Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: CitM Oct 30 2013, 09:26 PM

Hi guys,

first of all two relevant passages from the book:

Skills:

Improved Ability Adeptpower:


I was thinking, why is everyone assuming that adepts can go beyond 12 and dont just reach the maximum rating at this power "faster/ earlier"?

It says, "skill rating is ranging from 1 ... to 12" and "this power increases the rating of a skill".

I know adepts could go til "maximum x 1,5" in sr4 but i dont get why it should be the same here.

Any ideas?

Posted by: Dolanar Oct 30 2013, 09:44 PM

so your suggestion is that everyone except Adepts are allowed to have a 12 skill?

logic states that everyone is allowed to have the 12 skill which means that if this particular ability allows you to bring that up to 1.5x then 18 would be the maximum for an Adept with 12 skill + 6 power.

or are you saying if I brought a skill to 12 then bought the Adept power my Adept power would be useless? again, they would need to specify that sort of limitation & their wording implies that it can go above 12 for Adepts.

Posted by: CitM Oct 30 2013, 10:01 PM

Yes, thats exactly what my suggestion was -.-. I just said, that adepts are reaching the final goal faster/ better/ easier; that is what my suggestion whould be and actual if you take the relevant passages its the only thing really "logic".



Very squishy. Should ... would.



So we have "The skill Rating is a numerical value ranging from 1 [...] to 12", we have: "The standard limit for skills is 12." and we have "This power increases the Rating of a [...] skill."

I dont see how "logic should state" any of your statements.

Posted by: Dolanar Oct 30 2013, 10:10 PM

adjective: standard

1.
used or accepted as normal or average.

which means that under normal circumstances with nothing else modifying it. Then we have the Abnormal ability effecting it which states that you can go 1.5x the "Standard" limit.

Posted by: CitM Oct 30 2013, 10:19 PM

You have a point.

Posted by: Isath Oct 31 2013, 04:44 AM

Aside from what the rule says

If that power would not (sort of) augment the skill, why would anyone in their right mind, be learning it?

Posted by: Cain Oct 31 2013, 05:10 AM

If we go by that logic, remember that specific rules trump general. If it increased the Skill Rating directly, the limit for IA would also go up; so instead of a rating 6 skill capping with 3 levels of IA, we'd have a skill level of 9 with a cap of 5. And because the specific rule says the new limit is skill x 1.5, the improvement can go on indefinitely.

Basically, your reading leads to a That Way Lies Madness interpretation that could break the game. Better to use Occam's razor and stick to the simple solution: It doesn't affect the base rating.

Posted by: Godwyn Oct 31 2013, 03:23 PM

Except it cannot go on indefinitely. Max ranks in the power will be limited by magic, and total value would be limited by the skill cap. 6 skill, 6 magic and 6 ranks hits both caps immediately. Alternatively, it is rather simple to calculate max ranks of the skill before the power is added.

While I do not think this is how the power is supposed to work, I like it. It helps limit some of the massive advantages adepts seem to have over cyber lately. While the adept will be able to get to a skill cap faster than with cyber, it will eventually catch up. I like it. And as for why to take the power if it works like this. Raise a skill from 9 to 11, 42 karma 21 weeks training. Initiate 3rd time 19 karma 1 month, raise skill from 9 to 11.

I like CitM's interpretation. I think it is potentially -more- balanced than how it is used. But I am pretty sure the intention is to let adepts get a total skill value of 18-19. And then, as usual, the cyber adepts can get 20 with a reflex recorder.

Posted by: Cain Oct 31 2013, 08:22 PM

That's still rather ridiculous. That allows an adept to start with a 12 skill ranking, before factoring in attributes or other bonuses. Way too much, in my opinion. Nine is bad enough.

Posted by: Chrome Head Oct 31 2013, 08:43 PM

Not to mention that the rules as written state that the improvement is capped at 1.5x rating, as opposed to being the improved rating being capped at 1.5x base rating. A pretty awful mistake, and I don't suggest that we should interpret the rules as they are written. If you really want to stick to RAW, it's pretty crazy, and the magic cap on an adept power rating becomes very relevant.

As to the interesting point by the OP about the rating of a skill being limited to 12 and how it limits that adept power. The question for me, again if we stick to RAW and don't try to interpret further, is which of these two rule snippets supersedes the other: "The skill Rating is a numerical value ranging from 1, ..., to 12", and "The maximum improvement possible is your current skill level x 1.5 (rounded up)." Shouldn't the second sentence also include something about the maximum improvement being capped at rating 12 total for the skill if that was the intent?

I think the whole adept power is worded too vaguely to begin with, and needs a well thought out errata.

Posted by: shonen_mask Oct 31 2013, 09:45 PM

The second line you are looking for is the skill ruling that the limit is 12, 13 with aptitude, for everyone.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 31 2013, 10:42 PM

Superseded by the Specific Rule for Adepts with Improved Ability, or anyone with Reflex Recorder.

Posted by: Epicedion Oct 31 2013, 10:59 PM

Do recall that a starting character can have at most 7 points in one skill, meaning that they can get use out of (at most) 4 points of Improved Ability.

What this means is that to dump more into Improved Ability they first have to buy the skill up to rating 9 (from 7) at a cost of 32 Karma, and then gain a Power Point (probably for 13 Karma through Initiation) and then they can only put half of that PP into Improved Ability. Which then means another 2 points of skill (42 Karma) and another PP (16 Karma) before they can spend another half PP on it again. In other words, it's 103 Karma dumped into almost nothing but improving a single skill from 7+4 to 11+6.

If you really want to go for the gusto and get it up to 13+7 it's crazy more Karma, since you have to throw in a 35 Karma Magic attribute bump (and 49 more Karma in the skill) to do it.

In an infinite karma game, yeah, it looks like Adepts can knock the socks off mundanes, but in reality if you do this you end up with a character that's street-level in everything except a single skill, maybe having Improved Reflexes 2 and maybe having one or two powers at really low levels. And you'd better be really happy with your attributes, because you don't get to touch them for nearly 200 Karma.

So he might be able to shoot a cigarette out of a fly's mouth at 1,000 meters, but he's going to be surpassed in virtually every other field to pull it off.

Posted by: Cain Oct 31 2013, 11:36 PM

Unfortunately, with the way Improved Ability is worded, the cap doesn't apply the way you think it does.

Because the OP postulated that Improved Ability actually raises the skill, and because the specific-case rule allows it to ignore the skill cap, you can start with an effective skill of 13+, and have PP left over. Also, for your hypothetical character, he could have low levels of Attribute Boost, which consistently take him to the augmented max. He'll be at least as good as a comparable character in many areas, *and* be able to shoot cigarettes out of a fly's mouth at 1000 meters.

Posted by: CitM Feb 4 2014, 05:23 PM

Sorry for bringing this up again, but i dont think this is the final point here.

There is no such rule.



"the height of sentient achievement", and then adepts can get +50%. It was right in sr4, but i dont get why it should be now. It does not even seem to be right.





