[Kincaid]

Good point on Living Focus, the multiple ways to reduce penalties would allow an Adept to get a really nice buff-spell without caring. Mages running out of casting dice when using illusions repeatedly happens here, so this would really help. Heck, the Mystic Adept may want to take this one in the future.

Also some of the nastier health spells.  But yeah, getting to most out of Living Focus requires the adept to coordinate with someone else at the table, but assuming that's done effectively, it can be awesome.  As a GM, I *love* the idea of henchmen with Living Focus.  For the WoD fans out there, think a Tremere with a pack of Blood Brothers.

[Michael Chandra]

I'm silly. Mystic Adept can simply use Adept Centering, doesn't need Living Focus. ^_^' MA just said he's likely taking that as his fourth Initiation, so he can use Adept Centering (rather than Centering) and keep 4 spells active.

(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)

Living Focus is nice for an Adept though. Psyche also helps there, imagine a few Adepts with Psyche, Living Focus, X Initiation Grades and X buff-spells on them, such as Combat Sense and Increase Strength.

[Patrick Goodman]

CGL is a big company. Or is it a small company? I guess it depends on the what the excuse-of-the-week needs to be.

The company's small. The freelancer pool who writes all this stuff is somewhat broad, however, and while we try to talk to each other...we're not always successful.

For example: I wrote up versions of the spells One Less, Slay, and Slaughter for Sail Away Sweet Sister. Someone else wrote the spell section for Street Grimoire, and I mentioned this to that person. After that...I wasn't in that loop. Frankly, I didn't have time to be in that loop because I was working on another project and had a lot more Real Life happen to me than I really needed, but that's a separate issue. The point is...we don't always coordinate like we should. And that's as much on us as it is on CGL. And we're working on it.

Another point is...sometimes people need the same thing for their work, and they don't know the other guy's working on it, and they put it together, and they both get published. This is a CGL thing, but sometimes it can't be helped. Depending on where/when in the cycle things happen, one version of a thing might be in layout or on the way out the door before the other is turned in.

We're all human. Even the guys at CGL. I'm not making excuses for anyone but myself...and believe me, I'd love things tightened up, especially if my name's in the credits or on the cover. But I accept that things happen, and I know that there's a real effort being made to make things better. Whether it works out or not is a separate question that's yet to be answered.

[Tarislar]

(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)

I'm thinking the same thing.
Heightened Concentration for 0.5 PP is basically going to be the same as having Focused Concentration, at least that is what it is looking like to me.

[Michael Chandra]

(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)

Living Focus is nice for an Adept though. Psyche also helps there, imagine a few Adepts with Psyche, Living Focus, X Initiation Grades and X buff-spells on them, such as Combat Sense and Increase Strength.

I'm an idiot. Had the whole Mystic Adept in my head so forgot that Living Focus only allows 1 spell, the way it's formulated. So only 1 spell would work, but you could take Psyche to reduce the penalty or probably use Heightened Concern to ignore that 1 penalty, and Adept Centering is still an option.

[Tarislar]

Yeah, I hadn't read it in full yet, so I wasn't sure on the multiple spells.

Still, if you know your group has a good mage the 2 dice penalty v/s getting 4-5 dice off the spell isn't a bad trade off.

Heightened Concentration I'm thinking will cancel out those 2 dice.

And for a Mystic Adept, as you mentioned, Heightened Concentration is a solid alternative to Focused Concentration.

[Michael Chandra]

If you have Adept Centering the Living Focus penalty is especially not that bad, or Psyche for just a -1. That spell could be +4 melee damage, or Agility at a solid base, or extra defense dice, or even invisibility for catching enemies unaware, so quite nice.

[jim1701]

Back on the actual topic for a bit...

What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?

Either way, this makes [Element] Grenade an amazingly potent spell. If you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then you're adding net hits to damage unopposed. If you don't roll Spellcasting at all, then it's a spell any magician build can take, even if they don't bother with the Spellcasting skill, like dedicated conjurers.

Also, [Sense] Link really needs a line that says you can't target spells through it. Without that line, that is immediately what a mage will want to use it for.

My read is that it requires two rolls.  The first is a standard spellcasting roll followed by the second roll as described in the spell to "fire" it at the target.  Mechanically speaking I think it would still be a single action though I think that part may be a little vague.

[Michael Chandra]

Here's an interesting question: If you Reckless cast Grenade, is it an attack action that will not let you detonate in the same IP?

[jim1701]

Here's an interesting question: If you Reckless cast Grenade, is it an attack action that will not let you detonate in the same IP?

That is a good question.  If you were firing a grenade launcher and intended to set off the grenade wirelessly, would you be able to do that in one IP?  It seems like the answer should be yes though I generally let my grenades go boom on contact so it isn't something I've looked at closely.  I'll have to read through the grenade rules again when I get the chance.

[Koshnek]

It seems to me the magic + tradition drain stat roll takes the place of the throwing roll. You would still have to roll spellcasting to determine its success, DV and glitching. Otherwise you're throwing a ball of nothing for no reason.

I re-read the spell, and it actually states that that roll replaces the throwing roll grenades require for placement. The Magic + Tradition stat roll doesn't affect the base DV/create the spell because the spell has it's own DV (Magic + Spellcasting) in the same way that the throwing roll doesn't affect a Grenade's base damage because it has it's own DV. (I'm not taking scatter and the distance from the explosion into account here).

I don't think creating the spell and throwing it into position counts as an attack, either. Nothing has been done yet. It's the difference between potential energy and kinetic energy. The threat is there, but it's not an attack yet. Also, like others have said there is the option to detonate grenades on contact. I've never GM'd, but I'd let my player take the extra drain to get it off that turn. Of course, that mean's my NPCs could too...muahahahaha...

[Michael Chandra]

It adds the interesting advantage where a Grenade spell will have 3 more damage than the equivalent Indirect Combat Area Spell, since you don't lose 3 hits to the threshold. On the other hand it requires activation, meaning that if you cast it as a Complex action people can run away from it without sacrificing Initiative for it.

[jim1701]

It adds the interesting advantage where a Grenade spell will have 3 more damage than the equivalent Indirect Combat Area Spell, since you don't lose 3 hits to the threshold. On the other hand it requires activation, meaning that if you cast it as a Complex action people can run away from it without sacrificing Initiative for it.

Yeah, I thought that too.  If they had made it a free action to detonate it would work pretty much like mundane grenades (wireless) in practice.  Of course timing can make this work for you too.  Hold an action to go last and then toss the grenade so the end of the turn detonates it.  That has the added benefit in that most everyone has used up their initiative by that point so using the run away rule isn't an option.  Making them run even has its own benefits under certain circumstances like flushing targets out from cover, for example. 

[firebug]

You activate Command Preparations as a Simple action, right?  Assuming you are allowed to detonate it in the same pass, that'd give them a surprising edge with those spells as the only way to do that otherwise would be with Reckless Casting like Michael said.  Pretty awesome.

Is Shadow Spells going to be usable in missions later?  Because if so, I have the feeling the answer will be "No, you can't." for missions.

[Kincaid]

Now I'm wondering about overlapping spell explosion damage values...