[Hobbes]

As a GM I love a table of power gamers.  "... the Magic being thrown around rouses a Force 9 Mosquito Spirit from it's slumber, looming 20 feet tall the giant insect spirit materializes in the rubble..."

"...of course the two vampires buffed up before Misting in to ambush you...."

Good times.   

[Shinobi Killfist]

As long as everyone at the table is on the same wavelength it’s fine.  Though some things like 7 levels of impaired attribute I’d rather the group just start with 100 karma than everyone jumping through that hoop.

[Lormyr]

optimizing where you are trying to beat the game or show there is only "one" way to build/play a character

What do these two things look like for you?

I don't know that I've ever seen someone try to "beat the game", in my adult gaming life anyhow (teenage years are another story). I've seen, and have participated in myself, one-off situations where the players do things like "lets see if Mike can make it through this combat without taking any damage", and "lets see if Shaun can kill every enemy on his first initiative pass", and stuff like that.

I've also seen, and have myself said, things along the line of "well, this is the most mathematically optimized/powerful/whatever (insert thing here)", but I can't say I've ever seen anyone try to force or shame someone into playing that thing instead of what they wanted to play. I have seen folks offer suggestions for improvement, but that's hardly the same of course.

I always believe that if a player(s) and GM have reached a point where it has become adversarial then it's not a gameplay issue but a person issue. Asking someone to cool their jets works for me the vast majority of the time, and in the rare case it doesn't, telling them to fuck off and continuing without them or myself just leaving the table of crap GMs always does.

[dezmont]

Optimizers are delightful people and are the only reason you know anything about the game's design. Like I guarentee you actor type players aren't the ones cracking that "All adepts should burn out nut." Not to mention optimization is a process, not a singular end state, and literally everyone is optimizing in some way. If you are not optimizing for something you are by definition not acting as a coherent agent with rational goals, nominally you have goals and are building your PC to accomplish them.

It is like complaining that car mechanics are evil because they soup up engines to run people over: While Optimizers can be Munchkins, so can anyone, that is just defined as trying to 'win' the game at the expense of other people. I have seen players dive on making everything about them from a roleplay sense way more than I have seen the optimizer trash the game with their engine.

In fact, Optimizers tend to be pretty free with their information and good at understanding goal oriented behavior, because they are so into it themselves. They can generally tell what someone else is seeking and help them get it even through non-mechanical optimization. Getting things is WHAT THEY DO. Most optimizers tend to like to have a trick 'in the back pocket' they can release at the most impressive moments possible, rather than constantly seizing the table's attention, because their cool little tricks and efficiencies aren't cool otherwise. Optimizers literally just are into goal optimization, which is really an awesome trait because as long as you can effectively convey your goals a good optimizer will move heaven and earth to help you reach them. Remember, you ARE optimizing too, you don't pick things at random or to deliberately NOT achieve your goals, you have some goal, be it 'make a cool hacker' or 'use this weird weapon I think is cool and have fun with it' or 'be the best example of X type of character.'

There are exceptions of course, sometimes an optimizer optimizes to 'be' a certain thing and will try to do it as much as they can (ex: I want to make the FASTEST PC is common) but that isn't a negative behavior in most scenarios, as long as what they seek isn't explicitly to the determent of others.

And if you think most optimizers seek stuff to the detrement of others, I am sorry to say that it isn't the optimizer's fault. It is a pretty basic GMing skill to write scenarios that make INTERESTING use of your player's capabilities, rather than depending on them not having them. Don't make a dungeon where Dimension Door doesn't work, but also avoid putting the final room within 40 feet of the surface for the same reason sorta stuff. A lot of folks struggle with soak tanks, and the real solution there is to remember runs are mission oriented, not survival/death oriented, and being immune to bullets is not the same as being able to accomplish your goals 100% of the time.

The main scenario an optimizer becomes an issue is when they are *way* better than someone else at that player's thing: the classic sustaining mage problem where they cast like 2 spells and suddenly talk better than the face or fight better than the samurai. Where they steal other player's cool moments and contributions. If your player is doing that, have a (non-agressive) talk.

If they aren't, get over it bucko, not everyone has fun the same way you do. Powergamers and Optimizers are delightful players when they know to stay in their lane (or only swerve out of it in scenarios where what they are going to do is going to be REALLY cool and make everyone on the team cheer because no one else had a response to that situation) because its really easy to give them what they want, allowing you to put more mental energy into people with more complex motivations. If your hacker is able to trivialize all matrix content, it doesn't matter as long as they are the only matrix PC and are having a good time trivializing said content and making interesting story beats happen for your actor and serving as a good soldier in your tactician's plans.

