Okay, Ellery's math model was fine. Then, I checked something and realized we've been going about this the wrong way. So, we must restart. The first step is to throw out all of the math we have done so far.

Our first step is to consult the FAQs. The following two quotes apply:

The two PCs you have to work with are too much alike, yet too different. Basically there are too many variables vs. knowns.

The thing that bothers me is that the initiative of the two characters are different.

Actually, the BP for Contacts is probably 2 per point, unless they stopped giving two free Contacts at chargen.

It doesn't say how above average you have to be before it's "expensive". Given that the flat model works fine up to 5, I'd say 6 is the magic number for expensiveness, if there is a magic number. They may just mean that you can't get enough points to raise many stats to 6, so averaged over all your stats, the mean is 3 or so. They may not have understood the mathematical implications of their own system when they wrote that paragraph, or might not have been speaking with mathematical precision but rather laying out their vision for how they viewed things happening.

Also, we can't tell if there's a limit on the number of attributes that are above 3. The sample characters shown have at most 4 attributes above three (not counting magic). There might be some limit to that effect, which would fit the quote, but wouldn't invalidate the flat 10bp attribute cost per point between 1 and 5. Likewise with skills.

Anyway, you're welcome to come up with other schemes, but given the small number of degrees of freedom in the problem, and given that a solution already exists that fits most statements pretty well and is consistent with design goals, I'm not going to waste the time personally.

Actually, it does say that "above average" attributes are expensive, so that indicates a progressive cost with a step at 3 or 4, excluding racial modifiers. (Presumably, racial mods are still a straight addition.) However, we haven't confirmed that costs above 3 are the same as the ones below-- and there's good indication that they don't.

Your 10 BP flat cost seems to work well for the weapons "specialist", but she doesn't seem to have any unmodified stats above 3. We'd need to look at the combat mage, who has an extra 2 stats above 3, and one stat below it. Now, assuming that the 15 BP to be a magician pays for the first point of Magic, from there on we can assume it probably advances like any other stat.

The combat mage has spent an additional 50 points to gain a total of +4 to his attributes: +1 Willpower, +4 Magic, -1 Edge. Again, assuming the 10 BP per level up to 3, that means the extra stats actually cost 60 points-- so we're looking at a 60:5 ratio, or roughly 12 points per extra stat point.

Of course, it probably isn't that even. If we assume Magic costs 10 per level up to 3, like everything else, we end up with a 40:3 ratio, or 13.3 BP per point. If we assume that BP's have to be spent in whole numbers, we're faced with a bunch of unappealling splits. The best split I can think of is 10 points to advance Will and Magic from 3 to 4, and then 20 points to advance Magic from 4 to 5. That doesn't make too much sense either, since stats above 3 are supposed to be expensive, but it does work.

Edit: Initiative appears to be Reaction + Willpower, although it could be Agility as well. Since both characters have identical Agility and Reaction stats, it's hard to be sure; but my money is on Reaction.

Lucky could be a variable-cost edge affecting Edge, dropping that from the list of purchased stats…

~J

I can see 2 scenarios for attribute costs that would work with both sample sheets currently released. Both Scenarios work on the assumption that there are no 'free points' from race, rather that race modifies the minimum and maximum allowable rating at which attributes can be set. The math adds up for both with the given examples, but I think the second is more likely.

Scenario 1 BP Cost:
Rating 1-4 = 6 * Rating
Rating 5-6 = 10 * Rating

Scenario 2 BP Cost:
Rating 1-3 = 5 * Rating
Rating 4+ = 5 * (Rating * 1.5 rounded up)

I'm still working on reverse engineering the active skills.

Neither one adds up. An attribute rating of 3 costs 20 points total. There are only 9 attributes.

Okay. I'll concede.

The only problem I can see with the spreadsheet is that you assume there are no "free" points, while most other layouts assume you get the first point in each attribute for free. I've also seen no indication that you can have a Magic of zero-- presumably, you get *something* for your 15 points to become magcially active in the first place.

Cain, he stated that when he came up with his figures.

Both proposed schemes make raising from 5 to 6 cheaper than raising from 4 to 5, which is a little odd if you're trying to avoid 6s. Also, I doubt that racial modifiers only let you buy up higher, because trolls wouldn't have enough points to buy that high, and you'd see trolls with scores of 3 in everything (which would be really weird).

Other than that, it seems to work out.

It costs 10 points per attribute point, with the first point free and the final 6th point costing 25.

Maximum points allocated to attributes is capped at 50% of total points.

Edge is bought like other attributes.

