[Tyburn]

Probably because of the way that everyone targeted getting to add in Edge would work out in the spell

The defending mage could, in theory, apply edge to his spell defense roll and if the caster still gets enough his to cast the spell through the defense, the targets could still individually apply edge to their respective defense rolls per usual. I'm not sure what the issue is here other than this not being how the rules are written.

and because it creates a situation where the spell manifests a harmful effect in an area but some people don't feel it as much or at all... while the counterspelling as a single roll could result in the spell not actually manifesting (the difference between a bunch of unharmed people standing in the crater a powerball spell just created, and a counterspelling mage having completely stopped a powerball spell).

This actually doesn't occur anymore than it already does now. If the counter spelling mage gets enough hits to reduce the caster to 0 hits, the spell just doesn't go off (i.e. no crater) just as if the caster scored no hits on the spellcasting test.

If the caster gets enough hits to get through the defense, the target(s) face a uniform (but potentially less powerful) spell and get to defend normally.

In fact, if it does work like this, conceivably spell defense can make an area indirect spell scatter, but at least it does mean that the scatters in a consistent and easily resolvable way.

I recognize we're talking about a system not described in the books...it just seems to make slightly more sense from an interpretation and implementation perspective.

[Noble Drake]

This actually doesn't occur anymore than it already does now. If the counter spelling mage gets enough hits to reduce the caster to 0 hits, the spell just doesn't go off (i.e. no crater) just as if the caster scored no hits on the spellcasting test.

If the caster gets enough hits to get through the defense, the target(s) face a uniform (but potentially less powerful) spell and get to defend normally.

I'm not sure you caught my meaning... allow me to show a detailed example:

Scenario A: A hostile mage is throwing a Powerball spell into Jim's apartment, where Jim and his friend Eddy are hanging out watching Trid while cleaning their guns - and counterspelling applies only to each person that Eddy (a mage) decides to cover with it.

Hostile mage gets an impressive limit-hitting roll on a force 10 powerball; Jim gets his 5 body and Eddy's  astounding 10 counterspelling, and ends up only taking 5 damge on average; Eddy has similar results... but the entire apartment is now in a state ranging from beat-up to completely destroyed (even the gun parts and tridscreen!)

Scenario B: Same characters involved, but the counterspelling applies directly to the spell instead of to each chosen person.

The force 10 powerball is reduced to only having 7 hits; Jim still averages 5 damage, and Eddy too... but the apartment is looking at being largely okay, other than a few simpler objects which are damaged, but not destroyed.

It's a significant difference, and one that people usually just hand-wave away or gloss over because of the implication that a character blasted by a high force powerball might just end up functionally (if not actually) naked because of it.

[Xenon]

(maybe we can start a new thread to discuss the mechanics of spell defense and use this thread for Q&A...)

A hostile mage is throwing a Powerball spell...

To answer your question:

Powerball is a direct LOS (A) physical spell that is resolved with Spellcasting + Magic [Force].

The opposed test for each target in the AoE pits the Spellcasting + Magic [Force] roll against their own Body.

If a friendly magician dedicate some or all dice from her remaining counterspell dice pool this combat turn to protect against the Powerball then each target (up to max magic rating number of targets) that the friendly magician choose to protect add the number of dice as a positive dice modifier to his or her Body test (rolled individually for each target together with their body dice pool when opposing the spellcasting test).

Unless, of course, how you resolve Spell Defense is also up for errata

[spoiler]
Spell defense example p.295
...That means Chordae and each of her teammates receives a +4
dice pool bonus to their Defense Tests...

Spell defense p.294-295:
Spell defense is used against hostile spells cast at you or at targets that are within your line of sight (using the same rules as for targeting spells) that you decide to protect with spell defense. Declaring this protection is either a Free Action or, if you don’t have one left, an Interrupt Action that reduces your Initiative Score by 5. Each Combat Turn, you have a pool of dice for spell defense equal to your Counterspelling skill. When a spell is cast, you may choose to use some or all of your Counterspelling dice to defend against an incoming spell. Against each spell attack, you have to choose how many dice from this pool to allocate for defense, and you can select how many people (including yourself if you desire) are covered by these defensive dice. You can protect a number of people at one time equal to your Magic Rating. These dice are then added to the defense tests of everyone you’re covering. The pool refreshes at the beginning of each Combat Turn.

