Flipping through the main SR4 book, I noticed a number of character examples without any kind of initiative jacking, outside of the occasional drug. Even the Weapon Specialist, for example. Has anyone actually tried this? Can you survive?

Avoid combat

Or win the combat in one pass and you are fine

Huh. So their weapon specialist is pretty much doomed then, huh? What about Technomancers?

TMs are already pretty well boned at generation when it comes to combat. Better have a few nice drones hovering around with Machine Sprites in them. TMs and combat do not mix well.

oh how I wish that the one init pass could be the only init pass!

Not everyone is cut out for speed based combat. Sometimes a weapons specialist is better off hunkering down with a sniper rifle, savvy?

Well I suppose in theory you can make sure you have a mage friend with the inititive boosting spell.

Cover. Well, friends and cover.

In my games 3 of the pc's don't have init boosting, ones an adept with level 1 improved reflexes and ones a sammy with wired reflexes 2.

well, first off don't forget edge. edge can bump you up to 2 IPs if you really need it (or make you go first, so that you can kill everyone else before they act if you're good enough).

you don't strictly *need* multiple IPs... but then again, the US military doesn't *need* assault rifles for their infantry (they could kill people with knives, or clubs, or even their fists, for example) it just makes them a heck of a lot more effective.

now, if you're looking at large groups, multiple IPs isn't as big of a deal... but if you have a sammy who's job is to keep half a dozen security guards from being a problem, he needs all those actions to avoid being overwhelmed by numbers.

One initiative pass is feasible if your character's main function is not combat. But combat-oriented adepts, street samurai, and combat mages should all have extra initiative passes if they are to do their jobs properly. Two or three initiative passes let a character do two or three times as much damage.

It's possible to get along with just one IP, you still have Edge to gain a second one, in case of emergency.

Of course, having more IPs is a very powerful ability (and for that reason it costs quite a bit to get them).

Bye
Thanee

I think it largely depends on how the GM runs the game. If your GM is the type who tailors his campaign to the PCs, and all of the PCs have 1 IP, the GM will artificially make fights easier. But if the GM's world runs independent of the PCs, and he envisions that world as being deadly for anyone who's slow in combat, you might become overwhelmed without the extra IPs.

The biggest problem seems to be when one player has 1 and most have 2 - 4. As a GM you ultimately have to try and keep the goons with around 2 IPs, or huge numbers or they get too overwhelemed too fast.

I had a player up until recently who tried to play a 1 IP character. Then when the mage would go to 4 IP via magic, and the Sammy is always at 3, physad at 2, spirits always 2 then he gets his action and gets bored waiting through the rest of the passes.

It seems like that second pass is the most important for player boredom level, and combat drugs turned out to be a good method to get the extra pass for this character.

I have at times become quite concerned about the importance of multiple IPs. You do get a situation where any character without initiative enhancements is gimped, and considering the expense of initiative enhancers, folk take those as standard leaving little resources for anything else. I tend to find that having every NPC they face in combat wired up to the gills is a little unrealistic, but if you don't enhance the NPCs initiative somehow it becomes an absolute bloodbath.

I'm not sure what the best way around this is. One could limit what is possible in extra IPs (while at the same time reducing the cost of initiative enhancers), or discourage the team in general from all taking that enhancement while at the same time reducing how common it is in the rest of the world.

Of course, I expect a lot of people to say "you touch my WR over my cold dead body", but I just find them to be overpowered compared to other enhancements.

Well I am playing a Magician in my current campaign and I never got the chance to cast increased reflexes due to it being more important to spend my 1 init pass on another action. It didn't go to good. If I would have had 3 init passes things would have been better. You have to think about it this way. A weaker character can kill a stronger character just because they have 2 more init passes. If they are a gun bunny, that is 4 more attacks they get. OUCH! I don't care what you are firing, that is some serious damage. If they are a melee attacker with a combat axe or mono-filament whip that is two attacks and still some serious damage.

Not only that, but those extra init passes can be used for a full defense too. So if you find yourself being attacked by GROG the barbarian Troll, you can really help yourself out. Someone with only one init is at a huge tactical disadvantage.

I agree with ornot. There is way too much of an emphasis on multiple IPs in SR combat. I don't know if this is something that is intentional, or ended up happening. Just looking at the "sample characters", I would have to say it was not intentional. But the implications of the rules makes multiple IPs so important, whether it was intended ornot(sorry ornot, I couldn't resist).

hehe.. not a problem for me Eleazar!

One thing I was thinking that would downplay the importance of multiple IPs would be to restrict bonus IPs to reactionary activities, like dodging. Consequently the big advantage the wired Samurai has is that he can get out of the way of a lot more attacks than a normal person, rather than the ability to shoot every mofo in the room before they can blink. Just a thought. (and note that I would also recommend reducing the cost of initiative enhancements as this change would gimp them significantly from their current King of 'ware position.)

