 SR3 vs 4 in Play |
  |
 Mar 16 2006, 05:39 AM
Post
#301
|
|
|
Immortal Elf  Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670  |
like i said, you don't need to be one-dimensional.
|
 |
 
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:51 AM
Post
#302
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Like I said to Cain, show me the character. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:00 AM
Post
#303
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
create an SR4 char? ugh. where did i put my waders...
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:04 AM
Post
#304
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
You are on DSF without at least a pair of waders? :eek: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:08 AM
Post
#305
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i could make a horrifically dirty joke, here. but i'm not. you should all thank me.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:14 AM
Post
#306
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Does it involve wool covered Doberman drones?
EDIT I finally took the time to fill in a sig. You like? :) |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:21 AM
Post
#307
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
not subtly insulting, like mine. but amusing nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 08:34 AM
Post
#308
|
|||||||||||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Actually, the best term is "too arbitrary". You've got so many limits and restrictions, and you can still turn in disgustingly abusive characters. The limits would be forgiveable if they prevented the grossest abuses, but they don't do that. The end result is that people who play "balanced" characters come out too weak, while the min/maxers rule the playground.
I actually have no problem with the BP allocation. What I have issues with is the fiddliness, overcomplexity, and abuseability of the system.
You've just mirrored some of my major frustrations with SR4 chargen. If you screw up in one area, you need to go back to the beginning and start all over again. The system is remarkably unforgiving in that respect, and that's part of the reason why I've found character creation times to be insanely long. Yes, I know there are programs out there. But we're comparing systems, not fan programming skills. If the only way to make character creation palatable is to download a program, you've got *serious* issues.
It is a bad thing, if you want your characters to be able to develop in their chosen area of expertise. Now, the absolute best you can do is match your archrival, which really leads to some sad story elements. Inigo Montoya wasn't satisified being the equal of the six-fingered man, he had to be *better* than him. The drive for perfection and superiority are really excellent roleplaying elements in a game, and the system shuts them down cold. Also, as Mr. Lucky demonstrated, you don't necessarily need to sacrifice a whole hell of a lot in order to be a one-trick pony.
Untrue. Let's compare the street sam archetype in the BBB to Mr. Lucky. Both of them have the exact same amount of points in basic attributes and gear (200 and 38, respectively); they also have a lot of the same cyberware. They'll make for a fair comparison. Looking at their attributes, we see that the BBB sam only has 2 higher attributes: Strength and Logic. Mr. Lucky has a higher Charisma and Intuition, so they're balanced out overall. Since they have the same Body and Willpower, they're equally vulnerable to combat spells and magic. Verdict: About the same. Looking at the special attributes, Mr. Lucky has slightly less Essence (0.8 to 0.75), but he has a higher Initiative (7/9 to 8/10) with the same number of passes (both have Wired 2). And, of course, Mr Lucky has a whopping Edge of 8, versus the sam's of 2. Verdict: Mr Lucky, hands down. Comparing Edges and Flaws, most of Mr. Lucky's edges are stat-boosters, opening up the option of him increasing his skills elsewhere. The street sam's are much more direct, granting him direct bonuses. The only edge Mr. Lucky has that gives him a direct benefit is High Pain Tolerance 1; but the street sam has it at 2. They both have Incompetences, but Mr. Lucky has a lot more, offsetting the sam's Mild addiction. Verdict: Street Sam, but not by a whole lot. As for skills, Mr. Lucky only has 5, against the sam's 10. However, if we include his bonus from Enhanced Articulation, Mr. Lucky has more dice for dodging (3 vs 6), Infiltration (2 vs 5 in urban environments, 2 vs 3 elsewhere), Social skills (Negotiation 2 vs Con (Fast Talk) 2/4), and primary attack form (5 in automatics vs 8/10 in pistols; with all modifications in place, Mr. Lucky is throwing 18 dice per pistols test). Mr. Lucky has gymnastics at 3, which is the same as the sam's Athletics skill group; the sam has an advantage, but not much of one, and that's without including Mr. Lucky's bonus from Enhanced Articulation. In fact, in combat skills, the BBB sam's only got a noticeable advantage in two areas: blades, and heavy weapons. Since Mr. Lucky isn't meant as a heavy-weapons platform anyway, that doesn't hurt him in the slightest; and his Unarmed Combat dice is one higher than the sam's Blades skill. Verdict: Mr. Lucky. Both characters are severely lacking in Technical skills of any stripe; however the BBB sam has an Incompetence in Hacking, while Mr. Lucky's incompetences are in skills that you can't default to anyway (Software), and/or are highly unlikely to come up in any case (Pilot Aerospace). Quite frankly, if he's going to have to pilot the space shuttle, he's already screwed past reason. So, the two characters are about equally weak in Technical skills, with a slight advantage towards Mr. Lucky since his weaknesses are less common. Gear wise, Mr. Lucky has three handwritten pages of equipment that I'm not about to type out. The highlights include: lots of pistols with concealable holsters and arm slides, tons of EX-EX, multiple commlinks and fake SINs, multiple pieces of armor for different occasions, glasses and contacts with plenty of vision enhancers, several rating 6 Medkits, and a Bulldog Step Van with an improved Pilot program and Maneuver soft. The street sam has about a paragraph's worth of gear, not nearly as detailed or as varied. Mr. Lucky also starts with a High lifestyle, and will have (4d6 +12)x500 :nuyen: in starting cash. The street sam only gets 3d6 x 50. Verdict: Mr. Lucky. In contacts, Mr. Lucky has spent 11 points vs. the street sam's 9. They both have a Fixer and Street Doc, oddly enough. Mr. Lucky's contacts aren't as well-connected, but are a lot more Loyal. We'll call this one even as well, with another small advantage to Mr. Lucky for spending more points. Overall, Mr. Lucky either totally outclasses the street sam, is slightly better, or isn't much worse off. The balanced character has no advantages in any particular area, and loses in several.
