyber-up, but you can not initiate to a level higher than your Essence rounded-down. And intiiations always remove a Geasa rather than give an extra Magic point. Not an over-kill suggestion but one that makes you think twice, and almost guarantees no mage does more than 3 points magic loss.
| QUOTE |
C) The connection between an astral form and its body is unclear |
Trying to define this will raise more questions than answers. Best left alone.
| QUOTE |
D) Astral combat should be based on either the Astral Combat skill or the appropriate melee skill |
I'm sorry. What's the issue? You mean replace Sorcery as the Astral Combat skill? Seems ok with me, but then you shouldn't allow the appropriate melee skill, since they'd be better off using Unarmed Combat since it can be used in more than the Astral Plane.
| QUOTE |
E) Astral "vision" needs to be better defined. Is it possible to see through transparent objects while astrally projecting? What about transparent liquids? |
I think this should be answered by A) Astral Scouting is Overpowered. If you really feel it's overpowered, then opaque, otherwise transparent.
| QUOTE |
Spells A) Detection spells should be broken into direct and indirect categories. Direct spells (mind probe, detect (object)) are resisted, indirect (night vision) are not |
Please don't change this. I want SR3R to be compatable with SOTA:2065, and I give a solution through Psionics for this. If you change this rule, 1 category of Psionics becomes pointless.
| QUOTE |
B) Drop invisibility and improved invisibility, replace with concealment or SEP field (adds successes to TN to spot) |
Agreed. Camo vs Invis is so much better.
| QUOTE |
C) Spell defense is an oddity and should be straightened out |
Or, instead of using Sorcery dice, use Magic Dice. It will increase the power of the character slightly, but remove all confusion.
| QUOTE |
F) Manipulation as a category is too broad |
I don't think Elemental Manips should go into combat. I agree with breaking Manipulation up, but even more than suggested. The problem becomes the Totems, and what mods they grant. However, I do think Telekinetics, Transformation, Control, and Elemental should be the 4 categories that emerge from Manipulation.
| QUOTE |
G) Remove spells that create matter to avoid having to debate laws of conservation of mass and energy (this only impacts two or three spells and spirit powers) |
Agreed.
| QUOTE |
Problems -Spell TNs should be better defined, especially in relation to essence -Make sure all spell effects are linked to force |
Yes and Yes
| QUOTE |
Other magic: A) Let elementalists cast appropriate elemental manipulation spells |
Yes
| QUOTE |
C) Initiation, like cyber, should have a concrete cost (beyond cash & karma). Currently, magic is always "good", cyber is "bad" (but very, very useful) |
Way too complicated suggestions. Better to do as I suggested I think, limit Initiation level on Essence.
| QUOTE |
D) Add metamagic to allow a caster to sustain a spell with spell pool |
I -like- that idea.
| QUOTE |
E) Remove sustaining foci for spell locks and grounding (at worst, it's an overpriced grenade) |
No no no no no. I vehemently oppose that idea. Grounding makes an already too powerful character class too much more powerful.
| QUOTE |
Problems: -Immunity to normal weapons currently means attacker is invincible or generally far too easily beaten |
Yeah.
| QUOTE |
-Make psionics and voodoo useful |
SOTA:2065, not SR3R
I guess I will try and confuse the issue.
If you want to seperate astral projection but change the way the damage is treated how about having an astral damage track that aplies to magic and any mental activity until it is healed.
I like the idea of astral projection as a metamagic technique.
Make the Astral more dangerous by adding Astral Flora and Fauna. Add little strange spirits that might sting a character. Have a tree that is in the Astral but not in the physical and is solid there.
I am personally mean when it comes to crossing magic and tech. Tech anchors a person to their body with 1 pt of essence. At 3 pts you loose magic altogether. Geasa will stop this only to the 3 pt mark and then you loose it all anyway. Each pt hinders the flow of magic so it also causes the loss to be added to TN for magic use.
You are not your astral body. You create an astral body to tune in and to explore the astral. It s however your connection with the magical flows of the astral. I think that destroying your astral form should cause you to temporarily loose your magic and a point of a mental attribute. Once you buy this back then you get your mind focuses again or regain your confidence. Maybe your essence heals back weaker by a point or something. I don't like the killed in the astral you are dead here thing myself.
Personally I think that some of the spells should be moved over to Psionics and not allowed for magic users. Make the psionists destinct and useful but different from magic.
There I hope I confused you as much as I confuse myself.
If you want to seperate astral projection but change the way the damage is treated how about having an astral damage track that aplies to magic and any mental activity until it is healed.
