[X] My Assistant

[deek]

Somebody mentioned this above, but I'd like to reiterate, as its a pet peeve of mine. You can always spend a point of edge for an additional IP. Everyone seems to forget this fact...so if you take a 1IP combat character, say the face that was mentioned, drop some combat drugs and spend a point of edge, well, now you have a 3IP "monster" for one combat turn.

Obviously, this isn't going to happen every fight, but at my table, we play out somewhere around 2 combat encounters a session (which is about 4.5 hours of real time). I refresh edge every 24 hours, so my players can effectively gauge how to use their edge. Plus, if you are doing too much more than that many encounters per run, then your runner team isn't going to last very long...

And another thing, most combat shouldn't be like the 1700s where you get all your combatants lined up in plain site and you take turns shooting. Use the environment, duck, dodge, take cover. The 1IP guy should be able to hide pretty well, using AR from his teammates, pop up on his pass, take some shots and then duck back under cover.

If you are more concerned about the 1IP guy being as strong in combat as 3IP guy, then you probably are playing the wrong game. I usually measure success by how well the team gets through the encounter. If the 3IP sammy tore up the opposition by dropping more guys than the face, but everyone comes out with little to no wounds, well, then that's a good thing!

[Heath Robinson]

My main concern is that "get lots of IPs" wasn't immediately obvious to a few players who never played before, and even though they were a street sam and a mage, they both only had 1 IP. My drone with a taser was outshining them simply because it got 3 rounds of actions while they and the enemies only got 1 each.

You're forgetting to take Control Vehicle actions with your Drone. It's a Complex Action that avoids you needing to take a Crash Test. You have to take them, by RAW, even if your Drone isn't moving.

Unless your GM has houseruled them out.

[KX082]

If the issue is a new player rolls up a Sam with only one IP and doesn't have some way to compensate for that then the issue sounds more like a GM not doing their job, even more so since the player is new. One way you can compensate for only having 1IP is by using area attacks, such as wide burst. You may not do as much damage that way but you will slow down everyone else, Air Timed Grenades work well, and the ever so much flame thrower. I would let him spray an area with that if I where GMing. Another option is stealth, the drones distract the others, he sneaks up behind them... bad day for the foes. As for the mage area effect spells, or maybe he isn't a combat specialist to start with. I have built a few mages back in 3rd that didn't have any improved reflexes and they worked well.

Now on the topic of 1IP, I wouldn't ever support this in a game I play in and would leave if it came to be house ruled in regardless with what was done with the IP boosters. Though I can see the reason for wanting this, though I personally say don't remove the option for them to build up to getting the IP boosters. It sucks but I would be more for the new players adjusting their character, or the more experienced players making characters more to the new players levels and lowering the campaign that way. With that said I am not in your group so anything I say really is just what I would do and have no bering on what your group does, making everthing get 1IP does make things simpler and no one has to rebuild, it also might make it easier for the new players to learn the game. Though if they go to a game with another group or at a con then they might be in for confusion when their 1IP characters lose effectiveness if they where never built with having teammates and foes have 2-4IPs.

[Malachi]

When I GM'd Shadowrun for a bunch of new players, we went through the entire On the Run adventure, and then I let them go back and tweak/re-make their characters to whatever extent they wanted. I knew that players new to an RPG system will make mistakes in the character build and often they will only be apparent after the first session.

I don't think I have ever played any game for the first time (board, card, or roleplaying) where I didn't make some mistake by not realizing how ridiculously important X aspect of the game was.

[ornot]

My opinion has been documented elsewhere, but for those that haven't been elsewhere, I'll repeat it.

I don't take multiple IPs out of my game, since they are pretty integral to the system and the genre.

I do think they make guns too effective in combat, since in the most part a double tap is vastly more effective than the single melee attack allowed in the same timeframe. Multiplying that effectiveness by 2 or 3 times is simply too much for my tastes, so I make guns behave more equally in the hands of both Sams and the reflex impaired. In my game multiple IPs are still very valuable, but they only really add to combat effectiveness in melee (which by RAW is pretty weak) and with hypervelocity weapons (I won't go into it here, but it's pretty cool).

[Stingray]

Is he wielding two Warhawks or did you forget that its a Single Shot pistol?

