Smiley
May 7 2004, 04:16 AM
Just wondering what everyone used and why they chose that method. Why do you think one is better than the others?
Raptor1033
May 7 2004, 05:08 AM
we do priority or point, player decides which. so basically the magic users go for priority and the mundanes go for point. definately if the character is mundane human
theartthief
May 7 2004, 05:14 AM
Personally, I like the BP system due to flexibility. There again I don't make a ton of magic users. If I am playing mundane human I would change my answer to Sum-to-ten as one "A" and two "B"s kicks serious tail.
I have never used BECK's.
- theartthief
Connor
May 7 2004, 05:24 AM
I'm currently a BeCKS fan, which is what I voted, but I think it depends on the group really. For inexperienced groups I think sticking to the priority system is best, and perhaps even new players joining an experienced group.
For the more experienced, whichever system they like best is fine by me. BeCKS just seems to fit my character generation style better than the other systems. Plus, I find that using it across the board sort of works as a good meter of balancing characters and npc's against each other since you have a single karma count to use as a rough gauge.
Arethusa
May 7 2004, 06:19 AM
I'm a devoted fan of BeCKs. It's not perfect, but given the heavy specialization forced by the other systems, nothing else really compares.
Diesel
May 7 2004, 06:28 AM
BeCKs brings about a whole different level of min/maxing. Before they'd go for the skill of six over the four and the two. Now they just specialize extensively in the skills where the likelihood of using a non-specializing is very low. Woohaw. :\
Arethusa
May 7 2004, 06:32 AM
In terms of skills, it doesn't allow for any more min maxing than you'd get in game. Any brokenness there is just a result of SR's handling of skills, not BeCKS.
Glyph
May 7 2004, 07:12 AM
I like build points because they are customizable to the type of game you are trying to run. Although 120 points is too little - most games on the boards seem to run 130 points or so, with 120 points used for things like beginning runners and ganger campaigns, and that is about right. I like BeCKS for street-level games, and I like some of its concepts (Karma costs to buy skills so that a 6-point skill is more expensive than two 4-point skill, Contacts handled separately from Resources, Resources broken down into increments, etc.) but it doesn't seem to work as well for certain types such as otaku.
Connor
May 7 2004, 07:37 AM
No system is ever going to be immune to min-maxing unless it's a completely random system with no input from the player. The best ways to combat munchiness or min-maxing aren't messing with the generation system, but talking with the player as the GM and working out a way the player can create a character without needing to resort to tricks and loopholes. And to make the player realize that the game might not nessecarily be starting out at a particularly high level of skill and a lot of things can be worked for in game.
Just because you can min-max excessively or create an uber-munchkin character using a particular generation system doesn't mean that character is going to be accepted into a game.
Preface: Somehow, somewhere, this post became a rant. I apologize if anyone takes it thewrong way, but it does adequetly describe my feelings towards the different character creation systems.
I go with Sum to Ten, mostly because I have problems with the other systems then for any like of the Sum to Ten.
Under normal priority, it produces too many metas IMO, if the character is mundane.
BP is a touch too harsh on magic users, full mages should be 24, aspected around 18. I also dislike the point costs for shapeshifters, ghouls, metavarients, and changelings.
Shapeshifters are boned with the two physical stats, ghouls have so many penalties it's rediculous to charge for it, and metavarients and SURGE should be choices based upon concept IMO. There's nothing too extreme about either, and both make the runner conspicous as all hell, which is a major drawback for a runner.
BeCKS however, drives me batty. The arbitrary numbers are whacked. It amplifes all the problems with the BP system while at the same time adding even more number crunching.
First off, it overcharges for magic users, especially in the light that spell points aren't included and they have to buy the attributes and skills to work with it as well.
Trolls, Ghouls, Otaku, and Shapeshifters all have some pretty big penalties inheirant to them that severely hamper the character, which put them out of line for their Karma costs.
Trolls: Being Fraggin Huge is more then a two point flaw (10 Karma). It's a major problem when the world is made for those who are 5'8. I'm 6'4" and I still have problems with ceiling fans and fitting into normal places. Add that all their equipment costs 25% more, and they're conspicous as hell. Sure they're the munchkin's favorite race, but only if the GM doesn't enforce their penalties.
