You know, with alot of discussion going on about SR4 and how a loot of people seem to nerf alot of things in their games; i think i realize why i'm so outspoken about it. Not in a rude way; i mean, everyone's table is everyone's table, but in a practical way.

Well, besides the fact we play a more lean game that gives the players alot of chargen freedom(no hard Availability limit, we play by the gentleman's rule and get stuff that makes sense for our characters, whether it's availaiblity 20 or 5), lower number to hard-max an attribute(20 rather than 25, keeps the math nice and even), among other things. We've always played like this; and a balance of roleplaying, stealth, and good ol fashioned combat.

Now, i sort of get concerned with nerfing anything in the game without giving it a good playtest. As in, play a full session or two with the nerfs in play. (Now, others who utilize the nerfs may well do this.)

I'm not trying to attack anyone, by the way, here. Im hoping this discussion can stay civil.

One that sticks out in my mind is the FFBA debate. Some folks don't like that it runs at half encumberance. The players have too much armor. I mean, the Body 5 guy is going to take a -4 to the tests with this rule. Ok, sure, might make them think twice...but what about the opposition? I can easily see corp-sec guards running with FFBA. But the average corp-sec guy is probably what, body 4 tops? Maybe even 3? And his other stats are more than likely a sight lower than the PCs. It makes FFBA quite a boon to him. But...with the nerf...not so much. And when PCs are usually running with higher body totals-it's hurting THEM alot more than it hurts the PCs. Body 6 guy takes a -2 penalty with 14 armor. Body 4 Corp Sec guard is taking a -6(!). Which is alot harder on him. Utilize it as written, and Body 4 Corp-Sec guard now only takes -3, with the PC is even. It actually balances out MORE like that.(a -3 die difference rather than a -4.)

Not to mention, it's pretty much known now it's easier to fill the stun meter than it is the physical ones. Corp-sec with SMGs filled with gel or SnS rounds will be very effective here. Elemental damage is wonderful when dealing with armor, and stun batons and shock gloves give the PCs a chance to escape and fight another day.

Now, believe it or not, there are a couple of nerfs i do believe in. The bow nerf for one(changing it from STR+2 to STR/2 +2 or 3). This one, i don't forsee changing things too much. For one, every other muscle powered weapon uses STR/2 as a base. Two, it still allows a specialist to do sick damage; a Str. 17 maxed out troll can still shoot things for 11 or 12 P under this(12 or 13 with an explosive arrow). it's still strong as hell; and even the str. 3 guy is shooting for 4-5P(5-6P with exploding). It doesn't affect the low end as much as it does the high end; but this, to me, isn't bad at all. The high end still can get their arrows that are more powerful than a Panther Cannon, just not TWICE the power of a panther cannon. I of course would put it through a good play-test first, however.

Now, for the people who heavily utilize nerfs in their games-how do you prevent the Domino Effect? I mean, if something gets nerfed, I assume it counts for BOTH PCs and their opposition. The FFBA nerf off the top of my head, IMO, seems like it would end up harming the opposition alot more than the PCs, since the average mook is alot less than 400 BP; 400 BP opposition, IMO, is pretty hardcore opposition, especially if the number of opposition is equal to the PCs. They probably won't be running into this very often. I mean, look at Red Samurai; they are considered pretty damned elite, but they aren't terribly past the typical starting PC. And they don't get seen very often.

Like the Face. Now, im really not sure what the 'average opposing Face' is like. An Adept Face opponent(not on the PCs level, a bit lower but still good), could very well end up evening the ground being able to pump a few more dice into his skill. Utilize a Kinesics nerf, though, and they end up with less dice, regardless. Now, if the purpose is to shave dice pools from ALL aspects(PCs and Opposition), this can work; but leaving it the same can end up with the opposition getting outdone, BECAUSE of the nerf.

The Martial Arts DV thing comes into play, also. Now, i can see how this nerf can make a bit more sense sometimes. If a PC wants to blow a crapload of BPs into getting lots of MA DV, they are probably specializing in this. It's probably pretty rare for an opponent to have this kind of DV. I can understand wanting to leave it at a +2 DV limit; i mean, there are still things like bone lacing, hardliner gloves, and critical strike to help this.

