[Bruce]

imho, IE's (and I-whatevers) make for interesting plot points and NPCs, but I would NEVER allow a PC; not even one who claimed to be 'just a descendant'; into my campaigns.

But since I have as an NPC a survivor of the 1st world...

This is kind of why most people hate IE's.  "Good enough for the GM,  but there's no way it's good enough for a PC" is an attitude an awful lot of players really hate.

I've never encountered those players, I guess.  I mean, I don't have players wanting to start a company and work their way up to AAA status, either.  Or wanting to play a Dragon, even a lesser one.

You could run that level or type of game, sure; but that's not the campaign I'm running, or would be comfortable in running.

See, that's just it, though.  You don't need to run any certain "level" of campaign to let someone call themselves an Immortal Elf, or (especially) the descendent of one.  You just let them write "immunity to aging" on their sheet under Qualities, and then probably "Enemy," and you talk to them to see how entangled they want to be in top-tier elven or draconic affairs. 

Being "Immortal" doesn't need to mean they're thousands (or even hundreds, or even lots and lots of dozens) of years old.  It might just mean a player likes the idea of their character not having to worry about dying of old age.  If they want to be the great-grandson of one of the canon IE's, but removed from them in terms of power level, finances, and personal influence...so what?  Why not let 'em?  It shows they've done a little research for the game, at least, and care about the setting a little, and it's just given you, the GM, some plot hooks.

But when you say "IE's are awesome plot hooks and NPCs for me, the GM, to use," right next to "but I would NEVER let a player like that into my campaign," it triggers some warning bells, at least to me.  Especially when you then go on to say you've got a pet NPC that's a survivor of the 1st world.  The GM already has the whole universe up his sleeve, and the deck is wholly stacked against his players.  When something as trivial as "I have a super long lifespan, unless I die in this incredibly dangerous profession I've chosen" is something a character really wants, and if they've got a background that fleshes out the character without dominating the campaign, I tend to fall on their side in the argument. 

"Never" is a really loaded word, when a GM is talking about toys he's allowed to play with and toys a PC might also want to touch sometimes.

A GM who's 'stacking the deck' against his players is running a very different campaign, one which treats the players as adversaries, rather than motivators for a cool story.  There needs to be a real risk (that's what Edge is for, after all), but the objective is for everyone to have fun.  (Of course, there are groups that enjoy high casualty rates; I'm simply not part of such a group, nor am I interested in being so.)

And yes, I don't see how allowing an IE (even a newly-minted one) wouldn't change the character and complexity of the campaign.  The headaches the group has right now with a were-drake/dracoform trying to hide her very existence from discovery are quite sufficient for both me AND my players, thank you.

And I'm saying what I would do and allow; not 'no one should ever do this!'  Some groups might well enjoy the inevitable plots and machievellian twists that (should) result from such a character.  Some GMs might relish the opportunity to explore and create parts of the 6th World.  I just don't happen to be one of them, is all.

[RulezLawyerZ]

Would you let a player in your game say he was Damien Knight's son, or the mistress of a Corporate Court justice?

Say? Yep, absolutely. Believe, even. There is all sorts of potential mayhem that can happen with that sort of big claim, especially when it leads to a PC writing checks depending on that other person to cash them. If it's dramatically appropriate (or let's face it, funny), maybe their claim is actually true.

Except that the reason Frosty got to be Harlequin's apprentice was because she was Ehran's daughter, which is also the reason she got taken under Big D's wing ... If a player wants to get their hands on that kind of power, they should earn it in some way, and work for it, not just be given an 'in' because of their parentage.

Lots of people are who they are, where they are, because of who they were born to, or who they married, or who they had the dirty photos of (although I suppose that might qualify as earning it ). "Getting there" isn't what takes all the work, staying there is, and there will always be someone looking to unseat the top dog (especially if they look like they got there due to favoritism). Or maybe it's not what they think it is; maybe they're patsies, meant to take the blame or maybe they're meant to provide entertainment for the outrageously wealthy. Maybe daddy dearest is himself an imposter, using the character(s) to cover his exit? Hmm... the more I type, the more I want to do this to my players. "Evening, guys. Tonight we're playing Trading Places, Shadowrun edition."

[Crimsondude]

"Evening, guys. Tonight we're playing Trading Places, Shadowrun edition."

That would be fantastic.

[psycho835]

Too bad the pay is only 1 nuyen.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

No, that's the bet.  The pay - presuming you get a chance to get back at the guys who ruined your life - is traditionally millions.

[psycho835]

Only if you can play the stock market.

