More de-errataing, ...and this time they are getting creative Options

[bannockburn]

Your post is just ridiculous.

Actually: No it's not. The karma creation system was tested with New Attribute Rating*5, not *3, even at a time when *3 still was in the main rulebook. At least that's what I got from a German freelancer after I talked about how grossly overpowered karma gen was.
Even with *5 the karma gen is still (as written) mostly superior to a 400BP character, as several people here have already pointed out.
So, what we have here, is a Mr. Hardy, whose opinion (which doesn't have anything to do with actually comparing both generation systems, apparently) is that starting characters should be done with karma gen and be MOAR POWAR!
Nothing wrong with that, but it's still only a personal opinion. Gains a bit of credibility if uttered by a line developer, though.

Personally, I still go with *3 cost, since the *5 cost predominantly shafts adepts even more than SR4 already did. But that's another can of worms.

[Glyph]

It's true, but everyone needs Strength up to 3 or 4, so that's worth it. You're not getting the benefit of the increased Strength max, it's true.

That's why I like orks better than trolls, except for tank/melee builds. Body of 4 and Strength of 3 is right on the sweet spot, and their lower mental Attributes are the same way - a small but not crippling hindrance. Trolls, on the other hand - Body of 5 can be useful, but a Strength of 5 is a waste for a lot of builds, and the lower Attribute maximums are more of a hindrance, especially for Agility. And while +1 reach and dermal armor are nice, requiring gear that is specifically made for your metatype, and navigating a human-sized world as a hulking giant, are much more significant problems.

Comparing BP to karmagen, orks have a net gain in both. In BP, orks have a 20 point bonus compared to humans (50 in Attribute boosts - 20 metatype cost - 10 no Edge bonus). In karmagen, orks have a 40 karma bonus compared to humans (70 in Attribute boosts - 20 metatype cost - 10 no Edge bonus). Compared to humans, they can have significantly better Body and Strength, at the cost of a slight hit to their maximums in Charisma, Logic, and Edge. So they are slightly better at physical roles such as street samurai or combat adepts, while humans are slightly better at technical or social roles. However, you can still play ork hackers or faces, or human street samurai - they won't be as optimal, but are still perfectly playable.

[Yerameyahu]

Exactly. Those are the Str and Bod you were gonna buy anyway; pure savings. Troll is too far, and orks have very few drawbacks for general use.

[Nath]

Your post is just ridiculous.
Upping the available karma from 750 to 1000 is quite logical when the cost to buy something with that karma was changed from 3xrating to 5xrating and few additional costs added too.
This doesn't have anything to do with "aversion to errata".

You can read the "SR4A and KarmaGen" 2009 topic. When SR4A was released, Ancient History, aka Bobby Derrie, one of the two persons who designed the Runner's Companion karmagen system in the first place, wrote 750 karma was a good enough if using SR4A x5 multiplier for attribute, while 600 karma would actually be closer to 400 BP if suing SR4 x3 multiplier (once, twice, thrice, and in another thread, "The Karma System"). To put it another way, he acknowledged 750 karma and 400 BP weren't equivalent in the first place.

I also remember one playtester admitting he was already so accustomed to using the x5 karma houserule for attribute increase (yes, that fast, in the the timeframe between 4th edition release and RC playtest...) that he routinely applied it when testing RC karmagen, resulting in botched calculus. I can't provide a source for this part of the story however.

[Ancient History]

NMath's got the right of it. 750 Karma was calculated as an appropriate amount for attributes x5, but when RC went to print before SR4A it was printed with x3. I'll do the mea culpa on that since KarmaGen was my baby. When Jason finally applied the errata to RC in, I think, early 2012 (I have not been paying much attention of late, but I gave it to the Germany crew shortly after RC was printed in '08). Hardy increased the Karma to 1K because of the attribute increase, but this was unnecessary as that was already factored in...but I digress.

Re: 750 Karma vs. 400 BP
I no longer have the original spreadsheet, but here's the dilly-o: you cannot do a straight comparison of Karma to BP, because Karma costs are geometric and BP costs are linear. So at any nominal conversion rate (say, 2 Karma per 1 BP) you're going to hit some point where it is cheaper to buy stuff with Karma than BP, and more expensive to buy stuff with Karma than BP - and those are not going to be automatically complementary so that everything works out equivalent. While I did start out with a couple nominal conversion rates (2:1, 800 Karma; 1.75:1, 700 Karma, etc.) and built a lot of characters, I believe my final calculations were most strongly influenced by how much Karma it would take to max out a single attribute - which ties into "why do metahumans get more Karma to spend on attributes than humans?" (answer: because metahumans have higher attribute maximums, whether or not they choose to use them).