I like the idea of astral projection as a metamagic technique.
Make the Astral more dangerous by adding Astral Flora and Fauna. Add little strange spirits that might sting a character. Have a tree that is in the Astral but not in the physical and is solid there.
I am personally mean when it comes to crossing magic and tech. Tech anchors a person to their body with 1 pt of essence. At 3 pts you loose magic altogether. Geasa will stop this only to the 3 pt mark and then you loose it all anyway. Each pt hinders the flow of magic so it also causes the loss to be added to TN for magic use.
You are not your astral body. You create an astral body to tune in and to explore the astral. It s however your connection with the magical flows of the astral. I think that destroying your astral form should cause you to temporarily loose your magic and a point of a mental attribute. Once you buy this back then you get your mind focuses again or regain your confidence. Maybe your essence heals back weaker by a point or something. I don't like the killed in the astral you are dead here thing myself.
Personally I think that some of the spells should be moved over to Psionics and not allowed for magic users. Make the psionists destinct and useful but different from magic.
There I hope I confused you as much as I confuse myself.
| QUOTE (Garrowolf) |
| Add little strange spirits that might sting a character. Have a tree that is in the Astral but not in the physical and is solid there. |
There are many types of spirit that could be an issue, shedim are an even greater vulnerability, and alchera make for as odd of astral environs as you can want.
However, many GMs don't think to use any of them.
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
| c: what's the issue? e: Grimoire had penalties for extreme ranges due to visibility. 150 m or less: no penalty 151-300m: +2 301-600m: +4 601-1250m: +6 1251-2500m: +8 2501-5000m: +10 5001m: no valid target While it is based on near-ground viewing, at least everything under 5km is a reasonable penalty for even just identifying a metahuman sized targetin optimal weather conditions. |
The issue with spell defense is it's a completely new mechanic we don't see anywhere else, and so it's a little confusing and odd. It would make things simpler if, instead of attaching the rules of spell defense to Spell Pool, you attach it to a skill or somesuch.
I like your spell range ideas. Duly noted.
| QUOTE |
| How about the one I already suggested? Cyber-up, but you can not initiate to a level higher than your Essence rounded-down. And intiiations always remove a Geasa rather than give an extra Magic point. Not an over-kill suggestion but one that makes you think twice, and almost guarantees no mage does more than 3 points magic loss. |
You know, I loved that idea and wrote it down. I have no idea what happened to it. I blame my two-year-old.
| QUOTE |
| I'm sorry. What's the issue? You mean replace Sorcery as the Astral Combat skill? Seems ok with me, but then you shouldn't allow the appropriate melee skill, since they'd be better off using Unarmed Combat since it can be used in more than the Astral Plane. |
Yes, you summed it up well. I don't understand your response though. If a mage is projecting, he'd use unarmed combat if unarmed, or the appropriate weapon skill if using a weapon focus. Would you suggest it's made into an independent skill, Astral Combat?
| QUOTE |
| Please don't change this. I want SR3R to be compatable with SOTA:2065, and I give a solution through Psionics for this. If you change this rule, 1 category of Psionics becomes pointless. |
(In regards to directed and undirected detection spells). The problem is a spell like Night Vision is resisted by what you're looking at, while Detect Enemies works against everyone no matter how high their magical resistance. The change would be solely for the purpose of fixing a silly problem with magic. I admit, I haven't been keeping up with your psionics rules (I don't like magic so much), but I'm sure we can work out a compromise to fix the Night Vision problem and preserve the Psionics abilities.
| QUOTE |
Way too complicated suggestions. Better to do as I suggested I think, limit Initiation level on Essence. |
Your solution very gracefully solves the mechanics problem, but does not address the flavor issue. Nothing in cyberpunk should be clearly and obviously "good", yet magic clearly is. I want magic to require eating puppies or something.
Alright, thank you for the comments everyone. I've updated my list (and I can post it if people really want to reread what they wrote).
| QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Feb 3 2007, 03:19 AM) |
| ...Seems the consensus is in favour of dropping the MA loss rule for deadly wounds. |
Could the consensus just go over again why this would be a desirable thing?
| QUOTE (Sphynx) |
| How about the one I already suggested? Cyber-up, but you can not initiate to a level higher than your Essence rounded-down. And intiiations always remove a Geasa rather than give an extra Magic point. |
I'm not a big fan of hard caps like that, especially since canon mages who exceeed them already exist. Also, this would require us to keep geasa in the first place, which I am loathe to do.
More responses when I've fully regained consciousness.
