 Character Generation Preference |
  |
 Feb 9 2005, 02:02 AM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Great Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957  |
Any chance of an html version for those of us without the processing power to run the bloatware known as MS Office (or even the much more processor friend Open Office)?
|
 |
 
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 02:53 AM
Post
#42
|
|||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
Here's my data. It may have a few tiny math errors, but I've doubled checked everything:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 9 2005, 03:50 AM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 91 Joined: 23-January 05 From: Washington, DC Member No.: 7,007 |
Damn!!! I can't believe you calculated every option under the priority system. :eek:
Here's what I do to reconcile the metavariant thing with the priority system. I let the player choose which system they want to use. If they choose BP, I give them 125 pts.. If they choose priority, they get an extra 5 pts. If they play a metavairant, they have to spend the 5 on the variant. If they don't they can spend it on skills, attributes, or edges. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 06:54 AM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 27-January 04 Member No.: 6,021 |
The method I prefer is to roll 3 D6 and add them together for each attribute.
Unfortunately, no GM has ever let me use the method I prefer. ;) |
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 12:06 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 23 Joined: 10-March 04 Member No.: 6,146 |
BeCKS here, since I like the flexibility it offers--and the fact that you can make a decent generalist using it. OTOH, I've only used it on NSRCG, and I don't think I'd enjoy doing it by hand--except if I were in one of my occasional masochistic number-crunching moods.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 07:40 PM
Post
#46
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 15-September 03 Member No.: 5,619 |
It's BULLDREK!!! Dwarves are supposed to be less diffused than elves (for ex, sr3 pag.313 says that in Seattle only the 3% are dwarves while 12 % are elves, similar statistics can be traced throughout Shadows of North America) but dwarves are LESS EXPENSIVE TO CREATE than elves in both systems (priority or points). This accounts for the fact that being an elf is more advantageous than being a dwarf, NOT for the fact that elves are rarer than dwarves. THE CONSEQUENCE: metavariants should not cost more than the normal races, especially because they are often less an advantage than normal races. See my previous example: troll are stronger than fomori but fomori are more expensive to create: the system for metavariants IS UNFAIR. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 9 2005, 07:56 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
I think it's unfair that Dwarves get a net +4 to their attributes without any attribute penalties, along with free Thermo and +2 dice vs. toxins and disease, AND they only cost 5 points. But hey, I'm not complaining... anything to get more people to play Dwarves, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 08:31 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 392 Joined: 13-January 05 From: Forgot where his meat body was Member No.: 6,971 |
Personally, I prefer Becks. But only with NSRCG to do the number crunching. I'm no masochist. If NSRCG isn't available, I'd say point buy.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 11:24 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 355 Joined: 24-August 02 From: Magna, Ute Nation Member No.: 3,166 |
Flexable Priority. All add to 10.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 9 2005, 11:44 PM
Post
#50
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 15-September 03 Member No.: 5,619 |
ok in a way or in another you got my point: DWARVES COST LESS NOT BECAUSE THEY SHOULD BE VERY DIFFUSED. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 10 2005, 12:10 AM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,001 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Michigan Member No.: 1,514 |
NSRCG and BeCKs. Bethyaga is my homie.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 02:13 AM
Post
#52
|
|||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Yes, but that x2 instead of x3 to running multiplier really *really* sucks for them. Unless you're making a dwarf rigger, of course, but then the Str and Body bonuses are essentially worthless, as is resistance to toxins. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 10 2005, 04:10 AM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,102 Joined: 23-March 04 From: The Grizzly Grunion, in a VIP room. Member No.: 6,191 |
I gotta go with Hahnsoo. My group has had a few discussions about the point values for the different races and has talked about switching Elf and Dwarf, but we haven't found it annoying enough yet to house rule it. Maybe because nobody ever plays a dwarf (except that one time... the ONLY time I've ever had a character die, thank you VERY much, Ryan.)
