He who strikes first usually strikes last.

QFT

I've trained in a few different martial arts (Capoeira Regional, Muay Thai, and Jiu Jutsu) and I can tell you skill, while very important, becomes a null point if the person your facing is to fast for you. The point of CQC is contact and if you cannot make that contact due to the other persons superior reflexes then it makes perfect sense that they will probably beat you. My teachers are all much better then me but the older ones don't do to much sparing anymore because us whipper snappers are quick enough to make two moves to their one. The younger teachers however are fine because even if some of us are a bit faster their skill bridges the gap so they can take us down (hard...god I still have bruises.) Extra IPs giving such a big advantage makes sense because speed will always rule. It why faster characters win more often and it's why bullets win just about every time.

3 Skill * 4 IPs = 12 dice rolled, 6 Skill * 1 IP = 6 dice rolled. That's not a very fair comparison.

Suppose Skill * IP = Constant. The sniper has Skill 12, IP 1 (stacking bonuses somehow). The maniac has Skill 3, IP 4. Skill*IP=12 dice for both.

Now, in the first round, the maniac probably wins initiative and shoots twice, getting 1 success each time. This is fairly likely to be dodged because most combat characters have 3+ Reaction.

Then the sniper shoots twice (simple action), getting 4 hits each time, which is very hard to dodge. Net hits add to damage, and the maniac probably takes enough wounds to get wound penalties.

Then in IP 2, the maniac has only 2 dice remaining, for a 0.66 average hits per round. It becomes very easy to dodge him now.

Even supposing the sniper takes a wound in the first round; he goes down from 12 to 11 dice, and still has an average of 3.66 hits, still a dangerous amount.

I hope you see my point: one well-placed shot in the first IP can decide a combat. Lots of possible minor hits don't measure up to one certain good hit.

Now who isn't making a fair comparison? Skill 12? I already said that you could create extreme cases where the 1 IP and high skill character would win. A Skill of 12 is certainly feasible, but nowhere near an average skill level in any game I've ever run. I used Skills of 3 and 6 because that IS an average Skill range in my (and I assume most) games. You also mention "stacking bonuses somehow" which completely ignores the "all other things being equal" part of my example. If one character gets stacking bonuses somehow, then why couldn't the other character get equal stacking bonuses the same way. Its much easier to get multiple IPs than it is to get to a Skill of 12 and far more common in my games. YMMV.

I believe Brazilian was saying that when its lethal combat, the first guy to shoot is often also the last guy to shoot because the other guy is dead...so no more shooting. It doesn't matter if your facing doc holiday if you shoot him while he's playing poker. Similarly, it doesn't matter if your brock lesnar if the other guy sticks a knife in the back of your neck before you even realize its started.

I don't think he's saying that being fast matters for nothing in the face of skill. Or even insinuating that. He's merely implying that if your slow, be good enough to kill them on your first shot, BEFORE their inhumanly fast reflexes come into play. AKA The QFT is probably a wee bit unwarranted given its a relatively logical argument he's making.

Ironically, aside from CQB, astounding reflexes/speed matter very little in a modern gunfight (call of duty to the contrary), because you spend most of your time hunkering down, trying to figure out where the shooting is coming from, and generally hammering that area, or waiting patiently for a keyhole shot. If a target is outside your front 45 degrees or so of vision (60 if your a disciplined scanner, 15-30 if you get target oriented...and most people do), your reflexes don't matter, because you won't notice the target even exists until bullets are coming in.

No matter how fast your ability swing a gun on target may be, you can't complete the OODA loop faster than they can either keep shooting or drop back down again.

I think the big problem is that you compared someone with twice the skill, with someone with four times the speed. Of course the 4x is going to win out over 2x. Now, if you did 2 IP vs 1 IP and 3 skill vs 6 skill, then you'd have a decent comparison, and I think you'd find they'd be reasonably evenly matched.

I think the point some of the others are trying to make is that a front line fighter will need his extra IP more for things such as full defense, while the slower characters, who will (presumably) not be in front or drawing as much fire, will be likelier to be able to use their 1 IP to make an attack.

One of the big changes to the initiative system (done starting in SR3, IIRC) is that everyone gets one turn first, and then the extra IPs go afterwards. So slower characters still usually get to act in a round, compared to SR2, where usually the speed sammie used two or three actions to shoot all of the enemies dead before anyone else could do anything.

