Attributes are-a-changing, SR FAQ Part Four Options

[blakkie]

[lord_cack]

Seems more and more like "The Shadows" are gonna become "A World of Darkness" and I don't like it.

I was hopeful for an actual "Revision". I guess they can get away with saying "Revision" because the game still uses d6's. But, it is a redesign and in my opinion sounds more and more like a "Downgrade" rather than an "Upgrade" to the rules.

I have yet to see where the game retains any of the prior system. I know it has been said more than one time that the reason a lot of people like Shadowrun for the setting. Thats all well and good, but to me what set the game apart was the rules. I could use d20 Modern rules set and make a "Shadowrun-ish" setting. I could use the World of Darkness even. But, the rules made the game "feel" like Shadowrun.

[NightHaunter]

Ok.
Penta why Charisma for the split?

I would have liked to see a destinction between Dexterity and Agility rather than Agility and Reaction.
The split in intelligence is great its always been a peeve of mine.
I lik idea of Variable starting Magic which was only really availble to Magicans Way Adepts and even then not like this.
Edge Hmmm will need to be convinced.
Can it be bought up or is it fixed?

[blakkie]

[hermit]

If they do that, they effectively make the huge sacrifices in humanity cyberware brings highly uneconomical, and that would rape the entire world concept, far beyond screwing around with the rules system; it's greatly affect the way the world as such - fluff and all - operates.

I hope you're wrong. :(

[mmu1]

[Demonseed Elite]

It's not connected to magic or 'ware. But it does cost to raise, like any other attribute, meaning if you invest in it seriously, you're taking those points from something else.

But I'm still of mixed feeling about Edge.

[NightHaunter]

[Vuron]

Actually I had thought about mentioning an idea of Magic being equal to willpower + charisma + intelligence / 3 but I figured I would get dogpiled even talking about it.

Honestly it's not that bad of an idea as you can simulate low powered adepts and mages without neccesarily having to sacrifice alot of flexibility when you cyber up.

For instance maybe they don't have a base cost for being an awakened character but rather Magic 1 costs 10 Build Points, Magic 2 costs 30, etc. Maybe make adept magic points cost 5, 15, etc or 7, 21, etc. Overall it could allow people design characters with a small amount of magical edge that for lack of training or desire never really developed the spark. It's been mentioned several times in books so why not simulate it somehow.

As for division of some attributes and not some others I suspect it really is more about balancing the skill lists design wise than some grand concept. For instance if you look at quickness in SR3 there is a huge number of quickness linked skills currently. To keep quickness from becoming the end all be all stat in SR4 (outside of making levels of various attributes cost different amounts based on the utility of the attribute which is a hideously inelegant design method) you need to balance the number of skills linked to each attribute. So if you have 45 active skills in SR4 you'd likely want 9 groups of 5 skills each. After you've done that you pretty much need to come up for some concept that links the skill + attribute concepts together.

Fundamentally it's not that bad of a design choice as it allows more granular and balanced design. Of course the main thing is that you don't want to have so many attributes so as to make them individually useless so 9-10 attributes is pretty much the logical limit.

Yes consequently Charisma might remain a pretty potent attribute in SR4 but considering most people's game choices aren't about maximizing social skill interaction it's probably good not to hurt face characters too much.

[blakkie]

[lord_cack]

Does anyone think its possible for "Essence" to be replaced by "Humanity" rating or that the new system for "Essence" will work like WoD's "humanity"?

[Dawnshadow]

With the sudden increase in attributes, I wonder a lot more about character creation and karma awards..

With the increase in the number of attributes and so on, then unless there are more points to throw around, the average character created would logically be weaker (based on the information we have at present) -- just because they have to be spread out more. Mages? Well, if you have to buy 'awakened' as well, then you've just lost a LOT of points -- so available points for everything else is lower. If you don't have to buy awakened, then I predict a glut of people with a little bit of magic -- because a small armour spell is really helpful, etc.

Likewise, with more attributes to throw karma into to increase, then you have to be a lot more experienced to advance to the same degree -- SR3, 300 karma on a non-awakened, you can have almost all your attributes at RML or higher, and almost every active skill in the book at various levels (I know a lot of mine are 2,3.. bunch at 4-6 with specializations higher).. but defaulting becomes a nonissue.

[Patrick Goodman]

[Patrick Goodman]

[Patrick Goodman]

[Patrick Goodman]

[SirBedevere]

[Siege]

Magic
This should raise some ripples in the Mages are too powerful/No they're not threads.

And I wonder how this will impact adepts, considering their abilities are purchased directly from their Magic rating versus wizards who are limited in the power of their spells, but not number.

Attribute split
It looks like the revision is focusing on the commonly held aspects of the game and not addressing softer areas.

1. Firearms gets split into multiple, specific skills
2. Etiquette goes from specific sub-skills (Street, Corp, etc.) to one all-encompassing skill
3. The heavily tapped combat stats - Quickness and Int are getting attention
4. Charisma - the roleplaying stat, is not

While I grant most of SR players tend to be power-hungry Holy Handgrenade bunnies and it makes sense to focus on clarifying the skills and stats of most interest to the larger demographic, Charisma has always been a poorly defined attribute and one that could stand some clarification.

