Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 12:51 AM

First off: This is not for everyone! Most (if not all) of you like bookkeeping, and keeping track of even the most miniscule amounts of Nuyen, and I applaud you. Just keep doing what you're doing, and move along.

My players and I all agree: we're tired of our games eventually turning into more resource management than actual roleplaying. We've discussed and agreed to implement a more abstract Wealth system, inspired by the same system in D20 Modern. I've been mulling over some ideas, and figured setting it as a straight Attribute (Like Edge) would be the best way to do it, and somehow compare it against gear availabilities.

Has anyone else had experience with using such a system in Shadowrun, and if so, what were your methods and results?

Posted by: ShadowDragon Jul 15 2006, 01:09 AM

For little things like soybeer and club entrence fees I include it into lifestyle costs. Money is only subtracted for gear, bribes, and rent.

Posted by: Lagomorph Jul 15 2006, 01:30 AM

Considering that resources can range from 0 to 50 points, that is pretty on par with attributes which have the start at 1 and max at 6. The only difference is that a 6th point would cost 25points where it doesn't in this case.

Our group has never tried anything like that, but it seems like it could work well. You could roll Wealth + Negotiations to get an item or something.

Very interesting idea!

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 01:32 AM

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 01:35 AM

Posted by: Lagomorph Jul 15 2006, 01:42 AM

To keep it in line with other stats, you'd want to start it off at 1 = street and have 6 at luxury. That'll allow critters and paracritters to have a wealth of 0, which is to say, actually nothing.

Posted by: Edward Jul 15 2006, 05:11 AM

Lagomorph. Street is actually nothing. You eat out of the trash, you sleep wherever you can get a space and your security is whatever personal weapons your carrying (not included in lifestyle cost), sounds like how stray animals live to me.

It would work well for many of the variant team types but not for shadowruners.

Shadow runers work for money, why work for money when you have a wealth stat. you could say your wealth stat represents what you get paid but what happens when the teem contains a hyper efficient samy with wealth 1 and a wanabe with no useful skills and wealth 5, think the samy will be a little upset (in charicter) that he is getting paid so much less when he is all but carrying the newbie

It would however be worth wile for any game where your on a regular retainer such as special forces, loan star, corporate security or dock wagon campaigns.

Posted by: Zen Shooter01 Jul 15 2006, 05:48 AM

I have found the Wealth system in D20 to be almost unworkable. I don't have the book in front of me, but as I recall, anything with a DC equal to or less than your Wealth you could automatically acquire. Anything with a cost higher than your Wealth required a D20+Wealth roll to acquire, and reduced your Wealth score by an amount determined by how much higher the cost was than your Wealth.

So if you have a Wealth 7 and a hotel room costs 6, you can apparently live in that hotel forever at no damage to your purchasing power.

If you have a Wealth of 12 and a handgun costs 11, you can go back to the gun store every day for a month and end up with 30 handguns at no damage to your purchasing power.

Also, the more Wealth you had in the first place, the more an increase meant to you. A PC with a Wealth score of 30 discovers a treasure worth 3, and is now significantly richer than he was before, because now he can automatically acquire things that cost up to 33 without reducing his Wealth. But a PC with Wealth 4 discovers the same treasure, raising his Wealth to 7, and he still can't afford to buy a shotgun without serious financial damage.

I can only recommend against the Wealth system in any game.

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 06:17 AM

I appreciate your input, but your words against are falling on deaf ears. I've liked the abstract nature of the system in every game in which I've used it. I will be using it, once I get the details worked out.

So, seeing as how you've now gotten it out of your chest, care to actually contribute and offer input into making it workable?

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 06:25 AM

It should be noted that I also don't run typical "commit X number of crimes for money and street rep" games. My games are more like a TV show, a Soap Opera for criminals. We focus less on bookkeeping and more on action and plot. Hell, I don't even make them keep track of regular ammo.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 15 2006, 09:35 AM

Brahm did some work http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=13653 but then got upset and quit the thread. I don't know if he ever finished the project or not.

Posted by: Lilt Jul 15 2006, 12:40 PM

I do like the idea of simplifying things, less bookkeeping can be good, but I don't like making money into a system that's not money. Once money isn't money then the whole dynamic of the game shifts based on what the new money is. For example, many otherwise poor runners in the game as it stands may carry a back-up clip of EX-E rounds 'just in case'. It only costs a few nuyen and can provide that extra punch when they really need it.

If a wealth system is employed then runners either can't afford the clip of Ex-E bullets any more than they can afford certain alpha/beta-grade ware (even though the bullets are cheap and the ware is expencive), or they can afford as many EX-E bullets as they like.

