Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 00:01:45 -0400
While reading through my just-purchased SR3, I noticed that Dwarves and
Trolls get an unfair advantage in their priorities. In the SRII, all
metahumans' modifications were +3 when added up. I felt that this
reflected the cost of being a Metahuman, as opposed to a human. However,
when you add up the dwarves, for example,
(+1(Body)+2(Strength)+1(Willpower)) you get +4. Same with Trolls. The -1
for dwarves came from -1 Quickness, and the -1 for Trolls came from -1
Willpower. Why did FASA do this? The dwarven one sure made sense. Or is
this a misprint (the book says Corrected 5th Edition (6th printint)) that
is fixed in an errata?

--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the
chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+)
gm+ M-
Message no. 2
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 11:42:14 +0200
According to Strago, at 0:01 on 26 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> While reading through my just-purchased SR3, I noticed that Dwarves and
> Trolls get an unfair advantage in their priorities. In the SRII, all
> metahumans' modifications were +3 when added up. I felt that this
> reflected the cost of being a Metahuman, as opposed to a human. However,
> when you add up the dwarves, for example,
> (+1(Body)+2(Strength)+1(Willpower)) you get +4. Same with Trolls. The -1
> for dwarves came from -1 Quickness, and the -1 for Trolls came from -1
> Willpower. Why did FASA do this? The dwarven one sure made sense. Or is
> this a misprint (the book says Corrected 5th Edition (6th printint)) that
> is fixed in an errata?

These changes were intentional. Mike Mulvihill felt that trolls got
penalized way too much for having a -1 Willpower (making them mana-spell
bait) and dwarfs' Quickness reduction was also too much. I agree with the
former, but not really the latter.

Also, according to Mike, the fact that all metahumans in SR1/II ended up
with +3 attributes was coincidence... sorry, but I just don't buy that. If
it were just the +3 attributes, that'd be sort of believable, but they
also all got better vision, and the two races that had running multiplier
reductions also got another bonus (extra dice vs. disease, and extra
Reach). To me, that sounds very much like somebody thought long and hard
about how to give everyone the same...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Vraag niet om de terugkeer
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? 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. 3
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:29:55 -0400
On Sun, 26 Sep 1999 00:01:45 -0400 Strago <strago@***.com> writes:
> While reading through my just-purchased SR3, I noticed that Dwarves
> and
> Trolls get an unfair advantage in their priorities. In the SRII, all
> metahumans' modifications were +3 when added up. I felt that this
> reflected the cost of being a Metahuman, as opposed to a human.
> However,
> when you add up the dwarves, for example,
> (+1(Body)+2(Strength)+1(Willpower)) you get +4. Same with Trolls.
> The -1
> for dwarves came from -1 Quickness, and the -1 for Trolls came from
> -1
> Willpower. Why did FASA do this? The dwarven one sure made sense. Or
> is
> this a misprint (the book says Corrected 5th Edition (6th printint))
> that
> is fixed in an errata?
>

Trolls actually get even more if you think about it, what with reach
bonus and dermal armor.
Dwarves, with the running multiplier and the resist to disease, are not
as unbalanced, but keep something else in mind;
if you are none magic, you can be a dwarf for free, with no penalties.
(Setting magic to E and race to D)
That, I do find a trifle unbalanced.
I was thinking (a long time back) of a system of priority costs based ont
eh race, something like (A=troll, B=ork, C=Dwarf, D=Elf)
and scaling back or forward the bonuses to reflect the new cost, but
then I figured there'd be even MORE elves in the game <sigh>


Vocenoctum
<http://members.aol.com/vocenoctum>;

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Message no. 4
From: Angelkiller 404 angelkiller404@**********.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:51:25 -0400
>> While reading through my just-purchased SR3, I noticed that Dwarves
>> and
>> Trolls get an unfair advantage in their priorities. In the SRII,
all
>> metahumans' modifications were +3 when added up. I felt that this
>> reflected the cost of being a Metahuman, as opposed to a human.
>> However,
>> when you add up the dwarves, for example,
>> (+1(Body)+2(Strength)+1(Willpower)) you get +4. Same with Trolls.
>> The -1
>> for dwarves came from -1 Quickness, and the -1 for Trolls came from
>> -1
>> Willpower. Why did FASA do this? The dwarven one sure made sense.
Or
>> is
>> this a misprint (the book says Corrected 5th Edition (6th
printint))
>> that
>> is fixed in an errata?
>>
>
>Trolls actually get even more if you think about it, what with reach
>bonus and dermal armor.
>Dwarves, with the running multiplier and the resist to disease, are
not
>as unbalanced, but keep something else in mind;
>if you are none magic, you can be a dwarf for free, with no
penalties.
>(Setting magic to E and race to D)
>That, I do find a trifle unbalanced.


