Karma build question, I'm sure this is an old one... Options

[JonathanC]

So, in the Runner's Companion, I noticed that if you choose Karma build, there is basically no reason to really play a human, since you start with all of your attributes at the racial minimum for free, and pay no cost for race. I've been told that this has been house-ruled so that you have to buy the attributes to the racial minimum from one, which means that you're merely getting the non-attribute benefits (low-light vision, etc.) for free, which still seems a little odd.

The thing is, that's a house-rule. I would really like to hear from the developers about what the intent was with this rule. Is there a balancing factor here that I'm missing? I also noticed that Karma built characters are much stronger; while I like them being more rounded, I also liked the "starting out" feel of BP characters. Any ideas on finding a happy medium? Perhaps I should just double the number of knowledge skill points, but say that half of those points must be spent on non-academic know skills?

But really, I mainly want to hear about the karma build/free attributes thing. It seems really odd.

[Glyph]

As far as the power level goes, yes, 750 Karma is problematic if you want "starting" characters. 600 Karma has been suggested as being closer to an equivalent of 400 BP.

The race-for-free thing is there because Attributes scale up in cost, so rather than a set 10 build points, races with racial mods pay more for increasing abilities with bonuses. Take trolls, for example. In build points, they can spend 40 build points to raise Strength from 5 to 9, while a human spends 40 build points to raise his Strength from 1 to 5. In karmagen, though, the troll spends 90 karma to do that, while the human only spends 42 Karma. So they are NOT really getting it for free. Also keep in mind that even in build points, some races got more bonuses than they spent on buying their race - trolls spent 40 points, but got 80 points worth of Attribute bonuses, so even with build points, they had an advantage. They pay for being a troll under karmagen, it's just not as obvious. Yes, you can certainly start out with minimal stats, picking the race solely to get the bonus, but that leaves you without the main advantage of that metatype - I would rather pay the extra points to have a charismatic elf, strong troll, etc. than have a mediocre character with a few extra points more than the human for skills or whatnot. People who try to exploit the system that way are only shooting themselves in the foot.

IMPORTANT NOTE
Under the new rule changes in SR4A (the anniversary edition - and yes, these changes will make it to the normal SR4 errata), the cost to improve Attributes has increased from 3 x new level, to 5 x new level. The Runner's Companion errata will change the karmagen system to take this change into account, but until then, karmagen is in a state of flux, at least if you adopt the new rules.

[JonathanC]

I don't really see how they're shooting themselves in the foot. You save a lot of points, which you can funnel into Edge, more skills, etc. I can see your point with Trolls, perhaps, but most races have less extreme bonuses, so the cost difference is smaller. It's basically just a tax on future development, but even then...choosing a Troll is basically expanding your maximums for free. There is no longer any real "advantage" for humans.

[Glyph]

There wasn't really before, though. The only race that came out worse under BP was elves. Trolls got a net 30 BP gain, orks got a net 20 BP gain, and even dwarves got a net 5 BP gain.

I could see being concerned about elves under karmagen, since, unlike the others, they don't have any real disadvantages, but for them, it's a savings of 15 karma over the human, hardly game-breaking. (The new errata for karmagen could go any conceivable way, so this is only talking about the "old" karmagen)

[Glyph]

You know, I just realized why I actually like humans better under karmagen. Under BP, they were underpowered compared to anything, including elves, because they were stuck with those 200 points for Attributes. It was tempting to pick ork just to have a Body of 4 and a Strength of 3, and be able to raise the other stats higher. Under karmagen, with a 375 karma cap, humans can get their stats a lot higher. So they actually come closer to the other metatypes than they did before.

[TheOOB]

The fact that metatypes do not have a cost in karma is the subject of much debate. Ignoring the special non-standard critters which have abilities that are way to powerful to be free(free spirits and shapeshifters come to mind), some people think the metatypes don't need a cost because it costs more to raise their attributes up to average level, and some think that because the base attribute level is higher(and other assorted special abilities) that they should have a cost.

