About Logic and about Incompetence, rule questions Options

[EuroShadow]

I am new gamemaster (for SR, but with years of xp in d20 systems:) ) and I have started recently my first SR game and I have two questions.

First, about Incompetent negative quality. First time my players took one or two of them, but i guess probably next time they will take seven Incompetent qualities on less-used skills (such as Nautical Mechanics, Pilot Aerospace, Pilot-Exotic vehicle (air balloon), etc.). Is this how it can/should be? Would you allow it in your games?

I can house-rule-out this quality, but I am quite conservative about using house rules in the system I do not have experience in. I am loooking for an answer in range 'Yes, you are right, Incompetent quality should not be house ruled to be taken only once'; 'No, you are wrong, there is stated somewhere in rules that disallow such abuse'; or "Eh, roll with it, negative qualities are simply meant to give more BPs".


Second, about Logic. Our in-house hacker asks does he actually needs Logic at all. He has purchased variety of programs and does hacking rolling checks of Program+Skill. Logic doesn't come into play at all?


Thanks for answers.

[exSaint]

I wouldn't allow a character to take that quality unless it was something that they might just encounter. Incompetence (First Aid) or something of the like.

I don't know what the rules say off the top of my head, but I wouldn't allow it to be taken more than twice, either.

[Synner667]

First, about Incompetent negative quality. First time my players took one or two of them, but i guess probably next time they will take seven Incompetent qualities on less-used skills (such as Nautical Mechanics, Pilot Aerospace, Pilot-Exotic vehicle (air balloon), etc.). Is this how it can/should be? Would you allow it in your games?

I can house-rule-out this quality, but I am quite conservative about using house rules in the system I do not have experience in. I am loooking for an answer in range 'Yes, you are right, Incompetent quality should not be house ruled to be taken only once'; 'No, you are wrong, there is stated somewhere in rules that disallow such abuse'; or "Eh, roll with it, negative qualities are simply meant to give more BPs".

I always go by the HERO phrase, "if it doesn't disadvantage the character, it's not a disadvantage".

If they take disadvantages relevant to skills they wouldn't take otherwise, give them no benefit - after all, they can't be incompetent in a skill they're not using.
Or make them take skill levels in the skill that they're incompetent in, since they must have the skill for them to be incompetent in it [which will probably cancel out any points gained for the disadvantage].

[Ascalaphus]

I am new gamemaster (for SR, but with years of xp in d20 systems:) ) and I have started recently my first SR game and I have two questions.

First, about Incompetent negative quality. First time my players took one or two of them, but i guess probably next time they will take seven Incompetent qualities on less-used skills (such as Nautical Mechanics, Pilot Aerospace, Pilot-Exotic vehicle (air balloon), etc.). Is this how it can/should be? Would you allow it in your games?

I can house-rule-out this quality, but I am quite conservative about using house rules in the system I do not have experience in. I am loooking for an answer in range 'Yes, you are right, Incompetent quality should not be house ruled to be taken only once'; 'No, you are wrong, there is stated somewhere in rules that disallow such abuse'; or "Eh, roll with it, negative qualities are simply meant to give more BPs".


Second, about Logic. Our in-house hacker asks does he actually needs Logic at all. He has purchased variety of programs and does hacking rolling checks of Program+Skill. Logic doesn't come into play at all?


Thanks for answers.

Incompetence:
I wouldn't allow Incompetence for any skill that you can't test when unskilled, like Pilot Aerospace. I've also disallowed it to people who were unlikely to ever ever ever need the skill, like Blades for the Unarmed Combat specialist.
Negative qualities are supposed to hurt; that's why they're worth BP. Otherwise you could just as well give some free additional BP, if you (really) feel 400 isn't enough. (It makes you quite a head taller than the common man already.)

Logic in rules as written isn't that important, no. It's used in Logic+Programming and Hardware to upgrade your programs and commlink, but you can outsource that.
Should you let him start with a low logic? I wouldn't - I'd tell the player he was a dirty powergamer.



BP-based games always allow some sort of powergaming, ridiculous optimization of stats. Unlike class/level based systems, there are generally less restrictions on how you spend them; it's up to the GM to say "no, you can't do that, it just doesn't make sense."

[Ascalaphus]

Or make them take skill levels in the skill that they're incompetent in, since they must have the skill for them to be incompetent in it [which will probably cancel out any points gained for the disadvantage].

I'm not sure you can - not having points in the skill is one of the effects of Incompetence.


I've allowed Thrown Weapons and First Aid; both things people are likely to want to do.

[Medicineman]

If it isn't a Disadvantage you get no Points.
1 or maybe 2 Incompetences are ok,but if a Player would abuse it,Iwould get my rolled-up Newspaper and whack his Fingers !

