|
I don't really get how they're free points; if every character has to have >1 logic to not be a 'tard, what's the point of even having the option to leave it at 1? I mean, fine, Cha 1 runners auto-fail certain checks, roger that. Why does that have to mean they can't have a conversation?
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
Eh, to be honest, I see it this way. Charisma 1 means you can hold a normal conversation, like talking to your buddy, and act fine in situations your used to (stuff that shouldn't require a roll) But you can't debate worth crap, you can't tell a convincing lie or fake anything and you don't know how to react in settings your not used to (which is where etiquette would come in) Edit: And, yeah, reading up on cyberlimbs again, you can't get Agility 9 in one cyberlimb, the enhancements cap off at +3 for one copy (combined with the default 3 for 6) and you can't have multiple copies of the same enhancement in the same cyberlimb, so no having Agi +3 and Agi +3 in the same limb. The only way around it that I can see is if I had 6 natural agility and customized the cyberlimb up to 6 default agility and then added the +3 enhancement. DMW45 fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:Eh, to be honest, I see it this way. Yeah, I agree with this. Charisma 1 doesn't mean you're utterly incapable of relaying information via conversation. I would expand it to mean you're about as charming as a rock one way or another and encourage the player to explain that; Maybe they have Charisma 1 because they're a wheezing netdecker asthma monkey, or maybe they have Charisma 1 because other trolls roll their eyes at this walking troll stereotype. An attribute at 1 should be a possibility, because otherwise there's no point to having it as a mechanical possibility, but it should be as much a defining characteristic as an attribute at the racial maximum. I would probably raise an eyebrow at a player who had more than one attribute at the natural minimum.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
So the default should be 1? The average metahuman has 1 in every stat? to clarify, I'm talking about the whole "stats at 1 are an asset that you chose to not spend points on". Brannock fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:17
|
|
|
Brannock posted:So the default should be 1? The average metahuman has 1 in every stat? The default is 1, and the 'average' metahuman isn't detailed anywhere. The average value for equipment on a rating from 1 to 6 is 2, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:The default is 1, and the 'average' metahuman isn't detailed anywhere. The average value for equipment on a rating from 1 to 6 is 2, though. So what do you see as the metahuman average? In SR4 I believe the accepted average was +3 to your metatype starting score. Edit: The bog standard, comes in mook-like waves grunt has a three in every stat but Logic and Charisma, where they have a 2. So if you have a 1 in charisma you are less social then let's see "...the kind of knuckle-dragging, slope-browed Neanderthals that typify the phrase "angry mob."
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
Human (as in human human) average, on a 1-6 scale is 3, or at least it's been 3 in every edition I'm familiar with, so assuming that everyone starts with a 1 in every stat by default the "average" for any given attribute ought to be +2 points to whatever it is after modifiers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Human (as in human human) average, on a 1-6 scale is 3, or at least it's been 3 in every edition I'm familiar with, so assuming that everyone starts with a 1 in every stat by default the "average" for any given attribute ought to be +2 points to whatever it is after modifiers. Attributes E gives you 12 points - precisely enough to give you +2 to all six stats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Edit: The bog standard, comes in mook-like waves grunt has a three in every stat but Logic and Charisma, where they have a 2. It's probably a coincidence but that's the same number of attribute points you would have with Attributes D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Attributes E gives you 12 points - precisely enough to give you +2 to all six stats. ...there's seven stats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:39
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:...there's seven stats. Eight, actually. A 3 in every stat would be Attributes C for a human.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
If only those mooks were designed to accurately reflect an individual, instead of let's see "...interchangeable... the rules steamline how the gamemaster handles them in various situations" so please stop citing god-drat Verisimilitude.ProfessorCirno posted:In SR4 I believe the accepted average was +3 to your metatype starting score. You are really good at pulling these facts without any citation. By these standards a friggin' 400 BP runner (already head and shoulders above pretty much everyone) wouldn't be able to reach the staggering realm of, 'average.'
