Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Character Generation Preference
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Crimson Jack
When building characters, I've found that the point system is the most flexible for me. Which do you prefer? Are there some house-rule chargen methods out there?
Toshiaki
I'll generally go with point based creation as it allows me to get a bit closer to the character that I envision.

However, I'll use the priority method without complaining if the GM wants them. I also find it useful for quickly building characters. Great for when the fabled PC killing GM steps up to the screen.
Kagetenshi
Point, always point.

The two big house-ruled methods are BeCKS and Sum-to-10 (which in previous editions was canon).

~J
Smiley
I'm a big fan of Build Points. I gotta get in there with a pencil and some paper and really hash everything out. Helps me get to know the character.

We use any system we want to, though. It's all up to the player.
Capt. Dave
Now BeCKs is the one to get in there with a pen and paper to hash out a character. Takes for fraggin' ever. Of course, it usually works out better to use BPs, IMHO.

My personal favorite is Sum-to-Ten. Easy slot selection with more options/combinations than Priority. I usually try all of them with a bunch of sample characters, and I find that some characters work out better with different systems.
kevyn668
Points. All the way.
Chance359
BECKS (I've usually got alot of time to waste)
Smiley
QUOTE (Capt. Dave)
Now BeCKs is the one to get in there with a pen and paper to hash out a character.

GOD, I hate BeCKs. Takes forever, the point values are total bullcrap, and it's waaaaay too complicated.
kevyn668
I like BeKCs a lot, too. That system lets me spread the points around. If you don't like the number crunching, use the NSRCG.
hahnsoo
Priority system here... it's less flexible, but good for playing metahumans (assuming you are using the More Metahumans rules that are canon now in 3rd edition), especially the priority D metahumans. It's also one of the few ways to take the million, be magically active and still have decent skills and attributes. Depends on your point threshold, though. Although the SR Companion suggests 120 points, our group has found 125 to be better balanced against the Priority system. Most of the characters that I make with Priorities actually end up being 127 to 130.
kevyn668
Its only good for metahumans if you don't play Trolls or Elves.

Is there a way to play the meta-varients with Priority or Sum to Ten?
toturi
Priority is good for metahumans, even if you play Trolls or Elves. Just that it does not benefit them as much. To use metavariants, by Canon, you have only one route: BP.
hahnsoo
QUOTE (kevyn668)
Its only good for metahumans if you don't play Trolls or Elves.

Is there a way to play the meta-varients with Priority or Sum to Ten?

We usually just let the person who wants to play a metavariant purchase "Race" at a one higher priority.

Sum-To-Ten is definitely the cheesiest method out of all three character creation methods, although it really depends on the group point threshold for the point system.
kevyn668
So if a player wanted to create a Night One or a Giant it would be Priority B? That's pretty harsh. What happens if he/she wants to me an Adept or Aspected Magician?

I don't see how Sum To Ten is cheesy but you may have had bad experiences with it.
Xirces
Points or Priority have to be the way to go, IMO. I don't like the karma based way of doing things as characters end up with way too many skills - quite frankly min-maxing is a problem with players not the chargen system - if a player doesn't see the need for well rounded characters, good luck to them.

I'm not sure why I don't like it, but sumto10 *does* seem a bit cheesy... I get the impression it was created *just* to allow for million nuyen, 30 attribute samurai (I know I can achieve the same with points, but it's not quite the same) in response to the "mundane humans get screwed" school of thought.

Fact is, using points allows for the greatest flexibility without allowing the creation of characters with hundreds of medium level skills - a value of about 125 seems about right (any less and mages are disadvantaged over the priority system) and given the additional rules since the BBB was written allows for the unawakened to get some advantages (MA maneouvers, SUT as an active skill, off-hand skills etc).
Luca
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
We usually just let the person who wants to play a metavariant purchase "Race" at a one higher priority.

I think this is prettty unfair.
Fomori are clealry less strong then trolls but they cost more.
OK, anybody here prefers roleplaying over powergaming....but nobody wants to be cheated in this way!!!!
Grinder
Point - ever since it was introduced in the companion.
Garland
I likes the BeCKS. I think it creates more generalized and plausible characters.

