So, one thing that has always bugged me about SR (Well, lots of things, but this is the one I'm going to address right now) is that skill rating is directly tied by description for how good someone is at something. This fails utterly to take into account stats, which can easily make a novice (or even unskilled person) better than a master of a particular skill.

For this reason, I've decided to put together a new skill chart that takes into account the DP you have in a skill, as opposed to the actual rating of the skill itself. Hopefully this will be helpful in determining what sorts of stats/skills NPCs should have to truely bring them up to snuff instead of a single point in the skill changing someone from a novice to a professional while only increasing their chance of success at something by a fraction.

This is a fair bit more complex, so maybe isn't quite as easy to use, but oh well. Lets get started:

DP Skill level
3 Dabbling. This represents someone who is just learning their trade and isn't particularly talented at it. They'll succeed more often than not, but they'll still fail or not know something a fair bit of the time and often make large errors.
4 Training. Someone who has a basic grasp on their trade. They can do fairly easy things without fail, but anything too complex is likely to throw them for a loop.
6 Trained. Able to perform basic tasks without issue, and can handle or at least not fail spectacularly at halfway complex tasks.
8 Apprentice. Things of small complexity aren't an issue, and even difficult tasks can be done every once in a while.
9 Professional. Difficult tasks may not be managed every time, but it is a question of when, not if.
12 Skilled. Difficult tasks aren't worrisome, and even truly hard tasks can be undertaken with a reasonable expectation of success. Nothing is truly out of reach with some paitence.
15 Exceptional. Few tasks are too difficult to be accomplished, and mistakes are simply not made.
16 Master. All but the hardest of tasks are second nature, and even those are simply a small exercise to one of this skill.
19 Grandmaster. Among the top ranking in the world, nothing is too difficult to be undertaken, and most likely be succeeded in.
20 Perfection. Serious contender for #1 in the world, if not already #1. If this person cannot do it, it cannot be done. If this person cannot do it easily, it will melt lesser minds.

So, obviously I've based it on a DP cap of 20 setting the DP 20 as perfection. The points I picked I think are fairly obvious. Every 3 dice to represent a good chance of getting 1 added hit, and every 4 dice to represent being able to buy an additional hit. As the book, I'll provide some references.

Sub-Dabbling:
Athletics Example: "But Luke Carrare hadn't run more than 50m since gym class in the 1970s"
Firearms Example: "I know I need to flip a safety to be able to fire... but I'm not sure where that is."
Technical Example: Knows how to turn on a commlink and get plenty of viruses and spyware on it.
Social Example: BURRRRRPP!
Vehicle Example: The person that drives 10KPH when it rains.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): High school student.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): "I think it rains sometimes in Seattle."

Dabbling:
Athletics Example: Can throw a baseball more or less over the plate... most of the time. The batter may want to be ready to duck.
Firearms Example: Doesn't hit the other person's target at the firing range.
Technical Example: Have a basic idea of how to operate things properly.
Social Example: You just might be able to tip someone teetering on a decision in your favor.
Vehicle Example: Slow down significantly in any inclement weather, but otherwise do alright.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Freshman or advanced highschooler.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): Been to Seattle before and can locate the needle.

Training:
Athletics Example: Will hit the ball in the batting cage more often than not, but won't always be solid.
Firearms Example: You hit your own target, but just barely.
Technical Example: Operating your commlink isn't a problem so long as it doesn't crash, but don't expect anything fancy out of it.
Social Example: You can tip people in your favor if they're undecided, but don't expect to bring someone around who is completely opposed.
Vehicle Example: Unless it is pouring buckets, or there is ice on the road, you're just fine.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Sophomore/Junior in collage.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): You can locate the needle without looking at the skyline.

Trained:
Athletics Example: Good solid hits at the batting cage, can manage the 10 minute mile without overexerting too much.
Firearms Example: "Right between the eyes. Ignore the dozen other bullets in the general midsection area, that one was sweet."
Technical Example: You not only know about Ctrl+Alt+Del, but can actually use the various tabs it provides without crashing your computer (usually).
Social Example: "Would you like to buy some X?"
Vehicle Example: Dark, rain, and a bit of ice on the road aren't a real issue unless something unexpected comes up.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Senior in collage.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): Can get around town without a map, and can get anywhere specific with a short glance.

