Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: bullcon@*****.com (Bull)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:21:27 -0400
I'd say that now, 2-3 is average norm, while 3-4 is gonna be the
Shadowrunner "average".

Another thing to keep in mind, and this is a change, for skills is
that a Skill of Zero no longer means "No skill". It means the "The
normal level of untrained competency" in this skill. This means the
normal, average everyday person will have 0 in driving, and still be
able to drive. 0 Pistols means they know enough to point and pull the
trigger. They may even know enough to check the safety. But they
haven't really used a gun, so don;t know enough to adjust for kick and
the like.

Since you can always use just Skill, and don;t default to some wierd
place anymore, it makes 0 less of a hinderance.

Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that you're not much
better than your average person. You're now a starting character,
maybe with a little training. The idea of an SR2 or SR3 Shadowrunner
being a "newbie" to the streets was lauyghable at best, since they
were all geniuses with olympic level physical skills and were master
marksmen, deckers, or spellslingers. Hardly "Joe Wageslave" who left
his corp and is now trying to make his way in the world, or "Bob the
Ganger" who's trying to rise out of the gutter.

And hey, if you WANT to maintain the old Shaodwrunner godlike power
levels, feel free. The system doesn;t actually break that much if you
decide to simply remove the caps (Or replace them with the psuedocaps
SR3 had) and/or jack up the starting BP.

Bull
Message no. 2
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 07:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
> Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that you're not much
> better than your average person. You're now a starting character,
> maybe with a little training. The idea of an SR2 or SR3
> Shadowrunner
> being a "newbie" to the streets was lauyghable at best, since they
> were all geniuses with olympic level physical skills and were
> master
> marksmen, deckers, or spellslingers. Hardly "Joe Wageslave" who
> left
> his corp and is now trying to make his way in the world, or "Bob
> the
> Ganger" who's trying to rise out of the gutter.

Actually, I sort of disagree on this. The world is full of people
with tremendous athletic ability or prodigious education who would
not last 30 seconds in some inner cities. And a master marksman who
spent 10 years training for the olympics is a perfect explanation for
a suddenly SINless long gun with a 6 in Rifles and a case of Combat
Paralysis... "Fragging hell, that's a person... I... I can't!" I
have seen plenty of starting characters over the years who were above
average in their old life, and suddenly barely surviving the shadows.
The big fish in the fishbowl is still tiny in the pond. The problem
with all the various editions of SR is the same problem inherent to
any char gen system. If there is no story, no depth and background
to a character, then the numbers exist in limbo. You have to make
your players tell you why... why a guy with a 6 Intelligence,
Quickness, and Willpower found himself living on the streets. Why a
guy with Assault Rifles 5 and Small Unit Tactics 5 is rubbing
shoulders with the dregs of the SINless. Why someone with a 600,000
nuyen cyberware package is forced to live outside society and take
corp scraps to survive. And you hound them until the story makes
sense. And you can always, under Build Point systems, give less BP.
You want weaker characters, start with 90 BP. Most of my Combat
Night games use 90 BP or less characters.

I think you will find, once SR4 leaves the hands of the playtesters,
that it will be plagued by munchkins as much as any edition.
"God-like" is a pretty relative term, after all. Things break
whenever someone places min-max mathematics over (role)playability.

======Korishinzo
--Has spent 120 BP just making a charming corporate marketing VP...
wouldn't last one Turn in combat... and would wet himself at the
first hint of criminal activity (except maybe insider trading). ;)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 3
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:06:12 -0400
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 07:54:52, Korishinzo wrote:

>Actually, I sort of disagree on this. The world is full of people
>with tremendous athletic ability or prodigious education who would
>not last 30 seconds in some inner cities. And a master marksman who
>spent 10 years training for the olympics is a perfect explanation for
>a suddenly SINless long gun with a 6 in Rifles and a case of Combat
>Paralysis... "Fragging hell, that's a person... I... I can't!"
>

Amen to that.

It's not because someone is competent in real life that he will have the
same level of competency under stress or in another context. I remember
the story of a Karate guy who witnessed the beating of a woman in the
hands of a street thug. In the perfect gentleman that he was, he stepped
in and cremated the punk's ass. What do he received as reward from the
woman? She pulled out a gun and she shot him dead right after he dropped
the thug. You see, the woman was a prostitute and the thug was her pimp
in witch she was dearly in love with. It's not brute strength that got
that Karate-ka, it was the lack of "Cultural" underground knowledge.

