SR3R Project Forum

Discussion and debate for the SR3R Project
It is currently Fri Dec 06, 2019 12:37 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:08 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Yeah, you heard right, I want to get rid of the millionaire option in SR3R. There are several reasons why, but the biggest is that it always takes a ridiculous amount of time to seriously upgrade your equipment post-chargen, because prices are balanced such that a million nuyen doesn't change the game too much. For example, when was the last time you saw anyone pick up a piece of major 'ware, or actually pay for a new deck, post-chargen?

As I see it, there are currently five types of people who actually use the million:
  1. The decker
  2. The VCR3 rigger
  3. The escaped lab experiment sam
  4. The face who knows all of Seattle
  5. The guy who buys a permanent Middle lifestyle at chargen and retires.

The last one is silly and can be ignored, but I do think we need to start giving serious thought to the rest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:43 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I like option 5, it's the only way I can win Shadowrun :(

Seriously though, I would tend to agree. That is a major point of SR4 that I did appreciate; costs became reasonable. The only time I've seen someone upgrade cyberware is when they got paid in cyberware for a job (and even then it's tough for me to accept that. Even if the corporation only pays half what a runner pays, most major ware is $50k+. If the party gets paid around $20k per job, that means you need to do several jobs with the same corporation to be able to get that ware. And don't even start on betaware!)

I'd have no problem with reducing gear costs almost across the board. I also wouldn't mind decreasing the cost of contacts. Most experience shadowrunners are going to know LOTS of people, and my best game was one where I spent six months of RL time literally building up contacts, so the player actually felt like she knew the world and could pull surprises on me when she didn't have the right resources for the job.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:20 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Worcester, MA
Well I am a huge proponent of weakening characters at creation time, but honestly the prices are all relative are they not? $20k for a contract? That's pretty weak, I've seen players earn everything from $10k to $1 mil clean for serious heavy-end jobs. Honestly why would shadowrunners EVER work for $20k? A starting SR3 decker can make more than $20k in a day if they want to. Hell mafia hitmen with no gear or anything special can make $10k+ in a single day just busting legs and whacking people. Shadowrunners are WAY above that kind of stuff and can command much higher paydays.

I'd say for an average run I give my players $50-60k, if not more. It really depends on the job and it depends on how much *incedentals* they can pick up along the way. Of course I guess my games are mostly story driven so the money is usually an afterthought ... but I did just hand them $350k and there's only 6 runners ... so that's almost $60k a piece.

Are ya'll just super stingy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:14 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
I'm not sure I agree with your list. Add to it:

  1. Any Rigger with any level of VCR and any significant level of customization on vehicles or drones, a meaningful number of large vehicles, a meaningful number of drones with encryption, or any combination thereof
  2. Any 'ware-heavy character at all, pretty much
  3. Anyone with any nontrivial amount of foci, especially anyone with any weapon focus of Reach greater than -1, especially if they want anything but magical gear and possibly spell points
The last one gets alleviated somewhat by the switch to a modification of Sphynx's system, but that just takes away the nuyen cost of the spell points.

There are probably even more I'm missing.

Edit: bbcode apparently does not support passing a start index to the <list> tag.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:52 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well sure there are many other character types who can use the extra cash; who couldn't?

The point is that there is an impossibly large gap between Priority A and Priority E for resources, or even Priority A and C. To have the same gap for skill points, for example, you'd have to jump from 24 skill points at priority C to over 250 for priority A, and down to ~1.5 skill points for priority E.

The huge disparity between the different priorities (or point values, depending on your preference) creates extreme oddities between characters. You'll have some street-poor characters whose first 80kY run is many times more money than they've ever earned in a lifetime, and other characters for whom such a paltry sum won't even pay for their monthly upkeep. Realistic or not, such a wide disparity in character starting wealth and obligation makes for difficult GM-ing. There has to be a better way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:05 pm
Posts: 57
Location: chillin on my couch
I also agree that resource adjustment was one of the things that SR4 did right. I like the cost reduction and the flat amount per point.

_________________
If you see this, this thread will probably wither soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:23 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well I'm not so sure about going that far.

However, it is odd that, as points increase, skills and attributes increase linearly, while magic and resources increase pretty much exponentially.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 12:34 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
feralminded wrote:
$20k for a contract?


I do believe that's about average by canon. Companion says the pay for runs should be approximately equal to the characters' living expenses + cost of gear.

Companion recommends the MINIMUM for a GROUP doing an extraction (the best paid job listed) is $20k.

Part of the problem is also that a street sam or especially a rigger can expect to have a lot more 'gear' expenses than just about anyone else. Hermetics have more than shamans. Adepts can get away with basically nothing. The only thing I can really think to solve this is let people barter for karma just within the group, letting the wealth naturally redistribute it while letting 'market forces' prevent anything too munkiny from going on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:09 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Ok, let's back this up a bit.

You said there were several reasons why. List them, please?

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:33 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
1) Vast difference in beginning wealth --> complications in advancement, paying for runs, etc.
2) Attribute points/skills increase linearly with invested build points; money increases exponentially.
3) Most 'ware costs far too much.
4) Contacts are prohibitively expensive for low-wealth characters.

That's what I have for now. Anyone else think of any others?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:56 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Eyeless Blond wrote:
3) Most 'ware costs far too much.

But 'ware can be reduced in price.
Quote:
4) Contacts are prohibitively expensive for low-wealth characters.

Reducing the top Resources option won't change that by itself, and doesn't obviously encourage fixing this. Additionally, there have been proposals to make contact purchasing separate from Resource allocation.
Quote:
2) Attribute points/skills increase linearly with invested build points; money increases exponentially.

But this isn't, by itself, a problem—additionally, there have been proposals made which encourage supralinear returns on attribute/skill point investments.
Quote:
1) Vast difference in beginning wealth --> complications in advancement, paying for runs, etc.

This one I broadly agree on, but I don't really see how we can let beginning wealth vary much without having it still be an issue. I'm also not necessarily convinced it's that bad—exposition?

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 2:26 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I've been waiting to see where EB takes this (since he seems to be full of good ideas), but generally I would tend to agree with kage - the problem isn't having the $1M option available at chargen, the problem is its a bazillion times easier to purchase something at chargen than it is to purchase that same thing over the course of an entire campaign. I've never seen anyone upgrade any major piece of cyberware, for instance.

There are two methods to go about this:
1) Reduce the costs for things like cyberware - This is the direction SR4 went and I think in a way it makes a lot of sense. In a dystopian cyberpunk universe a trashy, off-the-shelf cyberlimb shouldn't cost as much as a new luxury car. Once you reduce the cost of things like cyber, the starting money can decrease as well to match. You can consider this deflation. The benefits is it really lets you stay more street level. Your street sam doesn't need a million nuyen of gear stuffed in him to be effective. It could be his ware would keep someone warm and few for a few months if sold on the street, but when he is considering whether he's going for a Middle or Low lifestyle, that has a real impact on how soon he'll be able to buy his next bit of ware.

2) Increase the pay for normal jobs - It sounds like feral has already done this. By the current rules, a runner is unlikely to have a million nuyen to spend at any point in his life, however he has that much available at chargen. By increasing the per-member pay from $20k to $80k or somesuch. The problem is that it really destroys the dark and gritty atmosphere for me, since you're really not eeking it out on the street if you're making $80k/month and spending $20k on your lifestyle. However it does eliminate the problem of characters finding wicked methods of bringing in a second income which otherwise unbalance the game.


So I think it's fair that, as we go through, we continue to try and reduce the monetary cost of cyberware, drones and foci (I don't think vehicles are particularly off, but I could be wrong). Once we've done all of that, THEN it makes sense to examine what the new Priority A resources should be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:18 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
So, table the issue for now until we get a better idea on costs for everything? Okay, I can go with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:30 pm
Posts: 6
The street level chart in Mr Js black book I think works fairly well for cash with prices as is. However you need to take the magic part of the chart as well or end up with some balance issues. Race/Attributes/Skills can stay the same as the main book.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:00 am
Posts: 70
Location: Oulu, Finland
Ditch the points, make everything have a Yen-cost at chargen. Yes, skills and attributes too. Thus, everything scales with the money. An option, though not necessarily a good one. :)

I don't see a "million yen man" as someone who has had 1MY drop on his lap and blow it all at once to become that sam he always wanted to be. I see it as "all the money this char has blown on himself ever since he has earned money". Some flaw could be connected to these monetary amounts, say, you've had to be "in (some kind of a) business" for 20 years to have had a cool million over the years... thus, your starting minimum age is 30. Or you had someone sponsor you with that amount, option one is a megacorp (congrats, they now own you!), option two is an inheritance (congrats, you now have a recognizable face/name, you have family politics to think/take care of!), or any other options you can think of that more or less constitute a flaw.

...maybe the money value SHOULD be made linear, and anyone wanting that "million yen man" would have to take flaws to get that far.

