Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Wakshaani on <04-30-21/0041:06>
-
Been underground for a while gang, missed out on a few discussions, and I'm trying to do some catch up while I get my legs back under me. One thing that I see, here or there, is some scoffing about the priority table for 6E.
I wanted to open the floor a bit and talk about it or, rather, LISTEN about it. What you liked, what you don't like, and so on. I'm looking for feedback if possible, not just "It sucks, I hate it, nyeah!" but WHY you think it doesn't work right. Where are the flaws? What *are* the flaws? It's kind of the central aspect of the whole kit n kaboodle of making characters and if it stumbles, everything stumbles.
So, what does it need help on? What does it do well? Does it make starting characters that are too strong? Not strong enough? Encourage too much min-maxing?
This one's a big one, it may drift a bit, but I'd like to see, now that we're away from the initial release a bit, what you've found about it.
The floor is yours.
-
I mostly like Priority in SR5 and SR6, because yes you can min-max, but it's far less choice paralysis. That said, some priorities are underpowered to me.
Take Metatype A/B, especially Metatype A (Attributes A would almost always be better, unless you're going super-low in Attributes but high in Metatype due to Edge+Magic/Resonance). These only give a small gain compared to their previous level, while with Attributes/Skills/Resources C->B->A goes up real big.
With Magic, the 'no learning extra spells in chargen' rule is why Mage is so limited in its increase and still be tempting, but I think it needs a boost. I'd consider '+X karma that is allowed to be used for binding Foci and learning formulae' to give Magic priority more of a boost there, since right now only Mystics would really be pressured for a higher Priority, Casters tend to just limit their spells.
Meanwhile, for Adepts I honestly see no reason why anyone would ever go above D with Magic, since they can use their Metatype for more Magic and Power Points instead. So Adepts would need a significant buff. And again, with Magic there's no significant buff in the highest ranks. So honestly I believe there should be a larger buff there, adding extra benefits would have helped there.
(The most interesting houserule I read for Priority is making Spirit Formulae also a Formula you need to learn, giving even Aspected Summoners priority-value and strongly encouraging Summon+Spellcast builds to go higher Magic-wise so they start the game with a nice list of available Spirits AND Spells.)
-
When would you take something other than Attributes A?
-
The problem of "why would you NOT take Attributes A?" is fairly self-evident, I think. Related to it (especially at the low Attribute pick levels one could ostensibly select) is the problem of too few SAPs coming from Race, as compared to Attributes.
Look at any two iterations of Race and Attributes picks. Whenever Race is the higher pick of the two, you have less total Attribute points + SAPs. That's ass-backwards.
For example: B & C picks. When attributes is B, you get 16 points for attributes, and 9 SAPs. When race is B, you get 12 points for attributes but 11 points for SAPs. Yeah, you get "more" SAPs, but remember they both go towards the same thing: Attributes. Attribs B + Race C gives 25 "attribute points". Race B + Attribs C gives 23... AND a bigger proportion (almost half!) of those points are restricted in how you can spend them! This makes a double whammy on the Attributes priority pick... so long as SAPs don't potentially generate more "total attribute points" than a lower Attribute pick, it's a mechanical trap to EVER take Race higher than Attributes.
-
Another problem I see is in the Magic pick: there's too little incentive to pick high. Unless you're a MysAd, there's no reason at all really to ever go Magic A. So long as you're not allowed to buy spells during chargen, that establishes a reason for anyone else to ever go higher than D, but not a very strong one since spells are so cheap... just buy them post-chargen rather than picking high magic, amirite?
I'd love to see the number of types of spirits/sprites you have access to tied to the priority pick. That doesn't do anything for aspected Enchanters/Sorcerers, but it DOES actually give reason for aspected Conjurers to invest in Magic since they literally have no reason to go higher than D as-is. And frankly, Enchanters/Sorcerers seem to be so few and far between, the "you can't buy spells in chargen" dyamic is all the reason they'll ever need to invest in more spells/higher magic pick.
-
I wonder if Attribute A would be less of an obvious choice if there was a smaller difference between attribute points options... 24-22-20 etc. instead of 24-16-fuhgeddaboudit
So some rebalancing within the ranks might help as well as rebalancing across ranks.
-
To tie SSDR's points together. You'd (basically) never take a Magic priority higher than your Metatype, and you'd never take a Metatype priority higher than your Attribute Priority. So for a big swath of characters the Priority table is pretty well locked. Attributes>Metatype>Magic, either Skills or Resources is the E, and the other goes in B or C.
Not that having some optimal allocation is bad. It's bad that if a player isn't doing the math, they're really behind the curve. Or if a concept character needs a little more from column A to pull it all together they're making noticeable mechanical sacrifices. These aren't just a couple dice here or there kind of choices that me and my fellow min/maxers love to fret about. This is 8 Attribute point swings, which is "Does your character have a meaningful secondary set of abilities?" or "Can I make difficult tests in my Primary thing?"
Stumbling out of char gen with 11 dice in "Your thing" and a bunch of dice pools around 5 is a noticeable difference from someone playing the same kind of character that allocated better and is hitting 16 dice in a thing and has 10ish dice in a couple other things.
-
*jotting down notes*
This is all useful, thank you!
Please feel free to keep it up.
-
Cool. I haven't read the whole thread yet so there's going to be repeats, just consider repeats a "+1 to that".
I have not been okay with the concept of the priority table for a long, long time. But I am used to it because SR was my first and only RPG during the 90s. I'm not a fan of how it rewards creating one-dimensional specialists that have already peaked and will barely see any growth over the course of play.
That's not a feature inherent in the prio table, but it is a feature of 1:1 point allocation at chargen followed by geometrically increasing costs post-chargen.
Ok the prio table specifically:
1 - The Attribute column. Attributes A is too high, Attr. E too low, it's just WAY too broad a range to create viable characters in. Attributes were definitely undervalued when this range was created.
2 - Metatype Column. My new players have the hardest time understanding Adjustment Points. So, conceptually they're not great. It's also unfortunate that there is no "6" option so mundane humans aren't able to utilize the one "special" thing about them unless they "waste" 3 points by picking C. People hate the feeling that they're wasting points; Ive never seen anyone make a mundane human and pick C here.
3 - Skills Column. I think the Skills column is good actually.
4 - Magic Column. This column screwed the pooch. When adjustment points were allowed to be used to raise your Magic attribute, this column became nearly meaningless for everyone except spellcasters. Spellcasters have to answer the question "How few spells can I live with for the first couple of adventures", and choose the appropriate priority. EVERY other Awakened picks D, because all their magic power comes from the Adjustment column, and EVERY Awakened gets to leave chargen with Magic 6. A ton of text in this column is devoted to gently separating the starting Magic attribute of each type of Awakened, and it really doesn't matter because everyone's going to raise it to 6. Pegasus German rules allow players to purchase spells with the 50 starting karma, so for them D is the correct answer for EVERY Awakened and any other choice is a trap.
Edit - Yeah I forgot Mystic Adepts still have good reasons for picking high Magic prio.
5 - Resources column. Since the value of this column is highly dependent on individual pieces of gear, it's hard to critique it. However, E is always the correct choice for archetypes that are not dependent on gear, which is a problem. 8000 nuyen is a tiny sum, for sure, but spend just 10 starting karma on cash and now you've got 28,000 which is enough for a lifestyle, car, fake SIN, commlink, reagents, and whatever other imaging, audio, and simsense gear you might need.
On the high end, I will say I dislike the fact that deckers can start with the second best cyberdeck and the second best cyberjack possible, right out of the gate.
Overall, there are too many traps and incorrect choices
-
*jotting down notes*
This is all useful, thank you!
Please feel free to keep it up.
You know, if, ah, sacred cows are on the chopping block...
I'd like to see a priority chart where you don't have points used in a linear cost manner. Not at least while post-chargen advancement works on a scaling cost. This disparity fuels the "high and low stacks" phenomenon of character creation, since the best way to spend 6 skill points is to put one skill at 6 rather than any other possible combination of more than 1 skill. I think it'd be quite interesting to see a priority chart that works somewhat like a "more complex" karma build mechanic: Priority A on attributes gives you X amount of karma to spend on attributes, and each increasingly lower pick gives some increasingly lower value of chargen karma for that purpose. Ditto for skills.