>I have seen plenty of starting characters over the years who were above
>average in their old life, and suddenly barely surviving the shadows.
> The big fish in the fishbowl is still tiny in the pond. The problem
>with all the various editions of SR is the same problem inherent to
>any char gen system. If there is no story, no depth and background
>to a character, then the numbers exist in limbo. You have to make
>your players tell you why... why a guy with a 6 Intelligence,
>Quickness, and Willpower found himself living on the streets. Why a
>guy with Assault Rifles 5 and Small Unit Tactics 5 is rubbing
>shoulders with the dregs of the SINless. Why someone with a 600,000
>nuyen cyberware package is forced to live outside society and take
>corp scraps to survive. And you hound them until the story makes
>sense.
>

This can be resumed by one single question:
"Why this character is running the Shadows?"

For me, this question is much more valid if it's directed to players who
put money or magic into "Priority A" during character creation. With one
million NuYen, you can buy a permanent high lifestyle and being magician
can give you a well-payed job (or three) very fast. I will go a little
further: the world of Shadowrun in the 2060 is filled with so much
wonders and technological advances that i barely see why i would want to
be a Shadowrunner without a very good reason.

Of course good reasons exists but the mess created by D&D still bring us
the bane of the munschkinism. Of course, a good dose of common sense and
sensible role-playing can easily set back some of the worst reflexes. I
have yet to see a Troll who dint get shot into overflow in the first
three game sessions. Munschkins exists because GMs let them be.

The lead PC in my most active campaign is a "Million NuYen Samurai", and
a well-rounded one. She is a half burned-up aspected magician with 750
000 Nuyen worth of bioware in the body and a very powerful ally. At
first sight, the character seem to be a munschkin but the background
make her human. She was orphaned at young age with only her big sister
to watch over her. The big sister became a shadowrunner to pay the bills
and ended-up at the wrong end of a corp-sponsored operation against
Tamanous. She met the corporate sponsor of the operation and he hired
her. After a series of successful operations, the sponsor offered to
"Upgrade" her with bioware. She accepted but vanished right before the
day of the surgery. Fearing for the worse, the sponsor offered the
bioware package to the PC, who accepted. Right after her time of rest
following the surgery, she left to seek for her big sister. She found
her. She was straped on an operating table, in a Tamanous "clinic",
gutted-out of half of her internal organs and very much awake. She asked
for the PC to ableviate her pain and the Pc killed her.

The wonder behind that character is the flavor of what the Shadows
represent in my point of view: emotional baggage. The player, an
excellent roleplayer, always played her as a distant, calculated young
woman with a serious case of post-traumatic stress disorder and a
crusade against Tamanous. As far as i am concerned, that character is
the most interesting PC i ever had in any of my games so far.

Another thing: I have a NPC who is a genius of the small unit tactics
and a virtuoso of the battletac system. Why he's doing mercenary work?
Because he got fired of his post as a general of the UCAS Marine Recon
Corps when they discover that he's gay.

>And you can always, under Build Point systems, give less BP.
>You want weaker characters, start with 90 BP. Most of my Combat
>Night games use 90 BP or less characters.
>

This is a cool option. It gives some real pride to the player when these
characters survive a tough nignt.
I love the idea, i might just run away with it!
:)

>I think you will find, once SR4 leaves the hands of the playtesters,
>that it will be plagued by munchkins as much as any edition.
>"God-like" is a pretty relative term, after all. Things break
>whenever someone places min-max mathematics over (role)playability.
>

The only God around a roleplaying table is the master itself. Some tend
to forget it.
That remember me the last time a NPC shot one of those "God-Like"
characters.
Who knew you can drop a Troll Physical Adept with two slugs of a cheap
Ares Pred...
:D
Message no. 4
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 12:52:26 +0100
At 03:54 PM 8/26/2005, Korishinzo wrote:
>Actually, I sort of disagree on this. The world is full of people
>with tremendous athletic ability or prodigious education who would
>not last 30 seconds in some inner cities. And a master marksman who
>spent 10 years training for the olympics is a perfect explanation for
>a suddenly SINless long gun with a 6 in Rifles and a case of Combat
>Paralysis... "Fragging hell, that's a person... I... I can't!" I
>have seen plenty of starting characters over the years who were above
>average in their old life, and suddenly barely surviving the shadows.

