Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Wed Apr 4 23:35:01 2001
Hey chummers. I have a few questions about SR3 Core rules (I'm rather new to
the game, although I'm familiar with the world).

How do dual beings handle disengaging astral perception (or is it even
possible)? For instance, if a dual-being saw someone coming at him in the
astral plane, could he disengage asatral perception and thus not be harmed in
the astral plane? Or is he always vulnerable, even if the dual being never
declared to use astral perception? If a dual being can disengage astral
perception, how long does it take to do so?

The other question I have is about full and aspected magicians. Why do full
magicians get less SP at character creation (25) and aspected get more (35)?
Is this a typo or something?
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Nexx)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Wed Apr 4 23:40:01 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: <DojiKimura@***.com>

> How do dual beings handle disengaging astral perception (or is it even
> possible)? For instance, if a dual-being saw someone coming at him in the
> astral plane, could he disengage asatral perception and thus not be harmed
in
> the astral plane? Or is he always vulnerable, even if the dual being
never
> declared to use astral perception? If a dual being can disengage astral
> perception, how long does it take to do so?

They can't; they're always potential targets on the astral (which is why the
ghouls of Cabrini Green were so devastated by the FAB Strain III that Ares
released to deal with the bugs). They are, however, a whole lot better at
fighting on the astral than most people, since they get to use their
(generally superior) physical attributes.

> The other question I have is about full and aspected magicians. Why do
full
> magicians get less SP at character creation (25) and aspected get more
(35)?
> Is this a typo or something?

Sorcerers have less to learn... since they don't have to spend time picking
up Conjuring and Enchanting and Projecting, they can spend more time with
spells.
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 00:05:04 2001
Nexx wrote:
>
> > The other question I have is about full and aspected magicians. Why do
> full
> > magicians get less SP at character creation (25) and aspected get more
> (35)?
> > Is this a typo or something?
>
> Sorcerers have less to learn... since they don't have to spend time picking
> up Conjuring and Enchanting and Projecting, they can spend more time with
> spells.

Am I the only one whose always found that absurd? Its giving a double
penalty to full magicians for no logical reason. So a full mage has
more talent? That means they shouldn't have had the opportunity to
learn as much as an aspected magician?

Now if the Priority/Build Point cost were identical, I wouldn't have a
problem with this. But as it stands, a full mage not only has to buy
their Magic at a higher cost, but also have less Spell Points to buy
their initial abilities (which is generally more widespread than an
aspected sorcerer or conjurer; they have to buy /both/ spells and
spirits, not to mention foci and the like). Hell, an Adept of the
Magical Path can end up with 36 Spell Points at character creation, and
they're even more spread out than a full magician.

I've actually flip-flopped the ruling in my home game. A full magician
gains 35 spell points to spend as they see fit on their magic, and
aspected magicians receive only 25. Adepts of the Magical Way only gain
4 spell points per point of Magical Power.
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (John Pederson)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 00:15:01 2001
oz@*****.net wrote:

> Am I the only one whose always found that absurd? Its giving a double
> penalty to full magicians for no logical reason. So a full mage has
> more talent? That means they shouldn't have had the opportunity to
> learn as much as an aspected magician?

It is slightly reasonable, but, no, you're not the only person with a
problem with the idea.

> I've actually flip-flopped the ruling in my home game. A full magician
> gains 35 spell points to spend as they see fit on their magic, and
> aspected magicians receive only 25. Adepts of the Magical Way only gain
> 4 spell points per point of Magical Power.

If/when I wind up GMing a game again, I'm likely to use the old 2nd
edition set-up: spell points (they were called force points then, but
I digress...) were tied to resources. It could be pretty painful for a
magician with low resources (nasty tradeoff, that), but it made sense
for higher levels and could easily be tweaked.

--
John Pederson
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 05:00:01 2001
According to DojiKimura@***.com, on Thu, 05 Apr 2001 the word on the
street was...

> How do dual beings handle disengaging astral perception (or is it even
> possible)?

Dual beings cannot switch off their astral perception -- it's just like
none of us can switch off our sense of touch, I guess. Maybe they can close
their astral "eyes," but they'd still be present on the astral plane and
therefore vulnerable to attacks coming from there.

> The other question I have is about full and aspected magicians. Why do full
> magicians get less SP at character creation (25) and aspected get more (35)?
> Is this a typo or something?

