[Triggvi]

Reread the thread for the beginning. We were discussing how to keep the min/maxing of characters to a minimum. How to help players grow beyond the need to min/max to the hilt as the only way to play.

What we got was angry fearful retorts that were thinly veiled attempts stop the discussion by nit picking and arguing nonsense.

in no way were we limiting choice. If fact we were opening choices up that people could not do in the current enviroment.

[All4BigGuns]

Reread the thread for the beginning. We were discussing how to keep the min/maxing of characters to a minimum. How to help players grow beyond the need to min/max to the hilt as the only way to play.

What we got was angry fearful retorts that were thinly veiled attempts stop the discussion by nit picking and arguing nonsense.

in no way were we limiting choice. If fact we were opening choices up that people could not do in the current enviroment.

I've been reading the thread, and there hasn't been any such thing. There has only been people stating that such a thing is not needed (which it isn't). One could say the same thing you're saying in the quoted post of the side you're taking (especially involving the misuse of min-max which is commonly done).

[emsquared]

Giving insight in the form of attacking people that see this game in a different light than you, how is that helpful to the discussion?

Right, I'm the one attacking people: Trigg's 2nd post, after his Karmagen theory is refuted:

I don't believe there is such a thing as ineffective characters only ineffective players.

A little later:

The only reason to have a 1 in a stat is that you are using it as a dump stat to squeeze point for other things.

You're the one who insists on the unilateral statements and being combative, I'm on the side of live and let live - erring on the side of devil's advocate.

Helping the discussion is diagnosing where the problem really is, and it's not in the mechanics - try and "fix" it through the mechanics and there's still going to be a dysfunctionality there. Do you truly disagree with this?

[JustADude]

I never used the word cripple or crippled or crippling to explain my point. I said a very weak stat like a 1 is shows disability. Disability meaning in is harder for you to common and routine things like balancing your check book (logic) and I would consider that a problem with being an uber hacker.

if you think my opinion is wrong about most GM's why don't conduct a comprehensive survey and we can find out.

First off, Logic 1 isn't "mentally disabled." They actually have a Quality for that. Just like they have Infirm and Para/Quadriplegic to represent being totally "frail" or crippled. A 1 in an Attribute, by itself, simply represents the far low end of "normal," not the extreme outliers that you purport... otherwise, why have the Quality?

That means a 1 in a stat... especially for Strength in a Matrix-based character... is perfectly acceptible. Some people are just scrawny little twerps, or gullible, or aren't the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

[Glyph]

I would balk at taking a 1 in an Attribute, both for mechanical reasons (you can't default unless you have positive modifiers) and for metagaming ones (it is one of those things that can really push the buttons of some GMs).  But someone with a Strength of 1 can carry 10 kg (about 22 pounds) without being encumbered, and can do normal physical tasks that would not normally require a roll to accomplish.  So someone with a Strength of 1 is a couch potato - not an invalid.  Likewise, someone with a Logic of 1 could be a lazy thinker who gets most of his opinions from the trid, and hasn't learned how to use half of the standard features of his stock commlink - not someone who needs to use his fingers when counting.

An Attribute of 1 is low enough that it can be described pejoratively - weak, dumb, etc.  But I balk at the more extreme characterizations of low stats - because they can be improved so quickly and easily later on.  10 karma, and you have an Attribute of 2.  15 more karma, and now it is a 3, indistinguishable from the masses.  It makes sense for the dumb troll ex-bouncer who has to use his brain, to step outside of his normal role and try to make it as a freelancer.  Or for a basement-dwelling hacker who has to run for his life, huff and puff his way over a chainlink fence, and wheeze as he drags a wounded dwarf teammate to cover.  It doesn't make as much sense for the more extreme characterizations of an Attribute of 1.

An Attribute of 1 is, in and of itself, not an indication of poor roleplaying.  I would at least check the character sheet, to see how the character's stats are reflected in the background.  Personally, I think an Attribute of 1, just like an Attribute of 5 or 6, is something that stands out from the norm, and should be explained.  That goes double for lopsided builds (things like Body of 5 and Strength of 1).

One way to address min-maxing is to give players more points.  If people are taking dump stats and bare bones skill allocations, then maybe it is because they feel that their resources in character creation are too limited.  It may seem a bit counter-intuitive, but sometimes, if players don't have to scrimp and squeeze as much to get a character they are satisfied with, and can get what they want and afford some nonessential things, they will min-max less.

[Katrex]

So guys. Im locking this thread. its a real shame to come back see a thread explode and then not read one useful comment on it.

Everyone getting obsessed on the min max component of it rather than the, "does this encourage the development of better role-play characters."

Some people think its not needed mechanically, I agree totally you can build anything you like without the system, and good role-players don't need a focus or pigeon-holing. True. But for average role-players (with average perhaps sometimes clichéd character concepts, )a little focus in the right direction especially when you don't get to choose your group of players from hundreds, Like In IRL, can go a long way

In my experience through playing eclipse phase with the same group of people this type of generation system DOES improve character generation and gives players and gm's a focus on their characters, and makes less conflicting parties (only these backgrounds and affiliations are allowed, GO!)

Anyway thank your for the interest. If anyone wants to discuss  reducing attributes to one (which i only mentioned as an aside) or anything else discussed here, feel free to continue on a different thread.

Peace.