Question re: Run and Gun, FFBA Tables incomplete? Options

[Lobo0705]

Sadly, it happens often enough that Limits are an irritant to me. Take that for what you will. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
It has often been said here that the table I play at is full of mutants. *shrug*

The issue for me, and I think others - although I will not try and put words in their mouth, is that your argument is that the mechanics are a problem, that the system is broken, when what in fact is the issue is that your dice are apparently screwed up.

It is the equivalent of me saying that we need to raise the limit on skills and attributes, because even though my characters have a 12 firearms, specializing in Heavy Pistols, and have a 10 Agility, but I am unable to roll more than 1 hit on my 24 dice. (which, btw, happens about just as often as rolling 8 hits on 9 dice).

I can't really argue that because on my one table, because I and my friends are incapable of rolling more than 1 hit on 24 dice, it is the limit on skills and attributes that are the problem, and not my die rolling.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Now I'm really confused. You're saying someone with 9 dice is completely inept and no training whatsoever is skill 3/4? I thought that's what you considered acceptable for professionals.

It is okay. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

In SR4A, 9 Dice was Professional Grade (assuming 3 of that came from Skill). In SR5, that Same 9 Dice is a Casual Professional at best, not a True Professional (again assuming Skill 3/4 vs. Skill 7 for the difference).

SR5
You get a new recruit - He has no training initially (Skill 0) but goes through Boot/Advanced Training, etc (skill 2).
He hits the Field - He continues to be trained (skill 3)
At that point, he is competent (just barely with a Skill 3, 4 for someone in an MOS who uses an actual Pistol), but still not up to par compared to the veteran who has been there for 10 years (who has a 7+ in the same skill)
And yet, I have seen crazy feats of accuracy from the barely competent.

SR4A - That guy (of which I speak) would have a 1 or 2 skill at best, while the professional will have 3-4.

So, mayhap I got caught up in an Edition Terminology issue. In SR4a, I could easily represent such a character with a Skill 1-2 and it would be all good, since the MOS guy would have 3+. In SR5, that Guy now has a 3-4, while the true professional has a STARTING skill 6 and goes up from there. Which is simply another dislike I have of the new system (the Skill change), but one I can live with, for the most part, even if I think it was wholly unnecessary. Either way, in SR4A, that character can pull of amazing things. in SR5, he cannot. Not unless he spends Edge. In my opinion, that is a bug, not a feature.

I probably still am making less than sense, but Oh well. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

It is the equivalent of me saying that we need to raise the limit on skills and attributes, because even though my characters have a 12 firearms, specializing in Heavy Pistols, and have a 10 Agility, but I am unable to roll more than 1 hit on my 24 dice. (which, btw, happens about just as often as rolling 8 hits on 9 dice).

Which happens a lot to at least one character at our table as well, but that is not a Limit issue for me. And it never really matters which dice he uses either. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Swing happens. In SR5, when it happens in the positive direction, you are punished for it. That is why I dislike that particular piece of the system. It is a Punishment. Nothing more.

[Critias]

Nope... I think Edge is a waste, generally, and only really useful for very specific things (I would pare that list given in the book down to maybe one or two things at most). Its very desirability to abrogate things is why I hate it so much. You are heavily incentivized to purchase it to play concepts, and that irritates me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

In fact - Forcing me to purchase it so that I can bypass Limits pisses me off, because I think limits suck as a concept in the first place. *shrug*

If you don't like it, you don't like it. I get it. I'm not a fan of 'em, myself. But I don't think they're as bad as you seem to think they are, is all. I don't see it as being "forced to purchase Edge" any more than a spellcaster is "forced" to purchase Magic, or a gunbunny is "forced" to purchase Agility. "Being a lucky dude" is a game stat (for a few editions now), just like "being a strong dude" or "being a fast dude." So if you want to be lucky, well, you buy Edge.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

If you don't like it, you don't like it. I get it. I'm not a fan of 'em, myself. But I don't think they're as bad as you seem to think they are, is all. I don't see it as being "forced to purchase Edge" any more than a spellcaster is "forced" to purchase Magic, or a gunbunny is "forced" to purchase Agility. "Being a lucky dude" is a game stat (for a few editions now), just like "being a strong dude" or "being a fast dude." So if you want to be lucky, well, you buy Edge.