My real beef is with the Priority system, where you'd be stupid not to max out those primary skills (whatever they are for your character). BeCKS at least makes you suffer for specialization.

As a side note, I tend to run VERY long campaigns, so a slightly less specialized start lets the fun go longer without the characters becoming unstoppable in their chosen field too quickly.
Grinder
We're using a house rule on char gen, saying that only a fair number of skills can be at rating 6, 5, etc.
How many skills are allowed to be at which rating is GM call. Works fine so far and the GM is able to balance the power level of the characters, preventing chars with five skills at 6 in the beginning. If he want to.
Fortune
I've done the same type of thing in my games. I typically only allow the use of the Build Point system, but if a player really insists on handicapping himself with Priorities, well, they can go for it.

I really dislike BeCKS, although I can see its appeal for some people.
hahnsoo
QUOTE (Luca)
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Feb 7 2005, 01:05 AM)
We usually just let the person who wants to play a metavariant purchase "Race" at a one higher priority.

I think this is prettty unfair.
Fomori are clealry less strong then trolls but they cost more.
OK, anybody here prefers roleplaying over powergaming....but nobody wants to be cheated in this way!!!!

Hey, metahumans USED to be Priority A for Race. Ugh.
Large Mike

Sum-to-10. I've seen points math-crunched once to often to like it, and priority often seems to limiting, so I think this is damn near the perfect balance.
Xirces
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
QUOTE (Luca @ Feb 7 2005, 06:28 AM)
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Feb 7 2005, 01:05 AM)
We usually just let the person who wants to play a metavariant purchase "Race" at a one higher priority.

I think this is prettty unfair.
Fomori are clealry less strong then trolls but they cost more.
OK, anybody here prefers roleplaying over powergaming....but nobody wants to be cheated in this way!!!!

Hey, metahumans USED to be Priority A for Race. Ugh.

Which actually meant there was reason to be human smile.gif

Now if you've taken your top three priorities as resources, skills and attributes (in no particular order) then from a purely numerical POV then it makes no sense to take Race as D and still be human... hence Sumto10 (which I don't like for that reason).

Players still used Metas in 1st edition even with Priority A *and* compulsory allergies. Sniff. I miss those days.
Xirces
QUOTE (Large Mike)
Sum-to-10. I've seen points math-crunched once to often to like it, and priority often seems to limiting, so I think this is damn near the perfect balance.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Math Crunched" - surely the whole point is that you *can* sacrifice an attribute for a couple of skill points, or move to the next level of resources. It's flexible but doesn't create characters any more powerful than the default priority system (not like BeCKS...)
James McMurray
My group has never done anything but priority.
Lindt
Depends what Im after. Personally I like points, its easy to scale up and down, and its still easy to memorize. But there are times that Becks has its bonuses. Namely mundane humans. Mostly because I can take a TON of low power (2 or 3) skills and still have reasonable atts and еее. A gen system that favors the jack of all trades. But MAN... Ill never do it without NSRCG again...
Thistledown
I typically use sum-to-10, find it pretty balanced. I never use priority, and I'll normally only use points if I'm making a character that requires it (metavarients, drakes, etc.), or if I want to have unbalanced edges/flaws.
Jrayjoker
I have not used BeCKS, but I have NSRCG and TSS article explaining it.

I prefer the point system as a GM because it allows me as GM to set the level of the game from street level to world changing, all I have to do is tell my characters how many points they have to spend.
Shaudes29
Becks here. helsp control min maxing. why is becks not listed in the poll
Xirces
QUOTE (Shaudes29)
Becks here. helsp control min maxing. why is becks not listed in the poll

BeCKS is merely a houserule, albeit a popular one.
Taran
I like BeCKS in the abstract; one of my big issues with SR character management is the disconnect between building and advancing your character, and the way it rewards versatility rather than punishing it is awesome. The character I'm playing now uses Sum-to-Ten, but I chose that for entirely munchkin reasons: I wrote down a list of abilities and resources that I figured I'd need to make the concept* semi-viable, then tried different build methods until I hit upon one that could accomodate it.

Of the options named in the poll, I prefer point-based, as it allows more variety and doesn't screw human mundanes.