Not me, I consider the lowered priority costs for dwarves and orks to
reflect (in role-playing terms) that orks are now the most numerous of
the metatypes, with a higher birth ratio than any other race (other
than human). That, I can see. Dwarves, on the other hand, are also
becoming more and more common. I think the greater prejudice against
orks also plays a factor, though I can't be too sure. For dwarves, a
10% increase in almost every piece of gear they buy can more or less,
balance things out for everyone else initially (actually, it doesn't
do jack, but what they hey. A 10% increase on a Eurocar Westwind 2000
ain't chump change).

I also think this is FASA's way of encouraging players to take more
orks and dwarves.

Completely off-topic, but what Priority do you guys place on metahuman
variants? Strangely enough, they weren't given a priority in the
SR3C, just a point-value. I think this was supposed to be a game
balance factor, as well as a push to make variants more personalized,
but I assign them with Priority A anyway.

Thoughts?

-----
AK404

http://freespeech.org/ak404/
http://gibbed.com/parasiteve/
ICQ: 2157053

"Just because you win doesn't mean you're right."
Message no. 5
From: Lars Ericson lericson@****.edu
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 08:52:07 -0500
I came across this discrepancy and eventually created a house rule to
reflect the changed priority costs. My reasoning and end ruling can be
found here:

http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/sr3metakarma.html



--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond
Smalley Research Group, Rice University
E-Mail: lericson@****.edu
WWW: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/

Life is like a Wankel Engine. In between the emptiness of boredom and
despair, and the compression of stress in one's life, there's that one
spark of enjoyment that keeps you going.
Message no. 6
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 10:28:22 -0400
> I came across this discrepancy and eventually created a house rule to
> reflect the changed priority costs. My reasoning and end ruling can be
> found here:
>
> http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/sr3metakarma.html
>
Okay, here's the thing, though; so what?

Last night, stuck in a stupid city I didn't mean to be with nothing to do,
as I know no one here, I wanted to do some roleplaying. So I chatted with
some of the hotel staff, and ended up finding a couple of guys who'd played
SR, and this girl who wanted to. [SR players really are EVERYWHERE, aren't
they?] So--long story short--they all ended up in my room. Well, the two
guys already had characters, but one of the guys wanted to GM. This was fine
with me, but I didn't want to play this guy's character. And the girl didn't
have anything. So the girl and I made characters. [What a blast. I had to
keep asking questions like, "Comment est qu'on dit _fireball?_"]

Well, this left us with three very differing power levels; the experienced
guy who already had a character, long-played, the girl, who was taught well
how to min-max her character [by me], and me, playing a mage who has begun
to firmly doubt the nature of reality [spend 20 years as a mage and then get
called by Spider, see how well _you_ handle it] and was thus not the most
useful, stable guy.

Once again, long story short; despite obvious language deficiency on my part
[what university French class teaches you words like "blood magic" and
"free
spirit?"] we played, and at very different power levels. Guess who got the
most karma? The girl, for being a new player, living, playing a brand new
character, in way over her head, whipping ass nonetheless. Then me next, for
creativity and general bad-assness. No one died, no one didn't contribute.
And we're talking about differences in point values of characters along the
lines of 300 points between the top dog and my character.

My point--I do have one--is this; the stupid bloody numbers on the damned
piece of paper don't mean ANYTHING. One of my favorite things to do is play
the Pedestrian contact as my character without telling anyone, in a crowd of
munchkins. Guess who ROLEplays the best? And guess who has to be more
creative in order to survive? The numbers are meaningless; it's the
creativity that counts. All this "make everyone equal" crap is rediculous.
Real life doesn't work that way, and I don't like SR to do so. If I'm not as
smart as the other guy I work with, he's going to get promoted over me. Or I
might be smarter, but he's more charismatic, and he still gets promoted.
We're not equal; he is "better," so he gets the benefits of that. And what
is the end result? I have to try harder, work more, get creative, push my
own envelope, so that I can keep up with someone better than I am. That's
one of the reasons I still roleplay, no matter how much older or more busy I
get; it's an invaluable tool for teaching creative problem solving.

Just a point. Sick of hearing about "game balance," had to vent. How do you
fellows survive in real life?

Made little sense; not my fault. Make sun go away; shut it off; I need more
sleep.
Message no. 7
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 11:20:35 EDT
In a message dated 9/26/99 22:02:18 Pacific Daylight Time,
angelkiller404@**********.com writes:

> Completely off-topic, but what Priority do you guys place on metahuman
> variants? Strangely enough, they weren't given a priority in the
> SR3C, just a point-value. I think this was supposed to be a game
> balance factor, as well as a push to make variants more personalized,
> but I assign them with Priority A anyway.