The other kind of bad optimizer is the 'false' optimizer. They aren't REALLY an optimizer, they are just a player who has a prescriptive attitude to what you 'should' do and can't deviate. Like an optimizer knows that automatics in 5e are the most versatile gun that has the best general return on investment but also understands why other guns don't generally have good ROI and what their upshots and efficiencies are. But some players just parrot 'Only use automatics' and don't actually understand the systems involved, they just dogmatically think only automatics are useful when in reality Longarms, Bows, and Heavy Weapons have upsides Automatics don't, and Pistols while technically inferior in almost every way from a realistic perspective are something you can use and still achieve efficient results with. Like not everything can actually be made fun (If you ask an honest optimizer how to make a fun combat focused character who uses lasers they will tell you not to, but also explain why and point out that a combat PC who consistently under-damages the 8 dice automatics hacker with a machine pistol isn't going to actually feel cool using the laser in any scenario because you just never will actually achieve a result that feels like your PC is doing what you built them to do) but most things can be worked around so if its your goal to use them a good optimizer can help.

So if you make your goal clear and an 'optimizer' tries to shut down a goal ("NEVER make an aspected mage ever!") be skeptical and maybe get a few other opinions and don't let them be overbearing to other players. And if an optimizer constantly is stealing the limelight that is its own problem too. But both these behaviors are common to EVERY type of player in EVERY RPG. Some people into the lore get really invasive and aggressive about what they think other people should do. Some people into roleplaying steal scenes and make things about themselves. Some puzzle gamer/tactical folk scream down people doing 'the wrong thing.' 

Being an 'optimizer' merely means you enjoy systems thinking and using the system to achieve a given result as your primary mode of engaging with the medium. It is not any less valid than liking roleplaying, or playing RPGs because you enjoy the lack of responsibility or risk that dangerous behavior causes compared to real life. I honestly think the prevelance of online play kinda ruined GMs to some extent because it became too easy to just pick players who think EXACTLY like you rather than understanding different aspects of the hobby that are appealing to others, because its sorta upsetting to see mostly rational people just sneer at others who 'do things wrong' when like... in reality, again, EVERYONE optimizes and anyone who didn't would be a troll of a player, and it really just comes down to a lack of empathy and understanding why people do what they do.

[Xenon]

Game mechanical differences between metatypes have never been this small. For this edition I really think you should just pick the metatype you want to play. Based on style rather than mechanics. Even if you like to min max.


Having said that;

Game mechanic wise the only case where metatype really matters is if you plan on building a character that focus on exceptional Strength (Unarmed / Archery) where Troll is better suited than Elf / Human or if you plan on building a character that focus on exceptional Charisma (Face / Shaman) where Elf is better suited than Troll / Ork.

Beyond that; game mechanic wise you should only pick Troll if you are going for that 9 body (because there is no other option). If you only aim for body 7 then Ork is the better option (because no 10% markup cost of Troll and because you don't have to sacrifice your only max attribute slot like Dwarf). At body 5 (or less) it doesn't really matter at all as it will just boil down to minor advantages and disadvantages, but Elf might be the slightly better option for a combat- oriented character (due to potential agility) while dwarf might be the slightly better option for a dedicated matrix-, rigging- or magic- oriented character (due to potential willpower).


Dwarf:
Short size; stocky build; perseverance. Is sometimes referred to as halfer or squat.
Thermographic vision (8 Karma), Toxin resistance (12 karma)
+ High willpower potential (resist stuff, full defense, techno firewall)
+ High strength potential (unarmed DV/AR, bow DV/AR, defend against grapple/engulf/glue)
+ Slightly higher body potential (physical condition boxes, soak damage)
--- Low reaction potential (AR piloting / initiative, defense, surprise, unarmed AR)
--- Pay 10% markup cost but only on items that need to be fitted for size (armor, clothes).


Elf:
Slender, lithe build; being attractive and knowing it. Is sometimes referred to as dandelion eater, keeb or pixie
Low-light vision (6 karma)
+ Highest charisma potential (con, influence, shaman drain, mentor spirit, watchers, techno attack)
+ Slightly higher agility potential (athletics, close combat, firearms, stealth, sprint)


Human
Average size; average build. Is sometimes referred to as breeder
+ Higher edge potential (edge boosts, edge actions, burning edge)


Ork:
Big, powerful physique; tusks; constantly being seen as outsiders. Is sometimes referred to as trog or tusker
Low-light vision (6 karma), Built tough 1 (4 karma)
+ High body potential (physical condition boxes, soak damage)
+ High strength potential (unarmed DV/AR, bow DV/AR, defend against grapple/engulf/glue)
--- Low charisma potential (con, influence, shaman drain, mentor spirit, watcher minions, techno attack)


Troll:
Being so big, you guys. Just huge. And horns. Is sometimes referred to as trog or tusker
Thermographic vision (8 Karma), Built tough 2 (8 karma), Dermal deposits (7 karma)
+ Highest strength potential (unarmed DV/AR, bow DV/AR, defend against grapple/engulf/glue)
+ Highest body potential (physical condition boxes, soak damage)
--- Low agility potential (athletics, close combat, firearms, stealth, sprint)
--- Low charisma potential (con, influence, shaman drain, mentor spirit, watcher minions, techno attack)
--- Pay 10% markup cost on all items.
--- Can't deal stun damage with unarmed

[Shinobi Killfist]

I'd say any of the point buy versions were more balanced than this. Compared to other priority systems I'm not sure, about the same I'd say as they were overall pretty balanced but usually troll was off a bit and here its mostly balanced but human is off a bit. I prefer the others as the races felt like how the setting described them. 1 strength trolls don't feel right for the setting.

