[MercilessMing]

I'm really glad direct damage spells are now just situational.  I can remember when indirect combat spells (then called damaging manipulation spells I think) were new, they were really cool but almost never taken because they were generally more drain for less damage.  Direct damage spells were easier to target, harder to notice, and more efficient damage.  It's only right that this kind of attack be less damaging.

[Hobbes]

Currently RAW you can Manabolt/Stunbolt/Powerbolt someone down to the floor with repeated castings and unless there is an Astral observer you'd be able to do it while standing in the middle of a crowd without anyone noticing.  Noticing Magic got a lot mechanically harder between editions.

Invisible Zots should not be the best Damage per Cast.  It's really okay that they're not that great for damage output.

An Invisible and/or Concealed mage casting Direct damage spells is all but invulnerable to mundanes outside of calling in an Air Strike.  It's okay that they need to work a bit for it. 

[Lormyr]

Neither direct nor indirect spells look particularly good coming out of the gate, but again, magic dice pools still scale substantially higher than the dice pools to defend against them. The nerf didn't go far enough, because the wrong element was targeted for the nerf (less initial damage rather than nerfing foci and maximum potential).

[argouru]

Still looking for an answer on this one, however. Is it a typo?

On page 132 there's a box containing an example of casting a fireball at a group. The pc used has a magic score of 5, but the damage is listed as 3P, but with 2 net hits the damage increases to 5P. Is this a typo? Since the base damage is 3p, shouldn't the 2 hits equal 6P damage?

[Hobbes]

And that.  Magic 6, Spellcasting with an Expertise is 9, so 15 dice pretty quick.  Depending on your reading I think Foci actually do cap in 6th at +4 Dice since it's adding to a Skill.  I'd have to go read Power Foci closely though, they add to Magic and may weasel past the Augmented Skill cap.  Honestly can't recall off the top of my head.  I presume the RAI is that +4 Dice would be the cap regardless of what kind of Foci, FWIW.

Anyway, 19 Dice Spellcasting after a run or three.  Drain dice of 20 out of chargen and climbing reasonably fast for the optimized spell caster.

So, bad ass NPCs with stupid high stats are still going to be throwing less dice in most cases.   And Drain can be mitigated.  And for the most part PC mages should be easily generating Edge (Invisible, Concealed, Analytical Mind, and so forth).

Spellcasting isn't bad.  It's not as crazy as the stupid tricks Conjuring can pull off, but literally nothing else is. 

[Lormyr]

I presume the RAI is that +4 Dice would be the cap regardless of what kind of Foci, FWIW.

I have heard SSDR say that as well, but that is not how I read it at all. Quick run down:

Attributes say: "Various things modify attributes, such as spells and gear, but a character’s adjusted attribute can never be higher than their current attribute rank +4.".

Skills say: "They can be modified by spells, gear, and other effects, but their augmented increase can never be more than +4."

Nothing else in the entire game is generallyrestricted in stacking other than Initiative, but some specific things state they will not stack (such as muscle toner and a suprathyroid gland, and only being able to apply one foci to a given dice pool).

Foci say things such as "A centering focus adds its Force to the magician’s initiate grade when they use the centering metamagic on Drain Resistance tests.", and "Spellcasting foci add their Force to your Spellcasting dice pool as long as the spell is in the same category as the focus."

My point:

Foci do not add to a skill - they add to a dice pool. You could have a mystic adept with Magic 6 + Spellcasting 14 (with adept improved ability) + a foci on top of that, because no foci just flat add to a skill.

If the intent is that no dice pool can be modified by more than +4 then all three of those sections are in dire need of a re-write, because that is not at all what it says.

[Michael Chandra]

Still looking for an answer on this one, however. Is it a typo?

On page 132 there's a box containing an example of casting a fireball at a group. The pc used has a magic score of 5, but the damage is listed as 3P, but with 2 net hits the damage increases to 5P. Is this a typo? Since the base damage is 3p, shouldn't the 2 hits equal 6P damage?

Huh?_? So Magic Score 5 means damage 5/2 = 3P, 2 net hits add 2 damage, so 5P?_?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

...
My point:

Foci do not add to a skill - they add to a dice pool. You could have a mystic adept with Magic 6 + Spellcasting 14 (with adept improved ability) + a foci on top of that, because no foci just flat add to a skill.

If the intent is that no dice pool can be modified by more than +4 then all three of those sections are in dire need of a re-write, because that is not at all what it says.

Right.  The wording on pg 39 is awfully vague.  What, specifically, is referred to when the augmented bonus is described: Skills in a categorical sense, or skill rank numerical value?  Unfortunately, that line didn't get fixed so it's still formally unclear.  But my personal view is still very much that the augmented bonus that could come from "spells, gear, and other effects" applies to skills in a categorical sense, rather than the skill rank numerical value.  And ergo the max dice pool in 6we when a skill is involved is Attribute (including augmented bonus) + Skill (including spec, expertise, and other skill rank modifications) + 4 dice from all other sources.

[Lormyr]

I dig it man. I just can't agree with that understanding based on the current wording. I am unable to speak for what the intent is/may have been.

[Hobbes]

I dig it man. I just can't agree with that understanding based on the current wording. I am unable to speak for what the intent is/may have been.

Official clarification would be cool.  You may have internet speculation if that does you any good?   

[Lormyr]

Well, at the risk of being arrogant, I don't need clarification because the wording is quite clear. :p

[Reaver]

Foci say things such as "A centering focus adds its Force to the magician’s initiate grade when they use the centering metamagic on Drain Resistance tests.", and "Spellcasting foci add their Force to your Spellcasting dice pool as long as the spell is in the same category as the focus."

My point:

Foci do not add to a skill - they add to a dice pool. You could have a mystic adept with Magic 6 + Spellcasting 14 (with adept improved ability) + a foci on top of that, because no foci just flat add to a skill.

If the intent is that no dice pool can be modified by more than +4 then all three of those sections are in dire need of a re-write, because that is not at all what it says.

If they are capped to a bonus of +4, why can you buy them at much higher force ratings?
Most gear or wear that has a limited number of upgrades tell you in description... You can't get Vision mag 43 for example... but I CAN get a force 12 Spell Focus - provided I have the cash and karma to bond it...

[Michael Chandra]

Background Counts.

In all seriousness, I like the idea of the rebalance, but it's not RAW, doesn't appear to be RAI and is definitely not for everyone.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

If they are capped to a bonus of +4, why can you buy them at much higher force ratings?
Most gear or wear that has a limited number of upgrades tell you in description... You can't get Vision mag 43 for example... but I CAN get a force 12 Spell Focus - provided I have the cash and karma to bond it...

My understanding is that all "augmentations" to a skill, both positive and negative, are cumulative and capped at +4.  So if you have -2 dice (due to wound penalties, or sustaining a spell, or etc) and +6 dice from a focus, then the resulting total of +4 dice is within the range for the maximum skill bonus.

[Lormyr]

Background Counts.

In all seriousness, I like the idea of the rebalance, but it's not RAW, doesn't appear to be RAI and is definitely not for everyone.

It would definitely be batter to cap foci at rating 4 for balance, but as you say, that is just not how the ruling reads.