Quick Karmagen Question |
Quick Karmagen Question |
Jan 19 2013, 03:09 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 124 Joined: 21-September 12 Member No.: 55,906 |
Metatype costs listed (I only have pre-erata RC, so correct me if this is fixed post-errata) is [(1/2*karma)+(2*meta bp)].
That means humans get, at basic karmagen, 375 karma to spend, and elves get 435 to spend on their stats? Does that give an overall benefit to metas versus plain humans, where in BP gen, taking a meta is a cost and a human is a benefit? |
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 03:47 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,373 Joined: 14-January 10 From: Stuttgart, Germany Member No.: 18,036 |
humans have more karma leftover to put in skills. Also in German errata karmagen, metatype cost in karma = cost in BP
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 07:10 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
in karmagen, it's generally much better to spread around your spending anyways. just because 1/2 of your points *can* go into attributes, doesn't mean half your points *should* go to attributes.
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 08:01 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
With the Attribute + skill dice pool mechanic, investing in Attributes is generally a good idea. The opportunity costs of doing so can vary depending on how reliant your concept is on other things such as skills and contacts.
Metatypes can potentially spend more on Attributes, but keep in mind that karma costs for Attributes go up exponentially. In build points, a human buying an Attribute to 5, an elf buying Charisma to 7, or a troll buying Strength to 9 all cost the same - 40 build points. In karmagen, they would spend 70 karma, 110 karma, and 150 karma respectively. |
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 10:23 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 |
Humans are a bit disadvantaged in comparison to metas, since the only free attribute bonus they get is Edge, whereas Orks e.g. start with Body 4 and Strength 3. The silver lining of playing an 8 Edge human is prohibitively expensive in Karmagen.
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 06:51 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 07:01 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,930 Joined: 9-April 05 From: Scandinavian Union Member No.: 7,310 |
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 07:05 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
It's the best because it doesn't cost points to be one. (To all the "optimizers": No matter how much you tell people that someone is 'paying' to be one, it still doesn't make it true.)
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 07:33 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 |
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 07:43 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
|
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 09:05 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,782 Joined: 28-August 09 Member No.: 17,566 |
It's the best because it doesn't cost points to be one. (To all the "optimizers": No matter how much you tell people that someone is 'paying' to be one, it still doesn't make it true.) Opportunity Cost is a thing, yo. But there's also zero-cost/unstatted/fluff disadvantages to other metatypes to consider, like Dwarf and Troll Tax, and people being racist. |
|
|
Jan 19 2013, 10:53 PM
Post
#12
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,654 Joined: 29-October 06 Member No.: 9,731 |
Opportunity Cost is a thing, yo. I think "opportunity cost" was made up by economists to rationalize the profligate exploitation of the natural world, but this isn't the forum for that discussion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 12:28 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
It's the best because it doesn't cost points to be one. (To all the "optimizers": No matter how much you tell people that someone is 'paying' to be one, it still doesn't make it true.) Suppose for a character that you decide in advance that you want 3 Body and 3 Strength (to fit the Human average). This can either be done at the cost of 40 bp (that also counts against attribute limit) as a Human, or at 20 bp by being an Ork (and 10 bp extra to also get the extra edge that humans do). This even affords one more point of Body than what you originally wanted. Granted, if you were aiming for 5+ Charisma or Willpower, or 6+ Edge, Ork is probably not your best option, but point for point, there are situations where Orks are simply better. |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 01:25 AM
Post
#14
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
Suppose for a character that you decide in advance that you want 3 Body and 3 Strength (to fit the Human average). This can either be done at the cost of 40 bp (that also counts against attribute limit) as a Human, or at 20 bp by being an Ork (and 10 bp extra to also get the extra edge that humans do). This even affords one more point of Body than what you originally wanted. Granted, if you were aiming for 5+ Charisma or Willpower, or 6+ Edge, Ork is probably not your best option, but point for point, there are situations where Orks are simply better. The thing is, when talking 'average' you have to take the metatype's bonuses into account, and thus to be average for that type, it will cost the same amount. |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 03:05 AM