The reason why they dont have a priority is because depending on the GM they
would either have A) the same priority as their base race, but most of the
time b) are only allowed in games where the GM uses the point build system.
Message no. 8
From: Lars Ericson lericson@****.edu
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 10:48:16 -0500
> My point--I do have one--is this; the stupid bloody numbers on the damned
> piece of paper don't mean ANYTHING. One of my favorite things to do is play
> the Pedestrian contact as my character without telling anyone, in a crowd of
> munchkins. Guess who ROLEplays the best? And guess who has to be more
> creative in order to survive? The numbers are meaningless; it's the
> creativity that counts. All this "make everyone equal" crap is rediculous.
> Real life doesn't work that way, and I don't like SR to do so. If I'm not as
> smart as the other guy I work with, he's going to get promoted over me. Or I
> might be smarter, but he's more charismatic, and he still gets promoted.
> We're not equal; he is "better," so he gets the benefits of that. And what
> is the end result? I have to try harder, work more, get creative, push my
> own envelope, so that I can keep up with someone better than I am. That's
> one of the reasons I still roleplay, no matter how much older or more busy I
> get; it's an invaluable tool for teaching creative problem solving.
>
> Just a point. Sick of hearing about "game balance," had to vent. How do you
> fellows survive in real life?

First off, I agree with your main point that the numbers aren't the
important thing it's what you do with them. I'm a big fan of actual
role-playing and like a challenge. People shouldn't focus on the numbers
*instead* of role-playing.

However, saying that the character creation shouldn't be fair is just
plain wrong. No one here is wanting to make everyone the same, carbon
copies of each other, but we do want the characters to start off on the
same level. If someone wants to play a character with disadvantages and
obvious shortcomings compared to the other characters (like what you've
described) then any GM is going to allow it. However, nobody should be
forced to play a character that is weaker or with less abilities. That
is why game balance is essential for any game, both in the mechanics and
the character creation. Players need to feel that they are being given
the same opportunities and chances in the game without being forced to
favor a certain style or character. I admire your desire to push the
role-playing envelope, but surely you wouldn't force others to do the
same.


--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond
Smalley Research Group, Rice University
E-Mail: lericson@****.edu
WWW: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/

Life is like a Wankel Engine. In between the emptiness of boredom and
despair, and the compression of stress in one's life, there's that one
spark of enjoyment that keeps you going.
Message no. 9
From: Wildfire Wildfire@*************.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 12:51:41 -0400
abortion_engine wrote:

> My point--I do have one--is this; the stupid bloody numbers on the damned
> piece of paper don't mean ANYTHING. One of my favorite things to do is play
> the Pedestrian contact as my character without telling anyone, in a crowd of
> munchkins. Guess who ROLEplays the best? And guess who has to be more
> creative in order to survive? The numbers are meaningless; it's the
> creativity that counts.

I agree that role-playing is what counts. When I GM, you don't get but minimum
amounts of karma unless you role-play. But game balance can matter in some
cases. I've played in (non-SR) games where game-balance was totally unknown and
had tons of fun being the brand-new character with characters 1 year to 8 years
old, but I've also played in games where game-balance was absolutely
neccessary. It really does depend on who you're playing with whether or not
game balance is needed. If you're a new player, it can be very discouraging
when you've spent the time to make up this character to have fun with, and
basically just tag along because you're not good enough to do anything
before/better/more interestingly than others. If you're an expereinced
roleplayer, then it doesn't much matter most times, because you've played enough
to know how to get around it. It all depends on what you can have fun with, and
in your case, everyone wanted to have fun playing, and it was only once, so it
was fine. I'd imagine that if you ran several games with the same characters,
it would be awfully hard for the girl who was new to not get a little annoyed
after a while, but maybe it would work, who knows?

Wildfire
Message no. 10
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:40:20 -0400
> > My point--I do have one--is this; the stupid bloody numbers on the
damned
> > piece of paper don't mean ANYTHING. One of my favorite things to do is
play

> > <snip me>

> > Just a point. Sick of hearing about "game balance," had to vent. How
do
you
> > fellows survive in real life?
>
> First off, I agree with your main point that the numbers aren't the
> important thing it's what you do with them. I'm a big fan of actual
> role-playing and like a challenge. People shouldn't focus on the numbers
> *instead* of role-playing.
>
> However, saying that the character creation shouldn't be fair is just
> plain wrong. No one here is wanting to make everyone the same, carbon
> copies of each other, but we do want the characters to start off on the
> same level. If someone wants to play a character with disadvantages and
> obvious shortcomings compared to the other characters (like what you've
> described) then any GM is going to allow it. However, nobody should be
> forced to play a character that is weaker or with less abilities. That
> is why game balance is essential for any game, both in the mechanics and
> the character creation. Players need to feel that they are being given
> the same opportunities and chances in the game without being forced to
> favor a certain style or character. I admire your desire to push the
> role-playing envelope, but surely you wouldn't force others to do the
> same.
>
Only two things;

1. I guess I just feel too much emphasis is placed on game-balance. If you
want to play a mage, you should want to play a mage no matter whether or not
that makes you "weaker." I think that the emphasis on game-balance, in a
way, lends credence to the idea that these numbers are actually important,
and far too many people end up thinking that.

