Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 05:29 PM

Okay, so Changelings have access to certain Metagenetic Qualities that impose the "Freaks" penalty, a -3 dice pool modifier on most Social Skill Tests not performed over the Matrix, but a +2 dice pool modifier to Intimidation Tests.

The idea is that certain bizarre physical features are just so outlandish as to weird out ordinary people. Which makes sense! It's fine as a concept. But where it gets weird is in the execution. Let's look at the various qualities that inflict the Freaks modifier and compare their costs and benefits.

Positive Metagenetic Freaks Qualities

360-Degree Eyesight - For 10 BP you get the biological equivalent of the Eyeband cyberware implant, except you can't turn it off. You can see in a full 360 degrees, but this provides zero benefit in terms of game mechanics, as well as an additional -1 to any actions taken while in motion. Oh, and unlike the cyberware, you suffer the negative social modifiers of being a freak.

~Why is this is Positive quality?~

Beak - For 5 BP you get a Lifestyle cost reduction of 10% and a +1 to resist ingested toxins, but you can't chew your food and have to swallow it whole. For 10 BP, you get a Raptor Beak and can also inflict Physical damage instead of Stun via the Unarmed Skill. But of course, you're a freak.

~This one is a little better, but isn't great. I could see someone possibly taking this if they really wanted toxin immunity, cheaper lifestyle costs, and the Intimidation bonus from being a Freak, but the Raptor Beak's pitiful contribution does NOT merit an additonal 5 BP of cost - it should just be part of the basic variety at the basic cost.~

Larger Tusks - For 10 BP you get the Raptor Beak's ability to deal Physical damage instead of Stun via the Unarmed Skill, plus a bonus +1 DV, but without the Lifestyle cost reduction or the ingested toxin resistance. And you're a freak.

~And now we're back into WTF territory. The cost is absurd for the pitiful benefit it provides.~

Proboscis - For 10 BP, you can pick up and use objects with your elephant trunk. You can even perform fine manipulations like pulling a trigger, albeit at a -2 modifier. You can also use it to make a "blunt punch" as an Exotic Melee Weapon. Except... apparantly you can't? It informs use mere sentences later that "Trunks do not provide an extra attack." Uh. Okay?

~So yeah, if the whole matter of how the heck you're supposed to use this in combat was cleared up, I could see this being worth 10 BP to the right character or in the right circumstance. But the real problem I have with it is that all of the lore and fluff regarding Changelings purposefully and specifically states that the so called "Ganesha" changelings who resemble the Indian elephant god are actually not mistreated, in part because of the religious reverence they attract in their native India, but also because "The few ganeshas and cat people got the luck of the draw - they’re cutsey and can play off people’s preconceptions." Yet to actually build a Ganesha you need to possess not one, but TWO different Freaks qualities! Thankfully the modifiers don't stack, but still...~

-------

Negative Metagenetic Freaks Qualities

Cephalapoidal Skull - For -10 BP, you're a Davy Jones / Cthulu tentacle thing. You suffer -3 dice to resist damage to the head and upper torso, and you suffer the Freaks modifier.

~This one is actually pretty balanced. If you're into tentacles, anyway.~

Deformity - At the -5 BP value, you get a severe facial deformity, while a -25 BP value gives you severe physical deformity. Each of these can inflict their own negative modifiers, "Depending upon whether the deformation affects sensory or motor functions", whatever that means. For the facial deformity, a flat -2 to Perception, because apparantly having a messed up face not only impacts vision, but also hearing, taste, touch, and smell somehow. For the physical deformity, you suffer a -1 to Physical Active Tests. In either case, you suffer the Freaks modifier but at double value.

~This is another absurd one. The wishy-washiness about whether a deformity affects sensory or motor functions or not is just sloppy. Is it saying that you have to hash it out with your GM as to whether you suffer the penalties or not? Because that's just a headache waiting to happen. Either have deformities impose penalties, or have them not, none of this sitting on the fence crap.

Putting that aside, the facial deformity is grossly underpriced. A blanket -2 to perception coupled with a -6 to social tests for a measly 5 BP and +4 to Intimidation is just baffling, especially compared to the numerous -5 BP negative metagenetic qualities that impose almost NO mechanical modifiers, (Extravagent Eyes, Feathers, Scales, Striking Skin Pigmentation, Unusual Hair, Vestigial Tail), or which impose MUCH LESS severe penalties (Bioluminescence, Critter Spook, Mood Hair, Stubby Arms). Double or triple the value to -10 or -15 BP, and make the Freaks modifier only apply once (in all other cases it never stacks), and this MIGHT be worth considering.~

Insectoid Features - For -5 BP, you're a bug thing. You inflict a Critter Spook effect on people, and are a freak.

~Here's another decently priced one. The only concern I have with it is that it suggests that you may be mistaken for a Bug Spirit Flesh Form, so you need to be sure your GM isn't a dick who is going to screw you over just because of that.~

Neoteny - For -10 BP, you have the body of a child, reducing your physical Condition Monitor by 2 points and making people think you're a child. It says that you "may" suffer the Freaks modifier, presumably meaning it's up to the GM.

~Mixed thoughts on this one. A reduced physical condition track is harsh, but probably worth the 10 BP. It's the social modifiers I have problems with. Neoteny technically imposes the Freaks negative social modifier, but that would only ever make sense in cases where it was known that you weren't actually a child, and even then that's a bit of a stretch. In real life, Neotenous people do run into the problem of being treated like children, but the negative effects this produces are hardly comparable to something like having a gorram elephant trunk instead of a nose.~

Third Eye - For -5 BP, you have a third eye. It acts exactly like your other eyes, and as long as any 2 of your 3 eyes are open, you still have depth perception. It also inflicts the Freaks modifier, but only if someone notices it, which takes a Perception Test [2].

~This one is fine. Cheap price, minor effect. Wear a hat or headband to cover it up most of the time, but suffer a detriment if you end up revealing it for some reason.~

-------

Annnnd that's it! Weirdly.

It's kind of nonsensical which qualities impose the Freaks modifier and which do not, though.

I mean, with Feathers you can be covered in fluffy duckling down from head to toe and no one will bat an eye? Speaking of eyes, no one thinks it's weird to be a Cyclops with "a single huge eye directly above the nose"? You can be a furry monkey-man with Unusual Hair, Monkey Paws, and a Prehensile Tail and your Social skill tests are completely unaffected? You can have Striking Skin Pigmentation, Stubby Arms, and Thorns all at once and that's just dandy? A dude can walk into a bar with Clawed hands, Rhino Hide, Bone Spikes, Goring Horns, Gills, Shiva Arms, Satyr Legs, a nictitating membrane for Underwater Vision, and Webbed Hands and Feet, and he'll have an easier time making Social Tests than some putz with a third eye on his forehead?

Seriously?

~Umi

Posted by: StealthSigma Feb 1 2013, 05:47 PM

You can attack with the knife in your hand or with your trunk but you may not make an attack with both your knife and trunk.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 05:54 PM

Why the hell not?

If you can attack with both a Cyber-Spur implanted in your ankle and a gorram Oral Slasher at the same time, why can't you do the same with a trunk and a knife?

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 05:55 PM

It might just be me being lazy but I found the number of options given for SURGE kinda lacking, they want you to build thematic freaks but they only seem to have like four or five coherent themes possible.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 06:00 PM

Indeed, I feel exactly the same way. Particularly the Negative qualities are very limited.

As a matter of fact, I'm even writing up my own "Snout" quality, inspired by my recent work in building a T'skrang. I'll share it once it's done.

~Umi

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 1 2013, 06:10 PM

erm, wait, did not every last single one of the metagenetic qualities, both visible and invisible, render one a freak?

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 06:14 PM

That would make glamour kinda pointless

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 1 2013, 06:35 PM

yeah, so?
doesn't mean it's not true, does it?
i remember having read something to that extent somewhere . .

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 06:49 PM

Only the qualities I listed above are marked as imposing the Freaks modifier.

~Umi

Posted by: Tanegar Feb 1 2013, 06:54 PM

I don't think that having a character with Insectoid Features be mistaken for a bug spirit qualifies as "being a dick" or "screwing the player over." The bugs are one of the big, existential threats in Shadowrun; Ares nuked a major American city to contain an outbreak, and twenty years later Chicago still isn't back to normal. John Q. Public might not necessarily have a reaction beyond, "Ew, gross," but anyone with even one rank in Magical Threats or similar Knowledge Skill is going to be seriously perturbed by the character and probably report a suspected insect hive to somebody.

Bottom line: if you don't want to suffer the consequences of looking like something that wants to eat the entire ecosphere for lunch, don't take the Quality.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 07:05 PM

Okay, then it's a quality no one will ever take, because 5 BP is not worth being treated worse than Special Infected. Congratulations, it's a waste of printing space.

~Umi

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 1 2013, 07:16 PM

Took it for my Spider themed character.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 07:31 PM

What kind of features was that TJ? given that arachnids doesn't really have that many distinctly insect features, no multi-facet eyes, fangs rather then mandibles so on and so forth

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 07:34 PM

Yeah... spiders aren't insects.

That and the fact that Insect Spirits aren't spiders.



