Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Trolls and their skulls and intelligence
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
lorthazar
In the Free Spirits case i don't suppose why not. Of course it would not be pretty if a Free Fire Elemental lost control of a Water Elemental. lol
Ol' Scratch
The only spirits I know of that can using Conjuring are queen bug spirits.
Kanada Ten
Though, other spirits have the ability to reproduce as well, such as Corpse Lights and Nomads.
Ol' Scratch
Well, let's put it this way. Of the spirits that a character has a chance to summon on a regular basis, none of them (including Ally and Free Spirits) have the ability to use Conjuring.
Solstice
QUOTE (Botch)
Making a statement like that and then bigging-up your knowledge starts the rub, no? If you

I would like trolls to be biologically defensible in SR, but this does not be mean they have to be evolutionary OR creationist,

It wasn't my intention to 'big up" my knowledge whatever that means. I was simply trying to backup my statements with scientific knowledge not trying to smear anyone. I prefer to qualify my statements with facts which frankly is what a discussion should consist of.

As for the 2nd part of your quote: It's a paradox. I would make the assertion that something cannot be biologically defensible unless it can be explained by evolutionary processes which as we can see by any number of examples, drives physical adaptations. Natural selection is the reason why every animal has the physical form that they have.
Tanka
QUOTE (Solstice)
[...]Natural selection is the reason why every animal has the physical form that they have.

That's arguable. There is no scientific evidence (also known as "proof") that any animal was different hundreds of thousands of years ago. Darwinism is a product of the 19th century, which isn't enough time to prove that animals have, in fact, evolved. There may be things closely related to and looking like, but that does not prove that they were or are something else.
Solstice
Um...I don't know what that statment means and I don't want to get sucked back into this debate as anyone can read the previous pages but I will mention that this is what the fossil record is....

For instance we can see from the fossil record that modern birds are a product of natural selection (evolution) of reptiles. The same goes for Homo sapiens sapiens. Now this is where the species concept comes in. When an animal is significantly different from it's ancestor we call it a new species which I guess is what your getting at. And not all of the fossil record is objective. It's like we look outside and we see snow on the ground..so we can safely assume that it did indeed snow the night before, even though we didn't actually witness the process.
Tanka
QUOTE (Solstice)
Um...I don't know what that statment means and I don't want to get sucked back into this debate as anyone can read the previous pages but I will mention that this is what the fossil record is....

For instance we can see from the fossil record that modern birds are a product of natural selection (evolution) of reptiles. The same goes for Homo sapiens sapiens. Now this is where the species concept comes in. When an animal is significantly different from it's ancestor we call it a new species which I guess is what your getting at. And not all of the fossil record is objective. It's like we look outside and we see snow on the ground..so we can safely assume that it did indeed snow the night before, even though we didn't actually witness the process.

This is assuming evolution according to Darwin is the correct theory.

Nowhere do we have 100% evidence that a pterodactyl became an eagle. Same goes for Cro-Magnon "man" and modern man. We just have best guesses from DNA that merely says they are related very closely.
Solstice
If your trying to say that evolution is not a perfect theory well then you are correct. If it was flawless it wouldn't be a theory it would be a law. But it's held up pretty well based on the fossil record thus far.

In fact a good example of near instant evolution occured to me while I was on the shitter.

Take for instance bacteria. When bacteria are exposed to counter measures such as anti-bacterial soap or viruses to anti biotics, some but not all of the bacteria/virsus cells die. Those that survive quickly diseminate the genetic information that allowed them to resist (i.e. a random genetic mutation) througout the population using a conjugation method unique to those organisms. This makes the rest of the population resistant to that measure. This is why antibiotics must be switched up frequently and the doctor always tells you to take the entire course so that this does not occur. This is a classic example of environmental stress (natural selection) causing adaptations of organisms.

There are few areas of science where we would have anything approaching 100% certainty. However, we use the best model available as long as it's better than an existing model.
Tanka
QUOTE (Solstice)
If your trying to say that evolution is not a perfect theory well then you are correct. If it was flawless it wouldn't be a theory it would be a law. But it's held up pretty well based on the fossil record thus far.

