 SR3 vs 4 in Play |
  |
 Mar 10 2006, 04:51 PM
Post
#151
|
|||||
|
The back-up plan  Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910  |
May I take a moment to direct everyone's attention to SR4 p. 69. The whole page is devoted to the developers giving every GM the option to run the game the way they want to. To address the problem of Mr. Lucky:
Suddenly his 8 edge cycles down very quickly as he runs out of luck. Additionally,
Please don't let me stop you from beating a dead horse, but make sure that we all know the state of affairs.
For Fastjack, Unwired could provide additional rules similar to the knowledge skills from SR3 which increased your pools depending on the type of host you were in. The flood of extra skills would definitely show the difference that 40 years of experience can make. |
||||
 |
 
|
||||
|
Mar 10 2006, 05:03 PM
Post
#152
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,651 Joined: 23-September 05 From: Marietta, GA Member No.: 7,773 |
Bad? Nah. Amused or maybe bemused at worst. Thanks though. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 05:55 PM
Post
#153
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i'd be satisfied with "close". |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 05:59 PM
Post
#154
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,512 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 392 |
This sort of stuff isn't necessary in Unwired since it'd just be a strict rehash of the SR3 book. What's needed is new ways of using and looking at this brand new Wireless Matrix. My group has already been using Knowledge skills in that fashion using the teamwork rules. Roll complimentary skill and successes add dice to primary skill. This might even be covered in the rules (can't remember right now). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 06:49 PM
Post
#155
|
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
Cheops--True. I was simply using an example of possible additional rules and supplements that are coming out, which can draw lines in the sand between starting characters and those who have 40 years and god knows how much karma under their belts. Add to that specialized hardware and software and we begin to see the distance grow between the two groups.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:09 PM
Post
#156
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
It doesn't make me feel bad. I was just trying to get through to Azralon how him trying to appeal to all people to stop getting worked up over perceptions of mimicking reality in the game were going to be about as effective as screams into the dead and empty night. :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:23 PM
Post
#157
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 89 Joined: 29-January 06 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 8,210 |
Hmm bemused, lol yup, thats a good word here. I like it.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:32 PM
Post
#158
|
|||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
The point of Mr. Lucky was to demonstrate that you can have a character who's at an equal skill level, and *still* have an Edge of 8. Since that's the absolute cap for any character whatsoever, all of Fastjack's experience becomes meaningless. As for creative character tweaking goes: one example would to create a maxed-out otaku. Under the current rules, all programs are capped out at 6; there's no way even an experienced PC can get much higher. However, an otaku can invoke Threading to give his Complex forms a higher effective rating than Fastjack's. He can still have a high Edge, and his Threading makes up the difference in skill levels-- he becomes equal, if not superior, on a good Threading roll. Even if we allow for self-coding of programs and OS, there's only so much Fastjack could reasonably have gotten. Assuming a Software of 6, a Logic of 7, and an Edge of 8, we still aren't looking at much of a gain in the less than five years the new matrix has been in place. What's more, all of that is possible in the hands of a starting character, so Fastjack's bonuses start dropping rapidly unless we invoke serious GM handwaving. You may be right that, in play, two dice is a mechanical advantage. In my mind, it's worth .66 additional successes, which means 1 more success more often than not. Which often spells the difference between success and failure, but it does mean that you're barely squeaking by, instead of completely dominating. As you pointed out in your examples, even though some people might theoretically be equal from the view of us Joe Averages, some of them consistently beat others at the same level. There needs to be more granularity at this level.
There are several problems here. First of all, as Mr. Lucky demonstrated, SR4 hasn't noticeably leveled the field in generalists vs. hyperspecialists. In fact, the one-trick ponies not only keep their advantage, they don't have much in the way of relative disadvantages. Because of this, hyperspecialization is the optimal build choice. Just like how in SR3, you would always set certain skills to max, you now always set one given skill to the max. Players are encouraged, through the mechanics of the build-point system, to create legends. So, intentions aside, the caps actually do two things: they make it so starting characters are encouraged to be equal to the living legends of Shadowrun; and they prevent a character from being able to ever improve. I'm all for a system that prevents abuses and encourages more balanced characters, but the way SR4 has gone about it isn't one of the more effective ways I've seen. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:34 PM
Post
#159
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Numerical differences are only important if they translate into a differential results. If the end result is identical the numerical differences are only there for color. To take your example - while your premise is perfectly valid in theory, in practice (in SR3) if you asked 5 min-maxers (perfect choice to represent an Olympian's focus on performance) to come up with the best Sixth World 4 minute mile runner and even slapped 100 karma points on the basic chargen build to represent experience, you'd end up with a one or two die variation in dice for the relevant tests. This is because to get the same end result you optimize the same basic skill sets so ultimately nobody gets a "serious statistical advantage" when competing with athletes (or anything else) at the same skill level. SR3 has long recognized this reality and included this in play with the Prime Runner/Opposition rules - as the definition of an Equal adversary. SR4 simply incorporates this into the basic framework of performance levels (though the Att+Skill combination can lead to minor variations).
