Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Character creation and critique => Topic started by: Rule of Three on <09-02-15/1033:49>
-
I'm learning.
Like any good runner, I wish to keep educated and will state my ignorance on this topic.
We have a multitude of questions about the idea of Skills A being a bad choice; there are few people willing to truly explain how they got that opinion.
Let us try.
-
That is the view for priority character creation.
It implies that you spent too much on skills and neglecting metatype or resources.
For a human or elf, Skill A isn't that bad, but for other metatypes, you'll take a hard hit elsewhere.
-
I wouldn't say trap.
Attributes are more important than skills - this is almost universally true except maybe for very specialized builds like certain riggers.
High Magic/Resonance beats usually skills, since they deliver bonus skills/groups
Races bring attribute points and special attribute points, so they are more valuable than pure skills
High resources can compensate for certain skills through additional Attribute points, bonus dice to certain actions, skillsofts etc.
Low level skills can be easily bought with starting karma.
The two point PQ: Jack of all Trades allows you to buy low skill ratings very cheap
This makes it seem as if skills are at the end of the priority list.
Nevertheless are skills usually my second or at least third priority in any build. And if I can manage it, I'll take them as A together with attributes in a Sum2ten build.
Why? Because skills let you do things from the get go with no tedious grinding phase in game. That's important since I usually do not play in campaigns that stretch over years with the same character.
So my answer is: It depends on your playstyle.
-
Yeah, a lot of builds don't need a lot of skills (a bare bones street samurai or combat adept can get away with D in skills easily enough) but picking A in skills allows you, not necessarily to be more flexible, but to be specialized in a lot of areas. You can have a skill group at 6 and another at 4, and still have enough points to have 5 more skills at 6 with specializations.
I most often see it for things like deckers (who use a lot of skill points and so need a lot if they want to do more than just hacking), riggers, and magicians. Archetypes that have a high "skill requirement" so to speak, where there's four or more skills that are required to do the basics of the job.
While those have other choices that more naturally would be at A (resources or MAG/RES), those can be worked around. Special Attribute Points from metatype help if you pick B for MAG/RES, and you can make a decker with a B in Resources, they just will have less general 'ware and a cheaper deck, but it's a relatively small downgrade since cyberdecks only give small upgrades for massive jumps in price. The Hermes Chariot can go a very long way with the right programs, modifications, and modules, especially combined with things like Overclocker and Quick Config.
I'm not saying A in Skills is the best choice, but it's certainly valid and viable.
-
Skills are much easier and cheaper to raise in play than Attributes. Skills give progressively less bang for your buck at higher priority than Attributes, Magic, money, or Edge, because all these things are harder to raise or have no guarantee of payout after chargen. These other priorities also sometimes give corollary effects that cannot be duplicated after chargen (free spells, for example).
A low skill build with high attributes is much more viable than the reverse, especially if ware is involved. A low skill build with narrow skill focus is oftentimes more useful than a high skill build with the points dropped around everywhere to get a bunch of dice pools of 5-8.
Skills are not all of equal value and frequently new players don't know that some are very low value (Banishing, Astral Combat), extremely niche (Diving, Free Fall), that redundancy is not useful (taking the whole Firearms Group), or that some skills have very specific rules associated with their use (such as how you actually use First Aid, the initial threshold, and the cap on boxes healed; this is the #1 thing people miss I would say and it's why FA <6 is worse than a medkit every time).
The jack of all trades concept is easier to pull off after play begins than at the start especially with JoAT providing significant karma discounts to the most relevant levels of skill.
Attributes form a broad base of competency, while skills form a narrow one. If you want to be very competent you need good ratings in both. But there is something to be carried away with skills with the result of being middling at a lot of things.
I feel like high Skills often stem from the incorrect notion that one runner needs to cover a lot of bases, which is simply u true outside of a solo game, and even then, there should be NPCs to hire.
Some builds like high skills more (like Decker) but for others it really represents a trade off where you could get something much better.
-
My personal view is that Skills A is only a trap if you don't also take B or maybe C in Attributes (like if supplemented by cyber or a metatype with good starting stats).
As skill + attrib is the base for skill pools, having a high skill pool but low attributes often gains you very little and often leaves gaping holes in the build like poor physical resilience, i would suggest rebalancing Skills + Attribs slots.
Not all characters benefit from large skill pools, often a character concept requires them to be good at just one or two main things (combat adepts/street sams etc) and Skills C is more than enough, but there are a host of char types that benefit from a large skill pool to draw on, especially if you're in a very small team (like 1-3 people, one of whom is a pure decker or whatever) and have to cover a lot of ground, or if your concept is more of a generalist or lone wolf. There are some really good generalist builds out there ( i had a thread open a while ago on the topic) which are more than playable in shadowrun and for me, that kinda proves that Skills A is viable for at least something.
Here's an idea of what i'm talking about:
Priorities:
A-Skills (46/10)
B-Attribs (20)
C-Resources (140k)
D-Meta (human, 3)
E-Magic (0)
Attribs:
BOD 3 (+2)
STR{4}(+2)
AGI{5}(+3) 20/20
REA{7}(+3)
CHA 4 (+3)
INT 4 (+3)
LOG 3 (+2)
WIL 3 (+2)
EDG 5 (+3)
ESS 6
MAG 0
Qualities + Karma:
Starting +25
First impression (-11)
X2 R2 skills (-12)
SiNner; National (+5)
Distinctive Style; scarring (+5)
Martial art + 1 maneuver (-12)
Mild, uncommon allergy; Antibiotics (+5)
Contacts (-5)
Net=0
________________________________
Martial Arts:
Quarterstaff fighting
+Jiao Di (-1 penalty to knock down)
+Sweep (inflict full damage with knockdown as stun)
________________________________
Skills:
Groups:
Stealth 5
Influence 5 10/10
Individual:
Computer 5 (Matrix search +2)
Automatics 5 (SMG +2)
Locksmith 5 (Maglock +2)
Con 5 (Fast talk +2) 46/46
Clubs 5 (Batons +2)
Perception 5
First aid 4 (Gunshot +2)
Forgery 3 (ID +2)
Gymnastics 1 (Climbing +2)
Karma:
Pilot ground 2 (6 karma)
Pilot air 2 (6 karma)
_________________________________
Gear: 140,000 NY
Cyberware:
Augmentations:
Smartlink 0.2ESS 4,000
DataJack 0.1ESS 1,000
Wired reflexes(used) R1 2.5ESS 29,250
Reaction Enhancers(used) R2 0.75ESS 19,500
Muscle replacement R1 1ESS 25,000
(89,250 spent -4.55 ESS)
_________________________________
Electronics + ID:
Erika Elite Commlink (DR4) 2,500 3050
+Sim module, hot 350
+Trid projector 200
Meta-link Commlink (DR1) 100
Fake SiN R3 7,500
+Fake Weapon License R3 600
+Fake Cyberware License R3 600 8700
Glasses R4 400
+Vision enhance R1 500 1675
+Low Light 500
+Flare Comp 250
+Image Link 25
Earbuds R2 100
+Audio enhance R1 500 850
+SSF R1 250
14,275
_________________________________
Weapons, Armour + Clothing:
Telescoping staff 350 450
+Personalised grip 100
{7 DV/5 ACC/Reach 2}
Ares Crusader II 830 1330
(integral gas vent 2, smartgun)
+Folding stock; powered 50
+Vision mag 250
+Flashlight 50
+Concealable Holster 150
{7 DV/ACC 7/3 RC}
Ingram Smartgun X 800 1115
(integral suppressor/gasvent 2/smartgun)
+Folding stock(powered) 50
+Personalised Grip 100
+Foregrip 100
+Sling 15
+Flashlight 50
{8 DV/ACC 6/4 RC}
Ace of Coins Jacket (arm 7) 2100 2600
{+3 social limit, +1 social DP}
+non-conduct 2 500 2/10
Lined Coat (arm 9) 900
{-2 concealability modifier} 1400
+chem protect 2 500
Helmet 100 350
+Image link 25
+Microtransceiver 100
+Radio signal scanner 100
+Flashlight 25
7245
_________________________________
Vehicles + Drones:
Suzuki Mirage 8,500 10000
+Morphing Plates 1000
+Spoof chips 500
MCT fly-spy 2,000 3000
R3 sensor suite
+Camera (low light 500)
+Omni directional Mic
+Laser Mic (SSF 250)
+Directional Mic (SSF 250)
+Olfactory
+Motion Sensor
+Ultrasound
+Radio Signal Scanner
13,000 123,770 total so far
_________________________________
Tools + Misc:
Locksmith kit 500
Disguise kit 500
Forgery Kit 500
Medkit R4 1000
Gecko kit 250
Autopicker R4 2000
Cellular glove molder R4 2000
Middle lifestyle (1 month) 5000
Squatter lifestyle (1 month) 350
-Dangerous area
-Cramped
Casual Clothing 50
Smart Clothing 250
14900 138,690 total so far
Silver Credstick 20
-130 spare NY from chargen embedded
_______________________________
Machine Pistol;
120 regular rounds 255
x3 clips
SMG;
130 regular rounds 275
x3 clips
40 explosive rounds 325
x1 clip
40 Stick'n'shock rounds 325
x1 clip
1180 140,000 total
_______________________________
Knowledge skills: 14pts
English N
Spanish 2
Chinese 2
Japanese 2
Area Knowledge 2
Gang identification 2
Bars and restaurants 2
Politics 2
_______________________________
Contacts: 12 pts + 5 karma
Fixer 4,3
Journalist 3,2
Decker 4,1
_______________________________
Limits + Dicepools:
Attack, SMG: AGI 5/Weapon 7/Smartgun 2 = 14
Attack, staff: AGI 5/Weapon 7/Reach 2 = 14
Con: CHA 4/Skill 7/Quality 2/Armour 1 =14
First Aid: LOG 3/Skill 6/Eqpt 4 =13
Locksmith: AGI 5/Skill 7 =12
Data search: LOG 3/Skill 7/Hotsim 2 =12
Pilot, hot-sim: REA 7/Skill 2/Hotsim 2 =11
Perception: INT 4/Skill 5/Enhance 1 =10
INI, Meat= 11 +2d6
INI, Hot-Sim= 8 + 4d6
[Mental] 5
[Physical] 7
[Social] 5
-
Skills A is not always a trap but under priority rule Skills A mean that something else is not A.
The other thing is that not all skill groups are equally useful.
-
To be fair, most of the skill groups have at least one duff skill that you wouldn't pay for if given the option
-
That's the reason I almost always take the stealth group. Sneaking, palming and disguising yourself are skills every shadowrunner should possess
-
Skill A for your average starting player is a Trap.
Why? b/c the Average starting player doesn't fully understand the opportunity cost. They don't see the full picture, just a lot of numbers. All to often Skill A is used to generate characters with a pile of redundant skills or comparative pools that are to low to be viable, when you see this Skill A is for sure a Trap. Now folks arrive at this for a long list of reasons, NPC opponents in the core are built very generically, often focused on high rating skill groups, as mentioned above the skill listing was a really big number so they went with it, or maybe characters from their favorite (Insert thing here) do all these things, Insert thing here being SR Book, TV show, comic book etc .
Now can you make builds where Skill A is optimal? Of course. But it takes experience with the system, and a clear understanding of how the game is played.
-
When 5e first came out, I made a character for Missions using Skills A. He's a jack of all trades/spy kind of character who's very deliberately designed for open play (when you don't know what skills you can expect to be at the table). When JoaT was published, I went back (as an experiment--you can't actually do this for Missions) and tried out a few different remakes, including the obvious Attributes A/Skills B, and then run each through the 200+ karma progression I'd earned at that point. I expected the Attributes A version to come out well ahead--I had spent a fair amount of karma raising Attributes on the "real" version. I was surprised when the Skills A original came out ahead.
Now, that's a very small sample and discovering Skills A is good for a jack of all trades character isn't exactly a groundbreaking finding. Most archetypes are invested in the depth, not the breadth, of their skills. Nevertheless, I don't think the idea that Skills A is always a trap is accurate. Any character you make will involve some tough choices--"can I make this guy work with fewer nuyen/skill points/attributes?" is a question you should always be asking yourself if you're concerned with efficiency. But there are certainly circumstances in which Skills A is a solid choice.
-
What do you mean by ahead?
Corollary: in your play experience, did you find that you had skills on your sheet that were minimally useful?
-
So I think I asked about this once as well. While it hasn't been a long time since and I am not quite so experienced as many others on the board I have made a ton of characters for NPCs while running, helped players make PCs and played in a few games as well and my findings are that skills never really FEEL like a trap. At the end of the day that is what matters really as it's a game you play for fun. Some characters almost feel like they require A in skills (I made a face/rigger and it felt pretty much unthinkable to go below B.) I am playing a troll mage and my skills are higher than my attributes. Every player in my game has a C+ skills priority. Like many have said it is most important to just remember you are giving something else up for the skills, but I don't think it is always a bad trade.
The one think I would say is that unless you are non-magic I wouldn't bother with skills D. May as well go E at that point and maybe pick up Jack of all Trades.
-
Skills A is not always a trap but it can be a trap option very often. Mostly what happens is a person takes Skill A and then feels the needs to cover everything, and often ends up being good at nothing, and having terrible defense and offense.
Skills A is almost never a good idea for an awaked character, a primary combat character, close combat adept, . If the majority of your time is going to facing opposing rolls by other specialized characters it's usually a terrible idea to take skills A.
Riggers, decks, faces, Infiltration specialist benefit from skills A, primarily because each of these archetypes has two groups for which they want all the skills in that group.
Generally Skill A is acceptable so long as you remain focused in your skills distribution, and that your attributes support those skills and that you maintain a credible defense.
-
I'll dispute that faces want or need everything in both Acting and Influence. And deckers don't need Software beyond one point and a Data Bomb specialty.
-
The Priority System requires you to do just that, prioritize. Taking A in something means "I consider this to be the most important area of my character, the one that requires the most of my limited pool of starting resources." Taking A in something also means taking lower than that in everything else, and by the time you get to E you'll be feeling the pinch. So A priority in skills is a trap, if there is anything else that does more for the character as an A Priority. So you want to ask yourself "Do I need all of these skills? Will I actually use all of these skills?"
The book has an example of resources: A as a trap option. For a decker or a street samurai, resources: A is very useful. But for a technomancer? The character was buying things like 10 fake SINs, a deluxe DocWagon contract, an expensive SUV he didn't even know how to drive, etc. Obviously, that character didn't need that much in resources, and obviously, the character paid for it in other areas. The player probably had a lot of fun spending all of that money, though. That's probably why skills:A is taken when it is not necessary, too - it feels lavish. Suboptimal isn't always bad, though. If you can take a high Priority for something you enjoy but don't necessarily need, and still be able to get the character you want with your remaining resources, more power to you. But if you don't get the character you want, you might want to look at getting something more cost-effective for Priority: A.
-
I've never seen a character of any core archetype that would benefit from Skills A over something else in the A priority. In fact, I don't believe any, with the possible exception of decker, would even want it at a B priority. The opportunity cost is just too high.
A jack of all trades or mundane B&E specialist might want skills A, but for those you'd need to ask yourself:
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
2) Do I really want to be a mundane B&E specialist as opposed to anything else (sometimes the answer here is yes due to some specific character concept)
I'd argue that in 90-95% (maybe more) of all build skills A is a 'trap', in that much better options exist. In fact, I'd argue that in 80-90% of all builds even Skills B is a a 'trap', in that more optimal options exist ... even if we use Sum-to-Ten.
