| From: | Michael Broadwater <mbroadwa@*******.GLENAYRE.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [SR3] Character Generation |
| Date: | Tue, 8 Jul 1997 08:48:26 -0500 |
>>1) What don't you like about the point-based system?
>
> It's linear and not geometric. Linear system are by nature more
>prone to abuse. The emphasis of priority of what you take is also greatly
>removed. As I've said, a point based system would be fine, but not this
>one.
Actually, the money in both the point based and priority based systems goes
up geometrically, while the number of skill points and attribute points are
linear. Saying one is "linear" and the other is "geometric" really
doesn't
define anything, nor is it very accurate. In the priority system, the
higher the priority you place on Attributes, the more points you get, and
the number of points goes up fairly evenly. Same with skill points. Money
goes up at a faster rate. This is similiar to the priority based system.
However, IMO, the priority system's greatest strength (and biggest flaw) is
that it allows players more flexibility in how they create their character.
This can lead to munchkinism and powergaming, but as is, the current rules
are no better, and somewhat worse (how many players have you seen trying to
suck every point possible from the priority system?) Now, the point system
can do the same thing, except that if you try to squeeze as many points as
possible from spot, you seriously threaten another (sounds like the
priority system, eh?) except you can have more points than are possible for
one area than in the priority system. For example, you can have 45 or more
skill points in the point, but a max of 40 in priority (no matter how hard
you try). Now, I can do that, but I lost 5 points somewhere.
>>2) Why do you like the priority-based system over the point-based system?
>
> Because Shadowrun CharGen creates a conceptual feel for the
>character. Just by your choices you can start to see where the character
>is focused. For me linear point based system is flawed to begin with. If
>the cost was on a geometric scale then I would reconsider.
Well, this is only true if you decide that you want to create stats and
then a character, and not create a character and the make their stats.
Some people like it one way, some like it the other. I like to come up
with my characters concept and background before I work the numbers out,
and one thing I've found about the priority system is this: the system
won't always allow your concept to exist. While it's a nice system, it
doesn't have the flexibility of the point system. I've had characters
where I've had extra points where I didn't think the character would have
them, and too few in spots where they should've. I haven't found this to
be true with the point system.
>>4) What modifications would it take for a point-based system to be the best
>>overall choice in your opinion?
>
> Like I said, a geometric scale as opposed to a linear scale. The
>current priority system is geometric and a point based system should be
>as well. It's all about balance.
I don't agree with this. The geometric scale isn't that dramatic a factor.
Again, IMO, it's better to have flexibility in character generation than
it is to worry about possible powergaming. An example: If you have a
hundred points, you can make, IIRC, any combination on the priority scale,
and not have extra points. Sounds as if their about equal, but that the
point system offers more flexibility for the chargen process. Something I
find to be a huge advantage.
Rasputin-the-trying-to-get-into-an-Sr-book-magekin
http://www.bcl.net/~rasputin
http://www.blackhand.org/
The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they're going to be
when you kill them. -- William Clayton
