[Hobbes]

Well if they suddenly introduce a arbitrary skillcap of +4 into the game, then congrats they've just broken the foci rules, the initiation rules...and probably more.

As was suggested by one of the previous posters, buffing tech or introducing some new ware would make sense as you don't start changing rules which will suddenly require a fundamental changing of the whole game system.

"Broken" isn't the word I'd use.  Magical characters have many more sources for additional dice than Mundane characters.  It's one of the reasons folks call it Magicrun. 

Introducing some new source of additional dice buffs everyone and doesn't address the balance issues that Wakshaani is looking to address.  Although you have an excellent point about Foci and Initiation, a skill cap will be a rough pill for existing characters that have made huge investments in high rating Foci ect. 

I suppose you could introduce something that lowers magic and buffs dice pools for moderate costs.  I can't think of what that would be in game fluff though.

[Coyote]

I suppose you could introduce something that lowers magic and buffs dice pools for moderate costs.  I can't think of what that would be in game fluff though.

I think that a reasonable option would be to have most drug use lower dice pools for magical tasks. The problem seems to be not with magic options for boosts, but with the fact that it's too easy to mix magic and other sources of benefits such as cyberware, bioware, and drugs. Cyber and bio are theoretically handled via Essence loss, but there is no real penalty for using drugs to augment magic use.

[Rosa]

Well if they suddenly introduce a arbitrary skillcap of +4 into the game, then congrats they've just broken the foci rules, the initiation rules...and probably more.

As was suggested by one of the previous posters, buffing tech or introducing some new ware would make sense as you don't start changing rules which will suddenly require a fundamental changing of the whole game system.

"Broken" isn't the word I'd use.  Magical characters have many more sources for additional dice than Mundane characters.  It's one of the reasons folks call it Magicrun. 

Introducing some new source of additional dice buffs everyone and doesn't address the balance issues that Wakshaani is looking to address.  Although you have an excellent point about Foci and Initiation, a skill cap will be a rough pill for existing characters that have made huge investments in high rating Foci ect. 

I suppose you could introduce something that lowers magic and buffs dice pools for moderate costs.  I can't think of what that would be in game fluff though.

It does "break" the system in the sense, that if you introduced a cap on bonus skill dice then you would effectively be forced to completely redesign the rules for foci, initiation, adept powers, aim actions...and probably more. I'm not saying that it couldn't be done, but it would be much much easier to introduce new ware that gives bonus dice to skills plus it would easier to explain in fluff.
fx.
skill wires version 1.0: essentially the traditional ones we already have.
skill wires version 2.0: adds it rating to an existing skill ( or possibly group )
Tailored pheromones: make them rating 1-6 rating instead of 1-3 as that are now.
Reflex recorders: make them stackable with skill wires and allow them to enhance any skill, not only physical skills

These ideas were just off the top of my head, I'm sure people can come up with more.

As for this imbalance that people talk about. First of all I think we all agree that at some point magical characters will surpass mundane,  however as was talked about earlier in this post it doesn't happen until you amassed some hundreds of karma ( exactly how many is a matter of debate ), but the thing most games never ever come close to that amount of karma ( someone claimed most games never pass the 30 karma mark in another thread ), so how big of an issue is this imbalance actually in most games? Second of all, I have never ever seen or played a rpg that does not have this issue, in fact I would say that it is rather common for games that include magic, that magic characters start out a bit behind the curve in terms of stat and skills but then close gap and eventually overtake the mundane.  Now given the fact that most people apparently play shortlived campaigns, then again how much of an issue is this really? Of course there will be balancing issues that's the way of these games, but one should be extremely carefully in how you go about adressing them, need I say Technomancers?

As for having to swallow a bitter pill, well maybe some would, I won't, we are already playing a mix of 4th and 5th edition rules at my table due to the many issues with 5th edition and I would not feel compelled to play a new edition if it just made things worse. In essence I'm ranting because I hope that efforts will go more towards fixing all the issues with the current edition so new players can get to enjoy Shadowrun the way it's supposed to be enjoyed like the rest of us have done for years without having to be mystified and frustrated due to...well you know.

That's not a bad idea Coyote.

[adzling]

So there's a couple of main problems I see:

1). Magic is pretty much the best route to raw power and the most flexible for everyone but riggers and deckers.
If I hadn't limited it our whole table would be mages.

2). Mystic adepts are the best at whatever the are designed to do. I had to ban them outright at our table.

3). If you want to cap things how about dice pool augs are limited by skill? (attributes are still subject to the separate +4 aug max)

[Blue Rose]

Unfortunately, any augmentation you introduce, mages can get it, too.  Adepts in particular.

And when doing anything to magic, particularly buffs or anything else sustained, you have to be mindful of both casting the spell at a low force for four hits and saying frag the limit, using some combination of edge and reagents, and getting twenty hits.  And making both relevant but not ludicrous is a feat.

[Rosa]

Unfortunately, any augmentation you introduce, mages can get it, too.  Adepts in particular.

Absolutely and unfortunately 5th ed. has made it much more forgiving for mages to have low magic

And when doing anything to magic, particularly buffs or anything else sustained, you have to be mindful of both casting the spell at a low force for four hits and saying frag the limit, using some combination of edge and reagents, and getting twenty hits.  And making both relevant but not ludicrous is a feat.

Yes, as much as i love the Whole idea of reagents, it probably needs to be reworked so you can't so obviously abuse the rules. As i said 5th ed. has made it much more forgiving to have low magic than previous editions. In earlier edition it was always a tough choice, go for augmentation and Loose magic power? Or stay pure magician and have the most magic power you could but no augmentations. Now its a no brainer, because if you have low magic you just use some edge or reagents to remove limits, so therefore no real downside to having low magic.