This of course doesn't take into account an expert player with high system mastery who is specifically choosing a high skills priority, knowing full well what the sacrifices are. This assumes a 'normal' player who is just trying to build a cool character for their game.
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
There are an awful lot of people out there that if you don't have a skill, they'll constantly throw you (without any teammate that possesses it) into situations that don't require it under the guise of "challenge".
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
There are an awful lot of people out there that if you don't have a skill, they'll constantly throw you (without any teammate that possesses it) into situations that don't require it under the guise of "challenge".
That's an OOC table issue beyond the scope of the rules to solve.
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
Not every group supports the idea that team roles should be uber specialised and unique to each PC. Sometimes redundancy isn't anathema. Characterisation, fun, and all that other good stuff can occur while someone else is playing your flavour of archetype - and for the most part it also means that more people can help out with teamwork tests.
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
At the risk of sounding immodest, I like to think that I have a decent level of system mastery and I disagree with this assessment. Obviously the, "because that's what I find appealing" reason trumps just about everything else, but that isn't related to mechanics. A JoaT character can not only cover a team's blindspots in a pinch (and a great many shadowruns have their "make this one Hardware roll" moments), but s/he can make the other members of the team better at their specializations. Back in 4e D&D, I played a lot of Warlords. Warlords didn't really get their own spotlight too often, but they were amazing at shining spotlights on other characters in the party (they were also pretty broken, but that's another issue). A JoaT character is somewhat similar. The basement for a group's performance is higher, even if the JoaT's ceiling is lower than most of the other character's ceilings in their own niche. A JoaT character doesn't get the "holy $h!t" moment that the mage might, but he gets a lot of, "Man, I'm glad we took him along" comments in the after action report.
-
I'm not sure I follow you fully Kincaid. Are you saying that Jack of All trades is a role that should be added to the always on a run list? Are you saying support concepts (like warlord) are a necessary role? Are you saying that SR isn't about specialization and team work?
-
I think that a Basic shadowrun team have 4-5 runners (mage, face, decker/technomancer, adept/sam and maybe rigger). If you have 4 players and each plays one role => you do not need skill A. But If you have only 2-3 players, one has to cover 2 roles => skill B is not maybe enough to cover all needed basic skills. A classic example is face/mysad:
B: Skills, A: Magic
Conjuring skill group 5
Spellcasting: 6
Counterspelling: 6
Pistols: 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Con: 6
Negotiation: 6
Etiquette: 1
Intimidation: 2
Sneaking: 6
Perception: 6
Impersonation: 0
This character has several weaknesses in his face skills. It might be a catastrophe if the guard notices that you cannot imitate the other guard behind the physical mask...
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
There are an awful lot of people out there that if you don't have a skill, they'll constantly throw you (without any teammate that possesses it) into situations that don't require it under the guise of "challenge".
That's an OOC table issue beyond the scope of the rules to solve.
And an issue with these boards, as I've seen several here that make the claim that you're expecting a "cake walk" for expecting one's character's abilities to be showcased rather than being prodded at in areas the character doesn't have the skill.
-
I'm not sure I follow you fully Kincaid. Are you saying that Jack of All trades is a role that should be added to the always on a run list? Are you saying support concepts (like wardlord) are a necessary role? Are you saying that SR isn't about specialization and team work?
The point was that JoaT gives a team more options and can be a substitute or a support for a specialist.
I want to add that being a JaoT doesn't mean that you do not have a speciality!
-
I want to add that being a JaoT doesn't mean that you do not have a speciality!
An interesting point.
-
I'm not sure I follow you fully Kincaid. Are you saying that Jack of All trades is a role that should be added to the always on a run list? Are you saying support concepts (like wardlord) are a necessary role? Are you saying that SR isn't about specialization and team work?
The point was that JoaT gives a team more options and can be a substitute or a support for a specialist.
I want to add that being a JaoT doesn't mean that you do not have a speciality!
ZB beat me to it. A team of specialists can work, certainly, but it results in pretty siloed skillsets. As long as you're running up against challenges to those specific skillsets, you're fine. If challenges start to stray outside of those things, then the group can get stuck. JoaT characters don't become "I Win" buttons, but they help prevent teams from getting stuck.
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
There are an awful lot of people out there that if you don't have a skill, they'll constantly throw you (without any teammate that possesses it) into situations that don't require it under the guise of "challenge".
Well yes. It's like negative qualities... sometimes, you need to press your team in their weakpoints, not their strong points. It can be as simple as "You're all running from security and you have to jump from one roof to another ... how's your Athletics?" to having a cop rap on the RIggervan's window and ask her why she's there (Charisma 1 and no Con you say? Oh dear.) ... While "SPECIALIZE!" is one style, there's also a style where "Basic competency in core abilities" comes up, or one where, sometimes, you don't have certain team members around and have to adapt.
And boy howdy, will you be thanking your team's skillmonkey at that stage.
Skills A works for certain charcter types, like the Mercenary, Weapons Specialist, or Face. It isn't for everyone, obviously, but you'll find that you can have quite respectable characters who don't require the A for something else (Cash for Riggers/Deckers, Magic for magicians, Attributes for a PhysAd or Samurai, etc.)
It's, intentionally, not a one-size-fits-all solution.
-
This character has several weaknesses in his face skills. It might be a catastrophe if the guard notices that you cannot imitate the other guard behind the physical mask...
Default skill roll and/or Influence.
IMO the biggest weakness is taking the whole Conjuring Group ;D
-
But you have 5 skill points. The only valid groups are influence and conjuring. Because of action economy I think that there is no room for leadership tests => it is total waste. Banishing is at least sometimes useful.
Your default is only 7 dices, which is really not much... I think that the total fail probability is too high.
-
The only valid groups are influence and conjuring.
The Stealth group is quite good.
-
But you are building a face/mage? Do you really think that you get enough skill points to be a competent mage and face at the same time, whenever you are wasting skill points to palming and disguise? Ok, palming is good, but disguise is even more useless than leadership and banishing.
-
If ranks in Banishing are on my sheet at all I have morally failed.
Also leadership in that situation would be somewhat amazing due to Commanding Voice spam.
-
Ah, I forgot the commanding voice. With it leadership is maybe more useful than banishing. My bad.
But if you see a F12 spirit, remember to run for your life. Without banishing it will kill you.
-
Ah, I forgot the commanding voice. With it leadership is maybe more useful than banishing. My bad.
But if you see a F12 spirit, remember to run for your life. Without banishing it will kill you.
WITH Banishing it will kill you as well. It's going to beat you at the opposed test and then proceed to beat you upon the head and shoulders.
-
Yeah, but your survival probability is higher.
If you don't have banishing => you are surely dead.
If you have banishing 6 + Magic 6 = 12, your probability to survive is 50%. The spirit have 1 service (lol, try to get more than 1...) and it is unbound( 2x lol if you try to bind it). If you get more hits than the spirit, you destroy it.
The nove in the beginning of street grimoire is good. The banishing was the only good solution to destroy the wolf.
-
"Surely dead" is hyperbolic.
-
Lol, I'm not native speaker, so my text may contain errors. :)
-
ZB beat me to it. A team of specialists can work, certainly, but it results in pretty siloed skillsets. As long as you're running up against challenges to those specific skillsets, you're fine. If challenges start to stray outside of those things, then the group can get stuck. JoaT characters don't become "I Win" buttons, but they help prevent teams from getting stuck.
The thing is a team of specialists are not that silo'd in this system. Skills D or C with a magic priority, or skills C or B without it will cover all of your bases + your specialization. Don't forget that magic covers a lot of skills as well. A jack of all trades covers multiple roles, but none of them well.
A jack of all trades can be useful in situations and in some tables, but they're definitely worse than the specialized characters that this system tends towards. Comparing it to 4e's warlord isn't a very valid comparison, as the systems are fundamentally different in many ways.
As an experienced player I wouldn't doubt you can make a useful and valid jack of all trades type character. But the majority of posters who ask for help don't know how to do that, and will make characters that are honestly not that useful ; too low dicepools, no real role, not knowing how to fill the secondary character role, etc. Or they'll be in groups that really need 'x' (face, rigger, whatever) but they can't do 'x' that well because of how they're built.
I don't think any option is a 'trap' option for experienced players, but the character creation in shadowrun is extremely complex. Saying 'skills A is a trap' is legitimate for the majority of casual players who don't have a deep system mastery, as it leads often leads to ineffective characters. The DnD 3.5 equivalent might be taking more than 2 levels of fighter - usually not recommended unless you know what you're doing. Just perusing the builds posted here shows that pretty clearly, in that most builds with skills A are severely lacking in other areas, and skills A wasn't really needed to do what they wanted.
-
1) Why am I playing a jack of all trades in a game about specialized character roles and teamwork (the answer here is usually a lack of system understanding)
There are an awful lot of people out there that if you don't have a skill, they'll constantly throw you (without any teammate that possesses it) into situations that don't require it under the guise of "challenge".
And Skills A doesn't help with a GM who is deliberately picking things the group is bad at. Shadowrun has 50ish? active skills. Even Priority A can't cover all them.
If a GM wants to spotlight a Jack of All Trades character, that is totally different from highlighting team deficiencies.
-
I don't think any option is a 'trap' option for experienced players, but the character creation in shadowrun is extremely complex. Saying 'skills A is a trap' is legitimate for the majority of casual players who don't have a deep system mastery, as it leads often leads to ineffective characters. The DnD 3.5 equivalent might be taking more than 2 levels of fighter - usually not recommended unless you know what you're doing. Just perusing the builds posted here shows that pretty clearly, in that most builds with skills A are severely lacking in other areas, and skills A wasn't really needed to do what they wanted.
I think most game system traps are in the context of new players, because they just don't have the system chops to see why the choice is bad, and possibly get starry-eyed over big numbers like "46 skill points and 10 group skills" or whatever without good understanding of the context, and then don't know that they should back out and reprioritize. Or they don't know how the skills work and think that dice pools of 2-4 for threshold tests or 5-6 for opposed tests are perfectly ok. Sure there are some games where they ARE perfectly ok which means if you have system knowledge you will be even further ahead.
Basically I might question Skills A if a forum vet uses it but I go into that just to ask, from an outside perspective, how that choice is benefiting them. But if they're new I can almost guarantee that they saw a big number and thought it was better without knowing the context of Attributes (arguably) being more important, or Limits, or spreading stuff around ineffectually.
I'm sure I could build a Skills A character where the skill points were minimally wasted and the character just happened to cover multiple competencies but even that is quite different from dropping 1-2 points in everything on the sheet, including the skills where my resulting dice pool is less than 5. I'm also sure that most characters I play have better things to allocate at A. That's just where system knowledge comes in.
-
I'll certain agree that the character creation process can be tricky and you see new players make a variety of mistakes, including taking Skills A when there's really no point to it. I see a lot of people take Resources A (because money) for similarly flawed reasons. You're creating a glut of resource where none is needed at the expense of something else. Character creation involves hard choices--I wince a bit every time I see one of those, "Help me with my mage/rigger/sam character" threads--but there are playable builds out there that work well with non-traditional allocations.
-
Frankly I think a lot of it stems from trying to build a solo game or video game-esque character in a team game setting, and recognizing even in a solo or small group game that you can and should seek it NPC contract help for the stuff you're not good at.
-
I expect most of the folks reading this have seen those threads, help Review XYZ, with some variation on Skill A, Money B, Magic/Techno C, Meta D (Elf), Attributes E. I'll also agree Non-traditional Allocation for specific purposes that are well thought out and that are viable builds are fine. That said there are bad options, the general rules or advice given by most in this forums, which does often include that skill A is trap, are not there to be artificially restrictive, or meant as a criticism of the creation process (Well at-least not by me, but I'm fairly sure that goes for everyone else here). They are used to help folks (Particularly new folks) get the most out creation. But even experienced players benefit from having their concepts re-examed and questioned. I'm as stubborn on builds as they come I expect, but I still made some fundamental build changes in my last character thread.
I'm not really sure where this is conversation is going, We have all listed our logic on the subject are we near a consensus?
-
In another thread it was suggested that a discussion of the trap status of Skills A might be stickied as a resource. Though I'm not sure how one requests that.
-
Also a quick point, Skills A isn't the best way to build a Jack of All Trades character. It works, it's certainly playable. But Skill wires with a subscription is better, and so is high Attributes plus 7 Edge. Skills A would be 3rd place or so in Jack of All Trades builds. This is another reason Skills A is a trap. You want to play the character with 10+ dice in everything, Skills A isn't the best way to do it.
The Skillwires character is built entirely around Skillwires and is your best choice for JoaT. Adzling's technomancer skillwire build is around here somewhere and is probably about as optimized a JoaT concept as you'll find. But B attribuites, C Metahuman (human) leave you open to lots of other concepts, and you're likely going to be able to toss 10 dice at about anything.
-
In another thread it was suggested that a discussion of the trap status of Skills A might be stickied as a resource. Though I'm not sure how one requests that.
I do think a general recommendation guide could be very useful. But I assume we would need to find a Mod who could do the sticking, regardless I doubt they really want a thread labeled skill A is a trap. I do thinks we have covered the ground on this pretty clearly.
-
. The DnD 3.5 equivalent might be taking more than 2 levels of fighter - usually not recommended unless you know what you're doing.
If you have more than 2 levels of fighter on your character sheet for ANY REASON than you have morally failed!!!
But seriously (though seriously NEVER have more than 2 levels of fighter in 3.5) the Skills A is a Trap saying doesn't preclude certain niche concept or builds from using Skills A effectively, it's just that they are never being posted on here asking for help. Anyone asking for help on this board means that Skills A is a Trap for them, if they knew how to build an effective character using Skills A then they wouldn't be asking for help. It's a simple Catch-22 that makes Skills A is a Trap the correct position to take from the framework of helping people design better builds. No one should EVER be given a Bard for their first time playing D&D, no one should ever be given a Skills A character for their first time playing Shadowrun either.
-
Given that this conversation has gone so far already I doubt I'm going to say much truly unique here, but here's my two nuyen:
I don't see Skills as the A Priority as a Trap. Unwise for the majority of builds? Assuredly! Not optimal? Oh, definitely. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a trap though. In my time playing Shadowrun and interacting with players new to the system and tabletop games both I've very rarely seen someone actually want to go for Skills A on their first character. Usually they come in with some sort of concept or idea, however loose or vague as they may be, and work toward toward that. Sure, I see a lot of useless skills get picked up and never used, but I've only seen Skills chosen at A once or twice. Usually the highest it gets is B and that's just because of the free Skill Groups.
My opinion is that anything at Priority A is a trap in so much as the big numbers are so very alluring and pull even vets in there to see what they can't make work. Resources A gives just so much money to play with, Attributes A gives you such a good starting point, and Metatype gives you all of the Edge. Magic/Resonance A gives you so many different choices and opportunities that it's ridiculous. But that's the point of the system. All the high ranks in the Priority Structure are alluring and they make you really have to figure out where you want to start and what you want to focus on. I won't say everything is as viable as everything else, but I think Skills A is far from the worst choice a new player could make.