So a character built with 400 BP and a character built with 750 Karma are not going to be exactly equivalent, especially on the outliers where somebody maximizes the advantages of the different systems, but they have a large overlapping range where the characters aren't too far apart in terms of skills and attributes. This is also why I suggested just picking one chargen method at table and running with it, because mixing chargen systems can lead to wildly different character levels.

Of course, y'all are welcome to disagree with my reasons for doing stuff, but just so you know.

http://the-unpublishable.com
"Mostly not porn! Updates Fridays between midnight and midnight."

[_Pax._]

No Umaro.. I'm using the costs AS PUBLISHED BY SR4 to illustrate how badly undercosted they are. That doesn't mean I actually believe an orc should be 100. I was taking issue with Pax's 10BP figure pulled out of thin air... which didn't reflect anything in game except the cost to raise a stat BUT NOT IT"S MAXIMUM.

But which nonetheless, by apparent consensus, still represents a muchmore fair assessment of what each metatype should cost.

IMO: a far better measure is +-5BP for a raise lower in the attribute max, then 10BP for the free point itself.

So, for Orks:

5BP Night vision
50BP for fir attribute increases
25BP for five increases to maximums
-510for 2 impaired attributes.

75 for being an Ork. Not, I say, all that materially different from your prior suggestion. And still nearly double the 45-ish most folks here seem to feel is appropriate.

If an orc had to pay 50BP for his race... he'd be net -10 Bp behind a human on stat values ignoring maximums.

Only 10? What happened to the 5-point adjustment for increasing an attribute maximum ...?

Regardless of the precise value, however: the fact that humans get something, anything, argues for every other metatype (or other sapients) getting a discount on their costs .... so that humans remain the "costs 0" option.

[Falconer]

Pax.. I said only 10 behind IGNORING MAXIMUMS. Also, yes I disagree with your figures as you only pay for the stat. You don't pay for the attribute increases at all. So no your method is not more realistic. You give very powerful benefits for free.

The most abusive case in BP Gen is when you buy up the strong attributes using BP. Conversely the most abusive case in karmagen is when you DON"T BUY UP STRENGTH AND BODY strong attributes but instead buy up the weak attributes to play against type. Karmagen actually encourages this. Ancient understands this, we had a long drawn out thread on it way back after RC came out.

I understand his working constraints though. I just absolutely hate the idiocy that Mr JM Hardy represents though. Mr Hardy should try making some 1000 karma chars converting them to BP then trying to use them with his own published adventures to realize how rediculously wrong he is.


Also if you bothered to read my post.. I subtracted 15 from the 70 (5+50+25-10, your math is wrong, mine is right if you bothered to read it) for the humans edge + edge max increase. Then you'll notice I subtracted *15* (human edge + edge max). lowering that to 55. I then applied a 10% package discount (sort of like cyberware suittes... 10%-25% is about reasonable) before popping out that 50 figure.

So yes in absolute free attribute terms, the orc is 10 behind... in terms of higher maximums though the orc is far ahead of the human though, especially in terms of augmented maximums. At that price, orcs are VERY well positioned to make street toughs, melee adepts, street sams, even things which use logic like combat medics. The higher body allows for some very tough chars with a lot of armor. A prime consideration for a main combatant... that extra armor is easily worth a point of edge when it's constantly adding 5 or so dice to each and every damage soak roll and extra physical damage boxes.


So please read the damn post... you'll notice I said 50... which is only 5 off the 45 you just listed... so I'm not that far different from you (and that's simply a matter of 10% vs 20% package cost on the meta, or tossing in an extra -5BP for the short lifespan if they weren't allowed to use the fluffy human lifespan by goblinizing as a teen route).

Using the same method
Elves: 30BP ~=30+15+5 ==50. -15... 35... 10% off... 30BP right where they are! You could maybe knock that up to 35BP if the lifespan is important.
Again roughly 10BP more than the free attribute points...