-
A few notes, mostly just crunching some numbers (numbers don’t tell you everything, but they do tell something)
For each column, here is the delta E->D / D->C / C->B / B-> A
Metatype: 3 / 5 / 2 / 2
Attributes: 6 /4 / 4 / 8
Skills: 6 /4 / 4 / 8
Magic/Res: 1* / 1 /1 /1 (each point of magic is coming with 2 spells or complex forms)
Resources: 42k / 100k / 125k / 175k
A couple of notes:
- the biggest step function varies by column: D to C for metatype, B to A for attributes and skills, magic is pretty flat but arguably E to D is the biggest jump, B to A for resources (although karma value wise, B to A will be the highest, being worth 20 karma in attributes and 10 karma in spells/complex forms)
- Metatype progression increases fastest in the middle*, attributes and skills increase fastest at both ends, magic is flat all the way, and resources increase faster the higher up the chart you are.
*the correct metatype value, arithmetically, is usually D for mundane humans, and C for most of everyone else, although there will always be build priorities that override the arithmetic
Karma value on attributes and skills is obviously impossible because it depends how high the rating point is. However with all of metahuman adjustment points, attribute points, and skill points, at higher total available points you are more apt to have more maxed out numbers, which makes the big step from B to A probably even more impactful than the 8 points show on their own, and possibly making the step from E to D less impactful than the 6 points seem.
**********************
In general this table is the most punitive of attributes and skills E of any edition of SR, from what I can recall. It would be an awfully rare PC who took either of those, I suspect. (granted taking either at E has probably never been a common choice).
Personally I'd like to see the E value brought up and the intervals made more regular, perhaps starting Attributes E as 8 points (and starting skills E of 16 points), and going up by 4 for each letter above that. That would put E at 'average person on the street' level of attributes (2 in each attribute) , with C at average of 3, and A at an average of 4, which to me feels about right for 'runner builds (being worse than the average person on the street is the realm of negative qualities, IMO).
-
It's bad that if a player isn't doing the math, they're really behind the curve.
What the others have said largely reflects my own opinions as well.
Hobbes makes an important point here about optimization. In this case there is a penalty to new players (or players who aren't analytically-inclined) and that penalty is steep. Optimization should be the difference between "good and great" not the difference between "functional and non-functional". Perhaps a bit of exaggeration there, but the point is that I'd prefer fewer trap options. Ideally, I'd like any and every priority combination to be viable. Skills A doesn't have to be the best choice, but I'd at least like it to be in the conversation. When there's a lack of clarity (i.e. a lot of debate) about which priorities are best, then I think the system is successful. If there's broad consensus about the value of the priorities (like we're seeing in this thread) then the system warrants revision.
Getting into specifics, I don't mind if things don't scale evenly between priority steps (A vs. B vs. C, etc.). If anything, I prefer that they don't, so that your A priority really gets an above-average boost. But I at least wish that the relative scale differences between steps would at least be similar across priorities. (For example, going from B to A in Attributes nets you an additional 8 but only 2 metatype points, or 1 point of Magic/Resonance.) Edit: Beta is saying the same thing but ninja'd me.
I've only made a handful of SR6 characters so others here will have much more experience than I do. But, broadly speaking, here are my impressions about how I'd do the A/B/C/D/E values:
Metatype: 12/8/4/2/1
Attributes: 24/20/16/14/12 (SR5's basically)
Magic/Resonance: 5/1/0/0/0
Skills: 36/28/20/16/12
Resources: As-is
The idea is that Metatype and Attributes would scale at the same rate to reflect how fungible their points are.
I wouldn't have Magic/Resonance available at lower priorities. I would go back to the earlier editions (SR1-3) approach of making it an expensive priority investment.
Skills scale at 2x the rate of attribute points. This wouldn't have been enough in SR5 but since skills are closer to skill groups in SR6 I think it's close (or at least closer).
Edit: Got ninja'd several times while writing this. I'll post it now before getting ninja'd some more.
-
OH, and I'd like to add that I very much LIKE how the In Debt quality pairs with the mid range Resource choices on gear-dependent characters. Makes me feel like I can get away with one row lower than normal sometimes.
-
Let's say your concept is to be a human.
There's not a lot of point to Metatype C (I don't know anybody who likes throwing away the extra couple adjustment points).
That being the case... Why not take 2 spells or 1 point worth of adept powers plus Edge 2 (metatype Priority E), instead of Edge 5 (metatype priority D)? Surely that bit of magic or couple of powers could offset the extra few starting Edge.
But... I don't especially like that you can have some magic abilities almost for free. It's almost like a throwaway: I got nothing better to do, so I'll have some magic. "Magic is my dump stat." It makes being Awakened lose its special-ness.
So I guess I'd rather Magic/Resonance D was still Mundane.
-
That being the case... Why not take 2 spells or 1 point worth of adept powers plus Edge 2 (metatype Priority E), instead of Edge 5 (metatype priority D)? Surely that bit of magic or couple of powers could offset the extra few starting Edge.
Cause unless that was their concept, they're probably going to lose that Magic rating when they start putting in ware.
-
There's not a lot of point to Metatype C
The reason would be to walk out of chargen with Edge 7 instead of Edge 5.
(I don't know anybody who likes throwing away the extra couple adjustment points).
It is still an increase of 2 Edge (which in this case is a post chargen value of 65 karma).
But yes, it would make a lot more sense if metatype adjustment points instead gave you for example 1, 3, 6, 9, 13 adjustment attribute points.
And you also need to have a correlation between metatype points and attribute points. If you go Meta A and Attribute B or Attribute A and meta B should not matter. You should probably end up with the same character.
Using the same delta between the points (+2, +3, +3, +4) translated to attributes (and starting with a baseline of 2.5 average attributes) you might end up with something like this; 12, 14, 17, 20, 24.
But to be honest, since there is no real opportunity cost to pick a metahuman I think it would not be more than fair that Humans also get to spend adjustment points on regular attributes. Otherwise metahumans will just be straight up better (in most scenarios they probably will be anyway since they also get free racial qualities).
I don't especially like that you can have some magic abilities almost for free.
...
So I guess I'd rather Magic/Resonance D was still Mundane.
Agree.
All other priority categories start out bad and then get slowly better and then really good.
Magic start out bad, but then immediately get super good. Then just add 10 karma worth of spells and 1 adjustment attribute point worth of magic per category on top of that which honestly is not really worth it. For adepts it is basically only 1 adjustment attribute point worth of magic per category which mean there is virtually no point at all at going higher than D if you plan on going Adept.
Instead magic D need to be just slightly better than Magic E and Magic A need to open up a lot more options for an awakened character than just Magic priority D. Progressie distribution like the other categories.
Perhaps something like this; E = Mundane, D = Weak Aspected Magician, C = Weak Adept/Techno or Strong Aspected Magician, B = Strong Adept/Techno or Weak Full Magician/Mystic Adept, A = Strong Full Magician/Mystic Adept.
That being the case... Why not take 2 spells or 1 point worth of adept powers plus Edge 2 (metatype Priority E), instead of Edge 5 (metatype priority D)? Surely that bit of magic or couple of powers could offset the extra few starting Edge.
Cause unless that was their concept, they're probably going to lose that Magic rating when they start putting in ware.
I think he mean that starting the game with Edge 5 + forever Mundane (Magic E, Meta D) is pretty bad compared to starting the game with Edge 2 (that you can raise to 3 with 15 customization karma) but you are now also fully Awakened or fully Emerged... and perhaps also get a couple of free spells or complex forms as an added bonus (Magic D, Meta E).
Even if you don't really plan on being a magician, adept or technomancer there is still very little reason to not go Magic D during chargen.
-
I guess if you play that going to Magic 0 doesn't mean you become mundane, that makes sense.
-
I guess if you play that going to Magic 0 doesn't mean you become mundane, that makes sense.
I'm not a fan of that being the case, but it's been that way for a couple editions now. Maybe even in 4e.
-
I'm not a fan of that being the case, but it's been that way for a couple editions now. Maybe even in 4e.
