And, I'd have to ask...so?

I preferred Sum-To-Ten myself, which allowed for a little more flexibility.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying don't fix rules. I'm saying you aren't going to balance a 10 foot troll that can pick up a fridge in one hand and throw it, with a 2.5 foot gnome, with out getting stupid funky in the attempt.

Life sucks. Not all things are balanced. Trying to enforce unrealistic balance for game equality is something I don't like. It makes the game seem silly when everything has to be balanced. Again, GM's enforce balance or not. These boards are full of people(Not me. lol I'm not skilled that way) That can take that 2.5 foot gnome, and by the rules in the books put one together that could pick up a troll and beat it to death against a wall. And that's with the rules and 'balance'. When that can happen the concept of artificially trying to force game balance seems silly.

What's up with all this talk of gnomes?
Makes me feel like punting...

Again it comes back around to "Why do they all have to be equal?" Maybe it's my playstyle but I don't mini/max stuff. I role play lots of stuff out more than Roll dice at things. That's the aspect of RPGs I like. Not having the biggest gun, best cyber, on the best race, all optimized to thee decimal points to the right for the absolute 'best' of everything. I know some people play exclusivly like that. My point is they're going to do that if you enforce artifical balance or if you don't.

It's a player/gm thing. If some guy's screwing up the game due to how he's building his character, he's going to find a way to do that in the rules or no.



It's choices when you make your character. If you want the 'more' then make your character that way. or.. don't. Be an adult and realize if you build a character one way it's going to be different than a guy that buildds his another way.

Again, I build characters to play. Not just spreadsheets of numbers and equasions. I think I've played one human in shadowrun? Ever? lol I'm used to being penalized to play the sorts I like. I take that penalty in stride because I want to play that ____.



But again, we're back to the "Well if you want a Drow, play a drow. If you choose to play a weaker race, that's your choice" I don't see why everyone has to be equal. The universe isn't like that. Trying to artificially enforce it in the game, dumbs things down, not inflates the others up. If Drow are dumbed down to be equal to the normal humans, the Drow arn't as they're described. in SR, if My Troll has to be penalized, just so he's balanced with a gnome, it doesn't make the game better. It's an artificial limitating the trolls, just so people playing Gnomes don't feel weaker. Well if you choose to play a gnome. That's part of the package.



in 22 years of Role playing, I've never played in a system that couldn't, and wasn't, gamed, and rules twisted, by those that game the system and twist rules. It's up to the GM to allow or disallow such things and keep the game from getting stupid. People that are going to abuse the system, abuse it no matter what 'balance' is built in or not. So I don't like being limited due to those sorts. Honestly, look at some of the threads here and the builds and stuff people put together. lol (Not all, but the ones I'm talking about are easy to pick out.)



It depends on what you mean by "overall", but in general.. I don't agree. I'm sorry. if you play a character the size of an 8 year old, you chose to play it. The 'numbers' and 'rules' shouldn't make them equal to a 10 foot tall 400 pound mountain of muscle. To make it so, is an artifical limitation that is silly



Eh.. Kinda sorta. To me, it's "Play your character" and if you play a troll, play the troll. Don't make me play a retarded Troll, just so the gnome the size of an 8 year old is equal to me. HE/SHE chose to play the gnome. (( And it's not just trolls and Gnomes. they're just two polar extremes that illistrate the point. it goes for anything.))



And you're missing my point. If you want to play the troll, play the troll. If you want to play the gnome, play the gnome. Each has it's own things. My point is, my troll shouldn't be weakened down just because there ARE gnomes and everything has to be equal or someone playing a gnome gets butthurt about it all.



I disagree with this too. If you want to play a Dwarf, play a dwarf. Have fun with it. Own it. Sure your dwarf might not be able to throw cars (( though some might)) but you know that going in. You're playing a dwarf. Chances are he's not going to be the Power Forward for the Seattle Basket ball team. Why? Cuz he's a dwarf.

And that's where my objection comes in. The 'Game balance' that would force a dwarf to be 100% equal to that ultra tall elf metavariant (I forget what they're called) Or a "Giant" Troll Metavariant, on the Basket ball court. Now that's an extreme. I get it, but that's my objection. The Giant and the Elf are going to dunk all over the Dwarf. "Game balance" would say that the dwarf and the troll and the elf were all equal on the court. Which is silly if you look at it.

Now.. try and take one of those Giants or Elves through an airvent or a cramped tunnel or under a car or something. Should the troll and elf be just as equal there? Course not. So why do the 'numbers' that build the character have to be equal?

If Game Balance isn't an issue, then there's no point in bothering with all the chargen beancounting, and players should just choose attributes, skills and gear, no?

Ehh... to a point. In a way. Yes. Sure there has to be some limitations, or you'd end up with giant combat monsters with every possible thing maxed out 100% of the time.

But making that Gnome that's the size of an 8 year old be 100% equal to the 10 foot troll flipping cars over is an artificial limitation that I don't like.


