[Drakeotic]

Hello, I am new to Shadowrun and making my first character. I know it says you can spend up to 25 Karma for good qualities and negative ones as well but I don't see a cost for negative ones. Do I count the bonus karma as its cost? I have always enjoyed adding negative features to my characters, it brings a little more life to them. Thank you in advance.

[Ryo]

The cost of a negative quality is the negative effect it gives you. In exchange, you get bonus karma. So you start with 25 karma, and you can take up to 25 karma worth of negative qualities, giving you a total of 50 to spend.

[Drakeotic]

Thank you very much! Now I can continue with my character. I like that it will give you extra Karma to spend later on. Thanks again.

[Michael Chandra]

By the way, you can ask your GM for permission to take a combination of qualities that are somewhat more than -25, getting only 25 karma for it.

[Agonar]

By the way, you can ask your GM for permission to take a combination of qualities that are somewhat more than -25, getting only 25 karma for it.

I usually allow my players to take as many negative Qualities as they want to RP their character with, but they still only gain 25 bonus Karma, max.  Several of my players took 30+ points worth of negs anyway, just for extra flavor.

[Michael Chandra]

It's more a thing for people who'd end up at 10+10+6 rather than 10+10+5, but yeah, taking multiple is nice. It's allowed for Missions, by the way.

[ZeConster]

Which would've been helpful to know beforehand, as getting Gremlins on my has-a-commlink 24-Karma-from-Negative-Qualities Magician would've given me 2k more starting nuyen.

[samiam]

Eh, that's not exactly the thought behind that allowance.  It's one thing to do so for a character concept a different thing entirely just so I can gets me a bit more cash to spend.   

[Michael Chandra]

A player taking a negative quality they don't really like because they want the points, rather than a more-expensive quality that they like but think they can't get because it puts them past -25, isn't really a good thing though.  He could have cheesed for -25 but didn't, settling for -24 since he didn't know he could go past -25.

[Insaniac99]

One thing that I found I completely fell in love with in a different system is that you don't get character points for negative qualities.  That system believes they either end up being free points that never really hamper you much, or they end up costing you much more than you get in the long run.

  Their decision?  You can take as many negatives as you want (with a bare minimum of 2) and then any time one comes up and affects you, you get that system's equivalent of an edge point.

  I found my players made more nuanced characters and were less about point mongering; they actually took more negatives than they normally would!  It is definitely something I hope to see in other systems, and I might introduce it as a house rule in my games.

[All4BigGuns]

One thing that I found I completely fell in love with in a different system is that you don't get character points for negative qualities.  That system believes they either end up being free points that never really hamper you much, or they end up costing you much more than you get in the long run.

  Their decision?  You can take as many negatives as you want (with a bare minimum of 2) and then any time one comes up and affects you, you get that system's equivalent of an edge point.

  I found my players made more nuanced characters and were less about point mongering; they actually took more negatives than they normally would!  It is definitely something I hope to see in other systems, and I might introduce it as a house rule in my games.

Sounds like crap that is way too similar to how NWoD handles flaws (getting 1 xp) when one comes up (and I've never seen anyone take a flaw in that system due to not getting anything worthwhile out of it), except with a bullshit minimum to take. When you take a "flaw" you should get something out of it beyond a bare pittance when you get boned by it.

[Noble Drake]

One thing that I found I completely fell in love with in a different system is that you don't get character points for negative qualities.  That system believes they either end up being free points that never really hamper you much, or they end up costing you much more than you get in the long run.

  Their decision?  You can take as many negatives as you want (with a bare minimum of 2) and then any time one comes up and affects you, you get that system's equivalent of an edge point.

  I found my players made more nuanced characters and were less about point mongering; they actually took more negatives than they normally would!  It is definitely something I hope to see in other systems, and I might introduce it as a house rule in my games.

Sounds like crap that is way too similar to how NWoD handles flaws (getting 1 xp) when one comes up (and I've never seen anyone take a flaw in that system due to not getting anything worthwhile out of it), except with a bullshit minimum to take. When you take a "flaw" you should get something out of it beyond a bare pittance when you get boned by it.

