Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Using a "Wealth" Attribute in SR4
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Brahm
QUOTE (eidolon @ Jul 19 2006, 05:08 PM)
QUOTE (Brahm)
Me too. That's why I flipped on the automated response to him. nyahnyah.gif Just trying to keep him from killing the thread again. Only time will tell if it'll succeed. smile.gif


No. You're one of the ones to be wondered about, actually. The fact is, if you're going to acknowledge the fact that your writing is disjointed and scattered all over the place, you can't really (with any credibility) tell someone that they're a moron for not following right along perfectly. Also, it's a fair sign that a "discussion" is over and has no point in continuing when one party gives up and resorts to simply insulting the other. Communication is an exchange of ideas. If you can't properly communicate your system of ideas to another person (who, by all evidence, is quite capable of understaning it, as he has contributed his own system of ideas here and there), then you have failed to communicate. Simple stuff.
Brahm
QUOTE (eidolon @ Jul 19 2006, 05:08 PM)
As to your comment on my "middle lifestyle rule", that's hardly a rule.  I was offering an example of something that might come up in play that would be easily adjudicated based on the game at hand, without needing to spend time writing, perfecting, and resorting to rules.

Of course it is a rule. There is a method or procedure for determining an outcome going forward from a given situation or action. It is mostly consistant, or at least as consistant as the GM is. Because that's where the original resides, in his head.
QUOTE
You can nitpick the semantics of it all day to make it appear that it is a rule,

Well you certainly seem to be nitpicking semantics. nyahnyah.gif Sure that was a sadly incomplete rule you gave, closer to an example really. But there you have the problem, which would be quite topical to the thread too. biggrin.gif If it isn't written down in one place then it's harder to communicate to all the players so they have an understanding. Because the whole thing is a blob floating in your head of some level of clarity, and the only parts others get to see of it are what you tell them.
QUOTE
but you'd be wasting your time.  (Nobody's stopping you though, so knock yourself out.)

Sorry to hear today is not a listening day for you. Maybe try come back to this post tomorrow? wink.gif
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Brahm)
Sure you have gotten the point. Lots of people here have gotten the point.

And unfortunatly for us, you didn't get the point (again):

Stop spamming the forum with offensive messages.

If you don't understand why, check the Guidelines.
Brahm
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (Brahm)
Sure you have gotten the point. Lots of people here have gotten the point.

And unfortunatly for us, you didn't get the point (again):

Stop spamming the forum with offensive messages.

ohplease.gif

SPAM is unsolicited. They are replys to posts directed at me. nyahnyah.gif They aren't random, and they aren't to posts where he is talking to other people. In short they don't happen when he doesn't pester me.
James McMurray
Hi Brahm! Nice to see you respond to "pestering" you by pestering the entire thread. And oh yeah: Hi Brahm!

--

My post earlier about runs paying in karma resulting in runs focused on karma got me thinking.

If a wealth system is designed to get rid of the desire to "run, get money, run again, get money again, repeat as necessary" then what stops the game from moving on to another monotany of "work, reward, work, reward?" Basically, if a player is the type that wants to focus on risk vs. reward, he'll most likely focus on it no matter what the reward being offered is.

For instance, if goods are negotiated through the Johnson instead of purchased with run money, the likely situation is "negotiate, run, negotiate, run." If runs are rewarded with information regarding a larger plotline, the likely situation is "run, get intel, run, get intel."

Can a wealth system be done such that it avoids this problem, without removing the idea that shadowrunners are people that do dangerous jobs for other people in order to get things from those people (usually physical things that help them survive and/or prosper as runners)?
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Brahm)
SPAM is unsolicited.

How fitting - nobody want's to read those replies by you.

QUOTE (Brahm)
They are replys to posts directed at me.

That somebody still is willing to talk to you at all is not our problem - don't try to make it.

QUOTE (Brahm)
They aren't random, and they aren't to posts where he is talking to other people.

Even worse: It's the same repeating junk all over the place.

QUOTE (Brahm)
In short they don't happen when he doesn't pester me.

You are pestering us. Stop that.
Brahm
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jul 20 2006, 02:45 AM)
QUOTE (Brahm)
SPAM is unsolicited.

How fitting - nobody want's to read those replies by you.

Hell, I don't want to read them. But at least they short. smile.gif
QUOTE
QUOTE (Brahm)
They are replys to posts directed at me.

That somebody still is willing to talk to you at all is not our problem - don't try to make it.

That's an illusion. It's effectily the same as the posts you are complaining about, but with more words.
QUOTE
QUOTE (Brahm)
They aren't random, and they aren't to posts where he is talking to other people.

Even worse: It's the same repeating junk all over the place.

