 Character Generation Preference |
  |
 Feb 7 2005, 11:28 AM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 15-September 03 Member No.: 5,619  |
I think this is prettty unfair. Fomori are clealry less strong then trolls but they cost more. OK, anybody here prefers roleplaying over powergaming....but nobody wants to be cheated in this way!!!! |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Feb 7 2005, 12:13 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 |
Point - ever since it was introduced in the companion.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 12:18 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 527 Joined: 30-January 04 Member No.: 6,043 |
I likes the BeCKS. I think it creates more generalized and plausible characters.
My real beef is with the Priority system, where you'd be stupid not to max out those primary skills (whatever they are for your character). BeCKS at least makes you suffer for specialization. As a side note, I tend to run VERY long campaigns, so a slightly less specialized start lets the fun go longer without the characters becoming unstoppable in their chosen field too quickly. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 12:59 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 |
We're using a house rule on char gen, saying that only a fair number of skills can be at rating 6, 5, etc.
How many skills are allowed to be at which rating is GM call. Works fine so far and the GM is able to balance the power level of the characters, preventing chars with five skills at 6 in the beginning. If he want to. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 01:03 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I've done the same type of thing in my games. I typically only allow the use of the Build Point system, but if a player really insists on handicapping himself with Priorities, well, they can go for it.
I really dislike BeCKS, although I can see its appeal for some people. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 01:05 PM
Post
#21
|
|||||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
Hey, metahumans USED to be Priority A for Race. Ugh. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Feb 7 2005, 01:12 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,311 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Calgary, Alberta Member No.: 2,062 |
Sum-to-10. I've seen points math-crunched once to often to like it, and priority often seems to limiting, so I think this is damn near the perfect balance. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 01:31 PM
Post
#23
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
Which actually meant there was reason to be human :) Now if you've taken your top three priorities as resources, skills and attributes (in no particular order) then from a purely numerical POV then it makes no sense to take Race as D and still be human... hence Sumto10 (which I don't like for that reason). Players still used Metas in 1st edition even with Priority A *and* compulsory allergies. Sniff. I miss those days. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Feb 7 2005, 01:33 PM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
I'm not sure what you mean by "Math Crunched" - surely the whole point is that you *can* sacrifice an attribute for a couple of skill points, or move to the next level of resources. It's flexible but doesn't create characters any more powerful than the default priority system (not like BeCKS...) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 7 2005, 04:16 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
My group has never done anything but priority.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 04:35 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Man In The Machine Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,264 Joined: 26-February 02 From: I-495 S Member No.: 1,105 |
Depends what Im after. Personally I like points, its easy to scale up and down, and its still easy to memorize. But there are times that Becks has its bonuses. Namely mundane humans. Mostly because I can take a TON of low power (2 or 3) skills and still have reasonable atts and ¥¥¥. A gen system that favors the jack of all trades. But MAN... Ill never do it without NSRCG again...
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 05:44 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 236 Joined: 14-March 04 From: Cal Poly: SLO Member No.: 6,155 |
I typically use sum-to-10, find it pretty balanced. I never use priority, and I'll normally only use points if I'm making a character that requires it (metavarients, drakes, etc.), or if I want to have unbalanced edges/flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 06:25 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,453 Joined: 17-September 04 From: St. Paul Member No.: 6,675 |
I have not used BeCKS, but I have NSRCG and TSS article explaining it.
I prefer the point system as a GM because it allows me as GM to set the level of the game from street level to world changing, all I have to do is tell my characters how many points they have to spend. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 11:19 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 126 Joined: 27-December 04 Member No.: 6,908 |
Becks here. helsp control min maxing. why is becks not listed in the poll
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 7 2005, 11:31 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
BeCKS is merely a houserule, albeit a popular one. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 8 2005, 02:44 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 7-July 03 Member No.: 4,891 |
I like BeCKS in the abstract; one of my big issues with SR character management is the disconnect between building and advancing your character, and the way it rewards versatility rather than punishing it is awesome. The character I'm playing now uses Sum-to-Ten, but I chose that for entirely munchkin reasons: I wrote down a list of abilities and resources that I figured I'd need to make the concept* semi-viable, then tried different build methods until I hit upon one that could accomodate it.
Of the options named in the poll, I prefer point-based, as it allows more variety and doesn't screw human mundanes. Aspected conjurer/decker/face/small-time rigger. I wanted to pack as many means of gathering information as possible into a single character. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 8 2005, 03:12 AM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 14-January 05 Member No.: 6,976 |
I'm personally a big fan of BeCKs because it lets you build the character you want (the biggest advantage of Points) and it doesn't penalize you for taking, say, one skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6.
