Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Using a "Wealth" Attribute in SR4
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
phasmaphobic
First off: This is not for everyone! Most (if not all) of you like bookkeeping, and keeping track of even the most miniscule amounts of Nuyen, and I applaud you. Just keep doing what you're doing, and move along.

My players and I all agree: we're tired of our games eventually turning into more resource management than actual roleplaying. We've discussed and agreed to implement a more abstract Wealth system, inspired by the same system in D20 Modern. I've been mulling over some ideas, and figured setting it as a straight Attribute (Like Edge) would be the best way to do it, and somehow compare it against gear availabilities.

Has anyone else had experience with using such a system in Shadowrun, and if so, what were your methods and results?
ShadowDragon
For little things like soybeer and club entrence fees I include it into lifestyle costs. Money is only subtracted for gear, bribes, and rent.
Lagomorph
Considering that resources can range from 0 to 50 points, that is pretty on par with attributes which have the start at 1 and max at 6. The only difference is that a 6th point would cost 25points where it doesn't in this case.

Our group has never tried anything like that, but it seems like it could work well. You could roll Wealth + Negotiations to get an item or something.

Very interesting idea!
phasmaphobic
QUOTE (Lagomorph)
Our group has never tried anything like that, but it seems like it could work well. You could roll Wealth + Negotiations to get an item or something.

I've been debating that exact idea. Work out a system where negotiations could be used to remporarily boost either the wealth of the buyer or the availability of the item.

Perhaps allow some kind of "shopping" skill to allow an extended test as the character "shops around" at all the good places (priceline.com, pricewatch.com, ebay, eyc - Matrix versions, of course) before buying.
phasmaphobic
QUOTE (Lagomorph)
Considering that resources can range from 0 to 50 points, that is pretty on par with attributes which have the start at 1 and max at 6. The only difference is that a 6th point would cost 25points where it doesn't in this case.

Also, that works with wealth on a scale of 0-5.

0 = street
1 = squatter
2 = low
3 = middle
4 = high
5 = luxury
Lagomorph
To keep it in line with other stats, you'd want to start it off at 1 = street and have 6 at luxury. That'll allow critters and paracritters to have a wealth of 0, which is to say, actually nothing.
Edward
Lagomorph. Street is actually nothing. You eat out of the trash, you sleep wherever you can get a space and your security is whatever personal weapons your carrying (not included in lifestyle cost), sounds like how stray animals live to me.

It would work well for many of the variant team types but not for shadowruners.

Shadow runers work for money, why work for money when you have a wealth stat. you could say your wealth stat represents what you get paid but what happens when the teem contains a hyper efficient samy with wealth 1 and a wanabe with no useful skills and wealth 5, think the samy will be a little upset (in charicter) that he is getting paid so much less when he is all but carrying the newbie

It would however be worth wile for any game where your on a regular retainer such as special forces, loan star, corporate security or dock wagon campaigns.

Zen Shooter01
I have found the Wealth system in D20 to be almost unworkable. I don't have the book in front of me, but as I recall, anything with a DC equal to or less than your Wealth you could automatically acquire. Anything with a cost higher than your Wealth required a D20+Wealth roll to acquire, and reduced your Wealth score by an amount determined by how much higher the cost was than your Wealth.

So if you have a Wealth 7 and a hotel room costs 6, you can apparently live in that hotel forever at no damage to your purchasing power.

If you have a Wealth of 12 and a handgun costs 11, you can go back to the gun store every day for a month and end up with 30 handguns at no damage to your purchasing power.

Also, the more Wealth you had in the first place, the more an increase meant to you. A PC with a Wealth score of 30 discovers a treasure worth 3, and is now significantly richer than he was before, because now he can automatically acquire things that cost up to 33 without reducing his Wealth. But a PC with Wealth 4 discovers the same treasure, raising his Wealth to 7, and he still can't afford to buy a shotgun without serious financial damage.

I can only recommend against the Wealth system in any game.
phasmaphobic
I appreciate your input, but your words against are falling on deaf ears. I've liked the abstract nature of the system in every game in which I've used it. I will be using it, once I get the details worked out.

So, seeing as how you've now gotten it out of your chest, care to actually contribute and offer input into making it workable?
phasmaphobic
It should be noted that I also don't run typical "commit X number of crimes for money and street rep" games. My games are more like a TV show, a Soap Opera for criminals. We focus less on bookkeeping and more on action and plot. Hell, I don't even make them keep track of regular ammo.
James McMurray
Brahm did some work here but then got upset and quit the thread. I don't know if he ever finished the project or not.
Lilt
I do like the idea of simplifying things, less bookkeeping can be good, but I don't like making money into a system that's not money. Once money isn't money then the whole dynamic of the game shifts based on what the new money is. For example, many otherwise poor runners in the game as it stands may carry a back-up clip of EX-E rounds 'just in case'. It only costs a few nuyen and can provide that extra punch when they really need it.

If a wealth system is employed then runners either can't afford the clip of Ex-E bullets any more than they can afford certain alpha/beta-grade ware (even though the bullets are cheap and the ware is expencive), or they can afford as many EX-E bullets as they like.

IE: Money is money, lumping costs into a bigger 'lifestyle' is great, making money not money will completely change the game dynamic. Perhaps even in ways you can't predict needing a lot of playtesting. If you somehow manage not to change the game dynamic then you'll probably have a complex system, at which point you're probably better-off just using money.
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 15 2006, 04:35 AM)
Brahm did some work here but then got upset and quit the thread. I don't know if he ever finished the project or not.

Upset? More like I didn't feel like repeatedly explaining the same things to the slow kid, which is what the thread had devolved too. nyahnyah.gif At the momment I don't have any live game suitable for trying to apply the system in myself, so I haven't drawn it altogether into a document yet. The large majority of the system is there in the thread, it just needs gleaning and dragging together. I could try bring it together into a document, but not this weekend.

P.S. It also avoids the issue of buying things indefinately as there is minimum per use, success or not, taxxing of the Resource (Wealth) Attribute.
Brahm
QUOTE (Lilt)
Once money isn't money then the whole dynamic of the game shifts based on what the new money is.

Which can actually be a very good thing.

QUOTE
For example, many otherwise poor runners in the game as it stands may carry a back-up clip of EX-E rounds 'just in case'. It only costs a few nuyen and can provide that extra punch when they really need it.


That is much more a problem with the ammo design than anything else as that is pretty much how it works now. Unless your runners are going though several hundreds of rounds of purchased instead of scavanged ammo, which represents a lot of combat, the difference in money spent between the cheapest and the most expensive isn't that much of a barrier.
phasmaphobic
QUOTE (Lilt)
I do like the idea of simplifying things, less bookkeeping can be good, but I don't like making money into a system that's not money. Once money isn't money then the whole dynamic of the game shifts based on what the new money is. For example, many otherwise poor runners in the game as it stands may carry a back-up clip of EX-E rounds 'just in case'. It only costs a few nuyen and can provide that extra punch when they really need it.

If a wealth system is employed then runners either can't afford the clip of Ex-E bullets any more than they can afford certain alpha/beta-grade ware (even though the bullets are cheap and the ware is expencive), or they can afford as many EX-E bullets as they like.

IE: Money is money, lumping costs into a bigger 'lifestyle' is great, making money not money will completely change the game dynamic. Perhaps even in ways you can't predict needing a lot of playtesting. If you somehow manage not to change the game dynamic then you'll probably have a complex system, at which point you're probably better-off just using money.