IE: Money is money, lumping costs into a bigger 'lifestyle' is great, making money not money will completely change the game dynamic. Perhaps even in ways you can't predict needing a lot of playtesting. If you somehow manage not to change the game dynamic then you'll probably have a complex system, at which point you're probably better-off just using money.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 01:58 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 02:09 PM

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 02:52 PM

Posted by: Lilt Jul 15 2006, 04:14 PM

If you trust your players so much and approve everything personally, then why have a system (wealth attribute ETC) at-all?

Posted by: DireRadiant Jul 15 2006, 04:20 PM

To provide a system of relative scale. Can PC X obtain this item, or be expected to have this item.

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 04:45 PM

Posted by: Lilt Jul 15 2006, 05:35 PM

lol. I've GMed for someone playing a broker/hacker character in shadowrun anyway. No, neither of us were or have ever been accountants so we generalised it, although we did keep track of how much money was involved and let the character's action influence the market slightly.

Also, you say that your system makes such things easy, but how does your abstract system deal with money when it is money? Do characters talk in terms like "You owe me one wealth, chummer"? Perhaps "you owe me *intermission... do do, da da, hey!*, chummer!"

When you have an out of character value for something in-game then it means that you can't talk about it directly, not without ruining the game. Money can be cinematic. Consider all of the movies where big sums of money are quoted, like "the girl dies unless I recieve 2 million dollars in unmarked bills" rather than "The girl dies unless I recieve wealth 20 in unmarked bills". You can have money without micro-management, and removing it completely is silly.

In-fact before you can convince me that it's a remotely good idea, you'll have to persuade me that it won't gimp money-based characters like sammies and riggers, or make them massively overpowered. The same goes for riggers, who could have a limitless number of drones available very cheaply. It doesn't matter that your players may be good little boys and girls, if things go badly then they can just lose a drone or two every run and not care. That removes any form of responsibility for the rigger, whilst other characters do still have to worry about being wounded.

And I'd like to draw a distinction again between keeping track of every last 0.01 nuyen and keeping money money. Big tiocket items aren't all that hard to work-out the costs for, they're usually costed in big round numbers for that purpose. Otherwise you can phase everything into lifestyle, or perhaps a slightly more expencive lifestyle.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 05:51 PM

The linked thread actually does discuss this a little bit, but to put it more directly: Using an Attribute doesn't mean you can't speak an absolute IC number or use the term . You just don't bother to write down that number on your character sheet because it is largely irrelavent outside of a general magnitude, which certainly serves any cinematic purpose.

P.S. I remember another thread in the Shadowrun forum a while back from a guy that doesn't use cash directly, or even a resource Attibute for that matter. http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=10894 He mentions some things in there as well about the subject of cash in the character's text.

Posted by: Phobos Jul 15 2006, 06:01 PM

Okay, though I don't really like the idea of a Wealth stat in Shadowrun, I DO have an idea how to simulate this, though, so ...
('Runners should always scape for survival - if they accumulate enough wealth that they don't have to worry about money any more, the should retire on a nice island in the caribean.)

Basics
Two stats, Wealth and Savings.
- Wealth indicates your general level of monetary resources, how much you have to worry about getting food, lodging or ammunition ... more or less a redefinied Lifestyle.
- Savings indicates how much money you have accumulated for spending on new goodies.

Description
Wealth is rated as you already proposed it :

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 06:42 PM

Here's what I've got so far...

WEALTH IN SHADOWRUN 4

Using a Wealth system allows for a more abstract approximation of character finances. This is designed for groups whose players are not as interested in the exact balances of their characters' checking accounts, and better takes into account the concept of actual credit lines, investments, and viable assets.

This system replaces the static money system with an Attribute + Skill setup just like the core SR4 dice mechanic.


WEALTH, LIFESTYLE, CHARACTER CREATION

At character creation, you buy wealth just like any other attribute. WEalth starts at 1 for everyone, with an across-the-board racial maximum of 6. Exceptional attribute can be acquired to raise the maximum to 7.

When you purchase your wealth, it also determines your character's lifestyle. Sure, there is no law saying you can't voluntarily live a lower lifestyle. However, the Wealth rating remains the same regardless, as does the monthly payoff requirement.


USING YOUR WEALTH

Your Wealth attribute is used as the basis for a dice pool, rolled with a skill using the normal SR4 mechanic. The skill in use varies depending on the situation. The new "Finances" active skill governs your character's keenness in accounting and financial acumen. Depending on the situation, other skills might come into play. For example, if you want to intimidate someone with the enormity of your checkbook alone (foreclosure, eviction, buyout, etc), roll Wealth + Intimidation. If you want to use your Wealth to "buy" yourself into social circles, roll Wealth + Etiquette. Different unique situations will have different rules and results, so be creative, and discuss with your GM.

