 Karma and the problmes it causes |
  |
 Sep 14 2005, 07:46 PM
Post
#101
|
|
|
Prime Runner  Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665  |
BTW, having a skill group does not forbid you from having specializations. You have a skill group every time all of your skills in a group are the same rating (P. 106). You can't take a specialization for a group (SR4, p. 110), but you can still have a specialization in every skill that is in the group.
So if you have Firearms 3, you can't specialize your firearms, but you can still specialize your longarms. And once you've done that, there's nothing to stop you from buying the whole skill group up some more. Remember, the rules say that you can't get a specialization for a skill group, they do not say that you can't get a specialization and a skill group. -Frank |
 |
 
|
|
Sep 14 2005, 07:52 PM
Post
#102
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 18-August 05 Member No.: 7,567 |
Then blakie I apologize I must have missed the points there that you two were arguing. No offense...wasn't paying too close of attention to either of you as theres alot of chest thumping going on ;).
Moving on to Frank. Thats real iffy. Which comes back to my thoughts on skill groups and individual skills being completely seperate. The rules are a bit confusing there. And as a GM I'd rule that you're wrong, and attempting to abuse the rules and thus would tell you you can't do that. But thats my personal opinion on the matter, which may or may not be flawed. Would be really nice to hear from the devs on what the spirit of the rules there are. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 14 2005, 08:11 PM
Post
#103
|
|||||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
That's not in the rules though, that's just how you would do things if you were writing the rules from scratch. What they actually say about moving into and out of skill groups is:
The design intent is that buying a point of Skill Group is just like buying a point in every contained skill at once, but you get a cost savings for doing it in a lump sum. Just like means just like. There's no statement that having a specialization keeps you from regaining your group, and no statement that having skills of equal ratings keeps you from ever being able to buy specializations. This isn't rules lawyering, this is the fact that the designers don't see anything special at all about grouped skills. It's just a package deal for the purposes of purchasing skills. So the whole boogy-boogy about not being able to get specializations isn't the rules, it's just you making up stuff. Which brings me to Blakkie's claim. Buying a skill group saves you so much Karma over buying the skills one at a time, that the timeliness advantage isn't one. When purchasing the skills in singlets, you get an advantage from between 2N karma and 5N-1 Karma, where N is the next rating of those skills. After that, the guy who purchased the skill group is ahead from 5N Karma until the end of frickin time, because the guy who bought the skills individually can't ever do anything to ever catch up. You're essentially spending permanent Karma to maybe get a +1 bonus to one skill for one adventure. What the heck is that in there for? Let's assume we get 5 karma per session, and we don't have Influence, and decide that we want to start being more socially ept. After the first session, the Blakkie style character can have a rating 1 of Ettiquette and 1 Karma, while the Frank style character has a pile of 5 Karma and no skill bonuses. And then after the second session, the Frank style character has a rating 1 of Influence, and the Blakkie style character has a rating 1 in Ettiquette and Negotiate, and 2 Karma. After session 3, the Blakkie style character has rating 1 in Ettiquette, Negotiate, and Con, and 3 Karma, while the Frank style character has 1 in Influence and 5 Karma. After the fourth adventure, Blakkie has a 2 in Ettiquette, and a 1 in Con, Leadership, and Neotiate. The Frank Style character has a 2 in the entire Influence Group. What do we notice? We notice that the Frank style of advancement is "more timely" in 3 out of 4 of those sessions, and that it will continue to be "more timely" until the end of time. That's why I don't take Blakkie's "timeliness" concerns seriously. -Frank |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 14 2005, 08:48 PM
Post
#104
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
...you are once again trying to prove a negative by providing a jury-rigged example?
Yup. :dead: Excellent example though of one of the worst places/ways to look for an advantage. No advantage multiplier, likely low use count, short term plan, group of 4 skills, lack of development focus. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 14 2005, 08:53 PM
Post
#105
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 18-August 05 Member No.: 7,567 |
But if you look at it she's not buying specilizations to begin with Frank AND she purchased it at chargen. So she already had the group, the split it up because she needed something boosted and didn't have the time to wait. And then she raised the others and resealed the group. Theres no specializations involved there. And while not exactly following my thoughts thats decently close. A group is a group, a skill is a skill. Lets piece together all we know about skill groups, skills and specializations pg 264 tells us this...
pg 264 tells us this...
pg 106 tells us this...
