Skill Groups, kill 'em all! Options

[Larme]

Wake up people! Skill groups are a trap set by the devs! Maybe not on purpose, but from the standpoint of character optimization, they are (almost always) horrible.

I have reviewed quite a number of noob sheets. I look at these sheets and I ask, "How the heck are they getting so few dice out of 400BP?" Sometimes, the culprit is positive qualities that cost a lot for very little benefit (Will to Live anyone?), but most of the time, it's skill groups!

First of all, skill groups do not automatically save points like people seem to think. They only save points if you actually need every skill that they come with, AND you need all of them at the same level. If you don't, you are wasting points, plain and simple. The worst are the ones with only 3 skills in them, since they only save 2 BP over normal skill selections. You'd save more points by simply dropping one of those skills and taking 2 of them only.

The worst culprits are Firearms and Close Combat. They are the #1 sheet nerfers in existence. Firearms is a boondoggle, because what possible need could you have for pistols, automatics, AND longarms, all at the same level? First of all, Automatics serve every firearms roll there is, you've got sidearms, SMGs and Machine Pistols, and you've got main combat weapons, Assault Rifles. Pistols are perhaps a bit better as sidearms because you can grab heavy pistols, but is a slightly better sidearm worth all those points? Longarms as well can cover all your bases -- you've got rifles which are very powerful semi auto weapons, good for big targets, and shotguns which can full auto, replacing assault rifles. You've even got a sidearm if you get a sawed off, short barreled Defiance. Having all three is nothing but obbsessive just-in-case-ism. "But Larme, what if I need to grab the nearest weapon and start blasting away?" "Stfu!" is my answer! When does that ever happen? When has anyone lost all of their character's weapons, then been forced to fight using someone else's weapon? Well it's never happened to me, not once, in my entire Shadowrunning career. Either I have my weapon in my hand, or I die. There's no middle ground in my experience.

Even if you do feel compelled to be a weapons expert, I ask you: can you really afford every gun at the same rating, and still be a useful character? If you take Firearms 4, that's 40 points. But if you take, say, Automatics 6, and pistols and longarms at 1(3), that's only 36 points, and you are a lot better with one class of weapons, while losing only one die in the others. Even if you feel compelled to have them all, there's no possible reason to have all of them at the unimpressive rating of 4-- especially not if shooting guns is supposed to be "your thing." The only reason is deliberate nerfing, if you're playing in a low powered campaign, or if you're one of those people who thinks weaker characters are more fun. That's fine if that's what floats your boat, just don't deceive yourself about Firearms being good in terms of sheet optimization.

If Firearms is bad, Close Combat is the worst. I will admit that each class of firearms has different abilities, and might come in handy, maybe. But close combat weapons are 100% interchangeable. It does not matter one little bit whether you're using clubs, blades, or unarmed. All can be pretty much equally powerful. There are three viable melee strategies for a streetsam, IMO -- use cyberspurs, so you don't need free hands and can't be disarmed, use fists, so even if you are disarmed you're effective, or use clubs, so you can clock people with melee hardened guns without having to swap weapons. There is no earthly reason for doing all three. If you have spurs or unarmed, you cannot be disarmed, you will never *never* be forced to pick up a club for any reason. And if you have clubs, almost anything can make an improvised club, there's no reason you'd ever need to fight with your fists or a blade. Having the close combat skill group is always a waste of points, because you absolutely do not need all of those skills.