I'm surprised you didn't mention Bast.
An A-Boy Ganger, (thanks to N.E.R.P.S.:Shadowlore) who began with maximum
funds (capped at Priority B) and Priority A on Magic (MageAdept, designed
as a burnout) and a total of five skills in the 'Proffesional or better'
region - Athletics (Proffesional (including Adept Ability), Stealth (again
Adept enhanced), Philosophy, Chess and Zoology (Innate on a specialisation)...
A little over half of his funds were spent on his Bioware, he picked up a
shotgun, some contacts and some clothes and then blew the rest on synth,
joygirls and generally ganging around. As a Physical Adept he's in
inoffensive coward, as a 'runner he's still a ganger and as a ganger he's
full of bluff and bluster, the meanest thing on the streets (as long as
he's got mates backing him up.
Slowly he's working out his new place in the world.


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 5
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:29:08 +0200
According to Bull, on 26-8-05 06:21 the word on the street was...

> Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that you're not much
> better than your average person. You're now a starting character,
> maybe with a little training.

This is something that I like on the one hand, but don't on the other. I
like it because it means characters have a lot of possibilities for
improvement in them, but I don't like it because I don't think that a
new character must also automatically always be new to shadowrunning.

> The idea of an SR2 or SR3 Shadowrunner
> being a "newbie" to the streets was lauyghable at best

Unless you specifically made a character that way, of course. However,
you usually ended up with more points in some areas than you really
wanted for new runners...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 6
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Sanger)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 09:43:29 -0400
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 12:21:27AM -0400, Bull wrote:
> Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that you're not much
> better than your average person. You're now a starting character,

That's a matter of definition. "not much better" is true compared to
the SR3 version: SR3 characters could be maximized with little room for
improvement in their areas of expertise (other than mages).

SR4 runners are a far cry from level 1 characters in That Other Game,
however. You can create SR4 characters that are significantly more
skilled, cybered, and prepared than the "average person". There's just
a lot more room for improvement.

Flattening out the success curve means that an average SR3 person
wouldn't be able to do much at difficulty, where an average SR4 person
can do a bit better. So the average SR4 person is a bit more
competative to the runner, rather than the runner being weaker.

YMMV, of course.
--
SwiftOne / Brett Sanger
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 7
From: keith@***********.com (Keith Johnson)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:20:10 -0700
>> Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that
>>you're not much better than your average person.
>>You're now a starting character, maybe with a
>>little training.
>
>This is something that I like on the one hand,
>but don't on the other. I like it because it
>means characters have a lot of possibilities for
>improvement in them, but I don't like it because
>I don't think that a new character must also
>automatically always be new to shadowrunning.

As a Power Gamer(tm) this aspect of SR4 is a
downer for me. I enjoyed the ability to make
expert (yet decently rounded) folks.

One of the things I *hate* about *most* RPGs is
that, while the players quickly become experts
in the rules and the game setting, only SR2-3
(and a handful of other games) allow (as part
and parcel of the game design) new characters
to be as expert in their word as the players
are.

I can make a character who is an expert mage,
but new to the shadows, and expert merc who
has been in the shadows for years, an expert
face who grew up in the shadows, or... if I
feel like it, a guy with next to no useful
skills who has lots of opportunity for growth.

I'm sad that it appears SR4 will take that
away from me.

Now, I know that I can have a game the way
I want, but the thing that I liked about SR
was that I never had to convince anyone to
try a powergame.

Ah well...

-k
Message no. 8
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:34:19 -0600
On 8/29/05, Keith Johnson <keith@***********.com> wrote:
> >> Plus, the idea for Starting characters now is that
> >>you're not much better than your average person.
> >>You're now a starting character, maybe with a
> >>little training.
>
> As a Power Gamer(tm) this aspect of SR4 is a
> downer for me. I enjoyed the ability to make
> expert (yet decently rounded) folks.