To be honest, I assumed you COULDN'T stack DV more than twice. I didn't know you could stack different martial arts. But this doesn't strike me as a nerf-because it's a lot easier to swallow opposition that only has 10 BPs invested in a Martial Art than it is 35 BPs. 10 BPs invested in a martial art means you're damn good, you studied it, but it's not so out there. People that invest 30-35 positive quality points in a martial art are, like Jet Li, Jackie Chan and DMC's Dante rolled into one and are probably quite rare. To me, leaving it as a +2 DV maximum through martial arts won't cripple the opposition too much for that reason(especially if you want to put That Guy in there, the Big Elite Bodyguard, he's probably going to have other things going for him too to raise his DV.)

Hmm..come to think of it, the only nerf out of this list so far that leaves a bad taste in my mouth is the FFBA nerf, because again, to me it looks that it would hurt the opposition FAR worse than the PCs.

Ok, so i guess my main question is, when it comes to nerfing things in your games:

1. How do you determine if something needs a nerf? Just by looking at it or seeing it in action? How often does it have to 'act up?' Of course PCs can get lucky rolls in, as can opposition. Does something have to repeatedly get out of line?

2. How extensively do you playtest the nerf, and how do you determine if you decide to 'take it back?' Do you actually put it in a real session or do you run a 'playtest' session? What if the nerf ends up harming the opposition more?

3. And the main topic-how do you PREVENT the Nerf Domino Effect? It might be the wrong thing to call it, but sort of the effect of nerfing one area and a LOT of other things end up getting nerfed that didn't need it. as a result.

Again, i'm not attacking anyone here. I admit that I don't quite understand all of the nerfing(it really has never affected us...but maybe we've played together so long and don't try to break the game, and havn't had to deal with problem players), but i figure i'd try to understand how it comes about, and for those odd instances where nerfing something actually comes to mind(the bow, with me. Really, that's the only thing on my mind at the moment where i'd like to adjust.)

Well, to understand my stance on nerfing, I have to first say that in many cases, it's not removing something that is in the game, it's not putting something in that's not yet in the game. So, the way I see it, I nerf stuff to avoid the domino effect of everyone having to change to the latest gear (like with firepower ammo).

I am happy with my campaign/house rules. Things are fun to run (and to play, from what I gather), so it's a system that works. Now, if something new comes up, I think about how this may change my campaign - for better or worse. Or basically I ask myself: "what do I gain from adding something, what do I lose?"

Emotitoys are such a case. Social situations are a big part of my game, and dice pools are generally lower than what most people seem to consider the norm. So, if I add them, what happens?
1. A pretty much maxed (for the game) face type gets 50% more dice.
2. Everyone with a clue will be using the toys to avoid getting steamrolled in negotiations. Which means I have to add them to any NPC.
3. In the end, I roll more dice all the time, and the difference is still the same 1-6 dice between "face" and "Non Face".
4. I'd have (unless going the "assume it's a software working with cybereyes" route) lots of cute-cuddly toys sitting on people's shoulders.
So, what do I gain? Nothing at all. What do I lose? More work, more dice to roll, more bookkeeping.
Net result: The toys are detrimental to my enjoyment, and would change my game for the worse (unhappy GMs make for bad games).
Conclusion: Toys as they are there will not be placed in my game. However, if anyone wants the toys for their pure RP value, as a sort of "advisor", by all means, do it - should be fun to roleplay out, and it may even get some bonus in some situation (with kids, f.e.).

Now let's check FFBA. It's the most effective armor/encumbrance on the market, and compatible with just about every armor my runners wear. However, the campaign flavor is set in Miami and the Caribbean, and most people do not wear armor at all in everyday situations. On the other hand, the PCs are not using optimised weapons either, nor wear max armor.
So, what do I gain? Runners get better armor. NPCs do the same. Campaign flavor is changed. Combat takes longer, since people can take more shots. PCs and NPCs may change to more powerful weapons. There will be more stun damage anyway. And it runs counter to my assumption that every armor is usually form fitted anyway.
Result: FFBA adds nothing but more dice to roll to my game, if it even geets used, but has the possibility to change the flavor of my campaign in ways I do not want, and may start a new arm's race.
Conclusion: Make FFBA like armor clothing. People who want it for flavor get it, game world doesn't change en masse. to it since it's just more options, not more "Must have".