_________________
-HcK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:50 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
There were some rules for receiving Enemies based on your resource allocation, though I considered them mostly another player-hostile (and worse yet, mundane-hostile) part of the rules.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:02 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well, the problem wasn't the consequences of having a million in hardware, the problem was the let-down you feel when, after blowing 1,000,000 nuyen on one character, your first mission: risk life and limb for... 20,000, split five ways (and even that's generous, according to the core rules).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
The obvious way to fix that is to provide guidance towards higher rewards, though I admit that this does create further barriers to creating the "gotta go on another run so we can eat next week" atmosphere found in some of the canon material.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:08 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
There's also the flavor aspect: cyberware is supposed to be cheap (eg. Muscle-replacement dockworkers being used instead of forklifts, office workers with metal in their heads replacing typewriters, skillwires replacing people with real knowledge, etc), but by the rules most 'ware costs more than what the average worker will make in years, or even several decades for high-level skillwires or Wired Reflexes. Deckers are wandering around on the streets with hundred of thousands of nuyen slung on their backs in a three to five pound laptop case. "Cheap" foci cost several months' rent, and expensive ones can cost as much as those cyberdecks.

There's a huge cognitive dissonance in having a "street" campaign, with characters wondering how they're going to make rent that month, when they're carrying around items they could sell to get enough to buy a small condo, and have enough left over to eat for life (permanent Low Lifestyle: 100,000 Y).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 12:34 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
Indeed, the greatest argument against the million nuyen street sam is that cyberware is supposed to be pervasive. I do like that change in SR4, that suddenly prices aren't astronomical (and that also makes it more tempting for mages).

I don't feel that dropping the million nuyen option is necessarily desirable (if only for the rigger), but reducing cyberware costs make sense to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:49 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well it's not like the rigger should have to spend a million to have a decent stable of drones either. I mean, you can buy a really good RC car or helicopter or miniblimp for a few hundred or thousand bucks today; why should it cost several dozen times that amount fifty years in the future?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:45 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
The drone rigger is usually okay (disregarding the VCR). It's the vehicle rigger, who wants a helicopter and a westwind and a van who hits serious problems, and I don't know how I'd reasonably address that. Take care of the VCR though and you've hit 60% of the rigger's cash problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:00 am
Posts: 70
Location: Oulu, Finland
To me it feels a bit like GM-player -miscommunication if the player creates a MYSam and then the mission pay runs in 20kY per, split n ways... of course, if you can run missions like that twice a week, then you net around 2MY per year for the team. :)

Maybe a good yardstick for chargen cost vs. mission pay is that the first year of running you expect to be able to net at least half of what you blew in chargen.

But from what I understand of the original question, point 5. is the Monty Python option, points 2.-4. are high-end variations of the basic type (and as such, it is okay that they cost much, they can expect a lot of income... or incoming attention), so the only real problem is the decker who absolutely needs the million?

If that is so, then maybe it should be noted that the program library they have was probably not bought off the shelf, not even whitebox, but programmed by themselves. Investing their own skill and time since the first exploit they ran into. Their programs are cut during chargen!

Hit or miss? :)

_________________
-HcK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:40 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Glancing blow, maybe? :)

We've gotten bogged down in semantics, about who can use a million nuyen and who can't, and which archetype X needs a million nuyen to build and which doesn't. The larger point here is that the vast wealth disparity between Priority A resources (1M Y) and Priority E resources (5K Y)--a 20,000% difference!--invariably causes friction both within a given party and between the players and GM. You end up with mages living on the street with literally nothing worthwhile to do with their newfound wealth, while the rigger is desperately trying to keep his vehicles from falling apart from regular wear and tear. You have adepts who are lighting cigars with 1,000 Y bills, while sams are looking five years down the line to when they'll finally have a similar amount of money to what they had at chargen, to make meaningful upgrades to their 'ware.

I'm not saying that everyone should have the same amount of starting cash. Certainly not! But it makes balancing cash very difficult when one starting character will gain ten times as much money as he's ever seen in his lifetime on his first run, and another will likely never see half as much cash as he did when he built the character, even after years and dozens of runs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:55 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
That is true. It's like they're running on different tracks. Karma is surprisingly balanced between types, and non-cyber/vehicle/deck gear is also reasonably balanced for most types.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Honestly, what I'm seeing here at the moment is an argument for raising the lower echelons of the Resources table and increasing the cost of other archetypes. We already have some serious cost imbalances between shamans and hermetics, for example.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:01 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
The goal is to level them. You can raise some or lower some, but the problem of having cash you don't have anything to do with isn't as pressing as needing a lot of cash but no way to get enough of it. I'd focus on pulling the riggers down by $600,000 before I worry about boosting shamans by $30,000.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Eyeless Blond wrote:

As I see it, there are currently five types of people who actually use the million:
  1. The decker
  2. The VCR3 rigger
  3. The escaped lab experiment sam
  4. The face who knows all of Seattle
  5. The guy who buys a permanent Middle lifestyle at chargen and retires.

The primary reason 1 mill exists is for one character type (mostly); street sam that needs wired 3 at chargen.

Why?
Backstory merits it.

That's the largest reason.

Now, there are probably ways around this, but none of them are pretty.

If you take out the 1 mill then what will happen is that people will just revert to SR3 standard chargen and ignore the revised idea.
Why?
Because they want their wired 3 and rigger builds at chargen because one of the things most people like about SR (as far as I've ran across) is that at chargen, you are about 80% character complete.

You only have somewhere around 20% growth left and that feels really nice to them.
It means they can jump in with a new char in an ongoing campaign and just run.

And it means they don't have to wait a month to get up to where they want, and it means they don't have to scale up the system to start with better characters.


If you don't like the mill option...honestly, lower the build points to the point where it's not even an option, and don't allow anything but the build point option for chargen.

But like I said...if you remove it...I'm betting people will just add it in or revert on their own.


But I will say that if you don't go wired like that and choose the mill option...yeah...you do have a massive amount of nuyen just kicking around for no real reason.

That all said...whatever there is in resources that players choose, I demand a comparible back-history to support those choices.

Now and then, however, it can become a real pain to actually blow that much on making a character if the idea is really specialized.

Furthermore, however, if a mage (or the like) needs extra cash to pull off their character to match their back history idea...I just crank up their build points for them specifically just so they can pull off what they want, providing I'm cool with it.
I don't mandate everyone go universal on the build points.

I kind of tend to do the build points based on what their idea for their character is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:11 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Stumps wrote:
If you take out the 1 mill then what will happen is that people will just revert to SR3 standard chargen and ignore the revised idea.
Why?
Because they want their wired 3 and rigger builds at chargen because one of the things most people like about SR (as far as I've ran across) is that at chargen, you are about 80% character complete.

I think you're missing the larger point behind this idea. The point isn't to limit character choice; in fact, we're going to have to lower the cost of Wired 3 specifically so we can have people with it at chargen, even if 1,000,000 is reduced to, say, 100,000, or even less.

Why will we do this? Because cyberware is supposed to be cheap and dehumanizing. The idea was supposed to be that skill and skilled labor are expensive, but pop a cheap pair of skillwires in a cheap minimum-wage human and you're off to the races for a whole lot less. That kind of loses meaning when a decent pair of skillwires costs 648,000 Y, enough for six people to retire on. There are dozens of wars to fight, and it's cheaper to put Wired 3 in your soldiers than to hire three times as many, thus your postwar streets are filled with twitchy wireheads with PTSD; that's less likely when you can sell your wires and use the proceeds to both retire and pay for extensive therapy.

But, more importantly, it's an issue of party balance. In many SR3 games, 5,000 Y is a dream come true for the street shaman. He can live off of that for months, even blow some of it on lodge materials and an expendable spell focus or two. But for the drone rigger it won't even pay for this month's vehicle upkeep. This makes it an exercise in pain to figure out what to pay a group; do you give the rigger his 10,000 that he needs to barely make upkeep each month, then find out the shaman has 50,000 nuyen worth of foci? Do you give the rigger the cash he wants to upgrade his vehicles and drones, and find the shaman burning bales of money in the street because he doesn't have anything else to do with it, or worse, retiring?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Ahhh....I getchya.

Well...that's always been the problem in SR; the sam's are the cheapest to own (overall) and they also have the least attachments.

It doesn't cost them anything to upkeep, and they need little improvement over time, but that's because most people don't play with the idea of cyberware maintenance.

If you leave everything just as it is and throw that in...nuyen quickly get's gobbled up by the sam's just on hardware maintenance.

If you read the description of wired, they aren't greatly stabilized; especially when put through what runners do.
I think most think of them as fairly stable because things like move-by-wire are even more volatile.

But really, everything that rigger is going to do to their car, that sam should be doing in relative form to his ware.

Though there is something to be said about making that more mechanically simple to work with, as another reason I think folks don't pay attention to this is because it's kind of a pain to track and do currently.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:06 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well yes, upkeep is rather boring and painful to deal with, and varies greatly between archetypes. It's also only part of the picture.

