[X] My Assistant

[Elfenlied]

Or, in my case, being a minority male dating a white girl; you get all kinds of stares in even liberal neighborhoods.

On a side note: Might I ask where you live? Portland? I'm asking since I'm in a similar situation, yet I've rarely faced what you describe. Then again, chances are we live at different ends of the world.

[Cain]

If you live in Portland, we don't. But that's a better topic for PM.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

In this situation, I'd be inclined to give it to the player. The dryad in question only came up once in game, and the stories about that person are not fit for a public forum. However, a combination of roleplay and a disgusting dice pool counts for a lot, and should count for a lot, in any game. She portrayed the situation convincingly, thus opening the door for the roleplay and the dice roll. Sure, I probably wouldn't have let a troll use Intimidate in that same situation, regardless of dice pool. (And I have a house rule that you can use Strength instead of Charisma for Intimidate, so trolls are actually good at scaring people.)

Social skills aren't an auto win at my table, but they are very powerful. I'm forbidden from using Commanding Voice on my players ever again, after a Leadermancer got away from them for the third time.

Fair Enough...
Strength and Intimidation, Interesting... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Ascalaphus]

(I just got back from holidays, so excuse me responding to things discussed a few days ago)

Should races be optimal choices for certain roles (elf faces, ork sams)? Not too much - preferably not conclusively at all. I like it better when any given role can be done a bit differently depending on which race you pick. An elf gunbunny would emphasize accuracy and speed a bit more, an ork would put more stress on staying standing even when shot at. You're not mad or stupid or deliberately nerfing yourself by picking a different race for a role.

The current system verges on that (to my mind ideal) situation, although trolls tend to be Good For One Thing Only, unfortunately. You just pay too much BP for Strength if you're not going to make serious use of it. And making a social troll is just too hard, with the low charisma caps. (Seattle 2072 mentions a flaming gay troll fixer...)

Are humans underpowered? Not all that much, compared to most races. Maybe compared to orks, but if orks are also overpowered compared to trolls and dwarves, I don't think the problem is with humans...



On the other hand, there's some stuff orks don't do all that well. Consider: I only want Body 4. That's enough to wear FFBA and an Actioneer Business Suit; total armor of 11/6 I think. (Best stay out of close combat.) Any heavier armor basically looks like armor, and that's not the impression I want to make.

So, while creeping through an office building, you bump into some people. If you're a human in a nice suit, you've got a shot at talking your way out of it. And if not, of getting near enough to surprise them with something.

As an ork in heavy armor ("because Body's cheap and you can wear lots of armor that way"), you look Suspicious. You might take them down quietly, but that's risky. Talking your way out is difficult too: you're an ork and you're wearing armor. The only orks employed are a bunch of guys they took on to comply with some equal opportunities directive; fat chance they recognize you're not those orks. (Those would be the human-poser orks with nerdy glasses, in order to look less threatening. Probably in a wheelchair.)

Admittedly, this is just one scenario, but it's a sketch of how being more "civic" can be useful.

[suoq]

As an ork in heavy armor ("because Body's cheap and you can wear lots of armor that way"), you look Suspicious.

I don't understand why the Orc isn't wearing an armored vest (plus the same ffba, ppp, etc) under janitor/maintenance coveralls (which is actually just a hair bit better armor for the same body and gives him more places to hide B&E tools). Is there a reason he's not attempting to look like an employee but the human is?

[Irion]

A body of 3 is usefull. True, a body of 5 tends to be not that usefull anyway, because you hit the "can't get additional armor" problem.
(This is one of the reasons I do not see the troll as such a great melee/tank. His larger size and all the problems comming along with that makes more than up for this +1 armor +1 body (which is gone as soon as you use cyberlimps or even orthoskin), if compared to an ork. I would even go that far, that this is true for close to any build. Even the once focused on strengh, since these 2 points do not get that far. (Thats one point of damage in most cases, and a little bit of range if you go with the throwing adept.)
Not that helpful if you (to close the cirle) do not have a GM mostly hitting on the strong points and ignoring the weak once.
Because now, this one point of damage is all thats left.

Orks are seen to be better than humans, because mostly the GM won't let you roll with the Body 1, Strengh 1 Human generated in BP Gen, to just add some Points after a few runs.
(Granted, this was a quite better idea, when the attributes were just *3.)
Even if this human, for example as a gun bunny adept with high edge, would not have a lot of problems. (Or the technomancer in the van, the projecting mage etc.)