Bows: I don't consider bows as fitting my campaign style in any way other than "stuff a stupid Legolas-wanna-be gang member uses" flavor. I do not want to GM a game where bows are more common than this. It's a game breaker for me for purely fluff/style reasons, the stupid stats are just icing on the cake.
Result: Bows are banned. (Yes, I actually told a recent player "I hate bows, you'll not play a bow adept.").

So, generally, I don't playtest stuff, I just eyeball it, and usually implement it as a variant of an existing piece of gear rather than something that breaks the mold/existing rules. Anything that looks like it'll add to my workload as a GM without offering anything more than "more dice" gets "nerfed" right away. Anything that would make running the game less fun for me gets banned.

PS: I really hate the term "nerf".

I can follow you on your FFBA argument. It does usually hit the mooks harder than the PCs. But so what? In my group we came to a quick consensus that we didn't want to go over the top with stacking armor. (yea, cyberware armor might be an issue, but noone bothers getting that)
So what we did was keeping FFBA at half encumbrance, but we removed the stacking factor. And yea, some players still bought it. And some NPCs will also use it. But it isn't a must have item.

I am not personally for nerfing, but I am against DP inflation on the part of the devs. If every new books adds die to every test then that is worse than the normal power creep from more powerful gear. In fact it is wrong. I however see no issues with Troll bow and melee DV, as that is something trolls have always been good at, and is not broken in any way. FFBA is not too much, but does nullify APDS, which I don't exactly like but don't have a fix for yet.

Question for everyone: Does the Urban Explorer suit come in dark colors, or are they always in the "Oh God! My Eyes... THEY BLEED!" bright happy cheerful colors?

The reason I ask this is because the UE armor is the most efficient armor on the market with a 6/6 and a cheap price.

The Urban Explorer Suit reminded me too much of the outfit YT wears in Snow Crash. So I tacked on 200 yen and told my players that they could select 3 color patterns and change them at will from a PAN signal. Not true r-polymer, just some cheap knock off with limited options.

I don't think my group uses any house rules to nerf anything, we use them to make things more to our liking...
For example, we feel blocking or parrying a monowhip is just silly, you need to dodge those unless you don't need that arm or weapon anymore...
We've limited the number of AR actions to 1IP per round, with cold sim getting 2 IPs and hot getting 3, this is because we feel it makes no sense that someone with WR3 can hack faster than someone who is actually inside the system...
Now, you could consider this as we have nerfed the unarmed combat skills, and in a way, I suppose we did, but we didn't do it to make them weaker, just to make them more real...
Same with AR, now our hacker actually goes hot if it needs to be done in 10 seconds...

Most of our group used to play Dark Age of Camelot and we all have bad experiences with nerfing because something will always be on top and require nerfing, if you look at it that way...
Even though most of us have optimised characters, we like our style more than our substance, my face wouldn't be caught dead using a toy to negotiate... "But it's the cool GOTH one!!!" Nah, it just doesn't fit...
Our troll sammy doesn't wear FFBA because he doesn't want to look like a troll wraped in a condom (his words)...

If you're playing with people who want to just roll the most dice and don't care about how it looks, nerfing their characters will just upset them, and if you're playing with characters who will take style over substance, you generally don't need to nerf anything...

At least this has been my experience...

Interesting points here. Again, so far we havn't had to nerf/cut down/weaken anything yet, due to them not getting in the way of fun(the number one thing at the table). Bigger dice pools don't bother any of us, really. But i can understand why it might bother others. The Emoti-Toys, now...i havn't seen in action yet and by the sound? THIS is one i can't blame people for wanting to cut a bit. Having a teddy bear on someone's shoulder shouldn't necessarily make them as good as a Pornomancer.

But with the Monowhip, i do have a question; in SR3, barrier ratings were actually double vs. a monowhip. Don't melee weapons made of metal have a stronger barrier rating vs. them, at that point?

Of course, i admit i still get the rules screwy in my head. We havn't had monowhip vs. barrier come up yet-but i remember in the old game they were pretty crap against anything hardened. Thus using a sword to get one entangled WASN'T a bad option at the time.

Now an arm? Yeah, you wouldn't have the arm anymore.

And ''Troll in a Condom''...hehe, that's one way of cutting down any potential FFBA abuse rather than making it count as full encumberance should it come up. Just say it makes a character look like a condom.