~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 07:38 PM

There is a spider spirit however, she eats invae
a spider character would be kinda cool though, good excuse for shiva arms

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 1 2013, 07:39 PM

Subphylum Chelicerata vs Subphylum Hexapoda

Sometimes arachnophobia comes in handy.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 1 2013, 08:00 PM

He has the face of a Spider; so Multiple eyes, chelicerae with fangs, and so on and so forth. The Quality seemed like the easiest route for that.
Spiders may not BE insects, but they creep people out just the same, and the character makes it a habit to hide his features best he can.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 1 2013, 08:03 PM

That a can of WD40 you got there?

Nope, it's a can of bug spray.

Bug spray? Why? What's that for?

When that guy acts up. -.-

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 08:13 PM

I still maintain that since Spider Spirits are not the same as Insect Spirits, people wouldn't react to them in the same way.

Just because spiders are "scary" doesn't mean they're on the same level as the fear inspired by the known malevolence of Inspect Spirits. I wouldn't treat Spider features any differently than I would treat Scorpion features, or Shrimp features, or Crab features, or Lobster features, or any other arthropods.

Say, maybe that's an idea. Change Insectoid Features to Arthropoid Features, and make it a two level quality. At the 5 BP level, you look like one of the non-insect arthropods and suffer the Freaks modifier and the Critter Spook effect. At the 10 BP level, you resemble insect spirit flesh forms, inspiring people to attack you, perhaps if they fail a composure check.

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 08:19 PM

A lot of people associate spiders with insects and as most have no experience of a "benevolent" spider spirit they will most likely just assume it's another bug they haven't seen before. they're also likely to adopt a "better safe then sorry" attitude.

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 1 2013, 08:39 PM

360-degree vision. Nothign can "sneak up behind you". Thoguh I tend to agree, it should be a 5-pointer, nto a 10-pointer.


Otherwise, generally, I agree with your overall assessment.

Each feature should have been assigned a "freak index", with the total from both positives and negatives producing the "Gene Freak" penalty. Neoteny, for example, would have a 0 IMO; okay so you look like a kid, or a tweenager at best. You're still not bright purple, scaley, with a tail and a glowing beak ...!!

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 1 2013, 08:41 PM

HOLO HOOD clothing feature, here we come!!

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 1 2013, 08:48 PM

He embraced the look, though it does not help (or, maybe it does) that he has 8 limbs... He just does not socialize much. He never gets invited to the big parties.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 08:54 PM

Oh you've just been hanging with the wrong people, that whole spider thing you got going? The extreme clubbing scene will just Lo-ve it!

Posted by: Umidori Feb 1 2013, 09:02 PM

Just finished a preliminary write-up of my proposed "Snout" metagenetic quality.

Feel free to suggest improvements.

~Umi

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 1 2013, 09:48 PM

SURGE'd TM that has neoteny and Glamour. "No mister, I ain't one of those techno-whatsits. But that drone behind you with the LMG thinks you should leave now".

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 1 2013, 10:14 PM

That is quite possible...

Posted by: Glyph Feb 1 2013, 10:40 PM

No, they all give you the distinctive style quality. The freaks modifier only applies to the more extreme SURGE qualities, such as insectoid features.

There are certainly negative SURGE qualities that are a lot more detrimental than others, but there has never been much parity in quality costs - some are bargains, while others should cost a lot less (positive), or be worth a lot more (negative). But while the more extreme qualities may seem to offer more disadvantages, they also tend to be taken by people who want to play the outcast/pariah type of character. That doesn't mean I wouldn't house rule a few minor changes if I was the GM (deformity level: 1 should be 10 points, not 5, for example - although the additional penalty would be non-ambiguous).

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 1 2013, 10:54 PM

Some of the negative ones aren't negative enough aswell... 5 BP for blue hair?
Im okay when it's used for werewolf syndrome kind of deals, but really? unusual hair colour qualifies?
I knew a girl with blue hair that liked to wear various coloured patterned lenses (including a pair made to look like radioactivity signs) Didn't stand out as a metagenetic freak to me...

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 1 2013, 10:57 PM

I have to agree about the hair color. Shows how far we've come from the "80's but with elves and cyber" aesthetic.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 1 2013, 10:59 PM

@Glyph:
Aaah yes, i think i got that mixed up.

Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 2 2013, 12:39 AM

I had a character with one of the hair qualities (Specifically mood hair). My GM and I discussed it and decided that one side effect of the mutation was that the hair was extremely resistant to dying, with nanite-based disguises required to conceal it effectively for more than a few hours. It made the quality actually have some impact for my face character.

Posted by: Teulisch Feb 2 2013, 12:57 AM

i suspect the real problem with changelings rests with 3rd, rather than 4th. they were a part of 'year of the comet', and later migrated to core rules from a supplement without much change. some of them are a tip of the hat to earthdawn, while others are just strange. Overall, its not really a balanced selection as the original version had rules for random mutation of existing characters. it does allow for a huge number of very strange characters, but a good chunk of it is just a list of random negative effects, rather than well thought out or balanced options.

really, i believe the most imbalanced options were to modify attribute maximums. surge class II, metagenic improvement(20), impair a different attribute, and grab some blue hair. stack on a genetic upgrade, and now your at +2 to an attribute maximum on your metahuman.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 01:11 AM

Even difficult to dye hair can still easily be concealed. And while Mood Hair at least betrays your emotions, Unusual Hair costs the same amount of BP, but has almost no practical downside to it. Contrast that to something like a facial Deformity, again giving the exact same 5 BP, but inflicting -2 dice to perception tests and -6 dice to all social tests? That's just madness.

~Umi

Posted by: Glyph Feb 2 2013, 03:13 AM

I don't have a problem with 5-point flaws being comparatively mild. Essentially, you are taking on a trait that is moderately but not impossibly difficult to hide, that makes your character stand out. Unusual hair, striking skin pigmentation, vestigial tail, scales, feathers, and so on. Personally, I think the deformity quality should be worth more than 5 points.

I would also add that if a changeling gets a quick, easy outpatient bit of biosculpting or cosmetic 'ware to get rid of one of these traits, they should be required to buy the flaw off.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 03:29 AM

They are required to buy the flaw off. No "should" about it.

~Umi

Posted by: Tanegar Feb 2 2013, 03:32 AM

A thought I just had:

Quadruped: 5BP Positive Metagenic Quality
The character's hips, shoulders, and limbs are modified to support quadrupedal locomotion. The character's base movement rates are doubled when moving on all fours, but bipedal movement becomes more awkward, incurring a 50% penalty to movement rate.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 03:44 AM

But now you're constantly prone...?

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 2 2013, 03:50 AM

I should think he was probably picturing somethign closer to a gorilla, that CAN walk bipedally, or CAN walk quadrupedally (but still surprisingly upright).

In which case, it should probably be worth more than 5BP.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 03:52 AM

The only thing that's comparable are Sasobonsams, who can walk and run while prone. And with those, you're trading a normal ghoul's Claws for Elongated Limbs as well as the ability to run while on all fours.

Metagenetic Claws cost 5 BP, but Ghoul Claws have +1 DV compared to the metagenic variety. Elongated limbs also cost 5 BP. Swapping the one for the other is roughly equal, with Ghoul claws being slightly more valuable than their metagenetic counterpart. Thus, running on all fours is worth however much that single +1 DV is worth. At the very most, 5 BP.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 2 2013, 04:19 AM

.... so make it a 5BP trait, that requires you to already have Elongated Arms ...?

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 04:27 AM

That kind of makes it into a 10 BP variant of Elongated Arms, though, and that's not really worth it in my mind.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 2 2013, 04:36 AM

Look at it as more of a Satyr LEgs for 5BP, that you can get if you have Elongated Arms.

I wouldn't penalise bipedal movement, mind you. Just give you the option to go twice as fast as normal, when on all fours.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 2 2013, 05:02 AM

That might push the value up enough to justify it.

~Umi

Posted by: Manunancy Feb 2 2013, 08:14 AM

From the average Joe's point of view, both are chitinous, with eyes that don't look like eyes should (spider eyes may not be faceted, but they're still lacking eyelids, pupils and similar mamailan eye features) and nasty moving parts were lips should be. Which means he'll probably react just the same way. Sure when enlarged to human scales the features may be distictive to teh trained eye, but how many peoples have had a good, close look at insects and spiders to tell their facial fetures apart ?

How do you think District 9's aliens would be viewed in Shadowrun ? My bet would on the 'torchs and pitchforks' end of spectrum.

Posted by: Mäx Feb 3 2013, 07:43 PM

Considering all the other negative qualities that are worth 5BP, like mild allergy to a uncommon substance or -2 dice to resist simsense damage etc. , i don't see much problem with this.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 3 2013, 07:50 PM

The difference is those actually impose mechanical penalties.

You lose dice to your allergy if you don't protect yourself from it. You lose dice to resist simsense damage if you don't actively avoid it. But there's absolutely no penalty to running around with a two foot long purple pompadour, or having chest hair that naturally grows in the shape of Australia.

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 3 2013, 07:50 PM

Those are mild inconveniences, in a world with obvious cyberlimb replacements, and 2,5m high trolls no one is even going to bat an eyelash at blue hair...

Posted by: Umidori Feb 3 2013, 07:57 PM

Exactly. From a mechanical standpoint, you're getting free build points, and that's not kosher.