The word "standard" wich definetely refers to the quality-description and not to this power, does not say "do what you want".
The cap is 12, 13 with aptitude. Thats basicly it. The "skill x 1.5 rule" does not negate anything that was said before, in fact it limits it on top of the first rule.

So again, why is everyone assuming adepts can go beyond 12 that easy?

Edit: I dont want to argue. Maybe my english is not good enough to get it, or i am missing something. But for me it seems crystal clear.

Posted by: Curator Feb 5 2014, 04:33 AM

it IS magic. i would imagine an adept who wants to run faster then anyone else, can run faster then anyone else. but then maybe a machine could be built to do the same thing. idk... now that i see that, ya 13 should be the cap

Posted by: tjn Feb 5 2014, 04:40 AM

No, you're right. Under RAW, there is no exception under Improved Ability to the hard limit of 12 ranks in a skill (or 13 with the advantage), and Improved Ability explicitly states it increases the rank of the skill. This would translate into Adepts being able to get to the maximum rank quicker than mundanes, but the mundanes could eventually match the Adept with that same maximum rank.

What most are conflating is that older editions worked differently, and how Improved Ability worked then was consistent with how Attributes, in general, work now. It used to be that improved ability did not directly modify the base stat itself, but would create a new modified stat that would allow characters to exceed the base stat by 1.5. There's the added bonus that this interpretation is easier to apply, is consistent with other rules and older editions, and doesn't effect the karma costs for improving the base rank of the stat.

Honestly I use this alternative view, but yes, it would be a house rule, but it is probably one of the most common house rules there are.

Posted by: RHat Feb 5 2014, 04:44 AM

I would argue that it is at very least INTENDED for Improved Ability to exceed the normal maximum; it may well be that the removal of a strict "augmented maximum" for skills has muddied things a bit. And as was highlighted, if you look at Improved Ability as directly modifying the base skill rating (as in, the skill rating becomes 9 rather than 6(9)), you get into absolutely ludicrous situations - meaning that in some form, Improved Ability must stand separate from the skill rank itself.

Posted by: Sponge Feb 5 2014, 05:37 AM

Only if you ignore the explicit use of "current skill level", i.e., the rating before you activate the power.

Posted by: RHat Feb 5 2014, 05:48 AM

Actually, you can still run into problems that way, Qi Foci being an example. But that's actually aside from the fact that I'm fairly sure the intent is for it to go past the normal limit.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 5 2014, 08:03 AM

I'm... kind of boggled, here. Don't they talk about augmented skills at all in the skills section? Like they did in SR4? That seems an incredible omission.

Overall, I'm not liking how the adept ability works in conjunction with the higher skill caps. In SR4, the skills may have been horribly truncated, but at least a mundane with a reflex recorder (and sometimes a quality) could get within spitting distance of an adept, skill-wise. The gap seems a lot wider now, at least after char-gen.

Posted by: RHat Feb 5 2014, 08:15 AM

Well, if the street sam is going to have easier access to attribute boosts and an easier time scrounging the karma for raising the skill (as the adept has to spend karma in a number of places the street sam doesn't)... The sam gets his dice in a wider area, and the adept gets more dice in his smaller area.

Posted by: attilatheyeon Feb 5 2014, 11:08 AM

I kinda agree with the OP. Not only do i believe his point is RAW, i believe it is probably RAI. I believe the devs stated that they wanted to reduce the bonus dice and increase the skills, which would go in line with what the OP stated. Also wouldn't this mean that at character creation, this power can't be taken to increase a skill above 6 total. By that i mean if i have pistols at 5, i can't buy 2 levels of improved ability regardless of my magic rating? Hmmm i still like it.

Posted by: Cain Feb 5 2014, 06:41 PM

I agree with you, for game balance reasons if nothing else. However, the OP wanted the ramifications of his reading. So, I'm going to try and see things from his perspective.

Posted by: Curator Feb 6 2014, 05:00 AM

they describe the skills as 12 being 1 of a few in the world having this skill, so perfected and honed, they know no master to them in that field/skill. if adepts could bypass that, they would take over every professional sport in the shadowrun world, and i don't seeing that possible. they didn't before, they can't now. sure magical knowledge is something researched but so are these augmented players too, usually with so much enhanced specific gear that they have an edge on the adepts in a sport. nono it's capped.. it has to be. can they always have this power going? cause if so, it's almost a landslide when you apply it to whatever when you get high in the skill.

Posted by: RHat Feb 6 2014, 06:36 AM

That argument applies just as much when it's capped at 6/7...

Posted by: CitM Feb 6 2014, 01:31 PM

Honestly i think in this case there is no such thing as RAI. The intention here was to get fast trough the adepts-chapter, so they picked up all the old powers from sr4 and copypasted them into the new book. But yeah, maybe it was intended and if so, i like it. The fact that, like curator said, skillrating 12 marks the top of the tops, the best of the world etc. and adepts just like that could go to 18! made me read precisely.



I do not exactly understand what you mean (based on language), but if you want to say that i actually want adepts to be less powerfull, that is just not true. I mean, like you said, for balance reasons it would be fine, but i am a convinced adept player and naturally want them as powerful as possible

Posted by: RHat Feb 6 2014, 10:10 PM

I actually think there's balance PROBLEMS if Adepts can't exceed the skill cap.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 6 2014, 11:15 PM

I would agree with that...

Posted by: Beaumis Feb 7 2014, 01:15 AM

Would you care to elaborate on that?

I'd like to point out that reading adept powers as unable to breach the skillscap (Which I have to say makes sense to me) turns improved ability into a *major* karma saver. For the cost of a single initiation, an adept can basically get up to 4 skill ranks (magic increase + powerpoint metamagic). With a skillcap of 12 and a max improvement of 50%, that means taking a skill from chargen 6 to max costs an adept (14 + 16) 30 Karma to get to rank 8 and then the cost of one initiation to get to 12. Everyone else has to pay 114 karma. In the best case scenario an adept saves up to 71 karma. Within limits, this is also a repeatable process.

This is a decent boost early on and gives adepts quite some room to branch out mid to end game.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 7 2014, 02:42 AM

How are reflex recorders treated with regards to skill caps? Or are they in the same limbo that improved ability seems to be in?

Posted by: CitM Feb 7 2014, 08:06 AM

Besides that QI-Foci are rediciulously cheap now and you can get some Foci for nearly everything, since you can have Magic x 5 worth of Focipoints bound at the same time.

And even with this fix, i see Adepts much more powerful than regular cybered-chars, no matter it is combat, covert-ops or social (and like i said, i almost entirely play adepts myself).



Since its nearly the same text, i would say yes.

Posted by: Beaumis Feb 7 2014, 11:40 AM

Did I misunderstand this? I took RHat to mean that adepts would be underpowered if they couldn't exceed the skill cap?

Regarding QiFoci, the rules for focus addiction are pretty harsh this time around.

Posted by: CitM Feb 7 2014, 12:49 PM

Thats right. But addiction only kicks in if you exceed magic by force. So you can have all the foci but only 1-2 active at the sime.