Ghouls: Forced to eat metaflesh. Blind. Conspicous. Large amounts of prejudice. Dual Natured. Sensitive System. Less Essence, less magic, less charisma, less intelligence. Mild allergy Sunlight. All for two points in body, one in strength, being able to run a bit faster, having a little better hearing and sense of smell, and they're immune to VITAS. For 50 Karma? WTF mate.
Otaku are an exercise in futility. The price to get "normal" Otaku mental scores, computer skill, and channels are just prohibative, let alone trying something a bit different or out of the box and still remaining a competant Otaku.
Shapeshifters, boned again. The two attribute thing is a huge karma sink, they're dual natured, have vulnerabilities to silver, are actively hunted, not considered sentient by the world at large, and not really much of a point to play one enless they're magically active due to the no cyber thing (see above about magic). Regeneration's nice, but not 120 karma nice.
If concentrating on mundanes with an eye towards generalization, BeCKS works well. Start adding the fantasy side of Shadowrun and it falls to pieces IMO.
Austere Emancipator
May 7 2004, 08:18 AM
QUOTE (tjn) |
BeCKS however, drives me batty. The arbitrary numbers are whacked. |
Since you obviously know what arbitrary numbers are better than the current arbitrary numbers, why not share them? After all, the point of BeCKS isn't the set prices of some special abilities but the simple idea of using Karma to create characters with the same basic rules as improving existing ones.
Connor
May 7 2004, 08:28 AM
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
QUOTE (tjn) | BeCKS however, drives me batty. The arbitrary numbers are whacked. |
Since you obviously know what arbitrary numbers are better than the current arbitrary numbers, why not share them? After all, the point of BeCKS isn't the set prices of some special abilities but the simple idea of using Karma to create characters with the same basic rules as improving existing ones.
|
Exactly, they're already arbitrary numbers, changing them doesn't break some cosmic law or anything. If you feel the mages are penalized by having to buy spell points, throw 25 in for free.
I mean, you can prefer another generation system, that's fine, but complaing about numbers that are in the first place arbitrary and aren't really set in stone to begin with in a generation system that is hardly canon is just odd.
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ May 7 2004, 03:18 AM) |
Since you obviously know what arbitrary numbers are better than the current arbitrary numbers, why not share them? |
That's the thing AE, I don't know what would be a better arbitrary number.
I do feel that the ones suggested are whacked, which is one of the reasons I dislike the system.
And I have a sinking suspicion that were I to suggest lowered cost for some of these options would result in either: pitchforks and torches as the villiage gathers to the cry of munchkin, or those defensive of the system attacking me for not seeing the sublime beauty of the system.
For creating generalist mundanes, it's a good system, however I feel it breaks down after that.
EDIT: Been thinking, now BeCKS is still currently out of my league until I can get a better handle on the values of multiples in comparison to arbitrary numbers, so I took a shot at revising the BP rules to something that would be more palitable to me. Thoughts?
64 total points to spend.
Magic
24 Full
18 Aspected
12 Otaku (No free channels, no free atts. If the only atts spent on phys is to keep att above 0, mental can go past Racial Mod Limit)
Race
+24 Drake/Shapeshifter (remove second set of physical attributes for shapshifter; both with GM approval)
12 Elf/Troll
6 Ork/Dwarf
+0 Metavarient/Ghoul/Changeling (with GM's approval)
Attributes
18 Free, can sell for 1 Att per 2 points (with GM's approval)
1 Att per 2 points spent, can not exceed racial mod.
Skills
24 Free, can sell for 1 skill per 1 point (with GM's approval)
1 skill per 1 point spent under Att
1 skill per 2 points spent after Att
Resources
500 -4 N/A for Otaku
5k 0 Squatter
20k 4 Low
90k 8 Middle
200k 12
400k 16 High
650k 20
1000k 24 Luxury
shadd4d
May 7 2004, 10:57 AM
I use the point system. It's worked. It doesn't work the best, but it does work. I never really liked the priority system, although I have made use of it in some instances.
Don
Shockwave_IIc
May 7 2004, 11:33 AM
I prefer the Bp's myself as well, I find Priority (and thus Sum-to-10) to inflexable, due to the "you must have this this or this many skills/ Attribute Points
Becks, I like the idea behind Becks but i tend to find that theres too many Skill 4/7's with the Becks system, And some charatcer types really do get choked under this system.