Apprentice:
Athletics Example: The batting cage is everything out of the park, the 10 minute mile is a standard, and you can keep your hustle afterwards.
Firearms Example: Still aiming for the body, but you only need about half the rings now.
Technical Example: Most crashes can be circumvented, and you know what all those bars in the video options menu means.
Social Example: "...only ever driven by a little old granny to get groceries every weekend."
Vehicle Example: If you were the only car on the road, you wouldn't have trouble regardless of the condition. It's those other morons that can't figure out how to drive that scare you.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Fresh out of collage, and learning the real world ropes.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): Best place to eat without spending a fortune is....

Professional:
Athletics Example: You've got the curve ball down and are working on perfecting the splitter. 9 minutes to the mile and you can keep it up for at least a few miles.
Firearms Example: The head is a viable target for you 2 times out of 3.
Technical Example: No longer 'the new guy' but still your first few years.
Social Example:
Vehicle Example:
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Could teach the lower grades, or help with research.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): Hey look, I've heard of this place where you can get that if you know how to ask.

Skilled:
Athletics Example:
Firearms Example: You hit the head with each shot, and often get it in those couple of innermost rings.
Technical Example: Been in your job for several years and have basically all the tricks of the trade down pat. Prime of your game.
Social Example:
Vehicle Example:
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): Could teach if you wanted, or do your own research and get some funding for it.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): "Go to 1234 1st street and knock on the door twice, then kick the lower left corner, then knock three more times."

Exceptional:
Athletics Example:
Firearms Example:
Technical Example:
Social Example:
Vehicle Example:
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic):
Knowledge Skill Example (Street):

Master:
Athletics Example:
Firearms Example:
Technical Example:
Social Example:
Vehicle Example:
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic):
Knowledge Skill Example (Street):

Grandmaster:
Athletics Example: People swear they hear sonic booms behind you when you run.
Firearms Example:
Technical Example:
Social Example:
Vehicle Example:
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic):
Knowledge Skill Example (Street):

Perfect:
Athletics Example: "Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound."
Firearms Example: You've unloaded five clips with your eyes closed and your target only has one hole... you haven't missed.
Technical Example: A toaster, a screwdriver, and some duct tape are sufficient to create working drone.
Social Example: "ALL OBEY HYPNOTOAD."
Vehicle Example: Hollywood chase scenes look like sunday drives compared to what you can do. If the car can physically do it, you can make it happen. If the car can't physically do it.. you'll work on it.
Knowledge Skill Example (Academic): You create new theories that are proven to be both radical and sound on your napkin during lunch.
Knowledge Skill Example (Street): If it exists, you can find someone who is selling it by this afternoon.

It's late, I'll update with more examples when I'm less tired and have a chance. Feel free to suggest examples or changes to the examples I have, or comment on how much you like/hate this idea. Also fully open to new suggestions for the titles for the different skill levels, as I'm fairly unimaginative when it comes to naming things.

I think dice pools are a better overall gauge of effectiveness than raw skill, but I don't think one range is good for all skills. Some, such as combat, go to a much higher level than others. A 12 dice pool for infiltration, or electronics, is very damn good - but that same dice pool for firearms would be "significantly better than the average security guard, but still not in the league of people like street samurai who shoot for a living".

Just to chime in. The "normal" maximum dice pool a human can roll is 16 dice: 7 from an exceptional stat, 7 from an aptitude skill and 2 from a specialization. Of course certain devices or super-human stats might surpass this easily.

I'm just saying this to explain why I think anyone with a strait skill + attribute sum of 14 should be given a "master of the art" title already. Anything beyond 14 should be considered "above perfection"

Good General descriptors . I'm assuming 20 DP is your dice cap ?

How bout for your descriptors of skill =>

Social: Look trust me. Would I lie to you?
Social almost perfection: You sell ice to Eskimos.

Vehicle: Could be a professional stunt driver
Vehicle almost perfection: They name stunts and moves after you / Normal stunts are routine. You invent your own.

Hey I kinda like this, although some of the "sub dabbler" entries are more appropriate for people with skill less than 0 (Incompetence). Although amusing, they are exaggerated. For example, the first time I picked up a handgun and shot at a target 10 meters away I got 1 bullseye and almost all my shots hit the target. I was amazed at how easy it actually is to shoot a gun, there is a reason why bows and arrows have fallen out of use. For comparison, the first time I shot with a japanese longbow I couldn't get the arrow more than 1 meter, and even hitting a target with a modern competition bow is hardly automatic.

