[Shadowhack]

I was always under the assumption that racial qualities are free and don't count toward karma points. Is this true or am I wrong?

[ZeroSum]

RAW doesn't actually state this either way. I cannot imagine that RAI is that you have to pay for them, though; they are included in your Priority pick.

[Shadowhack]

That is pretty much what I thought too. It would make playing a human a lot more attractive though. You would start with 50 points instead of whatever you had to start with as another metatype.

[Michael Chandra]

Eh, that would nerf metahumans too unfairly since they'd be able to get far less qualities (a Troll would then be capped at 3!). I'm just houseruling 'humans get 5 extra karma to use in the quality phase, still capped at max 20 net karma so max 70 customization karma'.

[Xenon]

Metahumans that don't get their racial qualities for free are actually very balanced compared to Humans

Metathumans still have two or three attributes with higher maximum ratings
And they also still have the option to spend adjustment points on said two or three attributes

While Humans have a slightly higher racial edge attribute
But perhaps more importantly they also get to freely choose all their positive qualities

Does it actually say somewhere that metahumans are supposed to get their racial qualities for free...?



Metahumans that get their racial qualities for free are mechanically clearly superior to Humans
(to compensate we either need to house rule a benefit for humans or hose rule a penalty for metahumans)

[Michael Chandra]

How is it balanced if you get extra gear costs that are only useful if you maximize your Strength or Body? What you're saying is nobody should ever pick Troll if they're not maximizing one of those. The exact opposite of what they meant to achieve with allowing metatypes at Priority E.

There is literally nothing supporting that racial qualities actually cost karma. So the question about where it says they're for free, is insincere, since it assumes an absence can only mean 1 thing. I can easily counter that with 'where does it say racial qualities are normal qualities and cost karma?'

[Xenon]

No need to be so hostile about it. It is a new edition and none of us really know the rules as intended, yet.

You seem to agree that metahumans are mechanically stronger than humans since you are prepared to house rule a compensation to humans in order to balance them out.


What I am saying is that from a game balance perspective it would be more balanced if the racial qualities are not free than if they are free (but the most balanced result is probably something in between, maybe that qualities are free but still count towards the max number of quality limit or even that humans are compensated in some other way as you are suggesting).

If metahumans get free qualities then they will have all the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

There is not really any mechanical reason to play a human over say... an elf.
While there are a lot of game mechanical reasons to play an elf over a human.
Where I come from, this is not balanced.


If they pay for their starting qualities (or if their starting qualities count towards the maximum limit)....

...then there are still reasons to play an elf over a human.
But there are also suddenly strong reasons to play a human over an elf.
This is more balanced than the alternative.

[skalchemist]

There is literally nothing supporting that racial qualities actually cost karma. So the question about where it says they're for free, is insincere, since it assumes an absence can only mean 1 thing. I can easily counter that with 'where does it say racial qualities are normal qualities and cost karma?'

I agree with your interpretation, Michael. 

However, the fact that the racial traits are called "qualities" and are listed with all the other qualities in the same list is a point in favor of "they cost Karma", I would think.  Like, if those qualities had their costs listed as "X if not a dwarf, free if dwarf" or similar it would be much clearer.  So to say that the question is insincere seems a bit strong to me.

I don't really care about the "balance" question one way or the other, but I do think that this is an area of "edition blindness".  My suspicion is that racial traits were converted into qualities to streamline and unify the system and to make them available as purchases with Karma for people not of that race, but then no one realized this would raise the question of whether everyone had to pay for them.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

My personal belief is that the intent is all of the following:

1) metatypes get their racial qualities for no karma
2) these racial qualities do not count against the limit of 6 qualities total
3) since they have a karma cost, anyone who doesn't get them for free may purchase them.  Yep, you can have elves with armored troll skin, humans with thermographic vision, and etc.  I blame SURGE.

Messing around with these assumptions would of course dis-incentivize metatypes compared to humans.  If that's your roll, then have at it!

