Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Missing karma pool.

Posted by: MITJA3000+ May 15 2006, 04:47 PM

Okay, I'm a 4th. convert now. But man I miss karma pools. I guess the closest thing to it is Edge, which, also has a hard-cap. But for me karma pool always seemed like the perfect way to represent experience: even if you didn't use karma to upgrade your skills or attributes, you'd still be better off as a 200 karma point veteran than a zero karma greenie. And I'm damn sad to see such a grewat thing go away. So, the question is, has anyone incorporated karma pools to 4th edition, and how has that worked out? Or, do you see any complications in this? I guess that if you'd give karma pools the same uses as with edge it would be over-powered, but I was thinking of using it just the way it was in 3rd edition, just extra dice.

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll May 15 2006, 04:59 PM

In my groups Karma Pool became a crutch, players would rely on a large pool instead of good planning or tactics. I don't miss it.

SR4 is a different game. Edge has some great benefits more than a Karma Pool ever had IMO.

Posted by: emo samurai May 15 2006, 05:06 PM

What's better about Edge that wasn't in karma pool?

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll May 15 2006, 05:48 PM

QUOTE (emo samurai)

What's better about Edge that wasn't in karma pool?

The two that stand out:
- Getting an extra IP.
- Going first in an IP.

Posted by: James McMurray May 15 2006, 06:18 PM

Also with edge you can survive death more than once and don't have to totally burn out your pool to do it.

If you're really in love with karma pool, just removing edgea nd replacing it witht he SR3 karma pool rules should work fine.

Posted by: mfb May 15 2006, 06:31 PM

i don't think i'm going to miss karma pool, either, once it's gone. i like the concept of having a save-your-ass mechanic, but i don't like the speed at which it accrues. it's also completely dependent on the GM to keep the karma pool's size in check.

Posted by: Shrike30 May 15 2006, 07:19 PM

Edge is basically (IMO) karma pool with a hard cap and some pretty cool extra abilities (one of my players has a fairly high Edge and uses about half of it to keep up to speed in combat, since he's unwired). While you can push it to do some bizarre things, you can't do it as reliably as you could with a high-end character in SR3. The upshot, of course, is that you can *start* with it high.

Posted by: MITJA3000+ May 15 2006, 07:59 PM

Most of you are pointing out that edge is better than karma pool, and I agree with you. Karma pool has a relatively low effect on the game (at least with lower end characters) compared to edge, which you can use to get the aforementioned extra IP's. But my point in the beginning was that I think that karma pool was a great way to represent experience. 4th ed. doesn't have such a direct way to make a difference between starting characters and prime runners. Yes, you can use karma to raise edge, but to a certain point only, though the only hard cap I'm happy with is precisely with edge, as it would get very overpowered, say with an edge 15. Karma pool on the other hand, didn't have such drastic effects on the game, at least when using it to buy dice, not burning it. Sure, a veteran runner in 3rd with 20 karma pool could survive death many times via hand of god, but he would burn all his karma pool doing that, but at least in my games karma pool was used in most cases to buy extra dice.

So yeah, I'm with you on that edge is waaaayyyy better than karma pool, for characters that is, but karma pool was just a neat way of displaying experience.

Posted by: James McMurray May 15 2006, 08:11 PM

My problems with karma pool came from rerolling failures, not buying dice. They weren't problematic enough for my group to change the larma pool rules any, but it could definitely get crazy once pool hit 10+.

Posted by: Shrike30 May 15 2006, 08:21 PM

Same here. Rerolling failures was one of the most annoying ways in which karma could do sick, sick things to a game. I rarely had players buy extra dice with Karma... mathematically, a single karma point could "buy" a number of extra dice equal to all of your failed dice when you rerolled.

Posted by: mfb May 15 2006, 08:29 PM

QUOTE (MITJA3000+)

But my point in the beginning was that I think that karma pool was a great way to represent experience.

the problem with that is, there's no set standard for how 'experienced' a starting SR character is. you can play an aging merc with 20 years of combat experience, right out of chargen, or you could play a young undercover reporter whose only experience in the shadows comes from buying a BTL every other week to relax with. both of those, under the karma system, start out with the same level of experience. i like the fact that with Edge, you can decide how experienced--or lucky, or whatever--your character is.

there are problems with viewing karma as an experience meter, too. what happens when you burn 5kp to keep yourself alive? are you somehow less experienced, afterwards? it just doesn't work well enough to justify keeping it, to me.

Posted by: Thanee May 15 2006, 08:51 PM

Edge is cool.

The experience thing you mention with Karma Pool was nice, but it's not so much of a loss IMHO. There are enough ways to show experience.

What I'm missing a bit are the combat-oriented dice pools, which allowed to have more offensive or more defensive stance, or a balance between both (especially with Counterspelling, I think this would be a good idea, Counterspelling is so darn simplistic, no amount of thinking or trade-off involved anymore).

Bye
Thanee

Posted by: mdynna May 15 2006, 09:35 PM

QUOTE (James McMurray)

Do you have a problem with Edge's ability to re-roll failures? SR4 dice pools regularily hit 10+ dice and the SR4 "target number" of 5 is usually lower than most "difficult" tasks in SR3.

Posted by: James McMurray May 15 2006, 09:54 PM

Edge can only reroll failures once, and is limited to 6 (7 as a human, 8 with an edge). It has built in balances that karma pool rerolls didn't.

Posted by: Cain May 15 2006, 10:00 PM

I think Edge is a pretty cool concept at the core, but it needs quite a bit of work. First of all, the front-loading issue is pretty serious; starting with an Edge of 5 is a lot more overpowering than the starting karma pool.

The problem isn't Edge, though-- the problem is the Longshot test. No matter how many modifiers gets piled on, the character gets his full Edge to make the test with. Further dice reductions don't help, since that'll remove the "incredible stroke of luck" aspect that Edge is supposed to represent. And just allowing exploding dice on the test only makes the initial problem worse. You need to rework the entire modifiers as +/- dice concept in order to fix this issue.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 15 2006, 10:07 PM

I think the Longshot problem can be solved by increasing the Threshold by 1 for every 2 dice below a normal test pool of 0. Then, it's always possible to get enough hits due to the Rule of 6, but it becomes extremely unlikely very quickly.

Posted by: James McMurray May 15 2006, 10:10 PM

An edge of 5 can help you at most 5 times before it's refreshed unless you screw yourself over with a critical glitch. Starting with an edge of 5 also means starting with weaker skills, attributes, and/or resources. I personally like the ability to start play as a lucky character instead of having to somehow "earn" my luck by going out and taking runs.

By the way, didn't we already cover the longshot problem in at least three other threads? Would it be simpler just to link to those instead of driving this thread off course witht he same old same old?

Posted by: Shrike30 May 15 2006, 10:38 PM

QUOTE (mdynna)

Do you have a problem with Edge's ability to re-roll failures? SR4 dice pools regularily hit 10+ dice and the SR4 "target number" of 5 is usually lower than most "difficult" tasks in SR3.

I certainly do. I haven't worked out a decent solution to the issue yet, but what I may do is simply disallow it (but allow for the use of an edge point to buy a single success after the fact).

Posted by: mdynna May 15 2006, 10:45 PM

QUOTE (James McMurray)

Edge can only reroll failures once, and is limited to 6 (7 as a human, 8 with an edge). It has built in balances that karma pool rerolls didn't.

Ok, I had always played SR3 Karma Pool as only being able to re-roll failures once. Plus, I don't know what you're saying about "limited to 6..." Do you mean you can only re-roll 6 failures? Not true.

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 67)

You may re-roll all of the dice on a single test that did not score a hit.

The Rule of Six doesn't apply to these dice, however.

Now, if you meant that Edge itself has a hard cap, then fine. I had my PC's karma pools only refresh between adventures (not even sessions) so my PC's used it very sparingly. Bottom line: I never found Karma Pool to be overly powerful and I still don't see Edge as being overly powerful.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 15 2006, 10:48 PM

In SR3 you could re-roll more, but each time cost one more karma: the first costs 1, the second costs 2 (total of 3)...

