IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Foci bonding costs, Any errata?
toturi
post Sep 11 2006, 03:29 PM
Post #1


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



The charactor generation foci bonding costs for bonding a focus is equal to the Force of the focus. Has there been any errata that I am unaware of?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Sep 11 2006, 03:42 PM
Post #2


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



at chargen, you need 1 BP per force of the focus to bind it. after chargen, it uses karma based on the type of focus, and is generally more expensive.

so no errata, but you may have been thinking of the rules for bonding a focus after chargen ;)

other than that, i'm not sure what you might be thinking of...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 11 2006, 03:55 PM
Post #3


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



So it is actually better to get a power focus at chargen (karma wise) than some other focus. And it is better to get a weapon focus with greater reach than 1 with less at chargen.

I was figuring out why someone(in terms of game mechanics) would get a katana rather than a combat axe. I would also like to ask if there are rules for using 2 melee weapons that I am not seeing. Also is a monofilament sword a 1 handed or 2 handed weapon (canonically speaking)?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Sep 11 2006, 04:15 PM
Post #4


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



monofilament swords are 1 handed, as i recall.

i don't memorise the melee weapons per se, but i would guess the axe is probably less concealable.

and no, there aren't any rules for 2 melee weapons that you're missing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2bit
post Sep 11 2006, 04:50 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 749
Joined: 28-July 05
Member No.: 7,526



If your group plays with chargen availability limits (as is standard), the max force power or weapon focus you can get is 2. Other foci can be purchased at force 3. So there's your tradeoff. At chargen, a force 2 power focus and a Force 3 spellcasting focus both cost 12 BP, which is both :nuyen: and bonding. Post chargen, the force 3 spellcasting focus is cheaper to buy and bond than the force 2 power focus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mistwalker
post Sep 11 2006, 05:41 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 668
Joined: 4-September 06
Member No.: 9,304



Don't have my book handy

but for fighting with two weapons, isn't rules already set up?
I seem to recall that if you have ambidexterity, you evenly split your dice pool and make two attacks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Sep 11 2006, 06:02 PM
Post #7


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



That's for ranged combat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mistwalker
post Sep 11 2006, 06:16 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 668
Joined: 4-September 06
Member No.: 9,304



Well, seems like a good rule of thumb for melee too
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shrike30
post Sep 11 2006, 08:21 PM
Post #9


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,556
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 98



People keep saying that, but the rules keep not saying that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Samaels Ghost
post Sep 11 2006, 10:51 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 984
Joined: 15-June 06
Member No.: 8,717



Isn't the only possible multi-target attack in melee the one where they have to be very close to each other and you spilt your dice? There's not a rule for attacking with both hands at once like with guns
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mistwalker
post Sep 12 2006, 12:36 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 668
Joined: 4-September 06
Member No.: 9,304



Well, there is a rule for off-hand use in melee combat, and just below it, a rule for attacking multiple targets (you split your pool by the number of targets).
Personally, I would not have any problem with one of those attacks being with the weapon in the off-hand (the pool is still divided regardless if it one or two weapons).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Slithery D
post Sep 12 2006, 12:43 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 750
Joined: 9-August 06
Member No.: 9,059



[edit, wrong thread]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 12 2006, 01:27 AM
Post #13


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (2bit)
If your group plays with chargen availability limits (as is standard), the max force power or weapon focus you can get is 2. Other foci can be purchased at force 3. So there's your tradeoff. At chargen, a force 2 power focus and a Force 3 spellcasting focus both cost 12 BP, which is both :nuyen: and bonding. Post chargen, the force 3 spellcasting focus is cheaper to buy and bond than the force 2 power focus.

Really? I thought you just paid the BP equal to the Force?

So a Force 2 Power focus is 2 BP to bond and a Force 3 (someother) focus costs 3 BP to bond? Which is why I was thinking would someone actually bond a less "expensive" focus.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Sep 12 2006, 03:09 AM
Post #14


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



2 BP to bind a force 2 power focus, 10 BP to buy the dang thing. 12 BP.

3 BP to bind a force 3 spellcasting focus, and presumably 9 BP to buy it. 12 BP.

notice he indicated those figures to include both the resources cost as well as the binding cost.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 12 2006, 02:27 PM
Post #15


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



OK. Is there any reason why someone would bond a Weapon focus with a lower reach? I mean any of the higher reach weapons are nigh unconcealable anyway, so why not go the whole hog and bond the longest reach weapon focus?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2bit
post Sep 12 2006, 03:01 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 749
Joined: 28-July 05
Member No.: 7,526



well obviously for a lot of characters, melee weapon choice is pretty personal and directly related to their sense of style. People are much more likely to pick a melee weapon that "fits with their character" instead of reaching automatically for the combat axe.