Except that in Previous Editions, I could be Lucky by simply rolling really well. Well, so much for that in SR5, though.
Yes, if you want a Mr. Lucky, you buy Edge. You should Not HAVE to buy it, though, to get lucky. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

No worries, though.

[Sengir]

So you are complaining about the .09% of the time that this happens? Literally it happens 9 out of every 10,000 rolls.

What it literally says is that for a sufficiently large number of rolls, the ratio of rolls where "this" happens converges to 0.09%. The number of rolls you make even in the worst roll-playing session is anything but sufficient, and therefore outliers like not hitting the proverbial barn can become relatively common (because there are not enough repetitions to even things out over the long run).
TL;DR: Statistics over five data points are rubbish. Expecting five data points to adhere to a pre-established statistic doesn't work, either.

PS: And for precision to two decimal places, even 10k repetitions are a bit on the sparse side (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

What it literally says is that for a sufficiently large number of rolls, the ratio of rolls where "this" happens converges to 0.09%. The number of rolls you make even in the worst roll-playing session is anything but sufficient, and therefore outliers like not hitting the proverbial barn can become relatively common (because there are not enough repetitions to even things out over the long run).
TL;DR: Statistics over five data points are rubbish. Expecting five data points to adhere to a pre-established statistic doesn't work, either.

PS: And for precision to two decimal places, even 10k repetitions are a bit on the sparse side (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

There you go talking about that Statistics thingy again. *sigh* (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[psychophipps]

Issue with limits that drives me nuts is how it's obviously a response to the increases in dice pools. When you have noob SR characters tossing 21+ dice at a time, even in the (self-professed) bad builds you see in FuelDrop's campaign, you're obviously going to run into the dice proliferation issues that are pretty commonly honked about from 4E and 4A. How to fix it? Well, the CGL editorial staff and writers thought about it really, REALLY hard and though to themselves, "Self, we have to think up a way to keep this eruption of dice pools under control...how to do it?...Ahh! *Lightbulb!* We'll add an arbitrary, ham-fisted 'limits' thingy with a sense of game balance approximating the military brilliance of the Charge of the Light Brigade...yeah, that'll do 'er...and they'll love it!"

Me? I'm a bit more "out there", y'know? When I run into the bucket-o-dice insanity I stop what I'm doing, think for all of two seconds, and decide that maybe...perchance...possibly...the answer might be in making it really, REALLY hard to be tossing 21+ dice as a noob Shadowrunner?

Nah! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Method]

Which could have been accomplished with a karma build system and rapidly escalating prices for attributes and skills. But oh well... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[psychophipps]

I don't know about you guys, but I personally think that the 1-6 + 1-6 with a maximum of +4 to a stat (or skill) would have done the job just fine. Call me crazy...

[Smash]

Nope... I think Edge is a waste, generally, and only really useful for very specific things (I would pare that list given in the book down to maybe one or two things at most). Its very desirability to abrogate things is why I hate it so much. You are heavily incentivized to purchase it to play concepts, and that irritates me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

In fact - Forcing me to purchase it so that I can bypass Limits pisses me off, because I think limits suck as a concept in the first place. *shrug*

I have that exact same problem. I think strength is a total waste of a stat and always take one in it but 5th ED sucks because I always do awful damage in melee and can't modify my armour much (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Critias]

I have that exact same problem. I think strength is a total waste of a stat and always take one in it but 5th ED sucks because I always do awful damage in melee and can't modify my armour much (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

This is such a perfect example of "if you want your character to be lucky, buy Edge, just like if you want your character to be strong, buy Strength," that I honestly can't tell if you're poking fun at TJ or you're legitimately irritated that your low-Strength characters have a low Strength, and are blaming SR5 for that fact. So, uh, kudos, I guess?

