Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: gargaM0NK on <09-30-19/1320:47>
-
From Combat Round on p. 107:
"The basic Action allotment for each character is 1 Minor Action and 1 Major Action per combat round. Players get 1 additional Minor Action for every Initiative Die they have.
Actions can be traded between Minor and Major, but there are restrictions. A Major
Action can be used to perform a Minor Action, simple as that. A character can also
trade 4 Minor Actions to perform 1 Major Action.
Characters may never start a player turn with more than 5 Minor Actions."
Does the trading Minor / Major actions occur before or during the turn?
If before, it would mean that players have a maximum of [Infinite] Major actions and [5] Minor actions.
If after, it would mean that players have a maximum of [2] Major actions and [1] Minor, or [1] Major and [5] minor.
-
From Combat Round on p. 107:
"The basic Action allotment for each character is 1 Minor Action and 1 Major Action per combat round. Players get 1 additional Minor Action for every Initiative Die they have.
Actions can be traded between Minor and Major, but there are restrictions. A Major
Action can be used to perform a Minor Action, simple as that. A character can also
trade 4 Minor Actions to perform 1 Major Action.
Characters may never start a player turn with more than 5 Minor Actions."
Does the trading Minor / Major actions occur before or during the turn?
If before, it would mean that players have a maximum of [Infinite] Major actions and [5] Minor actions.
If after, it would mean that players have a maximum of [2] Major actions and [1] Minor, or [1] Major and [5] minor.
That last sentence seems to indicate that you have to choose before you act, which kind of makes sense. When it comes time for your character to declare their turn, they would have to choose how to allocate their actions, including whether or not to trade up or down.
-
Remember that a Player Turn only begins what that player (or NPC) is "up" in initiative order.
If you begin a Combat Round with 1 Major and 6 Minors, yes when your Player Turn comes up you drop down to 1 Major and 5 Minors. However, if you use an anytime Minor between the start of the Combat Round and the start of your Player Turn (perhaps you Dodged an attack...) you still have 1 Major and 5 Minors, and so you don't lose any when your Player Turn begins.
-
If you begin a Combat Round with 1 Major and 6 Minors, yes when your Player Turn comes up you drop down to 1 Major and 5 Minors. However, if you use an anytime Minor between the start of the Combat Round and the start of your Player Turn (perhaps you Dodged an attack...) you still have 1 Major and 5 Minors, and so you don't lose any when your Player Turn begins.
So then, if you begin a combat round with 1 Major and 6 Minors, can you trade 5 of the Minors for 1 Major and 2 Minors, or does the limit on starting with more than 5 occur first, giving you 1 Major and 1 Minor?
-
My understanding is that trading minors in for a major is not an "anytime" activity. Ergo, you can't do It until your Player Turn begins, and by then you're down to your cap of 5 minors.
-
Perfect - thanks!
-
My understanding is that trading minors in for a major is not an "anytime" activity. Ergo, you can't do It until your Player Turn begins, and by then you're down to your cap of 5 minors.
Is that supported by RAW? I can't see any definition one way or the other.
Your interpretation means characters could not do two Anytime Major actions before their turn happens. For example, they couldn't engage Full Defence and then Intercept. Yet they can do one Anytime Major and any number of Anytime Minors before then. This feels like an arbitrary and unintuitive limitation.
-
My understanding is that trading minors in for a major is not an "anytime" activity. Ergo, you can't do It until your Player Turn begins, and by then you're down to your cap of 5 minors.
Is that supported by RAW? I can't see any definition one way or the other.
Your interpretation means characters could not do two Anytime Major actions before their turn happens. For example, they couldn't engage Full Defence and then Intercept. Yet they can do one Anytime Major and any number of Anytime Minors before then. This feels like an arbitrary limitation.
It's not an official ruling, no. As I said, it's merely my understanding.
To give it more explanation:
Your allotment of actions are generated at some point every combat round. This is unspecified in RAW, and by my sensibilities there are only two probable possibilities: 1) everyone's actions are all generated/refreshed at the beginning of a combat round, or 2) when their player turn begins. I think 2) has mechanical problems, so 1) stands as the better choice in my opinion.
Problems with generating your actions at the onset of your player turn:
You're stuck without any actions at all, major OR minor, during the first combat round until you go.
It's simpler to just have everyone's unused actions expire together at the end of a combat round and refresh together at the beginning of a new combat round.
-
My understanding is that trading minors in for a major is not an "anytime" activity. Ergo, you can't do It until your Player Turn begins, and by then you're down to your cap of 5 minors.
Is that supported by RAW? I can't see any definition one way or the other.
Your interpretation means characters could not do two Anytime Major actions before their turn happens. For example, they couldn't engage Full Defence and then Intercept. Yet they can do one Anytime Major and any number of Anytime Minors before then. This feels like an arbitrary and unintuitive limitation.
I think this is defined by RAW at the very start of the Game Timing and Actions section.
When you get to take a turn and describe what your character is doing, your actions are contained in a combat round. A combat round lasts for about three seconds of in-universe time. Everyone, player characters and non-player characters alike, take a single player turn within that round.
This defines the terms "combat round" and "player turn" as distinctly separate entities.
The book then goes on to state, and I'm paraphrasing here, that you gain actions each combat round to spend on your player turn; by RAW you can take actions outside of your player turn, so it logically follows that the allotment must come at the start of the combat turn.
As a result, since you gain your actions at the start of the combat round, but can't start your player turn with more than 1 Major and 5 Minor, and because the rules state that "players can trade minor and major actions" but doesn't specify when this happens, I would infer that trading can be done at any time during the combat round.
RAW also states that unused actions are lost:
Note that actions cannot be carried from one round to another unless that is specifcally allowed in a rule.
-
Ah, I may have misunderstood what you were asking about penllawen. If you were asking about not being able to trade in minors for a major until your Player Turn begins being RAW...
This is good Rules Lawyering 101: "It doesn't say you can't" is trumped by "It doesn't say you can." Not only is it prima facie that you can't do things if it's not your turn, things you CAN do when it's not your turn explicitly say so. Trading actions isn't one of them, ergo "it doesn't say you can."
-
The book then goes on to state, and I'm paraphrasing here, that you gain actions each combat round to spend on your player turn; by RAW you can take actions outside of your player turn, so it logically follows that the allotment must come at the start of the combat turn.
As a result, since you gain your actions at the start of the combat round, but can't start your player turn with more than 1 Major and 5 Minor, and because the rules state that "players can trade minor and major actions" but doesn't specify when this happens, I would infer that trading can be done at any time during the combat round.