I personally fall in the second camp. I either houserule that metatypes and racial options cost their BP cost in karma, or they cost twice their BP cost in karma but you raise attributes like a human(ie, it would cost the same karma to get an elf to 5 charisma as it would to get a human to 3). Use either or neither as you see fit.

[JonathanC]

TheOOB brings up a point I had forgotten, which is that karmabuild works rather poorly for races like AIs, which have a high cost normally, but not because of ability bonuses. I guess the easiest fix would be to simply charge for races in karmabuild as a houserule. But thanks Glyph, for explaining the thinking behind the original rule. I just think that it breaks down once you look at the more advanced races, which funnily enough are introduced in the same book.

[Falconer]

To OP:
Ancient History is the name de forum of the guy who wrote that. As far as I'm concerned, he should absolutely never be allowed to write rules. Though he seems like an absolutely great fluff author and exceedingly knowledgable on the SR & ED settings. His stated reason was that "orks, trolls, ... and metas are supposed to be common" therefor we'll intentionally undercost them. Quite frankly... as far as I'm concerned that's a great way to let a fluff author break any rules system.

The problem w/ the rationale on some things cost more is that it really only applies to trolls (and to a lesser extent orks) where exceptionally high bod/str scores can come into play. If you have a lot of time... here's the thread in question.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...5&hl=common


I actually have one other problem w/ both systems. Penalized stats mean nothing normally. A typical troll doesn't care that his max Cha is 4. It costsd him 20BP (or he saves a ton of karma just like a human does to raise it to 3 or even 4, no max attribute penalty cost under karmagen). And humans will be subpar so long as it costs rediculous amounts to reach dicepool parity w/ metas. For a none face char, they really only care that they have say 5 to 7 dice on an etiquette test to avoid critical glitches and unnecessary scrutiny IMO.

One other problem which comes out under karma and BP... skills are still less valuable than attributes. You're almost always better raising the attribute before the skill. The rule is you always want either 1 rank or a ton of ranks it seems. (1rank to avoid defaulting, or a ton of ranks to save karma to learn other skills later to round out). And the source of this disparity is that they use two radically different systems to build a character as opposed to advance a character. Using karma to generate fixes this and reduces the incentives to twink like this.

As far as they can't quite reach the exceptional dice levels they had under BP. I don't see this as a problem. The strength of karmagen IMO is that it allows and encourages more balanced characters. It also actively discourages twinking in chargen since you don't save later by buying now under a different system. It's not worth destroying the system to break that.




I was under the opinion karmagen worked reasonably well, if you made them cost BP=Karma, then modify the generation, apply attribute bonuses, buy up attributes, THEN APPLY ATTRIBUTE PENALTIES. (all stats min 1), suddenly that troll has to spend extra to get his mental stats up to par. Also, you might like to give 3x(int+log) karma in extra kamra only to spend on languages & knowledge skills depending on your starting karma. (IMO 500 under system ir about 400BP level). Enforce the half karma on attributes rule for EVERYONE.


NB: that was before the change from 3x to 5x karma (which is still a bargain compared to skill costs IMO).
Though w/ the 5x cost, then meta might be 'free' w/ penalties applied. But it's still a problem for things like AI's where they simply don't have physical stats and the BP cost reflects this (IMO an AI pays 110BP for phantom physical attributes it just doesn't have, still freeing 200BP for spending on a mere 5 attributes, compared to the 9 or 10 other characters need to spread those same points across). The only way I feel the devs can address this is to publish both a BP and a karma racial cost (which aren't necessarily the same or simply multiples of each other, or put a special note under a few exceptional cases like AI's which are different enough to justify a unique cost outside the normal system).

[Neraph]

Honestly, I don't know why people choose the karmagen. I understand the flexibility is greater under karmagen, but the headaches are even more headache-y. I personally prefer the BP-gen, and am going to be taking a serious look at the Priority system again.

