Shadowrun

Shadowrun Missions Living Campaign => Living Campaign Discussion => Topic started by: Tarislar on <06-15-14/0125:11>

Title: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <06-15-14/0125:11>
Hey all, 
I seem to recall that the Windy city was coated in that anti-magic bacteria stuff a while back.
I was wondering for those that are running in Season 5 &/or those that have the sourcebooks.
How bad off is Chicago today for an "Awakened" character ?
Fully Mage v/s Physical Adept ?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <06-15-14/0256:17>
This is from the general rules in the current Missions adventures:

Quote
Between the Cermak Blast, the bugs, the debilitating effects of FAB III, and years of death and metahuman misery, astral space in and around the Zone is horrible. Unless otherwise noted in the scene, assume a default background count of 2 anytime characters are within the Containment Zone. The count fluctuates wildly at times, so players should expect to encounter everything from high background counts and mana voids to various aspected backgrounds and mana warps. (See Background Count sidebar for full rules. Future Shadowrun, Fifth Edition rulebooks may supersede these rules). Areas of Chicago outside the CZ may also suffer background count bleed from the Zone.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <06-15-14/1330:28>
Thanks

So I just realized that there are no rules for Background Count in the 5E core book.   (That I can find)

How are you handling it ?   Using 4E rules ?  Or is there something I'm missing.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <06-15-14/1358:44>
Simple answer - the background count is a die pool penalty to any actions that use or are modified by magic.  Initiative is a special case, reducing the total result by the background count instead of reducing dice.

Basically, expect to be at a penalty for at least part of most Season 5 modules.  My physical adept went ahead and took Adept Centering when he initiated to help mitigate the penalty.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <06-15-14/1410:52>
Okay, that's messed up.

So if you have "Improved Agility-1" then 17 different skills now run at a -1 Instead of the +1 that you paid for ?

Time to make a Samurai.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <06-15-14/1447:22>
I'm pretty sure Bull did that just to fuck with Critias and me.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <06-15-14/1522:11>
Between the Rigger Repair Rules & Back Ground count......... I see a lot of Samurai, backed up by a Decker & maybe a Mystic Adept that dumps points into Astral Perception, Reflexes, Senses, and a few other low die count options as being the core of a "lease affected runners" group.
But maybe that's just my first impression.

Anyway, thanks for the info.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: cantrip on <06-16-14/0101:12>
Okay, that's messed up.

So if you have "Improved Agility-1" then 17 different skills now run at a -1 Instead of the +1 that you paid for ?

Time to make a Samurai.
Maybe increase a threshold by one - or decrease your accuracy by one instead of loosing a die? Course that would jack the 'improved accuracy' power...
Since magic is focused inward for adepts, they may be affected less in corrupted areas than a mage, shaman or MA. How about increasing drain for boosted and activated powers? Foci would loose a die because you are actively channeling power through an item (or tattoo). Other effects and fluff, IMHO, would be determined by GM - headaches, some modifiers to Improved Senses (occasionally), a feeling of corruption or being tainted, modifiers to the astral perception power etc.

I'm pretty sure Bull did that just to fuck with Critias and me.

Then there is this method - which as a budding Eviiiill GM, certainly has some appeal to me!  8)
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: tequila on <06-16-14/0956:27>
Okay, that's messed up.

So if you have "Improved Agility-1" then 17 different skills now run at a -1 Instead of the +1 that you paid for ?

Time to make a Samurai.

Beats 4A  version of background count:  it was a penalty to foci's and your magic rating.  I'll take a die pool penalty any day over that.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Belker on <06-16-14/1213:58>
Street sams, deckers and technos have to deal with a -2 dice noise rating as well. There's ways to deal with that, however.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: ZeConster on <06-16-14/1235:55>
Okay, that's messed up.

So if you have "Improved Agility-1" then 17 different skills now run at a -1 Instead of the +1 that you paid for ?

Time to make a Samurai.
IIRC, Bull said Adept Powers can be turned off and on at will.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <06-16-14/1903:51>
Yeah, hopefully we can clear that up some for future products.  But for now, for Missions purposes, adept powers can be "Switched off" if necessary.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <06-16-14/1944:28>
I'm pretty sure Bull did that just to fuck with Critias and me.

Then there is this method - which as a budding Eviiiill GM, certainly has some appeal to me!  8)
Bull is definitely that.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <06-16-14/2344:47>
Then there is this method - which as a budding Eviiiill GM, certainly has some appeal to me!  8)
Bull is definitely that.

I learned from the best.  Before he was Gamemaster to the Stars, he was dubbed the "EvilGM" back in the old RN list days of the mid 90's for the horrors he put Bull the Ork Decker through. :)

*Moment of silence for his fallen brother*

Dammit.  I miss that evil bastard. :(
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <07-01-14/1157:58>
This won't apply until Street Grimoire becomes legal, but I have a question regarding the Containment Zone background count:
Quote
Between the Cermak Blast, the bugs, the debilitating effects of FAB III, and years of death and metahuman misery, astral space in and around the Zone is horrible. Unless otherwise noted in the scene, assume a default background count of 2 anytime characters are within the Containment Zone.
Is the Containment Zone considered to be aspected towards "violence and war", which would allow the Domain of the Warrior metamagic (from the Warrior's Way) to apply to the Background Count? 

Also, would the worship of insect and toxic spirits in the area make it aspected with "religious or spiritual significance", which would allow the Domain of the Spiritual metamagic (from The Spiritual Way) to apply?

Once Street Grimoire becomes legal, those questions are going to need answers.  Personally, if I had to make a call as a gamemaster, I'd consider the Containment Zone aspected towards violence and war, but not to religion or spiritual elements.  However, I freely admit my Chicago knowledge is more from the Cliff Notes version of what happened than having played through all the game events of the past 20+ years.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <07-01-14/1659:43>
Most of the containment zone has no specific aspect.  It's more of a warp than anything else.  It's been twisted by far too many elements for any one specific domain.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <07-02-14/0904:14>
Most of the containment zone has no specific aspect.  It's more of a warp than anything else.  It's been twisted by far too many elements for any one specific domain.
I have to say, I'm disappointed by this.  It really leaves adepts in the cold when it comes to the penalties of background count, while magicians can use Clensing (pg 155 Street Grimoire) to reduce or even negate the penalty.  13+ dice (Counterspelling 6, Magic 6, Initiation 1+) against 2-4 dice of background count means the magician will on average reduce the count by 2 points even if the background count affects the cleansing test...and it can be done more than once.

