So, how many GM’s allows for stolen/used weapons and gear at beginning of play?

Personally I see no problem with it as it comes with certain problems:

Item used in a crime under investigation
Now, what could this apply to? Mostly weapons and vehicles but I’d think that identified hardware such as a commlink (if it is identified through some hardware check).

Item Stolen
This could include EVERYTHING – And why shouldn’t a runner have some (or a lot) stolen goods? The Cybered to the gills ex-mil streetsam might have gone AWOL and taken the hardware with him. Riggers stealing vehicles, you jest good sir, they would never…Oh, you would. Software? Well, hacked software could be classified as “stolen” and could probably be identified when it is used, too bad for the hacker if someone sends a signal to his programs to shut down.

Item used
This can also be applied for everything – how many runners have spanking new equipment? Poorly taken care of guns? Glitchy cyberware? Old commlink? The GM can enforce a multitude of small glitches in play whenever they feel like if the character have programs that are prone to failure, package loss for the hacker giving them a temporary -1 Matrix initiative.

Item used could easily be applied to every vehicle a character has, or drones, especially stolen vehicles should have this unless they are stolen from a new car dealer.

Yes – in the end it’s about saving money, but it has it’s drawbacks.

In case of vehicles (especially mundane cars and motorcycles) I would allow it. They may have accumulated some stress and might fail to start in an appropriate situation, but for the purpose of getting from A to B they are sufficient.
However, I would not allow it for heavily costomized (unless strictly cosmetical).

Used is ok, as long as there is a disadvantage to balance the lower cost (like with cyber-/bioware since Augmentation, where used items have x1.2 Essense cost).

Otherwise, Resources are not necessarily money you had and spent, but the value of the stuff you have, when the game starts.

It doesn't matter, whether a gun was stolen or acquired through a fixer. As long as it works the same way, it costs the same Resources.

Bye
Thanee

Well, for used items I would give the item a Gremlin quality equal to the percentage reduction of the item (per 10 percent).

20% would give a Rating 2 Gremlin quality. This would mean that the weapon actually have some quality flaws due to heavy use or the character hasn't been taking care of the equipent in question.

In the case of heavily customized vehicles and weapons then I would only allow the base cost of the gun/vehicle to receive a price reduction. Modifications are added later on.

Armors would loose 1 point of Ballistic or Impact per 10% reduction chosen by the player, the armor would also look more worn and might be a bit obvious.

All the gear the PC started with at the beginning of the game was stolen. It wasn't bought in a store with legally earned cash.

If the PC wants more gear, they can take a Negative quality or two to get extra gear.

If the PC wants a story hook, they can take a Negative Quality like Hunted or Enemy, with the explanation being they stole soemthing from the party.

I like this idea a lot, but I think it would be more fun if the players didn't really know how bad the gremlins would be when they bought used vehicles/equipment.

I wouldn't allow it on heavily modified vehicles if those mods were chosen by the player.

I was about to post something long and drawn out, but this sums it up neatly.

At chargen, I have characters buy everything at straight book price. No modifications.

That's how I view it. The only reason I'd apply the discounts is if I wanted them to have a bit more gear starting out than usual without having to mess with build point totals too much. Starting resources is simply a game balance conceit used to put players on roughly even footing at the beginning of play. How they acquired stuff doesn't matter yet.

What do you mean my -20% stolen vehicle gives me Gremlins 4 and Unlucky while I'm driving it!?!

I would have random glitches.

A gun jams and the character needs to use a complex action to clear the chamber.
The gearbox gets stuck in reverse when the character makes a 180 turn
One of the hackers program "twitches" for a combat turn and is effectively zero.
The clip falls out of the gun for no apparent reason
A random sprite makes his home for a day in one team members commlink

Exactly. As a player one should be aware of these things since one has no idea about the status of the vehicle unless you take it to an autoshop before driving it.

I might let someone get a discount for bulk.
Like, 20 mid/low end comlinks at 50% off. It's easy as shit to steal coms, so a bulk thing should be way closer to the 10% of total price a fence pays for stolen goods.

If someone wants a Used, Stolen, Under Criminal Investigation Vehicle [total -60% price] I would allow it.

Why? They would be able to get access to vehicles you don't normally see - IF it fits the character.