[Tzeentch]

Hmm, missed that. And the Sioux Nation was the one I most wanted an update for. I'll be dropping $6 or $7 for certain.

-- I hope you won't be disappointed (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

This is such a perfect example of "if you want your character to be lucky, buy Edge, just like if you want your character to be strong, buy Strength," that I honestly can't tell if you're poking fun at TJ or you're legitimately irritated that your low-Strength characters have a low Strength, and are blaming SR5 for that fact. So, uh, kudos, I guess?

Poke fun or not, its all good. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Cochise]

I don't see it as being "forced to purchase Edge" any more than a spellcaster is "forced" to purchase Magic, or a gunbunny is "forced" to purchase Agility. "Being a lucky dude" is a game stat (for a few editions now), just like "being a strong dude" or "being a fast dude." So if you want to be lucky, well, you buy Edge.

Maybe I would dig that idea if that comparison between Agility and Edge actually worked out in a truyl similar fashion. Unfortunately Edge is not an actual representation of "being lucky", but rather a variation of the karma pool that hadn't much to with "luck" either. It's more of an (retroactive) alteration to probability from a meta level where I as the player try to become "Lady Luck" myself instead of having her on my side. Exceeding limits (and limits are the new thing here) as a "luck" mechanism don't work too well either: When investing Edge prior to the roll I won't create a lucky roll; it merely allows me having one, which comes closest to having luck, however it's limited number of uses per session (or other Edge resetting events) certainly interfere more than often, thus making it a "tactically bad choice" of using Edge in advance. And when using it after a lucky roll to exceed a potentially interferring limit just bring's me back to changing an outcome retroactively from that metalevel ...

So while I can agree that in order to be the "strong" or "fast" guy I'd have to go for strength / agility, going for Edge won't actually make me "lucky".

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Maybe I would dig that idea if that comparison between Agility and Edge actually worked out in a truyl similar fashion. Unfortunately Edge is not an actual representation of "being lucky", but rather a variation of the karma pool that hadn't much to with "luck" either. It's more of an (retroactive) alteration to probability from a meta level where I as the player try to become "Lady Luck" myself instead of having her on my side. Exceeding limits (and limits are the new thing here) as a "luck" mechanism don't work too well either: When investing Edge prior to the roll I won't create a lucky roll; it merely allows me having one, which comes closest to having luck, however it's limited number of uses per session (or other Edge resetting events) certainly interfere more than often, thus making it a "tactically bad choice" of using Edge in advance. And when using it after a lucky roll to exceed a potentially interferring limit just bring's me back to changing an outcome retroactively from that metalevel ...

So while I can agree that in order to be the "strong" or "fast" guy I'd have to go for strength / agility, going for Edge won't actually make me "lucky".

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

[Shinobi Killfist]

Maybe I would dig that idea if that comparison between Agility and Edge actually worked out in a truyl similar fashion. Unfortunately Edge is not an actual representation of "being lucky", but rather a variation of the karma pool that hadn't much to with "luck" either. It's more of an (retroactive) alteration to probability from a meta level where I as the player try to become "Lady Luck" myself instead of having her on my side. Exceeding limits (and limits are the new thing here) as a "luck" mechanism don't work too well either: When investing Edge prior to the roll I won't create a lucky roll; it merely allows me having one, which comes closest to having luck, however it's limited number of uses per session (or other Edge resetting events) certainly interfere more than often, thus making it a "tactically bad choice" of using Edge in advance. And when using it after a lucky roll to exceed a potentially interferring limit just bring's me back to changing an outcome retroactively from that metalevel ...

So while I can agree that in order to be the "strong" or "fast" guy I'd have to go for strength / agility, going for Edge won't actually make me "lucky".

