Ok, so it seems not everyone agrees how to do KarmaGen. Those are the rules at my table that i think are kinda ok:

Attribute cost ist x5 (i mean, of course it is. it's like that later on as well, x3 in those english books must have been a typo)
Racial Modifiers are added afterwards (shouldn't cost an orc 25 karma to get that bod 5 when it costs the same for a human. orcs are not just humans that have trained a fair bit, they have other physiology)
No Initiation / Immersion at chargen (that one's arbitrary, one could easily rule otherwise if the tables wants it)
You still get free knowledge points based on logic and int
You get free connection points based on cha
You start with Edge*1000 nuyen (that one's a minor less common houserule that has worked out pretty good. so chars without a real demand for cash do not need to invest some single points into it)
You can purchase Nuyen at a rate of 2500 per 1 karmapoint (instead of 5000 per 2; doesn't hurt, does it?)
Of course you pay for race! they bring boni with them, no way they could be free (remember those AI / Free Spirit Threads -.-) Cost is BP*2
Speaking of it, EVERYTHING is BP*2 btw. Makes sense, doesn't it?

btw, the most karma-efficient allocation of attributes for a human in BP is of course 5/5/5/5/5/1/1/1 (200 BP) - thats equivalent to 350 karma and should be doable in karmagen as well. turns out, it's just the maximum a 700 karma char can spent on attributes anyway. also keep in mind that just 3's in everything (baseline) is already 200 karma flat.

How much karma you start with is of course up to you and what kind of game you want to play. anything between 600 and 800 works, did both extremes already. Perhaps 700 are a good middle ground for what most people want. 750 is suggested. At my table, we use 800 most of the times (it's also 400*2 ). Honestly, it's not much of a difference. People already have everything they want to focus on as high as they see fit (and there are still the usual caps) so extra karma will most likely go into branching, which i think is a good thing. Even then, 50 Karma is two skills from 4 to 5, or 2 new skills at 4 plus spec. Nothing dramatic.
Also, people tend to have a high edge on 800 - something that i like a lot, it's just an enabler for great scenes and makes chars special IMHO.

Usually it turns out like that: Half the Karma is gone in attributes already, + something for the race (yeah, orc. really have to fix that), so just around 400 is remaining. Something up to 200 into skills, 200 left. Mostly 100 into 'being special', either money (250K Nuven) or mojo (magic or resonance at ~6). So 100 is left. That could be 4 more skills at 4. Some Martial Arts (should not count as qualities at all). Or Edge 6.



To all the people saying 'OMG HATER, BP IS JUST FINE!!11': How can you defend a system that encourages you to metagame constantly? "yeah, a spec would be really nice..OHWAIT, better get it with karma later!" or "hm, i only have BP for 2 skillpoints left and want both of these skills in the long run..OHWAIT, lets put both into one skill because its cheaper that way!"
I mean seriously, that's not something ANYBODY would like, right? Sometimes, I don't get people.

Some of us have better self-control. I tend to specialize *everything* in BP, knowing full well it's 'inefficient'. The reason we say it's fine is that… it's fine.

Same here. I see specializations at BP-gen all the time at my table. Really, the only 'metagaming' I see at all is people often getting a single dumpstat so they can maximize the stats they need the most.

Oh, and if my players know that they'll be getting some karma right after char gen (usually to 'catch up' when a character dies in a long-running campaign) they tend to ignore a skill or two to raise it with the karma. Usually that extra karma goes somewhere else though, like initiation/submersion or to push up Edge.

Then again, none of my players are obsessed with min-maxing and squeezing out every last drop of benefit they can find. They're more into making interesting characters that they will enjoy playing.

For me, BP specializations tend to just happen if I'm sitting on a weird number of points after buying everything I need.

This.

Believe it or not, there are still a few of us who think about the character concept and match the numbers to it rather than the other way around.

For the record: Those two are not mutually exclusive. I would even say they got nothing to do with each other.

Imagine a mundane human that takes Agility 6. Now that's expensive, and in BP also implicates an explicit fine in an otherwise linear cost scaling system - ouch! Now what if he instead just takes Agility 5 and a Muscle Toner 2? Thats not only cheaper, it's also more dice at the same time! The saved points could for example be spent in a skill that gives a nice touch to the character, explains parts of his backstory and emphasizes one reason why he is who he is - and makes him even more enjoyable to play along the way!

