Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Allan Petersen <ap@******.DK>
Subject: Karma Pool (Was: RE: SR3 Wishlist)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:28:30 +0100
Hi

<snippety>

Others have commented about limiting the amount of Karma going into the
Karma Pool because PC's with A LOT of karma are a pain in the ass.

I think the easiest sollution is to make your own *exponential*
Karma_Pool_Award_Tabel:

10 - 20 - 50 - 100 - 150 - 200 etc.
or
10 - 20 - 30 - 90 - 120 - 150 etc
or
10 - 20 - 40 - 70 - 110 - 160 - 220 etc.
or
10 - 20 - 40 - 80 - 160 - 320 etc.

it's just a question about how tough you want to be with your players.

allan
Denmark
Message no. 2
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Karma Pool (Was: RE: SR3 Wishlist)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:01:14 GMT
Allan Petersen writes
>
> Others have commented about limiting the amount of Karma going into the
> Karma Pool because PC's with A LOT of karma are a pain in the ass.
>
> I think the easiest sollution is to make your own *exponential*
> Karma_Pool_Award_Tabel:
>
snip ideas.
I have been thinking and the best i have to date is.
start at 2 points per character in the team pool, and personal pools
of 1.
Award akrma pool on these thresholds,
0,10,30,60,100,150,210,180........
The reason for this set of numbers is its 'add 10 to gap every time'
and the mathematicians here will likely recognise the 'triangular'
numbers with a multiplier of 10 :)

1 1 *10 = 10
11 +2 3 *10 = 30
111 +3 6 *10 = 60
1111 +4 10 *10 0
11111 +5 15 *10 0 etc.

Gives a karma pool of 5 (enough for a couple of double rerolls or the
odd point here and there) quite quickley but then tops in style.

Or you could start team karma as now and allow folks to top up the
pool above for 10 good karma/point.

Mark

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Karma Pool (Was: RE: SR3 Wishlist), 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!