Let me give you another data point: the percentage difference between A and E priorities:

Skills: 27 to 50: 85.19%
Attributes: 18 to 30: 66.67%
Cash: 5,000 to 1,000,000: 19,900%

This vast, enormous disparity between Priority A and Priority E causes all sorts of bad effects throughout the game, from upkeep and upgrading to party balance and cash/karma conversions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
It has honestly been years since I've used the priority version, so I only really think in terms of build points...perhaps that's where I'm having the problem seeing things.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:13 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
The reason I'm using build points is that there is a basic assumption in SR that you won't generally find a character with less than Priority E's worth of BPs in either attributes or skills. You end up with a character who is either totally useless (too low attributes) or totally incompetent (too low skills).

But even with build points, it's essentially impossible to build a normal character (non-shapeshifter/ghoul, anyway) with less than ~40 BP total in attributes and skills, and that's only for the millionaire full magician elf/troll. The percent difference between him and the human penniless mundane with 120 BP in attributes and skills is 200%. A considerable gap, to be sure, and it's one of the many reasons uncybered mundanes are difficult to work with as members of a shadowrunning group: they've hit a major point of diminishing returns on their skills, and don't have any other avenues to advance in.

It's a far cry, though, from the 19,000% difference in wealth between the guy with 1,000,000 Y (30 BP) and 5,000 Y (0 BP). For the guy with 5K, when he receives a payout of 5,000 Y he rejoices; it's literally more money than he's had his whole life, and he's likely to have plenty of places to spend it. Hell, he's probably living as a squatter; another 5K payout will set him up for life! For the millionaire, though, it might be half of his monthly rent.

It needs to change. But it's not going to be easy; we'll have to change many different prices to get things right. About the only character concept I'm not so worried about is the vehicle rigger; having a helicopter or jet fighter at chargen seems a little too much to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Perhaps, the idea could be used that different archetypes have different rates for priorities/points inflated over others when selecting different power levels and lifestyle levels.

And perhaps, there could be a discussion about group lock power levels and lifestyles if the GM wishes.

This way, the millionaire isn't paired with a squatter; nor is the powerless with the uberpowered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:42 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Eyeless Blond wrote:
About the only character concept I'm not so worried about is the vehicle rigger; having a helicopter or jet fighter at chargen seems a little too much to me.

It seemed a little too much for the designers as well, which is presumably why a million nuyen is totally insufficient for either of those (unless you count a tiny one-man auto-gyro as a helicopter, which is just silly). I would start being worried about Riggers again, especially as one of the core Rigger concepts as presented in the books is totally unavailable, not just at chargen, but until some major windfalls come in (T-bird Riggers; I haven't checked how low I can get the price for a bare-bones T-bird, but the cheapest R3 bird is 2.2 meganuyen.)

Mm. Well, ok, I guess a player who is willing to sacrifice just about everything else could get a real helicopter; there are a bunch of them with costs in the mid hundreds of kilonuyen, but they universally have mediocre to bad Handling and the cost makes DBWing impractical since it's based on base vehicle cost. Jet fighters, starting at 2.1 meganuyen, are right out.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 3:47 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Stumps wrote:
Perhaps, the idea could be used that different archetypes have different rates for priorities/points inflated over others when selecting different power levels and lifestyle levels.
What, so calling yourself a "decker" will give you more money than calling yourself a "ranged weapon specialist", even if the two people put the same points in Resources? Ugh, that's kind of what I want to avoid, as frankly that's the system we have now. The "decker" or "sam" basically has to get more resources, both at chargen and afterward, for his character concept to work than the "adept" or the "street shaman". Games are rife with sams randomly getting access to beta/delta clinics essentially for free, because otherwise they'd never be able to upgrade their cyberware ever, or deckers randomly "finding" better decks while on runs, while adepts simply don't need the cash.

Quote:
And perhaps, there could be a discussion about group lock power levels and lifestyles if the GM wishes.

This way, the millionaire isn't paired with a squatter; nor is the powerless with the uberpowered.

Well group power levels are supposed to be handled by giving everyone equal BP/Karma/Priorities/whatever. The fact that they don't is the whole premise and purpose of this thread.

And yes, lifestyle disparity should probably be discussed too; that may be for another topic, however.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Hm...I'll have to admit I'm not up on par on this, but it must exist in some form because I've just been using 120 as the BP's that everyone has to start with, and then as they work out their character backgrounds, I slide that around depending on what they are wanting to do (and what I'm willing to bargain for).

For instance, the mage of the current group this campaign started with 160BP to pull off his Las Vegas Casino Mage slave.

This is counter to the 120BP that it took to make a sam with wired 3 that was a run-away brain-augmented assassin from Renraku.

So, I think I see where you are coming from a bit...I'm just not sure whether I have any issues with it, or what the solution should be.
The BP system, and sliding the scale per player has always just been so very nice for me as I (as a player or GM) have always enjoyed the flexibility of taking 90BP's if I want to instead of 120, so I can build a street rate, or take 160-180BP for some more involved back-stories and options, and 120 as the standard middle-ground for Joe-sam-snuffy McGee.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:39 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
I think part of what encourages the massive difference between the low and high end is the (proper, I think) desire to make taking low Resources actually provide a meaningful disadvantage, that is to say, one actually worth Build Points. To a high-Resource character, guns and ammo are practically free at chargen, which is a luxury that a low-Resource character simply is not granted.

The problem is, it's not clear to me that there's a way to reduce this disparity without eliminating that. For something to be "practically free" it can't just be a fraction of your total Resources, it has to be an insignificant fraction of total Resources. My Resources-30 Rigger spent 4000¥ on MMG rounds at chargen, an investment of 0.4% of her starting Resources, but representing 80% of the Resources of someone who takes Resources-0. Even just halving the 30-point award pushes that into needs-real-consideration territory.

I think we might want to consider other avenues for addressing the issues raised. In particular, I think shifting to karma-based chargen (if we do) will help karma->cash conversion, as then it can just run on the same (extended) scale; cash->karma is stickier but it's not clear to me that we need to support that.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:06 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well that's true, having the income difference between A and E Resources set as it is does make Resources E a disadvantage at chargen. The thing is, after chargen the disadvantage shifts to the high-Resource character: things that were "practically free" when the character was being constructed suddenly because exactly as expensive as they always were to the low-Resource character. Suddenly it costs the same 4000 Y to buy those bullets going forward, since the high-Resource character and the low-Resource character are being paid from roughly the same pot of rewards. The high-Resource character just got demoted to a low-Resource character.

Additionally, the high-Resource character is saddled with two added disadvantages post-chargen. First, the high-Resource character likely has taken on more types of resources that demand ongoing obligations--Contacts, for example, or more expensive Lifestyles, or vehicles--that the low-Resource character hasn't purchased, and so has a higher monthly upkeep cost. Second, the high-Resource character likely has taken much of the low-hanging fruit when it comes to resource-based help, and so his upgrades typically cost more in incoming resources than the low-Resource character, even though both characters get the same resources post-chargen.

You end up with the very odd conclusion that the high-Resources character ends up with fewer net resources post-chargen than the low-Resource character, and being forced to spend more of those fewer resources to get the same benefits that the low-Resource character receives from his Resource investment.

This by the way is also why you and other GMs find themselves disliking and usually banning Cash-for-Karma: the mages, adepts, and other previously low-Resource characters always have cash to burn, because you have to up the group Resource level to accommodate the high-Resource (now ultra-low Resource) characters, and those previously low-Resource characters trade all the extra Resources they get--remember their Resource requirements are still low--for Karma. Fix the million nuyen problem and I think you'll find the Cash-for-Karma problem solves itself.

Unfortunately a comprehensive solution to the high/low Resource problem is going to be very difficult if we want to keep the massive income disparities that we currently have. The only solution I can think of is to abstract away nuyen costs altogether, and create something like Wealth levels like you see in d20 Modern.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Quote:
Suddenly it costs the same 4000 Y to buy those bullets going forward, since the high-Resource character and the low-Resource character are being paid from roughly the same pot of rewards. The high-Resource character just got demoted to a low-Resource character.

Wait....wow.

OK, I think I see what you are talking about more clearly suddenly.
And I think I see why it was confusing me before.

See, in ours, there's not a problem with this because no one is allowed to make "out of sync" characters beyond the groups general resource levels.

Meaning, if we are making well-to-do-mercs, then the mages are adjusted to end up with the same levels of lifestyles as sams and, etc...

There are no "low resource" characters if the group wants to play a high resource level character group.

That, OR...

As I've stated it before to many players.

RESOURCES at chargen is NOT MONEY.
It's a POINT system in the currency of nuyen, because that's easier than making another round of point conversions, that account for the BACK-HISTORY of the character's RESOURCES.

Meaning...
If you are taking 1 mill...that's not saying you ARE rich.
It means the amount of occurrences you have had in your life, one way or the other, have led you to a position of acquiring lots of things netting a value level of chargen 1 mill nuyen in resources.


