[Michael Chandra]

A sadistical one, based on how Shedim are too squishy now:

Harrow power for Shedim:
For normal Shedim, gives them Immunity to Normal Weapons at a Hardened Armor value equal to their Force. For Master Shedim, gives them Immunity to Normal Weapons at a Hardened Armor value equal to 1.5x their Force.

The 1.5x instead of 2x is to compensate for the fact they can wear Armor.

[Mason]

Some of the guns in the book are incapable of killing an unarmored person on the street with one shot even if you Call a Shot for increased damage and max hits with the Accuracy (assuming they roll average two hits to move out of the way and average 1 hit to soak damage). Mostly holdouts, but still. That doesn't make any sense to me. So its either set Accuracy based on how good you are, or make the claim that the weapon has an inherent limit sure but you need to raise those limits by 2 across the board.

That's how I feel about it.

[Michael Chandra]

So because not all guns are one-shot killers the system is flawed?_?

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Honestly, that's a 'dead to rights' sort of thing.  Most pistols, properly placed against a target who cannot functionally resist, are going to kill the target - at least, most targets.  I can see a very durable ork, troll, or cybered-out anything taking the headshot / eyeshot / earshot and surviving, just from a freak of the bullet's bounce off an especially tough skull.  That having been said, though, it is IMO pretty much a hand-wave.  "You have him bound at point-blank range, unable to resist; you kill him."

Of course, the converse will generally work too - but then, I don't generally let nameless mooks use Edge to miraculously survive.  (Not generally, anyhow.)  That's why PCs are PCs.

[Lucean]

Some of the guns in the book are incapable of killing an unarmored person on the street with one shot even if you Call a Shot for increased damage and max hits with the Accuracy (assuming they roll average two hits to move out of the way and average 1 hit to soak damage). Mostly holdouts, but still. That doesn't make any sense to me. So its either set Accuracy based on how good you are, or make the claim that the weapon has an inherent limit sure but you need to raise those limits by 2 across the board.

That's how I feel about it.

Guns =/ Pistols, so I don't understand the point you try to make. If you count Submachine Guns in, than the lowest you have with max Accuracy and Called Shot is 14 P, which is good enough.

[ZeConster]

So there are a number of issues people have with the way Mystic Adepts work now:

• They can't get PP post-chargen except through Initiation
• Because of this, they have to invest 30 of their maximum 50 Karma at chargen
• MAs are magician first and adept second: making one that's adept first and magician second isn't possible
• (me personally) Adept Powers are affected by Magic no matter how much effort an MA put into their adept side, so you can have 7 Magic, only 2 PP worth of powers, but the powers will be based on your Magic rating of 7

At Top Dog's suggestion, I've reworked my houserule proposal to include different Priority levels, so here it is:

• Add a new Attribute: Chi, replacing Magic for Adepts. Chi is used for the following:
  
  • Power Points (you get 1 Power Point for every point of Chi you have, in addition to any you choose to get through Initiating)
  • Adept powers: the maximum amount of ranks you can have, the mechanics (when the adept's Magic rating is referred to, replace "Magic" with "Chi" for things like duration, dice pool, and the like), and how many discounts a Way gives you
  • Masking (can be used to alter both your perceived Magic and perceived Chi ratings, provided you have them (you can pretend to not have Chi while having lower Magic than you really have, for example), and you use the highest of your Magic and Chi for the opposed test)
  • Metamagics and Enhancements from the Ways in Street Grimoire: like with adept powers, when the adept's Magic rating is referred to, replace "Magic" with "Chi" (this includes the Pied Piper limit); Master of the Nine Chakras reduces both Magic and Chi in the target
  • Maximum Initiation grade (use the highest of your Magic and Chi values to determine the limit: restricting how many non-adept and adept-only metamagics you can have based on your Magic and Chi ratings is optional and probably not worth the extra bookkeeping)
  Chi is lowered by Essence loss just like Magic
• Instead of the current Mystic Adepts, you have Mystic Adepts (MA: adept first, mage second) and Versed Mages (VM: mage first, adept second):
  
