I brought this topic up specifically with shapeshifting, but more generally, is the Concentration maneuver per spell or in general? If it's per spell, then it seems that maintaining a spell is far more taxing in Genesys than in any other system I have read, particularly since there's no minimum duration beyond the end of your next turn. Actually, either way it's a huge potential Strain drain if the caster needs to make any other maneuver.

One suggestion I read was make a spell that can be maintained last a minimum of 1 round per rank in the casting skill or in knowledge. Or simply make spells encounter length.

Our understanding was that it was per spell.

With the conjure spell, the druid magic implement allows the user to summon an ally without making the concentration maneuver. Precedent to think about.

OK, the balancing mechanism in spell casting in this game is Strain. All the proposals being made to remove Strain cost go right to tilting that balance. In 5E it's the limited number of spell slots available between rests. If GM's remove that Strain cost the remove the constraint on their casters. To each their own, but in the campaign I am running I like the Strain costs for casting, concentration, etc right where they are as they are making my caster think and balance his resources.

I could see a Tier 4 or 5 talent being made that allows you to reduce the cost to maintain one spell at a time from a Maneuver to an Incidental action for the rest of the Encounter for 1 Story Point.

Maybe Tier 5...

In my Avatar: The Second Age conversion, I introduced a mechanic (pre-Genesys) that allowed benders to "sustain" certain forms [spells] (like an airbender who created a vortex). As a maneuver either that turn, or at the beginning of their next turn, the bender can take a maneuver to sustain the form. If they choose to do so, the form is sustained and they incur a single Setback dice on all subsequent skill checks. This is on a per-form basis, so a bender could theoretically sustain multiple forms, but the Setback penalty is cumulative.

However the way around this is that benders can 'upgrade' their forms with XP to represent their training and expertise. So they can upgrade a form so that they can remove this Setback penalty. That way, benders who are really skilled at certain forms can thus sustain those forms without penalty.

Only if a bender has sustained a form for more than 3 rounds do they start suffering strain to keep sustaining it. Now that Genesys is out, I simply named the maneuver to sustain forms "Concentrate". In our play tests, this has worked out nicely. The Setback dice can be removed with appropriate talents, or with enough XP, and it hasn't hindered gameplay in any way that has been inconvenient.

2 hours ago, Dragonshadow said:

I brought this topic up specifically with shapeshifting, but more generally, is the Concentration maneuver per spell or in general? If it's per spell, then it seems that maintaining a spell is far more taxing in Genesys than in any other system I have read, particularly since there's no minimum duration beyond the end of your next turn. Actually, either way it's a huge potential Strain drain if the caster needs to make any other maneuver.

One suggestion I read was make a spell that can be maintained last a minimum of 1 round per rank in the casting skill or in knowledge. Or simply make spells encounter length.

Page 218 says:

" Spells that can be sustained through concentration last until the end of the character's next turn…. However, if the character performs the concentrate maneuver during that next turn, the spell's effect last until the end of the character's following turn, instead. "

That, to me, says one spell per manoeuvre.

9 minutes ago, c__beck said:

Page 218 says:

" Spells that can be sustained through concentration last until the end of the character's next turn…. However, if the character performs the concentrate maneuver during that next turn, the spell's effect last until the end of the character's following turn, instead. "

That, to me, says one spell per manoeuvre.

I read that text to indicate that a single maneuver is sufficient to sustain all existing spells. However, I assume the intent of the rule is that you need a concentrate maneuver for each spell.

Rules Lawyer:

Will spell 1 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn. Will spell 2 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn.

4 minutes ago, ubik2 said:

I read that text to indicate that a single maneuver is sufficient to sustain all existing spells. However, I assume the intent of the rule is that you need a concentrate maneuver for each spell.

Rules Lawyer:

Will spell 1 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn. Will spell 2 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn.

[yodaVoice]

Ambiguous it is, yes. Reach out to customer service we should, hmm?

[/yodaVoice]

4 minutes ago, ubik2 said:

I read that text to indicate that a single maneuver is sufficient to sustain all existing spells. However, I assume the intent of the rule is that you need a concentrate maneuver for each spell.

Rules Lawyer:

Will spell 1 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn. Will spell 2 end? No. They performed the concentrate maneuver during the turn.

Someone send this over to the Devs, STAT!

A single concentration maneuver for multiple spells is a somewhat useful counterbalance to going "nova" with buff actions pre-encounter and not having to worry about sustaining any of them. The problem is that having to sustain each one separately is swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction.

Frankly as is, for the most part, you can only sustain one spell, and if you're actually moving during your turn it's as costly as the initial casting is.

There are other much more interesting ways to counterbalance a myriad of long duration spell effects than maneuvers: add one Setback to subsequent casting roll per spell currently being sustained, for instance. Make a blown concentration check (however implemented) bring the whole stack of spells crashing down, and perhaps add Setbacks to any such check. That's letting the dice do the talking .