Your preferences and opinions on the nWoD flaw system aside - the system that Insaniac is talking about is actually Mutants & Masterminds, and the "negatives" being taken are actually just things that represent how your character might be pushed into more dramatic situations... one mandatory "negative" being your character's motivation for being a hero (like how the Punisher is motivated by a sense of vengeance, and Spiderman feels like he has to simply because he can), but the other could be pretty much anything...

like how Wolverine has enemies that show up from time to time and make things personal, or how so many characters in comics have a loved one that gets put in harms way.

It's nothing at all like real flaws because they don't actually affect you mechanically at all - they just exist to encourage you to let the GM make the plot actually matter to your character by handing out cool bonuses in the times that they do come up.

[Insaniac99]

It's nothing at all like real flaws because they don't actually affect you mechanically at all - they just exist to encourage you to let the GM make the plot actually matter to your character by handing out cool bonuses in the times that they do come up.

I agree with everything you've said except this part.  Supe's Kryptonite allergy and magic weakness is covered by the system, as is the Human Torch's getting doused removing his ability, and numerous other mechanical effects.

As to defense for BigGuns statements, how often do you get players who take some mild allergy that barely comes up or picking uncouth or something else that almost never affects them?  Heck, Code of Honor and prejudiced are just a free points for actually role-playing a character.  The Poser qualities rarely affect the character, especially if they manage to keep their secret.  It is very easy to scrounge up a good 10-15 points that would rarely if ever affect the character in any pre-written missions.

In Shadowrun if you get 15 points of negatives then your GM has carte blanche to bone you as much as they want, and you don't get jack from it.  If you want to get rid of it you have to pay double the amount you gained, meaning a minimum of 6 sessions (using standard rates) to get rid of those qualities, If your GM even lets you.  Oh, and the system has built in things where you get NEW negative qualities and have NOTHING for them so you are really boned because you have something that screw you over, didn't get anything for it, and if you want to get rid of it you have to pay twice what it would normally cost so you get REALLY boned every step of the way.

Now compare it to M&M where you take negative qualities with the possible reward of better dice rolls and all the other things that Edge provides.  If you get tired of that negative then you resolve it in character, and it goes away without paying points.  If your GM gives you one then you get rewarded for it whenever it comes up and if you can resolve it whenever you want to get rid of it. 

If you get rewarded up front for negatives the short-term benefit is there with little to no disadvantage but if you look at the long-term you are getting screwed over royally for a pittance.  Getting rewarded as you are affected by something rewards you in proportion to how much it effects you in both the short and long term. 

I'd say that the being paid AS something effects you is WAY more fair to the player and GM.

[Michael Chandra]

Heck, Code of Honor and prejudiced are just a free points for actually role-playing a character.

Prejudiced is far from free points. I had to walk away from a meeting with a Johnson so as to not impact it negatively.

Also, you mention allergy and code of honor yet talk about free points for missions: Allergies MUST be easy to target by the GM for Missions, and Code of Honor is banned.

[Insaniac99]

Heck, Code of Honor and prejudiced are just a free points for actually role-playing a character.

Prejudiced is far from free points. I had to walk away from a meeting with a Johnson so as to not impact it negatively.

Also, you mention allergy and code of honor yet talk about free points for missions: Allergies MUST be easy to target by the GM for Missions, and Code of Honor is banned.

I wasn't referring to the SRM living campaign but pre-written adventures in general, which do not have a one to one relationship.  Even if we talking SRM I still think many Allergies don't make it into play regularly and as long as you aren't the face, not seeing the Johnson isn't a big deal.

But regardless on your position as it pertains to free points all my other statements about how much a player can get shafted in the long term stand.  This is especially true for negative qualities that the GM assigns after a mission begins; you don't get rewarded for getting the quality, you don't get rewarded when it is used to screw your party over, and you have to pay twice what it would normally cost to get rid of it.

I really do think that getting paid as a negative actually affects you is the most fair to everything involved, the player, GM, and game balance in general.