[Lormyr]

I've done some tinkering with character sheets yesterday and I don't see why people say "if mysad is as powerful as physad, people will never choose physad" ...
If you have the same amount of points to allocate into different stuff, the less stuff you choose to put the points into the better your character will be at that thing.
The simple fact that mysads have to divide their points into stuff already make them weaker in a way (less min-maxed) you don't need to nerf them beyond that.

Mystic Adepts needed brought down a peg, but I agree they went overboard. The better move would have been to allow them 1 PP or 2 spells per point of magic at chargen only, however you arrived at the final number. Likewise, mages should have 2 spells per point of magic at chargen, however they got there.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Mystic Adepts needed brought down a peg, but I agree they went overboard. The better move would have been to allow them 1 PP or 2 spells per point of magic at chargen only, however you arrived at the final number...

I don't know how that would have been bringing Mystic Adepts down a peg at all, then.  For the exact same priority array, you can either play an adept with 6 PPs, or an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells, to boot!

Limiting MysAds to a a maximum of 4 PPs, and making them come at opportunity cost of knowing spells, at least gives a balance reason to consider playing a (physical) adept who can never summon spirits nor learn spells.

[Helzmasher]

The chargen rules actually don't state that you can't get extre PP at creation. They do imply that you can't get them from adjustment points, but then the book just says to go look in the magic chapter. With the german text available, the intent seems clearer.

The January reprinting of the CRB makes it clear: Adepts have PPs equal to Magic, just the same as after chargen.  OTOH Mystic Adepts cannot gain PPs during chargen even if they raise their Magic, but they can lose them due to essence hits.

Then there is no reason to roll a mysad instead of a physad...

as a mysad I will have to take priority A for attributes, or else I won't be able to handle the mage side AND the adept side together. If I take magic B I will have magic: 3, which will give me 3 power points or 6 spells or anything in-between. And I am stuck with magic: 3, because if I raise magic during chargen I am only making my PP more costly.

Tha also leave me with a priority C skills which and I need a lot of skills since I am both a mage and a adept.

I think the mystic adept should have half the power of a mage and half the power of a adept so to say... but this way... the mysad has, lets say, 1/4 of each...

Just to finish:

The mysad IMO should be potentially as powerful as a mage, and potentially as powerful as an adept... and then slide a bar between the two

But they way it is... its just weaker than both.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

But they way it is... its just weaker than both.

That's how hybrids are SUPPOSED to work.  You can do everything? Great.  Better damn well not be able to do everything as well as those who can only do one of those things.

If a MysAd can end up with as many power points as a PhysAd, but still conjure and post chargen learn spells, to boot?  No, that's not "balance".  That's where there's no reason to play a PhysAd.

[Helzmasher]

Mystic Adepts needed brought down a peg, but I agree they went overboard. The better move would have been to allow them 1 PP or 2 spells per point of magic at chargen only, however you arrived at the final number...

I don't know how that would have been bringing Mystic Adepts down a peg at all, then.  For the exact same priority array, you can either play an adept with 6 PPs, or an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells, to boot!

Limiting MysAds to a a maximum of 4 PPs, and making them come at opportunity cost of knowing spells, at least gives a balance reason to consider playing a (physical) adept who can never summon spirits nor learn spells.

Yes. But to play "an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells" you have to allocate points of attribute in CHA or LOG and points of skills into Conjuring and Sorcery.

which already makes said adept weaker as an adept than a physical adept.

[Helzmasher]

But they way it is... its just weaker than both.

That's how hybrids are SUPPOSED to work.  You can do everything? Great.  Better damn well not be able to do everything as well as those who can only do one of those things.

If a MysAd can end up with as many power points as a PhysAd, but still conjure and post chargen learn spells, to boot?  No, that's not "balance".  That's where there's no reason to play a PhysAd.

Hybrids should be 50%-50% not 25%-25%

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Mystic Adepts needed brought down a peg, but I agree they went overboard. The better move would have been to allow them 1 PP or 2 spells per point of magic at chargen only, however you arrived at the final number...

I don't know how that would have been bringing Mystic Adepts down a peg at all, then.  For the exact same priority array, you can either play an adept with 6 PPs, or an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells, to boot!

