Author Topic: BGC final version?  (Read 577 times)

PMárk

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 70
BGC final version?
« on: (22:28:12/02-09-18) »
Hi all! So, what exactly is affected by background count? Especially in the case of adepts?

I know it got discussed many times on many platforms. I read many pages on it but it still seems to be contradictory. What is the official and final verdict on this? The Missions FAQ? Was there any official errata on this for Street Grimoire?

PiXeL01

  • Troubleshooter
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1465
  • Sheltering Orks in Osaka
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #1 on: (22:41:58/02-09-18) »
The easiest interpretation would be that as for Adepts if you have a power active you suffer a penalty to all you actions, magical or not.

PMárk

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #2 on: (22:52:22/02-09-18) »
The easiest interpretation would be that as for Adepts if you have a power active you suffer a penalty to all you actions, magical or not.

That seems to be an okay rule of thumb. However, I want to play it by the book, or rather, as intended by the writers.

The missions FAQ says "skill tests" augmented by magic. That is a lot clearer than the SG description, but

- For one, there's still some ambiguity. For example, Critical strike. It doesn't affect any tests, it's just raising the DV. You don't roll any dice with DV, it isn't a skill test, it's being added to the result of a skill test. Would the attack test be still affected? Based on the FAQ, I think not, but still, it's linked to a skill, so?

-For two, I'm not sure there isn't any official source overriding the Missions FAQ, or that is it the most recent and official ruling?

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #3 on: (23:26:44/02-09-18) »
"Skill tests augmented by magic" is fairly clear language.  What sorts of examples complicate that?

PMárk

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #4 on: (23:36:31/02-09-18) »
"Skill tests augmented by magic" is fairly clear language.  What sorts of examples complicate that?

See above about critical strike. It doesn't modify the skill test itself, but the outcome and ultimate resolution of the skill test. Does the attack roll being affected? I think, by the strict words of the FAQ, no, but I'm no entirelly sure and I could see the arguments for the contrary.

Also, what about stuff that modifies limits? Accuracy? Does that qualify as "skill test, augmented by magic"? Or only the powers strictly modifying the skill test roll count?

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #5 on: (00:06:32/02-10-18) »
The rules define skill tests.  If something modifies the values used for the sum of skill+attribute, the limit, the threshold and/or the interval then it's modifying the skill check as those are exhaustively the components of a skill check.  If it's not modifying one of those then it's fair to say it's not directly modifying the skill test, and that should be clear enough for most purposes?
« Last Edit: (01:47:23/02-10-18) by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »

Kiirnodel

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 1094
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #6 on: (00:16:27/02-10-18) »
Is the final result of the action in any way modified by magic? Then it is modified by magic.

In the case of Critical Strike, it modifies the effect of the weapon (+1 DV) meaning that attacking with that weapon is modified by magic.

The same thing goes for Killing Hands, it modifies your Unarmed attacks, which means that those Unarmed attacks are modified by magic.

I would ruled similarly for Traceless Walk. The power doesn't modify your roll, but it does enhance your ability to Sneak, which means it would be a penalty on Sneaking tests while affected by Background Count.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #7 on: (00:35:06/02-10-18) »
Is the final result of the action in any way modified by magic? Then it is modified by magic.

In the case of Critical Strike, it modifies the effect of the weapon (+1 DV) meaning that attacking with that weapon is modified by magic.

The same thing goes for Killing Hands, it modifies your Unarmed attacks, which means that those Unarmed attacks are modified by magic.

I would ruled similarly for Traceless Walk. The power doesn't modify your roll, but it does enhance your ability to Sneak, which means it would be a penalty on Sneaking tests while affected by Background Count.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but coming off a strict interpretive standard of what's a skill test has greater implications.  I agree that Killing Hands increased damage "feels" like it should be affected, but if you say it does then you also have to say that dodge tests enhanced by Combat Sense have to be affected, and so on.  Not sure that's the intent given the language of "skill tests" in the clarification.

ShadowcatX

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 484
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #8 on: (01:48:57/02-10-18) »
The thing about it is, this game is crunchy enough without driving yourself insane. Beyond that, adepts aren't exactly breaking the game and if you start stressing over every way possible to screw them over, they're going to be pretty worthless.

If the skill test is modified by magic means, to me, extra dice. That's the closest analogue to mages who are losing magic dice. This means things like increased agility and increased skills or increased social dice, etc

Also remember foci lose force in background counts, and 1 point of lost force is probably cancelling all an adept's ki foci.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #9 on: (01:51:14/02-10-18) »
I might be misremembering, but aren't Killing Hands treated like weapon foci for the purposes of checking the effects of a BGC?

ShadowcatX

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 484
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #10 on: (01:53:43/02-10-18) »
I don't remember. I think back ground count is a pretty poor mechanic over all, and especially poor with regards to adepts.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #11 on: (02:57:02/02-10-18) »
Well if a GM puts BG counts out as often as they probably should be (any time there's powerful or sustained sentiments!) they're a huge pain in the ass for everyone, including full magicians as their sustained spells get automatically eroded every time they hit a BGC 1 area...

Of course Matrix noise is similar in that it's not inflicted nearly as often as it could or arguably should be, but Noise probably affects less characters than BGC.

Marcus

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1293
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #12 on: (04:11:12/02-10-18) »
I might be misremembering, but aren't Killing Hands treated like weapon foci for the purposes of checking the effects of a BGC?

I doubt it, Killing hands has no levels, I'm pretty sure it's not effected.

firebug

  • Troubleshooter
  • Prime Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2618
  • Scraping the bottom of the Resonance Barrel
    • Moth's Mad Path
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #13 on: (15:20:05/02-10-18) »
Well if a GM puts BG counts out as often as they probably should be (any time there's powerful or sustained sentiments!) they're a huge pain in the ass for everyone, including full magicians as their sustained spells get automatically eroded every time they hit a BGC 1 area...

Of course Matrix noise is similar in that it's not inflicted nearly as often as it could or arguably should be, but Noise probably affects less characters than BGC.

Noise is way easier to resist and is only ever either a dice penalty or negation of a device.  It's just easier to use.

I have a houserule that alters BGC to be a penalty to limits only, I could post the explanation if you'd be interested.
I'm Madpath Moth on reddit (and other sites).
Firebug's VU93 Profile
Jeeze.  It would almost sound stupid until you realize we're talking about an immortal elf clown sword fighting a dragon ghost in a mall.

PMárk

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: BGC final version?
« Reply #14 on: (18:11:12/02-10-18) »
Is the final result of the action in any way modified by magic? Then it is modified by magic.

In the case of Critical Strike, it modifies the effect of the weapon (+1 DV) meaning that attacking with that weapon is modified by magic.

The same thing goes for Killing Hands, it modifies your Unarmed attacks, which means that those Unarmed attacks are modified by magic.

I would ruled similarly for Traceless Walk. The power doesn't modify your roll, but it does enhance your ability to Sneak, which means it would be a penalty on Sneaking tests while affected by Background Count.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but coming off a strict interpretive standard of what's a skill test has greater implications.  I agree that Killing Hands increased damage "feels" like it should be affected, but if you say it does then you also have to say that dodge tests enhanced by Combat Sense have to be affected, and so on.  Not sure that's the intent given the language of "skill tests" in the clarification.

And yet, SG give killing hands as an example, as something affecting a test. Does the FAQ contradicts the book on this?