That all being said, I play my character types. If I have to 'pay extra' to play an orc, or a troll, or a Night one. I pay that cost. As for me, the character type I'm trying to pay, is more important than having the best of everything. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I just don't like being penalized for doing such. As pointed out above, when you start assessing higher and higher penalties for anything other than human, they fall out of the game. Then it comes back around to "Well you can play a troll, if you want your character totally screwed because of it" or "You can play a dwarf, but you're going to be totally hosed if you do" Which I don't think the game should be like.

I'd say it's a question of how precise that "balance" has to be. It's quite obvious that some try to aim for the smallest extend of tolerance on game mechanic levels, while others are willing to take broader ranges

This is not the point of game balance at all. Of course, among an elf, a dwarf and a troll, the troll would make the best urban brawl heavy. The point of game balance is giving the others something they're better in: like, the elf would be the best dancer of them, and the dwarf the best drinker, or something to the effect. Nobody's saying that metatypes and classes should be equal in every thing they can be doing - they should instead have roughly an equal number of things they're the best at. Roughly the same amount of usefulness to a runner team, if you wish.

See I'm cool with that. Totally.

The trick is 'rules' that make it so. Instead of what you've written... we get the "DUrr Hurr pamcakes" View of Trolls and Metatypes other than humans on the fringe due to penalties that come from the 'balance' trying to be enforced.

If your catch phrase is "Everything has a price," everything needs a price. Ideally one that approximates its value, I think.

Still, for my part, I like to have balance with wiggle room in my games. Without the whole thing caving in on an imbalance. Like INWO over, say, VTAS. Or GURPS over Rifts. Or BattleTech over (original) Heavy Gear. Etc, usw, sono ta.

Not at all. The thinking in the current point-buy system, and the options offered so far, is this: so we're making the trolls the biggest and the toughest, which means it'll be easier for them to fill certain roles in a team, and gives them an obvious advantage. Nobody's suggesting we make gnomes as tough as trolls (as your previous comments seem to suggest); what is discussed are the ways to make gnomes as useful while not being as tough, whether by making them more agile or leaving them more BP for skills, or what have you.

As for the game balance itself: I am not really sure why all the attributes have the same cost. For example, high strength is needed pretty much exclusively for melee fighters, high charisma only for faces, some mages and technos, and high reaction, body and agility for everyone. Shouldn't that be reflected in their price, and thus the price of metatypes that change them?

What if attributes were closer in value, I don't know how far you'd have to bend the rules to make str relevant, but surely there's better solutions then having agility for pretty much everything...

I think it's easier to make str cheaper than change the laws of reality so that they'd require more str tests :ь

Or put Close Combat, Unarmed and Armed, back to the STR Stat instead of Agility.

There's other ways about it, like you know those optional rules with str and recoil? or have it affect you carrying armour and such, sure you'd still be a sammy type for wanting str but atleast that akimbo gun bunny would want some aswell next to her 12+ agility.
There's other stats aswell that could use some love, like logic... Maybe putting some practical application on knowledge skills (I mean besides being good in game shows...)
Not necessarily rewriting as much as expanding...
But as I've said before, I'm no game designer, so I don't get down to the nitty gritty with numbers or concrete solutions (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Or put a stronger opposition so that shadowrunners more often get to run.

Some people think they can outrun me.
Maybe, maybe.
I've yet to meet one that can outrun bullet.

In your calculations of relative BP value, you entirely forgot the almost unavoidable but purely role-played troll disadvantages "doesn't fit behind cover" and "weighs as much as a house, so often won't be dragged to safety if unconscious". These two elements combined eventually made them VERY unpopular in our campaign, far more so than your "calculated" advantages (wohoo, 60 bonus BP!) would imply they would be.

Every player seated at the table, unless the group agrees otherwise beforehand, should start with the same pool of resources for making characters. Each unit of those resources should be worth the same to each player. It's part of the basic social contract that forms the group in the first place.


"Balance" does not mean "min/max", nor does it mean "powergame". It doesn't mean "have the bext ____", either.

It means - you and I will end up equally able to be in the spotlight, it means you and I will be equally able to do awesome things (where "awesome" means whatever our group likes to see, be it Action-movie stuff, or deep drama, or whatever).


But, that's not how it works in 3E D&D. You throw off the power curve of the entire party. You throw off every single encounter the group has.

A Challenge Rating (CR) 3 encounter is appropriate for a party of four Level 3 characters. If one of them is Level 3 and a Drow, then he's really level FIVE, not three. The whole encounter gets just a bit too easy (especially for him). OTOH, an appropriate encounter for HIM, CR5, will be unfairly difficult for the rest of the party. And no, splitting the difference won't work either, because CR4 will be too risky / difficult for those others, too.


... fine. You and I will play a Shadowrun game. You get your 400BP character. I'm going to get a 2,000-karma character, plus I get to be Awakened and emerged at the same time and I want to be a Drake, but also Infected. That's all cool with you, right? BEcause, you know, it's what I want to play ... right?


It does .... for the guy playing a Gnome.

But, here's the thing: your troll isn't being penalised! Whereas, using my (imprecise, but for the sake of argument) numbers: the Troll gets to be a Troll with 300BP of "other stuff". The Gnome gets to be a Gnome, with 360BP of "other stuff". And you are no more entitled to be butthurt about the gnome getting those extra BP compared to you, than the gnome's player is entitled to be butthurt that your troll is bigger and stronger.