@Sinner 667
its not possible in SR4 to take a Skill in which you're incompetent (It doesn't make sense anyhow )

HougH!
Medicineman

[toturi]

I always go by the HERO phrase, "if it doesn't disadvantage the character, it's not a disadvantage".

And even the slightest disadvantage is a disadvantage.

So to the OP, I'd say, 'Yes, you are right, Incompetent quality should not be house ruled to be taken only once' and "Eh, roll with it, negative qualities are simply meant to give more BPs". There are already restrictions as to what you can take Incompetence for and there are rules for having Incompetence - use them.

For the hacker, I do not see why he is required to have high Logic if the player can have an explanation for it. If he doesn't want to be able to create his own programs and upgrade his own commlink himself, then he has to pay someone else to do it for him, there are consequences for low Logic and if it is acceptable to the player, I see no point in forcing him to take higher Logic.

IIRC, the more Incompetence you have, the worse your Notoriety and that mostly adversely affects your Social interactions. And having low Logic means less free points for Knowledge skills and I think you can use Knowledge skill points for Languages (according to published material, certain Languages are not available as softs) and Language skills serve a cap on certain Social interactions as well. For example, a low Logic hacker with multiple Incompetences is a bad idea, he can't make his own programs but his rep is imposing a penalty when he tries to buy those progs.

[EuroShadow]

If it isn't a Disadvantage you get no Points.
1 or maybe 2 Incompetences are ok,but if a Player would abuse it,Iwould get my rolled-up Newspaper and whack his Fingers !

@Sinner 667
its not possible in SR4 to take a Skill in which you're incompetent (It doesn't make sense anyhow )

HougH!
Medicineman

Ok, thanks for the answers regarding Incompetent. It is clearer for me. Still, I am not planning to do much empasizing on negative qualities (more game time for other activities), so maybe a fine start for house rule "No Incompetent quality for skills that you cannot default on", i.e., if you cannot default on skill (Variety of exotic stuff) you ain't gonna use it anyway, right?


So Logic used by hacker mostly to programming. Page 225 of the corebook (under Electronic warfare) says "When dealing hands-on with communication technology, make tests using Electronic Warfare + Logic", but it is hard to think of situation when hacker would access other node with hands on not through his commlink...


And then I got another question related to Logic and coding. Top notch program costs 20k, but it is not that hard for hacker to break the code and pirate the program. Can he then sell unlimited copies of it? Or even a copy to each contact. And give copied top programs to each team member?? It is definitely realistic, but it seems cheap...

[Ascalaphus]

Ok, thanks for the answers regarding Incompetent. It is clearer for me. Still, I am not planning to do much empasizing on negative qualities (more game time for other activities), so maybe a fine start for house rule "No Incompetent quality for skills that you cannot default on", i.e., if you cannot default on skill (Variety of exotic stuff) you ain't gonna use it anyway, right?

Otherwise, Incompetence: Eye Laser, Monowhip, Oceanfloor Crawler Pilot and a few others begin to sound interesting..
If you don't want to focus time on negative qualities, then let people take things that have a clear game effect that'll actually happen (make them earn the points), but that doesn't require you to focus on them (like Enemies).

Has anyone else had the situation where everyone but the Face treats social stats as total dump stats, expecting to hide behind the Face, and hoping that the people the Face talks to don't realize who he represents?
Maybe the Notoriety of all people in a team (and perhaps their Street Cred) should weigh in the test when they're being represented. ("Yeah, you are charming, but you represent Doc Incompetent...")

So Logic used by hacker mostly to programming. Page 225 of the corebook (under Electronic warfare) says "When dealing hands-on with communication technology, make tests using Electronic Warfare + Logic", but it is hard to think of situation when hacker would access other node with hands on not through his commlink...

Yeah, you don't use Logic all that much.

And then I got another question related to Logic and coding. Top notch program costs 20k, but it is not that hard for hacker to break the code and pirate the program. Can he then sell unlimited copies of it? Or even a copy to each contact. And give copied top programs to each team member?? It is definitely realistic, but it seems cheap...

The system is definitely flawed in this regard.

[toturi]

And then I got another question related to Logic and coding. Top notch program costs 20k, but it is not that hard for hacker to break the code and pirate the program. Can he then sell unlimited copies of it? Or even a copy to each contact. And give copied top programs to each team member?? It is definitely realistic, but it seems cheap...

You might find this thread relevant.

[Ascalaphus]

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=874690.

Bad link

[Mercer]

Here's my theory: if someone picks say, Incompetence: Submarine Piloting, what that player is really saying is, "If at some point in my character's career I am not locked, alone in the cockpit of an out of control submarine, then we have all simply failed as gamers." I would go as far to say the more unlikely the skill is to come up, the more disastrous it should be when it does.

[EuroShadow]

You might find this thread relevant.

