NEWS

[6E] Direct vs Indirect or Mana vs Physical

  • 10 Replies
  • 1787 Views

KabalahRaith

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 7
« on: <07-20-21/1904:13> »
I think folks got a little carried away with the whole Direct and Indirect Combat Spells thing. IMHO, it should be deleted altogether and replaced with Mana and Physical Combat Spells.
How this would change the rules:
(1) Page 132, under Combat Spells, Defense Rating against Physical Spells should be normal, but against Mana Spells it should be your Astral DR (yeah that means even the most Chromed Troll Street Sammie needs an Astral DR.
(2) Page 132, Change the paragraph title of Direct Combat Spells to Mana Combat Spells. Also, state that Mana Combat Spells can only do Stun damage.
(3) Page 132, Change the paragraph title of Indirect Combat Spells to Physical Spells. Also, state that Physical Combat Spells can do either Physical or Stun damage.
(4) Page 137, Clarify in the Illusion Spells paragraph that Mana Illusion Spells are better described as Phantasms, they are only in the mind of the affected creature, while Physical Illusion Spells are best described as Illusions, with a Physical presence for anyone or anything that can view the area being affected by the Illusion.
The whole idea of Direct and Indirect was silly, IMHO. Live by the KISS "Keep It Simple, Stupid" principle.
« Last Edit: <07-20-21/1906:14> by KabalahRaith »

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4572
« Reply #1 on: <07-20-21/2113:31> »
In previous editions, there were subtle but significant differences in how direct and indirect combat spells worked.  While they arguably still exist, these details weren't discussed in 6e and so as a result of streamlining the game, direct and indirect combat spells did become arguably indistinguishable from one another, besides having different dice pool mechanics.  And, in hypothetical absence of those subtle and significant differences in nature, I can see how making a distinction between direct and indirect combat spells can be reasonably seen as being a needless complication...

One of the projects the errata team is working on is getting an official FAQ published, and the magic rules will get significant attention to (re)provide those kinds of metaphysical details that previous editions provided that 6e omitted.  If that goes though as planned, it'd (hopefully) render your idea moot as it would (re)establish meaningful, tactical differences between direct and indirect combat spells. But, otoh, your idea is actually pretty sound on a first read-through, I have to say.  If one is willing to sacrifice certain sacred cows... and Shadowrun has been certainly willing to do exactly that before!
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

MercilessMing

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
« Reply #2 on: <07-21-21/1159:51> »
FAQ is still otw?  lets goooooooooo

KabalahRaith

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 7
« Reply #3 on: <07-31-21/1146:11> »
Stainless,

I briefly looked at some things while searching on this topic and saw some minor details, but these, IMHO could easily be integrated into Mana and Physical descriptions, which have a "real world" difference rather than creating additional abstract concepts that have no real value and only serve to make the game more complex with no added benefit.

Combat spells are already getting nerfed again with the addition of 'magic resistant' armor.

A mana spell never enters the Material Plane and should only be influenced by Astral phenomenon, to include Dual Aspect people, places, and things, unless you allow it to cause Physical damage, which I wouldn't. A Physical spell should enter the Material Plane at the caster and travel to the target in the Material Plane. It seems 6th Ed, is a bit lacking on the whole Astral thing, like attacking spells in the Astral Plane before the get to the target, which I thought was kind of silly treating spells like living entities. This would make it the case that AOE Mana spells would only affect things the caster can see to establish the "mana link" whereas no mana link is required with the target of a Physical spell because its energy is being channeled into the Material Plane. Hence, if someone is around the corner, out of LOS of a magician, but someone is standing right next to them in view, a LOS Physical Spell targeting the visible one would affected both.

Xenon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
« Reply #4 on: <07-31-21/1707:03> »
I think folks got a little carried away with the whole Direct and Indirect Combat Spells thing. IMHO, it should be deleted altogether and replaced with Mana and Physical Combat Spells.
Agreed.


(1) Page 132, under Combat Spells, Defense Rating against Physical Spells should be normal, but against Mana Spells it should be your Astral DR (yeah that means even the most Chromed Troll Street Sammie needs an Astral DR.
Agreed.

(But depending on your reading, this is already already true for direct combat spells....)


Also, state that Mana Combat Spells can only do Stun damage.
I disagree...

Mana spells only affect living entities (but can be cast on either the physical plane or on the astral plane)
Regular Invisibility is a good example of this. Or Knockout (which does Stun damage). Or Death Touch (which does Physical damage)

Physical spells can only affect things on the physical plane (but both living objects as well as inanimate objects)
Improved Invisibility is a good example of this. Or Punch (which does Stun damage). Or Shatter (which does Physical damage)


(3) Page 132, Change the paragraph title of Indirect Combat Spells to Physical Spells. Also, state that Physical Combat Spells can do either Physical or Stun damage.
Agreed.

(but I think that Mana spells should still also do either Physical or Stun damage, just that it can only affect living entities...)



(4) Page 137, Clarify in the Illusion Spells paragraph that Mana Illusion Spells are better described as Phantasms, they are only in the mind of the affected creature, while Physical Illusion Spells are best described as Illusions, with a Physical presence for anyone or anything that can view the area being affected by the Illusion.
Agreed.

