Hey look, you CAN express your opinion without using inflammatory language. You don't have to call things retarded, or use the word fuck, to get your point across. All that does is reduce the chance that people will respond rationally, and increase the chance of a flame war. If you don't want a flame war, for god's sake don't act like you do.

As for punishing the player, again, let's put this in perspective. 5 points. That's a very small pile of points. You get a neat appearance. To some people that's not a punishment, that's a cool thing to have, and it's worth 5 points to them. It's not worth it to you. But you can't blame the system because you value cosmetics differently than others. You think being rare and exotic is worth 0, but that doesn't set the value. You need to realize that your assertion, that the system punishes people who play an Oni, is not an absolute fact. It's an opinion based on your own personal preferences. You have no authority to declare whether a cosmetic change is worth points, and you have no standing to criticize those who think that looking like an oni is something of value.

As for the assertion that the entire game is unabalanced: again, that's your opinion, not an absolute fact. Points costs are arbitrary. I am positive that your changes to the rules are, in the end, every bit as arbitrary as the original points costs. You simply prefer them more. Once again, you are attacking the developers for writing Shadowrun by Catalyst Game Labs, and not Shadowrun by Muspellsheimr. Which is a bit crazy, because they don't work for you, or with you, nor can they anticipate your preferences, nor should they. You seem to have very particular preferences, to such an extent that you make a big deal out of a 5 point optional race that doesn't really affect game balance in any significant way. You have got to be kidding me if you think there's such an RPG that could meet your exact preferences, if you're going to be this precise. You're holding the devs to an impossible standard, so you'll forgive me if I don't accept it as a valid criticism of the game.

Actually I would disagree with this, as the system itself values "striking skin pigmentation" as a negative quality.

Now you're right in that there surely are players that want their character to be "rare and exotic" as you put it, and would be willing to pay for that in points.


That doesn't change the fact that the system itself sees it as a negative quality, that should provide extra build points for saddling yourself with.

And while it may never be a consideration in some games, having increased "...chances of being noticed, recognized, or encountering prejudice." can be a big hinderance in others.


So which ever way it's argued, someone playing an Oni is out an effective 10 BP vs. an Ork with Striking Skin pigmentation.


Now I don't think it's something to really get wildly upset over, but the pricing for the various metatypes (base metatypes included) do come off as quite arbitrary.

Oni costs 25 and they get 3 body and 2 strength... Elf costs 30 and get 2 charisma and 1 agility. Yes, orcs get lower max values to few other attributes but seriously, how many have made an orc with maxed out charisma or logic? Let's not even bring trolls to the comparison, as then the numbers would be way off, right?

If it bothers so greatly that Oni costs 25 and orc only 20 and the difference is that terrible 10bp if you count the stats + qualities they get together, then how about not play an Oni. I've heard of some crazy people who buy an Audi even though VW is the same car but lot cheaper (or some even crazier go for Seat or Skoda to get even cheaper but still basically same) just because it's a freakin AUDI. If you go change the logo on the hood, it still doesn't make your VW an Audi, but appears to be for those who know little about cars. Just as you might pass as an Oni to some by taking orc + skin pigment, but you still aren't an Oni.

Style over substance, anyone?

Exactly. It's incredibly arbitrary. The entire points system is nothing but an arbitrary set of numbers. Onis cost 5 because the devs felt like making them terrible and also cost more points. You can disagree with their decision, but it's not a wrong decision. There is no such thing as a right or wrong decision in such an arbitrary system. The right value is the value that you like, the wrong value is the value that you don't like. And people here seem to be complaining that the devs did something that they don't like. You can explain all the reasons why you don't like it, you can have valid reasons not to like it, but that will never in a million years convert anyone's likes or dislikes into absolute rights and wrongs. I'd appreciate if the SR4 detractors could realize that, that their problems are ones of preference and not Absolute Truth that we have to agree with or we're stupid.

*Not talking specifically to The Mack in most of this post, just SR4 detractors in general.

