BP's vs Karmagen Options

[Platinum Dragon]

By RAW, there is no definition for "flourish" or "detail". Even when we use the dictionary definitions, there is still no guide as to what constitutes a "flourishing detail" in Shadowrun.

There is also no RAW definition for 'air,' but we don't just assume that everyone instantly suffocates, or that they can breathe in space. Seriously dude, even for you that was over the top. =P

There are no definitions for 'flourish' or 'detail' by RAW, because they're established words with a meaning of their own that can be discovered by opening a dictionary to the appropriate page.

[Cain]

Cain, you seem to be using definitions of the words "flourish" and "detail" that of which I am unaware. Could you offer us the definitions you're using?

flour·ish (flûrsh, flr-)
v. flour·ished, flour·ish·ing, flour·ish·es

To wield, wave, or exhibit dramatically.

So, even if we blatantly ignore the fact that there's no restriction on the flourish, pretending like it cannot break the Suspension of Disbelief required to run a good game, we still see that it adds extra drama to a roll. So, the person who succeeds routinely is getting lower-quality spotlight time than the one who routinely scores crits.

The bigger problem is that there's no firm distinction between Drama and Melodrama. What's dramatic in one moment might be silly and game-breaking in another. It's usually up to the group to decide what's appropriate; but a SR4 critical success doesn't allow for that. It's up to the player, who may or may not be on the same page as everybody else.

There's also the fact that you can burn Edge for critical successes, leading to all kinds of wonkiness. Someone could leap from a tall building and burn Edge on his soak roll, saying he hit a truckful of mattresses as he landed. Sure, a GM could cry foul; but in reality, people have fallen from greater heights and emerged unscathed.

And none of that hits on the point that you can blatantly kill off Disbelief in a game by getting a critical success. If you don't like that argument, fine. Try going against the other three I've posted.

[Aaron]

I think it's pretty safe to say that neither a flourish, nor a detail, nor a flourishing detail is more important or profound than the main action for which it is a flourish, detail, or flourishing detail. So I think any extra touch a player chooses must be less of a deal than the original action. "Jumped into orbit" is a lot more extreme than "jumped a fence," and to say otherwise is at best something of a stretch.

[Cain]

I think it's pretty safe to say that neither a flourish, nor a detail, nor a flourishing detail is more important or profound than the main action for which it is a flourish, detail, or flourishing detail. So I think any extra touch a player chooses must be less of a deal than the original action. "Jumped into orbit" is a lot more extreme than "jumped a fence," and to say otherwise is at best something of a stretch.

Tha ignores the other points that I made, but to put it simply, sometimes the flourish is the action. For example, waving a flag dramatically might just be the whole point. When we're discussing things like leaping from a tall building without taking a scratch (remember, stranger things have been recorded) then leaping a quarter mile higher before coming down for a landing isn't as extreme anymore.

[toturi]

There is also no RAW definition for 'air,' but we don't just assume that everyone instantly suffocates, or that they can breathe in space. Seriously dude, even for you that was over the top. =P

There are no definitions for 'flourish' or 'detail' by RAW, because they're established words with a meaning of their own that can be discovered by opening a dictionary to the appropriate page.

Because in RAW, although air and breathing are not defined explicitly in and of themselves, it is implied through various means like Swimming(Holding Your Breath), Internal Air Tank, inhalation-vector toxins, etc. Otherwise, you would be partially right, nobody would need to breathe.

Correct, there are no definitions for 'flourish' or 'detail' by RAW, hence my statement:

Even when we use the dictionary definitions, there is still no guide as to what constitutes a "flourishing detail" in Shadowrun.

[Platinum Dragon]

The guide you're looking for is common sense coupled with understanding of the english language. Go only by the exact RAW and never extrapolate when things are not clearly defined, and you end up with things like sharks in D&D drowning (because the 'aquatic' sub-type never states that the creature breates water, rather than air).

A narrative flourish in SR is, therefore, whatever you and the people at your table agree on as being acceptable.

Tha ignores the other points that I made, but to put it simply, sometimes the flourish is the action. For example, waving a flag dramatically might just be the whole point. When we're discussing things like leaping from a tall building without taking a scratch (remember, stranger things have been recorded) then leaping a quarter mile higher before coming down for a landing isn't as extreme anymore.

That argument doesn't hold, though. People in real life have fallen from thousands of feet and miraculously survived, but I'll bet you've never heard of someone jumping more than a few feet off the ground under their own power, have you? Leaping a quarter-mile in the air is always going to be ridiculous for a mundane human. Magic might let you do it, jet boots might, and superpowers will, but without outside assistance, there are rules under athletics for how far / high you can jump. Saying you want to jump one foot in the air, and then getting a critical success does not let you exceed those limits. A crit success might let you do a flip in midair before landing, as an extreme case, but it's not going to let you flagrantly break the rules, or the bounds of common sense.