~J
| QUOTE (nezumi @ Feb 3 2007, 09:35 AM) |
| I like your spell range ideas. Duly noted. |
For sake of argument, if you extend the chart with each doubling adding 2 to the TN, hitting a metahuman on the moon without massive telescopic aid would be at a +42 (the 163,840,001m - 327,680,000m range) before considering the mana warp.
| QUOTE | ||
Yes, you summed it up well. I don't understand your response though. If a mage is projecting, he'd use unarmed combat if unarmed, or the appropriate weapon skill if using a weapon focus. Would you suggest it's made into an independent skill, Astral Combat? |
Well, Astral Combat being based on Strength for learning purposes, it does make more sense to have it based on a mental attribute. I'd be ok with Astral Combat being its own skill, though not sure Charisma is the right attribute, Intelligence seems more appropriate.
| QUOTE | ||
(In regards to directed and undirected detection spells). The problem is a spell like Night Vision is resisted by what you're looking at, while Detect Enemies works against everyone no matter how high their magical resistance. The change would be solely for the purpose of fixing a silly problem with magic. I admit, I haven't been keeping up with your psionics rules (I don't like magic so much), but I'm sure we can work out a compromise to fix the Night Vision problem and preserve the Psionics abilities. |
Then perhaps, rather than seperate direct/indirect like Illusions, it would make more sense to change it to Sensory and Insight. Sensory being for improvement of a natural sense, vs making it easier to Detect Enemies not wanting to be detected.
| QUOTE | ||
Your solution very gracefully solves the mechanics problem, but does not address the flavor issue. Nothing in cyberpunk should be clearly and obviously "good", yet magic clearly is. I want magic to require eating puppies or something. |
That gets into personal preference though. You can, as a GM, remove the /2 for determining drain. I think the best way to handle magic is to reduce its effectiveness on a per-spell level. Ie: Turning Invisibility into a more Camoflage type spell.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) | ||
I'm not a big fan of hard caps like that, especially since canon mages who exceeed them already exist. Also, this would require us to keep geasa in the first place, which I am loathe to do. More responses when I've fully regained consciousness. ~J |
Geasa are such a core part of SR, getting rid of them entirely seems wrong..... I could live with it, but I think we'll have alot less success with SR3R if we remove things people see as core principles instead of just fixing things.
As for exceeding the cap, maybe double or triple costs for passing their Essence in initiation. If you don't want a cap, just make it damn hard and annoying to exceed it. However, that cap really really does fix alot of the problems with magic being overpowered.
I really don't see geasa as being core—can I hear some other opinions on that? I personally see removing them as "fixing things", as well.
Though, as mentioned, I wouldn't be getting rid of them entirely—just shifting them from essence-loss-counters to things more like Exclusive limitations on spells (and maintaining the Adept's ability to put Voluntary Geasa on powers to reduce their cost).
~J
Though, as mentioned, I wouldn't be getting rid of them entirely—just shifting them from essence-loss-counters to things more like Exclusive limitations on spells (and maintaining the Adept's ability to put Voluntary Geasa on powers to reduce their cost).
~J
Sphynx, just to be clear, you'd be fine with splitting Detection into the two categories as long as, instead of being Direct and Indirect, they're called Sensory and Insight? Given the tone of the suggestion, I can't imagine that being a problem.
In regards to geasa, I certainly don't think they're a core part of the rules, at least not unless you're a hard-core powergamer (not to say that everyone who uses a geas is a powergamer, but that most powergamers with magical characters use geasa). Speaking for myself, I don't mind having geasa in the game, HOWEVER, it must be a limitation! I've seen too many people who take a geas that they must have a penny in their pocket or whatever other stupid thing they took, then end up with 6 points of magic and 5 points of cyberware. If a geas has an above average chance of leading to permanent magic loss over the course of a campaign, I think its doing its job. Otherwise it's just taking advantage of the rules.
So rather than eliminate them, make them more taxing. Make them so the mage really feels like one day he's going to have to choose between his life and his magic.
In regards to geasa, I certainly don't think they're a core part of the rules, at least not unless you're a hard-core powergamer (not to say that everyone who uses a geas is a powergamer, but that most powergamers with magical characters use geasa). Speaking for myself, I don't mind having geasa in the game, HOWEVER, it must be a limitation! I've seen too many people who take a geas that they must have a penny in their pocket or whatever other stupid thing they took, then end up with 6 points of magic and 5 points of cyberware. If a geas has an above average chance of leading to permanent magic loss over the course of a campaign, I think its doing its job. Otherwise it's just taking advantage of the rules.