2. I always forget that people aren't using roleplaying as a simulator run
on real life, with a few of the rules changed. Most people aren't all that
concerned with full-out realism. But because of the reasons I play, realism
is essential. So I am, as usual, coming from a different place than most
people on this. For instance, I never, ever, once, thought that roleplaying
should be fair. Most people do. So, in a way, it's pretty safe to ignore
what I have to say on this topic, as it likely has little bearing on your
own situation.
Message no. 11
From: Lars Ericson lericson@****.edu
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 14:32:17 -0500
abortion_engine wrote:
>
> Only two things;
>
> 1. I guess I just feel too much emphasis is placed on game-balance. If you
> want to play a mage, you should want to play a mage no matter whether or not
> that makes you "weaker." I think that the emphasis on game-balance, in a
> way, lends credence to the idea that these numbers are actually important,
> and far too many people end up thinking that.
>
> 2. I always forget that people aren't using roleplaying as a simulator run
> on real life, with a few of the rules changed. Most people aren't all that
> concerned with full-out realism. But because of the reasons I play, realism
> is essential. So I am, as usual, coming from a different place than most
> people on this. For instance, I never, ever, once, thought that roleplaying
> should be fair. Most people do. So, in a way, it's pretty safe to ignore
> what I have to say on this topic, as it likely has little bearing on your
> own situation.

Keep in mind, that game balance is the responsibility of the GM not the
players. I wholeheartedly agree that when making a character, a player
should not do much number crunching. If they want to play a mage, they
should play a mage for the style and concept, not for the game
mechanics. However, that only works when the player thinks their
characters are going to be useful and comparable to the other characters
in the party.

Let's say you decided to play in a campaign and choose to play a decker.
The GM approves it and everything is looking good. However, on your
first adventure you learn, straight from the GM, that the campaign is
going to be a jungle guerilla fighting campaign with no computers or
electronics and no you cannot have a satellite uplink. Suddenly, all the
points you put into computer skills and resources are completely
useless, or at least *extremely* reduced in effectiveness. Is this fun?
By your definition this should be plenty fun and challenging, because
such a thing could happen in real life. However, ask 100 shadowrun
payers and 95% are going to say, "That sucks," and ask to make another
character.

Roleplaying is an excellent simulator for social interactions,
puzzle-solving, and planning/tactics. However, all of that doesn't
amount to squat if the people are not having fun. People don't have fun
in a *game* if they are considerably out-performed by their peers. It's
a simple fact. That's why, as a GM, I strive to make the character
creation fair and the gaming sessions fun.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond
Smalley Research Group, Rice University
E-Mail: lericson@****.edu
WWW: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/

Life is like a Wankel Engine. In between the emptiness of boredom and
despair, and the compression of stress in one's life, there's that one
spark of enjoyment that keeps you going.
Message no. 12
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 15:44:00 -0400
> > 1. I guess I just feel too much emphasis is placed on game-balance. If
you
> > want to play a mage, you should want to play a mage no matter whether or
not
> > that makes you "weaker." I think that the emphasis on game-balance, in
a
> > way, lends credence to the idea that these numbers are actually
important,
> > and far too many people end up thinking that.
> >
> > 2. I always forget that people aren't using roleplaying as a simulator
run
> > on real life, with a few of the rules changed. Most people aren't all
that
> > concerned with full-out realism. But because of the reasons I play,
realism
> > is essential. So I am, as usual, coming from a different place than most
> > people on this. For instance, I never, ever, once, thought that
roleplaying
> > should be fair. Most people do. So, in a way, it's pretty safe to ignore
> > what I have to say on this topic, as it likely has little bearing on
your
> > own situation.
>
> Keep in mind, that game balance is the responsibility of the GM not the
> players. I wholeheartedly agree that when making a character, a player
> should not do much number crunching. If they want to play a mage, they
> should play a mage for the style and concept, not for the game
> mechanics. However, that only works when the player thinks their
> characters are going to be useful and comparable to the other characters
> in the party.

Oh. I never really minded being useless. Thanks for clearing up my
mis-perception of other people's tendancies.

> Let's say you decided to play in a campaign and choose to play a decker.
> The GM approves it and everything is looking good. However, on your
> first adventure you learn, straight from the GM, that the campaign is
> going to be a jungle guerilla fighting campaign with no computers or
> electronics and no you cannot have a satellite uplink. Suddenly, all the
> points you put into computer skills and resources are completely
> useless, or at least *extremely* reduced in effectiveness. Is this fun?
> By your definition this should be plenty fun and challenging, because
> such a thing could happen in real life. However, ask 100 shadowrun
> payers and 95% are going to say, "That sucks," and ask to make another
> character.

I suddenly realize how lucky I am, to have only played with those 5%. :)

> Roleplaying is an excellent simulator for social interactions,
> puzzle-solving, and planning/tactics. However, all of that doesn't
> amount to squat if the people are not having fun. People don't have fun
> in a *game* if they are considerably out-performed by their peers. It's
> a simple fact. That's why, as a GM, I strive to make the character
> creation fair and the gaming sessions fun.

Another difference: I don't give a damn about fun. I'm not really a fun guy.
I don't even laugh very much. [Unless I'm watching Friends; my only real
weakness is an incredible love of the american sitcom. Well, okay, so
Friends is the only one I like.] I don't really roleplay for "fun" in that
way. I think learning, analysing, planning, etc., are "fun."

