Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Andrew Corrigan <omen@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: shapeshifter creation
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 05:31:08 +0000
> > One of my PC's wants to make a shapeshifter. If using the
> > Point-based design system (SR Companion) What should the Building
> > Cost be?
>
> I'd just make them design it using the Shape Shifter design table, then
> convert it into points. Modify from there.
>
> Ray
>

Unfortunatly this allows for a lot of abuse what do I choose for
priority b

1. mage BP's
2. 24 attributesH BP's
3. 30 skills0 BP's
or
4. 400,000/35 BP's (+17.5 BP's if magically active)

Oh yea why is an adept (15 BP's) with the Astral Sight Edge (3 BP's)
cost 18 BP's. When a mage with the exact same number of Force
Points, plus all the perks (full use of all magic) only costs 20
BP's. Mages have it waaaaay too easy.

I just got the companion, and havent played in years, so I might be
missing something. I like the Point based creation system, but a lot
of the figures seem to be out of whack. having a police record is as
bad as being a quadriplegic.

Now finished venting, thanks for all the ideas.
Message no. 2
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: shapeshifter creation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 20:15:39 EST
On Sat, 15 Mar 1997 05:31:08 +0000 Andrew Corrigan <omen@*****.NET>
writes:
>> > One of my PC's wants to make a shapeshifter. If using the
>> > Point-based design system (SR Companion) What should the Building
>> > Cost be?
>>
>> I'd just make them design it using the Shape Shifter design table,
>then
>> convert it into points. Modify from there.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>
>Unfortunatly this allows for a lot of abuse what do I choose for
>priority b
>
> 1. mage BP's
^^^^
I've already had this discussion-shapeshifters almost certainly will not
be mages (I wound up on the receiving end)

>2. 24 attributesH BP's
>3. 30 skills0 BP's
>or
>4. 400,000/35 BP's (+17.5 BP's if magically active)

Try creating the character in the Priority-based system, munch them out
as far as you can (just as a test of game-balance, not for playability).
Convert over into the points system and check to see if it exceeded 100
BPs. I'll bet it didn't. for realism, I'd go with either the Attributes
or the Magical Priority. Resources and Skills would probably be waaay
down on the list.


>
>Oh yea why is an adept (15 BP's) with the Astral Sight Edge (3 BP's)
>cost 18 BP's. When a mage with the exact same number of Force
>Points, plus all the perks (full use of all magic) only costs 20
>BP's. Mages have it waaaaay too easy.

'Cause Steve (Kenson) didn't intend for the Magical Edges (other than the
Poor Link and Bad Karma Edge and Flaw, respectively) to be accessible to
characters who had already spent BPs on a Magic Priority. And then
limited to one Edge per character. I don't mind allowing an adept,
magician or otherwise mundane character to have access to those Edges
(not exactly how they were written or intended, but) as it allows a
greater variety of Magical talents in the game.




>
>I just got the companion, and havent played in years, so I might be
>missing something. I like the Point based creation system, but a lot
>of the figures seem to be out of whack. having a police record is as
>bad as being a quadriplegic.

First, look at the description for a Police Record. That character was
probably convicted on some sort of serious crime (not having experience
in such matters, I can't think of a sure-fire example). It's not someone
who has a few bad marks on their driving record.

A quadriplegic is stuck in their chair/bed all the time. A creative GM
should be able to make them about equal.



>
> Now finished venting, thanks for all the ideas.
>

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, canthros1@***.com
let him prepare for war. lobo1@****.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about shapeshifter creation, 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.