A negative quality is dependent on causing at least some form of problem for the player, otherwise it doesn't give the points. GMs are expressly instructed not to allow negative qualities that will never be an issue for the player, like not letting most of the hacking-based negative qualities be taken by someone who never plans on hacking.

~Umi

Posted by: Mäx Feb 3 2013, 09:02 PM

Yes there is, your easier to find if when you have such distinctive features.
So if someone sees your blue hair on the run, it makes it that much easier to track you down, yes you can try to avoid that happening, just like you can avoid damaging simsense and uncommon allergy substances.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 3 2013, 09:33 PM

That'd be true if it imposed Distinctive Style. It does not.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 3 2013, 11:05 PM

Wait, yes it does. ALL the negative metagenics do.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 3 2013, 11:19 PM

Now, what's an "advanced character option"? Anything other than a normal metahuman? Definitely the Metavariants and the Sapient Critters and the Free Spirits and the AIs and the Infected... but does that also mean Changelings?

Presumably it does... but if so, why does Glamour, a metagenetic positive quality, bother to say that it inflicts the effects of Distinctive Style? If only Changelings and Dryads can ever possess it, and they both already have Distinctive Style because they are advanced character options, why the need to state this fact?

Additionally, there's nothing I've found so far stating that specifically negative metagenetic qualities impose Distinctive Style. In fact, none of the other metagenetic qualities besides Glamour even mention Distinctive Style in the slightest.

And even IF all negative metagenetic qualities DO impose Distinctive Style, your argument STILL doesn't hold water, because while that would mean Unusual Hair imposes Distinctive Style, so would all the other 5 BP negative metagentic qualities! So again, you're getting free BP without any penalization that you don't already get from being a changeling, or from posessing any of the other 5 BP qualities, on top of their other penalties.

~Umi

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 02:42 AM

I think people might be sticking too hard to numbers and 'crunch' vs the 'fluff'.

Yes, they're distinctive because you're a changeling. It's a sort of package deal. Even if there's no "This ___ gives you ____ dice penalties" It's there, it's a role play aspect vs the roll play. You're supposed to stand out if you have blue hair, because you stand out. That's why it's a negative thing vs just a quirk.

Joe Blow might be able to die his hair blue, but the changeling with blue hair might notbe able to cover it. Dyes might just slid off the hair, or the hair color might come through the dye very very fast. As in you might be able to dye it for a few hours but then the dye is worn off by the unique oils in the hair or something. Or it might be ALL the hair is blue. Head hair, eyebrows, eyelashes, facial hair, even the body hair which isn't too prevelent on most people might be bright electric blue on this guy.

There's tons of ways to make 'blue hair' a bad thing. But the most easy is "There's not THAT many people with blue hair" you're going to stand out in the seas of browns, the few blondes and the few reds. Yes I know that in shadowrun your alt life styles embrace strange coloring and stuff. You can see it today in clubs. Sure... out side of clubs, not so much. Sure you might see one person with strange hair a day. Maybe more if you live in the big city.. but if you're walking down the street and you pass someone with neon green hair or something you remember it. If a cop asks later you can point um out. If you're LOOKING for someone with neon green hair, they stand out. Sure they can put on a hat but then it's hey that guy's in a hat, is HE the one with green or blue hair?

So it can and would be negative if you're a runner and someone that didn't want to be fingered. You gotta think after a short amount of time you'd be described as "The SURGE guy with blue hair" and it would start to affect your runs. Security forces or other runners might not look twice at a guiy with brown hair but if a blue haired guy walked by and they knew of a shadow runner with bright blue hair, he's going to check and make sure it's NOT the runner he knows with blue hair, and if it is.. you're blown.

Remember also not every surge guy or gal is a total SPIDER FACE MUTANT MAN or cat girl or fish person. Some of the lessor levels are meant to be pretty mild. Some just have a bit of extra metahuman traits. A elf with a dwarf's theromo vision, or elf ears on a human, or something. The 'extent' of freakyness varies. So some of the traits, like hair or skin color might seem minor, because not every SURGE person has an elephant or walrus head.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 03:41 AM

I don't fucking care. You're ignoring my entire point. I'm not talking about roleplaying or how to justify the quality. I'm talking about cold hard numbers and mechanics. And the mechanics here are plainly broken.

Unusual Hair gives 5 BP for free. That is not how negative qualities are supposed to work.

It doesn't impose any specific penalties of its own. And even if we allow that it imposes Distinctive Style, that's redundant because you already HAVE Distinctive Style if you're a changeling! It literally does NOTHING except give you build points. That is my complaint.

~Umi

Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 4 2013, 03:54 AM

Multiple instances of distinctive style stack, so logically the negative metagenic qualities are additional instances of distinctive style. That means taking a 10 point metagenic negative quality could be argued to make you less distinctive than taking 2 five-pointers.

...

I think. I could be completely wrong.

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 04:00 AM

Wow... hissy much? lol Take a moment and take a breath and look at your post freaking out about hair. lol

It's not for free. I've pointed out how it can be negative. Get your head out of dice numbers and penalties. Not everything is math on the sheet. It can be negative. Just because you don't think so doesn't make it so.

Go re-read the section. Minor SURGE expression is.. minor. Some isn't even visible. I mean some of them are 'invisible'. Thermo sight? You can't detect that walking down the street. Allergies or something. Again. Minor.

Your complaint seems to be that not every negative thing gives you elephant ears, or frog eyes on the sides of your head. The "Mechanics" You seem to be sooooo excited about don't always work out to numbers or dice. Some of them ARE roleplaying. Some of it IS the fact that out of 500 people, you're likely to be the only one with blue hair, and if you shoot someone or do any of the things that Shadowruns often have you do, 'getting away' is going to be that much harder if you're the only guy out of 500 that has that blue hair.. or the green skin.. or whatever.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Feb 4 2013, 04:10 AM

As regards the Insectoid Features SURGE quality and/or the similar genetics enhancement...

Yeah, my current character, upon seeing something walking around looking like a bug, would likely not bother waiting for the Assensing test, she'd call down the heavy fire from the Spirits. Two Force 10 Fireballs oughta do it.

I can't imagine any player/character behaving much differently, really.



Mind you, I think -5 is dramatically, stupidly lowballing that negative quality. -20 would be more like it. That's almost as bad as Dark Secret (Last remaining living member of Winternight).

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 04:19 AM

His point* seems to be that if there's a rule for it, if it interacts with the character mechanically, it should actually have mechanics that make sense. I agree with this. Blue hair gives a character 5BP to spend on something else. This is a mechanical benefit. There should be a mechanical downside to balance it. Otherwise, there's no need for this quality to have any mechanics. You can just roleplay it and say "My character has blue hair !1!!one".

This game has rules for a reason. Otherwise let's just sit around and tell stories free-form and save money on buying books.

* sorry if I got your point wrong, please correct me if so

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 04:29 AM

I'm pointing out that some 'mechanics' are dependent on role play in a role playing game. Other wise it's just numbers on a sheet with no story or point or reason. I've played for 20 years and I've seen many players that do such a thing. They'll mini max and what not just for numbers. Find "Maximum damage builds" and stuff that have no point as a character itself other than to 'mathematically, through the rules, not role play or character history, build the 'best' ____ there is. Be it Street Sam or Wizard, or whatever.

There's point to some things beyond numbers on your character sheet. This seems to be one of them. It's a minor negative trait that is -meant- to be played out. That's the duty of those that take such a flaw. You're supposed to be (( in theory at least)) Mature enough to not just take it for points and ignore it because there's no dice penalties. That and your game master is supposed to know it's on the sheet and use it as the flaw that it is. Why? Because you DID choose to take it as a flaw and get bonus points for it.

Now I know that's asking alot of some people. And some people's play style IS to just build the mathematical equation on the sheet, but RAW that's not how it's 'intended'. Some things in the role playing games are supposed to be played out. They may not give numerical problems, but they are meant to be played anyway.

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 04:40 AM

I disagree

You seem to be ranting against people who min/max and don't roleplay at all. This isn't what I'm saying is the problem. It's perfectly ok to have blue hair and use that in role-playing. It should be used to make a living, breathing character. The player should incorporate this NQ into their character's identity.

What it shouldn't be is freebie points that have to use DM fiat to see any actual game results. Once again, I say that if this is your stance, stop buying books and just sit around with your friends and tell stories.



I've been playing roleplaying games a long time too

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 05:17 AM

That's the thing, ALL Flaws are dependent on DM fiat. If you have an allergy to... sunlight for example, and your DM sets all the scenes at night, it negates any negative of the allergy. If you're allergic to pollutants and the GM never enforces it. Same thing. If you're playing a ghoul and you don't have to play out the acquisition of your human flesh (( At least every once in a while. not every single meal)) Then it's not a negative quality. If you have electric blue hair, head hair, eyebrows, eye lashes, pubic and even body hair and the GM never has it come into effect. Same thing. You don't need dice for it to be a 'thing'. The dice are just there to prevent 'I shot you/no you didn't' type things. The dice don't define your char. Your character's history and abilities, define what dice he HAS to roll.

I totally realize people play and have fun playing different ways, but to say "Those points are free if they don't have a --game mechanic-- is missing a large point of the flaw (( and flaws in general)) They're there to flesh out your character and to show that along with the good parts of SURGE there are some bad. It's not 'A needed number for mathematical equation of character creation'. They're there, but the 'math' isn't the point.

Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 4 2013, 05:50 AM

Exactly. I mean, you could take Incompetent: Parachuting, and 99% of the time it would be 5 free points. Of course the 1% when it did have an effect would be fairly dramatic...

Also, pro tip: Do not take a run delivering biological weapons if you have the weak immune system negative quality. Particularly not if the bioweapon is used to create zombies. True story.

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 06:00 AM

But you can't reduce things this much. Going by your logic, the whole game is GM fiat. At least things like allergy have a mechanical effect, so that if your team decides to do a run during the day, this mechanic actually impacts the player in a totally obvious and predictable way. The ghoul has mechanical effects to what happens if they don't eat flesh often enough. It's the combination of the rules and the roleplay that make things fun. Otherwise let's play free-form storytelling.

I was thinking about this during lunch. It seems to me like the aspects of a good Quality involve a mechanical aspect and a game-affecting (RP'ing) aspect.

An example of a good quality is Toughness. The player is free to roleplay a "tough" character, not show pain when injured and all that. Come up with an interesting backstory on why the character is tough. AND it also gives a mechanical effect.

A bad example is already mentioned above. It has a roleplaying aspect, but no mechanical aspect.

How would you feel about Toughness not giving a mechanical benefit anymore? You can say the same for any Quality. Still going to take it? Why not pay points to raise your Agi to 6, roleplaying as a "super agile" character, but you don't get any benefits for Agi 6. Is this ok?

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 06:02 AM

As bad as Incompetent:Parachuting would be, at least it would have a mechanical effect 1% of the time. Bad hair has an effect 0% of the time. Unless you just make stuff up, then anything is possible...

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 06:05 AM

Except that even with your sunlight allergy example, there are inarguable, black and white factors. There are dictated effects that MUST occur for a given situation.

Is it daylight? Yes. Are you covered up? No. Do you possess a Mild allergy to sunlight? Yes. You suffer -2 dice to all actions and do not Regenerate if you possess that power. Same with pollutants, if you are exposed, you suffer a mechanical effect. Any GM that fails to enforce such mechanical effects is a bad GM.

For your ghouls example, no, actually, you do not have to play out the acquisiton of your flesh, at all. There are rules for folding it into your regular Lifestyle costs - and with good reason. Because maybe, just maybe, you don't want to be bothered making a big fuss out of that aspect of your character. Maybe you'd rather put your effort into other aspects of playing the game, or into roleplaying other aspects of your character, such that worrying about each and every pound of flesh just becomes tedious bookkeeping. But even here, there are mechanical rules in place - rules designed to allow you to pay a predetermined amount more nuyen than normal on your Lifestyle costs, instead of having to count every scrap and crumb. It's not GM fiat. It isn't an arbitrary amount that varies from table to table - it is a flat, definite cost that is always the same and always incurred under the appropriate conditions.

You talk about a GM never having Unusual Hair come up. I say to you again, that is a bad GM. And you know what? I should fucking know, because I'm complaining about this from the point of view of being a GM. I don't like the fact that one of my players can choose to have a free 5 BP that I have to go out of my way to balance out. I don't want to have to tailor my missions in such a way as to try and punish them in order to make up for their extra character resources. I'd rather not have to houserule it away, or rely on fiat if I can at all help it.

I want precise rules that make sense. I want a game system that is reliable and clear, that doesn't leave me scratching my head over how to handle something that could easily be argued in five different ways with no one clear right answer. And despite the sheer complexity and intricacy of Shadowrun, and it's history of missteps and errors, it does a pretty decent job of providing a mechanical framework which is reasonable, reliable, and internally consistant.

You keep harping on about roleplay, roleplay, roleplay. But my grievances have NOTHING to do with roleplay, and everything to do with MECHANICS - that is to say, with the toolset I have available to help me craft quality roleplay that me and my table enjoy. I want my tools to work. I want them to serve my needs. I want them to be robust and flexible and sensible and well made. And you keep telling me the tools aren't the problem - that I just need to forget the tools and focus on the roleplay. Well I'm sorry, but I don't buy it.

~Umi

Posted by: Weldûn Feb 4 2013, 06:12 AM

Lvl 1 SURGE (w/Goring Horn [5], Keen Eared [5] and Bright Purple Skin [-5])... 5 pts.
Cyclopean Eye... +10 pts.
Ghoul... 35 pts.
Magician Quality, a Magic Rating of 4 and the Levitation spell.... 48 pts.

The look on the faces at your gaming table when they realize that you're playing a one-eyed, one-horned, flying purple people eater and you still aren't taking social penalties... priceless.

And just in case some of you weefle-runners out there don't get the reference... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nEeoXS18Ww

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 07:41 AM

It makes you easier to track down at all times, if some body knows you have a blue hair.

Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 4 2013, 07:51 AM

Isn't the GM supposed to pick the negative metagenic qualities anyway?

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 08:21 AM

Tell me how you would apply that in game, without 100% resorting to GM fiat. You can't.

Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 4 2013, 08:37 AM

I would suggest anyone attempting to identify, trace or physically locate the character should receive a +3 dice pool modifier on all tests made during such attempts (inc Perception) - in other words apply distinctive style.

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 08:45 AM

Sorry, I should've been more clear. I'm sure there are many good ideas on how to actually represent Bad Hair Days. Distinctive Style makes sense. It's just that this is your own GM opinion. You're using GM fiat. Because there are no actual rules in the SR rulebook for this Quality.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 08:57 AM

I feel like a broken record, but here goes...

Even if Distinctive Style does apply to Unusual Hair (which it doesn't seem to), it would also then apply to many other 5BP negative metagenetic qualities as well, in addition to their other effects. So you have a bunch of qualities that are valued at [Distinctive Style + Other Effect X], and they cost exactly the same amount of BP as Unusual Hair, which is only valued at [Distinctive Style]. There is a clear and obvious imbalance there.

~Umi

Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 4 2013, 10:09 AM

Not all positive qualities/weapons/spells/adept powers are balanced either - it is never going to happen. As to whether distinctive style applies the side bar "what is a distinctive style" states "as would anyone with visible changeling traits" blue hair is a visible changeling trait therefore it is a distinctive style.

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 11:19 AM

The distinctive style has rules for it and being a changeling automaticly means you have that.
Now by RAW being changeling in and itself gives you distinctive style, but IMO the person tracking you should actually know what distinctive about you to get that bonus(this isn't actually required by RAW) and unatural hair color is one such distinctive feature. Where as qualities like Impaired(Attribute) while having a mechanical effect(witch is pretty much meaningless) doesn't make you stand out all and as such doesn't make you easier to track down.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 4 2013, 11:50 AM

Changeling traits do give distinctive style, which has specific rules mechanics. There is also the prejudice that changelings are supposed to face, which should not be every single NPC, but should still be common enough. Blue hair is more of a disadvantage than things like prejudiced/biased/ghouls, or impaired Attribute/dump stat, or incompetence/aerospace pilot, or scorched.

It is presented as a possible option, but it is a stupid suggestion. Other than setting the overall guidelines (such as things which are disallowed or treated differently in that game), the GM has no business making choices for the player in character creation, unless the player chooses an option that gives the GM that ability (such as amnesia or mysterious implant).

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 12:32 PM

As pointed out, it has an effect. It doesn't have dice to roll. The effect is on you to play out. Not just throw dice. The effect is social and visual. Not just " I have a -1 on X roll". yes it's the job of the GM to enforce flaws. They're plot hooks and things that make the character interesting. The lack of a dice mechanic doesn't mean they can't be very very effective. In one of the examples above having that blue hair could easily get you killed if it's recognized. (( Probably in conjunction with something else)).

You don't need a numerical thing to roll or penalize for an 'effect' to be there. The first time the cops or corp security puts out an APB for the a guy, and the first bullet point in the description is 'BRIGHT BLUE HAIR" along with other descriptors and what not, you'll see how huge of an effect it has. With out the dice there to roll. Cops and corpsec will come out of the woodwork and the char will be all

"MAN WHY ME???? There's no -1 on my sheet!"

"Yeah smart guy but you're the only one in the area with blue hair and it stands out. They're coming to see if you are the guy they're looking for, as you have bright blue hair" ( Note it doesn't have to be blue hair. could be green, or hot pink, or purple skin, or canary yellow, ect.))

Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 4 2013, 12:40 PM

"gamemasters may chose to take on Negative Metagenetic qualitiy selection to ensure balance."

The player did pick a quality that gives the GM that ability.

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 01:05 PM

Not everything in the world is 100% Yes or no. Sorry man. Not everything is binary. Some things are conditional and more subtil.

(( as a note it wouldn't let me quote you in small parts so I'm putting your stuff in italics
Is it daylight? Yes. Are you covered up? No. Do you possess a Mild allergy to sunlight? Yes. You suffer -2 dice to all actions and do not Regenerate if you possess that power. Same with pollutants, if you are exposed, you suffer a mechanical effect. Any GM that fails to enforce such mechanical effects [i]is a bad GM[/i]

Just like a GM that allows someone to take blue hair as a flaw, and get points for it, and never uses it is a "Bad GM" there's no difference between ignoring an allergy and ignoring a negative quality of this nature. It's the same. You just don't have to worry about dice. You have to worry about the game and the setting your in. Arguably alot harder. If you have a "SOLID BLACK AND WHITE FACTOR" you can do what SOOOOOO many bad players do. Take the flaws and then use the mechanics to 'get around them'. Not everyone does this, but if you've played more than a few times you know someone that does. That's a bad thing too. With something like the blue hair thing, yes it can be partially dependent on the GM, but it doesn't allow you to dodge your die penalty by using the mechanics against the setting.



