[Shinobi Killfist]

Take it with a grain of salt however I'll just mention that I've survived multiple castings of F12 Lightning Balls. I've done it multiple times usually not in a row almost killed myself when I did it in a row. No initation just my skill and edge. xD

generally I think 3-6 DV to myself but to the opposition probably anywhere from 18DV to 30 DV (depending on the roll and if that roll was edged) If that was a Fireball.... I wonder what kinds of things it could have melted.... O.O'

Yeah but a force 12 powerball would have done more damage for less drain. Basically if one spell is more useful probably 80+% of the time the other spell having its niche really isn't a great excuse for it being a high drain value unless that niche is a lot more important than indirect spells niche.  And some of the niches people come up with like the elemental effects are vastly overblown.  Oh look I ignited his ammo woo hoo, um yeah I just killed him with the manabolt I didn't wound him and then get happy now that his gun blew up and I wounded him some more.  If it wasn't so easy to one shot everything with direct spells elemental effects night be a bit more impressive, they would even be more impressive if the guidelines for use existed.  GM discretion is nifty but its hard to talk about balance when arguments are based on it. 

[mtfeeney = Baron]

Indirect doesn't have higher drain than direct.  Elemental causes higher drain, not indirect.  Physical is higher drain than mana.  Stun damage reduces drain.  You're free to create spells that fit situations, if that's your problem.  Make an indirect-physical-physical-area spell without the elemental effect.  It's just some sort of non-elemental explosion or whatever.  Tada, no elemental drain, no elemental bonus.

[Mason]

I'm not gonna lie, Direct spells have too much of an advantage over Indirect. I think there should be a Drain modifier just for a spell being Direct. Pf course, I also believe that Direct spells should be able to have an elemental effect too. I miss Hellblast....I cause things to explode from the inside out with FIRE! BOOM!

In my own games, I house rule that Direct spells have +2 Drain, and elements can be added to them. It represents that Direct is simply a superior method of attack fairly well by my standards. It also discourages Powerballs, since it now Drains as much as Fireball and without an elemental side effect. People use it, but Overcasting happens less. I also now see Direct spells being designed with elemental effects, which makes them vicious as all get out, but the mage drops after a couple castings of them.

It helps that I don't let First Aid heal Drain. Only Medicine skill and natural healing can do that in my game. And since Medicine is a long term care heal....

[Mirikon]

I disagree. You throw a fastball in a slugger's wheelhouse, of course they're going to hit it out of the park. That's what using direct spells on living targets is. You're looking at the absolute best situation for that kind of spell. To continue the analogy, it is when you come up against anything that isn't a living target that direct spells falter, missing that curve that just kissed the outside corner of the plate. A power hitter just can't do anything with that kind of pitch.

In contrast, indirect spells are like the batter who might not get the home run, but can be counted on to get on base more times than not. Single, double, triple, even a bunt now and then. They can fight off the fastball in on their hands, and bring the curve ball on the corner into play. In other words, they are able to make things happen, even when a situation isn't the most favorable for them.

To use a different analogy, I'll go back to D&D. High level spellcasters are some of the most powerful people in the game, it is true, and appear brokenly so if you put, say, a prepared wizard against a fighter in a one-on-one arena match where the wizard has no other fights that day. You're playing directly into the wizard's strengths, there. But put those two in a dungeon crawl together, and the balance shifts, as the fighter takes on the better part of the work, since the wizard must conserve his spells to fight the Boss with. Likewise, Direct and Indirect spells have such a relationship. Put a direct spell against an indirect spell in the direct spell's most favorable situation, and of course it will come out on top. But the indirect spell has far greater utility than the direct spell, and can affect all those things the direct spell cannot touch. This is the point that people keep forgetting, mindlessly harping on the fact that a direct spell is better against a living foe than an indirect, while failing to see that there are weaknesses that direct spells have that indirect spells do not.

Mason, your post reads as follows: "I think Direct spells are more powerful than Indirect, but I also believe that Direct spells should be powered up with things they can't already do."

[Zilfer]

Take it with a grain of salt however I'll just mention that I've survived multiple castings of F12 Lightning Balls. I've done it multiple times usually not in a row almost killed myself when I did it in a row. No initation just my skill and edge. xD

generally I think 3-6 DV to myself but to the opposition probably anywhere from 18DV to 30 DV (depending on the roll and if that roll was edged) If that was a Fireball.... I wonder what kinds of things it could have melted.... O.O'

Yeah but a force 12 powerball would have done more damage for less drain. Basically if one spell is more useful probably 80+% of the time the other spell having its niche really isn't a great excuse for it being a high drain value unless that niche is a lot more important than indirect spells niche.  And some of the niches people come up with like the elemental effects are vastly overblown.  Oh look I ignited his ammo woo hoo, um yeah I just killed him with the manabolt I didn't wound him and then get happy now that his gun blew up and I wounded him some more.  If it wasn't so easy to one shot everything with direct spells elemental effects night be a bit more impressive, they would even be more impressive if the guidelines for use existed.  GM discretion is nifty but its hard to talk about balance when arguments are based on it.