I would probably drop Apprentice and keep Professional though - 8 dice and 9 dice are very close but "apprentice" sounds like a beginner. Also renamed a few titles. I set Master level at 15, because that's the best an unmodified human can do by skill and ability alone. Also this is the best you can be in skills where there are no equipment bonuses.

Changes will be together with the old stuff.

Problem with that range is: in some fields there are tons of bonus dice to gather, in others near to none.

Software: Programming Suite +5, Encephalon +2, PusHed +1, Cerebralbooster +3...
Surivial: none

You should take that into account.

and in many fields it is easily possible to overcome 20 dice, so you scale should be higher.

cya
Tycho

Why not just look at stat+skill? Throw out all the various bonuses, like smartgun, custom weapon, etc.

This gives you a upper level of 16, and a lower level of what, 2? (below average stat, rolling off default) Calibrate the scale from that.

After all, a master gunman with a stock AK and a newb with an ultimate, tacticool, Arsenal monstrosity might have the same pool size, but the first guy is still better.

Well, I've never fired a gun, so I can't speak to the ease of that, but personally the first time I picked up a bow (The fairly cheap and unimpressive kind they buy in mass for summer camps and such) I was able to hit a target most of the time from about 10-15m away. Could be I have naturally high Agi or a talent in archery, but I didn't find their use all that difficult. I really do need to get to a gun range at some point. Oh wait, I've fired a rifle before, nearly forgot. Yeah, I was more accurate at a similar distance, but the added ease of a gun over a bow isn't put into the SR rules in any way.



Yeah, I considered dropping the 8/9 split because they are quite similar, though the added chance of getting that third hit is fairly significant for that one extra die.

P.S. Thanks for all the suggestion examples.


Unless the DP is capped at 20, which I said it was for the purposes of this chart.



Good points and things I took some time to think of. But the fact is those bonus DP should be considered when comparing to this chart. For instance, someone with a Skill 3 + Agi 3 and no smartgun, is going to get the same kind of spread as someone with Skill 1 + Agi 3 + smartlink. And thus even though one is more 'skilled' they are equal in any regards that matter to an outside observer. The only real difference is that the one person can pick up a smartlink and become better. Thus, while he has no smartlink, he is only of about 'trained' quality, but when he has a smartlink he is of 'apprentice' quality. It's kind of a "I don't care how you get the job done, so long as you get it done."

Reason I don't want to look at Stat+Skill and ignore bonuses is this creates the same problem that the book has in that it looks at just Skill and ignores Stats which make up a large part of a persons DP. For example, a professional is a skill 3 in SR, regardless of stats. So if you have someone with Skill 3 + Stat 2 vs someone with Skill 1 + Stat 5, the second person is going to be better at doing that thing, even though he is 'less skilled'. Personally I'd like my professional mechanic to be defined by how well he can actually fix a car, not how long he has spent learning to fix cars.

I agree there is a bit of a problem regarding things that have fewer bonuses, but I don't know how large of a problem it is. Yes, perhaps no one can ever become perfect in survival, but instead of creating individual skills, I just look at it as "Even the most skilled survivalist is going to have serious trouble if they are dumped in the antarctic in their underware." Which would be a 6+ target number, or a series of 5+ or something similar. Meanwhille, if you come up with a similarly difficult task for a marksman with muscle toner, reflex recorders, and a smartlink, she'll be able to mange it much more regularly. The fact that you've reached the highest it is possible to reach in your particular field (At 14 dice) Doesn't mean your difference from 1 is greater than the difference between someone who has 14 in a field in which you can get to 20.

Also, I'm fairly sure survival has several things that can give bonuses. A good survival kit should give a 'good tools' bonus just like a good hardware kit. And there is plenty of survival equipment that gives situational bonuses (Like a cold suit in the arctic) or should reasonably adjust thresholds (Desert clothing making it easier to resist heat stroke).

Remember that my descriptions involving grade level and work experience are more an idea of 'how joe average got here'. It is of course totally possible to grab some neocortical nanites and cerebral boosters strait into collage as an already fairly smart person and have the same skill level as joe average who has been working at it for a large chunk of their life. This also works slightly in reverse. For this example, that person (With the boosters) could reasonably expect to get to the same job pay and level and ease of life and so on as the experienced joe average fairly quickly. Perhaps even going a bit higher because 'he has so much potential.'