Ah yeah, that's one nerf I might put in my game if it isn't there already.

Monowire=Good Versus Fleshy Bits, not so much otherwise

I had a player once try to explain that he could cut sashimi style slices out of the densiplast floor by whirling his monowhip between two fingers. That seemed kinda stupid.

that's the way it is in johnny mnemonic, but not in SR, no matter what edition . .
and the barrier-rating was doubled against ALL close-combat attacks in SR3 . . if the weapon itself wasn't coated in dikote, then the normal barrier-rating applied . .
we haven't nerfed anything, as far as i can tell . . we've only made things better that weren't usable in SR3 otherwise . . for example, cyber-limbs *g*
and if the UE armor only comes in eye-cancer . . well . . there ARE spray-cans and duct-tape that can be used to change that . .

re: form fitting body armour.
It may not weigh as much or impede your movement, but does it breath? I reckon there will be some circumstances where it is just plain uncomfortable to wear for long periods. If my players wore it all the time I'd impose fatigue mods from dehydration if the weather was at all warm.

Bows, I agree. Either make the strength 12 troll bow prohibitively expensive or change the way damage is determined.

Emotitoys: I've not really experienced them so I couldn't really comment.

The monowhip is a bit nasty, which is offset by the investment required in exotic skills, but I would be inclined to agree that it could be entangled by stuff with a higher barrier rating than it's AP. It's not a goddamned lightsabre, after all!

But but.. it's one molecule wide!

Oddly none of my players have done so much as buy a monowire garret. Meh... we'll see.

Urban Explorer only comes in Bruce Lee yellow.

Seriously though, I used to pornomance in second skin line back in SR3 (I didn't even know about FFBA), I'm so happy now that I can shift from opaque to transparent as I see fit. Really helps on seduction roles. As for urban explorer, just pick a color when you buy it (it is at least available in all the power ranger colors ).

As for some un-nerfing that has been required, Cyberlimbs: the availability for upgraded ones sucks! Sure you can now get it at your normal attributes without having to pay capacity, but due to availability restrictions orks and trolls still have issues at char gen. That is just stupid, as it already costs too much.

In fact, lots of gear has stupid availability at chargen. I let a player get Great Dragons, LAWs, and Surface to Air missiles at char gen and he wasted them all on one run. Course, taking out two Horizon helicopters was quite something.

Nor mine, although when we saw the monowire garrote in Arsenal there were comments along the lines of "eww.. nasty!"

Making it prone to getting entangled on combatants' swords would be entertaining though.

EDIT: I just noticed a post about the UE suit. One of my players made a part-time motorcycle courier and figured the UE jumpsuit was the closest to biking leathers, this character pre-dating Arsenal. I allowed him to get one treated with Ruthenium so he now displays scrolling adverts. Now Arsenal has come out he's stuck with it, although I retro-actively made him pay for the mod. As it's all the armour he's wearing it's not been too high to threaten him, and it does make him quite memorable.

Guys, monowhip vs. barriers is not a rules problem, it's a failure to read the rules problem If you look on p.158, you'll notice that monowhips have a power of 1 against barriers. That means that without massive net hits, they can only cut through average material. To get them to cut reinforced material, you'd need 5 net hits, or 15 dice, which is no slouch. Structural material, 8 net hits -- fuhgedaboudit

On FFBA: Yes, it breathes. Jackets have air conditioners and personality software! You think they don't have breathing armored fabric?

I'm ambivalent about it, though. On the one hand, I think things that only help the PCs avoid being killed are generally good. As the GM, it's by job to challenge the PCs without accidentally killing them. The only time they should die is when they deserve it; but when I throw in a random, skilled shotgun wielding security guard who turns out to be too much to handle, I'd rather the PCs get knocked out than killed. If FFBA helps that, that's a good thing.

On the other hand, I'm sympathetic to the idea that it makes everyone effectively need to wear full body clothing. No bare arms, no bare midriffs, no shorts, nothing cool of any sort really. The culture of runners that wear FFBA is basically the same culture that wears black combat boots, black jeans, a black t-shirt, and a black trenchcoat, with black shades. But then again, having FFBA isn't going to keep any of my characters from looking cool. If people want to dress like goons in exchange for more armor, let em... 6 armor is great, but it doesn't break the game. It doesn't transform vulnerable into invulnerable. So I say leave it alone. It's been a fixture of the game since Cannon Companion, if there was a time to get up in arms about it, it was like 5 years ago


On avoiding the nerf domino effect: I really think that the domino effect usually happens when you change the system. Like I saw one guy on Dumpshock who changed spells to make them weaker, so he had to change spirits to make them weaker, so he had to change guns because now guns were better than magic, etc... It never ends when you do that.