I also think re-roll works better for NPCs, since the players never know when it will refresh or when that Longshot test will show up...

Posted by: James McMurray May 15 2006, 10:54 PM

By limited to 6 I meant that your edge stat cannot go higher than 6. Humans and those with a specific and expensive edge (20BP lucky) can reach 7. Humans with the edge can reach 8.

House ruling the rerolls to once per roll helps.

It also doesn't make sense to me that the longer you run the shadows the luckier you get.

Posted by: Jaid May 16 2006, 03:18 AM

QUOTE (James McMurray)

It also doesn't make sense to me that the longer you run the shadows the luckier you get.

well lucky for us it's not the luck stat then, i guess.

it's called edge. not luck. edge.

now certainly, your personal edge stat (for a character) may represent luck. it may also represent skill, or a stubborn refusal to accept failure. it may represent that you've been backed into a corner, and so you're putting 110% into whatever you're doing because if it fails, you're screwed. it might represent an adrenaline rush, a tendency to enter a berserker rage, a state of mental focus, intuition, instinctive use of adept-like powers, or any number of other things, depending on the character. it most certainly is not just luck, though.

Posted by: James McMurray May 16 2006, 03:27 AM

I was talking about karma actually, but since you said it...

QUOTE (SR4 pg. 61)

Edge is a combination of luck, timing, and the favor of the gods.

I suppose you could house rule that edge is not luck if you wanted to. I don't have an SR3 book handy, but IIRC it also attributes karma partially to luck.

Posted by: Jaid May 16 2006, 03:29 AM

i didn't say edge excludes luck.

i said it isn't *just* luck. it's luck, plus a hundred other little things. precisely what makes up your edge will vary from character to character.

Posted by: James McMurray May 16 2006, 03:45 AM

Ah, since I never said it was only luck, and your post seemed to be refuting mine, I assumed you meant the opposite of what I said, which would be that edge is not luck at all. Nevermind then.

Posted by: Cain May 16 2006, 08:22 AM

QUOTE

Except that thresholds never apply in combat, and the rule of 6 doesn't apply on longshot tests anyway. The second can be easily fixed, but the first leads to some very wonky results, very quickly.

QUOTE

Five times is more than enough, if you're good at resource management. As for being "weaker", let me see if I can dig up Mr. Lucky...

Mr. Lucky
Race: Human

B: 4
Q:5(7)
R:4(6)
S:3(5)
C:3
I:4
L:2
W:3

Essence: 0.15
Edge: 8

Init: 8(10), 3 passes.

Edges:
Lucky
Aptitude: Pistols
High Pain Tolerance 1

Flaws:
SINner
Incompetence x 6 (all in skills that allow no default, mostly technical skills)

Skills:
Pistols 7 (Semi auto) [total 19 dice!]
Gymnastics 3 (dodging)
Infiltration 2 (Urban)
Con 2 (Fast talk)
Unarmed Combat 2 (Martial arts)

Knowledge: 18 free.

Contacts:
Fixer 2/2
Street Doc: 1/3

Gear: 38 pts.
Cyber/Bio:
Wired 2
Muscle Replacement 2
Skillwires 3
Enhanced articulation
Reflex recorder (firearms group)

Gear highlights:
Guns. Lots of guns.

Lots of EX-EX ammo, except for the AVS.
Contacts w/ smartlink and vision enhancements
Glasses w/ lots of vision mods
Earbuds w/ Audio Enhancement
Several skillchips, including Perception and Ettiquette.

As you can see, he has both an insane Edge and an insane specialization. He's also well-covered in most other areas-- hardly the equivalent of a dedicated ninja or face, but he can function if he has to. He's got the full basic 200pts in attributes, and has some cyber backing those up; his resources are pretty good as well. A bit light on contacts, and weak in the technical areas, but that's what contacts, teammates, and deckers are for. He's certainly got no major glaring flaws.

You can take this same basic concept and apply it to just about every archetype-- one hyperspecialization plus super-high Edge-- and not really lose that much functionality if you're careful about your build. If you swapped some skills around, then you could end up with a super-infiltrator, or face, or so on. I haven't tried magic yet, but you could do it if you were willing to sac a bunch of resources and maybe lower your base attributes by a bit. I'm just presenting the street sam build as an example-- there are many other possibilities within this framework.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 16 2006, 01:37 PM

What's the problem with that character again? IMO, he's going to be dissapointed when he doesn't need Edge very often (where else can one drop 115 BP for only 8 tests?).

Posted by: Brahm May 16 2006, 01:59 PM

Deja Vu All Over Again

Save your time and your bandwidth, Kanada. The numerous issues with that character have been gone over with him a number of times and he remains a stone in a bucket of water. Taking up space and unable to absorb. http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=12010&hl=mr\.+lucky

Posted by: Shrike30 May 16 2006, 05:25 PM

QUOTE (Cain)

Except that thresholds never apply in combat, and the rule of 6 doesn't apply on longshot tests anyway. The second can be easily fixed, but the first leads to some very wonky results, very quickly.

Uh, how do you figure? A "threshold" in combat can be created very easily by either adding successes to the person getting shot at, or subtracting them from the shooter, depending on whichever creates the least screwy result at the time.

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig May 16 2006, 05:53 PM

Thresholds substract from net Hits, so they would perfectly work in ranged combat.

On the other hand, 'solving' the problem of the Longshot Rule only needs one thing - a text marker... color black.

Posted by: Shrike30 May 16 2006, 06:08 PM

Masking tape works too

Posted by: mdynna May 16 2006, 07:57 PM

The problem with that character is not his massive edge or hyper-specialization. This is the biggest "rules break" in my opinion:

QUOTE (Cain)

Incompetence x 6 (all in skills that allow no default, mostly technical skills)

Don't talk about Edge breaking the game until you stop using horrid rules-munching like this. That character wouldn't exist if you applied a Sanity/Sensibility filter to him first.

(Edit for ranting): Why is it that I see over and over people saying "SR4 characters are too powerful", "I can make someone who breaks the game" then tucked in there almost so no one will notice is a little line that says "Took the Incompetence flaw 50 times..." or some such nonsense. The incompetence flaw, from what I have seen, is by far the most abused and mega-munched of anything. I hereby campaign to have it ripped out of the BBB until everyone can learn to use it responsibly.

Posted by: Butterblume May 16 2006, 08:00 PM

Those 6 incompetencies are just lazyness, just to exploit the full 35 points for bad qualities. You could get there in other ways... but why think about how when this char is only an example?

Posted by: James McMurray May 16 2006, 10:18 PM

Ah yes, this one again. It's been gone over several times in several threads. Many good ways of handling the "longshot problem" ranging from GM and Player common sense to threshold modification to applying dice penalties to longshot tests (with or without also applying threshold changes or some form of increasing TN) have all been proposed. And despite the factt hat each and every one of them works, Cain is still insisitent that the only way to fix the problem is to drop the entire ssytem and start from scratch. Don't waste your time Kanada. Brahm described Cain's point of view in this one perfectly.

Posted by: Cain May 17 2006, 06:07 AM

QUOTE

What's the problem with that character again? IMO, he's going to be dissapointed when he doesn't need Edge very often (where else can one drop 115 BP for only 8 tests?).

He gets too much for too little. Edge isn't forcing the major sacrifices everyone seems to think it does.

QUOTE

In either case, you end up with "impossible" tasks, which Edge is supposed to prevent. Edge and Karma pool are both supposed to represent that amazing bit of cinematics that make things more exciting. By simply adding or subtracting succcesses, we rapidly hit the point where you just won't have enough dice to pull it off, with or without edge. For example, Joe Average with Quickness 3 and no Pistols skill can't even pull the trigger if the gun is in burst-fire; if he has lighting modifiers as well, then even if he spends his 1 Edge, it's still impossible for him to pull the trigger, since he's now got a "threshold" of 2.

