Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Begisle Jan 3 2007, 07:15 AM

I'm starting a game this Friday and was wondering what others thought about having players use 500bp instead of 400

We also will be using the variant rules of 4+ and exploding 6s(sorry long time Earthdawn player and this way feels more comfortable to me)

Posted by: Charon Jan 3 2007, 07:18 AM

For a standard campaign that will last 20+ sessions, bad.

For a short scenario, (can be) good.

For a campaign based on a chapter format where you'll play in alternance 3 to 5 group, none of which will play more than 5-6 sessions, good. Though not all groups should be at 500 BP. Variety is a good thing.

For a first campaign, very bad.

Posted by: Glyph Jan 3 2007, 07:34 AM

500 build points is high-powered campaign level. I disagree that it is bad for campaigns lasting 20+ sessions, as characters will still have plenty to spend their Karma on. However, you need to be aware that using 500 points will create very effective shadowrunners. Even with 400 points, you can make runners who sling dice in the high teens for their primary skill. With 500 points, they will be able to do so without needing to sacrifice in any other areas.

At 500 points, you could even make a halfway-decent technomancer.

So as far as good or bad, I give a qualified good. It is good... if it is your intention to have a high-powered campaign.

Posted by: Grinder Jan 3 2007, 10:54 AM

Posted by: TBRMInsanity Jan 3 2007, 01:48 PM

A 500 point game is ok. But tailor your missions around the fact that your players are more powerful. IE you have to run your games as if the SR are well established SR that have been working as a team so far. If you have any newbies in your group this may be a problem.

Posted by: Wakshaani Jan 3 2007, 01:51 PM

*Waves the 320 pt flag*

C'mon down to Rookie World! It's cool down here!

Posted by: ChicagosFinest Jan 3 2007, 02:57 PM

What do you have to work for or look forward to?

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 3 2007, 03:55 PM

...In SR3 we used the high powered rules from MrJ's LBB. Admittedly it was a short run (Brainscan) and we had a small group of players (3 - 4). Was able to make a kick butt decker/sam (Diamond Ice) who had her own custom deck and programmes (2 mil in resources) and we still barely made it through the module.

I will be using the same rule option for the re-run of my Rhapsody arc as well and do not see much of an issue handling the higher powered characters considering the difficulty level the campaign is set at.

Posted by: Ophis Jan 3 2007, 05:48 PM

Posted by: deek Jan 3 2007, 06:07 PM

I run a campaign bi-weekly, 4-5 hour sessions. We are in our 15th session...the only real change we made was increasing the karma rewards...still started with 400 BP at chargen, but each session, regardless of activity, I give out a base of 10 karma...then I add onto that the "normal" karma rewards for runs and stuff.

I would consider this a higher-powered campaign, but it works well and everyone is having fun. There hasn't been a ton of in-game downtime and because of the accelerated reward system, the group really hasn't been on a ton of runs and therefore don't have a bunch of gear to speak of besides chargen and stuff they have picked up.

But, there is a ton of stuff these guys like to spend karma on and with the karma rules, it really doesn't go as fast or make them as powerful as I would have expected...in the given time.

So, at this point, after 30 weeks of playing, these characters are about where you would be starting your group, using 500 BP. I think it would be fine as long as you keep the group as "professional runners", not up and comers or anything.

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 3 2007, 06:08 PM

Well, i got used to the 400 BPs, works well. Im sure 500 would work fine for a more experienced runner campaign.

I actually find, being an SR3 fan(fav of the 4, tho i enjoy 4), that 450 is a rather comfy amount to work with. It's not too terribly much more(youre basically allowed 25 more attribute points, which isnt too extensive), and 25 gives you some more Resources, Contacts, or if you divvy it up in Skills, a couple extra low end skills or one extra high end. Thinking about it like this, its not too extensive, but still allows for the more 'SR3' starting level runners(but not quite)...who some called overpowered, but i usually thought of it as runners that have been assumed to not be on their first one and have done a few. Another thing is with 450, I found Technomancers to be much more comfortable.


Well, lets break it down numerically. Taking maxes, a mundane character can have(for one instance), with 400:

200 on Attributes

Maxing out cash, can get 250,000(50BP)
Lets say dropping 15 into Contacts(15BP)

perhaps 10 on Edge(10 BP),
for 275 BPs, allowing 125 for Skills. (which go faster than you think sometimes).

This creates a competent, but not overpowering, character....with these resources, im guessing this might be in the lines of sammie or a Drone Hacker.

400 BPs can also make a well-powered, but not overly experienced, mage.

However, as said by many, technos do suffer a little under the 400 yoke.

500 BPs, to create the top sammie/drone hacker said above....

Add 50 Bps to their Attributes, fairly significant.

50 BPs more to spend on Skills or Contacts, also quite significant. If you allow more than 250,000 nuyen, then possibly considerably more Resources.

Yeah, these are some much more experienced runners...but not impossible to challenge. Youll just have to give it some thought.


