Shadowrun
Catalyst Game Labs => Errata => Topic started by: Twilight on <01-06-14/0014:02>
-
A question on the hot-fix errata that I just ran across...
I'm baffled by the Mystic Adept hot-fix errata.
What is the thinking on the massive nerfing of Mystic Adepts? By making the power point cost 5 karma (instead of 2), it means you can no longer start with 6 power points (at least without eating into positive qualities). By removing the acquisition of power points post-creation in any way except initiation (in place of taking a meta-magic), you move them solidly back into the nearly-unplayable category (like they were in previous editions). As written in 5th, they are likely overpowered but the hot-fix moves them solidly into extremely underpowered - a mage or physad will always be a better choice.
Why not an increase to 3 or 4 karma (still allowing buying 6 pp with your 25 karma) and why not apply that to future magic increases (and if you started with fewer pp than your magic)? Why the complete removal of power point gains post-creation (save initiation)? I assumed the free pp for Mystic Adepts was an error (and assumed it would follow the logical route of the same karma cost as during chargen).
-
Uselessness? I'm going to have to ask you to defend that assertion, as I find it to be baseless. They're still quite powerful, in particular for hybrid characters where they SHOULD excel, but having to dip into negative qualities to get full power points is part of the balance.
-
It's utterly ridiculous that one has to take any Negatives to get their full Power Point allotment. It is even worse that without taking those Negative Qualities, the opportunity to get all of those initial potential Power Points is permanently lost.
-
Uselessness? I'm going to have to ask you to defend that assertion, as I find it to be baseless. They're still quite powerful, in particular for hybrid characters where they SHOULD excel, but having to dip into negative qualities to get full power points is part of the balance.
It's quite simple really. I can't come up with any character concept that isn't better as a mage or physad (than a Mystic Adept) when factoring in the hot-fix. If you think they are still quite powerful, provide some character concepts that are better as a Mystic Adept.
The biggest problem is the lack of new power points. As play continues, the Mystic Adept will fall further and further behind the mage and physad. SR4 already established that a 50/50 split doesn't work - with the hot-fix, it's something like 75/75 at chargen but pretty close to 50/50 once play starts.
-
Except that after chargen, an MA can always get exactly the same character advancement as the Mage if he so desires. So he won't necessarily fall behind. Furthermore, I think 50/50 is greatly exaggerating. Perhaps you want to post example builds to support your numbers.
-
Except that after chargen, an MA can always get exactly the same character advancement as the Mage if he so desires. So he won't necessarily fall behind. Furthermore, I think 50/50 is greatly exaggerating. Perhaps you want to post example builds to support your numbers.
But if you're going to just replicate the mage path as you gain karma then you're better off playing a mage. The ma gets only the mage benefits of increasing magic (not even the option to gain a pp). When initiating, the ma gets the benefit of the mage or the pa (50/50) - the only part that pushes it a little above 50/50 is that some metamagics are based on initiate grade. However, while the ma is forced to initiate twice, the pa and mage can happily spend karma on other things.
Magic types are already huge karma sinks - the ma with extra karma to gain pp is even more so. It doesn't need even more hamstringing.
I think it's clear there is a vast divide in people's views on what makes a balanced Mystic Adept. My view is that the hot-fix will make the Mystic Adept unplayed (again). I have very rarely seen an ma played in past versions of SR (and all of them were quickly dumped for new characters) and I fully expect the hot-fix to have just that effect in SR5.
-
A Mystic Adept isn't supposed to be 100/100 anyway. So I really don't see the problem in that they don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
As for them not getting played, the only reason I'm playing a Street Sam is as symbolic successor to my never-got-to-play-in-SR4 build. I can cause far more havoc with my Mystic Adept insane-dodge builds.
-
The problem lies in that no character should have to permanently give up something intrinsic to them like the Mystic Adept has to give up any possibility for a number of Power Points if the player does not take any Negative Qualities. It doesn't matter how common/uncommon/rare that event is. If even one hypothetical person out of several hundred trillion may do so, it should be feasible without them losing out.