That said, a point that might want to be made here is what "It's a Trap" really means. If it means that it's sub-optimal then forget everything I just said. I don't think it's optimal for anything but very specific builds. But if we're saying that Skills A is a siren song that lures new players into the hazards and cripples their characters, then I strongly disagree. Almost any build can be made quite strong with Skills A. It just won't be the best it could be.
-
Any build CAN be made strong with skills A.
Most builds on this forum with Skills A ARE NOT strong, instead there's 15 skills at rank 3 or 20 at rank 2. There's opposed test dice pools in the 5-9 range. There's extended test skills with dice pools of 4. Etc.
I consider that a siren song situation that suckers people who don't know that having rank 3 in 15 skills is ultimately rather worthtless.
-
It would probably be worthwhile to get a stickied thread that touches on the math side of Shadowrun.
-
Given that this conversation has gone so far already I doubt I'm going to say much truly unique here, but here's my two nuyen:
I don't see Skills as the A Priority as a Trap. Unwise for the majority of builds? Assuredly! Not optimal? Oh, definitely. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a trap though. In my time playing Shadowrun and interacting with players new to the system and tabletop games both I've very rarely seen someone actually want to go for Skills A on their first character. Usually they come in with some sort of concept or idea, however loose or vague as they may be, and work toward toward that. Sure, I see a lot of useless skills get picked up and never used, but I've only seen Skills chosen at A once or twice. Usually the highest it gets is B and that's just because of the free Skill Groups.
My opinion is that anything at Priority A is a trap in so much as the big numbers are so very alluring and pull even vets in there to see what they can't make work. Resources A gives just so much money to play with, Attributes A gives you such a good starting point, and Metatype gives you all of the Edge. Magic/Resonance A gives you so many different choices and opportunities that it's ridiculous. But that's the point of the system. All the high ranks in the Priority Structure are alluring and they make you really have to figure out where you want to start and what you want to focus on. I won't say everything is as viable as everything else, but I think Skills A is far from the worst choice a new player could make.
That said, a point that might want to be made here is what "It's a Trap" really means. If it means that it's sub-optimal then forget everything I just said. I don't think it's optimal for anything but very specific builds. But if we're saying that Skills A is a siren song that lures new players into the hazards and cripples their characters, then I strongly disagree. Almost any build can be made quite strong with Skills A. It just won't be the best it could be.
Trap as in Counter intuitive. 5th edition Shadowrun the ranks in the skill don't matter so much, because its the dice pool you care about. If you could somehow have a decker with 1 point in Computer, but still have a dice pool of 14 for Matrix Search and Matrix Perception, you're good to go. (Silly made up numbers to illustrate my point). For most builds/concepts you're mechanically better off prioritizing other things.
Also, Trap as in, if you want a character to be good at a lot of things, Skills A isn't the best choice, mechanically.
-
Also, Trap as in, if you want a character to be good at a lot of things, Skills A isn't the best choice, mechanically.
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
-
Also, Trap as in, if you want a character to be good at a lot of things, Skills A isn't the best choice, mechanically.
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
Except its not. Edge lets you be a much better generalist without hurting things. No cyber, High attributes + high edge + a decent skillbase (B or C) is mechanically better. If you go magic thats even better, because spells can replicate a lot of things skills do, and sometimes do them better - though I don't know if the priority works out.
-
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
I'd say Attributes A (larger base dice pool to more things) + Skills or Resources B (points base or ware to further augment some of the Attributes, and if Resources B then Skills C) + JoAT (and buying multiple new level 1 skills per run).
JoAT is what makes generalist builds more viable this edition, IMO.
-
If you have more than 2 levels of fighter on your character sheet for ANY REASON than you have morally failed!!!
Untrue. A single-class Fighter is quite awesome at the higher levels. Best versatility of any combat class. Go into Pathfinder and it's even better.
-
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
There are no shortage of interesting JoaT builds, I happen to think the skill net concept is best, but that really a different discussion, and should be taken to a different thread if we wish to pursue it.
-
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
I'd say Attributes A (larger base dice pool to more things) + Skills or Resources B (points base or ware to further augment some of the Attributes, and if Resources B then Skills C) + JoAT (and buying multiple new level 1 skills per run).
JoAT is what makes generalist builds more viable this edition, IMO.
Yeah, thats probably decent for a long-term outlook but i think a "generalist" is pretty different to a "Jack-of-all-trades".
Generalist i see as someone who does a very diverse set of things well and a jack of all trades is someone who does nearly everything, but is only moderately good at most of them.
A generalist like the one i posted up earlier in the thread is good in a fight, has a variety of "on-run" skills (lockpicking, sneaking etc), decent social skills and decent legwork skills too, but there is plenty he can't do (like scuba diving, or hacking etc). a JoaT type guy is going to want some dice in pretty much every skill as part of the character concept. i'd def say the skillsoft network is the best way of achieving that
For me, being able to have so many skills at R5+ sits well with attribs B because you can have all stats at 3 and still have 4 more spare attrib points to divide as you need and 140k to spend on cyber (before in debt or karma-to-cash) to get attrib and skill boosters.
-
Skills A + Attribs B i think is probably the best "generalist" set up (outside of expensive cyber)
I'd say Attributes A (larger base dice pool to more things) + Skills or Resources B (points base or ware to further augment some of the Attributes, and if Resources B then Skills C) + JoAT (and buying multiple new level 1 skills per run).
JoAT is what makes generalist builds more viable this edition, IMO.
Yeah, thats probably decent for a long-term outlook but i think a "generalist" is pretty different to a "Jack-of-all-trades".
Generalist i see as someone who does a very diverse set of things well and a jack of all trades is someone who does nearly everything, but is only moderately good at most of them.
A generalist like the one i posted up earlier in the thread is good in a fight, has a variety of "on-run" skills (lockpicking, sneaking etc), decent social skills and decent legwork skills too, but there is plenty he can't do (like scuba diving, or hacking etc). a JoaT type guy is going to want some dice in pretty much every skill as part of the character concept. i'd def say the skillsoft network is the best way of achieving that
For me, being able to have so many skills at R5+ sits well with attribs B because you can have all stats at 3 and still have 4 more spare attrib points to divide as you need and 140k to spend on cyber (before in debt or karma-to-cash) to get attrib and skill boosters.
The "Master of None" is the most important part of "Jack of all Trades", but is often left out when mentioning.
The more you try to be able to do, the less effective you'll be when you try to do anything.
-
If you have more than 2 levels of fighter on your character sheet for ANY REASON than you have morally failed!!!
Untrue. A single-class Fighter is quite awesome at the higher levels. Best versatility of any combat class. Go into Pathfinder and it's even better.
Not to get derailed, but prestige classes and book of nine swords make that untrue. Paladin/Ranger are usually even better due to spells. Pathfinder tried to fix this, and 5e does an even better job.
*ahem*
Back on track ... :D
imho having a high edge + attributes is better for a generalist (or jack of all trades) then skills A. Reason being that high attributes give you a good baseline for every school (since dicepool is all that matter), and edge lets you excel at any skill whenever you need to. Its more efficient then trying to have high skills in everything, and then lets you give your character some other focus as well.
-
Not to get derailed, but prestige classes and book of nine swords make that untrue. Paladin/Ranger are usually even better due to spells. Pathfinder tried to fix this, and 5e does an even better job.
The opportunity cost of losing out on all those bonus feats just isn't worth the squeeze, IMO.
Pathfinder did make it even better, but that doesn't mean it was bad previously.
Don't even mention the travesty that is 5e. It is just as bad as 4e, just in different was.
imho having a high edge + attributes is better for a generalist (or jack of all trades) then skills A. Reason being that high attributes give you a good baseline for every school (since dicepool is all that matter), and edge lets you excel at any skill whenever you need to. Its more efficient then trying to have high skills in everything, and then lets you give your character some other focus as well.
A- Skills
B- Attributes
C- Resources
D- Metatype (Human)
E- Magic/Resonance (Mundane)
This can work quite well for an unaugmented mundane.
-
you can have all stats at 3
This is also kind of its own trap though, and we've all seen the builds that play into it. Middle of the road attributes are a weak foundation to hang even high-rated skills on, even after ware. There are always trade offs. Anyone who tries to be good at things tied to every attribute either needs to accept and be ok with the fact that that they'll never be better than mediocre to average at everything or rebuild with greater focus.
EDIT: maybe this is perceptive bias. A Sam with AGI 3 before ware vs 5 is "only" 2 dice down, all else being equal, and that's 2/3 of a hit, but it really does wind up hurting you when the dice spike high or low.
-
Yeah what I actually said was you get all attributes to 3 and then still have four spare points to use.
-
I know, but that 4 really doesn't spread around much meaningfully. There are generally 2-3 stars every runner would like to see at 5 and one that people might want to hard cap.
I cut part of your statement just to address the specific part I quoted, not to willfully misrepresent you.
-
EDIT: maybe this is perceptive bias. A Sam with AGI 3 before ware vs 5 is "only" 2 dice down, all else being equal, and that's 2/3 of a hit, but it really does wind up hurting you when the dice spike high or low.
You know if you're going to start questioning the value of +or- 2 dice, a significant portion of your posting history needs to be re-examined. ;D
Anyway.... the value of + or - 2 dice depends heavily on opposed/unopposed, and if you're already in the range of "good enough". Pistol pool of 10, those +2 dice are not causally dismissed. Gymnastics pool of 13? Yeah losing 2 dice won't hurt.
-
If you have more than 2 levels of fighter on your character sheet for ANY REASON than you have morally failed!!!
Untrue. A single-class Fighter is quite awesome at the higher levels. Best versatility of any combat class. Go into Pathfinder and it's even better.
Not to get derailed, but prestige classes and book of nine swords make that untrue. Paladin/Ranger are usually even better due to spells. Pathfinder tried to fix this, and 5e does an even better job.
Yeah... in 3.5 there was ZERO reason to go higher than 2 levels for any reason ever. You got every thing Mechanically beneficial possible from the class by that point & 3rd level was a "Dead" Class level. But that's the point what this thread is about... there are all kinds of different "Traps" in game systems. When we are calling something a "Trap" we are saying that it's Mechanically Sub-Optimal to your character to choose it.
The opportunity cost of losing out on all those bonus feats just isn't worth the squeeze, IMO.
Pathfinder did make it even better, but that doesn't mean it was bad previously.
Don't even mention the travesty that is 5e. It is just as bad as 4e, just in different was.
3.5 Feats were set at 3rd level power... though they did try to make the high level fighter ones better, they still SUCKED in comparison. It's an non debatable point that a +16/+11/+6/+1 Fighter Gish who's casting 9th level Spells/Powers is going to demolish any 20 level Fighter class. That's the point... there are ways to be ahead of the Power Curve in any system, Skills A is not the way to do it.
-
Well a trap is a trap because a new player sees it and thinks it is good just on the face of looking at it, because they don't have the system knowledge to know why it's actually bad.
Yeah I would say 3.5 Fighter is a good analogy. You see high BAB and good HP and a ton of feats and lots of weapon choices, and on its face it wouldn't look like you're largely obsoleted by things the Wizard can casually do by level 9, but not knowing it doesn't make that any less true.
An experienced player intentionally building something suboptimal is very different than a new player falling into a build trap.
-
A better example of "trap option" using D&D 3.5 (or any d20 really) as an example would be multi-classing AT ALL with a spellcaster. You gain almost nothing, but you slow down your spell progression and possibly lose access to an entire Spell Level.
-
I think one of the ways that skills: A can be a trap is those "Help me with my mage/rigger/sam character" builds that Kincaid mentioned. Because a newer player will look at skills: A and see enough skill points to combine several roles, but not realize that those roles also demand different high Attributes, or most of your starting resources, or a high slot for Magic/Resonance. So because of this, they can wind up mediocre, or even all but unplayable, across the board.
-
I think one of the ways that skills: A can be a trap is those "Help me with my mage/rigger/sam character" builds that Kincaid mentioned. Because a newer player will look at skills: A and see enough skill points to combine several roles, but not realize that those roles also demand different high Attributes, or most of your starting resources, or a high slot for Magic/Resonance. So because of this, they can wind up mediocre, or even all but unplayable, across the board.
Right. Or even if they have a solid concept in mind ('Mage', for instance), by taking Skills A they're oftentimes making their concept actively worse.
Even if their concept is a jack of all trades, they then often will forget edge and how important that is to such a character, or they may not have the system knowledge to effectively play such a character or know what it means (i.e. never really being the shining star of a run, like a street sam who blows away a knight errant kill squad might be).
-
Here is one example which is very strong with A in skills. He has no weaknesses in his skill pools to do his role as face or mage. He always throws at least 10 dices, very often 12 or even more. He can often (this depends on your gm that how often actually) boosts himself to be more competent by alchemy. The only weaknesses are some low attributes. But if e.g. log is 3, it does not really help, if you don't have the skill.
A: Magic
A: Skills
E: Attributes
E: Resources
C: Metatype (elf)
Str: 1
Agi: 2
Bod: 2 (3)
Rea: 1 (5)
Will: 3
Int: 5
Cha: 8
Log: 1
Edge: 4
Magic: 6
Dodge: 11
Drain: 11
Adept Powers:
Increase reflexes 3
Combat sense 1
The next two abilities are because of spiritual way. He will take it after some runs. Other options are indeed possible.
Increase Body 1
Increase reaction 1
Skills:
Conjuring skill group 5
Influence skill group 5
Counterspelling 6 (+2 combat)
Spellcasting 6 (+2 combat)
Alchemy 6 (+2 command)
Con 6 (+2 fast talk)
Pistols 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Perception 6
Sneaking 6 (+2 urban)
Intimidation 5
Impersonation 3
Spells:
Improved invisibility
Stun bolt
Blast
Clout
Increase willpower
Increase agility (alchemy)
Increase intuition (alchemy)
Levitate
Heal
Physical mask
Below is the same concept with B in skills. No specializations and several weaknesses in face skills. If he takes it, he can get +2 to his attributes (+2 to reaction or to willpower I think).
Influence skill group 5
Spellcasting: 6
Counterspelling: 6
Pistols: 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Summoning: 6
Binding: 6
Etiquette: 0
Intimidation: 0
Sneaking: 6
Perception: 6
Impersonation: 0
Con: 3
As I said earlier he is weaker than a pure mage and a pure face together (two different characters played by two players). But if you have not enough players to do that?
The cost to rise your willpower to 5 is 45 karma. If you rise your skills to same levels as with A in skills, you have to pay >100 karma even with joat!
-
Eh I would call this as a trap under almost any circumstance, 3 rating 1 attributes, a full 7 points wasted into alchemy (its also a loss of 2 spells for no useful gain), a full 7 points wasted into pistol which only gave a pool of 10. But I will agree it does clearly shows why Skill A is just bad news, in so many builds.
You could easily have dropped 14 skill points from this and moved those resources else where.
-
Your comment contains very many errors. First: He has only 2 attributes at 1 because reaction is 5. Second, the difference between A and B skills is 25 skill points, so it is not enough to move 14 points elsewhere. Even if 5 points are wasted to useless skill in skill group, and that's why released also. And so on.
I have played this concept already and it works. In our current run we are infiltrating to a camp in jungle and there is no background count. So if a pistol is needed, his pool is 13-14 (because of smart link and agility spell).It's not difficult to hit with that pool at least basic mooks. I use those alchemy spells almost everytime, more often than any other spells in my list, so I think that they are not waste. They are useful even in mild BC (1-3) environments. They are not necessary, only additional mild but nice bonuses.
