May house rule package: V1.2 (.pdf file)
Excel sheet for easy char creation: V1.7 (.xls file)
House rules complete with descriptions, examples, and why things were changed.
Comments appreciated.
Full Version: Houserule Package
Although i don't think using Logic+Skill, with Hits limited by Program rating, is a nessasary or even desirable change; Are the standard program costs and program building requirements still appropriate if you use that alternate rule?
The role of the programme rating before was giving you dice, the role now is to constrain number of hits.
before, every 3 rating points where giving you 1 hit. Assuming a standard hacking and logic of 4 (I know 3 is the baseline, but specialists, will allways be better in their field and runners are spcialists) we have the following situation:
before:
programme rating 1 (5 dice):
average hits: 2 (54%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 3 (21%)
programme rating 3 (7 dice):
average hits: 2 (74%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 4 (17%)
programme rating 6 (10 dice):
average hits: 3 (70%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 5 (21%)
#####
after (8 dice):
average hits: 3 (54%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 4 (26%)
min 5% chance best case hits: 5 (9%)
discussion: before the rules change, programme ratings were not that im portant as they are with the new rules. As a rule of thumb: an average hacker only needs an average programm, but a highlevel hacker needs highlevel programms. A programm rating of 5 is enough to not principally inhibit a hacker with 10 dice (logic+hacking) as the chance to get 6 hits is only 8 percent. A hacker with 12 and more dice would definatley need a programm 6 rating as he has an 18+% chance to get 6 hits.
Superhackers with 16 dice (9 logic, 7 skill, the maximum) would need a programm of rating 7 as they have already a 26% chance to get 7 hits.
On average a prorgamm rating of (logic+skill)/3 is enough.
Conclusion: After the rulechange, programms become more important for good hackers, not in comparison to bad hackers, good hackers are still better if both ahve the same programm rating, but to unleash their full potential.
before, every 3 rating points where giving you 1 hit. Assuming a standard hacking and logic of 4 (I know 3 is the baseline, but specialists, will allways be better in their field and runners are spcialists) we have the following situation:
before:
programme rating 1 (5 dice):
average hits: 2 (54%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 3 (21%)
programme rating 3 (7 dice):
average hits: 2 (74%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 4 (17%)
programme rating 6 (10 dice):
average hits: 3 (70%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 5 (21%)
#####
after (8 dice):
average hits: 3 (54%)
min. 10%chance best case hits: 4 (26%)
min 5% chance best case hits: 5 (9%)
discussion: before the rules change, programme ratings were not that im portant as they are with the new rules. As a rule of thumb: an average hacker only needs an average programm, but a highlevel hacker needs highlevel programms. A programm rating of 5 is enough to not principally inhibit a hacker with 10 dice (logic+hacking) as the chance to get 6 hits is only 8 percent. A hacker with 12 and more dice would definatley need a programm 6 rating as he has an 18+% chance to get 6 hits.
Superhackers with 16 dice (9 logic, 7 skill, the maximum) would need a programm of rating 7 as they have already a 26% chance to get 7 hits.
On average a prorgamm rating of (logic+skill)/3 is enough.
Conclusion: After the rulechange, programms become more important for good hackers, not in comparison to bad hackers, good hackers are still better if both ahve the same programm rating, but to unleash their full potential.
are you saying that in SR3, program ratings werent important?! a -6 to the TN, basicallt, at minimum for any test that you had the software for?
Nobody mentioned SR3. "Before the rules change" is a reference to vanilla SR4.
guess it was my misunderstanding based on
| QUOTE |
| before the rules change, |
and
| QUOTE |
| as they are with the new rules |
Since SR4 is the set of NEW rules, i thought the old rules thusly, were SR3, my appoligies, but you might want to change the second part to houserules.
| QUOTE (Serbitar) |
| Conclusion: After the rulechange, programms become more important for good hackers, not in comparison to bad hackers, good hackers are still better if both ahve the same programm rating, but to unleash their full potential. |
Ya, that is what i saw too. Well i didn't your whole rambling middle part.
But doesn't that mean there should be a change in the prices should and the difficulty to construct?After all if you are going through the make-work project of changing the rules you might as well finish it off.
Not point doing that, the prices and programming difficulties are allready pretty general. They are not fine tuned to the point that a change in the rules should be reflected in the prices as well.
Upgraded SECKSY to V1.5
- fixed some bugs and errors with complex forms
- added "basic education" knowledge skill packages
- fixed some bugs and errors with complex forms
- added "basic education" knowledge skill packages
Upgraded to SECKSY V1.6, SHP V1.1
Changed contac rating costs to rating x loyalty, fixed typos, fixed bugs, added contact skill guidelines, added archetype calculations
Changed contac rating costs to rating x loyalty, fixed typos, fixed bugs, added contact skill guidelines, added archetype calculations
This is really stellar work - and exactly the opposite of what should be done. If character generation takes an excel sheet, you're doing it wrong.
Almost everything in SR4 works on a linear scale. And that can be every bit as balanced as a quadratic scale. The amount of effort and math you are putting into this would be better spent getting rid of the last little bit of quadratics in character advancement than in attempting to impose a quadratic system on character generation.
All that remains to be done is to drop the problem-causing and needlessly complicated quadratic Karma system and to linearize the few legacy items of cyberware that still pay unique costs for different grades (like Wired Reflexes).
