*sigh*
Going away for a while and then reading all the acrimony at once is an interesting experience. It gives me a perspective not available to one who stays in the argument day-to-day. Here’s what I see from that perspective. It’s a little long, sorry.
Somehow, for some people, SR’s arbitrary 200 BP character generation limit on what can be spent on Attributes has come to be perceived as a representation of reality, and what’s more, that only a few versions of how those build points can be spent are legitimate. It would seem that living breathing humanity comes in only a few standard formats, almost as if there existed ‘character classes’. The Shadows would appear in this narrow view to be populated by rational supermen, who have no flaws or weaknesses. In order to maintain this illusion, to keep us all thinking inside the same box, a straw man has been set up and then attacked. Let me address the various arguments and claims that have been directed at my attempt to use the rules as they are written to create a fun, interesting character to play.
I have been quoted (as in having words inside quote marks, meaning they are allegedly my words) as saying people are “lazy” for not figuring out how to use cyberlimbs. This is simply not true. I never said any such thing. It is clear some of you spend hours and hours working out these issues. And the discussions that come out of that work on boards such as this one can be very enlightening and helpful. What I did say, and the responses my comment and subsequent posts have received only strengthen my position, is that folks often do not go far enough in understanding how the rules can be used to make reasonable and viable characters. Instead of asking how something can be made to work, they seek to find how it can be seen to fail. Instead of looking at the role to played, they often concentrate on the rolls.
Instead, they find home fixes to make the game work the way they like. At home. In their own games. This is all fine.
What is not fine is calling people “cheat” or “abuser” or “munchkin” just because they think or see things differently. Some have taken offence where none was offered, and then replied with insults. This is puerile behaviour and I would expect to receive the same respect I afford others.
Let’s have a look at some of the actual claims about what is wrong with the character I proposed. In synopsis, I created a character who had been damaged physically, but had a keen mind and strong personality. As well, I said that the cyberlimb rules are not broken and unusable, because you can make a character who has 5’s or better in all Attributes and lots of Skills, thereby being an asset to almost any run. In retrospect, maybe I shouldn't have joined in with the number-crunching, but I did.
This character was labelled “degenerate” for two reasons. First, allegedly I put all the mental Attributes to 5 and left the physical ones at 1. There are 40 BP still available to go into physical attributes. A less strident but related version of this claim was that the remaining BP would have gone into REA, presumably because the cyberlimbs allow bumping the other Attributes. Why did no-one ask where I put those points, rather than assuming? (More on these points to come below)
Even if I had not spent those BP on some or all of the physical Attributes, why would such a being be “degenerate”? Such people exist in real life. Lots of people, and in increasing numbers, suffer from diseases that weaken the muscles but leave nerves, brain and spirit alone. These are the people for whom cyberlimbs and other implants would first be developed, only later to be adapted for use by others with a desire for power, rather than a need for freedom. Such a character is in fact one of the enduring archetypes of science fiction from the last century: “Waldo” by Robert Heinlein. Waldo’s name has even become part of the language, referring to machines built to aid feeble bodies. (See
http://www.enotes.com/waldo/)Second, the thought was expressed that creating a character with all Attributes at 5 or higher would make her super powerful and an aberration that subverts the balancing intent of the rules. How? Most players put great weight into one or two Attributes, thereby giving them a large dice pool for associated functions. Most other characters therefore would have at least one or two sets of actions that they did better than this character. She on the other hand would be a well rounded character who could adapt to and serve in many situations. None of the detractors have ever said how this would make her overshadow the other PCs, or how her numbers are unfair. What advantage does a PC with 40 – 42 points in Attributes distributed evenly have over another PC with the same number (arrived at magically, with implants, or both) distributed unevenly? Dumpshock is full of accounts of PCs with dicepools in their primary Skill in the 15-20 range. This character has none like that. Somebody else will be a better shot. Somebody else will negotiate a better contract. Somebody else will hack the electronic defences better. However, any team, with any particular skill set missing, will probably be able to fill it reasonably well with her. She even has a fair chance at doing some part of the run solo. Is that what is so scary – a balanced character? Funny how that word, balance, can be both a positive and a negative.
Yes, of course this character has weaknesses. That is exactly what makes her interesting to play. She’s lost, broke, nearly friendless, scared and vulnerable. Just the kind of person you should find in the Shadows. No matter how hard I have tried to say I am interested in the story of this person, of the reasoning and motivation behind her being where she is, detractors continue to focus on the numbers and the balance of Attributes to fit their interpretation of the rules, without ever once addressing the story issues I feel are most important. And yet I am the “munchkin”??
The primary weakness of this character that various detractors came up with was her inability to resist disease and toxins, or heal damage because her meat body has a BOD of 1. As the discussion suggested, this would be truly serious, and doom her to a short life.
A) So what? Used by a corp, abandoned by the same, she is out to finally live, before she dies. I’m happy with that. Why should some self-appointed arbiter of normalcy say this character should not be played? Who is he to determine what is right in the Shadows? Not in your campaign you say? OK.
B) Who says her BOD is 1? What about those 40 unspent BP? Putting 20 BP into each of BOD and REA creates an ‘average-physique’ character (for those who need normalcy) who has been stricken by a muscular-degenerative disease. The woman isn’t degenerate, her muscles are. The character isn’t degenerate, the closed-minded reaction to her, however, would try to have her so.
C) There are at least two ways to make the whole healing issue go away entirely: put a couple of Attribute points into the original BOD, or don’t limit yourself to a human character. I wanted her human because… well… that red hair and … umm. OK.
Such a character, born or stricken with a broken body, could just as easily and believably become a rigger, a hacker, or an astral warrior and probably more if we spent time looking for ways that broken people could become runners that work. Cyberlimbs are just one of many options available.
The BP system is designed to create characters that we want to play. If the game were set up to allow only those PCs whose natural stats were above a certain level, then the numbers would have been limited so. (In fact, they are, come to think of it. The number is 1.) The 200 BP limit is an arbitrary limit on the amount that can be spent on character creation with the purpose of insuring starting characters are not too powerful. The same rules also allow spending BP on either Magic or implants of various kinds to go well beyond that limit. The balance so many detractors claim they seek is built in. Make one aspect very strong, another suffers. What one player likes to play is different from what another one likes. This flexibility and creativity is a legitimate right and a joy of the SR system.
Thank you, toturi, for being someone who sees.