-
Your comment contains very many errors. First: He has only 2 attributes at 1 because reaction is 5. Second, the difference between A and B skills is 25 skill points, so it is not enough to move 14 points elsewhere. Even if 5 points are wasted to useless skill in skill group, and that's why released also. And so on.
I have played this concept already and it works. In our current run we are infiltrating to a camp in jungle and there is no background count. So if a pistol is needed, his pool is 13-14 (because of smart link and agility spell).It's not difficult to hit with that pool at least basic mooks. I use those alchemy spells almost everytime, more often than any other spells in my list, so I think that they are not waste. They are useful even in mild BC (1-3) environments. They are not necessary, only additional mild but nice bonuses.
Just the fact you went Pistols instead of Automatics makes it a waste... Machine Pistols/Sub-Machineguns/Assault Rifles are clearly better guns to use.
You also missed one of the best spells for this build...
INFLUENCE (MENTAL)
Type: M Range: LOS Duration: P Drain: F – 1
You implant a single suggestion in the victim’s mind, like a powerful post-hypnotic command. For example, you might have your target think that FizzyFluid is the best drink on the market, or that he can’t remember his best friend’s name, or that he should let you past a locked door. The target carries out this suggestion as if it were his own idea. If confronted with the wrongness of the suggestion (like when the reality of the flavor of FizzyFluid in his mouth contrasts with his belief that it’s good), the subject can attempt to overcome it using the rules for overcoming mental manipulations (p. 292). In any case, the suggestion fades naturally after a number of minutes equal to your net hits.
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Influence is good spell but not always usable. Someone might notice you. For example in tight negotiation situation Yakuza boss is with mage who check that you do not try to cheat with spells (astral perception) => you have to survive with your natural skills...
It is possible to change clout to influence. It is probably better, I agree that.
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Carry an SMG in a concealed holster. Street legal, can even take it into some AAA area clubs in all likelihood. Most Johnsons aren't going to be pissed you're packing at a meet unless they specifically tell you not to, or invite you someplace with a super strict "no weapons" policy.
Considering the many places one cal lawfully carry handguns these days, I expect gun laws to be even looser in the dystopian future.
-
Yeah, given some of the suits come standard with a holster it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to slot a machine pistol into it for the meet
-
Here is one example which is very strong with A in skills. He has no weaknesses in his skill pools to do his role as face or mage. He always throws at least 10 dices, very often 12 or even more. He can often (this depends on your gm that how often actually) boosts himself to be more competent by alchemy. The only weaknesses are some low attributes. But if e.g. log is 3, it does not really help, if you don't have the skill.
A: Magic
A: Skills
E: Attributes
E: Resources
C: Metatype (elf)
Str: 1
Agi: 2
Bod: 2 (3)
Rea: 1 (5)
Will: 3
Int: 5
Cha: 8
Log: 1
Edge: 4
Magic: 6
Dodge: 11
Drain: 11
Adept Powers:
Increase reflexes 3
Combat sense 1
The next two abilities are because of spiritual way. He will take it after some runs. Other options are indeed possible.
Increase Body 1
Increase reaction 1
Skills:
Conjuring skill group 5
Influence skill group 5
Counterspelling 6 (+2 combat)
Spellcasting 6 (+2 combat)
Alchemy 6 (+2 command)
Con 6 (+2 fast talk)
Pistols 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Perception 6
Sneaking 6 (+2 urban)
Intimidation 5
Impersonation 3
Spells:
Improved invisibility
Stun bolt
Blast
Clout
Increase willpower
Increase agility (alchemy)
Increase intuition (alchemy)
Levitate
Heal
Physical mask
Below is the same concept with B in skills. No specializations and several weaknesses in face skills. If he takes it, he can get +2 to his attributes (+2 to reaction or to willpower I think).
Influence skill group 5
Spellcasting: 6
Counterspelling: 6
Pistols: 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Summoning: 6
Binding: 6
Etiquette: 0
Intimidation: 0
Sneaking: 6
Perception: 6
Impersonation: 0
Con: 3
As I said earlier he is weaker than a pure mage and a pure face together (two different characters played by two players). But if you have not enough players to do that?
The cost to rise your willpower to 5 is 45 karma. If you rise your skills to same levels as with A in skills, you have to pay >100 karma even with joat!
this character is pretty much the definition of Skills A trap. This character only really survives if the GM decides to pull punches, which some GMs do. my GM doesn't and this character would not survive.
Too many holes
too many weakness
too many things have to go just perfect for this character just to function much less excell
-
I would do something like this. this character still has 42K to buy gear and a lifestyle and 6 karma.
a scout type character, not super great in combat, but can get the first punch in and then run for cover and go full defense
== Info ==
Name: Unnamed Character Alias:
Elf Movement: 20/40
Composure: 6
Street Cred: 0 Judge Intentions: 8
Notoriety: 0 Lift/Carry: 7 (30 kg/20 kg)
Public Awareness: 0 Memory: 5
Karma: 0 Nuyen: 42500
Age: Skin:
Eyes: Hair:
== Priorities ==
Metatype: D - Human or Elf
Attributes: B - 20 Attributes
Special: E - Mundane
Skills: A - 46 Skills/10 Skill Groups
Resources: C - 140,000¥
== Attributes ==
BOD: 5 CHA: 3
AGI: 7 (10) INT: 5
REA: 5 (7) LOG: 2
STR: 2 WIL: 3
EDG: 2
== Derived Attributes ==
Essence: 4.26 Initiative: 10 (12) + 1d6
Physical Damage Track: 11 Rigger Init: 12 + 1d6
Stun Damage Track: 10 Astral Init:
Physical: 6 Matrix AR Init: 12 + 1d6
Mental: 4 Matrix VR Cold Init: 5 + DP + 3d6
Social: 5 Matrix VR Hot Init: 5 + DP + 4d6
Astral: 5
== Active Skills ==
Blades (Knives) Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 16 (18)
Con Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 9
Disguise Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 11
Etiquette Base: 2 + Karma: 0 = 2 Pool: 5
Gymnastics Base: 4 + Karma: 0 = 4 Pool: 14
Longarms (Sniper Rifles) Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 16 (18)
Navigation Base: 4 + Karma: 0 = 4 Pool: 9
Palming Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 16
Perception (Visual) Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 11 (13)
Pilot Ground Craft Base: 1 + Karma: 0 = 1 Pool: 8
Pistols (Semi-Automatics) Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 16 (18)
Running Base: 3 + Karma: 0 = 3 Pool: 5
Sneaking Base: 6 + Karma: 0 = 6 Pool: 16
Survival Base: 4 + Karma: 0 = 4 Pool: 7
Swimming Base: 3 + Karma: 0 = 3 Pool: 5
Throwing Weapons Base: 0 + Karma: 1 = 1 Pool: 11
Tracking Base: 4 + Karma: 0 = 4 Pool: 9
== Knowledge Skills ==
== Qualities ==
Adrenaline Surge
Agile Defender
Allergy (Uncommon, Mild) (Wrought Iron)
Code of Honor (Assasins Creeed)
Low-Light Vision
SINner (National) (Tir Tangire)
== Cyberware/Bioware ==
Image Link
Muscle Toner Rating 3
Reaction Enhancers Rating 2
Smartlink
== Weapons ==
Unarmed Attack
Pool: 9 Accuracy: 6 DV: 2S AP: - RC: 1
-
At least in our tables a machine pistol is not a pistol, it's too big to concealable holster. Your rules may wary. And if it is allowed to put there, it is only -2 to perception test => even a child notices them without very high palming skill => even more skills is needed. Note also that I mean by Yakuza boss that he isn't your friend, he's your enemy.
Ikarinokami, how many players do you have in your tables? I do not recommend a character covering two archetypes if there are enough players to cover all 4-5 basic roles in runner team (mage, face, decker, sam and rigger). Core "single" archetypes are better, but if you have only 2-3 players, you cannot cover all roles...
Moreover, at least I cannot see very many situations in which this character is very weak. Skills, magic (for example levitate), spirits or gear helps a lot. Note that for example he is not good in climbing (gymnastics), but levitate solves the problem. But if your agi is 4 (typical value for a pure mage), how he can survive against sadistic gm, he is still rolling only 3 dices (no gymnastics because of C in skills)? This is a very big mystery to me.
-
Your comment contains very many errors. First: He has only 2 attributes at 1 because reaction is 5. Second, the difference between A and B skills is 25 skill points, so it is not enough to move 14 points elsewhere. Even if 5 points are wasted to useless skill in skill group, and that's why released also. And so on.
I have played this concept already and it works. In our current run we are infiltrating to a camp in jungle and there is no background count. So if a pistol is needed, his pool is 13-14 (because of smart link and agility spell).It's not difficult to hit with that pool at least basic mooks. I use those alchemy spells almost everytime, more often than any other spells in my list, so I think that they are not waste. They are useful even in mild BC (1-3) environments. They are not necessary, only additional mild but nice bonuses.
First off 46/10 - 36/5 is not 25, it is in fact 15 or really 10/5. Multi-source magical boosting leaves you very vulnerable to even low back round count, even in a BC 1 your Reaction drop to a 3, not a good method. Next Alchemy just isn't worth the points at present, to many restrictions and not enough benefit. If your going to have spellcasting at 6 alchemy is both inferior and redundant, a very poor combination. You could just as easily have caste those spells the old fashioned way and it would have worked just as well.
Drop the two I mentioned Trim another point drop conjuring group, get summoning at 5 and your basically at Skill B, Use that point to raise Attributes to D, and you can probubly solved all the issues.
-
CHA mages should have Too Pretty To Hit.
INT and LOG mages just always need to take cover but INT mages probably have INT 6 and are therefore in a better position.
-
Here is one example which is very strong with A in skills. He has no weaknesses in his skill pools to do his role as face or mage. He always throws at least 10 dices, very often 12 or even more. He can often (this depends on your gm that how often actually) boosts himself to be more competent by alchemy. The only weaknesses are some low attributes. But if e.g. log is 3, it does not really help, if you don't have the skill.
A: Magic
A: Skills
E: Attributes
E: Resources
C: Metatype (elf)
Str: 1
Agi: 2
Bod: 2 (3)
Rea: 1 (5)
Will: 3
Int: 5
Cha: 8
Log: 1
Edge: 4
Magic: 6
Dodge: 11
Drain: 11
Adept Powers:
Increase reflexes 3
Combat sense 1
The next two abilities are because of spiritual way. He will take it after some runs. Other options are indeed possible.
Increase Body 1
Increase reaction 1
Skills:
Conjuring skill group 5
Influence skill group 5
Counterspelling 6 (+2 combat)
Spellcasting 6 (+2 combat)
Alchemy 6 (+2 command)
Con 6 (+2 fast talk)
Pistols 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Perception 6
Sneaking 6 (+2 urban)
Intimidation 5
Impersonation 3
Spells:
Improved invisibility
Stun bolt
Blast
Clout
Increase willpower
Increase agility (alchemy)
Increase intuition (alchemy)
Levitate
Heal
Physical mask
And here is the same concept with Skills B. This one is more focused on Con and magical infiltration, its easy enough to swap around Mentor spirits and skill points to be more specialized in Negotiation and Legwork.
Also note, Priority build, not SUMto10. SUMto10 is cheating.
== Info ==
Street Name: Elf Mystic Adept
Name: Unnamed Character
Movement: 6/12
Karma: 1
Street Cred: 0
Notoriety: 0
Public Awareness: 0
Elf
Composure: 13
Judge Intentions: 13
Lift/Carry: 4 (15 kg/10 kg)
Memory: 6
Nuyen: 1050
== Priorities ==
Metatype: D - Human or Elf
Attributes: C - 16 Attributes
Special: A - Magician or Technomancer
Skills: B - 36 Skills/5 Skill Groups
Resources: E - 6,000¥
== Attributes ==
BOD: 3
AGI: 3
REA: 1 (4)
STR: 1
CHA: 8
INT: 5
LOG: 1
WIL: 5
EDG: 1
MAG: 6
== Derived Attributes ==
Essence: 6
Initiative: 6 (9) + 4d6
Rigger Initiative: 9 + 4d6
Astral Initiative: 10 + 2d6
Matrix AR Initiative: 9 + 4d6
Matrix Cold Initiative: 5 + DP + 3d6
Matrix Hot Initiative: 5 + DP + 4d6
Physical Damage Track: 10
Stun Damage Track: 11
== Limits ==
Physical: 3
Mental: 4
Social: 9
Ballistic Mask [+1] (Only for intimidation, Must be visible)
Astral: 9
== Active Skills ==
Binding : 6 [Spirits of Man] Pool: 12 (14)
Con : 5 Pool: 15
Counterspelling : 6 Pool: 12
Etiquette : 1 (from Karma) Pool: 9
Impersonation : 5 Pool: 13
Negotiation : 6 [Bargaining] Pool: 14 (16)
Perception : 6 Pool: 11
Performance : 5 Pool: 13
Sneaking : 6 Pool: 9
Spellcasting : 6 [Manipulation] Pool: 12 (14)
Summoning : 6 [Spirits of Man] Pool: 12 (14)
== Knowledge Skills ==
Gangs : 3 Pool: 8
Magical Theory : 6 Pool: 7
Sprawl Life : 3 Pool: 8
== Contacts ==
Corporate Secretary (2, 1)
Talismonger (4, 3)
Gang Leader (2, 5)
Fixer (5, 2)
== Qualities ==
Focused Concentration (Rating 3)
Low-Light Vision
Mentor Spirit (Raven)
Mystic Adept - 6 PP - 30 Karma
Prejudiced (Specific, Biased) (Technology)
SINer (National) UCAS
Dependant (Nuisance)
Allergy (Uncommon Moderate) - Silver
Addiction (Mild, Cigs)
== Spells ==
(Tradition: Shamanic, Resist Drain with WIL + CHA (13))
Ball Lightning DV: F-1
Control Thoughts (Limited) DV: F-3
Heal DV: F-4
Increase Charisma DV: F-3
Improved Invisibility DV: F-1
Levitate DV: F-2
Mob Mind (Limited) DV: F-1
Physical Mask DV: F-1
Shapechange DV: F-3
Stunbolt DV: F-3
== Powers ==
Astral Perception
Combat Sense Rating: 3
Improved Reflexes 3
== Lifestyles ==
Rooftop Squat 1 months
== Armor ==
Armor Jacket 12
Ballistic Mask 2
== Weapons ==
Unarmed Attack
Pool: 2 Accuracy: 3 DV: 1S AP: - RC: 1
== Gear ==
Cheap Pre-paid Commlink x5
Fetish
Reagents, per dram x50
Survival Kit
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Carry an SMG in a concealed holster. Street legal, can even take it into some AAA area clubs in all likelihood. Most Johnsons aren't going to be pissed you're packing at a meet unless they specifically tell you not to, or invite you someplace with a super strict "no weapons" policy.
Considering the many places one cal lawfully carry handguns these days, I expect gun laws to be even looser in the dystopian future.
Off topic, but I see SMGs in concealed holsters enough that I want to point out that only pistols and tasers fit in them. In the above scenario you could obviously just swap a machine pistol in.