Limiting MysAds to a a maximum of 4 PPs, and making them come at opportunity cost of knowing spells, at least gives a balance reason to consider playing a (physical) adept who can never summon spirits nor learn spells.

Yes. But to play "an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells" you have to allocate points of attribute in CHA or LOG and points of skills into Conjuring and Sorcery.

which already makes said adept weaker as an adept than a physical adept.

I think we should agree to disagree as to whether PhysAds being able to go to 6 PPs in chargen and Mysads capping out at 4, IF they pick Magic A, is a good balance or not.  Arguing about it isn't going to change either opinion.

[Lormyr]

I don't know how that would have been bringing Mystic Adepts down a peg at all, then.  For the exact same priority array, you can either play an adept with 6 PPs, or an adept with 6PPs who can also conjure spirits, and post-chargen learn spells, to boot!

See, to me part of that last sentence is the key. 6e elected to treat the symptoms of the incorrect affliction rather than cure the disease. Ask yourself this question: "If spirits and foci were better balanced, how would each mage, adept, and mystic adept look in comparison to one another then?".

As things stand at current with spirit abuse aside (because we all know that is pretty much all you need to be a one man team), Mystic Adepts come out the door considerably inferior to either mage or adept. In the long term, they have the potential to be better than a mage at spellcasting and summoning (because mages cannot access improve ability), and better than an adept at physical defense (equal level combat sense as an even karma total adept, plus increase intuition which adepts cannot compensate for). Those are the only two areas where they have the potential to defeat the other magic archetypes in power though, and doing so is very intensive of their more limited resources. If you really need comparative builds at a respectable karma level I can do that to highlight.

Doing as I suggest would yield the following results at chargen:

1). Mage enters play with Magic 6 and 12 spells.
2). Adept enters play with Magic 6 and 6 PP.
3). "Balanced" Mystic Adept enters play with Magic 6, 3 PP, and 6 spells.

That is a relatively even playing field, with in which Mages and Adepts will have steady growth within their field, and the Mystic can either have steady growth in one and stunted in the other, or intermittent growth in both. At the extreme side of chargen, taking either all PP or all spells, you basically are just playing a Mage or Adept that can give up steady growth to splash into the other field.

In 5e this was a problem due to how many defensive spells there were. In 6th, as it stands now, it is far less of an issue.

If a MysAd can end up with as many power points as a PhysAd, but still conjure and post chargen learn spells, to boot?  No, that's not "balance".  That's where there's no reason to play a PhysAd.

On this we agree, but at no point in character advancement is that possible. An equally experienced Adept will always have more PP because they get them both on Magic increase and Initiation where the Mys can only get them through Priority and Initiation (or through Initiation post-chargen with the rules I'd prefer).

I think we should agree to disagree as to whether PhysAds being able to go to 6 PPs in chargen and Mysads capping out at 4, IF they pick Magic A, is a good balance or not.  Arguing about it isn't going to change either opinion.

This is another really big deal though. With the (good imo) errata, Adepts are back to D magic priority and spending points to get Magic 6 and 6 PP. In order for the Mystic to potentially get 4 PP, they just gave up 8 attribute points. That is a fucking titanic sacrifice that is not remotely worth it karma cost wise.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

This is another really big deal though. With the (good imo) errata, Adepts are back to D magic priority and spending points to get Magic 6 and 6 PP. In order for the Mystic to potentially get 4 PP, they just gave up 8 attribute points. That is a fucking titanic sacrifice that is not remotely worth it karma cost wise.

True, that most Mysads won't even have the 4 PPs due to that phenomenon.  Between not being able to bond foci or buy spells in chargen, MysAds come out of chargen with the least momentum of all the magicians.  But since they have the MOST potential (assuming a campaign of infinite length/rewards) the back of the pack is absolutely the correct place to begin.  IMO.  YMMV, and clearly for some it does.

If wishes were fishes and I could issue errata myself (or have designed the game) my preferred idea for knocking MysAds down from where they were in 5e would be to change their nature from being full magicians who trade projection for adept powers, to being Aspected magicians who trade projection for adept powers.  MysAds suddenly become much less abusive if they can only conjure or only spellcast.

[Michael Chandra]

I understand where they were going with the Magic priority, but it needs finetuning to be more balanced. I got a few ideas I'll write up in a few weeks or so.