Yup, that's what I found any exchange with Jame McMurray was boiling down. This just makes it clearer and easier to skip.
QUOTE
QUOTE (Brahm)
In short they don't happen when he doesn't pester me.

You are pestering us. Stop that.

No problem there, I'm more than done with this thread as the ration of Jame's prattling noise to the other peoples posts has convinced me he has successfully throttle the intellegence out of another thread. I'm sure it won't be the last. Yup. He won. Celebrate! I guess next time I should just stop posting the momment he enters the poor thread and save the time. frown.gif

Thanks to everyone else for the time, the questions, and the good ideas. We might be testing out the system in a game next week. There happened to be an independant expresion of desire from another player in the group about this sort of thing so I'm going to propose we try retrofit this into a running game. PM me if you'd like to hear about how it goes.
James McMurray
Bye! By the way, if you're feeling curious, do a count of on topic posts for you and I since page 3 (where your repetitions began). You can't really complain that someone is throttling a thread when you're more off topic than they are.

Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion. smile.gif
Moon-Hawk
It seems to me that the only way to remove the run, reward, run, reward mentality, is to either take the rewards away completely, or give them regardless. One solution for this is to make them into company men, or do a LS campaign, or Doc Wagon, or something else where it is their job to do something and they get a regular salary regardless of how much or how little they do whatever it is their job to do. Of course, the problem here is loss of motivation. They have to have some sort of independent goals to give them a reason to care. Justice and fighting corruption might make the basis for a LS campaign, but in general it's that reward system that you're trying to get away from that forms the primary motivation of the players/characters.
James McMurray
If I put my group into a Lone Star campaign they'd turn into a bunch of Vic Mackes. eek.gif

Even changing to a "justice vs. corruption" campaign becomes "run, pat self on back, run again" setup. The reward changes to something intangible, but it's still there. I guess I just think that rewards are such an integral part of practically every game that trying to design a system to avoid one particular type is a bit futile. Now, a wealth system designed to make player to money interaction easier and/or more balanced is a great idea.
Moon-Hawk
Well obviously there's got to be some kind of reward system, tangible or intangible, or else why would anyone play? There's always a reward to anything you do, on some level, or you wouldn't do it. We're big dumb animals that way.
Imagine:
GM: Okay, we're going to play FuckURun. I give you a mission, you fail, and then I poke you in the eye with this stick. Sound like fun? biggrin.gif

I thought the point of this was to find ways of getting campaigns more focused on the less tangible rewards like character development and plot advancement, and less focused on the crunchy rewards like money and karma.
Hmmm, I guess maybe I just don't know what the point of this thread is, and should just stay out of it. smile.gif In my defense, it's getting kind of hard for me to sift the wheat from the chaff in this thread.
eidolon
Moon-Hawk, I see what you're saying, but I think you might be stuck on "money is the only reward in SR". If the players are more interested in story development, then meeting that specific person you've always wanted to meet, or hitting Renraku where it hurts even if you have to do the run pro bono, or finally getting that Westwind Turbo (which you still could, doing what's being loosely discussed in this thread) becomes much more important than the fact that you made 7,500 on the last run.

It doesn't take away the reward you get, it just shifts it from purely monetary (which some of us feel isn't really enough to motivate an ongoing game by itself) to more story-based. It's like how reading a good book is its own reward.

Granted, it's not going to work for every player or ever group. But when you've got the right group for it, a system such as those being tossed around lets you focus on the story (stories) at hand, rather than constantly trying to track character wealth, run payments, gear costs, etc.

(Nice sig btw. In my last game, that was the gunslinger adept's centering chant. And talk about a series that was its own reward. Well, minus the ending. wink.gif)
Moon-Hawk
Huh? Wha? I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm arguing against money being the only reward. I am 100% for the intangible rewards of the story. Sure, money is nice, but I prefer motivations that don't result in my characters retiring after a couple profitable runs.
I was arguing against James suggesting that intangible rewards lead to the same mindless cycle of run-reward-run-reward, but re-reading his post I'm not sure he was saying that in the first place.
James McMurray
Yes and no. When the rewards are intangibles that drive the story forward you still have "run, reward, run" but it's done in a way that the rewards don't necessarily look like rewards. They still have to be tere, because people don't play characters that risk their lives for no reason. Even if the character is just out acting insane, the player is doing it because it's what he wants to do and he gets something out of it.
Moon-Hawk
Um, good then. So I guess we all agree. smile.gif
James McMurray
No! Must argue!!! wink.gif

Anyone got an updated version of a wealth system to post? There's been a couple of attempts made followed by a lot of talk. Has anyone updated their version to account for that, perhaps with a bit of playtesting?
eidolon
I think you're right, MH. Sorry about that. I had eggs on the stove while checking DS earlier. Reading fast doesn't always equal reading well. smile.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012