Clensing is also a LOT cheaper.  To get Domain of the Spiritual or Domain of the Warrior, you first have to get a 20-point Quality (which will cost you 40 points after character creation) followed by 13 Karma for initiation...all to reduce the penalty by 2.  Yes, the adept has the option of spending an initiation on Adept Centering...but by the rules that only helps with Physical and Combat skills.  That won't help initiative, or an adept that wants to do more than jump walls and beat on the bad guy (Social adepts, for example).

Any chance the nature of the multiple elements in the background count could be reflected by allowing a partial reduction from Domain of the Spiritual or Domain of the Warrior?

On a separate note, it seems like the book has a different take than Missions on how large a "neighborhood" is.  You gave an earlier answer (http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=11547.msg224011#msg224011) about the home ground quality, saying that a neighborhood is just a few blocks in size.  The example given on pg 32 of Street Grimoire infers that "the Barrens" would count as a neighborhood, and that's pretty huge (more than a square mile).  Given that it's a 10 point quality that is effectively useless under the current interpretation (at least in a Missions game), would you be adverse to revisiting that ruling?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: martinchaen on <07-02-14/1047:04>
Hey Bull, now that Street Magic Grimoire (wow, that's going to take some getting used to...) has been released and will (eventually) see a street day, should we expect to see the Mission specific rules for background count replaced with the Street Grimoire rules (at some point)?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <07-02-14/1605:49>
(which will cost you 40 points after character creation)
Where does it say that ?
I got the impression a Way is 20 Points whenever you buy it,  I never saw a 1/2 or Double quote anywhere.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Namikaze on <07-02-14/1645:31>
Yeah, it's 20 karma to buy the Way quality.  During or after character creation.  Then it's a metamagic, so 13 karma on average.  So 33 karma in total.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <07-02-14/1825:57>
Hey Bull, now that Street Magic Grimoire (wow, that's going to take some getting used to...) has been released and will (eventually) see a street day, should we expect to see the Mission specific rules for background count replaced with the Street Grimoire rules (at some point)?

They're largely the same, just expanded.  But yes.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: ZeConster on <07-02-14/1913:38>
Most of the containment zone has no specific aspect.  It's more of a warp than anything else.  It's been twisted by far too many elements for any one specific domain.
I have to say, I'm disappointed by this.  It really leaves adepts in the cold when it comes to the penalties of background count, while magicians can use Clensing (pg 155 Street Grimoire) to reduce or even negate the penalty.  13+ dice (Counterspelling 6, Magic 6, Initiation 1+) against 2-4 dice of background count means the magician will on average reduce the count by 2 points even if the background count affects the cleansing test...and it can be done more than once.
Adept Centering can be used to counter the dice pool penalty, though.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <07-02-14/1932:13>
Adept Centering can be used to counter the dice pool penalty, though.
Addressed in the paragraph after the one you quoted.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <07-02-14/1936:26>
Yeah, it's 20 karma to buy the Way quality.  During or after character creation.  Then it's a metamagic, so 13 karma on average.  So 33 karma in total.
Is there a specific page for that exception in Street Grimoire?  Because qualities bought after character creation are Karma x2, according to the main book (pg 107, New Positive quality).
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Namikaze on <07-03-14/0048:47>
Is there a specific page for that exception in Street Grimoire?  Because qualities bought after character creation are Karma x2, according to the main book (pg 107, New Positive quality).

Nope - I stand corrected.  After character creation, it is 40 karma to buy a Way, and then 13+ karma to buy a metamagic.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Dr. Meatgrinder on <07-03-14/0847:10>
Quote from: p.176, Street Grimoire
Players can amend previously created characters and retroactively purchase a Way. [emphasis in original text] This is per the gamemasterís discretion. See p. 103, SR5, for more information about purchasing and paying off qualities.

It's possible there was intent to allow characters to purchase a Way at the same karma cost whether in chargen or in play with this statement, but this statement is explicitly at GM discretion.  As it is, this statement probably won't hold in Missions, but it's also possible that it could hold using the current respec rules in the FAQ.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Dinendae on <07-06-14/0549:36>

It's possible there was intent to allow characters to purchase a Way at the same karma cost whether in chargen or in play with this statement, but this statement is explicitly at GM discretion.  As it is, this statement probably won't hold in Missions, but it's also possible that it could hold using the current respec rules in the FAQ.

Actually, that may not be correct: Bull can make it legal to do, just as Exceptional Attribute (which required GM approval) was approved for Missions.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Linkdeath on <07-24-14/1441:17>
Hmm, just giving background count a scan in the Street Grimoire and it seems to me that a default background count of 2 is probably too low. Going by the boxout on page 31, I'd say the default background count in the zone should probably be between 4-6.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <07-24-14/2131:26>
There are a lot of spots where it hits 4-6, or higher.  But keep in mind that it's been 15 years since Fab scoured the place and the bugs were active.  While it's not a nice place to be, it's settled down.

Generally speaking unless it's for cinematic or storytelling purposes, we don't usually enforce high background counts, even when there should be one.  Lets face it, almost every sprawl should have a BGC of 1 to 2, and the Barrens should probably have a 3-4, but we never wrote those into things before (Nor are we likely to continue to do so).

Plus, we really don't want to completely cripple the magic users.  We want to show that yes, Chicago is fragged up for magic and it largely sucks to be magically active there, but we still want them to be viable characters.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Marcus on <07-28-14/0306:04>
A two die penalty isn't the end of the world, there lots two die penalties in the system. A four die penalty is dangerous, and certainly pushes the bar of being crippling. Just look at the conditions monitor. However as I read it, it is totally possibly to walk around a corner and get hit by 12 unsoakable stun if your character is magic, employing foci, or generally doing what the system intends for you to do with magic. That is too much risk, even a shot at that, mean there is a chance a player could simply be done for session from something she/he couldn't really do anything about. I have serious doubts concerning the viability of magic under this missions set. If such things are  included as advertised.

If the goal is to have tech take a stronger role I'm sure it will come to pass. But why do that?

Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Southpaw on <07-28-14/1101:35>
I always thought mages tended towards being freakishly powerful. I think a -2 penalty is a nice, dirty way to cut them down to size. It does really suck for adepts, though.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <07-28-14/2141:14>
Having really high end BGC's, especially Mana Warps and Voids (12+ BGC) are very, very are, and players will have warning when they go into those areas.  A magical character will not be just wandering along and *bam* get hit with a 12+ void out of nowhere.  So they'll be able to avoid the problem areas and/or prepare themselves ahead of time. 
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <11-17-14/2304:29>
Now that the Grimoire has given us specifics.

I'm curious & asking again, for the Awakened players,  How is running in Missions-5 going?

