Metatype costs listed (I only have pre-erata RC, so correct me if this is fixed post-errata) is [(1/2*karma)+(2*meta bp)].

That means humans get, at basic karmagen, 375 karma to spend, and elves get 435 to spend on their stats?

Does that give an overall benefit to metas versus plain humans, where in BP gen, taking a meta is a cost and a human is a benefit?

humans have more karma leftover to put in skills. Also in German errata karmagen, metatype cost in karma = cost in BP

in karmagen, it's generally much better to spread around your spending anyways. just because 1/2 of your points *can* go into attributes, doesn't mean half your points *should* go to attributes.

With the Attribute + skill dice pool mechanic, investing in Attributes is generally a good idea. The opportunity costs of doing so can vary depending on how reliant your concept is on other things such as skills and contacts.

Metatypes can potentially spend more on Attributes, but keep in mind that karma costs for Attributes go up exponentially. In build points, a human buying an Attribute to 5, an elf buying Charisma to 7, or a troll buying Strength to 9 all cost the same - 40 build points. In karmagen, they would spend 70 karma, 110 karma, and 150 karma respectively.

Humans are a bit disadvantaged in comparison to metas, since the only free attribute bonus they get is Edge, whereas Orks e.g. start with Body 4 and Strength 3. The silver lining of playing an 8 Edge human is prohibitively expensive in Karmagen.

I still call BS on this idea. Humans are by far the BEST metatype.

Humanis scumbag...

It's the best because it doesn't cost points to be one. (To all the "optimizers": No matter how much you tell people that someone is 'paying' to be one, it still doesn't make it true.)

Could you elaborate on that?

You skipped a post.

Opportunity Cost is a thing, yo.

But there's also zero-cost/unstatted/fluff disadvantages to other metatypes to consider, like Dwarf and Troll Tax, and people being racist.

I think "opportunity cost" was made up by economists to rationalize the profligate exploitation of the natural world, but this isn't the forum for that discussion.

Suppose for a character that you decide in advance that you want 3 Body and 3 Strength (to fit the Human average). This can either be done at the cost of 40 bp (that also counts against attribute limit) as a Human, or at 20 bp by being an Ork (and 10 bp extra to also get the extra edge that humans do). This even affords one more point of Body than what you originally wanted. Granted, if you were aiming for 5+ Charisma or Willpower, or 6+ Edge, Ork is probably not your best option, but point for point, there are situations where Orks are simply better.

The thing is, when talking 'average' you have to take the metatype's bonuses into account, and thus to be average for that type, it will cost the same amount.

Only if you decide that for flavor purposes, you have to be that far above human standards. Even a weak ork (5 Body, 4 Strength, 2 Edge) is just 50 bp, compared to the 70 that a human spends on that. While you can argue that you wouldn't want the Strength, there aren't a whole lot of concepts that don't want that Body for the extra armor.
Perhaps you'll have to do a little background justifying why you're physically on the weak side of ork-kind, but (at least, without NQs) it can't be argued that you're actually scrawny and sickly, which a human with 2/2 Bod/Str would likely be.

Compared to normal orks you probably would be.

Yeah, but I don't compare to normal orks, I compare to the world at large. Almost no matter what, I'll be weaker than the average troll, and stronger than the average dwarf, elf and human.

Whereas, as I said, it's best to compare to the nominal versions of one's own metatype, IMO. That way, you can't be at all accused of the 'munchkin' thing. My motto: MSMAIC (Make Sure My A** Is Covered).

That's holding yourself to a higher standard than the archetypes. Looking at the only two ork/troll non-muscle archetypes, the hacker and the street shaman, they both have the equivalent of Body: 1 and Strength: 1 for a human.

Considering the low standard set by the archetypes, I'm going to go out on a limb and say most of us here hold ourselves to a higher standard than that.

Also, every single archetype has at least one stat that's equivalent to a 2 and all three dwarves have the equivalent of Strength 1.
The archetypes might be poor examples of optimizing a character, but looking at them in general, they're indicative of the world.
Thus, I do not believe it should be seen as munchkin-y to have stats that are at 2-equivalent (making way for the body 5 strength 4 ork).

Funny how when it suits their purposes, people on these forums (and the other one) will tout the table showing meanings for attribute values and the one for skill values all day long, but as soon as it disproves their opinion, they turn right around and find something else to use.

I wasn't even aware that attribute meanings had a table until you mentioned it (SR4A p. 67, for anyone else). That table only shows what attribute numbers correlate to for humans, by the way.

I don't prescribe to the notion that descriptive words for how good attribute/skill numbers are, have anything to do with the actual game. I don't think that players should hold back their skills because they can't be expert in that much and similar notions. I think that such descriptive words should only be for quick designs of NPCs, really. Player characters should be treated as special, and allowed to be deviate from the average in whatever fashion suits them.

Easy way to figure 'average' for the others: Add two to their minimum since that would come to being a three attribute (which is average) before adding their "racial bonus".

Wow! Genius! I certainly never thought of that!

Welcome to the world of AverageRun, where every runner is completely average.