So lets look at the sections I have highlighted. Specializations may not be applied to skill groups. Ok thats prety simple yes? Second part if you iprove any skill individualy the skill group ceases to exist. Seem's simple to me. Third part, is you can't use specializations with skill groups. Thats simple enough. Ok so what does all that mean together. Well you can't specialize in a group. And specilizing in a specific skill is well, improving a specific skill which would break up the skill group. And you can't use specializations with skill groups. So anylyzing the rules there Frank. You're wrong. You can not use specializations in conjunction with skill groups. Improving any one skill in a skill group does infact break up a skill group as well. Basicaly your example of not specializing firearms skill group but specializing with longarms doesn't hold up with the rules. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 14 2005, 11:44 PM
Post
#106
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,032 Joined: 6-August 04 Member No.: 6,543 |
Like your character that proves that humans are worth wile? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 14 2005, 11:54 PM
Post
#107
|
|||||||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Yes, like that human that i used to demonstrate to you what you were doing. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 04:21 AM
Post
#108
|
|||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 775 Joined: 31-March 05 From: florida Member No.: 7,273 |
sweet mother of blades, you folks go get a room and kill each other allready...sheesh |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 04:39 AM
Post
#109
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Blakkie I must say I am highly amused at your antics.
Firstly I will address your "Frank's example is loaded" claim by making one that is as far loaded in your example as possible first the 5 karma per session seems to be reasonable so we will go with that Second let's start each person with 2 levels in the skill group used 3: make it a 3 skill group 4: a group heavily used (Firearms) end of session 1: neither player advances end of session 2: player 1 buys pistols up to 3 end of session 3: player 1 buys a level of longarms, player 2 buys a level of firearms damn well that didn't work... we'll try with skills starting at 1 end of session 1: player 1 buys pistols up to 2 end of session 2: player 1 buys longarms up to 2, player 2 buys firearms up to 2 example 3 player 1 is a stealth specialist that never engages people outside of pistol range end of session 1: no advancement end of session 2: player 1 buys pistols up to 3 end of session 3: player 1 buys pistols up to 4 player 2 buys firearms up to 3 end of session 4: no advancement end of session 5: player 1 buys pistols up to 5 end of session 6: player 1 buys ares viper up to 5(7) end of session 7: player 2 buys firearms up to 4 okay so a stealth specialist doesn't need to buy the group, hey we have a winner for Blakkie's point. Now let's try an army rifleman (would never need more than two points of pistols) both players are such riflemen one will buy group other will buy appropriate skills end of session 1: no advancement end of session 2: player 1 buys longarms up to 3 end of session 3: player 1 automatics up to 3 and gets the Ares alpha spec for longarms player 2 buys firearms up to 3 end of session 4: no advancement end of session 5: player 1 buys automatics up to 4 and buys specialization in ares alpha for automatics. end of session 6: no advancement end of session 7: player 1 buys longarms 4 player 2 buys firearms 4 end of session 8: no advancement end of session 9 player 1 buys longarms 5 end of session 10: no advancement end of session 11: player 1 buys automatics 5 end of session 12: player 2 buys firearms 5 end of session 13: player 1 buys longarms 6 end of session 14: no advancement end of session 15: no advancement end of session 16: player 1 buys automatics 6 and that shows a slight advantage for the individual skill raising which shows that a three skill group is not optimal if you don't intend to use one of the three skills now lets add in a player 3 for each of the last two examples... each peson now has agility 3 to start player 3 advancement session 3: agility 4 session 6: agility 5 session 9: agility 6 session 12: buys firearms 3 session 16: buys firearms 4 so at this point player 1 wins out with favorite gun (alpha) at 11 dice then has other rifles at 9 dice player 3 has everything at 10 dice incedentally if player 3 was done more like player 1 to create this player 3B session 3: agility 4 session 6: agility 5 session 9: agility 6 session 11: buys longarms 3 session 12: buys automatics 3 and spec in alpha for longarms session 14: buys longarms 4 and spec in alpha for automatics session 16: buys automatics 4 not this build has 12 dice in preferred gun and 10 dice in all other rifles... clearly winning in the rifles stakes My conclusion there are cases where buying a skill group rather than the skills is not the optimal choice there are not cases where buying the stat rather than the skils or skill groups is anything other than optimal |
|
|
|
|
Sep 15 2005, 04:58 AM
Post
#110
|
|||||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Absolutley. But you did notice that all of those situations were when you had no intention of ever buying all the skills in a group, right? The only time it is ever to your advantage to not buy the group is if you don't intend to buy the whole group. That means that a character who only wants Blades and Unarmed should buy the skills individually, while a character who also wants clubs should always buy the group. Note, I don't even think this is a problem. I just think that getting back into skill groups should be a bit easier and less complicated than it is now. That's why I support a system where commutative addition is easy and fun.