In fact a good example of near instant evolution occured to me while I was on the shitter.

Take for instance bacteria. When bacteria are exposed to counter measures such as anti-bacterial soap or viruses to anti biotics, some but not all of the bacteria/virsus cells die. Those that survive quickly diseminate the genetic information that allowed them to resist througout the population using a conjugation method unique to those organisms. This makes the rest of the population resistant to that measure. This is why antibiotics must be switched up frequently and the doctor always tells you to take the entire course so that this does not occur. This is a classic example of environmental stress (natural selection) causing adaptations of organisms.

I'm not disbelieving in evolution as a whole, actually. I do follow the thoughts of survival of the fittest to an extent. I don't feel that something as random as evolving from a single-celled organism is worth putting a full belief into.

Example: A bird is living on seeds this year, thus his beak is longer and thinner so he can get more seeds per bite. Next year, the seeds diminish so they switch to nuts. The birds with shorter, wider beaks will be the surviving ones, so there'll be more of them. That's the part of Darwin's theory that I do believe.
Kagetenshi
What about something as random as a particle not having a definable location, merely a probability of location?

The universe is fundamentally totally probabilistic, or at least so says the current most-accepted theory.

~J
Solstice
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
What about something as random as a particle not having a definable location, merely a probability of location?

The universe is fundamentally totally probabilistic, or at least so says the current most-accepted theory.

~J

Yes this is true. This is why when as a scientist as I attempt to predict or model something I deal exclusively in probabilities becuase nothing is really binary especially in nature. It's graduated almost exclusively.
Kagetenshi
I remember once back in High School I got into an argument with my math teacher because he was using the old example of always moving halfway towards a wall and never reaching it and I brought up the Planck Length smile.gif

Quantized and probabilistic. What a weird universe.

~J
Solstice
Ha! This is why the science of statistics is so vital to the rest of science.
Halabis
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
The universe is fundamentally totally probabilistic, or at least so says the current most-accepted theory.

Incorect, the universe is only absolutes. It is only our ability to measure those absolutes without changing them that is the problem.
Austere Emancipator
Yay! Bring forth the Creationism vs Evolution threads!

Or not. It is worth mentioning that, in SR, evolution could not have worked like it did in our world, what with the horrors and GDs and whoever else meddling. Not much else about that issue that isn't already said in this thread is.
Da9iel
IRL Creation vs. Evolution: no comment.
In SR Creation vs. Evolution: I see a very strong argument in favor of at least some creation. There's the whole "Horrors Created what's-his-name (the first dragon) who spawned more dragons and the namegivers etc." mythology. There's also the influence of spirits and the influence of mana (which is created and arguably influenced by life). And there's the fact that some artists "created" the image of Trolls that we are so happily discussing. biggrin.gif
DarkShade
QUOTE (tanka)
Example: A bird is living on seeds this year, thus his beak is longer and thinner so he can get more seeds per bite. Next year, the seeds diminish so they switch to nuts. The birds with shorter, wider beaks will be the surviving ones, so there'll be more of them. That's the part of Darwin's theory that I do believe.

umm.. its actually the other way around..
what the theory of natural selection says is that at a given time there exists birds with short beaks and long beaks , one year say the winter is harsh and only the ones with long thin beaks can find enough food, so more of those will survive.
eventually you can end up with `long beak variant`being the new norm.

ie organisms do not `grow larger beaks`when needed. the theory depends on the diversity already being there. `random mutations`are used to explain this. this is rather unsatisfactory as an explanation for any higher organisms <example: bombardeer beetles>, and the fossils only help with the natural selection part..but it is the only working theory we have therefore the one we use atm.

in SR, with semi inmortal critters messing about, spirits, etc is is quite possible, even likely, at least from what I have read from earthdawn, that evolution is not random for metas but guided.

DS
Stumps
They're big. They're dumb. They're Trolls.
That's it.
Just big, dumb, trolls.