Aspected conjurer/decker/face/small-time rigger. I wanted to pack as many means of gathering information as possible into a single character.
Mr Cjelli
I'm personally a big fan of BeCKs because it lets you build the character you want (the biggest advantage of Points) and it doesn't penalize you for taking, say, one skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6.

I'll admit it's numbers heavy and it's not perfect. Say, if you want to play a shapeshifter full mage w/ 30 spell points you need to drop a whopping 240 karma.
tisoz
QUOTE (Mr Cjelli)
I'm personally a big fan of BeCKs because it lets you build the character you want (the biggest advantage of Points) and it doesn't penalize you for taking, say, one skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6.

It gives you a bonus for taking a skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6.
toturi
One of the reason why I dislike Becks is that it encourages versatility. WTF, you ask? Why would I as a GM dislike Becks for encouraging my players to build "believable, rounded characters"? Because when I GM SR, there is usually more than 1-2 players. Having only 1-2 players demand that they spread out their skills to cover the bases. When you have more and when EVERYONE is a generalist, you have to ask yourself,"What is the Johnson doing? Hiring a bunch of guys all with the same set of skills and not one of them an expert at what he does?"

OOC: If the sammy can't doing anything the decker can't or that the mage can negotiate as well as the face, then what is the sammy or face doing in the group? It takes the fun out of the experience for everyone.
Mr Cjelli
QUOTE (tisoz)
It gives you a bonus for taking a skill at 4 and another at 2 instead of one at 6.

True, in that if your defaulting attribute is six, it's almost twice as cheap to buy one skill at 4 and another at 2. Yes, it hoses you if you want to have 6s in four or five active skills. But, I think it's a fair trade off. First, in practice you're not getting characters with twice as many skill points. Your typical character is going to want 6s and 5s in a few skills, and then many at 4, and a couple at 3 and 2. In practice it works pretty well. Sure, you could build a "super generalist" with 3s in tons of skills, but whether such a character would be playable or fun to play is another question.

If you assume that every point of karma is worth as much as the last, and that the karma costs of advancement are indicative of the advancement's worth (yes, I know, this isn't the safest assumption), then after character generation a skill of 6 is worth twice as much as a skill of 4 and a skill of 2. They're worth the same thing at chargen using all the canonical methods. So, which way is correct?
Luca
QUOTE (Xirces)
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Feb 7 2005, 01:05 PM)
QUOTE (Luca @ Feb 7 2005, 06:28 AM)
QUOTE (hahnsoo @ Feb 7 2005, 01:05 AM)
We usually just let the person who wants to play a metavariant purchase "Race" at a one higher priority.

I think this is prettty unfair.
Fomori are clealry less strong then trolls but they cost more.
OK, anybody here prefers roleplaying over powergaming....but nobody wants to be cheated in this way!!!!

Hey, metahumans USED to be Priority A for Race. Ugh.

Which actually meant there was reason to be human smile.gif

Now if you've taken your top three priorities as resources, skills and attributes (in no particular order) then from a purely numerical POV then it makes no sense to take Race as D and still be human... hence Sumto10 (which I don't like for that reason).

Players still used Metas in 1st edition even with Priority A *and* compulsory allergies. Sniff. I miss those days.

3rd edition metahumans are as follow:
c Trolls/elves
d Orks/Dwarves
e Humans

IN points
human 0 (= E)
ork-dwarf 5 (=D)
troll-elf 10 (=C)
shapeshifter 25 (more expensive than A!!!)

metavariant: +5 (so +1 category)
Ghoul +10 (so human ghouls are C)
otaku +30 (always A...but in effects is more expensive than A so being an Otaku is more an advantage with the priority system)

This is the correspondence between the races of the two systems which I think it is not completely correct and fair (see the otaku).
More unfair is the metahuman variant +5 which I usually do not transform, in +1 priority level (I never used point system): being a fomori is less advantageous than playing a troll, why one want to pay more? Many other metavariants are not an edge but are only alternative. The simplest thing to do is to not make them pay +5 point or +1 priority level.
Xirces
The points allocations and costs are not supposed to *fair* - they are supposed to produce a reasonable spread of races - which having looked at the various polls on DSF "which race are you?" etc actually does seem to work. Trying to evaluate the cost/benefit of any particular race is a pointless exercise.
Gyro the Greek Sandwich Pirate
Psh. You should have given Sum to Ten and BeCKs their own categories.