As written, the maneuver cost is largely a "nerf" (to borrow an apropos MMORPG term) against some fairly standard caster conventions (not only buff/debuff, but also casters looking to drop a wall into place for a fast getaway, etc.). I recognize that I can simply house rule it away, but I'd rather see the rule as written be reconsidered.

That was a quick reply!

3 minutes ago, Dragonshadow said:

A single concentration maneuver for multiple spells is a somewhat useful counterbalance to going "nova" with buff actions pre-encounter and not having to worry about sustaining any of them. The problem is that having to sustain each one separately is swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction.

Frankly as is, for the most part, you can only sustain one spell, and if you're actually moving during your turn it's as costly as the initial casting is.

There are other much more interesting ways to counterbalance a myriad of long duration spell effects than maneuvers: add one Setback to subsequent casting roll per spell currently being sustained, for instance. Make a blown concentration check (however implemented) bring the whole stack of spells crashing down, and perhaps add Setbacks to any such check. That's letting the dice do the talking .

As written, the maneuver cost is largely a "nerf" (to borrow an apropos MMORPG term) against some fairly standard caster conventions (not only buff/debuff, but also casters looking to drop a wall into place for a fast getaway, etc.). I recognize that I can simply house rule it away, but I'd rather see the rule as written be reconsidered.

To alleviate this somewhat, I'm going to be making a few talents that allow for very specific spells to be concentration-free. For example, a tier 2 Wildshape talent that allows for the augment spell cast on only oneself with the primal fury option (to make sure it's only druids who can use it) to be sustained with an incidental instead of a manoeuvre.

29 minutes ago, c__beck said:

That was a quick reply!

One manoeuvre, one spell.

Ugh.

Thank you for contacting FFG. Part of my long term concern with this is that casters will simply choose the attack option every time. Damage doesn't go away when you stop concentrating.

2 hours ago, Dragonshadow said:

Frankly as is, for the most part, you can only sustain one spell, and if you're actually moving during your turn it's as costly as the initial casting is.

If a caster needs to move while sustaining a spell, they may be better off sacrificing their action instead, though if this is frequent, that player will get bored.

An example that comes to mind is late game use of the Barrier spell for +5 defense with enough advantage to have it apply to everyone in the party. In that case, I'd probably rather maintain that spell than add attack spells when I need to move.

For Augment, the Haste adder mitigates the concentration cost. Druids using this to shift are sacrificing their first action, but that may have been spent closing anyhow.

The other option is to build implements like the Druidic Circlet for their spell, and just keep track of whether it's causing balance issues.

There's plenty of Talents that are ranked and require the expenditure of Strain per rank used, and that's on top of 2 for using a second Maneuver during your turn. This situation isn't new to the system mechanics. It's a matter of managing a finite resource effectively.

If you want to get around the limitation of only being able to sustain one spell with concentration, create a magic implement that allows you to sustain one spell for free without using a manoeuvre. It will likely be very expensive but I can certainly see powerful casters keeping a few of these implements on hand.

9 hours ago, Popdart said:

If you want to get around the limitation of only being able to sustain one spell with concentration, create a magic implement that allows you to sustain one spell for free without using a manoeuvre. It will likely be very expensive but I can certainly see powerful casters keeping a few of these implements on hand.

The druid circlet already does this, and only costs 750.

12 hours ago, 2P51 said:

There's plenty of Talents that are ranked and require the expenditure of Strain per rank used, and that's on top of 2 for using a second Maneuver during your turn. This situation isn't new to the system mechanics. It's a matter of managing a finite resource effectively.

Yep, plenty of talents do that, and should, because they represent the character pushing themselves further than normal. But a non-caster doesn't need to spend strain to do what that character considers a basic attack. The caster's basic action (casting) is 2 strain right up front. Likewise, between encounters are they really likely to recover all strain? Let's be generous and say the Discipline/Cool check recovers 5.

I'm not even opposed to this model inherently, but it's radically different than the d20 casting paradigm that I literally grew up with, and I have to get used to it. Frankly, I LIKE the 2 strain to cast. That in itself is a ward against multiple party buffs before an encounter. Genesys CRB Magic is a great improvement on the "5 minute workday" of Vancian d20 magic where you blow through your spells in the first encounter, but by the equivalent of middish "levels" I suspect casters are going to start feeling some frustration. And frankly, we don't really know how it will go yet since the game's been out less than 2 weeks.

Someone beyond Brawl can't do anything without the equipment to do so beyond their basic attack, whereas the caster can be in their jammies and point their finger. In addition the caster can just choose to add Difficulty to their attack and add all number of situationally useful effects to the spell, or indeed everything from blowing a room up to conjuring pink bunnies out of the ether. The Strain cost is appropriate for the overwhelming utility and versatility mages enjoy. Nothing wrong with a bill of 2 Strain imo.