If you want to BE rich (high lifestyle), then you are going to have to write one hell of a story to support it (A), and you are going to also have to make sure to provide the living conditions for yourself that merit it (B), and you are going to also have to make damn sure that you have a "day-job" penalty (even if you DON'T go to it) to support the HIGH levels of income even without running, UNLESS, you have a back-history of being a very elite runner with only high paying jobs...

If the latter, then either A) you are taking this group on for some other reason of motive than money, B) you are really down on your luck because of some unfortunate series of events that has you struggling for street credit, or C) you are going to be the money ticket for the other runners...hope you trust them; your street cred and personal lifestyle is on the line.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:00 am
Posts: 70
Location: Oulu, Finland
I take that the price to "do magic" will be upped? The price, availability and upkeep of foci/other magic seems too low if the mage/adept/shaman can be a competitive character to a Million-Yen-Sam while spending a fraction of the cash and expecting to survive and improve on a fraction of payouts compared to the Sam.

And maybe the payouts of jobs should not always be in straight nuyen? Payouts like "10k per head, can be exchanged for 20k's worth of cyber" might make both the Sam and the company get out ahead (they probably paid 5k to produce said cyber) and the mage gets the short end of the credstick. The rigger can get cut-price spare parts or similar, decker gets programs or spare decks etc. etc. Mass produced (possibly illegal) goods as payment. The straight cash does offer anonymity for the company, but most of the times they don't care, because they get deniability either way, and that's what they're after. Foci cannot be mass-produced (I think?) like other goods and as such do not get "cut-price" treatment.

Not to mention that the "20k worth of cyber" could probably be converted to 30k on the street if not in a hurry, so as such the mage would probably also get his pay in goods, to be converted into cash. But that is always risky, and might net a loss if the cash is needed in a hurry. So sometimes it'd be better to just take the loss and the straight cash. Or the 100k in diamonds might become 30k to a street level person without contacts, while the high-lifestyle guy can make the most of it, net his 100k and thus have enough to pay for his rent.

In any case, this would be a major way for illegal goods to get to street level... explosives, autofire weapons and other military hardware. High-end decks. Hardly-used armored cars (never mind the dents in the trunk, stops LMG fire fine). It's not all just stolen, it's gotten as payment and fenced on.

What I'm suggesting that the pay might indeed be variable, depending on who's being paid by whom and what with.

Converting this idea into easy-to-implement rules..? Uh, I just remember I have an appointment elsewhere, bye!

_________________
-HcK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:46 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Stumps wrote:
See, in ours, there's not a problem with this because no one is allowed to make "out of sync" characters beyond the groups general resource levels.

Yes, if the GM disallows everything that he foresees becoming a problem, then yes you won't have problems. Street shamans are now off-limits, because they spend so much more cash than a sam. Riggers are too expensive; let's ditch them. Heck, let's just take that a step further and play Monopoly instead, so everyone can have the same resources and resource requirements.

I kid, but your assertion that a GM can balance a group's resource level simply by fiat belies how hard that task really is. The top two questions on Dumpshock almost invariably were about how to balance the cash/karma levels of a team, and about how much better mages were than sams because at least the mages has a realistic upgrade path, and sams basically came out of chargen as good as they'll ever get.

HcK wrote:
And maybe the payouts of jobs should not always be in straight nuyen? Payouts like "10k per head, can be exchanged for 20k's worth of cyber" might make both the Sam and the company get out ahead (they probably paid 5k to produce said cyber) and the mage gets the short end of the credstick. [...]

Such a solution becomes increasingly contrived the longer it goes on. What, so every Johnson you work for just happens to be a mage-hater, and also happens to have access to a Beta- or Delta-grade clinic and be willing to pay in cyberware instead of cash? Your decker just randomly finds 500,000+ nuyen decks lying around? Rather than behind lock and key, jealously guarded by automated defenses, as your own decker's always will be, considering that without that half-million yen deck a decker is entirely worthless?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 2:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I don't really have problems with it, but I'm pretty flexible in general.

At any rate, I getchya...it's not intuitively set right.
I agree with that, absolutely.

As to a fix...sheesh...lol, wonkiness abounds no matter how you approach that mess.

I mean...essentially, you are playing taxes with shadowrun.
Whereby you have to figure out cost in karma to move forward, cost in nuyen, and then scale them all by percentage uniquely in a table to each.

It's kind of nuts that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:12 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Eyeless Blond wrote:
The top two questions on Dumpshock almost invariably were about how to balance the cash/karma levels of a team, and about how much better mages were than sams because at least the mages has a realistic upgrade path, and sams basically came out of chargen as good as they'll ever get.

Really? I thought they were about Improved Invisibility and… probably Improved Invisibility again, but Dikote if not.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
lol...oh man...sorry, I'm only posting to just say that made me laugh Kage, thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:38 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Kagetenshi wrote:
Eyeless Blond wrote:
The top two questions on Dumpshock almost invariably were about how to balance the cash/karma levels of a team, and about how much better mages were than sams because at least the mages has a realistic upgrade path, and sams basically came out of chargen as good as they'll ever get.

Really? I thought they were about Improved Invisibility and… probably Improved Invisibility again, but Dikote if not.

~J

Oh now now, it was just one thread. Granted it lasted like five years and 50,000 posts, but only one thread. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:25 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I do regularly pay in cyberware and programs. I don't mind paying in magical formulae as well, but it takes karma to learn those, while the others don't.

However...

Yes, if we drop the price of everything sammie/rigger/decker, that means we need to increase the point cost of money substantially (since $400k is the new one million), likely drop the monetary cost of some mage stuff, and slightly increase the cost of magic (and this may also require a slight bump in the total number of build points).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:56 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Eh; I think we can keep the BP total, so long as the cost of everything is also dropping. In the end the Resources question stays the same; you're basically just bumping up the low end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Pretty much....the only thing I'm holding off on for this idea is that I'm just letting it sit for a bit and make sure that I'm OK with the deflation rate we're talking about Sixth World wide.

In MMORPG's, for example, such an occurrence is a nightmare...so I just have to think on that a bit.

So far I can't think of any problems, but something is really nagging at the back of my head screaming, "NOOOOO!! BAD THINGS! BAD THINGS!", but I don't know why that is or if it's just because it's a large jump that my mind is thinking this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:20 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Only issue I see is that it makes Resources E more valuable; the low end can now buy things that were out of their reach before.

In some ways I'd actually like to see a "Wealth" Attribute, and do away with actual nuyen numbers altogether, but it strikes me that such a system would be ripe for abuse, and would be tough to reconcile with a payment system.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:29 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
I think that's just a bad match for Shadowrun; the system is big on exact numbers, even if it does then drop Lifestyles in to abstract away a bunch of fiddly bits.

I should note, just for purposes of consideration, that I'm currently not in favour of this proposal and my main direction of thought is towards giving archetypes that are currently substantially nuyen-independent more options (some more optional than others) to throw money at; among other things, I'm seeing a lot of linear cost functions for foci when other archetypes tend to be running into quadratic or worse and thinking that that might be a place to look for change.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
You know what....shouldn't this be the last, or among the last, sections we mess with?

We don't even really have all the archetype content really outlined...I mean...decking is getting a fairly large overhaul at the very least.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
The problem is that we don't have an acyclic graph of things that affect other things. It's true, we could definitely take the approach "figure out what things are going to cost, and then decide how much money (and how widely that money should vary) should be thrown around". It's equally valid to say "let's figure out how much money is going to be thrown around, and price things based on that".

This is why we appear to be all over the place; because the entire process is all over the place.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 11:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I just meant, we don't even know what "things" are that may or may not need to be priced one way or the other.

It's not about the price of the "things".
It's that we don't even have "things" identified yet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:46 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Hm, well I doubt that we're going to be altering "things" at such a fundamental level that they won't be applicable anymore. The decker's still going to have a deck and programs, the rigger's going to still have vehicles and some sort of 'ware that lets him control them, the mage is going to have foci, the adept is going to have a board with a nail in it, that sort of thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Yyyyeah....my vote is...it's not like there's any hurry on this.
We can just wait on this one concept until we have more things defined and we know our landscape more thoroughly.

Typically speaking, creation systems are one of the last systems one makes in game design, so it would make sense to follow suit there.

We, collectively, seem to be kind of torn on the issues of this idea for many different reasons.
I think we'll have a much better perspective, each, at the more defined stages when we get more things altered for the archetypes in rule.

Once those are in place, I'm fairly certain that this subject will be less of a wish-wash issue and difficulty to balance out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:24 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I think it would be good to know if it is desirable to reduce costs, as a general guideline. Then we go and redesign stuff to meet that guideline. Then we determine the actual BPs->cash conversion. However, the first step is to decide whether we want to reduce costs or not.