Ok, I keep seeing the thread...sorry. I'll go away now.
Tanka
But why? From Goblinization? Possibly.

But what about Metavariants? After YotC, more people Goblinize into those as well. Do the Elves and Dwarves suddenly take Int/Cha hits?
Botch
a) Goblinisation could cause brain damage in the metamorphosis to explain the INT penalty, but not for those born trolls.
b) Low selfesteem and childhood bullying could explain the CHA penalty for those born trolls, but not those who goblinise or apparently Fomori.
c) Physical appearance could explain the CHA penalty to other races or the goblinised, but not within those "goblin" communities.

These three seem to be a least partially exclusive, what is it really and how does SURGE fit in?
Solstice
QUOTE (Halabis)
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Nov 30 2004, 12:03 AM)
The universe is fundamentally totally probabilistic, or at least so says the current most-accepted theory.

Incorect, the universe is only absolutes. It is only our ability to measure those absolutes without changing them that is the problem.

If we can't measure them, how do we know they are absolutes? biggrin.gif
Solstice
QUOTE (DarkShade)

umm.. its actually the other way around..
what the theory of natural selection says is that at a given time there exists birds with short beaks and long beaks , one year say the winter is harsh and only the ones with long thin beaks can find enough food, so more of those will survive.
eventually you can end up with `long beak variant`being the new norm.

ie organisms do not `grow larger beaks`when needed. the theory depends on the diversity already being there. `random mutations`are used to explain this. this is rather unsatisfactory as an explanation for any higher organisms <example: bombardeer beetles>, and the fossils only help with the natural selection part..but it is the only working theory we have therefore the one we use atm.

in SR, with semi inmortal critters messing about, spirits, etc is is quite possible, even likely, at least from what I have read from earthdawn, that evolution is not random for metas but guided.

DS

No not really it could work in any direction depending on the circumstances.

And random mutations are fairly efficient because there are so many happening in the population. Think of the number of mutations possible in 1 million organisms over 10,000 years. Really they can respond to natural selection pressure from any direction as long as it is gradual enough.

Evolution is never random it's pushed in one direction or another. Random mutations simply provide the necessary increase in fitness so that members with increased fitness can pass that genetic material on, they don't decide the direction.
Stumps
Actually.

SR isn't adding up...again. ohplease.gif
I don't remember reading this in SR2 but that doesn't mean it wasn't there.

If you read pages 50-51 in SR3, you'll read about how trolls are not "brain-dead, no matter what lots of other people think."

The Issue
The problem with this "essay" about trolls is that it goes completely against the rule set and says that trolls don't suffer from being less intelligent.
There is absolutely no rule set to back up what this essay says and this essay doesn't back up anything that the rules say.

According to the essay, trolls are only "dumb" because they are stereotyped as "dumb" for various reasons given in the essay such as their speech’s sound, their un-common look, others fear, and historical comedic injustice.


What The Essay And The Rule Set Sum Up To When Put Together
If I go by this essay, I am to believe that the trolls Intel. Attribute is lower because that's what people expect.
Thus, that the attribute negative really is something of a false attribute for perceptive values only, regardless of the real attribute level of their intelligence.


Another Possibility
On the otherhand.
They do hint at ONE possibility as to why trolls are "dumb":
"In many areas, troll children can't even go to the local school. Socially speaking, most people's reaction on first meeting a troll is, "Please don't beat me up!" "

So it's possible that trolls lack educational intel. because of being ostracized rather than their ability.


The Revision?
If this is true then it would make more sense for trolls to have a negative to Knowledge Skills rather than Intelligence.
The reasoning being that they are fully capable OF learning but simply haven't had the OPPERTUNITY as fruitfully as others have.
Kagetenshi
The essay, IIRC, is written in-character by an above-average intelligence Troll with an agenda.

~J
Halabis
I like pizza.
Trolls are big.
My tummy hurts.
Stupid people make stupid posts.

This thread is driving me insane.
Solstice

QUOTE (Halabis)
Stupid people make stupid posts.


As you have so eloquently demonstrated....

