NEWS

[SR5] House Rules

  • 416 Replies
  • 261054 Views

Stoneglobe

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Drug Addled Console Cowboy
« Reply #345 on: <07-05-15/1207:24> »
Thanks for the feedback Herr Brakhaus

You know, I always forget the sound link when I'm writing these things up

Also the Resonance Infusion is based on Line Of Sight out to Resonance2 meters. Didn't notice that I'd missed that when I was copying and pasting from my house rules pack. Thanks for pointing that out.

I personally don't find the addition of the smartgun link particularly overpowering in gameplay but as you have said if anyone choses to use these they can modify them as much as they wish.
´Wonderful´, the Flatline said,´I never did like to do anything simple when I could do it ass-backwards.´ - William Gibson, Neuromancer
“Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.” - William Gibson

Top Dog

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1219
« Reply #346 on: <07-05-15/1517:54> »
I don't think I'm a fan of completely decoupling ASDF from mental attributes as a technomancer. Perhaps limit the relevant ASDF stats to the linked ability +3? Leaves a lot of freedom, but you can't dump them outright as a technomancer.

I don't see a big problem with free smartlinks. It's only a +1 extra (for an archetype that's traditionally quite terrible at combat) plus a few nuyen saved. Sounds good. Image/Sound Link makes sense too.

Stoneglobe

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Drug Addled Console Cowboy
« Reply #347 on: <07-05-15/1729:32> »
I don't think I'm a fan of completely decoupling ASDF from mental attributes as a technomancer. Perhaps limit the relevant ASDF stats to the linked ability +3? Leaves a lot of freedom, but you can't dump them outright as a technomancer.

It's a perfectly valid option that I did consider when re-designing the rules but in the end preferred my way as it gives additional encouragement for technomancers to continue with sublimation and also doesn't penalise or reward playing certain metatypes. With my system you can finally have a Troll Technomancer who can hold his own against the elven one.
´Wonderful´, the Flatline said,´I never did like to do anything simple when I could do it ass-backwards.´ - William Gibson, Neuromancer
“Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.” - William Gibson

Chronos

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 20
« Reply #348 on: <08-09-15/2016:44> »
So ultimately it will be up to my table, as we take turns GMing and we are doing everything pretty by the book, but I was going to propose the following as an option for aspected mages. (I assume our mage will be for it, considering he aspected and that was less than awesome). Anyway, I would love to hear some thoughts on it from you guys.

Aspected perks!
Basically when you pick aspected this houserule would give you something for it. "X" in each instance is the number of spells a full mage of one higher priority would get and "Y" corresponds to the priority as well. So for priority B:X=10 Y=3, C:X=7 Y=2, D:X=5 Y=1.

Sorcery: X spells or rituals for free and a Yforce spell focus of whichever school they like.

Enchanting: X alchemical spells, X10 reagents, Yforce enchanting focus.

Conjuring: X2 karma worth of already bound spirits (none of which may have a higher force than the mage's magic), X50 reagents, Yforce spirit focus.

All foci come unbound and if it's a practical item (a spear or staff or something) you must buy that item. Thoughts?

falar

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 809
  • The Fourth Jesse
« Reply #349 on: <09-29-15/0952:17> »
Alchemy Rewrite

Over the last couple of weeks, I've been working on a rewrite of Alchemy. A lot of it stays the same, but there are a couple of key differences throughout. A summary of the changes and additions are as follows:
  • No resistance roll on Alchemy unless you're overcasting
  • When activating a preparation, Potency is now the number of hits on the Spellcasting test
  • Overcasting and Hits > Magic Rating both cause physical drain
  • LOS now has (Potency x Force) meter range increments instead of a maximum range of (Potency x Force)
  • Negative modifiers on the Spellcasting test now apply as a resistance roll on the preparation's activation, even when there normally wouldn't be a resistance roll
  • Magical lodges can store a number of preparations equal to their force. The force of the preparation must not be greater than the lodge's force. This makes the preparations expire in weeks instead of hours.
  • There's a new kind of foci called a Preservation Focus that lets you store preparations for days instead of hours. It costs (Force + ( Maximum Preparations - 1 ) / 2) karma and 500 nuyen times the karma cost.
  • Alchemists can innately preserve preparations up to their Magic rating divided by two, round up.
  • Two new metamagics - one which increases range and one which allows someone to preserve preparations naturally.

If you want to look at any of this in more depth, check out my REALLY LONG POST ON REDDIT. I basically took the SR5 rules and inserted my changes and added stuff at the end.






fenrir4life

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 27
« Reply #350 on: <10-20-15/1402:25> »
I seem to have fallen onto the Technomancer Issues bandwagon.  I'm toying with the idea of a restructuring with the following purposes:
1) allow a technomancer to protect the party's devices in a similar way to a decker
2) circumvent the problem of technomancers having to submerge to get abilities that seem completely intuitive for every 'mancer to have.
3) reduce the Technomancer's painful combination of MAD/MSD and matrix limits that prevent them from accomplishing most hacking tasks without spending Edge
4) fix some of the "trap" complex forms and bring fading values a bit more in line with actual effect
5) Do the above without further enhancing the pokemancer playstyle, as it doesn't really need much help.


To that end, I'm considering the following changes
1) Resonance PAN.  Your resonance is your living persona's device rating, as established on p.251,  I don't think extending PAN functionality to technomancers is particularly harmful; while they might be able to protect a great number of devices, a midcost deck running a common-use program can still have a higher Firewall than any 'mancer can start with, even with the other changes I'm proposing.