QUOTE

Ah yes, this one again. It's been gone over several times in several threads.

Yes, and each and every time, I've demonstrated the flaws of each and every fix. Switching to a floating TN is the best one-- not the *only* one, but certainly the one that leads to the best results overall. Floating TN's have their flaws as well, but mathematically they work out better, with fewer impossibilities.

Posted by: James McMurray May 17 2006, 06:13 AM

Ahem... In your example the person would be able to still hit soemthing. Or are you forgetting the big long discussion about leaving behind a single exploding edge die? Given that it's a workable fix but isn't your pet fix it's no wonder that you stopped trying to refute it and are now trying to ignore it.

Really though, your "proof" has always been crap that you constantly repeat in the hopes it will one day turn to gold. You need a new hobby. "Bash the longshot" just isn't working out for you.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 17 2006, 07:23 AM

QUOTE

Edge isn't forcing the major sacrifices everyone seems to think it does.

115 BP for 8 tests. That's just about perfect to me.

Posted by: James McMurray May 17 2006, 05:27 PM

115 BP is 28 skill ranks. Or 25 if 12 of those BP go to fill out the full 50 points of resources. Or you could be nonhuman and get a lot of stat boosts. Elf would give the guy an extra firearms die, or troll would make him a hell of a lot beefier in terms of soaking damage and slappin gpeople around.

Posted by: Cain May 17 2006, 11:09 PM

QUOTE

Ahem... In your example the person would be able to still hit soemthing. Or are you forgetting the big long discussion about leaving behind a single exploding edge die?

Still not workable; that effectively changes the TN to 6 anyway, since you can only hope to hit it if you roll a 6. Sorry, but I've refuted it many times.

QUOTE

115 BP for 8 tests. That's just about perfect to me.

And automatically winning any inititative ties. Besides which, he hasn't lost anything at all. He's gained something for nothing. There's really nothing better for this character concept to spend his points on-- and he's more than a match for any other gun bunny.

QUOTE

28 skill ranks equals 7 skills at rating 4-- not really *that* much, when you think about it. Useful for a generalist character, sure, but Edge is a more powerful build choice, especially when you take defaulting into account *and* the Longshot loophole. Congratulations, instead of an effective character, you've got a character who's mediocre in more areas.

Going nonhuman would also reduce the Edge maximum, which kinda defeats the point of the example-- an Extreme Edge character with no significant flaws, and a gun hyperspecialist to boot. We could potentially rewrite the core concept to fit metahumans as well, but I haven't had six weeks to spend per character.

[Edit: Missed this one:]

QUOTE

Why is it that I see over and over people saying "SR4 characters are too powerful", "I can make someone who breaks the game" then tucked in there almost so no one will notice is a little line that says "Took the Incompetence flaw 50 times..." or some such nonsense. The incompetence flaw, from what I have seen, is by far the most abused and mega-munched of anything.

That's because Incompetence is the best example of extremely poor design and testing in the Edge/Flaws sections. It practically *begs* to be abused, because it's just that bad. It's also badly off-balanced in relationship to the "group incompetence" flaws: Infirm, Uncouth, and Uneducated. For example, if you took Incompetence x 4 in technical skills, you'd have the exact same gain as if you took Uneducated... except you could still buy all the necessary Decking skill groups, and any others you wanted; heck, if you were careful, you needent lose access to any Technical group at all. You'd only lose 4 out of 19 active skills, and keep access to all the Academic and Professional knowledge skill defaults. Heck, if you pushed to Incompetence x 7, you'd *still* keep more functionality than buying Uneducated, and get even more points for doing it. This isn't just a powerplay, it's just flat-out poor game balance.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 17 2006, 11:11 PM

QUOTE

Actually, he's a match for only 8 gun bunnies. I think it's a pretty good character and hope to see a few edge runners in my games.

Posted by: James McMurray May 17 2006, 11:36 PM

QUOTE

Still not workable; that effectively changes the TN to 6 anyway, since you can only hope to hit it if you roll a 6. Sorry, but I've refuted it many times.

It still lets you hit, right? You also have the option of making your house rule allow rerolls of all successes on that final chance die, not just sixes. I wouldn't do it, but it would make the longshot tests easier.

But then again, so what if they have to roll a 6? We're talking a house rule designed to make the nearly impossiblt tasks be nearly impossible. Saying that it makes things harder by changing the TN to 6 is pretty much what it's designed to do. That's your refutation? "It works as intended"?

QUOTE

You call 28 skill points or 25 skill points and 60,000

nothing? Hmmm... Interesting.

Nothing better? What about the ability to have an actual peception skill instead of a chipped one? Or the ability to drive? Or actually hurt someone in melee combat? Or con somebody? Or conceal his weapons? Your idea of what the word "nothing" means seems to be severely flawed.

QUOTE

A skill rating of 4 is far from "mediocre." HEck, most every PC skill in the game will be maxed at 4 unles it's your one or two skills you put at 6 or 5. You are now as good at driving anything but a ground vehicle as the rigger who specialized in ground vehicles, and you're almost as good at driving ground vehicles. Or you're as good at all forms of hacking except cybercombat as the decker who focused on cybercombat and almost a good at cybercombat. Mediocre my ass.

QUOTE

Going nonhuman would also reduce the Edge maximum, which kinda defeats the point of the example--

Ummm... Actually it highlights the point of the counterexample. You lose a point of edge and gain a lot of boosts to other stats.

QUOTE

This isn't just a powerplay, it's just flat-out poor game balance.

But it's poor game balance that has no place in a discussion about the edge stat, as it isn't even related to the edge stat. You could of course have a bunch of other flaws, or just have no flaws at all without changing the character's stats much, so your need to toss another jab in there is kinda pointless.

QUOTE

he's more than a match for any other gun bunny.

Unless they have any decent amount of stealth and sneak up on him, since you've only got 7 perception dice at the most and he can have 12 stealth dice fairly easily. Not to mention he can spend his edge on stealth but you can't spend yours on perception.

Posted by: Butterblume May 17 2006, 11:50 PM

Please, Mr. Lucky was discussed before. So, get back on topic.

Posted by: Shrike30 May 17 2006, 11:57 PM

One of the things I like about Edge over Karma Pool is that you don't get people hoarding quite the same way you did with KP. My players had this mentality of "oh my god, I can never, ever, ever burn a karma point, because it'll reduce my KP forevar," and they had a really bad time in some situations where they should have just bought a success. Edge doesn't quite have that "permanently gone" feeling to it (mostly because they didn't have to introduce burning as a method of pool limitation), and so it's aesthetically more pleasing to me to run with it.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 18 2006, 12:12 AM

Hey, what would happen if we allowed people to burn other attribute points to simulate the effects of burning edge, but only for tests that involve that attribute?

Posted by: James McMurray May 18 2006, 12:44 AM

Probably not much unless the attribute were already low. Burning your 6 to a 5 means you just tossed your next 12 karma out the window if you want to get it back.

Posted by: Cain May 18 2006, 05:49 AM

QUOTE

It still lets you hit, right?

The goal is to not make the nearly impossible become possible-- the goal is to make the nearly impossible become *cinematically* possible. I don't know how you like to play, but I think things like excitement, tension, and drama are kinda nice to include. The rule doesn't just have to make things possible, it needs to make things cinematically possible-- which your variant does not do.

QUOTE

Nothing better? What about the ability to have an actual peception skill instead of a chipped one? Or the ability to drive? Or actually hurt someone in melee combat? Or con somebody?

He can already do all of that. Not as good as a dedicated character, true, but that's why we create shadworunning teams.

QUOTE

A skill rating of 4 is far from "mediocre." HEck, most every PC skill in the game will be maxed at 4 unles it's your one or two skills you put at 6 or 5.