The other time it happens is when you try to achieve some kind of golden ratio of non-brokenness, which is another thing I see people do. If you just nerf, say, bows, then you're fine. But if you nerf everything that bugs you in the slightest way, it will be a domino effect. Like if you nerf APDS ammo because it's too good, then you might end up nerfing ExEX when you find out it's just as good. Then you'll nerf stick-n-shock when your players start using that instead. So they'll pick up sniper rifles, which are powerful regardless of ammo type, so you'll nerf those. All in pursuit of not letting anything be overpowered. But the problem is, but nerfing selective options, you're making things that weren't overpowered into the the optimum choices, which just starts the cycle over again.

I don't have my books on me. I'm at work. I never suggested that monowhips could cut through any material. I was suggesting that they shouldn't cut with impunity through opponents' weapons, not even from a rules POV, but simply from sheer cheesiness.

I see no reason why FFBA should necessarily be breathable, but even if it is you'll still be getting sticky and uncomfortable on a hot day in your armoured longjohns, which is all that I was suggesting, albeit in a slightly tongue in cheek manner.

Frankly I'm in favour of FFBA, especially on guards. Unlike everything else my players decide to loot, it has no resale value as IIRC it must be custom designed for any given individual.

I do admit i've had several ideas for non full body clothing. I mean, i don't need my runners to run around in a speedo with wrestling boots and a mask, but there IS something just slick about a guy that wears cargos, combat boots, a tank top, fighting gloves and suspenders. Called shots might come into play here; but at least shin guards and forearm guards help a BIT here. Part of me likes being somewhat realistic; but the other half indeed doesn't want to punish for style.

Adepts have an advantage, though. Mystic Armor. Well, cyber folks(Orthoskin, bone lacing). Then there are the crazies who stack bone lacing, mystic armor(hey, they can have plenty of leftover magic if they max it), AND Orthoskin. Mystic Armor has that nifty ability of stacking with everything. It's expensive, but indeed, they can walk around at that point dressed almost however they like.

Speaking of the UE jumpsuits...a little off topic, did anyone recall the fact they come with speakers? This means people that wear them can have their own theme songs.

Bruce Lee Yellow has a non-negotiable Kung Fu Fighting chip in there as it comes with.
Pink has Abba's 'Mamma Mia'.

..i havn't thought of the other colors. Yet.

I'm going to have to play a mage whose UE suit plays Europe's "The Final Countdown" ...

He can also ride a Horseman, or whatever is most like the Segway.

ah, come ON!

I don't know if my group really nerfs anything. We un-nerfed dual-wielding a little bit, maybe (if I was reading the BBB right, you don't even get smartlink on one of your guns?). But as for oppositiong, I've always tried to make it at least as powerful as the PCs. The point is usually to get away, not stand and fight (not that we don't enjoy a good firefight, we just like hit and run tactics). I think I'm going to suggest tonight that we nerf emotitoys, though. I like the toy aspect of them, and want to see it in the game world, but I don't want everyone at every meet having one.

as for bows, you don't take one because you want to be Legolas. You take one because you want to be Rambo.

Speak for yourself!

I'm not sure what the shared obsession with expanded foam projectiles [nerfs] has to do with SR, but whatever makes you happy


I'm more with Mr Fuchs - I don't take things away, I just don't allow them in the game.

I have a setting, and I generally stick to it..
..It may be non-standard SR, but it's a setting based on Akira/Bladerunner/RoboCop/Diamond Age/Altered Carbon/UltraViolet/Mindstar Rising/CoC/CP/etc
and has elements from a whole host of settings, genres, sourcebooks, books and movies.

It may be considered low power by some, but it gives me the leeway to have Characters who are better than the average person and still gives them room for development..
..Small tales and Epics, challenges and surprises.

I can see what fits into the settings and what doesn't - and there's not much that can't be found somewhere in my setting.