Dwarves: 50 ~= (40+20-5+5+20(toxin/disease)-10(special size))==70. -15 - 10%...
Again roughly 10BP more than the free attributes... Not sure the toxin/diseas is really worth 20... just went with the 10BP for +1 dice on each twice.

Trolls: 80 ~= (80+40-25+5+5+10-10(special size)) == 105. -15 - 10%
Wow once again only about 10BP more than the free attributes compared to a human.

See... very consistent results here. The other thing to remember is metatype package costs are spent for IN ADDITION TO the half BP allowed for attributes. So effectively a metatype can spend 200BP on attributes AND spend race cost (which is working out to be free attribute BP + 10). So metas still make out better than humans, but not by nearly as much. It's close enough that it really is much more of a RP cost.

[All4BigGuns]

Pax.. I said only 10 behind IGNORING MAXIMUMS. Also, yes I disagree with your figures as you only pay for the stat. You don't pay for the attribute increases at all. So no your method is not more realistic. You give very powerful benefits for free.

The most abusive case in BP Gen is when you buy up the strong attributes using BP. Conversely the most abusive case in karmagen is when you DON"T BUY UP STRENGTH AND BODY strong attributes but instead buy up the weak attributes to play against type. Karmagen actually encourages this. Ancient understands this, we had a long drawn out thread on it way back after RC came out.

I understand his working constraints though. I just absolutely hate the idiocy that Mr JM Hardy represents though. Mr Hardy should try making some 1000 karma chars converting them to BP then trying to use them with his own published adventures to realize how rediculously wrong he is.


Also if you bothered to read my post.. I subtracted 15 from the 70 (5+50+25-10, your math is wrong, mine is right if you bothered to read it) for the humans edge + edge max increase. Then you'll notice I subtracted *15* (human edge + edge max). lowering that to 55. I then applied a 10% package discount (sort of like cyberware suittes... 10%-25% is about reasonable) before popping out that 50 figure.

So yes in absolute free attribute terms, the orc is 10 behind... in terms of higher maximums though the orc is far ahead of the human though, especially in terms of augmented maximums. At that price, orcs are VERY well positioned to make street toughs, melee adepts, street sams, even things which use logic like combat medics. The higher body allows for some very tough chars with a lot of armor. A prime consideration for a main combatant... that extra armor is easily worth a point of edge when it's constantly adding 5 or so dice to each and every damage soak roll and extra physical damage boxes.


So please read the damn post... you'll notice I said 50... which is only 5 off the 45 you just listed... so I'm not that far different from you (and that's simply a matter of 10% vs 20% package cost on the meta, or tossing in an extra -5BP for the short lifespan if they weren't allowed to use the fluffy human lifespan by goblinizing as a teen route).

Using the same method
Elves: 30BP ~=30+15+5 ==50. -15... 35... 10% off... 30BP right where they are! You could maybe knock that up to 35BP if the lifespan is important.
Again roughly 10BP more than the free attribute points...

Dwarves: 50 ~= (40+20-5+5+20(toxin/disease)-10(special size))==70. -15 - 10%...
Again roughly 10BP more than the free attributes... Not sure the toxin/diseas is really worth 20... just went with the 10BP for +1 dice on each twice.

Trolls: 80 ~= (80+40-25+5+5+10-10(special size)) == 105. -15 - 10%
Wow once again only about 10BP more than the free attributes compared to a human.

See... very consistent results here. The other thing to remember is metatype package costs are spent for IN ADDITION TO the half BP allowed for attributes. So effectively a metatype can spend 200BP on attributes AND spend race cost (which is working out to be free attribute BP + 10). So metas still make out better than humans, but not by nearly as much. It's close enough that it really is much more of a RP cost.

You're forgetting one important consideration. The point costs are most likely also taking into consideration what people might be willing to pay. Under your costs, one would likely never see an ork, troll or dwarf character enter their games as those costs are just much too high. Granted, there are some outliers that might still pay it, but that can't be counted on.

[Glyph]

You're forgetting one important consideration. The point costs are most likely also taking into consideration what people might be willing to pay. Under your costs, one would likely never see an ork, troll or dwarf character enter their games as those costs are just much too high. Granted, there are some outliers that might still pay it, but that can't be counted on.