1 hour ago, 2P51 said:

Someone beyond Brawl can't do anything without the equipment to do so beyond their basic attack, whereas the caster can be in their jammies and point their finger. In addition the caster can just choose to add Difficulty to their attack and add all number of situationally useful effects to the spell, or indeed everything from blowing a room up to conjuring pink bunnies out of the ether. The Strain cost is appropriate for the overwhelming utility and versatility mages enjoy. Nothing wrong with a bill of 2 Strain imo.

Not needing equipment is a selling point, true, but not having your normal equipment on hand for a given encounter is rare. Likewise, most of the above suggestions involve implements, which are equipment.

We used open spell slots in d20, so once a caster reached about 3rd level, they had a fair amount of utility and versatility already, so the high strain cost of Genesys magic doesn't feel like as much of a reasonable price since we're already used to having the latter.

My posts make it seem I'm more strongly disagreeing with you than I actually am. Like I said, part of this is a paradigm shift for me that I'd like to work through in advance of my players working through it. But perhaps I should let it roll and see where it goes since I'm not one to assume infallibility of the rules as written--the high wire act might require some wobbles and rebalancing as we go.

1 hour ago, Dragonshadow said:

Not needing equipment is a selling point, true, but not having your normal equipment on hand for a given encounter is rare. Likewise, most of the above suggestions involve implements, which are equipment.

We used open spell slots in d20, so once a caster reached about 3rd level, they had a fair amount of utility and versatility already, so the high strain cost of Genesys magic doesn't feel like as much of a reasonable price since we're already used to having the latter.

My posts make it seem I'm more strongly disagreeing with you than I actually am. Like I said, part of this is a paradigm shift for me that I'd like to work through in advance of my players working through it. But perhaps I should let it roll and see where it goes since I'm not one to assume infallibility of the rules as written--the high wire act might require some wobbles and rebalancing as we go.

I would just play it as is and not over think it. Every system has some manner of corralling spell use and imposing a cost, this one's is Strain.

I'm curious to hear from those who have actually started playing a Genesys game how the Magic rules are working out for them. Are your casters simply using magic to blast things or are they using it to buff/debuff other PC's/NPC's with effects that have to be sustained for multiple turns. Does the strain cost seem balanced or is it too limiting? "Cost" in terms of both the initial casting and the per turn strain of needing to maneuver twice in order to use one for concentration.

It's going to be a few weeks before I start our Genesys game, so I haven't had my own chance to test drive the rules yet.

In the last game I ran, the ice mage favoured the curse spell. It was flavoured as an ice cage debuff that made the targets move and react slower. The manoeuvre to concentrate wasn't that big of a deal since they just stayed back and blasted with ice magic anyway. That player enjoyed screwing over my NPCs.

The strain cost was a good balancing factor, and actually made the druid stop and think before casting healing spells, he actually weighed the pros of getting wounds back with losing strain from each casting. So in that sense, I think the strain cost is in the golden zone.

Of course, that's just from ~9 hours or so of play, so it is a limited sample pool.

3 hours ago, Dragonshadow said:

I'm curious to hear from those who have actually started playing a Genesys game how the Magic rules are working out for them. Are your casters simply using magic to blast things or are they using it to buff/debuff other PC's/NPC's with effects that have to be sustained for multiple turns. Does the strain cost seem balanced or is it too limiting? "Cost" in terms of both the initial casting and the per turn strain of needing to maneuver twice in order to use one for concentration.

It's going to be a few weeks before I start our Genesys game, so I haven't had my own chance to test drive the rules yet.

My group and I have been running through various sessions of different genres, testing out mechanics and seeing what we like and how we might tweak them for actual plays.

As far as concentration is working RAW, it's fine, but I see why people would want to change it. Our last long play campaign was in D&D 5e, and the concentration rules in D&D as well as Genesys feel very similar. The concentration tends to de-incentivize casters from using any spell other than Attack, especially at lower levels. At higher levels when casters are able to hit Additional Targets +difficulties regularly, then concentration becomes much more worth it, but concentration just to maintain a single spell on a single target is pretty meh. Conjure is pretty useful to spend your concentration on if you can get a friendly creature that can help out during combat. Summon Ally becomes more problematic because it's a concentration spell, *and* it takes another maneuver to direct the turns of the summoned creatures/allies.

One of my group members who is our other main GM is talking about running a medium fantasy game and we've been talking about making a talent or two to enhance concentration. Note these are all still in the high planning stages, not ready for implementation, just ideas.

First we've been considering a roughly tier 3 talent that allows certain casters types to maintain a concentration with either a maneuver or 1 Strain. We've been talking about limiting this talent to one spell, so when you take the talent you have to choose which spell to apply this talent. For example, the taking this talent means you could choose to concentrate on the Barrier spell with a maneuver or 1 strain, but wouldn't work for another spell like Augment.

And a top tier talent that allows you to spend a story point to to extend the duration of a spell to the end of the scene without concentration, again with the limitation that it works on a single spell that you choose when you take the talent.