Starting cash? 16,000 nuyen.

4d6 for luxury lifestyle + 12d6 for having 1,200 nuyen leftover from char gen. 16d6 * 1000 at all 6s is 16,000.

Chargen cash? 330,000 nuyen. BMP doesn't increase funds, it only stretches how far they can go.

250,000 - 50BP
50,000 - Born Rich
30,000 - In Debt
330,000 - Total

You have some truly wonky math. If the first part of what you said is correct (which it isn't) that would be 16*6*1000=96,000

Now, if you use the actual rules, then you're looking at (4d6+12)*1000 nuyen, which is (4*6+12)*1000=36,000 nuyen.

[quote name='Karoline' post='990670' date='Sep 20 2010, 12:42 PM']You have some truly wonky math. If the first part of what you said is correct (which it isn't) that would be 16*6*1000=96,000

Arg, I did misread the rule. I was thinking it was 1 die per 100 nuyen.

Its 4d6 * 1000 + 12,000.

Minimum: 16,000
Average: 26,000
Maximum: 36,000

Since it is still a Negative Quality until it is paid off with Karma, and the GM can enforce it anywazy he feels, including replacing it with another negative Quality (or several) equaling to the original BP debt, I see nothing improper in the interpretation that you STILL OWE SOMEONE something...

Favors equal Cash in Shadowrun, anyone who disputes that has not been paying attention...

That's odd, WE have the exact same interpretation at our table a well...

The fact that you MUST pay off the Negative Qualities with Karma to be rid of them indicates to me that you will suffer under the GM's thumb, Through either a re-interpreted version of In-Debt or new Negative Qualities equal to the uinpaid BP debt that exists (with no way to influence what they may be as a character)... either way, the GM is in his right to do so if you show no interest in repaying the Karma Debt incurred by paying off your monetary debt... Well within the Rules as they are Written as far as I am concerned...

The GM cannot enforce it any way he feels, except as a non-RAW house rule. That's not at all 'well within RAW', which is why it's not acceptable that you keep saying so. Just *say* 'it's a house rule for balance'. Didn't we go through this same issue elsewhere, Tymeaus? You're allergic to the phrase 'house rule'?

I remember that conversation.

Not allergic, No...

But here is the thing... when the GM is allowed Carte Blanche in the Rules, it is not a Houserule to use it. If the Character refuses to buy the Negative Quality off (Assuming the GM even lets him do so) because he is being a jerk, the GM can give him additional Negative Qualities to rebalance the Negative Quality he was abusing... My interpretation simple uses the quotes within In-Debt to keep it balanced. "The charactert is indebted to an organization"... Indebted implies much more than just money, especially if the Karma Debt is never paid...

Are You allergic to that Yerameyahu?

You and I disagree on whether the GM is within his rights to rebalance the unpaid for Quality... My way is RAW as far as I am concerned, and you disagree... that is okay with me...

I wouldn't say that indebted 'implies' more than just money, but I would agree that it 'could mean' more than just money.

That's the definition of a house rule, and the opposite of RAW. If you choose to define RAW as 'including house rules'…

Again, I'm not saying that you shouldn't do any of the good suggestions and ideas mentioned here, because In Debt sucks. I'm saying, please stop calling it RAW when you change the rules.

Fair Enough... I choose to read it as "It Does" mean more...

However, the possibility exists that I am right in my interpretation, and as such it would fall under RAW... at that point, it becomes quite useless to tell me that I am wrong, when there is no evidence to PROVE it...

And since you cannot disprove it, well...

The purpose of these discussions is to point out different points of view that have meaning... My interpretation is just as valid as yours, and is therefore not WRONG (Meaning it has the possibility to be RAW or Houserule)...

There is a rule that states if you don't like something you can change it, as its all about having fun. The GM doing the above, is RAW. Just not RAW.

I tend to have the opinion that a negative quality is a negative quality until the karma's been paid off.

That's the general rule, anyhow, and In Debt doesn't have any notations that the general rule is suspended.

Let's face it, most of the organizations that will lend large amounts of money for a 50% interest rate and no questions asked about what you're doing with the cash, tend to be very not-nice people.

They are the sort of people that it probably doesn't matter if your entire cash debt is paid off, they still will consider you to owe them.

The Karma cost to pay off the quality abstractly represents efforts taken to finally end their hold over you once and for all. Additional payoffs, blackmail, bribes, secret deals, etc. All to get that organization to back off and leave you alone.

That's my opinion on it, anyhow. And it's more or less supported by the rules.