So rather than eliminate them, make them more taxing. Make them so the mage really feels like one day he's going to have to choose between his life and his magic.
Ok, talismans must be prominent and uncommon. Any other difficulties with the current geasa rules?
I do like the idea of applying them directly to spells to reduce effective force for learning and/or casting. It also works for the mentally unstable hermetic who thinks he is a D&D Sorcerer (and brags about how much XP that last thug was worth) who needs to have some spells require chanting and hand waving while others can be cast with just thinking.
I do like the idea of applying them directly to spells to reduce effective force for learning and/or casting. It also works for the mentally unstable hermetic who thinks he is a D&D Sorcerer (and brags about how much XP that last thug was worth) who needs to have some spells require chanting and hand waving while others can be cast with just thinking.
YesNezumi, I'm ok with it being Sensory and Insight instead of Direct/Indirect.
As I stated before, 5 points of Cyberware with Geasa shouldn't be possible. Maximum of 1 point Magic Loss counterable with a Geasa should be the max. The 'carry a penny' is GM discretion. No GM I've ever played with (and I do realize you're exaggerating boss) would have allowed that. Like Herald said, a 'Talisman' being required should be sizeable and difficult to come by.
As for applying Geasa to spells, I'm ok with that as well.
As I stated before, 5 points of Cyberware with Geasa shouldn't be possible. Maximum of 1 point Magic Loss counterable with a Geasa should be the max. The 'carry a penny' is GM discretion. No GM I've ever played with (and I do realize you're exaggerating boss) would have allowed that. Like Herald said, a 'Talisman' being required should be sizeable and difficult to come by.
As for applying Geasa to spells, I'm ok with that as well.
Side Note, we should come up with what is 'Sensory', since I believe spells like 'Aim' should fall under that Category, along with the more obviously Sensory spells like Night Vision, Pack Eyes, UltraSound Vision (should someons make such a spell), etc.
The problems with geas, going sample geas at a time...
Condition geas: "you must specify a personal condition to do magic..."
How hard is it to have a character who is drunk more than half the time? Or high? Or married? Or wearing a red shirt? The wording is so open-ended that it puts the onus on the GM to be the hard ass. If you had a smart player and a novice GM (and how many times have you seen that?), this can be abused to no end. The only reason this one isn't abused more is it really isn't necessary when you have the talisman geas below.
Domain geas: "You must specify a domain in which your magic works... Most urban types choose the city." Again, your mage just never goes on a job which isn't in the city. If you're a GM, you already know, if your Johnson doesn't guarantee none of the job will take the mage out of Seattle, the job is rejected. This one isn't so bad, but it isn't all that tough for a smart mage to avoid or argue his way out of.
Gesture geas: "This geas requires the character to gesture visibly and freely to make magic." How often have any of your characters been unable to give the magical bird? Giving up the ability to use magic while actively restrained only puts you on par with the rest of the team, who can't use most of their cybered abilities while restrained. The only serious disadvantage of this on a run is that it marks you as the mage.
Talisman geas: hah. While I agree with Herald's modifications, I'm still hesitant though, although I suppose if you have to have something such that it can be easily broken or stolen, it would make sense. A talisman needs to be a point of vulnerability, no if's and's or but's. If you're in combat, there needs to be a reasonable chance of the talisman getting hit and destroyed. The rules do not even come close to making this a legitimate limit on power.
Time geas: "The time can be day or night, or a single season of the year..." This one isn't so bad, but again, you can have a player who says his character is only working during the summer, then moving to Australia or something. This is a restriction, but one that I feel would impact out of character play more than in-character play.
Keep in mind the trade-off we're talking about with a geas.
In exchange for geasing one magic point, you can get 1 essence point of cyberware. We're all aware of how much stuff you can stick in with one point of essence.
And what are you paying for your reaction enhancers, cyber eyes and smartlink? If you break the geas (which comes up what, 10% of the time or less?) your magic rating goes down by 1 (oh no, force 5 instead of force 6 spells!) and +1 to magical skills. If you have something like a smartlink, which is a -2 to all firearm tests, plus whatever other cyber you've stuffed in for that one point, I'd argue that that is already a good trade-off even if the geas were broken all the time. As a mage, I'd happily trade 1 magic point and +1 to magical tests in exchange for -2 to firearms tests and reduced karma costs on learning all skills (or whatever other ware you stuff in there). Where's the bite?
I seemed to recall geas being the first step to burning out, but the rules don't seem to support that. A geas needs to be dangerous. A broken geas shouldn't be repairable just by doing the geas again, otherwise when you lose a magic point the question is, do you lose the magic point permanently, or just half the time? I'd say, make geas so dangerous that, if you screw up, they run the risk of costing twice as much as you gambled. If the geas is broken to a certain degree, you lose the magic point and the ability to initiate, or you lose two magic points.