Does it state a consequence of going to Magic 0 somewhere in 6e? I see p38 it talks about Essence decline as you install cyberware and your Magic rating going down accordingly, but doesn't mention any consequence of going to 0. In the magic chapter the only mention I see is under Initiation, where your initiate grade can't be higher than your magic rating (so, no initiation with magic 0). In the gear chapter it just reiterates that essence is lost as you install cyberware/bioware. I don't see any discussion of essence loss in the character creation chapter. (FWIW, I also don't see a consequence of going to Resonance 0.) Your associated dice pools would be comparatively lousy, but presumably you'd pick spells/forms/powers where that wasn't as important.
I thought there was a discussion of consequences of Essence going to 0, but I can't even find that now, so maybe I'm just missing a passage?
Anyway, I'm not really saying people ought to build characters this way, more that it's odd that the priorities table would even allow it. I would have thought the table would set it up so that being Awakened would be more special than "you can add on a bit of magic" or "anybody can do it if they like". The impression I've always gotten from the setting is that magic/technomancers were somewhat rare -- not like every wageslave has a couple powers they don't even bother to put on their résumé.
-
SR6 is not very explicit when it comes to rules in general ;-)
In SR5 it was explained that you can not cast spells when your current magic reach 0 but that you can start casting spells again once you raised your magic rating to a positive value.
It was also explained that you would only be forever mundane if your max magic was ever lowered to 0. But since max magic is equal to floor(essence) + initiation grade this typically will never happen if you first initiate at least once.
In SR6 they changed it so maximum magic is not reduced until you lost a full point of essence (max magic = ceiling(essence) + initiation grade) which mean they could skip the entire paragraph about becoming mundane if maximum magic reach 0 (because this doesn't happen until you reach 0 essence at which point you are dead anyway). This was actually an elegant way to get rid of a set of rather complicated rules.
-
In SR6 they changed it so maximum magic is not reduced until you lost a full point of essence (max magic = ceiling(essence) + initiation grade) which mean they could skip the entire paragraph about becoming mundane if maximum magic reach 0 (because this doesn't happen until you reach 0 essence at which point you are dead anyway). This was actually an elegant way to get rid of a set of rather complicated rules.
Gosh, I like your reading... I would like if trivial amounts of cyberware didn't affect magic... but it wasn't how I read it. p.38: "anytime your Essence goes below any whole integer, you lose a corresponding point of Magic or Resonance" -- if you get your first 0.01 worth of cyberware, didn't your Essence just "go below the whole integer '6'" meaning your Magic goes to 5 when your Essence is 5.99?
Wait, now I see under Initiation, "Your maximum Magic rank is 6 + Initiate Grade (reduced by one for every full point of Essence lost)." So I guess I'll just go with that. :)
Also, does it actually say you die or turn into a zombie or whatever when your Essence goes to 0? That's what I thought I remembered, but I couldn't find it in the 6e book when I looked this morning.
-
but it wasn't how I read it. p.38: "anytime your Essence goes below any whole integer, you lose a corresponding point of Magic or Resonance"
This is where they talk about your current magic rating, not your maximum magic rating
under Initiation, "Your maximum Magic rank is 6 + Initiate Grade (reduced by one for every full point of Essence lost)."
This is where they talk about your maximum magic rating, not your current magic rating.
So if you have current magic 1 and max magic 6 and essence 6.
Then get 0.1 essence worth of augmentations
Then your current magic goes down to 0 but your maximum magic stays at 6 until you get another 0.9 essence worth of augmentations.
Also, does it actually say you die or turn into a zombie or whatever when your Essence goes to 0?
It might have been mentioned in the quick start rules actually. But No. Core doesn't explicitly mention anything about this. And IIRC it also doesn't actually say you start with 6 essence (but maybe that was finally fixed in errata, don't remember).
-
Huh.
(Side note: the current 6e core PDF and the current errata sheet both do have Essence "starting at 6.")
All right, so... let's say you put in Magic D for the heck of it, and choose to be an Aspected Spellcaster. Then you go with Metatype E, Resources C, and buy Wired Reflexes 2 (used, to save nuyen, so essence 2.2) and up to another 0.75 Essence worth of Cyberware.
If I've got this right, you started with Current Magic 2, Max Magic 6, and 4 spells.
The cyberware costs up to 2.95 essence, resulting in Current Magic 0 (technically -1 but negative attributes don't seem possible), Max Magic 4, and the 4 spells, so pick ones that don't have super-hard tests to take effect. (Heal people with high essence, for instance.) You might not be as good as a dedicated Mage/Shaman build, but maybe this is a group without a caster, or maybe you can just take complimentary spells or whatever.
I guess you could also use Karma to buy your Magic rating up from 0 to your max of 4? But since (pointed out in next post) that comes before cyberware, you'd spend 35 to buy it up to 4 and then it would get cut to 1, or 65 to net a 2 if you put negative qualities into it too.
So I think you can exit character generation with Essence 3.05, Magic 1-2 as an aspected spellcaster, 4 spells, and that's with Magic Priority D (for "Dump"). You have Attributes A and Skills B (a pretty awesome base), though you do need to invest in Sorcery. You know, you can be a gunslinger build with Wired 2 and Improved Invisibility and Mystic Armor, or a Face with Physical Mask, because why not? You can still Initiate as well, or start with a level of Focused Concentration, to make sustaining those spells cheaper.
It's not as bad as I first thought on account of the order-of-operations, but that still doesn't seem right for a "D" priority.
* Edit: corrected starting magic according to the following post
-
It could absolutely be made more explicit, but you first buy up your attributes with karma THEN you buy cyberware. There is no "start at low MAG, dump a ton of essence because lul, then buy up MAG with karma."
-
Once a PC is live (post creation and etc.), can you buy up Magic with Karma? If your current Magic rating is 1 and maximum magic rating is 4, can you buy up your Magic from 1 to 2 with 10 Karma?
In the "Character Advancement" section, the discussion of buying up attributes starts with "Whether physical or mental," and omits special (e.g. Magic). But in the Initiation section it says "Note that the Magic rank does not increase automatically at initiation—you still must spend Karma to increase it." So I guess you would buy it up like any other attribute?
-
You can spend karma to raise special attributes like edge (but only if you not already have a current edge rating equal to your metatype maximum edge rating), magic (but only if you are awakened and not already have a current magic rating equal to your max magic rating) or resonance (but only if you are emerged and not already have a current resonance rating equal to your max resonance rating).
In previous edition you bought augmentations at step six before spending left over karma at step seven of chargen.
In this edition you spend your customization karma at step four and then buy your augmentations in step five of chargen.
Raising a physical, mental or special attribute from 0 to 1 cost 5 karma. Raising an attribute from 1 to 2 cost 10 karma.
All right, so... let's say you put in Magic D ... and choose to be an Aspected Spellcaster
Why go aspected. You might as well go full magician. The extra magic you got from limiting yourself to an aspected magician was wasted on augmentations anyway. Or go physical adept. Spending 5 karma on magic after chargen will give you a free power point.
Current Magic 0, Max Magic 4, and the 4 spells, so pick ones that don't have super-hard tests to take effect.
The intent is probably still that you cannot cast spells while your current magic rating is 0.
But yes, after you spend 5 post chargen karma to raise your magic rating to 1 your aspected magician will have access to 4 spells (and astral perception and projection!).
-
In character creation, Spend Customization Karma is step 4, Buy Gear is step 5, so that's how you can tell that you can't buy up your MAG after tanking it with ware, during character creation. Has to be live to do that :)
-
It could absolutely be made more explicit, but you first buy up your attributes with karma THEN you buy cyberware. There is no "start at low MAG, dump a ton of essence because lul, then buy up MAG with karma."
Really only an impediment to burn out Technomancers. Magic 1 or 2 Adepts/Mages weren't counting on their Magic for much out of the gate. If they need to wait a run to get there squib on, no big deal.
Technomancers that weren't going to do much with Sprites can easily get by with a single point of Resonance. But they need at least one point to do the hacking and threading. Luckily its only a minor annoyance to have to ask the GM, "Hey can I spend my 5 points of karma that I saved from Char Gen before the run starts?"