Uh, no?
Why have a character generation system to begin with if you then deduct arbitrary amounts of BP for different selections?
Might as well roll for point costs or starting BP.

Anyone not playing the One True SR4A Way is wrong.

For only $5000, you get a spiffy set of colorful books, a 4 day weekend session in an exotic location, and a lifetime of fun playing SR4A the One True SR4A Way.

Cash or Credit only.

If you are familiar with the One True SR4A Way you know how to reach me.

I like it. You don't like it. You like it. I don't like it. It could this, It could be that. Is that right? Is this right? Is this wrong? Is that wrong?

This, That, you must choose one. You can only write one word. Choose the word. Is it this or that?

This or That, you will be wrong.

This or That, you will be right.

Lay some more of those mellow words on me, daddy-o. *snaps fingers*

-paws

...He gets 30 and 10 points' worth of changeling stuff.

Arbitrary, in the sense that I'm using it, means that it's entirely up to the devs' discretion, there are no hard and fast rules telling them what to do. Rolling dice isn't arbitrary, it's random. Arbitrary decisions can still be dictated by rational thought. Onis cost 5 points, in other words, because the devs thought that being rare, unique, different, and/or funny looking had a slight value. You can disagree with that decision, but you can't prove it to be wrong, because it is arbitrary. Until someone comes up with a mathematical system that explains the "right" number of points in every situation, I won't accept anyone telling me that something has the "wrong" points cost, as opposed a points cost they would prefer to see changed.

I have my own opinions about the game too, I think that certain options are undercosted, or overpowered, or whatever. But I recognize that this isn't a problem with Shadowrun, it's a problem with my own personal preferences being unique to me. Nobody could create a game that satisfied all of my own personal preferences unless they were actually writing it for me alone, with my input, so I won't object if this game doesn't. What SR4 detractors seem to have in common is that they have some very picky personal preferences, so to them, the game's flaws are many indeed. But this is a question of degree, not nature. It's still opinion, it's still relative, and any "fix" you create (or feel "forced" to create) is just as arbitrary as the original rules as written.

And luckily every game has a GM. So, as a player, regardless whether you feel right or wrong or think game developers are right or wrong, really doesn't matter when you are playing at the GMs table.

I'd be a more happy forum-goer if the SR4 detractors focused their right/wrong debates on their GMs. Now I'd be happy to read about how "your table" does one thing or another, changed a BP cost here or added a house rule there. But a line is crossed when anyone starts telling anyone else what's right or wrong. In fact, I'd care less if a game developer told me what was right or wrong in my game...

Anyone not playing the One True SR4A Way is a bad bad person.

Do not confuse the 1 Tru SR4 Weigh with the One True SR4A Way. It may seem to be as much, nay, even more fun then the One True Sr4A Way, but that is merely an Illusion, you must have fun the way I do it, the way I enjoy it the most, for my way is the best, nay my way is the only way that you can have fun, because I know all, feel all, and know best.

See previous posts for information on learning the One True SR4A Way and learn to have fun in the right and proper way.

The problem is, they think that needing house rules in the first place somehow makes the game bad. They want a game where no house rules are necessary, because it already satisfies their preferences 100%, right out of the shrink wrap. But instead of going on a quest for that mythical game, they keep playing this one, making our experience on this forum oh so wonderful with their positive, constructive comments.

I wonder if gamers are as particular with instruction manuals?

I mean, I've rarely put together any piece of furniture, kid's toy or model that didn't have at least one piece, instruction or diagram that wasn't a little vague. A few have just been outright wrong. And on at least one occasion, where everything was clear and correct, I preferred to assemble it a little differently, aka MyWay^TM.

When you think about it, that's all a rulebook and even setting are...instructions to assist a GM and players to have fun and play a game...

Oh really?

Blandness
Cost: 10 BP
This character blends into any crowd. He is average in height, weight, and appearance, and has a distinct lack of distinguishing physical characteristics or mannerisms.


Human-Looking
Cost: 5 BP
A metahuman character with the Human-Looking quality can “pass� for human in most circumstances.