Hmm it's been awhile since I shot with the common modern bow. Aren't they designed to be easier to use than the medieval equivalents? After all, it's child's play

Still it was considered you needed years of training to become good (professional) with the bow. But the point wasn't about one skill being harder to learn than another (way to much bookeeping), but the silly notion that someone with actual Pistol skill don't know how to turn off the safety and that people with about medium skill (usually take skillswires or weeks/months of training) has a hard time hitting his own target.

Added chance of getting a third hit on 9 instead of 8 dice isn't that much really, only slightly higher (making it likely on an average). Also, it looks strange as it breaks the otherwise linear scale and requires new inventive titles that really don't mean anything.

Otherwise I agree about Dice pools better representing effectiveness than skill alone.

Well, I put that example under sub-dabbling, which is a DP of less than 3, which means that the person almost certainly lacks the pistols skill, and instead represents someone who has never touched a gun before trying to use one. Since I fall into that category (For pistols) I know perfectly well that there is a safety, and I need it off in order to fire, but I'm only somewhat sure where it is, and have no idea which position is on and which is off.

As for 'dabbling' that represents something along the lines of 'Hey, this is my first time on the firing range', and yeah, maybe you won't actually hit your neighbors target instead of your own, but if you look at it from the rules standpoint, you have a decent chance of a glitch (1, 1, 5+) and an even better chance of a critical glitch (1, 1, 4-), so yeah, you're actually reasonably likely to miss your target entirely (No hits) or hit your neighbor's target (glitch/critical glitch). Then when you hit 6 dice, your chances of a glitch or critical glitch go way down, and you're virtually always going to get at least one hit, and often 2 hits, which represents that you're basically always going to hit your target (1 hit, barely) and will often get decent shots (2 hits, outer few rings) and will occasionally get an inner few rings hit. At 8 you will always get at least some rings, and can reasonably expect to get inner rings.

I realize my assessment of how hard it is to hit a target at a shooting range might be off, but so is SRs general assessment on how hard it is to use a gun compared to say a bow. Both are equally likely to hit a given target from similar distances (Same range categories) with the same level of training. Ignoring that arrows move slowly enough that you can react to them, while bullets do not, and also ignoring the ease of using a gun to a bow.

Hmm true that. But If you do have a dice pool of 3 or more (thus about 1-2 skill) you should be able to hit your target. I imagine just hitting the target might even be easier than fumbling with the safety, slide etc. during your first handing of a gun. I sorta cheated since I had range operators insisting on loading and preparing the guns for me. Of course since it didn't require any license or safety courses, that's probably a good idea. Still when I later got a friend's gun in my hand I was able to find and understand these fairly quickly. It's not brain surgery and is designed for ease if use and understanding.

Maybe your entry on sub-dabbling was ok. You could probably say "someone who has never used a gun but has seen it on trids."

I just double the number in the books, so 1-6 becomes 2 - 12 and base it on Attribute + Skill pool.

Saves my reinventing and rewriting tons of stuff.

I did that before this thread made it easy for me to use that instead Also... slow day at work.

As a point you can hit 20 in every skill though some are harder than others. 7 dice exceptional skill, 3 dice physical adept, 7 dice exceptional attribute(assuming human) and most attributes can be bumped up in someway. Even if it might be limited to physical mages and a sustaining focus.

Oh and I really like this DP description list, it be awesome.

And while some atrributes can't be raised with augmentation nor magic. "Intuition, I'm looking at you". There are some Augmentations that increase the DP of skills based on intuition. (2 genetechs and 1 nanotech as I recall)

Great scale.

I wonder, do GM's ever give out good qualities like exceptional skill to their players? Just asking because the number of time I have seen either exceptional skill or attribute picked in the builds shared in these forums...

I personally like those good qualities, if only for the potential to one day bump them up one with a bunch of karma even if I don't have the stat maxed out at start.

I don't think the GM every (or hardly ever) gives out positive qualities for free. Instead you are generally allowed to purchase qualities with karma, so long as they make some degree of sense.



Like which? Every stat except edge can be improved with the increase [stat] spell, or the improve [stat] adept power, and I believe there is something out there in the tech world to boost every stat (or stat based skills) as well.