Every item has an associated Value rating, usually from 0 to 7, and rarely ever higher. Value tells you the number of hits you need on a Wealth check to afford the goods. To acquire something, first determine your relevant dice pool (usually Wealth + Finances) and then compare it to the Value. If you have enough to buy it with normal rules of hit-buying (exchange 4 points of pool for 1 hit), then no test is necessary, as your Wealth can easily afford the cost. If not, then make a test using your dice pool, with a threshold equal to the item's Value. Edge can be used to assist.

Much like spells and Force, your Wealth attribute limits the amount of hits you can get on this test. If the item's Value is higher than your wealth, then you cannot afford it without saving or liquidating (see below) or borrowing from someone else (teamwork, or contact roleplaying).

If you meet the threshold, you manage to find enough cash to pay for it, now carry on as you were. If not, then you don't have enough to pay for it at the moment without saving or liquidating (see below) or just waiting until the next payoff cycle of your Wealth goes through.

To determine the different numbers behind wealth, check the chart below. Each Wealth rating has an associated Lifestyle and monthly payoff. The same chart is used to find the value of an item using it's normal SR4 gear listing costs.


PAYOFF

Rather than using actual cash, the Wealth system uses an abstract measurement of income called "payoff" to keep track of how the rise and fall of a character's background resources (credit lines, investments, jobs, and more). One point of payoff is roughly equal to 100 units of base currency (nuyen), but rather than serving as an actual gauge of expendable cash, payoff works to keep your wealth rating afloat.

Payoff stockpiles are not used as cash! Payoff is used to keep your Wealth attribute afloat, and to serve as a measure of your current financial standing. Payoff can be used (with Karma) to make investments and manipulate assets, raising your Wealth rating to a higher level.


POOLING YOUR ASSETS

As with standard rules, multiple characters can use Teamwork to assist in the proper situations, using one character's wealth to cover the losses of another. Characters who loan each other money should work out their own interpersonal standards for finances and paybacks.


MAKING (and Missing) THE PAYMENTS

Wealth ratings have a monthly cost that must be paintained by your payoff. Like the normal lifestyle rules, missing payments and being in debt are not good. When the payment time comes rolling around, the character needs enough stockpiled Payoff to pay the Wealth level's payoff cost. If the character has enough, just subtract that much and keep on truckin.

However, if the character can't afford it, determine what wealth rating they can afford. Subtract that from their current rating, and then make a check with a threshold of 1 + the difference. If successful, no sweat, the credit and savings and accounts covered the difference in costs, and the character's current payoff stockpile is dropped to zero. If the test fails, then one of two things happens: Repo, or Debt.

If the character goes the Repo route, they simply lower their current Wealth by the amount by which they failed to meet the threshold, keeping their payoff stockpile where it is. Their lifestyle is immediately adjusted downward, and this can create definite roleplaying opportunities as the character seeks new digs.

If the character goes the debt route, their Wealth and Lifestyle remain the same, their payoff stockpile is dropped to zero, and they are now in debt by a payoff amount equal to whatever their previous stockpile did not cover, divided by the number of hits they got on their test.


RAISING YOUR WEALTH

Wealth is raised just like any other attribute. The maximum is six, unless you have an Exceptionl Attribute quality in Wealth, at which point the maximum is seven. In addition to the Karma cost (New rating x3), the character must also have enough payoff to pay the difference between their current wealth rating's monthly maintenance cost and the next one. This should be roleplayed, of course, as financial investments, property managements, etc. The character's lifestyle is effectively increased to the next level as well.


LIQUIDATING ASSETS

When you absolutely need something that you just can't completely afford (meaning: the value is higher than your current Wealth, or you just did not score enough hits on the check), you can attempt to liquidate some of your Wealth in order to acquire the necessary goods. When doing so, you roll your base Wealth again, adding the hits to your original roll, and applying the rule of six to the new dice. If your total hits are enough to acquire the item, then you immediately subtract from your current Payoff an amount equal to the monthly payoff cost of your current Wealth (divided by the extra hits scored on the test).

This represents your character manipulating assets, hocking valuables, and taking a dip into her actual way of life in order to attain what she desires most at the moment.


SAVING FOR LATER

You can manipulate your wealth to save up for something later, should you not be able to afford it now. This is treated as an extended test with an interval set by the GM, usually based on the rotation of your finances (every week, two weeks, twice a month, once a month, etc). The Threshold varies depending on the difference between the item's Value and your wealth. If the Value is less than or equal to your wealth, the Threshold is Value x2. For each point that it is equal to or higher, increase this multiplier by +1. You can spend Edge to make this easier, as per normal Edge rules.