Now keep in mind I'm not flaming on you guys for choosing the karmagen, I'm just wondering why you prefer to use that (not kind words [not profanity] deleted) system as opposed to others.

And has anyone else noticed that the Karmagen system starts you off with 75 Street Cred?

[Falconer]

Neraph:
Because of the nature of the system. BP encourages two things... as many soft maxed stats as you can. (w/ the rest left as low as possible, you can quickly raise them up to average with your first 20-30 karma). And then to hyperspecialize in a handfull of skills raised as high as you possibly can. Difficulties arise because long-term it's cheaper to buy some things later and some things right now in chargen specificaly because you're using two radically different point buys.

also IMO a lot of people get hung up on 2karma == 1BP... IMO it's a lot closer to 1.5:1 or 1:1

Think about it this way, a skill group (max4 chargen) costs 55karma, or 40BP (1.375:1 ratio)
Skill group raised to 1: 10karma or 10BP (1:1 ratio), Raised to 2: 20karma or 20BP (1:1 ratio)
An attribute raised from 1-5. 42karma, or 40BP (~1:1 ratio)
An attribute raised from 5-9. 90karma, or 40BP (here's the 2:1+ ratio and about the only place you find it, trolls are the only race which goes up this high, most of the rest are limited to +1 to 3)
Oh and chargen focuses are another gold mine in the ratio for mages (reduced attunement cost)

Remeber points spent on attributes help all skills linked to that attribute. Points spent on skills only affect that skill. So think of attributes as super-skill groups.

Because now consider above, until you get 3 or more ranks in a skill group it costs you the same in karma as it does in BP. From a long term perspective you're better off buying them later and raising your existing groups to 3 or 4 to start seeing linear cost savings. (IMO: skills suffer badly for the first rank costs double).

Or another example of abuse. Under simple BP. (which karma made even worse... which is IMO the primary reason for the howls of outrage)
An ork who just doesn't care. 5 bod is 5 bod for soak he's an intuation based mage! And low-light vision for free (helps w/ vis mods against spellcasting)
4->5 bod, 3str free... rest going elsewhere. 15karma or 30BP (20 race which doens't cost against attr limit). The rest is free to be spent on a higher magic rating or the like or making the mage even tougher (more armor w/ even higher bod than a human can)
If it was a human....
5bod, 3str. 60BP or 57karma. All of which count against the attr limit!.

net 42 karma saved. 42karma is enough to raise the orks magic from 1->5 before we even start doing anyuthing w/ the human! If we 'equalize them' we now give the ork 'human looking' for 5BP qual, and the human 'Night Vision' for 5BP qual... almost identical from RP perspective!

When you're talking numbers like that, now suddenly balance issues are more than minor. I think everyone accepts that perfect balance is impossible. But if you're going to try and set any kind of a point buy for things, an effort should be made to keep balance issues minor.

[Glyph]

I could live with either of TheOOB's house rules. I don't think they're necessary, but they don't cripple metahumans. Falconer's house rule, though, would, and is needlessly complicated (plus, who needs to go back to how SR1 & SR2 did it?).

Neraph, karmagen is not that complicated. You just need to make yourself a little table of Attribute and skill costs, and you are good to go. It gives characters with decent Attributes with a wide spread of skills in addition to being good at their core skills. Characters are more powerful, but make more sense than they do under BP, where you can either min-max or be ineffective (although BP is better when you go a bit over 400 BP).

Priority system has not even come up that much. Does anyone even use it? It falls flat on its face, because most characters require "Priority A" in several areas to be good. And for something that is supposed to be for newer players, it is actually more difficult to use (and get a usable character) than doing it with build points.

[Neraph]

I still don't see how karmagen is any "more better-er" than BP. The BP system keeps it much more simple, and karmagen seems to punish metahumans, let alone other racial choices (metasapients, AI, Wild Spirits...).

[Falconer]

I still don't see how karmagen is any "more better-er" than BP. The BP system keeps it much more simple, and karmagen seems to punish metahumans, let alone other racial choices (metasapients, AI, Wild Spirits...).