The next worst culprit is Athletics. Don't get me wrong, there is a good skill tucked in there, and it's a 4 skill group, so you save 6 points per level. But again, it's not really savings, because who needs ever skill in that group? Running and Swimming *suck.* You can run and swim just great without them, without ever spending an action or making a roll. All these skills do is make you a teensy bit faster, if you spend a simple action to sprint. That's a horrible ability to get for all those points. And then there's climbing. Since when is that a necessary skill? I have never once climbed anything in Shadowrun. The only people who want to climb are noobs who want to climb buildings and go in through the roof, which every vet will tell you is a retarded idea. If there's a fence, you cut it, you don't climb it. Maybe, in some remote circumstances, climbing could be a necessary skill, but even if it is, just take a die or two so you don't have to default. You don't want it at full rating with your useful skill, which is Gymnastics. Gymnastics is the one valuable skill in the Athletics group. It should not be stuck at the same level as the rest of your Athletics, because it is too handy. Gymnastics handles defense, it handles balance, and it handles jumping, which are all things that Shadowrunners have to do on a fairly regular basis. But a skill group with just one good skill is not a skill group that should be taken, ever.

Now, I'm just speaking from the perspective of twinking out here. If you're trying to make a "realistic" character, where fluff matters more than power, and you think your character's background forces you to take skill groups and consequently have very low dice pools, fine. Just don't delude yourself. Skill groups, for the most part, are essentially roleplaying devices. They let you pick up broad sets of skills because you think your character would know all of those skills. Rarely, if ever, is every skill in a group something you actually need. And eliminating things you don't actually need is the one and only skill required to make a powerful build.

[Glyph]

I agree with you, mostly, about those particular skill groups. The combat ones especially - for your main skill, you want a six with a specialization. Getting the skill group instead essentially guts four dice from your dice pool - not good! Not all skill groups are bad, though. Hackers need a ton of skills simply to do their job, so the electronics and cracking skill groups are useful to them. The influence skill group is good for faces because it has four skills, and all four of them are useful for a face to have. The stealth skill group is useful if your character is heavily focused on covert ops - otherwise, just get infiltration.

I think part of the problem is that efficient builds are usually criticized as being "munchkin", or the new favorite buzzword for anything slightly effective, "broken". For those who buy into this thinking, skill groups are doubly good - first, they get your dice pools down to "reasonable" levels, and they also help to make you "well-rounded". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif)

[deek]

For min/maxing, I definitely agree, but for those that feel they have to have a 6 in a skill to be effective, I just have to say that is BS, at least at the tables I play at. Yeah, maximizing your dice for every test is obviously good, but a shooter with a 4 pistols isn't horrible compared to someone with a 6.

I know the OP is looking at it more from why pick up a skill group for two skills that you would never use, and yeah, that is a waste. But I have a character that has a 4 pistols with specialization and smartlink that's tossing 12-14 dice in chargen...and he's a mage. I feel just as good with him in a gunfight as I would with the 16-18 die pool combat monster...

[BullZeye]

I think part of the problem is that efficient builds are usually criticized as being "munchkin", or the new favorite buzzword for anything slightly effective, "broken". For those who buy into this thinking, skill groups are doubly good - first, they get your dice pools down to "reasonable" levels, and they also help to make you "well-rounded". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif)

Indeed (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Social group is for faces a must but the other groups aren't that nice. I think there's one handy way to use skill groups: get them at rating 1 and then specialize on those that you really need during the game. Technical group can come handy to some, but again on the rating 1 as then you can do a lot with just a little effort. On all these 1's as a group, it's important that your linked attribute is high enough to get an ok dice pool.

[Larme]

I agree with you, mostly, about those particular skill groups. The combat ones especially - for your main skill, you want a six with a specialization. Getting the skill group instead essentially guts four dice from your dice pool - not good! Not all skill groups are bad, though. Hackers need a ton of skills simply to do their job, so the electronics and cracking skill groups are useful to them. The influence skill group is good for faces because it has four skills, and all four of them are useful for a face to have. The stealth skill group is useful if your character is heavily focused on covert ops - otherwise, just get infiltration.

I think part of the problem is that efficient builds are usually criticized as being "munchkin", or the new favorite buzzword for anything slightly effective, "broken". For those who buy into this thinking, skill groups are doubly good - first, they get your dice pools down to "reasonable" levels, and they also help to make you "well-rounded". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif)

Good points, but even if someone wants all four skills, even then it's rare for it to be a good idea to take for all four at the same level. All skills are not created equal, even in the better skill groups, there will be some you really really want, and some that are just decent. Like Electronics -- you really really want Computer spec'd in Analyze, that's your matrix perception. Data Search is nice, but not that critical, since all it means to have less dice is longer intervals to search. Software and Hardware you can use, but neither are anywhere near as important as Computer.