  • Points 1-4 and 6 of the sidebar on page 69 remain the same for both MAs and VMs
  • Mystic Adepts have Chi as primary attribute, and raise Chi normally: they can raise their Magic for 5 Karma (and 1 week of meditation if done post-chargen), up to a maximum of [Chi - 1]
  • Versed Mages have Magic as primary attribute, and raise Magic normally: they can raise their Chi for 5 Karma (and 1 week of meditation if done post-chargen), up to a maximum of [Magic - 1]
  • important: raising your Chi by 1 point gives you an extra Power Point, even post-chargen, regardless of whether you're an Adept, Mystic Adept, or Versed Mage
• The priority table is altered: although MAs and VMs get about 5 less Karma worth of stuff on priorities A and B, this is solely due to starting with fewer spells, and the amount of Karma they can spend on raising their secondary attribute is more limited than the current system, due to a lower cap and getting a point for free (15 max on A, 20 max on B and C), which means they can spend more Karma on other things: in addition, they can wait until post-chargen before they invest in their secondary attribute
  The new priorities are as follows:
  A:
  
  • Mystic Adept: Chi 6, Magic 2, one Rating 5 Magical skill, one Rating 5 Active skill, 7 spells
  • Versed Mage: Magic 6, Chi 2, two Rating 5 Magical skills, 7 spells
  B:
  
  • Mystic Adept: Chi 4, Magic 1, one Rating 4 Magical skill, one Rating 4 Active skill, 5 spells
  • Versed Mage: Magic 4, Chi 1, two Rating 4 Magical skills, 5 spells
  C:
  
  • Mystic Adept: Chi 3, Magic 1, one Rating 2 Active skill, 3 spells
  • Versed Mage: Magic 3, Chi 1, 4 spells

[iamfanboy]

ZeCoster, I do like your idea (though to fit the rest of the book might change it to Qi); however, any way you cut it the mystic adept gains 2 points of Magic/Qi over a dedicated adept or mage at the same Priority level. I'm not sure that's bueno.

Perhaps changing the starting values to:

A Mystic Adept Qi 4 Magic 2  Versed Adept Magic 4 Qi 2
B Mystic Adept Qi 3 Magic 1 Versed Adept Magic 3 Qi 1
C Mystic Adept Qi 2 Magic 1 Versed Adept Magic 2 Qi 1

That fits with the Mage/Technomancer progression of Magic/Resonance, and further points in either could be purchased as per normal character gen rules, at the price for more Magic points - I'm not a fan of the mystic adept getting 'cheap' adept powers, so that little bit gets axed. It would take investment to take a starting character up to 6/6 (A to Magic, B to Race (human) so you get 7 points), but you lose Edge to do it.

Seems fair to me? I dunno though, it's all theoretical at this point to I.

[Top Dog]

ZeCoster, I do like your idea (though to fit the rest of the book might change it to Qi); however, any way you cut it the mystic adept gains 2 points of Magic/Qi over a dedicated adept or mage at the same Priority level. I'm not sure that's bueno.

The Versed Mage trades in a fair number of spells and the ability to astrally project and perceive for the 2 chi (he can buy back one of those, but then he'd have to pay for it so that's a wash). He's worse off than a core rule Mystic Adept by 5 karma (although the tradeoff might be worth it for many MA's).

The Mystic Adept (ZeConster style) is worse off then a pure adept since he starts at lower Chi compared to an adept of the same priority.

So in both cases I don't understand what you mean by gaining 2 points over a dedicated adept/mage. I mean, yes, but at a steep cost.

[ZeConster]

The secondary attribute only costs 5 Karma per rank (similar to how core-rules Mystic Adepts have to pay 5 Karma per Power Point), and with the spells trade-in, both MAs and VMs get 5 Karma less worth of stuff on the higher priority levels (+2 Chi/Magic, -3 spells; or +1 Chi/Magic, -2 spells) than the core-rules Mystic Adept. The biggest reason to put the primary attribute at 6 at Priority A is to not penalize Metatype priorities that start with 0 special attribute points.
Making both attributes cost special attribute points (which I think is what you're suggesting) would penalize MAs and VMs too much compared to the current system, where they simply pay 5 Karma per Power Point compared to 5 Karma per Chi rank (as VM) under my houserule. My goal isn't to nerf them, but to make them more fun to play while not deviating too far from the core-rules mechanics.

[iamfanboy]

The secondary attribute only costs 5 Karma per rank (similar to how core-rules Mystic Adepts have to pay 5 Karma per Power Point), and with the spells trade-in, both MAs and VMs get 5 Karma less worth of stuff on the higher priority levels (+2 Chi/Magic, -3 spells; or +1 Chi/Magic, -2 spells) than the core-rules Mystic Adept. The biggest reason to put the primary attribute at 6 at Priority A is to not penalize Metatype priorities that start with 0 special attribute points.
Making both attributes cost special attribute points (which I think is what you're suggesting) would penalize MAs and VMs too much compared to the current system, where they simply pay 5 Karma per Power Point compared to 5 Karma per Chi rank (as VM) under my houserule. My goal isn't to nerf them, but to make them more fun to play while not deviating too far from the core-rules mechanics.

