[incrdbil]

I've been debating my initial House rules, and the first one I'm thinking of is tinkering with success  limits. I wanted to see if anyone else is doing the same, and if they have any actual play experience to relate.

One thought is to keep them, but simply say successes above limits take 2 rolled successes to gain one more net success.

For calculation of limits, I have been thinking of allowing characters to choose their highest characteristic to  be the base portion of a formula. (For example, for physical limits, a character could decide to use Agility instead of Strength).

Adding limitations to a skill based on the characteristic they default link to--this creating a lot more limit scores

Eliminate Gear Limits

Or there's the easiest option: drop limits altogether.

I'm interested in any variation on limits you've tried in your games.

[Ryo]

The Limits exist purely to eliminate the issue of dumping an attribute that would otherwise be considered worthless. The most common dumpstats in SR4 were Strength, Logic and Charisma, so its no surprise to me at all that those three are the primary contributors to the respective limits.

I personally see no reason to eliminate limits, or alter their function at all, except to make the guy who dumped his Strength to 1 feel better about his decision every time he rolls Sneaking.

[All4BigGuns]

Limits aren't really that bad, as one would have to be nearing the top ten percentile in the world with a particular skill to really be bumping up against the limit all that much.

That said, when it comes to discouraging dump stats, it wasn't all that necessary, as all it takes to discourage such is a GM that will look at the offender and say "Tell me why your Strength, Logic and Charisma are all still sitting at 1. And it better be a damn good reason."

[DigitalZombie]

I dont think neither social nor mental limits are cutting many successes away normally. Thats because if the character only has logic 1, then he rarely has any high logic related dicepools anyway, making the limit a very small factor. Physical limit is different, as sneaking and palming are under that one, and I usually envision many sneaky characters to have low body and strength, with high agility and reaction. But oddly enough trolls are "better" at sneaking and palming than the body 2 agi 6 str2 guy so I agree with OP that in that case the limit might be a bit off.
But I think it would be very unwise to get rid of them completely. spells and cyberdecks would work vastly different without them. And I like the limit on weapons, it gives a more nuanced weapon world, where there is both "finesse" weapons and pure "brutal" ones. So not every character would be better off buying "same best gun" as it would be different for each character.

If you REALLY want to choose 1, Id go for the first one you suggested.

[GiraffeShaman]

Keep in mind it's one of the functions of Edge to break those limits. And high Edge characters are rewarded by it. Also, Edge refresh is put completely in a GM's hands in this edition. You can literally refresh Edge every  battle if you wish.

[incrdbil]

I'm not quite comfortable with how certain limits affect gameplay.  I'm very happy with how they work on the mental side and social side, but I'm not quite sold on the combat side.  It may be the gear book will come out though and have all sorts of customization options that will enable players to raise the accuracy rating of weapons (customized grips, match quality weapons etc).

Of course, a flat accuracy rating is simpler than individual weapon dice pool modifiers at range bands to represent more or less accurate weapons.
I'm going to give it a few more sessions. 

Maybe it was just a fluke, but the last game I ran I saved time by using pre-generated roll results to tell the player not to roll his declared action because the defender had already beaten his accuracy limit.

I'm leaning now towards allowing successes over the limit as above, but maybe carefully start off at a 3/1 or 2/1 trade in ratio, so its still very desirable to have the better quality weapon.

[RHat]

Maybe it was just a fluke, but the last game I ran I saved time by using pre-generated roll results to tell the player not to roll his declared action because the defender had already beaten his accuracy limit.

Never do that.  Never.  Not once.  Just because the defender has beaten his Accuracy does not mean it is a foregone conclusion - he still has the option to spend Edge and thus bypass his Limit.

[All4BigGuns]

As I said, the chances of actually running into problems with one's limit--be it Physical, Social, Mental or Accuracy--aren't really all that high for a well-rounded character.

If you're really concerned with defense tests getting 'auto success', just apply the Physical Limit to them*. It really should apply there anyway.

* Or, if you think that Limit will be too high for a defender, do something kind of unusual and apply that Limit to defense tests just with it being calculated only with natural (before magical, cyber or bio augments) attributes for that purpose (and that purpose only).

[Michael Chandra]

I dont think neither social nor mental limits are cutting many successes away normally. Thats because if the character only has logic 1, then he rarely has any high logic related dicepools anyway, making the limit a very small factor.

Except that we also have Intuition-based Mental Skills.

The rough estimate is that you want your limit to be half your dicepool for 10% to lose 1+ hits.

[incrdbil]

Maybe it was just a fluke, but the last game I ran I saved time by using pre-generated roll results to tell the player not to roll his declared action because the defender had already beaten his accuracy limit.

Never do that.  Never.  Not once.  Just because the defender has beaten his Accuracy does not mean it is a foregone conclusion - he still has the option to spend Edge and thus bypass his Limit.

He can certainly opt to use edge at that point. (and this would be considered after roll edge, I don't reveal anything until the player has committed to not using edge prior to his chance to roll).  He'd make a roll, count the successes, then roll the failures.  No reason not to tell him that though, and save him the time rolling dice if he doesn't choose to use the edge.

[Ryo]

How exactly are your defenders automatically beating their Accuracy Limit? The average gun has an accuracy between 4 and 7, which can easily be raised to 6 and 9 with a smartgun. I've personally never seen a player with an Accuracy lower than 6, and the majority of the sample grunts only have around 6 or 8 dice in their entire pool. Did he roll nothing but successes?

[Michael Chandra]

He'd make a roll, count the successes, then roll the failures.

To break the limit, Edge must be used to add exploding dice, rerolling failures does not let you break the limit.

[Rythymhack]

Now I could see the possibility of an automatic failure if the defender has more succesess that the attacker has dice. But that seems like a GM error if that occurs (or REALLY bad jusgement of the player).

[All4BigGuns]

In a somewhat unrelated but remotely similar vein, the advent of Limits really makes things so that not having the 'Rule of Six' at all times is rather silly. Considering that the majority of rolls have some sort of Limit attached to them and that spending Edge is the only way to completely ignore Limits, there was no real reason to continue restricting the 'Rule of Six' in such a manner.

[incrdbil]

He'd make a roll, count the successes, then roll the failures.

To break the limit, Edge must be used to add exploding dice, rerolling failures does not let you break the limit.

Ah, true. after they commit to not using pre-roll Edge, limits are solid, and the defense test can be rolled first.