Same goes for Stealth -- all are useful, but none as useful as Infiltration. If you're a stealth character, you want your highest skill to be infiltration, the rest of the skills in that group can be much lower because they're not nearly as crucial. And Influence is the same way -- Etiquette is pretty blah in SR4, it used to be used for everything, but now it's kind of situational. The really important ones are Negotiation and Con -- Leadership's not great unless you've got commanding voice (you rarely have to persuade someone when you're not actually conning them). And the group doesn't even include one of the most important skills, Intimidation.

So even if you've got a skill group with a solid set of skills, it's rare that it's the optimal choice to have them all at the same level -- because each one has varying utility, you should apportion BP to them accordingly.

Indeed (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Social group is for faces a must but the other groups aren't that nice. I think there's one handy way to use skill groups: get them at rating 1 and then specialize on those that you really need during the game. Technical group can come handy to some, but again on the rating 1 as then you can do a lot with just a little effort. On all these 1's as a group, it's important that your linked attribute is high enough to get an ok dice pool.

"Skill groups may not be broken up into individual skills for further improvement and specializations may not be taken for skill group skills at character creation—although, as always, individual gamemasters are free to allow this option." p.87, SR4A. Technical groups are one area where I can kind of agree that skill groups are good. But I think it's a travesty that they broke technical skills into so many categories in the first place -- first you have to buy Logic, an almost useless stat, then you have to get a different skill to work on industrial machines, groundcraft, watercraft, aircraft, cyberware, hardware... They really just should have one "Mechanic" skill, to reduce the heavy burden that a tinkerer has to carry. They could separate that out from cyberware and hardware, but a separate skill to repair every kind of vehicle or drone is just too much.

Where 1's can really count is with your agility skills, because it's easy to start with a 9 agility. 1(3) is great for stuff like heavy weapons (grenade launchers) and longarms (sniper rifles), or whatever. Things you want as contingencies without nerfing your starting sheet. But again, you can't do that with a group unless your GM alters the rules. Though I suppose it's not too bad to take the group at 1 to start, and then use your starting karma to spec all the skills.

[kzt]

As Frank pointed out a long time ago, there is no reason to buy most skills in SR until you have maxed attributes. They are just too expensive. And yes, most of the skill groups suck.

[Heath Robinson]

Even better for Clubs: Stun Batons. Are you a poxy weakling? Stun damage is just superior to Physical (case in point: Trolls), and Stun Batons do 6S(e) - which means that not only do they roll against Half Impact Armour, but they also have a chance to just disable the enemy. Sure, you only get 10 hits with them, but you can pack more than one of them. You can even get the trogprod from Arsenal that does even more damage if you really want to take people down in one go.

[Critias]

All of which is really unfortunate, because in theory Skill Groups are one of the few things I actually like better in SR4 than SR3. They bring to mind the good ol' days of "Firearms" from SR1, to me, and I like the idea of a character being able to, for one build point expenditure, be a capable shooter with everything from handguns to sniper rifles.

I also really like the idea of the Close Combat group -- Escrima/Kali teaches me stuff with sticks (as stand-ins for knives) and then the same thing with my hands a class or two later after we've got the basics. I dig the notion of getting Clubs, Blades, and Unarmed all up at the same time, at the same level, and...and...i]*sigh*[/i].

In practice, though, they just cost too much, and deliver too little. It's easier and cheaper and more efficient to pick one thing and be awesome at it, than to pick three things and be good at all of them. Which is too bad.

[Machiavelli]

For min/maxing, I definitely agree, but for those that feel they have to have a 6 in a skill to be effective, I just have to say that is BS, at least at the tables I play at. Yeah, maximizing your dice for every test is obviously good, but a shooter with a 4 pistols isn't horrible compared to someone with a 6.