Exactly the opposite. pointwise, Karmagen as published gives nothing except incentives to metas. And zero reason to consider human.


Glyph:
My only issue w/ TheOOB's is that is still encourages the worst types of abuse. And is probably a little worse on that score.

Take above example... ork intuition mage. 20karma for ork (garrr). To get say bod7 (great point for lots of armor and good soak and natural healing of things like drain). He pays even less under his system than he would under karma. (bod7 for a human is pretty much inconcievable as the exceptional attribute qualities are rediculously expensive IMO, maybe if the quality gave the extra rank they'd be worthwhile). And he never addresses how cha and logic would be treated...

At the end of the day a dice pool is of either of size A or size B. If you pay significantly less for A >> B for no real cost. Then you have a problem.
How much is it worth to have. I'm fine w/ this, no such thing as perfection... but it should be limited to say no more than 2-3% (10-20karma on a 600karma character)

[TheOOB]

I should note that doing the math on my second houserule (races cost 2xBP cost in karma, but positive racial mods are applied after you buy attributes) usually would reach a net bonus in karma in the 5xattribute cost. A dwarf who manually uses raises their body to 3, and willpower to two is getting (20+15+25) 60 karma worth of attributes for a 50 karma meta. Not bad. This gets even better if you focus on your metas attributes, eg the troll is more valuable if you focus on strength and agility.

[JonathanC]

I don't like the idea of hitting metahumans with their penalties at chargen, subtracting from their attributes. This is essentially how it worked in SR3, and as a result nobody ever played metas, unless they were an Elf gunslinger or some kind of melee troll. I think I'm just going to go back to BP in the future; it's much easier and faster for chargen.

[Glyph]

I still don't see how karmagen is any "more better-er" than BP. The BP system keeps it much more simple, and karmagen seems to punish metahumans, let alone other racial choices (metasapients, AI, Wild Spirits...).

Metahumans aren't as "free" as you would think for having no base metatype cost, but they aren't "punished" - you can make viable elves, trolls, whatever. I guess I like it because it's less tight, point-wise, than BP, so you don't have to take dump stats or do other min-maxing tricks just to get a usable character. And since you are paying with Karma, you don't have to worry about "I want to start out with this, but it would be cheaper to improve with Karma once the game starts."

Also, despite what you have heard about it creating "balanced" characters, you can still be as badass. In BP, you could sacrifice in other areas to have an effective gunslinger. In karmagen, you can make that same gunslinger, and also have enough points to give him some other skills.


@Falconer:
TheOOB's house rules don't work like your example. In version 1, the ork pays 20 karma to be an ork as a flat cost. In version 2, the ork pays 40 karma to be an ork, but gets his racial bonuses added after buying Attributes. Like I said, I don't personally think they are necessary, but I could certainly live with them.

In version 1, the ork comes out 16 Karma ahead of a human, the troll comes out 38 points ahead of the human, the elf comes out 15 points behind the human, and the dwarf comes out 4 points behind the human. That's fairly reasonable, since the ork and troll came out ahead (by 20 and 30 BP, respectively) under BP, too. The elf and dwarf are screwed a bit, but it's a liveable amount.

In version 2, the ork who takes racial minimums is 4 points under a human, the troll is 2 points under a human, the elf is 45 points under a human, and the dwarf is 29 points under a human. The ork who soft-maxes the attributes getting bonuses is 20 points over a human, the troll is 16 points over a human, the elf is 24 points under a human, and the dwarf comes out 2 points under a human.

NOTES: Comparing points to the human, if they seem off, remember that humans get +1 Edge, a 6 Karma bonus, which I factor in when comparing them. Also keep in mind that the SR4A rules make a lot of these calculations moot until we get the errata for Runner's Companion, which will adjust karmagen to take the SR4A rules into account.

[JonathanC]

Setting aside house rules for a moment, could you live with the standard ruleset and a player who makes an AI character, or a Free Spirit?