And being out-performed consistantly by one's peers really crippled my
fellow players' sense of "fun," I'd be in trouble, 'cause they'd never want
to play with me.

:)

--ae
Message no. 13
From: Graht Graht@**********.worldnet.att.net
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 19:04:59 -0500
Lars Ericson wrote:
/I came across this discrepancy and eventually created a house rule to
/reflect the changed priority costs. My reasoning and end ruling can be
/found here:
/
/http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/sr3metakarma.html

Well, I gotta toot my own horn :) I've created a character creation system
similar to the priority system that can be tweaked very easily by altering
the number of build points available to the character(s).

http://home.att.net/~Graht

-Graht
--
ShadowRN GridSec
The ShadowRN FAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3
Geek Code: GCS d-( ) s++:->+ a@ C++>$ US P L >++ E? W++>+++ !N o-- K-
w+ o? M- VMS? PS+(++) PE+(++) Y+ !PGP t+(++) 5+(++) X++(+++) R+>$ tv+b++ DI++++
D+(++) G e+>+++ h--->---- r+++ y+++
http://home.att.net/~Graht
"The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know
and the more I want to learn."
-Einstein
Message no. 14
From: Lars Ericson lericson@****.edu
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 08:52:56 -0500
Graht wrote:

> Well, I gotta toot my own horn :) I've created a character creation system
> similar to the priority system that can be tweaked very easily by altering
> the number of build points available to the character(s).
>
> http://home.att.net/~Graht

The system seems alright, except for one big problem. The Dwarf and Ork
characters get the same points as a Human while getting bonuses to their
attributes (a net +3 for Ork and a net +4 for Dwarf). Seems to me that
in terms of game mechanics there is little advantage to playing a
non-magical Human over a non-magical Dwarf or Ork. That was my biggest
complaint about the SR3 main book priorities (D could be allocated to
Race without loosing anything if you were non-magical).


--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond
Smalley Research Group, Rice University
E-Mail: lericson@****.edu
WWW: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/

Life is like a Wankel Engine. In between the emptiness of boredom and
despair, and the compression of stress in one's life, there's that one
spark of enjoyment that keeps you going.
Message no. 15
From: Kevin Langevin kevinl@******.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 09:57:56 -0400
> > Well, I gotta toot my own horn :) I've created a character
> creation system
> > similar to the priority system that can be tweaked very
> easily by altering
> > the number of build points available to the character(s).
> >
> > http://home.att.net/~Graht
>
> The system seems alright, except for one big problem. The
> Dwarf and Ork
> characters get the same points as a Human while getting
> bonuses to their
> attributes (a net +3 for Ork and a net +4 for Dwarf). Seems to me that
> in terms of game mechanics there is little advantage to playing a
> non-magical Human over a non-magical Dwarf or Ork. That was my biggest
> complaint about the SR3 main book priorities (D could be allocated to
> Race without loosing anything if you were non-magical).

Sure there are advantages...no short jokes...no ugly jokes...

:)

-Kev
Message no. 16
From: Dave Mowbray dave_mowbray@*****.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 10:25:42 -0400
This, while it may be a problem for players who feel their character has to
be more powerful than everyone else's, does not represent a problem in game
play. The GM can use his discretion to make life just a little more
difficult for the players who choose metahumanity.

So you wanna be a troll? Well... you don't fit in older model vehicles or
houses for that matter... you wanna use that gun lying around? Sorry...
fingers don't fit in the trigger guard... etc... you get the point...

You wanna be a dwarf? Oops... sorry chummer your getaway driver got
hosed... yeah you have a Car skill of 6... but you can't reach the
pedals... oh well... better start running before those Red Sam get here...

See my point?
-Dave
P.S. Ork and Elf are a little harder to deal with... but it's still very
well within the realm of possibility...


The system seems alright, except for one big problem. The Dwarf and Ork
characters get the same points as a Human while getting bonuses to their
attributes (a net +3 for Ork and a net +4 for Dwarf). Seems to me that
in terms of game mechanics there is little advantage to playing a
non-magical Human over a non-magical Dwarf or Ork. That was my biggest
complaint about the SR3 main book priorities (D could be allocated to
Race without loosing anything if you were non-magical).
Message no. 17
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 22:43:49 -0300
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to abortion_engine."
<snip>
] Once again, long story short; despite obvious language deficiency on my part
] [what university French class teaches you words like "blood magic" and
"free
] spirit?"] we played, and at very different power levels. Guess who got the
] most karma? The girl, for being a new player, living, playing a brand new
] character, in way over her head, whipping ass nonetheless. Then me next, for
] creativity and general bad-assness. No one died, no one didn't contribute.
] And we're talking about differences in point values of characters along the
] lines of 300 points between the top dog and my character.

Sounds like a good session. Wish I'd been there :( Haven't played
in weeks...

<snip more>
] Just a point. Sick of hearing about "game balance," had to vent. How do you
] fellows survive in real life?