QUOTE (Halabis)

This thread is driving me insane.


You've only just shown yourself...how do you think the rest of us feel 7+ pages in?? spin.gif
hyzmarca
Something else to consider is that trolls have to make less effort to raise their intelligence. Because of their body and strength bonuses thay can pour karma into their mental attributes if they want. Your average human may work out several times a day to achieve a body of 5. Your average troll already has a body of 8 and can spend less time and less karma to raise his intelligence to 3.

The real consequence is the absolute limit of 8 Int instead of 9. It only costs 10 more points of karma for a troll to be a super-genuis and a troll doesn't have to worry about bodybuilding.
Shockwave_IIc
QUOTE (Stumps)
Another Possibility
On the otherhand.
They do hint at ONE possibility as to why trolls are "dumb":
"In many areas, troll children can't even go to the local school. Socially speaking, most people's reaction on first meeting a troll is, "Please don't beat me up!" "

So it's possible that trolls lack educational intel. because of being ostracized rather than their ability.


The Revision?
If this is true then it would make more sense for trolls to have a negative to Knowledge Skills rather than Intelligence.
The reasoning being that they are fully capable OF learning but simply haven't had the OPPERTUNITY as fruitfully as others have.

So your saying that Trolls should have the Uneducated/ Illterate flaws instead of a -2 to Intelligence?

Can see that working somewhat.

With the possiblilty perhaps of a Troll Only edge that allows them to "buy off" said problem to allow for Trolls which had a better upbringing?

But then what about Electronics/ Biotech/ Computer skills? Would you allow a character with one of the above flaws to have anyof those at 6?

But then we would have to give orks a similiar consession no?

Note: This is not a personal attack, just putting forward some thoughts to the board.
GaiasWrath8
QUOTE (KarmaInferno)
I do recall measurements taken of Einstein's brain after his death showed he had a smaller brain than average, but with a denser neuron network. Could be mis-remembering, though.


-karma

This is true, denser with more bumps or rolls (how ever you want to look at it) but was smaller than the average.

Nikoli
Add to that a (Bad reputation) flaw, remember it isn't always deserved
Stumps
QUOTE (Kage)
The essay, IIRC, is written in-character by an above-average intelligence Troll with an agenda.

The problem is, No where is that idea expressed.
He could be an above-average intelligence troll with an agenda, and he could also not be.
They don't say.

QUOTE (Shockwave_IIc)

So your saying that Trolls should have the Uneducated/ Illterate flaws instead of a -2 to Intelligence?

Sure, that idea could work.
I didn't have any exact idea in mind. I was just vaguely pointing out the issue and a basic suggestion.
Your idea could work well though.

You could also say things like "-X points to Skills"
(I realize that this hurts active skills as well, but it's harder to say -X to Knowledge Skills the way it's set up.)

QUOTE
With the possiblilty perhaps of a Troll Only edge that allows them to "buy off" said problem to allow for Trolls which had a better upbringing?

I would say that if you used your idea above, this idea would be an option that should be used, but rather that instead of making it an edge, you simply spend built points to remove the Flaw from above.

QUOTE

But then what about Electronics/ Biotech/ Computer skills? Would you allow a character with one of the above flaws to have anyof those at 6?

Under your concept of using a Flaw, these things are active skills and thus not technically suffering since it can be argued that they can learn them outside of a classroom more easily than academic skills through practice.
Except maybe that Biotech there.

QUOTE
But then we would have to give orks a similiar consession no?

I was thinking about that.
I haven't read their description to see if there's any cross-referencing in the text so I can't say until I get home later and read that part.
I'll post after I do.

----
Really, I think my prefered, as of now, concept is something akin to using the Flaw of Uneducated/ Illiterate, as you suggested, and saying that it gives the character a -X Skill points from the flaw. (ouchy)
The way to remove it is by spending X build points and then the troll would suffer no loss of Skill points from the flaw.

The "X" is because I haven't looked at what those numbers should probably be and without the books I don't like the idea of throwing a number out there blindly.

