[Moonshine Fox]

Just get yourself an RG-6 and make your opponents team go away. Or get one of the belt fed MK-19 grenade launchers and make the opposing team, the building they're in, and the hill it's on go away. Because nothing succeeds like excess!

[Shinobi Killfist]

I guess we just disagree then.

A) Missing out on 4 edge is indeed a bigger deal than missing out on 1 edge.  Now, it's possible that the wording will change for edge gain per action, but even if it doesn't...

B) If you already gained 2 edge on your own action, odds are good that you're outclassing the opposition.  You likely won't need that 1 edge you missed due to the edge gain cap.

C) You still have the capacity to infinitely deny edge. Ensuring the other guy(s) don't gain edge is usually at least as important as whether you gain it yourself. Let's face it.. usually when PCs face NPCs the NPCs are all in a case of use or lose on their edge.  They won't need to conserve edge expenditure for the "next scene".  Since they can spend it more freely, you're going to be concerned with preventing them from gaining any more of it.

Yes 4 is bigger than 1. That doesn’t make the loss of one good.

Whether you outclass them or not the cap motivates narrative breaking displays on both sides.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Whether you outclass them or not the cap motivates narrative breaking displays on both sides.

Yep, we still disagree.

Even if you're capped on edge gain, it's still always relevant to do what you can to ensure the other guys don't get theirs.

[Moonshine Fox]

Anyway, a thing I read here once is that grenades (especially high-explosive ones), when brought up against the Barrier rules, can not only destroy nearly every cubicle in its blast radius, it can also blow apart cheap walls and even flooring.

So the question of, "Do you really want to cause indiscriminate property damage?" will cause people to pack flash-bangs instead. Or just save grenades for the Really Dangerous Stuff.

Don't count on that being a factor.

While all of the GMs I have ever played under (regardless of rules system) have, at the very least, a working knowledge of the rules the vast majority do not know drek about "the real world."

Bear in mind, must people get their knowledge from the movies where kitchen cabinets are bulletproof.

Unless the 6e rules blattantly, and in plain language, declare that grenades cause catastrophic collateral damage, it will hardly be enforced.  I mean, I often come across GMs who swear that standard hollow "stick" build dryway walls stop bullets.

total tangent ...

amen ... bugs me to no fraggin end when players want to try and break in somewhere using the HVAC duct or sewers, etc ... not fraggin possible!!!! on the flipside though I have used  my real world knowledge to break a few GM's when I have had the chance to play by bypassing a security door by going through the wall right next to it (just need them to look up the barrier ratings of a standard wall vs a security door)

One of the best disguises you can have going into a place is a hardhat, a high-vis vest, and a clipboard with papers. Act like you know where you're going and what your supposed to be doing and no-one will question you. Also, AR games. No joke a friend of mine does pen-testing on facilities and had a guard demand to know what he was doing when taking pictures of their keypads. Friend paused for a moment, the said 'It's all good, caught the pikachu', and the guard let him go without any more questions.

When in doubt, just bluff like hell!

[FastJack]

I'm just pointing out that you gain Edge every round, up to a max of seven for the encounter. So, if the fight lasts longer than a round, unless they have beat you to a pulp in the first round and you glitched all the dice, you should be getting more edge in the next round (and the opponents won't ever gain any, since you have advantages).

Now, if you're going after professionals, and not go-gangers, Edge probably won't be as free-flowing, so it should be much more dramatic on the back and forth.

[Finstersang]

No question, the grunt rules are a fine addition and yes, they help take off the Edge take the sting out of this problem (praise the mighty thesaurus...), but only in this specific situation with the gangers. With a diversified opposition, the problem is just as bad. Not to mention that it can also work the other way around. PCs usually don´t employ grunt rules, I assume  

I guess we just disagree then.

A) Missing out on 4 edge is indeed a bigger deal than missing out on 1 edge.  Now, it's possible that the wording will change for edge gain per action, but even if it doesn't...

B) If you already gained 2 edge on your own action, odds are good that you're outclassing the opposition.  You likely won't need that 1 edge you missed due to the edge gain cap.

C) You still have the capacity to infinitely deny edge. Ensuring the other guy(s) don't gain edge is usually at least as important as whether you gain it yourself. Let's face it.. usually when PCs face NPCs the NPCs are all in a case of use or lose on their edge.  They won't need to conserve edge expenditure for the "next scene".  Since they can spend it more freely, you're going to be concerned with preventing them from gaining any more of it.

First, we´re talking about potentially 2 Edge, 1 from the AR-DR-Comparison and 1 from circumstances/gear etc. And that´s for each Action taken against the character in question. If the gangers, well, gang up for their attack, it´s "just" 2 Edge max., but if there are more attacking parties, many more Edge Tokens will fall victim to the cap.   