Adept (and anyone) can take Firing Selection Change (SS-->SA),only 300 yen,add
Personalized Grip,STR Recoil Compensation rule..2xRuger+ Gunslinger Adept=Death!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ninja.gif)

[Malachi]

Adept (and anyone) can take Firing Selection Change (SS-->SA),only 300 yen,add
Personalized Grip,STR Recoil Compensation rule..2xRuger+ Gunslinger Adept=Death!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ninja.gif)

Ah yes, the mod that I banned from my game. I think the firing mode of a weapon is an integral part of its balance in the game. I soon as I read that mod I knew that it was going to be trouble. I wasn't quite ready for full-auto Panther Cannons or Sniper Rifles to enter my game.

[Veggiesama]

You're forgetting to take Control Vehicle actions with your Drone. It's a Complex Action that avoids you needing to take a Crash Test. You have to take them, by RAW, even if your Drone isn't moving.

Unless your GM has houseruled them out.

I see that both chase combat and tactical combat require complex actions every round, but only when there's a "driver" involved. If a drone is acting autonomously by its Pilot program, is a test still required? If the rigger is issuing orders to a Pilot program instead of actually remote controlling or rigging it, is a test still required (if so, who makes the test: drone stats or rigger stats?)?

What if the drone is just standing still in tactical combat? Or what if it's crawling along at walking speed?

Is there a part in the book where it clearly says a DRONE must also make these tests? Yes, drones are essentially vehicles, but the vehicle combat rules talk specifically about "drivers," and unrigged drones don't have any drivers besides their Pilot programs.

I like what you've brought up, and it definitely makes sense in retrospect, but I don't see the SR4 book clearly spelling out that DRONES need to spend an action every round to avoid spinning out of control when not involved in a high-speed pursuit or performing funky aerial maneuvers. It's not intuitive to me, at any rate. Maybe I missed a page, or might it be in Arsenal, or something?

[ornot]

Don't take it as canon, but I believe in an unrigged drone the Pilot is the driver for those tests. Of course, if the drone is sitting still, the threshold is only 1, so with a manouveur 'soft and handling bonus most can buy a hit.

Personally I think the rules for drones are kinda sketchy, and annoyingly seperate from vehicle action. I guess that's one of the things they've fixed with the new SR4A layout, but I've not read it.

[Malachi]

Drones should be considered as "vehicles" and a drone's Pilot program should be considered the "driver" while it is acting autonomously. That leads to the least amount of rule confusion, IMO.

[psychophipps]

I just have to say that removing extra IP, even with Edge being spent, has been 100% positive on our weekly game. Nobody misses them or mentions them anymore.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Don't take it as canon, but I believe in an unrigged drone the Pilot is the driver for those tests. Of course, if the drone is sitting still, the threshold is only 1, so with a manouveur 'soft and handling bonus most can buy a hit.

Personally I think the rules for drones are kinda sketchy, and annoyingly seperate from vehicle action. I guess that's one of the things they've fixed with the new SR4A layout, but I've not read it.

Ar you telling me that you make a Driver/Pilot Program actually make a test if the vehicle is not actually moving... are you kidding me?

[Shinobi Killfist]

Yet about half of the examples in your counterargument involve summoning or piloting something with multiple IPs in order to remain competitive, and one involves saying, "Well, it's okay for you to suck at combat if you're the face."

Think of it as analagous to the attempts at making it so that someone achieving most goals has the option of using magic OR 'ware to do it with. I want it to be possible for someone playing a primary combatant to take the resources that would have been used for IP enhancement, choose something else, and still be roughly as effective. There is no way that I know of to do this, short of your Magician option, which has its own problems, as per the recent overcasting-and-combat-magic brouhaha. It's just that I can't think of a single damned implant that would provide the same "bang for your buck" for a combatant as IP increase 'ware. It's fine if it's a damned good choice, but it's so much better than the others that you'd have to be a damn fool not to take it - and that doesn't do the game any favors, in my mind.

The intent of my examples were to show that outside gun bunnies all the other types had other ways to either get extra IPs, extra actions, or have a big enough bang they don't really need them. Mages have bad assed area of effect spells and an on call lackey. Deckers can have built in IPS. And heck even that pure face if they have a decent agility and combat skill will be decent in the fight, they would just be better with more IP.

So sure, if you want to be a physical combatant nothing else gives as much bang for your buck as extra actions. But only in the sense that the guy with extra actions can likely have whatever you took instead so really isn't missing out on anything. I think muscle toner probably adds just as much bang for your buck as wired relfexes, but you can have both so yes if you don't take extra IP you are out of luck. You can still kick ass with 1 IP, just not as much as you could. Be an elf, take enhanced attribute agility, take restricted gear for muscle toner and get it to level 4. start off with a 12 agility and a couple decent combat skills and you will be effective. You would be more effective if you added in wired reflexes, but you don't scuk in a fight if you are rolling 20 dice with your smg.

