Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 19:53:49 -0700
Mon goose wrote:
/
/ >> Look, we both Know how sorcery and spellcasting IS written.
/ >>Personally, I'd like to see it broken into seperate skills-
/ >>spellcasting, astral techniques (including astral combat), and maybe
/ >>metamagic. Have any suggestions on what would make more sense than
/ >>the current mess?
/ >
/ >Yes I do, but it doesn't involving the changing of the skill Sorcery,
/ >it involves the changing of the overall Spellcasting Process. I think I
/ >am personally going to try and "vote heavily" for the "Spell is the
/ >Force, Skill is the Accuracy" sort of thing. Defaulting to Willpower
/ >for those people with Magical Edges (spell-effects).
/
/ Thats One idea Mike has mentioned as a potential spellcasting procedure
/ for SR3. It changes total dice rolled drastically, and (AFAIK) makes
/ force pointless for some spells- like almost all health spells. BIG
/ rewrites!

How about... A mage makes a Sorcery(Force) test to see if he
successfully casts the spell. The target number could be modified by
such things as wound modifiers, background count, etc. If the test
fails the spell fizzles. If the sorcery test is successful make a
Force test (determine the target number per the rules), adding dice
equal to the number of successes gained from the Sorcery test.

This way an apprentice mage (Sorcery 1-2) won't always get that spell
off. And his chances of casting a high force spell are slim. A
learned mage (Sorcery 5-6) however can justifiably cast high force
spells and can get a lot of mileage out of low force spells.

I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.

Did I do good? :)

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 2
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 22:01:30 -0500
At 07:53 PM 11/28/97 -0700, you wrote:
>How about... A mage makes a Sorcery(Force) test to see if he
>successfully casts the spell. The target number could be modified by
>such things as wound modifiers, background count, etc. If the test
>fails the spell fizzles. If the sorcery test is successful make a
>Force test (determine the target number per the rules), adding dice
>equal to the number of successes gained from the Sorcery test.

I rather like this idea, since it makes the Sorcery skill actually rolled
in the test, and improve the abilitiy of the spell to affect the target,
without making it too powerful. However....

>I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
>Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.

I don't think you really need a Magic Pool, at this point. Sorcery skill,
which used to provide extra dice, is doing that in a different way now.
There's no reason to add dice for other attributes and skills now, that's
just more dice (something mages don't need, and SR in general doesn't need,
imo).


losthalo
Message no. 3
From: Adam Treloar <guardian@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 15:00:56 +1100
On Fri, 28 Nov 1997, David Buehrer wrote:

> How about... A mage makes a Sorcery(Force) test to see if he
> successfully casts the spell. The target number could be modified by
> such things as wound modifiers, background count, etc. If the test
> fails the spell fizzles. If the sorcery test is successful make a
> Force test (determine the target number per the rules), adding dice
> equal to the number of successes gained from the Sorcery test.
>
> This way an apprentice mage (Sorcery 1-2) won't always get that spell
> off. And his chances of casting a high force spell are slim. A
> learned mage (Sorcery 5-6) however can justifiably cast high force
> spells and can get a lot of mileage out of low force spells.
>
> I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
> Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.
>
> Did I do good? :)

I LIKE it! Magic is about the only ability I can recall where the
person's skill in the area doesn't come into the success test. This evens
things up immensely... Although I'm not so sure about the magic pool bit.

Overall, a good idea worthy of playtesting.

Guardian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indestinguishable from technology.
So there."
Adam Treloar aka Guardian
s777317@*****.student.gu.edu.au http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1900/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 4
From: "Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 07:32:36 +0000
On 28 Nov 97, losthalo disseminated foul capitalist propaganda by
writing:

<snip the rolling Sorcery skill idea>

> >I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
> >Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.
>
> I don't think you really need a Magic Pool, at this point. Sorcery
> skill, which used to provide extra dice, is doing that in a
> different way now. There's no reason to add dice for other
> attributes and skills now, that's just more dice (something mages
> don't need, and SR in general doesn't need, imo).

Well, if you don't have a Magic Pool, how will you use Spell Defense
dice?

You still need MP, even if only for spell defense and shielding...
And the new way is pretty nice, as it uses all the "magic-connected"
attributes.