[Mirikon]

Only if you can play the stock market.

This is why I prefer The Sting to Trading Places.

[Tarislar]

All I'm saying is I don't see what the problem is with letting someone play Frosty the day before, where their background fluff mentions a natural aptitude for magical power, growing up missing (at least) one parent, and where their character sheet has a few Qualities that are, in all likelihood, never actually even going to come up in-game (because when was the last time one of your PCs died of old age, anyways?).

This actually got me thinking about the rules.
Ignoring Age as its never likely to happen.  If you just added up the other Immunity classes,  What sort of Positive Quality point value would you put on "Immortal".
25 ?   50 ?
I figure its 4/10 points for a single Immunity, so, so 25 to 50 for ALL immunities is really  not that much.   No Aging is a freebie thrown in.

[Senko]

Thing is, there's those like me who'd be happy to accept an "immortal" lite due to dilution as its the no aging that's the important part to us not the other immunities.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

100 karma.  What immortals have is the critter power 'Immunity' - 2x Essence in the equivalent of Hardened Armor (Essence in automatic hits plus 2x Essence in dice, plus regular resistance - i.e. Body + Willpower) against the thing.  I looked at that and decided on 50 karma for Immunity to Toxins, 45 for Diseases, and 5 for Age -- 100 as the package deal, with the requirement that the character cannot have any implant-friendly qualities, and must be either a full mage, a mystic adept, or have purchased Latent Awakening for one of those.

[DeathStrobe]

100 karma.  What immortals have is the critter power 'Immunity' - 2x Essence in the equivalent of Hardened Armor (Essence in automatic hits plus 2x Essence in dice, plus regular resistance - i.e. Body + Willpower) against the thing.  I looked at that and decided on 50 karma for Immunity to Toxins, 45 for Diseases, and 5 for Age -- 100 as the package deal, with the requirement that the character cannot have any implant-friendly qualities, and must be either a full mage, a mystic adept, or have purchased Latent Awakening for one of those.

Only 5 Karma for immunity to aging? Would that cost go into being a vampire too? Obviously being a vamp would cost more since you also get + to a lot of attributes, and some vision enhancements, and regeneration, mist form, and...maybe being a vampire would be crazy expensive.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

What does immunity to age get you?  'You don't age, you don't get old.'  I used to be on the 'oh holy crap that's powerful, immortality whee' bandwagon, until I really started to look at the what it does factor.  Without 'age rays' or aging/youth magic, immortality does ... almost nothing.  It gives you a good backstory, it gives you a good future-story presuming you survive the more immediate dangers, it means you never have to retire the character due to that one factor - and that's it.

There's a reason why, in HERO System, you can be immortal for 5 measley points - equivalent to 1d6 worth of an attack, which ain't much.  Presuming they don't gain the other critter-power immunities immediately, immunity to age is a negligible 'gimmie'.  It is interesting to note that the writeup for Harlequin has the Immunities, while the one(s) for Lugh Surehand and Frosty do not.  Perhaps those immunities are not innate, and are instead gained from long-term training, magic, or whatever.

In which case, yeah, 'immunity to age' is a gimmie.

[Tarislar]

and Frosty do not.

Her original write up in Harlequin's Back has all the Immunities listed.

[Senko]

No offense but that seems a bit excessive TheWyrmOrouborous.

Personally I'd drop the costs for aging because really while I want it, it doesn't do anything in game terms. There are no ghosts that age you with each attack, no magics that age you when you use them and most campaigns take place over a few years tops. 5 Karma is equivilent to Bilingual (a native ability to speak another language for social tests, analytical 2 dice for pattern recognition tests, ambidextrous negate a -2 dice penalty for using both hands). Unless your talking 4th ed I'd put it at 1 or 2 myself if that.

Now the others are a much more valuable property and I'll take your calculations there however I wouldn't have the no cyber/bioware criteria. Afterall any cyber/bio you add reduces your essence and thus reduces your "immunity" so you become slowly more vulnerable to toxins, disease and poisons.

If your talking build points from fourth that would be different 5 isn't so bad even 100 for a raciual package could be viable.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Take it however you want, Senko.  I'm talking a BECKs-style karma creation system, in which the karma point cost for something at character generation is the exact same cost as that which you would purchase in-game.  100 out of 1000 points is quite a bit - but considering what you get, it's a steal.

Also, I did not require the character to not have cyberware or bioware; I restricted the character from having Positive Qualites that affected the impact of implant-ware, so that if they get implants, they get all the bad that's coming to them.

Seriously - read what I write, not what you think I write.