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:43
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:...there's seven stats. Er, right. My bad. Stat block D gives you almost all 3's and two 2's. Mystic Mongol posted:If only those mooks were designed to accurately reflect an individual, instead of let's see "...interchangeable... the rules steamline how the gamemaster handles them in various situations" so please stop citing god-drat Verisimilitude. First off what are you even trying to say. You can't just shout "VERISIMILITUDE" and cross your arms smugly. YOu have to make an actual argument. Secondly, the NPC blocks all paint the same picture. Attributes D for the moonks, then slowly scaling up with better attributes with each mark up. Same with the contacts - they mostly fall into what would be Attributes B, mostly evenly distributed. Now we turn to the sample "creat a character" characters and what do we get? The slow technomancer has a 2 in agility and reaction and all 3's and 4's beyond that. The phydically weak shaman took +1 to strength. NONE of them have a 1 in any stat. What about the sample Runners in general? Most of them have 3's and 4's with one or two strong stat - and no 1's. But then hey, you were doubting SR4, so let's grove over to there. SR4A, page 67, states that a 1 in a stat is "weak," a 2 is "underdeveloped," and a 3 is "typical." So that answers that - a 3 is the average. Thirdly, free points or a weakness? You never answered. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Thus far, in the Shadowrun game children overboard is running, I've yet to make a single Logic based roll. Or a Charisma based roll for that matter. Okay, I think a couple of my knowledge skills are Logic based so I guess I lied there. But my character has a couple of significant areas where she's largely deficient...social skills, serious logic stuff...and hasn't yet had to deal with the serious repercussions thereof. I also get to have conversations and stuff with people too. In theory, up 'til now the points I put into giving her a Charisma of 3 and a Logic of 2 at character creation have yet to pay off in any meaningful sense and could just as easily have been spent on something else more relevant to her areas of expertise. I'm sure at some point the time might come where CO calls for me to make a social test of some sort or forces me to logic my way out of a problem but so far I've been doing pretty well by letting other people handle the real heavy lifting in those regards. So is CO being a bad GM here or what?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
Yo I'm relatively new to Shadowrun and reading 5E for the first time (moderately familiar with 4E rules but never actually played). I've mostly played D&D and some indie RPGs so in light of this conversation about dump stats I want a general opinion on a scenario: The players have hidden some drugs in a false wall. Lone Star or something are raiding the place and have all the characters lined up. Some really intimidating investigator is tapping on all the walls while staring down the players. By the rules, a scenario like this would call for a composure check. A person who dumps charisma or willpower is probably going to fail this and I would rule that they subconsciously begin to sweat or dart their eyes to the hidden cache. Is this unfair to the players? Is this bad GM'ing? I'm reading through the rules thinking about the scenarios I want to devise but wouldn't a character with 1 logic and 1 intuition be duped by everyone around them? Wouldn't their contacts take advantage of them, wouldn't they be accosted by random gangers who can just look at this guy and think "Wow, what a poo poo head we can probably take advantage of him." I'm coming from D&D and World of Darkness here where your attributes pretty directly reflect what kind of character you are. Intelligence 6 is stunted and Dexterity 3 is someone who can barely walk without tripping over their feet. Shadowrun doesn't have an analogy for attributes like it does skills but being unable to make a perception check, for example, means you probably can't even tell when a bucket is placed in a door's threshold. In all my D&D games, the players act independently or split up almost as much as they act as a group. I try to play to their strengths and provide smart workarounds but I don't see the point in having every player together or challenged directly at every turn. With all your contacts and connections I feel that talking skills should be just as important as active skills lest everyone fucks you at every opportunity with higher prices. If that's playing Shadowrun wrong then please alert me. al-azad fucked around with this message at 03:18 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:15
|
|
|
al-azad posted:A person who dumps charisma or willpower is probably going to fail this and I would rule that they subconsciously begin to sweat or dart their eyes to the hidden cache. Eh, personally I think what happens should be dependent on how they've acted thus far. Like, an aggressive guy who fails a composure check would likely talk smack or otherwise be hostile and get a beating for it. But I've never GM'ed before (or played tabletop, for that matter) so what do I know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
