[Hobbes]

Some of those archetypes really aren't very good. I'm not even talking about the whole 'optimal' thing either, as there are some in the core book that flat don't follow the rules.

I heard somewhere once that they were actually made before character gen rules were completed, and thus it isn't possible that they could conform to them. Seems super lazy and shitty on the part of catalyst, but that seems to be their publishing MO. Bad editing is like a running bad joke with them.

Yes, some minor rules were not finalized before the Archetypes were.  And some outright errors were made.  *shrug* Gotta write somethings before others.  And, if you ask the guy who created several of them, the art work was really the primary driver on the characters builds.  It's actually a bit of a challenge to create a character for a broad audience where most of the primary mechanical choices were made by an artist. 

[FST_Gemstar]

Off topic-

Marcus: What is Logic used for in Astral Combat besides defense tests? The Logic = Agility conversion doesn't match the stated rules of Willpower + Astral combat being the combat test (instead of using Logic + Astral Combat to better simulate the more typical physical combat rules).

[ZombieAcePilot]

Off topic-

Marcus: What is Logic used for in Astral Combat besides defense tests? The Logic = Agility conversion doesn't match the stated rules of Willpower + Astral combat being the combat test (instead of using Logic + Astral Combat to better simulate the more typical physical combat rules).

Willpower contributes to condition monitors and is used to resist magic, thus it makes sense to make it the body analog. The statement of what willpower represents made more sense for astral combat than logic. You could almost call astral combat a battle of wills (as in willpower) or spirit. Specific trumps general though according to rules, so it was easy to have the cake and eat it too. You still need an agility for other skills you might want to use in the astral, which is where logic has its place.

[FST_Gemstar]

I've been trying to think of some - what skills in astral would require agility (not combat if willpower is the linked attribute, not palming, not gymnastics, not lock-picking... maybe sneaking to avoid astral detection or maybe escape artist to get out of a spirit grip)?

[Marcus]

Off topic-

Marcus: What is Logic used for in Astral Combat besides defense tests? The Logic = Agility conversion doesn't match the stated rules of Willpower + Astral combat being the combat test (instead of using Logic + Astral Combat to better simulate the more typical physical combat rules).

I thought it was still agility Gemstar. So that's my bad. *shrug* To many editions, I'll go re-read that section and go see what that willpower was.

[Marcus]

Ok Logic is reaction.

Opposed Astral Combat + Willpower [Astral] v. Intuition + Logic Test or Opposed Astral Combat + Willpower [Accuracy] v. Intuition + Logic Test.

Willpower was 4, so the total pool would have been 9 instead of 6. A little better, but still not effective.

[FST_Gemstar]

I've been trying to make an astral samurai work and the table about converting physical stats to astral stats has confused me, as it doesn't seem to correspond much with the stated rules. The table says Agility = Logic and Reaction = Intuition. However, the combat rules are as you describe. I like that, as my usually psyched up characters get a nice bonus to defense tests without having to invest so much in Logic. I have another thread about this, but I really don't know what Agility tests one would do in astral space. You can move in any direction and basically limitless speed, you don't use agility for combat, there is no gear to steal or plant nor you don't use standard sneaking tests to avoid detection. If people think of anything I do want to know.

It does make want to think up at least as McGuffins wholly astral gear (like perhaps stats for a shamanic mask that can only be found on the astral plane) or ways to make other kind of physical skill foci that aren't weapons nor qi foci (armor foci, lockpick/key foci for specific astral locks that also add dice to lockpicking in the physical,  compass foci for when you lose your way in astral space that also help with navigation in the physical world, artisan foci for helping create astral art and a tool to help make physical art [magic paintbrush], etc.). Perhaps it's moving magicians too much into adept territory, but it might make astral space a more appealing place to spend game time.

