 Incompetent Quality min/maxing, And what about Skillsofts? |
  |
 Sep 1 2005, 03:19 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638  |
For 5BP each, my magician can take the following 'negative' incompetencies:
Aeronautics Mechanic Automotive Mechanic Industrial Mechanic Nautical Mechanic Electronic Warfare Hacking Viola! i just saved 35 points! Wouldn't it make more sense to make it target entire skill groups, rather than individual skills? Of course, I'd also consider bumping the cost up a bit to compensate, say 8BP. You could still wind up with just as many points, but you'd be writing off a Hell of a lot more skills at least. Also, what's the official ruling on using Skillsofts for Incompetent skills? Given that the higher of the two skill levels (user vs. chip) takes precedence, I'm guessing that Incompetence has no effect. |
 |
 
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 03:33 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
This is where the GM steps in and says "hell no you can't take flaws/qualities/whatever that would never affect your character, you munchkining little twit :please:."
:D |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 03:34 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,070 Joined: 7-February 04 From: NYC Member No.: 6,058 |
Aren't there restrictions on it? In SR3, you can only take this flaw if you actually have the skill in question.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:35 AM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 165 Joined: 30-September 04 Member No.: 6,715 |
In which case, just take the skills at 1 ... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:39 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
In SR4, you are expressly forbidden to ever take the skill if you are Incompetent.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 05:28 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
In which case, these "incompetencies" really are just build points built into the system for munchkins to take advantage of.
*scribble scribble* Just added it to my list of "Reasons Why I Will Never Play SR4". So far, it's a LOT longer than the "Reasons SR 4 Might Be Okay". |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 05:48 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 171 Joined: 5-February 05 Member No.: 7,053 |
Good grief...
Analyse Device (Ares Predator), Home Ground (The Milky Way) and now this. Has anyone here even heard the phrase "In the spirit of the rules, not the letter"? It worries me that people even indulge these ridiculous minmaxing fantasies believing that there's a GM somewhere who won't just slap them about the head with the largest rulebook on hand, but it truly saddens me that people use things like this as justifications not to like the system. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 05:58 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 125 Joined: 23-August 05 From: C.A.S. Member No.: 7,601 |
Unfortunately Narmio... I'm afraid there actually are GMs out there wou WOULDN'T slap them about the head with the largest rulebook on hand... Glad I'm not one of them! :D Winter |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 05:59 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 458 Joined: 12-April 04 From: Lacey, Washington Member No.: 6,237 |
There's an age old rule of thumb from the Hero System RPG: "If a flaw doesn't negatively impact your character, it isn't worth any points." The GM has to have some backbone, man. Might as well find out at character generation whether or not it you have what it takes to GM SR4. Guess eidolon can count himself out. ;)
(just a joke, man. no hard feelings) |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 06:04 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 807 Joined: 9-October 04 Member No.: 6,741 |
It just occured to me that someone, using their knowledge properly, could possibly take enough of these to pay off for being magical in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 06:12 AM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
It's good from that vaunted role-playing perspective. What sense does it make for a character to be Unaware of a skill that he or she would use? Face it, the problem arises when the skill is being used properly. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 06:36 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
I'd probably further restrict applying the Incompetant negative quality to any skill that cannot be defaulted to anyway (that includes most of the Mechanic skills). You simply can't take the Incompetant negative quality for those skills, because it wouldn't give you a flaw... you can't default on that skill, so Incompetant would be redundant, and thus couldn't give you points.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 07:06 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 458 Joined: 12-April 04 From: Lacey, Washington Member No.: 6,237 |
Yeah, hahnsoo, I think you've got a good fix.
For even more ridiculous, the Street Samurai could theoretically take incompetent in spellcasting, counterspelling, etc. :spin: |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 07:16 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 |
Waited for this so long, the "I Hate SR4" comments and threads had becoming so rare the last days. Thank you. :P |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 11:02 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
In a similar vein, I'm considering building a magician character with Incompetencies in all 3 firearms skills. Given how integral guns are to this game, I'd rule that as a fair use of this quality. And I agree, Hahnsoo's solution fits in quite well. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 03:07 PM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Man In The Machine Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,264 Joined: 26-February 02 From: I-495 S Member No.: 1,105 |
And this is why Sr4 is hard cover? Ahhh it all becomes clear now. And Spook, I (as a GM) would never let that fly for 15 points either. A runner who just hasent a CLUE on how to fire a gun? Mage or not, he/she would be a laughing stock. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 03:50 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 93 Joined: 9-December 03 From: Greenville, SC Member No.: 5,889 |
So, I see a lot of people don't like the way others have suggested using Incompetent. How about some suggestions of where you think it would be appropriate to use it?
Should it only be used in a way that it would cripple the standard concept? i.e., a Rigger with Incompetent: Pilot skills, or a Samurai with Incompetent: Firearms skills? What about a Samurai that normally uses a sword (Blades skill) taking Incompetent: Clubs? I'm just trying to figure out what people think are reasonable versus unreasonable uses of this quality. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 03:54 PM
Post
#18
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,070 Joined: 7-February 04 From: NYC Member No.: 6,058 |
Don't use it, because as written, it makes no sense? It's either crippling, or free points, with no happy middle ground. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:00 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Hmm, how about:
Bad luck with (skill) 5 points This flaw can only be taken for skills the character has a level 2 or higher. Once a (game?) the GM can Force a glitch add X number of 'glitch dice to a roll' (only count the 1s) add a penalty of -2 to the roll... Somethnig like that. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:00 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
well, not having read the book but as a general rule here's some ideas, that MIGHT work.
1) (assuming all software/hardware is are the new b/r's) A software/hardware incompetant hacker. He knows what he's doing in the 'trix, but he has to buy all of his software/hardware from someone else, because he doesnt understand the "guts" of his own system. 2) a mage incompotent at one aspect of casting, perhaps spell defense? one other note, if i had a player try this, i wouldnt even let them try to default to an attribute to use the skill. "what, you wanted to be an incompetant at stealth, and now you want to use your munchkin 6 agility to sneak around? uh huh... |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:06 PM
Post
#21
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Ugh. There's too much GM-fiat bulldrek in the rules already. Aku, that's already the way it works. No defaulting, no buying the skill. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:24 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
well, gee, i guess i dont have much to worry about then not liking SR4, huh? it seems like we already think alike, in some regards...
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:26 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I really hope you're joking.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 04:27 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
well, i wont really know until i buy it, but meh, maybe i'm.. more maleable than others around here, since i've really owned SR3 for a year or so, am have only been in two games now i think, both of which I'm GM'ing.. scarry huh?
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2005, 05:26 PM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
I don't see it as quite the problem. In this particular case, the mage has skillwires, a backup pistol, and a skillsoft allowing him to use it (somewhat). Besides, my mage relies on the street sams to provide physical protection, just like they rely on him for spellcraft. Pure street sams don't waste build points on magic; why should a mage have to waste points on mundane weapon skills? If anything, it reinforces my character's combat philosophy -"if you see me pull out my gun, we're fucked." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th July 2026 - 11:09 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.