With Bp's it has just about the right amount of flexability init for me. It's not perfect but some house rules it's good enough (Sphnyx's reasource system as an example)
Moonstone Spider
May 7 2004, 11:39 AM
I find Sum-To-10 the simplest to use but all Shadowrun Chargen systems seem to have the same horrible flaw: Resources.
I spend more time trying to buy gear for my character than every other aspect (Except possibly the story but I usually think that up while I'm driving or working so it's not particularly relevant.) Frequently I try to make a low-resource character, but crumb! I need 6100
worth of gear! Now I've got to buy 5 points worth of resources and that gives 20000
which means I have to figure out what to do with the other 10,900 I didn't want (Because paying points for 1/10th the nuyen sucks hugely). And the fact that it jumps so hugely is an irritation as well, the first 5 points is only worth 15,000 more Nuyen but the last 5 is worth 600,000? Why is 30 points of resources worth more than double what 25 points are?
I hate that. And it seems to work that way. In every system.
Shockwave_IIc
May 7 2004, 11:56 AM
Thats why i use this (from Sphynx)
-5 ======= 500¥
-4 = 1,400¥
-3 = 2,300¥
-2 = 3,200¥
-1 = 4,100¥
0 ===== 5,000¥
1 = 8,000¥
2 = 11,000¥
3 = 14,000¥
4 = 17,000¥
5 ==== 20,000¥
6 = 34,000¥
7 = 48,000¥
8 = 62,000¥
9 = 76,000¥
10 ==== 90,000¥
11 = 112,000¥
12 = 134,000¥
13 = 156,000¥
14 = 178,000¥
15 === 200,000¥
16 = 240,000¥
17 = 280,000¥
18 = 320,000¥
19 = 360,000¥
20 === 400,000¥
21 = 450,000¥
22 = 500,000¥
23 = 550,000¥
24 = 600,000¥
25 === 650,000¥
26 = 720,000¥
27 = 790,000¥
28 = 860,000¥
29 = 930,000¥
30 = 1,000,000¥
Austere Emancipator
May 7 2004, 01:01 PM
BeCKS gives Resources per Karma. You could get 6,000 or 6,500
, 12 or 13 Karma on Resources.
Siege
May 7 2004, 01:05 PM
Knowing two terminal min-maxers, I'll second the "it's the gamer not the game" school of thought on that subject.
I prefer BP for the sheer flexability -- and I've never had a problem with having too much cash.
-Siege
Lilt
May 7 2004, 01:17 PM
Priorities is fairly limited
The points system over-charges for magic compared to priorities. It's either that or it under-charges for sammies.
Becks is interesting. Having the same price for stuff at chargen as later in the game encourages keeping stats and skills low, but that can make it a bit boring for some people.
Sum-to-10 is the priorities system for min-maxers. OOh! A system just for me
toturi
May 7 2004, 01:45 PM
I stick to one of the 2 Canon systems, either Priorities or Build Points.
Usually Build Points but sometimes Priorities is used for Meta-Awakened.
Caine Hazen
May 7 2004, 01:56 PM
I like the build points, I'd go with BeCKs as a second...priorities are just whack!! (wiggity whack? no just regular type....) BeCKs seems to confuse my players though, so the vote goes to build pts..
I used priorities to determine my points though...I made 40 characters in priorities and averaged out the points it took to make them. The average turned out to be 127.8 points, so I go with 128 points for build totals...keeps em close to priorites level charas, but gives the players flexablility...I hadn't seen sphynx's money though..gotta use that next time
booklord
May 7 2004, 01:56 PM
I allow players to use either sum to 10, build points, or a slightly modified BECKS.
( I found how it handled netahumans like trolls with high physical stats and low mental stats troubling and had already house ruled that when using karma to raise attributes you did it after subtracting racial modifiers [Troll raising str from 9 to 10 would cost the same as a human raising str from 5 to 6])
Anyway, what I found is that players would make thier characters under BECKS (which by far is the most complicated) then try to remake them under Sum to 10 and build point systems to see if they could get a better deal. ( Oh, those wascally players )
Personally I liked BECKS characters best since you could get a lot of cheap but useful skills under BECKS. ( for example Biotech(first aid) of 2(4) is fairly cheap under BECKS and very useful on during a shadowrun ) But if a player is going to min/max their character anyway they might as well use the sum to 10 or build point systems.