Good link (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I read through it, but it is based basically on discussion about Unwired [book]. I don't have it and I am sure that in the nearest future me and players are not yet ready to tackle all the supplements (balancing issues). And I am not thinking about hacker bying pirated software, but pirating himself. So it can degrade, mmkei.

Maybe he cannot break the code once, but (it somehow randomly generates again for each copy) he has to break it again and again for each team member and for each sales?

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Negative qualities are supposed to hurt; that's why they're worth BP. Otherwise you could just as well give some free additional BP, if you (really) feel 400 isn't enough.

Actually, in SR4, it's the outher way around, like in Savage Worlds: Without taking NQs, you won't get a halfway decent character at all. 400BP is designed to be that way, just look at the archetypes.

[toturi]

Actually, in SR4, it's the outher way around, like in Savage Worlds: Without taking NQs, you won't get a halfway decent character at all. 400BP is designed to be that way, just look at the archetypes.

Agreed. All Qualities (Positive or Negative) are about trade-offs and some trades are better than others. Negative Qualities do not always have to hurt, and similarly Positive Qualities do not always have to help.

[Saint Sithney]

Your players are treating their qualities as a number value. This should be strongly discouraged.

A quality is an integral part of a character. A Negative Quality represents their personal failings and flaws.
An Incompetence flaw means that there is something which every living human being should be able to comprehend and attempt, but, for some reason, the character in question will never be able to understand it or do it.
Therefore, it is up to the player to explain to you why his character can not grasp these basic concepts. What is wrong with this guy that he can't figure out how to throw something across the room or can't seem to wrap his head around the concept of a joystick. If he can't reasonably explain why this is, tell him to turn around and fix his sheet. And, if he can't roleplay his reasoning, let him know that he's sacrificing future Karma by trying to pick up something which will hurt his ability to remain in character.

Another thing to consider is that every Incompetence flaw adds a point of Notoriety. Taking 7 incompetence flaws means that the character would have to be functionally retarded to the point that he was a well-known joke. Feel free to make your players aware of that as well.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Taking 7 incompetence flaws means that the character would have to be functionally retarded to the point that he was a well-known joke. Feel free to make your players aware of that as well.

Actually, that makes him very intimidating by RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Even "Defaulting: No" isn't quite a good way to filter incompetencies... having a Magician with any Incompetency in a Magical Skill is quite a drawback.

[Draco18s]

Actually, that makes him very intimidating by RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Even "Defaulting: No" isn't quite a good way to filter incompetencies... having a Magician with any Incompetency in a Magical Skill is quite a drawback.

It's called Aspected Magician. -3 + -4 (not having the skill and not being aspected for it) means a -7 dice pool modifier on a dice pool of just Magic. You'd need magic 8 to have one die.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

It's called Aspected Magician.

No, it's not.

Having Sorcery, Counterspelling, the Conjuring Group, but Incompetency Ritual Spell Casting is quite different.

-3 + -4 (not having the skill and not being aspected for it).

Defaulting is -1 - just you can't default on Magic Skills.

[Saint Sithney]

Actually, that makes him very intimidating by RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

"He doesn't seem to want to talk. What say we pull his fingernails out?"
"Hey! I've got an idea! I say we let Mongo have him!"
"Mongo! Hell, that's too cruel! I like it!"

[Draco18s]

Defaulting is -1

....Where'd I come up with -3?

*Blames previous post on his sleep cycle, or lack thereof*

[Dakka Dakka]

Besides the ridiculous rule that an incompetence makes the character intimidating (at the GMs discretion) there is the other thing about reputation: each incompetence gives -1 to all other social skills if the NPC is aware of the character's shortcomings. That's -7 for an incompetence-maxed character. I'm not sure if that is such a good idea.

[Ascalaphus]

Besides the ridiculous rule that an incompetence makes the character intimidating (at the GMs discretion) there is the other thing about reputation: each incompetence gives -1 to all other social skills if the NPC is aware of the character's shortcomings. That's -7 for an incompetence-maxed character. I'm not sure if that is such a good idea.

I think it should also reflect on the rest of the group; they're considered weird for even associating with the incompetent fool. At some point your extreme notoriety isn't just your own problem anymore. It should definitely influence fee negotiations with Johnsons.

[Ascalaphus]

Actually, in SR4, it's the outher way around, like in Savage Worlds: Without taking NQs, you won't get a halfway decent character at all. 400BP is designed to be that way, just look at the archetypes.

That's a really depressing way to look at it. It's fairly doable to start without NQs and still be better than the average ganger. It's a bit like being a generalist: you sacrifice some specialization but get caught flatfooted less often too.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

That's a really depressing way to look at it.

No...

It's fairly doable to start without NQs and still be better than the average ganger.

..this is. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)