-
A Mystic Adept isn't supposed to be 100/100 anyway. So I really don't see the problem in that they don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
As for them not getting played, the only reason I'm playing a Street Sam is as symbolic successor to my never-got-to-play-in-SR4 build. I can cause far more havoc with my Mystic Adept insane-dodge builds.
I don't want 100/100 - I just want playable (which is where the huge variance in subjective views seems to enter the picture). In my view, the hot-fix makes Mystic Adepts unplayable and I have yet to see any comments that convince me otherwise (though it wouldn't surprise me if there is a specific MA build that is broken even under the hot-fix).
-
I'd love to try to provide arguments to debunk your view, but it's not as if you're given me anything to work with. All you said is that in your view they're unplayable. You haven't even made clear what you think Mystic Adepts are supposed to be able to do. And besides, views are opinions. Those cannot be easily argued against. So what point would there be in this debate to begin with? It's not as if you came with cold hard facts that need to be countered, you have an opinion and the right to have one. And it's not as if we can change it.
-
Mystic Adepts are playable, and vastly improved over 4th edition: what evidence do you have to the contrary? Why should we waste time trying to convince someone who's just stamping their foot and not actually saying anything?
-
It's not like you all actually have any real fact supporting your case either. You just have very extreme things that some saw at the convention that the new edition was introduced at and a bunch of exaggerations along those same lines.
"Stamping their foot"? Really? That's all the "MA is broken" crowd is doing too.
-
Burden of proof lies on the one making a statement. In this case, the OP has failed to provide any sort of evidence of his claims. As Michael points out, it's perfectly fine to have an opinion, but it's hard to argue them... So until a claim backed by some form of evidence other than opinion is made, a debate cannot be held.
My statement: Mystic Adept characters can be created under the current Hot-Fix rules. Care to argue that particular fact, considering I make no claim as to whether or not they are "good" since that is a subjective opinion and not objective proof? No? Good...
OPs statement: Mystic Adepts are nearly-unplayable.
My counter-statement: Prove it, objectively, and not by providing subjective opinion. Yes, they cannot take 6 Power Points without taking a Negative Quality (or several). And?
-
Again, points gained from Negative Qualities are supposed to be entirely 'extra', not required to have full base resources available for character generation use. That it isn't possible to have the full 6 Power Points without taking Negatives is utterly ridiculous.
Any claim of "overpowered" is by it's very nature a subjective claim laden with personal opinion. "Overpowered" does not exist within a system itself. It only exists once one begins taking an individual table (likely their own) into account.
-
Burden of proof lies on the one making a statement. In this case, the OP has failed to provide any sort of evidence of his claims. As Michael points out, it's perfectly fine to have an opinion, but it's hard to argue them... So until a claim backed by some form of evidence other than opinion is made, a debate cannot be held.
My statement: Mystic Adept characters can be created under the current Hot-Fix rules. Care to argue that particular fact, considering I make no claim as to whether or not they are "good" since that is a subjective opinion and not objective proof? No? Good...
OPs statement: Mystic Adepts are nearly-unplayable.
My counter-statement: Prove it, objectively, and not by providing subjective opinion. Yes, they cannot take 6 Power Points without taking a Negative Quality (or several). And?
Okay. Let's start from a different angle. The rules as written are the baseline. What is the justification for the hot-fix? I haven't seen any evidence that it was necessary (except removing the pp for free on magic increase). The rules were released with one obvious easily fixed problem - the hot-fix seems exactly like "knee-jerk BS" to borrow All4BigGuns' phrase.
-
It's not like you all actually have any real fact supporting your case either. You just have very extreme things that some saw at the convention that the new edition was introduced at and a bunch of exaggerations along those same lines.
