NEWS

[SR4a] BP Character Generation: the Math You Really Should Know

  • 81 Replies
  • 52779 Views

All4BigGuns

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
« Reply #60 on: (00:12:52/05-28-13) »
The contention isn't the pool, but rather the Force.

Exactly. The rules say that the dice pool uses the lower value, but where it says all other purposes includes the Force in the same manner as it applies to Adept powers (which the FAQ attempts to contradict there as well).
(SR5) Homebrew Archetypes

Tangled Currents (Persistent): 33 Karma, 60,000 nuyen

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
« Reply #61 on: (02:41:01/05-28-13) »
Basically the FAQ adjusted a bad wording and some people don't like it, so they use it as argument that the FAQ sucks balls rather than as argument that RAW was written poorly there and needs a RAI errata to keep Mystic Adepts painfully nerfed/balanced.

Note, though, that the FAQ DOES contradict RAW on one big thing: Determining the maximum level of adept powers. RAW says the full Magic value applies, the FAQ errata'd that to the Adept Magic value. You could probably consider that an errata on FanPro that they forgot to fix in the SR4a printing. If SR4a had had proper errata (including the stealth-errata on bows) that likely would have been in there.

Now the FAQ says that the Force of sorcery/conjuring is part of the magical skill, same goes for the Magic used when using Attribute Boosts and such. The full Magic applies to Initiation limit, pressing through astral barriers, Masking, being assessed, etc. Basically anything using Magic that isn't a magical skill or adept power.

RHat

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
« Reply #62 on: (03:34:27/05-28-13) »
Er, no.  The FAQ involved one guy who takes the "Adeptrun" point of view trying to force it upon everyone as rules without the normal editing process.  It neither "clarifies" nor "adjusts" the wording, it CONTRADICTS the wording.
"Speech"
Thoughts
Matrix <<Text>> "Speech"
Spirits and Sprites

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
« Reply #63 on: (03:44:25/05-28-13) »
It neither "clarifies" nor "adjusts" the wording, it CONTRADICTS the wording.
Note, though, that the FAQ DOES contradict RAW on ...

RHat

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
« Reply #64 on: (04:04:11/05-28-13) »
Part of the contradiction is casting Force.
"Speech"
Thoughts
Matrix <<Text>> "Speech"
Spirits and Sprites

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
« Reply #65 on: (04:16:54/05-28-13) »
That's your view on it. I consider it a clarification of what "to use with Magic-based skills" exactly means. So no, I do not consider that part a contradiction. Yes, it contradicts your interpretation, it contradicts what likely many use as RAI. It doesn't contradict RAW because RAW isn't clear enough on the matter. Which is what FAQs are for.

RHat

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
« Reply #66 on: (04:22:20/05-28-13) »
Except that your skill has nothing to do with your casting/summoning force - that's purely determined by the attribute.  That's assigning a new significance that otherwise exists nowhere in the rules; hence a contradiction.
« Last Edit: (04:24:03/05-28-13) by RHat »
"Speech"
Thoughts
Matrix <<Text>> "Speech"
Spirits and Sprites

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
« Reply #67 on: (04:38:36/05-28-13) »
If you want to argue semantics, I can bring up half a dozen counter-arguments on that but honestly, I don't feel like turning this in a heated rule-lawyer/munchkin debate. You don't trust the FAQ. That's fine. You consider it a contradiction. That's fine. I consider it a mere clarification. That's fine. It's still your RAI vs my RAI vs official RAI.

The FAQ explains that the magic "to use with Magic-based skills" is for all aspects of using those skills. That, according to the FAQ, includes the maximum allowed Spell Force and overcasting. When you spellcast, you check your magic to see what Force you can cast as and when you're overcasting. According to the FAQ, only the points that you can use with Magic-based skills apply in this Step 2 of Spellcasting.

If you disagree with that, fine by me. Want to consider it a contradiction rather than a clarification, fine by me. But the FAQ is the closest to RAW we can get without an errata, so it will be what many GMs will follow. And it IS part of the rules, so it's not a matter of the rules or the FAQ, it's a matter of the FAQ's RAI or the GM's own RAI.