If you look at build posted here or used, you normally do not see body 1, strength 1, charisma 5, edge 6.
Well, I guess it depends on which system you use too.
Getting an attribute from 1 to 2 in Karma Gen is dirt cheap. In BP-gen it is the same as getting an attribute from 4 to 5 so...
But I guess most of the thought that orks are superior is not from a general build done once ork once human, it is from the more extrem builds.
Like the throwing adept or the tank.
And here it is only true for BP-gen, since in Karma-Gen the ork would need to pay a lot to get those fancy body 8 and strength 7.

[UmaroVI]

On the other hand, there's some stuff orks don't do all that well. Consider: I only want Body 4. That's enough to wear FFBA and an Actioneer Business Suit; total armor of 11/6 I think. (Best stay out of close combat.) Any heavier armor basically looks like armor, and that's not the impression I want to make.

Nonsense. You can wear way heavier armor than that and not look armored. FFBA plus PPP (minus the helmet) plus Vashon Island Steampunk Suit (worn over the FFBA/PPP) just looks like the latest fashion and you need Body 6 to wear it.

[sabs]

PPP isn't subtle. II would argue you can't wear it under even a steampunk suit, without people getting decent odds of figuring it out.

[UmaroVI]

No.

"The SecureTech PPP (Personal Protection Piecemeal) System consists of padded densiplast sections that the wearer can combine to give additional protection to several body parts. Each piece of armor is available in at least three styles: as discreet protection designed to be worn beneath other clothing, as an obvious strapped addition to other visible armor, and as sports equipment."

[Shinobi Killfist]

The current system verges on that (to my mind ideal) situation, although trolls tend to be Good For One Thing Only, unfortunately. You just pay too much BP for Strength if you're not going to make serious use of it. And making a social troll is just too hard, with the low charisma caps. (Seattle 2072 mentions a flaming gay troll fixer...)

Just wanted to focus on this because one thing Trolls they would seem to be good for they really aren't.(melee combat) Since every combat skill is tied to agility -1 to agility caps wrecks trolls in combat even hand to hand combat. They may match on one side of the equation unmodified agility opponents with reach but modified enemies can get up to a 9 agility vs the trolls 7. It might not sound like much but given the double defense melee combat gets you need every die you can get. The extra 2dv in damage when you hit is nice, but you actually have to hit to do damage. I am not saying you can't build an effective melee troll just that it isn't really a big strength to them. It is a bit of a pity but since the game designers are the ones defining what an attribute means they could have defined attributes in such a way that there weren't a couple super attributes.

[Shinobi Killfist]

No.

"The SecureTech PPP (Personal Protection Piecemeal) System consists of padded densiplast sections that the wearer can combine to give additional protection to several body parts. Each piece of armor is available in at least three styles: as discreet protection designed to be worn beneath other clothing, as an obvious strapped addition to other visible armor, and as sports equipment."

Yeah PPP is just form fitting for impact damage. I wish they had just made FF work against both instead of every character having a full paragraph detailing all their armor, or better yet make the initial armor protect at the level they want instead of padding supplements with it.

[HunterHerne]

Just wanted to focus on this because one thing Trolls they would seem to be good for they really aren't.(melee combat) Since every combat skill is tied to agility -1 to agility caps wrecks trolls in combat even hand to hand combat. They may match on one side of the equation unmodified agility opponents with reach but modified enemies can get up to a 9 agility vs the trolls 7. It might not sound like much but given the double defense melee combat gets you need every die you can get. The extra 2dv in damage when you hit is nice, but you actually have to hit to do damage. I am not saying you can't build an effective melee troll just that it isn't really a big strength to them. It is a bit of a pity but since the game designers are the ones defining what an attribute means they could have defined attributes in such a way that there weren't a couple super attributes.

That -1 agility isn't as big a negative as you think. Trolls also get a +1 reach bonus, which makes up for it, without going to augmented maximums. The reach only works in melee, so the Troll still isn't as effective in ranged combat.

[UmaroVI]

Trolls see more play than they otherwise might because Fomori are so amazingly good, but otherwise, yeah, you really need to want that strength very badly for troll to be worth it. Subduing is the big draw of the high STR; if you want high melee damage (which is honestly a questionable goal in the first place) there are better options than being a troll.

[Whipstitch]

I would argue that there is a difference between being designed to be worn under clothing discreetly and being utterly undetectable. Wearing all that stuff under an industrial coverall or other bulky outfit is one thing but I tend to think that strapping on all that gear under something more fashionable or form-fitting would be akin to "discreetly" packing a heavy pistol in a shoulder holster-- a lot of people won't notice but ultimately the biggest advantage is that you're not really brandishing or making a big show of being armed even when people do notice.