"Fact"? I seem to recall being quite factful about why I thought Mystic Adepts shouldn't get a free Power Point when they increase their Magic - you're the ony who came up with baseless and vague remarks. Heck, I suggested pre-errata to make MAs pay extra Karma for their Magic-Increase Power Point.
OPs statement: Mystic Adepts are nearly-unplayable.
My counter-statement: Prove it, objectively, and not by providing subjective opinion. Yes, they cannot take 6 Power Points without taking a Negative Quality (or several). And?
Okay. Let's start from a different angle.
Let's not. Unless, of course, you're admitting that your claim that they're "unplayable" post-errata is incorrect.
-
I'll freely admit that I know next to nothing about Adepts and Mystic Adepts, so I'll read through those rules right now. What are the consequences of starting with less than maximum power points?
-
Any rule can be abused. That is no reason to screw everyone else over just because some people can (or do) abuse it.
I'll freely admit that I know next to nothing about Adepts and Mystic Adepts, so I'll read through those rules right now. What are the consequences of starting with less than maximum power points?
The most important is that one can never access those Power Points after play begins, so they're always behind the curve.
-
Behind the curve? They are adepts with access to spells. They're a hybrid; isn't that part of the "everything has a price" deal?
By limiting the mystic adept somehow (and the designers chose to do so by making mystic adepts pay karma for power points and making them choose power points OR metamagic at initiation just like adepts, but also restricted mystic adepts from gaining them for free when raising magic), the developers have ensured that both mages, adepts, and mystic adepts have different capabilities and thus roles. The mage is the strongest spell caster, the adept has unique abilities, and the mystic adept is a blend of both but will never be as good at either as the others. Your perception that they will end up "behind the curve" is clearly intended by the designers, not an unintended consequence.
Your claim that mystic adepts are "always behind the curve" is only true if you compare them to their counterparts, but this is an invalid comparison factually as they were never intended to be the same.
I can see your argument from an optimization point of view, but SR5 makes it very clear that everything has a price; unlike the street sam who simply cannot start with synaptic boosters R3, the mystic adept has a choice; spend karma on power points to gain abilities normally unique to the adept AND have the capacity to cast spells, and if the player wants his character to be able to live up to his fullest potential that comes with a very specific cost.
Besides 1: this argument is all over a temporary document, and we don't know for sure if the changes in the hot-patch are going to make it into the official errata.
Besides 2: you are entirely free to house rule whatever you want at your table, so what is up with the subjective insistence that the game is objectively "wrong"? The game is what it is; don't like it? Change it. It's right there in the rules. If you want to play at conventions, however, you've got to follow the official rules. Everything has a price...
-
Your claim that mystic adepts are "always behind the curve" is only true if you compare them to their counterparts, but this is an invalid comparison factually as they were never intended to be the same.
No, it is always true because if a player chooses not to take any Negative Qualities for any other character type, they will not permanently lose out on anything, but if they do so on a Mystic Adept they will permanently lose out on one or more Power Points. The point is that taking any Negative Qualities should not be required for the Mystic Adept not to lose out because it isn't required for anything else not to.
-
And that is the cost of being a Mystic Adept. You're also neatly ignoring the two distinct other Mystic Adept builds that uses priority Magic B or C, who start with 4 or 3 Magic respectively; neither of these HAVE to take a negative quality to fully realize their potential.
We clearly don't agree on this, and we are still arguing opinion, so I'll just leave it at that. Have a good one.
-
And that is the cost of being a Mystic Adept.
No, the cost of being a Mystic Adept is never gaining Astral Projection; having to spend a Power Point for Astral Perception; needing more skills due to their split focus; needing more attributes to be higher also due to their split focus and having less karma for 'tweaking' things, buying contacts, bonding foci, having bound spirits or getting a little extra cash. Despite the people whinging because the way the book had them isn't 100% perfect for their table, all that evened things out. The BS "Mage+" argument is nothing more than an attempt to create an emotional reaction in support of their position.