I know the OP is looking at it more from why pick up a skill group for two skills that you would never use, and yeah, that is a waste. But I have a character that has a 4 pistols with specialization and smartlink that's tossing 12-14 dice in chargen...and he's a mage. I feel just as good with him in a gunfight as I would with the 16-18 die pool combat monster...

100% agree.

[BullZeye]

"Skill groups may not be broken up into individual skills for further improvement and specializations may not be taken for skill group skills at character creation—although, as always, individual gamemasters are free to allow this option." p.87, SR4A.

Yep, which is why I said:

...get them at rating 1 and then specialize on those that you really need during the game...

So straight out of the box you got 1, but after one session, you got specializations here and there or raise just the one skill you need (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Larme]

Yep, which is why I said:

So straight out of the box you got 1, but after one session, you got specializations here and there or raise just the one skill you need (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Hey, I failed. It's not the first time (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[ElFenrir]

Sometimes, I've found, that taking the group can end up costing roughly the same amount.

Take my current guy; a sam/weapons tinkerer. He is ex-military, and would, IMO, have firearms skills(and I wanted him to have the skills,anyway.) Melee is his speciality.

I wanted him to be quite good. Now, his Agility is 9(along with Strength.) I took Firearms Group 3. So he throws 12(14 smartlinked) dice with any guns. Being a weapons tinkerer, I wanted him to have some training in all types of guns. In order of importance, I wanted SMG/Assault Rifles, Pistols, Shotguns, Rifles, Machine Pistols. It was 35 Karma under karmagen(30 in BP.)

Okay, so his top gun skills I wanted to be SMG/AR's. I wanted them higher than 1(3.) One, I wanted him to be fairly equal with SMGs and Assault Rifles. So it would have been at least a 2 there, if not a 3. So that would have been 8 to 14 Karma(8-12 BP.) I would have wanted at least a 1(+2) Longarms(Shotguns), for 6, and a 2(+2) Pistols(Revolvers), since I wanted him to be better than a 1 with semi-automatics. This would have been 10. So at the least, I would have likely spent 14+6+10 minimum, or 30. In the end, I would have saved all of 5 Karma(alright, so that's another skill at 1-not bad), but I would have lost a die in semi-auto, 2 dice in rifles, and gained 1 die in Revolvers at the end. If I wanted to get a couple more SMG dice from 3(+2), that would have been 32 Karma, saving me 3-not enough for another skill.

This was an instance, since he does have a small gun collection(a semiauto, revolver, smg, AR, shotgun and sport rifle-he collects them, what do you want-though he typically only has his SMG and revolver with him), I figured I'd eat the 3 karma and take Firearms 3. It was clean, simple, and it was not his primary skill.

Now, he also has both unarmed and blades. This indeed is an instance of it being Karma and having extra points-had I been scrimped, I would have kept him unarmed. His Unarmed is 5 and specialized, but with a 9 Agility and Kick Attack I didn't need to spend 12 Karma to get 1 more die for 6-he still throws 17 dice and ends about any fight in a single hit with his enormous damage code. I would not have touched Close Combat here-he relies on his unarmed and his Blades is still high, but Clubs is something that really has no point with him. In about any situation, I can agree, Close Combat is purely a flavor group. I'd just pick one(if I was scrimping), or two(if I had some extra points and wanted a mix of maneuvers-a combat mage could also do well with both blades and unarmed. Unarmed for subtlety and touch spells, Blades for weapon foci).

However, for Stealth-he simply has Infiltration(Urban), and Shadowing(Tail Evasion), both at 3(+2). This was 16 Karma each, for 32, but I really didn't see him with Palming or Disguise, so I decided to take the specializations for the two I would use more, and take them higher, than, say, Stealth 2, even though stealth 2 would have been cheaper.

I can agree on some parts, but I do think that they CAN have their place with certain characters, and for more than flavor-but they are a bit more situational, I would say, for sure.