Distinctive Style
Bonus: 5 to 35 BP
A character that takes this negative quality possesses at least one distinctive physical feature or unique mannerism (note that what qualifies as a Distinctive Style may vary from group to group; see the What is a Distinctive Style? Sidebar, p. 104). The quality may represent a unique look, a peculiar fashion sense, a trans- or non-metahuman modification, a unique speech pattern—anything that makes the character inconveniently attention-grabbing and memorable.

Notice a tendency here?
You are right that you will never please everyone with a certain point cost or whatever but rules should nonetheless be consistent.

As to making some species more or less rare by adjusting the point cost:
Do you really believe that whether or not a race is present in a certain group of shadowrunners does have any impact on, or is in any way related to, how rare or common they are in the game world?
The only thing you achieve by this is that a race you wanted to make rarer is less competent.

Actually, yes. If you want to make Oni, you gotta pick that race unless you want to stick out. Yes, they are different than other orks, but they look alike any other Oni. So if you want to have a colored and weird face without being distinct, you have to pick Oni instead of making a freak out of some other race. Hence, the race's points are quite balanced, aren't they? Perhaps Oni's have that 5BP as "Oni looking - quality. You pass as one of them and get all the prejudice they deserve." And not having a distinct style negative quality from having a weird skin counts for some points, too. So all in all, 25 sounds about right...

and...

That 5BP vs normal orc sure is going to make all those Onis totally incompetant and game breaking.



If the GM thinks it's just yet another orc with weird skin and such, then it's that GM's problem to not figure out the difference. I still think it's quite easy solution to this: If you don't like paying that extra 5bp for all that fluff, then don't? Play an orc and buy it all those negative qualities to make it look somewhat alike but if a real Oni catches you... have a docwagon ready.

A question to those who see this as such a big deal: Why is it such a big deal if some metatype is according to your opinion so way off balance? Did an Oni piss in your cheerios and now you want to pay back by playing one? For someone who would pick a metatype for RP reasons wouldn't go bitching about 5bp worth of payment to get to play just what one wants.

So, why not pay BP for hair colour?
I mean after all if you want to play a blonde you might as well pay 10 BP for it right?

Umm, not really? Unless you're pointing to how distinctive style is a flaw, but Oni effectively pay points for it?

Regardless, your point is not a rebuttal to mine. You're right that being consistent is a good thing. But it doesn't logically follow that inconsistency is always bad in all situations. There are too many variables in a game like Shadowrun to make a simple equivalency like this. In this case, the developers thought that the rarity of Oni should be represented by a points increase, even though that makes them pay points for a flaw. And if that's what they were going for, it works doesn't it? No way in hell are we going to see gaming tables overrun by Oni, now are we? This could very well be a "feature, not a flaw" thing. You might disagree with it, but that doesn't make it a mistake.



Yes, I believe it's related in some way. If you have a random team of runners, with no common background, it would be rare beyond belief for all of them to be Oni. And the fact that Oni pay points for no benefit means that this will indeed be rare. In the same vein, the vast expense of free spirits and AIs partly represents how rare they are, because they're not very good and cost a ton of points. And this too has its intended effect, because you're never going to get entire teams of these train wrecks without some kind of relevant story behind it.

The point is, if a race is supposed to be ultra rare, you'd expect not to find it as part of any given team. Statistics still apply, even when there's a sample size of one. By ensuring that they are not common at a given gaming table, the rules do ensure some degree of internal consistency with the fluff.

As for making them less competent, that's actually a good point. That's how the BP system works. If you want to be an Oni, or an AI, or a Free Spirit, or a Drake, you have to start out worse than anyone else. And part of that is because you pay points for being cool. If you can come up with some other way to buy coolness, you're welcome to use that, but BP is the system already in place. The great thing about SR4 is how they've created this modular, streamlined system that uses only one mechanic for each thing. Of course, sometimes you get things that don't quite fit. That's the price we pay for SR4's streamlined system. I'll take not quite fitting any day over SR3's rules-spread-across-four-books, different-mechanic-for-everything-for-no-reason craziness. Now, there's a good reason for AI's and Free Spirits to start of kinda sucky, because they have more potential for advancement than almost anyone and thus need to start lower for game balance. That doesn't apply to Oni, of course. But seriously, 5 points is less competent? You show me a build that is significantly worse after losing 5 points and I'll eat my hat.