And having an appreciable distinction between personality and the superficial outer shell goes further to distinguish people from the walking technical illusions.

-Siege

Edit: For code typos

[blakkie]

[Grinder]

After reading this thread i get the impression that a lot more characters will be at least weak awakened. I once tried to build a half-burnout shaman, but it was horrible. But now, with maybe the possibility to buy only two or three magic points, it will become much easier i guess - and much more common. Don't know what i should think of it.

I would like to see the new attribute edge be affected in a negative way by magic or cyber/bio. Really mundane (no bio and no cyber) would have an advantage this way. But who really wants to play a char without anything?

And i'm curious as hell about the new initiative system and how the boys will work out the new karma rewards. :)

[Dawnshadow]

[Phantom Runner]

Attribute splitting isn't such a bad thing...a

[Vuron]

I would assume that any character creation system at this point in time will look more like a karma/build point system like Becks2.0. Not because it's the only way to do things but that it seems like that's a better method for insuring that attributes aren't purchased to the exclusion of everything else.

I'm still mixed on whether there should be one big pile of points like becks or if they should do something like three piles (Attributes, Skills, Augmentations). Personally I kinda like the three piles system now that I know magic is just another attribute (if reaction can also be purchased up from a base this might also be a good system).

So if you have 3 pools you might have enough attribute points to average 4s in every stat but magic and if you want magic one you regular stats take a hit. Everyone would be equally skilled (somewhat a problem simulating some character types) but would devote those skills to various concentrations etc. Finally augmentation pool would pay for stuff like spells, nuyen pool, edges and merits. You could even have a system where unused points from each pool can be saved on a 1 for 1 basis to a later phase (attributes then skills then augments so no spending your wad on attributes as it's the first phase). This would allow a weak attribute character to be extraordinarily skilled or a relative novice to have lots of resources.

Personally I'd even allow unused character points to buy edge pool dice so as to simulate that perenial favorite of beginners luck.

As for defaulting I'm assuming that all skills are linked to an attribute so defaulting pretty much is rolling your attribute dice vs TN 5 whether this uses a penalty to number of dice rolled or successes required really depends on how much they consider it a hit.

Other ideas with Magic a purchased attribute I suspect that magical skills will be linked to magic rather than willpower as in SR3. Thus a sorcery test might be Magic + Sorcery skill vs TN5 etc. This would represent casting spells as a function of magic ability rather than strength of will etc.

In order to compensate for willpower being weakened I wonder if some of the social skills will change thier linked attribute to willpower. Intimidation and Interrogation would be interesting but I could also see some subset of Negotiation being used.

One area I'm interested in learning is whether Vehicle skills will remain reaction linked and what formula will be used to determine reaction.

[Phantom Runner]

Attribute splitting isn't such a bad thing...at least I'm glad they stuck with Quickness and Intelligence and didn't split all attributes (like Strength into two different ones). Which to me says it was done not only to solve some inconstency problems with things like high intelligence meant high awareness, but also to rebalance the attributes so that not one single attribute help more sway over any of the others. In SR3 I don't think I ever made a character without first maxing Quickness and Intelligence (then Willpower and Body) and then spending left over points on Charisma/Strength. Unless playing a Mage. Then it was Int/Will, followed by Cha/Quick, then Str/Body... Intelligence and Quickness were deffinately far more usefull than the other attributes...

As currently described, the Edge attribute sounds like something from a lot of RPG computer games. You know the ones where they had the "Luck" attribute. Not that that is truly a bad thing...just something I noticed.

And with naming the attribute "Edge", I assume that means Edges and Flaws will no longer be part of the system. Which is too bad because I was hoping that with the change to point buy being in the main rules, then Edges/Flaws would be included in the main rules as well. Then again maybe they will be under different names....but I doubt it.

[Moon-Hawk]

I've been silent on these boards since the announcement came out. I admit, I've been skeptical since I first heard the announcement. So many other systems have come out with a new edition just to force people to buy new books and make money. But the more I learn about this new "revision", the more I absolutely friggin HATE the sound of it. I understand that everything new sounds bad, and that if maybe half of the stuff sounds like a good idea and half of it sounds bad; that in the end it's probably an all-around improvement. But I'm hardly hearing anything that sounds less than awful for the game. Now I'm not rounding up villiagers and getting torches and pitchforks ready....yet....because maybe....just maybe.....they're doing an abysmall job of explaining/selling what it is they're trying to do, but I'm sorry to say I think SR has peaked and is on its way down. I'll never stop playing, of course, with my trusty 3rd ed books. I'll even keep buying the 4th ed books.....because I'm a MORON, and because I want the story (even if mine diverges), and I want the flavor, and because I friggin' LOVE THE GAME. But that doesn't mean I'm remotely happy with what I'm hearing.
I suppose that on the bright side, when it finally does come out, it can't....just CAN'T....be worse than I'm expecting.