This is a false argument since lower base TN applies to both parties involved in such a straight up competition. In fact its one of the reasons I mentioned unaugmented athletes above - without augmentation there's no significant modifier that wouldn't apply to everyone involved identically and hence in SR3 like in SR4 it boils down to overall dice pools, of which IMHO variation in specialists is minimal in both cases. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:42 PM
Post
#160
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 23-October 05 Member No.: 7,882 |
I've created a monster.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 07:43 PM
Post
#161
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 515 Joined: 19-January 04 Member No.: 5,992 |
And it's burninating the countryside.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 08:02 PM
Post
#162
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
I'm going to go hide in my thatch-roofed cottage. I'm sure I'll be safe in there.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 08:24 PM
Post
#163
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 89 Joined: 29-January 06 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 8,210 |
Being pro SR4 here as a closed system, I still see some of the merits on the on going talks here,
I think using the build system as is, where you can have up to two 5s or one 6 as a start out build. I think it should have had a natural cap of 10 with 11 being legendary. I do believe that starting out we are to close to the top end heroic/infamous NPCs. NPCs that we should be looking up to / hateing. I believe the idea that SR4 tried to promote is more horizontal growth as well as virtical growth. A true shadowrunner can't afford to be a one trick pony but should excel at somthing and be well rounded everywhere else. For its normaly the minor details that will do them in, not the gun battle but all the things that will cause the gun battle. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 08:51 PM
Post
#164
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,651 Joined: 23-September 05 From: Marietta, GA Member No.: 7,773 |
/bow |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 09:53 PM
Post
#165
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 914 Joined: 26-August 05 From: Louisville, KY (Well, Memphis, IN technically but you won't know where that is.) Member No.: 7,626 |
I think of Nicky from Casino (Joe Pesci). He's an excellent leg breaker but that's all he does: he breaks legs. He never bothers to learn how to do anything other than break legs because he can intimidate people into giving him what he wants. Until he gets capped for not being happy with a leg breaker's role and ticking off too many people. Great recipe for dying young. With the way things are in SR4 I've got no trouble with specialists. Look at the olympians: once they get their gold...then what? Teach? Sure, if they learn how to share what they know. Be a TV personality? That requires social skills and/or perform. Vertical growth will only take you so far and you'd best be happy where that is or else like Nicky you're going to be disappointed. IMO most of the top olympic athletes are basically playing a game of chance: is today the day that I make no mistakes (aka not rolling anything below a 4)? Barring that, is today the day I make fewer mistakes than my opponents? That's where secondary skills come in. Athletes in many cases will try to psych out their opponent; intimidation is, if not rampant, not unheard of. Does athlete X win because he's so much better or because he rattles his opponents' cages so much? Is athlete Y just such an annoying prig that your desire to crush his skull distracts you from your event? Plus this is Shadowrun, not Olympiad 2054. For all we know there are complementary skills that can factor into certain athletic endeavors, much like Gymnastics can be incorporated into a full dodge. Complementary skills also make an appearance with Forgery suggesting it is possible that for performance-type activities where you try not only succeed at an action but do so with a particular style or appearance (e.g. ski jumping where a good jump is more than "controlled landing") you may need Athletics(Skiing) limited by a Jump test or in ice-dancing you'd have the Perform(Dance) test limited by the Athletics(skating) test. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 11:30 PM
Post
#166
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,556 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Seattle Member No.: 98 |
It comes down to this:
Some players understand the transition of the stats/skills they're looking at into "real life," and some do not. Some people have fun playing "look how many pistol dice I get" and some people have fun playing "I'm running Agi 4 Pistols 3 with a smartlink because my character concept has no reason at the moment to get better than "professional" with a handgun." I haven't seen a game system yet where some players won't decide to become an absolute god at the skill that gets their rocks off the most, and manage to do it to the point that the people who build their characters with the in-system descriptions of skill levels taken into account don't get pissed off about it. SR4 isn't a change. It doesn't get absolutely ridiculous if the GM tweaks his game a little through the use of optional or house rules, just like any other game system. If a GM is enough of a stickler for the RAW that the game gets out of control, he needs to think hard about how he got there. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 11:37 PM
Post
#167
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 89 Joined: 29-January 06 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 8,210 |
All I can say Shrike30 is, WOOT!