Except it doesn't matter, either way, because the 4IP sammy will STILL roll just as many dice as the 1IP guy, because he's likely as not hitting the same limit. Or rather, the 1IP face will probably actually be rolling far fewer. Even if he were a dedicated 1IP sniper, then he would probably not have more dice.

Well.... let's say: Agi7 + Skill6 + 2spec + 2smart + 1reflex rec.=18
The 1IP adept sniper: Agi6 + Skill6 + 2spec + 2smart + 6 Improved combat ability : 22. Alright... but that's seriously minmaxed (and illegal) and still not enough to matter. Oh right, we still have a few PPs.. time to add some IPs .

The point being: More IPs, get them. Even if you're not a combat monster.


Well... we just have to accept it's a game. And I'm quite glad it is, so I don't have to deal with cumbersome rules like in real life .

Yes, that's what I meant, but it is not "relatively logical", because I said 'usually'.
Most of the time, people are disabled with a single shot, so it takes a single bullet to stop someone. If you hit your target first, chances are it won't fire back. Unless of course you miss it or you are shooting an angry Troll with a BB gun

This is specially true when fighting in L5R (how I love the Crane and Scorpion clans and their hit first, hit last mentality)

Oh, I don't disagree at all.

I know. I was addressing the specific complaint of "A more skilled person should be better than or on par with a person that has more IPs." The original comparison was 4 IPs and 3 skill vs 1 IP and 6 skill. This is a nominal skill difference, and a massive IP difference, and so was an absurd comparison.

Sorry for rulelawyering but i won't fall asleep tonight if someone is wrong on the internet
You can improve your skill to a maximum of original skill * 1,5, meaning 10 ist the max skill you can have with aptitude.

I don't understand why you consider it an absurd comparison. The skill difference may be nominal, but it is certainly an average degree of difference one could place between a low skilled character and a higher skilled character without min/maxing to extremes. You really don't have to min/max to get 3 IPs, but you would have to min/max quite a lot to get a characters skill up to a level where they stood a chance against a character with 3+ IPs. Again, all other factors being equal.

According to SR4a pg. 119 a skill rating of 3 is considered Professional while a skill rating of 6 is Elite. I went with those 2 numbers because they are in the average range for characters and to keep the math simple. Its not my fault that the difference between having a Skill of 3 and a Skill of 6 in SR only results in 1 additional success on average. Blame the game designers for that joke. Even if you lowered the high IP character's skill down to a rating of 2 (considered Novice) the only thing that would change is the math involved to reach the same conclusion. High IP on average trumps skill.

The difference in skill level isn't that great. What is different here is the expectation that Elite is somehow that much greater than Professional or even Novice. In SR4a, the difference in skill level is often marginal.

Yeah, the fact is that a 6 skill person is only going to be marginally better than a 3 skill person even if they have the same number of IP.

You are correct, I believe. I was trying to emphasize the point in the most ridiculous manner, and forgot about that in the process.

And that is precisely the point I was trying to make about having multiple IPs being so much more important than Skill.

I don't have a problem with having multiple IPs until it gets into the 3+ range and thats when you have to get extreme levels of skill just to balance things out. Or, the opposition must also have multiple IPs in which case there is nothing gained by having a multiple IP system beyond merely 1 or 2. Its a problem of escalation in the guise of variety.

What you have here, is a failure to communicate problem with the basic system that is Shadowrun. If you want skill to mean more, then make it mean more. Take stats out of the equation and allow skills to go up to 12 or infinite or whatever.

Part of the problem here is that skill is only a small part of the equation that gives you how good a person is at something, so being mad at a max skill and a middling skill person barely being different in ability has nothing to do with IP.

And no, it isn't really escalation in the guise of variety, because while 1 bonus IP is easy to get, 3 bonus IP is very difficult to get. Yes, many combat characters will likely have 3 IPs, every non-combat character who wants to participate in combat should likely have 2 IPs, but you don't often see characters with a full 4 IP, despite it being what you are complaining about too much. For cyber/adept it simply costs too much essence, and for bioware it often just plain costs too much.

I mean, you may as well take magic items and attack bonuses and armor class out of D&D, because that's all just escalation in the guise of variety. What's the point of a +1 sword? It just means all enemies will now have to have +1 armor to balance it out and nothing has been accomplished. I mean, what's the point in even playing a game? No mater how good you get, you'll always be facing evenly matched opposition. What's the point in even improving in any way whatsoever?

