Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Shadowrun 5th Edition Errata Released
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 12:49 PM) *
Really? In my book, any Edge value above 3 was a waste of resources. smile.gif


Well, 3 was surely the sweet number of benefit/cost ratio. But on our games, if something bad was going to happen, our GM would ask us to roll Edge, the one with less successes was the one to be hit with a rock on the head (or a sniper shot from far away);
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Feb 13 2014, 09:55 AM) *
Well, 3 was surely the sweet number of benefit/cost ratio. But on our games, if something bad was going to happen, our GM would ask us to roll Edge, the one with less successes was the one to be hit with a rock on the head (or a sniper shot from far away);


Rarely did I ever go above an Edge 3 (for Humans OR Meta's) unless the concept called for it (2 characters out of about 50 or so). Yeah, same with us.
eek.gif
SpellBinder
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 08:45 AM) *
Entertainingly, it was always the other way around for me.... I ALWAYS chose Hacker over Technomancer in SR4A. Yes, a TM is strong and their sprites are pretty cool, but my Cyberlogician ALWAYS gave the TM a run for his money, and was often better than he was, both IN the Matrix, and Most Definitely OUT of the Matrix.

I had to come up with reasons to play a TM in SR4A. And in the end, I never actually played one, because Hackers were just better in most ways, in my opinion. *shrug*
Funny thing, in the SR4 games I've been in or ran, there have been more technomancers than hackers, and this is even with me not using the software degradation rules in Unwired. As for Edge, my players are currently saving their karma to get to 3 (we'll see if they shoot for 4).

For a friend's game that's in SR5, no one yet has played a technomancer while there have been a few deckers among the players that have cycled through. Funny thing, the deckers have done more shooting in combat than decking (combat shotgun with APDS & BF is apparently better than a cyberdeck spin.gif). Same thing the hackers/technomancers have done in my SR4 games.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (SpellBinder @ Feb 13 2014, 11:27 AM) *
Funny thing, in the SR4 games I've been in or ran, there have been more technomancers than hackers, and this is even with me not using the software degradation rules in Unwired. As for Edge, my players are currently saving their karma to get to 3 (we'll see if they shoot for 4).

For a friend's game that's in SR5, no one yet has played a technomancer while there have been a few deckers among the players that have cycled through. Funny thing, the deckers have done more shooting in combat than decking (combat shotgun with APDS & BF is apparently better than a cyberdeck spin.gif). Same thing the hackers/technomancers have done in my SR4 games.


I always have interesting ideas for Technomancers, but few of them (none really) are for their hacking abilities, which are often eclipsed by a Hacker. *shrug*
In Combat, Hackers SHOULD be shooting and not trying to hack/brick opponents. Shooting is more effective, and always has been.
Sponge
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 11:46 AM) *
hope you don't mind only being able to choose human.


This is not the fault of Technomancers so much as the fault of the SR5 Priority system and how much it (over-)charges you to be a non-human metatype, an entirely different rant topic.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 13 2014, 12:11 PM) *
This is not the fault of Technomancers so much as the fault of the SR5 Priority system and how much it (over-)charges you to be a non-human metatype, an entirely different rant topic.


Priority Gen is just an inferior System all the way around. But you are right... Wrong thread for that. smile.gif
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 03:50 PM) *
In Combat, Hackers SHOULD be shooting and not trying to hack/brick opponents. Shooting is more effective, and always has been.


We actually had a saying for that on our group: "Don't bring a computer to gunfight." biggrin.gif
Glyph
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 07:49 AM) *
Really? In my book, any Edge value above 3 was a waste of resources. smile.gif

In SR5, mundane humans start with a minimum Edge of 5.

Edge is a wonky Attribute. It is not essential, but on the other hand, everything else being equal, a high Edge can make a huge difference. I played a character with an Edge of 6 in a one-shot PVP game, and it was a major factor in keeping her alive.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 13 2014, 12:48 PM) *
In SR5, mundane humans start with a minimum Edge of 5.