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 11:41 PM
Post
#168
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
The GM running a multi-dimensional game does wonders to having multi-dimensional PCs. The flatter the game a GM runs the better off a flat PC is. The better off a flat PC is the more you are going to see flat PCs. Don't like flat PCs? Don't run a flat game. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 11 2006, 12:39 AM
Post
#169
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 328 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,353 |
The problem isn't PCs who are only good at one thing but suck in all others. The issue are PCs that are extremely good at one thing while being passable in others. Mr. Lucky isn't a one-trick pony. He's just has the same weakness as everyone else while being king of pistols (or anyone other skill of your choice) and extremely lucky to boot. No one can be great at everything, but he has a decent shot as most of PCs for things outside their focus (for example a hacker in combat or a mage hacking). However if Mr. Lucky is in a situation of "roll well in X or die" he has 8 edge to fall back on. It should also be pointed out that due to caps he'll likely spend his XP on the cheaper skills and therefore being more rounded after raising agility. I will have to say the incompetents are a bit on the cheesy side, but that isn't too hard to get around.
So the GM has two choices, try to screw over Mr. Lucky which would be trying to burn away his edge pool and then hit him with "do or die" tests while somehow keeping other PCs whose expertise in the area elsewhere or screw over everyone. Both have huge chance of backfiring either by killing the rest of the team or not working. And at any point, you have to plan what you're doing as a GM around screwing over one person, something's wrong anyways. As for the way to fix this, there isn't a clear one. Usually if you run into a problem like this it means there are too many attributes and skills so that everyone sucks in most things such as in Legend of the Five Rings or old editions of WoD. While this is the case in Shadowrun, I don't think even a harsh trimming of skills and attributes would get rid of Mr. Lucky's lack of weakness relatively to most people. I believe the cause is due to the specializations of roles in a shadowrunning team. And you'll definitely have to change the nature of a shadowrunning team to remove this either by making teams extremely small (the case in most of my games) or forcing everyone to do everything which presents its own difficulties. I'll work up Mr. Generalist to be as good as Mr. Lucky if need be, though I doubt it'll be done unless the deck is heavily stacked against Mr. Lucky. If you have to do this, you might as well be doing "a stack of soy vs Mr. Lucky" for all the good it's worth to ya. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 12:42 AM
Post
#170
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
By definition, if two characters are fully min/maxed with the same amount of BP/Karma/XP/GP/CP/whatever to perform a certain task, they're going to end up equally good at said task. This problem (if you consider it a problem) is inherent in any non-randomized character generation system for RPGs. My personal issue is more with how there appears to be a strict limit beyond which a non-augmented character (or maximally augmented character) can no longer gain an advantage over another similar character in a particular task. A breaking point where there's no longer any point in training harder and longer to better yourself in something. An absolute ceiling of As Good As It Gets. This just seems wrong to me. I feel that the ability to get better and better, to improve yourself with no concrete limit to what you can achieve, is central to the human condition. I do not understand why the rules would deny characters this, and it didn't help that when this was first discussed people were trying to pass it off as "realistic" instead of as a means to make the game have a certain kind of balance. No doubt many people feel that kind of balance appealing -- else I suppose the rule wouldn't be there. Maybe it's just that I often use the real world as a kind of ideal for game balance, but I feel the ever increasing cost vs. ever decreasing returns model makes for a more enjoyable game, and is more realistic to boot. And no, it's not exactly problematic to house rule that into SR4.