I agree, multiple IPs are huge when you get into combat. Our mage only had 1 and that last about one or two sessions before he realized how much he had to wait with no actions...

As a GM, I normally give most opponents at least a WR1 or just plan to use a point of edge to get that second pass. I will admit, not much combat has gotten further than 2 or 3 combat turns, so it has not been a huge issue.

Drugs is an option not often explored. But I suspect combat drugs will be very common among street gangs (those who can afford it), and possibly even for corporate security if forced to confront shadowrunners.

"Sure, this is bad for me but how often do Shadowrunners try to attack MY facility?"

And just to add this...from a GM perspective, because combat is resolved within a couple combat turns, just using Edge for an opponent is likely going to be all that is needed to increase IPs...even on non-combat oriented opponents. Normally, if I really have a planned encounter or one that should be a bit tougher, then I will at least give WR1 and then use Edge to get a 3rd IP.

Since everyone in my group has at least 2 IPs, that only seems reasonable, granted, they could increase their own through Edge as well, but that rarely happens due to the speed they can get through combat.

...I agree with Backgammon. Initiative boosting would be uncommon with the exception of a few specialised cases. I could see maybe a couple "HT Specialists" on a large security force with Wired 1, but for the most part, even unaugmented security would have the advantage as they know the "lay of the land", know where the chokepoints are, and have command of the Security systems. In short they should have the high ground.

While I am not totally enthused about what happened to riggers in the re-write, it does make them more of a reality in corp and security circles (not an overly large expense both nuyen & essence wise). A good spider or two can ruin a runner team's entire day (unless the runners overwhelm them with magic & spirits - that is another discussion for another day) all from a nice secure location. In a thread about security, it was brought up that living (metahuman) security is the weakest link and Mechanical security measures and drones would be much more cost effective. I tend to agree.

As to PCs, Many of my characters save for KK (even then I am considering in the latest [new] version of dropping her Improved Reflexes to rating 1), have no more than 2 IPs in the meat world. This also means the characters must have some sense of tactics or a good instinct to know when things could go bad and adjust their actions. Yeah it's all nice and fine to go in "guns a blazing" & kill everyone in sight before they can even look up. However in my campaigns that can easily snip important threads to clues the runners need. Dead men (at least in my world) rarely tell tales.

Problem with that is most groups of goons don't even have as much edge as they have members. Remember unless every opposition you throw after your players is prime runner material you're not really giving them individual edge.

If you give every goon individual edge then you're running them like prime runers and really that's not much different from giving them all cyber.

When I do street gangs, I use a combination of large numbers (After all it's a gang that's what they have going for them), and afew with combat drugs. When you lose 1 defence die for every incoming shot it doesn't take many to be a lethal combination. Consider 3 goond shooting at a single runner that 6th shot is -5 dice to dodge... Even if you start with a reaction 9 you're eventually taking some damage.

When it's corp sec, it's like Backgammon said, tactics, cover, suppresive fire.

Using Edge for goons to either get more passes, or even deadlier, go first in a round, is seriosuly deadly for PCs. PCs have to manage their Edge carefully. If every NPC blows all his Edge on this one combat, that's not really fair, especially if the PCs get into multiple combat before Edge refresh. Edge is A LOT more powerful than Combat Pool was in SR3, where I had no problem giving each goon combat pool. But if you Edge all your goons, especially in the Innitiative department, PCs are gonna bleed for sure.

..and they are going to feel a lot less special.

Well, speaking from experience, the PCs don't bleed because of it. Again, most of the time, I am using group edge, and I am normally looking at 1 or 2 points of edge...so, for one combat round, the uncybered goons get 2 IPs...if they make it to the next round, they are down to just 1IP.

My players have had fights where they start defensively and other times where they go all out...so it varies, as does the power of their opponents. Plus, the way I see it, that group of goons, seeing a well-organized crew, is going to want every advantage they can get...and when some of their team is dropping, "blowing" their point or two of Edge seems quite reasonable and likely of actions...the PCs on the other hand, know they may need to overcome several combat groups in a given run...and therefore should really pace their Edge.

Goons on the other hand...I mean, how often do they really expect to get into combat, let alone, in one night? That is what the edge is for, IMO...they are excited about the action and I spend the point at the start!

I have not gotten any complaints from the players...goons aren't acting more than they are nor are they as well equipped, so the players still feel special on most runs. But, when they meet equal or greater level threats, they certainly feel the difference in the first couple of passes...

Actually, for one round, one or two of the goons gain an additional IP. The rest is out of luck.