Errmmm...well, the game isn't real life. Personally, I like the
attempt at balance in Shadowrun, it sets the system apart from others
that don't have such 'delusions,' like Palladium. Of course, your game
is your game, and if you have more fun roleplaying than crunching
numbers, more power to you.
Also, I'd like to think that most people on this list do have some
conception of Life being different than Game. I think that little bit
at the end of your post was a bit unwarranted, even a touch nasty.
Just a point.

-Boondocker

"If he'd pay me the money he's spendin' to
make me stop robbin' him, I'd stop robbin' him!"

-Butch Cassidy,
Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
Message no. 18
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 11:54:25 -0400
Dave Mowbray wrote:

> This, while it may be a problem for players who feel their character has to
> be more powerful than everyone else's, does not represent a problem in game
> play. The GM can use his discretion to make life just a little more
> difficult for the players who choose metahumanity.
>
> So you wanna be a troll? Well... you don't fit in older model vehicles or
> houses for that matter... you wanna use that gun lying around? Sorry...
> fingers don't fit in the trigger guard... etc... you get the point...
>
> You wanna be a dwarf? Oops... sorry chummer your getaway driver got
> hosed... yeah you have a Car skill of 6... but you can't reach the
> pedals... oh well... better start running before those Red Sam get here...
>
> See my point?
> -Dave
> P.S. Ork and Elf are a little harder to deal with... but it's still very
> well within the realm of possibility...
>

Funny, I haven't seen this happen in our games... ;^P. But in all serious,
I agree totally with this. As for the Orks, well, let's see: Orks are the most
hated metahuman race on the planet. If you are an Ork, most people don't like
you because, well, there's just so fragging many of you! While some players
don't like to put racism in their games, that's the biggest disadvantage to
playing an Ork (except for the -2 to Charisma. As one of the newbies in my game
said when I suggested she play an Ork "I don't WANT to play an unattractive
person. This is a game after all, not real life.").
And Dave, just a quick point: replies go after the post you are replying
too, not before. Just like I did here. We don't want GridSec to get you this
early in your membership to the list ;^P.

*Strago leads the list by saying "HI DAVE!" Then he drop-kicks a woodchuck*
--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+
M-
Message no. 19
From: Dave Mowbray dave_mowbray@*****.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:17:06 -0400
Dave Mowbray wrote:

> This, while it may be a problem for players who feel their character has
to
> be more powerful than everyone else's, does not represent a problem in
game
> play. The GM can use his discretion to make life just a little more
> difficult for the players who choose metahumanity.
>
> So you wanna be a troll? Well... you don't fit in older model vehicles or
> houses for that matter... you wanna use that gun lying around? Sorry...
> fingers don't fit in the trigger guard... etc... you get the point...
>
> You wanna be a dwarf? Oops... sorry chummer your getaway driver got
> hosed... yeah you have a Car skill of 6... but you can't reach the
> pedals... oh well... better start running before those Red Sam get
here...
>
> See my point?
> -Dave
> P.S. Ork and Elf are a little harder to deal with... but it's still very
> well within the realm of possibility...
>

> Funny, I haven't seen this happen in our games... ;^P. But in all
serious,
>I agree totally with this. As for the Orks, well, let's see: Orks are the
most
>hated metahuman race on the planet. If you are an Ork, most people don't
like
>you because, well, there's just so fragging many of you! While some
players
>don't like to put racism in their games, that's the biggest disadvantage
to
>playing an Ork (except for the -2 to Charisma. As one of the newbies in my
game
>said when I suggested she play an Ork "I don't WANT to play an
unattractive
>person. This is a game after all, not real life.").
> And Dave, just a quick point: replies go after the post you are
replying
>too, not before. Just like I did here. We don't want GridSec to get you
this
>early in your membership to the list ;^P.
>
>*Strago leads the list by saying "HI DAVE!" Then he drop-kicks a
woodchuck*
>
>--Strago

Thanks for the pointer Josh. As for that happening in our games... can you
even begin to imagine the screams of anguish that would produce? You all
say I'm bad enough as it is... but I'll see what I can do.
The hardest thing with GMing racism is not having the player hate YOU. It
is all to easy to fall into the mindset of either "us against the GM" or
"the GM is out to get me", when this happens the game quickly degenerates
into players and Gm's only trying to "beat" one another, which NEVER makes
for a good game.-Dave
Message no. 20
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 12:19:05 EDT
In a message dated 9/28/99 09:10:42 Pacific Daylight Time,
dave_mowbray@*****.com writes:

> The hardest thing with GMing racism is not having the player hate YOU. It
> is all to easy to fall into the mindset of either "us against the GM" or
> "the GM is out to get me", when this happens the game quickly degenerates
> into players and Gm's only trying to "beat" one another, which NEVER makes