I did. Remember? You tried and failed to find weaknesses in the character. I've even done a point-by-point comparison with a BBB character to show that all the differences favor Mr. Lucky. We had this argument, and you lost. 8) What's more, only the most amateurish, rollplay-trapped GM's think you need a lot of Active skills to give a character depth. You only need a handful of Knowledge skills to really bring a character alive. Mr. Lucky has 18 free points, which is more than enough. Let's say that we give him a bunch of street oriented knowledges. That makes him a standard gutterpunk. Then, we erase those, and give him Knowledges in Farming, Animal Handling, and Rodeos. Suddenly, he's a cowboy, lost in the big city. We then try a different set: Cantonese, plus a bunch of martial arts knowledges, Zen-type philosophy, and maybe even Chinese magical theory. Now we have a gun-fu monk-- maybe even a burned-out adept, who sacrificed his magic for the quick gains of cyberware. I can even do this with the most min/maxed troll. Even with a Logic and Intuition of 1, that's 6 points. If we shove that into an Art History skill, suddenly we have a character with hidden depths and a surprising appreciation for beauty. He doesn't have any hobby skills, but that's okay-- he spends his free time getting happily lost in galleries and art museums, and occasionally correcting the tour guides. You do not need an extensive Active skill list to have a detailed character. What you need is roleplaying skills and a bit of creativity, as well as a GM who encourages you to play around with your Knowledge skills. An extensive character history leads to more "depth" in characters than extensive skill lists, any day of the week. A GM who encourages roleplay over rollplay would know this automatically. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Mar 16 2006, 09:22 AM
Post
#309
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 23-October 05 Member No.: 7,882 |
I am now officially begging.
STOP THE MADNESS!!! |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 02:38 PM
Post
#310
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Cain ain't going stop claiming that he's proven through irrefutable logic that black is white. I found this out in the thread about LA salvage where he could read a single page and come up the most bizzare statements. Even playing an actual game with him wouldn't get through that Mr. Lucky ain't all that. Plus it would likely be an experience something like this. :( But the good news is that I've managed to work in an Apocolypse Now quote to sum it all up. So grab yourself a pair of wings and fly baby, fly! 8) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 03:06 PM
Post
#311
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
okay brahm show where the mr lucky loses on a poitn by poitn comparison
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 03:15 PM
Post
#312
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Most of the big points are in the thread already. In case you don't have a set of wings to work through the 13 pages, here is a quick rundown. The first problem is any GM with half a brain tossing the laundry list of Incompetence Qualitys back in Cain's face. The second biggest problem is Mr. Lucky's overreliance on Defaulting. (EDIT: Even more specifically he is Defaulting Perception!) The third is the idea that Edge, even 8 points, is going to last that long when you are relying on it so heavily. Cain's basic response? U R DUM GM! :( Only he seems to claim it is ok if you let people know up front, and not springing stuff on players. I'm not advocating surprising players that a broad game is what would be played, and not advocating dropping rulings without fair warning. I'm not sure, he seems really confused. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 04:37 PM
Post
#313
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,651 Joined: 23-September 05 From: Marietta, GA Member No.: 7,773 |
Hear, hear. That's what always seems to happen with a point-buy system. Sometimes people will myopically make up an uber-specialist and completely dominate their designated role, only to get smacked down in a foreign arena. Sometimes people make up a generalist, trying to cover all bases, and then they gripe about how they feel like they're sucking at everything because the specialists are overshadowing them. And then those people actually feel indignant when confronted with the consequences of their build style. Of course you're going to have weaknesses; were you looking to be 100% unstoppable in all situations? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:11 PM
Post
#314
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Seems like the biggest downside of that char is the need to constantly provide Grade A Roleplay just to keep up the edge levels
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:13 PM
Post
#315
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
I don't really follow you. Example? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:31 PM
Post
#316
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
the section on page 68 which suggests that you should award a point of edge recovery for a piece fo impressive roleplay
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:38 PM
Post
#317
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 13-March 06 Member No.: 8,367 |
This entire conversation seems to me to be intellectually bankrupt. (Therefore, I will, foolishly, add my two cents... man, I'm dumb.) About half the participants say, "Being able to make any character you like, overpowered OR balanced, is a good thing." We'll call them Group G. The other half say, "Being able to make any character you like, overpowered OR balanced, is a bad thing." We'll call them Group B. These two statements are mutually exclusive: therefore, at least one of them must be wrong.