I see your point, but I think you are speaking on a very broad scale. My runners are pretty good players. They don't ever try to weasel their way into cheesiness, and I personally approve every skill and piece of starting gear.

My players would never pull a "well, TECHNICALLY I can buy this APDS ammo, so I'm gonna buy 20 clips!" trick, because I'd buttrape them with it quickly after they tried.

Brahm: I read that previous thread, and I agree with your sentiment over re-explaining it.

I like the idea of "vague money" - esecially when I run games where money really isn't the focus or the reward. We play for objectives, goals, plot hooks, and more, and rarely do I ever reward my players with raw cash. Additionally, several are new to Shadowrun (but experienced elsewhere) and the idea of balancing a personal bank account in real life annoys them, let alone doing it for fun in a roleplaying game. They don't always know what to buy at creation, so have a real quick way to say "well, let's see if Johnny D. would have remembered to buy that" is a good idea.
Lilt
If you trust your players so much and approve everything personally, then why have a system (wealth attribute ETC) at-all?
DireRadiant
To provide a system of relative scale. Can PC X obtain this item, or be expected to have this item.
phasmaphobic
QUOTE (DireRadiant)
To provide a system of relative scale. Can PC X obtain this item, or be expected to have this item.

Exactly. If the item has a value significantly lower than their wealth, don't even worry about it, as they can easily pick it up. If not, they can make a test to see if they might be able to manipulate their finances.

In the modern day, I believe wealth could very well be a viable attribute, and the management of your wealth a viable skill. With a base amount of wealth and an apt skill, you can acquire many things that would normally seem out of range. Complex manipulation of finances and accounts in a high-profile setting could very well be a viable course of action, and pave the way for money-focused characters like brokers, accountants, and loan sharks.

Rememebr, not everyone limits their games to a handful of strategically-placed gunfights, and not everyone enjoys painstakingly keeping track of every .01 New Yen in their possession.

Hell, I myself rarely do this, and more often use a system of mental approximations to calculate whether or not I can afford something. I have balancing my checkbook in reality, why would I want to do it in a fun game? My players feel the same.
Lilt
lol. I've GMed for someone playing a broker/hacker character in shadowrun anyway. No, neither of us were or have ever been accountants so we generalised it, although we did keep track of how much money was involved and let the character's action influence the market slightly.

Also, you say that your system makes such things easy, but how does your abstract system deal with money when it is money? Do characters talk in terms like "You owe me one wealth, chummer"? Perhaps "you owe me *intermission... do do, da da, hey!*, chummer!"

When you have an out of character value for something in-game then it means that you can't talk about it directly, not without ruining the game. Money can be cinematic. Consider all of the movies where big sums of money are quoted, like "the girl dies unless I recieve 2 million dollars in unmarked bills" rather than "The girl dies unless I recieve wealth 20 in unmarked bills". You can have money without micro-management, and removing it completely is silly.

In-fact before you can convince me that it's a remotely good idea, you'll have to persuade me that it won't gimp money-based characters like sammies and riggers, or make them massively overpowered. The same goes for riggers, who could have a limitless number of drones available very cheaply. It doesn't matter that your players may be good little boys and girls, if things go badly then they can just lose a drone or two every run and not care. That removes any form of responsibility for the rigger, whilst other characters do still have to worry about being wounded.

And I'd like to draw a distinction again between keeping track of every last 0.01 nuyen and keeping money money. Big tiocket items aren't all that hard to work-out the costs for, they're usually costed in big round numbers for that purpose. Otherwise you can phase everything into lifestyle, or perhaps a slightly more expencive lifestyle.
Brahm
The linked thread actually does discuss this a little bit, but to put it more directly: Using an Attribute doesn't mean you can't speak an absolute IC number or use the term nuyen.gif . You just don't bother to write down that number on your character sheet because it is largely irrelavent outside of a general magnitude, which certainly serves any cinematic purpose.

P.S. I remember another thread in the Shadowrun forum a while back from a guy that doesn't use cash directly, or even a resource Attibute for that matter. Here it is. He mentions some things in there as well about the subject of cash in the character's text.
Phobos
Okay, though I don't really like the idea of a Wealth stat in Shadowrun, I DO have an idea how to simulate this, though, so ...
('Runners should always scape for survival - if they accumulate enough wealth that they don't have to worry about money any more, the should retire on a nice island in the caribean.)

Basics
Two stats, Wealth and Savings.
- Wealth indicates your general level of monetary resources, how much you have to worry about getting food, lodging or ammunition ... more or less a redefinied Lifestyle.
- Savings indicates how much money you have accumulated for spending on new goodies.

Description
Wealth is rated as you already proposed it :
CODE
Rating † Wealth † † † † † † †Savings † † † † † †Nuyen
0 † † † † = street † † † † † †= broke † † † † † †= 0
1 † † † † = squatter † † † † †= hand-in-mouth † †= 500
2 † † † † = low † † † † † † † = poor † † † † † † = 2,000
3 † † † † = middle † † † † † †= average † † † † †= 5,000
4 † † † † = high † † † † † † †= prosperous † † † = 10,000
5 † † † † = luxury † † † † † †= wealthy † † † † †= 100,000
6 † † † † = corporate † † † † = rich † † † † † † = 1,000,000
7 † † † † = A corporate † † † = filthy rich † † †= 10,000,000
8 † † † † = AA corporate † † †= see it, buy it † = 100,000,000
9 † † † † = megacorporate † † = Lofwyr † † † † † = 1,000,000,000


System
Any Earnings or Purchases are represented by ratings, too, using the same scale as for Wealth and Savings.

A character has a lifestyle equal to his Wealth. He can afford any purchase with a nuyen value of two steps below his Wealth Rating at any time without taking a hit on either Wealth or Savings.
The character can make a purchase one step below his Wealth without attacking his savings by saving up from his lifestyle for a number of months determined by an extended Wealth (Purchase Rating, 1 month) Test.

A character can make any other purchase by spending his savings (up to his Savings, of course). Any purchase two steps below his Savings rating is free. Any purchase of higher value might mean the character's savings take a hit. Roll the purchase's value against the character's Savings (+ half his Wealth if Purchase rating < Wealth rating), if the purchase wins, savings are reduced by 1.

If the character needs money fast, he can sell his Wealth. By reducing Wealth by one level, he gains Savings at his previous Wealth Rating. This might result in raising Savings.

To raise Wealth, a character has to accumulate Savings equal to his Wealth + 1. His Wealth is raised by 1, and his Savings are halved.

To raise Savings, a character can simply earn money. If he earns more money at one time than his Savings rating represents, this will be his new Savings rating.
If the character earns money equal to or one less than his Savings rating, roll the earned money's value (+ half the character's Wealth if the earned money rating = Savings rating) vs. the player's Savings rating. If the earned money wins, the character's Savings are increased by 1.


... take a look at it, I'll do an example later if you want one. 'Should work, though.
phasmaphobic
Here's what I've got so far...

WEALTH IN SHADOWRUN 4

Using a Wealth system allows for a more abstract approximation of character finances. This is designed for groups whose players are not as interested in the exact balances of their characters' checking accounts, and better takes into account the concept of actual credit lines, investments, and viable assets.

This system replaces the static money system with an Attribute + Skill setup just like the core SR4 dice mechanic.


WEALTH, LIFESTYLE, CHARACTER CREATION

At character creation, you buy wealth just like any other attribute. WEalth starts at 1 for everyone, with an across-the-board racial maximum of 6. Exceptional attribute can be acquired to raise the maximum to 7.