I agree with all of this. The trading (to my mind) happens whenever the player wants, on-demand, and doesn't even need to really be explicitly declared as such. It happens implicitly when the player uses their second Major action. Or doesn't happen if they don't, or if they use too many Minor actions.
I don't understand why this limit of "5 Minor Actions" exists, particularly as (as far as I can tell) there's no way to get above 6 anyway. I assume it's just a guardrail against future buffs that do stack. I also think it's daft that it's 5, which means Wireless Reflexes IV are weirdly nerfed compared to III. I don't see why the text is "cannot start turn with more than 5" and not "no player can ever have any combination of initiative boosts that take them beyond 5d6 / 6 minor actions." Like, we all agree that the 5d6 boost is intrinsic and eternal, it's not something that we only calculate at a specific point in the combat turn. So why is the cap on minor actions not applied the same way?
RAW also states that unused actions are lost:
Note that actions cannot be carried from one round to another unless that is specifically allowed in a rule.
This has the interesting connotations for dodge/block/full defence; in so far as, if you act really early in the turn and choose to keep some actions back for defence later on, they could easily be wasted. Not sure if that's fun tactical decision making or annoying analysis paralysis, though.
Ah, I may have misunderstood what you were asking about penllawen. If you were asking about not being able to trade in minors for a major until your Player Turn begins being RAW...
Yes, that's what I'm asking, and I don't agree with your take because (as I said above) I think it's unintuitive to allow characters to act out of turn in other ways (ie Anytime actions) but not do their Major/Minor trades.
Consider another example: A character ends their turn and keeps a Major action back. Later, someone attacks them, and they want to do a Block Minor Anytime action to defence themselves. Are you going to tell them "no, it's not your turn now so you can't to major/minor trading"? Or are you going to let them trade the Major for a Minor action and defend themselves?
This is good Rules Lawyering 101: "It doesn't say you can't" is trumped by "It doesn't say you can." Not only is it prima facie that you can't do things if it's not your turn, things you CAN do when it's not your turn explicitly say so. Trading actions isn't one of them, ergo "it doesn't say you can."
That depends on if you think trading Majors and Minors around is "doing something" or not. It's clearly not, in itself, an action. So I see it as something that happens outside the turn ordering.
-
Ah, I may have misunderstood what you were asking about penllawen. If you were asking about not being able to trade in minors for a major until your Player Turn begins being RAW...
This is good Rules Lawyering 101: "It doesn't say you can't" is trumped by "It doesn't say you can." Not only is it prima facie that you can't do things if it's not your turn, things you CAN do when it's not your turn explicitly say so. Trading actions isn't one of them, ergo "it doesn't say you can."
I disagree; "Trade Action" is not an action in and of itself. Instead, the rules state:
Players can trade Minor and Major Actions, using a Major Action to perform a Minor Action or using 4 Minor Actions to perform a Major Action (possibly providing an extra attack in a single player turn). Each action has a note next to it indicating when it can be performed; this is either Initiative (I) or Anytime (A). Initiative Actions can only be performed on the character’s player turn during an initiative round, while Anytime Actions can be used at any time. Note, though, that in order to perform an Anytime Action, you must have an Action left.
By RAW, you can you trade minor actions for a major, and you can do so when you take an action. This can happen outside of your player turn, which means that if you have 4 minor actions and want to perform an Anytime Major Action, you can choose to trade when doing so. This is not interpretation; this is following the literal steps in the Game Timing and Actions paragraph.
For example:
1. My street samurai has an initiative of 15+5d6
2. At the start of the combat round they are allotted 1 Major and 6 Minor actions (1 base plus 5 for each initiative dice)
3. An NPC manage to beat the samurai's initiative roll, and fires a grenade in the direction of the sam
4. The samurai takes the Avoid Incoming (A) action, and uses 4 of his minor actions to do so
5. Having survived the grenade, it is now the samurai's turn; he has 1 major and 2 minor actions left, and goes after the NPC with a vengance
This is RAW; you don't have to take an additional action to trade between major and minors, you just choose to do so when taking any action.
-
Ah, I may have misunderstood what you were asking about penllawen. If you were asking about not being able to trade in minors for a major until your Player Turn begins being RAW...
Yes, that's what I'm asking, and I don't agree with your take because (as I said above) I think it's unintuitive to allow characters to act out of turn in other ways (ie Anytime actions) but not do their Major/Minor trades.
Well, take the "Add 3 to your Initiative Score". Clearly that's not an action either, yet it says you can do this before your Player Turn. Stuff you can do outside your Player Turn says you can do it outside your Player Turn. IMO this is fairly straightforward then that if it fails to say you can do some "thing" outside your Player Turn, then you cannot.
Consider another example: A character ends their turn and keeps a Major action back. Later, someone attacks them, and they want to do a Block Minor Anytime action to defence themselves. Are you going to tell them "no, it's not your turn now so you can't to major/minor trading"? Or are you going to let them trade the Major for a Minor action and defend themselves?
I would absolutely not let someone trade in a Major for Four Minor actions, because that's not a thing. Re-read pg 40:
"Players can trade Minor and Major Actions,
using a Major Action to perform a Minor Action or
using 4 Minor Actions to perform a Major Action
(possibly providing an extra attack in a single player
turn)."
Bolded for emphasis. In other words: If you only have a Major and you want to dodge, you just spend the Major. You don't get to convert to 4 Minors then just spend a Minor.
This is good Rules Lawyering 101: "It doesn't say you can't" is trumped by "It doesn't say you can." Not only is it prima facie that you can't do things if it's not your turn, things you CAN do when it's not your turn explicitly say so. Trading actions isn't one of them, ergo "it doesn't say you can."
That depends on if you think trading Majors and Minors around is "doing something" or not. It's clearly not, in itself, an action. So I see it as something that happens outside the turn ordering.
On this we can agree to disagree. And honestly... the disagreement is moot: There's technically no such thing as having 2 Major actions.
Re-read the quote again. The rule allows you to spend four Minor actions in place of a Major, it doesn't technically allow you to convert 4 Minors into 1 Major. If you have 1 Major and 6 Minors, the only way to not lose a Minor action is to spend it before your Player Turn begins.
-
This is RAW; you don't have to take an additional action to trade between major and minors, you just choose to do so when taking any action.
Yes, exactly.
-
This is RAW; you don't have to take an additional action to trade between major and minors, you just choose to do so when taking any action.
Yes, exactly.
Indeed. If you spend 4 Minors, you can take a Major action. If it's an anytime Major action, you can spend 4 minor actions doing that anytime Major action before your turn begins, yes.