Not so much a case it can't be done, just can't be done at char gen. Couple other things fall into that bucket too. Delayed gratification, it's good for you, teaches patience.
-
It could absolutely be made more explicit, but you first buy up your attributes with karma THEN you buy cyberware. There is no "start at low MAG, dump a ton of essence because lul, then buy up MAG with karma."
Really only an impediment to burn out Technomancers. Magic 1 or 2 Adepts/Mages weren't counting on their Magic for much out of the gate. If they need to wait a run to get there squib on, no big deal.
Technomancers that weren't going to do much with Sprites can easily get by with a single point of Resonance. But they need at least one point to do the hacking and threading. Luckily its only a minor annoyance to have to ask the GM, "Hey can I spend my 5 points of karma that I saved from Char Gen before the run starts?"
Not so much a case it can't be done, just can't be done at char gen. Couple other things fall into that bucket too. Delayed gratification, it's good for you, teaches patience.
It's still a point of ambiguity as to whether you CAN save any chargen karma... I'd say by RAW you're given no allowance to save any and therefore you must spend it all.
But that's another issue :D
-
Not that the tangent isn't valuable, but it's been discussed many times and in many places.
I'd like to turn the conversation back to Wakshaani's original question around the 6E priority table, specifically its strengths, weaknesses, and how it might improve.
-
Changing the order of operations during chargen prevented a loop hole though (in 5th you could go adept D, get 2-4 points worth of augmentations and then increase your magic rating from 0 to 2 or 3 for free adept powers). This was a good change in SR6.
Prio table. The bad thing with it is that it doesn't feel like a consistent feeling. Shift around the numbers to make them into sequences that make more sense across the board.
- D should just be slightly better than E and A should be much better than D (this is not the case for Magic, see my suggestion above on how to fix that).
- Metatype bonus adjustment points per rank need to have an exact correlation to Attribute bonus attribute points per rank (at least at higher ratings where most of the points will almost always go into physical or mental attributes, and not special attributes)
- There need to be a metatype adjustment point option that give exactly 6 points (to align with mundane human's max of 7 edge)
- Shadowrunners that don't focus on Attributes at all should still end up with a *minimum* attribute average of say... 2.5 (today you end up with an average of just 1.25)
-
(Honestly, 7 Edge is a trap. You constantly have to spend the Edge after you first miss a chance to gain it due to being at your limit.)
I must admit, I disagree with Attributes E being bad. Attributes D is still an average citizen, Attributes E is a dumpstat that really forces you to spend Karma or suck it up. If citizen average was still 3, yes, D and E would be low. But citizen average is 2, and you can see that in grunt blocks. As such, I don't see the problem with Attributes E being a real painful thing. Pick your poison, everything at a price.
-
Attributes of 2 being average is fine conceptually for an average person, but Shadowrunners are hardly average. Additionally, once we leave the realm of conception, attributes of 2 would leave most characters with what I consider a shit dice pool unless perhaps they ultra min-maxed the one or two skill based pools they wanted to be their focus.
Attributes E is the worse possible selection imo. Most of the other problems with the disparity of this particular priority chart have already been touched on, in particular as relates to Magic.
-
I must admit, I disagree with Attributes E being bad.
Oh boy. Ok, you win, most unpopular opinion.
Attributes of 2 being average is fine conceptually for an average person, but Shadowrunners are hardly average. Additionally, once we leave the realm of conception, attributes of 2 would leave most characters with what I consider a shit dice pool unless perhaps they ultra min-maxed the one or two skill based pools they wanted to be their focus
Yeah, although I respect that SR6 wanted to lower the starting power level by declaring that "2 is the new average", the game does not actually support this idea. The dice pools you make with a rating of 2 do not indicate any kind of base level competency at anything.
Like I said originally, the authors seriously undervalued Attributes when creating the priority table. It is the most valuable stat type. Yet they seemed to be under the impression that reducing the skill list to 17 made them equal value. The progression from 2 to 24 stinks of someone making an "elegant formula" and falling in love with the math instead of looking at the actual values and putting them to use. No seriously, do the math. Skills and Attributes follow identical progression, and you get 8 more skill points than attribute points on any given letter. Since you start with 1 in each of the 8 attributes, the end result is an equal number of attribute and skill points across each of the priority levels. Giving skills and attributes equal value is the root cause of this problem. The author literally did not realize that attribute points would be worth more than skill points.
Of course they are! Obviously, attributes have much more utility than skills (with the exception of STR - ha!). But the author is wrong in more ways. Attributes and skills are not spent in the same way on the low end. If you take E skills and get 10 skill points, you are not going to take 1 skill at 3 and 7 other skills at 1. That would be incredibly inefficient. But that IS what your attribute array will look like at E attributes. So I would accuse the author of not only undervaluing attributes but also just plain not understanding the right way to create characters in a game that rewards specialists and has a 1:1 point buy chargen with exponentially rising costs in character advancement.
-
citizen average is 2, and you can see that in grunt blocks.
Citizens are typically poor mundane humans with perhaps 7-8 extra attribute points and perhaps 6-12 skill points. Which, if they were to use the priority table, would roughly translate into a priority array of 5 E's.
If a Shadowrunner don't prioritize magic then she will be mundane like most citizens. If she don't prioritize resources then she will start with 8.000 nuyen which mean you are poor like most citizens. If she don't prioritize skills then she will only get 10 (or perhaps 12) skill and be as unskilled as most citizens. If she don't prioritize attributes at all then she should at the very least get 8 (or perhaps 12, not just 2) extra attributes so she at the very least have the same low average attribute array as most regular citizens.
Also, by increasing the attribute value of the minimum attribute priority you indirectly also reduce the value of the maximum attribute priority. Instead of dropping 8 points going from attributes A to attributes B (24 -> 16, which is huge and make attribute priority A hands down best option) you might perhaps just drop 3-4 points going from attribute A to attribute B (24 -> 20 or perhaps 21). Or (same thing) the opportunity cost of going from attribute B to attribute A is very low if the difference is a staggering 8 attribute points. The opportunity cost of going attributes A will be inherently much higher if the difference is only 3-4 attribute points.
-
I must admit, I disagree with Attributes E being bad.
Oh boy. Ok, you win, most unpopular opinion.
Attributes of 2 being average is fine conceptually for an average person, but Shadowrunners are hardly average. Additionally, once we leave the realm of conception, attributes of 2 would leave most characters with what I consider a shit dice pool unless perhaps they ultra min-maxed the one or two skill based pools they wanted to be their focus
Yeah, although I respect that SR6 wanted to lower the starting power level by declaring that "2 is the new average", the game does not actually support this idea. The dice pools you make with a rating of 2 do not indicate any kind of base level competency at anything.
Like I said originally, the authors seriously undervalued Attributes when creating the priority table. It is the most valuable stat type. Yet they seemed to be under the impression that reducing the skill list to 17 made them equal value. The progression from 2 to 24 stinks of someone making an "elegant formula" and falling in love with the math instead of looking at the actual values and putting them to use. No seriously, do the math. Skills and Attributes follow identical progression, and you get 8 more skill points than attribute points on any given letter. Since you start with 1 in each of the 8 attributes, the end result is an equal number of attribute and skill points across each of the priority levels. Giving skills and attributes equal value is the root cause of this problem. The author literally did not realize that attribute points would be worth more than skill points.
Of course they are! Obviously, attributes have much more utility than skills (with the exception of STR - ha!). But the author is wrong in more ways. Attributes and skills are not spent in the same way on the low end. If you take E skills and get 10 skill points, you are not going to take 1 skill at 3 and 7 other skills at 1. That would be incredibly inefficient. But that IS what your attribute array will look like at E attributes. So I would accuse the author of not only undervaluing attributes but also just plain not understanding the right way to create characters in a game that rewards specialists and has a 1:1 point buy chargen with exponentially rising costs in character advancement.
Question: How much more valuable do you think an attribute is than a skill? If a skill costs, say, 5 points, how much should an attribute cost? Twice as much? Four times? Ten times? Toss a rough idea out there.
(I have a personal formula, didn't know if anyone else had a general feel on it.)