Exactly. The trouble with higher costs for orks, etc. is that most people aren't going to want to waste points paying for potential. Personally, I think Exceptional Attribute is one of the most overpriced qualities in the game, and only justifiable by a design philosophy of "Yes, you can hit the hard limits at character creation, but you will pay through the nose for them".

If orks cost 75 points, who the hell would ever play them? They would go from 20 BP ahead of a human, with some accompanying drawbacks, to 35 BP behind them.

Elves are the only metatype that actually comes out numerically worse than humans, by 10 BP, getting to improve two of the most important attributes in the game in exchange. By contrast, I wouldn't be too impressed at the option to improve Body and Strength to higher than normal, in exchange for limits on edge, two mental Attributes, and a 35 point penalty.

[_Pax._]

Pax.. I said only 10 behind IGNORING MAXIMUMS. Also, yes I disagree with your figures as you only pay for the stat. You don't pay for the attribute increases at all. So no your method is not more realistic. You give very powerful benefits for free.

It's about flexibility.

If you say "it costs 10BP to raise any of your nine or ten attributes by 1 point", that's a very large amount of flexibility. If, OTOH, you present a package that says "You get 3 points of Body and 2 points of Strength", and there's no choice in where those five points go? Then, well, the loss of flexibility means they should cost less. And that's as true of maximum increases as it is of "current value" increases.

And as All4BigGuns mentions, it's also about selling that package to players. And not just the players that want to play (in Orks' case) melee fighters. IF you don't discount the "package deak" slightly, you won't see Ork hackers, or Ork medics, or Ork riggers. You WILL see Ork melee adepts.

I'll accept a slightly munchkin-able bit of extra efficiency for those archetypes, if it means seeing mroe people playing "against type" with Orks (or whichever metatype, really), because "yeah it's not the BEST way to spend those BP, but it's not so expensive it breaks my concept either".

[Shortstraw]

It's about flexibility.

If you say "it costs 10BP to raise any of your nine or ten attributes by 1 point", that's a very large amount of flexibility. If, OTOH, you present a package that says "You get 3 points of Body and 2 points of Strength", and there's no choice in where those five points go? Then, well, the loss of flexibility means they should cost less. And that's as true of maximum increases as it is of "current value" increases.

And as All4BigGuns mentions, it's also about selling that package to players. And not just the players that want to play (in Orks' case) melee fighters. IF you don't discount the "package deak" slightly, you won't see Ork hackers, or Ork medics, or Ork riggers. You WILL see Ork melee adepts.

I'll accept a slightly munchkin-able bit of extra efficiency for those archetypes, if it means seeing mroe people playing "against type" with Orks (or whichever metatype, really), because "yeah it's not the BEST way to spend those BP, but it's not so expensive it breaks my concept either".

The loss of flexibility certainly makes it worth less than the straight 10. As to the amount less the other other games (ie pathfinder) race book has a fixed item worth half of a flexible one.

[Falconer]

Why is it people keep trotting out that 75 figure... the one which showed Pax MADE A MATH ERROR.

Why is it people keep ignoring that I cut 15 off to account for the humans enhanced edge. Also I didn't use exceptional attribute... as it is a humongous waste.


What is it people don't understand metas ALLOW PEOPLE TO PAY POINTS FOR ATTRIBUTES WITHOUT PUTTING THOSE POINTS UNDER THE 200BP limit!. An orc as it stands now can start with 240 points worth of attributes for 220BP (200 attribute + 20 race). How is that fair in any way shape or form to a human? The whole problem in all this was that at 3x attribute cost... attributes were rediculously better buys than skills in almost all cases. At 5x generally they still are. Generally the key to min/maxing your build is to stuff as much into attributes early and then enough skills to keep you going til you get some karma.

Also, the problem with all this is the package deals are very good... nothing stops you from WANTING 4bod and 3str... then dumping all the other points in other attributes. Why... 3str is a nice value for almost anyone except a melee specialist. 4bod... almost anyone concerned with armor has at least that much or more. Yes you lack flexibility, but if you're going to be spending those points anyhow few things beat it. You make it sound as if someone is trying to sell you a cuisinart. (really all the dwarf's stat boosts are relevent... same goes for the orc, same goes for an elf, and only the troll starts to get questionable unless you're going melee or tankus maximus).