RHat

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6317
« Reply #68 on: (04:59:42/05-28-13) »
The FAQ cannot create rules text - but this isn't the place for discussing it.
"Speech"
Thoughts
Matrix <<Text>> "Speech"
Spirits and Sprites

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
« Reply #69 on: (05:02:09/05-28-13) »
And as I already explained, I don't see it as creation but as clarification.

UmaroVI

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2655
« Reply #70 on: (09:53:53/05-28-13) »
You can still make Mystic Adepts that aren't sad about their life choices if the FAQ rule is in place, but the good or really good version of Heightened Concentration is allowed.


emsquared

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
  • Super Perfundo
« Reply #71 on: (12:05:29/06-03-13) »
The most recent and final planned addition, Part 5: Adepts, OR; Why Does Everybody Hate Me?! is up. Enjoy, everyone!

Dinendae

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
« Reply #72 on: (08:21:25/06-05-13) »
The most recent and final planned addition, Part 5: Adepts, OR; Why Does Everybody Hate Me?! is up. Enjoy, everyone!

Thanks! It pretty much confirms what I already knew; I'll be waiting until 5th Ed launches before trying out a mystic adept.

emsquared

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
  • Super Perfundo
« Reply #73 on: (10:42:24/06-06-13) »
So, I decided to engage in a little experiment to see if there is actually anything to all this BP Math business. Iíd never really done the math of a before and after situation, so thatís what I decided to do here. And since the goal is ostensibly to use this information to come out with the same PC that might otherwise be inefficient I applied some rules:

What Iíve done is taken the Weapon Specialist template from the SR4A core book and calculated her net post-chargen Karma efficiency, then applied the karma-efficiency "rules" and did the calculations again. For consistency/comparison sake, I had the goal of keeping every Skill the template had (though adding more is fine) and maintaining the flavor of the character through Qualities (though they may be changed if it still maintains the flavor). Everything else was up for change.

Weapon Specialist Before
Karma Efficiency -243 = Elf, 0 + Attributes, -135 + Skills, -88 + Qualities, -20 (more PQ BP spent than NQ BP gained)
Skill Pools:
Archery                             5
Armorer                            8
Close Combat Group   6
Demolitions                    6
Dodge                              5
Firearms Group             7
Heavy Weapons            5
Negotiation                     6
Throwing Weapons      5

Really itís hard to believe that was a 400 BP character.

Weapon Specialist After
Karma Efficiency -90 = Elf, 0 + Attributes, -50 + Skills, -60 + Qualities, +20
Skill Pools:
Archery                             11
Armorer                           10
Close Combat Group   11
Demolitions                    8
Dodge                              10
Firearms Group             14
Heavy Weapons             11
Negotiation                      7
Perception                        6
Throwing Weapons        11

What did I do to the build? See the attached file for details. But in short, I took more Neg Qualities, "better" and fewer Posi Qs, devoted more points to and re-arranged the Attribute point distribution to align with the Skill-set, re-arranged Skill point distribution (and added a Perception Skill), devoted more BP to cred and used that cred to buy 'ware to bolster de-emphasized Attributes, and re-arranged Contact point distribution (eliminating a redundant Contact).

To sum it up though, not only did this PC ďgainĒ roughly 150 Karma that the player would have had to gain through play otherwise if she had started in her karma-inefficient state, but also added 46 dice in her main Skill pools, which was almost double what she had to begin with. That 150 Karma is probably longer than most campaigns last, on average, no? Or, what, 6 mos. or more of weekly play, at least a year of monthly?

Anyway, maybe it's hard to see here because of the stark difference in mechanics, but the point is not to reach a net-positive Karma start, not only is that nearly impossible, but if you did it, it would be a really wonky looking PC with some massive weaknesses. The point is that you can build the PC you want - RP and story wise, but still get the most out of their mechanics.
« Last Edit: (10:52:35/06-06-13) by emsquared »

I_V_Saur

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 244
« Reply #74 on: (18:25:03/06-06-13) »
Should have a reference on page one, to that post, for ease of access.