-karma

I don't think it is that they loan it to you at a 50% interest rate (actually they loan it to you at a 10% interest rate), but the 50% increase represents that you didn't take out the loan the day before play starts, you likely got it several months or a year or two ago, and the interest has been slowly building up.

And there's nothing wrong with that, KarmaInferno. It's simply lying to tell people that's the RAW. It's not a question of multiple RAW interpretations, which we considered at length earlier in the thread.

Saying that it's no less wrong than other 'interpretations' isn't an argument that it's *right*, Tymeaus. There is zero possibility that you're 'correct', unless by that you mean that a dev says, 'yes, that's what I *meant*, but didn't write'.

The only things we can be sure are RAW are that you have to pay 10% interest (on 150% of the initial principal, *possibly* reduced by repayment) each month, or they 'may send people looking for you'; and that you must pay karma to have the Negative Quality removed from your character sheet. There is no possibility that the RAW says, let alone means, that you owe favors, or more money, or any other (perfectly acceptable and appropriate) house rule effects.

It's a quality.
A defining characteristic of a person.

This means it is history, and significant enough history to warrant 5-30BP.
There is nothing in the text implying that the debt was incurred at T minus ten minutes to the start of the game, so that interpretation is just as invalid as the interpretation that the character has a long-standing relationship with some organization which has continuously put him/her in their debt.

If a GM wants to make it free points, that is within the rules. If the GM wants to make it the source of constant headaches as past associations crop up in inconvenient ways, that's still entirely within the rules too. Where is this spelled out? right here: "Quality... 5-30BP... indebted." So, 1) it is a defining character trait. 2) it ranges from inconvenient to deadly serious. 3) its nature is owing something to some nasty people.

It's not clear. It's not spelled out. It's just an interpretation, (a form of RAI,) of what is on the page. It's not RAW, unless you want leg breakers showing up saying "Hey! You didn't pay us no money this month... So's we gotta tune you up! ..also that wasn't a double negative!" You know, since the character would still actively have to keep up with his monthly payments of 0 creds according to RAW and you can't actively give somebody nothing... maybe a shady back-alley meeting to hand over an empty cred chip each month? Eventually you get jumped for the empty chip by gangers, but the mob guy takes a bullet, not you. Now the Cosa Nostra blames you...

Alternately, you go with the old:
player - "But I gave you that money last month."
thug - "Which was very generous of you, and don't think I don't appreciate it. However, despite what gifts you might ply me with, you still owe Don Vito his money and his monthly interest. I wouldn't want people to think that I could be bought out by such a paltry sum as 45 Gees..."

I think that you are incorrect that my interpretation has ZERO percent of being correct (especially since there are so many others that seem to see the same conclusions here)... The Text has many interpretations... No single Interpretation is going to be the only interpretation... But that is really okay with me... I know what I like about In-Debt, and you know what you like (even if they may, in the end, be the same thing).

IF you have not paid the Negative Quality off with Karma, you still are in possession of a Negative Quality (Which should be heavily enforced at Any Table out there), The GM has the right to enforce that Negative Quality however he wants, until it is bought off with Karma, or it is changed to something else with equivalent BP costs. The GM runs the World, after all, and everything within it, including those damned criminal organizations...

But it is not really worth arguing over... I can agree to disagree with you here... how about you?

I agree that we disagree, since the beginning. Just don't misinform people about the rules.

It was Not Misinformation (It is a Valid Interpretation of the Rules in the Book when taken as a whole)... But it is no longer worth it either... so...

Didn't the developers somewhere list the amount of money per mission that a beginner is likely to get and the number was really low? Probably if you got paid very little per mission it would be hard to get by, paying for housing, consumables like bullets, and emergencies like doctor bills. You would end up really pinching newyen for the first couple missions or it would take much longer to pay off and you would end up paying a lot of money in the end. Karma in some ways does equate to newyen. All the inconvenience of skimping by may be worth some karma too. But I do agree that you would normally need to pay off the debt with karma and cash. Also I think in most campaigns runners get payed enough money that paying off the debt in newyen is not much of an ordeal.

Yeah... the Money Debt is easy to pay off for In-Debt... The most difficult part is always going to be the Karma Debt Payment...

Use 12,200¥ from the 15,000¥ of a 15 Bp In Debt Quality in order to buy a custom Luxury lifestyle and 12 hits on your starting nuyen test.
Chances are you'll then start out with about 24,000¥ in pocket cash. Immediately pay off the debt, ending up with free BP and free money.

(Isn't In Debt banned form Missions games?)

I don't think so. I think they simply require you to pay the karma when you pay off the debt. Could be wrong though.

It is allowed currently in Missions, but when Season 4 starts it will probably be disallowed for new characters.