-
At least in our tables a machine pistol is not a pis
tol, it's too big to concealable holster. Your rules may wary. And if it is allowed to put there, it is only -2 to perception test => even a child notices them without very high palming skill => even more skills is needed. Note also that I mean by Yakuza boss that he isn't your friend, he's your enemy.
Ikarinokami, how many players do you have in your tables? I do not recommend a character covering two archetypes if there are enough players to cover all 4-5 basic roles in runner team (mage, face, decker, sam and rigger). Core "single" archetypes are better, but if you have only 2-3 players, you cannot cover all roles...
Moreover, at least I cannot see very many situations in which this character is very weak. Skills, magic (for example levitate), spirits or gear helps a lot. Note that for example he is not good in climbing (gymnastics), but levitate solves the problem. But if your agi is 4 (typical value for a pure mage), how he can survive against sadistic gm, he is still rolling only 3 dices (no gymnastics because of C in skills)? This is a very big mystery to me.
Your base agility without the spell is too low. Why? Grenades are exceptionally dangerous to low soak characters. If you don't that spell on and you run into trouble your dead.
Sustaining agility and reaction with alchemy is way too risky. Because of limitations, and worse yet, these aren't spells that make you better they are spells that make you viable. That's a big no-no
Second your limit is only 3 for both physical and mental so those points in sneak and perception are useless to you unlessess you are fully buff or wireless. They are many times we you won't be buff or can't risk wireless.
You cannot make an active meat space runner with E attributes. That's another main cause of the A Skills trap the belief that you can get away with low attributes you cannot. Unless you are going to be an off site Decker or cocoon rigger E attributes are not viable.
It's not even so much the A Skills but the E attributes that just kills this character. You don't have the core attributes to support your skills or even your survivable except under perfect circumstances, which is a trap in and of itself.
Your character should be able to be fully viable even under less than ideal conditions.
-
Here is one example which is very strong with A in skills. He has no weaknesses in his skill pools to do his role as face or mage. He always throws at least 10 dices, very often 12 or even more. He can often (this depends on your gm that how often actually) boosts himself to be more competent by alchemy. The only weaknesses are some low attributes. But if e.g. log is 3, it does not really help, if you don't have the skill.
A: Magic
A: Skills
E: Attributes
E: Resources
C: Metatype (elf)
Str: 1
Agi: 2
Bod: 2 (3)
Rea: 1 (5)
Will: 3
Int: 5
Cha: 8
Log: 1
Edge: 4
Magic: 6
Dodge: 11
Drain: 11
Adept Powers:
Increase reflexes 3
Combat sense 1
The next two abilities are because of spiritual way. He will take it after some runs. Other options are indeed possible.
Increase Body 1
Increase reaction 1
Skills:
Conjuring skill group 5
Influence skill group 5
Counterspelling 6 (+2 combat)
Spellcasting 6 (+2 combat)
Alchemy 6 (+2 command)
Con 6 (+2 fast talk)
Pistols 6 (+2 semiautomatics)
Perception 6
Sneaking 6 (+2 urban)
Intimidation 5
Impersonation 3
Spells:
Improved invisibility
Stun bolt
Blast
Clout
Increase willpower
Increase agility (alchemy)
Increase intuition (alchemy)
Levitate
Heal
Physical mask
And here is the same concept with Skills B. This one is more focused on Con and magical infiltration, its easy enough to swap around Mentor spirits and skill points to be more specialized in Negotiation and Legwork.
Also note, Priority build, not SUMto10. SUMto10 is cheating.
== Info ==
Street Name: Elf Mystic Adept
Name: Unnamed Character
Movement: 6/12
Karma: 1
Street Cred: 0
Notoriety: 0
Public Awareness: 0
Elf
Composure: 13
Judge Intentions: 13
Lift/Carry: 4 (15 kg/10 kg)
Memory: 6
Nuyen: 1050
== Priorities ==
Metatype: D - Human or Elf
Attributes: C - 16 Attributes
Special: A - Magician or Technomancer
Skills: B - 36 Skills/5 Skill Groups
Resources: E - 6,000¥
== Attributes ==
BOD: 3
AGI: 3
REA: 1 (4)
STR: 1
CHA: 8
INT: 5
LOG: 1
WIL: 5
EDG: 1
MAG: 6
== Derived Attributes ==
Essence: 6
Initiative: 6 (9) + 4d6
Rigger Initiative: 9 + 4d6
Astral Initiative: 10 + 2d6
Matrix AR Initiative: 9 + 4d6
Matrix Cold Initiative: 5 + DP + 3d6
Matrix Hot Initiative: 5 + DP + 4d6
Physical Damage Track: 10
Stun Damage Track: 11
== Limits ==
Physical: 3
Mental: 4
Social: 9
Ballistic Mask [+1] (Only for intimidation, Must be visible)
Astral: 9
== Active Skills ==
Binding : 6 [Spirits of Man] Pool: 12 (14)
Con : 5 Pool: 15
Counterspelling : 6 Pool: 12
Etiquette : 1 (from Karma) Pool: 9
Impersonation : 5 Pool: 13
Negotiation : 6 [Bargaining] Pool: 14 (16)
Perception : 6 Pool: 11
Performance : 5 Pool: 13
Sneaking : 6 Pool: 9
Spellcasting : 6 [Manipulation] Pool: 12 (14)
Summoning : 6 [Spirits of Man] Pool: 12 (14)
== Knowledge Skills ==
Gangs : 3 Pool: 8
Magical Theory : 6 Pool: 7
Sprawl Life : 3 Pool: 8
== Contacts ==
Corporate Secretary (2, 1)
Talismonger (4, 3)
Gang Leader (2, 5)
Fixer (5, 2)
== Qualities ==
Focused Concentration (Rating 3)
Low-Light Vision
Mentor Spirit (Raven)
Mystic Adept - 6 PP - 30 Karma
Prejudiced (Specific, Biased) (Technology)
SINer (National) UCAS
Dependant (Nuisance)
Allergy (Uncommon Moderate) - Silver
Addiction (Mild, Cigs)
== Spells ==
(Tradition: Shamanic, Resist Drain with WIL + CHA (13))
Ball Lightning DV: F-1
Control Thoughts (Limited) DV: F-3
Heal DV: F-4
Increase Charisma DV: F-3
Improved Invisibility DV: F-1
Levitate DV: F-2
Mob Mind (Limited) DV: F-1
Physical Mask DV: F-1
Shapechange DV: F-3
Stunbolt DV: F-3
== Powers ==
Astral Perception
Combat Sense Rating: 3
Improved Reflexes 3
== Lifestyles ==
Rooftop Squat 1 months
== Armor ==
Armor Jacket 12
Ballistic Mask 2
== Weapons ==
Unarmed Attack
Pool: 2 Accuracy: 3 DV: 1S AP: - RC: 1
== Gear ==
Cheap Pre-paid Commlink x5
Fetish
Reagents, per dram x50
Survival Kit
No Intimidation and etiquette (note that the test is opposed test). No pistols (you cannot hide your magical abilities as Long as possible), so they will geek you first. Edge is 1. He has several weaknesses in his face skills => he is not a good face.
-
Not to get too much into debating a particular build, but what? Etiquette pool of 9 is sufficient. You can hold out as a mage sure but to that end is trade a spell for Chaotic World because the area debuff helps protect you. Intimidation and Leadership are hardly "necessary" for a good face.
-
Make an etiquette + charisma [social] test against the other person's perception + charisma [social] opposed test. If you get any net hits, they'll accept you (crb p. 141). If the other person is a basic runner, your probability is like 50% => someone notices you. I cannot understand that how the etiquette 1 is enough, it is opposed test.
Another mystery is that sams are good in intimidation with their typically 1 charisma... If their intimidation is e.g. 5. Well, good luck with that.
If you have not leadership or pistols and you cannot use magic (BC is very high or something like that), you can do nothing in firefight...
Chaotic world costs only 5 karma, it's not difficult to learn that after the first run. It is good spell!
-
Why would GMs tell you to remake?
-
Clearly such a character is tenacious, street smart and can talk their way out of bad situations, despite not cultivating their strength and hand-eye coordination and possibly growing up without access to (or completely blowing off) formal education.
EDIT: just pretend I didn't respond if my response would kick off another round of arguments about what Attribute 1 "means," it's not an interesting discussion after being rehashed a dozen times and it'd be off topic to boot.
-
No Intimidation and etiquette (note that the test is opposed test). No pistols (you cannot hide your magical abilities as Long as possible), so they will geek you first. Edge is 1. He has several weaknesses in his face skills => he is not a good face.
Etiquette isn't opposed, and intimidation isn't a required skill. Especially when you can conjure up Spirits with the Fear ability. I would argue Astral Perception is a far more needed ability than an intimidation skill, but that isn't because of Skills A or B that is PP and Karma allocation.
Edge 1 is the skills B builds weakest point and be could be addressed by swapping Meta and Attribute priorities *shrug*. The point here is that skills B build covers the same roles as the Skills A build, and as it turns out, has a better dice pool in Negotiation- bargaining (13 v 16), Con - fastalk (16 v 17), Conjuring (11 vs 12 or 14 for Spirits of Man), Binding (same), even a slight edge in Sorcery (14 v 16 in their chosen specialties). This is because the Skills A build used the Group skill points on some of those skills where the Skills B used individual skill points getting the skill to 6 instead of 5 and allowing for a specialization at chargen. Also Menor Spirt vs picking up Spiritual Way at chargen (also another Trap for most builds btw).
As other posters pointed out, the Skills A build is an example of why Skills A is considered a Trap. You can get the same or better dice pools with different priorities, and as a bonus have a few more stat points to throw around. The Skills A build winds up spending skill points on things that are really superfluous (pistol, Alchemy) compared to a couple more points in Attributes. (and, again, SUMto10 vs Priority slightly mitigates the impact of Skills A since you can, and did, put another A priority into something.)
Edit: Also, Mr. Facemage, you're comparing a SUMto10 build to a Priority build. Try doing a FaceMage :P with the priority system not SUMto10. There are some very different considerations to make in the Priority System when you can't just take 2 A and 2 E and a C.
-
Ok Calm down guys. Back on topic, or take it to another thread, if ya still feel the need to hash it out.
-
Read my previous answer about the etiquette test which is opposed (as you can see by reading corebook p. 141). If you want to change that, be free and do it.
I did not put astral perception to my build because I thought that I take it later with qi focus. But it is really easy to change improved phys Rea to astral perception. Assensing is really easy to get by
allocating
some points if you have 46/10 points. Much more difficult with only 36/5. Astral perception is even in discount powers of spiritual way.
Spiritual way is only an option and I am not taking it in chargen.
But without any weapon skill or leadership you are useless in fight in which you cannot use magic.
Yeah, with normal priority system it does not work.
-
I have to agree that running away from grenades and low mental limit are real problems. As ikarikonami said. I need to rethink this setup. But leave it out from this thread. My current build in use has not those problems (at least not so severe).It's not exactly the same.
I think that typically the first runs are without bc so it is possible to collect ~20 karma before first bc rum and fill the holes. If there are bc in first run and constantly after that, at least I forget all mages.
Edit: You can always evade one grenade with agi 2. If there are two grenades I think that other characters are also killed. You need to waste -10 in your initiative. It is possible with that build but impossible with riggers, deckers, mundane faces and so on. So, if an enemy throws a second grenade at second phase, many characters are dead (what is the point in that?). If alchemy bonus (and improved invisibility) is not usable (BC is >=5) it means that pure mage cannot use increase reflexes neither => he is also dead.
-
If I can bankshot this one a bit, two fo the sample archetypes, the Face and the Weapons Specialist, are Skills A. Would you (the plural you) consider tham 'trap builds', or are they functional as-is?
(Not to say that either can't be improved as the rules I was working on, and which are houseruled in my own game, are a touch different than what the final product was.)
-
Well, first, many of the archetypes (1) do not actually follow the character creation rules; and (2) are incredibly poorly made from an efficiency perspective, rules or not.
The whole concept of "weapons specialist" is a trap, imo, because when you invest in 9 different skills and can only use one of them at a time in any given action pass, the level of redundancy is insanely inefficient.
As for the face, jeez, the character has skills he can barely use. Dice pool of 6 in blades, STR 2, group skills with things you want to take individually and spec in, electronics dice pools of 8 on extended tests or the character has no reason to ever make...
I dunno, I think those archetypes would be improved with total rewrites, and part of those rewrites would include reallocation and improved efficiency. Like, I understand not wanting to ruthlessly optimize the example characters, but some of these are just plain bad.
-
Well the Weapon Specialist has Pistols at 10 dice and everything else in the single digits. I mean if any character were to take 6 in Firearms group you'd think the Weapon specialist would be it. The build is really bad, in general. Tough to say if its a trap or just awful. But in general being able to pick up any weapon and use it isn't real valuable in Shadowrun anyway. Having multiple ranged combat skills and multiple melee skills is generally considered wasted points.
If the Weapon Specialist went with Stats A; Skills B; Resources C; took a moderate combat augmentation package Used Muscle replacement, Wired 1 and Reaction Enhancers, Smartlink, datajack, then a few weapons? Use the 5 group points and pick up Firearms group, Grab a melee skill, Armorer, and Hardware, Demolitions, splash Gunnery, thrown Weapon, and Heavy Weapons with a few points of Karma. Max Agility, dump charisma, Body and Will of 3, spread the rest out.... don't you wind up in the ball park of what they were aiming for with much better results? I have to think that "Weapon Specialist" is supposed to be a combat focused character. Honestly most technomancers you see on the boards are better off than that mess.
The face is (as far as the archtypes go) not bad. But even if you tightened up the skills and Maxed out Charisma you still wind up with a smaller dice pool than most of the faces you see on the board because no Augmentations and no Magic. You'd wind up with a much stronger Primary (face) and at least the inkling of some kind of secondary focus (often combat) if you shuffled around priorities. So I'd say yes the Face is certainly a trap with Skills A. You just wind up with a lot of skills you can't use effectively, at the cost of your Primary function.
The Weapon Specialist concept is a bit of a Trap do to how little value there is to being able to use multiple weapons in most games. The build in the book is a hot mess. But Skills B would certainly work for the concept and leave you better off in the long run. Honestly I lump the Weapon Specialist and the Infiltrator Concept together as traps. YMMV.
Edit: Ninja'd by Whiskyjack....
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Influence is good spell but not always usable. Someone might notice you. For example in tight negotiation situation Yakuza boss is with mage who check that you do not try to cheat with spells (astral perception) => you have to survive with your natural skills...
It is possible to change clout to influence. It is probably better, I agree that.
Machine Pistols.... duh. You are trading 1DV & -1 AP for a -2 on their Defense Tests... and it gives you access to Real Guns that have actual Damage dealing capabilities while on a job. Pistols don't work against anyone with a decent Soak Pool, so against any kind of credible threat they are meaningless.
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Influence is good spell but not always usable. Someone might notice you. For example in tight negotiation situation Yakuza boss is with mage who check that you do not try to cheat with spells (astral perception) => you have to survive with your natural skills...
It is possible to change clout to influence. It is probably better, I agree that.
Machine Pistols.... duh. You are trading 1DV & -1 AP for a -2 on their Defense Tests... and it gives you access to Real Guns that have actual Damage dealing capabilities while on a job. Pistols don't work against anyone with a decent Soak Pool, so against any kind of credible threat they are meaningless.