Edge is a wonky Attribute. It is not essential, but on the other hand, everything else being equal, a high Edge can make a huge difference. I played a character with an Edge of 6 in a one-shot PVP game, and it was a major factor in keeping her alive.


Which I HATE - Just something else added to the List, though. *sigh*
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Feb 13 2014, 12:39 PM) *
We actually had a saying for that on our group: "Don't bring a computer to gunfight." biggrin.gif


Indeed... smile.gif
FuelDrop
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 12:51 PM) *
ok, so you remember how we covered the fact that a technomancer needs:

- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.

and then you remember how we also covered that they can't effectively compensate for their low physical attributes with augmentations or magic, right?

and at this point, they also have to be human or elf, with at best moderately good edge.

none of this is sounding new to you, i hope?

so then, they need 8 skills *just to have basic levels of proficiency* in their specialized area.

now, in addition to this, i'm going to posit that in order to function on a basic level as a shadowrunner, they're also going to need a defensive skill, at least one offensive skill (general purpose), and at least 1-2 social skills, all at a moderately decent level. plus perception. more is better, of course; our current theoretical technomancer likely won't have any melee capability at all, for example, and stealth is a very useful skill to have as well.

so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.

or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].

so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).

so please, do tell... how is this competitive with a decker that needs two fewer skills, can spend priority A on resources and B on skills (C can go to race, there's not a *huge* difference between C attributes and D or E, and our decker doesn't need incredible attributes like our technomancer), gets to use a deck that swaps attributes and programs around at will, gets to use programs *at all*, doesn't need to spend karma or priority on an extra special attribute, and can upgrade both his core and secondary skill sets with augmentations? heck, if we *really* want to drive the point home, we *could* choose adept in priority D since we only really need 1-2 points of essence in augmentations, and now we've got even more bonuses (increase our limits, add to our hacking dice pools, etc) plus the ability to use qi focuses to adjust our abilities as needed.

I'm not sure your math with attributes is right. You start with attribute 1 and buy up from there, so Attributes C for example would allow you 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5 if you were suicidal enough to dump all your physical stats.
Critias
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
Fatum
Nah, we trust CGL's judgment.
Sendaz
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 06:09 PM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?

attributes were fine, it was the skills where I was wanting a few more nyahnyah.gif

greedy I know
Glyph
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 02:09 PM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?

I think the problem is that SR4 limited how many Attribute points you could get, because they were so comparatively valuable. But the thing is, people would usually take the 200 points, both for that very reason, and because 200 points was honestly not that much spread out among eight Attributes. That's four 4's and four 3's - even getting one or two 5's usually entailed some sacrifices.

So that's a big problem when you try to shoehorn Attributes into a priority system. The maximum is also the minimum. They made it slightly more workable by having a bit more at the A priority, but that still means most people will want A or B for Attributes, maybe C if they are playing a metatype with good Attribute bonuses, but no one will want D or E for Attributes. Especially since SR5 tried to make every Attribute essential for something, meaning low Attributes will hurt you even more.
RHat
QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 13 2014, 04:39 PM) *
I think the problem is that SR4 limited how many Attribute points you could get, because they were so comparatively valuable. But the thing is, people would usually take the 200 points, both for that very reason, and because 200 points was honestly not that much spread out among eight Attributes. That's four 4's and four 3's - even getting one or two 5's usually entailed some sacrifices.

So that's a big problem when you try to shoehorn Attributes into a priority system. The maximum is also the minimum. They made it slightly more workable by having a bit more at the A priority, but that still means most people will want A or B for Attributes, maybe C if they are playing a metatype with good Attribute bonuses, but no one will want D or E for Attributes. Especially since SR5 tried to make every Attribute essential for something, meaning low Attributes will hurt you even more.


You can actually wind up with something pretty workable for A Resources, B Skills, C Attributes, Human D. The trick is just that you wind up accepting a couple of 2's you buy with Karma. But setting just about anything to D or E kinda hurts - you're not gonna want very much to touch Skills D or E without a serious offset either, for example.
Smash
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 14 2014, 09:09 AM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?