Posted by: Jack VII Feb 7 2014, 03:17 PM

I must be missing the point here. Why are we concerned with skill caps for regular humans when adepts are, by definition, superhuman?

Yes, IRL Peyton Manning (who in SR4, at least, was listed at a 6 or 7 skill rating, IIRC) is skilled enough to thread a football over the hands of defensive linemen into his WR's hands (well, discounting this past Super Bowl). Peyton Manning the adept would be able to not only thread the ball past the defensive line, but also through the hands of multiple cornerbacks and safeties while being tackled, blindfolded and hitting the guy right in the numbers. It's one of the reasons that Adepts are so regulated in sports. It's not that they have easy street to reaching peak performance, it's that they can go past that, IMO.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 7 2014, 10:49 PM

Exactly. Adepts are not Normal Humans, which are capped at Skill 12.
They can Exceed Normal Human Limits - Therefore they can have skills up to a Maximum of 18 (Current x1.5).

Posted by: Mikado Feb 7 2014, 11:53 PM

I do not have the SR5 book so I cannot check...

Are there Dragons or other higher powered critters in the book that have skills over 12(13)?
If so you would have an argument... If not... your theory falls flat.

Edit: I have no side in this. I am just pointing out an idea.

Posted by: Jack VII Feb 8 2014, 12:05 AM

So apparently dragons can routinely go over the 12(13) cap considering these skills are for an average example of the species.

Posted by: Mikado Feb 8 2014, 12:10 AM

Well then I guess there is a better argument for Adepts going above 12... Thank you for checking Jack.

Posted by: Jack VII Feb 8 2014, 12:18 AM

NP, I like how the book points out that there are no known examples of adept dracoforms, which would honestly be extremely terrifying.

Posted by: attilatheyeon Feb 8 2014, 03:37 AM

Airn't cybered characters superhuman too? So i still think the intent was for the skill cap to work as the OP suggested. But that's also my opinion and i doubt any poster would be playing at the same table as me

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 8 2014, 02:50 PM

Cybered Characters can exceed 12/13 as well, through Reflex Recorders. They just cannot exceed it as much as an Adept can.

Posted by: tjn Feb 9 2014, 10:29 AM

TJ, I'm going to hope you've either found the special exemption for RAW in SR5 for either Improved Ability or Reflex Recorders to exceed the normal limitation and are just about to share what page or where in the errata you found that rule, or that you were talking to one of the players in your home game about your house rules and just forgot to state that for the rest of the forum.

What I sincerely hope you're not doing, is asserting your opinion on how you feel things should be as RAW fact, because that would just encourage discrepancies in situations such as at cons or during Missions.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 10 2014, 02:44 PM

If you want confirmation, look at Missions FAQ. I am sure that Bull has addressed it.

Posted by: tjn Feb 10 2014, 06:06 PM

I'm looking at the Missions FAQ right now, and there is nothing even remotely in the ballpark. Similarly, there's nothing in the Missions errata to do with Imp. Ability other than it is effected by background count. If I have a different version of these .pdfs, please point out exactly where you are getting this confirmation because I'm not seeing it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 10 2014, 06:23 PM

Hmmm... thought it was in there.
Still, I stand by my Interpretation. It is ludicrous to think that a person could benefit from a Skill of 12 but not the magic that would boost it. *shrug*
Of course, I still think it is ludicrous to have skill ratings going to 12/13 anyways. It just was not needed. *shrug*

Posted by: tjn Feb 10 2014, 06:47 PM

I do agree, and as I said previously, I would use Imp. Ability similar to how magic and cyberware effect attributes for my home game. But it would still be a house rule and not something I'd use with Missions, because Missions needs to adhere to RAW for cases specifically like this, as there are players who don't have anything but the SR5 corebook to work with and have never been to either dumpshock or the official forums.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 10 2014, 10:00 PM

Indeed... Not sure why I thought it was there, but I did.

Posted by: Sendaz Feb 10 2014, 10:04 PM

It's alright... at your age memory does tend to go.

*sends warm soymilk and krill cookies then runs*

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 10 2014, 10:35 PM

Note to self...
Check on disposition of team tasked for eliminating Sendaz...

Posted by: Falconer Feb 11 2014, 01:19 PM

TJ: Disagree... having the skill go that high and eliminating all the pesky equipment dice in many cases makes the char more skill dependent. This is *NOT* one of the things SR5 got wrong.

Also it gets rid of the gods out of the gate problem. Where everyone comes out of the gate with 6's in their best stuff and little to no room to improve except magical types who can initiate/submerge and continue to sink karma.

Further... skill ranks when from 6->12 max... but defense dice got essentially doubled as well as you're rolling against 2 attributes... so to be as deadly as you were in SR4 you pretty much need the super high skill. (my combat mage has a 15'ish dice pool (21+) with full defense. Touch of edge and you pretty much need a prime runner or a hail of bullets to tag him... which is good since combat spells are nowhere near as effective as before! His role seems to be more of look a mage... geek it... dodge monkey while the gunbunnies clean up the mess).


Anyhow I did a very quick look into the SR5 book and skimmed to the Street Sam.
It shows the augmented skills from the reflex recorder in the augmented form Blades 5(6), Longarms 3(4), Sneaking 2(3).

The Kyra example doesn't help at all... it shows pistols 3 and imp ability (pistols) as separate line items (p92).

And the Brawling Adept seems critically flawed as if whoever wrote it up didn't know how to make a character. (Am I wrong or do I see both Priority B Attributes and Priority B skills on that char?, Pri C is obviously Mag (Adept 4), and Pri D Hum(3 , 2+2==4 edg, 4+1==5mag). Resources seem Pri E + a touch of karma.


Overall I disagree completely with the OP. The absence of a general rule regarding augmented skill caps does not render the specific rule under Improved Ability dead letter.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 03:37 PM

No worries.
No problems with Skill dependent Skills on my part. Mine were pretty much always that way in SR4, though. So it is not a change for me. But then, most of my character's DP's were in the 8-15 range. So...

And I never had a God out of the Gate issue with any of my characters because, again, I seem to understand that no runner should ever be the best of the best of the best out of the gate.
My Professional Characters primary skills started at 3 or 4 for their focus (Not 5's or 6). I ALWAYS have characters with room to grow both in Breadth and Depth.
I say it again... Just because you CAN start out with 5's or 6's does not mean you SHOULD start out with 5's or 6's - or heaven forbid a 7 (Obviously in SR4A).

I think the expansion of skills was a bad choice. In SR4A, we had 9 discreet rankings of skill (with up to an additional 3 for Adepts). MORE than enough room to provide difference in capability (as opposed to the 15 ranks, plus additional 6 for adepts of SR5). I also think that going to a 2 Stat defense was a poor design choice as well (but was definitely needed when expanding Skills to 12/13).