[Sengir]

Your post is just ridiculous.
Upping the available karma from 750 to 1000 is quite logical when the cost to buy something with that karma was changed from 3xrating to 5xrating

Same question I asked A4BG: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t&p=1169272

He didn't answer yet, maybe your want to enlighten me?

[_Pax._]

Also, the problem with all this is the package deals are very good... nothing stops you from WANTING 4bod and 3str... then dumping all the other points in other attributes.

.... except the GM, who then expects you to roleplay your Ork like he was a sickly 90lbs weakling. Such a character should probably be physically nonaggressive, and certainly be prone to taking TONS of vitamins, etc, to stave off illness.

[Yerameyahu]

Except he's not. He's only weak compared to the average troll. He's neither weak nor sickly for a world of humans (which it is). A 'sickly-for-orks' ork is still robust against the flu, and a 'weak-for-orks' ork can still carry a full backpack.

[Mäx]

Same question I asked A4BG: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t&p=1169272

He didn't answer yet, maybe your want to enlighten me?

Because thats what the SR4A changed it to.
And I'm pretty damm sure that the SR4A change had nothing to do with karmagen.

[bannockburn]

Because thats what the SR4A changed it to.
And I'm pretty damm sure that the SR4A change had nothing to do with karmagen.

And Nath and me are pretty sure that it was, at least partially, on basis of statements from people who actually tested and implemented the karma gen. Something which was now also confirmed by AH, who worked on it as well.

Now what's your ratio for being 'pretty damm sure'?

[Mäx]

And Nath and me are pretty sure that it was, at least partially, on basis of statements from people who actually tested and implemented the karma gen. Something which was now also confirmed by AH, who worked on it as well.

Now what's your ratio for being 'pretty damm sure'?

The karmagen might have been tested (atleast partially if not wholly) with the changed cost, but the change sure as heck wasn't because the optional chargen system would be too powerful with the old costs.

[bannockburn]

That's what I said.
The karma gen was tested with costs *5.
It got printed with costs *3.
That's why 750 Karma was horribly broken in SR4 and works fine (and closer to 400BP) in SR4a.
Ergo: No reason at all to stack it up to 1000 karma (which would make it horribly broken again)

[Glyph]

In my experience, the old karmagen worked out to about 550+ BP, and the revised karmagen worked out to about 450+ BP. I did a character with 1,000 karma but the new costs, and it came out to be the equivalent of 572 BP. So yeah, 1,000 karma is about right if you are trying to emulate the original karmagen - which is generally way more powerful than 400 BP.

This typically shows up in breadth rather than raw power. 400 BP is enough to soft-max your essential Attributes, get a 6 and a specialization in your main skill, and obtain the requisite dice pool modifiers. What 1,000 karma lets you do is shore up your weak areas and get lots of tertiary skills and extra contacts. To me, that is the definition of a prime runner - specialist dice pools without a specialist's weaknesses, and plenty of skills outside of his or her main specialty.

Of course, you can choose not to specialize in karmagen, but then the character would work out to be worth even more than 550+ BP. The build I did had high but not hard-maxed Attributes, a skill of 6 and two others at 4, high resources, and lots of knowledge skills which were not free. In other words, a specialist build that played to the strengths of BP rather than karmagen. And it still came out that far ahead of BP.

[Glyph]

I'll go ahead and post the build I did here, a street samurai/face, so everyone can see it. It includes the breakdown for both karma costs, and the BP costs, for comparison:

[ Spoiler ]

BREAKDOWN (1,000 Karma)
Core Attributes: 445
Special Attributes: 90
Race (Human): 0
Active Skills: 209
Martial Arts Maneuvers: 8
Knowledge Skills: 48
Qualities: 70
Contacts: 30
Resources: 100

BP Cost (for comparison - 572 BP)
Core Attributes: 270
Special Attributes: 40
Race (Human): 0
Active Skills: 158
Martial Arts Maneuvers: 4
Knowledge Skills: 0
Qualities: 35
Contacts: 15
Resources: 50

=Attributes=
Body: 5
Agility: 5(9)
Reaction: 5(9)
Strength: 3(5)
Charisma: 5
Intuition: 4
Logic: 3
Willpower: 5
Edge: 6

Essence: 0.80
Initiative: 13
Initiative Passes: 3
Physical Damage Track: 11
Stun Track: 11

