NEWS

Example Confusion

  • 4 Replies
  • 1976 Views

Beansidhe

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 42
« on: <09-17-10/1632:37> »
I am rereading the chapter on the Awakened World right now in preparation for tomorrow's game session.  I got to page 184 and read the example of spell casting that they give.  It reads as follows:
Quote from: Shadowrun 20th Anniversary page 184
A go-ganger is about to ride Raze down with her motorbike, so Raze casts a Powerbolt at her. He chooses Force 5 and rolls his Spellcasting 4 + Magic 5 (9 dice), and gets 4 hits. The ganger rolls her Body 3 to resist, and gets only 1 hit. The base damage of the Powerbolt is 5, increased by the net hits (3) with the go-ganger taking a final damage of 8—ouch! The Drain Code for the Powerbolt is (F ÷ 2) + 1, plus 3 from the net hits, so Raze must resist 6 DV, rolling his Willpower + Logic (he’s a mage).
If Raze had targeted the bike instead of the ganger, his 4 hits would have been enough to reach the threshold of 4, as a motorbike counts as a highly processed object. Since nonliving objects cannot resist against Directed Combat spells, the bike would have taken 5 DV from the spell (Raze didn’t score any net hits over the threshold to raise the damage).
This is an example of the basic rules, but in basic rules I cannot find where the DV goes up based on the net successes. 

As an optional rule presented on page 204 for Direct Combat Spells I find this:
Quote from: Shadowrun 20th Anniversary page 204
Direct Combat spells involve channeling mana directly into a target as destructive and damaging energies rather than generating a damaging effect. Affecting the target’s being on this fundamental level with raw mana requires more focus and more power than producing basic effects; as a result every net hit used to increase the damage value of a Direct Combat spell also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1.
Is the example on 184 using the optional rule or am I missing a step in spellcasting?

Thanks chummer!

Mäx

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1572
« Reply #1 on: <09-17-10/1643:33> »
That was an mandatory rule in the first version of the PDF release, so thats most likely the reason why the example uses that. It was downgraded to an optional rule after the shitstorm we raised about it at Dumpshock(and i doupt we where the only ones)
"An it harm none, do what you will"

Frankie the Fomori

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
« Reply #2 on: <09-17-10/1649:40> »
If you asking about drain value then it is on Page 203 and 204.
Quote
Page. 203
Drain Value
This describes the Damage Value the Drain causes. Drain is based on the spell’s Force; the more powerful the spell, the more exhausting it is to cast. Drain is variable, based on the spell’s Force ÷ 2, rounded down, and modified by Drain modifiers appropriate to each spell. Drain is Stun damage, unless the spell is overcast (cast at a Force higher than the magician’s Magic), in which case it is Physical damage. Note that no Drain Value can ever be less than 1.

Now the drain modifiers are covered in the section you highlighted on page 204. So combat drain value is affected by force/2 then ad Net hits.

If you’re talking about the damage DV that is found one paragraph above what you posted about  page 204


Quote

Direct Combat spells cast against nonliving objects are treated as Success Tests; the caster must achieve enough hits to beat the item’s Object Resistance (p. 183). Net hits increase damage as normal (the object does not get a resistance test).


I do not see it as an optional rule in my 4Ea?
« Last Edit: <09-17-10/1653:15> by Frankie the Fomori »

Magus

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • Dumpshock Alum
« Reply #3 on: <09-18-10/1122:53> »
It was THE rule as Max said until the Devs came under fire on it. And man what a firestorm that caused. So by the time the PRINT copy came out it was changed. It was also updated in the SR4 Changes document over in the Errata Section of the SR homepage.
Commanding Officer of the Floridian Ninja Surfing Drop Bear Pirates!!!

Shah Dude!!

Frankie the Fomori

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
« Reply #4 on: <09-18-10/1446:16> »
Thanks I feel silly thinking the change errata was for 4E gamers looking to avoid buying 4Ea