I should make it clear that I don't think there's anything unfair about a GM requiring a check of a player who's weak in that area; I'm not gonna pitch a fit if CO starts throwing social tests or hardware tasks at me or if I maneuver myself into a position where that's the only way to go, simply that so far thanks to the members of our band of miscreants having sufficiently broad portfolios none of us has really been stuck completely in a situation where we're forced to use our weakest abilities. But it seems kind of weird to me that people here are looking at a guy with Charisma of 1 no social skills and going "woah gently caress, that dude is in for SO MUCH TROUBLE man" while someone with Charisma 2 or 3 and no social skills would probably warrant a shrug, even though 2-3 Charisma dude isn't exactly going to be a super social powerhouse with his one, maybe two possible hits if that. Like, that possibility of miniscule and marginal success is enough for people to go "oh okay, that guy's fine" even though the distinction in terms of "how good is this guy at social stuff really" is largely meaningless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:Eh, personally I think what happens should be dependent on how they've acted thus far. Like, an aggressive guy who fails a composure check would likely talk smack or otherwise be hostile and get a beating for it. But I've never GM'ed before (or played tabletop, for that matter) so what do I know. It still has the intended effect. If the cop is getting hot and someone blurts out "gently caress you, pig" there going to get suspicious. In fact when I was thinking of the scenario I was remembering the scene in Roger Rabbit when Judge Doom is tapping 'A Shave and a Haircut' and Roger is going bonkers trying not to respond. He failed his composure right there although with more dramatic effect. Kai Tave posted:But it seems kind of weird to me that people here are looking at a guy with Charisma of 1 no social skills and going "woah gently caress, that dude is in for SO MUCH TROUBLE man" while someone with Charisma 2 or 3 and no social skills would probably warrant a shrug, even though 2-3 Charisma dude isn't exactly going to be a super social powerhouse with his one, maybe two possible hits if that. Like, that possibility of miniscule and marginal success is enough for people to go "oh okay, that guy's fine" even though the distinction in terms of "how good is this guy at social stuff really" is largely meaningless. See, where I'm coming from is that being literally unable to do certain things is kind of counter-intuitive to how runners are depicted in all the lore and fluff material. There isn't a single default character with a 1 in an attribute so you have to ask yourself, how did a person with a 1 function in everyday society up until this point? But this is just a difference in play styles where the rules don't match up to the fluff. I'm not looking to gently caress players, but events don't exist in a vacuum. al-azad fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:Edit: And, yeah, reading up on cyberlimbs again, you can't get Agility 9 in one cyberlimb, the enhancements cap off at +3 for one copy (combined with the default 3 for 6) and you can't have multiple copies of the same enhancement in the same cyberlimb, so no having Agi +3 and Agi +3 in the same limb. The only way around it that I can see is if I had 6 natural agility and customized the cyberlimb up to 6 default agility and then added the +3 enhancement. You customize a cyberlimb to your natural maximum, which as a human is 6. Then you take enhancement to +3 for the total of 9. It doesn't work in the cyberhand but it works otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:36
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I should make it clear that I don't think there's anything unfair about a GM requiring a check of a player who's weak in that area; I'm not gonna pitch a fit if CO starts throwing social tests or hardware tasks at me or if I maneuver myself into a position where that's the only way to go, simply that so far thanks to the members of our band of miscreants having sufficiently broad portfolios none of us has really been stuck completely in a situation where we're forced to use our weakest abilities. Yeah, exactly. I don't understand why Logic 1 is "barely cognitive" and 2-3 is a-okay when the mechanical difference is negligible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
dirtycajun posted:You customize a cyberlimb to your natural maximum, which as a human is 6. Then you take enhancement to +3 for the total of 9. It doesn't work in the cyberhand but it works otherwise. It can? I thought customization was only for if you had a higher natural attribute than the cyberlimb gives as a default--otherwise your gimped in that limb for that attribute. Yeah, taking a look at it, you're right. Okay, time to change things. Also: I totally hate Wired Reflexes and want Synaptic Booster instead for cheaper essence--but it doesn't stack with Reaction Enhancer 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:It can? I thought customization was only for if you had a higher natural attribute than the cyberlimb gives as a default--otherwise your gimped in that limb for that attribute. Welcome to cyberlimbs! Seriously though, this took me a couple tries to wrap my head around when 4E introduced cyberlimb customization too, it is quite possibly the most unnecessarily convoluted method of giving people robot arms they could have come up with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:It can? I thought customization was only for if you had a higher natural attribute than the cyberlimb gives as a default--otherwise your gimped in that limb for that attribute. They cost so much and riggers want as high a reaction as possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:First off what are you even trying to say. You can't just shout "VERISIMILITUDE" and cross your arms smugly. YOu have to make an actual argument. My actual argument is that page 44 states Shadowrun 5E posted:Your Shadowrun character does all the things a normal person does, along with the occasional grand theft, espionage mission, or hit job. Most of these things—common tasks like eating, sleeping, and crossing an empty street—are done automatically and are kept in the background of the game. When you need to do something difficult or extraordinary, or when you need to avoid someone who has got you in their crosshairs, you have to roll the dice to determine a result. and nowhere in the book does it state that a 1 in a stat is somehow handicapped. You keep making things up. Go find me a page source that claims that charisma 1 is literally incapable of talking, or that logic 1 means you are severely mentally deficient. I know the rules don't say what you wish they did. But that's life, man. ProfessorCirno posted:Thirdly, free points or a weakness? You never answered. I answered twice, you just ignored both times because the answer didn't fit with what you wanted it to be. Just like the rules!