For your ghouls example, no, actually, you do [i]not have to play out the acquisiton of your flesh, at all.[/i]

Then you're not playing a ghoul. You're geting the powers and hand waving huge parts of the character.

There are rules for folding it into your regular Lifestyle costs - and with good reason.

It still is a part of the character. It still has to be worked out, and if you're on a shadowrun that lasts longer than a few days, it's going to come up in game PDQ. You might have a way to get body parts in seattle but there's no "Corpses are Us" in the Ukraine that you can pick up your allotment of corpseflesh if you're out side that 'life style" thing.

Does it mean you have to role play out every meal? No. of course not. If a --------------huge defining characteristic------------ of your character is such immense and signifigant dietary restrictions and you ignore them, you're a bad player. Play something else.


Because maybe, just maybe, you don't want to be bothered making a big fuss out of that aspect of your character.

Then don't play a character who's defined by the fact that they must eat 5% of their body weight in cannibalistic flesh. lol Don't choose a character who's defined by that, then ignore it. That's lame on so many levels.


Maybe you'd rather put your effort into other aspects of playing the game, or into roleplaying other aspects of your character, such that worrying about each and every pound of flesh just becomes tedious bookkeeping.

Then don't play a ghoul! lol. And if you read up. I didn't say worry about each and every pound. I specificly said not every meal, but it's a huge part of the character. It'd be like playing a dwarf and ignoring the size and acting like you could dunk on a troll in Bball, or playing a troll and acting like he can crawl through a cat door no problem. If your char's are just numbers on a page, you're just playing the numbers. Not a character. And that's part of my point. Some people DO that. Some have fun doing that. I personally think it's lame and people that do that are horrible Role players. As they're not role playing. They're compairing numbers on a sheet with other numbers. Go play fantasy football. You know?



But even here, there are mechanical rules in place - rules designed to allow you to pay a predetermined amount more nuyen than normal on your Lifestyle costs, instead of having to count every scrap and crumb. It's not GM fiat. It isn't an arbitrary amount that varies from table to table - it is a flat, definite cost that is always the same and always incurred under the appropriate conditions.

And that's an artificial thing put into the game for ease of play. With ghouls for example, it's not a flat definite cost, as you're consumption of such is an illegal act. Your prices could change at the drop of a hat. Your organ grinder's could be caught or shot in the streets by cops and suddenly your only food source is gone. A character is NOT the numbers on the sheet. The numbers on the sheet are mechanics to explain the character.


You talk about a GM never having Unusual Hair come up. I say to you again, that is [i]a bad GM. [/i]

No. I pointed out it's part of the GM's job to make sure it DOES come up. I pointed out that lack of numbers attributed to it doesn't mean it never comes up. I pointed out that if the GM ignores it yes, it's a bad gm. Just like someone that puts it on the sheet and never plays it is a bad player.



And you know what? I should fucking know, because I'm complaining about this from the point of view of [i]being a GM. I don't like the fact that one of my players can choose to have a free 5 BP that I have to go out of my way to balance out. [/i]

You're just lazy. If you're a GM you should fucking know the flaws on your player's sheets and use them as a GM. If you need 100% of flaws to be 100% defined in 100% of the ways or you can't use them..... perhaps you shouldn't be GM. It's not a free 5 BP. It's a flaw. Its up to you to make something of it or make the character play it out. If you can't think of a way for such a thing to be a flaw, you're not trying.



I don't want to have to tailor my missions in such a way as to try and punish them in order to make up for their extra character resources.

Cry me a river. You don't have to Tailor your missions to 'punish' people. Know your player's characters flaws and use them when needed or when they come up. For example, if the guy has bright electric blue hair and he's trying to dodge a tail, it's going to be a bit harder. Doesn't mean you have to put that into every game.

All Im hearing is that you're lazy.




I'd rather not have to houserule it away, or rely on fiat if I can at all help it.

You don't have to house rule it at all. Just buck up and be a GM. Not everything's spelled out in 'Rules". You gotta actually think and stuff man.

I want precise rules that make sense.

Sadly there's not 'precise rules' for every single thing in a humans life. Do you make them perform checks to eat cereal? Or to wipe their butts? Do you make them make rolls to walk down the street, or put on their clothes? No? Probably not. Same thing. You don't need a rule for it, as a GM you just encorperate it. Simple as that.

I want a game system that is reliable and clear, that doesn't leave me scratching my head over how to handle something that could easily be argued in five different ways with no one clear right answer. And despite the sheer complexity and intricacy of Shadowrun, and it's history of missteps and errors, it does a pretty decent job of providing a mechanical framework which is reasonable, reliable, and internally consistant.

You're the GM. You don't have to 'argue' anything. If someone puts the flaw on their sheet, you point at it and go "There's no dice to that. I'm going to use it as I see fit. Period" and the player can accept it, or take it off his sheet. Boom. You're done. No arguments needed. If they don't trust you as a GM or don't want to put up with what ever creative hell you might dream up, they should find another flaw. I've had GMS that would flat out DELIGHT if someone took blue hair as a flaw, and boooooy they'd NEVER say it was a free point buy. They'd pay for every point in that flaw. Nor would they say they were being 'punished' as they chose the flaw. It was on them.


You keep harping on about roleplay, roleplay, roleplay.

Yeah... I know. *sighs greatly* Imagine that..... role play... in a ROLE PLAYING GAME!! Who'd have ever imagined it was about the role play, and not 500 tables of every minutia that could ever be dreamed up. It's not "Number calculator to describe orcs and humans and spirits and the matrix" it's a ROLE PLAYING GAME. lol

But my grievances have NOTHING to do with roleplay, and everything to do with MECHANICS - that is to say, with the toolset I have available to help me craft quality roleplay that me and my table enjoy. I want my tools to work. I want them to serve my needs. I want them to be robust and flexible and sensible and well made. And you keep telling me the tools aren't the problem - that I just need to forget the tools and focus on the roleplay. Well I'm sorry, but I don't buy it.

~Umi


That's a problem with you. If you need a rule to cover EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD all the way down to how to handle blue hair, you're never going to be happy as the concept of such a thing is absurd and can never be done. It's silly to try and demand it. If you ARE a GM and you can't handle such things, you either need to grow as a GM and realize that MOST of the world is in your hands and does what you say it does, or.... get back on the other side of the table. If you can't handle the repercussions of blue hair with out charts and tables and dice.... that doesn't bode well for when your players get inventive on a run.

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 01:11 PM

It's to prevent people from sitting down with the book for an hour and using SURGE to just build the perfect 'Combat creature' with specially tailored 'flaws' or disadvantages, specificly chosen to NOT be suich for that specific character.

I.E. If you're a mutant with cool powers, your mutation is not under your control and there's some bad things that come along with it. How do we know? because the -rules- tell you so.

Personally I'd like to pick my own flaws. But then I'm one of the sorts that play out the flaws alot more than the benifits. lol Flaws define you. For Shadowrun and SURGE, you MUST take them. I'd prefer to take my own. There are few game masters that I'd trust not to give me a Tucan beek or something. lol.

I can totally see why some GMs would pass out the flaws to a SURGE character, to make sure they were difficulties.

Posted by: phlapjack77 Feb 4 2013, 01:30 PM

Pepsi Jedi, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one

I'm definitely not a min/maxer by any stretch. But in this case, I think (better) rules are warranted.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 03:41 PM

You do not have to be a Changeling to take Metagenetic Qualities. ANY variant metatype can do so as well. *shrug*
Besides, if you do not think that having multiple distinctive qualitites does not make you STAND OUT MORE, then I really don't know what to say.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 4 2013, 03:54 PM

do variant metatypes fall under advanced character options too?

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 04:35 PM

Ofcource they do.
But as always GM has the make the call on how distinctive they based on the current location, ie. Oni in japan does stand out nearly as much as one in texas.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 04:45 PM

I think so Stahl...
Anyway the problem with qualities like extravagant eyes and unusual hair, is that they're cheap cop outs for people that wants the benefits of SURGE without being readily identifiable as Changelings (and thus likely as subject of prejudice)
Look at a Nartaki, very distinctly 'not human' bright colourful skin and multiple arms. Now look at the guy with blue hair and Violent eyes... Would you immediately think Changeling? You probably wouldn't... and that's exactly the problem, you can be Class III SURGE and show no tell tale signs of it, that's not roleplaying, that's weaseling out of your character choice for freebies.
A guy with Allergy to whatever isn't meant to stand out, a Class III is supposed to stand out like a luminous ten foot sore thumb.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 05:20 PM

+1 Lionhearted

Now as for Pepsi. You are missing the point, again and again. And I'm going to prove it to you right now.

That isn't a mechanical effect. Why are you even bringing it up?

This is about MECHANICS. You are repeatedly changing the subject and getting off topic for some unknown reason. You keep going back to roleplay, but we're not talking about roleplay. We're talking about MECHANICS. Nothing else. Stop going off on abusive, tangential, judgemental rants, please.