The one thing you need to know about FASA rules is that (perceived) game
balance goes before just about everything else. Thus, to compensate for the
reduced abilities of an aspected magician, they get more spell points than
full magicians.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
If there are vegetarian hamburgers, why isn't there beef lettuce?
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Alfredo B Alves)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 09:45:01 2001
On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 23:15:57 -0500 John Pederson
<pedersje@**.rose-hulman.edu> writes:
> oz@*****.net wrote:
<SNIP>
> If/when I wind up GMing a game again, I'm likely to use the old 2nd
> edition set-up: spell points (they were called force points then, but
> I digress...) were tied to resources. It could be pretty painful for a
> magician with low resources (nasty tradeoff, that), but it made sense
> for higher levels and could easily be tweaked.


I never liked that. It prompted mages to take high resources in order to
get force/spell points and they'd wind up with a tone of money and not a
lot to spend it on... Oooo a year's supply of chalk! :) I would reccomend
setting it to a constant and allowing them to buy more. I think the SR3
conversion is 1 spell point for 25k but I can't rememebr where that's
from (BBB3 or SR3Co?).

--
D. Ghost
Profanity is the one language all programmers know best
- Troutman's 6th programming postulate.
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bob Ooton)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 15:45:00 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: John Pederson <pedersje@**.rose-hulman.edu>
To: <shadowrn@*********.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: SR3 core rules questions


> oz@*****.net wrote:
>
> > Am I the only one whose always found that absurd? Its giving a
double
> > penalty to full magicians for no logical reason. So a full mage has
> > more talent? That means they shouldn't have had the opportunity to
> > learn as much as an aspected magician?

> It is slightly reasonable, but, no, you're not the only person with a
> problem with the idea.

I'm actually of the opinion that it's very reasonable. If two people
have spent x amount of time each regarding their magical talents and
person A has to research Astral issues, Sorcery, and Conjuring, then
he'll be more spread out overall and won't have the number/power of
spells that person B has, because B can only (and does only) work from
the Sorcery aspect. Same deal as specialists in medicine, law, or any
other field. They're better at what they do because they are
specialized, but can't handle every aspect like a general practicioner
should be able to.

Full magicians aren't penalized in *any* way, believe me. They have
access to the Astral abilities, can initiate to raise their magic rating
(cybered runners have no such option), can now quicken and bond to their
heart's content thanks to the removal of the grounding rules, are easily
the most versatile characters thanks to the sheer variety of spells
available, can summon spirits/elementals at a fraction of the cost (if
not outright for free) and problems associated with using a rigger
similarly, and can act faster in combat thanks to the new initiative
system.

In short, they get it all and shouldn't ever whine about anything. They
spend nearly zero nuyen throughout their careers, so they live like
pimps. The only thing even pretending to keep them down is karma - they
actually have to do something with their awesome and diverse powers to
get better. Of course, cybered characters have to do this *and* they
have to spend money. So the magicians *still* come out ahead.

Man, I can feel the old mage-hate coming back to me now, so I'll let
this one go at that. Later =)

| Bob Ooton <rbooton@*****.edu>
| aka TopCat, the cyberware advocate
| Member of the Black Hand Demo Team
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (John Pederson)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 18:00:01 2001
Bob Ooton wrote:

>> It is slightly reasonable, but, no, you're not the only person with a
>> problem with the idea.
>
> I'm actually of the opinion that it's very reasonable. If two people
> have spent x amount of time each regarding their magical talents and
> person A has to research Astral issues, Sorcery, and Conjuring, then
> he'll be more spread out overall and won't have the number/power of
> spells that person B has, because B can only (and does only) work from
> the Sorcery aspect. Same deal as specialists in medicine, law, or any
> other field. They're better at what they do because they are
> specialized, but can't handle every aspect like a general practicioner
> should be able to.

*shrug* While I agree on that point, I'm still not totally sold on the
idea. I'd really be happier if the number of Spell Points a character
received was independent of the character's Magic priority (assuming
they can *use* the spell points, anyway). I liked it better when they
were called Force Points, too. Perhaps I'm just stubborn.


> Full magicians aren't penalized in *any* way, believe me. They have
> access to the Astral abilities, can initiate to raise their magic rating
> (cybered runners have no such option),

Cyber-fiends have alpha, beta and deltaware, plus bioware (cultured
and otherwise). All of which expand their abilities. Given time, money
and karma, they can become deckers or riggers, even if they won't be
as good at it as pure deckers or riggers (did we cover that already?).

> can now quicken and bond to their
> heart's content thanks to the removal of the grounding rules, are easily
> the most versatile characters thanks to the sheer variety of spells
> available, can summon spirits/elementals at a fraction of the cost (if
> not outright for free) and problems associated with using a rigger
> similarly, and can act faster in combat thanks to the new initiative
> system.