Extra IP is a form of advancement for combat characters, and it is a big form of advancement for them, because they can start out with maxed attack pools, maxed armor, and near maxed defense pools. It is also what separates them from non-combat characters. When shooting someone, it really isn't difficult to hit them, and extra hits aren't that special. So a giant DP only makes a combat character mildly better than a non-combat character. It is that extra dedication in the form of extra IP that really separates them. It is those extra IP that lets them go "When the excrement hits the air circulation system, I'm the one who you turn to."

If non-combat characters getting to have 3% more spotlight in combat is worth taking away such a defining characteristic of combatants, and if you really don't want anyone to be good at anything, then go ahead and take out IPs above 2. But you also need to take out commlinks and VR and programs, because those prevent the combat character from doing anything while in the matrix. And you need to take out kinetics and tailored pheromones and all those social skills because that prevents the combatant from doing anything (meaningful) in social situations. And lets not even get started about what you have to do to magic because the combat character can't cast spells or summon spirits or go astral.

The short and long of it? Combat based characters are GOOD AT COMBAT and non-combat characters AREN'T and extra IPs are one of the things that highlights that. Just like the 100k of programs highlights the difference between a hacker and everyone else.

This is 110% correct. Everything else you brought up just misses the point, but I take responsibility for not being able to communicate in a manner that makes things more clear. I just don't like game systems that place so much importance on a single aspect it becomes a virtual requirement to keep a character from appearing crippled in such an important area. No, every character does not need to be a combat monster, but neither should they feel like a mouse with a broken leg facing a hungry cat every time the action starts. In a system with only 1 or 2 IPs, the combat monster still has plenty of room to shine, but everyone else is no longer sitting ducks waiting to be slaughtered or left twiddling their thumbs until its their turn again.

I can only speak from my own experience, but for the characters with multiple IPs in my game 3 IPs is more common than 2 IPs.

Reducing the maximum number of IPs to 2 instead of 4 what is lost from the game except variety?

Given the context of his argument, I'm fairly sure he meant 12 dice pool, not 12 skill.

Which is pretty trivial to get in SR.

Hell, a character with one or two dice pools of 20+ are not that hard to make and still have fairly decent other abilities.



-k

On idea I've been considering was to enforce the RAW that Observe in detail (and rolling a Perception test) requires a Simple Action and Communicating one piece of information a Free Action. Players usually start their IP by asking several questions like "Where are our opponents ? Is my last target down ? Did [other PC] succeeded in [whatever he was trying to do] ?" Rarely do they just say "I keep firing at the closest muzzle flash in front of us." and the sure never ask "Hey, by the way, how bad have I been wounded ?"

Oh dear, now the guy with 1IP never gets anything done....

But yeah, should happen more often.

In building the two PCs I now play who each have one IP, I understood from the beginning that they would feel like that mouse. I expected it. I like playing it.

Each has ample skills in other areas that make up for this combat shortfall. If they are 'extra baggage' in combat, even a liability, so be it. I hope that their skills and talents will in the long run help the combat-focused PCs understand their value, and develop tactics to keep them safe. If that doesn't happen, then maybe I, the GMs, or the other players aren't playing up to snuff.

EDIT: Having said that, one of these two PCs has Living Focus and Heightened Concentration, with the design plan of being able to be sped up by the team mage. This is in the Post or Die thread, and several mages have entered the campaign, and some have died spectacularly because their players did not post frequently enough. Not a single one of them has/had Increase Reflexes.

You must think it really sucks that guns are virtually required to be useful in combat too. And armor. And as I said, you get the exact same effect with hackers and their programs, faces and tailored pharamones/pharamone receptors.As has been said a hundred times on this thread, 2 IP is absurdly easy to get. Just like a gun is absurdly easy to get. Heck, depending on the method, it could be easier to get than a gun. And I don't really think that 1 IP is enough of a difference. The combat character is always going to be spending at least 1 IP a turn on dodges because she is going to be the one being shot at. This means that a combat character with 2 IP is going to be virtually no more effective than the non-combatants in combat. Like I said, combatants are good at combat, non-combatants shouldn't be unless they invest in it. That investment takes the form of a weapon, armor, some skill, and some form of increasing your IP. You're basically saying "I don't want anyone to actually be good or bad at anything."