Existing characters may keep the quality (as the Missions campaign does not alter existing characters if the rules change), but to get rid of the debt completely requires both paying the money owed and the karma cost.




-karma

10% mensually. If you translate that into an annual rate this push things up to 214% if compounded, 120% otherwise... IMHO definitively not bank rates.

Well, not modern bank rates. This is a dystopia future in which corps run every thing and the common man works more often than not in order to keep a reasonable lifestyle. I doubt they get the kind of loans we get in modern times.

Holy Obi Wan Kenobi Cop Out Defense Batman. LOL.

"What I told you was true. From a certain point of view."


The possibility exists that you might be right and we cannot prove that the reasoning that supports it doesn't exist? Oh Jebus. Now we have to prove that something doesn't exist. Nice. Nevermind you proving that something does exist. We have to prove it doesn't.

Well hey, if it's kept the organized religions going for this long, it might as well work for you huh?


Nevermind that nobody has said you were wrong about anything other than the RAW. Which you are. Incontrovertibly. And you know how we know it is incontrovertible? Because none of you have been able to come up with evidence from any written material. Evidence must be observable, measurable, and empirical. Your house ruling is completely valid at your table. In fact, In Debt is so badly written, your alterations to it might make it much better and less of an out and out exploit flaw. It's terribly written. Which is why there's such an argument over it. Vendetta says that if the NPC with the vendetta is killed, he will be replaced unless the quality is bought off. In Debt says nothing like that. That could possibly be an oversight, but that's speculation. In two years, no errata has been offered for this book...

I really don't understand why you're so dead set on your interpretation being RAW and not simply a house rule. Well, I take that back. I think I understand. However, something being a house rule doesn't make it bad. For example, I think the way Contacts are purchased at Character Generation sucks. I've happily participated in discussions suggesting a better way to do it. In many ways, I'm happier with my solution being a house rule because it demonstrates how much smarter and more awesome I am than the guys who wrote 4th Edition originally.

I can agree that you'll never admit to being wrong so that arguing is pointless and this thread is a lost cause and has been for three pages. That's good enough for me.

I don't know if it has been brought up yet, but depending on how much ware you purchase the qualities that give you free genetech and reduce genetech cost, couple with the quality that reduces bioware/cyberware cost (there is one, right? It's been a while) can get you close to a 400k total.

Well, the OP asked about cash strictly (for a vehicle), not 'value'.

If you're spending 100k on genetech, and you get a 10% discount you have 110k of genetech. For a vehicle the OP is kind of screwed by the starting cap and no available discounts.

His only shot is a gm allowing blackmarket (vehicles) to be available in char gen

so go for black market (gentech) and genecrafted

Genecrafted, genetic heritage, blackmarket (genetech). 60% discount FTW

That is what is funny to me here Kruger... You attempt to inflame me, and yet you failed. I have, MANY TIMES, admitted that I am wrong... When I am wrong....

Since the reading of the topic is so very vague, my interpretation is indeed a valid interpretation... AS is Yerameyahu's, and several others as well... Ironically, we are all RIGHT... all of us have quoted RAW as defined within the parameters of this very vague rule... I happen to like my interpretation better than yours... You disagree... neither of us are WRONG here...

It is no longer worth arguing...

Have a Nice Day...

Yeah, I will point out that there is a difference between merely interpreting a rule, and making an actual house rule.

House rules by definition create "new law" where there was nothing before.

Merely interpreting existing text doesn't really count.





-karma

Good point KarmaInferno... I will remember that...

It depends on what that 'interpretation' is.

You can't really interpret text that doesn't exist. What they're doing is adding to the rule. It's house ruling, plain and simple.

What's silly is that there nothing wrong with house ruling. It's not like there's even some kind of stigma against it. Nobody is saying anything negative about it. Heck, it's encouraged and expected because no game system is perfect and not every rule works for every table. So the fact that people are so fervently denying it is rather absurd. I don't agree with all of the house rules suggested, but the good news is, I wouldn't have to enforce them. But Rules as written are rules as written. Even the Rules as Intended is there, because there are multiple examples of other flaws stating the consequences and terms of buy-off where In Debt says nothing extra. It's just that what the writers wrote and intended was retarded and obviously not well thought out or play tested.

It's the dumbest argument ever because we're arguing semantics about a rule that pretty much everyone agrees is terrible.

What's the most bizarre part of this, and Tymea is missing, is that I'm not trying to inflame him or anyone else and nor is Yerameyahu. We're just stating the truth. Sometimes I wish I wasn't such a stickler for the truth, but I am, and it's my nature.

