Capping Total Net DP Bonuses, Possibly a house rule to try? Options

[Malachi]

This discussion grew from someone pointing out this change that was implemented in SR4A.

Cumulative positive Social Modifiers may not exceed the character’s
combined natural Attribute + Skill Ratings.

Then AH let the cat out of the bag:

I'm tempted to suggest we apply the bonus dice cap = skill rating like we did for martial arts.

This twigged something in my brain, as I had already been kind of toying with the idea.

I had this thought too. Basically: the total net of all DP modifiers cannot exceed your Modified Skill + Attribute pool. That means bonuses from equipment (smartlink), 'ware, specialization, and situational would be capped. This makes skills much more important/valuable because it limits the bonus dice you can accept for any given pool, plus it also makes 'ware and powers that Modify the skill rating rather than give a bonus much more important, since a modified skill rating would also allow you to accept more of a bonus.

What does everyone else think?

[Malachi]

Here were the initial reactions:

This should be in the houserules thread, but that was killed by a turd fire!

It's an interesting suggestion though. I'm not sure if it would have a positive effect on the game though. Most of the time, it wouldn't matter much. Most people are going to have skill + attribute somewhere in the region of 6-10, and it's only the rare skill where you can stack on more than +6 bonus dice, let alone more than +10.

What would it affect? It would, for one thing, be a nerf to many adept powers. They have a number of abilities like Combat Sense and Kinesics that specifically provide bonus dice. Those would become less valuable. The current value of them is that adepts can stack on every single bonus that a mundane would use, and then they get their powers stacked on top, making them the best. With a skill + attribute cap, adepts are less likely to get value out of those abilities.

On the other hand, this rule would make +rating abilities a lot more important. Aptitude, Exceptional Attribute, Improved Ability, Reflex Recorder, and a few of the new RC positive qualities will be hugely important, because increasing skill and attribute rating will let you pile on more bonus dice. The Adepts will take a hit in terms of their bonus dice being useful, but Improved Ability and Improved Attribute will become better. The real issue I see is that you'd start to get a lot of metavariants and changelings. These people are supposed to be the rarest of the rare. But metagenically enhanced attributes are frickin' incredible, and would doubly be so under your proposal. So you'd start seing even more uber rare weirdos, including people with gross deformities from SURGE comprising your teams a lot more often. To that, I say meh. RC races are cool, but most of them (excluding gnomes and fomori) are balanced -- they're cool, but not no-brainers. Your rule would nudge them much closer to being no-brainers, I think.

I'm sorry that this is off topic from OP, but I know that your concern would not be valid in any game I run for a couple of reasons. First, I enforce a rule that only 1 player in any group I'm GMing for can ask to make a non-BBB race character. They also know that it has to be well thought out before I say yes to the character as well. Secondly, any changeling characters in my game would only be made after the player saw the following:

gamemasters may choose to take on Negative Metagenic quality selection to ensure balance.

Any character that takes Metagenic Improvement is automatically something I will look at balancing out; and the concept better work for me to even approve that quality.

[Malachi]

The objective of this change:

Place a greater emphasis on Skill ratings and the (typically more expensive) powers and equipment that modifies a skill rating rather than giving bonus dice.

[Caadium]

The objective of this change:

Place a greater emphasis on Skill ratings and the (typically more expensive) powers and equipment that modifies a skill rating rather than giving bonus dice.

Another benefit from it, from where I stand, is it limits some of the absurd things I've seen (and others have argued about as well). One example of this is the Troll sammie with 1 cha and 1 skill, but using an emotitoy and other oddities to be the social genius that he isn't.

One aspect of a rule like this that has me thinking is Skillwires. As they are just a programmed response, and not something you actually understand or know how to do on your own, I'm inclined to think that rolls involving skillwired skills (or biowires for Technomancers) would not be able to count the chipped (or threaded) skill. For example:

If you have Agility 3 and Skillwired Pistols 4, you could get modifiers for your Agility (say a smartlink and 1 aim). I know that this reduces the combat effectiveness of someone that doesn't actually know how to fight. For some reason, that appeals to me. I think that those that take the time to train and know how to do something are going to be better able to adapt than someone that has a binary based program guiding their actions for them; even if dicepool wise they both have a 4 in the same skill (1 natural and 1 wired).

Again, +skill or +attribute modifiers aren't what we are talking about here; but rather dice pool modifiers. Please toss this extra bit into the entire topic. Thanks.

[BlueMax]

The objective of this change:

Place a greater emphasis on Skill ratings and the (typically more expensive) powers and equipment that modifies a skill rating rather than giving bonus dice.

OK, its early and a no coffee day for me. I may be missing something but, would not this place greater emphasis on Stats as well? Most notably, the stats used most often CHA and AGI?