Second, it´s not just a question if it´s needed (and of course it is. I mean, this whole system revolves around egde), but what this lost point of Edge represents mechanically. It represents environmental conditions as well as the gear and perks to mitigate them. It represents range, armor, cover and recoil. It represents almost everything, safe for a few things that are still factored in through good ol´dice pool modfiers, like injuries. That´s all gone once that arbitrary cap is met. And while it´s true that you can still deny Edge: What is the point of f.i. choosing good armor and cover when you could have the same effect (no Edge for either side) with mediocre values?  Also what happens when both sides reach the limit? In this case, even Edge denial doesn´t work.   

It´s pretty much a Limit on gameplay depth. And despite that, it somehow doesn´t even make combat management easier, but slightly more complicated, because you have to keep an eye on the limit for every Edge pool over the course of the whole combat round.

I´ve heard some rationalisations why the problems coming from this rule (which likely wasn´t even conceived and playtested that way) are, sometimes, not so bad. But what good does it even do? What´s the actual purpose of this limit as it is right now?   

[Marcus]

I'm just pointing out that you gain Edge every round, up to a max of seven for the encounter. So, if the fight lasts longer than a round, unless they have beat you to a pulp in the first round and you glitched all the dice, you should be getting more edge in the next round (and the opponents won't ever gain any, since you have advantages).

Now, if you're going after professionals, and not go-gangers, Edge probably won't be as free-flowing, so it should be much more dramatic on the back and forth.

What? I though it was already said you could have more edge then your edge score it was simply that anything in excess would be lost at the beginning of the next encounter. Are you saying there is a still another hard cap on edge generation?

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

There's the hard cap of 7, yes. If your EDG stat is less than 7 You can still go up to 7. If your EDG is 7 then you can't go over your EDG stat.

As for why TPTB made edge gains capped at 2/round instead of 2/action... I have no knowledge.  I assume it was perceived to be necessary to slow down edge replenishment.

[adzling]

It´s pretty much a Limit on gameplay depth. And despite that, it somehow doesn´t even make combat management easier, but slightly more complicated, because you have to keep an eye on the limit for every Edge pool over the course of the whole combat round.

I´ve heard some rationalisations why the problems coming from this rule (which likely wasn´t even conceived and playtested that way) are, sometimes, not so bad. But what good does it even do? What´s the actual purpose of this limit as it is right now?

+1

[Marcus]

There's the hard cap of 7, yes. If your EDG stat is less than 7 You can still go up to 7. If your EDG is 7 then you can't go over your EDG stat.

As for why TPTB made edge gains capped at 2/round instead of 2/action... I have no knowledge.  I assume it was perceived to be necessary to slow down edge replenishment.

So no kidding if your combat runs 4 turns you will no longer generate edge? Are you serious? They are betting this whole edition on a system that stops working in turn 4? Further the 2/action to 2/round is actually intended? Even knowing that is not what was play testers wanted or said worked?

Man every time I think 6e isn't that bad something new is released, and we reach new depths.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

There's the hard cap of 7, yes. If your EDG stat is less than 7 You can still go up to 7. If your EDG is 7 then you can't go over your EDG stat.

As for why TPTB made edge gains capped at 2/round instead of 2/action... I have no knowledge.  I assume it was perceived to be necessary to slow down edge replenishment.

So no kidding if your combat runs 4 turns you will no longer generate edge? Are you serious? They are betting this whole edition on a system that stops working in turn 4? Further the 2/action to 2/round is actually intended? Even knowing that is not what was play testers wanted or said worked?

Man every time I think 6e isn't that bad something new is released, and we reach new depths.

No, the cap is 7 edge held at once, not 7 edge earned in total over the course of an encounter. So long as you keep spending edge, you can keep earning back up to the hard cap.

Given the complaints about how "abusive" edge actions are, I'd have thought you'd have welcomed a ceiling on how much edge you're allowed to have at once. 7 edge is a perfect value to prevent healing 2 boxes of physical damage at once, for example.  Imagine what'd it'd be like dropping 16-20 edge at once.

[FastJack]

This is all listed in the QSR of the Beginner Box Set.

[Marcus]

No, the cap is 7 edge held at once, not 7 edge earned in total over the course of an encounter. So long as you keep spending edge, you can keep earning back up to the hard cap.

Given the complaints about how "abusive" edge actions are, I'd have thought you'd have welcomed a ceiling on how much edge you're allowed to have at once. 7 edge is a perfect value to prevent healing 2 boxes of physical damage at once, for example.  Imagine what'd it'd be like dropping 16-20 edge at once.

I said many of them are bad, and what I said is true.

I'll go over the list again for those new to the conversation.

• 1 Edge to Re-roll one failure is a trap. 67% of the time that will be a wasted point. It's a bad option to give players.
• 1 and 2 are glitch is also bad, that means the larger the pool the higher glitch chance. Glitching isn't heroic and winning by an enemy glitch isn't any better.
• Spending 2 edge to make them expend an additional is also bad. This use will cause some players option paralysis. Meaning they will starting playing not to lose instead of playing to win. Sitting on edge rather then spending it. For those player will negate the usefulness of the System.
• Next We know we have flaws that negate the edge system. There is no flaw in SR that has ever negated a primary stat. Sure things given big penalties, but to straight remove something so core to the system? It's just another example of the massive over reaction we see over and over in 6e.
• Finally we are asked to assume that 6e works largely based upon the play test. We are expect to be ok with repeated over reactions, that even members of the demo team agree are bad. But we shouldn't worried based upon the play test. But then raw goes against the play test.