Is it a serious problem?  How often are you tossed into even nastier areas?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: SichoPhiend on <11-18-14/1115:05>
My experiences thus far in Chicago are probably not as nasty as they could have been.  My cybermage has enough diversity that when the background count starts to go above 2 (which happens more often than I'd like) I'm not feeling like I'm being kept from doing what it is that I do.  However, I have sat at tables that the dedicated mages begin to feel completely useless because of the background count (this has happened to hackers as well through noise).

Of the pure mages that seem to have the easiest time with the higher BC areas, they seem to fall within two types, those that are capable of filling a secondary role or those that throw so much karma at raising their magical ability that the BC isn't that much of a hindrance.

I can't say which is better, they both have their merits.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Raven2049 on <11-18-14/2201:13>
I have noticed on my Adept, that my abilities that i rely on that are based off of Qi Foci tend to go by by when the background count gets above 1-2. which i believe is most everywhere in the CZ if memory serves (minor places might not but main areas yes) mainly i remember that i can no longer use my Force 4 Qi Focus for Astral Perception. which really sucks when your trying to do astral combat....
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Michael Chandra on <11-19-14/0540:32>
I have noticed on my Adept, that my abilities that i rely on that are based off of Qi Foci tend to go by by when the background count gets above 1-2. which i believe is most everywhere in the CZ if memory serves (minor places might not but main areas yes) mainly i remember that i can no longer use my Force 4 Qi Focus for Astral Perception. which really sucks when your trying to do astral combat....
That impression seems incorrect for Missions. I played the raw versions of 5-02 and 5-03, and do not recall them throwing the Background Count to 4. Only 1 Mission had this, namely Humanitarian Aid at the worst point, which is not Chicago.

I checked the finalized versions. The base Background Count and Noise in the CCZ is 2 and 2. In the first three Chicago runs there is a 3 Noise once, a 1 Background Count once, and that's the only exceptions.

In the raw versions of the next three, which aren't out in finished format yet, there is only 1 exceptionally high background count and one I suspect will be toned down given the finalized Background Count rules.

Honestly, I'm surprised that the background count for people goes past 2 in Chicago, because there is only 1 Chicago Mission out of six with that, only one out of eight 2010 CMPs, and none out of eight 2013 CMPs. Granted, I haven't seen the second batch of Chicago Missions yet* but even then I would not assume it's a really frequent occasion.

*: I am going through filler CMP Missions in the hope 4~6 release before I run out of filler Missions, since I want to run them with finalized versions.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Raven2049 on <11-19-14/0658:49>
well according to my, and my groups GM, since astral perception is a 1 PP adept power, and you need PPx4 force Qi foci for an adept power, and according to new missions rules that the background count subtracts from active foci force, our ruling was that since its not fully "powered" it cannot activate. since there's no such thing as partially astral perceiving.

or are you suggesting that even tho the foci is effectively a 3 in a background count of 1, or a 2/1 in a background count of 2/3 it can still activate as long as it has 1 force?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Michael Chandra on <11-19-14/0709:17>
I find that decision extremely controversial since you effectively completely devaluate a new system. I haven't seen any proper support for it in the rules myself and don't think such a judgement call should ever be made without official confirmation. So until Bull gives an answer, which he cannot because nobody asked him the question*, I personally do not believe any GM has the right to make that call.

As for my own judgement call: "Each focus is specific to a single adept power at a specific level." This can be read in two ways. One: The creation Force has to be sufficient. Two: The current Force has to be sufficient. I don't think the SR5 Core description kept Background Count in mind, and since Qi Foci are not stated as special exception in Street Grimoire there is no reason to treat them other than other Foci. In other words, if it's not shut down it still works. If they intended to reduce the Powers of Qi Foci they should have said so explicitly in SG.

* Edit: Which I now did.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Foxworthy on <12-31-14/2116:36>
I have a question along these lines. I don't own Street Grimoire so I'm trying to piece some of the background count rules together from forum post and the FAQ.

It seems that Foci don't work if brought into an area with a background count, where as before street grimoire background count didn't effect foci. So that means that with the assumed background count of 2 that foci of force 2 or below are no longer usable? So they're now just wasted money and karma? Is that how the rules work?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <12-31-14/2334:58>
Yes.

That's how Background Count has always affected foci.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Foxworthy on <01-01-15/0103:21>
Yes.

That's how Background Count has always affected foci.

I just went back and checked the previous FAQ (1.0 & 1.1.1), and Hot Patch errata (1.0) and saw no mention of Foci being effected by background count, just the dice pool penalties.

The reason why I bring this up, is because I have a character that uses a couple low level foci for sustaining spells and as a power focus at force 2. If the background count always worked that way and I missed the rule then I pretty much wasted a large amount of karma and nuyen making the character. Which will probably have me start over again with a new character.

If the effect on Foci was added when Street Grimoire was legalized then I may be able to use the minor rules change caveat in the FAQ to get back the karma and nuyen so that I can buy Foci that are actually useable in the game. Though I may not be able to because they aren't technically unusable because places that have a lower than 2 background count may exist, even if Missions assumes that background count of 2 is standard.

I have some time before I play again as my local GM is waiting on London Falling to become missions legal and get debriefing sheets before he starts up again.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <01-01-15/0137:30>
I meant previous editions.

But anyway, that's what SG says background count does to foci. So, yeah, you want to get that money and karma back.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Lucean on <01-05-15/0128:46>
Would you also require the GM to hand you money and karma back, when you're required to go to an area where you can only use pistol-sized weapons and not the Ares Alpha, you're so fond of?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <01-05-15/0142:39>
Poor analogy.

The early Season 5 Missions material specifically allows for this in anticipation of Street Grimoire superseding the ad hoc Missions rules regarding background count, and post-SG Missions modules cite Street Grimoire rules.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Foxworthy on <01-05-15/1454:44>
Would you also require the GM to hand you money and karma back, when you're required to go to an area where you can only use pistol-sized weapons and not the Ares Alpha, you're so fond of?

Except it's worse then that. A Force 2 Sustaining Foci which was usable before Street Grimoire is unusable in Chicago now since we have a assumed background count of 2. It's now become an item that completely unusable. And unlike firearms, it does cost karma just to use. Not owning the new book that has changed the rules, I don't even know if I could still use my Force 2 Power Focus in my own magical lodge, but I know it won't work default in Chicago. Between those two items I believe it was 16 karma and 44,000 nuyen. Not really small numbers. I've gained like 32 karma playing 5 missions, and about 60,000 nuyen over five missions or so. Losing those foci would be pretty much like throwing 10 hours of game play down the drain. That's after I had to switch to a mage after the first guy dropped out of missions in my area, so I had to retire a character with 5 missions on him.