The Edge "Human Looking" would reduce the results of this Flaw by half. (whatever those results end up being)
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Stumps)
QUOTE (Kage)
The essay, IIRC, is written in-character by an above-average intelligence Troll with an agenda.

The problem is, No where is that idea expressed.
He could be an above-average intelligence troll with an agenda, and he could also not be.
They don't say.

My point (that the writer is not necessarily a reliable source) is unchanged.

~J
Herald of Verjigorm
Using the simplest logic and comparison, a racial +1 is equivalent to exceptional attribute and bonus attribute point (4 BP total). Ignoring the limits that exist on those edges, changing trolls to have no mental flaws would take a 16 BP change. That means either pricing them at 25 BP/priority B (closest multiple of 5) or tossing in another 16 points of flaws. Orcs would face a relatively mild 8 making them about 10 or 15 BP for race (13, but it's close enough to make me hesitant about automatically rounding off the value).

So I ask the question: would a troll with no mental attribute penalties be worth priority B? Would an orc with no penalties be worth priority C?
Kagetenshi
Trolls cannot take Human Looking.

And I really should have caught that earlier. My brain is dead.

~J
Ol' Scratch
Personally, I have no problem with the Intelligence penalty. It's the Charisma one -- or more correctly, the standard reasons associated with that penalty -- that I have a problem with.
Herald of Verjigorm
Any attribute that applies to both skilled debate in AOL-speak and mentally kicking an astral entity in whatever most thematically resembles a groin is sufficiently complicated or abstracted that I don't care for any obvious traits indicating high or low in that attribute. Others disagree.
Stumps
QUOTE (Kage)
My point (that the writer is not necessarily a reliable source) is unchanged.

As I was saying earlier. Shadowrun hit it again with profound consistency ohplease.gif

QUOTE (Kage)
Trolls cannot take Human Looking.

I was referring to Orcs, as the comment was made about application to both trolls and orcs. Trolls wouldn't be able to use the option.
I just didn't state that clearly at all the first time around. My bad.

Doc:
In all reality of the system, the normal penalty as stands is fine.
I do agree that the cahrisma penalty seems odd because it even applies when they are talking troll to troll.
That doesn't make sense at all.
Shockwave_IIc
QUOTE (Stumps)
QUOTE
With the possiblilty perhaps of a Troll Only edge that allows them to "buy off" said problem to allow for Trolls which had a better upbringing?

I would say that if you used your idea above, this idea would be an option that should be used, but rather that instead of making it an edge, you simply spend built points to remove the Flaw from above.

I had thought of that, but i wanted the option of Trolls from the right background buying it off, instead of Trolls having to take the flaw to be more canonlly correct.

QUOTE
QUOTE

But then what about Electronics/ Biotech/ Computer skills? Would you allow a character with one of the above flaws to have anyof those at 6?

Under your concept of using a Flaw, these things are active skills and thus not technically suffering since it can be argued that they can learn them outside of a classroom more easily than academic skills through practice.
Except maybe that Biotech there.

While those skills can be learned without the aid of "books" im fairly certain that reading and a good education would be important to there advancement.

QUOTE
Really, I think my prefered, as of now, concept is something akin to using the Flaw of Uneducated/ Illiterate, as you suggested, and saying that it gives the character a -X Skill points from the flaw. (ouchy)
The way to remove it is by spending X build points and then the troll would suffer no loss of Skill points from the flaw.

The "X" is because I haven't looked at what those numbers should probably be and without the books I don't like the idea of throwing a number out there blindly.

The Edge "Human Looking" would reduce the results of this Flaw by half. (whatever those results end up being)

Would it be better to say give no actual Intelligence Penalty, but to make Int skills over a certain level cos 1pt more? Say skills over 2 for trolls and 3 for orks unless the "unEducated" Flaw was brought off?

Example.
Troll- current rule set
Int 6 (4) [12Bp]
Computer 6 [8Bp]
Electronics 6 [8Bp]

Total cost 28Bp

"Suggested" rule set
Int 6 (6) [12Bp]
Computer 6 [10Bp]
Electronic 6 [10Bp]

Total cost 32Bp
Though if you "brought off" the flaw at a cost of say 4bps it would still end up costing 28Bp's (With the cost of "buying off" the flaw).