Leszek Karlik, aka Mike - trrkt@*****.onet.pl; http://www.wlkp.top.pl/~bear/mike; FIAWOL
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, (SS) (PC) (ISM) {IWATS-IIC} JH(Sith)/House Scholae
Palatinae
Jesus jogs.
Message no. 5
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 01:50:39 -0500
At 07:32 AM 11/29/97 +0000, you wrote:
>On 28 Nov 97, losthalo disseminated foul capitalist propaganda
<<<Did not! I am not a capitalist.>>>

>> I don't think you really need a Magic Pool, at this point. Sorcery
>> skill, which used to provide extra dice, is doing that in a
>> different way now. There's no reason to add dice for other
>> attributes and skills now, that's just more dice (something mages
>> don't need, and SR in general doesn't need, imo).
>
>Well, if you don't have a Magic Pool, how will you use Spell Defense
>dice?
>
>You still need MP, even if only for spell defense and shielding...
>And the new way is pretty nice, as it uses all the "magic-connected"
>attributes.

Simple. Allow characters to apply Sorcery skill as a defense. Require
them to declare it (Free Action to do so) for a target(s).

My problem with adding Magic Pool on top of the already-explained new
system is, well, magic is wiz enough as it is. Some go to great lengths to
complain of its power level already. It doesn't need a shot in the arm
(i.e. a Sorcery test to automatically boost any spell you cast, in addition
to having Magic Pool to defend yourself and others). I agree that Spell
Defense is a good idea in the game, it should be kept, but perhaps in a
modified form? I'm even thinking it might be nice to require a mage to
perform an action (simple, prolly) to grant spell defense to others
(requiring an action to be held to provide it when the time comes...).
Though this is making things *tougher* on mages than they are now. Hmm.
Unless, that is, we reduce the average size of the Magic Pool somehow...
That might work for me.

losthalo
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 11:30:41 +0100
Leszek Karlik, aka Mike said on 7:32/29 Nov 97...

> Well, if you don't have a Magic Pool, how will you use Spell Defense
> dice?
>
> You still need MP, even if only for spell defense and shielding...
> And the new way is pretty nice, as it uses all the "magic-connected"
> attributes.

Don't forget that, if Magic Pool were to be removed from the game, Drain
Codes should be adjusted down as well. If they wouldn't be, then most
spells will quickly cause lots of Stun damage to the caster.

Also, since there's a Combat Pool that can be used for attacking people
and defending from their attacks, IMHO there should be a Magic Pool as
well, that allows the same but against magic.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
We must remember that the news itself is only entertainment.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 11:47:12 PST
>>Well, if you don't have a Magic Pool, how will you use Spell Defense
>>dice?
>>
>>You still need MP, even if only for spell defense and shielding...
>>And the new way is pretty nice, as it uses all the "magic-connected"
>>attributes.
>

I like magic pool for its "can't do everything" aspect- pools in general
can force characters to choose between the rock and the hard place, by
alowwing only offense OR defense to be fully effective.

Magic pool is also the ONLY way to do ritual sorcery- any fix for that?

As Gurth mentioned, it's needed for drain <sad noise for poor troll
mages>.

It has a few other esoteric uses (aiding your spells combat when
intercepted), besideds the obvious spell defense / sheilding losthalo
adresses below.

>Simple. Allow characters to apply Sorcery skill as a defense. Require
them to declare it (Free Action to do so) for a target(s).

>My problem with adding Magic Pool on top of the already-explained new
>system is, well, magic is wiz enough as it is. <snip> I agree that
Spell Defense is a good idea in the game, it should be kept, but perhaps
in a modified form? I'm even thinking it might be nice to require a mage
to perform an action (simple, prolly) to grant spell defense to others
(requiring an action to be held to provide it when the time comes...).
Though this is making things *tougher* on mages than they are now. Hmm.
Unless, that is, we reduce the average size >of the Magic Pool
somehow...That might work for me.
>
>losthalo
>

Effetive Spell defense actully seems a GOOD thing to me- it can force
mages to do something besides chucking offensive spells. Our initite
mage had YET to put up a barrier, despite learning the spell and the
samurais tactical advice. But when stopped cold by an opposing
initiate, up went the barrier, forward went the team, down went the
opposing mage. Heck, the mage even drew his gun (he's got firearms 3
and used it once, when I had to run his character. He killed an assasin
the other party memebers could not even SEE.)

Divorcing spell effectiveness from magic pool means the mages spells
will generally be about the same in power regardless of situation: he
won't be able to pore in his whole pool because he knows there is no
magical opposition (or because he has to get by said oppositions
defense). I think thats a big enough limitation to satisfy anyone who
wants to limit mage power.

I don't think spell defense has changed much since SR1, and messing with
it would probably cause so many headaches people would just ignore the
whole schmeel.


Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
of a psychotic - Einstein

get sucked into -The Vortex- Chicago's shadowland BBS
http://www.concentric.net/~evamarie/srmain.htm


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 8
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 12:50:53 -0700
losthalo wrote:
/
/ >I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
/ >Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.
/
/ I don't think you really need a Magic Pool, at this point. Sorcery skill,
/ which used to provide extra dice, is doing that in a different way now.
/ There's no reason to add dice for other attributes and skills now, that's
/ just more dice (something mages don't need, and SR in general doesn't need,
/ imo).

Let me first say that I made the above suggestion because I feel that
dice pools should be based off of stats, not skills.

Having said that, the magic pool still comes into play for drain
resistance and spell defense.

Now I understand the lack of desire to use dice pools (they slow down
the game, make things to easy for the PCs, shatter reality, etc).
And if you don't want to use dice pools in your game that's fine with
me :)

My philosophy is that dice pools are what set the PCs aside from
everyone else. It's what makes them "heros". Dice pools also add a
cinematic feel to the game, which I like. I like dice pools so I'm
keeping them. My only problem is that the combat pool is based off
of stats while the other pools are figured from skills. Ergo, my
suggestion.

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 9
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 13:01:39 -0700
losthalo wrote:
/
/ Unless, that is, we reduce the average size of the Magic Pool somehow...
/ That might work for me.

Which comes back to my idea of adding Intelligence, Willpower and
Magic and dividing by 2. Per the rules magic is equal to sorcery.
How many players do you know that will create a mage with a sorcery
less then 6 knowing this? And it costs them a whole 6 skill points
during character creation (i.e., not much). Make a character using
my equation and see what happens. You have to choose between high
stats and low skills and few spells (and low resources) or making a
character with average stats that can actually do something.

And with three stats involved, one of them being Magic, this will
slow down the increase of the magic pool over time (whereas equalling
magic pool to sorcery will cause problems in very short order).

Combat pool is figured by adding three stats and dividing by 2, and
time has proven that its balanced (I've never had any problems with
it anyway). So I'm hoping the same will hold true for my idea :)

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 10
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:59:23 EST
In a message dated 97-11-28 22:01:39 EST, dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:

I wrote this earlier reply btw...

> / >Yes I do, but it doesn't involving the changing of the skill Sorcery,
> / >it involves the changing of the overall Spellcasting Process. I think I
> / >am personally going to try and "vote heavily" for the "Spell is
the
> / >Force, Skill is the Accuracy" sort of thing. Defaulting to Willpower
> / >for those people with Magical Edges (spell-effects).

IIRC, Landsquid wrote this one...

> / Thats One idea Mike has mentioned as a potential spellcasting procedure
> / for SR3. It changes total dice rolled drastically, and (AFAIK) makes
> / force pointless for some spells- like almost all health spells. BIG
> / rewrites!

And now David speaks up...

> How about... A mage makes a Sorcery(Force) test to see if he
> successfully casts the spell. The target number could be modified by
> such things as wound modifiers, background count, etc. If the test
> fails the spell fizzles. If the sorcery test is successful make a
> Force test (determine the target number per the rules), adding dice
> equal to the number of successes gained from the Sorcery test.

Seems like some extra accounting to me, but that is MHO only... ;)

> This way an apprentice mage (Sorcery 1-2) won't always get that spell
> off. And his chances of casting a high force spell are slim. A
> learned mage (Sorcery 5-6) however can justifiably cast high force
> spells and can get a lot of mileage out of low force spells.

That one thing I am looking at is the concept of "Throwing a Spell Wildly",
similar to a guy with a gun (mediocre analogy, but it works). He has the gun
pointed in the direction, he knows if he pulls the trigger it goes off, but
his accuracy could vary widely. Same idea with the spell, he has the magic,
he releases, but because of his skill, his "accuracy" varies a bit.

> I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
> Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.

I thought about this too, we call it the "Mental Index" here. I think however
that I would have found a way to place the actual magic attribute into the
figuring somehow....perhaps (Wil + Int + MA)/4 (round down). I am thinking of
the POV of the decker's hacking pool, where the MPCP of the deck comes into
play.