So, if I'm not allowed to do that, I understand, but it seems like it should fall under the minor rules change provision. But I really don't see this issue as equivalent to someone not being able to use a rifle in certain area.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Kiirnodel on <01-05-15/1526:26>
To clarify, if I'm remembering correctly, the standard background count of 2 is in the CZ, not all of Chicago. Don't quote me, I haven't double-checked the missions FAQ.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Crimsondude on <01-05-15/1741:32>
To clarify, if I'm remembering correctly, the standard background count of 2 is in the CZ, not all of Chicago. Don't quote me, I haven't double-checked the missions FAQ.
You are correct.

But because it's the CZ ó an area completely FUBAR in the physical realm, astral space, and the Matrix/Resonance ó it ranges from higher background counts to huge mana ebbs and even foveae, and lower background counts do "bleed" into the rest of Chicago (the CZ is only the central third of the city itself. Chicago, for those who've never been, is fucking HUGE, and I say that having just returned from L.A.).

The point is, the general background count is 2 in the CZ, and while not all Season 5 Missions to date are set entirely in the CZ, it's like the Redmond or Puyallup Barrens Ė you're going in sooner or later, and that Force 2 focus is dead weight. And while the default is 2, the rest of the section on background count (and signal noise) is intended to give your GM carte blanche to fuck you over with any manner of astral effects that would all make a Force 2 focus less than useless.

Inside the lodge, it should be fine. In part because, I assume, the lodge isn't in the CZ. Even if it is, I would posit that depending on your mage's lifestyle that he was smart enough to put it/live where the background count isn't 2 because it would also drive him fucking mad over time (Not a rule, but fluff-wise living around a permanent background count does tend to alter magicians over time unless/until they become attuned to it, i.e. become toxic or twisted or worse).
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-06-15/1546:02>
So I was reading up on Counterspelling recently v/s AE's & as I was going over the rules I got to thinking about Chicago again.

1.  Does Background count affect the Spell Defense Pool, or just Counterspelling (Dispelling) tests.
I want to clarify because it says "Tests" in the rules so I'm wondering if your pool is also penalized in a double penalty kind of thing.

2.  Speaking of Double Penalties.  If you have a test affected by magic in multiple ways, its still just one background penalty right?  Or is it per "way" that magic is affecting it.  For Example.  PsyAd with Agi Boost & Imp Ability (Blades) using a Katana Weapon Focus-3 modified by Imp Crit (Blades) and Inc Attr-STR-2  Attacking a Bug Spirit in the CZ (Background Count-2)

So, would the "Blades" Test be affected by a -2 (Ability), -4 (Ability/Boost), or -6 (Ability/Boost/Focus) or some other combo? 
And would damage still be STR+2+3 since DV isn't a "Test" or would it also be reduced since IncAttr is modifying it?

3.  Speaking of Background Count.  I read that "active" Lodges are effectively aspected towards the creators tradition but can't find a level.
Is it just a low level 1?  Or is it the level of the lodge?  Or something else like based on how long its been set up?

Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Raven2049 on <04-06-15/1649:28>
So I was reading up on Counterspelling recently v/s AE's & as I was going over the rules I got to thinking about Chicago again.

1.  Does Background count affect the Spell Defense Pool, or just Counterspelling (Dispelling) tests.
I want to clarify because it says "Tests" in the rules so I'm wondering if your pool is also penalized in a double penalty kind of thing.

2.  Speaking of Double Penalties.  If you have a test affected by magic in multiple ways, its still just one background penalty right?  Or is it per "way" that magic is affecting it.  For Example.  PsyAd with Agi Boost & Imp Ability (Blades) using a Katana Weapon Focus-3 modified by Imp Crit (Blades) and Inc Attr-STR-2  Attacking a Bug Spirit in the CZ (Background Count-2)

So, would the "Blades" Test be affected by a -2 (Ability), -4 (Ability/Boost), or -6 (Ability/Boost/Focus) or some other combo? 
And would damage still be STR+2+3 since DV isn't a "Test" or would it also be reduced since IncAttr is modifying it?

3.  Speaking of Background Count.  I read that "active" Lodges are effectively aspected towards the creators tradition but can't find a level.
Is it just a low level 1?  Or is it the level of the lodge?  Or something else like based on how long its been set up?

1: My guess would be that it would affect only tests tied to your magic attribute, so Banishment: Yes, Dispelling: Yes, Adding counterspelling dice to your teammates resistance test: no

2: that would suck on my Adept. im hoping thats a big no

3: logically it would be rating, but in my opinion it would be only while the character is within the lodge. and personally i wouldn't allow it to be used in a "temporary lodge" mainly because it is "temporary" not a place where multiple castings and the flow of the same type of energy would be happening over and over

none of this is backed up with facts, so i reserve the right to change my opinion ;)
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-07-15/1452:01>
So I have re-read the Missions FAQ & I'm guessing that it would not affect the Defense Pool since it already penalizes the test once for being Spellcasting.

Can anyone confirm the Aspected power level part for being in a Lodge?  I know it mentions mages having home court advantage.  I'm just trying to figure out if its related to the Lodge Rating or if its a Generic 1-3 based on Background descriptions & how you decide that #.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Lucean on <04-14-15/0702:18>
1. Spell Defense is not affected.
2. The attack suffers a dicepool modifier of -2. It's not relevant how much magic is adding to the attack. The damage of the attack is unaffected by background count.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-14-15/1531:37>
Thanks, 
The more I read in the books, on this forum, & google search for other forums it does look like that is the case.

So. 
1.  Defense Pool Unaffected.
2.  Only 1 time penalty
3.  Lodge Rating is the background, same as mana barrier.

Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <04-14-15/1903:32>
Correct.

Though do keep in mind that Foci do not get a dice penalty, but are instead reduced in Force by the background count.  So this can hit you with a double whammy, potentially, espeically if you're an adept relying on Qi Tattoo's too heavily.

Bull
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: halflingmage on <04-16-15/2337:28>
I have not played in any of the season 5 mission, but in general I do think it was a poor design choice to make background counts so ubiquitous in the Chicago area.  It know it fits the story, but it amounts to nothing but a general nerf to awakened characters.  Background counts and aspects are something that should come out once in a while, to emphasis you are in some serious drek, like a bug spirit nest of a toxic zone.  But if the whole campaign is like that then its basically just a way to not make magic work as well as RAW.  How would the deckers feel if they spend the entire campaign in a heavy static zone, or the street fighters were told no APDS ammo and all the damage values are decreased by one.  It should be a trick you pull out once in a while, not something you constantly have to deal with.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Lucean on <04-17-15/0616:08>
According to the rules the CCZ should also qualify pretty easily for penalties due to noise because of static zones.