I like to play cards with a 50 card deck. These 52 deck cards are horrible at being divided by 5 or 10 evenly for the people I play with. Whoever designed this 52 card deck sucks. Petition the card company and devs to make 50 card decks! I'm tired of tossing out those extra two cards!

Can someone just shut this guy up?

My arguments are as valid as anyone else's, though they are abstracted.

Or am I not allowed to argue because I have a different opinion?

You are. You're not. You're trolling.

Make coherent arguments and address points that have been brought up, or be quiet. You're not adding anything here.

His posts just take a little thought to understand, but are really good and sum up my thoughts of every thread in this vein on Dumpshock. (and many other gaming forums)

Guys, keep it civil. I don't see anything terribly out of line, here. If you don't like what a person is posting, ignore them, but nobody seems to be breaking any rules here so far.

I pointed out that your view of being unique as an advantage was apparently the opposite of what the authors of the qualities had in mind.


Er what variables?
Having red skin and being from Japan is good whereas having red skin and being from America is bad?
Being an outcast in your own society somehow is an advantage?
Ya that makes sense and doesn't seem to be random at all.


In fact it doesn't. If you want to make an Oni you simply make one. He'll have less points to distribute then an Orc though, for no reason I may add.


Yes would be extremely unrealistic. That's why you never see minorities networking or hanging out together. The average bowling team always consists of 3 whites, a black, an asian and an indian, half of which are female.


By that approach every npc in the game must be a shadow runner and there are like 20% mundanes.


Imo at least the Spirit is well worth the cost right out of 400BP chargen.


Coolness is about the worst thing you can put a point cost on because what is cool and what isn't is so dependant on ones personal opinion.
Prime examples are elves and vampires. Some people think they are really cool, others that they are extremely gay.


Thank you i already bought a copy, so no need for advertisements.


I said less competent, not crippled.
Deduct 5 BP from any build and it will be worse in some way then the build you started out with.

Just to back that up a little:



Emphasis mine.

The same sidebar also talks about why their are uncommon concentrations of metahumans vs. humans working the shadows compared to more normal walks of life.

My view was never that being unique is an advantage. I said that some players would value it, even though it's actually bad. It might make you stick out more, it might make you easier to find, but it also makes you more interesting and more cool. Value is not the same as advantage. Lots of things have value that confer no advantages, like toilet seats made of gold. The devs intended Oni to be like that -- worth a small number of points for being interesting and different, even though system wise that is not a good thing.



Again, being an Oni has value to some people, or to the devs at least. You get to look like a cool demon from Japanese legend. I don't know. Your point is, you disagree with this, and call it wrong. That's non sequitur. The only thing that follows from the fact that you don't think being an Oni has value is that you don't think being an Oni has value. It does not follow that this value is nonexistent.

As for the red skin, Oni have more than just red skin. Being a normal meta with weird skin makes you a SURGEd freak. Being an Oni makes you unusual, but you have a distinctive look that means people know you're part of a meta subtype, and not a mutant. It's a different set of traits, and therefore a different value.



My ass it doesn't! Almost everyone here is thinking, "Man, Oni suck so much, I'd have to be drunk to make one." And like maybe one person is like "I ignore BP and just focus on concept, so I might make an Oni." I think that very well accomplishes the objective of making them rare. I can't believe you're seriously contending that making something shitty has no effect on whether anyone wants to use it.



You're ignoring relevant parts of my post to prove your point, namely the part where I said it would be unrealistic to have a team of Oni with no back story. If they were friends already, and happened to meet up and form a team, then it would make sense. If they went to a bar that was the one place in Seattle where Oni were a common sight and met each other, that would make sense. If a J just called for four random runners, and they all just so happened to be Oni? That would be almost impossible.