Honestly, rules are there for a reason. If you don't like it it's fine - and i even sympathize strongly with you because let's get that straight: Most rule systems are crap! And while it may be better than others, we all know Shadowrun is FAR from perfect.
My point is that it depends on player skill (Exploiting Rules (Shadowrun) ) how good a character is. We all know the sample characters. Lets not get started on those poor ponies again, but i mean yeah.. you get my point. Now compare them for example to the chars Abraham Isgur (UmaroVI) comes up with. Yup. They basically don't even live in the same universe.
To me, that is a BAD thing. And it's partly BECAUSE of BP Gen and all the hooks that are to it. Wen can conclude: Sadly, two characters that used the same number of (Karma | BP) Points are by no means automatically on the same power-level.
I don't have a real solution to this. If you do, by all means let me know. But I handle it through building characters that are reasonably good. If everyone at a table does it, it's ok that way. Not great, just ok.

So, let me try to be constructive. To all those agreeing with snowRaven: Why don't you just make numbers up?

Agreed. If a specialty fits, I buy it in Character generation, regardless of the character generation system being used. We use BP Gen almost exclusively.

Oh, There you/we are... I was under the impression you/we had gone extinct.

I was under the impression Humans are a non paranormal creature, whereas someone like a Troll is not. Anyone know where I am getting that, wasn't there a thread or a FAQ about it?

EDIT: I found it http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...=24121&st=0

The reason why it works is because Critter Form is worded differently than Shapechange, allowing the catch all term "Animal" instead of Critter (although IIRC Critters is a general term for all NPC as per the SR4 rulebook) Humans are animals and thus it works.

Nevermind that there are also sentient (and sapient, which he meant) critters, yes.

As always, RAW or not, no good GM would ever allow human form. The spell is broken enough without that.

You mean how you can chain critter/shapechange castings to get into ever bigger and powerful forms?

Your second sentence is also very subjective, "good" or "bad" has nothing to do with allowing or disallowing something. Thats typically a knee jerk reaction, and I frown upon it as its the "easy way out", try working around or with the problem and youll see you don't need to ban as many things.



Really? We are about to argue about this? I should think all end points are explained by the various hints, you of all people know the rules just as well as me and should understand the various applications to get the total.

I don't believe you can do that, but yes, that would be even worse.

Nothing wrong with subjective points. You *should* take the easy way out… it's easier. Good and bad are the *only* reasons for allowing/disallowing things.

--
Regarding the actual thread: my point is only that BPgen works just fine, though Xenefungus says it doesn't. BPgen does not force or encourage metagaming hijinks, any more than karmagen does. They are simply different systems. Karmagen does indeed have the nice benefit of using the same cost scales as post-chargen advancement. This benefit is hardly so overwhelming that it renders BPgen pitiable and useless. That's all. It's not about powergaming, minmaxing, or good roleplaying. They are both merely chargen options.

Lets us make a example then

I am a human with BOD 4

I critterform into a Great Cat, BOD 6

I now have BOD 6

I then critterform into a Horse, BOD 8

I now have Bod 8

Etc, Etc, Etc, Rinse and Repeat

Keep in mind you don't have to upkeep the previous castings, the spell only cares about your BOD when you cast it. Once you Enter Horse for BOD 8, you can cancel the Great Cat casting as it no longer matters. As long as you maintain the Horse you have BOD 8 and can keep going up the chain.

As for your second sentence...I dunno, I've never had a problem with a disruptive rule or character. There is always a way to let the player have his fun while mitigating his impact on the experience.
Also I enjoy a challenge, it keeps me sharp.

Like I said, I don't believe you can do that. I didn't say I hadn't seen the arguments for it. It depends on a number of assumptions that aren't in the rules (they're also not *not* in the rules, which is the perennial problem). I'm not in the habit of adding major functionality just because the rules don't disallow it. Obviously, people can do whatever they want at their table.

Lucky you (you must play with TJ!). Most people have, though. It's why rules exist.