> for a good game.-Dave

Thats the hardest thing about GM'ing period. Even if you dont empasise
racism, far to many games devolve into an us vs him mentality anyway! Its
easy to understand how that can happen too... The GM is the one who rolls
the dice for the opposition, decides what they do, etc... thus it is far to
easy to see him as "the Enemy"...
Message no. 21
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 16:41:43 -0500
> > While reading through my just-purchased SR3, I noticed that Dwarves and
> > Trolls get an unfair advantage in their priorities. In the SRII, all
> > metahumans' modifications were +3 when added up. I felt that this
> > reflected the cost of being a Metahuman, as opposed to a human. However,
> > when you add up the dwarves, for example,
> > (+1(Body)+2(Strength)+1(Willpower)) you get +4. Same with Trolls. The -1
> > for dwarves came from -1 Quickness, and the -1 for Trolls came from -1
> > Willpower. Why did FASA do this? The dwarven one sure made sense. Or is
> > this a misprint (the book says Corrected 5th Edition (6th printint))
that
> > is fixed in an errata?
>
> These changes were intentional. Mike Mulvihill felt that trolls got
> penalized way too much for having a -1 Willpower (making them mana-spell
> bait) and dwarfs' Quickness reduction was also too much. I agree with the
> former, but not really the latter.

Even with the -1 willpower, troll characters were not abnormally easy
targets for mana spells, unlees you think everybody needs a 6 willpower to
not be "spell bait". Anybody who wanted to could give thier troll a 5
willpower.
I do think dwarves were over- penalized on movement in SR2; the average
dwarf moved less about half as fast running than a simialr human. I've
never seen a dwarf run, but that seems awfully slow. Adtionally, the
quickness penalty affected reaction and "hand eye" co-ordination, neither of
which would be impacted by the lenght of your legs. Of course, now dwarves
JUMP just as well as everybody else...

> Also, according to Mike, the fact that all metahumans in SR1/II ended up
> with +3 attributes was coincidence... sorry, but I just don't buy that. If
> it were just the +3 attributes, that'd be sort of believable, but they
> also all got better vision, and the two races that had running multiplier
> reductions also got another bonus (extra dice vs. disease, and extra
> Reach). To me, that sounds very much like somebody thought long and hard
> about how to give everyone the same...

Probably the line developer of SR2 (and maybe SR1- is it Tom Dowd in
both cases?) did attempt such a "mathmatic balance". That doesn't mean the
end results were balance in game play, however, or that changing them
wouldn't make the game more fun.
If they were not coincidence, they were not precisely equal, either.
Its rather like comparing appels and oranges to look at the modifiers given
to trolls and dwarves in SR2 and say they "equal out". Just on the stat
modifiers, is it really "equal" to have one race with a few moderate bonuses
and very few penatlies, and the other with a couple of huge bonuses and a
few really chunky penalties?
The current balance is more "empiric" than "mathmatic"; Mike asked
play
testers which races were "most powerful" and based the current priorities
and racial modifiers partly off that. Thus, the values for SR3 metahuman
priorities and bonuses are based on players perception and enjoyment of
those races.
For example, the "low" (D) dwarf proirity is partly because players
simply didn't choose them often or percive thier bonuses as "useful"; even
still, with "no cost" for dwarven mundanes, the simple fact that they run
slowly and can't use normal equipment is enough to give players a reason to
play mundane humans. Orcs were similarly unpopular- thier bonuses just
aren't big enough to impress people, compared to a troll's. On the other
hand, most people perceived elves and trolls as being worth "paying" a
higher priority to play, for various reasons.
I'm surprised how evenly split our players seem to consider the races as
given in SR3; we give everybody the same karma pool (which does tip things
somewhat to the favor of metahumans, unless you play up the impact of
anti-meta racism), and we got a very even distribution; 3 humans, 2 elves, 2
dwarves, and an orc. Both dwarves, one human, and one elf are mundanes;
theres also one human and one elf adept, and the orc and one human are full
mages. (I'm the one who wanted the orc mage, but I also took the 6 point
flaw "Cursed Karma"...)
Trolls, for some reason, don't draw many players in our games. In SR3,
Trolls do effectively get a -10 to knowledge skills and 10% less cash, as
well as still being the obvious choice target of most gunfire. I think that
B priority means you have to REALLY want a troll. I think its also a matter
of nobody wanting to worry about the size issue. If they get knocked out;
who will drag thier 500+ lb carcass to safety? Will they fit in the get
away-car your team just stole?
For the Priority B, elves get less of a "boost" numerically (unless your
strictly looking at conjouring and other magic abilty) than trolls. Partly,
being an elf doesn't have many drawbacks, attribute-adjustment or
other-wise; that's a real game effect, but it does not show up when you
compare the numbers.

Mongoose
Message no. 22
From: Carsten Gehling alvion@****.uni2.dk
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 11:53:23 +0100
From: Dave Mowbray <dave_mowbray@*****.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 5:17 PM

> The hardest thing with GMing racism is not having the player hate YOU. It
> is all to easy to fall into the mindset of either "us against the GM" or
> "the GM is out to get me", when this happens the game quickly degenerates
> into players and Gm's only trying to "beat" one another, which NEVER makes
> for a good game.-Dave

Hmm... I can't remember any gaming session, where my players got angry at
ME. But then again that might be because I always make sure there is one
single person/institution that they can blame.