This is about one thing, and one thing only - the interactions of mechanical effects. Positive and Negative Qualities have mechanical benefits, and they have mechanical detriments. Every single one of them. Except Unusual Hair. And that lack of consistancy, that apparant failing of the rules, that breaking of uniformity and cohesion and logical regularity, is the sole and entire breadth of the conversation. Full stop, end of story.

~Umi

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 05:34 PM

Except you don't have multiple Distinctive Styles. Unusual Hair does not impose an additional level of DS, any more than any of the other 5 BP qualities do. So you've got 1 Rank of DS from being a Changeling, and 0 additional Ranks from Unusual Hair.

Taking Unusual Hair does not, by any ruling I've found, make you more Distinctive, but it does give you 5 free BP.

~Umi

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 05:50 PM

Perhaps, by any MECHANICAL ruling, but the fact that you have 3 different things that each qualify for Distinctive Style means that you stand out that much more. There are 3 traits that can be hit to identify you (rather than none). The guy with the Blue Hair (Facial, haed, arms chest, etc), with Neon Green Eyes, who creeps out the Neighborhood animals will almost certainly identify you, specifically, or at least a small enough subset to not make much of a difference. And that is the thing. It is an identifier that you cannot remove. *shrug*

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 06:02 PM

But is that worth 5 BP? Especially compared to the other 5 BP negative qualities which do exactly the same thing, and then some?

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 06:18 PM

What you're complaining about, Umidori, is called "granularity".

5BP is the value of "blue hair", because by and large, 5BP is the lowest value assigned to negative qualities.

Having blue (or neon green, or rainbow-dash-like multicolor, etc) hair is worth "more than 0 BP" ... the next stop on the dial is 5BP. So ... *shrug*

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 06:48 PM

But is it worth "more than" 0BP? That's his point. To him it's worth exactly 0BP.

Same as gender.*

*Side note: gender has more mechanical benefits and drawbacks than blue hair.

Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 4 2013, 06:58 PM

it does?
where?

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 06:58 PM

If a quality is not worth the BP cost assigned to it, it shouldn't be a quality.

Now, if the system supported smaller values, like 1 or 2 BP? Maybe I wouldn't mind it. But it doesn't, so it's a moot point.

Particularly because the minimum value of such a quality is 5 BP, it either needs to be worthy of that 5 BP pricetag, or not exist at all.

~Umi

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 07:00 PM

It's one of those things that is unlisted, but which will come up.

For instance, you encounter a gay orc, willing to cut you a deal for those goods you wanted, if you do a little somethin-somethin.

If you're female, oops, no deal...

If you are male--blue hair or not--then deal.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 07:13 PM

How is that any different than if you have Identifiable physical characteristics? In this case, the Blue Hair is an identifiable trait that you cannot eliminate. Seems like it has a drawback to me. *shrug*

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 07:15 PM

What difference is there between dying your hair blue and having blue hair in terms of how people react to you?

If none, why is dying your hair blue a 0BP thing, but having naturally blue hair 5BP?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 07:17 PM

Becasue you can re-dye your natural hair a different color. Not so with the NQ Blue Hair. Thought that was obvious. *shrug*

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 07:23 PM

If Unusual Hair said that it was Dye-Resistant, maybe. Sadly, it does not.

Or If it said that it imposed an additional layer of Distinctive Style, sure, I'd give you that in a heartbeat. If it said anything at all about anything of any sort having anything to do with substantial costs to the player or character, that'd be just dandy.

But all it says is that a character's hair "changes to an unusual color or texture, or grows from her body in unusual patterns or areas".

Oh, and it "is incompatible with other natural or artificial hair modifications". Which only really precludes taking Animal Pelage or Mood Hair. (Animal Pelage counts as Unusual Hair anyway, according to its entry.)

In fact, those are the only, actual mechanical effects of Unusual Hair - you cannot have both it and Animal Pelage, or it and Mood Hair. (Or cyberhair, but that's just fluff, so who cares?)

~Umi

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 07:24 PM

Quite a few of the negative meta qualities, actually are completdly unoticable and thus aren't exactly something that can be used to track you down(by the trick RAW even when you have nothing but such qualities you still get distinctive style, but IMO thats dickish GM rules layering) and for example Impaired(Attribute) has such a weak sauce mechanic effect i would say it's much more free point then unnatural hair for example.


If you make away with the effect you have to pay back to point you get, just like all other negative qualities.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 07:30 PM

Quite a few? Which ones, please? Point them out. Anything that lacks a mechanical disadvantage, please show to me. I'll gladly disapprove of them as well.

Also, dye is not permanent. Would you have someone pay karma every time they dye their unusual hair?

You're not paying to have your hair be blue. You're paying for it to grow in blue naturally. If you get some form of bodysculpting done which makes your hair grow in as a normal color forever after, then you need to pay off the quality. But cutting or dying or concealing your hair doesn't remove the quality and does not incur any karma costs.

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 07:39 PM

*Grin* You gave me an idea...

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 07:39 PM

1) Actually you can redye your blue hair another color. You can also shave it off. No need to pay karma (as Umidori points out).
2) I was referring to a single-situation event. If your hair is blue, then it is gawd damned blue in that situation. Someone is either going to react negatively, positively, or not, based on your hair color. If there's no difference in their reaction to natural blue vs. dyed blue, then natural blue is not a drawback. Getting a negative reaction, stepping into a shower stall, redying your hair, and coming back isn't really going to change anything.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 07:43 PM

The character may not "have control" of the mutation, but the player should. It is his character, not the GM's. Sure, there are GMs out there who will be reasonable about what to pick, but there are those out there who will pick the absolutely most debilitating for the character just so they can sit back and cackle maniacally--no matter which one is in the minority, that the latter type exists should preclude the GM picking those 'flaws', the whole "one person ruins it for everyone" deal.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 07:46 PM

Well look at this way Bigguns, if you're going to pick the most min-max positive selection you can think of, I'm gonna make you a greased up ant-eater with bug eyes... Fair is fair

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 07:49 PM

Dude, people pulling those shenanigans are not the majority of players, nor is everyone defending the player's right to have control over his character "just trying to 'min/max'--something that is CONSTANTLY used entirely incorrectly*--all the way to the bank".

* For instance, people on either forum will say that a character with two 1s in attributes is "min/max". No, it's not. Someone who does "min/max" would never take a 1 in an attribute, as that creates a massive weakness and "min/max" is all about removing as much weakness as possible.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 07:54 PM

Yes, there's two scenarios here that are left untold
Scenario 1: "So I got this idea for a character with snake traits, you know unblinking eyes, scales, keen scent..."
vs
"So I got this character with Orange eyes and Chest hair in the shape of canada, and also I got metagenetic improvement..."

Which one do you think I would turn into an ant eater?
and yes I would probably let the first example take +attibute but only for reaction or agility

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 08:03 PM

I may not like the second one, but all I'm gonna do is roll my eyes a little. I'm not going to force a player into something they don't want to play just because what they made doesn't fit what I like.

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 08:04 PM

Read again i didn't say no mechanical disadvantage, i said unnoticeable(as they dont change how you look), but here's a list anyway:
Berserker,Critter Spook,Nocturnal,Impaired(Attribute),Slow Healer and Symbiosis
Also Balance Receptor,Bicardiac,Electrosense,Keen-Eared,Low-Light Visio(can be),Magnetosense, Natural Venom.Ogre Stomach,Thermographic Vision and Vomeronasai Organ from positive side.

By the strict RAW even if all your qualities are from that list you still have distinctive style, but really GM has to be quite a dick to enforce that.
Where as if you have blue hair, you have now room to complain if some one who knows that can track you down more easily.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 08:11 PM

He always have the option to go back to the drawing board and make a proper concept...
Like a player of mine
"I want to make a counterspell expert..."
*two seconds later*
"Can I play a gnome?"

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 08:13 PM

The emphasized portion is exactly the problem. This smacks of "elitist" thinking to me.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 08:18 PM

It wouldn't if you knew some of my players
I'm willing to let a lot of things fly, providing you got reasoning to back it up.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 08:20 PM

Actually, it still would. There is no such thing as a "proper concept".

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 08:31 PM

In an absolute sense...
But there is such a thing as having no concept and just building a character around numbers without any sort of cohesiveness, theme or personality.
It has less to do with what you are and more to do with "what's your story".
There's of course outright broken things that I never let fly.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 08:35 PM

And there's nothing wrong with starting out that way and letting things get more fleshed out as play goes on.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 08:37 PM

Perhaps you should be the one to be doing the rereading, as this is something like the fourth time I've said it, but...

MY COMPLAINT IS ABOUT THE MECHANICS. If your response fails to address the MECHANICS, you are wasting your time. If you aren't talking about the MECHANICS, I don't want to hear it. Please, for the sake of my sanity, stay on topic.


Berserker - Chock full of game mechanics. Composure Test, Berserk status, +1 to physical attributes while -1 to mental attributes, Willpower X 1D6 Combat Turn duration, triggers Adrenaline Pumps.

Critter Spook - Inflicts a -2 penalty on animal handling tests, applies Fear effect on animals with 5 meters, in combat applies a "Taunt" effect to critters, driving them to target the spook first.

Impaired Attribute - Your natural maximum in an attribute is lowered by one, which also affects your augmented maximum.

Slow Healer - Inflicts a -2 penalty on all healing tests.