When you purchase your wealth, it also determines your character's lifestyle. Sure, there is no law saying you can't voluntarily live a lower lifestyle. However, the Wealth rating remains the same regardless, as does the monthly payoff requirement.


USING YOUR WEALTH

Your Wealth attribute is used as the basis for a dice pool, rolled with a skill using the normal SR4 mechanic. The skill in use varies depending on the situation. The new "Finances" active skill governs your character's keenness in accounting and financial acumen. Depending on the situation, other skills might come into play. For example, if you want to intimidate someone with the enormity of your checkbook alone (foreclosure, eviction, buyout, etc), roll Wealth + Intimidation. If you want to use your Wealth to "buy" yourself into social circles, roll Wealth + Etiquette. Different unique situations will have different rules and results, so be creative, and discuss with your GM.

Every item has an associated Value rating, usually from 0 to 7, and rarely ever higher. Value tells you the number of hits you need on a Wealth check to afford the goods. To acquire something, first determine your relevant dice pool (usually Wealth + Finances) and then compare it to the Value. If you have enough to buy it with normal rules of hit-buying (exchange 4 points of pool for 1 hit), then no test is necessary, as your Wealth can easily afford the cost. If not, then make a test using your dice pool, with a threshold equal to the item's Value. Edge can be used to assist.

Much like spells and Force, your Wealth attribute limits the amount of hits you can get on this test. If the item's Value is higher than your wealth, then you cannot afford it without saving or liquidating (see below) or borrowing from someone else (teamwork, or contact roleplaying).

If you meet the threshold, you manage to find enough cash to pay for it, now carry on as you were. If not, then you don't have enough to pay for it at the moment without saving or liquidating (see below) or just waiting until the next payoff cycle of your Wealth goes through.

To determine the different numbers behind wealth, check the chart below. Each Wealth rating has an associated Lifestyle and monthly payoff. The same chart is used to find the value of an item using it's normal SR4 gear listing costs.


PAYOFF

Rather than using actual cash, the Wealth system uses an abstract measurement of income called "payoff" to keep track of how the rise and fall of a character's background resources (credit lines, investments, jobs, and more). One point of payoff is roughly equal to 100 units of base currency (nuyen), but rather than serving as an actual gauge of expendable cash, payoff works to keep your wealth rating afloat.

Payoff stockpiles are not used as cash! Payoff is used to keep your Wealth attribute afloat, and to serve as a measure of your current financial standing. Payoff can be used (with Karma) to make investments and manipulate assets, raising your Wealth rating to a higher level.


POOLING YOUR ASSETS

As with standard rules, multiple characters can use Teamwork to assist in the proper situations, using one character's wealth to cover the losses of another. Characters who loan each other money should work out their own interpersonal standards for finances and paybacks.


MAKING (and Missing) THE PAYMENTS

Wealth ratings have a monthly cost that must be paintained by your payoff. Like the normal lifestyle rules, missing payments and being in debt are not good. When the payment time comes rolling around, the character needs enough stockpiled Payoff to pay the Wealth level's payoff cost. If the character has enough, just subtract that much and keep on truckin.

However, if the character can't afford it, determine what wealth rating they can afford. Subtract that from their current rating, and then make a check with a threshold of 1 + the difference. If successful, no sweat, the credit and savings and accounts covered the difference in costs, and the character's current payoff stockpile is dropped to zero. If the test fails, then one of two things happens: Repo, or Debt.

If the character goes the Repo route, they simply lower their current Wealth by the amount by which they failed to meet the threshold, keeping their payoff stockpile where it is. Their lifestyle is immediately adjusted downward, and this can create definite roleplaying opportunities as the character seeks new digs.

If the character goes the debt route, their Wealth and Lifestyle remain the same, their payoff stockpile is dropped to zero, and they are now in debt by a payoff amount equal to whatever their previous stockpile did not cover, divided by the number of hits they got on their test.


RAISING YOUR WEALTH

Wealth is raised just like any other attribute. The maximum is six, unless you have an Exceptionl Attribute quality in Wealth, at which point the maximum is seven. In addition to the Karma cost (New rating x3), the character must also have enough payoff to pay the difference between their current wealth rating's monthly maintenance cost and the next one. This should be roleplayed, of course, as financial investments, property managements, etc. The character's lifestyle is effectively increased to the next level as well.


LIQUIDATING ASSETS

When you absolutely need something that you just can't completely afford (meaning: the value is higher than your current Wealth, or you just did not score enough hits on the check), you can attempt to liquidate some of your Wealth in order to acquire the necessary goods. When doing so, you roll your base Wealth again, adding the hits to your original roll, and applying the rule of six to the new dice. If your total hits are enough to acquire the item, then you immediately subtract from your current Payoff an amount equal to the monthly payoff cost of your current Wealth (divided by the extra hits scored on the test).

This represents your character manipulating assets, hocking valuables, and taking a dip into her actual way of life in order to attain what she desires most at the moment.


SAVING FOR LATER

You can manipulate your wealth to save up for something later, should you not be able to afford it now. This is treated as an extended test with an interval set by the GM, usually based on the rotation of your finances (every week, two weeks, twice a month, once a month, etc). The Threshold varies depending on the difference between the item's Value and your wealth. If the Value is less than or equal to your wealth, the Threshold is Value x2. For each point that it is equal to or higher, increase this multiplier by +1. You can spend Edge to make this easier, as per normal Edge rules.

During this process, you suffer a -1 to all Wealth checks (including those made to save up!), as you set aside chunks of finance to save for something important.


CODE

WEALTH/VALUE LIFESTYLE ITEM VALUE PAYOFF required
1  street  up to ~50 0
2  squatter up to ~500 10
3  low  up to ~2000 40
4  middle  up to ~5000 100
5  high  up to ~50000 1000
6  luxury  up to ~100000 2000
7  the good life up to ~250000 5000

OR

WEALTH/VALUE LIFESTYLE ITEM VALUE PAYOFF required
1  street  up to ~50 0
2  squatter up to ~500 10
3  low  up to ~2000 40
4  middle  up to ~5000 100
5  upper middle up to ~10000 200
6  high  up to ~50000 1000
7  luxury  up to ~100000 2000



NEW POSITIVE QUALITIES

"Assets"
(-5 to -30)
Each 5 BP spent on this quality gives you 10 points of recurring monthly payoff from stocks, businesses, etc.


NEW NEGATIVE QUALITIES

"Garnishments"
(5 to 30)
Each 5 BP gained from this quality gives you 10 points of recurring monthly payoff debt, be it from child support, alimony, unpaid loans, or whatever.
Brahm
QUOTE (Phobos)
Wealth is rated as you already proposed it :


First off I find 'corporation', well, kinda silly. If the runner is a real legitimate corp then you are playing a very different game. I know I mentioned early on in that thread about maybe having extra Lifestyles, without giving any details about where they'd get added and such. But as I got further into it I've come to think there isn't much point to it, even going up past Luxury. Maybe a single point, and call it Opulent or something. But that's about it.

Another question is when have you ever had a single runner with more than 1 million in a single take? Even 100,000 in one take is relatively rare in games I've played. Truth be told I can't recall an specific time I've seen it myself, although it might have happened. All those extra levels seem to be for NPCs, which I don't ever see having a Resources stat.

I'm not sure exactly what your issue is with a Wealth stat, if in your attempt to simulate to avoid it you basically remake but with a different way to move it up and down and a different permanancy? And introducing the issue of unlimited medium purchases.