You can do that in SR4. You can start with one attribute at 6, and
one skill at 6. If the attribute with the 6 is the one the skill is
based off of, then you have a pool of 12d6 for that skill. I.e.,
you're an expert. And you will have enough points left over to round
out the character.

And if that still doesn't float your boat, change it. Increase the
number of build points in your game and alter/remove the "one maximum
attribute" and "one skill at 6" rules.

:)

--
-Graht
Message no. 9
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 19:48:39 +0200
According to Keith Johnson, on 29-8-05 19:20 the word on the street was...

> One of the things I *hate* about *most* RPGs is
> that, while the players quickly become experts
> in the rules and the game setting

You must play with a different kind of people than I do ;) The majority
of the people in my group over the years never read more about the rules
or the setting than they absolutely needed to -- which is to say that it
varied between a little bit and just about nothing. I've even had ones
who still had to be told how to roll Initiative after 3 or 4 years...

> I'm sad that it appears SR4 will take that
> away from me.

Yes and no. The normal building point amount you get is specifically
mentioned as being _recommended_, which leaves it open to more variation
than most games do. OTOH, you would need to convince the other players
that a higher BP limit may be a good thing.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 10
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 19:54:39 +0200
According to Graht, on 29-8-05 19:34 the word on the street was...

> You can do that in SR4. You can start with one attribute at 6, and
> one skill at 6. If the attribute with the 6 is the one the skill is
> based off of, then you have a pool of 12d6 for that skill. I.e.,
> you're an expert. And you will have enough points left over to round
> out the character.

I'd do it somewhat the other way around, though: put the attribute that
most of your skills are based on at 6, and then take those skills at a
decent but not maxed-out rating, leaving you with more points to spend
on levels in other things :)

But then again, I don't like one-trick characters -- I'm not overly fond
of them as a GM (because they are invariably very good at that one
trick, and try to turn all situations so they can use it), and like them
a lot less as a player (in SR3, I'd normally take plenty of skills at
2-4, which of course usually meant that "those other" characters often
did things better than I did, but tended to be a bit lost at other times).

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 11
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Sanger)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:01:33 -0400
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:20:10AM -0700, Keith Johnson wrote:
> As a Power Gamer(tm) this aspect of SR4 is a
> downer for me. I enjoyed the ability to make
> expert (yet decently rounded) folks.

You can quite easily do this in SR4. Someone with skills of 4 and
attributes of 5 will have a wide array of skills they are quite
accomplished at. Perfect for the "experienced runner that isn't the
best in the world".

You aren't making Fastjack, but you aren't making Just Entered The
Shadows. (unless you want to)

> I can make a character who is an expert mage,
> but new to the shadows, and expert merc who
> has been in the shadows for years, an expert
> face who grew up in the shadows, or... if I
> feel like it, a guy with next to no useful
> skills who has lots of opportunity for growth.

All of these are possible, depending on the definition of "expert".
Also, as SR4 is from-the-book BP based, you can raise or lower the BP
number for your game as appropriate. (though that will take the
convincing you lament.)

Still, don't be too sad until you try making some characters. Once I
accepted that I wouldn't be able to have all 6's in skills, I found I
could make characters that would still work very well as grizzled
veterans of the shadows.

--
SwiftOne / Brett Sanger
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 12
From: keith@***********.com (Keith Johnson)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:11:35 -0700
> You must play with a different kind of
>people than I do ;)

I must... Most of the gamers I hang with devour
a game's world... that's kind of sad when you
think about it.

>>I'm sad that it appears SR4 will take that
>>away from me.
>
>Yes and no... OTOH, you would need to convince
>the other players that a higher BP limit may
>be a good thing.

Not gonna happen. "recommended" means "canon"
in the circles in which I have been playing.
The reason that that tends to be that way is
that some of the devourers of worlds tend
toward unbridled, irrational exuberance for
creativity
Message no. 13
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:23:17 +0200
According to Keith Johnson, on 29-8-05 20:11 the word on the street was...

> I must... Most of the gamers I hang with devour
> a game's world... that's kind of sad when you
> think about it.

Only one person in my group is like that. Many of the other (ex-)players
(we've lost most of the group in recent months :( ) almost couldn't be
bothered to read the useful parts of the books about their kinds of
characters, let alone the rest of the source material...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 14
From: keith@***********.com (Keith Johnson)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:24:00 -0700
>You can do that in SR4.