A Clockwork Lime
May 7 2004, 03:12 PM
The biggest problem with BeCKS is its own philosophy.
In a style that's nearly bordering on the obnoxious, it goes on and on about how it was disgusted by the arbitrary nature of the standard character creation systems and how they ignore their own character improvement rules using Karma. But then on the same hand, it ignores two major aspects of the game where Karma *is* clearly established and used to measure character improvement; the rules for Karma-for-Cash and the rules for buying off a flaw (which basically sets Edge and Flaw points at 10 Karma a pop).
But because Bethyaga didn't like either of those/couldn't get them to work, he threw it aside and just went the arbitrary route.
Basically all he ended up doing was creating an overcomplicated number-crunching intensive system that introduces staged costs for attributes and skills while overpricing everything else. It does nothing to bring character creation into the same lines as character improvement anymore than the costs for races or magic does in that system or any other. All it does is penalize players (yes, I said players) for being the experienced specialists they're assumed to be in the game.
'Course, then you have his personal dislikes about the game slipping in, like the bit about no initiations (or none with a group or ordeal in the so-called "extended" phase) or the lack of applying things like mnemonic enhancers (which I can agree to during standard creation, but not extended).
gfen
May 7 2004, 03:27 PM
Everyone says BeCKS is ths wonderful, munchkin=proof system and I htink they're all horribly horribly wrong.
Not that I didn't try to get away with it at my last game, mind you.
I'm used to priorities, I like priorties, and it works well. My sole experience with BP was magical metas, and I wasn't happy. Now I realize that's because the system is a little too expensive for that, so perhaps BP isn't so bad.
I dunno, the made the game with priorties and BP. While I'm not one for constant, blind loyalty to some cause, I have to say they must've had their reasons, and not only that but those two systems (especially priority) are universal. Everything else is just a big, fancy house rule.
Austere Emancipator
May 7 2004, 03:31 PM
QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) |
the rules for Karma-for-Cash |
You've said this before and I've asked you about it before: How could the Cash-for-Karma and Karma-for-Cash rules possibly be relevant to character generation? Both rules are very much optional, and the rules keep saying over and over again that the individual GM should deeply ponder whether or not and exactly how he wants to do Cash to Karma and vice versa exchanges. It doesn't even suggest any figures for a nuyen cost of a Karma point in the Karma-for-Cash paragraph on p. 80 of SRComp. The Cash-for-Karma rules say it could be 100 or it could be 1,000 or it could be anything the GM damn well pleases.
And there's no reason why Eliminating a Flaw would have to be the one and only true Karma Cost figure for all Edges and Flaws. No more than you should be forced as a GM to give back 12 Karma to a human PC who wants to drop his BOD back to 5 from 6 mid-game.
I'm sure we've had this discussion innumerable times, and it always ends the same: You just don't like the idea of doing chargen with Karma, you don't appreciate the bit of extra math it causes, and you don't agree with some numbers picked by Bethyaga. You could just say that.
Austere Emancipator
May 7 2004, 03:33 PM
QUOTE (gfen) |
Everyone says BeCKS is ths wonderful, munchkin=proof system |
Who says that? Anyone who thinks any reasonably complex chargen system is munchkinproof is not someone who's opinions you should give a damn about anyway. I know I have never claimed anything of the sort, and yet I still like BeCKS.
A Clockwork Lime
May 7 2004, 03:33 PM
Oh shock shock, I left out the part where I go on to say which system I do like the best.
That would be Sum-to-Ten. The Priority system is one of the things that makes Shadowrun unique to me. It's a brilliant concept that, especially for newbies, helps a player focus his character's abilities and/or talents. Sum-to-Ten is simpy an improvement on that philosophy, allowing for more combinations (such as the rich full magician, or a mundane human) without cheating either them or other characters.
The Build Point System is all right, though it seems to encourage the same types of characters in my experience. But at its heart, it's just a variation of the Priority and Sum-to-Ten systems, just with more liberal costs for each Priority.