During this process, you suffer a -1 to all Wealth checks (including those made to save up!), as you set aside chunks of finance to save for something important.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 06:47 PM

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 06:48 PM

Gah, I can't get the code to look right

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 07:02 PM

@phasmaphobic

PAYOFF seems to me more like just tracking cash in 100 nuyen increments. Which I'm cool with, it just doesn't really need all this to bother with that. Especially if you are including all the monthly lifestyle rents too and a running PAYOFF total. That's mostly what I do with my PC right now, when I buy something I just round up to the next 100 nuyen. It is kinda rare that I have to bother rounding off anyway. It's only for the piddling little stuff, and the character is such that he rarely buys cheap dollar store type crap anyway. He isn't rich, he just isn't frugal.

I do like the idea though of just having Lifestyle set by the Wealth/Resoure Attribute because the BP cost of the cash price of Lifestyle is negligable in comparison to that of an Attribute. When I get around to bringing together all my thoughts I'll include that.

P.S. I prefer the name Resource to Wealth because Resource is a much closer match to the second use, the backup check to see if you have something onhand that isn't explicitly on your inventory list. Even when you take into account any 'toolkits' listed on the inventory list.

Posted by: phasmaphobic Jul 15 2006, 07:12 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 07:32 PM

For the second use a single roll of Logic+Resource can give you memory and cash in one Attribute Only Test.

I do like the idea of Edge, without spending a point I assume, used as sort of a Fate Test if there wasn't a readily available mechanic. But I think a mechanic can be put in place there in this case.

The way I looked at Resource was that it also represented investments whose ROI cover off the basics of your Lifestyle. So it is self sustaining as long as you don't try to do anything other than typical existance activities that are consistant with the Lifestyle. That seems a lot more inline with a cost of 10 BP per point, and the karma costs for raising it.

Also by not having to worry about end of the month payments it provides more flexibility to the GM in choices of runs offered. Basically the GM doesn't have watch the cash/credit totals to walk the line of providing the opportunity to keep them in their house while avoiding a bit of a Monty Haul spiral. You don't need to worry so much about timing of runs too. If you are relying on a monthly Lifestyle as a cash sink then having a burst of runs in one month can quickly throw wonks into things. Not having a monthly Lifestyle payment also makes it a bit easier to manage a team with disparate Lifestyles.

Posted by: Phobos Jul 15 2006, 07:44 PM

Brahm :
I simply took the opposite way from yours - simpler, not more complicated. I thought the goal was simply to have a way to get rid of the nuyen crunching while still having a means to keep track of the character's purchase power.

There being two major considerations, genral funds for keeping up lifestyle and making small purchases, and savings for major purchases, I tried to make those the focus of attention.

Though ... yes, I guess I could have avoided some of the levels, but at times a runner might want to save up an insane amount of money for a single purchase (like updating cyber to all-delta .... outch .... which might be a couple milion nuyen at once).


Seems I have to do examples.

Joe and Fred are shadowrunners. Joe is new in town but has kept some savings from his old hunting grounds (W2, S4) while Fred has a nice hideout and a steady supply of work, but is out of money right now due to his attempt to keep up with SOTA (W4, S1).

Both would have no real problems buying up Ammo (Purchase Rating 1) or an Armor Jacket (Purchase Rating 2), but if any of them wanted to buy a nice new commlink (Purchase Rating 3), things would start to get interesting.
Joe does not have enough Wealth to get it on the by, so he has to check if it's a major hit on his saving. He rolls 5 Dice (S4 + half W2) vs. 3 Dice (the Purchase) and wins - seems the commlink wasn't worth any fuzz yet.
Fred cannot afford the comm with his savings, but he can save it up from his lifestyle. Rolling 4 Dice each month until he accumulates 3 hits on the second roll, he buys it on the second month.

If they wanted to buy a new car (Purchase Rating 4), Fred would have to sell his lifestyle (Reduce Wealth to 3) to do so, while Joe would check his savings - 4 Dice vs. 4 Dice of the Purchase - a good chance his Savings will be reduced to 3.

Neither could buy those Wired Refelxes 3 (Purchase Rating 5) they dream about.

So they take on a job for some 20k nuyen (Earnings Rating 4).
Fred now has Savings 4 as this Income was greater than his savings.
Joe would roll 5 dice (Income Rating 4 + half W1) vs. 4 dice (Saving 4) to check if the new money is worth an increase in savings. If he wins, his Savings will rise to 5 and he can finally buy those Wired Reflexes.


As you can see, the whole system is a lot more abstract and will have different dynamics than a money based system. It is not munchkin proof ... not at all ... and so I'd not recommend it for any group, but for plasma's group and purposes it might just be enough ... or even just right.

If you don't like it ... hey, I don't like it either
I just think that it is a valid approach for tracking Wealth, Savings, Income and Purchases two simple Attribues and a few rolls now and then.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 15 2006, 08:14 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 15 2006, 09:40 PM

Hey Brahm, any chance you can make a post in response to something I say without an insult?