Well, it gives you a basis for what is considered Average for each Metatype, though, which is somehting that I think is important. If you know that an Ork has an Average of 6 Body and 5 Strength, you know where you fall in that particular scale when comparing to another Ork. *shrug*

And that puts the metatypes more into context when it comes to costs and disproves the crap about humans supposedly costing like 30 points (or whatever their claim was).

I didn't say that humans cost points, only that for a given level of str/body, they cost more than the equivalent ork. Pure numbers game, orks give higher numbers at the same cost or less.
For most game mechanics, I'm a proponent of the idea that fluff should be disregarded when comparing costs and benefits.

fluff has mechanical aspects to it as well.

like the social skill penalties orks face in some cases, for example. like the fact that prejudice is a real thing, and whether it's wrong or not the cops are more likely to pull you over if you're an ork in a nice neighbourhood. like the fact that you *will* stand out instead of blending in when you're at certain events, and will as a result have a very memorable face to a lot of witnesses.

and of course, as has already been mentioned, there's the mechanical fact that strength is not always valuable as well... even on a melee build, you can completely ignore it (for example, by using electric/stun weapons), and if you're not ignoring it then you'd be better off with a troll anyways... and trolls have basically all the problems orks have, only worse (for example, they are a more rare metatype due to slower breeding rates, so there are most likely even fewer possible suspects for anything you do and get spotted doing).

there's also things like size. yes, most of the time, not a big deal... but you go ahead and try to cram your ork through a ventilation shaft, see if you think it's not a factor. in general, larger is convenient for melee combat, and inconvenient for most other things (cover that a dwarf could hide behind completely will leave an ork or a troll in danger of getting shot, unstable structures will support a human or elf more readily, a tight squeeze for an ork is likely only barely going to slow down a human, etc). it will also have occasional advantages (like being able to reach things that are higher up), but it is in general much easier to artificially duplicate the advantages of large size than it is to duplicate the advantages of being small.

The average ork is bigger than the average human, but the size differential is not big enough to really be that much of a factor (and remember that the average elf is taller than a human, too). Trolls, on the other hand, have actual rules for their larger size, such as needing gear specifically modified for their size.

I agree with Halinn that a Strength of 5 is a Strength of 5, whether it is on a human or a troll. One caveat, though. Metahumans are a package deal, so their Attribute bonuses won't always be what is optimal for a particular character.

the size differential is more likely to be noticeable than you think. consider, someone who is 5'10" is average, someone who is 6' is tall, and 6'2" is considered exceptionally tall (well, for men, anyways). that isn't exactly a huge difference. an ork who is just a little bit taller than human average *will* stand out when compared to humans. my brother who is just 4" taller than me is much more likely to have problems with hitting his head when walking through doorways and such.

furthermore, orks are not just taller, they are much bulkier as well. narrow passageways will be harder to get through. orks weigh over 50% more than humans, on average. 15 centimeters taller is about 6" taller, and while that may not sound like much, think of the last time you saw someone who was 6'4" tall. if they were proportionate to a human, they would have about 128% our volume and most likely mass... but it's more like 164% of our mass, which means they're probably also about that much more volume (maybe a bit less, ork muscles are probably more dense than human). so now picture in your head 6'4" tall and they're also about the build of the guys you might see at a strong man competition, or a body builder competition.

orks are freaking huge compared to humans. no, they aren't Andre the giant... but the size differential absolutely will be a factor. even people who don't hate orks for being orks are likely to respond differently to them just based on the size differential.

Human-looking is always available for those with the points to spare.

Your mileage may vary on that one. I'm 6,2" and I don't consider myself exceptionally tall, sure most public transports don't have seats high enough and I can always reach the top shelf. But my height doesn't stick out very much around 6ft is quite common here. Heck I work with two guys that are 6,4''+ and know several more. Anecdotal mayhaps, but the average do vary.

well, first off, i don't know you personally, but i'm guessing you probably don't come even close to 300 lbs. the average ork weighs about 325 lbs. they are quite large.

secondly, i rather imagine your line of work doesn't involve squeezing through HVAC systems, crawling through sewers, passing through derelict buildings where the roof and floor may be falling apart, squeezing through windows, and other such things on a regular basis. if it did, i rather suspect height and weight would not be considered beneficial to your line of work.

not every shadowrun will involve all of those things, or even one of those things, but it's likely to come up at some point. bigger is good for combat, but shadowrun is a game where only being good at combat really can and should come back to haunt you.

I was not arguing the bulk of an ork, but rather that the figures you gave is a tad misleading. The average ork is only slightly taller then the average man in these regions (178cm or 5,11")

The point still stands that the average ork (6 Body, 5 Strength) will still cost more in either generation than the average human (3 Body, 3 Strength).

Costs including Metatype Prices

Average Ork: 60 BP or 120 Karma

Average Human: 40 BP or 50 Karma

That still isn't the point that anyone else was making. Just because you don't understand what everyone is saying doesn't make it not true.

Compare instead two characters with the exact same stats, one ork and one human and see who is cheaper.