As for the 320 BP method, its one of those things that i have to be in the mood for. Sometimes i like to play a more down end street gang-like campaign, and it works pretty well, but since most RPGs start you so low, i got a bit tired of it, so i typically more enjoy playing a bit more seasoned(ie, regular 400 BP to 450 BP.)

Posted by: Red Jan 3 2007, 11:49 PM

It is much more difficult, and much more expensive to make a well balanced character than it is to make a more potent character. Anyone can make a potent one/two trick pony with 300 BP. However it a very experienced player to make a viable, well balanced character with only 300 BP.

GMs should be wary of restricting BP out of a kneejerk reflex reaction to the power that BPs grant munchkins, lest they starve other players of the ability to be anything but a minmaxer in order to survive.

Posted by: OneTrikPony Jan 4 2007, 01:15 AM

It looks to me like the generation caps that are in effect control character generation as much as the build point totals.

You can have 500 bp but if you still keep the availability 12 cap and the 1/2 bp total cap on attributes you end up with more ballanced characters than specialists.

I'm playing my first SR4 character now and he is a 500 point character. He nearly died, took overflow damage in the first adventure. Part of that was that I'm out of practice and made some bloody stupid moves. But still it's not hard to kill a 500 pont character.

If I had to rebuild this character I would spend less on atributes (i used 200 pts) and but about 50 points worth of contacts.

Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Jan 4 2007, 01:26 AM

Posted by: OneTrikPony Jan 4 2007, 01:40 AM

AH HA! I didn't know everyone had edge. I actualy like that idea more skull sweat for the GM but serious NPCs should have their own edge.

I think that's a good way to increase the power of a game and let the world keep up with advancing PC's too, no mater the BP startup.

Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Jan 4 2007, 01:48 AM

Oh, did I forget to mention that one house rule?

Yeah, I couldn't find any logical reason that an NPC shouldn't have an attirbute that every PC has, which is also a big part of the reason we play w/ 500 BP. It does make you sweat it a bit.

But that gun fight you were in, I think the only time I used edge for the NPC's was :
1) when the FRT trooper tried to kick the grenade away and glitched
2) the yellowjacket shooting rockets at the hovercraft.

So it can still be plenty nasty without it.

Posted by: OneTrikPony Jan 4 2007, 02:08 AM

MMMM Chunky Aztechnology Trooper Salsa is my favorite brand of salsa... YUMMY!

If anyone wants the recipe;

put 12 aztech guards in a citymaster,

Add one frag grenage

Let bake for 3-5 seconds.

Viola! Who brought the chips?

[edit] sorry for hijaking the thread

on topic; 500 bp is not too much if you have a GM who is a complete bastard. (this has not been another OTP personal attack, just a simple statment of Fact. You all saw the smiley above.)

Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Jan 4 2007, 02:11 AM

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 4 2007, 02:50 PM

Posted by: ornot Jan 4 2007, 03:13 PM

The question I'd be asking as a GM, is where that specialised character picked up his skills.

I tend to feel that demanding justification is a reasonable check on twinks, and at the very least you can make them feel stupid by pointing out the gaping holes and illogic in their character backgrounds.

Of course should a player come up with a reasonable reason for his character to be so insanely good with SMGs while barely having picked up a rifle, that's fine.

Posted by: Banaticus Jan 4 2007, 03:46 PM

Some of you are acting like this is a new thing for Shadowrun -- this is why BeCKS was invented back in the year 2000. True, it hasn't been modified for 4th edition yet (the latest version, linked from the bottom of this post is v2 from the year 2004), but this is Dumpshock so I assume it will be updated soon. Perhaps we could start a thread to discuss it.

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 4 2007, 03:53 PM

Oh, i personally loved BeCKS. I showed it to some gamer friends and they agreed as well, when converting my SR3 Shaman to BeCKS he came out wonderfully well rounded, much better than before. I like the example they give. I recall there being a variant of SR4 BeCKS somewhere on the forum. With a little work you could probably heave over the old BeCKS to the new.

Posted by: OneTrikPony Jan 4 2007, 04:35 PM

Posted by: Brahm Jan 4 2007, 04:39 PM

Posted by: sunnyside Jan 4 2007, 04:47 PM

I really don't see why 500 BP would be a problem. Especially since presumably you'd leave all the caps on skills and stuff in place.

I mean Shadowrun has been a great game for a long time. I remeber for a while there you could be a human with a million nuyen, stats of 6 6 6 4 4 4 a good batch of skills and have some positive/negative qualities to boot.

That'd be something like a 700 point character. And we still had a blast and they always wanted that Karma for something. (maybe not quite as desperatly though).


I'm guessing what you'll get are characters who can do more than just one thing and that would be good.


I'm more worried about the 4+ and the 6's both being in play. On the other hand that may help mitigate the extra points. With both of those rules the security guard you didn't notice in the corner has a respectable chance of turning one of your player's character sheets into hamster cage lining. That'll keep them on their toes.

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 4 2007, 05:50 PM

Posted by: OneTrikPony Jan 5 2007, 01:40 AM

Posted by: Begisle Jan 5 2007, 06:35 AM

Posted by: eidolon Jan 5 2007, 02:27 PM

Got rid of the wonky error posts. No worries. If anyone gets 404 errors again please post it to the Bugs etc. forum so we can try and get it fixed. Thanks!

