[Lansdren]

Astral Perception is a lovely place to be, but not always practical.  It's an extra action in the holy-crap-fighting!-moments that some of those low-IP folks cling to like velcro and your Grandma's sweater, it opens you up to spirits hovering on the Astral, and it sure-as-heck messes up your real-world judgement (dice pool penalty for other stuff).

Against mundanes in poor visibility, is all kinds of awesome for spellcasting and seeing one's way about, for the most part.

My poor, squishy Chaos Mage is getting in the habit of fielding a Watcher or two just to keep eyes out for magical/astral presences (watchdoggin').

And I agree that Direct Combat spells are awesome fun.  I like that Power Ball is so...indiscriminate.  EVERYTHING in the area (if thresholds are exceeded) takes the kaboom.

PowerBall: when you positively, absolutely HAVE to kill every m#*$f#*$n thing (that you can see) in the room...accept no substitute.  Half the calories of Fireball, none of the smoky smell.

Its the seeing bit that bothers me,    All it takes is the bad guy to drop down behind something out of veiw and he is free and clear hell the cliche of turning the table on its side will do the trick.

Blastball - If its not dead and smoking its down and hurting.      Drain can be a pain this is true but this is the magical equivilent of a grenade that doesnt scatter, doesnt lose power over distance and has a controlable radius

[Mäx]

PowerBall: when you positively, absolutely HAVE to kill every m#*$f#*$n thing (that you can see) in the room...accept no substitute.  Half the calories of Fireball, none of the smoky smell.

Nah its
Napalm:When you positivly, absolutely have to destroy every fraking think inte the room..accept no subtitude. No need to see thinks, everythink burns either way.

Ofcource you better be a blood mage or counter spelling specialist with absorption and force 6+ spell absorbed.

[Bradd]

@Lansdren: Note that you can get line of sight from reflective surfaces, even if you can't directly see your target. And you can optionally target using other senses, although your GM may require an appropriate perception test.

[Lansdren]

@Lansdren: Note that you can get line of sight from reflective surfaces, even if you can't directly see your target. And you can optionally target using other senses, although your GM may require an appropriate perception test.

If your having to rely on mirrors and relective surfaces to do damage you have already lost the battle. Choosing the right spell for the situation is the key.


Napalm is nice but sometimes you dont want to turn every place into a inferno. Collateral damage isnt always the plan.

But sometimes

Just sometimes


It Is


As I said the key is the right spell for the right targets

[Juxtamon]

As I said the key is the right spell for the right targets

Absolutely.  Someone totally concealed that you wanna set on fire (or explode, with Blast Ball)?  Indirect area!  They get more dodgey/resistey chance to tamp it down, though, so the armored hefties have an advantage over others.

Buncha hazmat goons/evil firemen?  Powerball.  Want the neutron-bomb-version?  Manaball.  Make thugs' heads explode because you can see them.

People hiding?  Wait for 'em to pop up, or sneak around for better visibility, or get somebody to take the cover out.

Again, being intelligent beings, the mage can find the right spell (and/or spirit) and the right situation.  Even if it's to make the Sammie jealous of the capability for rampant, wanton destruction.
   ("Is there, like, a cyberware implant for that?" 
     "What, a Fire Elemental?"
    "Yeah, it's only fair, right?")
 

[Shanfara]

Spirit of Man, rating 6, dropping manaballs. Good times.

[bedlam]

So, let me get this right.  Nearly the entire game has two sets of tests, (1) Once to hit, (2) then to soak damage.  Except Mages with Direct spells.   Does something seem wrong here?

This feels way overpowered to me.  I've read some of the post/comments justify this power, and I don't buy it.  I can build a Mage to squeeze a trigger just as well, and as fast as a Sammy.  If you also consider Power Foci, and Overchannelling, Direct combat spells become very powerful, veryfast.  

Now lets add the ability to summon high powered allies as a complex action.  Assensing, astral projection, banishing, counterspelling, watchers, foci, ect...

I'm just saying, it doesn't seem very well balanced.  Are there any mundane weapons that only non-magic types can use that have No damage soak rolls?

I'm not trying to hate on the mage, they and physical adept are my favorite.  It just feels way over powered to me, and honestly, ruins the game for me as a GM.

[Critias]

This is (a) probably going to need its own thread, and (b) probably never going to get settled.  I'm not sure how much you've lurked before making that initial post of yours, but the simple fact is folks have been complaining about magic being overpowered since...well...forever.  House rule it if you think it needs the attention, but it's an argument that's been had time and again, over the course of years of play.

[bedlam]

I haven't lurked long.  

Wren, a player in my group, sent links from here to clarify a dissagreement we had in the middle of game last Sat.  I have spent the last week attacking this percieved problem of imbalance.  No matter what direction I mentally approach this problem, I can't seem to find a counter.  

Sorry, if this is an old or boring subject for you, and if it is required I'll post a new thread.

[Kontact]

Mages kill people.  Massive dice pools vs. tiny dice pools.
Drones kill mages.  6+ hits needed for mages to affect them, also indirect fire lets them shoot through walls easily enough.

That's what's up.

So, for example, a mixed unit of guys and bots comes rolling along.  the guys all get downed by the stunball, but the bot is unaffected by mana spells.  It shreds the mage.

Someone shoots at the mage, his Combat Sense spell helps him dodge, because he easily wins the opposed divination test.
The robot shoots at the mage, his Combat Sense active divination test needs 6 or more hits to help him dodge.  He's caught relying on his mundane skills.  Bot FA wide burst,  mage gets shredded.

Spirits... now that's some shit right there.  Direct mana spells are cute compared to the kind of cheese a mage gets up to with a Force 8 spirit.

[bedlam]

Wouldn't most of that same example work on ANY other archtype?   

Reaction for dodge being the only difference.   Let us not forget about full dodge. 

I'm not saying that a Mage can't be killed.  I understand that.   

Now refresh me on the rules if you would be so kind.  Would an indirect combat spell require 6 net hits to effect a drone?

[Bradd]

Indirect combat spells are tough to compare. The direct spells often have the advange, but indirect works better when your target is around a corner, or has spell resistance, or when you want one of the elemental effects.

[Kontact]

Wouldn't most of that same example work on ANY other archtype?   
Reaction for dodge being the only difference.   Let us not forget about full dodge. 

Well, mages use shortcuts to help them fill in where they can't afford the skills.  Mundane archetypes just go for the skills.
Honestly, I don't know too many mages who up their dodge pools as such.

Now refresh me on the rules if you would be so kind.  Would an indirect combat spell require 6 net hits to effect a drone?

Nope, but the drone can dodge and soak it like regular fire.  Except for indirect area of effect spells.  Those can be done indirectly and as a success test.  Then all that's left is for characters in the area of effect to try and soak the damage.

Though indirect AoE spells are generally (f/2)+5, so they are drain-tastic.

[Bradd]

I hadn't really thought about indirect area spells before. I'm not sure that you're right about that. At the very least, you have to allow for Counterspelling (and if you don't get any net hits, you don't affect the protected target).

But I also think it's odd that targets wouldn't get a chance to dive for cover and such. Are you sure that you don't get Dodge, cover, etc. to avoid the effects of an indirect area? What's the basis for the ruling?

[Kontact]

It's like that for all area of effect things.
Only the target rolls reaction.  If you're targeting an non-mobile object, it's a success test.

Same broken (i sh00t teh chair!) biz happens with grenades, except they scatter.
GMs would do well to house rule AoEs, but by the text, it's like an auto-failed surprise test.