I put my points about the concealability problems of machine pistols to my previous answers. If you want that no one sees your weapon, you cannot use machine pistols (or need very high palming=> which is almost impossible with this build, even more difficult with B in skills).
To resist damage of savalette guardian you need to have on average 24 resistance pool. It is high, few people have so high values. Against these he has a stun bolt (or spirits), which are much better than e.g. an assault rifle. If you cannot use magic at all (in our games this happens very seldom), he has leadership.
-
But he is a face. If you are going to important negotiation, expensive suit on you, do you have an assault rifle...
What do you think that the opponent side says?
Influence is good spell but not always usable. Someone might notice you. For example in tight negotiation situation Yakuza boss is with mage who check that you do not try to cheat with spells (astral perception) => you have to survive with your natural skills...
It is possible to change clout to influence. It is probably better, I agree that.
Machine Pistols.... duh. You are trading 1DV & -1 AP for a -2 on their Defense Tests... and it gives you access to Real Guns that have actual Damage dealing capabilities while on a job. Pistols don't work against anyone with a decent Soak Pool, so against any kind of credible threat they are meaningless.
I put my points about the concealability problems of machine pistols to my previous answers. If you want that no one sees your weapon, you cannot use machine pistols (or need very high palming=> which is almost impossible with this build, even more difficult with B in skills).
To resist damage of savalette guardian you need to have on average 24 resistance pool. It is high, few people have so high values. Against these he has a stun bolt (or spirits), which are much better than e.g. an assault rifle. If you cannot use magic at all (in our games this happens very seldom), he has leadership.
Huh??? Heavy Pistol & Machine Pistols have the same Concealability... +0, both can go into Concealed/Quick-Draw Holsters. But why is your Specialization (Semi-Automatics) if you are using Burst fire with a Guardian? You aren't getting your Specialization dice while doing that, so you are -2 Attack Dice instead of the -2 Defense Dice breaking even.
-
I think that I have already get from this forum the essential ideas and rules, so it's waste of time to comment anything more, at least against trolls. Have a nice autumn!
-
The weapons specialist, as Whiskeyjack pointed out, is crippled by its very concept - "versatility" in a wide range of redundant skills. Also, her cyberarm doesn't do anything for her, other than a slight Strength increase, making her essentially all but unaugmented. Her combat skills are also too low - she already suffers from the lack of Magic and augmentations, without middling skills and no specializations dropping her dice pool down further. She has a nice, organic feel to her stats, and I understand that archetypes such as her and the sprawl ganger were probably made low-augmentation to avoid stepping on the toes of other builds, such as the street samurai and the tank. But even with decent Edge and some lethal ordinance to mitigate her low dice pools, I would only recommend her for lower-powered games.
The face has similar low dice-pool problems, but at least hits the teens with his primary dice pools. He is at a disadvantage against contact types such as the Fixer and Johnson; even adding Edge only makes it close to even, and you want better than 50/50 odds for your main specialty. He suffers, like the weapons specialist, from being mundane and unaugmented. Like her, he is best suited for a low-powered campaign. He is nicely well-rounded, but it seems more that he is functional in some other areas - nothing that I could really call a second specialty.
-
A bonus that they both have, of course, is that they can go anywhere... neither has Restricted or worse cyberware, and neither has an astral give-away aura, allowing them maximum infiltration. The Weapon Specialist, for instance, is quite able to enter a social event and turn anything there into a weapon, for instance, while the Face has no problems negotiating in even the worst of background counts without pause.
Buuuut, they were designed with an average game in mind, not tweaked to maximum state.
(And were also made with the "One skill at 6 or two at 5, no Skill Groups higher than 4" design process, so.)
-
(And were also made with the "One skill at 6 or two at 5, no Skill Groups higher than 4" design process, so.)
Yeah, that'd make a BIG difference. Definitely a rule that would change the characters greatly.
-
(And were also made with the "One skill at 6 or two at 5, no Skill Groups higher than 4" design process, so.)
Yeah, that'd make a BIG difference. Definitely a rule that would change the characters greatly.
That, and the "Armor maxes at 3X your strength, every 4 points (or fraction thereof) beyond this puts an Encumberance penalty (either -1 Agility, -1 Reaction, or -1 to both, I forget!) on you.
Those were two important rules that vanished. I'm not sure if they were playtest-removed or just fell out of the final copy like Autosofts. Since they haven't been added to errata, I'd *imagine* teh former, but I'm not certain. I know there's been talk of another pass through the core for things again, but, I dunno.
At any rate, I use both of those rules for my house game, to try and get the design smoothed out.
Sadly, I was never able to get a good "Punch a dude in the jaw" rule together for proper cinematic combat. :(
-
I imagine the "one at 6, two at 5," etc went away because 6 was the absolute maximum skill level in 4th, where it's only the maximum chargen level in 5th. It's reasonable to limit a character putting a ton of things at the max level ever at the start but there's less reason for the restriction when it's only half of your potential maximum (even if most characters will have better things to spend karma on than levels 7-12 of a skill).
-
(And were also made with the "One skill at 6 or two at 5, no Skill Groups higher than 4" design process, so.)
I wondered a bit at that. With a few exceptions (such as the Decker), most of the archetypes look more like SR4 characters than SR5 characters, skill-wise. This is especially jarring when you compare them to the contacts, even ones like the beat cop. I wasn't sure whether the archetypes were simply done at a lower power level, with awakened characters with Magic of 3 or 4, and lots of unaugmented or lightly augmented builds. That's how it's always been, though. The archetypes let you start play right away, but once you know the system, you can make vastly more powerful characters.
-
A bonus that they both have, of course, is that they can go anywhere... neither has Restricted or worse cyberware, and neither has an astral give-away aura, allowing them maximum infiltration. The Weapon Specialist, for instance, is quite able to enter a social event and turn anything there into a weapon, for instance, while the Face has no problems negotiating in even the worst of background counts without pause.
Buuuut, they were designed with an average game in mind, not tweaked to maximum state.
(And were also made with the "One skill at 6 or two at 5, no Skill Groups higher than 4" design process, so.)
Go anywhere isn't difficult to get for most characters. Fake SINs, proper licenses and a plausible cover get your restricted augmentations/magic auras through check points. Within a few sessions you're either able to initiate and can consider masking or can get high concealment gear. Delta fingertip with Monowhip can get through any Cyberware scanner unless you're really unlucky, same with a Delta partial leg and a smuggling compartment. Or even the assorted Bioware implant weapons.
The ?Vixtronix? memory blade things are also solid options for starting characters. Hold out pistols with a decent palming skill goes a really long way too.
*shrug* Moderate to high starting resource characters have a lot of options. Low starting resource characters weren't getting in anyway because they can't afford to start with a fake SIN. The first run opens up a lot of options for both. I struggle with the idea that a characters first run is going to heavily penalize one type of character or another. High level security check points to stop weapon users, or high level SIN checks, or a background count of 4 off the bat. Maybe for Prime runners.
-
Skills A IS a trap option sometimes.
Why? Because it is a counter-intuitive option for players without experience. You see, the Priority system is made to make people choose what aspects of a charachter they value the most. It is a really simple thought process that only (sort of) fails if you try to create a generalist.
Do you want to play a mage? Magic A is for you. A frontline combatant street samurai? You'll need high attributes and resourses. A decker? Resourses and skills.
But what if you want to build a skillmonkey? It is only natural to assume that Skills A is the best option, right? Wrong.
It really takes some practice to see that you need high Attributes and probably 'ware to be a capable all-rounder because of how dicepools and opposed/unopposed tests work. Most skills in the game are connected to Agility or Charisma and if you have those attributes high you can have a vast majority of the skills covered without even using skillpoints. If you can default at shooting any gun for 9 dice (11 with a smartlink) it doesnt even matter if you have any firearm skills at all. You're already good. And if you spend a tiny bit of karma your dicepool jumps up to 11(13) for a smartlinked gun. That is what a dedicated samurai had in our noobish group when we just started to play.
The Skills A is a trap if you want to create a character with a lot of Agi or Cha based skills because you can get high dicepools in these areas without even trying very hard.
-
I have to say, there is an awesome amount of information here about why Skills A Priority is simply wrong... and a few ideas on how to make it work, although that really does seem to be the minority.
Thank you all for posting your thoughts, staying civil, and like 80% on topic! It isn't easy with a thread like this.
Personally, I think I agree with the idea that there are better ways to accomplish someone good at multiple areas than Skills A. I am happy it exists though... it gives people some options for their games. With certain story restric-- uhmm, tweaks, it may end up being great. I have yet to make one I feel will be successful enough that I could not make with another priority set, but I'm not that great at character building yet. Maybe it will be like a technomancer; it can make people create some amazing styles of play that I do not think would have ever been common without some non-euclidean thinking to make competitive. I love technomancer now, but it took me many many many hours of reading here. ;D
Thanks again all!
-
I certainly have fallen into Skills A traps. It is tempting for those of us who like multiple role characters (and technomancers, who may have lots of skills and skill groups to cover). I have found that it is the skill groups that make it most difficult. Having too many skill group points leads to characters who can't specialize at character generation in important actions for their roles, or dump skill groups in places they don't really need for dice pools that aren't worth it when suffering from deficits in other parts of the character.
However, I really liked how this technomancer face turned out with skills A: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=21580.msg391140#msg391140
With Skills B, this character could be a more specialized face, but going A allows it to be a potent and broad face while being a mediocre hacker too. (In retrospect, I would focus on crack sprites and drop intimidation for either a weapon backup or perception.)
So I know it's been hammered out here already, but when making a character and tempted to take Skills A, it is probably best practice to check yourself and think about what are you trying to cram in to the character that it could get by without and try with lower Skill priority first and compensating with special powers, gear, or edge.
I would like to think through what kinds of limited character builds where Skills A is most useful, though I don't know if there are any generalizations to make about it. Are there skill groups where individual skills are less essential for specializations or high ranks? I am thinking athletics and outdoors? Maybe stealth and electronics? Are there character concepts where having a broad base of these skills covered with groups and still have skill needs that require lots of skills and specialized skills? Does the character have lots of Agility, Charisma, and/or Logic linked skill needs with the attribute allocation to back them up?
-
If your GM is using all the negative social modifiers I think skills A works for faces. Otherwise it is a trap.
-
If your GM is using all the negative social modifiers I think skills A works for faces. Otherwise it is a trap.
What about the modifiers do you feel is most relevant or most facilitates Skills A?
-
As a face you need your social pools higher than other skills due to the many negative modifiers to social tests and the fact that they are opposed.
Don't try a Con or Impersonate with a pool of 11 or 12 or heck even 14 or 15 is pretty risky often enough.
-
If your GM is using all the negative social modifiers I think skills A works for faces. Otherwise it is a trap.
What about the modifiers do you feel is most relevant or most facilitates Skills A?
I guess it depends on what someone expects a face to cover. If you are talking pure negotiation then just say no to skills A. If you are talking about someone who infiltrates through disguise and impersonation and gathers information/assesses security then a boatload of skills are needed. Also, the way social skills work, you pretty much need them maxed out due to the negative modifiers.
Common situation - trying to talk your way past a security checkpoint.
Con Modifiers:
-1 suspicious
-3 result of PC getting past checkpoint is likely at least harmful to the person running the checkpoint in terms of job loss something unwanted happening
-1 NPC likely has some time to evaluate the Con.
Against an average dice pool of 6, with those modifiers, the PC needs a starting dice pool of 14 to average 1 net success.
Even negotiating against the Mr. Johnson contact example in the core book a PC needs a huge dice pool to have much of a shot even if there are no negative modifiers. Mr. Johnson has a negotiation pool of 13 so a PC needs a 16 dice pool to probably get the runners a couple hundred more nuyen.
-
yeah, i can see an argument for skills A face:
Most used skills depending on table:
Intimidate
Con
Etiquette
Negotiation
Impersonation
Lesser used skills;
Performance
Leadership (small unit tactics!)
Most of these are spread out in different groups or aren't in groups at all so when combined with sneaking/disguise/weapon skills/technical skills, you're looking at skills B as a minimum
-
yeah, i can see an argument for skills A face:
Most used skills depending on table:
Intimidate
Con
Etiquette
Negotiation
Impersonation
Lesser used skills;
Performance
Leadership (small unit tactics!)
Most of these are spread out in different groups or aren't in groups at all so when combined with sneaking/disguise/weapon skills/technical skills, you're looking at skills B as a minimum
For an adept - Leadership is used all the time due to Commanding Voice
Perception is a must.
I would argue that, if awakened, assensing is a must.
-
Of course, yeah. Skills a def looking good for that kind of character then
-
No. Skills A is not a trap. It just depends on the character. A street sam probably doesn't need Skills A. A mage or a decker or even a face could wisely take Skills A.
-
No. Skills A is not a trap. It just depends on the character. A street sam probably doesn't need Skills A. A mage or a decker or even a face could wisely take Skills A.
It totally depends on how you use the skill points. A face could certainly take Skills A and fall into a trap by allocating them poorly.
-
No. Skills A is not a trap. It just depends on the character. A street sam probably doesn't need Skills A. A mage or a decker or even a face could wisely take Skills A.
A mage definitely does not need nor want skills A - remember that magic A gives 10 free skill points. High magic and high attributes are much more important. Even high resources are more important (for a high force power focus).
A decker needs high resources for the deck, and doesn't really need nor want skills A either. Maybe skills B, but definitely not A.
Skills A is useless for a street sam. A technomancer definitely can't do it. Useless for a rigger. Suboptimal for a face. Suboptimal even for a jack of all trades (high edge/stats is better).
-
Novahot, I'd love to see more examples showing Skills A as more viable than believed.
Most of the comments here have explained and demonstrated the how or why they believe. So far, the thread speaks to an overwhelming "Skills A Bad!" for most scenarios. There are always exceptions, but the value of other priorities appears to cover what little excess the skills A grants, especially in terms of die pools.
-
No. Skills A is not a trap. It just depends on the character. A street sam probably doesn't need Skills A. A mage or a decker or even a face could wisely take Skills A.
A mage definitely does not need nor want skills A - remember that magic A gives 10 free skill points. High magic and high attributes are much more important. Even high resources are more important (for a high force power focus).
A decker needs high resources for the deck, and doesn't really need nor want skills A either. Maybe skills B, but definitely not A.
Skills A is useless for a street sam. A technomancer definitely can't do it. Useless for a rigger. Suboptimal for a face. Suboptimal even for a jack of all trades (high edge/stats is better).
A Mage with a strong secondary focus can come out ahead with Skills A since they can get "double" use out of their Drain stat. Shamans with social skills, Hermetics with any number of Logic based skill groups. Important note "Strong Secondary Focus" Skills A, Stats B, Magic C, Meta D (human), Resources E is solid for a specific set of characters.
Otherwise, yeah, you'll be better off with other priorities at A.
-
Novahot, I'd love to see more examples showing Skills A as more viable than believed.
Most of the comments here have explained and demonstrated the how or why they believe. So far, the thread speaks to an overwhelming "Skills A Bad!" for most scenarios. There are always exceptions, but the value of other priorities appears to cover what little excess the skills A grants, especially in terms of die pools.