-
Given a potential alteration-to-6e context? Personally, I think dropping skills to 4/level would be about right. Maybe even 3/level... that would accelerate skill development noticeably from current state and have the nice synergy of being the same cost to start a new skill as buying a new knowledge skill.
But that's a band aid.
I think, in theory, it's actually fine to have the skills and attributes cost the same to advance. 1 point in either still gives the same net result in a dice pool, after all. Yes, there's a valid point in that certain attributes flatly are more valuable than skills... but that's imo because skills weren't better balanced, nor were there sufficient ways the weight of a skill was made relevant.
Which is better? spending X karma to advance Agility 1 point, or the same amount of karma to increase (insert skill here) 1 point? As things are, it's virtually always better to take that 1 point in Agility if the karma cost is the same, because that same die can be used across so many skills as well as in potential attribute-only tests, to boot. Frankly, there needs to be more cases where "agility" skills use something other than Agility. Athletics has the example of being "agility", but linking with Strength in certain cases. Skills would be much more valuable, karma point for karma point, if they weren't so strongly linked (or arguably, implied to be linked) to an unbalanced assortment of attributes. Take Close Combat, for example. You roll STR instead of AGI when you're trying to smash or break through a barrier. That's not enough reason to bring any kind of parity between the decision to invest in Agility or Close Combat. But if the GM can insist you have to roll STR instead of AGI a large amount of the time (with a big weapon, whenever you're fatigued, whenever you're trying to knock someone over, etc etc etc) the value of putting a point into Close Combat goes up dramatically, as that die will always be available no matter what attribute is being invoked. Similarly, there's a few mechanics that key off the number of skill ranks (teamwork, dodging, blocking). If there were more of those kinds of rules, the value of investing in skills would also increase in relative value.
-
If there were more of those kinds of rules, the value of investing in skills would also increase in relative value.
Very true but perhaps harder to implement at this point? Maybe maybe not. Clearly though AGI is the king attribute for getting physical things done, and that's really unfortunate. I would have much rather seen a split between AGI and STR; AGI for ranged combat, STR for melee and throwing.
Question: How much more valuable do you think an attribute is than a skill? If a skill costs, say, 5 points, how much should an attribute cost? Twice as much? Four times? Ten times? Toss a rough idea out there.
Put a gun to my head and make me pick a number, I'd say 50% more valuable than a skill point. I wouldn't go all the way to 2x. Too many other factors at play - all attributes and skills are not equally useful to a character. But they are clearly more valuable, and it's a mistake to price them equally. I house rule karma costs at 5x for attr and 3x for skills.
-
Question: How much more valuable do you think an attribute is than a skill? If a skill costs, say, 5 points, how much should an attribute cost? Twice as much? Four times? Ten times? Toss a rough idea out there.
I tossed out 2:1 earlier in the thread in the context of but that's too probably too low because if someone offered me two skill points for one attribute point I'd tell them no.
3:1 is closer to the mark, but I'm probably still going to say no. At 4:1 I'll probably start considering it.
Again, the exchange doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be viable. High Attributes + low Skills vs. low Attributes + high Skills? It doesn't matter if they net out precisely the same, but I hope they're at least within the same ballpark so that the mechanics can support both characters/stories.
After chargen, the costs for advancement are a different story. I'm thinking that Wakshaani is asking about chargen specifically, but if he's interested in a broader answer then I'll take a stab at one.
-
Question: How much more valuable do you think an attribute is than a skill? If a skill costs, say, 5 points, how much should an attribute cost? Twice as much? Four times? Ten times? Toss a rough idea out there.
I tossed out 2:1 earlier in the thread in the context of but that's too probably too low because if someone offered me two skill points for one attribute point I'd tell them no.
3:1 is closer to the mark, but I'm probably still going to say no. At 4:1 I'll probably start considering it.
Again, the exchange doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be viable. High Attributes + low Skills vs. low Attributes + high Skills? It doesn't matter if they net out precisely the same, but I hope they're at least within the same ballpark so that the mechanics can support both characters/stories.
After chargen, the costs for advancement are a different story. I'm thinking that Wakshaani is asking about chargen specifically, but if he's interested in a broader answer then I'll take a stab at one.
Combo platter. In theory, there should be zero space between chargen costs and post-chargen costs, so for purposes of this, assume that the cost would be the same. IE, if a skill cost 5 points a rank, regardless of that rank (so, rank 1 = 5 pts, rank 2 = 10 pts, rank 3 = 15 pts, etc, non-additive (IE, it isn't 5, 15, 30, but 5, 10, 15) … assuming a progression like that, regardless of if in chargen or in regular play, what would a fair cost be for an attribute? 10? 15? 30? 50? Just spitballing here.
-
Honestly, Attributes are already at the max cost I'd give them, what with 1->2 already costing you 2 runs. With suggested karma down compared to SR5, I strongly oppose making them more expensive. I'd lower skills to 4 (or maybe 3) myself, make it cheaper to pick them up. 5->9 costs 150 karma right now, while an Attribute 4->6 costs 55, and the Attribute likely boosts multiple skills.
-
Question: How much more valuable do you think an attribute is than a skill? If a skill costs, say, 5 points, how much should an attribute cost? Twice as much? Four times? Ten times? Toss a rough idea out there.
From a karma cost point of view feel 5 Karma x new rating (same as Attributes) is actually spot on.
But from a prioritization table point of view I think you should get more skill points for each priority rank (delta between the ranks) than you get from attributes.
Example:
Attribute
E = 12
D = 15 (increase of 3)
C = 18 (increase of 3)
B = 21 (increase of 3)
A = 24 (increase of 3)
Skill
E = 12
D = 17 (increase of 5)
C = 22 (increase of 5)
B = 27 (increase of 5)
A = 32 (increase of 5)
Or
Attribute
E = 12
D = 14 (increase of 2)
C = 17 (increase of 3)
B = 20 (increase of 3)
A = 24 (increase of 4)
Skill
E = 12
D = 14 (increase of 2)
C = 18 (increase of 4)
B = 24 (increase of 6)
A = 32 (increase of 8 )
-
For Advancement I'd go something like, Skills Rank 1 through 6 cost 5 plus the Rank you're going to. Rank 6 to 12, 10 plus the Rank you're going to.
Attributes I'd go with 10 plus twice what you're going to for value 1 to 5. 6 and up 15 plus double what you're going to.
Lets characters fill in the low spots quicker, and keeps the costs more in line with Initiation.
I would also let people buy more "Max Essence" as a mundane parallel to Initiation.
-
Yeah, although I respect that SR6 wanted to lower the starting power level by declaring that "2 is the new average", the game does not actually support this idea. The dice pools you make with a rating of 2 do not indicate any kind of base level competency at anything.
Precisely. Regardless of any other sentiment about the matter, this is the bottom line.
-
There's not a lot of point to Metatype C
The reason would be to walk out of chargen with Edge 7 instead of Edge 5.
(I don't know anybody who likes throwing away the extra couple adjustment points).
It is still an increase of 2 Edge (which in this case is a post chargen value of 65 karma).
But yes, it would make a lot more sense if metatype adjustment points instead gave you for example 1, 3, 6, 9, 13 adjustment attribute points.
And you also need to have a correlation between metatype points and attribute points. If you go Meta A and Attribute B or Attribute A and meta B should not matter. You should probably end up with the same character.
Using the same delta between the points (+2, +3, +3, +4) translated to attributes (and starting with a baseline of 2.5 average attributes) you might end up with something like this; 12, 14, 17, 20, 24.
But to be honest, since there is no real opportunity cost to pick a metahuman I think it would not be more than fair that Humans also get to spend adjustment points on regular attributes. Otherwise metahumans will just be straight up better (in most scenarios they probably will be anyway since they also get free racial qualities).
I don't especially like that you can have some magic abilities almost for free.
...
So I guess I'd rather Magic/Resonance D was still Mundane.
Agree.
All other priority categories start out bad and then get slowly better and then really good.
Magic start out bad, but then immediately get super good. Then just add 10 karma worth of spells and 1 adjustment attribute point worth of magic per category on top of that which honestly is not really worth it. For adepts it is basically only 1 adjustment attribute point worth of magic per category which mean there is virtually no point at all at going higher than D if you plan on going Adept.
