wow this topic went sideways fast. but i dont think my gm is doing diminishing pools cause we are limiting the optional rules and its one of the many reasons the group as a whole left missions.

So are able to use this in missions? With some down time this could be very interesting

Well missions went and made all extended test btwn missions a diminishing dice pool where you had to buy hits to make everything everywhere the same.

Is that like a Metaplane?

For most systems of differential equations there won't be any.

So you would go with try and error. You could succed at some point, but thats monkey hitting on keyboards trying to write shakesbear.
Possible? Yes. If you give a a million years. Give or take.

Thats why I took them. If you solve one of the more complex once you have a PhD and it might fit on one page.
A mathprofessor I talked to said: The best PhDs in mathematics are the one fitting on one sheet of paper.

Thats why I took that example.

So you ADMIT it is possible to solve given enough time for an unskilled person... Absolutely amazing, since it is at odds with your stance.

… in a million years. C'mon, TJ.

But it WON't Be a million years Yerameyahu, and you know that (If it took a Million Years, we would STILL be struggling with Basic Calculus because it woud still not exist). What happened to that Metaphor?
Fact of the matter is that Diminishing Dice Pools only matter in Dramatic Circumstances, and have no real necessity when time is not an issue.

I would have thought karma to bind the things was the great equaliser, not the time creating them....

A Force 8 Power Focus costs a crap load of karma and imposes a lot of risk...

- J.

That's not the point. You said he said X, and he did not. You're being very silly with your 'debate' tactics today, TJ.

That is not a fact. Diminishing pools matter for downtime and other non-dramatic situations, in which the character cannot succeed in any reasonable duration.

The book specifically tells us that this is case, on SR4A p64.
In fact, it says nothing about 'dramatic situations'. It says, "Though it may seem that characters are guaranteed of success over time, this might not always be appropriate or dramatic." So, it's 'not dramatic that they're guaranteed success', not 'use diminishing pool when the situation is already dramatic'. In addition, per the rules, a limited timeframe (e.g., 15 seconds) is *already* limited, so there's no need for the diminishing pool. Again, this is explicit on p64.

Pretty sure the GM is also allowed to hand wave it and state that the character lacks the skills, and not just rely on diminishing dice pools.

- J.

I think that the Karma to binding is the Great Equalizer, yes. But honestly, why are you spending that much Karma to Bind a Force 8 Power Focus when you can get a Force 8 Basic Spirit Ally, which is even better?

Well, what do you think *I'm* working on in game?

Seriously, I gotta buy a few things first. GM has agreed to use the optional rules allowing me to tie Arcana to my casting Attribute (Charisma, yesssss....) so I gotta pick up at least 1 pt in Enchanting and Arcana, two other metamagics (one being Synesthesia, thanks Spy Games) and I'm good to start saving....

- J.

*shrug* That's the exact words from the book, The Jake. It says, 'the GM should limit them; we suggest by diminishing pools'. So… yes? The GM can do anything.

Maybe I have missed something when I have played what is buying hits?

I'm AFB, but I'm saying that the book actually says somewhere along the lines of "if it's going to take them forever the GM can just say no" (or words pertaining to that effect).
I've always been a fan of these. It's stops players from rolling dice endlessly, stringing out extended tests by 1-2 hits at a time.

- J.

I mean… I quoted it. It's right up there. It says the GM can limit it, and the suggested (not required) method is diminishing pool. The GM can also say X intervals only, or anything else.

Jesus christ. We had been over this on the last page.
YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO INCREASE YOUR SKILL. This means your knowhow about math will be that of a (lets say) 10 year old who left elementary and is in his first year of highschool. (Or in the second if your elementary is shoter than ours)

If you increase your skill, the whole process looks quite different. You will restart your work out of an other position.
And if you got into university and you "learned" it, you might just be able to solve it in 15 min. But it does not actually matter how long you worked on it before.