Str: Muscle Augmentation, Muscle Replacement, Cyberlimb, Suprathyroid Gland
Agi: Muscle Toner, Muscle Replacement, Cyberlimb, Suprathyroid Gland
Bod: Cyberlimb (Bone changes only affect for the purpose of soaking, so don't quite count), Suprathyroid Gland
Rea: Wired reflexes, MBW, Reaction Enhancers, Synaptic Boosters, Suprathyroid Gland
Int: Limbic System Nanites, Dynomitan, Qualia
Log: Cerebral Boosters, Neocortical Nanites, PuSHeD
Cha: Enhanced Pheremones... not sure any others boost all charisma based.
Wil: Daredrenaline.

And that doesn't account for things like reflex recorder, the large range of things that boost for athletics group. So I think that you can get more or less anything up to 20 DP, just that some things are much easier to manage that than others. And I can support this. Any skill can get to a 'natural' DP of at least 16, and then you have to start putting conditional modifiers in your favor such as having cold weather gear for survival in the arctic.

Edit: Make that 17, forgot to account for dwarves. And of course magic makes anything able to reach 20.

Er, I didn't mean for free. But if I am understanding you right, "as long as they make some degree of sense" means if a character wants to bump them self up that bit to perfection on the scale as generously provided by yourself, you have to hope your GM sees the sense in letting the player's character have their fun that way?

Hmm, another thought on the scale, I suppose once you start hitting certain DPs, that would have some effect on reputation, correct? I mean, most people who are interested in a particular subject have some idea of who the best in that area are or is it possible that some who were really the best just never made it into the history books records?

Sorry, just brain storming like crazy now, your scale is inspiring me in ways that the books 0/1-6/7 scale only seemed to kind of allude to. Just think, a character who can buy 5 hits on a regular basis, that has to be the super hero protagonist of shadowrun novel

Wait a sec, does the scale take into account Edge as well as the Skill + Specialization + Attribute + Bonii? Hmm, -1...7 + 0...2 + 1...16 + -6...3 + 1...8 = 0*...36 DP
Huh, guess that is why you stipulate the cap of 20 on a DP? I just came up with my range by quickly looking through the SR4A, there may be some bonii/penalties stacking I didn't take into account. The * is I realize having a 0 or negative DP is just an auto fail and depending on thresholds make auto fail even more possible for characters with low DP.

I'm glad you (and others, thanks for all the great comments!) like the scale (Still need to get around to editing it with all those great suggested descriptions)

Yes, that is exactly why I limited it to a DP of 20. Pornomancer easily shows how you can get into the 40+ range, basically every skill can get to 20+ if you really want to work at it. I picked 20 because I wanted there to be an upper limit to compare to. A scale of 1 to infinity is fairly useless because 1 is better than 2, but it still isn't that much compared to infinity.

Also a max of 20 allows the harder to max skills (Like survival) to still have a relevance on the scale. Also, one of the many reasons I wanted to make this chart was to show players just how good their characters are (I need a reminder of that sometimes) So many people seem to think they're characters are worthless without DPs of 18+, when the fact is that they've just about reached the pinnacle of physical potential. It is nice to have more realistic comparisons for a character than the pornomancer.

Oh, and as for your first question, basically yeah. You need to convince your GM to let you get the quality. I imagine some are fairly stingy on this, and some are more 'sure get whatever.'

I think some notable exceptions to the 'get whatever' would be SURGE and Awakening, since there are already qualities specifically for those coming up during play. And some really obvious exceptions like 'born rich' and genetic heritage and type O body and so on. Like I said, very GM by GM basis, but I don't think most will begrudge you getting aptitude or enhanced attribute (or whatever it is called). Aptitude is 20 karma and then it is another 14 karma to actually raise the skill, while the attribute one is 40 karma and then (Depending on metatype) another 35 to raise the stat. I think if you have that much karma you want to burn on a single stat/skill, most GMs will let you go that way. I mean, mages have infinite advancement thanks to initiation, may as well give mundanes a little bit of extra room for growth and something to burn karma on.

Thanks for all the tips on maximizing attributes, didn't know about the means of enhancing intuition, logic and willpower at least. Haven't really read up on genetech and nanotech as I figure it's too SOTA for normal runners.