P.S. What happens to the cash you get below the current Savings? Are you basically keeping nuyen by nuyen accounting and then adding this too? Because I really don't see much point in that.
phasmaphobic
Gah, I can't get the code to look right
Brahm
@phasmaphobic

PAYOFF seems to me more like just tracking cash in 100 nuyen increments. Which I'm cool with, it just doesn't really need all this to bother with that. Especially if you are including all the monthly lifestyle rents too and a running PAYOFF total. That's mostly what I do with my PC right now, when I buy something I just round up to the next 100 nuyen. It is kinda rare that I have to bother rounding off anyway. It's only for the piddling little stuff, and the character is such that he rarely buys cheap dollar store type crap anyway. He isn't rich, he just isn't frugal. cool.gif

I do like the idea though of just having Lifestyle set by the Wealth/Resoure Attribute because the BP cost of the cash price of Lifestyle is negligable in comparison to that of an Attribute. When I get around to bringing together all my thoughts I'll include that.

P.S. I prefer the name Resource to Wealth because Resource is a much closer match to the second use, the backup check to see if you have something onhand that isn't explicitly on your inventory list. Even when you take into account any 'toolkits' listed on the inventory list.
phasmaphobic
QUOTE (Brahm)
@phasmaphobic

PAYOFF seems to me more like just tracking cash in 100 nuyen increments. Which I'm cool with, it just doesn't really need all this to bother with that. Especially if you are including all the monthly lifestyle rents too.

I do like the idea though of just having Lifestyle set by the Wealth/Resoure Attribute because the BP cost of the cash price of Lifestyle is negligable in comparison to that of an Attribute. When I get around to bringing together all my thoughts I'll include that.

P.S. I prefer the name Resource to Wealth because Resource is a much closer match to the second use, the backup check to see if you have something onhand that isn't on your inventory list.

Payoff is essentially the same as 100 bucks, but I look at it differently, as something less tangible than hard cash. It represents favors, income, markers, job payments, and more. It's like the difference between Hit Points and actual health - most people quantify DnD hit points as wound counters and health levels, when in reality they represent something far more abstract.

Depending on how much the characters spend each month, payoff is a lot more variable. I based the payoff costs on double the nuyen cost of the stock lifestyles. I figure if you pay 10K to live each month, then on average you'll also have 10k to spend on goods, services, toys, and connections. Some months you might spend more, especially if your team gets a lot of action (in the boradest possible sense of the word, heh). Other months you might spend less. I think it balances out, and eliminates the constant need to check the bank account every time you go to the store to buy a box of ammunition. You use your payoff to pay for your lifestyle/resources, and the rest is handled by the attribute and approximation. I'm going to field test it tomorrow with my weekly group.

I forgot about the backup check, but I think it would qork quite well. Possibly first started with a Memory check to see if the character would have remembered it, and then a resources check. Or possibly, just have them roll Edge first, to see how Fate is treating them today?

Resources is a better name. I just defaulted to wealth as it is the term used in a few other systems.
Brahm
For the second use a single roll of Logic+Resource can give you memory and cash in one Attribute Only Test.

I do like the idea of Edge, without spending a point I assume, used as sort of a Fate Test if there wasn't a readily available mechanic. But I think a mechanic can be put in place there in this case.

The way I looked at Resource was that it also represented investments whose ROI cover off the basics of your Lifestyle. So it is self sustaining as long as you don't try to do anything other than typical existance activities that are consistant with the Lifestyle. That seems a lot more inline with a cost of 10 BP per point, and the karma costs for raising it.

Also by not having to worry about end of the month payments it provides more flexibility to the GM in choices of runs offered. Basically the GM doesn't have watch the cash/credit totals to walk the line of providing the opportunity to keep them in their house while avoiding a bit of a Monty Haul spiral. You don't need to worry so much about timing of runs too. If you are relying on a monthly Lifestyle as a cash sink then having a burst of runs in one month can quickly throw wonks into things. Not having a monthly Lifestyle payment also makes it a bit easier to manage a team with disparate Lifestyles.
Phobos
Brahm :
I simply took the opposite way from yours - simpler, not more complicated. I thought the goal was simply to have a way to get rid of the nuyen crunching while still having a means to keep track of the character's purchase power.

There being two major considerations, genral funds for keeping up lifestyle and making small purchases, and savings for major purchases, I tried to make those the focus of attention.

Though ... yes, I guess I could have avoided some of the levels, but at times a runner might want to save up an insane amount of money for a single purchase (like updating cyber to all-delta .... outch .... which might be a couple milion nuyen at once).


Seems I have to do examples.

Joe and Fred are shadowrunners. Joe is new in town but has kept some savings from his old hunting grounds (W2, S4) while Fred has a nice hideout and a steady supply of work, but is out of money right now due to his attempt to keep up with SOTA (W4, S1).

Both would have no real problems buying up Ammo (Purchase Rating 1) or an Armor Jacket (Purchase Rating 2), but if any of them wanted to buy a nice new commlink (Purchase Rating 3), things would start to get interesting.
Joe does not have enough Wealth to get it on the by, so he has to check if it's a major hit on his saving. He rolls 5 Dice (S4 + half W2) vs. 3 Dice (the Purchase) and wins - seems the commlink wasn't worth any fuzz yet.
Fred cannot afford the comm with his savings, but he can save it up from his lifestyle. Rolling 4 Dice each month until he accumulates 3 hits on the second roll, he buys it on the second month.

If they wanted to buy a new car (Purchase Rating 4), Fred would have to sell his lifestyle (Reduce Wealth to 3) to do so, while Joe would check his savings - 4 Dice vs. 4 Dice of the Purchase - a good chance his Savings will be reduced to 3.

Neither could buy those Wired Refelxes 3 (Purchase Rating 5) they dream about.

So they take on a job for some 20k nuyen (Earnings Rating 4).
Fred now has Savings 4 as this Income was greater than his savings.
Joe would roll 5 dice (Income Rating 4 + half W1) vs. 4 dice (Saving 4) to check if the new money is worth an increase in savings. If he wins, his Savings will rise to 5 and he can finally buy those Wired Reflexes.


As you can see, the whole system is a lot more abstract and will have different dynamics than a money based system. It is not munchkin proof ... not at all ... and so I'd not recommend it for any group, but for plasma's group and purposes it might just be enough ... or even just right.

If you don't like it ... hey, I don't like it either biggrin.gif
I just think that it is a valid approach for tracking Wealth, Savings, Income and Purchases two simple Attribues and a few rolls now and then.
Brahm
QUOTE (Phobos @ Jul 15 2006, 02:44 PM)
Brahm :
I simply took the opposite way from yours - simpler, not more complicated.

That is rather debatable. Given that, among other things, I'm really talking about having only one Attribute. nyahnyah.gif

I think the confusing part there though is I've gone a couple of ways looking at it, just thinking out loud, trying some numbers offline, reading some input from others here, and refining my approach. To that end I'll eventually have to put it together in one cohert lump instead of spread across a couple of threads.

QUOTE
There being two major considerations, genral funds for keeping up lifestyle and making small purchases, and savings for major purchases, I tried to make those the focus of attention.


Where as I actively avoided both of those, for reasons I've given. Above here, in a post you might not have read yet, I talk about Lifestyle payments actually creating work and hassle for the GM. Although I didn't really see Lifestyle payments in yours, so I think I might be missing something there.

