As I said I would I emailed Fanpro for a clarification of the skillgroups, skills and specilizations and how they work together. I just got the response so allow me to pass this knowledge onto you.
Full Version: Skills, Skill Groups, and Specializations Revealed
| QUOTE |
Hi, >There has been a ongoing debate regarding the way skills and skill groups >work due to the rules conflicting with the example ect. Care to forward me a link to the thread? >Below I'm posting part of that discussion on the dumpshock forums. The >bolding was added by me for emphasis of the key parts. From the way I >have read the rules, excluding the example, you can purchase skill groups >or you can purchase skills. Skill groups cost less to raise, skills allow >you the benefits of specializations. There are two major questions, one I >believe which is wholely false and the other I am not completely sure of >as the rules say one thing but the example shows another. > >The first, and what I believe to be completely Incorrect is that you can >have a skill group and purchase a specialization in one of its subskills >and still maintain the skillgroup and be able to use that >specialization. Page 106 says you can't use specializations with >skillgroups so to me this would be false. This also leads me to the >second question. That's correct -- specializations and skill groups are not compatible. You either take a scattershot approach (ie. a skill group) or you take a focused approach (individual skill with specialization) -- you can't do both. >If you improve any individual skill, as stated on page 264, the skill >group no longer exists and are treated as individual skills from that >point on. However your example on page 106 shows differently. Infact it >shows you don't have the skill group untill you get them all back to the >same level. But theres nothing at all in the rules about this, and the >rule on page 264 would, to me, expressly forbid the example. There's not really a contradiction here -- if you have a skill group, and you decide to improve 1 skill from that group only, then you break apart the skill group. Simple enough. Is the skill group broken apart forever? Not necessarily, though this is really more of a GM decision. If the character goes through the effort of raising all of the individual skills in that former skill group back to the same rating, could they be treated as a unified skill group from that point on? Sure, why not -- unless the GM decides otherwise. There's really no benefit to doing it this way -- you pay more by raising the skills individually than as a group. Does this mean that a character could buy up the individual skills in a skill group separately, get them all to the same rating, and then raise them as a skill group from that point? I don't see why not, as long as the GM approves it. And it's easier for bookkeeping. The only time I would not allow this would be if the character had a specialization in one of the individual skills -- specializations and skill groups cannot be used together, so you could not "recombine" the separate skills into a skill group if one has a specialization. I *might* allow it if the player was willing to give up the specialization, sacrificing it in favor of the skill group. > Also with this to me a specializaton would be improving the skill individualy and not the group so that would also break up a skill group correct? Yeah, if you decide to add a specialization to a skill in a skill group, then you can no longer get the benefits of the skill group (ie. the bulk improvement discount). >Thank you for your time in clarifying this for us, and with your permision >I would like to post this on the dumpshock forums for clarification purposes. Sure thing. :: Rob Boyle :: Shadowrun Developer for FanPro LLC info@shadowrunrpg.com ~ www.shadowrunrpg.com |
Seems fair enough. The clarification is nice too.
Now ask him if things like smart links count towards the modified skill cap.
So did you send him a link to the thread....as sort of a mental anguish payback for him not giving you a blow-by-blow details of how many books shipped to which distributors who supply exactly which retailers using what particular shipping method along with estimates of warehouse schedules? 
Just how I thought it worked. I didn't think Frank was reading it properly.
| QUOTE (blakkie) |
| So did you send him a link to the thread....as sort of a mental anguish payback for him not giving you a blow-by-blow details of how many books shipped to which distributors who supply exactly which retailers using what particular shipping method along with estimates of warehouse schedules? |
Yes I sent him a link to the thread.
No it was not out of payback for something I wasn't asking for in the firstplace
| QUOTE (Fortune) |
| Just how I thought it worked. I didn't think Frank was reading it properly. |
Frank was being FrankTrollman, pulling his munchkin lawyering schtick.
| QUOTE ("Blakkie") |
| Frank was being FrankTrollman, pulling his munchkin lawyering schtick. |
What the fuck is your problem? Are you physically incapable of posting in any thread without flaming him even if he hasn't posted in that thread yet?
| QUOTE (Modesitt) | ||
What the fuck is your problem? Are you physically incapable of posting in any thread without flaming him even if he hasn't posted in that thread yet? |
Flame? *shrug* Hey, i didn't bring Frank up. He earned all the love he gets.
So do you, as I've seen. You seem to be drawn to anywhere you can be as insulting and sarcastic as possible... which would be fine if it was funny too... but it seems to lack a certain.... finesse.
See, there are trolls and there are trolls...
And the dumpshock forum-trolls aren't the most sophisticated of their breed...
(They can be quite entertaining, however, as their kind often is...)
And the dumpshock forum-trolls aren't the most sophisticated of their breed...
(They can be quite entertaining, however, as their kind often is...)
| QUOTE (Xenith) |
| So do you, as I've seen. You seem to be drawn to anywhere you can be as insulting and sarcastic as possible... which would be fine if it was funny too... but it seems to lack a certain.... finesse. |
Sometimes fighting the stupid gets ugly.
P.S. I am too funny. Occationally.
| QUOTE (blakkie @ Sep 20 2005, 01:32 PM) |
| P.S. I am too funny. Occationally. |
You misspelled that on purpose.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.