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 08:07 AM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 5-January 05 From: Wherever this piece of meat rests. Member No.: 6,937 |
I've used Sum to 10 in my Game for years. I have an un-natural hatred for the points based system. I'll agree that the Sum to 10 definitely allows for a much more powerful character than just regular priority. As a GM, if I want to scrutinize a character, it's a hell of a lot easier for me to check the Priority(Sum to 10) than to bust out a calculator and check out the point based character. I also cap my players flaws at 6 points with which they can buy edges. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the point based method let's you buy Edges with your points, and you don't have to take a flaw for that. That's just wrong.
;) |
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 08:20 AM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 5-January 05 From: Wherever this piece of meat rests. Member No.: 6,937 |
Damn folks, who cares what a certain metahuman race costs! If my players concept is to play an Ork, he or she pays the Ork cost. If they want to play an elf, they pay the elf cost. There are soooo many reasons I could justify why a Dwarf should be cheaper than an Elf just from reading the source material alone, without having to revert to "pure" bonuses and the like. I've got no problem with how much the costs are.
:nuyen: :nuyen: :nuyen: |
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 11:47 AM
Post
#56
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
That's one of the advantages, IMO - that edges and flaws buy/cost BP. Sometimes you don't want to offset that flaw with an edge and extra skill points might be better. sometimes you want to sacrifice a couple of points for that edge... Forcing characters to balance their edges and flaws is limiting. YMMV. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 10 2005, 12:02 PM
Post
#57
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,512 Joined: 16-August 03 From: Northampton Member No.: 5,499 |
I Prefer to use points. It's just too many time i have found that 90k isn't enough or that i have no need for 1 Mil. Points (and BECKS) allows for a more even spread. I've looked a BECKS and all though i'll never ask for characters to be that way in one of my games. i will allow characters to be made that way and build one that way myself if a GM requires it.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 03:50 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,001 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Michigan Member No.: 1,514 |
BeCKs is by far the most versatile system in my opinion-having used it for a while now I can say how nice it really is. Combined with the NSRCG, well its amazing. Not only does it have everything in one place, but it organizes it for you. As a Game Master they are an invalueable tool.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 10 2005, 06:24 PM
Post
#59
|
|||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
Our group has TWO dwarves now. The dwarf point value came into question after I did my analysis. Now both of us want to take extra flaws to compensate for the extra cheese that dwarves get, or play new characters entirely. Even with a slower movement modifier and the need to customize your equipment, the attribute bonuses exceed the "net +3" general rule about metahuman races (or it used to be that way, anyway, in SR2). Maybe we need to just simply reinstate the -1 Quickness again. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 11 2005, 02:29 AM
Post
#60
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Or remove the +1 Willpower. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 11 2005, 07:49 AM
Post
#61
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 5-January 05 From: Wherever this piece of meat rests. Member No.: 6,937 |
What's wrong with that ? :D :vegm: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 11 2005, 11:25 AM
Post
#62
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 345 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Leeds, UK Member No.: 4,046 |
It's not like it's some sort a big philosophical problem I have, but most of the time when making characters I find it difficult to *have* to balance edges and flaws - it seems silly to have to find that /extra/ edge or flaw that you don't want and might not match the concept. Just seems to make more sense with BP...
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 11 2005, 03:01 PM
Post
#63
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 100 Joined: 14-June 04 Member No.: 6,400 |
Priority all the way.
IMO, points favor certain builds to heavily. In my game I much prefer to have lots of metahumans running around and points really favor humans to strongly. Also I like the feel more. Point buy feels like I'm playing some other game. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 11 2005, 03:12 PM
Post
#64
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,840 Joined: 24-July 02 From: Lubbock, TX Member No.: 3,024 |
I like SumToTen for most games, second is Point Buy.
Don't like BeCKs. Standard Priority is ok, but hard to be unique sometimes. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 11 2005, 03:13 PM
Post
#65
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,453 Joined: 17-September 04 From: St. Paul Member No.: 6,675 |
What book is sum to 10 in?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 7th January 2025 - 02:46 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.