All in all, it's an interesting experiment, but SECKSY is headed down an ultimately fruitless design path and I will never use it for anything. If you would put your talents to something that could actually be used by people sitting in a restaurant instead, that would be excellent.
-Frank
Almost everything in SR4 works on a linear scale. And that can be every bit as balanced as a quadratic scale. The amount of effort and math you are putting into this would be better spent getting rid of the last little bit of quadratics in character advancement than in attempting to impose a quadratic system on character generation.
All that remains to be done is to drop the problem-causing and needlessly complicated quadratic Karma system and to linearize the few legacy items of cyberware that still pay unique costs for different grades (like Wired Reflexes).
All in all, it's an interesting experiment, but SECKSY is headed down an ultimately fruitless design path and I will never use it for anything. If you would put your talents to something that could actually be used by people sitting in a restaurant instead, that would be excellent.
-Frank
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
| All in all, it's an interesting experiment, but SECKSY is headed down an ultimately fruitless design path and I will never use it for anything. If you would put your talents to something that could actually be used by people sitting in a restaurant instead, that would be excellent. |
Different strokes for different folks. I don't find the Karma calculations for character creation a bother, especially since character creation should only happen once (maybe twice) a campaign. The Excel sheet simplifies things, and it's simply a tool, and an unnecessary one for some of us (not to say that having good math skills is a virtue that elevates one's status, but in RPGs, it's a helpful talent). I'm not going to be using them, of course, as I'm satisfied with the Build Point Character Creation rules, but I'm not going to disparage Serbitar's efforts either.
On another note, your post sounds awfully like "Your talents should serve my interests, because any other opinion is worthless". That's not very encouraging, to say the least.
Suggestions:
Damage Resistance Test p.153 (Situations when the player rolls Body or Willpower for stun damage is cryptic).
Change:
When resisting Stun damage from physical attack, the character may roll Body or Willpower (whichever is greater) + armor (- AP mod if any).
Reason:
Large Body characters are penalized by using armor if they can not use their high body to resist stun damage.
----
Availability:
Most "digital" items (including skillsofts, programs, simsense, BTL, etc.) should be available much quicker. Reduce Interval by 50%-75%.
Availability = For an item that is legally available to all (not "R" restricted or "F" Forbidden), On the availability test (normally Charisma + Negotiations) add an automatic hit for each interval spent searching for it. If the character spends edge, add automatic hits equal to edge instead.
If a contact is trying to obtain a legal item for you. Add their connection rating as automatic sucesses each interval.
Reason:
Legal items should be easier to obtain then restricted/forbidden. GM has final approval on what is obtainable or not.
----
Damage Resistance Test p.153 (Situations when the player rolls Body or Willpower for stun damage is cryptic).
Change:
When resisting Stun damage from physical attack, the character may roll Body or Willpower (whichever is greater) + armor (- AP mod if any).
Reason:
Large Body characters are penalized by using armor if they can not use their high body to resist stun damage.
----
Availability:
Most "digital" items (including skillsofts, programs, simsense, BTL, etc.) should be available much quicker. Reduce Interval by 50%-75%.
Availability = For an item that is legally available to all (not "R" restricted or "F" Forbidden), On the availability test (normally Charisma + Negotiations) add an automatic hit for each interval spent searching for it. If the character spends edge, add automatic hits equal to edge instead.
If a contact is trying to obtain a legal item for you. Add their connection rating as automatic sucesses each interval.
Reason:
Legal items should be easier to obtain then restricted/forbidden. GM has final approval on what is obtainable or not.
----
@Hansoo: Thanks for your opinion.
@FrankTrollman: If you dont like it, ignore it. Its all just house-rules. You will never be forced to use them by anyone. The world is not linear, and rules should reflect that, where the difference between linearity and non-linearity is most evident. Have fun with your opinion anyway.
@Mightyflapjack: Thanks for your suggestions.
@FrankTrollman: If you dont like it, ignore it. Its all just house-rules. You will never be forced to use them by anyone. The world is not linear, and rules should reflect that, where the difference between linearity and non-linearity is most evident. Have fun with your opinion anyway.
@Mightyflapjack: Thanks for your suggestions.
Brought SECKSY to version 1.7. I added all the qualities and changed the skillgoups so that every single skill in a group can be advanced seperately. Added some mouse over comments.
SHP is now version 1.2 with additional archetype calculations and StickNShock changes.
SHP is now version 1.2 with additional archetype calculations and StickNShock changes.
| QUOTE (Mightyflapjack) |
| Suggestions: Damage Resistance Test p.153 (Situations when the player rolls Body or Willpower for stun damage is cryptic). Change: When resisting Stun damage from physical attack, the character may roll Body or Willpower (whichever is greater) + armor (- AP mod if any). |
The exact sentence is :
" Unless otherwise noted, a character rolls Body + armor to resist damage
(...)
Willpower is often used in place of Body, for example, against certain Stun damage attacks"
I guess stunbold is part of those certain "Stun damage attacks"
No need for a house rule then!
Broken link:
http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SECKSY.pdf
should be:
http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SECKSY.xls
milspec
http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SECKSY.pdf
should be:
http://www.serbitar.de/stuff/SECKSY.xls
milspec
Thanks, I corrected it
personally, I like this set of rules and plan to use it in a upcoming game.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.