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
dirtycajun posted:They cost so much and riggers want as high a reaction as possible. Well, at this point I'm trying to figure out how to fit two Alpha Full Cyber Arms into the mix so I can have an average of 7 Agi (9 in the Arms) and 4 Str (6 in the arms) I can't go down to partial limbs without negating their bonuses to the average so I'm not gimped with 1 str or 1 agi. Cyberlimb rules are weird Edit: On the plus side, you don't need Orthoskin with more cyberlimb enhancements, the armor enhancements all stack. I also replaced the Alpha Smartlink with cybereyes and got the smartlink as an internal system along with other nifty stuff. I love buying stuff in a bundle, what can I say? DMW45 fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Guys, if you were going to convert 4e's street magic golem / necromancy rules to 5th edition so one of your players could be the mage equivalent of a drone rigger for a magic-heavy game, how would you update them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Yeah, exactly. I don't understand why Logic 1 is "barely cognitive" and 2-3 is a-okay when the mechanical difference is negligible. The theory is that with a Logic of 1, any time you're called to make an actual skill check (i.e. whenever you are challenged in any way) in a subject in which you lack actual training in-- not things you're unaware of-- it is functionally impossible for you to succeed without pure dumb luck. Which is.. not unreasonable, if you ask me. I mean, let's look at what we're talking about here. Let's look at some Logic skills: Aeronautics Mechanic Biotechnology Chemistry Electronic Warfare Forgery Software These are not generally things a person of "merely" average intellect has a ghost of a chance of being able to pull off by just muddling through without instruction or expertise. poo poo, even First Aid-- 4000 people die a year in Turkey due to untrained First Aid. A person of average intellect lacking any training at all should probably be inept at this sort of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
Okay, I give up. I literally cannot make it fit. Even with absolutely everything alpha that can legally be alpha, it comes out to 6.28 Essence. Here's what I had. I need to figure out how to get around the 1 str/1 agi limitations with cyberlimbs.code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
Why do you need all that stuff in your cyber-eyes, besides the image link? You can just put them in goggles or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:The theory is that with a Logic of 1, any time you're called to make an actual skill check (i.e. whenever you are challenged in any way) in a subject in which you lack actual training in-- not things you're unaware of-- it is functionally impossible for you to succeed without pure dumb luck. Exactly. All paying 20 BP or 2 attribute points to set your Logic at 3 instead of 1 might accomplish from a practical standpoint is giving you the ability to completely suck fractionally less at defaulting to Logic skills...like maybe you could get a hit, maybe two if you're lucky, but you're going to fail a lot more than you meaningfully succeed and any successes you do get will be paper-thin. The same goes for having a Charisma of 3 and no social skills. But having a 1 in an attribute is like a neon sign to some folks that says HEY PLEASE SHOW ME THE FOLLY OF MY WAYS while having a 3 is like, eh, whatever, nobody cares. It's like an "under the GM's radar" tax, as long as you pay enough points to not look like you're being a minmaxer then nobody's likely to care as much about hammering home your lack of capability like an object lesson.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:Why do you need all that stuff in your cybereyes besides the image link? You can just put them in goggles or something. They don't take up essence when they're inside cybereyes. Capacity and all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
BenRGamer posted:They don't take up essence when they're inside cybereyes. Capacity and all. Let me rephrase the question: why do you need rating 2 cyber-eyes, which cost .1 essence more than rating 1 cyber-eyes, when you could shove all that stuff into a set of goggles? Also, you could drop your Reaction Enhancers to rating 1. You don't need to hit your augmentation cap at character generation, give yourself a little room to grow. Losing 1 Reaction isn't the end of the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
Mainly it's a convenience; goggles can get lost, stolen, dropped, not at hand, and depending on what sort of casing they're in not the kind of thing you walk down the street wearing without garnering some odd looks (though you can do the whole sunglasses thing if you want), but nobody looks twice at a guy with cybereyes, you always have them, and the only time they're likely to get lost or stolen is when you're dead (or if you're like me and let your cybereye drone get shot by security robots). There's nothing wrong with using goggles if that's your thing, but at that point why even bother getting cybereyes at all when you can get an image link in a set of contacts or the same goggles your other stuff is in?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Mainly it's a convenience; goggles can get lost, stolen, dropped, not at hand, and depending on what sort of casing they're in not the kind of thing you walk down the street wearing without garnering some odd looks (though you can do the whole sunglasses thing if you want), but nobody looks twice at a guy with cybereyes, you always have them, and the only time they're likely to get lost or stolen is when you're dead (or if you're like me and let your cybereye drone get shot by security robots). Mostly that. I also hate the goggle aesthetic for this guy. But I am considering dropping it down if I have to. Right now I'm trying to explore that partial cyberlimb thing I was talking about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:55