From the earliest announcements of 6e's it's been clear we haven't been dealing with an honest presentation of the edition.  We are told one thing and then it's another. The QSR aren't actually consistent with the core rules. We should believe the play testers but then the system they used isn't the one being shipped out.  There is no trust. We see mechanics that have been constant for every edition of the game just totally discarded as an over reactions to flaws from the previous edition.  When questioned about over reactions the devs come back and say, no it's not an over reaction or a mistake by us it's just mistaken view of small number of vocal fans. So without a factual basis how can we make a rational decision?

As to using 20 edge at once for it to have happened then a player would have had to generated 13 edge at minimum. That's 7 Rounds of edge generation. If you're in a combat that last that long and you have built up that much edge why wouldn't we want them to use that much edge? Does the spender completely healing themselves using edge or another options some how strike you as reality breaking? Welcome to the Valley.

[Michael Chandra]

No, the cap is 7 edge held at once, not 7 edge earned in total over the course of an encounter. So long as you keep spending edge, you can keep earning back up to the hard cap.

I do want to houserule that if you go past 7 Edge, you must immediately spend it or it gets lost, rather than never getting past 7. That way there's some proper value to a 7-Edge stat compared to Edge 5.

[Finstersang]

No, the cap is 7 edge held at once, not 7 edge earned in total over the course of an encounter. So long as you keep spending edge, you can keep earning back up to the hard cap.

Given the complaints about how "abusive" edge actions are, I'd have thought you'd have welcomed a ceiling on how much edge you're allowed to have at once. 7 edge is a perfect value to prevent healing 2 boxes of physical damage at once, for example.  Imagine what'd it'd be like dropping 16-20 edge at once.

I said many of them are bad, and what I said is true.

I'll go over the list again for those new to the conversation.

• 1 Edge to Re-roll one failure is a trap. 67% of the time that will be a wasted point. It's a bad option to give players.

I´ll stop right here, because this is assumption is really worth talking about.

First of all: While the Cap of 2 Edge per round is an absolutely catastrophic design decision/editing error/editing error that´s sold as a design decision (see my arguments above), there´s absolutely nothing wrong with limiting Edge pools to 7. It´s an incentive to spend Edge instead of putting in the bank forever to unload it en masse in situations that are totally removed from the situations that helped you earn them. Unlike the limit of 2 Edge per round, you will almost never lose an Edge Token because of the limit of 7 in total, as long as you keep spending your Edge. Even if you play a (norm-)human Edgelord that starts the battle with 7 Edge, you can just spend a couple of Edge tokens right away, f.i. to increase your initiative.     
     
Now: How valuable is one Edge Token? Just like you, Marcus, I really wasn´t a big fan of the system when I first saw the list of effects that was circulating online. Some of the more expensive Edge uses looked interesting, but especially the default "1 Edge to reroll one die" option looks very measly. Mathematically, it´s equivalent to just +1 die, and even a little bit worse.

Then the QSR came out and I couldn´t help but have a peak at the mess. Call it morbid curiosity  And what can I say, there really is a lot of issues with the QSR, but one thing surprised me: It´s explicitly stated that this "default" option can also be used to reroll an opponent´s die in an opposed test. Yes, including rolled hits. And that makes a huge difference.

• First, let´s look at this strictly mathematically: On average, you have 1 Hit per 3 dice, so rerolling a hit means that it´s more or less equivalent to 3 a -3 dice pool modifier. But wait, your opponent could score another hit on the reroll, so there´s a 1/3 chance that your Edge use is in vain after all. So in total, using this option to reroll a hit is about 2 dice worth. Not bad for the "default" option that doesn´t require you to safe up more than one Edge. And that´s not to speak about stuff like glitches or rerolling wild dice!
• Second, you can choose if and when you want to use Edge. If your opponent didn´t get enough hits to hit (or dodge) anyways, you can save up that Edge token for later.
• Third, there´s all the other Edge options. Yes, many of them are highly situational or even "traps" when evaluated from a purely mathematical perspective. But it´s the choice and flexibility that makes them valuable. There´s a reason why experienced trading card players often favour cards that let them choose between 2 mediocre effects over cards with 1 stronger effect.

So, when played right, the default option is about 2 dice worth. Sometimes, you can´t play it that way (f.i. for threshold tests), so it´s more like 1,8 dice in reality. It´s hard to put an acurate price tag on the "choice" aspect, but I´d say it´s roughly 1,4826102. So there it is: In total, one point of Edge equals 3,2826102 worth of dice pool modifiers 

OK, jokes aside. IMO, the individual uses of Edges are worth much more than one might think at a first glance or from a purely statistical perspective. The big flaw with the Edge system is the limit of 2 Edge per round.