I was just wondering if they went to a system in which you can only upgrade your attributes through karma to a maximum of your starting level + 3 ranks if people would hate or love that type of system.
The reason why I was thinking along this lines was the thought that upon starting thier careers as shadowrunners thier attributes are at some percentage of thier maximum potential. Sure you can work out and take lots of steriods but if you start the game with a strength of 2 you aren't going to get up to 9-10 without serious augmentations.
This way there is an incentive to buy relatively high stats at the begining of your career rather than converting those build points to cash and "getting more bang for your buck". With this sort of a system while going with low attributes and lots of cyber or magic boosts to attributes at the beginning will give you a big edge initially your maximum attribute totals will be lower than someone who goes high attributes from the beginning.
Full Version: Maximum Attribute Advancement
Flat caps are generally bad. It's better to make some sort of formula that just makes it insanely expensive to advance past a certain point.
It's something extra to keep track of--your starting stat as well as your current one--so I don't see it happening in SR4.
I like the idea in general, but as I've said elsewhere, I much prefer an unrewardingly expensive progression rather than a flat cap. If someone wants to spend 200 karma for that one extra quickness point (instead of the 50 karma they'd have had to spend if they hadn't skimped on quickness at build time), hey, who am I to stop them?
I like the idea in general, but as I've said elsewhere, I much prefer an unrewardingly expensive progression rather than a flat cap. If someone wants to spend 200 karma for that one extra quickness point (instead of the 50 karma they'd have had to spend if they hadn't skimped on quickness at build time), hey, who am I to stop them?
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul) |
| Flat caps are generally bad. It's better to make some sort of formula that just makes it insanely expensive to advance past a certain point. |
I'm just mentioning it because it add more versimilitude to character advancement. If you are dumb to begin with even if you crack the books a good deal you aren't ever going to be the next Einstein.
This way people with 9s in an attribute (ignoring race and augmentation) would be those select few willing to purchase a 6 in that stat at creation. It would be a sort of built-in reward system for characters who have impressive natural ability.
Further it would reduce the potentially game breaking effects of really really high attributes on a skill + attribute dice mechanic.
Of course racial modifications and the various cyber and magical enhancements would exists outside of this core mechanic.
| QUOTE (Ellery) |
| It's something extra to keep track of--your starting stat as well as your current one--so I don't see it happening in SR4. I like the idea in general, but as I've said elsewhere, I much prefer an unrewardingly expensive progression rather than a flat cap. If someone wants to spend 200 karma for that one extra quickness point (instead of the 50 karma they'd have had to spend if they hadn't skimped on quickness at build time), hey, who am I to stop them? |
Yeah I understand that but with a formula there is nothing preventing the intelligence 1 ganger from buying it up it up to 6 and being as smart as the techie who started out with that from the beginning. Even with a soft cap system there is nothing preventing the 90 weakling from eventually rivaling the strongest of men.
With a system like this someone with all scores of 3s for attributes can get much smarter than he/she was initially but she's never going to be in contention for a nobel prize in physics.
If someone is role-playing a ganger character, they probably won't be increasing their intelligence to a 6 from a 1 anyways.
I think a poll a little while back showed that most people buy up the attributes at creation (over skills) as it is anyways. Why do we need more incentive?
I think a poll a little while back showed that most people buy up the attributes at creation (over skills) as it is anyways. Why do we need more incentive?
even if they're roll-playing a ganger, exponentially higher costs for raising it more than, say, 3 points past its initial value will have roughly the same effect as simply applying a flat cap: you won't see many who do add more than three points, and the ones that do won't be min-maxing munchkins because it's not cost-effective.
| QUOTE |
| Even with a soft cap system there is nothing preventing the 90 weakling from eventually rivaling the strongest of men. |
Except the strongest of men might spend their karma the same way, and stay ahead.
If things get exponentially expensive based on how many times you've improved, then there will be a big difference in cost.
It's kind of a nice mechanic to enable the "you can do anything you put your mind to" mantra that is popular and appealing but not entirely realistic. This way, you really can do anything you put your mind to, except it's not going to be worth it. If you care *that* much about being stronger than everyone else, you're going to accomplish it, but it will be your life's work.