2) Smartlink. imagelink and soundlink compatibility.  Choice of Browse, Signal Scrub, or MMRI/Mind Over Machine as an innate ability (the ones not chosen can still, of course, be taken as echoes- the intent is to grant a starting 'mancer a choice of speed, range, or the ability to be a ghostdamned rigger out of the gate)

3) When using your Living Persona: Resonance may be substituted for Logic, Intuition, Willpower or Charisma when calculating Matrix attributes(but not die pools for Matrix actions).  You can change which one you are substituting as a free action(Intended to alleviate the MAD pressure without removing it entirely).  Resonance may also be substituted for the Cracking skill group.  This does not actually give you the skill group, nor can you take specialties in these skills, unless you purchase them separately, starting from rank 1 (which, if you plan to grab a deck at some point, isn't necessarily a bad idea- the purpose of this is to give 'mancers a baseline intuitive functionality in the matrix, but one that is far more expensive to improve than raising the actual skills would be.  The best Hackermancers are still the ones that are actually hackers)

4) Enact the following changes to CFs that emulate spells
Diffusion/Infusion CFs will inherit the Drain/Fade values of the Decrease/Increase attribute spells: L-2 and L-3, respectively.
Puppeteer:  Will behave essentially like the Control Thoughts spell:
Target: Device  Duration: S  F: L-1
You push Resonance commands into a target, forcing it to perform Matrix actions. Pick a target and make a Software + Resonance[Level] v. Willpower + Firewall test.  Keep track of your net hits, as they determine how long you can sustain the complex form. While the complex form is sustained, the owner/user of the device may take a Complex Action on their turn to resist by making a Willpower+Firewall Test with a dice pool penalty equal to the complex form's Level; every hit the target gets reduces the technomancer's net hits by 1. The device's owner/user can take this action even if they wouldn’t get an action because of the complex form. The complex form ends when your net hits are reduced to zero.  These subsequent resistance rolls may only be made once the device's owner knows something is amiss- generally, after the first action they didn't tell the device to perform, although an owned-but-unattended device will be significantly more vulnerable.
Resonance Spike: inherits the drain value of the single-target Direct Combat spells it emulates: L-3


Thoughts?  Am I going too far?

Bulshock

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 132
« Reply #351 on: <10-20-15/1424:13> »
@Fenrir4life I like them overall, but number 3 is very very powerful.  I would recommended putting some sort of hard limit on it for those.  Especially for a long game.

fenrir4life

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 27
« Reply #352 on: <10-20-15/1906:40> »
For the Cracking substitution, I think it's fairly self-regulating, given how much more expensive it is than raising the skills.  For ASDF, I can see hardcapping it at 9- the 'mancer in question still isn't going to stack up too well against anything by Shiawase or Fairlight, and their die pools will still be based on their actual attributes.
« Last Edit: <10-20-15/1911:43> by fenrir4life »

Bulshock

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 132
« Reply #353 on: <10-20-15/1925:44> »
I was more referring to it then being used instead of the Cracking Group, and then is also used with all the Resonance skills, making it the one true ability for a Technomancer to raise.  If I was playing a Technomancer with that rule I would ditch the Cracking Group entirely, as raising a Skill Group costs as much as raising an Attribute, and you're likely to already be planning on raising Resonance.

fenrir4life

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 27
« Reply #354 on: <10-20-15/1946:14> »
I hear you, but that's... kind of the idea.  Let technomancers actually splash some other skillset, too.  Learn to shoot, learn to talk to people, hell, learn to fly a helicopter.  If you want to be a true master of the matrix, it's worth your while to buy those skills up and take specialties, but if you want to be, say, a face or a rigger, then you can be decent at that and still be a technomancer.
And if you are equating costs, I'll point out that each point of resonance above 6 will also require submersion.  It's not that you don't get anything else from submersion, but a lot of the echoes are pretty lackluster, and it's still a cost speedbump.

Bulshock

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 132
« Reply #355 on: <10-20-15/2015:20> »
I've been playing a Technomancer for a while, and even with the lackluster Echo's and Resonance not being able to replace Cracking Group I still keep going back and forth on if I should raise Resonance or if I should raise Cracking stuff.  With that change I would go Resonance each time, no question.  As that would raise the Level of stuff that I can do with my Resonance abilities as well as give me better hacking.  Because to be a Hacking Technomancer you still need Resonance.  So I would be looking at it as 'well I could Submerge and raise my Resonance... or I could Submerge, raise my Resonance and raise my Cracking Group...".  Though maybe I'm just odd in not being able to think of a Technomancer that wouldn't use Resonance based abilities while being focused on hacking.

fenrir4life

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 27
« Reply #356 on: <10-21-15/1125:24> »
Don't really want to exacerbate echo taxation, but I could see capping it at 6 for Cracking substitution, with an echo you could take twice to raise the cap by 3 each time...

falar

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 809
  • The Fourth Jesse
« Reply #357 on: <10-21-15/1140:14> »
I think a better way to do it might be to just add "Cracking Skill Group at 2/Cracking Skill Group at 4/Cracking Skill Group at 6" to the appropriate priorities in priority-gen.

fenrir4life

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 27
« Reply #358 on: <10-21-15/1358:35> »
That would help address the issue that TMs get less per priority teir than most awakened, and it avoids the godstatting of Resonance that my approach could lead to.  Thanks!

falar

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 809
  • The Fourth Jesse
« Reply #359 on: <10-21-15/1507:23> »
My adjusted priorities gave them 2 technical skills at the same rating as the resonance skills.