I'll admit it's numbers heavy and it's not perfect. Say, if you want to play a shapeshifter full mage w/ 30 spell points you need to drop a whopping 240 karma. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 8 2005, 03:21 AM
Post
#33
|
|||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
It gives you a bonus for taking a skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 8 2005, 03:39 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
One of the reason why I dislike Becks is that it encourages versatility. WTF, you ask? Why would I as a GM dislike Becks for encouraging my players to build "believable, rounded characters"? Because when I GM SR, there is usually more than 1-2 players. Having only 1-2 players demand that they spread out their skills to cover the bases. When you have more and when EVERYONE is a generalist, you have to ask yourself,"What is the Johnson doing? Hiring a bunch of guys all with the same set of skills and not one of them an expert at what he does?"
OOC: If the sammy can't doing anything the decker can't or that the mage can negotiate as well as the face, then what is the sammy or face doing in the group? It takes the fun out of the experience for everyone. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 8 2005, 03:50 AM
Post
#35
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 14-January 05 Member No.: 6,976 |
True, in that if your defaulting attribute is six, it's almost twice as cheap to buy one skill at 4 and another at 2. Yes, it hoses you if you want to have 6s in four or five active skills. But, I think it's a fair trade off. First, in practice you're not getting characters with twice as many skill points. Your typical character is going to want 6s and 5s in a few skills, and then many at 4, and a couple at 3 and 2. In practice it works pretty well. Sure, you could build a "super generalist" with 3s in tons of skills, but whether such a character would be playable or fun to play is another question. If you assume that every point of karma is worth as much as the last, and that the karma costs of advancement are indicative of the advancement's worth (yes, I know, this isn't the safest assumption), then after character generation a skill of 6 is worth twice as much as a skill of 4 and a skill of 2. They're worth the same thing at chargen using all the canonical methods. So, which way is correct? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 8 2005, 07:44 AM
Post
#36
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 15-September 03 Member No.: 5,619 |
3rd edition metahumans are as follow: c Trolls/elves d Orks/Dwarves e Humans IN points human 0 (= E) ork-dwarf 5 (=D) troll-elf 10 (=C) shapeshifter 25 (more expensive than A!!!) metavariant: +5 (so +1 category) Ghoul +10 (so human ghouls are C) otaku +30 (always A...but in effects is more expensive than A so being an Otaku is more an advantage with the priority system) This is the correspondence between the races of the two systems which I think it is not completely correct and fair (see the otaku). More unfair is the metahuman variant +5 which I usually do not transform, in +1 priority level (I never used point system): being a fomori is less advantageous than playing a troll, why one want to pay more? Many other metavariants are not an edge but are only alternative. The simplest thing to do is to not make them pay +5 point or +1 priority level. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Feb 8 2005, 10:27 AM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
The points allocations and costs are not supposed to *fair* - they are supposed to produce a reasonable spread of races - which having looked at the various polls on DSF "which race are you?" etc actually does seem to work. Trying to evaluate the cost/benefit of any particular race is a pointless exercise.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 8 2005, 05:04 PM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 384 Joined: 18-August 03 From: North VA Member No.: 5,519 |
Psh. You should have given Sum to Ten and BeCKs their own categories.
BeCKs over here. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 8 2005, 07:12 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
I kept wondering why my Awakened characters were far more powerful under Priority than Points. I recently sat down and went through all the permutations of the Priority system. This is the abstract:
A range of 110 - 135 points, with an average of 123 and 7/9ths. If you allow mundane humans to use Sum to 10, then the range becomes 115 - 135 points with an average of 124 and 2/3rds. If you are an adept, the range is 124 - 135 (they get the most benefit) with an average of 128 and 1/9th. If you are a full magician, the range is 121 - 130 with an average of 124 and 5/9ths. Unless you use Sum-to-10, mundane humans are totally shafted under the priority system, with a range of 110 to 118. Trends: Taking higher priorities in Resources jumps the overall point value up significantly. NO mundanes have a point total over 123. Overall, you get better value out of magically active characters (with adept characters given the most advantage) and metahumans under priorities. What this means is that the point system is less forgiving with Awakened characters and more forgiving with mundances. Specific Examples: Resources A /Magic B /Attributes C /Race D/Skills E 135 points (the highest value is a dwarf/ork adept who takes the million) Resources A/Attributes A/Skills C 124 points i.e. the Street Sam Package in Sum-to-10 Skills A/Resources A/Attributes C 128 points i.e. the Techie Package in Sum-to-10 |
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 01:51 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 5-September 03 From: Rhode Island Member No.: 5,588 |
I like BeCKs.
Over the Xmas break this year, I wasn't working much. And you know about idle hands... So I manually calculated out which system (Points or Priority) was technically better. (not unlike what hahnsoo was doing) Points always has the advantage of maleablity and EdgeFlaws, but for the purposes of this experiment, we're looking at pure purchasing power. Also, this doesn't compare anything that can't be done with Priority, and no Otaku. Do it manually if you want to so badly. http://www.geocities.com/morphling_the_pre...der/Compare.xls It's divided by Race and Magic, with all others subordinate. Maybe next time you make a character, you'll check his archetype against this comparison? |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th January 2025 - 01:34 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.