BeCKS. Bleh.
A Clockwork Lime
May 7 2004, 03:40 PM
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ May 7 2004, 09:31 AM) |
QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) | the rules for Karma-for-Cash |
You've said this before and I've asked you about it before: How could the Cash-for-Karma and Karma-for-Cash rules possibly be relevant to character generation? Both rules are very much optional, and the rules keep saying over and over again that the individual GM should deeply ponder whether or not and exactly how he wants to do Cash to Karma and vice versa exchanges. It doesn't even suggest any figures for a nuyen cost of a Karma point in the Karma-for-Cash paragraph on p. 80 of SRComp. The Cash-for-Karma rules say it could be 100 or it could be 1,000 or it could be anything the GM damn well pleases.
|
It all boils down to the fact that the ONLY thing BeCKS does that falls in line with character improvement are those parts dealing with Attributes and Skills. That's it. Everything beyond that is just as arbitrary as every system, and in that respect, makes those attempts to handle Attributes and Skills in that fashion a moot point. Especially because the rules do have "suggestions" on how to handle at least two other major aspects of character improvement.
QUOTE |
And there's no reason why Eliminating a Flaw would have to be the one and only true Karma Cost figure for all Edges and Flaws. No more than you should be forced as a GM to give back 12 Karma to a human PC who wants to drop his BOD back to 5 from 6 mid-game. |
I'm sorry, but that's just a silly defensive statement to make. You might as well say that "there's no reason why the costs of Improving Attributes or Improving Skills should have to be the one and only true Karma Cost figure for doing such." It's just as valid a comment to make. Except that when you're creating a system that whines on about how it doesn't like the other systems because they ignore character improvement rules, then ends up doing the exact same thing, well... that's just hypocritical.
QUOTE |
I'm sure we've had this discussion innumerable times, and it always ends the same: You just don't like the idea of doing chargen with Karma, you don't appreciate the bit of extra math it causes, and you don't agree with some numbers picked by Bethyaga. You could just say that. |
I did, and explained why I don't like it. I'm sorry if that made you feel bad or... whatever else it was that caused you to write this post.
It's overcomplicated with no positive end result. You'd get the same exact effect by raising the number of Build Points given and adding a staged table for Attribute and Skill costs. Well, if you do that and throw in a bunch of house rules on top of all that, too. The only real difference is that you wind up with generally underpowered generalists instead of the experienced specialists the game revolves around, all at the cost of an excessive amount of number-crunching.
Lantzer
May 7 2004, 03:54 PM
As a player, I'm happy to use whatever system the GM is using. Priorities, Sum-to-Ten, BP, BeCKS, his own insane house-ruled system, whatever. It's the character that I'll be playing that generates the fun stories and fond memories, not the stat-generation system.
As a GM, I'm playing with BeCKS v2 at the moment, because I'm trying to encourage more well-rounded lower-skilled characters for my game, who can improve at their core skills, for specific campaign reasons. If I wanted topped-out specialists, I'd probably be using BP.
The point is, the chargen systems are tools. Use the right tool for the right job. If you use the wrong tool, don't complain. And there are no munchkin systems or munchkin-proof systems. Only munchkin players. And I work with my players on character generation, so we get a character that the player wants to run, and that I'm willing to GM for. If I have a problem with a character, I tell the player, and we work something out. If I have a problem with a player, I don't invite him to my games.
Keeps things simple, no?
Lantzer
May 7 2004, 04:06 PM
Ah, A.E., and Lime, I think your problem is a play style difference.
Lime prefers specialists who are highly skilled in their core proficencies at character generation, at the cost of few general-purpose skills. Given that, BeCKS is not a good choice for his play style. Sum-to-Ten is a very good choice. (It has some of the advantages/disadvantages of both BP and priorities. Whether its disadvantages _are _disadvantages becomes an totally different argument of play style.)
A.E. apparently likes beginning characters to have more spread, and the ability to grow more in their base skills. Therefore, for A.E., the BeCKS system is probably a good choice.
I don't see the two of you ever going to agree on the 'best' system, because the results you want out the system are different.