Condition geas: "you must specify a personal condition to do magic..."
How hard is it to have a character who is drunk more than half the time? Or high? Or married? Or wearing a red shirt? The wording is so open-ended that it puts the onus on the GM to be the hard ass. If you had a smart player and a novice GM (and how many times have you seen that?), this can be abused to no end. The only reason this one isn't abused more is it really isn't necessary when you have the talisman geas below.
Domain geas: "You must specify a domain in which your magic works... Most urban types choose the city." Again, your mage just never goes on a job which isn't in the city. If you're a GM, you already know, if your Johnson doesn't guarantee none of the job will take the mage out of Seattle, the job is rejected. This one isn't so bad, but it isn't all that tough for a smart mage to avoid or argue his way out of.
Gesture geas: "This geas requires the character to gesture visibly and freely to make magic." How often have any of your characters been unable to give the magical bird? Giving up the ability to use magic while actively restrained only puts you on par with the rest of the team, who can't use most of their cybered abilities while restrained. The only serious disadvantage of this on a run is that it marks you as the mage.
Talisman geas: hah. While I agree with Herald's modifications, I'm still hesitant though, although I suppose if you have to have something such that it can be easily broken or stolen, it would make sense. A talisman needs to be a point of vulnerability, no if's and's or but's. If you're in combat, there needs to be a reasonable chance of the talisman getting hit and destroyed. The rules do not even come close to making this a legitimate limit on power.
Time geas: "The time can be day or night, or a single season of the year..." This one isn't so bad, but again, you can have a player who says his character is only working during the summer, then moving to Australia or something. This is a restriction, but one that I feel would impact out of character play more than in-character play.
Keep in mind the trade-off we're talking about with a geas.
In exchange for geasing one magic point, you can get 1 essence point of cyberware. We're all aware of how much stuff you can stick in with one point of essence.
And what are you paying for your reaction enhancers, cyber eyes and smartlink? If you break the geas (which comes up what, 10% of the time or less?) your magic rating goes down by 1 (oh no, force 5 instead of force 6 spells!) and +1 to magical skills. If you have something like a smartlink, which is a -2 to all firearm tests, plus whatever other cyber you've stuffed in for that one point, I'd argue that that is already a good trade-off even if the geas were broken all the time. As a mage, I'd happily trade 1 magic point and +1 to magical tests in exchange for -2 to firearms tests and reduced karma costs on learning all skills (or whatever other ware you stuff in there). Where's the bite?
I seemed to recall geas being the first step to burning out, but the rules don't seem to support that. A geas needs to be dangerous. A broken geas shouldn't be repairable just by doing the geas again, otherwise when you lose a magic point the question is, do you lose the magic point permanently, or just half the time? I'd say, make geas so dangerous that, if you screw up, they run the risk of costing twice as much as you gambled. If the geas is broken to a certain degree, you lose the magic point and the ability to initiate, or you lose two magic points.
Hmmm, I see where you're coming from. My own character keeps a 'Condition: Astral Perception' to cast spells. I just like that restriction and go out of my way to lose a level of magic via cyber just to have that Geasa.
I think the solution is to, as you say, give a more stringent definition of what a Geasa is for and does. Make the Geasa magical/mystical. Penny doesn't work, Fetish might for talisman. Especially a fetish that 'you must hold in your hand' while using the magic.
Also, I definitely agree with a permanent non-geasa-able magic loss if you ever even once break the geasa, or better, a non-option. If you take the condition of Talisman, requiring you to 'hold' the item, then gloves, hands tied behind your back, etc, totally prevent you from using magic whatsoever.
I think the solution is to, as you say, give a more stringent definition of what a Geasa is for and does. Make the Geasa magical/mystical. Penny doesn't work, Fetish might for talisman. Especially a fetish that 'you must hold in your hand' while using the magic.
Also, I definitely agree with a permanent non-geasa-able magic loss if you ever even once break the geasa, or better, a non-option. If you take the condition of Talisman, requiring you to 'hold' the item, then gloves, hands tied behind your back, etc, totally prevent you from using magic whatsoever.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Aug 25 2005, 06:21 AM) |
| 2) The nature of Essence Essence is an attribute of the astral form, not the body. As such, a mage whose body has died will run out of Essence and die in a few hours. Cyberware and drug use can cause damage to Essence, which is expressed on the astral form. For example, a mage with a cyberarm may appear either wholly armless or with a shriveled and horribly damaged arm on the astral. Full-borg mages are truly a horrific sight on the astral. This damage to the astral form does not, curiously enough, impede functioning. |
Totally disagree with this, essence is, well the essence of being alive, it has nothing to do with the astral form.