House rules can fix many of those things, others may be a matter of
misconceptions. Drones don't have a set number of services, even if
they are less powerful, and Watchers aren't terribly useful, and they
don't last forever. If it still bothers you, you could increase the
drain involved in Conjuring. The initiative system is still (IMO,
anyway) flawed, and just flip-flops the original problem without
solving anything. Nothing new there, and nothing that doesn't affect
any character with a low initiative score. As for grounding.... well,
it's hairy and somewhat inflammatory, but I don't see any reason why
you couldn't still have it in SR3 (it would mostly mean disregarding
the explicit statement that 'grounding no longer exists', I think). I
certainly wasn't planning on keeping it out of whatever game I (might)
run in the future. YMMV (especially if you're a bitter player, rather
than a bitter GM).


> In short, they get it all and shouldn't ever whine about anything. They
> spend nearly zero nuyen throughout their careers, so they live like
> pimps. The only thing even pretending to keep them down is karma - they
> actually have to do something with their awesome and diverse powers to
> get better. Of course, cybered characters have to do this *and* they
> have to spend money. So the magicians *still* come out ahead.

SoTA rules on hermetic libraries, magical supplies in general are
expensive until the players discover talismongering. Talismongering
takes *lots* of time and will leave lots of trails back to the
character(s) in question if they decide to do very much of it.
Magicians have to expend karma for all the same reasons that
non-cybered characters do, plus to do pretty much all of the things
that make them magicians. Burn karma to learn spells, bond foci,
initiate, summon allies, bind spirits, initiate or what-have-you, but
you won't have that karma to build up your skills or attributes.

My Personal Opinion: While there are definite game balance issues, I
don't think they're as bad as you make out. A mage is relatively
fragile, even he or she *is* a nuclear bomb in a handy-dandy package.
Even so, much can be done to preserve game balance (a somewhat
illusory force in the first place).


> Man, I can feel the old mage-hate coming back to me now, so I'll let
> this one go at that. Later =)

Sure. I'll fully admit that I'm biased the other way, so it may be
best if we agree to disagree. HAND

--
John Pederson
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Nexx)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 19:55:00 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Ooton"

> > It is slightly reasonable, but, no, you're not the only person with a
> > problem with the idea.
>
> I'm actually of the opinion that it's very reasonable. If two people
> have spent x amount of time each regarding their magical talents and
> person A has to research Astral issues, Sorcery, and Conjuring, then
> he'll be more spread out overall and won't have the number/power of
> spells that person B has, because B can only (and does only) work from
> the Sorcery aspect.

However, you could say that they don't spend an equal amount of time on
their magical abilities, as one is Priority A and the other Priority B... it
would seem that magic is more important to someone who's a full magician,
than to a Sorcerer.
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BD)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 20:30:00 2001
>> I'm actually of the opinion that it's very reasonable. If two people
>> have spent x amount of time each regarding their magical talents and
>> person A has to research Astral issues, Sorcery, and Conjuring, then
>> he'll be more spread out overall and won't have the number/power of
>> spells that person B has, because B can only (and does only) work from
>> the Sorcery aspect.
>
> However, you could say that they don't spend an equal amount of time on
> their magical abilities, as one is Priority A and the other Priority B...
> it
> would seem that magic is more important to someone who's a full magician,
> than to a Sorcerer.

Well, that doesn't really wash, as there's really no choice as to what
level of power you've been bestowed with. No character has ever woken up
and said, "The heck with astral projection and conjuring, I want the
bonuses that come with a lower magic priority."

I think it's balanced just fine, given the disadvantages involved in
being an aspected magician.

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Sebastian Wiers)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 20:40:01 2001
<snip spell points discussion>

> I think it's balanced just fine, given the disadvantages involved in
>being an aspected magician.

The most notable of which is, you are ALWAYS an aspected magician. The
diffrence in spell points amounts to 10 karma points. Can an aspected
magician buy astral projection plus the potential to learn a whole new area
of magic (conjouring for a sourcerer, sorcery for a conjourer) for 10 karma
points?

LOL, dream on grog boy...

-Mongooose

P.S. - Grog: noun, slang - a term used by full mages in reference to
adepts and aspected mages to imply that those who are not full mages are
only "partly awakened".
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Nexx)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 20:45:01 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sebastian Wiers"
>
> P.S. - Grog: noun, slang - a term used by full mages in reference to
> adepts and aspected mages to imply that those who are not full mages are
> only "partly awakened".