Instead magic D need to be just slightly better than Magic E and Magic A need to open up a lot more options for an awakened character than just Magic priority D. Progressie distribution like the other categories.
Perhaps something like this; E = Mundane, D = Weak Aspected Magician, C = Weak Adept/Techno or Strong Aspected Magician, B = Strong Adept/Techno or Weak Full Magician/Mystic Adept, A = Strong Full Magician/Mystic Adept.
That being the case... Why not take 2 spells or 1 point worth of adept powers plus Edge 2 (metatype Priority E), instead of Edge 5 (metatype priority D)? Surely that bit of magic or couple of powers could offset the extra few starting Edge.
Cause unless that was their concept, they're probably going to lose that Magic rating when they start putting in ware.
I think he mean that starting the game with Edge 5 + forever Mundane (Magic E, Meta D) is pretty bad compared to starting the game with Edge 2 (that you can raise to 3 with 15 customization karma) but you are now also fully Awakened or fully Emerged... and perhaps also get a couple of free spells or complex forms as an added bonus (Magic D, Meta E).
Even if you don't really plan on being a magician, adept or technomancer there is still very little reason to not go Magic D during chargen.
I'd turn it ŕ la carte.
E gets nothing.
D gets a starting Magic/Resonance of 1 and 4 Awakened Points and the ability to buy one Awakened Talent.
C gets a starting Magic/Resonance of 1 and 8 Awakened Points and the ability to buy up to two Awakened Talents.
B gets a starting Magic/Resonance of 1 and 10 Awakened Points and the ability to buy up to three Awakened Talents.
A gets a starting Magic/Resonance of 1 and 12 Awakened Points and the ability to buy up to Four Awakened Talents.
Awakened talents for Magic are:
Astral Projection (Includes Astral Perception) cost 1.
Enchanting cost 1, 4 Preparations known.
Spell casting, includes Ritual Magic cost 2, 4 Spells known.
Summoning and Binding cost 2, if Binding Materials are purchased you may start with bound Spirits using the Buying Hits rule.
Adept Powers Cost 3.
Resonance:
Living Persona cost 1.
Threading cost 2, 4 Complex Forms known.
Compiling cost 2.
Registering cost 2, start with Registered Sprites using the Buying Hits rule.
You can use your Awakened Points to buy Magic or Resonance one for one or purchase an Awakened Talent.
No SAPs or Metahuman Adjustment points for increased Magic / Resonance. Can be increased with Karma.
-
From a karma cost point of view feel 5 Karma x new rating (same as Attributes) is actually spot on.
I couldn't disagree more. Almost everything about advancement in SR6 is far from spot on, and you know it. First, Attr being more valuable than skill should be obvious at face value to any experienced player, so skills and attr should not be the same cost to raise. Second, that cost is SO HIGH compared to recommended karma rewards that high skill/attr advancement may as well not exist. For the karma it costs to raise a single skill from 6 to 12, a mage could learn the entire Combat, Detection, Health, and Illusion spell catalogs in the CRB (actually I'm surprised how many spells there are in the CRB, I initially imagined you could learn every single spell).
I'm not saying raising a skill should be as cheap as learning a spell, but the delta cost between raising your high rank abilities/attributes and the low hanging advancement fruit (spells, specializations, etc) is so great that high level advancement is not a practical growth path.
But you know this. We all know this, it's a constant pain in SR.
-
Attr being more valuable than skill should be obvious at face value to any experienced player
Attributes are more valuable during chargen, yes, which mean attribute priority typically get more priority love during chargen.
Which is also why I suggested that you should get more skill points (delta) per priority rank compared to attributes.
Post chargen, skills typically get a lot of karma love actually. Often more so than attributes... ;-)
At...a mage could learn the entire Combat, Detection, Health, and Illusion spell catalogs in the CRB (actually I'm surprised how many spells there are in the CRB, I initially imagined you could learn every single spell).
I am not disagreeing that spells are too cheap compared to both attributes and skills (from a karma point of view).
But perhaps the issue here is that spells are too cheap rather than skills being too expensive...
high level advancement is not a practical growth path.
Perhaps the intent of the prio table is to let you exit chargen as an experienced (and often highly specialized) criminal.
And perhaps the main intent of post chargen karma is to let you expand sideways. To open up more options.
-
For the karma it costs to raise a single skill from 6 to 12, a mage could learn the entire Combat, Detection, Health, and Illusion spell catalogs in the CRB (actually I'm surprised how many spells there are in the CRB, I initially imagined you could learn every single spell).
Skill cap is 9. The only reason the Skill Level table goes up to 12 in value, is because of Specializations/Expertise. From 6+ to 9++ is 125 karma, not as high as 285. In fact, going from 0 to 9++ is 235 karma.
-
Attribute
E = 12
D = 14 (increase of 2)
C = 17 (increase of 3)
B = 20 (increase of 3)
A = 24 (increase of 4)
Skill
E = 12
D = 14 (increase of 2)
C = 18 (increase of 4)
B = 24 (increase of 6)
A = 32 (increase of 8)
I like both of Xenon's tables and would use either. I'd probably vote for the second one (above) because I prefer uneven scaling between priority steps.
Post-chargen is more complicated. Others have alluded to it but I'll say it outright: the bigger issue is with what Magic characters can use karma for vs. what Mundane characters can do.
This problem isn't unique to SR6 and has been around for a while. But what a mundane can do with 5 karma or 11 karma is laughable compared to a magician can accomplish with a new spell or an adept getting a new power point.
It's a deeper dig to fix, but the entire karma economy needs to be revamped, from the top (karma awards) down to the bottom (karma costs). It needs a holistic approach and until then any debate about karma costs between skills and attributes is just going to be a piecemeal solution.
If we're going to have scaled costs for improvements, then we need to get out of the precedent of karma awards being in the low single digits. Larger awards provide more opportunity for granularity in costs. Sticker shock that a spell costs 25 karma? Well maybe not if the average karma award is 40. And now maybe you can scale other costs to a point where a magician might be tempted to advance a skill or an attribute every once in a while instead of just pouring everything into initiations and spells.
Perhaps not, but it's nice to imagine.
-
Perhaps the intent of the prio table is to let you exit chargen as an experienced (and often highly specialized) criminal.
And perhaps the main intent of post chargen karma is to let you expand sideways. To open up more options
It's a game about specialists. Branching out is definitely one path, and the cost structure encourages it - but that should be an RP choice.
Skill cap is 9. The only reason the Skill Level table goes up to 12 in value, is because of Specializations/Expertise. From 6+ to 9++ is 125 karma, not as high as 285. In fact, going from 0 to 9++ is 235 karma
Noted thanks. So lets take the cost from 6 to 9, 120 karma. What could you buy with 120 karma other than 3 points in a single skill?
24 spells (The entire Manipulation catalog in the CRB)
6 skills from 0 to level 2 with specializations
4 skills to level 3
2 skills to level 4
1 skill to level 6 plus 2 specializations and an expertise (ironically, the same # of dice as a level 9 skill, though obvs you would purchase spec + exp first)
Every single non-awakened/resonance skill at lvl 1 with a specialization
Raise AGI from 1 to 6 and get firearms from 0 to 2 with specialization, going from 1 die in shooting pistols to 10 (and +5 dice in all agility related tasks)
40 Knowledge skills
13 Languages at Expert level
15 Force 4 Qi foci bonded
6 levels of Initiation plus MAG 6->7
And just for fun, $240,000 with Working For the Man
The cost scaling is just too high, the opportunity cost on other things, too great. Realistically, in terms of post-gen karma, everything after skill level 5 is a pretty low return on karma. 5 is when you can get expertise and a second specialization. There are no brass rings to reach for after that, it's just a big hill of karma for a few extra dice.
-
Perhaps the intent of the prio table is to let you exit chargen as an experienced (and often highly specialized) criminal.
And perhaps the main intent of post chargen karma is to let you expand sideways. To open up more options
It's a game about specialists. Branching out is definitely one path, and the cost structure encourages it - but that should be an RP choice.