Essence is lost through replacement of of the physical by the machine, it makes you less alive and less (meta)human. It's not just down to physically having pieces hacked off though, anything that provides you with a machine induced power makes you that little bit more machine, and that little bit less living being. Loss of essence through substance abuse is another manifestation of this, you loose sight of your humanity and give way to the 'abilities' of the drug, it's all to do with giving over self to something not yourself.
Essence loss through astral projection is a wierd one, especially since a visit to the metaplanes does not induce essence loss, and so a mage can project there pretty much indefinately. In a way though, projection is still moving away from your regular human abilities and your meat body, almost rejecting it I suppose, in favour of the abilities of the mind. That would explain why Adept-Magicians cannot project - their tuning to their bodies, while enhancing their physical abilities puts in place a mental block that stops them escaping the confines of it, and also hampers their abilities with their mind making them less able to sling magic than what you'd consider a "full magician".
| QUOTE (Darkest Angel) |
| Totally disagree with this, essence is, well the essence of being alive, it has nothing to do with the astral form. |
See, the problem is that it's a fairly densely interconnected web of defining characteristics here. In short:
Either Essence is an attribute of the body (Eb), Essence is an attribute of the astral form (Ea), or Essence is an attribute of the combined whole of the body and astral form (Ec).
Either the body and astral form are linked (Bl), or they are separate (Bs).
Ec -> Bl, all well and good. However, Bl has a problem: if this is the case, projecting magicians should be able to retreat to their body at will—they're still connected to it.
On the other hand, Bs ^ Eb -> projecting magicians shouldn't die when Essence runs out. Barring the introduction of some new system, it means a projecting magician should live forever until slain on the astral or forced back to their now-dead body by stun damage.
So unless we want immortal projecting magicians, Eb -> Bl. But that leads us right down the above problem. Either we need to accept foolproof retreat on the astral, which I am loathe to do (it's already too damn safe as it is), or we can't have Eb.
Does anyone see a way to resolve this?
~J
(Any chance we could get this board to support some subset of TeX? It'd be really convenient.)
The thing I got with Astral scouting is that A. You can't make out details. You might be able to follow a person to a location but only an initiate would be able to really get a good look to see what it looks like in the non astral world. Try giving car directions to a place you've only been while in the back seat of a car with windows covered in something to smear the image.
Ok not something you get everyday, but I think it is worth it to remember that the "real" world from the astral looks indistinct, no details. So if you were tailing a car you could count the number or roads or turn offs they pass, if you know the area you might be able to recognize larger features, or know the terrain. No roadsigns, and I wouldn't even allow no "Turn left at the red farmhouse and go half a mile." A mage busy tailing someone on the astral wouldn't have time to examine the house to tell if it was a farm house (if passing it at speed on a road) or really if it was red (might be an aura of someone in the house or a background count), and how exactly are you going to measure "half a mile?" How many people can really tell how far that is w/o cues like number of steps taken, pacing etc. The longer the distance the harder it gets.
The second thing is to remember that there are things living on the Astral. Esp in a big ugly distopian city a mage running a ways out of their body into unknown areas of town might just come across a fight they were not expecting. I know the wandering monster is put down, but there are times when a chance random encounter is called for.
Ok not something you get everyday, but I think it is worth it to remember that the "real" world from the astral looks indistinct, no details. So if you were tailing a car you could count the number or roads or turn offs they pass, if you know the area you might be able to recognize larger features, or know the terrain. No roadsigns, and I wouldn't even allow no "Turn left at the red farmhouse and go half a mile." A mage busy tailing someone on the astral wouldn't have time to examine the house to tell if it was a farm house (if passing it at speed on a road) or really if it was red (might be an aura of someone in the house or a background count), and how exactly are you going to measure "half a mile?" How many people can really tell how far that is w/o cues like number of steps taken, pacing etc. The longer the distance the harder it gets.
The second thing is to remember that there are things living on the Astral. Esp in a big ugly distopian city a mage running a ways out of their body into unknown areas of town might just come across a fight they were not expecting. I know the wandering monster is put down, but there are times when a chance random encounter is called for.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Does anyone see a way to resolve this? |
I'd say essence is connected to the meat. That explains Ghoul and Vampire dependence on said meat.