I still feel it would be good to bring the costs, especially for cyberware, under control. I feel like the sweet spot is somewhere around 150-400k spent on gear for your new street sam. Much lower than that and it becomes a little TOO cheap (and vehicles become untenable. Unfortunately, we need to have vehicles, and the prices can't shift too much from where they already are.) So chopping equipment price to about a quarter would be good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:08 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Well, there are at least four different issues I see as being at play:

One, the one that I think drives this thread, is "what should the ratio between the top and bottom resource allocations be"? Eyeless put his plan to decrease the ratio in terms of decreasing prices and resource availability, but increasing one or both would work just as well (though not necessarily identically, depending on details).

Another is "what should [specific resource] cost relative to the maximum (and by extension minimum) resource allocation?" This is what I think you're talking about, Nezumi.

A third question which is in principle constructed from the previous two is "what should [specific resource] cost relative to [other specific resource]?"

A fourth question which is actually pretty much irrelevant is "what numbers do we slap on everything?" In principle we could "bring the costs under control" by simply dividing every nuyen quantity by 5, with a few problematic exceptions, but I'm sure you all agree that that's a complete waste of our time.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:23 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I agree with point #1, but I see #2 as a delimiter (as well as a potential to adjust flavor of the game).

It occurs to me we've been comparing this to karma acquisition in every way but one. I have to ask, people who use BeCKS, how much karma does a starting character take (not including cash)? 400 karma? How much does a character make on a single run? Around 10? So (assuming those numbers are right, they probably aren't), 1 run = ~1/40th of a starting character (karma wise).

A $1,000,000 character who makes $10,000 on a single run is getting 1/100th of his starting character resources.

The ideal solution would have both courses of advancement run on similar tracks. The cost for the next upgrade should be similar to the cost for the next karma investment (probably around 1-4 runs). That would give us an approximate number we should be shooting for.

Assuming runs pay around $10,000 on average, the starting character should be capped at around $400,000 (approximately), and the next level of gear (beta grade cyber, next vehicle, decker program or deck upgrade, etc), should be attainable in 1-4 runs, so $10,000- $40,000. Aside from items which the GM should be in control of anyway (such as aircraft carriers), nothing player-attainable should be significantly above 10 runs (that's 100 karma), which translates to $100,000. This includes basically all betaware gear, all just-below-top-shelf decks, maxed out programs, awesome rigger attack vehicles, etc.


Of course, all of these numbers are ballparks, but I think it reinforces EB's point well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Quote:
A $1,000,000 character who makes $10,000 on a single run is getting 1/100th of his starting character resources.

It's not like the starting resources, however, are really representing one or two jobs.

It represents everything up to the point you are picking the player up at.
$10,000 for a mission sounds about right for someone of a resource background of 1 mill resources.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:39 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Yes, but it's also the same $10,000 for the guy who had $5,000 in starting resources. Suddenly he's tripled his lifetime net worth with one job, where the $1million man has... made rent that month.

It's not really that one man has $1million that I'm concerned with; the real problem begins with Kage's first point (which gives rise to many of his other points). In addition, or perhaps in consequence to that high starting ratio, mission rewards relative to $1million are so low that the $1million man has to go on hundreds of missions to gain the resources for any meaningful upgrades to what he started with. How much money does it cost to buy Wired Reflexes 3, in betaware to offset the low Essence the $1million sam starts with? How much for a loaded-up Kraftwerk-8? A top-shelf vehicle for the rigger?

In the meantime, $5thousand man tripled his net worth in the first run, and is buying all the stuff $1million man already bought, which for him is an upgrade. In the meantime, he's at roughly the same footing as $1million man Karma-wise, or at least the gulf there was never so wide to begin with so both are at relatively close points on the Karma curve of diminishing returns.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Like I said before....that comes down to a justification of why such opposite lifestyles would be working together in the first place.

The back history is lacking if you just take it by the numbers alone.
Why would a street rat be mixing tango with a former corp. covert mercenary?
What happened that allowed the guy who slums around to hit such a sweet deal, or what happened that caused the well-to-do to suddenly take the sour end of the market?

These things are not explained, and I think that's what causes your issue there.

Now, as to the inherent fact that all character's that are mage related, or similar, are commonly far more poor than the street sam's are...I agree, that is a problem.

My thinking is to make resources/contacts/lifestyle a separate building construct in it's own right and linked to a system that is somewhat similar to edges and flaws, in that you have to balance out your pro's and con's of choosing background conditions that one has had that arrive at the final resulting resource value, contacts type and level, and lifestyle.

The pros and cons would weigh in more about Sixth World life for the character, and some would not be mixable with other choices as easily.

For instance, a character that selects to be a former corp. agent of some kind wouldn't be eligible for resource/contact/lifestyle edges that place them in a job with a corp.
Being part of a corp, of course, has perks in that the nuyen could be nice.

Character's that choose edges that suggest the character has been running for a very long time (years upon years) would have to take a flaw of age, which subtracts a given small value to attributes like racial inhibitions do now.
However, they would gain a reputation bonus and that in turn allows them to gain more nuyen class runs.

Things of this nature.
A balance back and forth between picking the life your character has had, rather than just slapping a price on it because you didn't do anything magical or racially extreme.

I do agree that currently it is wonky, at best, that if you choose magic or certain races that you can end up taking a hit on your resources.

I think the answer is to remove resources from being party to the build of race, attributes, and skills, as it literally has nothing to do with these things inherently, nor does it inherently have anything to do with one's magic capacity.

I know it's a power balance, but it is too far off in left field of logic in my opinion.


I guess what I'm saying is that character's street rep and lifestyle levels (along with contacts, etc...) should probably play more of a role in determining what caliber of nuyen rich/poor jobs they get in the game.

So, while ye olde D&D over there is pushing out silly little arbitrary levels as an advancement, in SR3R character's would be pushing for literal life advancement for better quality jobs and more nuyen.
(better quality jobs are also more informative, and less risky, and more reputable)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Heh, what you're basically advocating for is wealth levels (linked above) like you see in d20 Modern.

It's not a horrible system, really: maybe in the SR version you'd have three new Wealth Attributes: Lifestyle, Resources, and Contacts, naturally ranging 1 to 6*, rather like the three Physical and three Mental attributes. Lifestyle would have various benefits (you roll it occasionally to see if you have a chance of being malnourished/starving, for example). You'd roll Resources to buy gear (using an abstracted cost TN rather than actual nuyen); gear that is sufficiently "cheap" wouldn't require a roll. Contacts would abstract the quality of your Contacts list, etc.

You'd get an amount of starting gear equal to some function of Resources. Successfully acquiring really expensive gear would lower your Resources attribute; getting a fat paycheck could potentially raise one of your Wealth attributes.

*Um, might be a little horrible and awful and non-politically correct, but we could even have racial bonuses/penalties to these Wealth attributes. Elves and dwarves would have a racial bonus to Resources, seeing as they have decades to save money and grow a bank account, humans and orks have Contacts bonuses, humans because they don't have as much racism to deal with and orks because they have gigantic families, trolls and dwarves would have Lifestyle penalties because nothing is built right for them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
That...my friend...is brilliant.

The only stiff I have is rolling to buy resources....I'm failing to understand that over your resource rating being a multiplier of some sort.

Wait...I think I just caught what you mean...you roll it and the amount of successes equals the accessibility to you, and this is augmented by the street index?

Ohh...that's just straight sexy slick.
Your contacts' level, if relevant, could act as a -modifier, while the street index a +modifier....hmmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
So I was playing around with what you said, and it's actually insane just how nicely this all starts to pair up with some of the ideas that have been discussed as of late.

Note: one major change is that I've classed Charisma as Grace, covering the same things as Charisma does in SR, but just renaming it so that the concept comes across more clearly in the name of the attribute; referring to overall grace in person, not physically (even if it's left as Charisma, I still am calling Grace here just for practice in my own system as I like the term so well for Charisma in SR).

Anyways....
Image

I color coded the families of attributes.
They are broke down into Empowerments, Graces, and Endurances.
The Empowerments are Intelligence, Strength, Contacts, and Magic.
The Graces are Grace/Charisma, Quickness, Lifestyle, and Essence.
The Endurances are Willpower, Body, Resources, Body Index.

The Empowerments, Graces, and Endurances are spread across the "universe" of SR as Mental, Physical, Wealth (for lack of a better term), and Sixth World (attributes that describe you uniquely as part of the sixth world).


I don't know if anyone else will like this quite as much as I do, but this seems to be really cool in my mind.


OH...I just thought of it.
Instead of, "Wealth", it can be, "Material".

So it can be Physical, Mental, Material, World (sixth world).
So that describes the Empowerments, Graces, and Endurances of our character's as they are Physically, Mentally/Socially, Materialistically, and Worldly.

That's kind of neat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:58 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
When I read Stump's first post, I understood it to be suggesting an entire, second character generation system, one for attributes and skills, one for cash, resources, contacts, history, etc. A cool idea, but twice as complex (and with very many more options).

As Kage said, using the vague wealth system for Shadowrun seems a step in the wrong direction.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:46 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
So let's turn this discussion on its head.