You misread what I said. I said 2 bonus IP, aka 3 total.

A separation of those who have basically devoted their lives to combat and those who picked up a pistol last week. They'll both be able to shoot someone on average, they'll both take two shots to kill someone on average.
The other problem is that because 2 IP is so freaking easy to get to you're not even going to have that separation. When 2 IP costs 20 nuyen of drugs, why not have 2 IP and be twice as good in combat?
And you'll lose variety. I don't know why you say that like it is nothing. I mean, would SR be as good a game if it just had one gun, one piece of armor, one spell (that can only be cast at a particular force), etc. Would you be happy if you got told you only got to eat one food for the rest of your life? Verity is an important thing. The spice of life as they say.
Oh, you also lose a major method of improvement/advancement for combatants.

So yeah, you lose alot by dropping a max like that on IPs

And you'll be left with a table of cram/jazz users. If 2IP is the max, why waste valuable essence/powerpoints/spells on something you can do for a handful of nuyen?

If drug use becomes regular, sooner or later addiction will follow.

Depends on how often you enter combat.

Your also taking away one of the fundemental decisions of Sam design, balancing speed vs more money/essence to spend on other stuff.

No its not, you can have a much creater difference, you just have to calculate the whole dicepools and not just the dices provided by the skill(which is usually less then half)
Considering that the dicepool for shooting can range from 0 to 30+ i would say a somewhat fair comparison might be.
Slow skilled shooter 24dice and 1IP
Fast unskilled shooter 6dice and 4IP
or Fast low skilled shooter 12dice and 4IP

And if its a one on one between the fast and the slow guy, the amount of IP:s the fast guy has doesn't matter as he's very unlikely to survive the first IP of the slow guy shooting him.

No, there would be plenty of room for separation (read: variety) between the gun-bunnies and everyone else. Gun bunnies would still be able to get Initiative Boosters allowing them to go earlier in the round than other character types. Gaining an additional IP would no longer be "so freaking easy to get" because it would now become the maximum and move up to where 4 IPs is now in its difficulty to obtain.



But having one specific gun, one specific piece of armor, one specific spell is not of greater importance than any other other. With IP Boosters it IS a single aspect that is of greater importance than nearly anything else for someone who wants to create a combat charater. And because IP Boosters are currently "so freaking easy to get" it becomes too common, nearly required for one specific character type... and that limits variety within that character type. Sure, you can create a gun-bunny without it, but they aren't going to be nearly as effective and in a world where it is common to have and "so freaking easy to get" the one without it is just asking to get slaughtered by those that do have it.

You would not really lose any of the improvement/advancement opportunities for combatants. All it would do is take away the focus from bonus IPs and place it on Initiative Boosters. So it would be a matter of "who goes first" and get rid of the the "who goes 3 or 4 times before anyone else gets to act again" syndrome. Or maybe you think any game without something that allows the combat characters to act 2x to 4x more than everyone else lacks a major method of improvement/advancement for combatants.

Now let me tell you what is gained by reducing the max # of possible IPs to 2...

1.) Much fewer wonky situations requiring House Rules to fix (some of which have been brought up in this very thread)
2.) Less importance placed on having one specific piece of cyber, spell, adept power which allows for greater variety of combat characters
3.) No more combats with most of the group doing nothing while the high IP character finishes the rest of their IPs
4.) No more combats where those without high IPs are slaughtered by those with high IPs by the end of the first round.
5.) Action scenes where even the slower characters still feel they are able to contribute something
6.) No more game world full of people moving 2+ times as fast as everyone else because its "so freaking easy to get"


I don't see anything really being lost by limiting things to 2 maximum IPs, but a lot that can be gained.

I think this is a case of you do it your way, we'll do it ours.

There's a lot in that last post I disagree with but I get the impression that arguing it would be ultimately futile as you seem to be set on your 2 IP limit.

It's your game, play it how it works for you.

Except that you forgot to factor in teh relevant Agilities and other bonuses of the players involved...

Add the average of 6 Agility and 2 for Specialization and now the Dicepools are like this...

Skill 3 Guy = 11 Dice (Mook Guy with an AR and APDS Rounds: 6p, -5 AP) Average Hits is 3 (Hard to Dodge)
Skill 6 Guy = 14 Dice (Sniper Guy with an HK and APDS Rounds: 7p, -7 Armor) Average Hits 4 (Harder to Dodge)

Assume that each opponent gets an average of 2 hits to dodge (Reaction 6)... So...