Posted by: RHat Feb 11 2014, 08:38 PM

The choices you or any other single person makes are not in any way basis on which to judge a system, though. There's a whole wide range of players and player behaviour the system has to support, and players who aim for the best they can get in their specialty (both with and without min-maxing) are part of that range.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 09:10 PM

I generally judge a system based upon its assumed level of play. Opposition in SR4A generally has pools in the 8-16 DP range, with Elite Troops throwing ~17 Attack Dice. As a result, I do not generally make character that blow that out of the water at character inception. In fact, I expect that the Red Samurai and Tir Ghosts in the book are to be antagonists, and as such do not generate characters that are capable of slaying a team of them in a single pass.

Those who routinely shoot to break those assumptions are either not understanding the genre, or they do not want to lose. Both interfere with a story more often than not. (Assumptions I know)
Can you start a character out with 25 Attack Dice and 40 Soak Dice? Sure. Should you? No, not in my opinion.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 11 2014, 09:40 PM

I think a game needs to have its limitations hardwired into the rules, not as something that prospective players need to be able to intuit somehow. But while SR4 would let you start out nearly the best at a single skill, that hardly made you the best in the world. There were usually a few elusive dice to chase even for a maxed-out skill, and there were also other areas in the character's specialty to improve, and weak areas to shore up.

That said, I do still like SR5's higher spread of skills. To be frank, the skill descriptions in SR4 were jarringly dis-congruent with the minimal difference made by a single die. As I hear more about the SR5 mechanics, though, I wonder if they did a good job balancing the new range of skill ratings. In SR3, skills were uncapped, but a skill of 6 was still badass, and skills above 8 were exceedingly rare. I worry that SR5 may have balanced the outlier skills of 12 at the expense of making starting skills ineffective.

And I am still boggled that they apparently don't mention augmented skills anywhere in the skills section!

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 10:27 PM

Yeah, I can see that.
Though in reality, the difference from No Skill to Best Skill is still only 4 average Successes (other stats being equal, of course). So, really, not that big of a difference either.

Posted by: RHat Feb 12 2014, 12:09 AM

My point, TJ, is that a system simply cannot be built assuming everyone keeps to that idea.

Posted by: Sponge Feb 12 2014, 12:49 AM

Unless of course the system specifically limits you to that level at character generation like, say, SR5.

Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 01:30 AM

This is just not true.



This is even more not true.

I can understand that many people WANT it to be RAW, but it simply is not. I doublechecked everything including errata, there is no such rule in SR5, and you should accept it, since there are people who check forums if they ask themselfes the same question as i did.

And maybe our understandings of how magic works in shadowrun are different but for me there is no logical relationship between adepts beeing superhuman (in wich i totally agree) and them by default beeing better than the rest.

MUNDANE Usain Bolt --> Athletics (Running) 13(15)
ADEPT other Jamaikan Sprinter --> Athletics (Running) 10(12) + 3 levels of imp ability

Mundane Usain Bolt had to give a lot more karma(=time) to be best of the best while adept-sprinter reaches that goal much earlier, and than puts the other karma(=time) to master another disipline like e.g. heavy weapons what definitely makes him look superhuman because he is the fastes shooter you have ever seen (or the best shooting sprinter anyone has ever seen). Your way of thinking of it, implements that there is not a single ability in wich a mundane could beat an adept and i dont think/ like that way. Bye bye Cpt. Chaos, FastJack and all the other mundane trash that every Adept with a hackingskill of 18 just could smile of.

And even if this is not how it works and my thinking of it is bulldrek, RAW is stil proving me right.

Sry for crappy english, keep the typos

Posted by: Falconer Feb 12 2014, 02:23 AM

CitM:
The problem is that the RAW is ambiguous. You cannot use it to conclusively say either side is right or wrong... hence why I went to try and look for intent (how did the guys who made the example chars do it). By looking for their own character examples. You keep saying by strict RAW... but by strict RAW anyone can simply point to the specific rules for Improved ability. Both rules are equally valid... only one is very specific... and generally the specific rule overrides the general rule if there is a conflict. (it establishes an exception).

By the same token though people can't say you're wrong either. Hence ambiguous. You have two rules in conflict with each other. The only way to clarify would be an official FAQ or errata. (A FAQ's purpose is to clarify grey areas without changing the rules text... errata rewrites things).


Other problems which come out are that through cyber... dice pools can be enhanced directly. Adepts cannot do this without sacrificing magic. Hence why some others have come out and said there's a balance problem with adepts if it were to function as you suggest.

EG: Synthacardium (3).... +3 to all your athletics skills like running... so right there the street sam can get 12 (+2) (+3). That's only in the base book.... given time more will appear just as they did in augmentation in SR4. That used to be one of the 'hacking' tricks... there were a ton of things which gave dice pool bonuses to all 'logic linked skills' and you'd stack them up.



Also your notation syntax is off... a specialization is done as a "(+2)". The plus sign shows that it is a specialization and not an augmented skill. Look at the characters with reflex recorders in the book (which also gives a skill rank just like improved ability)... The street sam in the core book is an example, the only one with a reflex recorder.

It has Reflex Recorder [Blades, Longarms, Sneaking, Unarmed Combat].
"Blades 5(6)", "Longarms 3(4)", "Sneaking 2(3)", and "Unarmed Combat 2(3)".

Look at the Sprawl Ganger (or some of the others with specializations noted).
"Etiquette (Street) 2(+2)"

Someone with both an augment and a specialization would be
"Skillname (Specialization) 3(4) (+2)"



Anyone:
Is it just me or is the brawling adept somehow fubared? I can't make the math jibe. (appears to be missing a priority A)
Has anyone gone through all the book examples and rebuilt them as a rules exercise to make sure they're square?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 12 2014, 02:25 AM

Yeah, I know...
But to me, at least, the intent is pretty clear.

Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 03:01 AM

Dont think so. As i pointed out earlier in the thread the so called "specific rule" for imp ability does not negate the basic rule that skills are capped at 12. It just gives another restriction. Going by your logic i could also ignore the fact that the augmented max for attributes is natural max +4. Id just say "but specific rule muscletoner/-augmentation says its maxrating +4 and specific rule increased attribute say its +rating and maxrating is magic so id like to have +10 agi/ str."



I dont get why synthacardium and tailored pheromones are not just improving ability. Would solve so many problems. I just think it also was copypasted from sr4. But as a matter of fact adepts are able to get some ware, while mundane cant get the qi-power.



Yep, missed that - although it was not neccessary to point out what i meant.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 12 2014, 03:27 AM

If a system assumes a given level of play, it should either be unequivocally stated, or hardwired into the rules. A system is poorly designed if it depends on someone looking through the rules and thinking "Looks like I can get 20 dice for this, but gee, these simplified archetypes and generic mooks don't have 20 dice. I guess maybe I should limit myself to 16 dice, even though the rules, which explicitly forbid or limit a kajillion other things, let me do that without taking any significant hits to my character's overall versatility." This is especially true in a game like Shadowrun - you are playing elite professional criminal specialists, in a world where magic and technology can literally make people superhuman.

It depends on your playstyle, too. If your characters tend to be ex-corporate troubleshooters, mercenaries, bounty hunters, or underworld enforcers, then you will tend to make more powerful characters than someone whose characters tend to be gangers clawing their way up from the Barrens, embittered alcoholic ex-cops, and corporate wageslaves suddenly finding themselves out of their comfortable enclave. The rules as written support both playstyles, although individual groups might have more specific power levels.