As for buying the Exceptional Attribute quality, I for one would allow it without a problem. It's damn expensive to have a use for it at Chargen, and even more expensive with karma later on. So if you want to nerf your character to the best in one particular skill? No problem.

Most of it is surprisingly low availability. I think all the personal nanites are 12 or less, and same with all but one geneware.

Oh, and I forgot to include in the list genetic optimization, which is 45k and .2 essence I think, and raises the max of any (of the basic 8 attributes) by 1.

The main trouble with nanites is the stupid high essence cost of nanohives. The simple workaround is to get a cyberlimb of some kind. Even a hand or foot can hold a couple nanohives.

The adept power "Improve attribute" works only for physical attributes, so this doesn't help boosting mental attributes.



All the neural amplifier nanites (limbic, neocortic) only give bonus dice to intuition or logic-linked skill tests. So limbic nanites don't boost intuition directly and therefore don't increase initiative. Same goes for enhanced pheromones, neocorticals and the gentech.
Most of the time this won't make any difference to the final DP but for almost every implant one can think of situations where the bonus should not aply (like negotiations via VR shouldn't benefit from enhanced pheromones).
Also note that Neocorticals explicitly do not work in stressful situations...



Such a shame, they could have been the ultimate hacker cyberware....

Yes, I know they don't boost the stat directly. I was specifically talking about things that made you better at skills.

And neocortical is still the ultimate hacker cyberware. After all, what counts as an ultra-secure node will vary from hacker to hacker. You could also set yourself up to be good at the composure test, and thus able to stay calm enough to make use of them even when in dangerous situations.

Yikes.. if it were that common you'd think it was in the main book... then again you could say the same about light pistols...

Most of the stuff in augmentation and arsenal is <12 availability, and a huge chunk of street magic is applicable for starting characters. Simply a case of only being able to fit so much stuff in a book (And also having enough stuff that you can sell other books)

Yeah, I'm considering chopping off a foot so I can put a cyberfoot with a nanohive inside. I still don't get why it is so Essence-costy.

I think you're missing the whole point of the original examples in the book here. I believe they're meant as guidelines to help players (and GMs) design characters, based on already knowing the concept ahead of time, to decide how many skill levels you should consider buying if you want to achieve a particular concept. If you start adding in all kinds of dice pool modifiers, you can't really say how much is due to the character's skill, their raw talent, or their spiffy equipment.

Actually I think that is the point of this thread. The original skill descriptions don't help players much because they give a false picture of how good your character is at in a particular skill. The total dice pool helps a player design there character more because it gives more accurate description of there overall skill level in the skill in question.

But a character with a skill of 5 and an attribute of 1 is a completely different concept from a character with a skill of 1 and an attribute of 5. And whether they have a smartlink/cyberware/other dicepool bonus is again a separate concept question.

The concept might be different, but the end result is the same. In play 1/5 and 5/1 get the exact same number of successes. I don't think its very hard for a player to figure out where most of his dice come from so that effects the concept, but how he acts and looks in the game ends up being based on total dice pool.

I totally agree with Sponge. And there's even a different cost in BP: skill 6 + att 1 (24bp) \ Skill (1) + Att 6 (65bp!!!) (that makes a HUGE difference)

If you think a skill level doesn't mean a thing when i cames to the actual result, maybe there's an easier way to fix this up:
> You may simple determine a limit for hit points based on the skill level (actually the opposite of Magic related actions...). Spending Edge could make that limit disappear.
> I would put a limit of (Skill +1 or +2) hits. For defaulting the limit would be only one hit.

As Shinobi said, no, I'm not, I'm actually correcting the fact that the book does a very bad job of displaying skill. Okay, you have a 6 skill, you are 'among the best in the world.' but you also have a 2 attribute, so you only have a DP of 8. Compare that to someone with an attribute of 8 (Thanks to handy augmentations) and a skill of only 2, and gets a +2 from some equipement. That person is only a 'beginner' in the skill, and yet the high stat low skill person will trounce the supposed 'best in the world' every time. Thus the skill descriptions in the book give a very poor look at how good someone is at something.

Instead my table tries to show how good someone actually is at something. If they have a DP of X, then they are at Y level, regardless of how they got there. They are even with other people of Y level, regardless of how they got there, and both of them are below someone of Z level, regardless of how that person got there.