[BullZeye]

Hey, I failed. It's not the first time (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Tis ok omae (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Larme]

I can agree on some parts, but I do think that they CAN have their place with certain characters, and for more than flavor-but they are a bit more situational, I would say, for sure.

Right, more for flavor is the key word. If your dude had automatics 6((IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) , he would have been a lot scarier, because automatics can do essentially everything you need a gun to do. That doesn't mean he was horrible -- you pumped up his agility so he was still ok, even though not optimized.

[ElFenrir]

Well, his 'optimization' was for melee combat. Well, 1 point under optimized. He was 5(+2), 9 Agility,9 Strength, Titanium Bone Lacing, +3DV to martial arts, and hardliners/steel-capped boots(which in our home games add +1 DV.) His defenses were also very tight, with high Reaction, wired 2, FFBA, armor, rolled a total of 22 soak dice, had a high dodge to help for the fact he was melee specialized. He has tons of maneuvers. He hasn't gotten hurt yet(though I popped Edge twice-he has a 4, another stat i made sure to have above average-to reroll failures.) In other words, I have him VERY well-equipped for melee. As in he hadn't taken a wound yet. He soaked any possible damage he might have taken. Other times he dodged. He has not fought wussy things, either. (I also make sure to use tactics, as well.) Oh, I know he's not invincible-I sweat several battles, trust me, but came out well due to the fact I built him so well for his job.

If i were optimizing him for firearms, I would have indeed split the group, took the high Automatics, high other guns, specialized-in other words, the same stuff I did for his melee. His 14 dice are actually pretty scary to lay down enough fire for him to get in close. In his case-having a firearms group was cool, since it wasn't his thing. Our gunslinger has Firearms all split apart and specialized.

Hmm...I think what I'm saying is that they can be pretty fine for the non-optimal skills. I mean, if Con 2, Negotation 2 and Etiquette 1 are all going to cost 20, then why not just get Influence 2 for 20? At that point you are getting 2 skills nearly free. (Unless you didn't want Etiquette at all-then I'd say go for Con/Negotations 2+2. We actually find ourselves using Etiqutte, so in our current game, Influence 2 was actually the better buy for 20 Karma, instead of 2/2/1.)

The 4-groups, as backup skills, NOT primary, it can sometimes pay to buy the group, as I mentioned above. If you need more than 2 of the skills, it then pays to just get the group, usually. If I had 12 points left to spend, I could get Con/Negotations(something) 1(+2) each and be done with it-but I'd probably just take Influence 1 at that point, and pop the last 2 into a skill I hadn't specialized in yet.

Close Combat, I agree, I would probably never buy as a group, even FOR flavor. If I want someone to have a self-defense skill, 2(+2) something would be way better than Close Combat 1, even with a high Agility. (Hell, especially with a high Agility. Agility 9 can default for 8 dice, plus reach. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) )

[The Jake]

Trogprod. LOL.

- J.

[Darklordofbunnie...]

I feel the need to counterpoint at least one group worth taking: Cracking, every skill in the set is useful. The flipside of my endorsement is that this group is only useful to the tech-support. I would also say that a hacker/rigger combo could get reasonable mileage out of the electronics group. On most of the other groups I have to admit that they fall pretty flat other than to grab that one die to avoid defaulting.

[EnlitenedDespot]

I have observed plenty of situations in various roleplaying games where a character has been relieved of his weapons/normal gear and has had to improvise. That being said, I still don't think the firearms skill group is a great choice for most characters simply because it doesn't save you that much at all, if anything really. Automatics + Pistols is much cheaper and covers just about everything short of a 'sniper' concept. I'm generally avoidant of shotguns because even though they're 'fun,' there's a reason modern militaries don't use them for much more than door-breaching (generally speaking). Besides, if you had to obtain a random firearm in an escape from a problematic corp run, you're probably obtaining an assault rifle or pistol.