BeCKs over here.
hahnsoo
I kept wondering why my Awakened characters were far more powerful under Priority than Points. I recently sat down and went through all the permutations of the Priority system. This is the abstract:

A range of 110 - 135 points, with an average of 123 and 7/9ths. If you allow mundane humans to use Sum to 10, then the range becomes 115 - 135 points with an average of 124 and 2/3rds. If you are an adept, the range is 124 - 135 (they get the most benefit) with an average of 128 and 1/9th. If you are a full magician, the range is 121 - 130 with an average of 124 and 5/9ths. Unless you use Sum-to-10, mundane humans are totally shafted under the priority system, with a range of 110 to 118.

Trends: Taking higher priorities in Resources jumps the overall point value up significantly. NO mundanes have a point total over 123. Overall, you get better value out of magically active characters (with adept characters given the most advantage) and metahumans under priorities. What this means is that the point system is less forgiving with Awakened characters and more forgiving with mundances.

Specific Examples:
Resources A /Magic B /Attributes C /Race D/Skills E 135 points (the highest value is a dwarf/ork adept who takes the million)
Resources A/Attributes A/Skills C 124 points i.e. the Street Sam Package in Sum-to-10
Skills A/Resources A/Attributes C 128 points i.e. the Techie Package in Sum-to-10
Morphling The Pretender
I like BeCKs.

Over the Xmas break this year, I wasn't working much. And you know about idle hands...

So I manually calculated out which system (Points or Priority) was technically better. (not unlike what hahnsoo was doing) Points always has the advantage of maleablity and EdgeFlaws, but for the purposes of this experiment, we're looking at pure purchasing power. Also, this doesn't compare anything that can't be done with Priority, and no Otaku. Do it manually if you want to so badly.

http://www.geocities.com/morphling_the_pre...der/Compare.xls

It's divided by Race and Magic, with all others subordinate. Maybe next time you make a character, you'll check his archetype against this comparison?
James McMurray
Any chance of an html version for those of us without the processing power to run the bloatware known as MS Office (or even the much more processor friend Open Office)?
hahnsoo
Here's my data. It may have a few tiny math errors, but I've doubled checked everything:
QUOTE
Mundane humans
Att/Ski/Res/Mag/Rac 110
Att/Res/Ski/Mag/Rac 114
Ski/Att/Res/Mag/Rac 114
Ski/Res/Att/Mag/Rac 118
Res/Att/Ski/Mag/Rac 118
Res/Ski/Att/Mag/Rac 118

Mundane Human Sum to 10
Att A/Ski B/Res B 120
Att A/Ski A/Res C 120
Ski A/Att B/Res B 124
Ski A/Res A/Att C 128 i.e. the Techie Package
Res A/Att B/Ski B 124
Res A/Att A/Ski C 124 i.e. the Street Sam Package

Mundane Dwarf/Ork
Att/Ski/Res/Rac/Mag 115
Att/Res/Ski/Rac/Mag 119
Ski/Att/Res/Rac/Mag 119
Ski/Res/Att/Rac/Mag 123
Res/Att/Ski/Rac/Mag 123
Res/Ski/Att/Rac/Mag 123

Mundane Elf/Troll
Att/Ski/Rac/Res/Mag 115
Att/Res/Rac/Ski/Mag 119
Ski/Att/Rac/Res/Mag 119
Ski/Res/Rac/Att/Mag 123
Res/Att/Rac/Ski/Mag 123
Res/Ski/Rac/Att/Mag 123

Adept Human
Att/Mag/Ski/Res/Rac 124
Att/Mag/Res/Ski/Rac 125
Ski/Mag/Att/Res/Rac 128
Ski/Mag/Res/Att/Rac 127
Res/Mag/Att/Ski/Rac 133
Res/Mag/Ski/Att/Rac 131

Adept Dwarf/Ork
Att/Mag/Ski/Rac/Res 124
Att/Mag/Res/Rac/Ski 125
Ski/Mag/Att/Rac/Res 128
Ski/Mag/Res/Rac/Att 126
Res/Mag/Att/Rac/Ski 135 (Max efficiency: Take the Mil, dwarf adept)
Res/Mag/Ski/Rac/Att 130