That boggles my mind though, WHY couldn't you do that (assuming we are not choosing the less power option here /wink), this isn't even a argument where the rules don't say I can. We have permission to do this, as the game only cares if we have a high enough BOD score when the spell is cast.

Its not like if you somehow LOST Bod during a upkeep the spell goes away, this just doesn't happen as the rules simply don't work that way. You cast it, it happens, it goes away only when you stop upkeeping it or its dispelled.

As you may know, I also think the Shapechange rules are just wrong, in so many ways.

But, leaving that aside, it doesn't make sense to me to use whatever magically-enhanced Body you happen to be sporting at the time of casting; the spell says, "a critter whose base Body rating is 2 points greater or less than her own". I interpret this to mean their own, actual *base* Body.

It also doesn't make sense that you don't even have to maintain that boost, but that's obviously a TANSTAAFL argument, not a rules lawyer one.

And here's the thing: 1BP is almost never the equavalent of 2 karma. Sometimes you can get close, but worst case 1 BP equates to 1 karma (low attributes, skills at 1 and 2). I understand using this yardstick in KarmaGen to buy things like Race, qualities and other things that cannot be bought in-game by karma makes sense, my objection is to the mistaken belief quite often quoted on this forum that 1BP is equivalent to 2 karma; it is not.

By the numbers:
Skill 6 @ 24BP/44 karma 1BP = 1.83 karma; this is the best BP/karma ratio possible for only 1 skill at CharGen
Skill 4 @ 16BP/22 karma 1BP = 1.375 karma
Skill 2 @ 8BP/8 karma 1BP = 1 karma

Attribute 6 @ 65BP/100 karma 1BP = 1.54 karma
Attribute 5 @ 40BP/70 karma 1BP = 1.75 karma
Attribute 2 @ 10BP/10 karma 1BP = 1 karma

Rant over.

As to specializing/not specializing during CharGen, as TJ succinctly put it people using BP gen still use it in cases where it makes sense to their characters. Believe it or not, most folks using the BP gen system do not try and squeeze out the maximum possible karma equivalent out of their BP as they can.

Oh, and you're plain wrong about the 2 skills at 1 vs 1 skill at 2 conundrum - in either case you get the equivalent of 8 karma for your 8BP ...

That is a excellent ripost to my standpoint and good job for it, one of the best I have seen over the last few days.

Here is the Fun part



I interpret this to mean your actual score when you cast, regardless of how you got it.

If we go by your interpretation, stuff like Vamp enhances, Cyber/bio-ware, Spells do not count towards this. If your character sheet says you have 1 body, but have a spell that ups to to 9, by your point of view we need to go with the 1 body for Shapechange. That...is... Not correct , nor is it fun for the player (whew, dodged a Mod post there)

I dunno if I've ever seen anyone say that BP=2 Karma for any purposes other than race, qualities, etc., as you mention. But I'm glad you got your rant out.

--
That wouldn't be 'base' Body, then. That's current and/or augmented Body.
I agree: cyber, spells, etc. *don't* count. That's my intended result. I see no reason it's not correct, or unfun. Also, screw the player, especially if he's a vampire.

So, we find ourselves once again at a disagreement over *interpretation*. Mine assumes that base Body is unaugmented, and is uniformly less vulnerable to power creep. Yours assumes current Body is the limiting factor for the Body of the critter you turn into, and therefore that cyber, spells, etc. somehow affect the size of the critter available. This doesn't make sense to me, because the character is not actually bigger (this is one issue with the spell itself, because Body is a messy stat). Yours is also vulnerable to the abuses you and others have clearly described. A subjective choice has to be made, and I made mine.

Your a bad person for saying that

... and looking at the thread you quoted, you can see that it was a contentious issue. Ancient History (one of the devs) said using Critter Form to turn into a human was almost certainly not RAI, and you should check with your GM about whether or not it would work at his table.

Most of the sane members of this forum consider the use of the undefined word "animal" in the spell description a dev mistake for the defined "critter" used in the spell name and move on. However, I do grudgingly grant you that by strict reading of the RAW of the spell description human form could be allowable pending GM approval.

That is all I ask, nothing more

As an aside, in previous editions of Shadowrun, metahumans were included in the Critter table. --Fortune

But you're a bad person for using "your" in place of "you're".