It is best to let people know what the group's level is ahead of time. Just a quick synopsis of the game like "You guys are a step above street scum, looking to move up to runner level. 320 build points, Availability capped at 10, Magic or Resonance capped at 4, skills one 5 or two 4's and 3's for everything else, and normal metatypes only. Try to keep dice pools 15 or under, be sure you have at least minimal social and stealth skills, and while you get Charisma x 2 in free contacts, I recommend buying a few more, since contacts will be important in this game." Much better than letting someone waste his time creating a character, then using the sheet as a "munchkin" litmus test.

Or you could just run SR5, where all characters suck (although I am not sure about that - the SR5 cage fight thread seemed to have some badasses in it - so again, the GM needs to set more specific expectations).

Posted by: Falconer Feb 12 2014, 03:45 AM

No, because you're drawing a false analogy. You're also being pedantic.

The rule you're citing is completely silent on the matter of improved ability/reflex recorders/etc.
You cannot conclusively say that A & B both apply, or that B modifies A.
I've read all your arguments. Your logic doesn't PROVE... that's the problem. Ambiguous.
My logic can't prove it either. I can only search for intent (RAI)... because the RAW is in this case insufficient.

That's a problem I've noticed a lot of posters have issues with... that the book may leave many things undefined. This was true in 4th as well... as the book as ambiguous on many points where the GM could make life living hell for a rules lawyer player while still staying within the letter of the rules.



The rule regarding augmented attribute maximums is quite specific... from any and all sources cannot exceed more than +4 over your base attribute.

"First, when purchasing augmentations such as cyberware and bioware, each attribute rating (Mental and Physical) can only receive an augmentation bonus of up to +4."

"Such as" is not an exhaustive list, it's an exemplary list. It provides some examples, but does not list everything.

Further the magic section makes regular reference to the 'Augmented maximums' still being in effect.

Increased Ability makes no such reference to any maximum being in effect except for it's own.


The SR5 book right now is still a mess... because the editors didn't edit. Mr Hardy didn't keep his freelancers in check. And they spent more time in layout making it look nice and glossy than actually fixing the text. Only now that they're getting stuff ready for a 3rd printing has an errata document actually come out.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Feb 12 2014, 04:03 AM

Except there is a specific rule in that case for augmented attributes, there is no rule one way or the other for augmented skills so when skills get augmented it is unclear and not RAW that it stops at 12(13). The specific rule for improved skill is you CAN take it to current skill level x1.5, it gives no max so if anything the RAW is more explicit in that it can go past 12. As even if you have a 12 rating you can take 6 levels in it. There is no limit put in the game, there is no limit that skills can't be augmented past 12.

Anyways it looks like Falconer answered this already and I'm getting nijaed.

Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 11:15 PM

The skill Rating is a numerical value ranging from 1,
representing the most rudimentary skill, to 12 (or 13 with
the Aptitude quality) representing the height of sentient
achievement.

12-13 APEX
You have reached the pinnacle of mortal achievement. This
expertise represents the top 0.00001% of all practitioners in
known history. The very highest rating, 13, can only be reached
with the Aptitude quality (p. 72).

So if you say "there is no limit that skills cant be augmented past 12" what exactly do you think does "The very highest rating, 13, can only be reached
with the Aptitude quality (p. 72)." mean? This is no interpretation of mine, this is RAW. 13 can ONLY be reached with aptitude. This statement includes that NOTHING can reach 13. And since you cant reach 13, you barely would reach 18.

For me this is more than clear, and i think people should finaly stop dreaming.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Feb 12 2014, 11:40 PM

Because that is only talking about the skill chapter, it in no way references how things outside of the skil chapter effect it.

"You need to know the skill in order to buy this
power for it, and you can’t buy it for skill groups. The maximum
improvement possible is your current skill level x 1.5
(rounded up).


So if my skill is 12 my max rating is 6. It is a specific rule, it does not say it can exceed the natrual max it doesn't say it can't. But the fact is if I have a skill rating of 12 the power says I can take up to 6 levels in it. Under your interpretation you say the general rule that we cap at 12 overrides the specific rule that I can take up to my skill x1.5. The max rating is not 1.5 or a max skill of 12 whichever comes first, it is 1.5. but hey if you want to delude yourself go for it.

Posted by: Cain Feb 13 2014, 09:44 AM

The issue isn't exactly the "Gods out of the Gate" situation. That was more caused by the ease of dice pool inflation in SR4.5, and not the skill rankings themselves. For example, let's look a a pornomancer. He has skill 6, and a dice pool of 52. If he only had a skill of 4, he'd lose... two dice. For a pool of 50. Whoop de fragging do.

The bigger issue was that the skill rankings were far too compacted. The difference between average skill (3) and world-class skill (6) was one success, on average. Three dice really does not adequately model the difference between the two extremes. So the skill levels did need to be spaced out more. Now, skill 3 is still average, but world class is 12 or 13. That's about ten dice, which is a significant difference.

Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 10:58 AM

CitM, you'd get a better reaction if your tone wasn't so combative, but then again this is Dumpshock, so... meh.

But Falconer and Shinobi... the rules, the literal words that are on the page, are clear and do not say what you think they say.

One:

If there exists any exception to this rule for player characters, please cite your page number and where exactly you found it. Please note Dracoforms are NPCs, and as such are not subject to this rule. It applies during character creation, it applies after character creation, it applies if you choose Improved Ability, it applies if you don't choose Improved Ability. Hell, it even applies if I spread peanut butter on my eyes and do the funky chicken, even though it never says it applies if I spread peanut butter on my eyes and do the funky chicken. This is because you need an affirmative exception to this rule in order to qualify as an exception. If it doesn't specifically say it doesn't apply, it applies.

Two:Please note it says "increases the Rating." If the skill was a 4, buying one level in Improved Ability means the skill is now at a rating of 5, not 4+1. If it was 4+1, the power would state that for each level of the power, it would increase the dice pool when using the specific skill by the level of the power. It doesn't, it directly modifies the Rating of the skill. If it created a "modified skill rating" like it did in SR4, it would specifically state that, but it's not even like the power was copy/pasted from the previous edition without any thought. There was a conscious decision to change the power as written from the previous edition and include the specific rule that showed up.

The limit in Improved Ability is a limit for the levels you can take for that specific power, not on the rating of the skill. The levels of the power are not equivilent to the rating of the skill and as such are two different things with two different rules limiting their acquisition. Additionally, you still have the above limit on all skill ratings that applies at the same time as the limit on the levels you can take of Improved Ability. You can have bought a skill of 10 and two levels of improved ability, or you can have two levels in the skill and, because the limit on the power is recursive, you can have 10 levels in improved ability. But under no circumstances can you have a skill of 10 and 5 levels of improved ability or a skill of 5 and 10 levels of improved ability, because that would make the rating of the skill itself a 15. Which is over the rule on page 129 and there is nothing that says that limit ever goes away under any circumstance.