Human (cost 180 BP)
Bod 4
Agi 3
Rea 3
Str 3
Cha 3
Int 3
Log 3
Wil 3
Edg 3

Ork (cost 160 BP, 165BP if you want the human looking quality to negate social differences)
Bod 4
Agi 3
Rea 3
Str 3
Cha 3
Int 3
Log 3
Wil 3
Edg 3

But when determining "cost to just be a metatype" you only take the cost of the metatype or the cost to be an average member of that metatype.

Given that I'm not playing an average person, why should I think that cost is defined relative to that.

Of course the strengths of the character should be above average, but there should be a VERY good character reason for anything that is at metatype minimum.

Taking 4 Body and 3 Strength with an ork is the same as taking a 1 Body and 1 Strength with a human, and as such will probably draw the same "aggro" from whomever is running.

I require my players to rise every attribute by at least one point, or to have a really good explanation why.

But one could compare an underdeveloped orc (lets say a cliche hacker) with a human bodybuilder. Both have BOD 5 and STR 4.

And if the Ork is Human Looking, it will be hard to tell them apart as different races.

Then take 5 and 4. Body should be odd for maximum gain anyways. If you think that a few stats at 2-equivalent is going to draw super much attention, you're not playing the same game as I am.

Should still have a good reason for having more than one thing below average. Having a higher attribute is different, as that attribute will most likely be relating to one's role on the team.

Well, the couch-potato basement hacker has a better reason to have all physical attributes at a (human) 2 than having BOD 2 and reaction 5.

Just my point, but how often do you see the hacker with the latter (more often than not).

OP:
Yes... mostly right... the german errata is pay karma == to BP cost to be the race... the opportunity cost.
Then on top of all the free karma for attributes... they get to spend even more karma on attributes than humans.

You found the key to exploiting the karmagen system and it's fundamental flaw. In a system in which attributes define characters far more than skills do like SR4 does (attributes give far more mechanical benefit than skills do). We're going to give these types free attribute ranks... and allow them to spend more... and give them higher natural/augmented maximums to boot if they care to use them (or augment things cheaply using tech for the more cybernetically inclined).

Karmagen was done great... except until you allow metatypes... if everyone was one race. It would be fine... how they handled metatypes though is a huge issue which breaks it badly. (originally it was metas for free... which was even worse).

The worst is when metas take the advantage of humans cheap low attributes cost and their extra attribute allowance. Yeah I don't want to build a high body, high str orc... therefor I'll dump all these extra points into my mental and other attributes and make a kickass mage with high edge (since i can spend more on edge & magic than the human can). Penalized stats mean nothing to builds... while boosted stats mean everything.

The counter-argument is that well humans get more skills... but skills play second fiddle to attributes in pretty much everything in most things right now. Because most tests are Attribute + equipment, attribute + attribute, attribute only, or attribute + skill. Note only one of those tests includes skills. (with the big exception of decking where people go to long ends to get it involved in decking as well via house rules).


Jaid:
Except the company line has been continually playing down meta-racism for pretty much all of SR4. And I firmly believe that they'll even make the orc underground stuff happen as well making it even less of a problem. And as others have pointed out... if this is a factor... then just toss on the Human-looking and most of it goes away. Bringing up orc's very short lifespans with dementia and similar old-age problems coming as soon as age 30 is also verboten among many in the forums. (or gets handwaved away by fluff... Bull is an old orc but he goblinized as a teenager therefor he gets a normal human lifespan. At least the one tir prince seems to be quickly aging in the storm front fluff).

you can be human-looking if you want.

a 6'4" 325 lb human is still very noticeable.

and no, SR4 hasn't removed racism from the setting. there may be less visible racism, since nobody wants to be accused of it, but it's still there, going strong. yamatetsu makes a big fuss out of how metahuman-friendly they are, and that's all very nice, but it doesn't change the fact that there are still plenty of racist people in the setting.

This depends a lot on the modules you are playing. In Missions S4, up till Mission06, being an Ork is rarely a disadvantage, and in fact quite often advantageous, since multiple modules involve the Ork Underground.

Orks come out a bit ahead of humans, but not excessively so. Take the best-case scenario, an ork mage who takes the base Body: 4 and Strength: 3, assume an Edge of at least 2, and assume he is an Intuition tradition, so that the lower mental hard caps won't really hurt him. He spends 20 karma to be an ork, 10 karma to catch up to the human on Edge, and gets 70 karma worth of "free" base Attributes (Body: 4 is worth 45 karma, and Strength: 3 is worth 25 karma). So, a net gain of 40 karma.

Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad amount of extra karma to spend, but in karmagen, where Attributes scale upwards in cost exponentially, it's not that significant of a difference. It could raise Edge from 5 to 6, with 10 points left over (which could get a dump stat from 1 to 2), for example, but that really wouldn't blow the human out of the water. And that is the most extreme example. Take metatype "average" stats, say, a Body of 7 and Strength of 5 compared to a Body of 5 and Strength of 3 for the human. That's 135 points compared to 95 points, plus the cost to be an ork and a lower base Edge. so orks can save you a few piddly points if you create them with minimal investment in their strong area (which is usually shooting yourself in the foot - the intuition tradition mage and a few other builds are the rare exceptions to this).