Skills A for a rigger:
Pilot ground 5 (wheeled +2)
Pilot Air 6 (remote ops +2)
Pilot walker 5 (anthroform +2) 46/46
Ewar 6 (sensors +2)
Gunnery 6 (ballistic +2)
Pistols 4 (semi auto +2)
Perception 3
Con 2 (fast talk +2)
Computer 1 (matrix perception +2)
Groups:
Stealth 6
Engineering 4
Then Resources/attribs B, Resources/attribs C, Meta D, Magic E
depending on how many drones/vehicles/cyber things you're buying. at resources B you can get a really decent RCC, control rig, pimped van, drone fleet
-
No. Skills A is not a trap. It just depends on the character. A street sam probably doesn't need Skills A. A mage or a decker or even a face could wisely take Skills A.
A mage definitely does not need nor want skills A - remember that magic A gives 10 free skill points. High magic and high attributes are much more important. Even high resources are more important (for a high force power focus).
A decker needs high resources for the deck, and doesn't really need nor want skills A either. Maybe skills B, but definitely not A.
Skills A is useless for a street sam. A technomancer definitely can't do it. Useless for a rigger. Suboptimal for a face. Suboptimal even for a jack of all trades (high edge/stats is better).
Skills A is a suboptimal face? If we are just looking at an adept you want to max out:
Con
Etiquette
Impersonation
Leadership
Negotiation
Intimidation
Perception
Those are pretty much required to cover your ability to both initiate and defend in social situations
On top of that I think these are required.
Assensing
Disguise
Sneaking
Weapon Skill
How about not required, but probably good to have?
Computer, Palming, and Arcana (required for initiation)
You aren't getting around all those rolls with Edge unless your GM is very lenient and you can't get through social interactions with just high stats (if your GM is using the social modifier table). If all your social interactions are just opposed rolls then perhaps Skills B would be sufficient.
-
Skills A is a suboptimal face? If we are just looking at an adept you want to max out:
Con
Etiquette
Impersonation
Leadership
Negotiation
Intimidation
Perception
Those are pretty much required to cover your ability to both initiate and defend in social situations
On top of that I think these are required.
Assensing
Disguise
Sneaking
Weapon Skill
How about not required, but probably good to have?
Computer, Palming, and Arcana (required for initiation)
You aren't getting around all those rolls with Edge unless your GM is very lenient and you can't get through social interactions with just high stats (if your GM is using the social modifier table). If all your social interactions are just opposed rolls then perhaps Skills B would be sufficient.
In no way are all or even most of those "required" maxed for a face, let alone a magic face. More gives you more options but you can skip a few of them and not miss them at all.
I'll grab the lowest hanging fruit: Arcana 1 with karma is all that is "required" for your first few initiations. Implying you need more, or that more benefits you in any way, is simply fallacious.
-
Novahot, I'd love to see more examples showing Skills A as more viable than believed.
Most of the comments here have explained and demonstrated the how or why they believe. So far, the thread speaks to an overwhelming "Skills A Bad!" for most scenarios. There are always exceptions, but the value of other priorities appears to cover what little excess the skills A grants, especially in terms of die pools.
Skills A for a rigger:
Pilot ground 5 (wheeled +2)
Pilot Air 6 (remote ops +2)
Pilot walker 5 (anthroform +2) 46/46
Ewar 6 (sensors +2)
Gunnery 6 (ballistic +2)
Pistols 4 (semi auto +2)
Perception 3
Con 2 (fast talk +2)
Computer 1 (matrix perception +2)
Groups:
Stealth 6
Engineering 4
Then Resources/attribs B, Resources/attribs C, Meta D, Magic E
depending on how many drones/vehicles/cyber things you're buying. at resources B you can get a really decent RCC, control rig, pimped van, drone fleet
Stats C on a Rigger makes me cringe. You're looking at cha, str, both at 1. Body/will 3, and a handful of points left for Reaction, Agility, Logic, Intuition. You're short somewhere, and you can't fix it with the starting Karma.
Resources C on a Rigger you're either going with nearly no augments, or Augments but no vehicle, or just a handful of cheap drones. And you're limited with how much Karma you can turn into Nuyen.
Skills C and max out your favorite skills, splash your two group points into engineering, throw 30 odd of your 50 starting Karma at skills and you're likely better off. Skills A you've got skills a Rigger doesn't really need or can't use effectively because of a low base stat and you're short on either stats or gear.
-
What even uses pilot walker? Did I miss it when the corps started deploying BattleMechs?
-
With those allocations, you could probably drop Con, Computer, and Walker (more than 10 skill points) and take the engineering skills you need for your drones/vehicles (and not the groups), still have decent stealth group, and up Attribute or Resource Priority for more stat/augmentation to the effect of having probably higher dicepools where you need them... I agree that this rigger concept could probably be better off with Skills B.
-
Skills A is a suboptimal face? If we are just looking at an adept you want to max out:
Con
Etiquette
Impersonation
Leadership
Negotiation
Intimidation
Perception
Those are pretty much required to cover your ability to both initiate and defend in social situations
On top of that I think these are required.
Assensing
Disguise
Sneaking
Weapon Skill
How about not required, but probably good to have?
Computer, Palming, and Arcana (required for initiation)
You aren't getting around all those rolls with Edge unless your GM is very lenient and you can't get through social interactions with just high stats (if your GM is using the social modifier table). If all your social interactions are just opposed rolls then perhaps Skills B would be sufficient.
In no way are all or even most of those "required" maxed for a face, let alone a magic face. More gives you more options but you can skip a few of them and not miss them at all.
I'll grab the lowest hanging fruit: Arcana 1 with karma is all that is "required" for your first few initiations. Implying you need more, or that more benefits you in any way, is simply fallacious.
What of those would you say aren't required? More doesn't just give you more options - they are required to defend against people socially influencing you as well. Not to mention you are rarely getting your full dice pool on any roll that matters.
-
Impersonation and Intimidation are often a lot less useful than Con. Intimidation especially is nice but not required.
Leadership matters if and only identity care about Commanding Voice.
Etiquette requires minimal investment with good CHA.
Disguise and Sneaking matter only if you are worried about disguise/invisibility magic lighting up the astral and even then it's not a disguise roll to pick up clothes that fit the area, like your contact gets you surplus Ares janitorial jumpsuits for when you're inside their fences.
Assensing is a threshold, maxing it is not needed.
I like my Mage to have a weapon skill but I am in the minority on this forum, regardless, ok AGI and a spec, Smartgun and auto fire make up for a mediocre skill level.
The decker can handle Computer. Palming is rarely a concern if you have a legal gun in most places. Arcana, see above.
Maxing Perception, Con and Negotiation is usually a good idea. And getting specs in them is a higher priority for me by far than Impersonation is. Even with the opposed rolls I don't worry as much with a social limit in the low teens and Edge to spend post-roll
And there's something to be said for Control Thoughts and Laes/Lael.
-
Novahot, I'd love to see more examples showing Skills A as more viable than believed.
Most of the comments here have explained and demonstrated the how or why they believe. So far, the thread speaks to an overwhelming "Skills A Bad!" for most scenarios. There are always exceptions, but the value of other priorities appears to cover what little excess the skills A grants, especially in terms of die pools.
Skills A for a rigger:
Pilot ground 5 (wheeled +2)
Pilot Air 6 (remote ops +2)
Pilot walker 5 (anthroform +2) 46/46
Ewar 6 (sensors +2)
Gunnery 6 (ballistic +2)
Pistols 4 (semi auto +2)
Perception 3
Con 2 (fast talk +2)
Computer 1 (matrix perception +2)
Groups:
Stealth 6
Engineering 4
Then Resources/attribs B, Resources/attribs C, Meta D, Magic E
depending on how many drones/vehicles/cyber things you're buying. at resources B you can get a really decent RCC, control rig, pimped van, drone fleet
Stats C on a Rigger makes me cringe. You're looking at cha, str, both at 1. Body/will 3, and a handful of points left for Reaction, Agility, Logic, Intuition. You're short somewhere, and you can't fix it with the starting Karma.
Resources C on a Rigger you're either going with nearly no augments, or Augments but no vehicle, or just a handful of cheap drones. And you're limited with how much Karma you can turn into Nuyen.
Skills C and max out your favorite skills, splash your two group points into engineering, throw 30 odd of your 50 starting Karma at skills and you're likely better off. Skills A you've got skills a Rigger doesn't really need or can't use effectively because of a low base stat and you're short on either stats or gear.
Bullshit, attribs c gets you a 3 in every ranking as a starting point and it's not like you can't take cyber with resources b. You can easy get used R3 reaction enhancers to get that up to six for your main driving skill and some muscle replacement for STR and Agi.
Resources C is enough for a shin hung, rcc, rig and a few recon drones. I swear sometimes you're an argumentative git on these boards for no reason.
-
Skills A is a suboptimal face? If we are just looking at an adept you want to max out:
Con
Etiquette
Impersonation
Leadership
Negotiation
Intimidation
Perception
Those are pretty much required to cover your ability to both initiate and defend in social situations
On top of that I think these are required.
Assensing
Disguise
Sneaking
Weapon Skill
How about not required, but probably good to have?
Computer, Palming, and Arcana (required for initiation)
You aren't getting around all those rolls with Edge unless your GM is very lenient and you can't get through social interactions with just high stats (if your GM is using the social modifier table). If all your social interactions are just opposed rolls then perhaps Skills B would be sufficient.
Required for a Face, Negotiation. If your table uses Etiquette for legwork then yes, max, otherwise, splash. Con I'd max out, but most missions/modules you can get through without ever checking Con. Intimidation and leadership are no way required. Impersonation and disguise, you need the right team to really make use of these skills. Standard shadowrunner package, Stealth, Perception, Combat, sure. Computer, just not needed at all for a Face.
The quoted skill list is for a Face in a solo game. Assensing, every social skill, Computer, plus standard shadowrunner skills? What is the rest of your team doing?
-
Either nothing or just decking a spell casting. :D
-
Impersonation and Intimidation are often a lot less useful than Con. Intimidation especially is nice but not required.
But defending against intimidation - if you don't have it - is *extremely* difficult in any situation where a sane person would actually be intimidated. Armored troll + troll buddy + troll has a club = -7 at a minimum to your die pool. That could be any gang interaction ever.
Leadership matters if and only identity care about Commanding Voice.
Yes, but I would say most faces are adepts.
Etiquette requires minimal investment with good CHA.
It is still an opposed test against perception - which most everyone who matters has a relatively high skill.
Disguise and Sneaking matter only if you are worried about disguise/invisibility magic lighting up the astral and even then it's not a disguise roll to pick up clothes that fit the area, like your contact gets you surplus Ares janitorial jumpsuits for when you're inside their fences.
Completely disagree here. If invisibility is always an option then you don't need a face. If you need a face then it isn't an option. Magic also requires a mage to sustain, deal with wards, along with lighting up the astral. A disguise roll is pretty much required if your face is ever going to be shown. It is impossible to avoid every camera/sensor everywhere.
Assensing is a threshold, maxing it is not needed.
Only if you want simple info and only if the opposition doesn't have initiates themselves. IMO, you consistently want 3+ hits on an assensing roll.
I like my Mage to have a weapon skill but I am in the minority on this forum, regardless, ok AGI and a spec, Smartgun and auto fire make up for a mediocre skill level.
Assuming you can Full auto your way through a fight - where you are basically forced to shoot every other round because of recoil.
And how are you going to conceal that without Palming?
The decker can handle Computer. Palming is rarely a concern if you have a legal gun in most places. Arcana, see above.
Legal or not, there are a lot of places were guns would be restricted. Not to mention palming key cards and anything else a face might find handy. Also, a decker won't always have access to the same computer a face might be on.
Maxing Perception, Con and Negotiation is usually a good idea. And getting specs in them is a higher priority for me by far than Impersonation is. Even with the opposed rolls I don't worry as much with a social limit in the low teens and Edge to spend post-roll
And there's something to be said for Control Thoughts and Laes/Lael.
Maybe our idea of a face is just different. I see a face playing a few roles.
1) Basic negotiation
2) Disguising himself/fellow runners - in more than just a change of clothes
3) Social engineering (which often has to be done solo)
That requires a lot of skills besides just Con, Perception, and Negotiation.
-
Required for a Face, Negotiation. If your table uses Etiquette for legwork then yes, max, otherwise, splash. Con I'd max out, but most missions/modules you can get through without ever checking Con. Intimidation and leadership are no way required. Impersonation and disguise, you need the right team to really make use of these skills. Standard shadowrunner package, Stealth, Perception, Combat, sure. Computer, just not needed at all for a Face.
The quoted skill list is for a Face in a solo game. Assensing, every social skill, Computer, plus standard shadowrunner skills? What is the rest of your team doing?
Missions/modules are often one shots and again - it sounds like many people play the face as:
"We all go together - but you do the talking."
Which is fine - but isn't what I think of when playing a face.
-
What even uses pilot walker? Did I miss it when the corps started deploying BattleMechs?
The Shiawase Kanmushi, the Aztechnology Crawler, the Ares Duelist, Bust-A-Moves, Clockwork Greyhound, and possibly some of the other Stolen Souls ones. Those aren't very clear on what type of skill they need.
That's not to say that any of the above are particularly good, just that there's a number of drones that do use the skill.
On topic: I get what most everyone's saying here. It's ridiculously easy to make a character using Skills A who isn't optimal. But I think that's where the wires are crossed here. A lot of those who are saying that Skills A isn't a trap are saying you can make perfectly viable, useful characters with them. The moniker "trap" suggests that anything that uses it is useless, broke, or otherwise an impediment to a group. That isn't true. Sure, there's tons of ways to build a character with Skills A that's terrible, but the same can be said for any Priority of A.
Is Skills A easier to make sub-optimal than the others? Maybe, leaning toward yes. But does it almost definitely ensure a useless character? Not in the slightest.
-
The moniker "trap" suggests that anything that uses it is useless, broke, or otherwise an impediment to a group. That isn't true. Sure, there's tons of ways to build a character with Skills A that's terrible, but the same can be said for any Priority of A.
Is Skills A easier to make sub-optimal than the others? Maybe, leaning toward yes. But does it almost definitely ensure a useless character? Not in the slightest.
Sure, but as I've said before in the thread, "traps" frequently refer to pitfalls that ensnare new players who lack much system knowledge or experience as to what works better. Players can certainly build useful characters with Skills A. I would say the percentage of new players capable of doing so is much lower for any number of reasons discussed in this thread. I'd even say new players building characters with Skills A are more likely to build a worse characters than new players allocating Resources, Attributes, or Magic to A. It's simply a lot easier to screw up.
-
For what it's worth, I'm personally of the opinion that social adepts were a bad thing to add. Magic overshadowing everything's been a problem since the old initiative system was changed (Back when STreet Sams dominated everything) but social interaction was the one area that 'normal' people had. Social Adepts took that away. Making magical reflexes a bit worse for Adepts, removing the spell from magicians (Or at least making it MUCH worse), then trimming social Adept powers would be part of a general rebalancing I'd like to do, but, it's WAY above my paygrade. (Mind you, I'd also be tossing a LOT of stuff at Adepts, and a few things at mages, to make up for this removal!)
But that's a whole other topic.
-
I agree Wak with a lot of that Wak.
I think casters should never have access to the same type of top end initiative enhancements a sam does.
Adepts shouldn't have access to astral at all.
Mystic Adepts should not exist.
Aspected mages should be able to astrally project.
Magically active characters should still risk magic loss from life-threatening injuries.
Taken together the above would help mundane folks retain value instead of turning it into magic run.