It's important to remember this rule does not allow you to spend 4 minors to bank a Major action for use later on in the turn.
Edit: Re-checked the CRB. There are 2 (A)nytime Major Actions: participating in a teamwork test and counterspelling. If you have 1 Major and 6 Minors, you can do one of those things before your turn begins, then begin your turn with 1 Major and 2 minors. What you cannot do is begin your turn with 2 Majors and 2 Minors.
-
I would absolutely not let someone trade in a Major for Four Minor actions, because that's not a thing. Re-read pg 40:
I know it's not a thing, which is why it's not what I said. Let me emphasis and reword for clairty:
...are you going to let them trade the Major for a single Minor action and defend themselves?
But onwards.
In other words: If you only have a Major and you want to dodge, you just spend the Major.
Hang on, so now you've argued a character can spend one Major action to perform a Minor action at some point out of their turn, but they cannot spend four Minor actions to perform a Major action at some other point in their turn? Am I reading this right? Here's the quotes again:
If you only have a Major and you want to dodge, you just spend the Major. You don't get to convert to 4 Minors then just spend a Minor....The rule allows you to spend four Minor actions in place of a Major, it doesn't technically allow you to convert 4 Minors into 1 Major.
My understanding is that trading minors in for a major is not an "anytime" activity. Ergo, you can't do It until your Player Turn begins, and by then you're down to your cap of 5 minors.
I don't see how these posts don't contradict each other. In particular, I don't understand why you've shifted from talking about "trading" to talking about "it doesn't technically allow you to convert".
-
Edit: Re-checked the CRB. There are 2 (A)nytime Major Actions: participating in a teamwork test and counterspelling.
Then you missed Intercept and Full Defence, both of which I mentioned above.
-
I strongly suspect the limit of 5 originates from when each die gave a Minor, and is there in case future books let people score extra Minors. We'll see if it turns out to be 6 after errata or not, I myself prefer it at 6.
-
I don't see how these posts don't contradict each other. In particular, I don't understand why you've shifted from talking about "trading" to talking about "it doesn't technically allow you to convert".
Because honestly, until re-reading the rule closely I fell victim to the groupthink of equating "spending 4" with "trading in 4".
If we're in agreement that you can absolutely spend a Major for ONE Minor anytime you want to spend a Minor, or four Minors for a Major anytime you want to spend a Major, then yes we're in agreement.
And this agreement should extend to acknowledging that it's impossible to save a sixth minor by starting a Player turn with 2 Major actions. You can save a potential sixth minor action from being lost by spending it before your Player Turn begins: either on its own as an anytime Minor before your turn begins or as a group of 4 minors spent to perform an anytime Major before your turn begins.
-
I think we're all in agreement, honestly.
- If you have a way of getting +5d6 initiative dice, you start the combat round with 1 Major Action and 6 Minor Actions.
- You can only start your player turn with 1 Major and 5 Minor actions.
- If you start your player turn with 1 Major and more than 5 Minor Actions, you lose excess Minor Actions
- You can spend Minor Actions on the following at any time during the combat round: Avoid Incoming, Block, Change Device Mode, Dodge, Drop Object, Hit The Dit, and Intercept)
- You can spend Major Actions on the following at any time during the combat round: Assist (has to be done before the Leader's player turn), Counterspell, and Full Defense
- When taking a Major Action, including Anytime Actions, you can instead choose to use 4 Minor Actions to do so; note that this does not give you 1 Major Action to use later, it only allows you to immediately spend 4 Minor Actions to do a 1 Major Action
- When taking a Minor Action, including Anytime Actions, you can instead choose to use 1 Major Action to do so; note that this does not give you 4 Minor Actions to use later, it only allows you to immediately spend 1 Major Action to perform 1 Minor Action
Did I miss anything?
-
and Intercept
...
Did I miss anything?
(I think you covered it all, just wanted to add that you need to have both a spare Major and a spare Minor in order to take the Intercept anytime action)
-
If we're in agreement that you can absolutely spend a Major for ONE Minor anytime you want to spend a Minor, or four Minors for a Major anytime you want to spend a Major, then yes we're in agreement.
And this agreement should extend to acknowledging that it's impossible to save a sixth minor by starting a Player turn with 2 Major actions. You can save a potential sixth minor action from being lost by spending it before your Player Turn begins: either on its own as an anytime Minor before your turn begins or as a group of 4 minors spent to perform an anytime Major before your turn begins.
Riiight, yes. Now I see what you mean and yes, I agree.
(I still don’t see why initiative dice and minor actions have different caps and I still think that’s silly. If the caps are harmonised, a lot of the messiness we just chewed over for two pages vanishes.)
-
- If you have a way of getting +5d6 initiative dice, you start the combat round with 1 Major Action and 6 Minor Actions.
- You can only start your player turn with 1 Major and 5 Minor actions.
I really hadn't picked up this distinction between the max number of initiative dice and the max number of minor actions until this thread. That seems so much like a mistake that I feel like it has to be a mistake. If you just turn that 5 into a 6 in that 2nd bullet point, as penllawen says, it becomes completely unnecessary and the rule is quite simple. Everybody earns their alloted actions at the start of the round and uses them in any legal fashion during the round; any left at the end are lost and a new bunch is handed out at the start of the next round.
Conceivably, you could physically track them using one big token and 1 to 6 small tokens. Literally spend them into the pool in the center of the table during the turn as you use them.
-
I need to start figuring out whether pokerchips or colored stones should be used for the Edge, and use the other for Actions.
And yeah, like I mentioned, I personally believe the limit of 5 is a mistake left behind by rule evolution. We'll see what errata says.
-
Side note: I´m currently toying with a houserule Edge boost to convert Edge into additional Minor Actions, to help smooth out the Action economy when needed. Think 2-3 for a Minor in your own turn and 3-4 to buy a Minor outside your turn as a reaction, depending on the chosen houserules for the other Edge Limitations.
I´m removing the Minor Action Limit as well. If these 2 houserules combined mean that some hyper-specialized Speedlord can boost up to 3 Majors every once in a while, I´m absolutely fine with that. Cinematic shit ftw :P
-
I was wondering about actions that cost more than one minor action would be of value. it's probably more complex given the interaction with other rules. The example I was thinking of was ready weapon and reload weapon for pistols costing 2 minor actions each. And then equipment like quickdraw holster and smartlink would be defined as reducing minor action cost by 1. More gradient in action cost.
-
I was wondering about actions that cost more than one minor action would be of value. it's probably more complex given the interaction with other rules. The example I was thinking of was ready weapon and reload weapon for pistols costing 2 minor actions each. And then equipment like quickdraw holster and smartlink would be defined as reducing minor action cost by 1. More gradient in action cost.
