[Shadowjack]

Is it true that the target only gets their Willpower to resist the damage of this spell AND it can not be dodged? If that is true, it seems a bit strange to be able to basically two shot most people in the game with no challenge. How does this work? And if it is that powerful, why is it THAT powerful? It seems to bypass partial cover too.

*Edit* After learning that my book is outdated and this spell has been updated, I can conclude that is is balanced although it is still powerful. After some thought I realized this spell can potentially be negated by adding edge to a will power roll to resist the damage. That alone can be enough reason for the magician to feel a need to risk using the net hits to increase his Manaball damage which can actually lead to some severe consequences.

[Halancar]

Yes, you only get Willpower to resist (as in any Mana spell, although you do add Counterspell if you are a mage or are protected by one) BUT you use it to resist the spell itself, not the damage.

That is, there is an opposed roll between the mage's Magic + Spellcasting and your Willpower + Counterspell. If you resist, then the spell has no effect. If the mage wins, then the spells does (Force + net hit)S damage to you.

So while willpower does end up 'resisting' the damage in the sense it decreases it, if it is high enough there is chance to resist the spell entirely before the damage is even taken into account.

As for two-shoting most people, Shadowrun is very deadly. Firearms two-shot two people, too, particularly on full automatic (heck, they one-shot most people).

[Shadowjack]

The thing I notice with firearms is you incur so many penalties during battle that it can be tough to hit your target at times. But for some reason this spell just gets to auto kill everyone. It seems really cheesy. I was in hurt in combat and opted to just hide and let the mage kill the remaining guy because I knew he would be dead in 2 hits. Especially when a mage has 4 IP's it seems really insane to allow these kinds of spells. Does anyone outlaw the usage of these spells in their games? One last thing, you can also snipe people with these spells too. It seems really over powered.

[JustADude]

The thing I notice with firearms is you incur so many penalties during battle that it can be tough to hit your target at times. But for some reason this spell just gets to auto kill everyone. It seems really cheesy. I was in hurt in combat and opted to just hide and let the mage kill the remaining guy because I knew he would be dead in 2 hits. Especially when a mage has 4 IP's it seems really insane to allow these kinds of spells. Does anyone outlaw the usage of these spells in their games? One last thing, you can also snipe people with these spells too. It seems really over powered.

First off, you can snipe people with guns, too. I mean "sniper" meant "expert marksman" before it meant "one who kills people with guns at long range." Just take a look at the Barrett M-121. That thing will one-shot you like nobody's business, and pretty much any "Rifle" or higher gun will drop someone in two shots, tops.

Secondly, if you're taking "so many penalties" that you can't hit your target, then either your GM is throwing some really heavy opposition at you, or you've got a very "sub-optimal" character.

Third, if you're jealous of 4 IPs, go buy a Rating 3 IP Booster or ask the Mage nicely to cast it on you as well.

[Shadowjack]

The sniper at least has to try to hit his target, that's the difference. In a dice rolling game it seems strange that mages can use these spells to kill people without any effort when everyone else needs to roll to actually hit their target.

About the penalties, my new character has a 12 dice for pistols. Not a ton but her main focus is not firearms. I was firing from behind cover with a pistol and attacking someone who had good cover, at the second range increment I take a -1 penalty so already that's 6 dice I'm losing, leaving me 6 dice to hit my target. Mathematically, someone with a good reaction has a chance to dodge my attacks since I should net 1 hit on average. If I do manage to hit my target then they get another chance to resist the damage, in some cases rolling over 20 dice. All this to me seems reasonable. So why does a mage get to automatically hit the same people and kill them in 1 or 2 attacks? I really don't see the balance. This is especially strange when dealing with incredibly durable characters. They can shrug off hard hitting gun shots yet 2 spells which practically can't be avoided will drop them.

And yes, the opposition was tough considering it's early in the adventure. I like the challenge though. I just really wonder about these spells. They don't really feel fun and my group seems to agree. The mage also found it quite odd and now he wants to use different spells just so he has to roll to actually hit his targets like everyone else.