First: Bold assumption that there´s any form of concise "intent" at work here ::)
Second: To put MM´s statement more precisely, the cost structure of character advancement encourages branching out. The cost structure of character building is pretty much neutral if you don´t keep further advancements (and the free 50 Karma during chargen) in mind. But if you do, the overal structure heavily encoruages you to go as narrow as possible during chargen and later branch out into side skills.
And as much as we try to justify that by repeating to ourselfes that "SR is a game about specialization": This creates problems. Players are more likely to start out with highly specialized characters that lack options outside their main skills, and when the time comes to spend karma, speccing into side skills doesn´t really feel like actual growth. Instead of slowly becoming an ace decker or gunslinger, you already start out as one and later just add some frills and ruffles. Yes, you could save up the Karma to raise your optimized main skill from 6 to 7 or higher, but it takes ages to get the karma needed for that one additional die, especially since you now have to raise what had been a whole skill group in 5th Edition (not to mention the bad joke that is 6th Edition training intervalls :P).
It´s a clash between a linear costed chargen system and a progressively costed advancement system. IMO, one of these needs to go, if only for the sake of our holy simplification. I´m not even dedicated which, it´s the interaction that causes these problems.
-
It´s a clash between a linear costed chargen system and a progressively costed advancement system. IMO, one of these needs to go, if only for the sake of our holy simplification. I´m not even dedicated which, it´s the interaction that causes these problems.
I can't agree with this more. Aligning the systems is a big step to overcoming the problem.
-
The problem is: I love Priority because it comes with way less choice paralysis than Karmagen. So unifying it could be incredibly frustrating. Maybe a partial point-system, like D&D uses for its attribute-point systems, could be a nice intermediary move. (E.g. ranks 1 and 2 and spec cost 1 point, ranks 3 and 4 2 points, rank 5 and 6 3 points, rank 7 and 8 4 points, rank 9 and 10 5 points.)
-
I agree.
If we are to make changes here I think it should to use a point system (similar to what we have today during chargen) but make it progressive instead of linear (similar to how post chargen is today) but perhaps step-wise and not so punishing as it is today.
For example:
Metatype
- During chargen, different metatype priority ranks give you different amount of ear-marked metatype points
- Metatype points are used for buying Edge (cost as other attributes) and Qualities (humans get a few bonus points since they have higher max edge and because they don't get free racial qualities)
- Customization karma can be used at a 1:1 ratio
Attributes.
- During chargen, different attribute priority ranks give you different amount of ear-marked attribute points
- Attribute points are used for buying Physical and Mental Attributes.
- First rank is free and cost 0 points (all attributes start out at 1).
- Rank 2 and rank 3 cost 1 point each.
- Rank 4 and above cost 2 points each.
- Metatype maximum rank is special and cost 3 points
- Customization karma (and later post chargen karma) can be used at a 1:1 ratio
Skills.
- During chargen, different skill priority ranks give you different amount of ear-marked skill points
- Skill points are used for buying skills.
- Rank 1, 2 and 3 cost 1 point each
- Rank 4 and above cost 2 points each.
- Rank 9 (post chargen only) is special and cost 3 points.
- Specialization is special and cost 1 point.
- Customization karma (and later post chargen karma) can be used at a 1:1 ratio
Magic/Resonance
- During chargen, different Magic/Resonance priority ranks give you different amount of ear-marked magic/resonance points
- Magic points are used for buying magic attribute (cost as other attributes), spells, rituals, preparations (2 points each), and for mystics also power points (3 points each) as well as Awakened Qualities (Sorcerer, Conjurer, Enchanter, Adept, Mystic, Magician) and spare points can also be used at a 1:1 ratio as skill points for Astral, Conjuring, Enchanting and Sorcery skills
- Resonance points are used for buying resonance attribute (cost as other attributes) and to buy complex forms (2 points each) as well as Emerged Qualities (Technomancer, Sourcerer, Cyberadept, Machinist, Technoshaman) and spare points can also be used at a 1:1 ratio as skill points for Cracking, Electronics, Engineering and Tasking skills
- Maximum Magic/Resonance rank (before initiation/submerge/augmentations this is 6) is special and cost 3 points
- Customization karma (and later post chargen karma) can be used at a 1:1 ratio
Resources
- During chargen, different resource priority ranks give you different amount resources (as today)
- Customization karma can be used at a 1:5000 muyen ratio
Customization karma reduced to 10 points.
-
That is broadly how I'd like to see the Priority table as well. Basically a hybrid Priority / Build Point set up. Higher Priority gets you more Build Points for that Priority with Metatype and Magic Priority having a bunch of sub-options for each Meta or Awakened.
I'd like it to not use Karma at all, just arbitrary "Build Points", or "Attribute Build Points" and "Quality Build Points" if one Priority needs to be more granular than another. Also gives flexibility in costing things differently from how they're advanced in play. No need to double the karma cost of Qualities for example.
-
I can't agree with this more. Aligning the systems is a big step to overcoming the problem.
In the past - I think in the early days of SR5 - the devs talked a lot about the desire to align the systems, with karmagen as the ideal, but also the challenge of getting new players into the system and not scaring them off with a mathematically intense chargen system.
I like chargen as much as the next person, but it practically requires a tool to help you construct a character, whether it's Chummer or Hero Lab or a spreadsheet. That can be a significant barrier to entry to more casual players. I've helped dozens if not hundreds of players through the priority system and that was complicated enough. Karmagen would have been much more challenging.
As such, I think this thread is on the right track. If one of the systems has to go then it's probably the strictly scaled advancement costs.
-
I feel like the route that Cyberpunk Red went is pretty healthy. It means having more than one option in the chargen section though.
Option 1: Total Beginners
Something simple like a pre-built package or a customizable version of the traditional archetype. Make a few choices within a very constrained list of options and you are done. You'll be successful, but with room to grow into better gear and specializations. For those who have played D&D5E, think of how they assign gear to new characters. You get a few choices, but the menu is short.
Option 2: More Freedom
Probably like a set of pre-built priority choices. Pick one, and spend the resources accordingly. Gear and skill packages available as recommendations/quick picks.
Option 3: Full Customization
Point Buy/Karma Gen. I'm also in favor of the scaling build point costs where higher ranks take more BP to buy. I think skills should cost less than attributes to advance. While 1:1 is easiest to grasp for new players, I don't think it's too big an ask of new players to work out the math.
-
My personal choice is a two-stage version.
Version A would be Priority build, included in the core book, to help new players along and make sure characters lined up properly.
Version B would be full-blown Karma build, in the "Runner's Companion" book, to allow players more freedom once they knew what was going on.
And absolutely you'd want to tie the two with the same costs, even if they were hidden, to avoid minmax opportunities. (IE, taking attributes in chargen at 5 and 6 and others at 1, because build points are more efficient than karma... that'd have to go.)
-
My personal choice is a two-stage version.
Version A would be Priority build, included in the core book, to help new players along and make sure characters lined up properly.
Version B would be full-blown Karma build, in the "Runner's Companion" book, to allow players more freedom once they knew what was going on.
And absolutely you'd want to tie the two with the same costs, even if they were hidden, to avoid minmax opportunities. (IE, taking attributes in chargen at 5 and 6 and others at 1, because build points are more efficient than karma... that'd have to go.)
Min/Max opportunities are good. There are lots of players who enjoy that aspect of the game as much as playing the game. Bad is when RP choices cause significant mechanical penalties or when one particular set of mechanical choices is overwhelmingly better than all the other choices.
The distance between "Best" and "Next 2 or 3 Bests" shouldn't be noticeable in a play session. And "I want to play a smart Street Samurai with a splash of technical skills" shouldn't result in a significant compromise of combat ability. Whole lot of that is subjective though.
-
If I had to balance out the priority table, I would try out different combinations and for each one calculate the equivalent cost for creating the the same character with karma. Then adjust the amount of resources provided by priority level so that the karma cost remains more or less constant across all combinations.
This will never be perfect since karma costs are increasing with ratings, whereas with the priority system, everything is linear. This is especially true for some builds like troll bow specialists. But then again, if it were up to me, I would also change the karma cost for attributes by subtracting the racial modifier before applying the multiplier. Otherwise, who in his right mind would spend 50 karma for that last point to reach 10 Strength?