I personally think it should cost more to reload a cylinder or an internal magazine than a clip, for example, but then again one of the design goals of SR6 was to streamline.
The most valuable question I can think of is this; what value does this added complexity bring. If the answer justifies the added complexity, then go for it.
-
I was wondering about actions that cost more than one minor action would be of value. it's probably more complex given the interaction with other rules. The example I was thinking of was ready weapon and reload weapon for pistols costing 2 minor actions each. And then equipment like quickdraw holster and smartlink would be defined as reducing minor action cost by 1. More gradient in action cost.
I personally think it should cost more to reload a cylinder or an internal magazine than a clip, for example, but then again one of the design goals of SR6 was to streamline.
The most valuable question I can think of is this; what value does this added complexity bring. If the answer justifies the added complexity, then go for it.
Not so, Police have been using speed-loaders for cylinders for decades now: Speedloaders (https://www.pistoleer.com/speedloaders/)
-
I was wondering about actions that cost more than one minor action would be of value. it's probably more complex given the interaction with other rules. The example I was thinking of was ready weapon and reload weapon for pistols costing 2 minor actions each. And then equipment like quickdraw holster and smartlink would be defined as reducing minor action cost by 1. More gradient in action cost.
I personally think it should cost more to reload a cylinder or an internal magazine than a clip, for example, but then again one of the design goals of SR6 was to streamline.
The most valuable question I can think of is this; what value does this added complexity bring. If the answer justifies the added complexity, then go for it.
Not so, Police have been using speed-loaders for cylinders for decades now: Speedloaders (https://www.pistoleer.com/speedloaders/)
I completely agree with that, FastJack, and so does SR6. There is even a piece of equipment called a ... you guessed it ... "Speed Loader" :D
That being said, I could have been more clear. I was actually referring to putting bullets into a cylinder or an internal magazine (like on a shotgun) one by one.
Again, though, I'm not sure that level of granularity adds any value to SR6 when the stated intent is to streamline. A reload action is a Major Action that lets you reload to full capacity.
If, like Giabraltar stated, one wanted to change the action efficiency by introducing actions that cost more than 1 minor action, such as reloading a weapon like a pistol with 2 minor actions instead of 1 major action, my personal opinion is that yes, this makes sense from a realism perspective but I'm not sure it does from an SR6 streamlining perspective.
Is that more clear?
EDIT:
The speed loader in SR6 already lets you spend a Minor Action instead of a Major action to reload a revolver. Perhaps an alternate approach to changing up action economy is to introduce other pieces of gear instead of multi-Minor Action ... actions.
-
There's things that go 'if you do Minor X, get a free Minor' which I prefer over '2 Minors, 1 with gear X' since it's easier to remember and doesn't force you to run out of Minors way too fast. I prefer 1-Minor or '0'-Minor (still need one to spend and get it back) Actions, since there's plenty of things for you to do with your Minors. Including keeping them at hand for defensive actions.
-
I just realized we've all missed a pretty significant piece of equipment: good old Wired Reflexes!
With Wired Reflexes at Rating 4, you get:
+4 Reaction
+4 Initiative Dice
+4 Additional Minor Actions
When activated, each rating point of wired reflexes gives you +1 Reaction (and accompanying bonus to your Initiative Score), 1 additional Initiative Die, and 1 additional Minor Action.
This means that a Street Samurai with Reaction 3 (7) and Intuition 3 gets an initiative of 10+5d6 and 1 Major and 10 Minor Actions...
All of a sudden, the limitation of Minor Actions per player turn makes a lot more sense.
EDIT:
Yeah, this is true for the Synaptic Booster as well.
The booster confers a bonus of +1 Reaction (and accompanying adjustment to Initiative Score), 1 additional Initiative Die, and 1 additional Minor Action per point of Rating.
So at rating 3 you get +3 REA, +3d6 initiative dice (and thus 4 minor actions), and 3 additional minor actions. With the same character as above, you would have Reaction 3 (6) + Intuition 3 for an initiative 9+4d6 with 1 major and 8 minor actions.
-
No, it just remind the reader that +4 initiative dice will give you +4 minor actions
-
No, it just remind the reader that +4 initiative dice will give you +4 minor actions
I respectfully disagree.
The rule clearly states "and"; you get, and I quote, "1 additional Initiative Die, and 1 additional Minor Action per point of Rating". This is not a reminder; the initiative dice themselves give you minor actions, and so too does this piece of equipment; by straight RAW, each point of rating gives you additional initiative dice AND additional minor actions.
-
I respectfully disagree.
You do you.
Lets talk again after the errata is out.
-
I respectfully disagree.
You do you.
Lets talk again after the errata is out.
I mean, can you argue that RAW states anything else? It is quite clearly an addition through the additive property, is it not?
-
I respectfully disagree.
You do you.
Lets talk again after the errata is out.
I mean, can you argue that RAW states anything else? It is quite clearly an addition through the additive property, is it not?
Too many areas are in the we are looking at that or the errata team has worked on that stage for RAW to be meaningful in anyway. Especially when RAI is almost always more important anyways.
-
Too many areas are in the we are looking at that or the errata team has worked on that stage for RAW to be meaningful in anyway. Especially when RAI is almost always more important anyways.
Until errata comes out, we only have RAW to go by, though. At the moment, I only see one possible reading of those two particular pieces of equipment, and the way they are written is clearly inclusive.
I will agree that errata may change it, but until such a time... Well.
-
I see no reason to read that section as anything other than a repeat of the Minor Action per Initiative Die rule. The misunderstanding is understandable, however the insistence isn't. If the intent really was for these to be extra, there would be phrasing making explicit mention of these coming on top of the Dice-minors. As such, I do not see a reason to assume there is actual intent for the augmentations to be far superior to the other sources of initiative. Your opinion that your own reading is the only correct one and anyone else is a fool incapable of parsing the rules properly, is a minority and will not fly at other tables.
-
@Michael Chandra
Please do not put words in my mouth. Nowhere did I resort to personal attacks, and reducing my argument to implying that I said "if you don't agree with me you are a fool" serves no purpose other than to incite an emotional response, which is against ToS. You also cannot possibly speak for every "other table", so please refrain from making broad generalizations.
I do encourage you to argue your position as it pertains to the written rule, however. This is a rules forum, after all, and you seem to have an overall excellent grasp of the rules. I freely admit I am a newcomer, so if you have particular insights I may have missed I welcome your thoughts.