I'll paint the situation a little more clearly. The DM was determined to stop my character with a road block with a rediculous amount of enemies. On a roadblock wall in the middle of the barrens I counted over six people on the wall. It also sounded like there were more behind the wall so not being able to see behind the wall I cannot hit those guys with a powerball so I opted a Lightning ball for a base 12F damage and since the DM(I like the guy just not his DMing style sometimes) seemed to want to stack the deck in his favor with numbers I wanted to eliminate the 1 to seeming 6 or more odds.

This would hopefully A hit every enemy (including ones I can't see), B cause everyone hit to take -2 to everything they do for the next 12 Combat turns, and C Possibly incure the "Don't Tase Me Bro" roll that could also put some of them out of the count.

My otherspell in this situation was Stun Ball. Would have been a hell of a lot less drain but again wouldn't have had quite the same effect. And I know all about DM descression....

Needless to say you should never 'overcharge' an experimental prototype mech machine that shoots a gun that vaporizes walls and people. Otherwise you get so much heat that you need to pay shadowrunners to kill you on recording to confirm the kill all while misleading them that your not 'Black Demon' the international terrorist that blew up 3 city blocks. xD Damn F12 lightning spells! (ah that DM is so pick mohawk xD)

[Mason]

I disagree. You throw a fastball in a slugger's wheelhouse, of course they're going to hit it out of the park. That's what using direct spells on living targets is. You're looking at the absolute best situation for that kind of spell. To continue the analogy, it is when you come up against anything that isn't a living target that direct spells falter, missing that curve that just kissed the outside corner of the plate. A power hitter just can't do anything with that kind of pitch.

In contrast, indirect spells are like the batter who might not get the home run, but can be counted on to get on base more times than not. Single, double, triple, even a bunt now and then. They can fight off the fastball in on their hands, and bring the curve ball on the corner into play. In other words, they are able to make things happen, even when a situation isn't the most favorable for them.

To use a different analogy, I'll go back to D&D. High level spellcasters are some of the most powerful people in the game, it is true, and appear brokenly so if you put, say, a prepared wizard against a fighter in a one-on-one arena match where the wizard has no other fights that day. You're playing directly into the wizard's strengths, there. But put those two in a dungeon crawl together, and the balance shifts, as the fighter takes on the better part of the work, since the wizard must conserve his spells to fight the Boss with. Likewise, Direct and Indirect spells have such a relationship. Put a direct spell against an indirect spell in the direct spell's most favorable situation, and of course it will come out on top. But the indirect spell has far greater utility than the direct spell, and can affect all those things the direct spell cannot touch. This is the point that people keep forgetting, mindlessly harping on the fact that a direct spell is better against a living foe than an indirect, while failing to see that there are weaknesses that direct spells have that indirect spells do not.

Mason, your post reads as follows: "I think Direct spells are more powerful than Indirect, but I also believe that Direct spells should be powered up with things they can't already do."

You seem to be neglecting to realize that Direct spells work just fine on non living targets. The physical version of the spells, Powerbolt and Powerball, hit everything you see in the physical world. Due to that, Direct is simply far more powerful.

My post should have read as "Direct spells are more powerful, and because of that they should cause more Drain for the benefit of being stronger. Furthermore, the spell creation system should allow spells which are established Shadowrun canon to be created and used, such as Hellblast. There is precedent for Direct spells having elemental effects. The choice between Indirect and Direct then simply becomes a choice between effect and the Drain caused by that effect."

Also, Direct can be completely resisted. Indirect effects would create the elemental effect and hit the environment whether the target dodged/soaked or not. Direct requires the spell to have affected a target for the elemental to work at all.

[All4BigGuns]

Direct spells against a non-living target are far more chancy than Indirect spells against the same target. For example, getting the minimum of 5 hits to affect that Steel Lynx with a Powerbolt is going to happen less often than that same drone getting smacked by a Lightning Bolt. Also, while that Powerball is hitting everything you can see in its area of effect, that Ball Lightning can hit those you can't see as well as those you can. That is what people are glossing over and ignoring.

[Zilfer]

^Which is why I choose lightning ball over stun ball despite the larger drain. I mean I could have knocked the 6 guys on the wall out and chanced the people behind the wall trying to see them before they see me.

[Shinobi Killfist]

^Which is why I choose lightning ball over stun ball despite the larger drain. I mean I could have knocked the 6 guys on the wall out and chanced the people behind the wall trying to see them before they see me.

Yes in that situation lightningball might have been a better choice.  For most people the risk of getting shot is probably about the same as the risk of taking way too much drain 11 DV is not easy to soak.  Thing is most of the time direct spells are more useful, most non-living objects are fairly easy to hit with direct spells.  Indirect spells become the anti-drone and target the unseen spell which while nifty really isn't awesome enough to justify the increased drain you will have since without an elemental effect they are pretty damn pathetic.