Smuggler with a light LAV
AI with a host of drones
A ganger with a tricked out bike
A runner with his "old" trusty signature gun (prone to failure)

If they choose to have no SIN they would get a 20% discount on all items and they would be counted as Stolen (No SIN no legal purchases).

They can argue that they bought it with an earlier SIN but in that case it counts as stolen NOW since they lack the SIN in question.

Sure that would let them afford these objects, but the Availability of most air vehicles still places them firmly beyond the realm of chargen (barring possibly a Restricted Gear quality).


This is how I run it, but with the word "concept" instead of "conceit" (although I figure that's what he meant).

Unless the fact that its hot, used, or has a criminal history directly affects how well it works, I wouldn't allow any price discount. Characters are limited to 250K¥ worth of "retail cost" goods for a reason, and it doesn't matter how they aquired them. If they got them as hand me downs from cousin Jimmy who stole them from the military surplus lot, they still cost full retail at character creation. They could take some negative qualities (like, say a military detective / hardware recovery agent as an enemy) to cover the background of the stuff they own.

330,000 . 50 BP for 250,000 , 10 BP for Born Rich, another 10 BP for another 50,000 , and then 30 BP of In Debt for an extra 30,000 . A net BP cost of 40 BP.

OK, fair enough. I suppose you could use the "in debt" flaw to simulate maintenance / repair expenses on used gear or some such, plus the chance of "recovery agents" taking stolen gear back if you wanted.

The Cascade Skraacha is Availability 12

If they buy it used they have availability 16

Then you add Restricted Gear Quality

There is something kinda eerie about walking around using somebody's old bioware...

Player - "All of my cyber/bio is Alpha-grade, but secondhand."
GM - "So.... You mean it's all standard grade..?"
Player - "No. It's secondhand Alpha-grade."
GM - ".. Ok."

With 330,000 of gear I'd like to see them try and take back 30,000 of it...

If they can't take it back, then "in debt" isn't a negative quality.

Of course it is. The collecters show up at inopportune times, and they have to make you keep buying new ammo. That's annoying.

Well, the 1.2x essence cost is factored in after the .8x, which ends up being .96x essence. That's still technically better than standard for the exact same price.

Also, used cyber fits a lot of char concepts. Personally, I like the idea of a lot of grunt level cyber for ex-military themed chars having been salvaged from the bodies of soldiers who died or were wounded in combat. A whole, "you get the gear we have," kind of aesthetic.

Multiplication is commutative. It doesn't matter which is applied first.

(Correct me if I'm wrong and Shadowrun uses something similar to "D&D math".)

You are right.

1 x 1.2 x .8 = .96 AND 1 x .8 x 1.2 = .96 - doesn't matter in what order you multiply.

Bye
Thanee

It's the art school nerd in me talking-- "conceit" has been sort of hijacked over the years and is sometimes used synonymously with "device" these days, at least in artsy circles. Strictly speaking, a literary conceit usually has to do with metaphors, but a lot of the time the term would get informally trotted out whenever we were talking about somewhat arbitrary devices or conventions that happen to be present in a work. Usually they were of the sort that relied on the audience's indulgence/suspension of disbelief. For example, talking animals that the audience can understand but the humans in the play cannot are sometimes referred to as a sort of conceit, although god knows my professors would have required me to be more specific when writing a paper. I guess the term just seemed to fit naturally to me in this case; after all, a table top rpg isn't likely to get very far if people are unwilling to accept a few arbitrary rules here and there.

The entire point of chargen is that everyone comes out roughly equivalent. This includes equipment. So no, those mods do not apply.

The point is the character has it, it doesn't matter if it's hot, or whatever. (and in fact, for the vast majority of gear... R without a license or F... doesn't make much difference... it's still contraband).


A lot of those modifiers only matter if you're trying to sell it after play starts... which is simply an end run around the starting cash rules. (no I can't set 10BP aside and have 50k in the bank at the start of play). So no, I'm not a big fan of this is hot/stolen/etc. Even if it were... I assume your stolen westwind has been scrubbed (had tags removed, someone's changed the registration etc...).




