Shadowrun

Shadowrun Play => Character creation and critique => Topic started by: Ixal on (04:33:33/02-08-19)

Title: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Ixal on (04:33:33/02-08-19)
Going through the builds in this forum it looks like aspected magicans are not used much, if at all.
Do you see them in your home games and if yes how do they perform?
Or is the general consensus that if you already go magic, the ability to project and use both spells and spirits is too good compared to the savings at chargen when being aspected?
Title: Re: Do people actually use Adpected Magicans?
Post by: PiXeL01 on (04:44:51/02-08-19)
Thereís no real reason to. Why should you start with less magic than an adept is what I donít understand. I have seen a few conjuring aspects but no casters at all
Title: Re: Do people actually use Adpected Magicans?
Post by: Wenlocke on (05:15:55/02-08-19)
Most irritating side effect of the magical tradition/adept changes was the removal of Shamanic adepts. Unlike aspected magicians, they cast only spells/summoned spirits associated with their totem (ie the totem had bonuses to cast), but had other magic skills as normal, which was actually an interesting RP thing as well as still possessing a modicum of versatility. I think there was a hermetic variety as well that just used one element (I used to have a couple of different illusionist builds, a phoenix adept, and I think the other was a water hermetic adept. This may have been 15 years ago so my memory is hazy.)
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Hobbes on (07:06:43/02-08-19)
I haven't seen one played in 5th Edition.  Mechanically you're better off with a Mage or Mystic Adept and just not taking the skill(s) you don't want and then call yourself an Aspected Magician.

For Aspected Magicians to be a mechanically desirable choice they need a significant buff. 
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (07:20:09/02-08-19)
Aspected Magicians from core don't work in part because they don't get free spells or other compensation, so for casters they lose out big time. Unless your specific prio-build needs Magic D, there's no point. Fortunately now we got the other ways of aspecting instead.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Adpected Magicans?
Post by: Beta on (09:20:41/02-08-19)
There are a few mechanical issues with aspected mages, as they were set out in fifth:
- being given a skill group rather than skills.  By RAW that skill group can't be broken until the spend karma stage, so if you actually want to be good at your core skill, you need at least priority C in skills, and need to route skill group points your magic group of choice (and that is not really optimal as often you only care about 1-2 of the 3 skills in the group).
- best case starting with 5 magic, so that again your build needs to have a free special attribute point or you need to drop a load of karma, should you want to start at magic 6
- As already mentioned, casters not starting out with any spells

Personally I've played two character that I originally concieved of as aspected, but in both cases I eventually gave up that plan (in one case went with full mage with weak summoning instead of an aspected caster, in the other went with a mystic adept with no spellcasting (but with alchemy) in place of an aspected summoner.

Most irritating side effect of the magical tradition/adept changes was the removal of Shamanic adepts. Unlike aspected magicians, they cast only spells/summoned spirits associated with their totem (ie the totem had bonuses to cast), but had other magic skills as normal, which was actually an interesting RP thing as well as still possessing a modicum of versatility. I think there was a hermetic variety as well that just used one element (I used to have a couple of different illusionist builds, a phoenix adept, and I think the other was a water hermetic adept. This may have been 15 years ago so my memory is hazy.)

Wenlocke, that was brought back in Forbidden Arcana (called "Apprentice")
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Tarislar on (11:00:44/02-08-19)
I think that Aspected  Sorcerer & Conjurer got big buffs with some of the Positive Qualities in Forbidden Arcana (IIRC?)

Where they get free spells or bonus spirit types.

Magic-B  +  Skills-C was the only viable starting build method as it gave you 6 group points to cap out your Magic Group & then you just needed 1 point (Human-E) to get Magic to 6.

It let you do your magic niche & then have 4-5 really good other skills & great attributes which is often hard with a full mage.

Making a Conjurer with 10 spirit options & Spirit Whisperer sounds like fun.

Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on (11:27:20/02-08-19)
I tried making an aspected summoner.

Abandoned the character when I realized for 5th edition, Watchers aren't summoned but created by ritual spellcasting.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (11:30:02/02-08-19)
At the very least Aspected should be able to do that through different means...