The problem with treating something a character has to save up for as a character goal and plot hook is that every major purchase shouldn't require a plot hook to achieve. For example, if we assume that a character has the lowest wealth level possible, should a GM have to insert something into his story to account for every time that character wants to buy a tennis racket, when he could instead just let the character save up money?

A wealth system should, IMO, account for the ability to save up for an item without requiring GM intervention or raising your entire wealth level.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 16 2006, 06:28 AM

Posted by: Edward Jul 16 2006, 07:32 AM

There was actually the reverse of this argument on pattern spider and exalted forum. In exalted there is a resources background but it is supposed to represent having in income stream. And creates problems when somebody with resources 3 suddenly gets a windfall worth resources 5, he isn’t going to get that often is he. I think you may like the suggested solution of temporary resources.

Translated into SR it works like this.

You have a wealth stat that represents an income stream from investments or doing odd jobs claming unemployment, describe it as you will nothing will affect it without being significant a plot device. Any item worth les than wealth squared *100 you can be assumed to be able to afford.

1=100nuyen
2=400nuyen
3=900nuyen
4=1600nuyen
5=2500nuyen

sometimes you get money you cant rely on coming regularly, such as income from runs. This you can ether keep as money to spend on expensive things worth the accounting time (indeed anything you cant get with your wealth) or invest to increase your wealth rating this would cost 100 times your purchasing limit. You could also cull investments dropping your wealth a point and getting most of the money back if you needed to raise capital for some reason.

The reason am making it so hard to have a really high purchasing limit is that most campaigns have money as a major motivation and I am trying to avoid having the runners get in a situation where they can live comfortably forever without taking jobs. Otherwise why risk your hoop for some corp slave called Johnson. While still allowing minor things not to be important.

Edward

Posted by: Brahm Jul 16 2006, 08:23 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 16 2006, 08:25 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 16 2006, 09:32 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 16 2006, 10:08 PM

I'm talking about someone setting aside enough money to buy one thing. Increasing your wealth level means setting aside enough money to suddenly buy any number of things you couldn't afford.

"Eating Ramen" is the same as saying "cut back on expenses." I assumed it was a more global expression than it was. If it makes you feel any better, replace it with "fire normal rounds instead of Ex-Ex, or anything else that equates to not spending as much money as you normally spend.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 16 2006, 11:56 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 12:32 AM

Seems perfectly reasonable to me, but as I've said before, different game styles. I don't care for the game style or massive changes involved in making Shadowrun a wealth based system, for reasons already mentioned. You do. It's all good.

I understand the idea of buying things on credit in your system, and I don't like it. IMO credit for SINless criminals should be negotiated on a case by case basis with Guido and Nunzio's House of Sharks. Otherwise you negotiate pay up front or save money by cutting expenses elsewhere. Again, that's just my preference.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 02:52 AM

Posted by: Edward Jul 17 2006, 12:46 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 01:04 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 02:45 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 03:17 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 06:02 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 06:12 PM

I was trying to avoid bringing this up, as part of the "kinder, gentler" James" but for some reason you still think it's odd that people can't follow what you're saying.

Here's an idea, if you want people to easily understand what you're saying, don't make your ramblings disjointed, spread out, and incoherent.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 07:40 PM

@Edward Thanks for the info on Exalted. I had given some consideration to providing an alternate method for increasing Resources other than karma. Something like what is sorely missing from the SR4 BBB, improvment of a Contract's Loyalty, or even Connection, during play. Actually it is even worse in that there is no RAW way to improve a Contact or make a new Contact, even with karma.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 07:47 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 08:01 PM

Yet again you continue responding. I guess you lied when you said you were done? So now we have a stealth-editing, lying, rambling, incoherent, and disjointed poster.

I'm not making sense in regards to your wealth system, but if you'll notice, I've already said that my comments are general ideas for what makes a good wealth system. The ones directed at your ideas have basically been "I don't like it because..."

Yes, your system handles saving money, but it doesn't do it in a way I like. I said that already.

Your system (at least what I can glean from the disjointed, spread out, and incoherent ramblings) does not match my ideas of what makes a good wealth system. I said that already as well. I've also said IMO and YMMV. Get over yourself.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 08:04 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bugger%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 08:12 PM

So much for "I'm out," eh?

By the way if you type something in, it isn't automated.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 08:25 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bugger%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 08:31 PM

*yawn*

Posted by: mfb Jul 17 2006, 08:39 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/automated
lern2define, Brahm. that said, Brahm's suggestions make sense to me.

edit: and lern2bbcode, mfb

Posted by: Lagomorph Jul 17 2006, 09:07 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 10:31 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 17 2006, 10:37 PM

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Jul 17 2006, 10:51 PM

Personally, the concept of rating Wealth 1 (street) to 6 (luxury) sounds fine to me - 0 would be the total inability to trade.
It should work fine if the focus is more on storytelling anyway.