If you don't like the setting you can stay away from it, since you know what you can expect. Knowing upfront that you will face difficulties is certainly better than being told afterwards. And additionally there still is Cleansing, which has been toned down but still works in reducing the effects of background count for the awakened using it. With the ability to carry 7 Karma over from character creation it's not that far off, if you think that you need it badly.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Herr Brackhaus on <04-17-15/0812:50>
halflingmage
You do realize that there's a permanent Rating 2 Static Zone in the CZ, right?

Also, the CZ is not the whole of Chicago. Just figured I'd point that out, as it's only if and when you go into the CZ that the background count takes effect.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <04-17-15/0928:06>
halflingmage
You do realize that there's a permanent Rating 2 Static Zone in the CZ, right?

Also, the CZ is not the whole of Chicago. Just figured I'd point that out, as it's only if and when you go into the CZ that the background count takes effect.
Static Zones are much easier to deal with, though. Most characters will barely notice a R2 (it's not enough to stop wireless boni for street sams and the like), and deckers and riggers have cheap and easy ways to get rid of static. It's worse for Technomancers.

Meanwhile it hits everything magicians do, and often hits them double. Cleansing has a very high cost in actions (in combat anyway). Adepts do have decent ways to mitigate it though, via Adept Centering and Heightend Concentration (although at a higher relative cost than negating noise).
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-17-15/1355:44>
IIRC the CZ is described as the middle 3rd of Chicago City proper?

So you have the suburbs as the "Outer Ring", then you have the "Middle Ring" of actual Chicago City, then you have the CZ as the "Inner Ring" in the middle of the city.   Not that I'm saying its litterally in rings, I'm just picturing it that way.

I guess to put it in Seattle Sprawl terms,  I'm picturing it as the CZ covers 1/3 of Seattle Downtown District, with the other 2/3 clear & all the other Districts are also clear.  (Well, they might have their own "bad" area, but they are not part of the CZ Count of 2.



Anyway, a Couple more clarifications on Background count:

1.  Background Penalties are Dice Pools?
2.  Aligned Bonuses are Limits?
So they don't work the same, or exact opposite, of each other.


3.  The Example on Page 32 of St. Grimoire gives the Wiccan a bonus to limit for her Summoning.
So in turn should the Spirit receive the dice pool penalty to resist the summoning as well?
Or no because its not actually in the ring yet when its being summoned. 
But in turn if she attempted to bind it then it would have that -3 penalty to it.


4.  I was recently reading a thread where Bull talked about Spirits using Edge to resist Summoning. 
Is there some fixed rule on when that should apply?  All spirits do this?  Only if you have a bad spirit rep?
This seems really potent for spirits to cause massive drain damage.  But if combined with #3 above would mitigate it some.


5.  Finally, it says Dual Natured/Astral creatures take BGC count penalties to all actions.  V/S it says to all Skill Checks for Characters.
I'm wondering if this means DN/Astral take penalties to stuff like Damage Resitance, Initiative, Drain, & Defense, the stuff Characters are NOT taking penalties for.  Or if its supposed to be the same as Characters.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <04-17-15/1418:42>
Anyway, a Couple more clarifications on Background count:

1.  Background Penalties are Dice Pools?
2.  Aligned Bonuses are Limits?
So they don't work the same, or exact opposite, of each other.


3.  The Example on Page 32 of St. Grimoire gives the Wiccan a bonus to limit for her Summoning.
So in turn should the Spirit receive the dice pool penalty to resist the summoning as well?
Or no because its not actually in the ring yet when its being summoned. 
But in turn if she attempted to bind it then it would have that -3 penalty to it.


4.  I was recently reading a thread where Bull talked about Spirits using Edge to resist Summoning. 
Is there some fixed rule on when that should apply?  All spirits do this?  Only if you have a bad spirit rep?
This seems really potent for spirits to cause massive drain damage.  But if combined with #3 above would mitigate it some.


5.  Finally, it says Dual Natured/Astral creatures take BGC count penalties to all actions.  V/S it says to all Skill Checks for Characters.
I'm wondering if this means DN/Astral take penalties to stuff like Damage Resitance, Initiative, Drain, & Defense, the stuff Characters are NOT taking penalties for.  Or if its supposed to be the same as Characters.
Not entirely an expert, but
1) Yes (except for initiative which is a flat penalty)
2) Yes
So yes, they're opposite.

3) The spirit would receive a bonus to his limit, not the penalty - the spirit would be aligned as well. Though, as you say, it's not actually in it yet, so maybe not? Either way, it wouldn't matter, as the spirit's roll doesn't have a limit. Same for binding.

4) There is no fixed rule on it. Spirit rep and oversummoning are common situation where people apply it, but it would be up to the GM (although using it on every roll would be very bad form for the GM).

5)  Your descriptions are off, and in a way the wrong way around.
Characters take a penalty equal to all tests boosted by magic, not just skill tests. That includes DR, Initiative, Drain, defense, whatnot (but only if the thing in question is boosted by magic).
DN/Astral character characters, however, "only" take a penalty to all actions. DR, initiative, drain and defense are not actions, so they take no penalty.
So it's different, but the other way around.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Hibiki54 on <04-17-15/1420:55>
Replies in BOLD

Anyway, a Couple more clarifications on Background count:

1.  Background Penalties are Dice Pools? Background Counts effect all magic that involves a Force, foci and dice pools. If you casts spells you will suffer a dice pool penalty of the BC. If you are sustaining a spell or have a foci and enter an area of BC the Force of the Spell or Foci will be temporary suppressed by the BC. BC does not effect Adept Powers unless those powers effect are related to a dice pool such as Improved Ability, Attribute Boost, etc. BC does not effect Improved Reflexes in terms of initiative. It will effect the power in relation to defense tests and reaction tests.

2.  Aligned Bonuses are Limits?
So they don't work the same, or exact opposite, of each other.
Yes.


3.  The Example on Page 32 of St. Grimoire gives the Wiccan a bonus to limit for her Summoning.
So in turn should the Spirit receive the dice pool penalty to resist the summoning as well?
Or no because its not actually in the ring yet when its being summoned. 
But in turn if she attempted to bind it then it would have that -3 penalty to it.
The Spirit would NOT receive a dice pool penalty to resist because it does not exist in the Astral until after you have summoned it. However, it will suffer the BC penalty when binding.


4.  I was recently reading a thread where Bull talked about Spirits using Edge to resist Summoning. 
Is there some fixed rule on when that should apply?  All spirits do this?  Only if you have a bad spirit rep?
This seems really potent for spirits to cause massive drain damage.  But if combined with #3 above would mitigate it some.
This is mostly a home game thing and you will not see it in Missions unless you play with the same GM regularly in which he understands your character and its rep. But yes, a spirit can use Edge to resist summoning and binding.