It may sounds harsh, but I'm rarely without Players when I run anything - So I must be doing something right


Any Player who enters knows what they're likely to get, and it's their choice to be there or not.

Well, when my group of friends think something needs nerfed (or empowered), we usually sit around and talk it out for awhile, then roll up a couple of tests (single situations, or combat between a couple of PCs or something). If it seems ok (or if we think it's good even before testing), we'll just use it that way in the next regular session. If it's not working right, we'll put it back to how it was.

I dunno, it seems to work out for us. We're always happy with the outcomes. And as for the domino effect, that's actually something that's considered in the initial discussion of the particular rule. if it effects something else as well, it's probably not gonna be changed.

Not that these are formal discussions or anything. More like sitting at a restaurant and talking about the game and something comes up.

To nerf or not to nerf...

Yeah, I'm pretty much in the same boat as Chibu. We'll talk about it a bit (whether at lunch, on my messageboard or while playing WoW) and if everyone thinks it will make the game better (which could mean easier to play, more realistic or about 100 different things), I'll get it in the session and run with it. If it works, we'll keep it. If not, we either tweak it or drop it.

90% of the time, a nerf is presented by me (the GM) based on stuff I read on DSF. I'd say about 90% of the things I suggest, at least 2 of my players give me a thumbs down and don't want to even try it...which means I just let it go. The other 10% of the time, its something that happens at the table one night, and then the next day I come on here and see if anyone had a similar problem. If not, then I will create a new topic to get other opinions.

I will say that 100% of the time, I'll make sure I am clear on DSF whether its a nerf we are actually playing with or something that I think we would use if something came up. That keeps me away from arguing too much, as if its not something I think I would actually implement at my table, its not really worth me debating it...

We're not talking about nerf toys, we're talking about the kind from Star Wars! You smelly nerf-herder

See, those are things i can totally agree with, with Chibu and deek.

I think one of my other 'nerf aversions' is that i can't help but thing some stuff gets beaten harshly with the proverbial bat before it even SEES play sometimes. Like, the way i look at it, something might look 'bad' on paper, but in practice-it works really well. And vice versa. I can't help but think some folks jump the gun a bit when it comes to weakening things in games(i rarely see this option utilized to make things stronger...though im sure it does happen once in awhile, it's just not debated as much.)

But yeah, if something doesn't work right, i think talking it over with the whole table, trying out something new, keeping it if it works, and ditching it if it doesn't.

>sob<

Some people are so mean to me !!




Still not sure what the obsession with half a meter long and well over a meter tall, grumpy, antlered herbivores, resembling yaks, who have long, dull horns protruding from the head and are raised on many planets for their milk and meat has to do with anything !!

Derail.

Nerf is making a nerf SAW. Seriously, it's a belt fed electrically powered doom machine. It's going to be freakin awesome.

WOW! I never thought of that. Now I can finally play the Mission Impossible theme while Infiltrating a Corp Facility. Awesomeness!

(On second thought, maybe not the best idea )

Sorry, no way - it's custom-made, and everything a grunt will see in his (short screen-) life is standard issue.

Mmmmmmm ... Meter tall, grumpy, antlered herbivores, resembling yaks, who have long, dull horns protruding from the head.

It probably depends on the facility and the professional rating of the guards. If someone was a professional guard I can easily see them personally investing in FFBA to wear in addition to their corp issued armour. I'd be inclined to give some to senior Lonestar officers too. They've been around the block, probably been shot at quite a bit, and found out at first or second hand how much it hurts to get hit. They've also had the time to save up enough to get it made.

Possible, but usually they would have to exchange it too often to be economically viable.

I don't know about you but FFBA isn't exactly the most expensive thing in the world and it does offer a great deal of protection. If their corps doesn't provide it I'm sure smart (read: senior) guards/LS are going to buy at least some of it for themselves.

And no matter how dark and gritty your world is it's still cheaper to buy a new set or armor than it is to interview, screen, matrix index, matriculate, and hire a new guard.

Life's cheap in the Sixth World, but it's not as cheap as rent.

Huh? I assume you're talking about them getting shot up, and the armour getting damaged...

I imagine they could get it repaired reasonably easily. I'd be surprised if a security corp didn't have an armourer on hand to repair the corp issued armour, who could be persuaded to do a cut price personal job. I don't want to go too far second guessing the financial system in 2071, but realistically the guards could claim repairs as expenses, much as they could claim health care if a wound got through. They might even get a tax rebate, as if the system is remotely similar to today, body armour would count as tax deductible...