Unfortunately, this is true. This is why I am so vehement in my "skills should be cheaper, attributes more expensive" mantra. -Frank |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 08:41 AM
Post
#111
|
|||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
ture.. though for 4+ skill groups it is more accurate to say for those who never want more thasn 2 of the skills in the group |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 02:13 PM
Post
#112
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 18-August 05 Member No.: 7,567 |
Ok wait one second. Now you've got me completely confused Frank. KOA comes to the conclusion that its not optimal to buy stats over skills. And you agree with that, and thats why you so vehement in your opinion that skills should be cheaper and attributes more expensive. What? That doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe i'm missing something there or I misunderstand the concept driving it. But to me it seems theres no reason to make skills cheaper and attributes more expensive IF its already more optimal for skills to be purchased over stats. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 02:23 PM
Post
#113
|
|||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
No. If you don't plan to buy the group in the shortterm. Karma is always in demand, and it can be important to divert karma to other critical areas (for example Dodge, Perception, spells, etc.). The ridiculously cheap Specialization also becomes available sooner (sooner than Kremlin put it in) unless your GM has a brain aneurysm and falls for your munchkin lawyering (or you house rule). The benefits are in the extra 10% to 20% success rate (or more) from the extra dice on opposed rolls, the lowered chances of Glitches, and those extra boxes of damage from the successful shots, in the interceding sessions. SR is often times a game of live or die. I'd feel a lot more confident of coming out alive in a firefight, or of making that one-shot-kill on a sentry to avoid a larger firefight, if i had that extra dmg plus an extra Dodge die. Shouldn't you? So the issues become; is player 2 able to survive to buy up his group and see player 1 spend that karma to round out the group, and is player 2 able to succeed at the same goals as often to gain karma at the same rate. Now fully demonstrating in every detail obviously requires a large simulation, which i really don't feel is worth my time.
House ruling commutative addition for the canon rules is a small change to your rules for commutative addition. Raising the first highest and second highest skill alone costs the same as canon. Raising the third highest skill (and the forth Skill with it) costs 1xSkill. Raising a canon group can be expressed as: (Highest_Skill x 2) + (2nd_Highest_Skill x 2) + 3rd_Highest_Skill Example: Pistols - 3 Automatics - 2 Longarms - 1 Cost to raise Pistols only is: 4x2 = 8 Cost to raise Auto. only is: 3x2 = 6 Cost to raise Long. only is: 2 Cost to raise group is: 8 + 6 + 2 = 16 |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 02:25 PM
Post
#114
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Actually I misread him because of all the negation involved and the fact that it was quite late.
However, looking back over his math, it's wrong. The only way the character in the example comes out ahead by purchasing skills over stats is by purchasing the specializations. Yes, specializations are a good deal if they are going to come up. You can and should buy them before your purchase anything else for your character. After that, buying a 4th point of a skill group costs 20 Karma, buying your agility up to 6 costs only 18, so any claim that buying the attribute first is a bad idea is absolutely and provably false. -Frank |
|
|
|
|
Sep 15 2005, 02:31 PM
Post
#115
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 18-August 05 Member No.: 7,567 |
Ahhhh ok that makes a great deal more sense now. I'd disagree with you, but my argument relies on abstract though, which in and of itself is not physicaly provable by math. I won't bother relaying it here because of your apparent severe dislike of roleplaying and the GM having any sort of decision making power. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 15 2005, 02:56 PM
Post
#116
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
Frank, that is wrong for Skills but true for Skill Groups. It is cheaper to buy Skills versus Attributes and more expensive to buy Skill Groups versus Attributes. Or are you switching in the term Skill when you mean Skill Group. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 15 2005, 03:02 PM
Post
#117
|
|||||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
The suggestion was a "stealthy sniper" or the lke. As soon as you want Longarms and Infiltration; or Pistols and Automatics, the attribute is a better deal. If you are only concerned with 2 (or less) relevent skills in a skill group, you are better off with buying the skills individually than the skill group. If you are concerned with just 1 relevent skill, you are better off with the skill individually than the attribute. Otherwise you are better off with the skill group than the individual skills, and you are better off with the attribute than the individual skills. And the factis that you are always better off with the attribute than the skill group, even if the skill group is the only thing you care about. That's not good design. The cut-offs for when the attribute is a good deal are way too early. The Skills vs. Skill Groups works out fairly well I think, but the attributes vs. Skill Groups and attributes vs. Individual Skills does not. -Frank |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 03:10 PM
Post
#118
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 445 Joined: 18-August 05 Member No.: 7,567 |
Untill, ofcourse, you apply abstract thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 15 2005, 03:40 PM
Post
#119
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Fact is once again you run off at the mouth. The cases that are apparently so small your 'nano-probes' missed them :please: are: - the Skill Group is untrained (edit: and contains non-defaultable skills) - raising your Attribute costs more than your Skill Group (remember metahumans pay based on their meta type adjusted Attribute, and it is also very costly to buy the Exceptional Attribute) - the Skill Group has two different underlying Attributes.