5.  Finally, it says Dual Natured/Astral creatures take BGC count penalties to all actions.  V/S it says to all Skill Checks for Characters.
I'm wondering if this means DN/Astral take penalties to stuff like Damage Resitance, Initiative, Drain, & Defense, the stuff Characters are NOT taking penalties for.  Or if its supposed to be the same as Characters.
BC does not effect soak test unless you have the Mystic Armor power or have the Armor spell sustained, which will already be calculated when the spell is reduced in Force. No double penalty. It will not effect Drain unless you are using a Centering Foci.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <04-17-15/1444:36>
Replies in BOLD
BC does not effect soak test unless you have the Mystic Armor power or have the Armor spell sustained, which will already be calculated when the spell is reduced in Force. No double penalty. It will not effect Drain unless you are using a Centering Foci.
I'm not sure you're right there. The spell is reduced, yes, but you still have a dice pool, used for a test, that's boosted by magic. Why wouldn't it double dip? Well, because that would be cruel for the mage, I guess. Still, the rules would indicate it would.
The drain pool wouldn't be affected unless it's boosted by magic (it's not penalized just because it's a drain pool). But Centering itself is a magical bonus - that would trigger the penalty too. As would other magical bonuses to the test (Improved Willpower or such).
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Hibiki54 on <04-17-15/1606:20>
What you are suggesting makes no sense. Lets say I had 18 Armor and 24 with the Armor Spell Force 8. If I stand in a BC-2, the force would drop the spell Force to 6 which is already dropping the dice pool by 2.

In your suggestion, you are saying that a BC of 2 will drop a spell dice pool by 4, even though the dice pool for your total armor was already reduced to 22 from 24.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-17-15/1639:58>
3) The spirit would receive a bonus to his limit, not the penalty - the spirit would be aligned as well. Though, as you say, it's not actually in it yet, so maybe not? Either way, it wouldn't matter, as the spirit's roll doesn't have a limit. Same for binding.

Are you sure about the spirit being aligned? 
The Caster is aligned in the example but doesn't say anything about the spirit.
Spirits can be summoned by different traditions so I'm not sure its going to "auto-align" itself every time instantly. 
Though I'd think that a long term bound spirit might acclimate itself if its around long enough.

Also, so your saying Spirits are not limited in their roll by their own Force?
So if you are binding a Force 4 spirit, and its rolling 8 dice, its allowed to score 5 hits? 
I don't think we've been playing it that way.
Admittedly I'm not sure we've come across an Over 50% roll either which is what it would take.



Quote
5)  Your descriptions are off, and in a way the wrong way around.
Characters take a penalty equal to all tests boosted by magic, not just skill tests. That includes DR, Initiative, Drain, defense, whatnot (but only if the thing in question is boosted by magic).
DN/Astral character characters, however, "only" take a penalty to all actions. DR, initiative, drain and defense are not actions, so they take no penalty.
So it's different, but the other way around.
Really?   I heard PCs did in 4E but the 5E rules says its only for Skill Checks & not for Drain, Defense, Initiative, etc etc.
So I was wondering if that applied to DN/Astral beings as well.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-17-15/1643:14>
BC does not effect soak test unless you have the Mystic Armor power or have the Armor spell sustained, which will already be calculated when the spell is reduced in Force. No double penalty. It will not effect Drain unless you are using a Centering Foci.
I know that is how it is for PCs.
I was just making sure its the same or not for DN/Astral beings.  Because for them it just says "any action" which made me wonder if that meant more than it does for Characters.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-17-15/1654:48>
I'm not sure you're right there. The spell is reduced, yes, but you still have a dice pool, used for a test, that's boosted by magic. Why wouldn't it double dip? Well, because that would be cruel for the mage, I guess. Still, the rules would indicate it would.
The drain pool wouldn't be affected unless it's boosted by magic (it's not penalized just because it's a drain pool). But Centering itself is a magical bonus - that would trigger the penalty too. As would other magical bonuses to the test (Improved Willpower or such). 

I think this is a combo of 2 issues.
Sustained Spell Enters Background Count  v/s  Newly Cast spell while in Background Count.
Sustained = -BC Force.   Newly cast = -BC Dice Pool

So, a Force-6 Spell w/ 4 hits entering BGC 2 would not change its "Hits" at all.
While a Force-3 spell w/ 3 Hits doing the same would be reduced to 1 hit & force 1.

Meanwhile a newly cast spell in the BGC-2 would be at any force you wanted, but would have a dice pool penalty when casting.

At least that is how I'm reading it so far.

But to clarify, a newly cast spell in BGC doesn't "auto-reduce" its Force does it?  And if it does can you reference that?


Also, a follow up question.
There is a line about Foci not being able to be activated at all while in BGC.
Does this mean a Force-6 foci can not be "turned on" if its in BGC-1?   
Because that seems really powerful.
Especially since you get things like temporary background counts,  so basically you can't activate a foci while at a rally or concert?  Let alone a riot.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <04-17-15/1809:28>
Guys, be sure to check the Missions FAQ (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12034805/Shadowrun%20Missions%20Chicago%20FAQ%20Update%20v1.3.pdf) before diving in too far to these conversations.  At least a couple questions here have been answered in them:

Quote from: Missions FAQ
Can you clarify what tests Background Counts (p.30-33, Street Grimoire) affect?

Background Counts apply their modifiers to all Skill Tests that are being affected by magic in any way. This means casting spells, tests to activate adept powers, any test that is being augmented through a skill or attribute boost, etc.

The adept power Improved Reflexes increases your Reaction, and will affect any skill test based on reaction. However, Initiative is not a skill test, so you do not take any Background Count related penalties.

Drain is a damage resistance test, so likewise does not suffer Background Count penalties.

When discussing foci deactivating if the background count is higher than their Force, (p. 32, Street Grimoire) says that ďA foci cannot activate while under the influence of the background count.Ē Can you clarify if thatís referring to all foci in general, or just foci whose Force is equal to or less than the background count?

Just ones that are equal to or less than the background count. Considering how often runners are in a background count for Shadowrun Missions: Chicago, it would be cruel to not let foci ever activate.

Also, Lothan the Wise is working on something to help the magically active in Chicago.  Dunno when it'll be done, as new magical research is tricky and prone to causing explosions, but he has a theory...
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-17-15/1903:59>
Doh.  And to think I have read that at least twice.  Totally spaced it.
Thanks Bull
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <04-17-15/2205:43>
Quote from: Missions FAQ
Can you clarify what tests Background Counts (p.30-33, Street Grimoire) affect?

Background Counts apply their modifiers to all Skill Tests that are being affected by magic in any way. This means casting spells, tests to activate adept powers, any test that is being augmented through a skill or attribute boost, etc.