According to the Skill Ratings table, that makes you a "minor leaguer". It's not my fault that the default PC skill level is mediocre; it's just how it happens to work out mathematically.

QUOTE

Unless they have any decent amount of stealth and sneak up on him, since you've only got 7 perception dice at the most and he can have 12 stealth dice fairly easily.

Like I said, Mr. Lucky isn't a ninja. We could shift his base numbers around a bit, and have him tossing somewhere around 22 or more stealth dice, to make him into a ninja; we could also shift some stats to make him an uber-face. This example isn't any more vulnerable to ninjas than most other gun bunnies, and is significantly less vulnerable than the BBB Street Sam.

QUOTE

I kinda agree here, except that at low Edge levels, we get into the Video Game mentality, where you just burn Edge for extra lives. You can't have a free-success purchase system for high-end tasks without seriously breaking a game. For example, in SR1, you could get one free success by spending a point of Good Karma (Karma pool didn't exist). So, we got situations that went something like this:

Player: "I want to summon a force 200 spirit."
GM: "This I gotta see. Roll."
Player: <rolls dice> "Nope, no successes. But wait! I spend a point of Karma!"
GM:

Edge is quite a bit better than that; but what I don't like is the fact that you can burn Edge for a *critical* success. I can see burning Edge to push you over the top, but I'm picturing that force 200 spirit every time I see that "critical success" rule.

Posted by: James McMurray May 18 2006, 06:25 AM

QUOTE

Let's take an example of this option vs. SR3's variable TN. A run of the mill average Joe in SR3 has no skill in firearms and a quickness of 3. He gets three dice at a base TN of 6 after defaulting. The average Joe in SR4 gets 2 dice TN 5 after defaulting. Now let's play with those so we can get a dice pool of 1 and a threshold higher than 1.

If we add an uncompensated 6 round burst to the mix we add +5 TN or get rid of 5 dice. SR4 guy doesn't have 5 dice, so he drops to 0 dice after losing two, spends his one edge to get an edge pool of 1, which gets turned into a single longshot die TN 6 after losing one die and having one left to lose. His odds of success are 16.67%.

SR3 guy still has 3 dice, but his TN is now 11. His odds are 15.76%.

The numbers can be fiddled with some, and if we go for the type of thing you're trying to avoid, let's look at that same guy with various random factors that end up either being -15 dice or +15 TN. SR4 guy now has one die at TN 11 (5.56% chance of success). SR3 guy has 3 dice TN 21 (0.92%). If SR3 guys spends his 1 karma pool to reroll he ups his odds to 1.84%. SR4 has has a higher chance of cinematically succeeding in extreme cases if we use the "lost dice up the target number" approach.

Using the "up the threshold by one for every three lost dice" method:

SR4 guy at -10 dice finds himself with a single die needing 3 successes. Odds of success: 0.93%. SR4 guy at +10 TN has a final TN of 16 with 3 dice: 4.11% chance of success. SR3 guy has a higher chance, but not really a chance compared to what he could have if he didn't go insane with the modiofiers.

Don't like the low odds for SR4 guy? Let's change that from rerolling sixes to rerolling any successes. Now you have a 3.7% chance of success, which is very close to SR4 guy.

I'm too lazy to do a lot of other numbers, but it looks to me from just a cursory inspection that using the increasing TN or increasing threshold versions both still allow for cinematic success.

QUOTE

He can already do all of that

By defaulting he can drive. He'll find himself in trouble if he has to evade pursuit. He sucks in melee combat and won't be able to con anyone with half a brain. Yeah, he can do them, but not well. By dropping the 115 points dumped into edge he gets to do all that and more very well.

QUOTE

According to the Skill Ratings table, that makes you a "minor leaguer". It's not my fault that the default PC skill level is mediocre; it's just how it happens to work out mathematically.

It makes you a minor leaguer in athletics, which is actually pretty damn good. With firearms you're a combat veteran. Technical skills put you as a professional with 4 years of experience. Social skills a 4 is a diplomat. Driving? NASCAR or Formula 1 racer (military combat driver also). None of that is mediocre.

QUOTE

Exactly my point! You can shift stuff around to make him really good at one thing. The guy that put his 115 points into skills is really good at a lot of things. You are a lot more susceptible to stealthy people because you can't spend edge on perception tests and your skill is only a 3 instead of a 4. That means someone with mediocre stealth skills will sneak up on you. No need for ninjas. If you left a 4 in edge and got a four perception you'd have 12 dice against that mediocre stealth guy instead of your character's 6. With your 6 a professional level stealth guy (skill 3 attribute 3) can sneak up on you half the time. The guy with 12 dice can keep from being snuck up on by an elite "ninja" guy (stealth 6 attribute 6) half the time, and will almost always see the normal guy sneaking up.

QUOTE

and is significantly less vulnerable than the BBB Street Sam

If your idea of comparison is to twink a character out and then compare it to a BBB stock character then there's really no point in continuing because you're so far divorced from reality you're about to have some playing cards chasing you screaming "off with her head!"

QUOTE

that force 200 spirit every time I see that "critical success" rule.

You will never buy enough successes to summon a force 200 spirit and actually control him. Given how many successes you'd have to get for a single net success, you also won't be burning any edge to get a critical success on that otherwise impossible action.

Posted by: Cain May 19 2006, 05:19 AM

QUOTE

Using the "up the threshold by one for every three lost dice" method:

SR4 guy at -10 dice finds himself with a single die needing 3 successes. Odds of success: 0.93%. SR4 guy at +10 TN has a final TN of 16 with 3 dice: 4.11% chance of success. SR3 guy has a higher chance, but not really a chance compared to what he could have if he didn't go insane with the modiofiers.

Don't like the low odds for SR4 guy? Let's change that from rerolling sixes to rerolling any successes. Now you have a 3.7% chance of success, which is very close to SR4 guy.

I'm too lazy to do a lot of other numbers, but it looks to me from just a cursory inspection that using the increasing TN or increasing threshold versions both still allow for cinematic success.

Not really. If you change the longshot test rules so that al successes explode, and not just 6's, then you've changed the core rules just as seriously as switching to a floating TN.

QUOTE

Not "very well". Adequately, perhaps, but not "very well". You might be good enough to make a living at it, but you're not "very good". He's adequate in melee combat, can drive as well as most commuters on the road, and can fast talk most people. He'll have trouble against dedicated riggers, melee monsters, and faces; but I defy you to create a character who can beat all of them at once, all of the time.

QUOTE

Exactly my point! You can shift stuff around to make him really good at one thing.

No: two things. He's a gun-bunny from hell, and he's got all kinds of luck to back him out of tight spots. His skill spread is designed to minimize the number of tight spots he gets into. He's not great at any of them, but he's not going to be tripping all over himself in routine situations, either. For the advanced situations, it's always better to rely on the team specialist instead of being a one-man shadowrunning team. Besides which, I find that having one character completely dominate a game isn't a whole lot of fun for everyone else. It's okay for him to be mediocre in several areas, because then other characters get to shine.

QUOTE

You are a lot more susceptible to stealthy people because you can't spend edge on perception tests and your skill is only a 3 instead of a 4. That means someone with mediocre stealth skills will sneak up on you. No need for ninjas. If you left a 4 in edge and got a four perception you'd have 12 dice against that mediocre stealth guy instead of your character's 6. With your 6 a professional level stealth guy (skill 3 attribute 3) can sneak up on you half the time. The guy with 12 dice can keep from being snuck up on by an elite "ninja" guy (stealth 6 attribute 6) half the time, and will almost always see the normal guy sneaking up.

The guy with 12 perception dice is pretty much a perception hyperspecialist, so that's not proving much of anything. However, since Mr Lucky *does* have the "professional level" of perception (3 skill + 4 attribute) he'd be beating out the average Joe more often than not. You're suggesting that he sacrifice 8 points of Edge to *lose* one perception die-- he's got 7 right now, so dropping to 6 makes no sense at all.