However if you were to take more then 2 Int Based skills to higher levels like most Deckers/ Tech Experts do thats when you get the savings...

Of cause the figures would have to be changed for orks wink.gif
DrJest
Wow.

Having been following this thread (as best I can), my thoughts:

Intelligence: Not a problem. Troll brains are larger but have fewer folds. Ding, Intelligence penaltly explained. Sure, there are exceptional trolls who have more folds - so did Einstein.

Charisma: This is the tricky one. I think there is a Charisma penalty because Edges and Flaws are not part of the basic system.

That may not be clear. Let me explain.

A troll's lower Charisma most likely represents several aspects of being a troll. 1) Racism against metahumans; 2) Fear of anything or anyone a head and a half taller and twice the weight of you; 3) The lesser intelligence leading to an inability to articulate yourself as well as your peers. Possibly even 4) You mature younger than humans and therefore are not as socially adept as an adult human due to lack of practice.

The fact that Charisma also has game applications completely unrelated to social interaction (viz, the spiritual boot to the nadgers) is unfortunate, but in core rules there is no other way to simulate this.

Once Edges and Flaws are added into the equation, the flat Charisma penalty no longer makes sense. It would be more sensible to add or create flaws to simulate these problems. A charisma penalty of -2 equates to 4 BP, yes? So we need 4BP's worth of flaws. Nothing really jumps out at me from the list (looking at the NSRCG while I write this), but there's Incompetent at -2 (+1 to target numbers with the affected skill) which might serve as a basis. Although not perhaps mathematically sound, a new flaw of Stigma: Troll at -4 that added +1 to all social skill target numbers would work.

Of course this leads to the complication that by that token the Stigma: Ork flaw should only penalise -2 for the same effect (since orks have a -1 Cha penalty for 2 points), but one could rationalise this by saying that orks have a lesser intelligence handicap to work round and don't suffer so badly from the "looming over you" aspect. In this latter case, I would also require a player to buy off the Stigma flaw before taking Human-Looking.
Botch
QUOTE (DrJest)
...
Intelligence: Not a problem. Troll brains are larger but have fewer folds. Ding, Intelligence penaltly explained. Sure, there are exceptional trolls who have more folds - so did Einstein...

...A troll's lower Charisma most likely represents several aspects of being a troll. 1) Racism against metahumans; 2) Fear of anything or anyone a head and a half taller and twice the weight of you; 3) The lesser intelligence leading to an inability to articulate yourself as well as your peers. Possibly even 4) You mature younger than humans and therefore are not as socially adept as an adult human due to lack of practice.

DrJest, good thinking, just a couple of niggles, but .

INT: Unless, you agree with some of the concepts at the start of the thread a trolls brain would be too large in comparison and there doesn't appear to be any need to modify cyberware to fit troll brains. Academically challenged seems a better aproach.

CHA: 1) Racism effects all metahumans, 2) Trolls are bigger than that on average population heights, and I think that if a frightning, huge, muscle-bound human asked me a question I'd make damn sure I'd listen which is expressed in several sourcebooks as orks suffering more because they're only slighter bigger than humans and just not as intimidating 3) I'd think the large tusks mangling your speech and a dermal plating that surely inhibits body language would cause a greater problem, 4) Err, this seems irrelevant in SR terms as all you have to do is say you're 3 years older and bingo, there goes the penalty.

Saying that

Trolls = -2INT, -2CHA (Dermal Armour)
Minotaur = -1INT, -1CHA (Dermal Armour)
Fomori = -2INT, -0CHA (No Dermal Armour)
Stumps
Shockwave_IIc:
I like the direction of this.

Some issues that are perking in my head.
I think it should cost more than 4Bp to buy off the Flaw.
The reason is that if I have the following Skills:
Computer: 6[10Bp]
Electronics: 6[10Bp]
Demolitions: 6[10Bp]
Biotech: 6[10Bp]

The over all penalty in cost would be 8 points that I have paid extra than a normal player.