[Mirikon]

Mason, there's also precedence for Grounding and Spell Locks. You want to talk about the past, there's Shadowrun 2050. But just like those things, Hellblast is gone, and likely is never coming back, partly because it would be too powerful.

As A4BG and Zilfer said, you forget the critical part of that spiel the 'that you can see' part. Funny thing about indirect spells? They can be cast at things you can't see, or can't see with you natural senses. If I, say, have a pair of ultrasound goggles, which picks up the guy under the invisibility spell, Indirect spells give me an option I don't have with Direct spells.

Yes in that situation lightningball might have been a better choice.  For most people the risk of getting shot is probably about the same as the risk of taking way too much drain 11 DV is not easy to soak.  Thing is most of the time direct spells are more useful, most non-living objects are fairly easy to hit with direct spells.  Indirect spells become the anti-drone and target the unseen spell which while nifty really isn't awesome enough to justify the increased drain you will have since without an elemental effect they are pretty damn pathetic.

Different tools for different jobs. Direct spells are less effective against non-living targets, because they have to beat Object Resistance before even thinking about taking effect. Indirect spells take effect so long as you don't crit glitch the spellcasting test.

What you, and others, forget is that some targets are easier to kill with an indirect spell than with a direct one. To go back to the Mage and Troll example, it is foolish to try and stunbolt a mage. Between their high Will and counterspelling, they're better able to resist such spells. Use a flamethrower spell instead. For the Troll, with the higher body (and better armor), they're better able to shrug off the flamethrower. Stunbolt them instead. Use the right tool for the right job, and you don't have to rely on double-edged swords like overcasting as much.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Different tools for different jobs. Direct spells are less effective against non-living targets, because they have to beat Object Resistance before even thinking about taking effect. Indirect spells take effect so long as you don't crit glitch the spellcasting test.

What you, and others, forget is that some targets are easier to kill with an indirect spell than with a direct one. To go back to the Mage and Troll example, it is foolish to try and stunbolt a mage. Between their high Will and counterspelling, they're better able to resist such spells. Use a flamethrower spell instead. For the Troll, with the higher body (and better armor), they're better able to shrug off the flamethrower. Stunbolt them instead. Use the right tool for the right job, and you don't have to rely on double-edged swords like overcasting as much.

Yes we all get the different tool for different job thing.  The problem is one tool is used more often as its job comes up more often and the other tool is for less common jobs.  The less common tool should not be a higher drain.  Its like lets say there was a heavy pistol that did 7P had a 45 shot clip, could fire in sa/bf/fa had 6 points of RC and fired at sniper rifle ranges but it couldn't be silenced or suppressed, then you have another heavy pistol does 5p, 10 shot clip but has a built in silencer which was super good and reduced the perception to hear it by 8 dice.  Sure if you needed to keep it quiet gun 2 is the better tool for the job but wouldn't it seem weird if it had a higher avaialbiltiy and cost than gun one?

[All4BigGuns]

The problem really is that people are falling into the trap of thinking that in order for two things to be "balanced" versus each other that they have to be absolutely 100% equal in all regards. This is not true.

[mtfeeney = Baron]

That's a funny line of thought.  By the same theory, Physical Barrier should be (F/2)-8 DV.  I've never used the spell, while I have used stunbolt.  Therefore, by what you said, that means that PB's drain should be based on how useful it is in every situation instead of the merits of the spell itself.  This would revolutionize the game, I think.  Useful spell?  Penalty.  Crappy/Niche spell?  Overcast it like a mofo, you'll never be drained.

[RHat]

The problem really is that people are falling into the trap of thinking that in order for two things to be "balanced" versus each other that they have to be absolutely 100% equal in all regards. This is not true.

Indeed.  There are "core" spells, the keys to a character's general tactics, and "utility" spells, the things that make them flexible.  Here's the thing: You might think core spells are more powerful/valuable because they're used more often, but why don't you go ahead and play a character who has nothing but core spells.  See how far you get.  You have to have a mix of the two.

[Mirikon]

The problem really is that people are falling into the trap of thinking that in order for two things to be "balanced" versus each other that they have to be absolutely 100% equal in all regards. This is not true.

Indeed.  There are "core" spells, the keys to a character's general tactics, and "utility" spells, the things that make them flexible.  Here's the thing: You might think core spells are more powerful/valuable because they're used more often, but why don't you go ahead and play a character who has nothing but core spells.  See how far you get.  You have to have a mix of the two.

Indeed. Even on a combat mage, I don't find myself taking more than two (MAYBE three) combat spells at chargen. Mainly because the way to be a truly effective combat mage is not through direct damage (street sams and combat-focused adepts will almost always have you beat), but in battlefield control and debuff/manipulation spells. Orgy, Mob Mind, and Ice Slick, for instance, are three BEAUTIFUL spells for a combat mage, even better than Manabolt/Stunbolt, IMHO, since you can use them to set up the main damage dealers.