Posted by: Lagomorph Jul 17 2006, 10:58 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 17 2006, 11:22 PM

Just be careful about raising the stat. It doesn't really matter how you let it be raised (karma, RP, RP + karms, or whatever) as long as it's consistent and not too rapid. If you can get to rating 6 after ten runs you may find a lot of characters retiring early.

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jul 17 2006, 11:57 PM

Interesting concept.

I think it might be hard to only have 6 ratings, why not consider 1-12 like Magic/Resonnance attributes? You'd have an equivilant lifestyle = Wealth Rating /2. This could slow down the quick progression of a 1-6 Rating.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 18 2006, 12:00 AM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 18 2006, 12:05 AM

Posted by: TBRMInsanity Jul 19 2006, 01:27 PM

This idea is simular to the modern D20 idea of a resources skill. I like the idea as it streamlines the purchase part of character creation. I think that there should be wealth skill rather than attribute and base it off of Edge.

Posted by: Edward Jul 19 2006, 02:13 PM

I still don’t see how your going to still a story about a bunch of mercenary criminals without making a significant thing about money. if they don’t have to work for every nuyen and worry about weather they can afford the new focus or bit of cyber wear then there not going to behave like mercenary criminals and for the most part (excepting variant campaigns) mercenary criminals is a large part of what shadow runners are supposed to be. Even when they have other goals as well.

If you are going to have a wealth attribute may I suggest that it /not/ be the same as other attributes, at least in that you don’t raise it with karma in eth same way, you raise it buy earning money.

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Jul 19 2006, 02:24 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 02:29 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 02:36 PM

I think once you've hit the "let's get rid of money" house rule, one more tiny change to fake SINs won't be a big deal.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 03:14 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bugger%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 03:25 PM

Ah yes, the typical "I'm still a moron" response. *yaaaaawn*

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 03:40 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bugger%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 03:46 PM

If you type it, it isn't automated... still...

And no, I don't buy the Pee Wee Herman-esque "I meant to do that" excuse you gave earlier.

By the way, haven't you realized yet your complete and utter powerlessness in this situation? Telling people to bugger off in a place where you have no control is an excercise in futility. It's really kinda sad. I feel sorry for you.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 03:58 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bugger%20off

Posted by: CradleWorm Jul 19 2006, 03:58 PM

I'm not sure if this idea was presented or not, but here it goes...

For an abstract system I think wealth can only be one part of the equation. The other part has to be availability. Fortunately there are somewhat abstract rules there already.

Now as far as wealth goes, one of the things that makes Shadowrun a great, game in my mind, is the gritty nature of the world around Shadowrunners. They don't have retirement accounts, savings accounts, or SINs for that matter. Getting gear should be difficult to do.

After all, would a wealthy Shadowrunner really risk it all for a few thousand nuyen more or would he retire on some small island full of native girls?

When you do use an abstract system, consider seriously that the Wealth attribute must be able to move up and down quickly. Shadowrun is often about making that big score, living high on the hog for a while, and when the money dries up scrambling for another job.

I would leave much of the ability to get gear in the hands of lady luck, to help represent the nature of the streets. I would also modify things by the availability rating in the book. So even if your character has enough cash to get that panther cannon, perhaps he can't find one.

So this has all been very generic and I didn't present any real numbers to work off of, but just use the basic system for rolling dice and come up with some kind of edge to base it off of. Throw in the Negotiation and Etiquette skills somehow to locate and purchase gear and your all set.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 04:08 PM

I agree completely. In my experience runner resources fluctuate wildly, especially if they've got some flaws that draw on it (like addictions). A wealth system needs to be able to mimic that to some extent.

There are some game types where a resource based economy would work wonders. Any campaign where the group works for a corporation, government, or other organization is a good place for it. Instead of representing personal finances the wealth system then represents how friendly you are with the supply secretary, your ability to shmooze a few extra requisition forms out of your CO, or a few favors owed to you by Ralphie the gun merchant.

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Jul 19 2006, 04:51 PM

Posted by: eidolon Jul 19 2006, 05:44 PM

I'm beginning to wonder about the ages (or maybe, mental ages) of some DSers.

The idea of separating wealth and money-tracking from the game has plenty of merit. I personally think that if you're going to do it, there's next to no need for a mechanic to back it up. Just role play stuff like major acquisitions, and when the PC needs a few extra magazines for his Predator and he lives in a middle lifestyle and is part of a fairly successful team, just give them to him.