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 10 2007, 05:28 PM

My current group used 500 BP for chargen, with 250 BP allowed for attributes.
Nothing else changed, caps, etc...

I don't find it game breaking at all. Everyone is still needing lots of points for skill increases. No one has 20+ dice in a skill. The highest is 15 (in one weapon only), with most skills still being in the 11 dice range.

Admittedly, everyone tried to make balanced chars, with decent background stories. The only one who didn't, his char lasted 2 games, then the player made a balanced one and retired the one trick char.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 10 2007, 05:33 PM

...I envy your group. I wish my group did more balanced instead of munch characters.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 10 2007, 05:41 PM

It was kind of funny.
Everyone forgot /decided not to have high edge, and most forgot to get perception.

So, now everyone carefully nurtures their edge, only using it for life and death situations.
And everyone, after the first couple bacon trees, decided to start getting/raising perception.


Bacon tree, play on french pronounciation of ambush, which often sounds like ham bush, hence bacon tree.

Posted by: Butterblume Jan 10 2007, 05:46 PM

That's the way it worked out with us, too. Instead on focusing on one area, we spread the additional BP out. We created elite soldiers, each one with an area of specialty, and needed to have a lot of skills. 500BP isn't really enough to build convincing commandos .

I just wished the 50BP maximum for resources could have been increased as well for, my well cybered char (0,01 essence in the end, only alphaware the datajack...).

Edit: at least my char had edge 4 and 11 dice for visual and audio perception tests... seems common that some people underestimate the importance of perception, at least at the beginning :

Posted by: ornot Jan 10 2007, 06:20 PM

I've noticed that too... The number of characters I've vetted for SR4 and I've had to say "you might want to think about dropping the unarmed combat 7 and buying at least a point or two of perception".

Posted by: TheOneRonin Jan 10 2007, 07:45 PM

Not enough to build convincing commandos? 500BP is hardly enough to build a convincing real world, modern day person. I tried this little experiment...I got out of Active Duty in 2000. At that time, I was probably in about the best physical shape I've ever been in (@ 25 years of age), still had all of my military skills polished, and had already started working hard at breaking into the IT field.

Here are my projected stats based on what I know about myself and how the SR4 book measures such things.

BOD: 4 [I was running 2 miles in about 11.5 minutes, could max the push-ups (72) and Situps (72) portions of the PT test without difficulty, and had completed many long road marches with full gear. I also rarely got sick (still don't), never had any diseases or sicknesses worse than the flu, and have never had any broken bones. Don't smoke, and drank moderately (on the weekends). All in all, I was in excellent health...well above average.]

AGI: 3 [I was fairly average in this regard. Shooting, playing pool, and other types of coordination skills came easily to me, so I don't think this warrants less than a 3.]

REA: 3 [Same as above. In sports, and combat training, it pays to be able to react well. I was usually on the ball and not often caught unawares. Solid average score here.]

STR: 3 [At 185 lbs, I was benching 220, 10 reps, 3 sets. I probably could have pushed myself harder, but wasn't really concerned with building high str. Straight up average here.]

CHA: 3 [I'm a friendly guy, make friends easily, and can get along in almost any environment. I'm not a big charmer, though, and only had average luck with the ladies. So I give this a 3.]

INTu: 3 [My intuition is about average, though I have no real way to quantify that.]

LOG: 4 [I always did very well in school, and was an extremely fast learner. I scored well on standardized tests, as well as just about any other thing that was designed to gauge smarts. I pride myself on my ability to problem solve and develop solutions. I'm a voracious reader, and spend lots of time learning anything I can. I feel this qualified me for a 4 Log. Let me know if you guys/girls believe otherwise.]

WILL: 3 [A score of 3 here. I'm pretty self disciplined, but would give in to temptation from time to time. Will of 3 makes sense here.]

Given those scores, that puts me with 180BP from stats. That's aweful close to the max.


Now skills. This part is considerably longer, so I'm going to tag it for those not interested in reading a mini-novel.

Posted by: Ophis Jan 10 2007, 08:49 PM

450 Bp plus some free points for charisma seems to do it well, for ex-mil types and gives nicely rounded runners.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 11 2007, 01:46 AM

...While I would consider allowing characters to apply up to 100 BPs to the resources (as MrJ's LBB does for the optional high power chargen), availability for a lot of gear is still a limiting factor. Of course, following the Mr J's model, you could simply raise the Chargen Availability cap to 15.

Posted by: Thane36425 Jan 11 2007, 05:06 AM

I was digging through the boxes with some of my old gaming material today and I found something that relates to this topic. In the game GURPS, characters were built on 100 points standard. One campaign was very different. The Special Operations campaign started at either 400 or 500 points. The result was characters with pretty normal stats (except for the Health, representing all the physical training they do), a wide variety of other skills and a specialty area with very high levels.