Are we really calling each other idiots over the definition of the word 'is'

Pretty sure this thread has run it's course.

There is, according to the RAW, no way to pay off your debt.

It is never mentioned. The only payment mentioned is the 10% monthly payment.

So, if you're playing it with no interpretation, only using the words on the page, you can not pay the starting sum back, ever.
It's just like extra rent you have to pay each month until you buy it off with Karma.

Now we're talking flaw.
30 BP for basically having to pay for a middle lifestyle that you can never use? Could be worse; could be better.

You can get rid of the quality itself by buying it off with Karma, as we have already established.

Technically, you might argue by RAW that you don't actually ever have to pay off the nuyen. You pay the Karma, and In Debt goes away.

Anyone else have the funny thought, though, that "they send legbreakers after you if you don't make the monthly payment" might be interpreted by a wise-ass runner as "They give me money, and every month they provide me entertainment and free gear!"





-karma

It says 'at least' the interest, implying that you can pay more.

I have kind of thought that before. I'd imagine it would be hard to get together leg breakers that are actually a threat to a good runner.

But it is mentioned. The Quality very plainly states "The character then owes" and then says exactly what that is. The character owes principle + 50% with 10% compound interest on the balance.

it doesn't say or imply the character "owes" favors. It doesn't say or imply the character "owes" time spent as the Don's towel boy. It says exactly what it means.

Think about how stupid it sounds to say that the character owes endless favors until they pay off the NQ with Karma. If you borrowed 30K, then you owe sixty Karma. That's 6-10 runs of giving up 100% of what you earned, on top of a large chunk of whatever money you happen to earn. And on top of that, while your character is gaining absolutely nothing from his activities as a shadowrunner (the player is essentially running in place while his teammates jog ahead), you're getting endlessly hounded by chores and tasks to do for no pay or benefit. It reverses the flaw from being horribly munchkiny for the player to take to being so ungodly punitive that nobody in their right mind would ever take it.

There's absolutely no point for the writers of Shadowrun to create a Flaw nobody would take. Reworded like that, it has no roleplaying value, and it has no mechanical value. A character might take Borrowed Time because they have a fun concept for a doomed character and the extra points are nice. Same with a burnout addict, or they enjoy the challenge and an amnesiac character will be entertaining to play and discover. In all cases, they have a fun role playing challenge, and a mechanical benefit. With In Debt reworded to be the house rule quality "Endless Bitchmonkey" they have no benefit since they will automatically lose all the points they gain from it, and an endless in-game headache for both themselves and the rest of the group. And all for a pittance of money that would barely buy a high end SUV.

So if we assume the In Debt NQ goes by the strict interpretation of its exact text based on precedent of both implied and stated costs based on other qualities, and read the rules for getting rid of qualities exactly as written ("can", and "allow"), then the NQ was just very poorly written and not play tested.

If we assume the In Debt NQ has extra meaning that is not included in its exact text, ignoring precedent of both implied and stated costs, and interpret the rules for getting rid of qualities using words that don't exist in the rulebook in any shape, form, or implication ("all" and "must"), then the quality is so horribly written as to be completely undesirable on both a role playing and mechanical sense, and the writers included it just to fuck with players and consume space on the page.

It also says that the interest compounds.
Maybe you can only pay more than the monthly interest in order to cover a previous missed payment or to get the total owed back down to the starting amount. Maybe not. Since it does not explicitly say, all one can do is interpret what is on the page. If it is an interpretation, then it is no longer RAW, but RAI.

Don't break their legs.

Break their car.
Burn their house.
Break their friend's legs.

There are lots of ways besides a Surprise KO to hurt a runner.

*shrug*. They wouldn't bother saying 'at least' if they meant only interest. To repay is part of the definition of to owe.

You can't get rid of the negative consequences of a negative quality without spending karma.

You can't pay off the debt without spending karma any more than you can just quit your Day Job or shoot your Dependents in the head.

Yes, it makes it terrible - I think we've established that it's terrible in any interpretation you care to give it.

How is this confusing?

The favors aren't endless. They are micro-runs specifically for that runner. Each one gives a karma reward directly applied against paying off the quality. That way, the character's growth doesn't fall behind the rest of the team unless he/she specifically uses regular run karma to pay it off. The idea is to cause only that player to suffer the negative consequences of their debt. You might have missed that idea in my post. I didn't really highlight it.

The favors are opportunities. Maybe if a character refuses too many times, the In Debt quality drops a level and the character gains a 5pt Enemy flaw. There are a lot of ways to work this out with roleplay which can be backed up with written mechanics.