The savings part I talked about in the last thread where if you want something big that'll take some time to obtain that is a character goal. Something the character can let the GM know about to provide as fuel for the storyline of the game. Having it handled by a nuyen total or a savings stat is just, in my opinion, a waste of a good hook.
James McMurray
Hey Brahm, any chance you can make a post in response to something I say without an insult? wink.gif

The problem with treating something a character has to save up for as a character goal and plot hook is that every major purchase shouldn't require a plot hook to achieve. For example, if we assume that a character has the lowest wealth level possible, should a GM have to insert something into his story to account for every time that character wants to buy a tennis racket, when he could instead just let the character save up money?

A wealth system should, IMO, account for the ability to save up for an item without requiring GM intervention or raising your entire wealth level.
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 15 2006, 04:40 PM)
The problem with treating something a character has to save up for as a character goal and plot hook is that every major purchase shouldn't require a plot hook to achieve.

Why not?

QUOTE
For example, if we assume that a character has the lowest wealth level possible, should a GM have to insert something into his story to account for every time that character wants to buy a tennis racket, when he could instead just let the character save up money?


I mean a reason that isn't an unfounded bullshit one about a Tennis Racket. ohplease.gif

Of course if you want the character to start out dirt poor and to continue as a character with next to no luck (really low Edge) or shopping savy (Negotiations) then yes he's going to have to beg, borrow, or steal to scrape together a lot of his gear like an AR or good armour. But the hook doesn't have to be used for some intricate, involved storyline. They can just ask their fixer for equipment on the cuff to owe a favor if he needs it right away, and use that as a lead-in for a future run or event. Or ask when agreeing to a run for payment of gear in lieu of most or all of their cut for a job. They aren't going to be requiring a lot of cash (refreshing) anyway to live and pick up the smaller items like a baseball bat, a few rounds of ammo, or a *cough* tennis racket.

They could even ask another team member for castoff secondhand gear. Welcome to being poor. It isn't all that glamourous. In point of fact it sucks. nyahnyah.gif

QUOTE
A wealth system should, IMO, account for the ability to save up for an item without requiring GM intervention....


Saving up requires getting paid. Getting paid requires the so-called GM intervention of setting job prices and getting the character paid. In my experience however it tends to give a less personal feel, of the character being in the world. Instead it tends to lead to more of the PC showing up for cash then going home to order the gear from the catalogue.

QUOTE
.....or raising your entire wealth level.


Then WTH is saving up to increase a nuyen cash number doing? wobble.gif If you mean you don't want to change how your character is living Lifestyle-wise? Then don't, keep describing them as living in some crappy coffin motel dive, but with lots of squirreled away cash reserves. Nice colour. Or give them another couple alternate safe-house places instead of one nicer place to live, or a girlfriend/boyfriend that they keep set up in an apartment across town for recreational visiting.
Edward
There was actually the reverse of this argument on pattern spider and exalted forum. In exalted there is a resources background but it is supposed to represent having in income stream. And creates problems when somebody with resources 3 suddenly gets a windfall worth resources 5, he isnít going to get that often is he. I think you may like the suggested solution of temporary resources.

Translated into SR it works like this.

You have a wealth stat that represents an income stream from investments or doing odd jobs claming unemployment, describe it as you will nothing will affect it without being significant a plot device. Any item worth les than wealth squared *100 you can be assumed to be able to afford.

1=100nuyen
2=400nuyen
3=900nuyen
4=1600nuyen
5=2500nuyen

sometimes you get money you cant rely on coming regularly, such as income from runs. This you can ether keep as money to spend on expensive things worth the accounting time (indeed anything you cant get with your wealth) or invest to increase your wealth rating this would cost 100 times your purchasing limit. You could also cull investments dropping your wealth a point and getting most of the money back if you needed to raise capital for some reason.

The reason am making it so hard to have a really high purchasing limit is that most campaigns have money as a major motivation and I am trying to avoid having the runners get in a situation where they can live comfortably forever without taking jobs. Otherwise why risk your hoop for some corp slave called Johnson. While still allowing minor things not to be important.

Edward
Brahm
QUOTE (Edward @ Jul 16 2006, 02:32 AM)
The reason am making it so hard to have a really high purchasing limit is that most campaigns have money as a major motivation and I am trying to avoid having the runners get in a situation where they can live comfortably forever without taking jobs. Otherwise why risk your hoop for some corp slave called Johnson. While still allowing minor things not to be important.

I see money as a major motivation as the problem. Or at the least a symptom of the problem. What would you call writing a story where you had a plot that didn't match up with the characters? The words that that jump to my mind are illogical, ill-fated, and unengaging. Yet GMs have done and continue to do this all the time with RPGs. Then after the fact people try to come up with a reason for a character to be in the plot. So to try bridge the gap they fall back on something like amassing nuyen/gold/jewels that usually isn't the natural motivation for the character. If the player even had bothered to think about the motivations for the character.

Money as a motivation is nearly exclusively a crutch that is a poor substitute for character-plot cohesion.


Regarding Exalted, what ways exist in the original rules to increase the resources background of a character?
James McMurray
QUOTE
Instead it tends to lead to more of the PC showing up for cash then going home to order the gear from the catalogue.


Understandable. I don't see that as a problem f the system. Characters taht want to amass more money and buy better things will do it in a wealth system environment or with straight nuyen pay.

QUOTE
Then WTH is saving up to increase a nuyen cash number doing?  If you mean you don't want to change how your character is living Lifestyle-wise? Then don't, keep describing them as living in some crappy coffin motel dive, but with lots of squirreled away cash reserves. Nice colour. Or give them another couple alternate safe-house places instead of one nicer place to live, or a girlfriend/boyfriend that they keep set up in an apartment across town for recreational visiting.


No, I mean I don't think they should have to become the type that has money squirreled away in order to reliably buy something. Some people live hand-to-mouth and have cutbacks for a while if they want to buy something normally out of their range. Those characters might not want to have to work out a special deal to get their dodge scoot (or whatever else is just barely more costly then what they can buy. They'd rather eat ramen for a couple weeks and use the excess money to buy it. YMMV
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 16 2006, 03:25 PM)
No, I mean I don't think they should have to become the type that has money squirreled away in order to reliably buy something. Some people live hand-to-mouth and have cutbacks for a while if they want to buy something normally out of their range.

question.gif wobble.gif But you ARE talking about people squirreling away to buy stuff reliably, by this "eat ramen noodles" example.

Incidentally I don't really see any rules for voluntarily lowering your Lifestyle level. If you miss a payment on your Lifestyle you might not have to pay it, or you might have to pay it while living under a lower Lifestyle. So for your "ramen for a couple weeks example" that you keep dragging up doesn't appear to be supported as an entirely reliable option under RAW anyway.

Not that there is any real rules support for a notch lower Lifestyle, at least in the core book. Largely it seems to be more colour than anything, and maybe the GM can try give a reason for something or other happening because of it.
James McMurray
I'm talking about someone setting aside enough money to buy one thing. Increasing your wealth level means setting aside enough money to suddenly buy any number of things you couldn't afford.

"Eating Ramen" is the same as saying "cut back on expenses." I assumed it was a more global expression than it was. If it makes you feel any better, replace it with "fire normal rounds instead of Ex-Ex, or anything else that equates to not spending as much money as you normally spend.

QUOTE
Incidentally I don't really see any rules for voluntarily lowering your Lifestyle level.  . . . Not that there is any real rules support for a notch lower Lifestyle, at least in the core book.