I agree. This is why the complaining that technomancers need every stat at 6 doesn't really hold any water. All characters start with low stats and god forbid I want to max my agility, body, str, reation, intuition with my samurai AND have a character with a silver tongue.
RHat
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 06:51 PM) *
I agree. This is why the complaining that technomancers need every stat at 6 doesn't really hold any water. All characters start with low stats and god forbid I want to max my agility, body, str, reation, intuition with my samurai AND have a character with a silver tongue.


Well that's a complete misunderstanding. If we're gonna have THAT conversation, you simply have to differentiate between primary, secondary, and tertiary attributes. You've intentionally stretched the attribute requirements of the character.
Smash
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 03:51 PM) *
ok, so you remember how we covered the fact that a technomancer needs:

- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.

.................

so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.

or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].

so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).


Here's your problem. You are the kind of player that seems to think that every stat and skill a character has at creation must be maximised. This is not the case. Yes you probably aren't going to be optimised for both the matrix AND combat AND rigging at creation, and yes you will probably be less efective (note this does not mean IN-effective) than a hacker off the bat. Where the rigger shines is the scope for improvement. No matter how much you bitch about how stat heavy a technomancer is, etc a Hacker can NEVER EVER summon sprites or use any technomancer special abilities. Yes they have drain, but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.

Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!

3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?

But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
RHat
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 07:10 PM) *
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?


Actually, the rules are completely explicit on that point. This goes back to "please actually read the technomancer rules".
tjn
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 09:10 PM) *
but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.
This is where you are taking the left turn at Albuquerque. You are dismissing the advantages a decker has, just because they kinda do the same thing, does not mean the Technomancer can do everything the decker can. Especially in 5th, the decker got a lot of love with the customization and utility of their role. This is on top of the limitation that technomancers can't use their technomancer powers if they are jacked into a normal deck.
QUOTE
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices?
Page 251, first column, second paragraph: "You cannot reconfigure your living persona or run programs, as those are abilities unique to commlinks and cyberdecks. You are not a device, so you cannot be a slave or master, nor can you be part of a PAN or WAN."
QUOTE
But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
Not going to say it's impossible, and I could see a sorta melee ganger/budding technomancer thing going on as a hook for roleplaying, but there will be a distinct power level differential between the character and another that's been finely tuned optimization wise.
Jaid
technomancers just flat out start with lower dicepools in and out of the matrix, and have less versatility in the matrix to boot (you must not have paid very close attention to programs or the fact that a decker can just swap around their matrix attributes pretty much on a whim... they don't just start with more total stats, they can adjust their stats to match their needs at any given time, plus they can use programs to boost their stats, plus they can use programs to boost their actions after boosting their stats).

their theoretical unlimited progression falls flat on it's face when put into practice. it takes an awful lot of karma to even get to where the decker starts at, and the decker will be progressing too, using both karma and cash. a decker can basically buy a +2 to most matrix tests in chargen with money *after* buying the best deck a chargen decker can buy. now, they may prefer to spend their money on other things too (like initiative enhancements and a cyber arm so that when a fight breaks out they're basically a street samurai lite instead of being best off assuming the foetal position in a corner and whimpering), but that's up to them.

they start off weak, it takes forever to get them out of that situation, and in the meanwhile the decker has been boosting skills, potentially being an adept at the same time.

not to mention most of the technomancer's unique tricks aren't terribly unique. there's not much they can do that a decker can't, given a bit more effort, and most of the special stuff they can do isn't that relevant (or requires so much fading that they're even *less* able to contribute if a fight actually breaks out).
Fatum
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 14 2014, 06:10 AM) *
What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
Quick reminder: attributes cost new rating x5 in SR4; you rake 1 to 3 Karma per session. Advances that cost 30+ Karma (at least ten straight sessions to get!) are hardly thus "a no-brainer". Metatype choices that actually limit your Agility and Mental stats aren't, either.
I'm getting the impression we're reading different rulesets here.
Medicineman
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 05:09 PM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?