And how to resolve a Direct Physical Combat spell p.283
Direct: When your direct combat spell is successfully cast, it inflicts a number of boxes of damage equal to your net hits on the opposed test. The opposed test generally pits your Spellcasting + Magic [Force] against either Body (for physical spells) or Willpower (for mana spells). The target does not get to resist the damage, only the Spellcasting test.

[Noble Drake]

To answer your question:

I wasn't asking a question... I was merely stating that I believe that "I got more successes from my spell defense dice than the caster got on his area direct combat spell," should mean that the spell does absolutely nothing (as if the caster had failed to cast the spell), and that the rules (which you've pointed out) don't actually support that.

Now for a question: When deciding on targets to extend your counterspelling to, would you say that "appartment" is 1 and "self" is 1, or is "self" 1 and then each piece of furniture, decoration, or appliance is each 1?

I mean, do you support the idea that a mage can prevent a direct area spell from destroying his living space, or does he have to choose something like "Me, my couch, my commlink, the coffee table, my coffee cup and the coffee pot," and hope that the object resistance dice of the rest of his Lifestyle manage to be enough?

[martinchaen]

Q: Does the smartgun system on an Ares Alpha provide +2 dice when firing the assault rifle part of the weapon AND the grenade launcher part of the weapon?
I couldn't really find anything that would contradict this reading, and the grenade launcher does have Accuracy 4 (6), so it would seem to apply.

Also:
The description text for Airburst Link reads "this grenade/rocket launcher smartgun accessory"; as a smartgun accessory with no slot listed, does it use capacity instead, or is it installed without taking up slots or capacity?

[Tyburn]

(maybe we can start a new thread to discuss the mechanics of spell defense and use this thread for Q&A...)

Agreed. Since there's already a thread in the rules discussion forum I'll continue the discussion back there. http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=12951.0.

As a parting comment here: there's no confusion as to how spell defense affects powerball since, as a direct spell, it both allows a defense roll  and doesn't scatter if it doesn't hit a certain threshold. This works just fine with the rules as they are written or as Michael Chandra suggested they should be interpreted. The problem is that indirect area spells don't allow a defense roll and can scatter and so need to be treated as a special snowflake when it comes to spell defense.

How a table wants to deal with collateral damage isn't really a huge deal in my mind. Once you get into the territory of a mage using spell defense to protect objects in his immediate surroundings from powerball (and only powerball since it's the only direct area physical damage spell) we're well beyond what the rule set covers. If you go with Micheal Chandra's suggestion then you'd have to designate objects that were protected by spell defense if you wanted to protect them and the group of them would get protected by the spell defence roll of the mage and then do their regular object/damage resistance checks.

That said further clarification on whether or not spell defense can cause a previously on target fireball to fly off course would be appreciated.

There's also that odd situation where general negative pool modifiers other than from wounds make direct combat spells harder to defend against.

[Xenon]

Now for a question: When deciding on targets to extend your counterspelling to, would you say that "appartment" is 1 and "self" is 1, or is "self" 1 and then each piece of furniture, decoration, or appliance is each 1?

Self is 1
Apartment is not people.
Each piece of furniture, decoration or appliance is no people.

Spell Defense p.295
...and you can select how many people (including yourself if you desire) are covered by these defensive dice...

[Noble Drake]

Now for a question: When deciding on targets to extend your counterspelling to, would you say that "appartment" is 1 and "self" is 1, or is "self" 1 and then each piece of furniture, decoration, or appliance is each 1?

Self is 1
Apartment is not people.
Each piece of furniture, decoration or appliance is no people.

Spell Defense p.295
...and you can select how many people (including yourself if you desire) are covered by these defensive dice...