<stuff deleted>


Well, my favorite character had high INT and WIL, was
a Mage, had high Sorcery and Conjuring skills, (and of course
no resources)... the story behind the character was that
he was a top graduate from MIT&T worked at a corp until
he was used by one of the execs as a scapegoat, hence a
newbie in the shadows, running for his life.

I can't build that character with the default character
generation system in SR4.

Since I'm a HERO systems sort of guy, I build characters
backwards. I start with a basic concept, then I build
the character stats, then I develop a background to explain
the whys and wherefores of the attributes, skills and
powers.

It looks like, in SR4, I won't have the opportunity to
create this level of character by default... I'll have
to tweak the starting character setup, and that makes
me sad.
Message no. 15
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:36:48 +0200
According to Keith Johnson, on 29-8-05 20:24 the word on the street was...

> Since I'm a HERO systems sort of guy, I build characters
> backwards. I start with a basic concept, then I build
> the character stats, then I develop a background to explain
> the whys and wherefores of the attributes, skills and
> powers.

How is that backwards? It's more or less the way I normally work, too,
in 99%[1] of all RPGs I've ever played, although I usually mix the
"build stats" and "whys and wherefores" steps. I don't think I've ever

started with the backstory first.

[1]That's rounded up to the nearest 99%, because I think I haven't
played 100 different RPGs yet :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 16
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Sanger)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:46:38 -0400
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:24:00AM -0700, Keith Johnson wrote:
> Well, my favorite character had high INT and WIL, was
> a Mage, had high Sorcery and Conjuring skills, (and of course
> no resources)... the story behind the character was that
> he was a top graduate from MIT&T worked at a corp until
> he was used by one of the execs as a scapegoat, hence a
> newbie in the shadows, running for his life.
>
> I can't build that character with the default character
> generation system in SR4.

? Depends on what you consider "high". If you accept that the numbers
aren't the same, and that a 6 then is now a 4 or 5, you certainly can.
Judge not by the number, but by what you can do with it.

You can have a INT 5 WIL 5 physical weenie, with Conj/Sorc 4 across the
board and Magic 5 or 6.

He's rolling 9 or 10 dice for most magical activites.

Stunball Force 6: call it 10 dice. avg 3 hits. 9 base damage
(note that combat spells in SR4 can be less deadly with staging gone)
Drain? 2S. Roll 11 dice to resist. avg 3 hits, no drain.
(I'm working off of memory for drain formula here)

Want to be vicious about it?

Force 12: 3 hits, 15 base damage, that'll clear a room.
Drain: 5P: 11 dice = 3 hits = 2P drain. Not even a wound modifier yet.

Sounds comperable to SR3. Perhaps it'd be better demonstrated with a

Summoning?

Force 4 elemental, now summoned on-the-spot (SR3 Nature spirit style):
10 dice: 3 hits
Spirit: 4 dice = 1 hit.
2 services. No drain (? I need to recheck drain for summoning).

If you sacrifice the other skills, and min-max, you can even break those
groups into skills and make Spellcasting a 6, or take Spellcasting and
Summoning both to 5.

In a system where getting 4 more hits that your opponent is considered a
critical success, higher stats and skills now mean bigger things. 5's
in attributes and 4s in skills are not to be sneered at.

--
SwiftOne / Brett Sanger
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 17
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 12:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
> > Since I'm a HERO systems sort of guy, I build characters
> > backwards. I start with a basic concept, then I build
> > the character stats, then I develop a background to explain
> > the whys and wherefores of the attributes, skills and
> > powers.

> How is that backwards? It's more or less the way I normally work,
> too,
> in 99%[1] of all RPGs I've ever played, although I usually mix the
> "build stats" and "whys and wherefores" steps. I don't think I've
> ever
> started with the backstory first.

I write the story first, and assign stats second. It makes those
marginal decisions a lot easier. "Hmmm, another contact or dump the
rest into starting nuyen?" "Let's see, another point of Willpower,
or should I raise Biotech and Stealth by 1?" And so on...