QUOTE

I'm going to first explain why you're completely wrong, then I will show you how SR4 does have the antitwink rules built into it to guard against this specific trick. I prefer it when the rules prevent excessive twinking in the first place, instead of piecemeal mashing them into place, but SR4 does protect against this one example.

On page 59, it defines a critical success as any time a character scores four or more /net/ successes on a test. It then goes on to specifically say that this means four successes "more than needed to reach the threshold or beat the opponent." As a result, by burning Edge on this roll, it doesn't matter how many successes the force 200 spirit rolls; you automatically score four more than he did. What's more, since a critical success allows you to add whatever flourish you want, you didn't just get four services out of the force 200 demigod-- you beat it like a red-headed stepchild, stuck it into an AVS, started calling yourself the pimp and passing it out as the 'Ho.

Luckily, there is a hard rule against this in SR$. Namely, you cannot summon a spirit with a force greater than twice your magic attribute. If you've got a PC with a Magic of 100, then this trick isn't going to be a major worry of yours in the first place. We can safely declare this trick to be impossible, and have a hard-and-fast page reference to back it up.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 19 2006, 05:37 AM

QUOTE

He'll have trouble against dedicated riggers, melee monsters, and faces; but I defy you to create a character who can beat all of them at once, all of the time.

No one can. Edge is used up too quickly.

Posted by: NightHaunter May 19 2006, 12:15 PM

I may be hallucinating, but, i'm sure Edge can only be used once on each test, regardless of how you use it.

This is how I play regardless, but i'm sure it's also official.
No book with me at the moment so can't look it up, but its early in the book. Where they mention uses of edge.

Posted by: Aaron May 19 2006, 02:18 PM

QUOTE (NightHaunter)

PDF to the rescue!

QUOTE (SR4 p. 67)

No more than 1 point of Edge can be spent on any specific test or action at one time. If you spent a point of Edge for extra dice and rolled a critical glitch anyway, for example, you cannot use Edge to negate that critical glitch since you have already applied Edge to that test.

The word of RAW.

Posted by: James McMurray May 19 2006, 03:03 PM

QUOTE

Not really. If you change the longshot test rules so that al successes explode, and not just 6's, then you've changed the core rules just as seriously as switching to a floating TN.

We've changed one small portion of the core rules. But guess what. We're talking about a house rule here. Those, by their very nature, change the rules. Saying "you've changed the rules," is not an argument, it's a statement of unavoidable fact.

QUOTE

Hmmm... Let's look at the chart, shall we? He is now as good in melee combat as a combat veteran (your idea of what the workld considers adequate is flawed). He's as good a driver as a military combat pilot (your idea of how well most commuters drive is flawed). He fasttalks as well as a politician or diplomat (your idea of "most people" is right on this one).

No, he won't be as good as a character dedicated to that aspect. Nobody's saying he would. But he's a hell of a lot better at them then your version, and a lot better than most people he'll encounter.

QUOTE

or the advanced situations, it's always better to rely on the team specialist instead of being a one-man shadowrunning team.

That's not always an option. In those situations where you have to do something yourself, this guy will frequently fall on his face or burn through his edge so fast it'l be like water through a sewer grate. Yes, in a lot of situations he will function just as well as a normal gun bunny, and even be better 8 times per run. But in a game where GMs actually try and challenge their players you'll find yourself challenged more often then most of your fellow team members.

QUOTE

Besides which, I find that having one character completely dominate a game isn't a whole lot of fun for everyone else. It's okay for him to be mediocre in several areas, because then other characters get to shine.

You've already said he can't beat the dedicated characters. Now you're saying that he should be bad in several areas because otherwise he'd dominate? Make up your mind. Is he "adequate" or is he "dominating?"

QUOTE

The guy with 12 perception dice is pretty much a perception hyperspecialist, so that's not proving much of anything.

Nope, he's a typical runner where I come from. 4 stat + 4 skill + 4 edge if he thinks he needs it. "Perception am good," and all that. And when it comes to perception, beating the average Joe isn't what matters. Normal tests to see someone ready to ambush you are harder than that. Tests to notice useful information generally have a threshold of 3 or more.

QUOTE

You're suggesting that he sacrifice 8 points of Edge to *lose* one perception die-- he's got 7 right now, so dropping to 6 makes no sense at all.

Huh? 4 stat + 4 skill is 8, not 6. No wonder you're having trouble, you can't even understand basic math.

QUOTE

On page 59, it defines a critical success as any time a character scores four or more /net/ successes on a test. It then goes on to specifically say that this means four successes "more than needed to reach the threshold or beat the opponent." As a result, by burning Edge on this roll, it doesn't matter how many successes the force 200 spirit rolls; you automatically score four more than he did. What's more, since a critical success allows you to add whatever flourish you want, you didn't just get four services out of the force 200 demigod-- you beat it like a red-headed stepchild, stuck it into an AVS, started calling yourself the pimp and passing it out as the 'Ho

If you want to ignore the rules, that's how it works. Of course, since the burning edge rules say you have to actually be capable of succeeding at the task, and you quite obviously are not going to succeed, you can't burn edge for a critical success.

That explains another part of why you think a high edge is so powerful. You don't actually understand the edge rules. Yet another

Posted by: Cain May 20 2006, 04:24 AM

QUOTE

By changing the core mechanic to "all successes explode", you've gone so far away from the core mechanic as to not be playing the same game. We're not talking a few minor tweaks, we're talking about the entire way the dice interact with the game.

QUOTE

If you want to get into that... no, he has no driving skill, but then again, most people don't have one anyway. You can get away with an agent to do the job for you most of the time. With the use of specializations, he's doing just as well as your "combat veteran" and "politician or diplomat". So, nope, he's doing just fine. Sorry to burst your bubble, but pushing Edge to 8 doesn't really require any major sacrifices.

QUOTE

Huh? 4 stat + 4 skill is 8, not 6.

*You're* the one who offered 6 dice as an example, so don't try and be insulting to cover up for being wrong. And just in case you missed it: "With your 6 a professional level stealth guy (skill 3 attribute 3) can sneak up on you half the time." was your exact words. Since my example had a base *seven*, it's no wonder you're having issues.

QUOTE

Did you actually *read* anything that I posted? I explained, very clearly, why the example in question was impossible. Your understanding of the mechanic is wrong, and the page references are very clear. I'm wondering if you've even read the main book now-- maybe that's why you keep defending the system, you're quoting what you want to see, instead of what's actually there.

Posted by: James McMurray May 20 2006, 10:37 AM

QUOTE

We're changing the mechanic to "all successes explode" in a single very rare instance (the longshot test with only one die remaining). It doesn't change anything near the "entire way the dice interact with the game." And as I already stated, you don't even have to do that. You can if you want the extreme longshot test to be more powerful, but it's far from necessary.

QUOTE

no, he has no driving skill, but then again, most people don't have one anyway.

How is spending 4 of those 28 skill points you free up on driving "no driving skill?" Unless I'm misunderstanding your poor pronoun use and you're referring to Mr. Lucky. Perhaps try some nouns every now and then?

Yes, while most people don't have driving skill, most people aren't shadowrunners. Being able to get from place to place is kinda a job requirement. Someone who can't do that when things get rough is going to have a tough time of things sometimes. But, like with the face example, if your game doesn't require people to actually do things they don't specialize in very often, then it isn't a fault of the system.

QUOTE

You can get away with an agent to do the job for you most of the time.

True. Agents are mostly BS because they remove the need for PCs. there are things you can't do for an agent, and of course there's the fact that your guy can't afford agents.

QUOTE

With the use of specializations, he's doing just as well as your "combat veteran" and "politician or diplomat".

Really? A) The combat veteran will almost assuredly have the same specilization. Same with the diplomat. B) At least for etiquette, your specilization will only occur in one place. The Diplomat's base skill applies everywhere. C) Your etiquette fro Mr. Lucky is not a skill, it's a skillwire. He can't have a specilization.