BlueMax

[Warlordtheft]

Fortunately most of my players have not tried to tweak/abuse/muchinknize their dice pools. So while I see it as a problem, I do not see a need to address it yet. That being said I would suggest that adept powers be exempt from this restriction.

For example: Any non-adept power related bonuses cannot exceed the PCs Attribute+Skill for skill checks. Should a PC have both non-adept power bonuses and adept power bonuses to a skill check, apply the non adept power bonuses first, up to the limit. Then add in the full adept power bonuses, .

[Draco18s]

One aspect of a rule like this that has me thinking is Skillwires. As they are just a programmed response, and not something you actually understand or know how to do on your own, I'm inclined to think that rolls involving skillwired skills (or biowires for Technomancers) would not be able to count the chipped (or threaded) skill. For example:

That wouldn't effect anything either. If you're slotting a chip for a skill you likely don't have any DP modifiers for that skill.

OTOH if you do have DP modifiers, but no skill at all you're hosed.

Non social characters will get thrown into a social situation at some point (if they don't their GM is doing it wrong). Many of these characters rely on die pool modifiers rather than actual skill to not get utterly hosed (and then spend an edge). My last character had to lie. CHA 3 - 1 (default) + 4 (teamwork*) + Edge.

Those 4 dice I got from teamwork may or may not count under the cap, but they'd not be hard to get from other sources, such as Personable positive qualities or an emotitoy (as cheesy as everyone thinks that they are). Instead of having 7 dice + edge I'd have had 6 dice + edge (or 4+edge? we're including the defaulting penalty where?).

*Knowing I would need to lie my character took a few pointers from Honest Bob the user car salesman (that was our mage--the lying bastard that he was).

[Heath Robinson]

I made a similar suggestion to my GM, and it now finds its place amongst his set of houserules. The rule is actually that there's a DP cap equal to (Attribute + Skill + Skill). You can build up positive DP modifiers above that, but it just ends up offsetting negative modifiers.

[Ryu]

(Skill) as a limit is very restrictive - you should not need training to gain an advantage from Synthacardium, for example.

(Attribute+skill) seems a bit high for a limit, like Larme says.

I´d suggest to use a fixed limit, like "max. total net DP mod +6", or maybe even +4. Adepts can ensure that they have that +6/+4, then move into attributes and straight skill boosters with their powers. Samurai should have the karma for true skill, and more ware.

(I would prefer if Empathy software and Emotitoys were adressed in their respective entries. The +1-6 is a bit more on the relevant end than any of the situational modifiers. I´d look into adding their hits to the users pools - much like Eidolons variant.)

[ElFenrir]

This is another one of those situations that, while I've seen what people can do, like the Pornomancer, I never once saw anyone actually *do* this at an actual game. First off, the GM, be it one of our usual or myself, would have 86'd the idea rather fast. Second, large DP's can be gained rather easily without.

My current character, an elven sam, rolls 17 dice total for most of his Unarmed attacks. He has a 9 Agility, a 5(+2) skill, and +1 reach for his Kick Attacks when he uses them(which is often.) None of these are really too many ''outside'' abilities. Likewise, his 14 DP for Firearms comes from Firearms Group 3, Agility 9, and +2 to Smartlink. That's it. He can take aim for another +1.

Combat Sense, at .5 a level, unless you specialize in it-well, the typical Adept I know usually throws a fair amount of dice to begin with to dodge. I don't think this would come into play unless they wanted like 8 levels of this(again, I have never seen an adept at my table do this.)

I'm not against a houserule like this. But unless it's a pornomancer or something, or a Super-Stealth Guy, I haven't seen so many instances where this really comes up. The Pornomancer seems to be the biggest thing that this nips in the bud.

[Shadowfox]

I disagree with this, in the name of cyberpunk.


"Anything that can be done to a rat can be done to a human being. We can do just about anything you can imagine to rats. And closing your eyes and refusing to think about this won't make it go away. That is cyberpunk." —Bruce Sterling


The fact that some nerd who lives in the one lifestyle from Unwired where you never leave the net, who has no physical skills can eventually make enough money hacking online to become a jarhead who could be a formidal opponent to my people is what makes it cyberpunk.

The fact that if you have the right money, you can augment your body up to a ridiculous level.



Hell, just look at guns in general. Back in the 1200's before guns, if you didn't know how to sword fight or knife fight, you were pretty much going to lose. Nowadays any fool can point a gun and shoot, and it would be even more so in the future.

[Malachi]

Your vision of the cyberpunk world would remain intact, Shadowfox. A malnourished hacker could still get Muscle Replacement or Muscle Toner (which create a modified rating) or even a full replacement cyberlimb, and then get Skill Wires. None of those augmentations would be capped in my proposal. So, Mr. Malnourishment could have a base Agility of 5 with his cyberlimb and an Automatics skill of 4 with his skill wires, forming a base DP of 9, which means a further +9 worth of equipment (smartlink), and situational bonuses could still apply.