Also, if you're waving a flag dramatically, why are you rolling in the first place? Just wave the damn flag as a complex action. A critical success on a shooting roll (or similar) might let you use a 'narrative flourish' to keep waving the flag while you do so, however.

[toturi]

The guide you're looking for is common sense coupled with understanding of the english language.

And what is common sense? What is its RAW definition? The likelihood of someone having the same exact common sense as someone else is almost zero. You can extrapolate, but extrapolate from existing material within the context of the game, not from your existing understanding of how the rules should be or any other preconceived notion.

[Tyro]

Could we PLEASE get back to topic?

[MaxMahem]

I honestly don't think there is any point in debating any of these points with you Cain. It is obvious to me that pushing your SR4 is bad agenda is far more important to you than any rational approach to the rules could ever be. If you can honestly present things like "jumping a quarter mile" as appropriate 'flourishes' for the critical success rule, then we have clearly left the realms of rational discourse. And entertaining your argument as if it was a serious proposition does a disservice to us all.

[Tyro]

I repeat - though it might be a double post, I'm annoyed enough not to care - could we please get this thread-train back on its tracks?

[Cain]

I honestly don't think there is any point in debating any of these points with you Cain. It is obvious to me that pushing your SR4 is bad agenda is far more important to you than any rational approach to the rules could ever be. If you can honestly present things like "jumping a quarter mile" as appropriate 'flourishes' for the critical success rule, then we have clearly left the realms of rational discourse. And entertaining your argument as if it was a serious proposition does a disservice to us all.

As usual, you ignored the other points, in favor of the point that's "exaggerated for effect".

Second, who ever said I have a "SR4 is bad" agenda? I defy you to show a single occurrence of me saying that. I have a "SR4 is mediocre" point that I have been pushing, but that's hardly the same thing.

Third, what exactly is "back on track" mean at this point? The conversation has meandered, and the topic has changed. Happens all the time on internet forums. If you want to get things back to the original topic, make a controversial statement about "BP vs Karmagen", and watch the counterarguments roll in.

[toturi]

I honestly don't think there is any point in debating any of these points with you Cain. It is obvious to me that pushing your SR4 is bad agenda is far more important to you than any rational approach to the rules could ever be. If you can honestly present things like "jumping a quarter mile" as appropriate 'flourishes' for the critical success rule, then we have clearly left the realms of rational discourse. And entertaining your argument as if it was a serious proposition does a disservice to us all.

Note RAW does not state that the flourishing detail is required to be appropriate. However it does state that the "flourishing detail" has to be "what she likes".

[Fortune]

Could we PLEASE get back to topic?

What more do you think needs to be discussed on the topic? If you have something specific in mind, feel free to post about it. If you have a question, ask it. Otherwise, your posts about thread drift are just as off-topic as everyone else's.

[Fuchs]

Well, for the mathematically inclined: Is there a point (dice pool size) where BP is more effective in making a character that's very good in one area, and well-rounded in the rest?

[Tyro]

What more do you think needs to be discussed on the topic? If you have something specific in mind, feel free to post about it. If you have a question, ask it. Otherwise, your posts about thread drift are just as off-topic as everyone else's.

I was mostly just getting tired of arguments that went nowhere.

[Glyph]

I think generally you hit the point of diminishing returns once you start hard-maxing. A skill of 6 is fine, but when you hard-max Attributes, get Aptitude and a skill of 7, and so on, you are paying lots of points for a few extra dice, when the 20 or more that you have are plenty. You can generally have two decent specialties if you don't hard-max, and still be able to have decent stats and general skills. You can have more if they are closely related. If you have a skill of 6 in pistols, with the related Agility boosters and so on, it's not that hard to add another ranged or melee skill at 4. Likewise, some builds such as hackers or faces often take skill groups, and get most of their dice pool pimping from modifiers.

Generally, for combat and magical skills, it is in the 17-20 range, with social skills being higher than that. That's me, though. I like having either a lavish spread of the essential skills, or a good solid secondary specialty. If you want to be more hyper-focused, you can get closer to the hard maxes without really sacrificing playability.

[sk8bcn]

I was mostly just getting tired of arguments that went nowhere.

I must agree there. I was more interested in the debate karmagen end BP than the flamewar about a rule every GM can handle right.

[Fuchs]

I meant: At which point (if any) does the BP system get more efficient than the karma gen system, measured by dicepools?

[toturi]

At the default pointage/values? None that I can come up with.