Symbiosis - Area attunement based on Essence, Body + Willpower test to resist, once attuned receive +1 to Outdoors and Social Skills while in attuned area, if area is "unhealthy" suffer -2 to all actions from mild "allergy".

These all have mechanical disadvantages. I asked you to find negative qualities that do not have mechanical disadvantages. Please try again.


I... these... these are... positive... qualities. Of course they aren't going to have mechanical disadvantages. Are you drunk, or something? Or just being absurdly pedantic? Because even if it's the latter, they do actually have mechanical disadvantages - their BP costs.


I would agree with you... if Unusual Hair actually affected Distinctive Style in any way. It does not.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 08:43 PM

Yes it does.

It is a Metagenic Quality.

All Metagenic Qualities are "advanced character options".

All Advanced Character Options carry the full mechanics of Distinctive Style, in addition to their specific effects.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 08:43 PM

Ummm Dying Hair is a natural hair modification, is it not? So, obviously, dying does not work.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 08:43 PM

I want something I can grab on to and play off with a character, if you give me a blank sheet with stats I'm gonna atleast ask you to answer the 20 questions before I even consider letting you through.
Like this guy in my group he got Cha 1 and Str 1, his concept is a recluse tech nerd, doesn't need to be hard.
We had some great fun playing out those flaws, but he's also allowed to shine with his skills.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 08:48 PM

Clarification. If it affected Distinctive Style in any meaningful way. You already have DS from being a Changeling, Unusual Hair doesn't add to that, at least not according to any rules I'm aware of.

Please don't mistake me for arguing that this is how it SHOULD be, by the way. I'm actually doing the opposite. I think the Runner's Companion rules, particularly the metagenetic stuff, is very sloppily put together. Hence why I'm complaining about Unusual Hair in the first place.

~Umi

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 08:51 PM

You're actively trying to piss me off now, aren't you?

You know damn well what "a natural hair modification" is, you cheeky bastard. Please don't mess with me.

~Umi

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 08:52 PM

Unusual hair is fine for werewolf syndrome, would be nice if they were a bit more stringent with what it could be though... Like things you can't achieve by going to the supermart.
Extravagant eyes is worse as even the quality assumes people won't give a drek.

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 08:55 PM

Fiber Optic hair is also out.

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 08:57 PM

Each Advanced Character Option comes with Distinctive Style. They stack.


I agree with you on principle. I just don't think the problem is quite as bad as you've been presenting it to be.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 08:57 PM

Not really, no...

My point is that if you choose to not enforce the negativity of the Quality, that is not the quality's fault. The Unnatural Hair Color Quality is purely fluff, but it is still a negative. I choose to ENFORCE the notion that you CANNOT dye the hair (after all it is a natural Modification... can't argue that because you are modifying it with dye). Sure, you can choose to shave it all off... until it grows back, you still look like a freak (distinctive) becasue you have hints of blue where your hair is growing back, but until it does, you are missing all body hair. Kinda wierd, don't you think?

Is it more work for a GM. Perhaps. Is it any greater an amount of work? No, no more so than remembering the character has an allergy to sunlight. *shrug*

Posted by: Glyph Feb 4 2013, 08:59 PM

I think it is easily inferred that each distinctive trait from SURGE gives you a level of distinctive style. It is not explicitly spelled out, but it is still an easy stretch of logic to make, to the extent that I would call it a rules interpretation, rather than a house rule.


I don't always agree with All4BigGuns, but he is correct that the GM has no business picking out a character's negative qualities. The justification of cutting down "min-maxing" doesn't wash - if a concept doesn't pass muster, then reject it, and let the player know why. If you get a sheet with SURGE II, with celerity and glamour for the positive qualities, and astral hazing for the negative quality, and you don't like it, then tell the player something like "Sorry, but I want to see something visually obvious for class 2 SURGE, like unusual skin and hair coloration at least. Plus, I don't allow the astral hazing flaw, because I think it should be solely the province of things like cyberzombies." That's a million times better than going "I'm changing his negative quality to cephalopoidal skull, ha, ha, ha!" That's just douchebaggery.

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 09:01 PM

OTOH, there's nothing wrong with saying "Gee, 'unusual hair' just doesn't seem dramatic enough, what with Glamour and all. I'd rather see you take either Mood Hair, or maybe Bioluminescence (and we can apply it to yoru hair specifically)". IOW, the GM should still feel free to make suggestions.

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 09:02 PM

Oh good, the two of you are on the same page.

I believe that, right there, is his complaint.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 09:06 PM

Never said I was not on his page as far as the fluf goes. I also have no problem enforcing Fluff negatives. They usually flow from the narrative, so it is no skin off my back. *shrug*

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 09:08 PM

So you're saying that a level 1 Changeling is going to have 2 to 3 levels of DS, even if all they have are a Bicardiac and an Impaired Attribute? So other characters get +6 dice to their legwork tracking down a dude with a second heart and poor Willpower? Because those are just such noticeable attributes in a person, right?

Distinctive Style is just badly implemented. End of story, full stop. It needs a complete rewrite. (Or at least the rules regarding which "advanced character options" do and no not impose DS, or modify it, need a rewrite, because technically it works fine as an ordinary negative quality.)

~Umi

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 09:08 PM

His point is that he's getting a non-fluff-benefit for having a fluff-detriment.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 4 2013, 09:10 PM

Suggestions are fine. Just like a GM might say something if a sniper lacks an infiltration or perception skill. But making a character a "greased up ant-eater with bug eyes" purely out of petty vindictiveness is unacceptable behavior from a GM.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 09:11 PM

+9999 for both of you.

~Umi

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 09:11 PM

Which is dumb. Why should you get a Non-Fluff Benefit from a NEGATIVE quality? Does not really make any sense when you read, it does it?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 09:12 PM

Again... Why should you benefit from a Negative? It is a DETRIMENT, not a BENEFIT.
The BP you get are insignificant in comparison.

Posted by: Mäx Feb 4 2013, 09:12 PM

God you really cant read can you?
I didn't claim qualities not having mechanical disadvantage, that was you missreading.

That list is exactly what i said in my post it to be.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 09:15 PM

Pretty much what I'm getting at, though, I do think that instead of a knee-jerk rejection, they should at least give it a chance, just with a disclaimer laid out right then that if it turns out not to work out well for the game, he may ask for a change of character later.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 09:16 PM

Except when it's exactly that kind of behaviour that your group thrives on *shrug* We like having a laugh and bug eyed greased up ant-eater is more fun then saying no

Posted by: Glyph Feb 4 2013, 09:18 PM

Nope, that's why I specified distinctive traits. Things like unusual hair, or scales, or what have you. I think that one line, about "advanced character options", was very vague and poorly-worded. I would use a bit of common sense with it. Obviously, an allergy to silver is not going to make someone easier to find. But the rules are going to have those little glitches. Look at the thorns negative quality, which gives you "+1 to all Physical Tests" due to discomfort. Obviously, the GM is going to have to figure out how to implement that as an actual penalty (increase thresholds, change it to -1 instead of +1, etc.).

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 09:19 PM

Like those 5 build points, maybe?

I don't know what you're table looks like, but at mine "getting 5 more BP to work with" is a benefit. And a non-fluff one, to boot.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 09:22 PM

I guess it's not enough that unusual hair or mood hair makes it more of a PITA to disguise yourself to infiltrate some place?

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 4 2013, 09:23 PM

Shave n' go! The new product just for you!

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 09:32 PM

Then again, there is a way to turn that negative into something of a benefit if you're good enough at Disguise to manage pulling it off in the first place. You infiltrate a place disguised as someone with blonde hair and blue eyes, and once you're out, you ditch the wig and contacts becoming someone with purple hair and yellow eyes. I don't think they're gonna find you and what you took that easy, and heck if a player is smart enough to figure that one out, I'm by god gonna let 'em pull it off.

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 09:34 PM

I never said it was a GOOD rule; remember, I agree it's all poorly written.

However, it's more than there being no rule at all.


I agree. It should possibly be 1 die per level, plus 1 die base.

And I'd like to see various of the Metagenic qualities, as well as the Metatypes and playable Sapients have a "distinctiveness index" assigned to them, with their costs adjusted accordingly (the more distinctive something is, the more mechanical effect it has before it's own description comes into it..

It'd be grand, too, if things like "distinctive hair" and other such things, explicitly stated that things as simple as hair dye either didn't work at all, or, required expensive materials to work. (For an example of that, look at BiPolar. Essentially, it's BP for a monthly expense of 500¥.)

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 09:36 PM

And as a GM, I would happily reward that with "not screwing it up", because it's creative roleplay.

Also, because I've actually pondered a Face who is a master of disguise ... so much so, that noone has seen their REAL appearance in a decade, or more. Not even their lovers.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 09:36 PM

I agree with this general notion. But I would want every "distinctive trait" to actually be specified as such.

Any quality which adds to your distinctiveness should come out and say so. The rules as they stand are badly written.

Edit: And as odd as it is to say this, I agree entirely with Pax regarding a distinctiveness index and all that.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 09:38 PM

That's really all that needs to be said, anyway.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 09:53 PM

Or maybe they're just expecting people to ::gasp:: use some Common Sense rather than have their hand held.

