Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BuZZZard)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Thu Nov 8 19:05:01 2001
My groups Shaman and I were discussing initiation and tyes of meta magic
to learn for his character, and we agreed that both anchoring and
quickening were too costly in terms of karma to consider learnign the
skills.

We were working on the assumption that it would cost 12+ karma at
initiate and learn the Mata magical technique. Then it's going to cost
(approx) the force in karma to bind/quicken.Then just as the character
is getting used to having a nice spell readily available, another mage
takes exception to it and dispells it.

Therefore the character has spent say 5 karma on something that just
makes him a target for any vindictive mage / GM.

Are we correct in thinking that a simple dispelling basically burns the
karma spent on quickening / anchoring that spell?

I suggested that we could make a house rule that Dispelled spell anchors
and quickend spells return after 28 days. Does this seem reasonable?

Gotta Fly

BuZZZard
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jonathan)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Thu Nov 8 20:15:01 2001
Yes when you dispell it destroys the enchantment.

I won't comment on the 28 day thing, look to the previous debate about
upgrading spells by spending less karma and you will basically get how'd I
respond to this...If you never saw it basically I'm in favor of letting
players have choice with risks to either choice. When house rules remove
those risks I generally get annoyed so I remain at no comment...sorta :)

And for that somebody... It's all about strategy! :oP

/me ducks the rotten fruit

I will comment abount the vindictive mage thing though....welcome to the
world of reputation...

1) Never cheese off someone more powerful than you.
2) If you do cheese them off quickly get the word out you are strong (might
discourage revenge)
3) When all else fails...make sure no one is left alive to be vindictive.
Hard to cheese people off when they're turned into walking torches :)
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Thu Nov 8 22:45:01 2001
<snipt!(TM)>
> And for that somebody... It's all about strategy!
:oP
>
> /me ducks the rotten fruit
<snipt!(TM)>

Dude, you're pushing it. ;)

Jonathan's mostly right here. You take the power, you
run the risks. Having the spell, at least for a while,
can be worth the karma. Also, if you've got masking
you can hide a certain amount of quickened spells.

On the other hand, if your GM goes out of his way to
have NPCs break any quickened spells you have, simply
because they're quickened, you've got a reason for
complaint. Sometimes, though, it just happens, for no
good reason, or because that's what would happen in
reality. Then you just gotta lump it.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jonathan)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Fri Nov 9 00:55:01 2001
> Dude, you're pushing it. ;)
>

LOL couldn't help it. And the topic seemed fitting ;)
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (John Constable)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Fri Nov 9 05:30:01 2001
On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, BuZZZard wrote:

> My groups Shaman and I were discussing initiation and tyes of meta magic
> to learn for his character, and we agreed that both anchoring and
> quickening were too costly in terms of karma to consider learnign the
> skills.
>

The way I've always looked at this, is that the cost to quicken a spell is
less than that to bond a focus to do the same thing, and costs you less
money, too. yes, the spell can be dispelled, but then a focus can be
destroyed too, and you can get a new quickened spell very quickly if you
have the available karma... so its a trade off between the reduced cost in
karma and nuyen for quickening, and available to anyone, easy to link
spells to sustaining foci.. it all depends on, I guess, how much you get
other mage's dispelling your magic, and how much nuyen you have..

--
john@*****.net
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Fri Nov 9 11:55:01 2001
I am not sure about the usefullness of anchoring. Quickening on the other hand should be
a staple of every mage. You quicken any of the health spells that improve stats/reaction
and they are always on. Imagine having clairvoyance always on or detect lie or magic
fingers. Yes, you can have that with a focus, but a focus costs money and karma.
Quickening just costs karma. The mages in my group always quicken spells and have some
sustaining focus for flexibility.

As for dispelling quicken spells. Get shielding and tell your DM my default assignement of
spell pool is to shielding. This will make any sneak attack next to impossible. When
someone attacks the quicken track him and have your freinds shoot him. IMO attacking
quicken spells is a waste of effort. Just kill the guy and you will destory all his
quicken spells anyway.