So the people who do this will be the roleplayers who want to play a character overcoming huge limitations to be outstanding in some capability, or who have a sense of style which is served by singleminded devotion to some aspect of self-improvement. It would be a very unwise thing to do for people looking for the baddest-ass way to spend their hefty karma haul.
| QUOTE (Ellery) |
| If you care *that* much about being stronger than everyone else, you're going to accomplish it, but it will be your life's work. |
Exactly. It may take so much karma that if instead given to a bus load of novice mages they all could initiate themselves to grade nine and still have enough left over for one of them to buy the background skill Taiwanese Pastry up to rating 3. In practice, a formula designed like that would have the same effect as a flat cap without actually smacking players with the "No, you can't do that" stick.
What's wrong with a 90 pound weakling deciding that he's tired of being pushed around, and sets out to turn himself into the world's strongest man(mechanically represented by his increasing Str stat)? Or that street ganger really is the reincarnation of Einstein, but his intellectual growth has been hampered by his life on the steets, so it starts off at a 2. If the player isn't actually roleplaying the character doing this, well the rules are not at fault for a player not properly RPing their character (although I'd wonder how they explain the one stat rising at exclusion of all else).
| QUOTE (Sandoval Smith) |
| What's wrong with a 90 pound weakling deciding that he's tired of being pushed around, and sets out to turn himself into the world's strongest man(mechanically represented by his increasing Str stat)? Or that street ganger really is the reincarnation of Einstein, but his intellectual growth has been hampered by his life on the steets, so it starts off at a 2. If the player isn't actually roleplaying the character doing this, well the rules are not at fault for a player not properly RPing their character (although I'd wonder how they explain the one stat rising at exclusion of all else). |
Didn't Lou Ferrigno (the dude that played the old hulk) start out as somewhat of a weakling? I heard the reason he got all huge is because he didn't want to be made fun of anymore (for being deaf).
| QUOTE |
| Didn't Lou Ferrigno (the dude that played the old hulk) start out as somewhat of a weakling? I heard the reason he got all huge is because he didn't want to be made fun of anymore (for being deaf). |
Something like that. But what we're really talking about is genetic potential. I'm 5'8" and if I'd eaten better as a kid I might have made it to 5'10". That 5'10" is an expression of my full genetic potential for hight. No matter what I eat or do I'm (in this example) never going to be more than 5'10". Now you have the same thing with strength. At 5'8" I am only ever going to be so strong. If I work out every day and hit the juice I'm still limited by my genetic potential. There is a point in which I will never (with out the help of cyber or magic) get beyond.
I guess I'm in favor of a hard cap. Excepting magic and cyber
Thanos
D'oh!!! 
But just like everything there are exceptions. Most people at 5'8" ,even working out and on the juice will maybe be able to bench 600. Maybe
But just like everything there are exceptions. Most people at 5'8" ,even working out and on the juice will maybe be able to bench 600. Maybe
| QUOTE (Thanos007) | ||
Something like that. But what we're really talking about is genetic potential. I'm 5'8" and if I'd eaten better as a kid I might have made it to 5'10". That 5'10" is an expression of my full genetic potential for hight. No matter what I eat or do I'm (in this example) never going to be more than 5'10". Now you have the same thing with strength. At 5'8" I am only ever going to be so strong. If I work out every day and hit the juice I'm still limited by my genetic potential. There is a point in which I will never (with out the help of cyber or magic) get beyond. I guess I'm in favor of a hard cap. Excepting magic and cyber Thanos |
Theoretically there's a limit to muscle acquired, but what exactly is it? My PC keeps pumping iron, keeps taking the nu-roids, and his strength stat keeps going up. He's hard core about being able to arm wrestle wookies and win. Why should he suddenly run into a brick wall cap? I'd prefer a system that allows continued advancement past a certain point, even if because of karma cost, etc it's rarely used, just so the option is open, rather than some sort of artificial limit.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.