The incidence of mages in runner teams is higher than their incidence in the population. The same might be true for Oni, too. But the percentage of Oni is much much much smaller than the percentage of mages. So even if there were more Oni in shadowrun teams than in the population, there would still be much fewer Oni than mages. And the rules are likely to accomplish that.



Ah hah! And now you've just conceded away your whole argument. It's based on your own opinion. Spirits are worth the points in your opinion. Where I see something with a huge premium on coolness and uniqueness, you see value. You dislike putting points on coolness, because you believe that it's too subjective. That's all your own preferences. You're not showing my why the game is wrong, you're showing me why you don't like it. And hey, if you could just step back and say "you're right, this isn't about the game being wrong, it's about me disagreeing with it personally," this argument would be over. You are entitled to your own opinion, I might even agree with you somewhat. All you have to do is recognize that your preferences are yours, they are not absolute truths, and they are not binding on other people. Other people, including the devs, can disagree. And this does not make them wrong, it just makes them people who value things differently than you.



And I'm saying that "less competent" is an overstatement. Worse in some way? Fine. Worse in some way that matters? Nope.

Basically, it all boils down to persona Style...
In my opinion, Shadowrun (like Cyberpunk) is Style over Substance...

And yes... 5 BP less does not hurt a character in any significant way that matters...

Huh?
I said spirits are worth those 250 points in my opinion which has nothing to do with coolness or whatever but with being able to teleport, materialize/possess and being almost immortal. You know the kind of things that actually have an in game effect.
If you think they are worth less then that's your opinion which you are entitled to but that they have unique abilities is undisputed.

And if you would take the time to read what the "sr4 detractors" as you so eloquently put it actually wrote you might start to notice that we're the ones that want personal preferences out of the rules.
You want people to pay more or less for something that you believe is cool/extraordinary/whatever and by doing that you force your opinion onto people and that is wrong.
We want people to pay only for something they actually and objectively get like farting bullets and somesuch.

Oh and let me answer your funny assertion that coolness is not subjective with two words: Boy bands.

Right. You think they are worth every point. I think that they're not because they start out with next to nothing in skills and attributes. I think they pay a large premium for being rare, unique, different, cool, you name it. This is a disagreement based on opinion, not hard fact. I defy you to quantify the BP system in a meaningful way -- it cannot be done because it is arbitrary, based on a developer's assessment of value, which doesn't necessarily line up with yours.



What am I forcing on who now? The devs wrote the rules. They're the ones using their own opinions to write them. I wouldn't call it forcing their opinions on them, you bought it voluntarily. If you're unhappy, you can use your own opinions, and change the rules. No game is perfect, and if you're going to sweat the small stuff, you're not going to need house rules. The way I handle it is I take everything in stride, and only make a house rule if it's extremely important to me.



Um, I didn't say that coolness is not subjective. I said that you're right, it's absolutely suggestive. You don't think that Onis are cool enough to cost 5 points. Evidently, others, including the devs, do think that. That's the basis of this argument. Not an objective measure, but someone's subjective assessment of coolness. You think that their coolness is worth 0, the devs think it's worth 5. You have no basis to contest that as objectively wrong, because it has an subjective, not objective basis. You can disagree about whether anything should be based on a subjective concept like that, but that too is a subjective argument. Some people, like me, don't care if the devs use subjective standards. The fact is, the game is too complicated for everything to be based on objective standards. You simply can't make an RPG that's "objective," it would require some insanely complicated math that would probably end up with a crappy game anyway. The fact is, the very question of the right way to make an RPG is open to debate, and not capable of objective determination.

To make myself absolutely clear: I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you're neither right nor wrong. Build Point costs are largely arbitrary, and the "right" value for them is entirely subjective. You're just as right as the devs are. All I want is for you to stop pretending that there's some sort of absolute truth out there when it comes to BP costs, and only you know how to find it.

Also, your "answer" does not make sense to me. It sort of sounds like an attempted insult, but honestly I just have no idea what you mean. Wait, scratch that. My eyes are a little bleary, I thought you wrote "boy hands." Now I get you, after reading the actual word. But it doesn't matter, you're absolutely right that coolness is subjective, and I never tried to contest that.

