[Corgano]

I've got two questions in regard to background counts:

1. If a magician tries to cast a spell on a target that is located inside a background count, does he realize it before or after casting the spell and suffering from drain? In other words: Once he realizes that there is a background count, does he have enough time to change his mind about casting this spell and to do something else instead?

2. In Street Magic, page 117 it says: "... the background count is added to the Force whenever a character resists magical Drain. " Does this mean that the background count is added to the Force of the spell for the purpose of calculating Drain, or is is added directy to the Force of the Drain damage? The first interpretation would increase the Drain only by half of the background count, the second interpretation would increase it by the full background count.

[Thrass]

Regarding 1) I thought you could always feel the presence of a domain/other backgroundcount source and therefore Mages know immediately when entering a background count as well as adepts.

[Corgano]

Regarding 1) I thought you could always feel the presence of a domain/other backgroundcount source and therefore Mages know immediately when entering a background count as well as adepts.

Sure, but my question is about a situation in which the mage is on the outside of the area with a background count and tries to cast a spell on someone who is inside the area with a background count. In that case the background count will affect him but only once he starts casting his spell. And that's why I've asked, whether this mage would realize right away (or only after he finishes casting the spell) that he is casting a spell into an area with a background count and could abort the spell before suffering the Drain damage.

[farothel]

In that case my guess (emphasis on guess) is that he doesn't know, unless he assensed the target before.  Then he can see the background around the target.  But if he just goes 'I stunbolt the big troll' he will notice as soon as the stunbolt hits.

[Falconer]

Okay... firstly... reread all this... the background count only applies to sustained (and by extension permanent since they're sustained before becoming permanent) spells... instant spells like combat spells aren't affected.

1>  it's debatable if the mage knows he's in a BGC or not... he'll probably feel uncomfortable or that something isn't right somehow.   Some vague notion that he's not 100%.   But your magic score is down 2 points is metagame knowledge so it's fluff how the mage 'knows' this and when he knows it.  If he's hopped up on combat drugs he might not even realize anything is amiss...
1a> the magician needs to be assensing to see the BGC before walking into it... he has no idea it's there from outside of it.


2>  Drain.. the magician is NOT in the background count... he casts the spell normally for all purposes... when the spell crosses from the normal to the BGC domain it's force is reduced if it is a sustained spell.   If it passes through a domain is not reduced to 0... then passes out the other side to hit something else it restores to normal force.  The domain is a localized impairment in force/magic.

2a>  If the magician were inside the BGC... his magic would be reduced and he'd suffer drain as if casting a spell of higher force as normal... ie; rating 2 BGC... magic goes from 5->3...  He effectively casts at force 5... reduced to 3 by the BGC with drain calculated as if it were force 5.



3>  Just so the above is clear... the BGC is no defense against the mage lobbing in a firewall from outside of it... it's an instant spell and hits with full force.    But it will defend those on the inside against control thoughts or influence (sustained/permanent spells).

[Corgano]

Okay... firstly... reread all this... the background count only applies to sustained (and by extension permanent since they're sustained before becoming permanent) spells... instant spells like combat spells aren't affected.

That's a pretty bold claim. Do you have a source that supports your claim? Because it seems to me that if a person who has been enchanted with a sustained spell (let's say "Shapechange") walking into an area of BGC results in a reduction of the spells force, then there is no reason why a combat spell (lets say a "Stunbolt") cast from outside a BGC onto a target that is inside the BGC shouldn't suffer the same weakening of it's force. If mana flowing from a mage outside a BGC and into a target inside a BGC leads to a reduction of the spells force in case of a sustained spell, then why should mana flowing from a mage outside a BGC and into a target inside a BGC not lead to a reduction of the spells force in case of an instant spell? Both spell type create a mystical link and transfer mana from the mage to the target inside the BGC over that link.

Besides, there is a passage in the rules that seems to directly contradict your interpretation: In Runners Companion, page 116, in the description of the negative quality "Astral Hazing" (it creates a level 4 BGC around the character with a radius of Essence meters) it is stated that "This astral haze affects all attempts to cast magic on, at or in the vicinity of the character."

2>  Drain.. the magician is NOT in the background count... he casts the spell normally for all purposes... when the spell crosses from the normal to the BGC domain it's force is reduced if it is a sustained spell.   If it passes through a domain is not reduced to 0... then passes out the other side to hit something else it restores to normal force.  The domain is a localized impairment in force/magic.