That being said, unless you have an argument backing up why your opinion is correct and mine isn't, I would kindly ask that you please also refrain from reducing one side of an argument to "a misunderstanding".
My stance on this topic is simple; the operator "and additional minor actions" is not used elsewhere when initiative dice are added, so what makes these particular call-outs different? Drugs such as Cram, Jazz, and Kamikaze, spells such as Increase Reflexes, and the Adept power Improved Reflexes make no mention of additional minor actions, only additional attributes and initiative dice.
The specific use of this wording, then could be one of three things as I see it;
1. Intended as written
2. Intended as a reminder that additional initiative dice add additional minor actions
3. A mistake
Unfortunately, we do not know what the author intended when these sections were written, at least I do not.
My argument is quite simple; Wired Reflexes and Synaptic Boosters uniquely mention that you get bonus dice "and" additional actions.
Would you agree that it is possible, even if you think it is unlikely, that the author actually meant that these pieces of 'ware do both? If not, why?
Edit:
I forgot to mention that Wired Reflexes Rating 4 is one of the most expensive pieces of cyberware available, if not the most expensive. Again, would you agree that it is possible, even though it may be improbable, that the author intended for this gear to provide something unique at a cost of 400000 nuyen and 2/3 of your essence pool?
-
I forgot to mention that Wired Reflexes Rating 4 is one of the most expensive pieces of cyberware available, if not the most expensive. Again, would you agree that it is possible, even though it may be improbable, that the author intended for this gear to provide something unique at a cost of 400000 nuyen and 2/3 of your essence pool?
With the "Augmentation Overdrive" from p.282 they would actually be Rating VI and this would bring +6 Minor Actions and the +4 from the Initiative (that caps at 5)
But other than that i have to agree with MC, there are lots of things in the rules that are like 99% a mistake. And its kind of a "Gentleman Agreement" to ignore those mistakes.
Examples:
Adepts Power Points not dropping when Magic drops, (Actually the other one i had was actually mentioned as i just looked)
And there are some more i dont even want to mention :)
edit:
other examples are character creation not mentioning what happens with left over Karma, what actually can be bought with Karma not mentioned/everyone buys Specialisations yet it isnt listed, i didnt see anyone Submerging/Initiating at chargen yet
-
With the "Augmentation Overdrive" from p.282 they would actually be Rating VI and this would bring +6 Minor Actions and the +4 from the Initiative (that caps at 5)
But other than that i have to agree with MC, there are lots of things in the rules that are like 99% a mistake. And its kind of a "Gentleman Agreement" to ignore those mistakes.
Examples:
Adepts Power Points not dropping when Magic drops, (Actually one of them is actually mentioned somewhere)
And there are some more i dont even want to mention :)
I hadn't even seen the overdrive rules. Those could be... Interesting. Thanks!
Here's the thing, though; how do we know that Wired Reflexes granting both initiative dice and additional minor actions is a mistake? We can assume it is, just like Technomancers, pre-errata, having a Matrix Condition Monitor despite another section claiming that Technancers use the Stun condition monitor and that all Matrix damage (except biofeedback, presumably) is treated as Stun damage?
My point is that until we have official clarification, the only thing we have to go off of is the written word. I will be the first to concede that this very well could be a mistake, but that speaks to intent. I very well could be mistaken in this instance, but I have not seen a convincing counter-argument as to why (other than what I myself was accused of, namely stating that "You are wrong and I am right"). I've expanded upon my original argument, and I'm hopeful that we can continue to engage in rational debate.
As for intent; I cannot possibly know the mind of the author, so I have to base the rules on what is written even when there are glaring contradictions, and/or house rule the situation.
This is, in my opinion, no different than the Ruger 101 costing 11,100 nuyen. It's possible that this is a mistake, but how do I know that for sure?
EDIT:
Clarified my thoughts.
-
Adepts Power Points not dropping when Magic drops
This might or might change. It might or might not be intended.
Magicians free spells and rituals also don't drop when Magic drops
And Adept Power Points don't increase when Magic adjusted (during chargen).
other examples are character creation not mentioning what happens with left over Karma
In all editions where you were allowed to bring over left over karma from chargen there are explicit rules explaining how to resolve this. As you note yourself, in this edition there is no mentioning about left over karma at all. In this edition you spend your Customization karma on four things (listed at SR6 p. 66 Step Four: Spend Customization Karma):
- Skill advancement
- Attribute advancement
- Resources
- Qualities
what actually can be bought with Karma ...
- Skill advancement
- Attribute advancement
- Resources
- Qualities
Skill Advancement include up to one specialization per skill (Exotic Weapon might be an exception).
Attribute Advancement include Physical, Mental attributes as well as the Edge attribute and either Magic or Resonance in case you have a Magic or Resonance priority of A, B, C or D (but not E). Only one Physical/Mental attribute may be at metatype maximum rating during chargen.
Resources may be bought at a rate of 2,000 nuyen per point of customization Karma (or 5,000 nuyen per point of customization if you have the In Dept quality).
Qualities are limited to a maximum of 6 during chargen and the net Karma gain from negative qualities and positive qualities is limited to 20 karma.
That's it really.......
Which mean you cannot spend Customization Karma to Submerge or Initiate during chargen. Or bind foci. Or buy spells / rituals / power points. Or get an expertise on a skill. Or a second specialization. etc etc.
-
Adepts Power Points not dropping when Magic drops
This might or might change. It might or might not be intended.
Magicians free spells and rituals also don't drop when Magic drops
And Adept Power Points don't increase when Magic adjusted (during chargen).
If this doesnt change it opens a huge gap between lore and rules. Take a physical Adept. Give him Priority D Magic.
He has 1 Magic 1 Power Point 6 Essence.
Game starts he raises Magic to 2 for 10 Karma, gets Cyberware, it drops to 1 again he repeats that until Magic 6 Magic 1 Powerpoint 6 Essence 0,1 need Initation now which raises cap
Then burning his Essence makes him faster, a better Adept instead of a worse one ...
----
And you cant buy 2nd Specialisation before you have Expertise in the first Specilisation. A lot of things concerning Specialisations are double or triple mentioned. Smells of Errata too ^^
edit: it would be basically magic point, initation, Cyberware, repeat until Essence down
edit2: to be more precise the Magic Maximum drops with Essence loss so he does the stunt until his essence is under 1, then he initates for 11 Karma, and then raises his Magic for the last time to 2
edit 3: tried to make my thoughts more clear ^^
edit 4: and to add to the Karma misery at char gen i only read in RAW on page 66 "[...] the points are spent on skill or attribute advancement[...]" this does or does not include Specialisations .