-K


>
> Did I do good? :)
>
Message no. 11
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:45:17 -0700
Ereskanti wrote:
/
/ In a message dated 97-11-28 22:01:39 EST, dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:
/
/ I wrote this earlier reply btw...
/
/ > / >Yes I do, but it doesn't involving the changing of the skill Sorcery,
/ > / >it involves the changing of the overall Spellcasting Process. I think I
/ > / >am personally going to try and "vote heavily" for the "Spell
is the
/ > / >Force, Skill is the Accuracy" sort of thing. Defaulting to Willpower
/ > / >for those people with Magical Edges (spell-effects).
/
/ And now David speaks up...
/
/ > How about... A mage makes a Sorcery(Force) test to see if he
/ > successfully casts the spell. The target number could be modified by
/ > such things as wound modifiers, background count, etc. If the test
/ > fails the spell fizzles. If the sorcery test is successful make a
/ > Force test (determine the target number per the rules), adding dice
/ > equal to the number of successes gained from the Sorcery test.
/
/ Seems like some extra accounting to me, but that is MHO only... ;)

Upon reflection :) : A Sorcery test to hit followed by a resistance
test for attacking spells. Magus (Sorcery 5) attempts to cast a Mana
Bolt (Force 4) at Fred (Willpower 4). Magus rolls 5 dice vs a 4
(Fred's Willpower). Fred rolls 4 dice vs a 4 (the spell's Force).

A Sorcery(4) test followed by a Force test for beneficial spells (and
spells that aren't strictly combat oriented). Shamus (Sorcery 3)
attempts to cast Heal (Force 6) on Fred (Essence 6). Shamus rolls 3
dice vs a 4. The spell roles 6 dice vs a 4 (10-6).

In both cases the caster resists drain as per the rules.

/ That one thing I am looking at is the concept of "Throwing a Spell Wildly",
/ similar to a guy with a gun (mediocre analogy, but it works). He has the gun
/ pointed in the direction, he knows if he pulls the trigger it goes off, but
/ his accuracy could vary widely. Same idea with the spell, he has the magic,
/ he releases, but because of his skill, his "accuracy" varies a bit.

For some reason I just thought of the scatter rules for determining the
target of a miscast spell. Can you imagine a mage casting a mana bolt
and hitting his teamate behind him? Or casting Heal and hitting the bad guy
across the room? <EGMG>

/ > I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
/ > Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.
/
/ I thought about this too, we call it the "Mental Index" here. I think however
/ that I would have found a way to place the actual magic attribute into the
/ figuring somehow....perhaps (Wil + Int + MA)/4 (round down).

What's the difference between (Wil + Int + MA) and (MA + Int + Wil)? ;)

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 12
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 00:22:59 -0500
At 01:01 PM 11/29/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Which comes back to my idea of adding Intelligence, Willpower and
>Magic and dividing by 2.

Hmmm... Most players put a high values in Willpower to resist drain, and
in Intelligence just for Perception tests and the like. And given that
Sorcery/Magic are important already for spellcasting, why not put a
priority on a high value there? No, this is going to end up with an
average Magic Pool of, say, Int4, WP5, Sorcery 5 ... 7. Higher than the
usual starting value of 6 nowadays, unless I'm missing something here.
Otherwise, you're getting a Sorcery test to augment the Force dice for
casting, then also getting Magic Pool for defense. More powerful than it
is now.


losthalo@********.comGoFa6)7(Im6TJt)Fe(7P!ShMoB4/19.2Bk!cBkc8MBV6sM3ZG
oPuTeiClbMehC6a23=n4bSSH173g4L??96FmT1Ea4@*********************
4h7sM8zSsYnk6BSMmpFNN0393NHfsSLusOH5Whileyouarelisteningyourwillingat
tentionismakingyoumoreandmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome.
Message no. 13
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 14:29:44 -0500
In a message dated 97-12-01 12:44:43 EST, dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:

>
> / > I would also recommend figuring the Magic Pool by adding the mage's
> / > Magic plus Intelligence plus Willpower and dividing by 3.
> /
> / I thought about this too, we call it the "Mental Index" here. I think
> however
> / that I would have found a way to place the actual magic attribute into
the
> / figuring somehow....perhaps (Wil + Int + MA)/4 (round down).
>
> What's the difference between (Wil + Int + MA) and (MA + Int + Wil)? ;)
>
> -David
> -
David (sounds of carp buckets being placed close at hand....) You are being
nitpicky....(waving the 'pointy finger' ever so menacingly)....I was trying
to use something with a /4 vs. a /3 (in order to limit the potential of Magic
Attribute being really high (Foci, GoI, etc...)

-K (ready....aim....throw.........................................)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Sorcery and Spell Casting (was Choice Rulings), 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!