He can have, at character creation, a max of 3 in etiquette. He is big drawing factor (edge) cannot be used with that. Likewise with perception. Sure, if you're playing in a game where nobody but the face has to make etiquette tests you're fine. But the games I see being played aren't like that. If your game style lends itself to enhancing the power of Mr. Lucky that's not a fault in the rules, it's just something that a GM has to consider when he decides to allow hyper specialists to be the guys that are the ones called on for their specialty the majority of the time.

Let me say that one more time to be sure it sinks in: if your game lends itself to enhancing the power of hyper specialists by limiting the times when people make rolls outside of their speciality, it isn't a fault of the rules. I'm not saying that's how your game is, but you keep saying things like "usually the face does the talking" so it makes me assume that's what you mean.

QUOTE

pushing Edge to 8 doesn't really require any major sacrifices.

Except versatility and self sufficiency.

QUOTE

And just in case you missed it: "With your 6 a professional level stealth guy (skill 3 attribute 3) can sneak up on you half the time." was your exact words. Since my example had a base *seven*, it's no wonder you're having issues.

I was off by one because I missed a line on the sheet. Whoopdy doo. 7 vs. 6 means you will still be snuck up on a lot. Sometimes you'll get "a feeling that something's there" but you'll very rarely actually spot an average stealth person.

QUOTE

Silly me for misunderstanding you when you started arguing against things you yourself brought up. I assumed that, since only an idiot would argue against himself, your "SR$" meant SR3, whose summoning rules I didn't bother to check for a magic vs. force limitation. The point remains though, that while edge can indeed buy a critical success, it has to be something you're capable of doing. It doesn't let you make impossible things happen critically well.

I personally wouldn't allow it on opposed tests. But players that want to use it that way should know it would happen to them as well. As soon as they know that they're very unlikely to ever use it to try and shoot someone, summon something, or otherwise do something opposed. It would mean that suddenly any group of yahoos with a gun has a chance of automatically scoring 4 net hits with a bullet. That's just me though, and since it cuts both ways you don't really have to disallow it, just make sure the rule applies to everyone equally, on both sides of the screen.

Posted by: Cain May 21 2006, 07:10 AM

QUOTE

In order for that to happen, we need to alter the way penalties are applied in the first place. Instead of simply reducing the dice until you hit zero, we're now introducing a graduated penalty. Since the basic penalties are part of the basic dice mechanics, you've changed the way the dice interact with the game at the low end. By making it so all successes explode, we've made it even further from what it was originally. Before long, we're not playing the same game anymore. Heck, some of your suggestions amount to the same thing as a floating TN anyway. If you can only hit an increased threshold by exploding the die X times, then there's no difference between that and a TN of 6*X.

QUOTE

But, like with the face example, if your game doesn't require people to actually do things they don't specialize in very often, then it isn't a fault of the system.

If he has to do something he doesn't specialize in, like fast-talk someone, then he can do so decently well. If he has to fast-talk his way out of an extremely tight spot, he's just as screwed as any non-face character. He can do everything you mentioned, without falling for the "versatility is power" trick the designers are trying to convince you of. The fact is, SR$ does not prevent hyperspecialization, and it doesn't even make you suffer for it. The character limits would be more forgiveable if they could prevent or reduce this sort of thing, but it doesn't even do that.

QUOTE

He can have, at character creation, a max of 3 in etiquette. He is big drawing factor (edge) cannot be used with that. Likewise with perception. Sure, if you're playing in a game where nobody but the face has to make etiquette tests you're fine. But the games I see being played aren't like that.

First of all, have you read the SR4 skillwire rules? They no longer override your natural abilities; you keep quoting the SR3 rule. So, let's look at your previous example-- you say that your standard characters will be rolling 12 dice with perception: 4 attribute, 4 skill, and 4 Edge. Leaving aside the fact that they'd run out of Edge real damn quick if they're using it for every perception test, Mr. Lucky can do the exact same thing by turning off his skillwires. So, he'd end up with 12 *exploding* dice, and can do it twice as often. Likewise with ettiquette.

Second, once again, he *can* make ettiquette and social tests. He's not going to be the best one to negotiate with the Johnson, nor is he going to be the best at interrogating the suit you kidnapped. Nor should he be-- that's the Face's job. However, he can easily get past a bouncer, convince a rent-a-cop that the computer is glitched, and make it through a cocktail party without majorly embarassing himself. Unless you're forcing *every* character to negotiate for his life every single run, there's no need for him to be more than adequate in his non-specializations-- and he managed to do just that with only a few skills.

QUOTE

I was off by one because I missed a line on the sheet. Whoopdy doo.

You're the one who made the basic reading error, then followed it up with a basic insult when you failed to do the basic math. I'm not directly attacking or insulting you, so don't get offended when your attacks end up insulting yourself.

QUOTE

The point remains though, that while edge can indeed buy a critical success, it has to be something you're capable of doing. It doesn't let you make impossible things happen critically well.

Yes, and I *already* quoted a couple of rules to that effect; but it is nice to hear you admit that I was right all along. The force 200 spirit is impossible unless you've got a magic of 100; and in that case, it's not such a big deal anyway. However, the rules are remarkably ambiguous as to what exactly is impossible. Sure, a force 200 spirit isn't going to happen; but what about a force 12? Unlikely, sure, but not impossible-- and a properly used force 12 spirit can be just as bad as the aforementioned demigod.

QUOTE

But players that want to use it that way should know it would happen to them as well. As soon as they know that they're very unlikely to ever use it to try and shoot someone, summon something, or otherwise do something opposed. It would mean that suddenly any group of yahoos with a gun has a chance of automatically scoring 4 net hits with a bullet. That's just me though, and since it cuts both ways you don't really have to disallow it, just make sure the rule applies to everyone equally, on both sides of the screen.

Ah, one of my favorites, game balance through fear of retribution. I don't know about you, but I've found lots of ways to keep players from abusing rules short of actively threatening to turn it against them. I think that sort of thing really leads to an adversarial GM/Player relationship, and I think the shared storytelling/"friends out for fun" model works a whole heck of a lot better. But if you prefer the domineering GM type of games, that's okay: YMMV.

Posted by: James McMurray May 21 2006, 03:44 PM

QUOTE

Before long, we're not playing the same game anymore.

As soon as you introduce any house rule we're not playing the same game any more. Making this relatively minor change to the longshot test is far from a massive restructuring of how the game works. Obviously you disagree. But you're wrong.

QUOTE

If you can only hit an increased threshold by exploding the die X times, then there's no difference between that and a TN of 6*X

This already exists with the current edge rules. If you're making a test using edge and normal dice and your threshold is higher than your total dice pool (such as a base pool of 1 plus 3 edge dice needing a threshold of 5) then you have effectively set the target number for at least one of your dice to 11+. It doesn't mean you have actual target numbers, just that the way that particular situation works is similar to variable TNs.

Since one of the possibilities suggested was a variable TN, yes, it is possible to "fix" the "longshot problem" by using a variable TN. That is far from saying the entire system needs reworking. Obviously you disagree. But you are wrong.

QUOTE

he's just as screwed as any non-face character.

Wrong. They can use edge. He can't.

QUOTE

The fact is, SR$ does not prevent hyperspecialization, and it doesn't even make you suffer for it.

What part of "if your game style rewards hyperspecialization it isn't a fault of the rules" do you not understand?

QUOTE

So, he'd end up with 12 *exploding* dice, and can do it twice as often. Likewise with ettiquette.

So now your GM has said "roll perception" and you say "wait a second, I turn off my skillwires?" LOL

QUOTE

Unless you're forcing *every* character to negotiate for his life every single run, there's no need for him to be more than adequate in his non-specializations-- and he managed to do just that with only a few skills.