When the TN is lower, the variation in the amount of successes rolled with a particular amount of dice is smaller, hence more dice will more reliably roll more successes. Unless my Math Processor is really acting up, having 20 dice vs. 10 is much more likely to produce a victory in an opposed test if the TNs are 2 than if the TNs are 6. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 11 2006, 01:52 AM
Post
#171
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
@Hida Tsuzua
Burning up the opponent's Edge isn't screwing the player. It is standard procedure. This goes for PCs and NPCs alike. It is like the "geek the mage" axiom. Besides it appears that the intention was for Mr. Lucky to burn through Edge all by himself, no additional help required. Edge only helps with a roll if you get a roll. Mr. Lucky has a total of 5 Skills. Good g-d he doesn't even have Perception. If the GM decides he is ok with a flat game he can allow Defaulting at nearly any time, and Mr. Lucky will last as long as his Edge. However if the GM doesn't want flat PCs then they shouldn't be so generous with the Defaulting. I don't mean this as a special rule for Lucky, I mean this as applied generally. Edge is cool, it is fun, and it is a great Skill supplement. But it runs out and it is not a Skill substitute. If Mr. Lucky ends off by himself and is greviously harmed as a result of being denied a Perception roll, or some other roll, because of a consistantly applied ruling that isn't the GM screwing the player. That is the player outwitting himself and coming face to face with the downside of his own min-maxing. Mr. Lucky can't even defend himself particularly well in hand-to-hand (only 2 Skill points + Reaction 6), and as written has somewhere between a light and a debilitating encumberance penalty (depending on how the GM totals that up) when he wears his armor. Mr. Lucky is a two trick pony, shoot things with a handgun and roll Edge. Problem is that the second trick has only 8 charges to cover off everything he didn't take and very easily may not be available at the time it is needed most because he doesn't have the underlying Skill......unless the GM decides that a flat world with flat PCs is fine. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 02:06 AM
Post
#172
|
|||||||||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
You're missing the point or chosing to ignore it. You brought up the possibility that it was possible that (that in SR3 given that there were no upper Att and Skill caps) competing between two Olympian athletes would have "serious statistical advantage". I counterargumented that two (nonaugmented) athletic specialists given the same exclusive dedication and focus in life even there the statistical difference would be minute and not "serious". Even if you gave 100 karma to one and only 70 to another (to represent less experience and/or training) the statistical difference in results would be as minimal as it is in SR4. So in fact it is illusory.
I doubt you'll disagree that a ceiling does exist in real life. And there is a concrete limit, either imposed by biology or physics. No human athlete is going to run the 100 meter dash in under 8 seconds in our lifetime. No human is going to bench press a ton either. Those are hard limits - no known human being can exceed them. What does exists is a fine line or fuzzy area at the very top of human ability which is constantly being redefined as somebody knocks 0,5 seconds off a record or jumps an extra 5 cms. Both SR3 and SR4 abstract the issues completely. SR3 ignores concrete caps in the interests of continual development and unlimited growth options - meaning potentially, given enough karma, someone unaugmented could run 100 meters under 8 seconds (iirc I've seen someone run the numbers for just that on DSF with a character out of chargen). This is one approach, in my mind no more or less right or realistic than SR4s - because both are flawed abstractions. SR4 on the other hand proposes a closed framework which divides human ability and potential into the variable-sized "levels of performance" we know as ratings (normally 6 for Attributes, but exceptionally 7 and the same for skills, though specialization could push it up to 9). Everybody capable of achieving the "fuzzy area" where records get broken, where 0,01 seconds are knocked off the 100 meter dash (ie. at the limits of human ability) is assumed to have the relevant ratings maxed out and has at least a little luck on his side (or is less capable but exceptionally lucky).
The point I was making is that SR3 was equally unrealistic (and basically any game system will be) because of the way abilities are abstracted (yeah I keep mentioning that) and managed by the game system.
I suggest you reread my post. For what you're saying to happen one or more of the athletes/specialists competing would have to have a significant handicap (a 10 die difference)! There is no realistic reason for such a ability level handicap between world class competitors (or any specialists in their field). Not when the differences between the first and last runner in an Olympic event can be down to less than a second. Without the handicap there is no reason why they shouldn't both have the same or similar "dice pools" and the same or similar TNs - which means that the statistical difference between hyper specialists in an open system is illusory and is in fact pretty similar to the SR4 model in terms of final results. Where there might be a problem is something entirely different. mfb put his finger on it a while back. The problem isn't comparing those at the top of each field with each other. The problem for some people lies on whether or not the 1 or 2 dice difference, which distinguishes the best of the best from those in the next lower "level of performance", actually translates to consistent results that realistically justify the former's exceptional status. Or to put it simply whether a top-of-his-game world champion with a dicepool of 16 (Att 7 + Skill/Specialization 9) is significantly and consistently better than a maxed-out character with a dicepool of 14 (Att 6 + Skill 8) to justify a "legendary" status. Having a bunch of min-maxers and hyperspecialist freaks weened on SR3's open framework and variables in my regular group (one has an SR4 mage chucking 22 dice out of chargen) I thought this would be a problem. After almost a year of playtesting I can honestly say it has never cropped up and never mattered, in fact they're pretty happy with the fact that their comparative performance levels with NPCs and amongst themselves. Mileage will vary. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Mar 11 2006, 02:09 AM
Post
#173
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 89 Joined: 29-January 06 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 8,210 |
If you had the several people doing the exact same thing to reach a max situation for any lvl, wouldn't they come out evenly no matter how far they went and therefor create a status quo? I have seen this before. They ended up competing without end forsaken all else.