Austere Emancipator
May 7 2004, 04:19 PM
QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) |
I'm sorry, but that's just a silly defensive statement to make. You might as well say that "there's no reason why the costs of Improving Attributes or Improving Skills should have to be the one and only true Karma Cost figure for doing such." It's just as valid a comment to make. |
I know I'll only get a :rolleyes: for this, but there is, in my mind, a significant difference between getting a Flaw in chargen and eliminating it in-game. A difference very similar to my first example: Improving an attribute at chargen and then reducing it in-game. No, your quoted bit is not as valid a comment to make.
QUOTE |
Except that when you're creating a system that whines on about how it doesn't like the other systems because they ignore character improvement rules, then ends up doing the exact same thing, well... that's just hypocritical. |
You don't like BeCKS because it's hypocritical? That's just fine and dandy. I happen to like BeCKS because it feels nice to generate characters with and creates the kind of characters I want in my games.
QUOTE |
I did, and explained why I don't like it. |
If you still stand behind your original reasoning of why you don't like BeCKS, then would you mind showing how the Karma-for-Cash rules are directly applicable to character generation?
I can understand some other reasons you presented, like the math-heaviness of BeCKS. Some people don't want too much math in the character generation. I can understand that you want very specialized characters and BeCKS doesn't deliver those as well. I can understand any reason for liking one chargen system over another that's based on personal preference. I can not understand nor accept any reason for liking one chargen system over another that's based on the silly notion that one is better than the other.
QUOTE (Lantzer) |
I don't see the two of you ever going to agree on the 'best' system, because the results you want out the system are different. |
I know we won't, and you are likely to be right on with the differences of our play styles. But I'm not, have never been, nor will I ever claim that one system is better than the other. I am trying to show why A Clockwork Lime's arguments about the inferiority of BeCKS are not necessarily true. I think chargen systems can be discussed without trying to claim that one system is obnoxious and penalizes the players, etc.
A Clockwork Lime
May 7 2004, 04:19 PM
Wasn't trying to convince him or anyone else, actually.
Was just answering the original question; which system do [I] like.
Zazen
May 7 2004, 04:26 PM
I voted Sum-To-Ten because it's more flexible than priority and just as easy for me to check. I've been saying no to the BP system for a while because of the creative arithmetic that finds its way onto my players' sheets.
Lantzer
May 7 2004, 04:29 PM
QUOTE (Zazen) |
I've been saying no to the BP system for a while because of the creative arithmetic that finds its way onto my players' sheets. |
I guess I'm lucky. My players haven't given me reason to distrust them yet.
Moon-Hawk
May 7 2004, 04:41 PM
My players and I usually use either point buy, or a custom modification of the sum-to-ten idea. It's a very old idea that we had, ever since we started feeling restricted by the five priority slots. However, we all liked the feel of the priority system in general. Basically, we stretched the table out. I'm not going to try to type the table in, but I'll tell you how we made it.
Make a chart. First column: write the numbers 12 down to 0. Write an A next to 12, B next to 9, C next to 6, D next to 3, and E next to 0. Along the top, write race, magic, attributes, skills, resources. Fill in the five rows you know. Now fill in the blanks. Use whatever makes you happy, linear interpolation or curve fit, however geeky you're feeling. Instead of sum-to-ten, it's sum-to-thirty. (12+9+6+3+0). Obviously, race and magic have mostly empty boxes, but it gives the flexibility of point buy with the feel of priorities. It's all based on the "attribute point", so if you want to mesh it with edges and flaws they convert at 2:1.
Caine Hazen
May 7 2004, 06:38 PM
Distrust of players....plus ease of tracking and recording, is why we have 1 session just for character creation. Gives me time to take the sheets home and crunch the numbers....in reality my players usually short themselves points (but math isn't most of their strong points
) plus I give my players a week to think up their backgrounds while I've got their sheets, it helps them be creative without the numbers to crunch right in front of them. many of them change things (knowledge skills mostly) to fit with the concept they've come up with over the week
Solstice
May 7 2004, 06:53 PM
Point build is still the easiest system to use for new people. It's the most customizable. And it bridges the gap in characters caused by the horrible priority system. Making characters more well rounded and realistic.