The adept power Improved Reflexes increases your Reaction, and will affect any skill test based on reaction. However, Initiative is not a skill test, so you do not take any Background Count related penalties.

Drain is a damage resistance test, so likewise does not suffer Background Count penalties.

When discussing foci deactivating if the background count is higher than their Force, (p. 32, Street Grimoire) says that ďA foci cannot activate while under the influence of the background count.Ē Can you clarify if thatís referring to all foci in general, or just foci whose Force is equal to or less than the background count?

Just ones that are equal to or less than the background count. Considering how often runners are in a background count for Shadowrun Missions: Chicago, it would be cruel to not let foci ever activate.
Welp, I should have looked for longer then 2 seconds in the FAQ (apparently ctrl-F lies when it said it wasn't mentioned).

I was looking at Street Grimoire, that says "any tests" are penalized, but the mission FAQ clarifies that to just skill tests, so at leasts for missions that's a lot less. And that means drain and armor rolls don't apply a penalty at all (except when a spell is reduced in force etc).

I know that is how it is for PCs.
I was just making sure its the same or not for DN/Astral beings.  Because for them it just says "any action" which made me wonder if that meant more than it does for Characters.
More, yes, but it's still only actions that get affected. Actions are things you do; so basically, skill tests. Dodging an attack is not an action, for example.

What you are suggesting makes no sense. Lets say I had 18 Armor and 24 with the Armor Spell Force 8. If I stand in a BC-2, the force would drop the spell Force to 6 which is already dropping the dice pool by 2.

In your suggestion, you are saying that a BC of 2 will drop a spell dice pool by 4, even though the dice pool for your total armor was already reduced to 22 from 24.
Well the clarification clarified that this doesn't apply to soak rolls (except the Force reduction), but this is still how it works for, say, Increased Ability.

If you have, say, Increased Agility (the spell) active on you at Force 4, and enter a BG count of 2, it gets reduced by 2, so your bonus gets reduced. But that means that you still have tests affected by magic (they get a +2 bonus), so all those skill rolls get reduced by 2. So in essence, they get reduced by 4 from what they were before the background count. So yes, it double dips - that's what people are complaining about.

Are you sure about the spirit being aligned? 
The Caster is aligned in the example but doesn't say anything about the spirit.
Spirits can be summoned by different traditions so I'm not sure its going to "auto-align" itself every time instantly. 
Though I'd think that a long term bound spirit might acclimate itself if its around long enough.

Also, so your saying Spirits are not limited in their roll by their own Force?
So if you are binding a Force 4 spirit, and its rolling 8 dice, its allowed to score 5 hits? 
I don't think we've been playing it that way.
Admittedly I'm not sure we've come across an Over 50% roll either which is what it would take.

Actually you're making me wonder about the alignment now. As I've understand it, when you summon a spirit, you summon a spirit of your tradition, not a generic "air spirit" - an air spirit of the Shamanistic tradition might have the same stats as an air spirit from a Hermetic tradition, but they're not actually the same thing. But then, the book isn't exactly clear on how that works. In fact, it's intentionally vague on that topic. It does say you're summoning a spirit "of your tradition", but does that mean it's aligned to your tradition or just that it's one of your 5 types?

Anyway, as to your other question (as spirits can still be aligned to a BG count in other ways): The test to resist being bound is:
Quote from: SR5 p 301
an Opposed Summoning + Magic [Force] v. spiritís Force x 2,
No limit is listed for the spirit (limits are the things in square brackets), so there is no limit. Nor should there be one - limits usually only apply to skill tests, and this is a straight Force x 2. So if the spirit rolls 5 dice, yay for him. (Also, this isn't an action either, so it wouldn't be penalized in a negative aspected background count either).

Besides, why would the limit be Force anyway? Spirits don't usually use their Force as a limit, they have the usual Physical/Mental/Social limits. I don't think Spirits ever use their own Force as a limit.

--Sidenote--

Sadistic sidenote: does background count apply to skill tests penalized by magic? The rules and FAQ say "All Skill tests that are affected by magic in any way". If I cast, say, Chaos on someone, giving him a -4 penalty on everything, does he then get another -2 from a background count, as his tests are now "affected by magic"? It seems to be against the spirit of the rules, but a literal reading would have it apply. Something for FAQ/Errata perhaps?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Novocrane on <04-17-15/2251:10>
I've always had the impression that the penalty presented by background counts was a binary situation. Are you rolling for a (skill - Missions) test linked to magic? Yes? Take the penalty. Currently affected by all the adept powers? Still the same penalty.

At the same time;
Quote
In your suggestion, you are saying that a BC of 2 will drop a spell dice pool by 4[...]
Ignoring the spell specifics so we can assume the test is appropriate to the rule, I can see three things background counts do that could apply. (four if you include alchemy, but eh)

1. A background count impose a negative dice pool penalty equal to its rating for all (skill) tests linked in any way to magic

2. Dual-natured creatures or purely astral creatures take a negative dice pool penalty to all actions equal to the background count

3. Pre-existing active foci, sustained spells, quickened/anchored spells and rituals are reduced by the background count

If you walk into BGC Rating X with a sustained spell, the force drops by X (3.), and you suffer an X penalty for (skill) tests affected by magic. (1.)
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-18-15/0028:58>
If you have, say, Increased Agility (the spell) active on you at Force 4, and enter a BG count of 2, it gets reduced by 2, so your bonus gets reduced. But that means that you still have tests affected by magic (they get a +2 bonus), so all those skill rolls get reduced by 2. So in essence, they get reduced by 4 from what they were before the background count. So yes, it double dips - that's what people are complaining about.
More importantly, is the Force now too low to even stay on you since the Agility spell has a minimum Force amount.
As I'm reading it the spell would drop & to get it back on you'd have to Re-cast it at a higher force to compensate.


Quote
Actually you're making me wonder about the alignment now. As I've understand it, when you summon a spirit, you summon a spirit of your tradition, not a generic "air spirit" - an air spirit of the Shamanistic tradition might have the same stats as an air spirit from a Hermetic tradition, but they're not actually the same thing. But then, the book isn't exactly clear on how that works. In fact, it's intentionally vague on that topic. It does say you're summoning a spirit "of your tradition", but does that mean it's aligned to your tradition or just that it's one of your 5 types?
I'm fairly certain it means "One of your Five".  Because it does say in the fluff that how the spirit will appear to you is based on your beliefs but that they are the same kind of spirit.  So its not a Hermatic-Air v/s a Shamanistic-Air,  its an Air spirit who might look like a Whirlwind to one summoner or a
Chinese Dragon to another or a Soaring Eagle to a third.  But that is all part of them conforming to your mental beliefs & not actually changing who they are.
That said, it sounds like it wouldn't matter because your saying it won't affect their resist-binding attempt since that is not a skill test (action).
Which is contrary to how Hibiki answered.