If you accept that by projecting you're 'rejecting' your meat - you leave behind all it's limitations, because you prefer the freedom of astral movement, then that explains essence loss and death if you leave it too long. Your rejection also explains that there's no easy "waking up" from astral projection, you need to astrally get back to your body.
The astral planes are connected to life in that way too - where there is no life, there is effectively no astral, for example in the void of space, or those places too polluted and toxic to harbour any living thing. It takes physical life to allow astral life to flurish.
To me it's the metaplanes that throw the biggest spanner in the works for any explaination regarding essence.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Mar 3 2007, 09:32 PM) |
| Ec -> Bl, all well and good. However, Bl has a problem: if this is the case, projecting magicians should be able to retreat to their body at will—they're still connected to it. |
| QUOTE (SR3. p173) |
| Fortunately your astral form is strongly connected to your body, allowing you to track it down. You can search for your lost body by making a Willpower Test against a Target Number of 4. |
Looks like that's the intent, but that the retreat isn't automatic.
I believe the canon explanation is basically a mix between the two. When your astral form goes for a jaunt, it's running off a 'battery', if you will. You wander around until your essence runs out. If your body dies, you can still wander around until your essence runs out, like a 'ghost'. Finding your body takes some skill, but isn't impossible (if you want to make that process more complex, go for it). However, it is never 'immediate retreat' except if you go unconscious. If you change that single rule, I think astral travel makes much more sense. Make it so, if you go unconscious, you're now just an astral form floating around unconscious, hoping he wakes up before his body dies or he runs out of essence. No reason to make it so safe; it's not like getting knocked unconscious in physical combat is especially safe.
In the case of ghouls and vampires, the physical body fails to completely charge the battery, so they need to borrow other peoples' rechargers to finish the job.
Cyberware is somehow either feeding off this charging action (which would possibly help explain how cyberware is powered) or acting as a resistor, it makes it so the astral form can't completely connect and recharge (explaining why bone lacing is problematic). If the character his 0 essence, he doesn't die immediately, but only once his astral form runs out of essence because it can no longer recharge (so lets say we can install 6 points of cyberware 'instantaneously'. The fellow would survive for 6 hours, using the essence charge saved up pre-surgery. If the fellow got 5.9 essence loss, he would survive for an hour at 6 essence, an hour at 5, so on and so forth, until he hit .1 and was constantly 'recharged'. Keep in mind, all living things have an astral form, even if they are incapable of astral projection or perception. I would assume, in all living things this form must be kept alive.)
The interesting note is, hypothetically, this would indicate it is possible to 'supercharge' a metahuman (although how to do that is the toughie). The maximum capacity of an astral form seems to be 12 essence, not 6.
In the case of ghouls and vampires, the physical body fails to completely charge the battery, so they need to borrow other peoples' rechargers to finish the job.
Cyberware is somehow either feeding off this charging action (which would possibly help explain how cyberware is powered) or acting as a resistor, it makes it so the astral form can't completely connect and recharge (explaining why bone lacing is problematic). If the character his 0 essence, he doesn't die immediately, but only once his astral form runs out of essence because it can no longer recharge (so lets say we can install 6 points of cyberware 'instantaneously'. The fellow would survive for 6 hours, using the essence charge saved up pre-surgery. If the fellow got 5.9 essence loss, he would survive for an hour at 6 essence, an hour at 5, so on and so forth, until he hit .1 and was constantly 'recharged'. Keep in mind, all living things have an astral form, even if they are incapable of astral projection or perception. I would assume, in all living things this form must be kept alive.)
The interesting note is, hypothetically, this would indicate it is possible to 'supercharge' a metahuman (although how to do that is the toughie). The maximum capacity of an astral form seems to be 12 essence, not 6.
Well, my personal belief is that your Astral is connected entirely to your meat-body (Essence). The fact that you're connected doesn't mean you see that connection. Just because I'm always attached to my body when projecting doesn't mean I see that attachment, and thus, doesn't mean I see how to immediately return to it. Maybe that connector, isn't in the astral plane itself but some sort of pocket dimension outside of my astral perception.
It did occur to me that that option is possible. For instance, my heart is directly connected and part of me, but I can't make it speed up or slow down at will, I need to do so indirectly through some other action. I can't make my fingernails grow faster or my hair grow blond, but if I die, they will all stop doing what they do soon afterwards.
A direct relation does not mean it is a conscious or controllable relation.
A direct relation does not mean it is a conscious or controllable relation.