There aren't any chargen bonding cost differences between a reach 0 and reach 2 weapon focus.

Also, since weapon foci cost so much, I can definitely see the advantage of a more concealable weapon... just to protect one's investment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FrankTrollman
post Sep 12 2006, 04:41 PM
Post #17


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Banned
Posts: 3,732
Joined: 1-September 05
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Member No.: 7,665



Personally, I don't charge people extra Karma for having a higher reach weapon focus. An extra Reach is just an extra die in the new rules, it's not a Force Modifier. By charging a Karma cost per Reach per Force, you're ensuring that noone will ever have a high Force Sword. And frankly, that's unfortunate.

Magic in the Shadows took the Reach out of the equation for SR3, and I think it's unfortunate that Street Magic didn't do the same for SR4.

Especially now that in SR4 a weapon with zero reach and Force 4 is better than a weapon with +1 reach and Force 3. Having them cost the same Karma is bad. The advantage of low reach should be high concealability (or "not being a mono-whip", which is its own advantage), not lower Karma cost.

-Frank
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 13 2006, 01:43 PM
Post #18


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



I am trying to find a good game mechanic reason for someone at chargen to choose to use a weapon with lower reach than the maximum available. Is there?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Sep 13 2006, 02:09 PM
Post #19


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957



Concealability. Unless it's a monowhip, a large reach weapon will be hard to hide.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 14 2006, 03:49 AM
Post #20


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



What about the difference between a katana(1 reach and maxed Unconcealability) and a combat axe(2 reach and unknowned, but presumed to be maxed Unconceal)?

If the question was so simple, I would not have asked it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaid
post Sep 14 2006, 09:09 PM
Post #21


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



QUOTE (toturi)
What about the difference between a katana(1 reach and maxed Unconcealability) and a combat axe(2 reach and unknowned, but presumed to be maxed Unconceal)?

If the question was so simple, I would not have asked it.

what about it? this isn't some MMORPG where every weapon has to be balanced against every other weapon so that some whiner doesn't complain that his <insert weapon type> wielding character is inferior to the <insert other weapon type> wielding character.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lorechaser
post Sep 14 2006, 09:38 PM
Post #22


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,333
Joined: 19-August 06
From: Austin
Member No.: 9,168



Combat axe is two handed. Katana can be one.

Wallah!

And all the weapons *should* be balanced, whether by features, price, or availability.

If one weapon is clearly superior, there's no reason to have the rest!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Sep 14 2006, 09:52 PM
Post #23


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (toturi @ Sep 13 2006, 08:49 PM)
What about the difference between a katana(1 reach and maxed Unconcealability) and a combat axe(2 reach and unknowned, but presumed to be maxed Unconceal)?

If the question was so simple, I would not have asked it.

If you intentions are to create a character that prefers swords over axes or staves of swords then that stats don't matter.

On the other hand, if you are (and I think you are) asking why someone would choose X over Y based on stats then you've successfully reached the min/max level of selection which is pure numbers analysis over character choice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Sep 15 2006, 05:30 AM
Post #24


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



I am running a game as a stress test of the game system. If it is in the book, and not as an optional rule, it goes.

If the PC with a combat axe has an edge(no pun intended) over the PC with a sword, I'm sure my players can come up with a story for the ax-wielding PC that is believable.

A sword is one handed. A katana on the other hand is 2 handed. A monofilament sword is... unknown.

QUOTE
On the other hand, if you are (and I think you are) asking why someone would choose X over Y based on stats then you've successfully reached the min/max level of selection which is pure numbers analysis over character choice.


My point of view as a GM, character choice IS number analysis. A PC that you are comfortable roleplaying garners more karma since it is easier for you to roleplay him.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
WhiskeyMac
post Sep 15 2006, 05:47 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Iraq
Member No.: 1,789



The monosword is a one-hander. It's just a sword (SR4 ruleswise) that has a supersharp monofilament edge. It's not rocket science to figure that out. "This well-balanced broadsword features superfine monofilament wire attached to its edges." Unless it states "two-handed" anywhere in the description, which it doesn't, it's a single-hander. If you look at the description of the 2 2-handed weapons in that section, they specifically state they are 2-handed in the description.

The combat axe has larger reach because it has more of a haft than the katana. The katana is basically just a japanese longsword or broadsword for hacking. Considered 2-handed because of the hilt. The combat axe is 3/4 of a staff with an axe head on it.

A katana makes some sense in the shadows because it can be concealed a little easier along the back and is a cyberpunk staple. A combat axe doesn't really make sense in the shadows. Too big to really make good use of it and not at all concealable.

Strange, I thought that creating a character involved picking numbers around a concept. NOT forming a concept around my specifically min/maxed numbers. I don't remember that ROLEplaying involved specialy picked numbers. Hmm, how the shadows have changed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 12:39 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.