[Glyph]

Like I said, it depends on whether you go all in or not.  A mundane face can have high Charisma, high skill with specialization, first impression or trustworthy quality, appropriate clothing, and tailored pheromones.  Is that a decent dice pool?  Sure.  But an adept face can add authoritative tone, cool resolve, and a mentor spirit bonus on top of that.

[Whiskeyjack]

I will say my elf MysAd face has no PP invested in face-y adept powers and with just Attributes, Skills, specs, First Impression, and good clothing choices, I run at the 20-22 dice range at a Limit of 11-13 and routinely trounce even face-specced Johnsons.

This is why I think Adept powers are largely overkill.

[mbisber]

There is a warning that this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days. But, I am seeing this for the first time, and wish to retain its context.

In a homebrew game, the players and the GM can get together to discuss die pools beforehand, which all posters here seem to agree is most important.  But, in Missions, one not always has control over who the other Runners are at the table.

All too often, it's been my experience that many players are short-sighted as to their character's creation. While it's not that easy to determine where players have wasted Skill Points (if they don't try those skills), it's often easier to infer where they have wasted Metatype, Attributes, Magic, and/or Resources, by what they do (or do not do).

It makes sense that if Skills that were chosen are not used, that those Skill Points have been wasted. But, the same argument could be made that Edge, Attributes, Magic, or Resources expended are underutilized/wasted as well. It all comes down to how one likes to play the game.

I like to do lots of things! That requires lots of Skill Points. Most seem to like to shoot guns and do little else. But, I'm sure that's not true for those who have posted here.

And, wouldn't fewer guns and better Negotiation, First Aid, or Perception make sense? I'll always remember that player with the sniper character who did little or nothing over several Missions.

So, yes! I use Perception much more often than anything else. I believe it's worth 10D plus add-ons. Would I give up Sneaking or Con? No way. Negotiation? Assensing and Magic? No thanks. 2xR4 and 46/10 are nice. I can raise Edge, Attributes, and Resources after a few Runs.   



 

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

SRM is a curious angle for discussion.  Yes it's true there's potentially no telling what gaps in capability your  ad-hoc Shadowrun team may have.  For example, it's my belief that every character should have some driving and computer skill.. sometimes there's a chase and you just have no rigger... and data searches are always relevant for legwork, even when the team has no hacker.

OTOH while there's no telling what gaps in skills the team may have in SRM, in SRM you do have an idea of the dice pools you'd need to be successful.  Conventional wisdom may be to get 16+ dice in anything you plan on attempting... that's overkill in SRM.  You'll usually be fine with dice pools of 12+ the way Missions are written.  That can absolutely affect your calculus on how many skill points you "need".  Or how many ways you can get away with splitting up your skill points.

[Marcus]

Ugh this thread.

If you really wanna do a lot of things it's not actually skill points that you want. What you really need, is decent skill wires (Rating 2 should be fine), the subscription to match them, and the attributes to support it.

So long as you can push that pool to around 10 or so, and your not rolling vs something, you should be good to go.

My current favorite missions character is a skill wired street sam, with bionic legs for his pure kicking and moving fighting style.

[FST_Gemstar]

Doing things requires dicepools. Skills are only one component of those pools. 

Skills A is often seen as a trap because because you can often get similar dicepools pools in many things more efficiently with higher attributes/'ware that are precluded when taking skills A. Also, there are few concepts that benefit from 10 skill group points, as most groups have an underutitlized skill you don't really want to prioritize and taking a group precludes starting with a specialty. 

Additionally, it is easier to pick up a few points in more skills in play than it is to increase key attributes. Shadowrun character generation privileges building tall at character generation and widening out in play than the other way around.

There are great Skills A characters, but, for new players, the temptation for skills A often comes from wanting to get a character that does does too much, and ends up with a character that is mediocre at everything. So as a general guide, Skills B tends to be more efficient for a heavily "skilled" character concept. 

Especially for attributes with lost of linked skills (Agility, Charisma, Logic), working on the attribute level boosts dice pools in all of their linked skills. Just defaulting or a skill point with a high attribute (and even more when augmented with 'ware/magic) gets you a decent dicepool. than spending a much of skills A investment to make up the difference of having a lower attribute. 

Thinking back for my fave Skills A character... 

Intuitive Private Investigator/Psychometrist  (Aspected Magician/Face) 
Priority: EBDAC  or elf CBDAE 

Information Monger/Social Infiltrator (Technomancer Hacker/Face) 
Priority: DBCAE 

Van Hacker/Driver (Technomancer hacker/vehicle rigger)   
Techno: DECAB   


For the aspected magician, Skills A works but the character still has high attributes and resources needed to boost key attributes. 

For technomancers, skills can actually be more important because they serve as the limit for total Diagnostics bonuses. So the more skillful at something a technomancer is, the more they can leverage technomancery bonuses. 

[Hobbes]

Ugh this thread.

Indeed. 

There are several strategies for having a character that can do a lot of things well.  Priority A skills is mathematically the least efficient way of doing it.  You're better off with an Edgenomancer, or Skillwire build by a lot.

For long term character growth Skills are the cheapest to get post char gen if you're playing with normal book rewards.  In most cases you're better off with Skills B, and either Stats or Resources A.  Plus you've got a better baseline for Initiative, Defense tests, Movement, higher Limits, more contacts, more knowledge skills, whatever when you've got better stats.     

[mbisber]

So, as to how one wishes to play Missions, it seems all to come down to what works for you and if you have fun.

If some are satisfied with die pools of 10-12, great! I played in most-all of Chicago's 5-8 Runs, and I prefer to succeed more often than that.

Yes, some GMs thought I was overdoing it. And, I suspect some GMs might have changed the Module to make it tougher. But, that's life.

Skill wires might work for some, although it seems that they might get expensive for die pools of 16-20. And, it does seem cheaper to raise skills rather than attributes with Karma generally, but that all depends upon how one plays one's character. 100 to raise Attributes, 200 to raise Skills, or 300 for Initiations?

[Marcus]

You will never make a build that runs 16-20 in even most skills. Going that high is well into diminishing returns.

If you want the highest possible odds of the broadest possible skill set the max edge build will do that but edge can go fast if start using it on everything.

Skillwire builds only intended to be used a on skills that not primary role, or failing that filling in the gaps at a given table. Primary role should maxed and be distinct  from any skill wire component.

For example my Skillwire build Street Sam Primary and Jack of all trade secondary. Which has come in very handy at many tables, but it's no replacement for primaries.

 

[Marcus]

I pray that some Great and Powerful Mods for the Sweet Love of Great Justice and by the Power of Taco Temple,  Lock this Ancient and Undead Monster Thread and send it back the Deep Topic Abyss so it can stop taking precious space in here.