[Irion]

@Shinobi Killfist

The extra 2dv in damage when you hit is nice, but you actually have to hit to do damage. I am not saying you can't build an effective melee troll just that it isn't really a big strength to them. It is a bit of a pity but since the game designers are the ones defining what an attribute means they could have defined attributes in such a way that there weren't a couple super attributes.

Well, and a Troll is quite hard to miss.
So there is a lot more time to shoot him in the face... (Yeah, I know. The melee builds are about running speed and how crazy a troll with the right modification gets, so you close in from sniper distance in 3 seconds.)

Anyway: Melee weapons and hand to hand should be governed be strength, monofilament wip excluded.

[HunterHerne]

@Shinobi Killfist

Well, and a Troll is quite hard to miss.
So there is a lot more time to shoot him in the face... (Yeah, I know. The melee builds are about running speed and how crazy a troll with the right modification gets, so you close in from sniper distance in 3 seconds.)

Anyway: Melee weapons and hand to hand should be governed be strength, monofilament wip excluded.

For the attack test? Maybe from a balance perspective, but not if they want any semblance of realism for stat function. I've fought in combats with mock weapons and, honestly, it takes some hand-eye coordination to effectively use most weapons or tactics, and that falls within the scope of agility. There are exceptions, but those are mostly covered with subduing combat (which does use strength).

[suoq]

I would argue that there is a difference between being designed to be worn under clothing discreetly and being utterly undetectable.

I don't think anyone's claiming "undetectable". In the above example, I don't see a big difference between the human wearing PPP forearm & shin under Actioneer (which he should be doing with Body 4 and half FFBA) and an orc wearing an armored vest, and the same PPP & FFBA under coveralls (again, with a Body 4). Both have a chance to be noticed and what looks odder, bulkier coveralls or Actioneer clothing, in this office is really GM discretion at best.

---------

Numbers note. I was playing with Chummer, looking at a human hacker I built for missions but haven't run yet. The only numbers difference after going from soft capped edge for human to hard capped edge for orc was that I had to spend 5 points to get my strength from 2 to 3. As such, depending on table and what you consider acceptable minimum stats for Body and Strength for the character you're building, I'm not even sure humans are even at an edge advantage, unless they're going to hard cap their edge.

From a numbers perspective, I'm not seeing the advantage to being human unless you're hardcapping edge or you really want to use strength and/or body as a dump stat.

[Irion]

@HunterHerne
Strength is still a factor. And quite an important one. (If you are not fighting with very light weapons, which bend if but under stress)
Higher strength makes it possible to use moves you could not (or you would need to slow them down) with lower strength.
(Also you tend not to drop your weapon this easy.)

It always depends on what you consider to be in the attribute strength.
I do not only but how strong you are but also how well you may access your strength. Focus it.

So maybe thats why I consider them to be quite equal in melee. Maybe agility is a bit more important... (2to1 or something)

[Mardrax]

For the attack test? Maybe from a balance perspective, but not if they want any semblance of realism for stat function. I've fought in combats with mock weapons and, honestly, it takes some hand-eye coordination to effectively use most weapons or tactics, and that falls within the scope of agility. There are exceptions, but those are mostly covered with subduing combat (which does use strength).

QFT. Someone wielding a sword in combat without proper training and the agility to use that will be more of a danger to himself and his friends than to his enemy.

[HunterHerne]

@HunterHerne
Strength is still a factor. And quite an important one. (If you are not fighting with very light weapons, which bend if but under stress)
Higher strength makes it possible to use moves you could not (or you would need to slow them down) with lower strength.
(Also you tend not to drop your weapon this easy.)

It always depends on what you consider to be in the attribute strength.
I do not only but how strong you are but also how well you may access your strength. Focus it.

So maybe thats why I consider them to be quite equal in melee. Maybe agility is a bit more important... (2to1 or something)

Alright, you are on to something there. I know a little about the science of athletics (though very little), and you are right, strength is important. A gymnast needs to be able to lift his weight to do some of his routines, too. Agility shouldn't be the end-all-be-all of stats, but it's not easy to write easily implemented rules that take those things into account. If you, or anyone else, wants to bring strength into importance, that is up to them. I for one, don't know how to do it effectively.

[HunterHerne]

QFT. Someone wielding a sword in combat without proper training and the agility to use that will be more of a danger to himself and his friends than to his enemy.