I don't think they need a rule for characters saying "I move out of my apartment and get a slot in the coffin hotel. YMMV
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 16 2006, 05:08 PM)
I'm talking about someone setting aside enough money to buy one thing. Increasing your wealth level means setting aside enough money to suddenly buy any number of things you couldn't afford.

"Eating Ramen" is the same as saying "cut back on expenses." I assumed it was a more global expression than it was. If it makes you feel any better, replace it with "fire normal rounds instead of Ex-Ex, or anything else that equates to not spending as much money as you normally spend.

So? That is entirely built into my suggestion. You just don't see it because it seems you are still stuck on viewing purchases in terms of saving up to buy something instead of buying it on credit. Plus you seem to have issues with the less concrete "maybe I'll be able to buy that this month, maybe I won't". The funny part about it is that, because Shadowrunning isn't a regular income source, that is already happening. Your character just doesn't know if you are going to get work, if they will complete the work, or if they are going to get paid for the work.

The key here is what I'm talking about is more of lifestyle having it's own associated credit system. Which actually makes a lot more sense in the sixth world. For legal purchases if you start coming up with large purchases like a Eurowind, or even a more moderatedly priced vehicle, with financial background that says "lives in a cardboard box" that is going to tend to raise a red flag and bring the heat. But if you have the credit infrastructure to suggest that it makes sense for you to have it, i.e. an appropriate Lifestyle, then it'll blend in.

QUOTE
I don't think they need a rule for characters saying "I move out of my apartment and get a slot in the coffin hotel. YMMV


Generally How Things Work isn't "Well today I'm deciding to change around my lifestyle so tomorrow my base living expenses are going to immediately drop to a lot lower level." There is usually a fairly significant lag time. Remember that Lifestyle includes credit, banking account fees, rentals, morgages, and other longer term commitments. It actually doesn't seem reasonable to be able to immediately switch to a lower Lifestyle.
James McMurray
Seems perfectly reasonable to me, but as I've said before, different game styles. I don't care for the game style or massive changes involved in making Shadowrun a wealth based system, for reasons already mentioned. You do. It's all good.

I understand the idea of buying things on credit in your system, and I don't like it. IMO credit for SINless criminals should be negotiated on a case by case basis with Guido and Nunzio's House of Sharks. Otherwise you negotiate pay up front or save money by cutting expenses elsewhere. Again, that's just my preference.

QUOTE
Generally How Things Work isn't "Well today I'm deciding to change around my lifestyle so tomorrow my base living expenses are going to immediately drop to a lot lower level."


They are when you want them to be. It's pretty eeasy to call up the cable company and cut your account. The same with phone, electricity, or pretty much anything that's a monthly expense. If you're only looking at a temporary change some companies will let you suspend services for a month or two, or will let you defer payment until later (the die roll method in the core rules).

I lost my job in January and didn't get another until June. I know exactly how easy it is to drop expenses from a fairly good lifestyle to the bare minimum, including credit, banking account fees, rentals, mortgages, and other long term commitments. You can do most of it overnight.
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 16 2006, 07:32 PM)
Seems perfectly reasonable to me, but as I've said before, different game styles. I don't care for the game style or massive changes involved in making Shadowrun a wealth based system, for reasons already mentioned.

Then what are you doing posting here in this thread? spin.gif Ya, it is playstyle in the sense of actually attempting to make use of a fleshed out characters. For the story being told about the PCs. If you look through the Shadowrun boards you can see countless posts about GMs being real hardcases about fleshed out PCs that are functioning metahumans instead of a collection of stats. To the point of requiring, or encouraging via extra Build Points, lengthy background stories.

But in my experience not only is a large write-up of the background a liability, but the effort in the focus on the personality of the character is wasted because in large part the GM just goes off and tells a story they already had cooked up before they had a sniff about what PCs they'd have.

If you don't feel the need to address that, and you don't .

QUOTE
I understand the idea of buying things on credit in your system, and I don't like it.


What you are saying in your posts certainly suggests you don't fully understand it and the implications. Things you keep saying over, and over, and over, and over again. sleepy.gif

QUOTE
IMO credit for SINless criminals should be negotiated on a case by case basis with Guido and Nunzio's House of Sharks.


For the completely illegitamate that is pretty much what happens. But you still have to put it through a front to buy legal goods. But in the end it pretty much works out to the same thing. I just described it from a mostly [superficially] legally operating and purchasing POV.

QUOTE
Generally How Things Work isn't "Well today I'm deciding to change around my lifestyle so tomorrow my base living expenses are going to immediately drop to a lot lower level."


They are when you want them to be. It's pretty eeasy to call up the cable company and cut your account. The same with phone, electricity, or pretty much anything that's a monthly expense. If you're only looking at a temporary change some companies will let you suspend services for a month or two, or will let you defer payment until later (the die roll method in the core rules).

QUOTE
I lost my job in January and didn't get another until June. I know exactly how easy it is to drop expenses from a fairly good lifestyle to the bare minimum, including credit, banking account fees, rentals, mortgages, and other long term commitments. You can do most of it overnight.


Umm, unless you sold your house that sounds like effectively the SR skipping payments rules. You just could smooth it over because you had credit room to back it up, so you could roll payments over. If you did sell your house and managed to sell it with a possession date under a month I'd say that was either good luck or an uncommonly hot market in your area, and unless you rolled that morgage forward to a new house purchase or managed to get the buyer to assume it, quite possibly leading to a lower sale price, you are looking at eating the better part of 3 months of mortgage payments or more. From the Buying a Lifestyle section on page 262 you can see that such is not assumed.

Getting out of an rental appartment is a similar deal. Best case is you aren't in a longterm lease and you only have to give a full month's notice. Well I guess the Best Case is you live in your parent's basement and you tell them you just aren't paying and if they don't like it they can go get bent.....and take it out of your share in their will. wink.gif

Also did you pay off any credit debt that had been built up already? That is part of the lifestyle too.

All together that's why there is that 1 month owned when you fail the missed payment roll. Which is not that bad of a approximation, that it would cost nearly a month's worth to roll it down to have a move on down to the slums shift. That's pretty much the reasoning behind having an at least 2 week minimum layoff/firing notice for fulltime employees. To give people some room to roll back their spending before a total crash and burn that they won't be able to pay off.

Also you have to keep in mind that there are only 6 discrete levels covering a very wide range there is actually a lot. So something you might think was a lifestyle level change wouldn't nessasarily constitute a full step in SR.
Edward
QUOTE ( Brahm)

I see money as a major motivation as the problem. Or at the least a symptom of the problem. What would you call writing a story where you had a plot that didn't match up with the characters? The words that that jump to my mind are illogical, ill-fated, and unengaging. Yet GMs have done and continue to do this all the time with RPGs. Then after the fact people try to come up with a reason for a character to be in the plot. So to try bridge the gap they fall back on something like amassing nuyen/gold/jewels that usually isn't the natural motivation for the character. If the player even had bothered to think about the motivations for the character.

Money as a motivation is nearly exclusively a crutch that is a poor substitute for character-plot cohesion.


Regarding Exalted, what ways exist in the original rules to increase the resources background of a character?


first the easy bit. In exalted to increase your wealth I believe you need to role play the acquisition of additional money generating assets. If you come into a sufficient windfall of cash you can buy such an asset but there may need to be some looking around for one that is for sale and to your liking. The cost would be far more than the annual allowance you get for having resources

As to money being a poor motivation. In many other games this is true but shadow runners are professional criminals, shadow runs are how they put food on the table and pay for the gear that will allow them to survive in this very dangerous occupation. Many runners need constant maintenance of there bodies, expensive ammunition and want to maintain a high lifestyle. Unless they have an alternate sause of income this makes cash payment the most reasonable reason to put your life on the line.