[Marcus]

I've been trying to make an astral samurai work and the table about converting physical stats to astral stats has confused me, as it doesn't seem to correspond much with the stated rules. The table says Agility = Logic and Reaction = Intuition. However, the combat rules are as you describe. I like that, as my usually psyched up characters get a nice bonus to defense tests without having to invest so much in Logic. I have another thread about this, but I really don't know what Agility tests one would do in astral space. You can move in any direction and basically limitless speed, you don't use agility for combat, there is gear to steal or plant nor you don't use standard sneaking tests to avoid detection. If people think of anything I do want to know.

It does make want to think up at last as McGuffins wholly astral gear (like perhaps stats for a shamanic mask that can only be found on the astral plane) or ways to make other kind of physical skill foci that aren't weapons nor qi foci (armor foci, lockpick/key foci for specific astral locks that also add dice to lockpicking in the physical,  compass foci for when you lose your way in astral space that also help with navigation in the physical world, artisan foci for helping create astral art and a tool to help make physical art [magic paintbrush], etc.). Perhaps it moving magicians too much into adept territory, but it might make astral space a more appealing place to spend game time.

I like all your ideas here, I messed around with the armor foci awhile back, and I think your concepts is really cool. I did reply in that thread, though I don't think it was very applicable to your point. I'll take a longer look, and see if I can come up with useful argument. I'm a huge fan of the Aetherology book. It's super fun, and it's something I think should be developed as astral space should be at-least as interesting as the matrix.
 

[Glyph]

Shadowjack, I think the reason your use of the term "prime runner" is confusing people, is because that term has been previously used, in several iterations of the rules, to refer to the elite among runners, before SR5 used that term in a different way to describe NPCs.

The archetypes... are kind of a mess.  If you use them, be sure to check out the thread which fixes the errors in them, such as the street samurai being more than 200K over in resources, or the combat mage having an Edge of 2 which should be 7.  They are also a bit wonky because a lot of them were built with SR4 starting skill limits, and possibly a lack of knowledge of how the connection rating went up to 12 (a connection: 2 fixer?  What?).  And as someone said already, they had to match the artwork, so you have an ork ganger with a cyberarm with worse stats than his natural ones, a street shaman with a Strength of 5 because his picture shows a dude with muscles, etc.  Don't get me wrong, they are still good for quick PCs or NPCs, but with so many factors skewing them, I would not use them as any kind of approximation of what characters are supposed to look like.

[Jayde Moon]

This thread is amazing.

[falar]

This thread is amazing.

It's beautiful. It's everything I love about forums.

[Shadowjack]

@Marcus: I have already made several statements contrary to your declaration that the Stormwind Fallacy is in effect. The thing I don't like about this concept is that every time someone brings it up they also seem to ignore any evidence against it. I have explicitly stated, even on multiple occasions, that an optimizer can be a good roleplayer. I have also stated that I can and will create very powerful characters if I choose to do so. I do not make my characters weak just to be different, in fact, I suspect some of them could trump highly optimized charact ers on the job. Your eyes have either passed over all such remarks of you have chosen to ignore them. The Stormwind Fallacy is not a fact, it is an opinion. I can quote different theories and declare them to be factual but you are still allowed to reject them. Furthermore, you seem to be assuming that I don't understand how to optimize and that I should broaden my awareness, again, I have already stated that I am capable of it and did it in my earlier years. I also think it's a fairly simple thing to do for anyone who takes a little time to learn the methods and players do it in all rpgs.

[Gatlack]

@Marcus: I have already made several statements contrary to your declaration that the Stormwind Fallacy is in effect. The thing I don't like about this concept is that every time someone brings it up they also seem to ignore any evidence against it. I have explicitly stated, even on multiple occasions, that an optimizer can be a good roleplayer. I have also stated that I can and will create very powerful characters if I choose to do so. I do not make my characters weak just to be different, in fact, I suspect some of them could trump highly optimized charact ers on the job. Your eyes have either passed over all such remarks of you have chosen to ignore them. The Stormwind Fallacy is not a fact, it is an opinion. I can quote different theories and declare them to be factual but you are still allowed to reject them. Furthermore, you seem to be assuming that I don't understand how to optimize and that I should broaden my awareness, again, I have already stated that I am capable of it and did it in my earlier years. I also think it's a fairly simple thing to do for anyone who takes a little time to learn the methods and players do it in all rpgs.