It seems that this is the only magic thread covering rules revisions, so I'll post this here. The biggest problem I see with 3rd ed is the phrase "..number of successes up to the force of the spell..." If the pages weren't double sided I'd take a razor blade and remove that from every spell description. I understand what problem they were trying to correct with that phrase, but there are MUCH better ways to go about it than limiting the maximum number of successes a mage can get casting a spell. The whole philosophy behind the game system is that the more successes you get, the better you do. When a mage casts a spell, the effects of that spell should depend upon the skill of the mage casting the spell, and the amount of mana the mage is using to cast the spell. A mage with a skill of 12 should be able to accomplish as much or more with a lower force spell than a mage with a skill of 4. Currently that statement is only true for combat spells, a mage with a skill of 12 can cast a force 2 combat spell and theoretically get more successes than the target gets resisting the spell, but that same mage cannot get more effect from casting Levitate than a mage with a skill of 4 casting a force 6 spell. Also, spells cast at a force higher than 2 are illegal, but realistically are there any spells that give reasonable spell effects if limited to only 2 successes? Low force spells should be useful, and not automatically limited.
There are three changes I would make to fix the issue of players taking certain spells at a force of 1 or 2 and never taking them at a higher force.
1. Change spell effects to be dependant upon the force of the spell being cast: i.e., the area of effect is equal to the spell's force, not the caster's magic attribute. In fact anywhere in a spell discription where it says "caster's magic attribute" replace with "spell's force."
2. When casting a spell a mage rolls his sorcery skill and can add a number of spell pool dice up to the force of the spell. Any dice gained from a magical source (totem dice, elemental dice, foci, etc) are considered spell pool dice. So a higher force spell would allow the mage to use more bonus dice to cast.
3. Similar to #1, give all spell's a base effect if they are successfully cast. If a combat spell is cast successfully, it will due a minimum amount of damage based on the damage level it was cast at, so that same idea should be extended to all of those spells that currently have the evil phrase in their discriptions. I'm not going to list modifications for every spell, but here are 2 as an example:
Heal/Treat - this spell heals a number of boxes of damage equal to the force divided by 2 (or 3 if you want) plus one box for every 2 (or 3) successes. So casting a force 4 Heal spell will heal at least 2 boxes of damage as long as the caster gets one success on the casting test. This actually will make it easier to heal multiple boxes of damage on heavily cybered characters, if that's a problem have their essence affect the target number (as it does already) and have every point of body index (round up) remove one box of base damage healed.
Increase Reflexes - this is a popular spell to complain about. Change it to read that "the spell gives the caster extra initiative dice equal to the force of the spell divided by 3 (round down), plus 1 for every 3 successes. Maximum of 3 dice." Now casting the spell at less than force 3 results in no base initiative dice, just dice gained on the spell casting test, and casting the spell at force 6 gives two base dice, plus dice from extra successes.
If the magic rules are going to be changed, this is an important change to make.
There are three changes I would make to fix the issue of players taking certain spells at a force of 1 or 2 and never taking them at a higher force.
1. Change spell effects to be dependant upon the force of the spell being cast: i.e., the area of effect is equal to the spell's force, not the caster's magic attribute. In fact anywhere in a spell discription where it says "caster's magic attribute" replace with "spell's force."
2. When casting a spell a mage rolls his sorcery skill and can add a number of spell pool dice up to the force of the spell. Any dice gained from a magical source (totem dice, elemental dice, foci, etc) are considered spell pool dice. So a higher force spell would allow the mage to use more bonus dice to cast.
3. Similar to #1, give all spell's a base effect if they are successfully cast. If a combat spell is cast successfully, it will due a minimum amount of damage based on the damage level it was cast at, so that same idea should be extended to all of those spells that currently have the evil phrase in their discriptions. I'm not going to list modifications for every spell, but here are 2 as an example:
Heal/Treat - this spell heals a number of boxes of damage equal to the force divided by 2 (or 3 if you want) plus one box for every 2 (or 3) successes. So casting a force 4 Heal spell will heal at least 2 boxes of damage as long as the caster gets one success on the casting test. This actually will make it easier to heal multiple boxes of damage on heavily cybered characters, if that's a problem have their essence affect the target number (as it does already) and have every point of body index (round up) remove one box of base damage healed.
Increase Reflexes - this is a popular spell to complain about. Change it to read that "the spell gives the caster extra initiative dice equal to the force of the spell divided by 3 (round down), plus 1 for every 3 successes. Maximum of 3 dice." Now casting the spell at less than force 3 results in no base initiative dice, just dice gained on the spell casting test, and casting the spell at force 6 gives two base dice, plus dice from extra successes.
If the magic rules are going to be changed, this is an important change to make.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.