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:There's nothing wrong with using goggles if that's your thing, but at that point why even bother getting cybereyes at all when you can get an image link in a set of contacts or the same goggles your other stuff is in? A good question! Also, all that ware costs in the neighborhood of 435,000 nuyen so good luck affording drones or, like, housing. It might not be the best idea to combine two money-oriented concepts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 04:55
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:There's nothing wrong with using goggles if that's your thing, but at that point why even bother getting cybereyes at all when you can get an image link in a set of contacts or the same goggles your other stuff is in? In SR 5th it seems that for the most part the "convenience" sort of 'ware is much much better accomplished by a set of customized gear that doesn't cost you any Essence. I was originally going to get cybereyes for my face then realized that I'd just rather have a pair of mirrorshades instead for lowlight vision / flare compensation / vision enhancement. All he has now for ware is a Voice Modulator which is really fun to screw around with as long as your GM is receptive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
THe problem is that logic skills also include "use a computer" and "anything involving academics." And, well, the question still sits: are low attributes weaknesses? Or free points? Because they are either one or they are the other. Again, Logic 1 is something that literally not one single NPC has. If your logic is lower then characters described as knuckle dragging Neanderthals, how are you still doing things? Like, you could play D&D and potentially drop your Intelligence to 3 and make the argument of well I don't have any Intelligence skills. But if you go on to play that character as a cunning and brilliant tactical warrior, I'm going to call bullshit. If you have Logic 2 you are dumber then average. If you have Logic 1 you are significantly dumber then average. That's how low stats work. They're low. Stop looking at just the loving math, good lord. I hate to use this argument but this is a roleplaying game. If you have Logic 1 your character is legitimately really loving stupid. If they have Charisma 1 they legitimately have massive socialization issues. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
I like cybereyes for the same reason I like a lot of other cyberware which is that it redefines the baseline abilities of your character. On a prepared job where you have all your stuff the difference between goggles and cybereyes may be moot, but in the hundred and one circumstances where things are less than ideal and you don't have all your stuff, having implant 'ware increases the number of options you can rely upon as a default. "I always have the ability to see in the dark and do other sensory tricks, I always move faster, I always have X amount of armor, I can hold my breath for an hour, I can fall three stories and take no damage, etc." External gear shouldn't be a constant pitfall waiting to happen, but opting to get implanted gear is basically you saying "I want to make this an always option." That said, I'm not nearly as up on SR5 as I am on SR4 but based on what I know I'd say that trying to make a character that stars with super cyberlimbs like that is going to be much more of a stumbling block to other stuff than it was in SR4 where the costs were lower. Cabbit's right in that both samurai and drone guys are kind of monetarily intensive concepts. My suggestion would be to forgo the cyberlimb idea for now, maybe keep the rest, then go back to the drawing board. I don't think that a guy who's fighty but also uses drones should be unworkable, but it might be unworkable the way you're trying to approach it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:The problem is that logic skills also include "use a computer" and "anything involving academics."
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 05:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
Cybereyes do a few things goggles don't. If you're willing to burn the Magic, cybereyes let you cast magic through them, while you can't cast magic using your bonuses from goggles or glasses or what have you. Additionally, you gain an extra bonus from smartguns if you use smartlink in your eyes rather then in goggles. As was mentioned, cybereyes can't exactly be taken away. Additionally, goggles simple don't have high enough capacity to hold everything - cyber eyes and a pair of shades will.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 05:10
|
|