Woah, wait, so the sixth point just jumps by 2.5* cost for no real reason?

~J

EDIT: Nevermind.

Five is the new six.

Also, the combat mage is a 400 point character who spends more than half of that on attributes. I guess they don't need to follow their own rules for character creation, or magic doesn't count as an attribute when obeying the "half" rule.

Sorry. The half rule is for physical and mental attributes.

Doh, Tisoz is right. Forgot about that detail.

And the costs for skill points?

What are the costs for skills? Is there a similar jump at 6? And can players advance above skill 6 or 7?

Lets have some more info please, from anyone with a copy of the new book in their hands. Maybe a general overview of character creation costs etc. from start to finish?

250,000 nuyen max? Do you buy cyberware with BP or has the price of a new arm gone WAY down in those five years?

You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

Price has reduced, as mentioned elsewhere.

When you get the chance, what does the Lucky edge do? Trying to figure out what you get for 20 points of edges.

~J

Looking at this, I would say that this all strikes me as exactly what I said: FanPro saw that people were using their system in ways they didn't like and tried to fix it. Just looking at this I can see I will already have to rewrite the chargen system or change my entire style of play.

Currently, my players are reading this and complaining at both GMs. They suddenly don't want to play SR4 anymore.

Tisoz, thanks for your efforts.

@ Sabosect : I was just thinking that you might give more BP at chargen if you find the character might be too weak, instead of changing everything if you are not satisfied ? Or is there anything else I haven't understood ?

I have the same question.

I have to give more BP, change the allowed max on attributes, figure out some way to fix the magic system to where they would actually play magicians under this system (as it stands, too much karma/BP for magicians to even be worth playing), and check out the items section to see if I have to adjust the max on money. Basically, I have to rewrite large portions of the game's mechanics, what few there are. It's not worth it to take a game all the way back to concept to fix a few flaws.

I'll still play SR4, but I certainly won't play a magician. This game has illustrated the old adage about magicians: The only way to stop people bitching about them being overpowered is to make them not worth playing.

tisoz thank you very much for taking the time to clue us in on SR4.

Honestly, I will wait to have my edition to see. I am really happy that Tisoz provides us all those details (thanks again), but there are different ways of playing SR. And from my point of view, that is how things have to be (meaning that it is ridiculous to have all the basic police agents/gangers to have 6 in their skill in order to be a match to the characters of the players).
Then for the magicians, we will see. I was not considering them as too powerful before... Let's keep in mind that Tisoz is doing a kind of quick reading to provide us information.

What is really funny is that in this case Sabosect, you would be one of the people that should stick to SR3, but you still want to play SR4 I find it quiet odd. I think I would stick to 3 in this case, or would I ? I don't know... Anyway, this is not a critic, no offense was meant.

Well, if the play style was scaled down in power for players, likely the antagonists have been scaled down to match.
I've heard players make the complaint that "low levels" aren't any fun, guess what, the stuff you go up against in any game is typically less powerful in any given circumstance than you. It doesn't matter if you're Deathmage ™ is wielding a +20 vorpal dagger of bitch-slapping going against opponents that you still only have a 50% chance to hit than the lvl 2 wiener missing 1 of 2 swings.
Yes, more power means more options, bot for you and the GM. So long as the stuff you go up against are comparable in scale to your character, the overal power doesn't matter all that much.

I wonder on Sabosects behalf what the higher/lower lv campain options look like. Do you only change the amount of build points with those rules, or do the limits change also?

Sorry, I was thinking but not typing in the same time. My point was that a level 5-6 skill should have been quiet incredible in SR3, and in the end, even gangers had those levels...
I do hope that with SR4 (and it looks like), the ganger will have only 2-3, or 4 if he is really skilled. So in the end, when your character will have gain experience, it will make a true difference (because I don't know for you, but what was giving power to a character was kharma pool, not really the new skill he had, or the increasing of some of his existing skills as it was really expensive)...
Hope I clarified my point

Blakkie, for the love of all that is sacred, shut up. You're too busy trying to get nonexistant points to bother using simple common sense to see the information sitting in front of your face. I know you're capable of logic, so trying using it this time.

Chevalier_neon, actually, note at what I said. It's my players complaining. I've stated in the past I'm fine with street-level games. One of the things about this group is that it is a case of the group does vote on the system and the group indicates the style of play. I understood that when I joined them, even more when I took up GMing. To tweek to their style of play is mostly what I'm having problems with for this system. It doesn't lend itself to professional-level playing anymore than Cthulhu lends itself to being a way to play DnD.