Incidentally, SSDR, what's your thoughts on the Arcana Aspected options?
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: adzling on (12:31:44/02-08-19)
We have an aspected sorcerer at our table and he works just fine.

He's built as the team's combat mage and took the Dedicated Spellslinger quality which seems to help balance things a bit, making his spells cheaper.

When we formed the group I had three people out of 6 wanting to play mages so I forced one of the team to choose aspected to stop things going completely off the rails.

One of the mages was focussed on swords (kind of like a mystic adept without the adept powers) so it worked out pretty well (one full mage, one sword-mage and one aspected sorcerer).

Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Sphinx on (13:47:45/02-08-19)
I've never had a player create an aspected magician as a PC, but as a GM, I try to make my NPCs aspected instead of full magicians as much as possible.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Marcus on (14:30:34/02-08-19)
It was fairly disadvantageous until FA came down. There are cool concepts that some low magic options offer. Things like the astral adept. There is  nothing wrong with adept builds, they just aren't an vogue at the moment. But that sort of thing cyclies.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: DigitalZombie on (15:33:25/02-08-19)
I could also Imagine that the reason we dont see many aspected mages on the character forum, is because many groups have a Lot of aspected mage houserules that are specific to their table. Which kinda makes it hard to have strangers come up with suggestions regarding their newly created characters.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (15:38:01/02-08-19)
I've never had a player create an aspected magician as a PC, but as a GM, I try to make my NPCs aspected instead of full magicians as much as possible.
Same. My PR5 HTR-setup involves aspected alchemists, aspected conjurors and aspected combat mages. Alchemists make the preps for the SWAT-car-vault-of-ages, Conjurors send their Valkyrie Spirits with the team to provide Counterspelling and gun support, the combat mages are there to help deal with anything that's magically armored. That way, if the mage goes down, the Spirits are still at the ready and backup can be easily called upon (though it will take some time to arrive). Numerically there's quite a bunch of aspected arounds if I recall the books right, and aspected will be easier to employ since they're less allround.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: adzling on (16:35:21/02-08-19)
Id like to see your HTR team Michael, care to post somewhere?
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on (16:44:28/02-08-19)
Incidentally, SSDR, what's your thoughts on the Arcana Aspected options?

TBH I hadn't even heard of some of the options before this thread.

I'd *like* for aspected magicians to be viable, but I think you're right in that they're perhaps best employed as NPCs.  No matter how good or bad they are, they're upstaged by Mystic Adepts.  Essentially a full magician minus enchanting*, PLUS adept powers?  Why play anything else?

*yeah yeah MA's can't project, but what difference does that make when they can summon spirits who CAN do the astral recon.

Unfortunately I think MA's need a thorough beating with the nerf bat before aspected magicians can ever be viable. I'd like to see MAs lose the ability to summon. or pick between spellcasting and summoning.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: adzling on (17:26:12/02-08-19)
Yeah we banned M.A.s from our table so that does make some room for our Aspected Sorcerer.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Sphinx on (18:50:20/02-08-19)
I kept Fourth Edition rules for mystic adepts at my table: They have to split their Magic attribute between magician abilities and adept abilities. Unsurprisingly, nobody plays one.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Marcus on (21:56:04/02-08-19)
I've never had a player create an aspected magician as a PC, but as a GM, I try to make my NPCs aspected instead of full magicians as much as possible.
Same. My PR5 HTR-setup involves aspected alchemists, aspected conjurors and aspected combat mages. Alchemists make the preps for the SWAT-car-vault-of-ages, Conjurors send their Valkyrie Spirits with the team to provide Counterspelling and gun support, the combat mages are there to help deal with anything that's magically armored. That way, if the mage goes down, the Spirits are still at the ready and backup can be easily called upon (though it will take some time to arrive). Numerically there's quite a bunch of aspected arounds if I recall the books right, and aspected will be easier to employ since they're less allround.