The thing is, if the Gnome is weaker, then it should have a commensurately lower PRICE TAG. That's all anyone is asking for: for each race to be priced appropriately.


Not equal in strength - equal in FUN.

Sure, you've got the big strong Troll. Anything that calls for strength, durability, or sheer size - that's your turn in the spotlight, and I'll be over there on the sidelines, munching popcorn and waving a "Go, Troll dude!" pennant.

My Gnome is a rigger, and a bit of a hacker. Anything that would best be done by a drone, by the application of EW skills, or with a bit of low grade hacking? That's my turn in the spotlight, and I am as superior to you there, as you are superior to me in the brawn-and-brute-strength department.

Balanced, equal, not identical.

It's a thing called "niche protection". Every character should have a niche they fit into, a role in which they are the Star of the Show. The spotlight should move from niche to niche, so that everyone gets a chance to be the center-of-attention during gameplay. And everyone should be equally able to shine in their niche, as everyone else - with a given amount of "awesome" costing THE SAME, for any and all of those characters.


"Equal" does not mean "identical".

The Gnome doesn't get balanced by being as tough and as strong as the Troll. It's balanced because, after picking their Race .... the Gnome has more CharGen resources left to spend on other things. The Troll player spent some extra resources, to be extra big-tough-and-strong. Fine. But the Gnome will have a little more to spend on gear ... or on skills ... or on being a magician ... or whatever else. That is balance.


"Well you can play a Gnome, if you want to be toally screwed [for picking something so weak]" ... Pot. Kettle. You know the rest.

Sure you can. With properly-proportional costs, for one. By finding some other benefits to give tothe Gnome that are not reliant on size and muscle mass.

And, AGAIN: Shadowrun gnomes are not 2.5 feet tall. How many ten year old kids do you know, who are under four feet tall?? Gnomes are the size of KIDS, not babies or toddlers.


That's because GNOMES ARE NOT TWO AND A HALF FEET TALL. They're a variant of Dwarves, they tend to be the SAME HEIGHT as Dwarves: four to five feet tall.

It's also because, LOLcybernetics.






Yes. And these IMO are good things - for example, my houserule was that the limit on Worn Armor was "STR+BOD", not "BODx2".

Suddenly, even pure gun-fu samurai want a Strength of 4+, instead of dumpstatting it to, say, 2.






Absolutely.

My estimations were more about the process, and proportions. I didn't try, nor pretend, to account for EVERY variable. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Over all I agree with _Pax._ here. I think his back-of-the-napkin math may be off just a little, but it’s really close. Metas make up a small percent of the overall population of the planet, adjusting their costs will likely (Sorry I have no math to back up this claim) make them fall into similar numbers (percent wise) in the shadows too.

Would I pay 100 of my 400 BP to make a Troll? Yes if that was my character concept and trolls cost that much to make. Would I skimp in places to make the cost work, yes because I’d have to. If the shoe fits, wear it.

I'm also of the opinion that Magic (and Resonance) should be more expensive. I'm not sure how much more expensive, but with no functional maximum power level for those two stats, they are wholly unbalanced. Most every game I have played in (since starting playing SR in 1989/90) has ended up being "MagicRun" within a few game sessions because everyone saw that Magic would never hit a power ceiling. There needs to be either a hard limit on Magic (and Resonance) or the cost for it needs to be much higher.

Something did just occur to me that Pax isn't accounting for: Freely spent resources are more valuable than preallocated ones. Thus, a certain discount needs to be taken off the BP 'cost' of a metatype attribute bonus. For example, if you'r playing an elf gunbunny, that Charisma bonus isn't actually worth anything to you.

Pepsi_Jedi: Balance is not making things the same. Balance is making things equally valuable. If you make a Troll and play directly to the strengths of being a Troll, while I make a dwarf and play directly to the strengths of being a dwarf, our characters should be just as powerful. Powerful, however, is a vague term - it doesn't mean that they can do the same things, but rather that the things that they do have similar levels of influence.

That's a good point, but I did account for it somewhat - by deeply discounting the "increase maximum" side of a Metatype attribute bonus. Normally, increasing the maximum costs 20 points; I only assessed 5, chiefly because not every character will care to push any given attribute to or near it's maximum. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) The exact value of each attribute point, and it's commensurate increase to racial maximums, obviously could use some tweaking. Maybe it should be 8BP for the point, and 4BP for the increase to maximum, for example. *shrug*

...

With that said, I personally prefer Karmagen, now. I used to prefer the Priority system, especially the somewhat-relaxed "sum to 15" approach; my main reason in SR2 and SR3 for loving the resource system is that there was an intermediary step between 1M¥ and 400K¥ (specifically, IIRC: 650K¥). Sometimes 400K wasn't quite enough for what I wanted/needed, but 1M was almost always over-the-top excessive.

The priority system worked "better" in that is was faster, easier, almost as flexible, and less prone to breakage than points. Compared to the SR4.5 system, it's many times better in all those categories except flexibility, but a properly designed template system isn't that far behind.