I don't think there is any need at all for a 6 rating in your primary combat skill, unless you truly want it. Two 5s is generally more versatile for me, and is more BP-to-Karma efficient, if you care all that much (assuming your second skill that would have been a 5 is instead a 4, you're spending 40 BP for a 6 and a 4 or two 5s).

Also, I generally don't like specializations at all for chargen since they're one of the more inefficient BP expenditures you can make. The only time I guess you'd want one is if you take only 1 in a particular skill and grab a specialization just to have a specific specialized ability at 3 (which is considered professional competency, by the way).

Unless it's critical to your character's concept, I would find a way to integrate specializations into your character AFTER chargen.

I think a 1 in Climbing is quite useful for not defaulting, and if your strength is average, you now have a 4 dice pool instead of a 2 dice pool. I think it would be quite embarrassing to be in a fleeing situation and failing to climb a fence.

I figure any ranks in swimming would probably be a waste for a character, although I think most modern players find it hard to believe that a character's never swam before (though it's quite plausible in SR's environment as far as I can tell).

As for running, I actually haven't looked at the rules, so I have no idea if having ranks in Running is actually worthless (since you can run anyway, apparently?).

Ultimately, I would advocate balance. Characters made with the sole consideration of 'concept' and 'roleplaying' can have a strong tendency to not be able to contribute anything worthwhile to the group, especially in smaller groups where there aren't overlapping roles. Characters made purely for the sake of 'being optimized' tend to end up hucking huge dice pools that just frustrate GMs and up the ante anyway while leaving that character becoming utterly useless or handicapped in any situation outside of his area of expertise.

If you're finding that your GM keeps chucking heavily cybered trolls at your min-maxed streetsam, it might be because he can't figure out how to stop you out of sheer frustration to your Agility 28, Automatics 7 with specialization completely tweaked-out Ares Alpha. Now that GM should probably figure out that all he has to do is chuck a purely social problem at your streetsam and giggle when the character utterly fails (if that's the GM's goal), but the point is that you don't need to min-max to the teeth.

Honestly, I look at the examples given for skill levels and would find a 'gun for hire' acceptable at a rating of 3, assuming proper smartgun system, choice of weapon, and most likely specialization. Preferences would go to a level 4 to 5, although I wouldn't 'expect' to have my hired gun with a skill of 6...

Do what makes sense for the character with the assumption that the character could only be a shadowrunner if he could provide something a group could use. A guy with a 6 in 'paper-clipping documents' would probably never be a shadowrunner, even if such a choice would be good for concept.

[Draco18s]

If you're finding that your GM keeps chucking heavily cybered trolls at your min-maxed streetsam, it might be because he can't figure out how to stop you out of sheer frustration to your Agility 28, Automatics 7 with specialization completely tweaked-out Ares Alpha. Now that GM should probably figure out that all he has to do is chuck a purely social problem at your streetsam and giggle when the character utterly fails (if that's the GM's goal), but the point is that you don't need to min-max to the teeth.

Those kinds of characters turn games into:

if(combat) {
win = true;
return 0;
}
else {
have fun();
}

Where "have fun" is a function that does not have combat, and the character is generally useless. That is, fun for everyone else.

[Glyph]

You only run into that problem if you try for absolute overkill (exceptional attribute plus aptitude, etc.). A sammie who has multiple IPs, damage-soaking 'ware, and 18 or so dice for his primary ranged attack has plenty of BPs left for other stuff. You can have the above and also be a break-in specialist, or face, or techie. People get hung up on this false dilemma of "You can either be good at combat, or useful outside of combat, but never both." Sammies can be very well-rounded - yes, combat ability will take a hit, but you can still be good at that primary role.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

You only run into that problem if you try for absolute overkill (exceptional attribute plus aptitude, etc.). A sammie who has multiple IPs, damage-soaking 'ware, and 18 or so dice for his primary ranged attack has plenty of BPs left for other stuff. You can have the above and also be a break-in specialist, or face, or techie. People get hung up on this false dilemma of "You can either be good at combat, or useful outside of combat, but never both." Sammies can be very well-rounded - yes, combat ability will take a hit, but you can still be good at that primary role.