O_o Your long famed HTR team is all Magic?
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Jack_Spade on (07:35:55/02-09-19)
Aspected Sorcerors can be quite a lot of fun since Ritual Magic does allow you to substitute for summoning to a certain degree.
I've played one two times so far and with the right load out they can kick quite a bit of ass (Homunculi made from reinforced concrete with greater ritual are easy to make and nearly unstoppable)

The Enchanter is also a good chasis with Human E, Skill B, Attributes A, magic C and Resources D. Magic 6 and you have enough money to get all necessary toys for successfull alchemy.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Shinobi Killfist on (22:22:41/02-09-19)
Incidentally, SSDR, what's your thoughts on the Arcana Aspected options?

TBH I hadn't even heard of some of the options before this thread.

I'd *like* for aspected magicians to be viable, but I think you're right in that they're perhaps best employed as NPCs.  No matter how good or bad they are, they're upstaged by Mystic Adepts.  Essentially a full magician minus enchanting*, PLUS adept powers?  Why play anything else?

*yeah yeah MA's can't project, but what difference does that make when they can summon spirits who CAN do the astral recon.

Unfortunately I think MA's need a thorough beating with the nerf bat before aspected magicians can ever be viable. I'd like to see MAs lose the ability to summon. or pick between spellcasting and summoning.

Did I miss an errata when did MA get minus enchanting?  Given that you have to spend like 60 extra karma to make enchanting viable in the first place its not really a hit either way but at least its something I guess, even if they would still be too good.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on (01:03:53/02-10-19)
Maybe not... I saw the chart in Forbidden Arcana when I was reading up on the other aspected magician types and took it as gospel.  On double checking the Core Rulebook, you're right in that it does conflict.

I honestly don't know what the official stance on that is.  I hope the FA info is correct, because I want MA's to have every nerf I can justify.  If "Full" magicians and MAs are have all the same abilities except MAs gain Adept powers to boot in exchange for having to rely on sending spirits in astrally rather than being allowed to risk themselves astrally... well that's not an example of balance :(  Even if MAs aren't allowed to do the least used/least useful of the three "schools" of magic, at least that'd be something.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Tarislar on (14:55:53/02-10-19)
I recall when that came out there were questions about it.

Because it also gives them perception for free v/s being purchased like the Adept has.

I don't recall what the ruling was on that chart but I do recall quite a few discussions.

Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Jack_Spade on (15:40:10/02-10-19)
The German version reversed that chart and made it conform again with the core book.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Shinobi Killfist on (21:28:12/02-10-19)
Maybe not... I saw the chart in Forbidden Arcana when I was reading up on the other aspected magician types and took it as gospel.  On double checking the Core Rulebook, you're right in that it does conflict.

I honestly don't know what the official stance on that is.  I hope the FA info is correct, because I want MA's to have every nerf I can justify.  If "Full" magicians and MAs are have all the same abilities except MAs gain Adept powers to boot in exchange for having to rely on sending spirits in astrally rather than being allowed to risk themselves astrally... well that's not an example of balance :(  Even if MAs aren't allowed to do the least used/least useful of the three "schools" of magic, at least that'd be something.

I had forgotten about that chart.  Yeah, I wish that was accurate. It really wouldn't effect them but it would be a thematic hit at least, and yes I want to seem them get any possible nerf at this point.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (14:28:30/02-11-19)
Maybe not... I saw the chart in Forbidden Arcana when I was reading up on the other aspected magician types and took it as gospel.  On double checking the Core Rulebook, you're right in that it does conflict.

I honestly don't know what the official stance on that is.  I hope the FA info is correct, because I want MA's to have every nerf I can justify.  If "Full" magicians and MAs are have all the same abilities except MAs gain Adept powers to boot in exchange for having to rely on sending spirits in astrally rather than being allowed to risk themselves astrally... well that's not an example of balance :(  Even if MAs aren't allowed to do the least used/least useful of the three "schools" of magic, at least that'd be something.
Technically 'gain ability to buy Adept powers'. And if you consider not being able to spot astral threats and mana barriers no big deal, then yeah they're even more imbalanced than in normal games.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Glyph on (18:52:43/02-11-19)
Mystic adepts can spot astral threats; they just need to spend one of their power points on astral perception.  Which is very advisable, since they need astral perception to erase their magical signature.  Mystic adepts aren't really that OP, they just seem that way because they are front-loaded, power-wise, then progress at a slower rate.  Astral projection may not be as appealing as having adept powers, but it does give a mage a unique role in legwork, tracking, and infiltration.  Sure, a mysad can send spirits on astral tasks, but that is like a technomancer sending sprites out on Matrix tasks - cumbersome, limited, and inflexible, compared to doing it personally.