Adept Elf/Troll
Att/Mag/Rac/Ski/Res 125
Att/Mag/Rac/Res/Ski 127
Ski/Mag/Rac/Att/Res 127
Ski/Mag/Rac/Res/Att 126
Res/Mag/Rac/Att/Ski 134
Res/Mag/Rac/Ski/Att 131

Full Mage Human
Mag/Att/Ski/Res/Rac 123
Mag/Att/Res/Ski/Rac 124
Mag/Ski/Att/Res/Rac 123
Mag/Ski/Res/Att/Rac 122
Mag/Res/Att/Ski/Rac 128
Mag/Res/Ski/Att/Rac 126

Full Mage Dwarf/Ork
Mag/Att/Ski/Rac/Res 123
Mag/Att/Res/Rac/Ski 126
Mag/Ski/Att/Rac/Res 123
Mag/Ski/Res/Rac/Att 121
Mag/Res/Att/Rac/Ski 130
Mag/Res/Ski/Rac/Att 125

Full Mage Elf/Troll
Mag/Att/Rac/Ski/Res 124
Mag/Att/Rac/Res/Ski 126
Mag/Ski/Rac/Att/Res 122
Mag/Ski/Rac/Res/Att 121
Mag/Res/Rac/Att/Ski 129
Mag/Res/Rac/Ski/Att 126
Dizzo Dizzman
Damn!!! I can't believe you calculated every option under the priority system. eek.gif

Here's what I do to reconcile the metavariant thing with the priority system. I let the player choose which system they want to use. If they choose BP, I give them 125 pts.. If they choose priority, they get an extra 5 pts. If they play a metavairant, they have to spend the 5 on the variant. If they don't they can spend it on skills, attributes, or edges.

Calvin
The method I prefer is to roll 3 D6 and add them together for each attribute.

Unfortunately, no GM has ever let me use the method I prefer. wink.gif
JoeJones
BeCKS here, since I like the flexibility it offers--and the fact that you can make a decent generalist using it. OTOH, I've only used it on NSRCG, and I don't think I'd enjoy doing it by hand--except if I were in one of my occasional masochistic number-crunching moods.
Luca
QUOTE (Xirces)
The points allocations and costs are not supposed to *fair* - they are supposed to produce a reasonable spread of races - which having looked at the various polls on DSF "which race are you?" etc actually does seem to work. Trying to evaluate the cost/benefit of any particular race is a pointless exercise.

It's BULLDREK!!!
Dwarves are supposed to be less diffused than elves (for ex, sr3 pag.313 says that in Seattle only the 3% are dwarves while 12 % are elves, similar statistics can be traced throughout Shadows of North America) but dwarves are LESS EXPENSIVE TO CREATE than elves in both systems (priority or points). This accounts for the fact that being an elf is more advantageous than being a dwarf, NOT for the fact that elves are rarer than dwarves.
THE CONSEQUENCE:
metavariants should not cost more than the normal races, especially because they are often less an advantage than normal races. See my previous example: troll are stronger than fomori but fomori are more expensive to create: the system for metavariants IS UNFAIR.
hahnsoo
I think it's unfair that Dwarves get a net +4 to their attributes without any attribute penalties, along with free Thermo and +2 dice vs. toxins and disease, AND they only cost 5 points. But hey, I'm not complaining... anything to get more people to play Dwarves, I guess.
Aes
Personally, I prefer Becks. But only with NSRCG to do the number crunching. I'm no masochist. If NSRCG isn't available, I'd say point buy.
Rajaat99
Flexable Priority. All add to 10.
Luca
QUOTE (hahnsoo)
I think it's unfair that Dwarves get a net +4 to their attributes without any attribute penalties, along with free Thermo and +2 dice vs. toxins and disease, AND they only cost 5 points. But hey, I'm not complaining... anything to get more people to play Dwarves, I guess.

ok in a way or in another you got my point: DWARVES COST LESS NOT BECAUSE THEY SHOULD BE VERY DIFFUSED.
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