What part of "if your game style rewards hyperspecialization it isn't a fault of the rules" do you not understand?

QUOTE

I'm not directly attacking or insulting you, so don't get offended when your attacks end up insulting yourself.

Who said I was offended? So far you have managed to leave me greatly amused, but far from offended. It's rare that someone else's lack of intelligence and need to be right even when they're blatantly wrong offends me.

QUOTE

Unlikely, sure, but not impossible-- and a properly used force 12 spirit can be just as bad as the aforementioned demigod.

Yes, both for and against the players. In every edition there are things that have been incredibly powerful: big spirits, mind control, sniper rifles. They're things that bite both ways though, and so tend to balance themselves out.

QUOTE

So you're saying that the NPCs shouldn't use the powerful things the PCs can use? That's stupid. If mind control exists it will get used. If massive force spirits exist in a way that's easy to summon, they will get used. Not using it on the players isn't avoiding adversarial skills or not balancing through fear, it's coddling to players that want to have their cake and not let anyone else have theirs.

It isn't Domineering GMing when it's a group decision. We sit down at the start of every campaign in every system and discuss which things we don't want to use. Sometimes it's mind control, sometimes it's save or die spells, sometimes it's vehicles with armor ratings of 12+, sometimes it's nothing. Thank for for assuming you know my GM style and how my group plays. Isn't it you that told me to stop insulting your group's style? Kindly do the same.

And oh yeah, before I forget:

Obviously you disagree. But you are wrong.

Posted by: Cain May 25 2006, 02:13 AM

QUOTE

As soon as you introduce any house rule we're not playing the same game any more.

Big selling poing of SR4: "Fixed Target Numbers!" Reality: to make it work, you have to go to variable TN's. As a result, you end up with something that doesn't even come close to the original design specs.

QUOTE

Not really. A need for a mixed set of TN's: 11, 5, 5, and 5, for example, does not equal the same thing as a floating TN.

QUOTE

They can use edge. He can't.

Have you actually looked at the character? He does have Con, you know. You do realize that characters *can* use Edge with their natural skills, right?

You have read the Edge rules, right?

QUOTE

What part of "if your game style rewards hyperspecialization it isn't a fault of the rules" do you not understand?

What part of: "If the rules encourage hyperspecialization, it's not the fault of your game style" do *you* not understand?

QUOTE

So now your GM has said "roll perception" and you say "wait a second, I turn off my skillwires?"

Which part of the rules don't you understand now? Skillwires do not override your natural abilities anymore. Have you read the gear section?

Second, let's look at the actual rules. By the book, Mr. Lucky would have a total of 10 dice for visual perception tests, *before* he spends Edge. According to you, your characters, with the use of Edge, have 12. That's about 2/3 of a success difference, not much at all.

QUOTE

Who said I was offended?

You did. You put your own foot in your own mouth, not me. You're the one who made a simple addition error, then tried to insult me because the correct numbers didn't match what you saw. Generally, I never insult anyone, I just let them insult themselves, as this last exchange shows.

QUOTE

So you're saying that the NPCs shouldn't use the powerful things the PCs can use?

If the only reason you're using them is because the PC's are, definitely. When the PC's come up with a clever trick, it's a hallmark of poor GMing to suddenly have every NPC using the exact same trick against them. Occasionally having major NPC's pull a powerplay is fine, but suddenly arming every single ganger with sniper rifles and mind-control spells, just because the PC's pulled it off last game, is definitely not a way to run a fun game for everyone. If you like it that way, that's fine; but I hope you understand that a lot of people don't.

Posted by: Kanada Ten May 25 2006, 02:21 AM

With the power levels of SR4, high Edge is a edge the PCs may need.

QUOTE

Reality: to make it work, you have to go to variable TN's.

You only need variable TNs to play the way Cain wants to. There are many problems with SR4, Edge just isn't one of them

Posted by: James McMurray May 25 2006, 02:45 AM

QUOTE

Apparently you haven't been reading these threads. Several different options have been offered up, including "leave it as is." Because you disagree don't make it so.

QUOTE

He does have Con, you know.

A lot of good that will do him in etiquette or interrogation situations.

QUOTE

Skillwires do not override your natural abilities anymore.

Cool. So when do you spend edge and when do you not?

QUOTE

According to you, your characters, with the use of Edge, have 12.

That was an off the cuff example. If the perception test involves hearing or vision my current character has 11 dice without edge, 16 with. And he's certainly not a "Perception Specialist."

QUOTE

You did.

LOL Please point me to the post where I said anything like "you offend me."

QUOTE

When the PC's come up with a clever trick, it's a hallmark of poor GMing to suddenly have every NPC using the exact same trick against them.

Spending edge on longshot tests is not "a clever trick." At least no in the intellectual circles I play in. I can't speak for yours.

QUOTE

suddenly arming every single ganger with sniper rifles and mind-control spells, just because the PC's pulled it off last game, is definitely not a way to run a fun game for everyone

I agree. But given how powerful Mind Control is, practically every spellcaster on the planet that can get it and doesn't have moral compunctions against using it should have it. That will include a large number security mages and street shamen.

QUOTE

If you like it that way, that's fine; but I hope you understand that a lot of people don't.

I don't like it that way, and I certainly understand that most people don't. Yet again you opt for the hypocritical route of "don't presume to know my game style, but I'll happily presume to know yours."

Kanada Ten hit the nail on the head with that last paragraph.

Posted by: Geekkake May 25 2006, 10:24 PM

Mommy, Daddy, stop fighting!

Posted by: James McMurray May 25 2006, 11:53 PM

I'll just tell you what my daddy told me when I said that: "I ain't yo dady, punk!"

Posted by: Cain May 30 2006, 05:04 PM

QUOTE

Several different options have been offered up, including "leave it as is."

Yes, and since you've been reading this thread as well, you've seen the numbers backing up the statement: "They don't work".

QUOTE

A lot of good that will do him in etiquette or interrogation situations.

He's got Ettiquette as well. Next!

QUOTE

If the perception test involves hearing or vision my current character has 11 dice without edge, 16 with.

And Mr. Lucky has 10 without, 14 with. Not that much of a difference.

QUOTE

Spending edge on longshot tests is not "a clever trick."

Nice try, except we weren't talking about spending edge on Longshot tests, which we all acknowledge is hideously broken in the RAW. We were talking about bruning Edge on opposed tests. And what were your exact words?

QUOTE

So, you're not only saying that the Edge-burning rules are potential game-breakers, your response would be to have "every yahoo" suddenly getting 4 net successes. That's equivalent to arming every ganger with sniper rifles and mind-control magic. Since that's your *self-admitted* playstyle, you've got no beef coming when I point out that most people prefer to not game in a GM's power-trip; or when I say that responding to powerplays by having "any group of yahoos" pull the exact same trick is a hallmark of poor GMing.

Posted by: James McMurray May 30 2006, 06:22 PM

QUOTE

Yes, and since you've been reading this thread as well, you've seen the numbers backing up the statement: "They don't work".

And since you've also been around since the start of the discussion you know that you're so called proof is crap. You haven't shown any math on several of the proposed solutions. In fact, you've ignored them whenever possible. Nice try though.

Um, we've been talking about spending edge all along. That paragraph actually referred to spending edge for a critical success, not burning it for hits. Nice try though.

If you think that having NPCs use the same sort of tactics as the PCs is poor GMing then I can't imagine what your GMing style is like. Do players run around mind controlling everyone but the NPCs never use it because it's "poor GMing." do grunts never spend their edge pool in the same cheesy ways as the players do because it's "poor GMing." Yep, I admit that my GM style and playstyle involve complete fairness on both sides of the screen. The rules apply equally for everyone.

If you think that fairness is a power trip then we really can't discuss further because I'm not sure how to communicate with an alien mindset.

When did I say anything about arming gangers with sniper rifles and mind control? Nice attempt at belittling something without actually referring to it.