At conventions I have seen simular results. Wherefor if you have a cap (10/11 in my thinking) creation system that starts you off more well rounded with the present skill limitations you have now with 3 being avg. That would seem to leave much room for development in many areas and still be a competent runner. For a open ended or closed ended system the same results can be achived but I believe the difference is you know create with a closed system that pushes more horizontal then vertical with vertical still a option to a degree. Its one thing to have a open or closed system and try to build a Billy the Kid with a pistol, its another to want a open system to make a PC that has a Avatar skill with no piers. When it comes to skills, open systems are alot like drugs, the skill can never be high enough. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 11 2006, 03:39 AM
Post
#174
|
|||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
I guess I missed the point. When you said "the same skill level" and "100 Karma", I though you meant such characters were indeed fully min/maxed utilizing the same amount of BP or Karma or whatever, which assuming the min/maxers have a perfect knowledge of the rule system (regardless of what the rule system is) will indeed produce characters that are completely equal in a particular task.
At 70 vs 100 Karma, assuming capped out starting characters, the difference really does come down to just one die, since going from Unarmed Wrestling 7/13 to 8/15 takes 40 more Karma. Good thing too, I guess, because going from 13 to 15 dice against TN 4 increases your 20-80 percentile range by a whole success, from 6-8 to 7-9, a very significant advantage in an opposed test. I would call some 10-20% greater probability of success a "serious statistical advantage".
If a concrete limit can be agreed upon without agreeing on exactly where it is, then many/most physical achievements do indeed have some ceilings for their results. I think the rules concerning physical tests of this nature should be crafted such that these ceilings aren't broken, regardless of whether a character is significantly better at the particular task than any other living human. It is not the theoretically unlimited growth but the screwed up rules for such physical tasks that allows unaugmented humans to run insanely fast, or jump insanely high, or lift insanely little, or be incapable of jumping across any serious distance in SR3. The rules for these tests break down just as horribly at the low end as they do at the high end. It shouldn't take the average human adult male 25 seconds to spring 100 meteres, nor should the best unaugmented human athlete be capable of doing 100 meters in 5.7 seconds. The way SR4 handles skills does make it easier to handle the rules for such tasks, since you have a smaller scale of possibly figures to work with, and the lack of upward mobility means you can even get away with linear progression instead of rules with an inbuilt logistic curve. What it can't handle as well are tasks like wrestling, where the result is only determined by how well you did compared to someone else, where you can always be better than someone else regardless of how good they are.
We're now officially talking about two completely different things. I'll try to clarify what I was originally getting at: When rolling several dice against a fixed target number, the lower the target number is the less variation there is in the number of successes achieved with a particular number of dice. For example, if you draw a success probability graph of 20 dice vs. a TN of 2, the graph will have a sharp ridge at the center, or indeed at the rightmost edge, falling off sharply on either side -- it will have very little deviation. A similar graph of 20 dice vs. a TN of 6 will be much flatter -- it will have much more deviation. Though the difference is much less pronounced between TN 4 and TN 5, it's still there. When rolling opposed tests, you're basically overlapping 2 such graphs. If character A rolls 20 dice against TN 2 and character B rolls 22 dice against TN 2, because of the probability distributions with little variation character B actually has a pretty massive advantage on character A, even though he's only got 2 more dice to roll. With TN 6, ceteris paribus character B would only have a very minor advantage over character A. Regardless of how large the dice advantage or disadvantage is, it will make more of an impact in the outcome the lower the TN is. In SR3, the base TN is 4, while in SR4 it's 5. Hence in SR3 there's slightly less deviation in the success probability graphs than in SR4, which leads to smaller dice differences making bigger impacts on outcomes of opposed tests. You'd need a better mathematician than me to statistically show how much more of an impact. From the beginning I figured the difference wasn't large enough to warrant a thorough discussion of the matter, which is why I did not explain that part of my message at length earlier. Sorry if I sounded condescending, I just wanted to make absolutely sure we understand each other.
I can agree with that. I just can't absorb weapon-related knowledge fast enough, nor can I maintain a "gun-high" as long as I used to. :( (And no, I'm not suggesting I'm anywhere near a skill rating 6, either in SR3 or SR4 reckoning.) |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Mar 11 2006, 03:51 AM
Post
#175
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
not really true, in practice. i've seen a lot of characters, many of which had a pretty large amount of karma. i don't recall any that had a skill or even specialization higher than about 14. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 6th September 2025 - 02:52 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.