While I can see the point, I don;t see complaining about limits stopping you from being lucky to be any different than saying 6 dice stopped me from getting lucky enough to get 8 hits. In 1-3e with variable TNs a TN limit would cap your luck. In SR4-5e era you luck is capped by your dice pool and this is just another flavor of that, People can still hate it, but it really is no different than complaining that having only a 6 die pool capped my successes at 6 without edge. If exploding 6's was the default rule and not the edge rule, then sure.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

While I can see the point, I don;t see complaining about limits stopping you from being lucky to be any different than saying 6 dice stopped me from getting lucky enough to get 8 hits. In 1-3e with variable TNs a TN limit would cap your luck. In SR4-5e era you luck is capped by your dice pool and this is just another flavor of that, People can still hate it, but it really is no different than complaining that having only a 6 die pool capped my successes at 6 without edge. If exploding 6's was the default rule and not the edge rule, then sure.

I Disagree that TN's capped your Luck. I can still remember the Rocker who managed to get a Performance Score above 40. In just 1 Roll. It is just highly unlikely. But when it does happen, it is LUCKY. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

And when I refer to a Lucky roll sans Edge, it generally goes like this. I have 14 Dice. I roll the Dice. I tally hits, and what do you know, look at that, I have 12 Hits (Very Highly Improbable, so can only ascribe the roll to Luck). That is my definition of Lucky. In SR5, if the roll is capped at Limit 6, My Lucky roll is garbage at that point. It pisses me off. The Edge score is not a representation of Luck, in my opinion. It just allows you to potentially abrogate Limits. But Lucky? Not at all.

[Xystophoroi]

Wait. Doesn't Edge only allow you to ignore limits if you spend it before rolling? Like declaring 'I'm going to pull off a crazy lucky shot now!' before actually rolling and then kind of hoping you manage to roll well?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Wait. Doesn't Edge only allow you to ignore limits if you spend it before rolling? Like declaring 'I'm going to pull off a crazy lucky shot now!' before actually rolling and then kind of hoping you manage to roll well?

Sure, it will let you try. In My experience, that actually goes something like this...

I spend Edge so I can Bypass Limits.
I roll the dice (My 14 DP is not +2, so 16 DP).
Damn... look at that, I rolled 1 Success (we have a guy who would get Zero Successes more often than not - he is really unlucky that way).
Well, can't spend another Edge to reroll. That Sucks.
(Now, it does not always happen that way, but I think you get my point)... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

Edge Expenditure allows you the opportunity to be Lucky, it does not make you lucky.

But wait, you will now say "Just save that Edge to use when you actually make a Lucky roll so you can Uncap your limits."
And that just pisses me off, because NOW I need to spend a Resource to actually use the roll, that has already been made, to its fullest capability. That is Horrible game design in my opinion.

[Jack VII]

Wait. Doesn't Edge only allow you to ignore limits if you spend it before rolling? Like declaring 'I'm going to pull off a crazy lucky shot now!' before actually rolling and then kind of hoping you manage to roll well?

Nope, both the pre-roll and post-roll versions of Push the Limit break your limit. So if you roll really awesome and want to keep all your hits, you're more than welcome to spend Edge to break your limit after the fact. The difference between the two is that the Rule of Six applies to all dice that are rolled in the pre-roll version, but only to the Edge dice that are rolled in the post-roll version.

[Shinobi Killfist]

I Disagree that TN's capped your Luck. I can still remember the Rocker who managed to get a Performance Score above 40. In just 1 Roll. It is just highly unlikely. But when it does happen, it is LUCKY. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

And when I refer to a Lucky roll sans Edge, it generally goes like this. I have 14 Dice. I roll the Dice. I tally hits, and what do you know, look at that, I have 12 Hits (Very Highly Improbable, so can only ascribe the roll to Luck). That is my definition of Lucky. In SR5, if the roll is capped at Limit 6, My Lucky roll is garbage at that point. It pisses me off. The Edge score is not a representation of Luck, in my opinion. It just allows you to potentially abrogate Limits. But Lucky? Not at all.