Emy et alias:
Actually in the case of cyber/bio... they SHOULD have done it that way but they didn't. The way SR4 rules work is you add all the cyber bio mods together, then multiply the final result. (EG: alpha + biocompatibility + used... -20 -10 +20... final -10%).

This also means half-cost used alpha is not better than normal basic grade cyber... as it's just +-20%. So no you don't save a few % essence for the exact same cost.

I initially argued it should be multipflicative, pointed at augmentation... then realized in the reprint they changed all the numbers! Still wondering when the hell they'll publish the errata for that. (in any case, if you look at cyberware suites examples in the new printings it's obvious they add the mods, then multiply, not multiply through).

Of course if you get into the issue of getting a discount for having stolen goods at CG, you also get into the issue of getting a discount/free gear for having a relevant skill. For example, a hacker with a good software skill could easily claim she wrote all her own programs, and thus should start with everything at R6 for free without it degrading or being traceable.

The techhead should get a discount for being able to work on their own drones, and the animal trainer shouldn't have to pay for training at all.

Now while I like the idea of this to some extent, it quickly grows unbalanced as people get several thousand nuyen worth of stuff for free, or several k worth of discounts. This quickly makes characters unequal at CG as is intended.

Actually Karoline... the play does support that somewhat. A gearhead can start play w/ modifications from arsenal but most people forget the labor. (it's like going to the mechanic w/ your car... parts cost X... labor costs Y more). Problem is most GM's don't realize the cost of a mod is only the parts.



Good example here... mage starts play with a lots of raw reagants and the tools to refine them.

Refining reagants doubles their value. Turning the refined into ritual materials then doubles them again. However, this can take a lot of time... especially if the mage needs to summon/bind/ritual target something NOW not in a day or two.

cite?

Notice he said SHOULD not IS, so there isn't a site. I agree, it is fairly stupid to do it they way they do it.

This is what I wanted cited.

Oh, I thought that is what he was saying is how it should work, not how it actually does.

I can cite fairly easily where it says that isn't how it works.



Seems fairly straitforward. For some reason the Devs even sat there and looked at the absurdity of second hand alpha ware and said 'sure, why not?'.

Lost erratta? I bet there's some reward for finding that in Big D's will..

Now I point you at 48 and the cyberware suites.

Again they list it as a 0.9 multiplier however in my second printing they've changed the numbers in the chart.
(they also changed other things from the original).

Jumping straight to the Zeiss SenseSation Line... (since it has normal, alpha, & beta versions of the same kit though it's the same for all of them). It has Rating 3 cyereyes, rating 2 cyberears, simrig, and a rating 3 radar.

Package costs, Base cost ala carte == 1.5
Standard: 1.35 /(-10%) == 1.5
Alpha: 1.05 / (-20%-10%) == 1.5
Beta: 0.90 / (-30%-10%) == 1.5

In the first printing: The same values are 1.35, 1.08, and .95 (which are equivalent to 1.5 * grade * 90%). Before dumpshock crashed and we lost the archives... devs posted that this was incorrect and was corrected in the second printing.


Like I said, I don't agree with this (as I believe it makes more sense in a balanced system for increasing marginal costs... IE: delta + adapsin + biocompatibility == 30% original essence cost now... I believe they should have been multiplied through rather than added as it makes it harder to decrease essence to zero... and when you add them, new tech theoretically can reach a point where things cost 0 essence (or even return it). On the other hand, multiplied commutative percentile reduction systems are asymptotic to 0, they can come close but never reach it.

However from a standpoint of only arguing RAW/RAI. The devs don't intend for them to be multiplied but added... don't ask me why.

On the topic that players can/try/will start with gear for free (hacker has coded programs) I would use the following.

The base prices in the books are for:
A: Legally Purchased
B: The cost represents the time for the hacker to code the programs

Modifications to this:
Stolen: Cheaper price because the hacker stole the software and cracked it (Might be DRM on it, up to GM)
Used: Availability +4 but 20% cheaper (Yes, I would use Used Vehicle rules here, harder to get but cheaper)
Used in a crime: Anyone getting a data log can now see if the same hacker pulled this crime too.

So, no, nothing is for free - but getting things cheaper at chargen should be allowed, after all, you can get it more expensive and you can get equipment not normally available (Restricted gear)