[ZeroSum]

If metahumans get free qualities then they will have all the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

There is not really any mechanical reason to play a human over say... an elf.
While there are a lot of game mechanical reasons to play an elf over a human.
Where I come from, this is not balanced.

If they pay for their starting qualities (or if their starting qualities count towards the maximum limit)....

...then there are still reasons to play an elf over a human.
But there are also suddenly strong reasons to play a human over an elf.
This is more balanced than the alternative.

I definitely agree with this stance. It hadn't struck me until you broke it down like this that the human decker I created would objectively have been better off as a Dwarf, Elf, Ork, or Troll if racial qualities did not cost karma or did not count towards the quality limit, because he would be getting one or more free qualities as any one of those metatypes.

[Michael Chandra]

No need to be so hostile about it. It is a new edition and none of us really know the rules as intended, yet.

Then don't pull that kind of stunt with 'well the rules don't say not X, do they?', because you know quite well it's a dirty debate trick. Arguing about game balance is a good thing, and as I already noted, your interpretation breaks the very easy-metatype-access thing that SR6 was meant to add, so that's a debate I'm willing to have. But going 'well there's no explanation on how racial qualities interact with karma and quality phases, so I can just make shit up' is a dirty argument, because then you're deliberately phrasing it in such a way that you don't want anyone to voice an opinion against you.

[Michael Chandra]

If metahumans get free qualities then they will have all the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

There is not really any mechanical reason to play a human over say... an elf.
While there are a lot of game mechanical reasons to play an elf over a human.
Where I come from, this is not balanced.

If they pay for their starting qualities (or if their starting qualities count towards the maximum limit)....

...then there are still reasons to play an elf over a human.
But there are also suddenly strong reasons to play a human over an elf.
This is more balanced than the alternative.

I definitely agree with this stance. It hadn't struck me until you broke it down like this that the human decker I created would objectively have been better off as a Dwarf, Elf, Ork, or Troll if racial qualities did not cost karma or did not count towards the quality limit, because he would be getting one or more free qualities as any one of those metatypes.

As 2 of those metatypes there's extra costs, while under the other interpretation all metahumans face severe restrictions, especially those two. But yes, only 7-Edge humans actually get an explicit advantage out of being Human rather than Ork or Elf. The implicit advantage of being human in a mostly-racist world, is not worth it for everyone. Hence my suggested houserule to give humans a slight benefit to compensate.

[Xenon]

Then don't pull that kind of stunt with 'well the rules don't say not X, do they?'

In that case I apologize, this was not my intent.
It was meant an honest question (since I don't know all the rules in this edition by heart, as I do with 5th edition).

(and if I already knew the answer but for some reason still deliberately wanted to pull 'that kind of stunt' then I would probably have worded it as a statement rather than an open ended question)

[ZeroSum]

The implicit advantage of being human in a mostly-racist world, is not worth it for everyone. Hence my suggested houserule to give humans a slight benefit to compensate.

The roleplaying aspect should definitely not be discounted, but it's hard to argue a straight up mechanical advantage vs a potential lore-related consequence.

It's pretty clear that racial abilities costing karma or counting against the starting limit on qualities is not currently covered in the rule set. This will just have to be up to GM interpretation until the Errata team has time to chime in.

[Shinobi Killfist]

The implicit advantage of being human in a mostly-racist world, is not worth it for everyone. Hence my suggested houserule to give humans a slight benefit to compensate.

The roleplaying aspect should definitely not be discounted, but it's hard to argue a straight up mechanical advantage vs a potential lore-related consequence.

It's pretty clear that racial abilities costing karma or counting against the starting limit on qualities is not currently covered in the rule set. This will just have to be up to GM interpretation until the Errata team has time to chime in.

The problem with the role playing aspect is I suspect most people see the racism against them as a advantage not a disadvantage. The I get more screen time penalty isn’t really a penalty.