Next thing is if you can take Karma into Game, binding a Focus takes an hour per Force of the Focus (p.154)
so keep 16 Karma during Char gen, spend 8 hours, Qi Focus level 8 bound .... (example!)
-
If this doesnt change it opens a huge gap between lore and rules. Take a physical Adept. Give him Priority D Magic.
He has 1 Magic 1 Power Point 6 Essence.
Game starts he raises Magic to 2 for 10 Karma, gets Cyberware, it drops to 1 again he repeats that until Magic 6 Magic 1 Powerpoint 6 Essence 0,1 need Initation now which raises cap
Let us assume that you ended at essence 1.0 instead (so you have a max magic rating of 1 rather than 0).
Difference is not as big as you seem to think it is...
After a lot of post chargen juggling at magic rating 1 you will eventually end up with a 1 power point from chargen, a bound Force 5 Qi focus for 10 karma worth 1.25 power points and 5 extra power points from raising your magic rating a total of five times for a cost of 50 karma.
7.25 power points. 60 karma. And a lot of juggling (including waiting for your resources to catch up). No weapon focus. No initiation.
Compare this to a physical adept that start with Magic or Resonance D for an unadjusted magic rating of 1, Metatype C and walk out of chargen with an adjusted Magic rating of 6 (but only 1 power point).
In this case we will eventually end up with 1 power point from chargen and
7.5 power points from bound foci with a total Force of 30 for 60 karma.
8.50 power points. 60 karma. 5 adjustment points during chargen. No juggling. No weapon focus. No initiation.
"[...] the points are spent on skill or attribute advancement[...]" this does or does not include Specialisations .
Skill Specialization is a way to advance your Skills.
Why would not skill specialization be included in skill advancement...??
Also this:
SR6 p. 65 Skill
When using the Priority Chart, a specialization costs the same as one rank of a skill. You cannot acquire more than one specialization in a skill at character creation, and you cannot acquire an expertise.
...so keep 16 Karma during Char gen...
Unlike previous editions there are no rules in SR6 that allow you to keep any of your customization karma post chargen....
-
Unlike previous editions there are no rules in SR6 that allow you to keep any of your customization karma post chargen....
Which is what means that you can carry any amount you would like to post chargen. You are explicitly given it to spend as you see fit, and not told you will lose it if you don't spend it - rules don't stay as they were in prior editions by default, they have to be stated in the new edition too or they don't exist.
-
Unlike previous editions there are no rules in SR6 that allow you to keep any of your customization karma post chargen....
Which is what means that you can carry any amount you would like to post chargen. You are explicitly given it to spend as you see fit, and not told you will lose it if you don't spend it - rules don't stay as they were in prior editions by default, they have to be stated in the new edition too or they don't exist.
Well, a problem with that logic is if you accept that, then you also have to accept the possibility of saving attribute and/or skill points from priority pick: it never says use or lose on those, either...
-
While that is fair, there is also no mechanism to use said adjustment/attribute/skill points post-chargen. That is not the case for Karma.
-
A GM can always put their foot down, but yeah, the rules should be explicit about a cap or lack thereof. I would prefer a cap that's not 0. And yeah, we need rules about how exactly PP from Magic are connected to Essence Loss. I hope the errata will clarify, which is why I'm not touching Adepts or Mystics with an 11-foot-pole until the errata come out. Too messy a debate.
-
Difference is not as big as you seem to think it is...
After a lot of post chargen juggling at magic rating 1 you will eventually end up with a 1 power point from chargen, a bound Force 5 Qi focus for 10 karma worth 1.25 power points and 5 extra power points from raising your magic rating a total of five times for a cost of 50 karma.
7.25 power points. 60 karma. And a lot of juggling (including waiting for your resources to catch up). No weapon focus. No initiation.
Compare this to a physical adept that start with Magic or Resonance D for an unadjusted magic rating of 1, Metatype C and walk out of chargen with an adjusted Magic rating of 6 (but only 1 power point).
Really ? He has 5 Essence worth of ware, 6 Power Points (for 50 Karma), 4 Qi Focus for another Power Point and you think another Adept can compete with that ? Thats so obvious i wont even make a char (and i wont make a char abusing the PowerPoints staying either, thats just a rule that came into existing they separated Magic from Power Points, as long as -1 Magic means -1 PowerPoint and vice versa everything is fine.)
-
Well, a problem with that logic is if you accept that, then you also have to accept the possibility of saving attribute and/or skill points from priority pick: it never says use or lose on those, either...
While it is true that the same inaccuracy of language applies (not saying "you can't save these for later" in any case), there is no incentive for trying to hold back attribute or skill points for later usage - there's nothing you can get with them that you can't afford yet, or that you can't yet choose to buy with them.
In all cases, I believe the intent is to have to spend all your character creation points prior to starting play... it's just only implied, rather than explicitly stated.
-
In all cases, I believe the intent is to have to spend all your character creation points prior to starting play... it's just only implied, rather than explicitly stated.
Something I dislike about this interpretation is that you could easily get into places where you have a few points leftover you can't spend, and I don't like encouraging a "use-it-or-lose-it" mentality. Players end up scrabbling around taking random qualities mostly because the cost uses up their remaining karma. Just seems... untidy, to me.
Edit to add - and I see no harm in letting players take a small amount of leftover karma out of chargen.
-
Well, a problem with that logic is if you accept that, then you also have to accept the possibility of saving attribute and/or skill points from priority pick: it never says use or lose on those, either...
While it is true that the same inaccuracy of language applies (not saying "you can't save these for later" in any case), there is no incentive for trying to hold back attribute or skill points for later usage - there's nothing you can get with them that you can't afford yet, or that you can't yet choose to buy with them.
In all cases, I believe the intent is to have to spend all your character creation points prior to starting play... it's just only implied, rather than explicitly stated.
Well one notable thing you'd probably WANT to hang on to Karma for is raising your Magic Attribute as an Adept. Raising it during Chargen is a trap, since you won't get Power Points for it.. better to raise post-chargen, all the moreso if you can carry over karma. But that's more of an Adepts and Power Points issue, than a Karma carryover issue...
-
Unlike previous editions there are no rules in SR6 that allow you to keep any of your customization karma post chargen....
Which is what means that you can carry any amount you would like to post chargen.
No.
-
One thing I am finding isn't super clear from the rules, at least not to me, is when the Action Allotment refreshes?
Is it at the start of the round for all characters?
-This would mean if I get attacked before my first turn, I have actions available to defend with.
Or is it at the start of my own turn, like in most games?
-This would mean if I get attacked before my first turn, I have no actions available to defend with (like being Flat Footed, in certain other games).