Under point-build, one giganuyen is 30 points.

This means that the difference between 0-point Resources and 30-point Resources should be, on power terms, about the difference between n skills and n+6 skills at 6 (it obviously can't be exact; the difference between zero skills and six skills at 6 is huge, assuming purposeful skill choices, while the difference between 30 and 36 skills at 6 is, again assuming directed skill choices, almost certainly marginal). I would say that it should be about the difference between 30 and 60 points of Attributes, but Attributes are so huge that a character with only 30 points invested in them may as well just shoot himself.

Anyway, the point is that it should be a big difference, and it should be ongoing. A character with n skills at 6, assuming Attributes of at least 6 for all cases, needs 180 karma to catch up to the character with n+6 skills at 6. The ability to have gotten stuff without having to have paid Street Index on it is nice, but I don't believe it's sufficient.

How do we restore this balance?

Possibilities, not necessarily mutually exclusive:

Debt: characters take on a financial drain inversely related to Resources level taken. This drain is collected on a schedule, along the lines of Lifestyle costs. There may be some way to buy off the debt, probably with karma.
Advantages: ongoing cost; the karma to buy it off makes it permanent.
Disadvantages: it just sorta sucks. Also, there are issues explaining why violent criminals who may have few ties to the area nevertheless are hounded by an ongoing debt they can't get out of paying. This second issue might be solved via a better explanation for where the money goes, but the first issue, that you're forcing some serious water-treading, isn't enough to kill the proposal but is easily sufficient to make me want to find an alternative.

Make lifestyles more powerful (and maybe more expensive): if lifestyles had more pervasive effects on gameplay, the ability of high-Resource characters to secure a number of months up-front might become valuable, while the lower-Resource characters need to scramble around to get enough money to buy a better lifestyle.
Advantages: easy. Also, what new rules we would need we should probably have anyway; with a few exceptions (and some little-used options in the Sprawl Survival Guide) lifestyles don't have much effect on gameplay right now.
Disadvantages: once the game starts the costs for the lifestyle are applied evenly to everyone, and Lifestyles would have to get a lot more expensive to make the advantage of starting one sufficiently large.

Drain Mage and Adept Resources: Hermetics have Elemental-summoning materials to pay for, but the price only gets really significant when you're talking about big packs, high-Force where you're likely to get very few Services per batch of material, or big packs of high-Force Elementals. Sorcery is pretty much free; Libraries are expensive, but are substantially one-time investments. Shamans have Lodges, but those are dirt-cheap; beyond that they've got the same free Sorcery and no cost for summoning spirits either. Foci are expensive but they're also mostly one-time costs in exchange for big whopping chunks of power; the fact that mages sink Karma into them makes it even harder to justify going after them than, say, a decker's cyberdeck or a rigger's vehicle. Adepts have basically two to three inherent costs: not starving, maintaining their basic gear, and (for some) Weapon Foci. I guess Dikote could be another cost for some. I do not at this time have a specific proposal for what justification we would use for draining Awakened-character resources, or for what mechanical effects would be used if the character can't or doesn't pay.
Advantages: we substantially fix the problem that this thread was created around. There are only two other character types that I can think of who make minimal sacrifices by going min-Resources: Otaku (who are forced to go min-Resources, and don't need much in terms of expensive gear—though roughly the first 11k¥ an Otaku gets is pretty much reserved for a Math SPU 3, right now) and Shapeshifters without points in Magic (also forced to go min-Resources), for whom most of the ways to use expensive things are sealed off anyway.
Disadvantages: to begin with, I don't have even the vague shadow of a proposal. It also misses the aforementioned two character types, though at least Otaku may get fixed elsewhere; I think we need to make mundane Shapeshifters viable before we start thinking about what they do with money. There's also the fact that unless we move to karma-based chargen, some kinds of mages take 25 or 30 Resources for Spell Point purposes, so they end up getting screwed twice.

That's all I have at the moment. Any other proposals or comments on these proposals?

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:06 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
Make sure resource-heavy characters have available options for branching out which offer a reasonable ROI for expending resources in game.

So for example, currently a street sammie needs to shell out major bucks to remove a piece of gear, replace it with alpha/beta/delta to free up essence, sell the old gear at a super discount, then purchase a new piece of alpha/beta/delta before he sees any real improvement to his resource-linked stats.

If we changed it so upgrading a piece of ware to alpha/beta/delta was relatively low (perhaps even creating the 'adaptive tuning' edge where you spend karma for your body to 'attune' to a piece of ware you've had installed for a while and increase it's rating without actually having it replaced), and the price of new cyberware (especially alpha/beta/delta) was within reach of our $10k/run guidelines, we would fix this problem. If the rigger is able to buy/steal vehicles in game for less than a million nuyen (and better yet, if he can invest karma to reduce the cash cost), this gives him space to grow.


Actually, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of the street sammie being able to spend karma to reduce the essence cost of cyber already installed in his person. This fixes both the extreme financial cost of being a sammie, and the overabundance of karma sammies generally 'enjoy'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:25 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Stumps wrote:
So I was playing around with what you said, and it's actually insane just how nicely this all starts to pair up with some of the ideas that have been discussed as of late.

[ Cut ]

So it can be Physical, Mental, Material, World (sixth world).
So that describes the Empowerments, Graces, and Endurances of our character's as they are Physically, Mentally/Socially, Materialistically, and Worldly.

That's kind of neat.

Oh that is very neat. Making those World attributes work would be rather difficult, as all the other attributes (ideally including "world" attributes) start at 1 (+/- Racial mods) and go to 6, possible exceptions allowing them to go higher, while those three each have different rules. You'd either need to specify that they're exceptions, unless you rework things for those to start at 1 and go to 6 too...

Hey, how much does a "6" cost for an attribute in BeCKS again? This gives me one hell of an idea, but it'll have to wait until Friday when I'll have time (gah, and I've still got deck construction and generalized Maneuvers to deal with too. Curse my overactive imagination! :))

nezumi wrote:
When I read Stump's first post, I understood it to be suggesting an entire, second character generation system, one for attributes and skills, one for cash, resources, contacts, history, etc. A cool idea, but twice as complex (and with very many more options).

As Kage said, using the vague wealth system for Shadowrun seems a step in the wrong direction.
Indeed it may be, though it's an intriguing enough idea that I at least want to explore it further before dismissing it entirely. We already have extremely abstract Attributes; why not cash as well?

(Edit): I think you're missing the beauty here: the Wealth/Material attributes would be bought up with Karma, just like regular Attributes! No parallel chargen system with different types of attributes, some bought with cash, some with karma; everything costs Karma, and all is uniform. We just have to make it balanced.

Kagetenshi wrote:
So let's turn this discussion on its head.

Under point-build, one giganuyen is 30 points.

This means that the difference between 0-point Resources and 30-point Resources should be, on power terms, about the difference between n skills and n+6 skills at 6 (it obviously can't be exact; the difference between zero skills and six skills at 6 is huge, assuming purposeful skill choices, while the difference between 30 and 36 skills at 6 is, again assuming directed skill choices, almost certainly marginal). I would say that it should be about the difference between 30 and 60 points of Attributes, but Attributes are so huge that a character with only 30 points invested in them may as well just shoot himself.
Giganuyen->Meganuyen. Good Lord, if 30-point sam started with $billion I'd just throw my hands up in disgust and call the whole thing off. :)

30 divided by 6 is 5, not 6, so it's the difference between n and n+5 skills at 6. I'll argue that n is likely around 4.5; 27 skill points is the minimum number of skill points you can have under Priority, and really you're not going to have many fewer than that, even if you can theoretically spend your way down to ~5 skill points under Point Buy if you make a full mage with $1million and 30 attribute points. So you're roughly doubling your skills by investing 30 points, but multiplying your Resources by 200 ($5k ->$1M).

nezumi wrote:
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of the street sammie being able to spend karma to reduce the essence cost of cyber already installed in his person. This fixes both the extreme financial cost of being a sammie, and the overabundance of karma sammies generally 'enjoy'.

Heh, this ties right into Stumps' idea of World attributes, and mine of being able to buy them up from 1. Details as events unfold, but how's this for a spoiler: start with Essence of 1, buy it up with Karma like any other attribute. If Essence Loss from cyber exceeds your Essence, you die, so installing more cyber requires more Essence, which requires more Karma investment. Hey, it's not like Essence makes any sense anyway; may as well make it not make sense in our favor! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:54 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I'm not completely opposed to buying up essence. It would be like Humanity in CP2020. However, since magic is capped by essence, that makes another (pretty substantial) karma cost for mages.

I suppose you'd have to:
1) reduce the cost of being awakened
2) pair essence more closely with magic, so perhaps increasing one automatically increases the other


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I've been playing around with a karma purchase system in excel using the above attribute lineup, and I'm thinking about programming in a bonus modifier for Essence from Magic.

something similar for Body Index from Body as well.