If armour cannot be repaired, and corpsec are being shot on a nightly basis, and they are forced to bear the full burden of the cost, it might not be financially viable, but equally it makes it pretty hard to be financially viable for runners.

That's how I was thinking. I mean, while I might not give the rent-a-cop at the mall FFBA(unless that was his only armor), or the Guy at the Door checking the logbook might not have it, but anyone of at least a LITTLE rank, if it's not supplied, can drop, say, the 900 nuyen on a set that will probably last them awhile. While shadowruns do happen, i doubt a corp facility gets hit *every* night of the year.

And no matter how you turn it, it's more economically viable to prevent injuries than to treat it. FFBA could be the difference betwene knocked out and dead, or knocked out and standing. If someone has to keep replacing the set then at least he's still alive to do so - which is inherently more viable than being dead.

Even for a corp that skimps on medical, having to retrain a security guard with some rank is more expensive than to spring for FFBA.

And I believe that it will be the norm in SR for many clothes to be manufactured "tailor made" for customers, or at least customised for customers in the shop or online.

And if a facility is getting hit every night you better believe they'll either shut down and move (after awhile there really isn't anything worth stealing, and thus nothing worth selling) or at the very least, step up their security (Ares Alpha's and corpsec armor for everyone! And mages! Lots of mages)

Now... a mall cop might have it... if he's: The Legendary Mall Ninja

http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

You can't really repair armor (nanotech/magic aside, which costs more than bying a new one), just replace it.

The thing is, runners usually earn way more than grunts.
Even if FFBA needs to replaced once in a year, that's quite a sum for somebody barely managing to keep up a middle lifestyle.


That's why soldiers get the best protective gear issued, right? Just, they don't.


Just the 'customized' stuff isn't, or there would be no optional rules with price increase for it.

Wow slightly off-topic but wow thats funny, caused me to burst out laughing at customers over the phone.

Regarding nerfing something its basically just a group consensus if something seems overpowered we may nerf it. Never really had a problem with it however I am the only one at the moment in the game i'm running with Arsenal so can't say about the FFBA issue.

Dude, where can I find a job like that?

Hehehe.

Very funny, and not a little bit disturbing. See, this is why many folk think people really into guns are strange.

The Domino Effect might not be the term you want to associate nerfs with. Yes there is a thing about balance in a game setting that will almost be impossible to achieve, but then again why does it really apply to SR as a whole? SR is not an MMO, or a strategy game (where you can see game balancing issues really come into play) so why is it an issue? Everything in the game is always up to the GM in the end, or if you have a good group of players you can have group decisions.

The bigger problem besides dice creeping with FFBA, the social toys, and weapons like Troll bows is that it creates an escalation in the game which makes it harder to challenge the Shadowrunning team while at the same time more likely to kill them (unless you only let the opposition have them and thats no fun either.) What if as a GM you are giving a team low end scenarios where they are taking on street gangs and the shadowrunners are packing 24-34 armor? It's kind of like why even bother setting up the run if you know there is going to be no challenge and therefor no fun. As a GM it is hard to create a setting that is both challenging and fun, while at the same time you don't have to set up each run with a good chance that it will kill 50% of the team.

If I was to GM and I asked myself what could take a troll bow shot and still come on strong? The answer is if I sent something like that at my group it would probably kill most of the party, or I would have to just send mobs of guys at the party for every single encounter. That means constantly throwing dice and involving the party in long drawn out combat. As a GM I don't find that fun, and I doubt the people I would play with would find it fun either. When I look at a rule I try to look at if it is the fun or not. Would it make the game fun to have that item or character in the game? If not then disregard.

Precisely and any good shadowrunner and any well-made shadowrunner team should expect things to be no challenge. If your players are going to be playing professionals who stack all the odds on their end, then it should be no fun, not exciting and not a challenge, but sometimes things don't go your way and that's when all that extra "no fun" dice pools come in. As a GM I always tell my players that if they want to play professionals, "fun" is not on the books, you don't go looking for "fun", do it right and it is not any more challenging than SWAT against punks. Sometimes, just sometimes, shit happens, something goes wrong, then that's when it gets exciting, but you do not go looking for excitement.

