Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Squirrel on <01-10-16/0903:20>
-
Dear users of this forum!
I humbly request your cooperation in this theoretical inquiry.
Some or a lot of you will think 5 karma is spot on for spell costs, but if you'd have to change it where would you tend towards?
Context:
I am currently thinking about halving karma costs so that we get back into the 4th ed char gen territory of about 400-500 points.
This is happening along side various simplification to amass a set of house rules for my group and maybe the world out there, if they don't suck.
Thank you all for your participation in text and/or vote! :)
-
I'm ok with the status quo, but they sure shouldn't be any more expensive.
That is: I would be ok if aspected magicians would get spells at char gen. Rising costs on spells would even more gimp them than they already are.
-
To explain my vote for making prices lower if necessary... Just do something along the lines of Qualities in Character Creation. They're cheaper to purchase during CC, return to normal price in-game. So charge 2 or 3 Karma for new spells to begin with, leave the price the same everywhere else.
-
I echo Mij and Spade.
-
I would go with MijRai suggestion of reduced cost during chargen and regular otherwise.
The mage already paid the entry fee in the form of paying for his Magic score and the currents costs to adding spells to one's repertoire are pretty fair to advance with.
-
To clarify, the costs at chargen and inplay will not differ. It is either always less or always more.
This thread is not about how (aspected) mages will be compensated for their additional costs or limtations.
-
Pretty much everything is overcosted in karma in this edition.
-
Magic advancement overall is lower cost than Stat or Skill advancement so I'd leave the Magic advancement as is and address Stat/Skill advancement somehow.
So, I guess I'm in the leave it as is category.
-
Magic advancement overall is lower cost than Stat or Skill advancement so I'd leave the Magic advancement as is and address Stat/Skill advancement somehow.
True, and fair!
-
Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.
-
Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.
Well in that case I would lower it a bit because:
A) I play a mage. ;D
B) Did pay the entry fee in chargen to become a mage.
C) Having more access to spells will give people a reason to take spells for added functionality.
That said however, doing so may then make the Mage even more a Jack of All Trades that will let them step on a lot more toes of the rest of the party.
-
Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.
Based on your OP, if you are looking at the 4th ed. Char gen costs, Spells cost 3 BP at character generation, and then 5 karma during play. So based on that, you would be rounding up if you are doing something to effectively halve the cost of things.
That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to just use 4th edition char-gen rules with the Fifth Edition changes. There are only a few changes and most of them aren't to the base system that is needed for basic creation.
-
I would decrease them, as it can only be helpfull to a team if the spell slinger is more versatile in what they can do and Theres plenty of other stuff a magician needs to spend karma on.
Personally i think the cost of 5 karma is sort of ok, however if pressed i would definitely lower the costs for the reasons stated above. I think 3 karma to learn a spell is more fair tbh.
-
That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to just use 4th edition char-gen rules with the Fifth Edition changes. There are only a few changes and most of them aren't to the base system that is needed for basic creation.
I am not a fan of the 4th char gen. I just happen to mention that the amount of points would reach roughly that level from back then. 4th BP system is the worst of both worlds. The minmax of priority due to flat costs and the high numbers of points and choices of the karmabuy system. 4th BP sucks.
Clarification:
This is not an attempt to square 4th ed BP with 5th ed!
-
I think they are ok, but if I had to change them, I would opt to slightly decrease costs.
-
Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes.
That said - I'd probably do this:
- Your first [Magic] spells costs 4 karma apiece
- You second [Magic] spells cost 6 karma apiece
- You third [Magic] spells cost 8 karma apiece
- You fourth [Magic] spells cost 10 karma apiece
- You fifth [Magic] spells cost 12 karma apiece
I'd probably allow metamagics that allow you to specialize in certain category that reduce the cost of all spells in that category by 3.
-
Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes
Good reason to drop costs across the board IMO ;D
-
falar, that could get messy with raising of magic.
-
plus raising costs then offering discounts to lower them back down just seems to be adding more paperwork.
Which is fine for a Logic tradition because they like that sort of thing, but not so much for the other guys. ;)
-
Part of the problem is that learning the spell is the only way to gain access to the spell, unless you happen to know an alchemist who can make preparations of that spell. And since the alchemist won't be there, you're limited to timed or contact preparations, which have issues of their own.
Back in 4th, I proposed something I called Spell Matrices, as a nod to a construct from Earthdawn. How I set it up, you had a material object which held the 'pattern' for the spell, at a set Force. These items cost 1 Karma to bind them, but with that, you could cast the spell in the item at the force set at creation (making spellcasting and drain resistance rolls as normal) so long as you held the item during casting. So say you had a revolver that had a Fireball (Force 4) spell in it. You'd have to have the revolver in hand to use the spell, and every time you used it, it would be at Force 4. Since these are physical items that can be broken or stolen, and don't actually increase dice pools like Foci do, it seemed like a reasonable price. Especially since you'd basically be screaming that you're a mage, and move yourself to the top of everyone's 'to geek' list.
-
Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes
Good reason to drop costs across the board IMO ;D
That's what I'd do. But the question wasn't that. :)
I personally think that advancement is hella screwed up. I believe you should be able to do some kind of advancement every one or two sessions starting out.
-
Personally I'm starting to consider flattening advancement in skills/attributes to match most other advancement.
Maybe something like :
Skills - 8 Karma each up to 6 skill, 12 Karma each up to 8 skill, 16 Karma each up to 10 skill, 20 Karma each up to 12 skill
Attributes - 20 Karma each
(and half that cost during character gen Karma spend)
That way you can start with an specialised character and broaden out post character gen, or a broad one and specialise post character gen, and end up at the same level of effectiveness. Gets rid of much of the push to go for 1 or 6 skill in character generation.
The rest is pretty flat already, it's just these two. Initiation isn't quite flat, but isn't far off, and some of the benefits of initiation scale by initiate grade, so aren't flat bonuses, so it's fair.
-
I'd lower them simply because as is its hard to justify some of the spells that are thematically nice but don't really offer a mechanical advantage or are situation specific variants of existing spells. Of course I only say this because of your requirements for a specific answer I'd actually prefer an alternative way to gain spells e.g. aquiring from one of those corporate data libraries that are mentioned here and there. That way a GM could grant a mage extra spells if needed or not likely to see much ingame use e.g purify fire (I can't think of many situations where removing impuriities from a flame is going to make or break a game) sadly this would be more towards the cash side rather than the karma side of the mage spell costs but I think my point stands on its own.