In SR, you might have a Sammie with high levels in several weapon classes, plus above average skill in stealth, survival, demolitions and such, with fair skills in a few vehicles, electronics, computers, etc.

Posted by: Grinder Jan 11 2007, 11:02 AM

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 11 2007, 12:36 PM

Well, as it stands, 400pt chars are playable. Some can even be pretty good at what they do. However, a Special/Black Ops(depending if youre being 'goog' or 'bad' ) team, a team of more experienced runners, and the like...its hard to make with that. You can make an above-average person with training...but no vet. Ive had fun with mine. However its also been a chain holding back some of my old SR3 chars that i only got to play a couple of times(and thus dont have a ton of karma), who nearly halved in ability with the new system.

Ya know, i admit...one thing i dont really like what they say in the book...I know you dont HAVE to follow the RAW but it still makes me think the game was directed more at new players.... ''attribute limit exists to prevent overspending and ensures characters are well rounded.''

Hmm...what if i dont WANT to play a rounded character? That line to me was geared toward new players who might find it easier to play a rounded character...but man, i miss the Priority system that let you pretty much determine what your character is good and bad at. That is why i am considering erasing this cap for a home game...

Ive been compiling some house rules about things that arent working for me so far in SR4, and will post soon in a thread for some feedback. ive been saying that for awhile, i know, but i saw something shiny in a corner.

Posted by: Thane36425 Jan 11 2007, 03:34 PM

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 11 2007, 04:33 PM

Posted by: TheOneRonin Jan 11 2007, 08:19 PM

KK, you make some valid points. However, I feel that your example illustrates an issue that is much more endemic to D&D than to Shadowrun. In D&D (3.0, 3.5, pick your poison), the characters abilites can change pretty drastically over the levels, and a 20th level wizard is a wholely different character than a 1st level Wizard, and the two characters will have to behave differently during encounters.

SR4 characters don't change that much over the course of leveling. They get BETTER at what they could do before, but usually don't become completely diff characters. There are exceptions (Mages doubling their spells known over the course of their career, Street Samurai who invest tons of karma into boosting their computer skills so they become excellent hackers), but in general, your character just gets better at what he/she does.

A Street Samurai character will typically get better at fighting (shooting, stabbing, etc.), will get tougher and faster, and will end up with better equipment/cyber. But he/she still plays the same. If a player doesn't know how to play a samurai, it isn't going to be any different if that samurai starts at 300, 400, 500, or 600 BP.

Secondly, you don't address the issue of when the PLAYERS are very well experienced. For me personally, I've been playing and GMing SR since about 1992. I've played across all 4 iterations, but have generally stuck to the same sorts of characters. "Ex Army SpecOps" defines about 80% of the characters I have played in SR. If nothing else, I have hundreds of hours of exprience playing such characters...from right out of the box to 300+ karma (SR2 and 3). I don't think that not having played a SR4 SpecOps guy up to 200 karma would in any way make me less effective at playing a 600BP SpecOps guy.

Posted by: TheOneRonin Jan 11 2007, 08:35 PM

To me, where the BP system of SR4 suffers the most is with the skills.

Each archetype has a group of skills that directly effect impact how well that person fills his/her role.

For example, a Face NEEDS to have good scores in skills like Negotiate, Etiquette, Con, etc. to be an effective FACE. In general, if a player wants to play a Face type character, he is going to put his best scores in those skills.

This is normal for all archetypes. Usually the next part is picking up a few other useful skills outside of that archetype's specialty. Here is where things start to break down. Because of the 400BP limitation, characters often have to forego getting some of the less useful, though flavorful/situationally useful skills. That Ex-Marine Merc you are putting together just won't end up having room for skills like Parachuting and Diving (even though he should have them) unless he sacrifices some points from his Automatics and Heavy weapons skills (which he needs and uses often).

The game just doesn't recommend enough starting BP to give players those options. So what you end up with is characters that are really good in their specialties, but have almost nothing to support areas outside of that.

I just find it difficult to be a specialized, but well-rounded character with only 400BP.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 11 2007, 08:43 PM

...ahh, sound like some kind of a 'Package Deal" option is in order here.

This is what the Hero Games system uses for creating archetypes.

Posted by: TheOneRonin Jan 11 2007, 09:03 PM

You know, I've done a LOT of thinking about "character background packages" for SR. I've even tried my hand at developing a few. I've never been very happy with what I've put together. There are just too many variations of characters. And part of what makes SR so great is the freedom of building your character the way you want them built. The last thing I want to see is SR "character classes".

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 11 2007, 09:11 PM

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 11 2007, 10:16 PM

Im really leaning toward BeCKS SR4 style. BeCKS removed a lot of problems that plagued the chargen. It took longer, etc...but worth it. Ok, we can look from a standpoint of normal 3e becks for things like cost of magic, adept, and technomancer(tho i think they would be cheaper than otaku. Under any old chargen, Otaku were HELL expensive to play.)

SR4 has attributes increased with karma by 3x new level. Ok, that can stick. Skill groups? 5x new level. Fine. Skills? 2x new level. Great, works well. Specialization karma is factored.