John
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Dan Turek)
Subject: Anchoring and Quickening
Date: Fri Nov 9 12:45:01 2001
>Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 11:56:06 EST
>From: Johnflang@***.com

>I am not sure about the usefullness of anchoring. Quickening on the other
>hand should be a staple of every mage.

Definitely. Not just for group members but also to bad guys and their toys.
It may show your sig, but isn't linked to you (or did that change?)

>IMO attacking quicken spells is a waste of effort. Just kill the guy and
>you will destory all his quicken spells anyway.

Well, killing the mage doesn't get rid of quickened spells. No one has to
sustain them. If Stink Bomb is quickened on him, you still have a very
smelly corpse....

But if you purposely cast them at max force it makes them a bitch to
dispell. When the players don't care if it gets dispelled they do it at
force 1 or 2 (like Personal Detect Enemies Extended) while something
important to them at the highest force they know. It gives physical drain to
cast it above the Magic rating, but how many mages will take the risk of
dispelling something that can give physical drain during a firefight? Also,
the dipeller doesn't get any reduction for the spell using fetishes. The
only ones to really worry about are high grade initiates and decent power
focus owners.

Having a mix is good since the lower force spell will almost always be the
first target. So you lose a karma or two. Not only did you get the use of
the spell for a while, but you got a bonus warning about a hostile astral
presence.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Zebulin Magby)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Fri Nov 9 17:20:01 2001
<Johnflang@***.com> wrote:

> I am not sure about the usefullness of anchoring. Quickening on the other
hand should be a staple of every mage. You quicken any of the health spells
that improve stats/reaction and they are always on. Imagine having
clairvoyance always on or detect lie or magic fingers. Yes, you can have
that with a focus, but a focus costs money and karma. Quickening just costs
karma. The mages in my group always quicken spells and have some sustaining
focus for flexibility.
>

And that's why I like Grounding sooooo much. *egmg*


> As for dispelling quicken spells. Get shielding and tell your DM my
default assignement of spell pool is to shielding. This will make any sneak
attack next to impossible. When someone attacks the quicken track him and
have your freinds shoot him. IMO attacking quicken spells is a waste of
effort. Just kill the guy and you will destory all his quicken spells
anyway.
>

That's an intriguing concept, but isn't spell defense more of a concious
thing?

Z


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Sat Nov 10 11:15:01 2001
BuZZZard writes:

> <Snip description of how Quickening is too Karma costly>

Well, in a way you're right. But in a way, if the magician was considering
using Sustaining Foci, then Quickening is no more Karma expensive, and has a
whole host of benefits, too, so it's a really viable alternative. OTOH, if
the magician in question would not consider Sustaining Foci, then it's
rather unlikely that they'll find Quickening useful, either.

> Are we correct in thinking that a simple dispelling basically burns the
> karma spent on quickening / anchoring that spell?

For Quickening, yes. For Anchoring, I'm not so sure. Nobody's ever used it
in my games, for pretty much the exact reasons that you state - it's too
Karma costly for what you get. But Anchoring involves creating specialised
foci, so I wouldn't think it was merely possible to Dispell the foci - you'd
have to destroy the focus in the normal manner.

Also, don't forget that a magician who wants to Dispell a spell must be on
the same plane. Thus, no astrally projecting magician's Dispelling every
Sustained or Quickened spell that they come across. They can only Dispell
ones that were cast on the Astral plane.

> I suggested that we could make a house rule that Dispelled spell anchors
> and quickend spells return after 28 days. Does this seem reasonable?

Not to me, no. It's rather too much of a bonus. It's also a little difficult
to explain using the game metaphysics without leading to various other
dubious and probably broken interpretations of things.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Anchoring and quickening
Date: Sat Nov 10 11:15:04 2001
Zebulin Magby writes:

> That's an intriguing concept, but isn't spell defense more of a concious
> thing?

Well, in a way, yeah. But the rules do specifically say that it is assumed
most magician's always have a portion of their Spell Pool and/or Sorcery
allocated to Spell Defence (or Shielding if they've got it) at all times. So
the implication is that the magician entwines the targets (eg himself, foci,
spells, teammates, whatever) with his magical energy. The conscious effort
bit is in the original assignment of the power, not in the maintenance of
the energy.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Anchoring and quickening, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!