So I pay 4Bp and rid myself of the Flaw and I save myself 4Bp in doing so, in this example. Do you see what I'm getting at?
It comes down to a point where you wonder, "Who wouldn't buy off the Flaw?

I'm not bashing down the idea, I'm looking at it and raising questions where I see potential breaks.
I can be wrong too.

[Also, I'm looking at the basic skill list and seeing things like Gunnery and Launched Weapons being linked to Intelligence. It might be an idea to exempt Active Skills from the penalty for logics sake. Your thoughts?]


DrJest:
Your idea is also a good one, traveling down the same path of thought.
I really think your Charisma Flaw is actually just perfect in it's design there.
Only one thing (so I guess it's not really perfect huh...):
I think it should be added in that the penalty should not apply when dealing with trolls, if the character is a troll, and not apply when dealing with orks, if the character is a ork.

----------

Actually, streamlining the ideas at present together, you get a very nice package:

Automatic Racial Flaws:
Automatic Racial Flaws are flaws that a race of character automatically has at default character creation.
The automatic racial flaws do not cost any points to receive and do not count towards edges and flaws point allowance.
Basically, they do not count in the normal Edges/Flaws point system.
There is no purchasing of them. They are given uniquely to a race for no other reason than the race being what it is.


Rejected Education (Troll and Orc only):
Troll: +2TN for all Technical, Academic Knowledge, and Language(except for their native language) skill checks

Ork: +1TN for all Technical, Academic Knowledge, and Language(except for their native language) skill checks

Rejected Education can be removed by spending 4 Build Points for the Troll, and 2 Build Points for the Ork.
(removal costs might need to be adjusted...don't know yet.)

---------------------

[In this area I had started to type up a clean version of Stigma, but while referring to the books for guidence I realized that the entire Charisma -1, or any additional +xTN to Social Skills is completely silly to begin with when you read page 92 of SR3, "Racism". There is already a system in place that makes it hard for Trolls and Orks (and every other race) to interact with other characters.
What the hell the Charisma -1 was needed for I have no idea. It's already taken care of in the Racism table.

Granted, it is obvious that the table alone does not balance well (as it stands) when you say that Trolls and Orks are the two races that are more commonly hated.
The easy fix of this is pretty simple.
1) Remove "All, except own race" from the list and put Humans in it's place.
2) Remove Humans from 2 and put Orks there instead.
3) Whenever the NPC's own race is rolled they hate Trolls.
4) Leave both of the Orks and Trolls in their other normal positions as well.
5) Add a quick roll of 1D6/2 to determine how many races the NPC is racist against, if a 1 is rolled then they are racist against All, excpet their own race.
6) If NPC is of own race, Racism Roll is not needed. (Thus, the Troll is no longer Charismatically hendered even amognst it's own kind.)

So the table ends up looking like this:
........RACISM TABLE............
Dice Result.......Racial Bias
.......1................Humans.....
.......2................Orks..........
.......3................Elves.........
.......4................Dwarfs.......
.......5................Orks..........
.......6................Trolls*.......

*If NPC rolls their own race they are racist against Trolls rather than rolling again.

By making Orks a stagnat placement and Trolls a wondering placement, we increase the likely hood of both of them being hated, but preserve the greater likely hood of Trolls being hated because, potentially, the Troll can exist on every possible Die Result, where the Ork can only be found on 2 and 5.]
Shockwave_IIc
QUOTE (Stumps)
Shockwave_IIc:
I like the direction of this.

Some issues that are perking in my head.
I think it should cost more than 4Bp to buy off the Flaw.
The reason is that if I have the following Skills:
Computer: 6[10Bp]
Electronics: 6[10Bp]
Demolitions: 6[10Bp]
Biotech: 6[10Bp]

The over all penalty in cost would be 8 points that I have paid extra than a normal player.