I don't know. To me, the idea of not tracking nuyen for story reasons pretty much excludes there being rules for it by its very nature.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 05:51 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 06:23 PM

I can agree on disliking the unlimited extended tests. The way it's set up now unless your GM invokes the optional rules you can always get your hands on an availability 365 tactical nuke. It might take you quite a while, but it'll eventually happen as long as you have enough dice and edge to ensure you don't get a critical glitch.

That can easily be handled with the GM making judgement calls on what is and isn't available, which works great in home games, but can cause major hassles if you get the wrong guy in an online or convention game.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Jul 19 2006, 06:26 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 06:30 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 06:52 PM

LOL The "I'll be consciously ignorant of the fact that comments are directed at me." You're really pulling out the cliches now aren't you.

---

In my experience you need either

1) Lots of trust between GM and players or
2) Well defined house rules

Obviously #1 is best, as you can just decide on the fly what the characters can and can't buy. #2 is the more common situation.

Even in groups where the GM is trusted, having rules to look at gives a player a feeling of control over his own destiny. If he has a wealth attribute or a nuyen amount on his sheet he knows that he can call up his fixer and buy certain items (some of which may take a while to procure). Without that he has to rely on the GM's judgement every time he buys something, and even if the GM's judgement is great, it still pulls a little control out of the player's hands. Some players handle that better than others.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 07:52 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/piss%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 08:03 PM

Posted by: PBTHHHHT Jul 19 2006, 08:08 PM

Geez Brahm, you've already stated your point about ignoring James. You really don't have to persist in putting up your linky posts for James to bugger/piss/whatever else off since it's started to get a bit annoying also. Let James do his post since it's an open board and he's trying to be on topic. Just ignore him (and don't read his posts) and go about answering everyone else's posts.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 08:08 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 08:30 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 08:36 PM

Assimilate what? That you want me out of this thread? Have no fear, I understand completely and just don't care.

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jul 19 2006, 08:46 PM

Sorry if I've missed this point entirely this topic is new to me.

You could technically convert all run payments into Karma (~5k = 1 Karma). That would let you make meaningful negotiations, increase the time/chance of scoring gear by spending your Karma on top of having unlimited bribe/influence capabilities. Otherwise is seems you'd need to provide some cap what each ranking of Wealth permits.

It's actually piqued my interest more than I initially thought it would.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 08:46 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/piss%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 08:53 PM

Nope, not a cartoonist. Or at least not a good one. Those guys usually have some humor.

----

Grinder: The 5k to one karma sounds a lot like cash for karma. Is that the ratio that rule used in SR3?

It could definitely work, but some people are wanting to use wealth ratings to avoid games where money is the primary concern. Switching money for runs to karma for runs might make those games focus on "run for karma, get karma, spend karma, run again" to paraphrase an easrlier poster.

I think the general idea is to have a system that focuses more on storytelling for those groups to whom having money written on their sheet detracts from that.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 08:55 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/piss%20off

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 09:02 PM

There. I sigged it for you. Now every time I post you get the pleasure of having me say something to you. In the meantime, perhaps you'd like to contribute something useful to the thread, or did you miss your nappy and you're too cranky now?

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 09:09 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 09:11 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 09:14 PM

See PBTHHHHT? Repetition after repetition and he still is so thick that he keeps trying to talk to me? It's like in all his posting with Cain that stone in a bucket of water quality of Cain's rubbed off on him. He learns like dirt.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 09:14 PM

I definitely like #2, it's the primary reason I started the thread which spawned this one: being able to have gear on you that isn't written down. I'd definitely tie knowledge skills in, as they represent the reasoning behind that character having the item. i.e. "I have knowledge (breaking and entering) 4, doesn't it make sense that the character would have thought to buy a pair of wire clippers?"

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 09:15 PM

See PBTHHHHT? Repetition after repetition and he still doesn't realize he has no power over me. (or in fact anyone here). It's like in all his posting with Cain that stone in a bucket of water quality rubbed off on him. He learns like dirt.

Such a sad little man. I pity you and the world you live in that drove you to such madness.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Jul 19 2006, 09:24 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 09:28 PM

Posted by: eidolon Jul 19 2006, 10:08 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 10:24 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 10:35 PM

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Jul 19 2006, 10:39 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 19 2006, 11:02 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 19 2006, 11:55 PM

Hi Brahm! Nice to see you respond to "pestering" you by pestering the entire thread. And oh yeah: Hi Brahm!

--

My post earlier about runs paying in karma resulting in runs focused on karma got me thinking.

If a wealth system is designed to get rid of the desire to "run, get money, run again, get money again, repeat as necessary" then what stops the game from moving on to another monotany of "work, reward, work, reward?" Basically, if a player is the type that wants to focus on risk vs. reward, he'll most likely focus on it no matter what the reward being offered is.