So the next guy might solve the same problem even faster, even though you have worked on it for nearly 10-12 years and he just for 10 min.


It is quite hard to do. And at this point, you have to ask yourself (due to amount of prepartion you will put into this) why not just go with force 10 and "win" the game.

Because an Ally Spirit does not help you with summoning / binding spirits (e.g. an F8 ally spirit ^^)

No but it helps with almost everything else. That Force 8 spirit nets me 8 dice to all spell casting rolls with Aid Sorcery, can offset drain if I really need to (although I'd avoid that like the plague), has its own Edge which you can draw upon, and more.

To say nothing of the fact you can obtain a Binding Focus that does the same thing and for significantly cheaper. Infact, I am thinking of building a stacked Centering/Binding focus for that reason. Once I have that, I almost don't see a need for a Power Focus...

If you're a spirit focused magician, Binding tests and Drain Resistance are all you really care about. If I'm in combat and I'm casting (Combat) spells, something has gone horribly wrong.

Last session I sic'ced 5 Force 6 spirits onto a room full of Triads and a (Master?) Shedim. Watching the look on the other player's faces when I said "Get them!" was priceless.

Irion, I saw an analysis on this once by Frank Trollman and he said once you get to Force 7+, you start to really own face. So I split the difference and settled on a Force 8. I don't think my GM is happy with this move but since he's throwing around Force 10s and I'm spending a bucket load of karma, I don't feel so bad about it...

- J.

Who is increasing Skill? I posited a download of a Datasoft that could possibly AID IN THE SKILL ROLL, but DOES NOT INCREASE SKILL. Get over it Irion. Your position still holds that it is possible to do, whether it takes 10-12 Years or 10 minutes, depending upon the person. Therefore, There is NO need for a Diminishing Roll.

Which makes my point for me. If you are eventually going to solve it/build it/whatever, why would you CARE to use diminishing pools in the first place? It ONLY matters when there is a Limiting time factor. Can you do it in the time allotted? There are several options for that. Diminishing Dice pools, or limit the number of rolls to your Base Dice Pool, or Limit rolls to Skill Rank. Or just say NO. All of these are options thatt a GM can use to add DRAMA to the story. If there is no need for the Drama, then there is no need for the limit on how many rolls are required, because it does not matter if you succeed or not. The only thing that maters in that case is HOW LONG it takes.

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
The rule can't take into account changes of dicepool. Be it learning or datasoft or what ever. If you do it, you have to housrule.
So just increase your pool up from the point you use the talent soft.


No, if this is the case IT DOES NOT.
If time is the leading question you do not apply this rule (in most cases).
If success is the leading question, you do apply the rule.

The rule is really, really simple.
One big task: Deminishing dicepools.
Several small task: No deminishing dicepools.

There is actually no way where this rule leads to silly outcomes.

Really? I believe that several people have already pointed out a few...

You keep contradicting the clear rules quoted. The rule is suggested when the player *won't* eventually succeed (which is the standard case). This is for special cases. You *may* limit the time directly, or you may limit the number of rolls, and one (suggested) method of doing that is diminishing pool. This explicitly reflects the fact that the player *can't* complete the task with the skill they have. It can't be any clearer.

This lines up nicely with the distinction between brute force/brute time, and threshold ability; Skill 1 can complete thousands of addition tasks (or dig 1 foot of ditch), given time and attempts, but maybe never solve a single math task that is beyond them (or, I dunno forge a good painting). Note that this is only an illustrative example, not a literal application of a SR4 skill.

No, I just do not acknowledge that in 2070, you can NEVER accomplish something (Assuming you are at least skilled in the attempt - Rank 1 or better, and , ironically, that is not always a requirement either). There are so many ways to approach a task that all I see is it taking time. Even If it takes 10+ Years, you still succeeded at that task.

Give me an example of a 2070 Task Check (that you would expect to possibly see in a game) that *won't" eventually succeed, that is not time restricted.