Why does it affect SR as a whole? Because as much as each game is the province of the GM and his players, the forums also exerts influence. And the setting of SR as a whole, as much as you wish it not be so, is the domain of the people who write the books, the same people who write the rules that give you the dice pool inflations.

If you nerf things for a vague reason like "it will cause escalation," it never ends. That's what we're saying. If you just go on a theoretical concept like that, without playtesting it, there's any number of things that could "cause escalation," and once you nerf one you'll find yourself nerfing them all, and then you'll find yourself nerfing new ones all the time as whenever you nerf one kind of escalation, the players will find a new one you didn't expect. It's possible to limit it, but it's also possible to get yourself on a slippery slope that ends up with your game no better than if you left it alone in the first place.

Some games (like mine) are currently fine. Any addition to them, therefore, has to be judged before allowed in, since it may wreck the fun of the game.

And it doesn't really need a day-long playtest to see that something that just adds more dice to everyone, and makes combat last longer, is not fun for a group who doesn't want more dice to begin with, and doesn't exactly focus on combat either.

I'm not sure I agree with you here...
Our SR team has evolved from some people working together into quite professional team and it's a lot more fun than just playing a bunch of rabble. You see, our opposition is also professional, there were no punks guarding the Ares weapons research facility last run. The run took us about 5 hours real time, about an hour was legwork, getting the layout and security info on the place, checking up on the johnson that hired us, all that stuff. The actual run into the facility took less than an hour, the rest of the time was spent planning, replanning, creating contingency plans and the run went like a charm, not a single shot was fired, not a single person hurt. Me, playing the face with no combat skills at all, I didn't even join them into the facility, I waited in the car and I had a blast...
We didn't expect it to be no challenge, in fact, it was a challenge, with all the planning...
Yes, runs that go FUBAR can be fun, but I love it when a plan comes together, much more gratifying than being able to shoot your way out of trouble...
Different strokes for different people, I guess...

I want a game to be fun as a player and as a GM. Letting every character have their moment, making the run challenging, having a few twists and turns to keep the players on their toes, and creating seamless transitions from one form of scene to another. That to me is fun. In order to fit these concepts I find that having FFBA, and troll bows create a problem at least for me when trying to make the game fun for everyone. GMing is hard, and if there is something that makes the game more fun (by nerfing or boosting a certain something) then why not? In a game you don't go looking for fun, but you want to have fun. If the fun is finding the perfect plan then have at it.

Fine some people like pushing the "I win" button, and thats fine if you want or expect to play the game that way. All I was saying is that people like me, when looking at the situation from both sides there are some areas of the game that just need tweaking. There are very few things that our group has nerfed, but quite a few character concepts have been rejected. For instance we played around with the matrix, and since after a while we realized it just wasn't all that fun we decided to throw in an NPC character that just did all that mucky muck on the side so the team didn't have to deal with it.

I find that the group that I play with is the best table top group I have ever played with. We found a rough sort of balance with the characters we have, and many of the little house rules and nerfs we made were to keep the game fun. It was just my 2 cents, but hey you do what you want. What is fun for me is not fun for everyone.

Wow. What a superb bit of trolling. Though it does actually set up a potentially amusing low-power SR scenario, with the PCs being rentacops in a mall facing all kinds of threats from paedophiles to .50cal sawn-off-toting Humanis goons... Running corporate raids against rival malls, extracting high-flying managers from enemy corps... Might be a laugh.

Yes, and this is why you'd want that massive dice pool. I am not talking only about combat dice, but dice pools in general. When running the legwork, you want more dice to find out more. Getting the layout and security, you want more dice, to find out more and to make sure word doesn't leak that you are interested. Getting in, you want more dice... Planning, you should want more dice, but usually the GM would prefer you to "roleplay", so maybe there's your challenge, but realistically(in the sense that whatever happens in the game world is governed by the game mechanics) your dice should decide whether your plan was good or bad and you'd want more dice for that too. You don't necessarily require more dice, but you'd want more dice anyway. Your plan should come together when you have the necessary amount of hits/successes/etc; if not, well, maybe you should have bought more dice then. And when you don't have the requisite number of successes for a smooth run, then that's when your combat dice comes into play and hopefully you brought more dice than the NPC did.

What a genius idea! And people on the matrix would laugh at the PCs continually.