I guess I am having a basic disconnect form yes something makes you better and turning that into you suck without it. Less effective does not equal useless in a fight to me.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Ar you telling me that you make a Driver/Pilot Program actually make a test if the vehicle is not actually moving... are you kidding me?

Why not?

It might totally careen off course crash into that other unmoving object.

[KX082]

I just have to say that removing extra IP, even with Edge being spent, has been 100% positive on our weekly game. Nobody misses them or mentions them anymore.

That makes me happy to hear, I do know that in my third group we did a gang storyline and no one had special IP boosters and that made the game a lot of fun, I am glad to hear that 4th that still holds up.

[Stingray]

Ah yes, the mod that I banned from my game. I think the firing mode of a weapon is an integral part of its balance in the game. I soon as I read that mod I knew that it was going to be trouble. I wasn't quite ready for full-auto Panther Cannons or Sniper Rifles to enter my game.

SS --> SA is small modification. (no big deal.IMO) but SS/SA-->BF/FA is large mod (takes 4 slots out of 6)
Revolver that is SA is no big difference to Ares Predator..Revolver carry only 6 rounds after all..

[ornot]

Ar you telling me that you make a Driver/Pilot Program actually make a test if the vehicle is not actually moving... are you kidding me?

I wouldn't, but per RAW you could. It's moot anyway, since as I said, you only need a dice pool of 4 to purchase that hit.

[Heath Robinson]

Ar you telling me that you make a Driver/Pilot Program actually make a test if the vehicle is not actually moving... are you kidding me?

By RAW, you must. It brings their IPs into line with those of the other Action Economy abusers (spirits, agents) as a game balance effect.

Ornot,
You can't purchase that hit unless your GM houserules away the restrictions on buying hits. Crashing is a negative result, and in the situations where you care (i.e. combat) it's high stress and you also can't.

[ornot]

Fair point. Typically I'd permit it, seeing as the odds of failing are long, and it's an extra die roll to avoid. It is important to remember that it exists, since it eats up the drones actions, which is kinda why I mentioned it.

[Malachi]

SS --> SA is small modification. (no big deal.IMO) but SS/SA-->BF/FA is large mod (takes 4 slots out of 6)
Revolver that is SA is no big difference to Ares Predator..Revolver carry only 6 rounds after all..

Yes, its a large mod, but that just means it takes more slots and costs a little bit more. That's not much of a inhibitor. I know the Small version of the firing mode change isn't "much" of a game-break but I just found it easier to remove the mod altogether.

[Draco18s]

Many guns aren't well suited to a firing selection change.

There was a gun that did 7P damage (pistol?) that I wanted to make burst fire, but the sad thing was...it had a clip of 1.

There was simply no way to put enough bullets into it to take advantage of the mod.

[InfinityzeN]

Dispite me posting an alternate in the other thread, I'm really against the whole chopping multiple actions down to only one. Heck, even the game which must not be mentioned allowed multiple attack actions for "Fighters" in it's first two advanced rules, with multiple attack actions for all in 3/3.5.

Removing multiple actions in one of those never ending house rules. It changes things, butting up into the balance issues which break things. So you houserule/ignore those, which breaks other things. So on and so forth. Anyone who plays with a only 1 IP house rule actually has a lot more house rules (even if they are only ignore ignore ignore).

Anyone who thinks the multiple actions in SR4 are broken has never played SR3 most likely. Now there was some broken multiple action rules. Actions: Sammy, Sammy, Sammy, Rigger, Fast Mook, Mage, Mooks, Sammy.

[Malachi]

SR3 had a system similar to SR4 in that everyone got to take their "first" action, and then people with multiple passes got their additional actions on the "back end" of the Combat Turn. SR2 had the system where the fast people got to take 2 or 3 actions before the slower people even got their first.

[InfinityzeN]

*scratches head* Damn, I could have sworn I remember that was how it was in SR3. I'll have to go look in my books now since I haven't looked at any of the SR3 crunch since I started running SR4.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Why not?

It might totally careen off course crash into that other unmoving object.

A Vehicle THAT IS NOT MOVING will not careen off course... are you kidding me?