Current Karma: 0
Total Karma: 0
Street Cred: 0
Noteriety: 0
Public Awareness: 0

=Qualities=
Bilingual
Double-Jointed
First Impression
Guts
High Pain Tolerance (x 1)
Martial Arts (x 1)
> +1 DV unarmed
Restricted Gear (x 1)

=Active Skills=
Gymnastics/Dance: 4/+2
Infiltration: 2
Influence Skill Group: 4
Intimidation: 2
Long Arms: 3
Perception/Visual: 3/+2
Pilot Ground Craft/Bikes: 1/+2
Pistols/Semi-Automatic: 6(7)/+2
Running: 2
Unarmed Combat/Martial Arts: 4(5)/+2

=Martial Arts Maneuvers=
Kick
Finishing Move

=Knowledge Skills=
Languages>
English: N
Japanese: N

Other>
Chess: 3
Classical Music: 2
Corporate Politics: 2
Corporate Security: 3
Guerrilla Combat Tactics/Urban: 4/+2
Psychology/Cognitive: 2/+2
Security Procedures: 3
Underworld Politics: 3

=Cyberware=
Cybereyes II with:
>Flare Compensation
>Low-Light Vision
>Smartlink
>Vision Magnification
Plastic Bone Lacing
Reaction Enhancers: 2
Ultrasound Sensor
Wired Reflexes: 2 (Alphaware)

=Bioware=
Clean Metabolism
Cosmetic Biomods, Minor (2,000 Nuyen)
Muscle Augmentation: 2
Muscle Toner: 4
Reflex Recorders
>Pistols
>Unarmed Combat
Tailored Pheromones: 3
Vocal Range Enhancer

=Contacts=
Arms Dealer (2 Connection/2 Loyalty)
Fixer (4 Connection/3 Loyalty)
Street Doc (2 Connection/2 Loyalty)

23,000 Nuyen remaining for gear.

[Ryu]

In my experience, the old karmagen worked out to about 550+ BP, and the revised karmagen worked out to about 450+ BP. I did a character with 1,000 karma but the new costs, and it came out to be the equivalent of 572 BP. So yeah, 1,000 karma is about right if you are trying to emulate the original karmagen - which is generally way more powerful than 400 BP.

I don´t have old karmagen figures, but revised karmagen is equal to around 500BP for our group. First attempts with 1000 karma run around 650 BP. So yeah, looks the same for me.

[Sengir]

Because thats what the SR4A changed it to.

The change to 5x appeared in the German Runner's Companion long before 4A...not because of time travellers, but because Pegasus as usual included some errata.

[DMiller]

I’ve seen a lot of talk about the Race costs and a rarity tax on races. So I ran the numbers and I can easily see what people are clamoring about. After running the numbers this is what I came up with:

Race RAW Cost Balanced Cost
Human 0 0
Ork 20 25
Dwarf 25 45
Elf 30 25
Troll 40 40
Nartaki 25 0
Gnome 25 40
Harumen 50 55
Koborokuru 35 35
Menehune 25 40
Dryads 45 30
Night Ones 35 5
Wakyambi 35 35
Xapiri Thepe 40 20
Hobgoblin 20 20
Ogre 20 30
Oni 25 20
Satyr 25 35
Cyclops 45 35
Fomori 45 75
Giant 40 40
Minotaur 45 55

This factors in the attribute bonuses (based strictly on 10 BP per +/- 1) and listed qualities. I then removed the base cost for “Human” from all of them. When I ran the numbers Human actually cost 10 BP, but since that is the base-line I subtracted those 10 points from all races. I didn’t include the costs for exceptional attribute (or similar) for racial modifiers. I probably could have, but didn’t as that seemed to me to be over-kill and would have placed the costs for being metahuman into super high levels. The fluff of being metahuman will just have to make up for those points.

As you can see there are deals to be had among the races and there are a couple of races that are balanced. I’m sure this will strike a nerve with someone. I figured you all might enjoy this information. If anyone is interested I can supply how I arrived at these numbers, but it’s actually simple to devise them and most of the qualities exist in the game and you just have to add up the values.

-D

*edit* Sorry, the board stripped out my formatting (TABs), but I'm sure you can make it out.

[Yerameyahu]

I think we've been over that kind of simplistic calculation already, though. It results in funny things like 'dwarves are a better deal than orks', which is true if and only if the penalties actually affect your 'build', etc.