Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Like, dude, where's the firefight?" <MURRAYMD@******.BITNET>
Subject: Answer to mages and their power...
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 17:08:01 CET
>Hi I'm a new GM of ShadowRun. I've never played it which makes life
>slightly complicated. Is the following senario correct.

No problem. We'll shoot you later for never having played before.

>Mage with Spell locked (+4 WP) casts Sleep (reusable fetish force 6)
>He donates all his Magic Pool to the Spell (6 dice).
>This means that he has 6+6+1 dice to roll against a target number of
>the WP of the opposition

+4 Willpower?!?! That right there will make your mage a bit more
powerful than your average spellhucker. With the extra high willpower you
can cast a more powerful spell and have a good chance of beating the drain.
What force was the spell? Since you have 6 dice from the magic
pool and six from the force 6 *fetish focus* (reusable fetishes give only
1 die even under both editions of the rules) then the spell force must be 1.
If you are playing with first edition SR then yes you can do this and your
mage is *VERY* powerful. If you are using second edition SR then you have
broken a rule: You can only add as many dice from your magic pool for the
success test as the force of the spell. If you are casting a force 1 Sleep
spell then you can only add 1 die from your magic pool. If you were to cast
a force 4 sleep spell then you could add 4 dice from your magic pool. This
area of the rules is what I like the most about how they have improved the
game with SR2.

>These are the averages
> WP Average Number of Succeses
> 1 & 2 10.8
> 3 8.6
> 4 6.5
> 5 4.4
> 6 2.2

>The target then meust make a will power save against a target number of 7 (6+1)
>This is not done on average more than once.

If you are playing first edition then the target number for the
defenders to resist the spell is the Sorcery skill of the caster, normally
5 or better. If you are playing second edition then the target number is
the force of the spell. I don't think the target number goes up for adding
dice from the magic pool, though you may want to double check. Those of us
at the Matt Murray Institute for Better Shadowrun suggest the second edition
rules for more realistic games.

>So for people with 4 and below WP they will on average dice stage up to Deadly
> stun.
>This is an area of effect spell that can hit the a large number of people.

>The Mage still has 8 dice to resist a drain of (6/2)-1 =2S which means
>that he is bound to be standing at the end and odds are that he will
>not even be stunned lightly.

It looks like you are using second edition Shadowrun. Good show!
I'm assuming that your mage has a 4 willpower with +4 from the previously
mentioned spell lock. Yes, your mage would resist drain with 8 dice. You
just have to make sure that you don't roll over 2 ones or you are staring
at some stun damage.

>Have I missed something or are Mages this powerfull.
>Thanks

They can be powerful, especially against a load of schmucks with
low willpower and no mage of their own. That's why shadowrun teams have a
magic user of some kind.

>Chris


**************************************************************************
* Matt: You shot him!!!! | Matt Murray at the University of Dayton *
* Chris: No I didn't. It | MURRAYMD@******.BITNET *
* was a gunfight. | MURRAYMD@******.OCA.UDAYTON.EDU *
* He forgot his gun.| "Like, dude, where's the firefight?" *
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Star Fleet Battles Battletech Shadowrun Space Marine AD&D *
**************************************************************************

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Answer to mages and their power..., 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.