As a counterpoint, I would say that the Sammie could get along JUST FINE with just 12-14 dice, and have even still more points for the other things... it is all a matter of scale... As a lot of people (not me) say, the NPC templates are a "joke" because they cannot throw high levels of dice... I say that they are probably just right as they are the typical opposition that you will find most of the time, and even if they are lacking in one area, can be easily tweaked with a skill level or 2 here or there, so why bother even getting to the 18 dp range when 12-14 will perfectly suffice?

As Always, Just my 2 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

[Glyph]

Why? Because that's what the character's main function is, and every dice makes it likelier that he will succeed. The sammie has to fight again and again, often at a disadvantage due to numbers, the enemies having the home ground, being wounded and/or low on Edge, or suffering from penalties due to visibility, cover, etc. Rough parity with his enemies means that the sammie will go down, and sooner rather than later. To reliably succeed, the sammie needs to be better than "typical opposition" by a good bit - and trust me, he will still be plenty challenged.

If 12-14 dice is plenty, then either you are in a low-powered game, or the GM is using kid gloves. 12-14 dice is plenty for support characters, but it is inadequate for a front-line combattant.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Why? Because that's what the character's main function is, and every dice makes it likelier that he will succeed. The sammie has to fight again and again, often at a disadvantage due to numbers, the enemies having the home ground, being wounded and/or low on Edge, or suffering from penalties due to visibility, cover, etc. Rough parity with his enemies means that the sammie will go down, and sooner rather than later. To reliably succeed, the sammie needs to be better than "typical opposition" by a good bit - and trust me, he will still be plenty challenged.

If 12-14 dice is plenty, then either you are in a low-powered game, or the GM is using kid gloves. 12-14 dice is plenty for support characters, but it is inadequate for a front-line combattant.

In that (the deadliness of our games) you would be wrong... no kid gloves, people die in our games, maybe not every run, but enough that it is always a significant threat... there are other ways to compensate for your opponents superiority of numbers... and we exploit these as often as we can do so...

High Dice Pools for Front Line Characters (as you describe) allows then to walk all over the enemy, and although this may be fun, it lacks a certain verisimilitude... If I am throwing (consistently) 20+ Dice ( I think That I have heard DS'ers talking about 25+ Combat DP's) against my 12 dice opposition, then I am not significantly challenged unless you are throwing a LARGE number of the opposition into the fray or your opposition has commensurate DP's as well (as a typical Street Sam with 3 IP's is generally removing 2 per pass with a DP the size that you recommend)... this is rarely very "realistic" (hate the word), and stretches verisimilitude to the limit... In Shadowrun, firefights tend to last less than 30 seconds or less (and I wouyld say generally in the 9 to 12 second range on average)... they tend to go a little longer in real life...

Are you actaully going to tell me that against your typical Ganger Lieutenant (Pistol DP 5 (7 with Smartlink)), Security Guard (Pistol DP 4 (6 with Smartlink)), Lone Star Cop (Pistol DP 7 (9 with Smartlink)), Red Samurai or Equivalent (Pistol DP 8 (10 with Smartlink)), or Tir Ghost or Equivalent (Pistol DP 11 (13 with Smartlink)) you actually need to have 2-3 times their Combat DP to be effective character... I would call that poor tactics on your part...

Yes, Shadowrun is a damn deadly game, but not when I so far outclass my opposition that I do not even sweat...

[Glyph]

If you come close to dying every game, don't diss other people's hypothetical tactics. 20 dice isn't a magic pill that makes you auto-win the game. Used in conjunction with some clever playing, it can give your character enough edge to survive. A punk with 7 dice can still perforate you, though.

[kzt]

MY personal feeling is that 12+ dice, 3+ IPs and a willingness attack without warning when other people are still talking is a LOT of edge to reduce that chance of getting killed.