For instance, if goods are negotiated through the Johnson instead of purchased with run money, the likely situation is "negotiate, run, negotiate, run." If runs are rewarded with information regarding a larger plotline, the likely situation is "run, get intel, run, get intel."

Can a wealth system be done such that it avoids this problem, without removing the idea that shadowrunners are people that do dangerous jobs for other people in order to get things from those people (usually physical things that help them survive and/or prosper as runners)?

Posted by: Rotbart van Dainig Jul 20 2006, 07:45 AM

Posted by: Brahm Jul 20 2006, 08:40 AM

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 20 2006, 01:42 PM

Bye! By the way, if you're feeling curious, do a count of on topic posts for you and I since page 3 (where your repetitions began). You can't really complain that someone is throttling a thread when you're more off topic than they are.

Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 20 2006, 03:11 PM

It seems to me that the only way to remove the run, reward, run, reward mentality, is to either take the rewards away completely, or give them regardless. One solution for this is to make them into company men, or do a LS campaign, or Doc Wagon, or something else where it is their job to do something and they get a regular salary regardless of how much or how little they do whatever it is their job to do. Of course, the problem here is loss of motivation. They have to have some sort of independent goals to give them a reason to care. Justice and fighting corruption might make the basis for a LS campaign, but in general it's that reward system that you're trying to get away from that forms the primary motivation of the players/characters.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 20 2006, 03:16 PM

If I put my group into a Lone Star campaign they'd turn into a bunch of Vic Mackes.

Even changing to a "justice vs. corruption" campaign becomes "run, pat self on back, run again" setup. The reward changes to something intangible, but it's still there. I guess I just think that rewards are such an integral part of practically every game that trying to design a system to avoid one particular type is a bit futile. Now, a wealth system designed to make player to money interaction easier and/or more balanced is a great idea.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 20 2006, 03:40 PM

Well obviously there's got to be some kind of reward system, tangible or intangible, or else why would anyone play? There's always a reward to anything you do, on some level, or you wouldn't do it. We're big dumb animals that way.
Imagine:
GM: Okay, we're going to play FuckURun. I give you a mission, you fail, and then I poke you in the eye with this stick. Sound like fun?

I thought the point of this was to find ways of getting campaigns more focused on the less tangible rewards like character development and plot advancement, and less focused on the crunchy rewards like money and karma.
Hmmm, I guess maybe I just don't know what the point of this thread is, and should just stay out of it. In my defense, it's getting kind of hard for me to sift the wheat from the chaff in this thread.

Posted by: eidolon Jul 20 2006, 03:53 PM

Moon-Hawk, I see what you're saying, but I think you might be stuck on "money is the only reward in SR". If the players are more interested in story development, then meeting that specific person you've always wanted to meet, or hitting Renraku where it hurts even if you have to do the run pro bono, or finally getting that Westwind Turbo (which you still could, doing what's being loosely discussed in this thread) becomes much more important than the fact that you made 7,500 on the last run.

It doesn't take away the reward you get, it just shifts it from purely monetary (which some of us feel isn't really enough to motivate an ongoing game by itself) to more story-based. It's like how reading a good book is its own reward.

Granted, it's not going to work for every player or ever group. But when you've got the right group for it, a system such as those being tossed around lets you focus on the story (stories) at hand, rather than constantly trying to track character wealth, run payments, gear costs, etc.

(Nice sig btw. In my last game, that was the gunslinger adept's centering chant. And talk about a series that was its own reward. Well, minus the ending. )

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 20 2006, 04:31 PM

Huh? Wha? I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm arguing against money being the only reward. I am 100% for the intangible rewards of the story. Sure, money is nice, but I prefer motivations that don't result in my characters retiring after a couple profitable runs.
I was arguing against James suggesting that intangible rewards lead to the same mindless cycle of run-reward-run-reward, but re-reading his post I'm not sure he was saying that in the first place.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 20 2006, 04:36 PM

Yes and no. When the rewards are intangibles that drive the story forward you still have "run, reward, run" but it's done in a way that the rewards don't necessarily look like rewards. They still have to be tere, because people don't play characters that risk their lives for no reason. Even if the character is just out acting insane, the player is doing it because it's what he wants to do and he gets something out of it.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 20 2006, 04:37 PM

Um, good then. So I guess we all agree.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 20 2006, 04:46 PM

No! Must argue!!!

Anyone got an updated version of a wealth system to post? There's been a couple of attempts made followed by a lot of talk. Has anyone updated their version to account for that, perhaps with a bit of playtesting?

Posted by: eidolon Jul 20 2006, 04:57 PM

I think you're right, MH. Sorry about that. I had eggs on the stove while checking DS earlier. Reading fast doesn't always equal reading well.