You're also neatly ignoring the two distinct other Mystic Adept builds that uses priority Magic B or C, who start with 4 or 3 Magic respectively; neither of these HAVE to take a negative quality to fully realize their potential.
No, I'm not ignoring anything. Those Mystic Adepts have to take Negative Qualities and spend Special Attribute Points in order to realize their full potential. The only difference between those two and A is that A doesn't have to spend the Special Attribute Points.
-
I think this argument has gone beyond studying the facts of the problem and has gone more into the emotional responses to such things. Even if the book or the errata says something, there's no reason a GM can't houserule things to be differently. The only time that the rules interpretations even mean anything is when dealing with Missions. Everything else is up for debate and can be argued until the cows come home. Personally, I try to respect other people's interpreations, not change them. I've not always been successful, but I do my best.
Personally, I felt that Mystic Adepts were potentially unbalanced with the original rules. I had a debate with a player of mine who likes to munchkin things, and he basically built a series of Mystic Adepts that would very quickly overshadow all of the other players in a group. He would start weaker, but it wouldn't take too long to compensate for the weaknesses. When I mentioned Astral Projection, he said he didn't need it to be a good mage or to be a good adept. When I asked him about his attributes, he said he was going to work on getting quickened buffs or sustaining foci for buffs. When I mentioned the skill distribution to him, he put A in his skills. His plan was to use special attribute points to max out Magic, and just buy spells later with Karma (they're only 5 karma, so they're pretty cheap). He had the whole thing mapped out and it would have eventually totally eclipsed the whole game.
His munchkin behavior aside, he had a point. Mathematically the way that Mystic Adepts were built in the original rules were pretty weak to start but would very quickly become extremely powerful, so long as one was willing to dump a lot of Karma into spells and such. So I houseruled that the Mystic Adept would have to buy their power points at 5 Karma at start instead of 2. He took the negative qualities, which gave his character more depth and flavor, and ultimately prevented him from becoming too munchkin. The houserul actually broke him out of his munchkin role, and he's become a MUCH better player as a result.
I respect everyone's views on this issue, but ultimately houseruling things will solve whatever personal problems anyone has. It helped to solve mine.
-
That's the whole point, it is primarily munchkins that would pose any sort of a problem with it as originally written. House ruling it if you have such an individual is fine, but insisting on a change to the system because of something that is not an automatic occurrence (especially a change that adds a requirement that no other character type in the game must deal with) is patently ridiculous.
-
No, I'm not ignoring anything. Those Mystic Adepts have to take Negative Qualities and spend Special Attribute Points in order to realize their full potential. The only difference between those two and A is that A doesn't have to spend the Special Attribute Points.
To use your method of arguing: bullshit.
And with that, I'm out of this one too. I've already stated in the other Mystic Adept thread that the Hot Patch errata is, as you so desired, only for Missions and only for GenCon and DragonCon, so you are free to happily ignore those rules if you wish, so I have nothing more to add to this debate.
-
No, I'm not ignoring anything. Those Mystic Adepts have to take Negative Qualities and spend Special Attribute Points in order to realize their full potential. The only difference between those two and A is that A doesn't have to spend the Special Attribute Points.
To use your method of arguing: bullshit.
Full potential (highest possible in generation without a quality) is Magic 6 with 6 Power Points. Priority B must spend two Special Attribute Points on top of the Karma to reach that and Priority C must spend 4 Special Attribute Points on top of the Karma to reach it.
-
Uselessness? I'm going to have to ask you to defend that assertion, as I find it to be baseless. They're still quite powerful, in particular for hybrid characters where they SHOULD excel, but having to dip into negative qualities to get full power points is part of the balance.
It's quite simple really. I can't come up with any character concept that isn't better as a mage or physad (than a Mystic Adept) when factoring in the hot-fix. If you think they are still quite powerful, provide some character concepts that are better as a Mystic Adept.