Using old BeCKS costs of magical aptitude, as said, can stick i think. Magic can be increased as attribute, as Resonance.

Just figuring a Karma cost for Nuyen might need some work, as the stuffs a lot cheaper now, so you wouldnt get as much per karma as the old BeCKS system.

Starting Karma is adjusted as per GM. Whatever is needed or good for campaign.

It can be done, i think, with a bit of tweaking. Then, rounded, useful characters, or specialized characters, would all be viable.

Posted by: Jaid Jan 11 2007, 10:41 PM

serbitar has a version of a BeCKS type chargen system (similar in that it uses karma, i believe).

i've previously worked out something myself, though it was pretty basic and didn't really ever get playtested at all, but if you just directly convert everything that has a stated karma value as well as BP value, and then translate over those things which only have BP costs at a 1:1 ratio, you end up with about 425 karma for the various archetypes in the book (mind you, this is before errata though... the archetypes have changed slightly iirc).

the big offenders were the technomancer on the underside (which, i think you will agree, fits... i think she worked out to something like 380 karma... and she could use some powering up, so no problems there) and the enforcer, whose combination of extremely high strength and body in addition to his extremely poorly chosen qualities put his cost higher than was reasonable. probably if you were to tweak the costs of attributes so that racial bonus was not factored in, though, the enforcer would have been fine. certainly, i don't think he was actually worth over 500 karma.

but then you get into other tweaks that should happen (such as the ever popular tweaks which make the technomancer not totally useless), and you start ending up with a set of house rules which you have to use if you're going to get any use out of the chargen.

as a general rule though, i would say SR4 needs a little bit more tweaking in how certain things progress before a karma chargen system will really work out quite right.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 11 2007, 11:28 PM

Frank Trollman has an interesting chargen rules set, that can be found http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=9901&hl=.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 12 2007, 02:56 AM

Posted by: Lantzer Jan 12 2007, 05:32 PM

On the perceived lack of need for generalized characters in groups of 4+players.....


Many tasks become easier if you have more than one person who can fill that role. This is why special forces do cross-training. The game even supports it with teamwork rules.

Your character is a back-up face? You can run more complicated scams if you have two people working as a team.

Back up technician? Tell me you've never wanted an extra hand working with tools.

Back up samurai? Um, more shootin' is good.

Back up Rigger? Better surveilance, fewer distraction penalties, more than 1 jumped-in drone, pilot and gunner.

Back up mage? More spell defense anyone? And thats just the start.

Back up medic? For when the medic is hurt... or busy.... or needs a hand.

Backup troll? Hah! they'd never expect _two_ trolls!

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 12 2007, 08:01 PM

Well, i have Vil, my weapons specialist. Has really good weapon skills-Firearms Group 4, Unarmed with spec 4(+2), blades 3(+2), with Heavy Weapons 3 and even a peppering in Thrown Weapons and Archery of 2 each. With a modified 6 Agl, he does quite well. However, if he got in a pure skill shootout with a Gun Adept or twinked Sam, he's be outclassed by several dice. But, he does his duty well in the way that hes prepped for about any situation you come across. Again, a Stealth Group 1 doesnt make him a ninja, but he can hold up there too. A Negotiations and Etiquette skill of 3(+2 for spec) each and a 3 cha doesnt make him a full on face, but he can surely help out.

I actually wanted to make a good character who could fill in on lots of roles...providing creativity with weapons and good backup, rather than the 'main guy'.

However, it is also just as easy to spread a character WAY too thin. But i like what Lantzer is saying.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 12 2007, 09:33 PM

...VIolet is also our team's Technician, EW Security Specialist, and occasional B & E specialist (electronic locking systems).

Surprisingly, KK4.3 has become the team's Cultural and Relations expert when it comes to anything relating to Japan (including the Yakuza whom she has successfully dealt with on a number of occasions) as well as our driver.

Posted by: DragonWolf Jan 13 2007, 02:18 AM

Hello all, I'm one of the players in Begisle group and I finally (I think) decided on my character. Basis of the character is a mix of street sam, bounty hunter and a starting face. I like playing characters that are agile, have useful skills and that are good with guns (any troll can hit someone with a club ). Also, I don't care too much for min/max, but being new to SR I don't know where this limit is (see questions below).

Anyway here's Kerani:

Posted by: Jaid Jan 13 2007, 03:58 AM

everything is min/maxing to some extent. how much min/maxing is too much is up to you and your GM, as a general rule. imo, nothing in your build really sends alarm klaxons screaming in my head, but your GM may feel otherwise; ask him how he feels about it.

tracking in an urban area is generally going to be handled by the shadowing skill if you are following them physically, or by doing legwork (data search, social skills).

i would drop tracking, personally, and pick up some basic computer skills. electronics skill group at rating 1 would allow you to track down people on the matrix more easily, as well as giving you some basic knowledge for messing with maglocks and such. if you have the BP elsewhere, you may even want to consider picking up the cracking group. alternately, you could just get yourself a reasonably high rating agent and load it up with appropriate software.

i wouldn't worry too much about quick healing unless your GM uses a variant rule. everyone heals fairly quickly in SR4, especially if you have someone with high first aid as well as a mage with healing magic.

a commlink can be connected only to a skinlinked PAN, but you will want a second commlink (with no skinlink) for situations where you need to be broadcasting information but don't want to allow your PAN to be accessed from outside. a meta link should be sufficient for that purpose.

and your attributes are pretty much exactly what i would expect from a sammy/face.