Post
#15
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
The thing is, when talking 'average' you have to take the metatype's bonuses into account, and thus to be average for that type, it will cost the same amount. Only if you decide that for flavor purposes, you have to be that far above human standards. Even a weak ork (5 Body, 4 Strength, 2 Edge) is just 50 bp, compared to the 70 that a human spends on that. While you can argue that you wouldn't want the Strength, there aren't a whole lot of concepts that don't want that Body for the extra armor. Perhaps you'll have to do a little background justifying why you're physically on the weak side of ork-kind, but (at least, without NQs) it can't be argued that you're actually scrawny and sickly, which a human with 2/2 Bod/Str would likely be. |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 03:08 AM
Post
#16
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
|
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 03:20 AM
Post
#17
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
|
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 03:47 AM
Post
#18
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
Yeah, but I don't compare to normal orks, I compare to the world at large. Almost no matter what, I'll be weaker than the average troll, and stronger than the average dwarf, elf and human. Whereas, as I said, it's best to compare to the nominal versions of one's own metatype, IMO. That way, you can't be at all accused of the 'munchkin' thing. My motto: MSMAIC (Make Sure My A** Is Covered). |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 07:13 AM
Post
#19
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
That's holding yourself to a higher standard than the archetypes. Looking at the only two ork/troll non-muscle archetypes, the hacker and the street shaman, they both have the equivalent of Body: 1 and Strength: 1 for a human.
|
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 07:30 AM
Post
#20
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,654 Joined: 29-October 06 Member No.: 9,731 |
That's holding yourself to a higher standard than the archetypes. Looking at the only two ork/troll non-muscle archetypes, the hacker and the street shaman, they both have the equivalent of Body: 1 and Strength: 1 for a human. Considering the low standard set by the archetypes, I'm going to go out on a limb and say most of us here hold ourselves to a higher standard than that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 01:16 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
That's holding yourself to a higher standard than the archetypes. Looking at the only two ork/troll non-muscle archetypes, the hacker and the street shaman, they both have the equivalent of Body: 1 and Strength: 1 for a human. Also, every single archetype has at least one stat that's equivalent to a 2 and all three dwarves have the equivalent of Strength 1. The archetypes might be poor examples of optimizing a character, but looking at them in general, they're indicative of the world. Thus, I do not believe it should be seen as munchkin-y to have stats that are at 2-equivalent (making way for the body 5 strength 4 ork). |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 05:55 PM
Post
#22
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
Funny how when it suits their purposes, people on these forums (and the other one) will tout the table showing meanings for attribute values and the one for skill values all day long, but as soon as it disproves their opinion, they turn right around and find something else to use.
|
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 06:21 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
I wasn't even aware that attribute meanings had a table until you mentioned it (SR4A p. 67, for anyone else). That table only shows what attribute numbers correlate to for humans, by the way.
I don't prescribe to the notion that descriptive words for how good attribute/skill numbers are, have anything to do with the actual game. I don't think that players should hold back their skills because they can't be expert in that much and similar notions. I think that such descriptive words should only be for quick designs of NPCs, really. Player characters should be treated as special, and allowed to be deviate from the average in whatever fashion suits them. |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 06:25 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Former Member Group: Members Posts: 814 Joined: 15-July 12 Member No.: 53,042 |
I wasn't even aware that attribute meanings had a table until you mentioned it (SR4A p. 67, for anyone else). That table only shows what attribute numbers correlate to for humans, by the way. Easy way to figure 'average' for the others: Add two to their minimum since that would come to being a three attribute (which is average) before adding their "racial bonus". |
|
|
Jan 20 2013, 06:32 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 3-July 10 Member No.: 18,786 |
Easy way to figure 'average' for the others: Add two to their minimum since that would come to being a three attribute (which is average) before adding their "racial bonus". Wow! Genius! I certainly never thought of that! Welcome to the world of AverageRun, where every runner is completely average. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 12:43 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.