[penllawen]

If wishes were fishes and I could issue errata myself (or have designed the game) my preferred idea for knocking MysAds down from where they were in 5e would be to change their nature from being full magicians who trade projection for adept powers, to being Aspected magicians who trade projection for adept powers.  MysAds suddenly become much less abusive if they can only conjure or only spellcast.

Fun fact; when I first read 5e that's exactly what I thought they were. It was ages before I realised my mistake. And I wasn't exactly thrilled when the penny dropped, coz yeah, I'm also in Team Mysads Are OP.

[Lormyr]

True, that most Mysads won't even have the 4 PPs due to that phenomenon.  Between not being able to bond foci or buy spells in chargen, MysAds come out of chargen with the least momentum of all the magicians.  But since they have the MOST potential (assuming a campaign of infinite length/rewards) the back of the pack is absolutely the correct place to begin.  IMO.  YMMV, and clearly for some it does.

In 5th, I would agree with you totally. This is just no longer the case in 6th though due to secondary changes to specific spells and powers. First, that potential exists only in the two realms I listed above: spellcasting/summoning dice and physical defense pool. I would further argue that unless we are talking extremely high karma totals, you will not notice a substantial advantage when compared to a Mage or Adept.

I agree with your sentiment they should start slower than the other archetypes, but the current reduction is unacceptable.

If wishes were fishes and I could issue errata myself (or have designed the game) my preferred idea for knocking MysAds down from where they were in 5e would be to change their nature from being full magicians who trade projection for adept powers, to being Aspected magicians who trade projection for adept powers.  MysAds suddenly become much less abusive if they can only conjure or only spellcast.

That would also be an acceptable re-balancing.

[Banshee]

True, that most Mysads won't even have the 4 PPs due to that phenomenon.  Between not being able to bond foci or buy spells in chargen, MysAds come out of chargen with the least momentum of all the magicians.  But since they have the MOST potential (assuming a campaign of infinite length/rewards) the back of the pack is absolutely the correct place to begin.  IMO.  YMMV, and clearly for some it does.

In 5th, I would agree with you totally. This is just no longer the case in 6th though due to secondary changes to specific spells and powers. First, that potential exists only in the two realms I listed above: spellcasting/summoning dice and physical defense pool. I would further argue that unless we are talking extremely high karma totals, you will not notice a substantial advantage when compared to a Mage or Adept.

I agree with your sentiment they should start slower than the other archetypes, but the current reduction is unacceptable.

If wishes were fishes and I could issue errata myself (or have designed the game) my preferred idea for knocking MysAds down from where they were in 5e would be to change their nature from being full magicians who trade projection for adept powers, to being Aspected magicians who trade projection for adept powers.  MysAds suddenly become much less abusive if they can only conjure or only spellcast.

That would also be an acceptable re-balancing.

Personally I think the current 6E restrictions are just fine for mysads (maybe even still too good by a slight margin). The simple fact that they have access to ALL things in the magic realm can not be underestimated regardless of how many points they can put into it. They literally have zero drawbacks except for having to divide resources and progress slower.

[Helzmasher]

Well, progression is way slower in this edition than it was in SR5. Besides the higher downtime cost for training, the recomended rewards for each mission seens lower. So the character will be stuck with what you got from charger for a long time.

So progressing slower is also a huge punishment.

EDIT: Lets see the numbers

If I started with Magic 3 and wanted to go up to magic 4 during progression:

SR5
that would be 20 karma, which I would get in about 4 missions and then I would need a month of training.

now SR6
that would be tha same 20 karma, which now takes about 6 missions to get and then I would need 8 months of training (that the GM is probably not going to give).

SECOND EDIT: While the mystic adept is trying to get their magic to 4, the full magician and the physical adept, both that started with magic 6 are already half way to their second initiation.

[Helzmasher]

If wishes were fishes and I could issue errata myself (or have designed the game) my preferred idea for knocking MysAds down from where they were in 5e would be to change their nature from being full magicians who trade projection for adept powers, to being Aspected magicians who trade projection for adept powers.  MysAds suddenly become much less abusive if they can only conjure or only spellcast.

I also think this would be acceptable and well balanced.