Occasionally a runner will want to do something for his own ends, or as a favor to a friend but when this happens his team will need a reason to go along with it. Only in very tight nit groups would there be enough loyalty to risk life and limb without token payment.

This of cause assumes the campaign is playing shadow runners as apposed to gang members (all one gang) or regular employs of a government or corporate body, or members of a group with a political agenda. If they donít share major goals then they would not work together. Why risk your life for something you donít care about, unless you care enough about money to take the payment.

QUOTE ( Brahm)
So? That is entirely built into my suggestion. You just don't see it because it seems you are still stuck on viewing purchases in terms of saving up to buy something instead of buying it on credit.


what frager is going to give credit to a sinless runner that has every chance of being dead before he can pay you back. Nobody you want to owe money to thatís for shore

QUOTE
For legal purchases if you start coming up with large purchases like a Eurowind, or even a more moderatedly priced vehicle, with financial background that says "lives in a cardboard box" that is going to tend to raise a red flag and bring the heat.

but unless you have a sin you cant buy a car legally. If your using a fake sin it has a fake credit record and all they will check is if the money is available anyway, the car shop doesnít care where you got the money provided they have it now.

QUOTE

Generally How Things Work isn't "Well today I'm deciding to change around my lifestyle so tomorrow my base living expenses are going to immediately drop to a lot lower level." There is usually a fairly significant lag time. Remember that Lifestyle includes credit, banking account fees, rentals, morgages, and other longer term commitments. It actually doesn't seem reasonable to be able to immediately switch to a lower Lifestyle.


sinless donít get credit, sign rental agreements or have a mortgage. Nobody will make such a commitment with them because there is no way to enforce it. and bank fees are minimal anyway.


Theoretically credit should be available to sinners and people with fake sins but it is to easy to buy a fake sin rating 5 with an excellent credit rating and take out a personal lone for the purchase of a luxury car, sell the car ditch the sin and make a profit with no logical reason why you cant do this.


In real life I donít live on credit, I donít signe long term service contracts. I can drop my monthly expenses buy 50% without moving buy cutting off the ADSL, becoming stingy with my pre paid mobile phone, not getting beer, fast food or movies, using cheep spices instead of good curry paste and simmer sauces, not taking ekenatia every day. And at a moments notice I can reinstate all that within a day. This is not the same as the failure to pay lifestyle rules because doing that doesnít incur any cost for missing the payment. As a casual employ I have been fired without notice in the past and had to do this, it works within a day.

James McMurray
QUOTE
Then what are you doing posting here in this thread?


Discussing the topic. I may not want to use a wealth system, but that doesn't mean I don't have suggestions. My primary suggestion is allowing a means of saving up money for specific purchases. You don't like that idea, which is fine. There are others on this thread that may be interested.

Perhaps one could lower their resource level by X, or hold back X dice for a period of time. They could then use some fraction of X on a single purchase test. So for example, runner A wants to buy a sniper rifle, but his current wealth level makes that next to impossible. He cuts back his expenses, lowering his wealth level by 4 for a month. At the end of that month he makes a test for the rifle, gaining an extra 2 dice on it. A different ratio may be in order, I just tossed that one off the top of my head as I don't have the time to run any numbers.

QUOTE
Umm, unless you sold your house that sounds like effectively the SR skipping payments rules.


No, it's the "cut back on expenses to save money" method. Cutting off a phone and cable is a far cry from skipping a payment. What happens is that you cut off all unnecessary expenses: cell phone, cable, eating out, buying new gaming books, etc. Your house doesn't change, but your lifestyle drops dramatically.

QUOTE
That's pretty much the reasoning behind having an at least 2 week minimum layoff/firing notice for fulltime employees.


Not in Texas, and almost certainly not in Shadowrun. A lot of places do it, but it's a courtesy, not a requirement. My employer didn't. It was "welcome back from Christmas, goodbye."
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 17 2006, 08:04 AM)
QUOTE
Umm, unless you sold your house that sounds like effectively the SR skipping payments rules.


No, it's the "cut back on expenses to save money" method. Cutting off a phone and cable is a far cry from skipping a payment. What happens is that you cut off all unnecessary expenses: cell phone, cable, eating out, buying new gaming books, etc. Your house doesn't change, but your lifestyle drops dramatically.

Your lifestyle might have changed in your opinion, but I doubt that would constitute a Lifestyle change in SR. At least not at first. Skipping Payments is a rules mechanic label that you are taking quite too literally. The payment it is refering to skipping is the whole lump of money in, not individual payments of bills and stuff. So you keep the same broad Lifestyle catagory without any income directed to it. Keep in mind that it is a rough approximation so you can play B&E Criminal and not worry about playing Balance the Household Budget.

QUOTE
QUOTE
That's pretty much the reasoning behind having an at least 2 week minimum layoff/firing notice for fulltime employees.


Not in Texas, and almost certainly not in Shadowrun. A lot of places do it, but it's a courtesy, not a requirement. My employer didn't. It was "welcome back from Christmas, goodbye."

rotfl.gif Well that's what you get for living in a backwoods state that eschews pinko communist ideas like labour laws. At least here in Alberta the laws are on the books. Even if they largely get ignored a lot, that one still gets enforced. smile.gif

QUOTE
Discussing the topic. I may not want to use a wealth system, but that doesn't mean I don't have suggestions. My primary suggestion is allowing a means of saving up money for specific purchases. You don't like that idea, which is fine. There are others on this thread that may be interested.

I wouldn't mind so much you discussing it all with you so much if you weren't so damn unable to grasp the concepts. question.gif You've managed to drag yet another thread down into me re-explaining things to you that you seem just too thick to grasp. frown.gif No it doesn't seem to be just a matter of you not agreeing, it is a matter of you simply not understanding.

I'm gone.
James McMurray
QUOTE
Your lifestyle might have changed in your opinion, but I doubt that would constitute a Lifestyle change in SR.


It changed according to the lifestyle definitions given in the core rules.

If you're tired of re-explaining then why not just stop? I'm discussing a different brand of wealth system then what you are proposing. As such, you don't really need to reply to anything I post on this topic. I've already stated that:

1) I don't like having to increase your wealth level or jump through some roleplaying hoops to buy a single item.

2) I like the ability to "eat ramen" to save money. In other words, the ability to temporarily lower one's lifestyle.

Your system includes the two things I don't like, so I don't like your system. You are of course free to use whatever system you want to use, as is everybody else here. As such, please feel free to ignore my posts, as they are not directed at your system.
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 17 2006, 10:17 AM)
If you're tired of re-explaining then why not just stop?

I have now [edit: ok, I'll slip in one as an little example, but not cover everything in your post]. I was because you were continuing to misunderstand and therefore indirectly misrepresent what I had said. Along with saying generally stupid shit. Like this:

QUOTE (James in one post)
2) I like the ability to "eat ramen" to save money. In other words, the ability to temporarily lower one's lifestyle.


QUOTE (James a few posts before)
"Eating Ramen" is the same as saying "cut back on expenses." I assumed it was a more global expression than it was. If it makes you feel any better, replace it with "fire normal rounds instead of Ex-Ex, or anything else that equates to not spending as much money as you normally spend.