Why? Because the the tension of decision between getting a Skill or Attribute isn't there all the time? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 15 2005, 11:14 PM
Post
#120
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Uh guys the typo was in the conclusion... I meant to say that It is never optimal to not buy stat rather than skills... am editing my post now
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 15 2005, 11:21 PM
Post
#121
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
That's irony right there. You made the typo, and I read it originally as if the typo wasn't there. And then I originally responded to it as if you said what you meant to say rather than what you actually said. Maybe I'm telepathic and illiterate. In any case, thanks for actually taking the time to look through the numbers and come to reasoned conclusions. On threas like this, that's really refreshing behavior. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 16 2005, 12:52 AM
Post
#122
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
Not totally true. Lets take Jim the Baseline. Now Jim has NO skills and 1 in all stats. Jim wants to grow up to be John Wu, and double fist some guns. So, we have: Pistols=>Agility Dodge=>Reaction Perception=>Intution It will cost him 42 Karma to get a Skill from 0 to 6. It will cost him 60 Karma to get an Attribute from 1 to 6.
Now, lets replace Pistols with Firearms
So, is a player more likely to do option one and get 12 dice for 102 Karma or option two and get 12 dice for 170? That is a difference of 68 Karma. Your statement is erroneous because it generalizes. Are Skill Groups overpriced? I don't think so. They are a bargain for 3 to 4 skills (basically for 110 Karma you get 180 to 240 Karma worth of Skills.) I prefer the advancement of dice pool, in regards to sessions based on the base SR4 costs. The statement "It is never optimal to not buy stat rather than skills" is erroneous because it makes broad generalizations. By keeping Attributes cheaper than Skill Groups you steer players to Skills, and make the advancement of a generalist go slower than that of a specialist *in that Skill Group* at a healthy rate. By keeping Skill Groups more expensive than Attributes, you steer the player to buy Attributes, which have other benefits than just a plus one dice to a roll. I am not going to assume your style of play and overlap my preferred advancement plan over yours, but by increasing the cost of Skill Groups, you move your players to not buy Skills and instead by Skill Groups because the difference (or gap) between the cost of getting to a total of 12 has been decreased because of the increase in Attribute costs. /edit Oooops..fixed the Attribute notations in the second example... :grinbig: |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Sep 16 2005, 12:55 AM
Post
#123
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
It certainly seemed like a strange statement to make. :) Unfortunately this new version is also incorrect. :( You pulled a Frank, drawing a blanket conclusion from an example that does not represent the entire problem domain. I think you forgot to consider the Attributes that get little linkage lovin'. Well not Body or Will since they tend to get a lot of non-voluntary use. But Str only has three Skills linked, and sees very limited use unless you attack primarily in melee or use any of the 'medieval' weapons. Even you if wanted all of three of them it is the same cost to buy Athletics(3) than Str(5), and you get the Gymnastics thrown in for free. SR3 to SR4 really devalued STR, as it lost it's combat skill links to Agility. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 16 2005, 01:05 AM
Post
#124
|
|||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
The smart money is on flat out thick.
Unfortunately you are damn poor at judging reasoned conclusions. :( |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 16 2005, 01:51 AM
Post
#125
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
No you don't. Read the rules of Dodge again. While Reaction adds to all defense rolls, Dodge does not. Dodge only applies to a full defense action, Reaction applies to full defense actions and every other attack against you while you are concious, mobile, and aware of it. So a John Woo Action Hero wants an asstonne of Reaction, but honestly couldn't care about his Dodge Skill one way or the other. If you plan on capping people with double pistol action, your dodge skill isn't good for anything. This is an instance in which the attribute is so much better than the skill that the player would be willing to pay substantially more for it. That he doesn't is a problem. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 10:20 AM |
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.