Correct, and also the worst decision on the matter that can possibly be RAW... "sorry bud, can't counterspell that - he targeted an object... so what if it was an object he then crushed you with."

[Tyburn]

Correct, and also the worst decision on the matter that can possibly be RAW... "sorry bud, can't counterspell that - he targeted an object... so what if it was an object he then crushed you with."

If you're trying to use counterspelling versus a sustained effect such as a levitate spell lifting something heavy before it falls on your buddy (which seems to be what you're talking about here) that's an application of the skill as dispelling, not spell defense.

[Noble Drake]

Correct, and also the worst decision on the matter that can possibly be RAW... "sorry bud, can't counterspell that - he targeted an object... so what if it was an object he then crushed you with."

If you're trying to use counterspelling versus a sustained effect such as a levitate spell lifting something heavy before it falls on your buddy (which seems to be what you're talking about here) that's an application of the skill as dispelling, not spell defense.

I was thinking more like a high force fling spell - like slamming a 12 kg dumbbell into your face, which you can obviously dodge, but according to the rules read strictly cannot possibly counterspell because the dumbbell isn't a person, and can't dispel because it is instant.

...or something like blasting a tree so it falls on you, thus circumventing the ability to counterspell.

[Aaron]

Q: Does Noise Reduction (such as that offered by a wireless Datajack) affect the Noise Rating (not including distance) that prevents wireless functionality in gear with a device rating?

Yep.

If the spell defense dice only reduce the damage of the spell and do not cause the spell to scatter if they reduce the casters hits below 3 why not just say the spell defense dice are added to the damage resistance test instead for indirect area spells?

This is a great suggestion. You should post it in the errata thread.

Direct spells allow a defense test (typically either body or willpower) but no damage resistance test. p170 of SR5 states that wound modifiers don't apply to this defense test but do other "general" negative pool modifiers like the -1 for electricity damage or the effects of a confusion spell apply? Normally they wouldn't apply to a damage resistance test, but this is a defense test.

As long as the test isn't about reducing the number of boxes you're about to take on a Condition Monitor, Wound Modifiers apply.

Spell Defense vs Areas are only rolled once, hits apply to all protected. Still, the question is fair: Does it reduce the damage or reduce the hits?

It reduces the hits. Makes the aim go all wobbly.

This all said, stay tuned. There's a weird edge case here and I'm going to bring it up with the other designers.

Q: How are items with a "+ X" Availability Rating handled for the purpose of Availability Tests?

As written, they're not typically available as individual parts. You might want to try asking your GM to allow you to get your hands on an upgrade kit if you can do the installation yourself.

[All4BigGuns]

Question: If two casters both declare spell defense to protect their team, would both of their Counterspelling skill ratings apply to each test resisting a spell?

Mainly asked because it isn't something I'd thought of before, and while it would make sense, I wasn't sure if it would actually work that way.

[martinchaen]

Q: Does Noise Reduction (such as that offered by a wireless Datajack) affect the Noise Rating (not including distance) that prevents wireless functionality in gear with a device rating?

Yep.

Interesting. Does that mean that a decker can provide noise reduction for his team using the Scrub (i think that's the NR one) program? How else does one form of Noise Reduction work, but not another? Presumably, the decker would have to have access to the pan of each member for this to work. Thoughts?

[acolyte99]

Question: If two casters both declare spell defense to protect their team, would both of their Counterspelling skill ratings apply to each test resisting a spell?

Mainly asked because it isn't something I'd thought of before, and while it would make sense, I wasn't sure if it would actually work that way.

In SR4 it was explicitly mentioned, that in such a case Teamwork rules would be used. But you are right, this was left out in SR5.

[Xenon]

If a caster decide to spend one, several or all of his remaining spell defense dice to protect a person being targeted by a spell then that person add the spell defense dice as a positive dice modifier to the opposed test. If another caster also decide to spend one, several or all of her remaining spell defense deice to protect a person being targeted by a spell then the person add the spell defense dice from this caster as a positive dice modifier as well.