Quote
Besides, why would the limit be Force anyway?
Dang good question.  For some reason I was thinking that limit worked both ways.  No idea.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: SichoPhiend on <04-18-15/1207:41>
If you have, say, Increased Agility (the spell) active on you at Force 4, and enter a BG count of 2, it gets reduced by 2, so your bonus gets reduced. But that means that you still have tests affected by magic (they get a +2 bonus), so all those skill rolls get reduced by 2. So in essence, they get reduced by 4 from what they were before the background count. So yes, it double dips - that's what people are complaining about.
More importantly, is the Force now too low to even stay on you since the Agility spell has a minimum Force amount.
As I'm reading it the spell would drop & to get it back on you'd have to Re-cast it at a higher force to compensate.

My understanding is that, yes it will drop if the spell is no longer valid.  If, in this case, the character has a base agility of 2, then the spell is still valid as the reduced force would equal or exceed it, but if the character has a base agility of 3 or 4, then the reduced force would be too low and the spell would fail as it is no longer valid.
However you would only need to recast it at force 4 within the BC, as the BC only reduces the force of existing spells that are brought into the BC, not the force of spells that are cast in the BC (That is accounted for by the die pool penalty of casting the spell.)

As you did ask for a reference on this Tarislar, here is the best I can do, p. 32 Street Grimoire, second paragraph of Background count rules,,,
Quote
Pre-existing active foci, sustained spells, quickened/anchored spells and rituals are reduced by the background count.

On a side note as discussed earlier, when the force is reduced, the hits rolled may be as well, but it is possible to break the spell's limit from the force with the use of reagents.  While it may not be too helpful on an increased attribute spell (because of the minimum needed to cast),  it can help on other spells.
For instance; Increased Reflexes.  If cast at force 4 and you get 4 hits, you get +4 to initiative and +2d6, but you then enter Chicago's BC of 2; force drops to 2, limit drops to 2, therefore your hits drop to 2 and your bonus goes to +2 to initiative and +1d6. 
Now if you had cast it using 4 reagents to set the limit, force drops to 2 but the limit stays at 4 (As currently BC does not effect reagents) and you keep the full bonus of +4 to initiative and +2d6.
This does also mean that the case of the agility 2 character with the force 4 increased agility could still benefit from using 4 reagents too, as entering the BD of 2 would reduce the force to 2 and the spell's force would still be legal, while the limit would remain at 4 and thus keep all 4 hits from the spell cast.

Reagent use is just the price of doin magic biz in Chicago...
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Tarislar on <04-18-15/2158:24>
Morale of the story is, cast spells at high force if going into BGC  ;)

And yes, reagents will likely get burned a lot more.

Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: jim1701 on <04-29-15/1851:05>
The morale of the story is geek you mage before you go into the the CZ because he's a bloody useless git.   >:(
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Lucean on <04-30-15/0151:28>
And this helps your team how?
Shortsighted actions often lead to dead runners ...
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: WillAsher on <05-07-15/0833:05>
Background 2 isn't really all that bad.

I just ran a mission with a team of 3 mages and a sniper.  For about half the time we were running in Background 2.  It was a bit annoying, but not really crippling.  The only real issue we had with it was that the it shut down everyone's sustaining foci (Note to self, buy a Force 3-4 Sustaining Foci).  The two dice lost is less than one hit on average.  I have Focused Concentration 4, which let me keep my improved reflexes up.  We still made it out, and I managed to toast 4 mercs, the opposing mage, and a drone with a 12 Force Fireball (and not even knock myself out, thanks to an edge on the drain resist).  The biggest key is that it forces mages to be a bit more strategic in their casting. 
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <05-07-15/0900:22>
Background 2 isn't really that bad if it happens occasionally. A base background of 2, with higher spikes not being uncommon, gets worse real bad.

Like you say, it shuts down low-powered foci, so you're going to need high-powered ones to make them function at all - at lower rating - which means you can only get 2 or so, because of focus addiction. For everything you do where a focus normally helps, you now have -4 instead of -2 (and foci are one of the few ways of mages to use their nuyen effectively). And that's just your everyday occurrance. Sometimes it's much worse.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: schenn on <05-17-15/0258:17>
Just a note because I didn't see it mentioned:

Home Ground: Astral Acclimation positive quality (10 karma) allows the mage to ignore up to two points of background count. So by 'being' from chicago, you can do magical things without the penalty until the penalty gets worse than 2.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Top Dog on <05-17-15/0544:39>
It's not really specified how big your Home Ground can be, but I'm sure it can't be the whole of the Chicago CZ.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <05-17-15/2006:12>
Home Ground is supposed to be just a few blocks at most.  your local "Neighborhood".  I will codify this in a future FAQ update. It is not a blanket "get out of penalty free" quality.  It would be a lot more expensive if it was :)
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Fedifensor on <05-27-15/0851:58>
Home Ground is supposed to be just a few blocks at most.  your local "Neighborhood".  I will codify this in a future FAQ update. It is not a blanket "get out of penalty free" quality.  It would be a lot more expensive if it was :)
On the flip side, Home Ground isn't worth 10 Karma (20 after character creation) if it only covers a few blocks.  The only version that might be close to worthwhile is Digital Turf - if you pick the right host.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: schenn on <06-29-15/1221:10>
Yea if home ground only covers a few blocks, its essentially useless. When you're on a run, especially a mission, will you ever be within those few blocks?  From the description text, it sounds like the mage has been casting in a given area for so long that they have become acclimated to the flavor of the mana of the area. Why should that only be a few blocks. Maybe Chicago CZ and Chicago Corridor could be separate areas considering the volatile nature of Chicago, but Seattle? Tir?

If its only going to cover a few blocks, it should just be a lifestyle asset, not a character quality.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Herr Brackhaus on <06-29-15/1244:19>
Not to mention that Quantum Princess has Home Ground (Digital Turf (Noosenet Grid)) as a quality, which seems at odds with the "single host" aspect.
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: Bull on <06-29-15/2342:38>
NPCs cheat.  We also have a Changeling NPC, while they're not valid for PC play. :)

Plus Quantum BUILT the current Noosenet.  That gives you some special leeway :)
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: antaskidayo on <07-14-15/1242:26>
how bout the cleansing metamagic to temp alleviate the dice pool penalty?
Title: Re: Chicago v/s Magic
Post by: schenn on <07-24-15/1644:44>
Quote
how bout the cleansing metamagic to temp alleviate the dice pool penalty?

That should do it.  Cleansing metamagic only takes a combat turn, soak drain equal to background count.