Odsh

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 151
« Reply #5 on: <08-01-21/0303:38> »
Mana, physical, direct and indirect spells have existed for a long time. So if someone got carried away, it predates at least back to third edition.

A.f.a.i.k., indirect mana spells have never existed though and direct physical spells were relatively uncommon and limited to the cases where you wanted to affect a potentially non-living target with a combat spell that didn't consist in flinging some destructive energy at that target. There was a spell "spontaneous combustion" (or similar name) back then that fell into that category if my memory serves me well. I think that even touch physical spells were still considered as indirect spells.

I agree this should be simplified. And I'm aligned with Xenon that mana spells should still be able to deal physical damage. Manabolt and manaball are pretty staple and I see no reason to remove them from the game.

Odsh

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 151
« Reply #6 on: <08-01-21/0322:12> »
A mana spell never enters the Material Plane

I.m.o. mana spells should still be able to affect non-dual living beings on the physical plane and be cast by non-dual mages on the physical plane.
The important rule is to not allow affecting targets that are not on the same plane as the caster.

KabalahRaith

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 7
« Reply #7 on: <08-01-21/1607:25> »
I am sticking with my belief that Mana spells should never be allowed to directly inflict Physical Damage, except for Stun overflow into the Physical Condition Monitor.
Mana spells in no way shape or form should influence the Physical world. That is the whole point of having Mana vs. Physical spells.
Mana spells are neither affected or affect the Physical realm so they should not be allowed to cause Physical Damage. The whole blurb about Mana Barriers only being affected by Physical Damage by a Mana Spell in the Astral Plane needs removed. There should be no such thing as Physical Damage in the Astral Plane. One should think of it as the "Mana Plane." Now one does not need to be dual aspected to damage folks with mana spells as "every living thing as an astral aura" which can be affect by a Mana Spell. Anything without an aura cannot be affected by a Mana Spell. It was a mistake to ever let that be the case. I know this is fantasy, but there still needs to be a logic to the metaphysics of it. Since Physical Spells cannot be cast on the Astral Plane there is no issue with dealing with caster and target being on the same plane.  However, Mana Spells can be cast in either plane and I see no reason why an Astrally projecting magician cannot cast a spell in the astral at a living target that has an aura in the Astral Plane.  By limiting Mana spells to stun damage, this prevents Astrally Projecting Magicians from being too powerful by preventing them from impacting the Physical world from the Astral while keeping the body somewhere safe.  The metaphysics has to allow Astral entities from influencing living beings though as they have a presence in the Astral Plane and helps explain possessions, entering people's dreams, etc.

Xenon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
« Reply #8 on: <08-01-21/1756:37> »
I don't agree with you that Mana spells should only be able to be cast from the astral plane, that mana spells can only stun or that an astral caster should be allowed to affecting living targets on the physical plane that does not have an actual tangible presence on the astral plane.

But I do agree that indirect combat spells could be renamed physical combat spells (which mean they are affected by things like physical armor, physical barriers and line of fire) and direct combat spells could be renamed into mana combat spells (which mean they are affected by things like mage armor, mana barriers and line of sight).


Mana spells in no way shape or form should influence the Physical world. That is the whole point of having Mana vs. Physical spells.
I don't think I (nor the authors of Shadowrun) share your view on this....

If you want to cook someone on the physical plane from the inside out you use a mana spell that deal physical damage (mana barriers and mage armor helps against this). This used to be called a direct combat spell but I agree with your that this might as well just be called a mana combat spell.

If you want to cook someone on the physical plane from the outside in you use a physical spell that deal actual fire damage (physical barriers and physical armor helps against this). This used to be called an indirect combat spell but I agree with you that this might as well just be called a physical combat spell.


It was a mistake to ever let that be the case.
The reasoning here is that you need to target an actual form.
If you cast a spell on the physical plane then your target need to have an actual tangible physical form.
You can't target wholly astral entities from the physical plane.

If you cast a spell on the astral plane then your target need to have an actual tangible astral form.
You can't target intangible astral auras of living targets, only actual tangle astral forms from like dual natured or wholly astral entities.

What is cast in astral stays in astral.

This prevent spirits and projecting magicians from targeting physical guards on the physical realm without risk of being targeted back. Which is a Good Thing. If you want to hurt someone on the physical plane then you need to expose yourself on the physical plane.
« Last Edit: <08-01-21/1805:41> by Xenon »

Odsh

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 151
« Reply #9 on: <08-02-21/1259:20> »
KabalahRaith, I wouldn't read too much into a supposed relation between the physical damage monitor and the physical plane. An attack that aims at rendering an opponent unconscious inflicts stun damage and an attack that aims at killing said opponent inflicts physical damage, and that's about it. But the astral plane can be just as lethal as the physical plane.

I see no reason why an Astrally projecting magician cannot cast a spell in the astral at a living target that has an aura in the Astral Plane.

Seeing an aura in the astral plane doesn't mean the source of the aura is actually in the astral plane. That's only the case for astrally projecting, astrally perceiving, dual natured or purely astral entities.

KabalahRaith

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 7
« Reply #10 on: <08-03-21/1815:18> »
I see your points on an astral aura not being a targetable astral entity like that of a dual-aspected creature or an astrally perceiving or projecting magician or adept, and concede.