Are you sure that the spells force would be restored if you cast it through a BGC on a target on the other side of it? The rules in Street Magic (page 118, lower right) seem to indicate (imho) that only quickened or anchored spells and mana barriers restore their force after leaving the BGC.

2a>  If the magician were inside the BGC... his magic would be reduced and he'd suffer drain as if casting a spell of higher force as normal... ie; rating 2 BGC... magic goes from 5->3...  He effectively casts at force 5... reduced to 3 by the BGC with drain calculated as if it were force 5.

So essentially you're saying that the mage suffers the same drain as if he had cast the spell outside the BGC, but that the spells effect / force is reduced. Is that correct?

[Mirikon]

To be fair, a background count of any appreciable size (+-2 or more) will typically have an area large enough that unless you're having a mage duel in the astral, you're unlikely to have situations where one combatant is inside and one is outside the area. If a background count is focused on something smaller than a neighborhood, then it is usually something like a powerful ritual site, dragon line nexus, or some other focal point of major mojo. In which case you probably won't be spending too much time on the astral anyway, so things will still be a close-ranged battle, and you're still likely to both be inside the field.

Now, what follows is my own personal opinion. Background counts affect sustained/permanent magical effects entering or inside their space, as well as spells and powers cast inside the field. When casting into an area, targeted spells suffer from the background count so long as the target is inside the field. Area spells, however, are unaffected so long as the focal point of the area is outside the field.

[Corgano]

Now, what follows is my own personal opinion. Background counts affect sustained/permanent magical effects entering or inside their space, as well as spells and powers cast inside the field. When casting into an area, targeted spells suffer from the background count so long as the target is inside the field.

I don't quite understand why you think that only sustained/permanent spells are affected by the BGC but that instant spells are not. Why this difference? Both channel mana into the BGC over a mystical link. And as I've said in my last post: The passage in the Runner Companion makes it pretty clear that all spells are affected by the BGC.

[Mirikon]

You didn't read everything I wrote, did you? Read past that second sentence, will you? When casting into an area with a background count, I'd rule that targeted spells suffer from the count so long as the target is inside the field, and area spells would be affected if the center point (where the link is formed) is inside the field. Meaning that, yes, instant spells would be affected if the target point is inside the field. Please actually take the time to read and comprehend before posting.

[Falconer]

Mirikon which is exactly what the rules say NOT to do.   It's also one way to bitchslap all the litle munchkins with their astral hazing "negative" qualities for free points.

Page 118... street magic... Background count and magic...  the rules you're asking questions about.

"Pre-existing wards, mana barriers, active foci, sustained spells, and quickened/anchored spells are similarly affected. Reduce their Force by the absolute value of the background count. If the Force is reduced to zero or less, wards and mana barriers will collapse, foci will deactivate, and spells will fizzle. The enchantment on a quickened/anchored spell or ward/mana barrier will repair itself once removed from the background count, returning to its regular Force.

BGC also affects astral visibility (see p114),..."

Note it specifically states SUSTAINED spells... not ALL spells.

As for the second part.. while inside the area... you reduce the force.  If it goes to 0 it's gone/deactivated... After being reduced to 0, some specific constructs repair/reactivate themselves once removed. (wards/mana barriers & quickened/anchored spells). 

Fireball (hehe not Firewall)... is an instant spell.   It is not sustained.   Permanent spells prior to being made permanent are sustained as well.

Instant spells are only impaired by the reduction of the casters magic and higher drain while he is within the BGC.  (also by the astral visibility penalties or bonuses which come with a BGC... positive BGC is a visibility penalty... negative is a visibility bonus).


The reason I feel that normal spells restore as well to their normal force is this.   The first and second paragraphs detail this as a localized temporary disruption to the characters Magic... the 3rd states the same for spirits... the 4th uses the worlds 'are similarly affected'.   So I've always taken it as a temporary reduction of force... though the rules don't outright say this.   Personally rethinking this I actually prefer this as a permanent reduction in force of those spells... as it provides a reason for a mage to regularly renew the casting of his sustained spells if any (unless they're quickened in which case they renew themselves as per the 4th paragraph).  That would mean walking in and out of rating 1 bgc's would slowly drain off any magic cast previously as it lost a point of force each time.