About 4 IP's, not jealous at all, it just seems unbalanced when you essentially will hit your target automatically and usually for large amounts of damage. I'm surprised you don't find these spells strange. I've never really played an rpg other than this one in which you can just hit people for free and kill them quickly like that. I love this game but these spells seems very poorly designed.

[Makki]

The thing I notice with firearms is you incur so many penalties during battle that it can be tough to hit your target at times. But for some reason this spell just gets to auto kill everyone. It seems really cheesy. I was in hurt in combat and opted to just hide and let the mage kill the remaining guy because I knew he would be dead in 2 hits. Especially when a mage has 4 IP's it seems really insane to allow these kinds of spells. Does anyone outlaw the usage of these spells in their games? One last thing, you can also snipe people with these spells too. It seems really over powered.

most combat modifiers that apply to guns apply to combat spells as well

[Redmercury]

That is, there is an opposed roll between the mage's Magic + Spellcasting and your Willpower + Counterspell. If you resist, then the spell has no effect. If the mage wins, then the spells does (Force + net hit)S damage to you.

That's if you're using pre-anniversary rules. Direct combat spells now deal just their force in damage unless you opt to take 1 drain for each net hit you want to turn into extra damage. If you think manaball is messed up you should take a look at the stun spells. One less drain, and most enemies will have a smaller stun track than physical. Besides, unless you're playing a psychopath you shouldn't really be aiming to kill all your opposition, just incapacitate them. It's a win-win(ish).

[Shadowjack]

Every time I come back to this game I get burned for having the standard 4th edition book lol. I'm glad to see there are some adjustments. In the book I have, Manaball is absurdly unbalanced.

I would like to know: Does Manaball bypass cover? Or do you take penalties as well?

[WhackedMaki]

Note, this extra drain thing was originally an optional rule. My group still runs it as an option rule, because the mage ends up feeling useless otherwise.. You have to keep in mind that casting a manaball at say force 6, is 5 drain that they have to soak. Chances are they'll get 3-4 on average, which ends up dealing them damage for each one they cast. This can quickly add up.  If they have to soak an extra 6 for getting 6 hits, then they're taking SEVEN stun for that one spell. They probably killed some thugs, yes. But they're also useless for the rest of the fight. Meanwhile, GI Joe may take a whole 2 shots (still just one IP, just like the mage) to bring down this group of low level street thugs, and all he had to do was use two bullets out of his clip. Higher end operative can dodge the bullets, but if that manaball got counterspelled successfully (as can happen against tough enemies), that mage just took seven damage to do nothing at all.

If your groups main problem is the fact that all the enemies are super hyped up on drugs, twitching constantly and dodging everything with like 7 reaction and 6 dodge, then the GM is throwing awful enemies at you, as your average ganger would get around 6-8 dice to dodge, compared to the 10+ the guy should be shooting with. If you're fighting street thugs, it shouldn't matter who takes them out, it'll be easy for any member of the team. It you're fighting higher end operatives, then there would be a mage there to counterspell, as well as fight your mage back. Yes, that manaball you threw at them really hurt, but it didn't kill them. Now that your mage dealt himself 7 damage, how well can he counterspell that stunball from the mage nobody saw earlier? In one IP you've knocked out your mage, as well as taking heavy hits on each of your team members. With only 1-2 damage done to your mage however, he'll be a lot better at counterspelling (will+counterspell from a starting runner should beat everything but the most elite of operatives), and he'll be able to actually take any of the damage that does go through without being instant KO'd.

As for your final question, anyone behind cover is not hit by the manaball, as they don't have line of sight on the person. SR4A 183: "Some spells target areas or points in space; in this case the caster must be able to see the center of the area affected. All visible targets within the area are affected; area spells can affect more than one target at a time"

[acolyte99]

About the question of cover: page 160 in the paragraphs about partial cover and good cover:

Note that this modifier applies to all Ranged Combat tests and also to Spellcasting using line of sight.

Additionally there is a difference between the manball and powerball (direct spells) and fireball, acid wave and so on (indirect spells).

With direct spells like manaball you have to see the center of the spell and every target that is supposed to be affected (counting cover and visibility).