[ElFenrir]

More efficient? Hmm....

Yeah, generally speaking Karmagen is more efficient...BUT, a few things should be kept in mind:

-Under BP, it is more expensive to max an Attribute. However, under Karmagen, maxing skills is more expensive. A skill of 6(+2) is 26 BP. A skill of 7(+2) is 34 BP.

A skill of 6(+2) in karmagen is 46 Karma. 7(+2) (you still need to double the karma cost of the 7th point), is 74 Karma.(the 7 costs 28 Karma-14x2.) IMO, it's more efficient to pick up that Aptitude skill under BP. Paying 74 Karma for one skill hurts to do, IMO. 34 BP is quite a bit for one skill, but not as bad.

If you go the hardmax route, the percentages are roughly the same, actually. In the Pistols example, it would cost 65 BP to max the Agility(I'll keep the ware costs out of it, since it's roughly the same), 34 BP to get the 7(+2) Pistols and 10 BP for the Aptitude, for a grand total of 109 BP. Under Karma, it's 60 karma to max the Agility, 74 Karma for the Pistols, and 20 Karma for Aptitude, for a grand total of 154 Karma. Now assuming around 600 karma(if you want to have as close a match as you can for power level), and 400 BP, it's still about 1/4 of your starting points either way. It somehow...feels more efficient under Karma, though-even though it's technically roughly the same percentage of starting points.

If you soft-max in each system, it's 40 BP for the 5 Agility, and 22 BP for the skill(5 is the technical skill softmax), and runs 62 BP total, or around 1/6 of the starting points(a little less.) Under Karma(again, assuming 600 karma), it's 42 Karma for the 5 Agility, and 34 Karma for a 5(+2), for 76 Karma. In THIS case, however, it's more efficient under Karma-it only costs about 1/8 of the starting points. Going lower is typically a little more efficient in Karma; 4 skills at 3(+2) in BP runs you 56 BP, or about 1/7 of the starting points; the same skills in Karma are only 64, or about 1/10th of the starting points.

Now, assuming you can get more than one 6 at the start(just for the sake of things), it would cost 78 BP for 3 6(+2) skills, and 134 Karma...this turns out between 1/4 and 1/5 of the starting points, both ways; the higher you seem to go with the skills in BP, the more the bridges are gapped.

It just goes back to Karma seeming to favor the non-maxers, BP favors the maxers; both slightly.

Of course, my math here was done quickly and might be a load of BS, but this is just how it seems to turn out.

I know when I make characters, I seem instinctively drawn to go the middle-route for skills a lot in Karmagen. Somehow, I don't mind seeing a long list of skills that run 2-4, with 3's most prevalent and one good, solid biggie; whenever I make a BP character I see a lot more 4-5's or a 6(to what I'm allowed), and a couple of 1(+2's) floating around. It might be just something mental. Under Karmagen, I also notice my characters have a better pool of Knowledges(I know some folks say that the knowledges tend to be forgotten, but not in my experience, YMMV here), with a nice list hovering around 3's, with a 4 and a 2, with a couple languages; under BP, i tend to have a bunch of 2's and a few 1's, with perhaps a 3 in a language. Even though I know I can pull some BPs out of my pool for knowledges, I don't, I admit it. I don't mind pulling 43 or so Karma out for knowledges, though, and I don't even get free ones.

[Mäx]

(you still need to double the karma cost of the 7th point), is 74 Karma.(the 7 costs 28 Karma-14x2.)

Could i get a page reference for that.

[ElFenrir]

Aptitude, page 77, BBB:

Increasing a skill level beyond 6 costs double the normal Karma cost.

[Whipstitch]

Under the BP rules, I prefer to take skills at 4 or higher or not at all, plus I never take specializations except as a last ditch effort to bootstrap my way up to a decent Full Defense pool. Even then, I explore other cost saving measures first. If I just want to avoid defaulting something, that's what SkillWires are for. Likewise I'd rather spend my 2 bps on buying another level of Mnemonic Enhancer rating than spend 2 bps on purchasing a single Knowledge skill. New Specializations and merely dabbling in rather than mastering Knowledge skills is cheaper once you get in game than they are in chargen, meanwhile getting new cyberware can often be a pain in the ass once you hit the streets. Plus, once in play you're in a better position to figure out what knowledge skills out there are actually useful in the context of the campaign. It's not uncommon for the majority of my karma expenditures to be on dabbling in new Knowledge skills and picking up specializations in all my skills while my nuyen goes to a new vehicles, some drone backup and bribes. It's likely a good thing I don't play mundanes very often; for whatever reason I feel less of a need to min-max my mages.