Splitting Skill Groups during Character Creation..?, Rules Clarification Options

[admiral tee]

Hi guys,
Been haunting this forum for a short while, but this is my first post.
I am starting a SR4 game and one of the players has asked a question.

During Character Creation can you buy a skill group, say Firearms at rating 4, then split it by then upping Pistols to 6 and specialising?
Firearms SG
*Automatics 4
*Longarms 4
*Pistols 6, Spec 2 Colt Manhunter

This has cost him 40+8+2 = 50
Buying them separately 16+16+24+2 = 58

The BP saving is optimised with SG's containing only 3 Active Skills, and not optimised with those containing 4+ Active Skills.

Is this allowed?

Cheers

Tee

[Trax]

It can be split during the game, but not during chargen. The specialising can be done though.

[toturi]

When can you break up a skill group into its component skills? Can you break it up during character creation? Can I break apart a skill group in order to buy a specialization for one of the skills?

You can break apart a skill group whenever you want--as long as the GM allows it. We advise against breaking apart skill groups during character creation in order to keep it simple and counter min-maxing. Any time you improve a single skill within a skill group or add a specialization to one of those skills, that skill group no longer exists.

[Jaid]

specialising a skill breaks the skill group. so if you can't break the skillgroup, you likewise cannot specialise a skill in the skill group.

in answer to the original question, iirc it's a GM's call, but the intention was that it was not (supposed to be) possible. no rules explicitly state one way or the other, however, and we largely have to infer from how the sample characters were built (which is problematic, because most of them weren't built very well...)

[Cain]

To sum up for Toturi: It depends on the GM. Many won't allow it at chargen. Some will, so always ask first.

I should also point out that you don't specialize in specific weapons anymore-- in your example, you should specialize in "Semi-Auto" instead.

[admiral tee]

Ahh, ok.
Thanks for the quick reply guys. You should charge a fee for that rate of answer!

Yeah, guess i should've read the FAQ's...
OK, I won't allow it during CharGen, as you can see in the above example, the player has effectively "min-maxed" and saved 8 points.
And thanks for the fyi on the Specialisation, re Semi-Auto not Colt ManHunter.

Cheers,

[Ryu]

If you take the FAQ as declaration of developer intent (which is dangerous because the FAQ is slightly outdated), you learn that splitting a group at chargen is rules-legal - unless the GM follows up on the suggestion and forbids it.

Question: Do you want to forbid it? It is cheaper, because it lets the players use the group rebate. If you forbid the splitting of skillgroups at chargen, you are implicitly charging more for high skills that could be had in a skillgroup (usual price + lost rebate, in this case 8 BP), compared to skills that aren´t part of a skillgroup.

[toturi]

If you take the FAQ as declaration of developer intent (which is dangerous because the FAQ is slightly outdated), you learn that splitting a group at chargen is rules-legal - unless the GM follows up on the suggestion and forbids it.

Question: Do you want to forbid it? It is cheaper, because it lets the players use the group rebate. If you forbid the splitting of skillgroups at chargen, you are implicitly charging more for high skills that could be had in a skillgroup (usual price + lost rebate, in this case 8 BP), compared to skills that aren´t part of a skillgroup.

If you take the FAQ as declaration of developer intent, you learn that splitting a group at chargen is really ambigious. Unless the GM follows up on the advice and forbids it. If you don't forbid the splitting of skillgroups at chargen, you are implicitly charging more for skills that couldn't be had in a skillgroup compared to skills that are part of a skillgroup.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Of course the problem goes away if one uses Karma-Gen.

[Ryu]

If the person writing the FAQ was against splitting groups at chargen, and found the rules to be ambigous, the errata published on the same day would have been the place for corrections, no? I can applaud a freedom-of-style attitude in a ruleset, but basic FAQs should go for clear answers, rather than ambiguity. Rules that are ambiguous need work.

[Mäx]

Of course the problem goes away if one uses Karma-Gen.

How?
Care to elobrate.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Breaking up skillgroups is defined in RAW for karma.