Detailing the mechanics before you write the story means that a lot
of your point allocation decisions happen in a vacuum. They are not
linked to the character you are going to play eventually. I have
lost track of the number of times someone assigned points first and
then could not fit the story adequately to the numbers. They end up
with a character whose motivations and mood do not fit the dice they
pick up and roll. "Cicaeda cartwheels over the sofa one handed,
spraying the door behind her with a quick 3-round burst... doh...
Athletics 1?!" "Snake-Eye fixes a cold stare on the Johnson and
calmly points out that a percentage increase for unexpected security
personnel covers paracritters... doh... Negotiations... none?!"

I guess it is all a matter of style and personal taste.

======Korishinzo
--Story first, numbers second.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 18
From: davek@***.lonestar.org (David Kettler)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 19:25:42 +0000
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 08:36:48PM +0200, Gurth wrote:
> How is that backwards? It's more or less the way I normally work, too,
> in 99%[1] of all RPGs I've ever played, although I usually mix the
> "build stats" and "whys and wherefores" steps. I don't think I've
ever
> started with the backstory first.
>

While it's certainly not what I usually do (mainly because it takes a lot of time), I have
made characters before by writing a backstory first (without touching any stats) and then
figuring out what stats make sense for that background. This tends to give characters
with a great deal of personality and depth. The downsides are that you need to be very
familiar with the system to write a backstory without touching stats (not so good for new
players) and it does tend to take much longer (though that's usually because the backstory
you end up writing is far longer and more detailed than what you might usually write).

If you've never done things this way then I highly recommed you try it at least once.

--
Dave Kettler
davek@***.lonestar.org
http://davek.freeshell.org/
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Message no. 19
From: keith@***********.com (Keith Johnson)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:56:33 -0700
>I write the story first, and assign stats second.
>It makes those marginal decisions a lot easier.

For me it makes it a lot more difficult.

>"Hmmm, another contact or dump the rest into
>starting nuyen?" "Let's see, another point of
>Willpower, or should I raise Biotech and
>Stealth by 1?" And so on...

My imagination is almost always more experienced,
advanced, potent... than the rules.

The reason that going 'story first' is painful
for me is that I'll develop an amazing idea for
a character, full of strengths, weaknesses, and
idiosyncracies... a gorgeous character... then
recreating that guy within the framework of the
game is impossible for a 'starting character.'

>Detailing the mechanics before you write the
>story means that a lot of your point allocation
>decisions happen in a vacuum.

Which is why I start out with a skeletal concept,
then build a the character using the game mechanics,
and as I'm doing that, I do the 'another contact,
or dump the rest into starting nuyen' thing.

All the while that I'm throwing numbers around,
making a character mechanically efficient, I
develop the background... which evolves as I
juggle points. As the points settle out, I
solidify the background options as to why and
how the character got the stats he's got.

>I have lost track of the number of times someone
>assigned points first and then could not fit
>the story adequately to the numbers.

This explains why you and I end up at the same
place from bitterly opposite directions.

>They end up with a character whose motivations
>and mood do not fit the dice they pick up and
>roll.

And this happens to me when I write the background
first.

>I guess it is all a matter of style and
>personal taste.

Yup.

-k
Message no. 20
From: erobyn2@*****.net (Robyn Edwards)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:33:26 -0700
Try something different. Build the background and have the gm do the
numbers and stats, and skills. Better(tighter) the story, better the
stats.
This took awhile but both the gm and I had a firm fix on the guy.
Robyn

-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Johnson [mailto:keith@***********.com]
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 2:57 PM
To: 'Shadowrun Discussion'
Subject: RE: Average starting characters?


>I write the story first, and assign stats second.
>It makes those marginal decisions a lot easier.

For me it makes it a lot more difficult.

>"Hmmm, another contact or dump the rest into
>starting nuyen?" "Let's see, another point of
>Willpower, or should I raise Biotech and
>Stealth by 1?" And so on...

My imagination is almost always more experienced,
advanced, potent... than the rules.

The reason that going 'story first' is painful
for me is that I'll develop an amazing idea for
a character, full of strengths, weaknesses, and
idiosyncracies... a gorgeous character... then
recreating that guy within the framework of the
game is impossible for a 'starting character.'

>Detailing the mechanics before you write the
>story means that a lot of your point allocation
>decisions happen in a vacuum.

Which is why I start out with a skeletal concept,
then build a the character using the game mechanics,
and as I'm doing that, I do the 'another contact,
or dump the rest into starting nuyen' thing.