Mook Guy inflicts 7p -5 AP to the Sniper Target; 8 Armor (Jacket) is reduced to 3 and Body of 4 results in 2 Avg Soak; Damage Inflicted of 5p to the Sniper... Sniper is badly Damaged, but possibly still in fight (I would not be, but still)

Sniper Guy inflicts 9p -7 AP to the Mook Target; 8 Armor (Jacket) is reduced to 1 and Body of 4 results in 1 Avg. Soak; Damage of 8p to the Mook... Mook is likely out of the Fight (I definitely would be)

Smartlink adds 2 Dice to the totals for 13 and 16 Respectively, which will up the average damage to each target by +1 additional DV in the end... Now, Tacnet could add up to 4 more but these numbers should suffice...

Note, I used Sniper vs. Mook as the premise followed from that... Now, either one, all other things being equal, will typically incapacitate the other before the other acts, dependant upon who goes first... However, as can be very obvious, teh more skilled character will inflict more damage... Follow up shots in the 1st IP will completely finish off the other opponent, regardless of who fires first... So, if the Character is competent (Skill 3 Remember) and only has 1 IP, he will still typically eliminate a single opponent per Round. Yes, the character with Multiple IP's will do the same each and every Pass, which is why, as a Shadowrunner, it is often beneficial to have at least 2 passes, regardless pof your specialties. IP's are very easy to acquire for all character Archtypes. the Moral of the Story - Always get at least 2 IP.

My group allowed folks who don't have any kind of initiative augs to spend a point of Edge to get an extra pass for the entire combat, rather than one turn.

Agreed. Would be so easy to point out the errors with every one of those advantages and basically all the other stuff said, but he is quite plainly set into an 'IP is evil' mindset. If that's how he wants to play in his game *shrug*. Just remind me to never play in a game that he GMs.

Usually, as with all unnecessarily restrictive houserules: Frustrated players.

Except players, leaving.

Lot's of time on your own, indeed.

Basically you want to run a lower powered game. Go do it. You are making everyone the same, but thats ok because in your world you want everyone the same. Each GM should decide how they want their world to run. Shadowrun as it is played in the game is a world with mooks and powerful people. Powerful people in combat get to go more often. If you don't want that, don't do it

I personally really like the IP system in shadowrun. It makes combat characters good at combat. Combat doesn't happen much. In our games 3/4 to 5/6 of the time is out of combat. The faces, the hackers, the scouts get to shine. In combat the people with high IPs shine. They get to shine for a very small (but important) part of the game. It is a good thing that the people who are good at combat are better than those who are not. All the previous discussions abouts skills and how they compare, are not very interesting to me as the people who are good at combat will have high skills and high IPs (otherwise they won't be good at combat).

I repeat the early discussions about faces and hackers. Faces and hackers get to own the out of combat time. Samurai with loads of IPs get to own combat time. If you want a game in which there is less to differentiate between them, go do it. There are loads of good game systems out there, or just modify shadowrun and remove the multiple IPs. By doing so I feel you diminish the game, making every character more the same, but you feel that you get great wins.

I hope you enjoy your game, and feel that the reduction in effectiveness of the combat characters has added to the gaming experience. I personally will be carrying on with the IP system in which almost everyone has 2, the combat specialists have 3, and maybe someone has 4.


I mostly agree with this quote: let characters be different, don't make them all the same.

The wonky situations or the house rules haven't been needed in games that I have played in. The basic game system seems to work well/

There is a trade off between IPs and other stuff already. Yes you have to have one of the around 6 ways of getting IPs (6 is already quite a variety) but how much of each you get still makes for variety. And the most important variety is lost: the difference between someone good at combat, and someone not

Combat is a small part of the game. Most of the game is about faces, scouts and hackers doing stuff while the combat specialists get to watch. Its good that the combat people get their time.

This is the same as saying that you want no more combats where those that are not good at combat are slaughtered by those that are good at combat. I mostly want a game in which people that good at combat can quickly defeat those that are not good at combat

If you want to contribute more than once per combat turn get more IPs. If you don't want to be good at combat, you will presumably be good at something else, so you will get your own fair share of the time during different phases of the game

Shadowrun is about people that have been enhanced by magics and cyberware. Its basically Manga. Its about people moving 2+ times as fast as others.