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 13 2007, 01:00 PM

As for min-maxing, of course there is some, but as Jaid said, everyone does some.

To me, there is min-maxing, and there is twinking. Min-maxing is trying to get the most numerically out of your character concept. A little is expected and even good. Your stats have some minmaxing, but thats not a bad thing, i think many of us minmax our stats out. They are about right for that kind of job. Some are high, some are lower but you put something into everything what you could. You used half of the points about so were quite generous with them. Minmaxing some skills is not bad either, there are only so many BPs, so dropping a skill to add a couple specializations instead is sometimes effective.

Twinking, to me, is when you give big advantages to your character at what is essentialy no disadvantage. (Agl 6 Str 1 sammies are examples of this. because its cheaper to buy a str of 3 or even 5 with nuyen BPs than it is with Attribute BPs, people do this for the sake of getting more gun BP, even if the numbers make no sense for the character.The Logic Dump hackers fall into this category...since its skill+program, hackers can dump Logic to go ahead and max their programs out.) Taking useless disadvantages is another twinking example, of stuff that will never come into play. (Incompentence: Aardvark Training for example.) Twinking skills involve taking a twinked attribute(usually Agility, as its so easy to increase and links to all of the combat skills), and taking a crapload of skills at rating 1,(4 Bps each or groups for 10) and still netting a huge amount of dice with each skill. And im not saying a high Agility or Intuition is bad at all(hey, they are important), but its the intention behind them.

Posted by: ornot Jan 13 2007, 02:57 PM

I loathe loathe loathe the incompetence quality. It is taken far too often as a means to gain a few extra points by sacrificing a skill that is unlikely to ever be needed. Addiction and allergy are subject to similar abuses, but can be useful/interesting to a GM. Incompetency never is, as it is nigh impossible to put a character in a position where they must use a particular skill.

/rant

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 13 2007, 04:50 PM

Unless the character actually takes an incompetency in something that is big...Negotations, Infiltration, Pilot Ground Craft, Computer, even Longarms. Longarms might be, on average, the least taken of the firearms skills, but if someone takes it, they cant even use a common shotgun, so that could actually be a real disadvantage.

But those are typically not taken.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 14 2007, 07:47 PM

..my big peeve is still Sensitive System for awakened characters. I look at it as 15 free BPs and have not taken it for any of my adepts nor my one spellcaster, Hermoine.

Posted by: Konsaki Jan 14 2007, 07:56 PM

I personally stay away from all the negative qualities.
I wouldnt take a neg unless I knew I wasnt going to be affected by it much, and then I feel like a heel for doing that.
So I guess the only negative Quality all my characters have is the fact that they dont have the bonus BP that people who DO have neg qual have. 35BP is alot to toy around with, especially if you are spending 35 in positive qualities...

Posted by: Butterblume Jan 14 2007, 08:28 PM

With 500 points it's easier to stay away from bad qualities - my 500 BP char actually only had one, incompetence: electronics, which is a pretty hefty one (just to refresh your minds: leader of a special military team, I modeled him a bit after Leroy Jethro Gibbs).

Another char of mine had incompetence: blades. I would feel cheap if I took an incompetence that would never come into play.

As GM, I allow one cheesy allergy (mild, uncommon) without questions asked... The points have to come from somewhere .

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 14 2007, 08:33 PM

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 14 2007, 09:30 PM

...the only thing is, none of the awakened characters I've seen in my group take any cyber implants or have intent to do so later.

I also take back one thing about my adepts not having Sensitive System (bad KK, bad KK no Karma for you). I do have a Face Adept with some sensory mods and both the Sensitive System and Weak Immune System qualities. She is a reporter (I still love Shadowbeat) who has the basic "recording/editing remote broadcast studio in the head" package (alphaware) complete with implanted commlink.

This leaves her with an MA of 3 (out of 5) which is still enough for the "Social" based powers she needs. Alas, she has only one IP.

She is also built on only 400 BPs. 500 would be really nice.

As Audrey W. used to say: "I am the camera..."

Posted by: Fortune Jan 14 2007, 09:58 PM

Posted by: Fortune Jan 14 2007, 10:02 PM

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 14 2007, 10:38 PM

Posted by: Grinder Jan 14 2007, 11:28 PM

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 14 2007, 11:42 PM

Posted by: Jack Kain Jan 15 2007, 12:10 AM

Lets face it the book teaches you to take negative qualites what won't really effect you.
The sample combat mage has the negative quality sensitve system. And we know he ain't taking any cyberware.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 15 2007, 12:32 AM

...nah, a bad quality (flaw) should always have some kind of effect on the character.