Seriously though, that's your whole response? Why do I bother…

My work is done here.

Would have to double-check with books, but I believe cyberware such as Bone Lacing and Bioware such as Bone Density Augmentation do not increase the BOD attribute itself, but add dice to BOD for damage resistance checks (in a similar way to how Tailored Pheremones add to CHA for face-to-face social tests). The way I remember it, Suprathyroid Gland though *does* increase BOD ...

Nothing Wrong with Critter (Human) Form, as long as you alter how many attribute points are gained. Customize the spell, Change it to 1 point per Hit, assignable to any particular stat (physical) and you should be okay. I have yet to see it abused in our game, though I am the only one who actually uses it. Once you remove the +1 to all physical attributesd per net hit, it makes it far less useable to maximize stats.

I will say that if you do not change the Stat Boost, it is insanely overpowered. I find with the above rule that I tend to have a Human Form with the same stats as my normal Human Form. Of course, I only cast it at Force 3. *Shrug*

Not at my table, Yerameyahu...

I agree with you on the stacking of Shapechange... Horrribly abusive, and definitely not allowed at our table.

Yes, Midas, there are very few augs that actually raise Bod itself.

Yes, TJ, but that's a major houserule overhaul of Shapechange. I fully agree, of course, because that's the biggest problem with the spell: massive boosts to all attribs. Combining that with 'Human Form' basically makes it into a super-superior version of Increase [All attributes] + a perfect disguise… it's crazy. If you're going to start *changing* the rules, then that changes things.

Me, I still might not allow Human Form, because I like the idea that the spell is for non-sapient animals. A different spell could be for being a human. But that's just my taste, and extremely secondary to the +stat aspect. IIRC, the last houserule version I proposed was 'no +stats, Body *within* net hits of the subject's *base* Body'. Something like that. I've also seen things like 'you get net hits of +stat points to *distribute* among the Attribs'.

It is my belief that the spell works the second time but then a few seconds later you shrink down from a horse to a shetland pony.




Then you get eaten by a shark... that explodes.... in a swarm of cutter nanites.... made of thermite.

Agreed, but those are the logical changes if you want to reign in the overpowered aspects of the spell.
In our case, we created customized versions of [Metahuman] Form, rather than a redesign of Shapechange itself. I agree that Shapechange/Critter Form should probably be "fixed" though.

This.

So the consensus seems to be that BP is more balanced, and KarmaGen is good for making rounded characters and super-powered characters under lazy GMs?

I dunno about that. BPgen is sort of the archetype for 'minmaxing' (and dump stats), because of the linear costs. If Karmagen characters can seriously beat BPgen under a lazy GM, I'd bet the most common reason would be allowing chargen Initiations (which is a flat difference in the rules, not the gen method). Otherwise, it's probably a wash.

I think many people consider BPgen a little simpler and faster, though?

I made my point abundantly (and logically) clear. Shapechange requires a critter, (Critter) Form, despite the name, requires only a non-paranormal animal. There are also references in other places to dragons taking human forms through magic (not Greats using their Metahuman Form) that needs to be sustained. It's really quite simple - they can do so because (Human) Form is a legitimate spell.

@ TJ and Yera: While I have explained the RAW (in its bloodiest form), I personally believe that a spell with the same drain code of (Critter) Form that allows you to choose from metavariants only, at average metavariant attributes, and physically looking like the caster (albeit metatyped), is a good middle ground.

For example: Bob the human casts (Troll) Form. He now has average Troll stats (7, 2, 3, 7) and simply looks like Bob as a troll.



Absolutely.

I know we've been through it before, Neraph, but I'm perfectly happy concluding that Critter Form is intended to be *identical* to Shapechange, except for the specific-form limitation. Spell 'variants' like that should not have functionality that differs in the way 'the strictest RAW' interpretation mentioned here does. I'm also very happy letting dragons be special, *or* letting everyone have Human Form without the +stats. As long as they're not getting that crazy boost, buying one spell just to be human seems fine; it even fits nicely with *not* letting the much more flexible Shapechange do humans.

I'm fine with houseruling a metavariant form spell, but that's a separate question.