You play too much Ars Magica.... besides, an aspected mage would probably
be a Hedge Wizard, and an adept a consortes... its the sammies who are
grogs. ;-)
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Thu Apr 5 22:05:01 2001
Someone brought up karma and that brings up another question. When bonding
foci, does a person use good karma (experience) or the other kind (name
escapes me right now...the one that lets you reroll and stuff). It's not
clarified in the core rules (unless I overlooked it), but I'm assuming it's
good karma.
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Keith Duthie)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Fri Apr 6 01:15:01 2001
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 DojiKimura@***.com wrote:

> Someone brought up karma and that brings up another question. When bonding
> foci, does a person use good karma (experience) or the other kind (name
> escapes me right now...the one that lets you reroll and stuff). It's not
> clarified in the core rules (unless I overlooked it), but I'm assuming it's
> good karma.

It's good karma. If it were karma pool then I don't think /any/ mages
would bind foci.

--
Understanding is a three edged sword. Do you *want* to get the point?
http://www.albatross.co.nz/~psycho/ O- -><-
Standard disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this message are unlikely to
be mine, let alone anybody elses...
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Fri Apr 6 02:40:01 2001
--- DojiKimura@***.com wrote:
> Someone brought up karma and that brings up another
question. When bonding foci, does a person use good
karma (experience) or the other kind (name escapes me
right now...the one that lets you reroll and stuff).
It's not clarified in the core rules (unless I
overlooked it), but I'm assuming it's good karma.

That's because it's unnecessary to do so.

The Karma Pool is NEVER used to improve the character.
Improving skills or attributes, learning spells,
initiating, quickening spells and, yes, bonding foci
may NOT be done using karma from the Karma Pool. Period.

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

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mike D Fontaine)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Fri Apr 6 03:45:01 2001
> So the magicians *still* come out ahead.


You know, this could be said about deckers as well. Deckers, once you
begin the game are increadable independent characters. If you think about
it they never really have to spend more karma or yen, except for the
basics(lifestyle etc.) A good decker can spend all his downtime
programming, and, once he finishes a program, selling his selling his
programs. If he wants to he can also, for very little money(compaired to
any onther Character Type), upgrade his major focus, the cyberdeck. I
haven't seen Matrix yet(and probbly wont as it seems to be very scarce
now) so I don't know if this has been fixed, but most deckers could build
in a years game time a MPCP 12 cyberdeck with all BEMS. At least if you
build the decker with the thought in mind that he would try this.

Just a thought.

Czar Eggbert





________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Sebastian Wiers)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Fri Apr 6 08:05:00 2001
>>>Someone brought up karma and that brings up another question. When
bonding
foci, does a person use good karma (experience) or the other kind (name
escapes me right now...the one that lets you reroll and stuff). It's not
clarified in the core rules (unless I overlooked it), but I'm assuming it's
good karma.

Good karma is used for bonding foci and any other time it says something
costs a number of karma "points". The other kind is Karma Pool, and it has
ONLY the uses described in the rules for Karma pools- it can not be used to
raise stats, skills, and so on.

-Mongoose
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Strago)
Subject: SR3 core rules questions
Date: Fri Apr 6 17:00:02 2001
BD wrote:

> <SNIP>
> > However, you could say that they don't spend an equal amount of time on
> > their magical abilities, as one is Priority A and the other Priority B...
> > it
> > would seem that magic is more important to someone who's a full magician,
> > than to a Sorcerer.
>
> Well, that doesn't really wash, as there's really no choice as to what
> level of power you've been bestowed with. No character has ever woken up
> and said, "The heck with astral projection and conjuring, I want the
> bonuses that come with a lower magic priority."
>

I think that's it exactly: the priority is your natural ability, and the Spell
Points (or Force Points) are a representation of how much time you spend
learning something. What I'd like is to be able to take a full magician who
spends all his time/energy learning how to cast spells and run around the
astral while not bothering with the conjuring thing (or vice versa). I guess
for this you'd need a lot of money and buy a few Spell Points.

As for the Spell Points/Force Points disagreement, it removes a loophole one of
my players would use, which is that you could use Force Points to initiate/bind
Foci/quicken spells to start the game. So I'd get a sorcery adept initiated to
level 1 (using priority A Resources) so he'd get to quicken an Increase
Reflexes (+3 dice) spell and any other spells he wanted as a starting character
and then use karma to raise his attributes. Or he'd use the million nuyen to
buy a focus, initiate to level 0, and bind the power focus/weapon focus and
have THAT to start with. Now, with Spell Points, you just buy spells with it
and you have to use Karma to initiate/bind Foci. Makes things much easier.
<SNIP>
--
--Strago

All Hail Apathy! Or don't. Whatever. -abortion_engine

Down with the Moral Majority
-Green Day

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SR3 core rules questions, 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!