The biggest weakness of aspected mages is that spellcasting and summoning are both so powerful and versatile, and quite frankly, aspected mages don't get nearly enough in return for permanently giving one of these things up and not being able to astrally project.  I mean, look at what they get for Priority: B.  It's pitiful.

Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on (18:54:53/02-11-19)
Yeah I really wish Mystic Adepts were Aspected Magicians with Adept powers (pick one: Spellcasting, Conjuring, or Enchanting) rather than Full magicians with Adept powers.

Even then tho, why the hell would you play an Aspected Magician :(
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Mathan on (21:03:37/02-11-19)
I do all the time. I admit that I don't post as many characters here, mainly because I rarely get much feedback. But it's great flavor. Currently reworking Sparrow, one of my NPCs/characters. for a two year time skip which i"m doing for many characters and he's aspected, a street rat kid who enchants, and who is set up to make magic bullets for that double-barreled pistol in Street Lethal.

Yeah it's less flexible in terms of gameplay but it's also fun
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Shinobi Killfist on (21:36:41/02-11-19)
Yeah I really wish Mystic Adepts were Aspected Magicians with Adept powers (pick one: Spellcasting, Conjuring, or Enchanting) rather than Full magicians with Adept powers.

Even then tho, why the hell would you play an Aspected Magician :(

I have never seen one in 5e.  Honestly I never have seen a normal mage in play in 5e unless I give the characters pregens. While I mainly run for a group, I've played an assortment of online games and everyone if magical is a mystic adept or adept. But usually mystical adept.   
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (07:38:30/02-12-19)
Yeah I really wish Mystic Adepts were Aspected Magicians with Adept powers (pick one: Spellcasting, Conjuring, or Enchanting) rather than Full magicians with Adept powers.

Even then tho, why the hell would you play an Aspected Magician :(
I really want to work through FA's options for this.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Marcus on (20:58:13/02-12-19)
I do think MA needs to be reigned in, and further I do think  Aspected needs to be encouraged. The reality of the setting is Aspect should be a heck of alot more common then full mages. I would suggest lower aspect priority, and keeping them on a good magic and good magic skill level. Allowing Aspected to fall to second or third tier priority encourages more diverse builds.  Aspect can enhance plenty of other rolls.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Ixal on (05:04:20/02-13-19)
I do think MA needs to be reigned in, and further I do think  Aspected needs to be encouraged. The reality of the setting is Aspect should be a heck of alot more common then full mages. I would suggest lower aspect priority, and keeping them on a good magic and good magic skill level. Allowing Aspected to fall to second or third tier priority encourages more diverse builds.  Aspect can enhance plenty of other rolls.

Do you think it would be enough to give aspected the same MAG, skills and free spells (services for conjurers) as full mages get only at 1 priority lower?
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Marcus on (05:10:07/02-13-19)
I do think MA needs to be reigned in, and further I do think  Aspected needs to be encouraged. The reality of the setting is Aspect should be a heck of alot more common then full mages. I would suggest lower aspect priority, and keeping them on a good magic and good magic skill level. Allowing Aspected to fall to second or third tier priority encourages more diverse builds.  Aspect can enhance plenty of other rolls.

Do you think it would be enough to give aspected the same MAG, skills and free spells (services for conjurers) as full mages get only at 1 priority lower?

Probably too much lol. But it certainly would make a lot attractive lol.

I was thinking something like Priority C Aspected Magician Magic 5 Magic Skill Group 4. (Which is basically the current priority B) then Make Priority B Aspected Magician Magic 6 Skill Group 6
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: FST_Gemstar on (09:16:34/02-13-19)
I love aspected magicians!

Even before FA!

People need to remember they are practical magicians, not magical experts. They use magic to compliment another specialty, their specialty isn't magic. 