-
I think casters should never have access to the same type of top end initiative enhancements a sam does.
Part of this is game fun practicality. It's boring when you can act once for every three times your friend does. Hell, you die if you act once for every three times your opponent does.
Magically active characters should still risk magic loss from life-threatening injuries.
Magicrun aside this creates a huge negative play experience due to factors totally out of the player's control. It sucked. Good riddance.
-
Weird mage rage. If you think that the mage is unbalanced, fix it. The easiest way is ban the use of reagents to setting limits. Another easy way is set the use of reagents to be visible (you need to take those stones and minerals to your hand and new items after the spell has been casted, so anyone notices that you are doing something probably magical). Without that the only maybe stronger than weapons and grenades strategy (witness my hate and reagents) is not available. If you look at the combat spells you should notice that they are weaker than weapons and grenades. Their damage is lower and the caster needs to resist drain. Manipulation spells (chaotic world) are better but still not as good as grenades.
Later, if you allow your mage player sustain 8 quickened spells, mages are indeed stronger than sams. But this is easy, some strong wards should be enough.
-
What even uses pilot walker? Did I miss it when the corps started deploying BattleMechs?
The Shiawase Kanmushi, the Aztechnology Crawler, the Ares Duelist, Bust-A-Moves, Clockwork Greyhound, and possibly some of the other Stolen Souls ones. Those aren't very clear on what type of skill they need.
That's not to say that any of the above are particularly good, just that there's a number of drones that do use the skill.
On topic: I get what most everyone's saying here. It's ridiculously easy to make a character using Skills A who isn't optimal. But I think that's where the wires are crossed here. A lot of those who are saying that Skills A isn't a trap are saying you can make perfectly viable, useful characters with them. The moniker "trap" suggests that anything that uses it is useless, broke, or otherwise an impediment to a group. That isn't true. Sure, there's tons of ways to build a character with Skills A that's terrible, but the same can be said for any Priority of A.
Is Skills A easier to make sub-optimal than the others? Maybe, leaning toward yes. But does it almost definitely ensure a useless character? Not in the slightest.
it's pretty tough to go wrong with A attributes.
-
it's pretty tough to go wrong with A attributes.
That's true. Attributes is the easiest one to not screw up. It's still possibly, mind you, but that involves a rather high level of ignorance (willful or otherwise).
Sure, but as I've said before in the thread, "traps" frequently refer to pitfalls that ensnare new players who lack much system knowledge or experience as to what works better. Players can certainly build useful characters with Skills A. I would say the percentage of new players capable of doing so is much lower for any number of reasons discussed in this thread. I'd even say new players building characters with Skills A are more likely to build a worse characters than new players allocating Resources, Attributes, or Magic to A. It's simply a lot easier to screw up.
I think this might be selling new players short. Even if you're brand new to the system, it's not hard to go "I want to be an awesome gun fighter, so I'm going to max out pistols and, uh, automatics I guess. Longarms too because I want to use shotguns sometimes!". I know people on this thread have already pointed out that raising multiple weapon skills is "bad" because it's inefficient, but there are also definite perks to it outside of min/maxing. Granted I'm looking at this from a roleplay point of view (where you're trying to come up with a character to fit a story and not vice versa), so that may be skewing my perception on what the crux of this conversation is about.
I agree wholeheartedly that with our huge list of skills that it's easy to waste points on skills that'll never be used, to throw too few points to make the investment useless, or to throw too many points into a skill to thoroughly bury yourself in diminishing returns. But this just comes back to my original point: Every game of Shadowrun I've played has had new people in it who have built their own characters (both homebrew and Missions), and a number of them have had Skills A. None of them have been useless to the group, most were still very useful and some were way more useful than we imagined. This is why I have a hard time of saying "Skills A is a trap", because I have never actually seen it produce a useless character unless someone was purposefully making one to prove a point.
And again, I fully agree that Skills A is the least optimal of the A Priorities.
-
I think this might be selling new players short. Even if you're brand new to the system, it's not hard to go "I want to be an awesome gun fighter, so I'm going to max out pistols and, uh, automatics I guess. Longarms too because I want to use shotguns sometimes!". I know people on this thread have already pointed out that raising multiple weapon skills is "bad" because it's inefficient, but there are also definite perks to it outside of min/maxing. Granted I'm looking at this from a roleplay point of view (where you're trying to come up with a character to fit a story and not vice versa), so that may be skewing my perception on what the crux of this conversation is about.
Mechanically the call to split firearms into three skills is one of the more immersion breaking things in the game. You can take a Savalette Guardian, a large pistol capable of firing 3 round bursts, and bulls-eye every shot. You then take an Ares Crusader, a large pistol capable of firing three round bursts, and you're suddenly unable to shoot straight. It is one of the traps that pull players into over prioritizing skills because "My character is a great shot with any gun" requires a significant investment, for a small mechanical payoff. I really never saw the mechanical need to split up Firearms, as near as I can see the only thing it accomplished is to punish players for a lack of system mastery and trying to build to character concept.
-
I would agree that ultimately it probably would make more sense to simply have a single small arms skill and then make each type of firearm a specialization. Much like heavy weapons skill covers machine guns, cannons, and missile launchers (which are all much different weapon systems).
By the same token then the close combat skill group should just become a regular skill with it's constituent members made into specializations.
Plenty of other systems over the years have gone that route.
-
Mechanically the call to split firearms into three skills is one of the more immersion breaking things in the game. You can take a Savalette Guardian, a large pistol capable of firing 3 round bursts, and bulls-eye every shot. You then take an Ares Crusader, a large pistol capable of firing three round bursts, and you're suddenly unable to shoot straight. It is one of the traps that pull players into over prioritizing skills because "My character is a great shot with any gun" requires a significant investment, for a small mechanical payoff. I really never saw the mechanical need to split up Firearms, as near as I can see the only thing it accomplished is to punish players for a lack of system mastery and trying to build to character concept.
I agree. It's just silly. I was going to give examples, but then realized you've basically already beat me to all the ones I was going to make! I would love to see Firearms split into like Small Arms and Long Arms where Small Arms carries anything one-handed and Long Arms carries anything two handed. And, you know, keep Heavy Weapons to focus on the weapons that also tend to be heavy.
-
You don’t always have to default a skill when you don’t have it.
Sometimes your gamemaster might allow you to use a different skill, probably with a dice pool penalty. For example, if you’re trying to use makeup to disguise your face, and you don’t have a Disguise skill, the gamemaster could let you use your Artisan skill with (say) a –3 dice pool penalty.
You can always do this swapping trick to use an Active skill in place of a Knowledge skill (like using your Pistols skill at a penalty to see if you know where the closest Ares Predator V manufacturer is), but never vice versa. Knowing the history and mechanics of the modern pistol doesn’t make you a better shot.
The only reason (I can see) to say "you're suddenly unable to shoot straight" with a non-skill weapon is to preserve some kind of value in the firearms skills you don't have. Personally, I like the idea of using a fraction of the skill for somewhat related uses (pistols count for half skill rank with a sawnoff shotgun or dart pistol), and an absolute value for things that have even less in common. (any rank in pistols is equivalent to one rank in heavy weapons)
-
For what it's worth, I'm personally of the opinion that social adepts were a bad thing to add. Magic overshadowing everything's been a problem since the old initiative system was changed (Back when STreet Sams dominated everything) but social interaction was the one area that 'normal' people had. Social Adepts took that away. Making magical reflexes a bit worse for Adepts, removing the spell from magicians (Or at least making it MUCH worse), then trimming social Adept powers would be part of a general rebalancing I'd like to do, but, it's WAY above my paygrade. (Mind you, I'd also be tossing a LOT of stuff at Adepts, and a few things at mages, to make up for this removal!)
But that's a whole other topic.
Social adepts were relatively balanced in the main book, when all they had was kinesics to resist social skills, voice control and improved potential to raise their social limit, and improved ability to improve social skills at double what it cost to do so in SR4. True, they could add tailored pheromones: 3 on top of all that, but mundanes were still competitive. Then Street Grimoire came out, with authoritative tone and cool resolve. Now it's go adept, or go home. Mundanes can still be face/something else hybrids, but adepts are the overwhelmingly superior choice when you go all in.
Adepts are broken for two reasons. First, magic being better for some things and augmentations being better for others means that adepts get to pick the best option for what they want to do. Secondly, adept powers and augmentations frequently stack - tailored pheromones and authoritative tone, for example. Background count is a horrible way to balance magic, period - it basically capriciously penalizes characters in areas they have invested in. Plus, it affects the non-optimized adepts that have a lot of flavor powers the most. If they want to fix adepts, it isn't too difficult - just make augmentations much, much less compatible with Magic, as far as Essence cost.
-
But do you really need authoritative tones and cool resolves? If you have cha 8, skill 5-6, specialization and berwick suit, your dice pool is 16-17. It is more than enough very often. At least during first runs. Later, if it isn't, you can get the increase charisma spell (by casting it yourself or your friend mage does it). => your pool is 20-21 which is again enough.
-
Like I said, it depends on whether you go all in or not. A mundane face can have high Charisma, high skill with specialization, first impression or trustworthy quality, appropriate clothing, and tailored pheromones. Is that a decent dice pool? Sure. But an adept face can add authoritative tone, cool resolve, and a mentor spirit bonus on top of that.
-
I will say my elf MysAd face has no PP invested in face-y adept powers and with just Attributes, Skills, specs, First Impression, and good clothing choices, I run at the 20-22 dice range at a Limit of 11-13 and routinely trounce even face-specced Johnsons.
This is why I think Adept powers are largely overkill.
-
There is a warning that this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days. But, I am seeing this for the first time, and wish to retain its context.
In a homebrew game, the players and the GM can get together to discuss die pools beforehand, which all posters here seem to agree is most important. But, in Missions, one not always has control over who the other Runners are at the table.
All too often, it's been my experience that many players are short-sighted as to their character's creation. While it's not that easy to determine where players have wasted Skill Points (if they don't try those skills), it's often easier to infer where they have wasted Metatype, Attributes, Magic, and/or Resources, by what they do (or do not do).
It makes sense that if Skills that were chosen are not used, that those Skill Points have been wasted. But, the same argument could be made that Edge, Attributes, Magic, or Resources expended are underutilized/wasted as well. It all comes down to how one likes to play the game.
I like to do lots of things! That requires lots of Skill Points. Most seem to like to shoot guns and do little else. But, I'm sure that's not true for those who have posted here.
And, wouldn't fewer guns and better Negotiation, First Aid, or Perception make sense? I'll always remember that player with the sniper character who did little or nothing over several Missions.
So, yes! I use Perception much more often than anything else. I believe it's worth 10D plus add-ons. Would I give up Sneaking or Con? No way. Negotiation? Assensing and Magic? No thanks. 2xR4 and 46/10 are nice. I can raise Edge, Attributes, and Resources after a few Runs.
-
SRM is a curious angle for discussion. Yes it's true there's potentially no telling what gaps in capability your ad-hoc Shadowrun team may have. For example, it's my belief that every character should have some driving and computer skill.. sometimes there's a chase and you just have no rigger... and data searches are always relevant for legwork, even when the team has no hacker.
OTOH while there's no telling what gaps in skills the team may have in SRM, in SRM you do have an idea of the dice pools you'd need to be successful. Conventional wisdom may be to get 16+ dice in anything you plan on attempting... that's overkill in SRM. You'll usually be fine with dice pools of 12+ the way Missions are written. That can absolutely affect your calculus on how many skill points you "need". Or how many ways you can get away with splitting up your skill points.
-
Ugh this thread.
If you really wanna do a lot of things it's not actually skill points that you want. What you really need, is decent skill wires (Rating 2 should be fine), the subscription to match them, and the attributes to support it.
So long as you can push that pool to around 10 or so, and your not rolling vs something, you should be good to go.
My current favorite missions character is a skill wired street sam, with bionic legs for his pure kicking and moving fighting style.
-
Doing things requires dicepools. Skills are only one component of those pools.
Skills A is often seen as a trap because because you can often get similar dicepools pools in many things more efficiently with higher attributes/'ware that are precluded when taking skills A. Also, there are few concepts that benefit from 10 skill group points, as most groups have an underutitlized skill you don't really want to prioritize and taking a group precludes starting with a specialty.
Additionally, it is easier to pick up a few points in more skills in play than it is to increase key attributes. Shadowrun character generation privileges building tall at character generation and widening out in play than the other way around.
There are great Skills A characters, but, for new players, the temptation for skills A often comes from wanting to get a character that does does too much, and ends up with a character that is mediocre at everything. So as a general guide, Skills B tends to be more efficient for a heavily "skilled" character concept.
Especially for attributes with lost of linked skills (Agility, Charisma, Logic), working on the attribute level boosts dice pools in all of their linked skills. Just defaulting or a skill point with a high attribute (and even more when augmented with 'ware/magic) gets you a decent dicepool. than spending a much of skills A investment to make up the difference of having a lower attribute.
Thinking back for my fave Skills A character...
Intuitive Private Investigator/Psychometrist (Aspected Magician/Face)
Priority: EBDAC or elf CBDAE
Information Monger/Social Infiltrator (Technomancer Hacker/Face)
Priority: DBCAE
Van Hacker/Driver (Technomancer hacker/vehicle rigger)
Techno: DECAB
For the aspected magician, Skills A works but the character still has high attributes and resources needed to boost key attributes.
For technomancers, skills can actually be more important because they serve as the limit for total Diagnostics bonuses. So the more skillful at something a technomancer is, the more they can leverage technomancery bonuses.
-
Ugh this thread.
Indeed.
There are several strategies for having a character that can do a lot of things well. Priority A skills is mathematically the least efficient way of doing it. You're better off with an Edgenomancer, or Skillwire build by a lot.
For long term character growth Skills are the cheapest to get post char gen if you're playing with normal book rewards. In most cases you're better off with Skills B, and either Stats or Resources A. Plus you've got a better baseline for Initiative, Defense tests, Movement, higher Limits, more contacts, more knowledge skills, whatever when you've got better stats.
-
So, as to how one wishes to play Missions, it seems all to come down to what works for you and if you have fun.
If some are satisfied with die pools of 10-12, great! I played in most-all of Chicago's 5-8 Runs, and I prefer to succeed more often than that.
Yes, some GMs thought I was overdoing it. And, I suspect some GMs might have changed the Module to make it tougher. But, that's life.
Skill wires might work for some, although it seems that they might get expensive for die pools of 16-20. And, it does seem cheaper to raise skills rather than attributes with Karma generally, but that all depends upon how one plays one's character. 100 to raise Attributes, 200 to raise Skills, or 300 for Initiations?
-
You will never make a build that runs 16-20 in even most skills. Going that high is well into diminishing returns.
If you want the highest possible odds of the broadest possible skill set the max edge build will do that but edge can go fast if start using it on everything.
Skillwire builds only intended to be used a on skills that not primary role, or failing that filling in the gaps at a given table. Primary role should maxed and be distinct from any skill wire component.
For example my Skillwire build Street Sam Primary and Jack of all trade secondary. Which has come in very handy at many tables, but it's no replacement for primaries.
-
I pray that some Great and Powerful Mods for the Sweet Love of Great Justice and by the Power of Taco Temple, Lock this Ancient and Undead Monster Thread and send it back the Deep Topic Abyss so it can stop taking precious space in here.