Group A has not been able to prove its point sufficiently to convince Group B, and vice versa. Therefore, either no evidence for either side exists sufficient to prove the position, or one or both sides is too mentally incompetent to grasp the fundamentals. I know, both sides are now saying, "Yes! That's the one!" but I'm about to show that it's irrelevant. Let us examine, first, the logically simple solution: Neither side is "right" and the ultimate conclusion could best be summed up as "Being able to make any character you want, overpowered OR balanced, is a possibility in SR4." In such a case, continuing the discussion is pointless, as neither side is right, and arguing will only pound your head against an electronic brick wall. However, there is another option: Let us examine the possibility that one (or both) sides is simply too incompetent to grasp fundamental argument strategy. In this case, one side is right and the other is wrong. It doesn't matter which, because arguing does nothing. As we have stated, being able to understand argument strategy is necessary for an argument. Therefore, continuing the discussion will only pound your head against an electronic brick wall. Give it up. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:46 PM
Post
#318
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Tell me, doyouwalk around child care centers, taking away kids' toys and saying "Now this has no educational value so you can;t play with it any more"?
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:48 PM
Post
#319
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 13-March 06 Member No.: 8,367 |
I hadn't considered it before, but now I will. Thanks for the new entertainment venue!
Also, I suppose I made a faux pas by adding "give it up" before. I shouldn't have added a value judgment. My conclusion was that this conversation was essentially smashing your head against a brick wall. I leave it to you to determine whether or not that's "fun." |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:55 PM
Post
#320
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Ah, I see what you mean. That could make for a very entertaining game with that Incompetancies. ;) Over the longterm I can't see that being a very good strategy as, for me at least, I would see the bar as raising. After the first couple of times I would start running into the not so impressed anymore. I'm not very prone to giving PCs dice for player actions. Especially if the player on the other hand was expecting, if not demanding, things to go peachy keen for the character with such a limited Skill set. It is really kind of a Catch 22. If they don't play the character to match the Skill set they aren't likely to regain Edge used. But if they do play the Mr. Lucky to match the Skill set they are likely spending even more Edge. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:56 PM
Post
#321
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
but I am not smashing My head against a brick wall, I am tripping the others over so THEIR heads hit the wall, then laughing as they blame each other
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:58 PM
Post
#322
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Oh and Brahm, I would set the bar for a point of Edge back at the equivalent of a'2 dice stunt' from exalted
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 05:58 PM
Post
#323
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
How ironic that you actually failed to grasp the "sides" yourself. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:02 PM
Post
#324
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 13-March 06 Member No.: 8,367 |
Did I? Please, enlighten me. I know the last few exchanges involved some particular examples, but, overall, wasn't the crux of the situation that the SR4 chargen system allows for overpowered characters and balanced characters? I got the impression that some people felt this was the flexibility they wanted, while others felt it gave an unfair advantage to twinks.
Please, if I'm wrong, correct me. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2006, 06:05 PM
Post
#325
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
I have not played Exalted, though apparently some in the SR4 group I'm playing with have. So I couldn't comment directly on that right now. I can just say that I seriously doubt someone playing Mr. Lucky is going to like what he'll need to do if the goal is to gain back ground he's lost for being overspecialized. Not to say that a good player won't be able to, but it will tend to balance out any Edge he gets. If it doesn't then I would have considered it to have been poorly GMed...unless of course the players are having an over-the-top blast. That is really what it is about, having a blast. Exalted is kind of an over-the-top game where you play minor godlings, right? Hmm, there is a demo on the web perhaps I'll look it through later. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 6th September 2025 - 06:13 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.