EDIT:
I agree ElFenrir, the limit wouldn't come up very often, which is why I think its a more viable rule. The only time this would really come into play is when an incredibly unskilled person attempts to compensate using loads of equipment. Most of the equipment bonuses (eg. smartlink) are designed to aid someone in the task, so I think a case can be made that someone who isn't particularly skilled in the first place wouldn't get much as much benefit from those aids as someone who was skilled.

[Draco18s]

EDIT:
I agree ElFenrir, the limit wouldn't come up very often, which is why I think its a more viable rule.

The problem is that people which huge dice pools also have huge bonuses. This is why it doesn't come up. The only people it's infringing on are the unskilled whereas the problem is at the other end of the spectrum: the highly skilled having DP modifiers exceeding 10.

Edit:
By the rules as suggested, a Charisma 1 character will never be making a social test, ever.

CHA 1 - 1 (default) = 0 + (max 1 DP mod) = 1.

The charisma 1, skill 1 guy has four times his pool.

[paws2sky]

As a house rule? Sure. Knock yourself out.

I wouldn't want to see something like this make its way into a printing except, maybe, as an Optional Rule (and even then, I'd be rolling my eyes).

I think that making rules to address "corner cases," like a maxed out pornomancer, is dumb. Yes, you can make a character with 30+ dice in one skill. Congratulations! Also, so what? Most of these characters are so gimped in other areas that they're pointless except as an intellectual exercise or game system stress test.

If the real problem is cheaply acquired, large dice pool bonuses, then address that. Make it make sense, increase the cost, or ban it from your game.

I'm trying not to jump around too much, but here are a couple reasonable examples where the dice cap breaks down and, to me, makes no sense:

Example 1: Technomancer with AGL 2 + Pistols 1 + Specialization + Smartlink. The character has trained with a specific type of weapon, just in case. He even has the hardware to give him a little extra edge. Unfortunately, his smartgun "magically" doesn't work as well has his buddy's (it only provides a +1 bonus because of the cap). Congrats! We've discovered the one shadowrunner - without simsense vertigo - who might as well use a laser sight! And best of all, he's a TM! Brilliant! If he were to buy the Smartlink Complex Form, he still doesn't get the +2 bonus.

Example 2: Street Samurai with CHA 2 + Negotiations 2 + Specialization (Bargaining). She's actually invested in this social ability so she can try and locate her own gear. She buys some top of the line empathy software, but doesn't get more than +2 dice when Bargaining because... why? Oh, the software mysteriously doesn't work well for her. If she's using it for any other kind of Negotiation test, she gets a +4 bonus from the software... why does it work better when she's doing something she's not specialized in? Give the eToy to her friend with his CHA 3 + Negotiation 3 and all of a sudden, the Rating 6 empathy software the street samurai bought works just fine...


Just my 2 pesos.

-paws

[Stahlseele]

Yeah, rules like these would make tons of gear useless . .
and make the game even more unbalanced in favour of one trick ponies who maxed out their skill untill they could not force more points into it . .

[Malachi]

@paws2sky:

You make a good point about Specialization, it should probably be exempt from the capping rule. However, when looking at how equipment bonuses get capped, don't think of it that the equipment "mysteriously doesn't work as well," I more think of it that a less skilled person just can't utilize the assistance that the equipment provides as well as a more skilled person. The limit is already "sprinkled" throughout RAW right now: teamwork tests are capped by skill, Martial Arts bonuses are capped, and (as of SRA) Social Skill modifiers are capped by skill.

Incidentally, your situation in Example #2 is now canon (as of SRA). See the very first quote at the top of this thread.

[ElFenrir]

I would personally exempt Specializations, indeed. To me, they are still part of the skill. I have a character with Unarmed 6(Kicking +2). His Agility is 8. If somehow they invented these leg mods which gave+16 dice to kicking attacks(yeah, this is a very, very extreme example), I don't see how he wouldn't use the specialization. (again, probably a bad example given it's unlikelyhood.) At the same time, if they invented a bunch of stuff that gave +1 here, and +1 there, and it added up to +16 to his Unarmed Combat...I don't see why he couldn't get the +16 with his arms, too. I mean, a 6 rating in a skill using his arms doesn't mean he's gimped at ALL, he's just better with his legs. He'd just end up throwing 30 with his arms and 32 with his legs(yeah, it's huge, but again, just an example. It might have worked better if I used a character with a more minute skill in the thing.) In fact, i could do it here-if a guy with Agility 3, Unarmed(Fists) 1(+2), got that same ware as my character, if I were using this system, I'd say he'd be limited by his Agility+Unarmed+Specialization(allowing him a max +6).*

I mean, I can sort of see points to it. I personally am not a great programmer. Oh, sure, I can do some little odds and ends in a hobby sense(skill 1 tops), but even if you gave me an uber-super top of the line system(+10 to my DP somehow), I probably couldn't make it work that well.