[mcv]

Quickening is really hard for me to settle on. On the one hand, I feel like it has to be in the game, because mages need attribute augmentation options too.

I don't see why they do. Mages have plenty of other options already, they don't have to be able to do everything that other character types can do. In fact, I think it's important that they do have some limitations.

[Lormyr]

I don't see why they do. Mages have plenty of other options already, they don't have to be able to do everything that other character types can do. In fact, I think it's important that they do have some limitations.

While I agree with that, I also believe that attribute augmentation should be available to all character types. Right now Technomancers are back to losing again with the errata change to essence/resonance, which is unacceptable.

[Hobbes]

I don't see why they do. Mages have plenty of other options already, they don't have to be able to do everything that other character types can do. In fact, I think it's important that they do have some limitations.

While I agree with that, I also believe that attribute augmentation should be available to all character types. Right now Technomancers are back to losing again with the errata change to essence/resonance, which is unacceptable.

Not really.  IMO, the main benefit to TMs in 6e is you can skip the Cyberdeck/Cyberjack.  Sprites and threading are really just optional "add ons".  There are things there if you build for them, but if you roll with Resonance 1 or 2 you're just fine.  Complex Forms Editor, Puppeteer and Emulate Program work the same at Resonance 1 or 20. 

Throw a D in Resonance.  Toss a couple Adjustment points at it, take your Cerebral boosters, whatever initiative boost you need, maybe Muscle Toner.  Muscle Replacement possibly even.  Maybe grab the Tasking skill, maybe not, totally optional now.  Pick a couple programs to Emulate if you picked up Focused Concentration.  Carry on. 

Nothing to do with Humans though I suppose...

[Lormyr]

I was speaking strictly in terms of attribute augmentation options that don't reduce resonance (of which they currently have no permanent options).

[Shinobi Killfist]

I was speaking strictly in terms of attribute augmentation options that don't reduce resonance (of which they currently have no permanent options).

Haven’t seen 6e anything yet so I can’t reallt comment on technomancer. But as a general rule stat enhancements did more for them in previous editions. If you could give them straight +4s they’d of had the best deck in town in their head.

For mages I don’t think they need to have attribute spells up all the time. In fact I think they should have it less than anyone. The whole point of augmented types is they augment themselves. Mages getting it as an almost free add on doesn’t sit well with me. I wish focussed concentration just reduced the penalty to 1 per spell like it used to in 2e/3e and quickening was limited to 1 spell per aura it was attached to like no edition yet, but it’s the only thing that seems balanced given the investment cost.

[Lormyr]

Well while I do think every archetype should have permanent options, they do not all need every option. Ware and adept powers might exclusively focus on physical augmentation (which they primarily do). Magic and submersion may be more focus on mental augmentation, ect.

Magic still needs revamped to be more fair, absolutely, but I personally believe that is largely unrelated to attribute augmentation, and more related to foci cheese and unlimited potential.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Focus cheese is definitely a issue. Given the new systems edge focus I’m surprised they didn’t take the opportunity it just have it provide bonus edge. I guess in theory unlimited potential is as well though I have never seen it even get close to being one.

Though, I’ve always thought they should have added a version of initiation and essence raising for mundanes.

The changes I’d of tried to push and play test if I were  involved in making 6e would be only magically active/resonance types lose essence from ware. Mundanes done. A persons essence rating is a limit to how much ware their body can tolerate. Which would limit magically active types to 3 essence in ware, there essence went don’t decreasing that limit.

And mundanes would have access to a version of initiation and essence raising call it tolerance or something. They’d get “ metamagics”that allowed them to get more out of their already existing ware like bump it ratings without having to buy it have it perform past factory specs etc.

That way everyone has a version of unlimited advancement. And mundanes would always have places to spend karma that is around their character instead of I’ve maxed my go to skills I guess I’ll learn botany or something.

[penllawen]

And mundanes would have access to a version of initiation and essence raising call it tolerance or something. They’d get “ metamagics”that allowed them to get more out of their already existing ware like bump it ratings without having to buy it have it perform past factory specs etc.

Although this costs karma rather than nuyen -- isn't this basically the same as upgrading ware from alpha to beta to delta? That's how I've always played the street sam's progression path. Upgrade the cyber they have, creating essence holes for even more cyber.

[Shinobi Killfist]

And mundanes would have access to a version of initiation and essence raising call it tolerance or something. They’d get “ metamagics”that allowed them to get more out of their already existing ware like bump it ratings without having to buy it have it perform past factory specs etc.

Although this costs karma rather than nuyen -- isn't this basically the same as upgrading ware from alpha to beta to delta? That's how I've always played the street sam's progression path. Upgrade the cyber they have, creating essence holes for even more cyber.

Yes. But if done through karma it balances karma/nuyen among the archetypes and it helps with the weird situations where upgrading to delta is cheaper than retiring with a high lifestyle.