So lets look at making a character. I want to make a character who is a top marksman. Looking at the book I get a 6 in longarms, which makes me 'Among the best in the world.' I then go along and get my other stuff and forget to give myself a high agility (Or just don't think to). So, now my 'best in the world' skill character barely has 8 dice to throw when shooting. Meanwhile someone else creates a character that is supposed to be a bad shot, someone just learning to fire their weapon, so they get a skill of 1, specializing in hunting rifles to represent that being the only weapon they've fired, but they jack up agility and even get muscle toner. Now the character is 'a really bad shot' but throws 10 dice when firing. All the sudden, because you were only looking at skill, the worlds best is outperformed by the guy who's lucky he knows which end of the gun to point at the bad guys. (I know this is exaggerated, but I'm trying to show my point. You could just as easily not gimp the person and the novice is still equal to the world's best)

Using my scale however you decide that you want to be a really good shot, and look it up and see that 12 dice are needed to represent a good (Though not world class) ability. You now know that 12 dice is your goal, and you can decide if you want to achieve that because your character is 'naturally talented' (High Agi score), has been working at it forever (High skill) or has worked at it for a while (Decent in both). It also lets you know you can drop your agility by 1 and pick up a reflex recorder to represent someone trying to overcome their 'natural handycaps' or you could drop your skill by 1 and pick up reflex recorder to represent someone not wanting to bother with all that training.

I feel my scale allows for much more flexibility in how you create your character, and allows you to keep an eye on how good you'll be at the end of it all, instead of just having an 'I have high skill, I'm awesome at X' like the book suggests.



Several things. Yes, 6 att + 1 skill is more expensive for getting a DP up to 7, but that makes the assumption that a 6 attribute is useless outside of one particular skill. Instead look at it as you can get 6 attribute and 6 skills that go to that attribute at 1 for a cost of 24 + 65 = 89 points, or you could get the attribute at 1 and six skills at 6 for (24*6)=144 BP.

All the sudden the stat looks way better than the skill

As for limiting hits by skill, it is fairly commonly suggested with Skill*2=max hits (And I'm personally in favor of that) but the fact is that it is rarely a limiting factor. You generally only get 1 hit in every 3 dice, so a skill of 2 is enough to make good use of a DP of 12, and a skill of 3 is enough to handle a DP of 18.

This also doesn't really help the high skill low stat person much, because he has no prayer of reaching 12 hits with a DP of 8. Only thing this really does is make it hard to play a savant type character with a really high stat and stat type boosters and such and 1 skill point in most everything. Even then... well, at least you're always guaranteed 2 hits. The 6 skill 8 DP person will generally do better, but can occasionally do worse.

My problem with the skill descriptions was the examples. I think they would have done a better job if they had described the level of training involved. For example, for unarmed combat, they could have said:

1: has taken a self defense class
2: beginner level martial artist, or someone who has been in a few "real" fights.
3: intermediate level martial artist, first degree black belt from a "black belt factory", or a street fighter
4: a "real" black belt, seasoned street fighter, tough man competitor
5: "real" black belt who does regular sparring, pro fighters, back alley brawling champs, pit fighters
6: above level of skill with regular practice/sparring, championship contenders, tournament champs
7: fourth or higher degree black belt, pro champions, martial arts or pit fighting standouts

I also think that, much like Attributes, a skill at a given rating covers a range of ability, because the skill levels are so compressed.

What I don't like about the examples (special forces, etc.) is that the examples generally have that level of skill, and a certain level of the linked Attribute, and a certain amount of complementary skills. So you have players going "Well, my guy isn't like Matador or Hatchetman, so I guess he shouldn't take pistols at 6." When, in fact, a pistols skill of 6 might suit that character perfectly well.

Although I also think that skills and linked Attributes should usually be developed hand in hand. So I would actually consider someone with an Agility of 6 and pistols of 6 to be more skilled than someone with an Agility of 2 and pistols of 6. The first person has obviously spent time working on their speed and hand-eye coordination, rather than merely their technique.

I'd like to point out that with a dicepool cap of 20, you may still have a DP's of above twenty. It just cuts off at twenty.

For example, a world-class metahuman has a 24 in X - it means they're at the top of their game, even with wound penalties(-1) and distractions(-2) = 21, capped to 20.

It just means that people with perfect dice pools tend to be able to keep it up under pressure, too, which is more dangerous than rolling high only when you're at the top of your game.