I keep looking at the BeCKS outline for Karma cost for being a mage and I keep thinking that the bonuses should be tied in here somehow....
(currently playing around with formula's like, "(90/10)/3" positive modifier to essence, but this causes Adept and Aspected mages to equal out in bonuses to Essence modifiers even though one is spending more Karma to be what they are by 5 points.)

Full magician
90 Karma

Aspected magician
60 Karma

Adept
75 Karma

Adept (on the magician’s path)
90 Karma

I just haven't gotten it down as to what the bonuses should be for these things yet.


------

The other thought that I'm having is that we may just do away with these purchases and make it all attribute and skill purchases only...that might solve the issue itself.
Then the Essence bonus would be based on the Magic Attribute itself.
Plug in more Magic, get more bonus on Essence.

The only hitch here is Cyberjunkies raising Magic for no other reason than to get a discount on Essence, and then whipping out magic just because they bought magic for the essence discount, but on the other hand...if they do that and then slap cyberware on there, I think that's going to nig the whole bonus idea there for them anyway...I have to run the numbers to see if that would even be an abuse possible worth their interest though


Last edited by Stumps on Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:42 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
Actually, i'd recommend looking up Sphynx's posts on the topic. He made up an excellent, very modularized build point plan for making magic-users. I was really impressed with it, and thinking on it, it plugs perfectly into what you're ultimately suggesting here (that magic has to be bought up, rather than defaulting at 6).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:43 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Well, in one sense buying up the Magic Attribute would be what makes you Awakened. You'd have to buy up both Essence and Magic to 6 (Magic alone of all attributes starts at 0; your first point costs 10 Karma == 2 BP == 1 Attribute Point. Total cost: 90Karma==11Attribute Points==22BP). At this point you are a full mage; various 3-BP (15-Karma) Flaws will make you either an Adept or an Aspected Mage (two Flaws for the traditional Aspected Mage: first makes you unable to astrally project, second is the usual Shamanist/Sorcerer/Conjurer/etc choice), 3 point/15 Karma Edge for Magician's Way Adept. Spell points are purchased for 1BP==5Karma==5 Spell Points.

...hrm, that almost works out exactly right; the BeCKS points are spot-on; the built points are low by 2 for aspected mages, 6 for adepts, 3 for full mages, and 7 for magician's way adepts, unless we disallow the free Spell Points clause, in which case it's somewhat less for them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Honestly, I'm starting all attributes at 0, and just using the 2*rating per rating level and working it up from there; ignoring BeCKs and any other build system all together just to see what happens if I do it this way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:59 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
Eyeless Blond wrote:
Indeed it may be, though it's an intriguing enough idea that I at least want to explore it further before dismissing it entirely.

Be my guest :)

Quote:
Giganuyen->Meganuyen. Good Lord, if 30-point sam started with $billion I'd just throw my hands up in disgust and call the whole thing off. :)

30 divided by 6 is 5, not 6, so it's the difference between n and n+5 skills at 6.

Yeah, so, apparently I couldn't multiply this morning x.x

Quote:
I'll argue that n is likely around 4.5; 27 skill points is the minimum number of skill points you can have under Priority, and really you're not going to have many fewer than that, even if you can theoretically spend your way down to ~5 skill points under Point Buy if you make a full mage with $1million and 30 attribute points.

My Adept builds tend to have between 3 and 4 skills, so I've bottomed out at 18 (24 being more common, though).

Quote:
So you're roughly doubling your skills by investing 30 points, but multiplying your Resources by 200 ($5k ->$1M).

Admittedly Street Index throws a spanner into things, but I'm of the opinion that players tend to get more excited by 150 karma (even without it contributing to KP) than by 995,000¥ (I almost tacked another digit onto that. What the hell is wrong with me today?). A straw poll of all of one other person suggests similar thinking for at least some character types. Hammering out an exact comparison is probably intractable, but suffice it to say that it's not clear to me that doubling your skills is clearly less powerful than multiplying your resources by 200. If it's not clearly less powerful, the simple difference in ratios doesn't obviously constitute a problem.

Let me summarize here the things that you have thus far convinced me are actually wrong with Resource allocation:

1: archetypes have dramatic differences in their costs to tread water. In particular, without SotA rules and not counting Lifestyle I believe that only Riggers have to pay money to sit at home and stare at the wall for a month. Incidental expenses are also subject to dramatic differences; Hermetics need to pay thousands of nuyen just to summon one Elemental (and at decent Force may well only get one service for their money), Sams and Riggers may expend fancy ammo, grenades, missiles, etc., while meanwhile Deckers do their thing for free on a day-to-day basis and Shamans have difficulty finding ways to use up things that cost money (especially since I can't remember the last time I saw someone take an Expendable
Spell Focus).

Narrowing the range in which Resources are granted does nothing to alleviate this.

2: typical payouts for runs tend to be in a range such that very expensive items (like what you need to upgrade a typical Sam, Rigger, or to a lesser extent Decker) are wholly out of reach, practically out of reach (require so much saving that immediate demands consume the savings), or at the very least require extreme amounts of time to acquire the funds to actually obtain.

This issue is solved most easily by increasing typical payouts (maybe this is the right time to violently disagree with the 10k¥/run guideline? 10k¥ sounds about right for an up-front payment, not a reward for the run). The issue that some archetypes are now swimming in cash is actually the result of issue 1, not of the size of the payout relative to their Resource allocation.

There might have been more, but my brain is fogging up. Time to post this.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
OK...I checked against how I'm doing things at the moment, and a sam benefits from NOT raising magic to get the discount on essence (since they are going to raise Quick and Int).
They save cost by leaving magic 0 and just raising essence only instead of raising Magic to 6 and taking the +3 to Essence by about 12 karma points in cost.

Still fiddling.

So far though...seems clean.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:33 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Um, why would a sam ever benefit from upping Magic? Doesn't it start at 0, and move up from there?

What in the world are you building over there? :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I was making sure that wouldn't be a benefit...didn't want to suggest something that made such a thing happen, so I was checking to see if it did...it doesn't, so yay!

Because I'm doing things by every two points in magic equals a +1 to Essence...so in theory (at first) I was thinking there does lie a possibility that a sam may crank up magic to 6 to get that +3 bonus to Essence to make buying essence cheaper...doesn't reward him though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Here's what I'm doing...to recap.
All attributes start at 0.
"Build points" are gone.
Just using pure Karma at the book cost of 2*rating per rating
Every 2 points of Magic offers +1 point of Essence free.
Every 2 points of Body offers +1 point of Body Index free.

Here's the only snag I've ran into so far.

The street sam can literally leave Magic at 0 and live life perfectly fine.
However, the Mage has to have Magic at some rating (I have them at 6), and they get a break on Essence, which is good, but they (unlike the sammy) don't have a single attribute they can leave at 0.

That's annoying the crap out of me.
They can't lower anything to 0 because anything BUT magic has constant importance in SR for everyone.

Magic, on the other hand, only matters the mage, so if you aren't a mage, then you get the lucky break of not spending Karma on that attribute.

Errg.

That's ticking me off because it doesn't make any sense, and it's showing up because it's an inherent problem that I am now seeing with the SR perspective itself.

It's like they have magic costing so much just because your future potential power is going to be greater than the sam's...even though I disagree on that.

I'm still plucking away, but this might take some thinking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:05 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
I'm not sure why that's a problem, exactly. Um, if you're so worried about mages not having anything at zero, make Body Index start at zero and don't grant "freebies" from Body.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I want a mage to be capable of being built with the exact same amount of points for everything as a sam.
Equal point cost for equal return.

That means there must be equal opportunity for 0 if one archetype is capable of doing so, or that archetype has to be forced into a position of not having 0 as an option.

You can't have one go willy nilly like that and still have balance.
The more I look at the core system in SR, the more I realize this wasn't done.
I believe now that this is where the problem actually stems from.

Granting freebies from Body for Body Index has nothing to do with either of these two impactfully.
Body is more a trick valued to the Adept than to the Mage or Sam.

Magic is the Mage's gold, and so is Essence.
Essence is also the Sam's gold, but oddly, nothing else is.

The mage has two "gold" or cardinal attributes that are absolutely imperative, while the sam does not.

And it's not the mage's fault.
It's the sam's.

Looking at other archetypes, I see them having split interests.
The Adept is interested in either Magic and Essence, or Magic and Body Index (or splitting between them all), the Mage is Essence and Magic, the Melee beast is Body and Body Index or Essence (with either of the latter being 0 if not needed).

However, the Decker, Sam, or Rigger do not require anything more than 0 on Magic or Body Index (Body Index can be used but doesn't have to be).

So half of the archetypes can get away with at least one or more 0 point attributes and the other half can maybe get away with no more than one attribute of 0.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:43 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
In regards to Kage's comments and ongoing costs... Is there a reason riggers can't maintain their vehicles primarily with the relevant b/r skill, scrap parts, and lifestyle costs (to cover oil changes and such)? Really, 50% of vehicle costs is skilled labor, and another 20-40% are non-disposable parts you can pick up cheap at the local car yard. The remaining costs, oil changes and gas, are going to be equivalent to a monthly bus pass really, so should be covered by lifestyle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:26 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Stumps wrote:
[...]
So half of the archetypes can get away with at least one or more 0 point attributes and the other half can maybe get away with no more than one attribute of 0.

