Two is the new Three..., ...Joe Average NPC Stats. Options

[Konsaki]

No problem.

[Ryu]

Two might be the new three, but the average pedestrian will have a range of 2-4.

I´d prefer a system were the runners can start higher than above-average (half at 3, half at 4 so far), but can enhance only physical attributes ingame (at some point in your life, intelligence is nearly untrainable. To much retraining required).

[knasser]

[kzt]

[Jaid]

[Fortune]

Unfortunately, you picked a Skill linked to Logic. The best doctor in the world is an Adept with Aptitude, and Exceptional Logic, and more importantly, a Cerebral Booster 3, which is unavailable at chargen. ;)

[Steak and Spirit...]

Actually, he has Skill Wires Rating 12, which was a compiled by an AI from techniques, and knowledge used by the leading doctors from the last 100 years.

But, yeah. The Adept get's honorable mention. ;)

[Fortune]

By canon, Skillwires are only available up to Rating 5, while ActiveSofts themselves only come in Ratings up to 4. Skill doesn't beat the Adept. ;)

[Steak and Spirit...]

You must have missed the chapter on Skillwires designed by Artificial Intelligence.

[Glyph]

For the record, I, too, dislike char-gen that lets a PC hit the hard limit right off the bat - although that's one of the things that Frank Trollman's house rules address.

But to really be the best in the world, you need 30 points of positive qualities (Aptitude and Exceptional Attribute), an Attribute and a skill that are both maxed out at high cost, and a mix of adept abilities and/or 'ware that may or may not be available (at least at the highest levels) at char-gen. You can make a character who slings 20+ dice without too many compromises in other areas, but the game mechanics are set up so that getting the last two or so of the maximum possible dice aren't really worth it.

And it still doesn't address what I see as the most fundamental flaw with the current skill rankings - the actual dice probabilities don't come close to matching the skill descriptions - "Legendary" skill (7) will get you, on average, 1 piddling success more than someone with "Veteran" skill (4). Sure, a high skill will give you an edge against people with lower skills, but they can still get the best of you far more often than they should, if you are really the "best of the best".

[Fortune]

[knasser]

Point in Shadowrun is that the caps mean the best in the world is not the equivalent of a high-level D&D character. He's an extremely skilled person who's still going to go splat when shot by an assault rifle. It's not a problem in game play, so unless someone shares your distaste for the flavour, then they'll never see it as an issue.

[Garrowolf]

I think the problem here is the word average. In some cases and places two would be the average for most attributes.
I usually think in terms of how motivated the character is. If they are unmotivated and not trying to improve themselves or work hard at anything then I give them mostly 2s. If they are go getters and are more likely to try and fight for what they want then I give them 3s.

I agree that I wish there was a better way to deal with attributes in character creation without slowing down the game.

[Ryu]

@kzt:
The high school senior doesn´t know what he does not know. I´ll admit that some progress can be made by learning problem solving methods that are applicable to a wide range of problems. Your potential for mental progress depends on what you learned in your youth though. Physical attributes on the other hand can be enhanced easily if the willpower is present.

In game mechanics, I´d prefer to model mental progression with broader skill increases. One could maybe allow for one later-on increase per attribute, but not more. From a balance perspective, mental stats would have to be more expensive than physical stats.

[FrankTrollman]

The way the rules are set up, a dichotomy of attributes between physical and mental is horribly ungamebalanced and cannot be sustained.

I think a big problem here is legacy from D&D, where you had your "attributes" that essentially didn't change and represented potential, and "level" which represented how much you had accomplished as a person. In Shadowrun, that's not what they mean.

Your attributes are a measurement, not of potential, but of how good you are at a broad range of activities. Strength is how good you are at running, swimming, climbing, lifting, and punching. Logic is how good you are at mechanics, medicine, hacking, and the sciences. Exercise and good eating habits will improve the former, getting a good general education will improve the latter.

Conceptually, attributes are weird, because they don't represent your "potential" at all. They represent how generally accomplished you are in a field.

---

Now, from a game balance perspective, being generally accomplished in a field (attribute) is much beter than being equally accomplished in a sub-field (skill group) or specific task (individual skill) - so the fact that skill groups don't cost a lot less than attributes is a travesty.

An attribute is just a "Skill Group Group" - the cost savings over purchasing skill groups should be similar to the cost savings of getting a skill group over a collection of skills - discounts of 16.7% are fine, but right now Attrbutes are giving a discount of like 60%, and that's game breaking.

-Frank

[Draconis]

[Charon]

I tend to use 3 as the average mental stat and 2 as the average physical stats.

Because let's face it, the average North American is out of shape!

[Wakshaani]

[Konsaki]