| From: | Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Character creation (no, not another new system) |
| Date: | Thu, 29 Jun 1995 14:45:03 -0400 |
Marc Renouf wrote:
> > Also, to look at things with a tad of realism, there
> >are personal limits. If you are a totally puke, you're
> >not going to become a super-genius of high mental
> >acuity over the span of a few months. Doesn't happen.
> >The *only* attribute I would consider allowing someone
> >to raise more than once is strength. But for the few
> >wimpoids I knew who became bodybuilders, that was
> >*all* they did. They were in the gym 4-6 hours a day.
> >Not a shadowrunner's lifestyle. It is for these reasons
> >that we stick by the old "only raise each attribute once"
> >rule from SRI. It makes more sense and is more fair to
> >those who have put high priorities into attributes.
> Oh and to make sense for those that choose skills we
> should only allow other PCs to raise a few skills once.
>
> PLEASE....
> __get your head out of **&*__
Don't even start that. Don't even *think* it.
> as you say it doesn't make sense for a character to raise
> a his strength from a 1 to a 6 within a few months but it does
> make sense that a person with a very good skill in firearms
> * 6 * could all of a sudden be a GOD with the roomsweeper
> and raise his stat to a * 12 *
No, it doesn't make any more sense for the skill to raise. Which
is exactly why I enforce limits as to how skills can progress. I have
several players that have karma squirreled away for the time when they
are actually allowed to raise a skill. In my game, it takes long periods
of practice, study, or formal training to advance in your skills, and
especially to acquire new ones.
That's why putting higher priorities in skills is important.
It's because it's such a karma suck and a pain-in-the-ass to raise them
later. You're on the right track when you say that the priority system
allows you to create a character to your tastes. But if you don't put
some logical, reasonable limitations on character advancement, you end up
with a bunch of carbon-copy characters, all with max stats, high skills,
etc. The priority system reflects the fact that different people are
better at different things. Some are more skilled, some are more
physically or mentally robust. What *doesn't* make sense is the fact
that it's not limited afterward. Why bother making a mechanism whereby
you can reflect these differences, strengths, and weaknesses when it's
all going to turn into the same thing 66 karma down the road?
> Yes I completely agree that normal people can't raise strength
> from say a 4 - 6 in less that 6 months but shadowrunners
> are definately not normal. How many normal people attack
> 6 foot tall wasps and survive or live through 4 or 5 bullet wounds.
This argument is so lame. Shadowrunners are normal people. But
their lifestyle is considerably more dangerous than others' and they
have learned to cope. They are lucky, and the ones that remain alive
long enough get good enough that they don't have to be quite so lucky
anymore. But they're not Nietszche-esque Ubermensche. Just because I
kill people for a living is not a reason to up my Intelligence from 1 to
6 in two months.
Normal people will attack 6 foot wasps and take 4 or 5 bullet
wounds given the right set of motivating conditions. What sets
Shadowrunners apart is the fact that they make their living at it. And
even most shadowrunners don't take that many bullets without being
carted off the scene by Doc Wagon.
> You can justify increasing strength - well with strength comes
> body *as you increase in muscle your stamina also goes up
> your chest cavity becomes bigger your more exercised.
> (you have just increased your body)
> If I decided to become try to increase my speed and trained
> in water (a more resistant fluid than air) wouldn't my quickness
> increase. Or if I decided to take training with meditation and
> understanding my body and it's limits then worked on focusing
> my power - isn't that my Will. and last of all isn't better study habits
> more classes, more worldly experiences going to increase my
> intelligence.
All very true. But you're not going to go from Forrest Gump to
Stephen Hawking in a matter of weeks. It's just not gonna happen. Like
I said, the few people I know who've done it with physical conditioning
spent pretty much *all* of their time working out. And their stamina
didn't increase appreciably. Just their bulk. Their flexibility
actually decreased, so should their Quickness go down?
> The priorities are a starting point from which you have taken
> on trying to personify this character, everyone has ambitions.
> (i.e. A jack of all trades would tend to have good abilities and
> would use the skill web to perform/mimic skills.)
No. A jack of all trades would take A priority in skills,
spreading them out very broadly. Maybe 2 or 3 in ten to twenty different
skills. Average skill ratings that allow him or her to default not so
far as attributes and have a mediocre skill in a lot of things. You know
the saying: "Jack of all trades, master of none."
> If we really wanted to make this game more fair as you stated
> give the characters all the same # or abilities, skills, magic,
> and money.
I like the way FASA has done it. It reflects the fact that not
everyone has the same opportunities. Not everyone has the same amount of
money, the same potential attributes, the same potential skills. You can
mix it up and get a diversity that's unique. It allows way more
flexibility even within the same "class". In **&*, all of the fihgters
generally look alike. Big guys with lots of armor, a strong sword arm,
and little imagination. But in Shadowrun, you have he
hulking-chromed-street-monster, the demolitions specialist, the covert
insertion specialist, the cyber-ninja, the hand-to-hand fighter, the
sniper, the bodyguard. These all fall into the loose category of
"samurai," but are all totally different. It's fair. It's roughly
evened out amongst the different priorities. And most importantly, it's
decision based. No dice rolling (except for starting money, which is
trivial anyway). That's what makes it so cool.
> *oops I guess I kind of went off (sorry) don't take it personal.
That's OK. Just liberally dose with smileys and everything will
be fine. :)
Marc