Whether 1IP is viable or not is really down to how the GM runs the game. Of course in order to keep the players at the right sort of level, the GM needs to control access. Therefore, increase the availability of WR and Synaptic Boosters by 1 at each level. There you have it - a game that starts off with lower average IPs.

Yeah, I definately agree with alot that has been said here, most of combatants in the game should only have 1 IP. OTOH, Sec guards I would easily imagine giving a popper of combat drugs, it costs about 1/100th of the cost of WR1 and would be just as effective. And it is all about tactics.

My rigger had a few jazz inhalers just for when combat started and he was caught out of a vehicle and didn't have drones near by.

There are other limiting factors the GM can use to deter players from maxing out their IPs besides high cost.

I'm not totally familiar with SR4 (i've been trying to catch up) but in previous versions of the the game there were social and psychological draw backs to being heavily cybered.

Also if the GM develops a game world where there are lots of uses for other cyberware the essence cost of high end WR can be prohibitive as well.

Well, as a GM, I've had problems where if I don't give the opponents multitple IPs, the players just skate right over them. So I give initiative bonuses to a lot of them, which in turn makes players want to ensure that they're as twinked as possible...it creates this kind of arms race of unrealistically well-optimized combatants. I mean, if you can afford that kind of gear, what are you doing robbing warehouses for a living? And what kind of security guard is getting wired reflexes 2 implanted as part of his work medical plan?

...we cannot afford an initiative boosting gap...!

I will still stand by my original post:


It all depends on what game you play.

If stealth and social skills are more your style and guns rarely come into play, One IP is fine.

If you games play out more like a John Wu script, then you are going to be seriously hurting if multiple IPs are common AND combat is common.


Now agree on 'wage slave' guards.

Edge, Home ground (quality or just general knowledge / planning) can offset multiple IPs on the attackers part.

Ambushes, covering fire, cover, all can provide single IP and fair shake of hurting (if not winning) a combat against a group of multiple IP attackers.

Agree it totally depends on the game. One of the issues I've seen is where all the PCs are built for combat - the hacker, the mage, the sammie (obviously). At that point, the group has the firepower of a whole squad of guys.

Actually, having your goons use full defense (even with one initiative pass) can be helpful. They can move to better cover (or withdraw) or even move to flank! For this to work, the goons really need to outnumber the PCs AND have a way to avoid stunball and grenade launchers. Generally, I try to give my goons lots of armor. Similar rules would probably apply to a PC: try to be as tough as possible because you won't throw off a ton of damage.

Well it is safe to assume that most runners will eventually gain some sort of init pass, currently I'm starting a campaign in which my street sam/assassin only has 1 pass. However that's because I wanted to save enough of my essence and nuyen to aquire some sweet bioware that will eventually boost me to 4 passes.

That's a good point made. Now, of course, there are runners who make big bangs...and sometimes, runners are even PAID to make big bangs...but in those cases, they are probably bigger bangs that typical mercs can make.

And i definately don't think multiple IP passes are BAD in any way...they are great...but the whole team doesn't need them. The sammy has them, and he can indeed help the rest of his slower teammates arrange around and set up their attack.

A whole team with them=serious buisness indeed.

And i will say in SR4 they are alot more balanced. They were pretty much gamebreaking at higher levels in SR1-2(hey, it wasnt uncommon to see the team' sam with wired 3 and a smartlink and call it a day...add in cybereyes when alpha rules came about). Well, SR3 they were more balanced than the older still editions...BUT the problem was melee, as was pointed out.

In the old days, melee vs. melee has the wired guy with the lower melee skill getting to hammer away and soften up slow guy with huge melee skill. SR3, that first guy didn't WANT multiple passes. He'd just get pasted that much faster. Thankfully that was fixed up.

That's one of the strange things about Shadowrun. The player characters almost always tear it up in a stand up fight. However, the one thing the book and the GM is constantly pressuring you to do is NOT fight! You have a party with a street samurai, troll bounty hunter, combat mage with four initiative passes and a hacker with two steel lynx drones . . . and they're being told "if you have to fire your gun, you've failed."

I say that, as a GM, if you want players to play up the smart and stealthy aspects of the game, then you have to point that out up front at character creation. You then have to be GM enough to let the stealthy approach work! It's no good telling everyone you want a game of smooth intrigue and then jumping them with wired up assassins or calling in the SWAT team.

You also have to be in tune with what your players want. A stealthy planning game, especially, requires players who want that kind of game. They may not have the aptitude, or patience, for complicated plans to avoid security. If you have a party like the one you described, you would be better off playing to their strengths, or having NPCs to fill in the gaps in their capabilities.

1 IP is fine so long as the enemy doesn't get anymore passes.
Sometimes its better off if the enemy never sees you comming.