Posted by: Umidori Feb 4 2013, 09:58 PM

Wow, insulting and logically fallacious in one fell swoop. Congrats.

There is nothing wrong with wanting rules that leave no room for misinterpretation or variation from table to table. Your personal tastes do not equal Common Sense.

~Umi

Posted by: _Pax._ Feb 4 2013, 10:02 PM

Siding with Umidori on that point.

I's all well and good that we CAN use our own brains to interpolate and nterpret.

It would be best, however, if we didn't NEED to do so - and could instead apply the brainpower saved, towards creative ends. Like, entirely NEW rules. Or storylines. And so forth.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 4 2013, 10:05 PM

Yeah, got a Ninja build like that...

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 10:10 PM

The more time they have to spend codifying every little minute detail of little importance for you (like the qualities in question) the less time they have to actually work on IMPORTANT things.

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 4 2013, 10:23 PM

Part of this is knowing your Gm if your GM would screw you, clearly you don't want to be in that situation, where the GM CAN pick for you.

People are also forgetting there is the option to "Surge" During game play, where in your mutations can be determined by the GM. Again, I'd only do so with a GM I knew not to be stupid or a jerk, but it is an option. As much as we might like to custom design our chars, if it's random gene expression through mana induced radical mutation, IRL you dont get to choose. You're stuck with it. If you take that option in the game, it's another 'reason' a gm might pick. (( The first being the before mentioned Mini-maxer type))

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 10:30 PM

You miss the entire point. The character still doesn't have a choice. The player should, however, otherwise it's just another form of railroading--just a bit more subtle.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 4 2013, 10:50 PM

Remind me what part of your GM going - "You SURGE from exposure to X, here's what you got." is subtle?

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 10:53 PM

I was just saying that it could be considered more subtle than normal railroading.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 11:10 PM

If you chose to take latent metagenic expression at chargen (or any latent quality for that matter) You purposefully left the ball in the GMs court, putting the creative weight on him. As such you can just hold on to your pants and hope he does right by you. Exactly the same as total amnesia... How on earth is that railroading? You left the decision to the GM.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 4 2013, 11:14 PM

It's different than Total Amnesia (which I won't take because one might as well just grab a pre-gen), because it's an optional thing. Personally, I'd see it as a sign of future railroading if a GM took up that option, or even worse, a sign that the GM is one of those few who power trips their butt off. There is ONE person I would trust to pick those qualities in my stead.


Note how 'few' is emphasized in case you decide to try the "show where the bad GM touched you" stuff.

Posted by: Lionhearted Feb 4 2013, 11:20 PM

Uhm, how exactly do you define railroading?

Posted by: O'Ryan Feb 4 2013, 11:30 PM

More to the point, if you don't trust the DM to be fair to you, to work with the players, why are you playing with them?

It sounds like you refuse to let the DM make any story telling decisions about your character because "You don't trust them." Why even have them there? You can, after all, run Shadowrun Missions for yourself and have complete control of what happens to your character.

Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 5 2013, 12:18 AM

I've made characters that just have latent "something" and let the GM pick whichever he wants - much more fun that way.

Posted by: Pepsi Jedi Feb 5 2013, 12:26 AM

No I'm not missing the point. I'm saying the randomness of it is a part of it. A part you can either embrace or not. But it's there, if you ignore it, that's cool you ignore it, but the characters in question don't get to pick and choose, if you're trying to play it more realisticly, you wouldn't get to pick and choose either.

Just using a common example, Beast, from the Xmen wouldn't have chosen the huge feet and hands, and blue fur that eventually transformed into more feline characteristics. That further mutation happened in the course of the story. he started off just broad with huge hands and feet. The Furr and animistic features came later.

I get your side. "A PLAYER SHOULD HAVE TOTAL CONTROL!" I just don't agree with it. If you're playing a metahuman and you want to SURGE in game, then yeah, that's a GM thing. other wise you're just building a changeling from the start and waiting to get your freak on till later.

I get your 'A PLAYER SHOULD HAVE TOTAL CONTROL', but it's not universally true. We've all had games where there's one guy that just does stupid stuff ---if you let him---. Or, maybe not just dumb, but that one guy that will ignore the setting the group, the game and everything to do that math to get the mini maxed out character, --if he's allowed--. For people like that, if it's going to disrupt the game, cause annoyance to PLAYERS and ruin everyone's fun, they might not be allowed TOTAL CONTROL in that way. If the guy is going to give himself a tucan beak, neon pink skin, elephant ears, a monkey tail and 3 sets of extra arms, yes, it's best that the GM step in and go "If you're going to make a Surge character I'm going to pick out your traits.

Now... it'd be alot more simple to just not play with people like that, but every group usually has one (( if not more)) And sometimes if they're reined in, in the start, the game goes fine once it gets going.

__I__ Personally much prefer to build my own freaks, but I can totally see some situations where I'd understand a GM stepping in, and would actually prefer it.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 5 2013, 03:59 AM

I think some people might be talking about one thing, and others about another thing. The normal SURGE rules offer the option of the GM picking out the negative traits - which I think is a very, very poorly thought-out idea.

The Dormant Metagenetics quality explicitly states that the GM picks the level of SURGE, and the negative qualities (I was surprised when I read the actual quality, because I thought the GM picked everything). So someone getting the latter quality at least knows that some of the qualities will not be his own selections. It's the same as Latent Awakening, only the player does get to at least pick out the positive qualities. The only reason it is less likely to be abused, is that it will only be selected by players who have some degree of trust in their GM (same thing for things like amnesia or mysterious implant).

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 5 2013, 04:03 AM

I know that I was talking about normal Surge. If they're talking about the other one, then I can definitely see where lines got crossed.

Posted by: Udoshi Feb 5 2013, 04:23 AM

I found evidence a while ago that you can, in fact, have http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=23020&st=25&p=707758&hl=\distinctive%20style&#entry707758. that may change things.
For example, a nartaki that is ALSO incredibly gaudily cybered with extravagant custom casemods is MORE distinctive than just a nartaki.


My solution to this is to buy off the Distinctive Style quality during creation. If you're not suffering a penalty for it or it doesn't fit, just pay the points to get rid of it. Its not like it's unprecedented, since sapient critters can buy off the freebie Uneducated they get slapped with.


My biggest problem with Surge is really the Negative qualities that are really positive qualities in disguise. Mostly Astral Hazing. Thorns is another example, but it suffers from a simple type +1 where it should be a -1.

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 5 2013, 04:28 AM

Not-so-recent discussions make the point that Astral Hazing, does not in fact, do what you think it does.

(That is, a direct LOS spell cast from outside background count, into an area of background count, does not in fact fizzle).

It's still godawful cheese to plop an astrally hazed dude in a one-room apartment to shut down the magic of a city in a year or two.

Posted by: Udoshi Feb 5 2013, 05:00 AM

Background counts are still pretty useful things to have around, if you don't give a shit about magic!

Edit: I'm still not entirely convinced. If you can cast a spell through a magical impediment, then you should be able to cast a spell through a mana barrier with the same ease that you do a background count. The results ofhttp://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=18346&hl=Warddiscussion are worth perusing. I think it's this thread; either way, it involves questions about creating magic inside a ward while being outside it, and whether the barrier would interfere with the subject inside it, and also some side questions about what happens when a mystic link passes through interference.

Posted by: All4BigGuns Feb 5 2013, 05:06 AM

My main problem with people griping about mundanes taking Astral Hazing is that taking it with Awakened is nothing more than making your character useless. A mage or Adept will be built around their abilities as an Awakened, all of which are pretty much shut down entirely by the constant background around them with the quality.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 5 2013, 06:50 AM

Astral hazing itself needs a serious overhaul, as do background counts in general. The text for astral hazing is very insistent that it affects magic, but doesn't say how - I assume normally, meaning a hit to Magic rating and spell Force for purposes of Drain (it lowers Magic and gives spells higher Drain - it doesn't affect Force, other than possibly creating situations where the effective Force of a spell is higher than twice the lowered Magic rating). This doesn't quite make sense, unless you assume that the link between caster and target means you get affected unless you and the target are both outside the background count.

The detriment of astral hazing is that it does not distinguish between hostile and friendly spells, that it can be a serious hindrance to magical allies, and that to astral observation, you are the visual equivalent of a "a nartaki that is ALSO incredibly gaudily cybered with extravagant custom casemods", or maybe even a "greased up ant-eater with bug eyes". Very inconspicuous to any astral observers... NOT!! Like day job and a few other flaws, it is one that some GMs don't allow in their games.

Posted by: Draco18s Feb 5 2013, 02:07 PM

It refers back to background count, which explicitly states that while inside the area, Magic and Force are reduced and Drain is increased. For the purposes of casting spells: Magic is reduced (meaning you can't cast as high, and it gets to be physical drain right fast) and Drain is as if the spell was a higher force (even more drain). The force of the spell is not effected.

Eg.

Mag 6, BC 2:

Magician casts as if his Magic was 4, so he casts a F4 spell (F/2 drain).

Spell is F4, but the drain is treated as if it was F6. Magician resists 3 stun.
If he cast a F6, he'd be taking 4P drain.

The spell itself remains F4 unless it falls into one of several categories which are effected by the background count:
basically everything but instantaneous spells.



Actually, the astral hazed character is the visual equivalent of a very tiny storm cloud. You can't see into it, buy you know it's there.