The later certainly is covered by my suggestion. The former isn't actually covered by RAW without risk of owing a lot more money. Possibly to some very nasty people. Now I if you'll excuse me I'll just move on a more productive conversation.... wobble.gif love.gif
James McMurray
I was trying to avoid bringing this up, as part of the "kinder, gentler" James" but for some reason you still think it's odd that people can't follow what you're saying.

Here's an idea, if you want people to easily understand what you're saying, don't make your ramblings disjointed, spread out, and incoherent.

QUOTE ("Brahm")
I think the confusing part there though is I've gone a couple of ways looking at it, just thinking out loud, trying some numbers offline, reading some input from others here, and refining my approach. To that end I'll eventually have to put it together in one cohert lump instead of spread across a couple of threads.


If you're going to insult people for not understanding you when you are disjointed, spread out, and incoherent, then you probably want to avoid telling everyone that your writings are disjointed, spread out, and incoherent.

Also, what the hell is a "discussion conversation?" More incoherent ramblings that others are supposed to understand? Edit: I see you stealth fixed the post. Good job covering up one of your maaaany errors. LOL
Brahm
@Edward Thanks for the info on Exalted. I had given some consideration to providing an alternate method for increasing Resources other than karma. Something like what is sorely missing from the SR4 BBB, improvment of a Contract's Loyalty, or even Connection, during play. Actually it is even worse in that there is no RAW way to improve a Contact or make a new Contact, even with karma. frown.gif

QUOTE
As to money being a poor motivation. In many other games this is true but shadow runners are professional criminals, shadow runs are how they put food on the table and pay for the gear that will allow them to survive in this very dangerous occupation.


See there you are already taking about not money, not even really gear, but survival. The motivation isn't money. It is survival. Although I'd argue that usually just surviving generally isn't living. nyahnyah.gif Maybe your SR game is heavy on the bleak tones, and just surviving is an accomplishment in itself. But even then if you aren't headed somewhere it is unlikely you'll get anywhere. A story that goes no where usually gets dull quickly. Run, buy weapons, run, buy ammo, run, buy widget, run, rinse, repeat, die.

QUOTE
Occasionally a runner will want to do something for his own ends, or as a favor to a friend but when this happens his team will need a reason to go along with it. Only in very tight nit groups would there be enough loyalty to risk life and limb without token payment.

I'd expect that a Loyalty 4 and up Contact to extend sizable markers for cash, goods, or favours. Even going as low as a Loyalty 2 Contact, treating you as a Regular customer, might extend a small amount of credit. If your team generally doesn't treat each other, superficially or truely, as at least a Loyaly 3 type of relationship I suggest you shouldn't be using the term Team.

Incidentally currently my PC is owed a big favour by another team member. Literally a run-on-Aztech...in-the-Yucatan sized favour. And he isn't even particularly close to that runner, it is pretty much a business deal. However he has also tacked on a sizable premium to the inherent risk of this credit. So it is going to be a doozy of a marker when it gets called in. cool.gif

QUOTE
If they donít share major goals then they would not work together. Why risk your life for something you donít care about, unless you care enough about money to take the payment.

Certainly, if the characters are designed incompatible! If the characters are such that there is no common meshing plot for the GM to match up with then we have a breakdown even further up the chain!
QUOTE
what frager is going to give credit to a sinless runner that has every chance of being dead before he can pay you back. Nobody you want to owe money to thatís for shore

Oh hell ya you don't want to be indebted to them! cyber.gif Yet everyday there are RL people that go to people that they don't want to owe money to. smile.gif A few of them even make it out the other side intact and all digits accounted for. Life is rough.
QUOTE
but unless you have a sin you cant buy a car legally. If your using a fake sin it has a fake credit record and all they will check is if the money is available anyway, the car shop doesnít care where you got the money provided they have it now. <snipped other parts dealing with Fake SINs, being SINless, and such>


The whole Fake SIN interaction with Lifestyle, and even purchasing items, has kind of been bothering me. I've just not figured out where to sit on it yet. If you read through the text you'll see that credit, banking services, and paying for all of it is split into both SINs and Lifestyles. SINs and Lifestyles are also inherently interrelated, but that relationship is poorly explained and without mechanics to handle it. frown.gif It is sort of in a similar state to what Contacts were prior to SR3. Ill defined and lacking solid resolution mechanics and details in the rules. Similar could be argued about Fake SINs, especially where they interact with real SINs and Lifestyles.

QUOTE
In real life I donít live on credit, I donít signe long term service contracts. I can drop my monthly expenses buy 50%...


Most increments in Lifestyle involve a 4-fold, not 2-fold, change. The one that is 2-fold, Middle to High, is then followed by a 10-fold change from High to the minimum for Luxury. Which suggests to me maybe the High Lifestyle cost should have been closer to 20K than 10K. But without there being actual mechanics behind the Lifestyle that is hard to argue definatively.

QUOTE
....without moving buy cutting off the ADSL, becoming stingy with my pre paid mobile phone, not getting beer, fast food or movies, using cheep spices instead of good curry paste and simmer sauces, not taking ekenatia every day. And at a moments notice I can reinstate all that within a day. This is not the same as the failure to pay lifestyle rules because doing that doesnít incur any cost for missing the payment. As a casual employ I have been fired without notice in the past and had to do this, it works within a day.

Sometimes when you miss a payment in SR4 you still have to pay. So results of missing a payment in SR4 always costs from a risk analysis point of view in a very real and fairly tangible way. Roughly speaking on average skipping 3 payments in a row means you'll end up paying about 1.2 Months of your current Lifestyle instead of 3 times. Which makes it one hell of a deal, expect that if you do fail the roll you'll often owe a Lifestyle worth of money to people that you don't want to owe money too. And you'll could end up spending some money and living in a lower Lifestyle, not that that matters much by the rules currently. frown.gif

EDIT: Incidentally that is probably the best reason for having High Lifestyle at 20K. Otherwise it is actually cheaper to skip payments at High than it is to always pay a Middle Lifestyle. lick.gif
Brahm
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 17 2006, 01:12 PM)
Edit: I see you stealth fixed the post. Good job covering up one of your maaaany errors. LOL

It was editted within a couple minutes of the original post. *shrug* Apologies for the confusion.

QUOTE
If you're going to insult people for not understanding you when you are disjointed, spread out, and incoherent, then you probably want to avoid telling everyone that your writings are disjointed, spread out, and incoherent.


I'm insulting you by pointing you just aren't making sense. Notice where I mentioned to someone else that yes things are a bit spread out, so hard to pick up on. I cut slack for that. With you it is the things you are saying, about things that have been directly addressed to you already at least once.

Now bugger off unless you are going to add understanding, as previously suggested, to that "kinder, gentler James".
James McMurray
Yet again you continue responding. I guess you lied when you said you were done? So now we have a stealth-editing, lying, rambling, incoherent, and disjointed poster. rotfl.gif

I'm not making sense in regards to your wealth system, but if you'll notice, I've already said that my comments are general ideas for what makes a good wealth system. The ones directed at your ideas have basically been "I don't like it because..."

Yes, your system handles saving money, but it doesn't do it in a way I like. I said that already.

Your system (at least what I can glean from the disjointed, spread out, and incoherent ramblings) does not match my ideas of what makes a good wealth system. I said that already as well. I've also said IMO and YMMV. Get over yourself.
Brahm
*an automated reminder* pumpkin.gif
James McMurray
So much for "I'm out," eh?

By the way if you type something in, it isn't automated.
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