[Coyote]

that's good but it only moves the problem to Mystic Adepts make better Physical Adepts than Physical Adepts do.

I'm not so sure about that. I think that the accurate description is that MysAds make better CHARACTERS than PhysAds do. But in terms of what a PhysAd does, whether it's a social Adept or a combat Adept, it is possible to reach the augmentation maximums without spells, have the same skills in your interest as a MysAd would, etc. What a MysAd adds to the build is something that's outside the PhysAd's purview. For example, a MysAd could heal and cast combat spells.But that's not what a PhysAd does, so it's not reasonable to say that the MysAd is a better PhysAd. I personally think that the flexibility allowed by spells is both great (for the character) and too great (for the game), but someone running a PhysAd is doing so because they want social abilities and/or combat ability, not spellcasting. A MysAd is not doing that with much better ability, and while they have some minor gains (the Influence spell for social-oriented Adepts, for example), they have to spend a lot more Karma on the spells and spell-oriented foci, and on the magic skills, and have to split their Initiation grades between power points and spell-oriented Initiation abilities. As long as you're willing to run a character with a focused build, a PhysAd is fine.

[Hobbes]

Stat increases are very expensive for Physical Adepts, either in PP or in Action Economy/Drain.  For Mysads stat increases are comparatively cheap, either a sustained spell or an Alchemy prep.  Please note, "Comparatively" cheap.

A Physical Adept can be Fast, Agile, Dodgey, or Stabby.  Pick two, two and half if you're willing to optimize the hell out a build.  MySads can hit all four if they're willing to blow off a fair bit of "Mage" stuff. 

[adzling]

meh, you're all ignoring the problem.

for example if you build a physical adept and mystic adept you can make the physical adept do everything the physical adept does.
At worst he does it at parity.
If built well he could well be better.
Then toss in he gets to also summon spirits, cast spells etc.

What is the point of the physical adept then?

Reaver's post highlights this, his player built for general utility rather than focussing on one thing.
If he had his mystic adept would at worst be just as good as the PA at that one thing, but he would also get a smattering of spells and spirits putting him at significant power advantage over a pure PA.

I've made my point and I don't want to totally threadjack so I'll stop right now.
If you want to discuss MA OP more let's create a separate thread.

[Rosa]

If Mysads dominate so much, then yes the rules as they are are partly to blame but then so are the GM's because the GM's have been handed extra tools to counter characters that rely too much on sustained spells and spirits, background Count and enemy dispelling are just two of them, but probably the two most effective in this situation. Physads and mundanes on the other hand operate more or less like normal in these situations.

The thing is, this balance issue that so many talk about is partly our fault as well for not using the games balancing tools enough then. Seriously an eveil minded GM could make it practically impossible to play a mage or mysad if he/she so desired by using nothing more than the games balancing tools. Of course such a game would hardly be fun in the long run, but it does illustrate that the Whole issue about balancing is more than a rule question, it is also a gaming style question.

As i said in an earlier post, it is an illusion to think a game like this can be totally balanced right from chargen, magic  does tend to screw with game balance and its like that in every game i've ever played, but shadowrun actually gives us more tools to balance characters during gameplay than any other game i've played especially magic characters.

Oh and Adzling is correct, this thread has become somewhat derailed.

[PJ]

Then going back to skills, what do folks think of turning Perception and Etiquette into Attribute only tests?

Perception could be Int+Wil (+Log for Observe in Detail).
Etiquette could be Cha+Int.

Replace Intimidation with Etiquette in the Influence Group.

For gear, spells, etc that increased Perception Limits, have them reduce Threshold by a similar number.  Same could apply for Etiquette.

This wouldn't break the game really for any character types, and would potentially free up a few skill points for some builds.

[DragginSPADE]

Then going back to skills, what do folks think of turning Perception and Etiquette into Attribute only tests?

Perception could be Int+Wil (+Log for Observe in Detail).
Etiquette could be Cha+Int.

Replace Intimidation with Etiquette in the Influence Group.

For gear, spells, etc that increased Perception Limits, have them reduce Threshold by a similar number.  Same could apply for Etiquette.

This wouldn't break the game really for any character types, and would potentially free up a few skill points for some builds.

I dunno.  I'd be all about some skill consolidation, but I played in an era when Perception was a straight Intelligence roll.  It saved a few skill points in character creation, but let to the hilarious effect of most combat monsters being genius level smart.  Paying attention to your surroundings and knowing how to interact with people without pissing them off really are things that require some experience and/or training to get good at in real life. 

Seriously, in 1-3rd ed Shadowrun almost every street sam I saw had an Intelligence of 5 or 6.  It became a running joke in our group for a while.   If I was going to consolidate skills again I'd leave in some of the new ones that make sense like Perception and just make some of the skill Groups back into the single skills that they used to be. 

[PJ]

I started with 1E too.  The Street Sam archetype had Intelligence 5, but there were only six Attributes then.

With all the changes in 5E though, I thought it made sense.  I looked at the new Ork Street Sam; he has no Perception!  Then I looked up Surprise tests.  It's a Reaction + Intuition roll (which makes sense; while noticing threats is important, it's more important you are able to react quickly to a deadly environment).  That's when I thought about just making it an Attribute test.

Same with Etiquette.  Reading the Skill description, it could just as easily become a Knowledge that assists in situations.  Same with Perception; a Knowledge that represents formal training of innate instincts.  Since I'm on this band wagon, I'd also like to see First Aid merged into Medicine, and the surgery aspects of Medicine become a Knowledge skill.

I agree that some of the Skill Groups should be combined into single Skills (I also think 9 should be the maximum, but meh).  Other RPGs seem to have made the transition from having many specialized skills to fewer generalized ones.

[Mirikon]

Too many folks go in assuming you have to have 6's in appropriate skills to even be playable, and that you have to have high attributes.  But a character with 8-10 dice pool for their primary skill or two is supposed to be a skilled, viable character.  YOu don't need to start at 12+ and work your way up.

However, this depends a good deal on your GM and what he's throwing at you as well.  Your skills only need to be proportionate to the enemy.  So if you're feeling overwhelmed or like you're not useful because you don't have enough dice to regularly beat your opponents and challenges, talk to the GM, because he may simply be setting your thresholds and enemies at too high a level.

One of the things about Shadowrun rewards the super minmaxy side of things way more is how character creation rules and character advancement rules differ.  Taking your Troll with Exceptional Strength and Genetic Optimization Strength and advancing Strength from 10 to 12 in play costs 115 karma.  That same advance in character creation costs two attribute points.

Advancing Charisma from 1 to 3 in play costs 25 karma in play, but it costs those same 2 attribute points in character creation.  Much cheaper and more practical to start with strength twelve, then buy up charisma later.

Skills are in a similar spot.

I recommend starting at around fifteen dice in your main skill not because you need that many dice to be effective, nor from an idea of working up from there, but because it's so much easier to start really good at your specialty, and then build that broader ability base out in play than it is to start out spread out and build up into a specialty.

Also, I like having my main base covered, then spending my advancement however I feel like and however feels appropriate for the campaign.

This is one of the primary problems with the karma system as written. The scaling costs make it so the system actively rewards minmaxing at chargen. Compare this to other points-based systems, such as M&M, BESM, GURPS, Champions, and more. Going from one rank to three in a skill or ability costs the same as going from eight ranks to eleven. This makes it so that it is easier for players to actually branch out early on, and build up things later, as you don't have to spend four runs worth of Karma to get 1 extra die.