I was unclear. In SR 1-3e you had no cap on luck with the TN system, so if a limit were added there it would cap your luck. In SR4-5e limits IMO don't cap your luck in any fundamentally different way than the base die pool system already does. It might be a lower cap, but saying you can only have 5 hits due to a limit of 5 is no different than saying you can only have 5 hits because your dice pool is 5. Now if exploding 6s were the default rule instead of an edge rule then limits would work in a fundamentally different way at capping your hits than the dice pool does. So to me complaining that the limit steals your hits is no different than complaining that your 2 die pool stole your hits because you would have rolled more hits if you had more dice.

[Cochise]

While I can see the point, I don;t see complaining about limits stopping you from being lucky to be any different than saying 6 dice stopped me from getting lucky enough to get 8 hits.

That comparison isn't quite correct either. For the older editions (3rd and prior) there hardly weren't situations where you needed larger numbers of success without a smaller number still having at least some effect. So even with just 6 dice against the need of getting 8 successes I could get "lucky" in so far as I could still get 6 successes (particularly without losing the 6th due to a limit). And no, there's no need to provide an example where you needed 8 successes in order to more or less binarily decide whether or not something happened, because I'm perfectly aware of these ...

In 1-3e with variable TNs a TN limit would cap your luck.

That's outright wrong. The variable TNs certainly didn't cap my luck. They only interfered with the likelyhood of me actually having Lady Luck on my side. Any possible TN still has the - infinitely - small chance of me rolling successes with every single die that I have available.

In SR4-5e era you luck is capped by your dice pool and this is just another flavor of that,

We seem to talk different things there, because SR4/5 don't cap "luck" by dice pool either, since "Luck" only exists within the boundaries of possible outcomes - as infinitly small as the odds may be. Situations where my available dice pool isn't large enough to ever met the required number of successes are factually impossible ... in 3rd and prior more strictly than in SR4/5, but there I still have to "force" that luck from the previously mentioned metalevel via Edge.
Edge still is the mechanical equivalent to karma pool which doesn't truly reflect "Luck" either. And I merely objected to the notion "wanna be strong go for Strength ... wanna be lucky go for Edge".

People can still hate it, but it really is no different than complaining that having only a 6 die pool capped my successes at 6 without edge. If exploding 6's was the default rule and not the edge rule, then sure.

"Exploding dice" was the default rule in 3rd and prior, they just didn't create additional successes (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Oh and I'm not necessarily hating "Edge" ... certainly not more than I hate Karma Pool (and I have my gripes with that one, which causes my SR3 characters to have "Bad Karma" as default handicap and me deliberately burning Karma Pool on a regular basis). I'm just saying that Edge (with or without limits) is not "Luck"

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I was unclear. In SR 1-3e you had no cap on luck with the TN system, so if a limit were added there it would cap your luck. In SR4-5e limits IMO don't cap your luck in any fundamentally different way than the base die pool system already does. It might be a lower cap, but saying you can only have 5 hits due to a limit of 5 is no different than saying you can only have 5 hits because your dice pool is 5. Now if exploding 6s were the default rule instead of an edge rule then limits would work in a fundamentally different way at capping your hits than the dice pool does. So to me complaining that the limit steals your hits is no different than complaining that your 2 die pool stole your hits because you would have rolled more hits if you had more dice.

I guess the difference (to me at least) is that I would never complain that my two dice only got 2 hits (I would in fact be ecstatic about that). But when the Limit means that my super exceptional Dice roll removes 6 of my hits due to the Limit? It pisses me off. Completely different animals in my book. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Shinobi Killfist]

I guess the difference (to me at least) is that I would never complain that my two dice only got 2 hits (I would in fact be ecstatic about that). But when the Limit means that my super exceptional Dice roll removes 6 of my hits due to the Limit? It pisses me off. Completely different animals in my book. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

Which is fine. Go ahead and hate away. I was expecting to hate it for the same reason. But in play for me it was more ha ha I'm too weak to make the jump.