Lilt
May 8 2004, 09:12 AM
I'd have to disagree with you there Solstice. Without some basic numbers from the priorities system: I find it somewhat likely that you'd see characters imbalanced more towards Attributes or Skills than is healthy (IE: A magical character with high resources and race buying lots of attribute points and not leaving enough for skills or attributes). It's either that or they just sit wondering what is normal.
At-least with the priorities system you have a reasonable minimum on skills and attributes.
[edit] That is to say: I'm disagreeing with your statement about points-based being good for new players rather than what your favourite chargen system is [/edit]
dead_as_elvis
May 8 2004, 05:59 PM
I would have to agree with Lilt. The BP system can be a bit much for a new player, as it is all about customization. I like it because it is so flexible and incredibly easy to make the kind of character you want. The downside, of course, is the way it handles magically active characters. I don't usually play awakened, but if I do I just use priority.
Solstice
May 8 2004, 06:34 PM
When I first started playing I simply could not make the character I wanted to make with the priority system. I hated it and still do.
Kagetenshi
May 8 2004, 06:36 PM
I'm a big fan of the Point-Build system with 128 points. It's powerful, flexible, extensible, and standards-compliant.
Um. Well, maybe not that last.
~J
Zazen
May 9 2004, 03:48 AM
QUOTE (Lantzer) |
QUOTE (Zazen @ May 7 2004, 04:26 PM) | I've been saying no to the BP system for a while because of the creative arithmetic that finds its way onto my players' sheets. |
I guess I'm lucky. My players haven't given me reason to distrust them yet.
|
Damn right you're lucky!
Connor
May 9 2004, 05:30 AM
A thought that just occured to me on this...
The best character generation system is the one you used to create your character.
Xirces
May 9 2004, 11:22 AM
I personally like BP - for flexibility primarily. I don't mind the "penalties" to awakened folks as it's still relatively easy to get the "right" numbers for a character.
Priorities has to be best for a newbie though, as already stated.
I don't like BeCKS - the inclusion of everything in a single karma pool (bad terminology - sorry) seems wrong, IMO.
However, I've seen (somewhere!) a rather nice priority/karma system. Using the standard priorities, but with attributes and skill points converted to karma values. Seemed to work quite well, but I never really tested it.
TinkerGnome
May 9 2004, 01:54 PM
I've got no problem with BeCKs, if for no other reason than you can create the majority of the archetypes with it at about the same points cost. Complaining about its arbitrary numbers seems silly since it does its best to mimic the arbitrary numbers of the game's primary generation systems.
Edges and flaws are handled as best they could be and magicians... well, it meshes with priority.
Personally, I've been using priority a lot lately, but that's because I'm trying to decide on an SRM character.
A Clockwork Lime
May 9 2004, 03:49 PM
QUOTE |
I've got no problem with BeCKs, if for no other reason than you can create the majority of the archetypes with it at about the same points cost. |
Wha...? You mean like the horribly overpowered Face (627 Karma) or Tech-Wiz (464 Karma) or Sprawl Ganger (459 Karma)? Even the only non-cybered non-magician in the book, the Investigator (445 Karma), just barely falls in line with the system.
About the only ones that do fit in are the combat junkies and, aside from the Street Mage, all of the magicians -- the very ones you most often hear people complaining about.
TinkerGnome
May 9 2004, 04:21 PM
Becks v2 has the range narrowed down quite a bit. The face is 474 and is the highest of them. The bulk of the rest are at or 425. The Adept (452), Face (474), Mercenary (450), Ganger (432) and Street Mage (458) are the only ones who don't fit into 425 points (the Tribal Shaman is actually 426, but that's close enough not to worry about).
You could relatively easily remake most of those archetypes to fit into 425.
nezumi
May 10 2004, 07:16 PM
I think I've asked this before, but....
Is there any system in which you can start out with more than $1M in resources?
This time I'll write it down, I promise. (And yes, I know that most people with $1M wouldn't feel they have to run the shadows, but sometimes I like to make people who are in the shadows to joyride and break rules, not because they're there for financial constraints.)
Austere Emancipator
May 10 2004, 07:26 PM
BeCKS mentions ways to make that happen. It only suggests it for high-powered campaigns, it's strictly optional and up to the GM (as is anything with an unofficial chargen system).