I've bombed a PC's car, let the Lone Star bust him and keep him/beat him up.
The player's reaction to this treatment was: "Who was the rat?"

Of course you can't guard yourself against bad roleplayers, but making sure
that there is one or more NPCs who's obviously to blame, you're well off.

Right now I've got an interesting aspect of racism in the group. One guy is
playing a yakuza soldier, who is very traditional concerning metahumans.
Until now, there have been no metas in the group, but then marches in a
troll (another player who wanted a new character), whose "services" the
group needs. Naturally this has given some complications, when the Yak guys
biases became clear. But the group has to solve these problems themselves.

- Carsten

Offlist email: carsten@*******.dk

"Some day, when I become Supreme Ruler of Earth, I'll order everybody to go
outside once a day, and run around with their mouths open."
"Because you support fresh air and exercise?"
"No, because I hate flies."
(Dogbert)

GC 3.1: GCS d- s+: a- C+++$>++++ UL+ P+>++ L+ E-- W+++$ N+ K- w+++$ O- M--
V- PGP- t++@ 5+@ X++ R++ tv+(+++) b+(++) DI++ D++ G e++ h--() r+++ y+++
Message no. 23
From: Martin Steffens (Berlitz) v-marts@*********.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 04:11:35 -0700
Okay so the change in SR3 doesn't make sense from a rule
balance point of view. I think that it is quite obvious
by now that in respect of game balance SR2 priorities
are better balanced if you look at the cost vs. returns
values.
But I don't think that the reason it was changed was a
rule technicality. People weren't playing dwarves and
orcs as much as they were playing elves, humans and
trolls.
If you look at it from a psychological point of view it
kind of narrows down to the following:
-People know how to play humans (I hope).
-People have something with elves; beauty, grace, mystery
always suckers people in.
-The troll is a mighty combat machine which is fun to play
just for the invulnerability feeling it gives, or maybe
just because you've been bullied at school and want to
take revenge.
-The orc is a half human-troll combo, which makes it a
less appealing choice straight away. Why not go all the
way and get a troll?
-The dwarf doesn't really fit in anywhere. I doubt there
are many people out there who wished they could be a
dwarf, and he's not really good at anything.

Of course that's a simplified view, but in order to get
a more even distribution of races in PC-groups the only
thing left to do is give the "less interesting" races
a bonus and get more people to play them in that way.

If you don't agree, or your players choose evenly, just
go back to the SR2 system. I personally think that it
might get some of my ex-players to get over the
elves/humans-only phase.
Message no. 24
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 11:35:32 EDT
In a message dated 9/29/1999 4:53:35 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
alvion@****.uni2.dk writes:

>
> Right now I've got an interesting aspect of racism in the group. One guy is
> playing a yakuza soldier, who is very traditional concerning metahumans.
> Until now, there have been no metas in the group, but then marches in a
> troll (another player who wanted a new character), whose "services" the
> group needs. Naturally this has given some complications, when the Yak guys
> biases became clear. But the group has to solve these problems themselves.

There is a situation like this in Steve Kenson's novel "Crossroads" in the
last couple of sections of the book. I won't give away the details, but it
was interesting.

-K (who thanks to his trip is *almost* completely caught up on his SR Novel
reading now)
Message no. 25
From: Graht Graht@**********.worldnet.att.net
Subject: Priorities in the SR2/SR3
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 19:52:11 -0500
Lars Ericson wrote:
/Graht wrote:
/
/> Well, I gotta toot my own horn :) I've created a character creation system
/> similar to the priority system that can be tweaked very easily by altering
/> the number of build points available to the character(s).
/>
/> http://home.att.net/~Graht
/
/The system seems alright, except for one big problem. The Dwarf and Ork
/characters get the same points as a Human while getting bonuses to their
/attributes (a net +3 for Ork and a net +4 for Dwarf). Seems to me that
/in terms of game mechanics there is little advantage to playing a
/non-magical Human over a non-magical Dwarf or Ork. That was my biggest
/complaint about the SR3 main book priorities (D could be allocated to
/Race without loosing anything if you were non-magical).

So, decrease the number of build points for the dwarf and orc :)

My system is based on SRIII's system, point for point. The "problem" is
based in the SRIII system. However, with my system that issue is very easy
to address.

-Graht
--
ShadowRN GridSec
The ShadowRN FAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3
Geek Code: GCS d-( ) s++:->+ a@ C++>$ US P L >++ E? W++>+++ !N o-- K-
w+ o? M- VMS? PS+(++) PE+(++) Y+ !PGP t+(++) 5+(++) X++(+++) R+>$ tv+b++ DI++++
D+(++) G e+>+++ h--->---- r+++ y+++
http://home.att.net/~Graht
"My assistant, Bob the dinasaur, will now demonstrate
how to give a cat a 'fur wedgie.'"

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Priorities in the SR2/SR3, 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.