Is this intended? Probably not. Does that matter? Not in the slightest. Until such time as either CGL or Missions (which is the only time RAW actually matters) puts forth an errata, this is RAW. If you want to change it for your personal table to work like you obviously want it to work, do it. I personally am going to use it as a dice pool modifier and not a direct modification of the skill rating itself, but I'm also not going to attempt to say that the words on the page say something other than what they say.

Further, to address the "Gods out of the Gate" situation:This establishes that spending skill points in character creation specifically increases the skill rating equal to the points spent on the skill, which, if your remember from above, is also what Improved Ability does. And moving further on that same page, skipping the skill group rules, gets us to:
In addition to once again reiterating that the skill cap is 12/13 at all times after character generation, during character creation you are limited to a skill of 6. Which according to the above paragraph, means a skill rating of 6.

In character creation, you cannot exceed a skill rating of 6 and it doesn't matter how you get to a skill rating of 6. If you spend 6 skill points and then buy even a single level of Improved Ability during character creation (not counting a focus), means that the skill is now above the skill rating limit in character creation (without the Aptitude quality) as Improved Ability directly modifies the skill rating itself, and does not either create a bonus to the roll, or as in SR4, create a 'modified skill rating'.

Post character creation, a player can take any skill at 2 or higher directly to the cap of 12/13 due to how the limit on Improved Ability is recursively worded, but during character creation you are limited to a skill rating of 6, no matter if you get there through skill points or the Improved Ability power (or for that matter, the Reflex Recorder). Whether you chose to use these rules or not, these are the Rules As Written, and if you choose not to use the Rules As Written, that is by definition, a house rule. Which, again, is totally fine. But disagreeing with what the literal words on the page say doesn't change what is actually written on that page.

Posted by: CitM Feb 13 2014, 11:38 AM

First of all, nice post - where is the "like" button?

Secondly, its not my attention to be offensive or insulting, but since i am pointing this out for at least 3 months and people still just say "its your interpretation of the rules" i maybe got angry for no reason. So, .. apologies for that one.
Additionaly my english is not that good, so half of the words come out of a dictionary and maybe dont "strike the right note" (<< like this one) . Sorry for that either.



Same counts for you. I dont want it to be that way, but that does not change how it actually is. And even if you say that a hundred times, it still wont be true.

Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 11:59 AM

Ahh, no worries I'm sure you speak/write english a thousand times better than I could speak of your language. But yeah, those dictionaries don't do well with connotations (the implied connections and unstated meanings of words that affect the tone of what you are writing).

Posted by: Falconer Feb 13 2014, 02:35 PM

Tjn:
You can't make any such claim though. You completely miss the point of the word 'ambiguous' in your own 'combativeness' (hey it's dumpshock, I have thick skin unlike some posters who take any criticism as a personal insult.. especially when they build their entire argument on their own authority/expertise). You also completely fail to establish anything stating that augmented skills do not exist... yet I can point at many things in the book which point that they do exist. You can point me no rule establishing a limit on an augmented skill.

Neither rule references the other to define their interaction. Hence why I said it was ambiguous before and neither side could make a good argument.. reading further though. I now go with you're dead wrong. The book does show the existence of augmented skills and even mentions them with a quick nod in step 8. In the absence of a general rule limiting them (as is the case with attributes), the specific rules of each augment hold sway as specific rules. A rule establishing a 'natural' limit on skills is no different than the rule establishing a 'natural' limit on attributes by metatype.

A. Either skill augmentes are subject to the cap as you claim (but cannot prove! show me the text.. it does not exist)
B. Or they are not and are governed by other limitations (the specific limitations of whatever is augmenting the skill)
C. The book has examples of characters with augmented skills in it, in the augmented format. So they do exist.

So no, I'm switching my argument from ambiguous to you're flat out wrong here.
1. The RAW seems to point very conclusively to augmented skills do exist. "... Since many of these are adjusted by augmentations. It is best to wait until all decisions have been made on skills and attributes before making these calculations." (step 8. final calculations... when you adjust the sheet with numbers in parenthesis to reflect augmentations)
2. They are defined by their specific rules augmenting instead of an overarching general rule/limit. (reflex record has it's own rule, improved ability has it's own self-contained rule)
3. There is no rule establishing any limit on augmented skill values in general as there is for augmented attributes.
4. Your argument is no different than saying a human can't go over 1-6 because buying the 'base ranks' is limited to 1-6 for a normal human barring exceptional attribute. That in the absence of a rule establishing an upper cap on augmentations... I could only buy muscle toner up to my natural maximum. (instead of the toner and other augments being limited by only their upper ratings).
5. In fact, "Augmented attribute max" is only ever referred to in the magic section and otherwise left undefined. You have to hunt for the 'buying equipment' section of chargen to find anything that might hint at what it actually is and it uses different wording. Yet somehow attributes are fine to be augmented but skills aren't.
6. There are non-magical means to enhance dice pools of specific skills by paying essence. You introduce an adept balance problem with this interpretation
7. You leave many other items completely undefined... EG: if it directly adds to skill, how much does it cost to learn a new rank of the skill. 4(6)... 10 or 14 karma.
8. At the end of the day, your reading causes more problems than it solves. Occam's razor. Simplest solution is generally the correct one.

The problem is that we have clear intent (at least in the case of premade characters with reflex recorders) that there is an augmented skilll value in the same vein as augmented attribute value. There is RAW in step 8 which also describes their existence but establishes no limit. Unlike augmented attributes there is no provision anywhere in the book capping augmented skills, only augmented attributes.

Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 11:16 PM

So apparently there is a limit on the number of times a post can quote someone... so I have to break this up to fully address Falconer. I apologize for the text blocks and the spam; I'm unsure how to make it easier on the eyes, but I felt it was important to address the argument in its entirety.

I make no claim other than there are words that are in the book and there is no instance within this book that contradicts or says that those words don't apply.
Just because you say it's ambiguous doesn't mean it is. The words are there. Skill ratings are a thing. You can increase this skill rating in four ways: skill points from character creation, spending karma, Improved Ability, or Reflex Recorders. No matter how you get these ratings, you can only have so many ratings in a skill at one time, and this limit on skill ratings is different in character creation (6/7) versus after character creation (12/13).
I've tried to be accommodating of logical arguments; I apologize if you took my dismissal of non-logical arguments as combative, but this is Dumpshock, so I have no illusions. However if you want to be passive-aggressive, go right ahead. I've gone my rounds with Frank; my skin is thick enough.
Can you point out where in the book there is ever such a thing as "augmented skills?" I just did a find function of the word "augment." That word is in there a lot, but not once is there any such thing as an augmented skill. The closest thing is the reference you made on page 100. Since you provided the quote out of context, let me quote it:The things that are adjusted by augmentations are those several derived mechanics in the preceding sentence. The one you failed to quote. Which really makes it look like you are trying to be disingenuous. There is nothing about "augmented skills." Nothing. It doesn't exist. There are augmented attributes, there is augmented reality, there are augments themselves, and there is the use of the word augment meaning to change something, but there is nothing about augmented skills as a thing that exists. Do a Ctrl-F for "augmented skill." You won't find it.
It doesn't have to. If it doesn't mention an exception, the rule still applies.
Just because you say it's something does not make it so.
See above. If you believe there is actually a thing called "augmented skills" in SR5, you are deluded because it is not in the book
Since "augmented skills" do not exist as a thing in which to limit, there is no such rule to limit the thing that does not exist. However there are two rules limiting Skill ratings; one that applies in character creation, and the other that applies after.
At least we can agree on that sentence. But you don't seem to apply it fully: there is a specific rule that Improved Ability and Reflex Recorders increase the rating of each skill. However you seem to forget that this rating is still limited by the general rule for all skills.

Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 11:18 PM

Yes it is, because "augmented attributes" are a thing, whereas there exists no such thing as an "augmented skill." Skills can be augmented in the plain usage of the term, i.e. they have been changed by a separate effect, but there is no such stat as an "augmented skill."
skill augments (as in the things that change skills) increase the rating of that skill. Ratings of skills are limited as put down on laid out on both page 88 and page 129, as set out previous. This rule does not need to effect the augmentations themselves because it puts a cap on their effective change. The cap doesn't care how you get there, just that you can't go past it.
These specific limitations are not limitations on "augmented skills" because that does not exist as a thing. Instead the "restriction" in Improved Ability restricts the level of Improved Ability available to buy. That's it. It doesn't give a rat's ass about the skill other than to be used in the determination of the cap on Improved Ability.
Maybe they are the only evidence in the entire book of "augmented skills," maybe the writer wanted to make it clear what skill points were spent, or maybe they were made prior to the rules being finalized like explained in the current thread on this very forum: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=40239 Short answer? Never believe that the example characters are rules legal.
And you're still just as mistaken as you were before.

Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 11:19 PM

See above for how this disingenuous point has been taken out of context
Again, the specific rule does not comment on a limit on the skill rating, it instead limits the level of Improved Ability you can take. These are not the same thing, quit conflating them.
That's because augmented attributes are a thing, they exist and therefore need a limit. Augmented Skills on the other hand do not exist, therefore there is no need to make a rule to limit something that does not exist.
Again, quit conflating attributes and skills. Different things have different rules. Skill ratings have a limit. Imp Ability improves that skill rating but says nothing about exceeding that skill rating limit, therefore the limit still applies.
When discussing attributes, during character creation, the book is very careful to state: "Characters at character creation may only have 1 Mental or Physical attribute at their natural maximum limit;" (Emphasis added). Note it makes a distinction with the word natural. There is no such distinction under the skills entry. This is common place throughout the book.

I don't care about balance problems, I care what it says in the book. If I feel there's a balance problem, I correct it with a house rule... not to argue that there is no balance problem because the book doesn't say what it does.
The cost in karma is new rating times two. If you spend 4 skill points on a skill, buy 2 levels of Improved Ability, the skill rating is a 6. Therefore the new rating to be acquired is a 7. 7 times 2 equals 14. Therefore it costs 14 karma to improve the rating of that particular skill.
That saying... it doesn't mean what you think it means. What Occam's razor stands for is that the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is generally the one that should be used. I have no assumptions, I only point out what the book says. The simple fact that you argue that an what I am pointing out from the book's own words causes more problems and therefore should be discounted is an assumption. Your argument is invalid.
No, the problem here is you desperately want to inject a new thing, "augmented skills," into a text where they do not exist. The premade characters have problems and cannot be relied upon to be accurate and rules legal. The RAW in step 8 refers to the derived mechanics in the preceeding sentence (which you forgot to include) and not to this mythical "augmented skills." And because "augmented skills" are not a Thing, there can be no rule to limit that which does not exist.

Posted by: Chrome Head Feb 13 2014, 11:37 PM

I agree with all of what tjn is saying. This is far from being the first time that the rules are annoyingly flawed in SR5, yet clear when looking at RAW objectively. There should be a thing called augmented skill rating, or alternatively improved ab and skill reflexes should be dice pool enhancements, but sadly this is not the way it's written.

I'd also like to emphasize this point. I have gone through all the pre-made characters (and I post about this in the quoted thread), and most of them have mistakes in them. Some have very important mistakes. Not to mention that a skill which has its rating improved seperately from spending skill points in it should be identified so for clarity regardless of whether augmented skills exist.

Posted by: Glyph Feb 13 2014, 11:53 PM

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of us come from previous editions, and measure the new rules against the way things were done in previous editions. Especially things like augmented skills, which were handed similarly even in the vastly different 3rd and 4th editions. When we see an omission like that, our first reaction is to conclude that the rules for augmented skills were not copypasted over in yet another editorial error.

I agree the RAW does lean towards an absolute cap of 12(13), whether that was intended or not (I'm voting not), because while specific rules can override general ones (for example, wired reflexes and reaction enhancers with wireless turned on can go over the augmented cap for Reaction), they don't explicitly contradict the general rule when talking about adept improved ability. SR4 was a lot more clear about modified skill ratings - yet another reason not to switch, I guess.

Posted by: Falconer Feb 14 2014, 12:29 AM

tjn:
Actually in that flood of texts... you missed 3 major points.

One your 'out of context' is not out of context.

It specifically mentions to make final adjustments to the character sheet. Adjusting attributes, skills, and derived attributed with modified/augmented values. There would be no reason to do this if things did not somehow augment skills.

You completely ignore that the street sam has clearly augmented skills in his stat block.

Therefore. Augmented skills do exist in the SR5 core rulebook. They're just never spelled out directly. Only mentioned indirectly. But you cannot make the claim that they do not exist within the black and white print of the book in some spots. You can only argue that it's in error... and once you go down that road... it's a very slippery slope. If that's in error... then the skill section may also be in error.

Your entire basis of argument relies on stating that they don't exist. But there is text in the SR5 core book, and you cannot disprove it's existence. Only make claims of 'taken out of context'... when it's clearly well within context.

Just to use the exact same logic you try to use. The skills section which defines skills is deliberately taken 'out of context' by you to the exact same degree as I used the step 8 rules for final adjustments to the character. Those rules have no context with relation to other non-skill skill modifiers. Any citing of them in respect to them, is similarly taking them out of context. See how easy it is to spin that argument. It's not novel.


Chrome: I agree... the book is an utter mess! (too many people caring more about gloss/artwork/layout than the text!). But I disagree strongly with the weak and shoddy logic that some are employing here. And well it's the internet... a debate for it's own sake takes on it's own life and fun :). In this, case the exact rules interactions are undefined by RAW... to state that by strict RAW it's one way or the other is well wrong.

Posted by: RHat Feb 14 2014, 12:44 AM

I just want to point out how ridiculous this particular assertion is. If you're going to posit a flaw in the process or priorities, at least make it plausible...

(For those who don't understand my point: layout, artwork, and text are done by completely different people. Caring about one doesn't detract from the other two, except perhpas indirectly where the influence would have to be relatively minor due to the specific structure of how CGL gets books put together).