Posted by: NightHaunter May 31 2006, 11:43 AM

The best "fix" i've found for the longshot test is: GM approval.

I.E. Only when its dramatically appropriate, such as do or die situations.

Everythig else is balanced enough.

Posted by: James McMurray Jun 1 2006, 12:50 AM

That's what our group does, although it's more GM and Player approval. We've never had any problems. In general my group prefers to avoid the longshot tests whenever possible and instead do things that have a chance of working, saving edge for rerolls and critical glitch avoidance.

Posted by: NightHaunter Jun 1 2006, 10:47 AM

Yeah, glitch avodance.
Stupid Players, spoil all my fun!

Their other uses usually are re-rolls, and blowing up Aztecnology Aguilla Attack Helicopters with 1 spell!!!

Posted by: James McMurray Jun 1 2006, 06:16 PM

How so? Just high force plus a reroll, or was there more to it?

Posted by: Cain Jun 5 2006, 05:41 AM

QUOTE

You haven't shown any math on several of the proposed solutions.

That's because sometimes other people have beaten me to it. If you're following this thread, you shouldn't demand that everyone repeat what everybody else is saying.

QUOTE

Um, we've been talking about spending edge all along. That paragraph actually referred to spending edge for a critical success, not burning it for hits. Nice try though.

Um... you *have* read the Edge rules, right? The only way you can spend edge for a guaranteed critical success is to burn it. You can't actually burn edge for additional successes; you just burn it for the insta-crit. No wonder why you're so confused! Take an hour or two, and read the rules; you'll see what I'm talking about and wonder why you've been defending it all along.

QUOTE

If you think that having NPCs use the same sort of tactics as the PCs is poor GMing then I can't imagine what your GMing style is like.

I use what's known as the "shared storytelling" style of GMing. Which is, I collaborate with the players to create a fun environment. Now, as the GM, I have the ability to throw anything I want at the players; but that isn't any fun at all. If the PC's come up with a brilliant tactic, then with everything else I have in my arsenal, why should I ruin their fun by having every last grunt do the exact same thing? Part of the fun for the players is in coming up with the clever tricks and maneuvers. I might save a particularily nice play for the big NPC's; but having every last grunt pull a Hand of God and reappear in the next scene is just not fair. I don't understand how the players can have a fun game, when you're having every last grunt burn edge from an infinite pool to score critical successes left and right. I mean, part of the fun of a game is in the players feeling like they've accomplished something.

If you believe in "complete fairness" over having fun, that's fine-- YMMV. But personally, I think that a good GM should come up with his own cool tricks, instead of stealing them from the PC's.

QUOTE

When did I say anything about arming gangers with sniper rifles and mind control?

When you said this:

QUOTE

So you're saying that the NPCs shouldn't use the powerful things the PCs can use? That's stupid. If mind control exists it will get used.

QUOTE

The best "fix" i've found for the longshot test is: GM approval.

I.E. Only when its dramatically appropriate, such as do or die situations.

Everythig else is balanced enough.

The problem I encounter is that sometimes, what the player feels to be dramatic isn't the same as what I think it is. If a player really, really wants to try something, it's very cold of me to arbitrarily tell him "No way". If I can back it up with a solid rule, or valid example, then that's one thing-- but if the player wants to do something he thinks is cool, then why should I stop him? He'll enjoy the game more if he gets his chance.

Posted by: James McMurray Jun 6 2006, 02:26 AM

QUOTE

That's because sometimes other people have beaten me to it.

Incorrect. I have been following the discussiona ll along. Asking you to prove that the suggestions given don't work isn't asking you to repeat anything, because they've never been proven not to work. Heck, I doubt you can even remember all the suggestions, much less prove any of them mathematically infeasible.

QUOTE

Your inability to understand my paragraphs is not a reflection of my understanding of the rules, it's a reflection of your inability to understand my paragraphs. Nice try though.

QUOTE

If the PC's come up with a brilliant tactic, then with everything else I have in my arsenal, why should I ruin their fun by having every last grunt do the exact same thing?

I agree. But as I've said before, using edge is not "a brilliant tactic." IT's a basic rule. Everyone on the planet with edge has the ability to spend and/or burn it. If PCs decide that using edge to get critical successes is something theyw ant to do, it'll be something the NPCs also do. And since my group all agrees to that, it's part and parcel of the "shared storytelling" we use. Your inability to understand that has been demonstrated several times, and I don't know how else to explain it.

QUOTE

I don't understand how the players can have a fun game, when you're having every last grunt burn edge from an infinite pool to score critical successes left and right.

Please tell me where I said that. Nice try at ignoring what I say and inserting your own idiocy, but it didn't work.

QUOTE

If you believe in "complete fairness" over having fun, that's fine-- YMMV.

Actually, it's my group that believes in complete fairness = having fun. As I've said several times int he past.

QUOTE

But personally, I think that a good GM should come up with his own cool tricks, instead of stealing them from the PC's.

And again, using the edge rules is not a "cool trick." It's a rule. Both PC and NPCs use the same pistols rules, stealth rules, melee rules, and cyberware rules. They also, by the RAW, use the same edge rules. If your group elects not to do that, that's fine. But it doesn't have a place in a discussion about the "problem with edge rules" unless you're saying that your application of different rules for PCs and NPCs is a cause of or fix for the so-called edge problems.

Posted by: Cain Jun 7 2006, 06:57 AM

QUOTE

Asking you to prove that the suggestions given don't work isn't asking you to repeat anything, because they've never been proven not to work. Heck, I doubt you can even remember all the suggestions, much less prove any of them mathematically infeasible.

Oh, I can remember the highlights. They tended to fall into several camps. One was to keep carrying over dice pool penalties somehow. The problem, of course, is that it still left a lot of "impossible" tasks, where you just wouldn't even be able to try something, no matter how cinematically appropriate. The other suggestions involved upping the threshold, which is directly verboten in combat tests, and causes quite a few wonky results; also, if it exceeds the availiable Edge dice, the task is still impossible. The nWoD rule was also suggested in combination with the increased threshold and leaving a single exploding die; but that is effectively the same thing as raising the TN, only with a lot less adjustability. Oh, and Rotbart suggested excising the Longshot test altogether.

What, you *can't* remember all the suggestions?

QUOTE

Your inability to understand my paragraphs is not a reflection of my understanding of the rules, it's a reflection of your inability to understand my paragraphs.

So, because you are not able to write clear paragraphs, I'm expected to believe that your reading skills are adequate? You're making so many mistakes when quoting the rules, it's hard for me to tell if it's a writing problem on your part, or a misunderstanding of the rules. Which is it?

QUOTE

Some NPC's is fine and dandy. "Every yahoo", in your exact words, is excessive. Your example specifically said that "every yahoo" would be using the same trick against the players, for no other reason than that the PC's were using it. Game balance through fear of retribution.

QUOTE

I don't understand how the players can have a fun game, when you're having every last grunt burn edge from an infinite pool to score critical successes left and right.

Please tell me where I said that.

When you said:

QUOTE

Now, as a GM, you have the ability to give the NPCs as much of an Edge pool as you want. When you decide that the gang of incompetent yahoos has an Edge pool of 1000, that's your perogative. PC's, however, are much more limited in their acquisition of Edge. If you're actually being "fair", then you're not burning the free NPC edge pool any more often than the PCs can earn karma to raise their Edge. Since youhave an infinite supply of Edge to hand out, having grunts burn their edge means it comes from an infinite supply. Having "every yahoo" do this stunt is blatant GM powertripping; and doing it solely in response to the players pulling it off is sheer vindictiveness.

QUOTE

Okay, is this your lack of writing skills, or is this an actual misunderstanding of the rules? NPC's have a *different* set of Edge rules than PC's do. I suggest that you reread the "Friends and Foes" chapter, and in particular look up the rules on grunt Edge. Since you claim that your writing skills aren't up to par, I can't tell where the difficulty lies.