Really hate to do such things, but looks like a bit of "unauthorised" surgery may be in store the next time someone gets captured.

"...damn that datajack is costly."

Mwahahah!

[Pause]

...OK, I'm all better now...

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 02:35 AM

There will always be Min/Maxers. You deal with them as they come, but don't punish everyone else for their possible abuses / mistakes.

For those that abuse sensitive system, like KK suggested, you can always mess with them. Backstory isn't too hard either.

Put in eyes, ears and a commlink when they go to prison. They can't access the commlink, no controls for them to do so, except maybe to "phone" the guards, the rest is under the guards control. Perfect for knowing what is going on in your prison, and at a fairly cheap cost too.

Posted by: James McMurray Jan 15 2007, 02:39 AM

That's one thing I really like in nWoD: the new flaw system. You can take as many crazy flaws as you want but none will ever do you any good until they actually hamper play, at which point you'll earn XP for it.

Posted by: ElFenrir Jan 15 2007, 02:55 AM

Ahh, the only problem with that is you have to know, A. Are they taking it to twink? or B. Are they taking it because it fits?

A back to nature shaman who lives in a cabin doesnt like guns so they fight with a sword and a bow or crossbow, lives on natural food and have never touched cybertechnology, it could indeed be a fitting flaw.

As Mistwalker says, it becomes tough when you punish everyone for one person's flaw. (this is why i wasnt a big fan of the whole Hunted flaw taken at lv. 6. You could very well screw your entire group with that one.)

In the old systems, Sensitive System was worth -2 to the awakened, as opposed to -3. A houserule to make it 10 instead of 15 might be what you are looking for.

In addition, the old book had Bio-Rejection, in which the body would violently try to eject anything not the persons, including replacement limbs, imagine someone in the hospital when their new limbs don't agree with them. If mages want the 15, perhaps they can take that one in the new system?

I think that there could be a place for ANY edge and flaw, but its WHEN and HOW its used. Incompetence: Swimming, Nautical Mechanic and Pilot Watercraft would be indeed worth the points in a cyberpirate campaign, for example, as would Allergy: Seawater. Allergy: Sunlight in a desert campaign could be hell.


Allergy: Sunlight in a campaign that took place in winter in Lapland, i'd question.

I like one theory for testing edges and flaws. Let a decent sized group make characters. If you see the same flaw/edge popping up ALL the time, its probably broken. Likewise, if you NEVER see one, even on people who you know are NOT twinks, its probably too crippling/worthless.(I hear many on the forum calling Uncouth and Unlucky nearly falling into these categories..that 20 BPs are occationaly deemed too low.)

I usually just take a look at characters and see where they are going. Im pretty lean myself, ill let a fair amount slide if they can back it up with reason(but dont test my patience or good nature too much).

Posted by: Jaid Jan 15 2007, 05:33 AM

yeah, it's worth noting that flaws which are brutally crippling are as bad of a problem as flaws which are not bad enough to be worth points. infirm or uncouth are not a recommended choice for any player. heck, i've never seen a character that i feel justifies the full effect of uncouth, and i have a hard time imagining someone who actually survives in the shadows with infirm as a flaw.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 05:34 AM

I have a player that can play uncouth really well
shakes his head
He has taken it once. Changed chars, due to his good role playing. The other chars were about to kill him before he got them killed.

Posted by: Jaid Jan 15 2007, 06:07 AM

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 06:45 AM

I am not sure where you are getting your definition from for Uncouth, but it is radically different from mine.

Wikipedia definition of antisocial / sociopathic is

Posted by: Glyph Jan 15 2007, 06:54 AM

I think you are assuming too much. They still get the Willpower test - they simply don't have the skill to add to it. The negative quality does NOT mean that they automatically fail to resist any social skill test, no matter what the modifiers are! I don't think they would have given that quality to three of the archetypes if it were that crippling. It's bad enough as written - you either permanently lack a basic set of skills (not even having a zero rating in them), or you pay so much extra for them that the flaw is really not worth it's build point benefit.


As far as negative qualities, I don't find any of them outrageously twinkish. Even someone abusing Incompetence will still take a hit on their Notoriety rating, and Sensitive System removes some potential future options from a character. As I've said before, any GM who would give a character unwanted cyberware for taking the Sensitive System quality is being a very poor GM. I think negative qualities should come into play, but the GM shouldn't go out of his way to screw over the player with them.

Posted by: toturi Jan 15 2007, 06:58 AM

And here is the problem with Social skill checks. The player is not constrained by the negative results. Fail to resist an Intimidate? Fear not, you might not get that roleplay Karma(there is a RP karma by RAW) but if you need to play the PC out of charactor to survive, you can go straight for it. Why? Because he is your PC that's why and you can "roleplay", nevermind that "roleplaying" the Uncouth PC is actually not roleplaying. The GM can try to bot him, but I can almost see an argument/physical violent confrontation coming if that happens.

You do not see such things happen for combat skills even if 2 PCs go head to head. If one PC gets hit, he gets hit, endeth the argument, so sayeth the rules.