With a fireball you have to see the center of the spell and the ball extends from there. In that case it doesn't count if the target has cover in respect to the caster. It counts if the targets has cover in direction of the fire that comes from the center of the fireball. One of the very small number of reasons to learn fireball or other indirect combat spells which have such an exaggerated drain.

So when a mage attacks you with a manaball, use cover to have Willpower + cover mod and use a smoke grenade to lower his spellcasting pool. The caster can't use goggles against bad visibility and not many mages have cybereyes.

The optional rule to raise drain +1 for each used net hits favors casters who overcast (with magic 5 compare the drain of a manaball Force 5 with 5 hits to a manaball with Force 10; both have the same damage, but different drain). There have been long discussions about this on the boards.
And lots of people feel that it's wrong to punish the player for having lots of hits.

[The_Gun_Nut]

I would be one of those, acolyte99.

It makes little sense for someone who overcast to walk away with minimal drain while someone who rolled very well knocks themselves out.

That's called "punishing success."

[Mäx]

That is, there is an opposed roll between the mage's Magic + Spellcasting and your Willpower + Counterspell. If you resist, then the spell has no effect. If the mage wins, then the spells does (Force + net hit)S damage to you.

That's if you're using pre-anniversary rules. Direct combat spells now deal just their force in damage unless you opt to take 1 drain for each net hit you want to turn into extra damage. If you think manaball is messed up you should take a look at the stun spells. One less drain, and most enemies will have a smaller stun track than physical. Besides, unless you're playing a psychopath you shouldn't really be aiming to kill all your opposition, just incapacitate them. It's a win-win(ish).

Only if your GM desides to use that shitty optional rule and atleast personally i wouldn't play with a GM that does(because the optional rule in question sucks donkey balls)

Also shadowjack you seem to have the way direct combat spells work backwards, they most definedly can be "dodged", but you dont succeed in that there is no damage resistance roll.

[Mirikon]

That is, there is an opposed roll between the mage's Magic + Spellcasting and your Willpower + Counterspell. If you resist, then the spell has no effect. If the mage wins, then the spells does (Force + net hit)S damage to you.

That's if you're using pre-anniversary rules. Direct combat spells now deal just their force in damage unless you opt to take 1 drain for each net hit you want to turn into extra damage. If you think manaball is messed up you should take a look at the stun spells. One less drain, and most enemies will have a smaller stun track than physical. Besides, unless you're playing a psychopath you shouldn't really be aiming to kill all your opposition, just incapacitate them. It's a win-win(ish).

I believe that was changed after the initial release to be an optional rule as well, Mercury.

That said, there are plenty of IC reasons why you would do P instead of S damage. The one that comes immediately to mind is a follower of Wolf or Shark or one of the other 'predatory' mentor spirits. That isn't being psychotic, it is simply following your mentor.

[Eye Eternal]

You are given the option to reduce hits. Spells are pretty powerful as a whole. Magic is a dangerous thing. Mages just need to be more careful. For what they can do with spells I don't see drain being uber rediculous. Technos have to resist fade for everything THEY do. Why not mages? Try NOT throwing force 10 spells like it doesnt matter. A force 5 spell with hits is enough to hurt people plenty. And that drain is able to be made if you have a half decent drain stat.

[Zilfer]

Did I miss something? I'm pretty sure the rule to add net hits to the drain is still an optional rule per the newer book. I have SR4A eddition book, and it's still optional.

>.> I'll also mention that there's a reason the motto is "gank the mage first" so if every bad guy that see's the mage isn't trying to gun him down first and foremost before the mage gets his turn than they had it coming. xD

I'm also with the no net hits optional rule crowd. Though if you are using a few things in the game a stun ball might not drop you because you can't be knocked out due to "stun".

When your going up against a mage, you hopefully yourself have a mage otherwise it's just not fair. Just like in star wars, if you have a jedi or a sith on your side it's unfair because everyone fights by the 'rules'. Mages/Jedi/Sith don't play by the rules they break into a whole knew ballgame. xD I mean Vader doesn't have to "fight fair" against someone who uses a blaster or sword he could just flat out crush them. Not fair, cheap, but your a criminal remember? What do you care?