It depends upon how much Karma will be the Default Line for the Karmasystem.
If its ca. 1000 Karma then 1or two Attr.Points for the Priotable may be Ok.
If its much less (like 900 or so) than raising the Priority table will be totally unfair to those tables that want to ....Mix chars with different Creationsystems (....oO( I hope this post is understandable ?) )

with a mix of Dances
Medicineman
Shinobi Killfist
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 05:09 PM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?


Attributes and skills for me.

IMO A is fine, maybe a bit low but fine, they both scale terribly as the priorities drop though. The thing that throws things is E is totally functional for race, or magic, or hell even resources. E is not functional for attributes or skills. D isn't functional for attributes or skills either. C's 16 should really be E for attributes. Scale 2 a level from there and it kind of works.
Sengir
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 11:09 PM) *
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?

That, and stop giving away Magic/Resonance for free, it messes up any calculation...or even better yet, strap the whole priority system to a rocket headed for the nearest blue giant biggrin.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 07:10 PM) *
Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!


I saw 5 times as many humans as ANY other archetype in SR4. Personally, probably 80% of my characters were Human, rather than Meta. Sorry, your argument does not hold up.
Mikado
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 09:10 PM) *
Here's your problem. You are the kind of player that seems to think that every stat and skill a character has at creation must be maximised. This is not the case. Yes you probably aren't going to be optimised for both the matrix AND combat AND rigging at creation, and yes you will probably be less efective (note this does not mean IN-effective) than a hacker off the bat. Where the rigger shines is the scope for improvement. No matter how much you bitch about how stat heavy a technomancer is, etc a Hacker can NEVER EVER summon sprites or use any technomancer special abilities. Yes they have drain, but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.

Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!

3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?

But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.

First...
None of the characters I played in 4th (3 of them) had attributes above a 4 except for one build who had a 5 in only one attribute. Everything else where 3's and 4's. Now that did not include magic or resonance where I had one of each with the attribute at 5. Well the technomancer had a resonance of 7 but he had 2 points of essence loss and the mage was a mystic adept and he split his magic due to house rules.

Second...
ALL of the 3 characters I played in 4th where human.

Third...
I recreated my technomancer in 5th and after some adjustments since he had cyber that has not been converted to 5th yet he was still a very pale shadow of his former abilities. On the scale of 10% his former effectiveness. Now I know what you will say but it does not matter since his dice pools in 4th where NEVER over a 10 for almost anything including hacking. The one thing he had a dice pool above 12 for was Disguise since he was made to be an infiltrator.

Now, there are some things I like about 5th... but the things I hate outnumber the things I like by orders of magnitude. The nerf to technomancers being one...
Smash
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 15 2014, 02:12 AM) *
I saw 5 times as many humans as ANY other archetype in SR4. Personally, probably 80% of my characters were Human, rather than Meta. Sorry, your argument does not hold up.


The fact that the people you choose to play with chose not to powergame does not mean that there wasn't scope for it to occur. Maybe they just wanted to play humans?

If on the other hand your suggesting that the BP cost of trolls was too much in SR4 was too high then what's the difference between that and Trolls being A/B in the priority system?
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 14 2014, 07:43 PM) *
The fact that the people you choose to play with chose not to powergame does not mean that there wasn't scope for it to occur. Maybe they just wanted to play humans?

If on the other hand your suggesting that the BP cost of trolls was too much in SR4 was too high then what's the difference between that and Trolls being A/B in the priority system?


Not everyone chooses to powerplay (and it is not just my table; See Mikado's post above), and some of us actually want a living, breathing PERSON, not a stat monstrosity (and from my experience, Powerplay optimized characters do not produce what I would call "Real People." There are just too many logic gaps/character holes that need to be compensated for once the character obtains Karma in play)..