Why would you reward people for not getting augmented? I could maybe see letting them spend more then one edge but, everytime i see the "Oh you don't want to play with one of the core facets of the setting, lets invalidate the choices of those who do" always seems a little bit wonky to me.

We don't tend to have people with super-high Edge scores. If you wanted, you could modify that houserule to be 2-3 points of Edge spent for the boost, which is what a shorter combat would work out to anyways. As it basically makes "being cool" a way to get 1 more IP (but not even the +1 reaction you get from taking a hit off an inhaler of Jazz), what it's served to do is let us have folks with 4 IPs without them being guaranteed to have 4x as many passes as some of the combatants at the table. It doesn't seem overpowered, as those players we've got without init boosted chars tend to use it only about 50% of the time; I see how you consider it a reward, but the guys out there running Boosted 1/Wired 1/Jazz/whatever are pulling the same number of IPs with a minimal cost, without spending valuable Edge to do it. We've got a lot of out-of-combat die rolls for perception, social actions, knowledge skill checks... Edge is a sought-after commodity even in combat-free sessions.

The size of my group might be a factor in this... we frequently have 5-7 PC's at the table, meaning that if you've got one guy who doesn't have any initiative boosting, it's going to be a *long* time before he gets another action in a fight. With 2-4 PCs, this wouldn't be nearly the case. We've also got one player who tends to run 3-4 IPs on his characters who we're considering getting a sand timer for on his turns, just to keep combat rolling. I do think I'll float the idea of upping the Edge cost to 2, though.

I would think 2 is more reasonable. Most combat is likely to last 2-3 turns on average. This means they might spend some edge they may not have really needed for the chance that the battle will last longer and they'll need that extra boost.

I would say, especially in light of the fact that the sammy is the mose USELESS character of any shadowrun team - unless they fuck up - that it's perfectly fine that they shine at fighting, with as many IPs as they can get. And so I say that this is a load of crap. Secondary combat characters should have two IPs at least, because they are runners, and not house-wives. Simple as that.

And this is not meant in the least with disrespect towards house-wives. I just don't expect them to show up at a shoot out.

So, yeah, a lot can be lost with a crappy limit.

@Shrike: Your situation makes it a little more clear to me but I still don't necissarily care for it. Perhaps because of my own issues that I'm tired of players or people on here go "But how do I be cool without cyber or magic, I want to be an individual snowflake and do neither but still be just as effective". There are ways to do it but they are hard roads by design and you don't really net anything from them but a whole lot of smug.

@Shrike: Your situation makes it a little more clear to me but I still don't necissarily care for it. Perhaps because of my own issues that I'm tired of players or people on here go "But how do I be cool without cyber or magic, I want to be an individual snowflake and do neither but still be just as effective". There are ways to do it but they are hard roads by design and you don't really net anything from them but a whole lot of smug.

Limiting the passes hits me as a relative nerf to Adepts and Street Samurai just to fix something that never occurred to me as being problematic in the first place. Having more passes is an advantage, surely, but that does not mean that deadliness is primarily a function of Passes or even total actions. For example, Mages have limited multi-casting and are quite capable of threatening/mind controlling multiple people or zapping a guy twice with armor ignoring attacks in a single Complex Action. It's taxing, sure, particularly after the Direct spell drain revision, but if you're willing to risk a headache and carry around a slap patch or two you'll find that your character can often define the terms of an engagement despite having only had a pass or two to work with. Frankly, if I was a weaselly munchkin type, I'd welcome a 2 pass limit. It'd mean my combat oriented Magician could very nearly match a tweaked Samurai in the speed department with drugs instead of having to to blow points and slots* on Increase Reflexes and a Force 3+ Health Sustaining Focus. Addiction tests aren't so scary when Will is already one of your valued stats.


*By slots, I mean the limit on number of bound foci as well as the number of starting spells cap.

Note to self:
Next character: Sammy house-wife

The oven mits are for changing the barrels on the vindicator.

Why Not? I have a Sushi Chef Sammie... (Try to say that fast 3 times)...

Now I have this vision of her showing up with a cooking apron and oven mits. Man, think how easily she could waltz through security like that. "I'm just bringing my husband freshly baked cookies. Do you want a couple for keeping such a good eye on the security?"

I tried.

I hate you.

I couldn't even get past 'chef' on my first try

Well at least I did better then that lol.