-
And as much as we try to justify that by repeating to ourselfes that "SR is a game about specialization": This creates problems. Players are more likely to start out with highly specialized characters that lack options outside their main skills, and when the time comes to spend karma, speccing into side skills doesn´t really feel like actual growth. Instead of slowly becoming an ace decker or gunslinger, you already start out as one and later just add some frills and ruffles. Yes, you could save up the Karma to raise your optimized main skill from 6 to 7 or higher, but it takes ages to get the karma needed for that one additional die, especially since you now have to raise what had been a whole skill group in 5th Edition (not to mention the bad joke that is 6th Edition training intervalls :P).
This strikes at a deeper problem with SR way outside the scope of chargen reworks.
Mainly, in SR, most skills are binary pass-fail skills where the fail state actively makes things worse for your team, which are made against target numbers that you can't generally plan ahead for or know about, which are often opaque and not really represented on a non-mechanical level, which can scale infinitely high, and which don't allow you to make choices to reduce the difficulty of the test.
A skill of 3 and an attribute of 3 SHOULD mean something, but the system basically doesn't account for that pool at all unless your opposition is pathetic. A Hatchetman inspired 'samurai who practices decking' isn't able to look at a problem where their target is rolling 10 dice to defend against them and say 'Well trying to do anything flashy is unlikely to work, so I may as well just make an easy roll that gives me a +10 and see what info that gets me first.' Instead their investments are rewarded with getting no value because even attempting the roll is a liability.
Heck, with magic you can't even realistically tell the resistance pool of your target before you go for a spell that may alert them to you, because its hard for GMs to convey perception skills and mental attributes in IC terms that make sense, and most targets have a defense pool high enough that 'dabbling mages' just flub more than half their rolls anyway.
These skills are meant to mean something, people take them because they understand logically someone who is at a semi-pro-level with a skill (which a 3 represents!) should be able to do things with them, like your unarmed 3 SHOULD let you beat up thugs in a barfight. But they don't, because the game is, at its core, really only works at the superhuman level (and its always important to remember even a fairly unoptimized runner is by default at least a little superhuman. Like most of the pre-gens fit in well enough with The Avengers). A 3 skill 3 attribute character can't generally hit what they are shooting at, but it works because SR's attack actions are designed for cyborgs who see in slow motion with robot limbs and artificially enhanced muscles and assumes your not even aiming at all and are just firing blind snapshots. But most actions don't have a 'low risk' option like taking aim to allow your 'average joe' to do something vs a relatively decent host, even if that something isn't hugely impressive.
Fixing this requires a more fundemental rework to how skills/roles work at all (which SR desperately needs, we never have had a comprehensive rework of all of them that attempts to 'modernize' them and actively evaluate what works and what doesn't about the roles, instead its mostly trying to stopgap problems and otherwise leaving them alone despite clear problems with how the roles function and interact) that adds lower bounds to the roles so that basically every skill has an answer to the question 'What can you get on a run consistently that isn't likely to blow up in your face, without huge variance based on how powerful the target is and without requiring pre-knowledge of the run, from a skill of 3, and an attribute of 3?'
-
The Feb 2020 errata fixed the issue of Adepts being able to buy Magic with Metatype Adjustment Points and not getting PowerPoints as a result, but in doing so it created an imbalance. Now Adepts can happily increase Magic with these points and gain Powers which feels like it wasn't the original intent and also giving them an advantage over magicians who can increase Magic, but not receive additional spells.
I was thinking of requiring an Adept to spend 2 Adjustment Points to increase their Magic by 1 (and gain the PowerPoint) to try to restore some of the balance. Would be good to know if anyone can see a problem with that or if there is a known official fix for the problem.
-
Now Adepts can happily increase Magic with these points and gain Powers ... giving them an advantage over magicians who can increase Magic, but not receive additional spells.
Magicians can happily buy spells spells at the low cost of 5 karma per spell ... giving them an advantage over adepts who can not buy power points for just 5 karma each.
-
The Feb 2020 errata fixed the issue of Adepts being able to buy Magic with Metatype Adjustment Points and not getting PowerPoints as a result, but in doing so it created an imbalance. Now Adepts can happily increase Magic with these points and gain Powers which feels like it wasn't the original intent and also giving them an advantage over magicians who can increase Magic, but not receive additional spells.
Speaking with a completely personal and in no way "official, endorsed by the powers that be" opinion: in no world are full magicians disadvantaged when compared to adepts. The reason you can't buy spells in character generation is directly linked to the Priority table. If you COULD buy spells in chargen, there'd be absolutely no reason to go higher than Magic Priority D (unless you're a Mystic Adept, but just because they have a reason to ever pick A doesn't mean the Magic priority choices are balanced across the board)
I do daresay that if the priority chart worked in a way where there WAS a good reason for every awakened character (not just MysAds) to go higher than D, spells/complex forms probably COULD be allowed to be bought in chargen.
-
Magicians can happily buy spells spells at the low cost of 5 karma per spell ... giving them an advantage over adepts who can not buy power points for just 5 karma each.
Thanks Xenon; that is a really good point. I felt it had unbalanced the priority selection for Adepts a bit, but any small advantage at creation probably will balance out fairly quickly because of this.
-
But you are correct that there is very little reason for an Adept (or Aspected Conjurers) to take anything else than Magic or Resonance priority D (as magic rating is typically always cheaper to increase via metahuman adjustment points).
Then again, as long as you think you can survive on just 2 spells (as well as using spirits! and astral perception and astral projection!) for the first mission you should probably (from a strict min/max karma point of view) go Magic or Resonance priority D as a Full Magician as well (the 6 spells you miss out at chargen will only cost you 30 post chargen karma).
Typically only mystic adepts that should go Magic and Resonance priority A or B (as this give them access to power points during chargen that can only be gained via initiation post chargen).
-
Min/Max opportunities are good.
I disagree because that "opportunity" is not an opportunity, it's a necessity.
I've seen plenty of disgruntled Players leave a Shadowrun game to never return because of the trap of "not min/maxing" during Priority picks and chargen.
Mainly, in SR, most skills are binary pass-fail skills where the fail state actively makes things worse for your team, which are made against target numbers that you can't generally plan ahead for or know about, which are often opaque and not really represented on a non-mechanical level, which can scale infinitely high, and which don't allow you to make choices to reduce the difficulty of the test.
And this is the second problem with chargen. Players who know this, go in with a min/max plan, Players who don't know this often make tragically suboptimal choices then find themselves stymied at every turn. If they're lucky they can buy up something after 4-5 runs (in older editions, I have no idea now how many sessions it would take to bring a 3 Stat to a 5 now), but they'll always be behind the curve of any PCs who were min/maxed.
That's why I enjoyed point buy in 3e so much, it leveled chargen.
-
Min/Max opportunities are good.
I disagree because that "opportunity" is not an opportunity, it's a necessity.
I've seen plenty of disgruntled Players leave a Shadowrun game to never return because of the trap of "not min/maxing" during Priority picks and chargen.
Mainly, in SR, most skills are binary pass-fail skills where the fail state actively makes things worse for your team, which are made against target numbers that you can't generally plan ahead for or know about, which are often opaque and not really represented on a non-mechanical level, which can scale infinitely high, and which don't allow you to make choices to reduce the difficulty of the test.
And this is the second problem with chargen. Players who know this, go in with a min/max plan, Players who don't know this often make tragically suboptimal choices then find themselves stymied at every turn. If they're lucky they can buy up something after 4-5 runs (in older editions, I have no idea now how many sessions it would take to bring a 3 Stat to a 5 now), but they'll always be behind the curve of any PCs who were min/maxed.
That's why I enjoyed point buy in 3e so much, it leveled chargen.
Which is why you shouldn't make characters in a vacuum. Tables should allow mulligans and help out new players. Have a session zero and give out let players know what kind of opposition they'll be facing. And GMs should scale difficulty as appropriate. Additionally it usually doesn't matter if the Face "only" has 11 Dice in Con when the Decker has 18 in Cracking. The Face isn't taking on Hosts and the Decker isn't negotiating with the Johnson. PCs should be able to have their spotlight moments in whatever their schtick is without taking anything away from another PC.
But mostly, set expectations, help out other players, let them respec/mulligan if it's not working for them.