Just because the potential to powerplay is there does not mean you MUST exercise that option.
You will NEVER remove powerplay options from the game. They have existed since 1st Edition.
Glyph
I think options need to be roughly balanced against one another (although some things can, and should, be suboptimal for the sake of verisimilitude - unaugmented mundanes, for example). In an open character creation system, though, not everything is going to be equal purely points-wise. Trolls are balanced compared to humans, but in an apples and oranges way. Their bonuses work out to 30 BP more than a human, and they also have +1 reach, thermographic vision, and a point of dermal armor. However, it is a package deal - Strength of 5 is more than most non-combat characters (and a lot of combat characters) really need. Furthermore, they have a lower cap on Agility and three of the mental Attributes, require specially-made gear, and live in a world sized for smaller people. Trolls are good in a fairly narrow range of roles, such as close combat specialist who can no-sell small arms fire. Sure, you can "save" some points if you make a troll technomancer, but considering that mental Attributes are so useful to them, you are shooting yourself in the foot.
Machiavelli
I wouldn´t agree, that trolls were too expensive in previous editions. Besides the pure costs for attributes, there are other points that need to be summed up (dermal plating, reach, higher running distances and thermographic vision had already been discussed) that don´t count out at the first point. One of these things is, that you can generally raise your attributes 1,5 times the maximum attribute. The higher the base-attribute, the more advantage you get out of it (e.g. trolls strength addition is +4, but if you really max it out, you can reach strength 15 (10*1,5) and not only 14. Same goes for other metatypes.

In SR5 on the other hand, a lot of these benefits are gone. Running distance and bonus attributes are gone. Additionally you are penalized with a quite high priority and higher lifestyle costs (game-wise correct, I agree). This makes a troll quite unattractive, especially if you count in, that now every human can reach strength and body 10 and the maximum difference to a troll is now “just” +4. Before it was +6.

I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
Sendaz
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 06:35 AM) *
I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
I blame the IE conspiracy, trying to keep the orcs and trolls down! nyahnyah.gif
Machiavelli
Agree. Buuuh to racism. Damned elves.
Shortstraw
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 08:35 PM) *
I wouldn´t agree, that trolls were too expensive in previous editions. Besides the pure costs for attributes, there are other points that need to be summed up (dermal plating, reach, higher running distances and thermographic vision had already been discussed) that don´t count out at the first point. One of these things is, that you can generally raise your attributes 1,5 times the maximum attribute. The higher the base-attribute, the more advantage you get out of it (e.g. trolls strength addition is +4, but if you really max it out, you can reach strength 15 (10*1,5) and not only 14. Same goes for other metatypes.

In SR5 on the other hand, a lot of these benefits are gone. Running distance and bonus attributes are gone. Additionally you are penalized with a quite high priority and higher lifestyle costs (game-wise correct, I agree). This makes a troll quite unattractive, especially if you count in, that now every human can reach strength and body 10 and the maximum difference to a troll is now “just” +4. Before it was +6.

I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.

Remember they can get 9 agility as opposed to 7 so they are better in a lot of other areas.
Machiavelli
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 18 2014, 03:35 PM) *
Remember they can get 9 agility as opposed to 7 so they are better in a lot of other areas.

Which IS an Advantage. Agreed. But the main-purpose of a troll is weakened.
X-Kalibur
All derailing aside, thanks for the time and effort on the errata, Patrick. Although I'm disheartened it didn't really fix much.
FuelDrop
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 07:47 PM) *
Agree. Buuuh to racism. Damned elves.

At least they burn nice. smile.gif
garner_adam
QUOTE (Mantis @ Feb 8 2014, 06:37 PM) *
Thanks Patrick. I know you've been working hard to get this to be a thing.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.


Really curious what the opinion is on this one.
cndblank
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 03:00 PM) *
Which I HATE - Just something else added to the List, though. *sigh*



I have to say that Edge made my game a lot better.
Had a player who had serious bad luck with his dice.
I told him to take a good Edge and it really improved his enjoyment of the game.
cndblank
Oh and the finally reasonable price and availability on Autosofts gets TWO THUMBS UP from me.

AUTOSOFT PRICES (P. 442, SOFTWARE TABLE)
The following listing should be inserted in the table before
Cyberprogram, common use:
Program/Software Avail Cost
Autosoft Rating x 2 Rating x 500¥
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012