In that respect, they are more like adepts, than magicians. 

Additionally, their sweet spot is that they are not most efficient with Magic 6 (usually). Really, they benefit from just having a magic rating. Because Magic D is the most bang for your buck D priority, aspected magicians can get a lot of value out of that rating without losing out on much. 

Magic 1 gets you a mentor spirit, access to a skill tree, spells/spirits/preps, assensing, [counterspelling], foci (particularly weapon foci), magic qualities, metamagics, and access to more Magic as your character develops, etc. 

I'll post some ideas/builds later: 
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Wakshaani on (12:36:05/02-13-19)
Removing Enchanting from Mystical Adepts is an attempt to balance them since trading Adept Powers for Astral Projection is most certainly not a fair trade. Honestly, Astral + Enchanting still isn't really but it's closer.

The big problem is that we let too much magic slide through the core chart and pulling that back at this stage would cause a riot.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Michael Chandra on (16:28:54/02-13-19)
So it was deliberate? Sigh... More proof that Pegasus just tries to errata blindly.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Marcus on (19:08:31/02-13-19)
Removing Enchanting from Mystical Adepts is an attempt to balance them since trading Adept Powers for Astral Projection is most certainly not a fair trade. Honestly, Astral + Enchanting still isn't really but it's closer.

The big problem is that we let too much magic slide through the core chart and pulling that back at this stage would cause a riot.

The longer you wait the worse it gets. I'd argue Jack the chart and roll it back. Anyone who is running a full developed MA know's that it's broken. The Riots will end, everyone will be better for it.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: FST_Gemstar on (21:36:07/02-13-19)
Building Aspected Magician Principles: 

Aspected Magicians are practical magicians, not expert magicians:
That is, they use their magic to compliment a non-magic specialty, unlike magicians who are optimized to be magical specialists. This makes them more like adepts than full magicians. Aspected magicians are deckers, faces, combatants, etc. with magical tools at their disposal. It should not be their job to cover the role of magical specialist solely if a magical specialist is required, though many aspected magicians can pick up some of those duties in a pinch or compliment a more traditional magical specialist.

Aspected Magicians take advantage of low Magic ratings: 
While aspected magicians are closest in design to adepts, their difference is that adepts scale with higher magic (more magic = more power points and more potential initiations = more power points) and aspected magicians don't. Their value is that they can keep a low magic and leverage it for their particular roles.

There are a lot of great things that you can do well with just Magic 1, including: Assensing, Counterspelling, wield a weapon focus, use other foci, have a mentor spirit, learn a metamagic, and access magical qualities. 

Ritual Spellcasting and Alchemy use Magic in dice pools, but they are not limited by Magic rating (but by magical lodge rating and reagents), allowing people to be good at them without a high Magic rating, cobbling dice pools together with mentors, specializations, qualities, and foci. Foci for these pools are more broadly applied than more typical spell/spirit ones. Ex. Magic 1, Ritual 6, Spec 2, Foci 4 gets 13 dice for ritual tests, which has very good odds against F4 rituals (eight dice). Mentor spirits, Restricted Gear with R8 foci, etc. you can get this much higher.

Priority D Magic is your friend (almost always):
Besides some niche builds that are probably better built as full magicians anyway, you want to take Aspected at Priority D. The step up from E to D is rather minor in every other category, but going from mundane to Magic is a huge deal, opening a ton of fun things to play with and avenues for future growth.

This is also a bonus compared to magicians and adepts, because you need minimal investment at character generation in Magic, letting your magical character take advantage of having high priorities in other domains. Being able to be a more priority intensive metatype, having resources for 'ware/foci/gear, having higher edge, etc. can be really valuable for your character!

Aspected magicians can see meaningful growth in play:
Unlike other shadowrun builds where even in the longest campaigns your characters aren't experiencing more than 20% growth (ex. 150 karma) and growth that happens is usually wide (ex. picking up a few new skills and such) instead of tall (ex.increasing maxed attributes), aspected magicians can see dramatic growth throughout their campaign. Ex. Raising Magic from 1 to 2 and picking up two metamagics is only 40 karma. This can ramp up a competent character at character generation into something much more interesting/powerful very early on. Compare to a Magic 6 magician who who needs 50 karma to initiate and raise Magic to 7. It's a a power boost, but it isn't all that dramatic in comparison nor change much about your character.