Not to mention the 150+ BP worth of unique positive qualities...

I think it is worth the 5 points to play an Oni...

*Shrugs*

Seriously, you guys are going in circles. For those who think Oni are overpriced, you're right. Awhile back I attempted to quantify the precise objective BP cost of each race, purely based on the varied bonuses and negatives a race would have. Orks came out to 45, Oni to 35.

Edit: Apparently I'm still linking to the old forum topic in my sig. It's outdated. I'm posting a current .doc file of the breakdown to my SR page so people can see the numbers breakdown.

Edit2: Link now points to the file in question. Yay.

And know we get to the biggest reason why rarenes is a factor in racial cost of metavariants, that being that no metavariant should be cheaper then their parent metatype.

I successfully have done so, for all metatypes/varients, & infected (I have simply not bothered with the other races yet, as it has not come up in my game - SI/FS are not allowed, yet, because I have not done the rules rewrite they desperately need). I have posted it on the forums on multiple occasions. Orks are 35 BP, Oni are 30.

Bullshit. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to force them to cost equal or greater amounts than their parent type, if their benefits are less &/or drawbacks are greater.

Not doing that causes the extremely silly situation of everyone plying the cheapest metavariant with the most inconsecutial negative qualities.
ie. why would you play orc, when oni is just better in any way, you get all the same bonuses with no real negatives.
So some metavariant would be significantly more common then their parent metatypes and thats just silly.

Failing of said negative qualities, not of the race in question.

Distinctive Style is not a minor negative - a significant positive modifier for anyone attempting to identify your character or track you based on description makes Oni easily worse than Orks, thus the reason they should have a lower cost.

As far as player characters are concerned, not at all. They are by definition outside the norm, & the usual labels of common, rare, unusual, etc. do not apply.

If by 'more common' you mean that players are more likely to select them for their characters, that's not really a point since PC groups generally fall well outside of all statistical norms for the setting. Beyond that, some metavariants are more common than their standard metatype among certain ethnic groups. From RC, we find that Oni should be more common than regular Orks among ethnic Japanese. Now if you want to take the next step and assign a rarity (and BP cost) for Japanese ethnicity...

How do they cost 30BP if they get distinctive style, shouldn't that make them even cheaper.


So your saying that it's perfectly logical for all shadowrunning orcs to be onis.

Because they cost 25 points base, plus they have an effective "distinctive style" like drawback (Striking Skin Pigmentation = 5 points) that do not get BPs for.

So an effective cost of 30 BPs all things considered.

I'll believe it when I see it. But I've got a hunch that all you've done is make the numbers more consistent. That doesn't make them objectively right, because there's no law out there that says consistent numbers are better than inconsistent. It's just the way you feel about it.



You're just proving my point. Absolutely no reason? The other side has no valid arguments? You have the fervor of a religious zealot, that is to say, your arguments are based on faith and opinion, not objective reason. There is no possible conclusion to this debate because there are no right or wrong answers in an arbitrary system like RPG mechanics. There are just answers you like and answers you don't, and that differs from person to person. Calling the answer you like "right" or "better" is meaningless, because it wouldn't be for someone who disagrees with you.

*has only read 1st page*

Real life isn't balanced. If it was it wouldn't be interesting.
The point is that although you may be less powerful than UberMcPowergamer over there you are still playing and possibly RPG-ing which is what its all about at the end of the day.

Really?

You don't think the developers have put in a significant amount of effort to try and make the system as consistent as possible? You don't think a vast majority of players are looking for consistency in the rules of the games they play?

Isn't that a major goal of a functioning system, to implement a high level of consistency?

Otherwise, what's the point?

Just have a random dice roll decide how many BPs individual options cost and save countless man hours working out the technicalities of the system.

What I think actually happened, is that a handful of 5~10 point mistakes were made (and occasionally some larger mistakes).