This I know, both from observation and experience (though like I said, mock weapons, so the "danger" wasn't lethal)

[Apathy]

Alright, you are on to something there. I know a little about the science of athletics (though very little), and you are right, strength is important. A gymnast needs to be able to lift his weight to do some of his routines, too. Agility shouldn't be the end-all-be-all of stats, but it's not easy to write easily implemented rules that take those things into account. If you, or anyone else, wants to bring strength into importance, that is up to them. I for one, don't know how to do it effectively.

My take on making strength worthwhile below:

[ Spoiler ]

While I agree that it's a bit off to have something with the mass and power of a grizzly bitch-slapped by a weak but agile elf, I think the whole melee combat (and especially the unarmed combat) system is wacky.

My personal pet peeves:
(Rant)

[ Spoiler ]

• Unarmed damage codes in general are much too strong compared to armed combat. While fist-fighting with a swordsman looks cool in the movies, it seems a bit silly to me.
• I hate the martial arts specializations. I think the only specializations should be striking, grappeling, and possibly defense. Muay Thai 4 is really Unarmed 2 with a specialization in Striking. Krav Maga 5 is Unarmed 5 (no specialization). The rest is just fluff and pandering to people who want to think their particular style of combat is special.
• Strength should be a valid linked attribute for unarmed combat. There are plenty of styles that focus more on brute force and power than on speed and precision strikes. This could also apply to heavy melee weapons like mauls, axes, and polearms. This would also serve to make the dump stat strength be a bit more useful for at least a few builds (assuming that you'd want to gimp yourself by being a melee fighter in the first place.)

Here are some house rules that I'd like to try sometime:

• Unarmed damage codes are now based on one-third Strength, instead of one-half Strength.
• The only Unarmed specializations are Striking, Grappling, and Defense. If you declare a specialization, you should say what martial art style it's associated with, but this only matters for the purposes of fluff, and defining what manuevers are available.
• When declaring your specialization (or that you're not specializing), you should also declare whether your art links to Strength or Agility. GMs should encourage players to pick a linked ability that makes sense based on style chosen. (e.g. Wrestling could default to either, but Akido would logically default to Agility.)
• When in Unarmed Combat, both participants resist damage equal to the opponents base damage, raised or lowered by the net hits. If I do 3 damage and have 6 hits on my skill test, and you do 7 damage but only have 2 hits on your skill test, then I'll resist 3 damage (7, minus 4 net hits) and you'll resist 7 damage (3, plus 4 net hits). This means everybody will get a little bit hurt every round, unless the dice pools are so disproportionate that the contest is a joke.
• Yes, this makes trolls with high strength and body the kings of unarmed combat. Yes, this means that a troll brawler with Strength 12, Agility 2, and Brawling 3 will kick the ass of an elf with Strength 3, Agility 6, and Kung Fu 5. I personally think that it's appropriate. That elf would have no more luck with his delicate blocks against this troll than we would against a charging rhino.

[edit] Obviously, you could only adopt this house rule at the beginning of the game, since it completely changes the balance of different builds.

[KCKitsune]

Apathy, I don't like those house rules for one big reason. First off you take into account things like cyberlimbs. If I punch you in the face with my flesh and bone hand, I'll hurt you and hurt myself. If I punch you in the face with a cyberhand, I'll hurt you and NOT hurt my hand. My hand is made of metal. Also you're not taking into account things like shock hands (which uses the unarmed combat skill) or hardliner gloves, or Adept Killing hands.

Next, your take on a troll with low agility against an elf with high agility is wrong. If the troll hits the elf, it's all over for that poor bastard... but he HAS. TO. HIT! The elf is dancing around the troll and stinging him with "weak" hits. Hardliner, or shock gloves will give the elf a good chance to hurt the troll.

[suoq]

If the troll hits the elf, it's all over for that poor bastard... but he HAS. TO. HIT! The elf is dancing around the troll and stinging him with "weak" hits.

What I hear you saying is that one side always hits (100%) but does little damage (10%). Your flip side is someone who does 100% damage, but instead of hitting 10% of time (a balanced equation), never hits.

Yes, when you stack the deck that way, the guy doing 0 at either hitting or damaging isn't hurting. If you said the elf had the same chance of hurting the troll as the troll does of hitting the elf (both 0%) then the fight would go on forever.

If you want to write a new version of SR where instead of adding attributes to skills you cap skills with attributes and cap add-ons with skills and only roll dice for skills + add-ons, I'll be happy to sit down and play a game. But that's another thread entirely.

[Traul]

If you want to write a new version of SR where instead of adding attributes to skills you cap skills with attributes and cap add-ons with skills and only roll dice for skills + add-ons, I'll be happy to sit down and play a game. But that's another thread entirely.

And you call that SR3? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)