So I pay 4Bp and rid myself of the Flaw and I save myself 4Bp in doing so, in this example.  Do you see what I'm getting at?
It comes down to a point where you wonder, "Who wouldn't buy off the Flaw?


I agree in that instance who in their right mind wouldn't buy off the flaw, but's thats half the point, someone with those skills (and you can inclued B/R skills as well) Would in all likely hood BE educated, how else are they going to explain having those skills? if they can explain it in a different way then they buy off the flaw anyway just explain it differently.

But most people (Trolls) wouldn't do that because they would have a need to.

In the end it's kind of like the Focused Concentration Edge, Mundunes never need it so don't buy it (In fact Can't) but it's Very Handy for mages hence why alot of (though not all) mages take it. Same goes for Ambidex 3 and Close Combat/ Spur bunnies.

Basically if it's approperiate then PC's will take the edge or in this case "buy off" the flaw.
Botch
This going well, but what about meta-type variants? Without including these it breaksdown again.
Shockwave_IIc
Not really. You could go by the penelty that they suffer instead of the race.

Trolls, Cyclops, Giant, Famori fit into the previous "Troll" catagory.

Minotuars (being smaller thus more likely to be excepted in to standard education) Orks, Ogres, Oni, Satyr fall under "Orks"

Maybe... Been up a bit long now....
Stumps
meta-variants would fall into the same clause of either +2 or +1 TN for the Automatic Racial Flaw that I was posting.
I would have to go through and look at the variants before I could say which gets which, but I'm sure there is a very easy way to go about it, much like Shockwave_IIc was talking about.

Shockwave _IIc
I can't bring myself to agree with you on your last point.
I have my reservations about making a rule for a penalty that encourages players to buy it off and thus negating the rule almost completely, by not balancing the scales of profit and loss.
Botch
Umm, minotaurs have these large weapons attached to their heads and are argubly the least "human" in appearance. Fomori's on the other hand are described as the most beautiful (most human-like) of the troll variants and have no CHA penalty. Fomori's also are the most magically active troll variant, which IMHO causes a problem with proposed rules as they stand. Finally, what about trolls which come from the Black Forest.
Stumps
Botch.
There is no problem with the rule, as I posted it, and meta-v's.
(I'll let Shockwave_IIc speak on his postings behalf)

Why not?
I haven't looked at them yet.
When I do, then I'll make adjustments for the meta-v's and special cases, but as it is, there is no problem as the rule is applied, presently, just like the normal SR3 rule is applied to meta-v's.

The Cha thing isn't even an issue in any way, shape or form in my posted rule for that because there is no Cha penalty anymore with what I posted.
There is only the racism table.
At present, it only accounts for Trolls and Orks.
So, like I said, I'll look into it later and get back to you on it in more detail.
Ol' Scratch
See, even the education and other socialological limitations you guys are forcing on them is even *way* more inappropriate than a flat-out penalty. Not all trolls are uneducated, nor should it be considered the norm.

If anything, remove the restrictions and increase their price accordingly. Then offer those flaws as racial-only flaws (like Human Looking is).

If I were going to do something like this, I'd eliminate all Mental Attribute modifiers (even positive ones; the same reason the Charisma penalty for trolls makes little sense is the same reason the Charisma bonus for elves makes little sense) from the various races. I'd then calculate how much their base mods (ignoring Bonus/Exceptional Attribute Points) are worth and go for a number near there.

Dwarves and Elves would be 5 Build Point races, Orks would be 10 Build Points, and Trolls would be 15-20 Build Points.

At that point I'd create an Infirm variant for Mental Attributes, another variant that only applies to one of any Attribute, and then let the players build their characters as appropriate. Those that should be undereducated or unintelligent could thus take the Infirm variant and Uneducated/Illiiterate flaws to reflect that, while everyone else would be free to do whatever.

On the plus side it makes Elves more reasonable (since now they're just like everyone else, rather than being the only metarace with no inherent penalties), and puts everyone on the same footing since they all came from human stock. It also opens up more doors for individual character customization while still making each race unique with their own advantages and disadvantages.
Botch
Doc Funk, all I can say is YES.
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