*I hope i didn't confuse anyone here. I am coming from a Vappu/Mayday party. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[TBRMInsanity]

I don't see the problem with this suggestion. In SR3 and prior you were limited to the number of dice you can use in your dice pool based on your skill (at most doubling your dice). This seems along that idea and I'm fine with it.

[Stahlseele]

Biggest Problem i see personally with people being able to achieve 50+ Dice in a single skill . .
imagine what would happen if they were content with 30 or 40 dice in the skill and used the remaining Power to amplify other skills.

[paws2sky]

You make a good point about Specialization, it should probably be exempt from the capping rule.

So then the question becomes, "What makes a Specialization worthy of an exemption from the dice cap?"

Is it because its a learned ability?

However, when looking at how equipment bonuses get capped, don't think of it that the equipment "mysteriously doesn't work as well," I more think of it that a less skilled person just can't utilize the assistance that the equipment provides as well as a more skilled person.

That's one possibility. I guess.

Unfortunately, I think it neglects one of the themes of Shadowrun: Transhumanism. It defeats the point of transhumanism if you need to buy up a natural skill or ability instead of using a piece of equipment to compensate for your own failings.

Also, Autopickers and Medkits add directly to your skill + ability. Why should that change?

The limit is already "sprinkled" throughout RAW right now: teamwork tests are capped by skill, Martial Arts bonuses are capped, and (as of SRA) Social Skill modifiers are capped by skill.

I don't really agree with the Social Skill modifiers cap either.

-paws

[Draco18s]

However, when looking at how equipment bonuses get capped, don't think of it that the equipment "mysteriously doesn't work as well," I more think of it that a less skilled person just can't utilize the assistance that the equipment provides as well as a more skilled person.

OTOH, equipment that provides help will likely providing redundant information to a highly skilled character, yet in SR they maintain the full bonus.

Example:
Empathy Software says, "That guy's sweating a bit more than is normal." Dude who is a complete social idiot, "Oh, he might be lying." Dude who's highly trained in noticing people's moods, "I know that already you stupid piece of software! He's not lying, he's worried about something else! Shut up!"

[Caadium]

I more think of it that a less skilled person just can't utilize the assistance that the equipment provides as well as a more skilled person.

This is exactly how I see it. It has nothing to do with the smartlink mysteriously not working; just that the technomancers limited training limits the benefit from it.

So then the question becomes, "What makes a Specialization worthy of an exemption from the dice cap?"

Is it because its a learned ability?

The specialization is part of the ability. It might be a "DP modifier", but it is part of the actual ability, not an outside bonus.

Also, Autopickers and Medkits add directly to your skill + ability. Why should that change?

-paws

These are skill bonuses, not DP bonuses. They add to the skill, not just the DP.

Since the rule applies to martial arts already, I simply am saying its not a bad idea to make it a universal rule. Although I don't need this rule for my table, I don't have a problem with it. But keeping limits on only certain types of roles is not something I'm fond of. As an old SR player, this does also harken back to the days of the Combat Pool and such, where the max you could use was based on what you already had.

[ArkonC]

Do note that it is only social modifiers that are capped, not regular DP modifiers...
My gunbunny has a Charisma of 3, an intimidate of 1(+2), nasty vibe (+3) and 2 custom revolvers (+2).
DP total: 4 (attribute + skill) + 7 (DP Mods) => 11
I can now collect up to +4 in social modifiers (from page 131) and get up to a DP of 15...
At least, that is how we play it...
And I'd wager that even if we got this one wrong we'll keep playing it that way...

[Glyph]

Social skills are the only ones capped by actual rules changes, but they do also have an optional rule to cap other dice pools. But the optional rule to cap other dice pools, while similar, has a significant difference from the proposed house rule here. It caps dice pools at 20, or twice the sum of the character's natural Attribute and skill ratings, whichever one is higher.

Personally, I like the SR4A optional rule better. It caps dice pools slightly more stringently at the higher end (since it is the sum of the natural Attribute and skill ratings), but it does so without messing up characters at the lower end of the dice pool range - the technomancer with a smartlink, nearly anyone with a rating: 6 medkit, and so on.

[Caadium]

It caps dice pools at 20, or twice the sum of the character's natural Attribute and skill ratings, whichever one is higher.

I must have missed that one. What page is it on?

As I said earlier; my main thought is don't cap certain rules different than everything else. If there are enough possible modifiers out there that certain skill group(s) are seen as more abused, apply the modifier abuse rule to everything; preventing the problem from just moving to another group of skills since people will always try to find ways to use RAW in ways that are inconsistent with RAI.