Sams will need higher Resources, to cover their cyberware costs, any Lifestyle, to cover maintenance (unless they want to deal with maintenance-related penalties.) They also generally need more Skills: mages can get away with Sorcery, Conjuring, Etiquette and Sneak, while sams require... considerably more than that. If they don't have Skills then they need even higher Resources for a skillwires system*.

Riggers absolutely need Resources and Skills (vehicle skills, B/R skills, Electronics Warfare skills, weaponry/Gunnery skills, etc). I'm considering adding Lifestyle in there, making upkeep costs dependent on it.

Adepts need Magic and Skills. Essence does need to be bought up so you can have Magic, but everyone will need to buy up Essence, either for cyberware or Magic so that's basically zero-sum.

Deckers at the moment need Resources; I'm considering changing that to really, really heavy Skills instead. Maybe Skills+Resources.

Btw, what is your "Body Index" supposed to represent? Is that M&M's Bio Index? What would purchasing it get for you? Is it basically just Essence for bioware?

nezumi wrote:
In regards to Kage's comments and ongoing costs... Is there a reason riggers can't maintain their vehicles primarily with the relevant b/r skill, scrap parts, and lifestyle costs (to cover oil changes and such)? Really, 50% of vehicle costs is skilled labor, and another 20-40% are non-disposable parts you can pick up cheap at the local car yard. The remaining costs, oil changes and gas, are going to be equivalent to a monthly bus pass really, so should be covered by lifestyle.

Ditch vehicle upkeep for a skill/tools (need a garage too!) requirement? Yeah, I can see that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:41 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
I was wrong, incidentally; I've never seen anyone actually remember to pay it (or require it to be paid), but in principle contacts also require a monthly upkeep, hitting everyone with contacts but in particular Faces.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Quote:
Is it basically just Essence for bioware

Yes, it's your metabolic level that allows your body to keep up with bioware.
You could, in a way, say, "metabolism", I suppose.

As to resources, I'm leaving them at the same flat rate.
Because the point of this endeavor is to balance things out regardless of resource level.

Because when you use that level as the counter balance, you end up right back where we were with rich sam's, and poor mages.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I want to link up the spreadsheet I'm playing with this concept on and have at least eyeless crack it open and tinker with it a bit.

It's no where near complete, but it's functional in that it calculates things correctly so we can see the balance of numbers and cost.

Now, the question at hand is this.
Currently, I have this in Open Office Calc format.

Eyeless, do you have Excel, or do you have Open Offic Calc?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:33 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
I'm on Ubuntu, so Open Office. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:41 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
There's no telling, you could be using Gnumeric.

~J, user of Numbers (to the extent that I use spreadsheets, which is nearly not at all)

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Here you go eyeless

It'll be Sheet 2 that everything is on.

http://www.4shared.com/file/175574492/c ... s_ods.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:31 pm
Posts: 24
nezumi wrote:
In regards to Kage's comments and ongoing costs... Is there a reason riggers can't maintain their vehicles primarily with the relevant b/r skill, scrap parts, and lifestyle costs (to cover oil changes and such)? Really, 50% of vehicle costs is skilled labor, and another 20-40% are non-disposable parts you can pick up cheap at the local car yard. The remaining costs, oil changes and gas, are going to be equivalent to a monthly bus pass really, so should be covered by lifestyle.


If you consider the price of jet fuel for private pilots and the efficiency ratings of Shadowrun vehicles, certain types of vehicles and drones can get awfully expensive quickly.

On the other hand, some of them should be dirt cheap to operate.

nezumi wrote:
In general, the rules are awfully complex. Just rewriting the RAW to make them more straightforward, separating out which aspects of the maneuver score will change and which are constant turn by turn would be helpful. Right now driving combat takes me ages because I have to read over all of the rules every turn to remember what applies and what doesn't.

Any actual reduction in complexity would be fantastic.


We could introduce variable costs depending on chassis and power plant, but do you really want to?

(edited, had original inserted html link)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 6:39 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I do agree, jets and such can be pricey.

How about rolling it into a 'vehicle lifestyle cost'. Vehicles require a minimum amount of space and such. You can't be a squatter with a helicopter. Make it so vehicles require a lifestyle (generally Low or Medium), and you're allowed to 'room mate' with them to reduce costs. Now the rules are simple, easy to remember, and still sensible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 6:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
My first reaction is that it's horribly non-orthogonal and that I'd never remember it, whereas it's easy to remember with simple maintenance costs. Take that as you will, I'll try to properly consider the idea later.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:21 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
Let me ask, where do you normally store your vehicle? Do you leave your helicopter out in the cold? Or are you paying for a hangar somewhere? If you're paying for a hangar, how do you determine the costs, and what all does it include? Strangely enough, upgrading my personal lifestyle cost from Low to Moderate resulted in my vehicle maintenance costs dropping, because I could do them all myself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
I think lifestyle should be an attribute, like I have been playing around with.
I think that that attribute should come into play for equity ownership of things ambiguously.
Meaning, I do agree with nez; this attribute rating should allow, in part, for things like the level of vehicle you can and cannot maintain the owndership or care of.

If 3 is the average for attributes and one has a lifestyle attribute of 3, then I wouldn't expect you to tell me they can own a limousine or helicopter, as these things are not easily managed with an average lifestyle.

For something like the helicopter decked out like airwolf, I would expect at least a 6, and preferably an 8 for the lifestyle attribute.


I've been thinking about this thing too.
Perhaps, for more fun, we can make the lifestyle attribute something like a bank; since we have jack shit of anything modeling this in the game currently.

Perhaps you can take the money you earn from campaigns and invest in your lifestyle.
Make an exchange rate, like Good Karma to Karma.
Except here make it something like 2,000Y per lifestyle point (must purchase each point; like attributes).
(so, rating 1 is 2,000; rating 2 is 4,000; rating 3 is 6,000; etc...)

That way the players have something to work on for lifestyle that makes it tangible.
If you want to have that helicopter, which requires 6 lifestyle to keep (not to use), then you have to spend 42,000Y (21,000Y if you want to make it 1,000Y per point instead) to have that ability.

This represents a "month" of lifestyle.
Let it slip and a point of lifestyle slides...better find a place for some of your loved gear and stuff.
How do you let it slip?
Half the item's lifestyle rating (rounded up) is the rating of "cost" each 4 sessions (see below).
Basically, it takes that much of your money that you have put into your lifestyle.

You can roll your lifestyle attribute to minimize the costs; more successes reduces the cost like damage soaking.

If you fail to have the cred to keep up, then you have the applied affect of "borrowed time" flaw for anything that exceeds your new lowered lifestyle attribute.

(basically, failing that roll and not having the cred to cover the attribute means that you end up losing a point in that attribute, and then can't hang onto anything with a lifestyle rating above your now one less rating of lifestyle attribute. You have limited time to get it back before you lose your stuff, so hurry up and get on some runs to keep your stuff chummer!

As to what your limited time is, that's up to your GM, like borrowed time sort of works.
I prefer the idea of this being vague instead of locked down so that it doesn't over complicate with more regulations.

Can't come up with that kind of cred in the first place?
Get the group to help.
Everyone can chip in on a group Lifestyle Rating (attribute), just like Group Karma.

Everyone can chip in.

And, of course, you can get that attribute up during creation as well; balanced out.

I would suggest a "month" to be measured in uses, like a potion in other games.
Count this in "sessions" of play.
Good for 4 sessions of play (GM discretion for needed adjustment)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:54 am 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
Indeed, group lifestyles are pretty common. If the group gets a level 4 or 5 lifestyle, that gives the mage space for elemental summoning, the sam a place to heal up from Serious wounds, the rigger space to house his chopper, the shaman space to run around naked and bark at the moon, etc. Making this more clear in the rules could kill multiple birds with one stone (and become another mark of what 'level' the party is at, since it limits stuff like vehicles and spirits).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:09 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 875
Location: Boston
They are?

Our teams seem to spend a few minutes each session on ways to avoid letting the other characters know where they live.

~J

_________________
Failure: when your best just isn't good enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:39 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:50 am
Posts: 827
Location: DeeCee
I didn't say where they live (or sleep). It's their Lifestyle, which is the technical term the book uses. Most people have at least one Lifestyle they don't live in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 2:59 pm 
Offline
Forum Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:11 am
Posts: 903
Okay, so some of us are working on lifestyles, some on a wealth-attribute system. Maybe we should split off into different threads to hammer out the proposals, and converge to vote on which one is better?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 10:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 267
Sounds fine by me.
I'm for the wealth/material attribute with EB there.

Wouldn't mind hammering that out.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group