All the while that I'm throwing numbers around,
making a character mechanically efficient, I
develop the background... which evolves as I
juggle points. As the points settle out, I
solidify the background options as to why and
how the character got the stats he's got.

>I have lost track of the number of times someone
>assigned points first and then could not fit
>the story adequately to the numbers.

This explains why you and I end up at the same
place from bitterly opposite directions.

>They end up with a character whose motivations
>and mood do not fit the dice they pick up and
>roll.

And this happens to me when I write the background
first.

>I guess it is all a matter of style and
>personal taste.

Yup.

-k
Message no. 21
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:36:10 -0400
On 8/29/05, Robyn Edwards <erobyn2@*****.net> wrote:
> Try something different. Build the background and have the gm do the
> numbers and stats, and skills. Better(tighter) the story, better the
> stats.
> This took awhile but both the gm and I had a firm fix on the guy.

I just finished doing that for the campaign we started Sunday. Some
of the players were completely new to Shadowrun, and others hadn't
played it since the SR1 days and had forgotten everything. So I told
everyone two weeks ago:

"Okay. Here's some general stuff about the Shadowrun setting. You
have a week to come back to me with a concept. It can be as simple as
'I want to play a guy with cyberarms,' or you can give me a detailed
bio of your former Sioux Nation elite military troll adept with his
childhood, his enemies and his taste in women. After that, if you
feel up to crunching numbers you can; or you can do it with my help;
or I can put together your stats for you. It's up to you."

A couple people downloaded the NSRCG program and got bios and stats
back to me within a few days. Others just gave me bios or sentences,
and I ended up creating three characters myself. The other two were
somewhere in the middle.

It all worked out rather well. Everyone got a chargen experience that
suited their own familiarity and taste, I got a week to plan a
metaplot that would fit the characters' background, and we got to
actually *play* the first session rather than kill the entire time on
chargen. Go team. >8->

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 22
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:49:10 +0200
According to Ice Heart, on 29-8-05 21:11 the word on the street was...

> I write the story first, and assign stats second. It makes those
> marginal decisions a lot easier. "Hmmm, another contact or dump the
> rest into starting nuyen?" "Let's see, another point of Willpower,
> or should I raise Biotech and Stealth by 1?" And so on...

That's why I do this stuff at the same time. I decide to take Unarmed
Combat, for example, at the same time I decide the character may have
taken martial arts classes; from that I may get the idea that he's taken
martial arts because he grew up in a rough neighborhood, which means he
has a ganger contact; and so on.

> Detailing the mechanics before you write the story means that a lot
> of your point allocation decisions happen in a vacuum. They are not
> linked to the character you are going to play eventually.

No character I've ever played turned out the way his backstory said he
would. In my group I've observed that this is the case for nearly
everyone -- they write a background story, and after a few sessions half
the things they do don't fit with that. But the things they _do_ do,
usually fit together and so create the backstory by themselves.

> "Cicaeda cartwheels over the sofa one handed,
> spraying the door behind her with a quick 3-round burst... doh...
> Athletics 1?!"

I'd rephrase that to: "Cicaeda decides that in the hail of bullets
flying around her, it's a good idea to cartwheel over the sofa one
handed, spraying the door behind her with a quick 3-round burst... But
she rolls a 1 on her single Athletetics (that's not a typo ;) die, her
hands slips away and she smashes face-first into the back of said sofa..."

One die doesn't mean you can't _try_ stupid stuff. It may just work,
after all.

> "Snake-Eye fixes a cold stare on the Johnson and
> calmly points out that a percentage increase for unexpected security
> personnel covers paracritters... doh... Negotiations... none?!"

Have you played undercover in my group?

> Korishinzo
> --Story first, numbers second.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
--Both at the same time.
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 23
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average starting characters?
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:51:43 +0200
According to David Kettler, on 29-8-05 21:25 the word on the street was...

> If you've never done things this way then I highly recommed you
> try it at least once.

I have tried it, and it doesn't work for me. Part of the reason is that
you, IME, _have_ to keep the numbers in mind to make sure they fit the
story. Else you'll end up with too few or too many points, and possibly
have to invest them in things you don't want just to get rid of them :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Average starting characters?, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!