[Mithlas]

Not quite - sustained spells might be disrupted if their force reaches 0, but otherwise sustained and Permanent spells (and things like wards and foci) return to full strength once they leave the background count. It's all right there in Street Magic.

[Corgano]

You didn't read everything I wrote, did you? Read past that second sentence, will you? .... Please actually take the time to read and comprehend before posting.

It was simply a misunderstanding. I've read your entire post (twice actually) and I thought that you were referring to your previous remark about sustained spells, when you've said "When casting into an area, targeted spells suffer from the background count so long as the target is inside the field".

Page 118... street magic... Background count and magic...  the rules you're asking questions about.

"Pre-existing wards, mana barriers, active foci, sustained spells, and quickened/anchored spells are similarly affected. Reduce their Force by the absolute value of the background count. If the Force is reduced to zero or less, wards and mana barriers will collapse, foci will deactivate, and spells will fizzle. The enchantment on a quickened/anchored spell or ward/mana barrier will repair itself once removed from the background count, returning to its regular Force."

Note it specifically states SUSTAINED spells... not ALL spells.

This entire passage refers to already existing, active magic that is moved into a BGC. That's why it refers to the rules for spirits that enter a BGC ("are similarly affected"). Unless I've missed something, neither this passage nor any other part of the rules about BGC's in SM p.117-118 addresses the situation where a mage tries to cast a spell into a BGC while standing on the outside of said BGC. The only reference I know of where this specific situation is adressed is in the rules about "Astral Hazing" in RC, p.116. And there it seems pretty clear that ALL spells (not just sustained spells) that are cast into this BGC are affected by it.

That would mean walking in and out of rating 1 bgc's would slowly drain off any magic cast previously as it lost a point of force each time.

Yes, that's my interpretation as well. Although it's probably pretty rare that a runner crosses through several BGC's in a short space of time.

[Falconer]

Mithlas... again I point you at that paragraph.

That is a reasonable reading of the sentence... and the one I've gone with for a long while.  But after re-reading it... the only ones explicitly listed as restoring to full strength are quickened/anchored spells and wards.   The other ones can only be read as an implicit restoration which you can only get at by going between the lines of multiple paragraphs.

Since mechanically... rating 1 BGC are reasonably common.   It's not out of bounds to state that sustained spells slowly degrade as they go in and out of them.   And now that I spend more time thinking about it...  I prefer this reading.   This means that a mage can't get away with casting a rating 5 increase reflexes... (high drain spell)... rest for an hour or two for the stun to wear off.. then go about his day without worrying about the spell degrading and needing to recast it later... (at a potentially inconvenient time).   Mechanically again, I think I prefer this outcome and this reading... but both are valid readings I think after rereading the paragraph and up to the GM.


Corgano:
I see your point.. but the combat spell is pre-existing when it enters into the background count.   The spell starts at the caster... forms it's own astral construct which then flies to the target.   Under prior editions of SR you could even engage the spell in astral combat to stop it from reaching it's target.  (this was removed a long while back).

If you need a fluff reason why... they liberally make use of 'gathering and shaping mana'.   The instant spell has already had it's spell energies gathered and shaped and is simply being loosed.   The sustained spell needs to continually gather and shape mana from the ambient...  That's a very fluffy reason which makes a lot of sense to me.

Mechanically I prefer this result... because he helps police astral hazing cheesemongers.   They can't automagically reduce the force of any spell to hit them by 4 with their portable BGC which they actually GOT (didn't spend) BP's for.  It's supposed to be a drawback and negative quality...

[Mithlas]

It would sure be a drawback when you've barely survived taking down somebody with a shotgun and now need healing from the resident mage. I suppose muchkining is going to happen inevitably - my issue is that it's a very high background count (4), which is higher than most players are going to run into unless they head for Chicago. If it was rating 2 then even if it was being used as a Magic Arrestor then that wouldn't be necessarily destabilizing. As is, though, I agree that it could be abused if it reduced the force of anything incoming.

[Glyph]

If you think astral hazing is being abused, house rule it to make it less powerful (or limit it to just cyberzombies).  I would ban or nerf empathy software for that reason (I think it is overpowered, as well as pointless dice pool inflation all around).

That doesn't change the unambiguous text about how it affects magic by RAW, which is present when describing the astral hazing of cyberzombies, and the SURGE quality.  Personally, I would remove it from the SURGE qualities before nerfing it, because astral hazing is part of what is supposed to make cyberzombies so formidable.