[PJ]

What if Essence loss imposed a cumulative penalty to using Magic, instead of just reducing it?  Like -1 die for every 0.5 Essence, rounded up.

It could be like a special Background Count/Astral Hazing that only applies to the Awakened character due to his Essence loss.  Instead of losing Magic when he loses Essence, he finds it harder and harder to use.

[HobDobson]

If you're worried about all these over-powered spells blowing past available defenses, a simple remedy would be to return to SR4A's spell defense rules. Instead of breaking down a skill rating + bonuses pool into smaller pools per initiative pass, go back to the pool defending the selected members of the team against all incoming spells for the round. At the low end of the casting spectum, a team's caster is only defending against one spell a round, if that, so there's little effect. But once the opposition starts scaling up, it should make a significant difference (the best weapon against a magician being another magician, backed up with advanced weaponry of course.)

Likewise, if mystic adepts are too overpowered for a given table, houseruling that counterspelling can be used to unweave their fancy effects to an extent or that disenchanting can temporarily throttle down a focus might be an option. Seeing as how they have to squeeze the most effect out of their few appicable skills on a regular basis, a GM could reasonably limit that to aspected mages and specialists ("When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.")

Probably neither idea would satisfy most folks, but overhauling the whole bonus system seems like a lot more work.

[Coyote]

Likewise, if mystic adepts are too overpowered for a given table

The relatively simple solution that I use to balance Mystic Adepts without banning them is that they are limited to either using skills from Sorcery or from Conjuring, but not both. Giving up Astral Projection to go from Mage to MysAd is not a big penalty, but giving up spirits is a major penalty, and it seems to balance Mages vs MysAds quite well.

There is still the usual "Magic-using characters are better than non-mages", but that's now just a general magic issue rather than a problem made specifically worse by the MysAd rules.

[adzling]

that's good but it only moves the problem to Mystic Adepts make better Physical Adepts than Physical Adepts do.

[Tym Jalynsfein]

that's good but it only moves the problem to Mystic Adepts make better Physical Adepts than Physical Adepts do.

Which is why they cost more to play... A Mystic Adept with access to spells/spirits IS better than a Physical Adept.

[adzling]

Yeah but they don't cost more to play.

They cost more to develop in every area they could possibly develop, but that's an irrelevant argument/ logical fallacy.

The best measure is what you can do out of chargen and if you could build a non-MA that is better than the MA.

A Mystic adept out of chargen can do anything (except decking and rigging due to high $$ requirements) better than any other build route.

This, if your entire group optimizes for effectiveness, means that the MA is the "correct" choice almost all the time with a few exceptions.

This is demonstrably borked balancing/ game design.

[Tym Jalynsfein]

Yeah but they don't cost more to play.

They cost more to develop in every area they could possibly develop, but that's an irrelevant argument/ logical fallacy.

The best measure is what you can do out of chargen and if you could build a non-MA that is better than the MA.

A Mystic adept out of chargen can do anything (except decking and rigging due to high $$ requirements) better than any other build route.

This, if your entire group optimizes for effectiveness, means that the MA is the "correct" choice almost all the time with a few exceptions.

This is demonstrably borked balancing/ game design.

You are demonstrably incorrect...

They DO cost more to Play.
Mystic Adept is a Higher Priority than a Pure Adept is for all categories.
Mystic Adept Costs More in Point Buy/Life Modules (35) than An Adept does (20) (and even more than a Magician Costs (30), in fact).

SO... Not sure why you think they do not cost more, since the rules indicate that they do?

[adzling]

You can create a mystic adept in chargen that is better at your chosen area of expertise than any other type of build, excepting some high resource archetypes like riggers and deckers.

So given the above why would you play anything else?

This is borked game balance/ design at its worst.

The cost to achieve this dominance is the same as building any other character in chargen, your priorities + 25 karma.

[Reaver]

And, at 5 karma per power point (they start with 0), they have to expend a fair bit of karma to get those adept abilities.



I have a MA, PA, a mage, a sammy, and a decker in the game I GM and they are sitting around 220 karma earned (more or less).

At this level of play, all I can really say about the MA is he is extremely flexible. But that has generally been because he has been 'behind the curve' almost the entire time.
In getting everything he wanted (which I advised against... but, his character), it caused him to be not only short on in dice pools, but also in skills. His equipment just wasn't up to par, and his flaws hampered him big time.

Now, his dice pools were low, but not dangerously (for my style of play) at 8 to 10 on average, it meant he always 'just' got by, or took a little more drain, or did just a little less damage then the pure mage or physical adept.

And while the pure mage and PA where trading in money for karma, the was hording money to buy a focus. When they where spending karma on initiation, he was bonding foci..... he just continues to be that step behind the others.

Which in turn has affected his character build and decisions. I KNOW that when he created his character he, had a vision of some indomiable force on the battlefield, punching heads clean off with one hand, while frying groups of enemies with fireballs from his other... (cause after 5 years of playing with him, that's ALL he plays )...
But the reality is, he can't out punch the physical adept, and he can't out cast the pure mage. But what he can to very well is suppress and support enemy forces, if not out kill them. So now instead of fireballs (which he used to use all the time), its Chaos world and Orgy. Instead of trying to go toe to toe with the front line fighters, he leaves that to the PA and sammy while he goes decker/rigger hunting.... In short, he's the 'back up guy'. He's never the primary lead in any tactical plans, but every single contingency plan seems to revolve around him...