[Ancient History]

Setting aside house rules for a moment, could you live with the standard ruleset and a player who makes an AI character, or a Free Spirit?

KarmaGen is not really suitable for AIs or Free Spirits.

[Glyph]

Setting aside house rules for a moment, could you live with the standard ruleset and a player who makes an AI character, or a Free Spirit?

Personally, I would tend to treat it as a quality, instead, like drake or infected. That's a house rule, though (although I hope the Runner's Companion errata addresses this - it's the area where karmagen is truly broken).

[darthmord]

KarmaGen is not really suitable for AIs or Free Spirits.

BPs sure aren't worth it for Free Spirits IMO. I tried to make one under the BP system and was less than impressed. A lot of work for something not terribly effective.

Doing the same under Karma-gen was noticeably better.

[Falconer]

Glyph:

Please enlighten me. I have an ancient SR1 book, and my SR4 books. I was out of it for a while, so I'm not quite up to speed when you say that adding a modest penalty cost on penalized attributes kills metas. (also since pre-SR4 attribute splitup were often in the teens so those penalty costs would be a LOT higher in comparison I'm guessing). I understand that might be wrong, so explain the cost & difference to me please.


Why to discuss this now:
The rules are being worked on now. The time to be heard is now. Not after the errata gets published and all we can do is complain.


My views: (please feel free to disagree here)
Metas should not be free.
The cost for a meta should reflect the investment in an average attribute, not an exceptional one.
It's the really extreme cases which give the system problems
Undercosting the metatype is just as bad as overcosting it

I don't want to see metas not played, I just want to see some incentive to make human a reasonable pick, while not handing metas scads of 'freebies' just to precompensate for higher ranks in attributes they may or may not take. The only way I see to allow them a bonus in their strong attributes and not see them then 'save' the karma and invest in their 'dump' stats is to put a penalty cost on the dump stats related to the max reduction. (is 5 extra karma per rank for an attrib capped at 5 going to break the bank? That's the same as them spending 62karma to raise it from 1->5 when it would take a human 60 to take it from 1->6).

[Glyph]

Okay, first, here's my analysis of one of TheOOB's house rules, where the metatype pays its cost in karma.

In version 1, the ork comes out 16 Karma ahead of a human, the troll comes out 38 points ahead of the human, the elf comes out 15 points behind the human, and the dwarf comes out 4 points behind the human. That's fairly reasonable, since the ork and troll came out ahead (by 20 and 30 BP, respectively) under BP, too. The elf and dwarf are screwed a bit, but it's a liveable amount.

Your version would do that, then make the ork and troll pay an extra penalty on top of that. For example, if the troll wanted a Charisma of 4, he would have to pay 60 karma, instead of 27 Karma, or an extra cost of 33 Karma. And that's just one, out of four Attributes that he will be penalized on. And he still pays 90 Karma if he wants that Body or Strength of 9. And that's the old Attribute costs.

So that's why I think your house rule would be too excessive. I think TheOOB's rules already make humans the best all around option - there's no need to gimp metahumans even more.

[Falconer]

If that's the case, why not just give the troll a 'discount' on karma buys to raise those attributes.

Using the 5xrating new karma cost as a guideline.


Human: 1->6. 10+15+20+25+30==100karma
Human: 1->5 70karma
Human: 1->4 45karma
If you penalize troll cha by an extra 10karma/rank. 1->4 is 10+10, 15+10, 20+10. 45+30==75karma (almost the same as a human going 1->5)
If you penalize troll Log by an extra 5 karma/rank: 1->5 is 10+5, 15+5, 20+5, 25+5. 90karma (only 20more than human)
Now that those are within reason... offsetting them w/ reasonable discounts in bod & str.

reducing str by 20/rank.
5->6 (30-20==10), 6->7 (15), 7->8 (20), 8->9 (25)

NB: mathematically the above is the same as 'buying base attribs' as a human, then applying the meta template AFTER the stat buy.