Surprise rules seem to indicate I have an Action Allotment because I can use them to defend with only, just not move or take actions on my "turn", so it would seem everyone gets them at the start of the round, but that's not super explicit.
"During a single combat round, each participant gets an allotment of Actions to use on or around their player turn."
This doesn't say when the actions refresh, so I am confused on the RAI here too. Or is it explained elsewhere than in the description of a Combat Round?
-
One thing I am finding isn't super clear from the rules, at least not to me, is when the Action Allotment refreshes?
Is it at the start of the round for all characters?
-This would mean if I get attacked before my first turn, I have actions available to defend with.
I don't think RAW states it succinctly but I, for one (and I think most people here) are reading it as this option. IIRC the surprise rules go further and say you can't do any Anytime actions until your first turn, which if you adhere to the second interpretation - you don't get any actions until your first turn anyway - then they make no sense.
-
The way the rules are written in general, I guess I don't feel like I can take anything for granted. I agree with your thoughts though.
The start of the Round is the most logical place for them to refresh. Under surprise it just says you can't take "actions", but you can make Defense Tests. If Defense Tests are free, then all is well. You basically just don't get your normal Action Allotment (which is probably how it should read instead). Kind of moot, I suppose. It's basically the same thing as getting it but not being able to spend it. You just couldn't do any type of spending of the Allotment until the start of the next round.
Surprise says :
"Those who fail this test also roll Initiative, but they cannot act or spend Edge in the first combat round. They still roll to defend against attacks and to soak damage, but they cannot take any actions on their own. Once that first combat round is over, they can act normally."
"Cannot take any actions" would seem to imply you can't spend any of your allotment, but doesn't specify. I suppose that's not a terribly relevant. If I can "roll to defend" though, can I spend a Minor to add an extra dice pool into the mix? I assume not? Per the Action section, that would be "an action" which I am forbidden from. This also better fits the idea of being surprised. Either way, if that's the read, it seems that as soon as the round goes back to the top of the order, you get your allotment (given/refreshed/unlocked) and can now take defense or anytime actions in response to attacks prior to your turn.
-
You could read it that everyone generates a fresh set of actions at the beginning of their player turn, but if that's the case you can be stuck with no actions to dodge with even if you're not surprised.
-
It would certainly simulate the idea of being Flat Footed, but a lot of games are getting away from that these days. I think top of the order makes good sense when looking at the bigger picture. It's the least fiddly. I suppose more "gritty" games could hold to start of turn, since Defense Tests are free.
-
Is it at the start of the round for all characters?
This.
You are assumed to have all your actions refreshed at the start of each combat turn. That way you can for example use your Major action on an Anytime action if you like in case you have less initiative than your attacker. They reference this in a couple of places.
Here is one:
SR6 p. 41 Intercept (A)
If an opponent comes within Close attack range, you may go out of Initiative order and make an Attack action as long as you have both a Minor and a Major Action still available in this round (because you either are after the attacking player in Initiative order or you deferred some of your actions).
If I can "roll to defend" though, can I spend a Minor to add an extra dice pool into the mix?
You cannot spend a Minor Anytime Action if you are currently considered surprised (you already quoted the relevant rule).
Unlike previous edition you still get to oppose the attack (in previous edition you were considered "unaware of attack" and the attack turned into a simple test rather than an opposed test, which was often kinda devastating for the target)
-
Something I dislike about this interpretation is that you could easily get into places where you have a few points leftover you can't spend...
That's not true. You can end up with a few points that you don't want to spend on what they can get you, but because you can spend as little as 1 Karma and get something, you are always able to spend all your points.
I agree that there likely isn't any harm in letting a player hang on to a few karma from chargen though. Just like there isn't any harm in insisting they spend every last point.
-
No.
What a wonderfully robust and well-phrased rebuttal. You've convinced me - rules that literally do not appear in the book apply, even if somehow a person has never heard of such a rule because this particular book is their first experience of the system. I can't believe I ever thought otherwise.
-
While I do agree that the curt response from Xenon was unnecessary, I do want to point out that earlier in the thread we agreed, and we still do, on what is now being discussed.
I made this post on the first page, which I think illustrates that RAW does in fact tell you when actions are allocated, and it is at the start of the Combat Round, not the Player Turn (capitalization mine for emphasis): https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=30286.msg527345#msg527345
-
rules that literally do not appear in the book apply
Shadowrun rules list things that are allowed.
Shadowrun rules don't list things that are not allowed.
For customization karma to carry over post chargen there must first exist an explicit rule that describe/allow this. There isn't, hence it is not allowed.
In SR5 there was an explicit rule that described that you were allowed to bring left over karma into the game. It also explained the cap on the number of points you were allowed to bring with you. In SR5 it was allowed (within limits).
In SR6 there is no such explicit rule. In SR6 it is not allowed. If this is not intended, then it will be fixed in a future errata (but at this point I have no reason to believe that this would not be intended).
-
Shadowrun rules list things that are allowed.
Correct. The rules list that you are allowed 50 karma at character creation (give or take qualities).
For customization karma to carry over post chargen there must first exist an explicit rule that describe/allow this. There isn't, hence it is not allowed.
In SR5 there was an explicit rule that described that you were allowed to bring left over karma into the game. It also explained the cap on the number of points you were allowed to bring with you. In SR5 it was allowed (within limits).
The explicit rule that describes/allows carrying Karma to post chargen is the one that says you get 50 karma.
It doesn't say they go away. There is no reason to believe they go away.
Just like the rules don't say that the gear you buy automatically goes away after you use it on a job, so that doesn't happen either.
The SR5 rule you mention does not an "enabler" rule providing you with an option you wouldn't otherwise have given the language of other rules, it's a "limiter" rule stopping something that would otherwise be allowed to do.
That's how "list things that are allowed" rule systems work.
-
'It's chargen. You are creating your character. Spend it or lose it.' A GM has every ability to argue that and put their foot down.
Clarification is needed. But 'the rules don't forbid abusive case X explicitly so I'll abuse that' is a very poor argument when a GM can veto any character.
-
I will point out that there is a cap on nuyen that can be carried onward at that point. As there is a nuyen - karma exchange value in charge I take the assumption of a limit as given. But not stated directly
-
The rules list that you are allowed 50 karma at character creation (give or take qualities).
50 Customization Karma...which you spend on four different things (skill advancement, attribute advancement, qualities or resources) at step four of character creation (which is conveniently named Spend Customization Karma)
There is no reason to believe they go away.
There is no reason to believe that customization karma must be spend while you are actually customizing your character?