You can believe what you want. The rules explicitly say it can happen, and suggest this method. That's all. Don't use it if you don't like the suggestion.

It's not even useful to talk about '10 years'; simple math means that almost any task will either be completed after X intervals, or the person will have glitch-failed already. The point is 'is it a brute force task, or not'.

The rules may say that it *MAY* happen, but never tell you in what circumstances? That is the issue. There are absolutely NO defined Instances where it is an issue, other than when the GM thinks it may be possible (and usually when it is time constrained or dramatically appropriate - I would have to go back and look at the actual quote, but it is very similar to that). "It *MAY* happen." But to Whom? When? How? Why? See my point? Fact is, it is only when time is an issue that it really matters. Any other time it becomes irrelevant. Anecdotal, I know, but a Child, with standard Home Garage Tools, and no formal automotive education, can tear a car apart, to its frame and put it back together again, and have it function like it was new. I know this, because My uncle did it at the age of 8. By Himself. All it took was TIME (IIRC, it took him about 6 weeks each way, over the course of a summer).

What I will agree with is that Shadowrun does not have many "Rules" for the vast majority (Most) of design/construction/building tasks. And this causes issues when a group wants to pursue such things. This results in many GM's just assuming that a character will/should fail beacuse he is not the best at his profession, or does not have all of the materials/tools/locations he needs. When, in reality, these things are not really all that hard to come by. However, this is not Geek the Building, it is Shadowrun, and most of this is way out of the scope of most games. So, it should rarely be an issue.

Like I said: the rules provide for the possibility and suggest a method. If you don't want it, don't use it.

well, most children who take apart a lego building can't put it back together like it was without a plan ...

Agreed... they provide for the Possibility, not the Inevitability.
Unfortunately, the Diminishing Pool Method leans towards Inevitability more often than not.

No one said that, though. The GM decides whether or not to a given task is a non-brute-time task, period.

And I think that's exactly right. These rules are intended to - as you say - "prevent low DP characters plugging away at impossibly hard tasks until they get the requisite number of successes." Now, sometimes, that doesn't match reality, either just incidentally, or because the timescales possible in real life aren't reflected in the rule. Which is, ultimately, why there's a GM: there is no single, simple, fits-all rule that will match Shadowrun extended tasks to real-life extended tasks. GM judgment is still required to determine if a task is achievable at all, and if so, what sort of timescale it could be achieved in.

My reading of the rules it came down to GM fiat. I suspect that it is your problem - there is no clear mechanic, it's subject to GM interpretation.

- J.

@3278
Actually this rule fits. The point is, long term projects consist of doing something and scraping everything and start a new if you realize your methodes where not good enough to finish it.
Think of writing a programm.
If you just know very few basics you will start writing everything down in one file. Probably not even using loops. This will be OK for simple programs. But as your programm grows it gets harder and harder to keep track of everything. If you now learn, that it is better to write Sub-routines and sub-programs and how to format you program better, this might help you. But you would need to start again from scratches. And this is exactly what the rule is telling you.
So it does work.
The rule does of course not work if you simulate several tasks in a row. Because you would actually need to roll several extended test. And again it would work.
@The Jake

I really do not get it, it is quite spilled out in the text.

I mean honestly, thats quite straigt forward in my book. Everything where it is questionable that you can make it, you use this rule.
And by can make it, it of course means in ONE try. Not just making an extended test which consists of doing the same task over and over again, which is what some people here suggest as examples, why the rule does not work. Which is quite silly. Because here the extended Test rules in general DO NOT WORK.

Is that text in the original SR4 book or just SR4a?

- J.

@The Jake
SR4A as far as I know. The errata for the original book says:

Except what determines what is possible and what is not so that you can apply the ruling? It is arbitrary, mostly dependant upon individual GM's interpretation of how difficult a task is. A GM, I might add, who likely has absolutely NO IDEA of the actual difficulty of said task. But, he has to wing it, because there are no real guidelines available to determine such things, which leads to these types of discussions.