Basically, your initial build should be optimized enough to your non-magic specialty; you should have a character that highly competent in their role. But instead of investing in direct growth in that specialty, aspected magicians can target growth at the more dramatic and faster occuring magic area (learning new spells, metamagics, getting new foci, etc. raising magic from low to medium) that also indirectly makes you better at your specialty. 

Character Concepts
I have more of a list somewhere, and I can post more builds if people like. The forums don't have a spoiler option anymore so I don't like putting full builds into comments unless desired.   

Two characters I have played:
Intuitive Private Investigator -
Priority: EBDAC (human, any)
A social expert with minors (in this case infiltration and assensing/ guidance spirits) that takes up psychometry early in their career. This character type works just fine as a face, can mind their own in a fight, and brings unique magical elements to the table. This example character is an aspected conjurer, but works with any aspected magician (Aware and Apprentice included).   
Osmosis: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6kA-rvHAq-reHJ3TF9SU29ZQ1U/view

Channeling VR Decker -
Priority:  AEDCB (dwarf, conjurer)
This unique aspected conjurer is a VR decker that can summon its own body guard (F6 Guardian Spirit) when going VR limp. GM permitting, (I of course would allow it), after the character picks up channeling, the decker do matrix stuff in VR while a channelled spirit can animate their body--a VR decker that can leave its body functional in the hands of a spirit!
Waterloo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6kA-rvHAq-rR3UyLUJfY29tMFU/view


Other concepts:
Anti-Magic Melee/Tank Cybersamuari -
A Magic 1 aspected sorcerer with high counterspelling and a weapon focus. This lets your physical focused character be able to be less vulnerable spells, particularly direct ones, and be able to go more toe-to-toe with creatures with hardened armor/astral. Compares to a melee adept, but trades some initiative/dodge for armor/hardiness/magical defense.

Channeling Melee Combatant
Priority: BADEC (ork,conjurer)
Basically max Agility and soft max all other physicals to be at max 7. Magic 4, Edge 3. Skills only go to a weapon, summoning, and basics. Use resources to get a weapon focus and a summoning focus, nice armor/outfits, cool car, etc. Once you get channeling, your combat prowess goes way up, getting a big initiative boost, a +4 to all physicals, and spirit powers. 

Troll Face Conjurer!
Priority: AEDBC (Conjurer, Troll)
There is always someone who wants to play a troll face magician. Aspected troll face conjurers are actually a lot of fun! A Magic 4 troll with a cyberarm and some charisma boosters can be an excellent face, pistoleer, and summon meaningful spirits!

Necromancer!
Necromancy is kind of a crappily worded metamagic that has a lot of past edition copy and paste issues. It is not worth it for a character who actually is good at summoning spirits and casting spells. But as an Magic D Apprentice, a character can fulfill the pre-req of being able to summon spirits of man and use rituals and learn Necromancy. Necromancy is a metamagic that has a lot of rituals to learn within the single metamagic (karma efficient), and its rituals take minutes instead of hours (making them more practical in more campaigns). With just a little investment in a Ritual spellcasting pool, you can have a competent shadowrunner who is also a Necromancer!
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Iron Serpent Prince on (21:56:50/02-13-19)
Osmosis: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6kA-rvHAq-reHJ3TF9SU29ZQ1U/view

People always seem to miss the fact that Essence loss reduces current Magic rating as well, meaning this character has lost all Magic.

Quote from: Core Rulebook, 2nd Printing, Page 278, under the heading "Magic"
Anything that reduces your Essence also reduces your Magic rating. For every point (or fraction thereof) of Essence lost, both your current Magic Attribute and your maximum Magic Rating are reduced by one.

You need to start with a Magic/Resonance of 2 if you want any implants - or you might as well make a mundane at that point.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: FST_Gemstar on (22:00:27/02-13-19)
Aspected D Magicians start with Magic 2. Taking one essence of of 'ware and you can keep Magic 1. I use Magic 1 as an example because you only need Magic 1 to do all sorts of amazing magic things. Aspected D magicians start with Magic 2, however (allowing them to take advantage of 'ware with minimal waste).