The biggest problem is the lack of new power points. As play continues, the Mystic Adept will fall further and further behind the mage and physad. SR4 already established that a 50/50 split doesn't work - with the hot-fix, it's something like 75/75 at chargen but pretty close to 50/50 once play starts.
That's not hard (any time you're doing two main things in the build, especially when the two roles synergize, Mystic Adepts are ahead - the Combat Mage or the Shaman/Face are great examples), but you're trying to shift the burden of proof here. It is your claim that they are unplayable, and it is thus your responsibility to prove it.
Being "behind the curve" against a Mage or an Adept in their specialty is how it's SUPPOSED to go; that's the cost of having more areas in which you excel. While it might be better for Mystic Adepts to be able to get power points on Magic increases, let's not pretend for a moment that it would be at all balanced for them to be free.
Guns: I disagree with your assertion that it is inherently wrong for a character to need to take Negative Qualities to realize their full potential - and in fact submit that no character can realize their full potential if they do not take negative qualities. Full baseline might be a better term for what you're suggesting (though I'm not prepared to accept the premise upon which you're defining it), but even then I can't agree that it's inherently wrong for a character to need negative qualities to reach that.
-
The Mystic Adept under the Knee Jerk Reaction requires Negative Qualities to get their full Power Point allotment.
If the Mystic Adept does not take their full Power Point allotment in character generation, they lose access to any they do not take permanently.
No other character type is put into such a ludicrous position.
-
The Mystic Adept under the Knee Jerk Reaction requires Negative Qualities to get their full Power Point allotment.
If the Mystic Adept does not take their full Power Point allotment in character generation, they lose access to any they do not take permanently.
No other character type is put into such a ludicrous position.
Are you saying it would be just fine if the cost remained 5 Karma/PP, but you could continue to buy them after character creation up to your Magic?
-
The Mystic Adept under the Knee Jerk Reaction requires Negative Qualities to get their full Power Point allotment.
If the Mystic Adept does not take their full Power Point allotment in character generation, they lose access to any they do not take permanently.
No other character type is put into such a ludicrous position.
Are you saying it would be just fine if the cost remained 5 Karma/PP, but you could continue to buy them after character creation up to your Magic?
No. The 5 Karma is complete overkill (using a Nuke when a BB Gun would do, anyone?). For some tables the 2 may not be enough, but I seriously doubt that that applies to that many tables outside of those of the ones so much in favor of the Knee Jerk Reaction.
-
The Mystic Adept under the Knee Jerk Reaction requires Negative Qualities to get their full Power Point allotment.
If the Mystic Adept does not take their full Power Point allotment in character generation, they lose access to any they do not take permanently.
No other character type is put into such a ludicrous position.
Are you saying it would be just fine if the cost remained 5 Karma/PP, but you could continue to buy them after character creation up to your Magic?
No. The 5 Karma is complete overkill (using a Nuke when a BB Gun would do, anyone?). For some tables the 2 may not be enough, but I seriously doubt that that applies to that many tables outside of those of the ones so much in favor of the Knee Jerk Reaction.
Then please stop mentioning the permanency bit as it's not at all related to the issue of whether or not the cost is fair. And I am still waiting for your to argue your point, rather than simply stating it. I am not prepared to accept the premise that it is inherent;y wrong for Mystic Adepts to need Negative Qualities for their full baseline; you seem to be taking that as granted when it is not.
-
The Mystic Adept under the Knee Jerk Reaction requires Negative Qualities to get their full Power Point allotment.
If the Mystic Adept does not take their full Power Point allotment in character generation, they lose access to any they do not take permanently.
No other character type is put into such a ludicrous position.
Are you saying it would be just fine if the cost remained 5 Karma/PP, but you could continue to buy them after character creation up to your Magic?
No. The 5 Karma is complete overkill (using a Nuke when a BB Gun would do, anyone?). For some tables the 2 may not be enough, but I seriously doubt that that applies to that many tables outside of those of the ones so much in favor of the Knee Jerk Reaction.