For a system like this to work properly, the cost of the meta MUST be higher than if no points were spent on any attribs otherwise you leave open the problem of the ork intuition mage (strong 'dump' stats for zero investment). Hence why I suggest placing the meta cost as if 'average' stats were bought. (straight 3's, then apply template). Look at the karma difference between meta and basic stat. (at the end of the day, 7 dice in agility beats 5, all else being equal before skills etc.).

Explanation: buying the template then, costs you more, and you get a better 'value' the more you invest in their strong attributes, and the less you invest in your weak ones. But the system as it is now... the template costs less than even the lowest level stats which come with it, which is why it's so abusable.

[TheOOB]

Maybe I should have mentioned, I don't actually apply metatype penalties, I just leave them as attribute caps. In my game a troll would cost the same amount of karma to raise their charisma as a human, they just couldn't go above 4. The attribute cap is penalty enough in my mind.

Which would make the following(not counting human bonus to edge).

Dwarf(Base Attributes): 23 karma behind humans(50 cost - 6 body - 6 willpower - 15 strength)
Dwarf(5 base): 25 karma ahead of humans(50 cost - 18 Body - 18 Willpower - 39 Strength)

Elf(Base Attributes): 39 karma behind humans(60 cost - 6 agility - 15 charisma)
Elf(5 base): 3 karma behind humans(60 cost - 18 agility - 39 strength)

Ork(Base Attributes): 2 karma ahead of humans(40 cost - 15 strength - 27 body)
Ork(5 base): 62 karma ahead of humans(40 cost - 39 strength - 63 body)

Troll(Base Attributes): 4 karma ahead of humans(80 cost - 42 body - 42 strength)
Troll(5 base): 100 karma ahead of humans!(80 cost - 90 body - 90 strength)

NOTE: If using shadowrun 4eA rules, the metatypes get an even better deal.

I apply costs to make the meta's have value and make the human a viable option, as well as to encourage meta's to excel where their meta is good at(unlike the base karma gen which encourages trolls not to raise their body and strength beyond their base values, but also to make it so you don't get penalized to playing against type.

[suppenhuhn]

If that's the case, why not just give the troll a 'discount' on karma buys to raise those attributes.

Using the 5xrating new karma cost as a guideline.


Human: 1->6. 10+15+20+25+30==100karma
Human: 1->5 70karma
Human: 1->4 45karma
If you penalize troll cha by an extra 10karma/rank. 1->4 is 10+10, 15+10, 20+10. 45+30==75karma (almost the same as a human going 1->5)
If you penalize troll Log by an extra 5 karma/rank: 1->5 is 10+5, 15+5, 20+5, 25+5. 90karma (only 20more than human)
Now that those are within reason... offsetting them w/ reasonable discounts in bod & str.

reducing str by 20/rank.
5->6 (30-20==10), 6->7 (15), 7->8 (20), 8->9 (25)

NB: mathematically the above is the same as 'buying base attribs' as a human, then applying the meta template AFTER the stat buy.

For a system like this to work properly, the cost of the meta MUST be higher than if no points were spent on any attribs otherwise you leave open the problem of the ork intuition mage (strong 'dump' stats for zero investment). Hence why I suggest placing the meta cost as if 'average' stats were bought. (straight 3's, then apply template). Look at the karma difference between meta and basic stat. (at the end of the day, 7 dice in agility beats 5, all else being equal before skills etc.).

Explanation: buying the template then, costs you more, and you get a better 'value' the more you invest in their strong attributes, and the less you invest in your weak ones. But the system as it is now... the template costs less than even the lowest level stats which come with it, which is why it's so abusable.

I think your method is a bit complicated.
If you wanted to include all such stuff into the attribute cost then you'd have to buy them last and factor all qualities in.
For instance you penalizing a hermetic ork mage for the nice drain stats of an ork hedge witch would be unfair.
Also your system is rather hard on exotic things like troll faces etc.
I think with that system you railroad characters into a certain role, which isn't all that good.