Osmosis started with Magic 2, took .99 essence of 'ware, lost a point of magic and max magic, so now has Magic 1.

There are also ways to just burn out and buy magic back in play, but none of my build suggestions (except some builds of a the counterspelling samurai), do that. Many builds also might decide to keep magic from hitting 0 using special points, but that is usually not all that useful for aspected magicians except in very particular contexts.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Iron Serpent Prince on (22:08:00/02-13-19)
Aspected D Magicians start with Magic 2.

You got me.

I misremembered D being Magic of 1.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Shinobi Killfist on (22:55:26/02-13-19)
Removing Enchanting from Mystical Adepts is an attempt to balance them since trading Adept Powers for Astral Projection is most certainly not a fair trade. Honestly, Astral + Enchanting still isn't really but it's closer.

The big problem is that we let too much magic slide through the core chart and pulling that back at this stage would cause a riot.

The longer you wait the worse it gets. I'd argue Jack the chart and roll it back. Anyone who is running a full developed MA know's that it's broken. The Riots will end, everyone will be better for it.

Itís pretty late game to do an errata but better late than never I guess. MA got too much, aspected got too little. Regular adepts/mages are just right. Well sort of. I think the magic level # of free spells etc is right. Just some core elements of the magic game are kind of broke.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Glyph on (01:10:38/02-15-19)
Mystic adepts have to expend 30 points from their limited pool of starting Karma to have 6 power points to start with, and one of those points should go towards astral perception so that the character can clean their astral signature.  After that, they progress at about half the rate of a regular adept (who gets a point automatically for raising their Magic and have the same option of getting one in lieu of a metamagic).  So they can't compete with a regular adept, at being an adept.  So, better to concentrate on being a mage with 6 points of adept powers which are likely to remain 6 points of adept powers, mostly.  Which is very nice, don't get me wrong, but the focused concentration: 5 quality gives you a similar (slightly weaker but more flexible) boost.  After character creation, advancement slows down a lot.  That is what I meant when I said they were front-loaded.  They are still often a slightly more optimal choice than a mage.

I guess I cringe whenever I hear something described as "OP", because that usually leads to either fun-sucking nerfs that worsen the game (background count, hackable cyberware, overwatch score, etc.), or passive-agressive douchebaggery from GMs,


Aspected mages are horrible in sum-to-ten.  Look at what they get  - they need to pick a metatype level with bonuses to even out start with a magic of 6.  Then they get skill groups instead of skills, capped at 4, so they need skills at C or better to even start out with their core skills at 6, and have to use starting Karma for specializations. And to top it all off, sorcerers don't get free spell points!  Yeah, I hear FA has an option that fixes the last one, but fixes shouldn't come in a magic rules supplement (and not even the first one).  If the eratta completely changes what technomancers get, why not not do the same for aspected magicians?  In SR3, I played sorcerers all the time.

I will note that Point Build fixes these problems.  Aspected magicians have a lower base cost (and mysads cost slightly more), everyone buys spells, and you buy what you want, skill-wise.  A full mage flat-out spends more than a sorcerer or conjurer if he wants spellcasting and summoning.  The only problem with Point Build is that it tends to make ALL non-adept builds weaker.
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: FST_Gemstar on (07:07:48/02-15-19)
Apected Magicians are almost always only worth taking at Priority D.

They almost always should NOT have Magic 6.

For most, starting with Magic 1 or 2 and staying there works fine. 

The point of being an Aspected Magician is to leverage the perks of just having a Magic rating for characters who are not magic specialist.

See principles above. 
Title: Re: Do people actually use Aspected Magicans?
Post by: Mirikon on (21:39:43/02-15-19)
I do not use aspected magicians in 5e, because of how the priorities work out, unless it is extremely thematic.

In 4e, however, I did use aspected magicians a couple times, and if 5e had gone with point buy instead of priority, I probably still would have used them, especially for an aspected Enchanter type build.