With regards to minmaxing and twinking, I do not see the difference really. I know that some people use "twink" as a degoratory term, but the basic meaning of both words mean the same thing and both terms can be used to describe the same PC depending on the GM (which is why I prefer to use canon when discussing chargen and other rules).

EDIT:

Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 15 2007, 07:12 AM

The uncouth flaw is worthless for due to the fact that purchasing the necessary social skills for everyday survival is 24 (8 each for 3 skills).

Con is resisted with intuition+negotiation (or con).
Leadership is resisted with willpower+leadership.
Intimidation is resisted with willpower+intimidation.
Negotiation is resisted with charisma+negotiation.

Uncouth takes away the character's ability to default on social skills and thus takes away these resistance tests unless the character spends BP of these skills.

The Lone Star officer is a bad example Since he's have a -11 dice pool and is thus unlikely to get a single net hit. However, if the enemy does get a single net hit an uncouth character without the proper skills might as well have been hit with a control thoughts spell.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 07:39 AM

I think there may be a difference of interpretation here.

My read on the RAW, for social skills, is that they are not resisted with social skills, and as such cannot default to the social skills linked attribute of Charisma. The RAW doesnt say that they are resisted with other social skills, but with an attribute and a skill, with no defaulting (hence no -1 die pool modifier).

Hyzmarca's table indicates that social skills are resisted with an attribute and a skill. The attribute listed for 3 of them is not charisma.

So, for me, the Uncouth char does not automatically fail against con, intimidation, leadership and negotiation., as they are not using a social skill, but a social skill is being used against them. In fact, anyone trying to use those skills on an uncouth char has some serious social modifiers due to their indifference to pain, punishments, consequences, etc...

Posted by: Jaid Jan 15 2007, 05:00 PM

Posted by: Konsaki Jan 15 2007, 05:07 PM

You might as well take Incomp: for all the social skills... you get alot more points than Uncouth and it has the same problem of being really stupid.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 05:24 PM

Jaid,

Please read my post that is above yours, where I talk about interpretation.

Uncouth is not vulnerable to other peoples social skills. He can defend against them, just not as well as someone with social skills. It is not a case of not defaulting, there is no defaulting for defending against social skills.

Uncouth can lie, like everyone else. They just can't do it convincingly. They don't care.

Posted by: Jaid Jan 15 2007, 05:34 PM

Posted by: Konsaki Jan 15 2007, 05:42 PM

Someone with Uncouth can't figure out when and/or how to use a perticular social skill nor when someone might be using it on them if they lack any ranks in said skill.

Con
Your elf character just doesnt know that he might be better off to jsut lie to the troll bouncer to a tusker only club or he just cant do it properly.
"I'm here for a job." or "I have a friend on the inside." (in an unconvincing voice)
'Yeah, right...' could be the answer to both as the bouncer pushes the elf into the snowdrift by the street.

For resisting a Con test, the character just doesn't pick up on any slips that the other person might mess up with, or just cant find any reason not to belive him.

Thats my take on it at least.

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 06:12 PM

OK

I will give this one another shot.

You do not use a social skill to defend against a social skill.

You use an attribute (and not Charisma for most, the social skill linked attribute) and a skill. You are not defaulting if you only use the attribute. So, an Uncouth char can defend with the listed attribute, at full attibute value with no cap on successes.

Anyone targetting an Uncouth with social skills, will have penalties, cause they are indifferent to pain, punishments, consequences, etc...

Uncouth can lie, but they are not good at it. They don't really care if anyone believes them or not.

Konsaki,
in your example, the Uncouth Elf would probably not have even stopped for the bouncer. But if challenged, may have tried to lie, but more along the line of "I'm meeting a friend, so you can let me in, or I can lay you out in the street and then I'll go in". I may be obvious that the Uncouth Elf is lying about meeting a friend, but he doesn't care, and will be going in if he has to hose down the Troll bouncer with an assault rifle.

Posted by: Konsaki Jan 15 2007, 06:15 PM

So you have him try and do an intimidate test to cover the fact that he cant lie well?

On the point of why the whole situation, the ELF is trying to enter a TUSKER only club... Be there any more reason for the troll bouncer to question the elf?

Posted by: Mistwalker Jan 15 2007, 07:12 PM

The Uncouth Elf wasn't trying to intimidate the Troll, he was responding to the Troll's question, and proceeding into the club (if he could). The Uncouth Elf doesn't know how to intimidate, he was just stating what he was going to do, and would try to do so, to the best of his ablilities. For whatever reason, he decided he needed into the club, so he is going in. Periode. Regardless of the consequences, pain, etc...

At that point, Troll decides whether he tries to trounce the Uncouth Elf, or let the patrons do it inside.

Uncouth Elf will respond to what happens. If he lives.

Posted by: Glyph Jan 15 2007, 08:04 PM

Posted by: Jaid Jan 16 2007, 04:03 AM

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 16 2007, 06:54 PM

Posted by: James McMurray Jan 16 2007, 07:00 PM

Our group made Infirm not apply to Perception. Nobody has taken the flaw still, because even with that change it's too much take for not enough give (YMMV).