Well, part of the problem with mystic adepts as in the core rules is that they have all but one mage ability, all of the adept ability, and sacrifice nothing for it (ooh, they can't astrally project - with all the dangers GMs spring on mages that try to astrally scout, it's a crapshoot anyway). At the core, they give up very little for a lot of benefit; that's why minmaxers gravitate towards them.

I went back to the core idea of a mystic adept when they were first introduced - that they split their power between slinging spells and channeling qi - when I suggested that their attributes match their non-magic counterparts. With your pricing, picking a mystic adept puts them at near-parity with a normal adept or mage while also giving them (effectively) priority C in their non-speciality. IMHO, they should not be the equal of a mage or adept in those class specialties; they're dilettantes, dabbling in both worlds, and their values should represent that.

As of now, they don't, and that's why they're munchkin bait. Your method comes close to fixing that, which I like, but it doesn't go quite far enough.

Also, no other magic class can spend Karma points on improving their Magic/Resonance; why should mystic adepts get a free pass to do so instead of using Special Attribute points like everyone else? There's a reason it's a Priority system; you have to sacrifice something if you want to play a troll mystic adept who kicks ass at slinging mojo and, well, kicking ass.

Part of the problem with mystic adepts back in 2e/3e is that they had to Initiate to raise their ability (which a starting character couldn't do) leaving them WAY weaker than their other magic counterparts. Special Attribute points address that neatly.

[ZeConster]

It seems to me that what you have an issue with is the way Mystic Adepts work in 5th Edition, not my proposed houserule itself.

[iamfanboy]

That's kind of correct, but like I said, your houserule has a chance to fix my problem with mystic adepts: For the price of 10 starting Karma, (not counting the 2 spent on being able to astrally percept) the ONLY thing they're missing from either the Adept or Mage ability list is the ability to astrally project. They give up an ability that for most players won't matter in exchange for 3.5 metric butt-tons of ability. That is unbalanced, and needs to be corrected.

I mean, look at the start of this thread. Half the posts on the first page are talking about mystic adepts and the need to balance 'em.

I also LIKE mystic adepts (played one back in 3e when they sucked, the last time I was a full time player), but I also know enough to follow my inner munchkin player - and if it's saying, "Play a mystic adept in 5e, they're the best choice" then my inner gamemaster knows that it needs fixin'.

Hell, my munchkin friend's first statement after spending some time with the new rules is, "I wanna be a mystic adept." And this is a guy whose ability to absolutely destroy the D&D 3.5 rules is legendary and only tolerated because he's hilarious.


Question for anyone who owns the new magic book, though (because I can't afford the Street Grimoire and probably won't be able to for a long time), was what ZeConster and I are arguing about fixed in the Grimoire? 'cause if so, then there's little point talking further about it.

[Michael Chandra]

That's kind of correct, but like I said, your houserule has a chance to fix my problem with mystic adepts: For the price of 10 starting Karma, (not counting the 2 spent on being able to astrally percept) the ONLY thing they're missing from either the Adept or Mage ability list is the ability to astrally project.

25 starting karma, 5 for Astral Perception. It's 5 per PP, 2 karma was a mistake that was never intended and was already announced as wrong even before the official release of SR5, it's been in the HotPatch Errata quite soon and in the official errata for a while now.

[iamfanboy]

Ah, OK - I was going to read the FAQ AFTER I finished digesting the rulebook.

...and now I can't seem to find it. *sigh*

Still, I'm not sure I like the idea of Mystic Adepts having an 'exception' about buying what amounts to Magic points. That's why I like the idea of separating Magic/Qi into two categories and enfolding it into the Special Attribute rules: makes the 'cost' of being a dilettante that they don't start out as good at magic or adeptery as a dedicated character, but if you choose to, you CAN become that strong - at the cost of spending points on other stuff.

In other words, yeah, I'll use my version at my table, but your tables are your own.

[Michael Chandra]

If you force people to take really-high SAPs for Edge, Magic AND Chi, I feel you're pushing Mystic Adepts out of the game and you should just ban them instead.