Then please stop mentioning the permanency bit as it's not at all related to the issue of whether or not the cost is fair. And I am still waiting for your to argue your point, rather than simply stating it. I am not prepared to accept the premise that it is inherent;y wrong for Mystic Adepts to need Negative Qualities for their full baseline; you seem to be taking that as granted when it is not.
Name another character type that has such a requirement. Hint: You can't because there isn't one. That no other character type has such a ludicrous requirement makes it inherently wrong for that one to have that requirement.
The Decker and Technomancer can still hack without taking Negatives.
The Magician can still cast/summon/enchant/perform rituals without taking Negatives.
The 'standard' Adept can still do whatever he's specializing in without Negatives.
The Rigger can still pilot, drive and operate drones without Negatives.
The Street Sam can still work fine without Negatives.
The Mystic Adept is the only one who loses anything without taking Negatives.
-
The Mystic Adept is the only one who loses anything without taking Negatives.
Granting that point for the sake of argument, that does not prove that it is inherently wrong for a character type to be in that situation. It could be the case, for example, that Mystic Adepts are unique in the limitation because they're unique in the need for it (and thus, were another character type introduced where such a limitation was needed, Mystic Adepts would cease to be unique in this limitation).
-
I don't recall there being any other hybrid concepts, so "no other concepts have this flaw" is a weak argument. Plus a Mystic Adept who doesn't take negative qualities "can still" cast spells, summon spirits, and get 5 PP worth of adept powers (not even counting Qi Foci). Heck, considering how wide your definition of "munchkin" is, any Mystic Adept who wants to start with 6 Power Points would qualify as a munchkin.
-
You think it isn't fine as printed, then you can "house rule it" and the Knee Jerk Reaction can go to being a Missions specific ruling as it should have been in the first place. But no, you have the unmitigated gall to think that because something might be a bit off for your table that the system should be changed to suit you and be damned with anyone who might disagree. On top of that, your side is the one that out-and-out calls people liar for disagreeing.
-
This isn't remotely table specific. A systemic problem is not something to be fixed at the table-level. You fix table problems at the table and systemic problems in the system; a broken rule that was never supposed to be printed in the first place is pretty much as perfect an example of a systemic problem as you can get.
And yes, calling people liars for disagreeing with you is in no way useful.
-
This isn't remotely table specific.
Anything dealing with whether something is supposedly "overpowered" or "underpowered" is table specific. Nothing in any system is actually "overpowered" until how a given table-group operates comes into the mix. "Overpowered" is by very nature subjective.
-
On top of that, your side is the one that out-and-out calls people liar for disagreeing.
I (not my "side") called you a liar, and that's not because you disagree with me (which is a petty remark, by the way), but because you're being a liar. Back before the errata came out, I gave a detailed and factual argument as to why giving MAs free PP if they increased their Magic was unbalancing, as it gave them access to "Mage+" and "Adept+" routes when it came to character advancement (match either a Magician's or an Adept's advancement step by step, while also improving their other side), and you put up a ridiculous resistance: first you argued about organic growth, and then when you realized you were wrong, you gave some ridiculous speech about how nobody was right and nobody was wrong, even acting like I was bullying you when I stated that you were, in fact, wrong. And yet you continue to spout that "there was nothing whatsoever wrong with character advancement pre-errata" nonsense in pretty much every single topic that is made about Mystic Adepts.
So yes, if you're going to be a liar, I will call you one. And it is quite telling about you that you would take me calling you on your nonsense and try and twist it into some ad hominem attack on you, then try and play the victim in order to support your case.
-
This isn't remotely table specific.
Anything dealing with whether something is supposedly "overpowered" or "underpowered" is table specific. Nothing in any system is actually "overpowered" until how a given table-group operates comes into the mix. "Overpowered" is by very nature subjective.
Not prepared to accept that premise. Are you able to actually prove it?
-
This is why you can't have nice things.