Not a very big deal all things considered, but definitely has nothing to do with some obscure directive of being purposefully inconsistent to demonstrate that the developers need answer to no one.

It's one goal. But people here are saying that it's the only goal. Other considerations might involve diversity, for instance. In the past, the vast majority of people have played elves and humans because they're not ugly like trogs. But now orks and trolls are comparatively less expensive, making more people want to play them. The points incentive balances out a fluff consideration, that people usually prefer not to play ugly characters (not to mention how those characters will be subject to significant in-game racism), and that makes the game more diverse. That's a policy decision you may or may not agree with, but that's the only basis to object to it -- opinion. If you'd rather have a game that focused only on being consistent and didn't take anything else into account, that's fine. But recognize that it's your preference, not some kind of absolute rule. I mean honestly, are you people really suggesting that there is a set of absolute rules to follow when designing chargen? If so, why do you know them, and the devs don't? The fact that they follow a different set of rules and yet they are professional game designers shows that there is more than one school of thought. Reasonable minds can differ. Please stop pretending like you have a direct line to god that gives you all the answers.

I mean honestly, this should be an easy argument for me to win. My only point is "you don't have a monopoly on some kind of absolute objective truth." Are you guys refusing to concede even that much? You are not willing to admit that your opinions are just opinions, and not objective fact with which nobody could disagree? Seriously?

Hey guys! I got a great idea!

House-rule that Oni get the Goring Horns positive quality!

PROBLEM SOLVED.

Racial costs have never being in any way consistant in the SR4, so why are you demanding it now.

And yet nobody has ever even wanted to play an Oni in my games, and people routinely play the metavariants with the highest BP cost, citing the following reasoning:

[Metavariant]s are totally bad ass! I'm going to play a [metavariant] [runner type]!

Thing is, those of us arguing the BP cost for Oni are arguing based on the rest of the system that's been presented to us by the devlopers.

We're not citing any absolute rule set, were citing the rule set the game is based on.




Of course not. And that's not what I'm saying even remotely.

It has nothing to do with our opinion, we're going by the rules as they have been laid out in every book in the SR4 system which are generally quite consistent internally - which is what gives threads like this life as the players/customers nitpick and discuss why there is the occasional, random, inconsistent decision.




I'm not demanding anything.

But to answer why we are discussing it, there was SR4 and now there is SR4A.

Many of the changes that make SR4A what it is, were born from customer feedback (a good deal from Dumpshock I imagine).

The devs are cool enough to interact with us here, follow some of the discussions and even give us feedback.

Hence a major facet of this forum's appeal is a connection to the developers of the game. That should answer your question "why" I think.

See, maybe you could give me some citations? I look at the build point system, especially racial costs, and I think "arbitrary." I don't see any real thread of consistency. In fact, the one consistent rule for metavariants is that they cost at least 5 points more than their parent race. So unless you were to rewrite all the metavariant build costs, making Oni cost less than orks would actually be inconsistent with the very limited consistency we already have.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm no longer talking about "good" or "bad." Why do fomori and gnomes get Arcane Arrester for 5 points? Why do Oni and Night Ones get nothing at all for 5 points? There are rational arguments why these costs should be adjusted. But it's not because they're "right" costs or "wrong" costs. It's just because people would prefer to see such an advantage coming at greater cost, because they subjectively believe that all racial costs should incorporate the costs of any edges/flaws the race come with just as if you were buying them from chargen. Obviously, the devs thought that this shouldn't be the case, and I can't really explain why. All I'm saying is that we should start discussing what we like and dislike and stop smacking each other in the face with Truth. If you just prefaced statements with "I dislike this" or "In my opinion, it's far too inconsistent," discussions would be a lot more civil. If people think that you respect their position, then they are willing to have a nice conversation with you. And nobody needs to argue for days and days until they feel like they "won." It's when you come out with an Argument of Absolute Truth that Only Retards Would Disagree With that you start fights. I know this is the internet, but that shouldn't be an excuse for being obnoxious.

And yet, the rules set presented states that Oni cost 5 points more than an Ork... seems pretty consistent to me...