In any case, getting back to an earlier point on the balance of the whole thing - Street Sams get easier and better access to attribute augmentations. If the environment were balanced, Adepts would get easier or at least better access to skill augmentations. If skill augmentations are not present, there's a serious balance issue between the two to contend with.

Posted by: Chrome Head Feb 14 2014, 01:12 AM

Ok I don't have the patience to pick apart your craziness, but I'll pitch in for this part right here.

No, just no. Your basis for argument relies on stating that they do exist. His argument that you're wrong is one thing, but his main argument is just that there's a clear rule that states that improved ability improves the rating, and that the rating has a maximum. It's straight-forward and clearly in the rules.

Your argument relies on something that is not clear. The Samurai having a parenthesis is a very moot point, since the mage in the same section has a quality for being a magician. Oh and a sim rig (ETA: sorry I meant control rig here, for which one of the rigger characters isn't charged in essence) doesn't cost essence. You can't assert rules based on those examples, that's pretty clear. It's not even a rules section to begin with. And like I said before, the parenthesis seems needed regardless, otherwise it's ambiguous. If you only see rating 5, do you then have to add the rating from the reflex recorder, or is it already included. To clear the ambiguity, you put the parenthesis. It can be explained away while remaining consistent. That's a lot of points against that very weak argument that tries to justify an invented rule that the book doesn't otherwise mention.

And your second argument relies on that little bit in step 8. Namely:
"At this point, characters are basically done, though there are several derived mechanics that must be calculated before they are ready to be played. Since many of these are adjusted by augmentations, it is best to wait until all decisions have been made on skills and attributes before making these calculations."

Semantically, there is absolutely no indication there that skills are augmented per se, only that decisions about skills ought to be considered before making the final calculations. Once again, a very very weak argument in your favor, since once again it can be explained away. Your decisions about skills will affect other decisions, and so you should wait until your sheet is complete before making final calculations.

I see extreme weakness in your argument, to the point where it's generous to consider it valid to begin with. And you go on trying to wrap all that bulldrek in rhetoric. At the end of the day, the argument that the rating has a limit, and that improved ability increases the rating, which doesn't change the fact that the rating is limited, is very strong and hard to go against, from a pure RAW point of view. Your strong opposition to this is truly unwarranted and not based in objective facts, by which I mean words used in the book.

Posted by: RHat Feb 14 2014, 01:19 AM

Other than the implanted version, which costs 0.2 Essence.

Posted by: Chrome Head Feb 14 2014, 01:34 AM

My bad, I meant to say control rig, listed at 1 essence per rating.

Posted by: tjn Feb 14 2014, 01:38 AM

I... wow. The quote you used as "proof" of augmented skills, does not say anything about augmented skills, but rather how derived stats were to be changed based upon augments that can change attributes and skills. Augments can change skills but that does not automatically mean that the skill is now an "Augmented Skill" as a thing, a noun, or a stat, in which there are rules to be applied to it. The only thing that it means is that there are augments that can change the skill's rating without skill points or karma expenditure.

See the other thread as to how much importance to put on the example characters and their adherence to the rules. Maybe the parentheses are used to provide clarification or maybe at some point there was such a thing as augmented skills, but there isn't anymore. Either way the rules are explicit. Don't like them, change them! I will!

No, they do not exist. There is no mention of "Augmented Skills," only modifiers to the skill's rating itself. The rule is simple. I make no claim that it is right or it is in error, or anything else. There are currently four ways to modify a skill (karma, skill points, Improved Ability, Reflex Recorder), each and every one of those ways specifically increases the rating of the skill. The rating of a skill is capped at 12/13 but doesn't care how you get to that rating.

Your argument relies upon there being a thing called "augmented skills." You are putting forth that assumption. The burden of proof lies upon you to show that it does exist.

My argument, on the other hand, does not care if there exists an "augmented skill" or not. Just that increasing the rating of a skill is capped at 6/7 in character creation and 12/13 post creation, and it doesn't matter how you increase it, but there are four ways in which to do so.

What I have done, is cast serious doubt on the existence of "augmented skills" as written in SR5. Your argument relies upon that assumption, but instead of addressing this doubt, you reply that it's "just never spelled out directly." You cannot cite a page to support your argument. I can. Yet you claim I am the one that builds my case entirely upon my own authority.
Just because you say something, doesn't make it true. You need to support your position with facts, ideally from the text itself. This is what separates my logic from yours.
This is demonstrably wrong. Skill points directly increase the respective skill's skill rating. Improved Ability directly increases the respective skill's skill rating. Reflex Recorders directly increases the respective skill's skill rating. Karma expenditure directly increases the skill's rating.
So, uh, since you are demonstrably wrong... your logic is flawed since the conclusion does not flow naturally from the precedent. Citing to all things that increase the skill's rating has an inherent context and relation to each other, and relates to the rule limiting every skill's maximum skill rating.
The rules interactions are explicit. There are multiple ways to raise a skill's skill rating, but that skill rating, no matter how it is improved, is capped at 6/7 in character creation or 12/13 after. The page numbers have been cited, this is what the book, as written, says, as such they are not undefined, and to state otherwise, without citing any actual rules from the book, while claiming I'm the one claiming an appeal to my own authority? Mind boggling.

I apologize to everyone else, and if Falconer, or anyone else, wishes to continue this debate, my inbox is open. I'm done, consider the mic dropped.

Posted by: Falconer Feb 14 2014, 02:47 AM

Which I did show exists in the book tjn... Always putting up a wall of text to read doesn't change that. You're not addressing things point by point, simply repeating yourself ad nauseum.

You can disagree all you like. But you cannot change the fact that I did demonstrate that they exist in the book.

You can try to throw things out as 'irrelevant' or bugged. But the entire point there is that it exists AND it demonstrates intent. And once again that is a slippery slope... I can just as easily state your text is bugged/incomplete/whatever and disregard it.

You can't point to anything in the book to demonstrate intent as to your reading.

You similarly can't point to anything in the book to handle all the other questions which come up without secondary modifiers to skills.

Posted by: Chrome Head Feb 14 2014, 05:44 AM

Ok Falconer, if you've demonstrated that augmented skills exist in the book and you hate walls of text. Please state clearly and succinctly how you support your claim using written rules.

We've shown clearly with 2-3 simple quotes how the RAW supports our claim. Focus on your claim, show it using simple quotes and simple explanations based on actual text.

It seems to me like you're the one using tons of words with little content. Little demonstration. Show me your point clearly, don't go around it, just be straightforward like you claim you can be.

Posted by: Jack VII Feb 14 2014, 02:53 PM

While I think that this is an interesting conversation, I would point out that the freelancer who provided rules interpretations which made it into the first errata document has previously clarified that Improved Ability is apparently seperate from skill ranks rather than additive (thus allowing a Skill 13/Improved Ability 7 build). While Aaron describes his answers as not quite official and possibly incorrect in his signature, we do have official errata that incorporates many of his interpretations so far.

It may not be RAW, but may be RAI.

http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=11514.msg214143#msg214143