There is no reason to believe that since there are no rules allowing you to carryover customization karma you cannot do it?
Interesting...
(I can't really say I agree with your reading or on your interpretation on how the rule structure in Shadowrun works; but it is your table, your rules).
That's how "list things that are allowed" rule systems work.
There is a list of things you can do with your customization karma. It contain 4 things and the list does not seem to be open ended. Carryover customization karma is not one of the four things you can do with them. It used to be a thing in previous edition, but it was also only a thing because there was a rule explicitly allowing you to carryover (a maximum of 7 in this case).
That because there is no explicit rule forbidding you from carryover karma (rather than an explicit rule to allow you to carry over karma... which would follow the normal rule structure of Shadowrun and which was also precisely what previous editions had) you think there is reason to believe that you are still allowed to carryover up to 70 customization karma after character generation anyway?
That mean that, according to your reading at least, I can start a game at your table by initiating up to 5 times in a row?
Since you will also not find any explicit rule forbidding you from initiating during chargen it must, according to your reading at least, mean that it is allowed to also initiate during chargen?
I will point out that there is a cap on nuyen that can be carried onward at that point. As there is a nuyen - karma exchange value in charge I take the assumption of a limit as given. But not stated directly
If the intent is that you should be allowed to carryover customization karma in SR6 then there need to be an explicit rule allowing it (and in that case the rules as they are written would need an official errata). This is how the rule structure in Shadowrun work. In the previous edition you were explicitly allowed to to carryover a maximum of 7 karma. In this edition you are not.
If the intent is that you should not be allowed to carryover customization karma in SR6 then the rules as they are written are correct (and they are not in a need of errata). Having said that, since at least one person find this ambiguous it would not hurt if there was something added to clarify that you are not allowed to carryover customization karma in this edition.
-
Everyone who's saying the question of carryover Karma deserves clarification is correct.
-
'It's chargen. You are creating your character. Spend it or lose it.' A GM has every ability to argue that and put their foot down.
Clarification is needed. But 'the rules don't forbid abusive case X explicitly so I'll abuse that' is a very poor argument when a GM can veto any character.
I fail to see what is abusive by saving the karma for later. While it allows a wider range of things to spend it on you know have training times to deal with. trying to get people to finesse their character down to the last penny doesn't seem like a good intent with all the various odd costs. I'd lean more towards that being abusive to the players by the GM.
-
50 Customization Karma...which you spend on four different things (skill advancement, attribute advancement, qualities or resources) at step four of character creation (which is conveniently named Spend Customization Karma)
I'm just gonna say that there is nothing inherent in any of the words you emphasize that says it has to be done now.
I'm not saying you're wrong about the intent of the rules to not carry stuff forward from character creation.
I'm just saying that linguistically, there's nothing present that actually communicates that you can't as an example save 2 of your customization karma because you don't want what it can buy you.
Anyone reading the current rules and coming to the belief that keeping customization karma for later use is A) intuiting the intent (whether accurate or not is unknown without clarification), or B) applying rules they know from a source other than the current rules.
-
The rule structure in Shadowrun is that it will allow you to do things.
If there is no explicit rule that allow you to do a thing then it is by default forbidden.
While this is probably quite often confusing for new players, this is how the rule structure in Shadowrun look like.
This mean that, by default, you are not allowed to spend your customization karma to initiate, submerge or on attributes, skills, qualities, spells, binding foci or taking them with you after character generation or converting them to resources or buying contacts anything else you can think about.
The only reason you are allowed to spend them on skill advancement, attribute advancement, qualities and resources is because of this single sentence:
SR6 p. 66 Step Four: Spend Customization Karma
The points are spent on skill or attribute advancement, as well as additional funds to get those last gear pieces you might have missed or an additional quality (though the limit of six qualities still applies).
The only reason you were allowed to take left over karma with you after character generation in 5th edition was because of this single sentence:
SR5 p. 98 Step Seven: Spending Your Leftover Karma
If a player wishes to keep some Karma for use later in the game, she may do so, though the maximum carryover is 7 Karma.
In SR6, however, this does not seem to be allowed.
There is no rule forbidding you from saving customization karma post chargen in SR6, but since there is no rule allowing you to do it it is by default forbidden.
The only reason you were allowed to spend left over karma on Contacts during character generation in 5th edition (beyond the free Charisma x 3 additional Karma that was 'earmarked for Contacts) was because of this:
SR5 p. 98 Contacts
Every character receives free Karma to spend on their initial contacts. This Karma is equal to a Character’s Charisma rating x 3.
SR5 p. 98 Step Seven: Spending Your Leftover Karma
Any remaining Karma can now be invested in smoothing out any rough edges, picking up or improving skills, buying additional spells, acquiring bound spirits, bonding foci to be used at the start of the game, purchasing contacts, etc. Refer to the Additional Purchases and Restrictions table to note any special restrictions on purchasing items with Karma.
SR5 p. 98 Additional Purchases and Restrictions table
Item: Contacts
Karma Cost: 1 Karma for each point of Connections Rating, 1 Karma for each Loyalty Rating (minimum Karma requirement = 2)
Restrictions: A single contact may not have more than 7 Karma spent on them at character creation. There are no limits on how many contacts the character may purchase
In SR6, however, contacts is not something you are allowed to spend Customization Karma on and instead you are restricted to this:
SR6 p. 66-67 Contacts
During character creation, you have a total of Charisma x 6 points to spend on Connection and Loyalty ratings for your contacts, and at this point, neither rating can be higher than the character’s Charisma.
There is no rule forbidding you from spending customization karma on contacts (or initiation or binding foci or whatever you can think of), but since there is no rule allowing you to do it it is by default forbidden.
-
OK. I think we are just going around in circles here (trying to convince someone on the internet is often futile) ;)
I don't really care if you allow your players to bring up to 70 customization karma with them post chargen or if you allow them to initiate up to 5 times during chargen. It is your table and it is your rules.
(but if you are serious about trying to understand how the rule structure work in Shadowrun I urge you to read through my post a few times - I guarantee that it will help you resolving other Shadowrun-related rules in the future)
For now at least, let us just agree to disagree.
Have a nice day sir :)
-
We are definitely going in circles, and both trying to help the other understand the structure of language as it applies to rules.
We just disagree on the detail of what the book saying "you have these points" and "you can spend them on these things" means in regards to the unsaid idea of having those points and spending them on those things later.
I will always stand by that the rules of a game, being a list of things that you are allowed to do, must actually say something for it to be true. So rules saying "you have X" but not being accompanied by "and X expires at this point" means X doesn't expire.