Either you don't know what a fallacy is, or you don't know what the stormwind fallacy is saying. It is not an opinion, nor can there be any evidence against it because it is a logical fallacy. You would have to disprove it, which would mean in this case to create a causal link between its negated statements.

[Shadowjack]

@Marcus: I have already made several statements contrary to your declaration that the Stormwind Fallacy is in effect. The thing I don't like about this concept is that every time someone brings it up they also seem to ignore any evidence against it. I have explicitly stated, even on multiple occasions, that an optimizer can be a good roleplayer. I have also stated that I can and will create very powerful characters if I choose to do so. I do not make my characters weak just to be different, in fact, I suspect some of them could trump highly optimized charact ers on the job. Your eyes have either passed over all such remarks of you have chosen to ignore them. The Stormwind Fallacy is not a fact, it is an opinion. I can quote different theories and declare them to be factual but you are still allowed to reject them. Furthermore, you seem to be assuming that I don't understand how to optimize and that I should broaden my awareness, again, I have already stated that I am capable of it and did it in my earlier years. I also think it's a fairly simple thing to do for anyone who takes a little time to learn the methods and players do it in all rpgs.

Either you don't know what a fallacy is, or you don't know what the stormwind fallacy is saying. It is not an opinion, nor can there be any evidence against it because it is a logical fallacy. You would have to disprove it, which would mean in this case to create a causal link between its negated statements.

When I said "evidence" I was referring to the fact that I stated that optimizers can roleplay well. Why bring up the Stormwind Fallacy in the first place when I have, on many posts, said things that imply that I'm not doing what it claims? I'm not sure if you read the entire thread but Marcus seemed to bring it up based on his assumptions of my opnion on the skill of optimizers.I have seen many groups play and my statement was that the power gaming crowd tends to focus much less on roleplaying. That is based on experienced and as I said before, feel free to tune into all the Shadowrun Twitch streams and you will see people power gaming and talking out of character the entire time, there is very little "roleplaying" unless you consider piloting your pile of stats around the battlefield and rolling dice to be roleplaying, I however consider that to be game elements.

None of this would have sprung up had Marcus carefully read what I had written, I did not say that optimizers are incapable of roleplaying. In basketball, there is a common opinion that black players can jump much higher than white players. As a white person that played against many black players I found this to be very accurate, but every once in a while there was a black player who couldn't jump as high as me. That's how I look at "optimizers", they are usually much more focused on the game elements and pay little to no attention to the roleplaying side of the game. People can get angry at that assertion but it's not like I'm basing it off of nothing. This is how many groups start out in the hobby and very few tend to break out of that practice. This is definitely not exclusive to Shadowrun although it is much more prominent in Shadowrun. People see skills like Perform and Artisan and actually think they are worthless. Clearly the writers don't agree with that. Clearly the writers think that all equipment and spells have a place in the game. All of these things are tools for roleplaying, it's not a competition and the GM can jack up the challenge of the game as much as he likes. My entire gripe with optimizers is that a lot of them advise people to dump things that aren't powerful, and I think that's drek.

[Herr Brackhaus]

Either you don't know what a fallacy is, or you don't know what the stormwind fallacy is saying. It is not an opinion, nor can there be any evidence against it because it is a logical fallacy. You would have to disprove it, which would mean in this case to create a causal link between its negated statements.

Heh, made me chuckle. Somewhat ironically, this is a great example of a formal fallacy in and of itself. But keep trying; next you'll tell me Godwin's Law is an actual law.