[Shadowjack]

Is double-posting still taboo here? I never understood why people used to get so upset about that. Anyway, what do you think about the knockout blow edge action? I actually banned it vs prime runners. Quite anti-climactic in that regard but might be okay to beat down grunts, then again, not sure I like that either.

[CigarSmoker]

Is double-posting still taboo here? I never understood why people used to get so upset about that. Anyway, what do you think about the knockout blow edge action? I actually banned it vs prime runners. Quite anti-climactic in that regard but might be okay to beat down grunts, then again, not sure I like that either.

In my group when I GMed it was used regularly on the first run. (consisting of Hacker with Combat Drones, Full Mage with Spirits, and unarmed Melee Troll with Bow and Grenades)
Without Knockout blow the Troll would have been totally overshadowed by the other chars.
Personally i dislike rules like "banned vs xy" Prime Runners have Edge. they can use it to negate Edge ratio 2:1 .


On a side note but related to strength:
Actually playing with the rules showed that Grenades were not once usuable since the group avoided fights out in the open. With a radius of 20m Fragmentation Grenades are not usable 99% of the time... i mention  the Grenades because thats another thing many people here on the Forum mentioned to need a nerf down.

If you nerf down Knockout Edge Action and Grenades (for example) then there is nothing left for the strength char to shine ... think about it 

edit: and regarding Prime Runners, the book gives them the ability to take Edge from their Mooks ... so when the Prime Runner has PR 2 Mooks and PR 3 Mooks with him thats 5 Edge ... and if he has another 5 Edge (they are created like players so np) thats 10 Edge. 10 Edge is enough to negate 5 Edge - leading to the conclusion Prime Runners are already kind of immune to Edge Actions from a single source - but not for free.

[penllawen]

If your strength is low then its pretty easy to disarm your character

Let's look at that:

Block (A)
A character can add their Close Combat skill to a single Defense test in melee. The roll must happen in the same player turn in which the action is used.

Wrest (Block): When in melee combat, if you successfully Block an attack, you can use this action to wrest your opponent’s weapon away. Roll Close Combat + Agility, with the attacker’s Strength as the threshold. If you equal the threshold, you knock the weapon out of their hands, and it falls to the ground. If you get more hits, you take the weapon from them. If you get fewer hits, the attacker retains the weapon. Cost: 2 Edge

So, to pull this off against a player, an NPC has to:

1) be in close combat
2) have a Minor action to use
3) pull off a Block - an opposed test of player's Close Combat + Agility vs NPC's Close Combat + Agility + Reaction.
4) have two points of Edge to use
5) roll CC+Agility against a threshold of Strength
6) not have the PC win this roll via their own Edge

I don't think that's that easy to pull off.

I don't think grunt-level NPCs are often winning melee combat against PCs - which are the vast majority of NPCs my players fight. According to the stock goons, PR4 has a close combat dice pool of 7; PR5 is 6; PR6 is 12 (getting a bit more dangerous now). NPCs ain't gonna pull those rolls off very often. Sure, I can throw in the odd close-combat specialist once in a while to try and specifically target this weakness. But how often can I do that before it feels cheesy and cheap?

Also, 2 Edge is quite a lot. That's 2 Edge the NPCs could have been using to hurt the PCs.

Also also, so the PC is disarmed now. So...? All they have to do is spend a Major action pulling another weapon. That's not nothing but if you say to most players "would you rather be disarmed or hurt" they're not gonna pick "hurt" very often.

Also also also, I don't think increasing Strength from (say) 1 to 2 drastically shifts the odds on the chance of success on (5). So again, I question the value of boosting Strength to counter this tactic.

[Xenon]

Having strength of 2-3 is probably OK for most characters.

A character focused on melee weapons probably want to have a strength of 3-5 or so.

A character focused on specifically unarmed combat, bows and/or throwing weapons probably want to have a strength of 5+ (where the sky is the limit).


This is not much different than how it is for all other attributes.

[Finstersang]

The wrest action is a very thin excuse for strength not affecting Melee weapons. It´s at best a small ncentive not to go Strength 1 with your flashy Katana Elf, but again, that´s not the really big issue here.

The moment you increase your strength to above average levels and/or get one of the (pretty affordable!) bone augments, most weapons are outclassed by fists anyway, so why even bother bringing a knife or a combat axe or getting spurs implanted? Hell, the RAW Telescopic Baton is even outclassed by an unaugmented unarmed attack with completely average stats.

[Shadowjack]

I'm not saying that the wrest action is a good way to balance an attribute, simply that it is a relevant factor.

[penllawen]

Having strength of 2-3 is probably OK for most characters.

A character focused on melee weapons probably want to have a strength of 3-5 or so.

y tho

[Hobbes]

Having strength of 2-3 is probably OK for most characters.

A character focused on melee weapons probably want to have a strength of 3-5 or so.

A character focused on specifically unarmed combat, bows and/or throwing weapons probably want to have a strength of 5+ (where the sky is the limit).


This is not much different than how it is for all other attributes.

Yeah.  "Strength is a dump stat!"  Unless you're building for Unarmed damage.  "Logic is dump stat" unless you're a hacker.  "Charisma is a dump stat" unless you're the face.  ect. ect. ect.

Shadowrun is a game of specialists.  Some Specialists will want different stats than other Specialists.  Not all 'runner teams will have every kind of Specialist.

I only played a couple 4e games, there were 3 players.  A Shaman, a Face, and a Hacker.  We almost failed the run because nobody could open a stuck door or climb a rope. 

Strength is as much a dump stat as Logic or Charisma.  Good bad or otherwise.

[Finstersang]

Having strength of 2-3 is probably OK for most characters.

A character focused on melee weapons probably want to have a strength of 3-5 or so.

y tho

It´s 2-4 at best.

• 2 to not get so easily punished by grapplers, wrenching and creative GMs that want to crack down on min-maxing
• 3 to deal 1 additional Damage in unarmed combat in case you don´t have your weapon ready (also, say goodbye to saps and telescopic batons)
• 4 because... Well ... I dunno, maybe a bit of extra defense against grappling?! 

Hit 5 and a solid reaction score (which you will have if you want to play any kind of fighter) and your fists are already in the same weightclass as most melee weapons, safe for the hard-to-hide stuff like Polearms and Combat axes. Play a Troll and/or get some bone enhancing juice and you can threw those weapons out even sooner.

Nothing about this is good.

[penllawen]

Yeah.  "Strength is a dump stat!"  Unless you're building for Unarmed damage.  "Logic is dump stat" unless you're a hacker.  "Charisma is a dump stat" unless you're the face.  ect. ect. ect.

This is misrepresenting the criticism that is being made.

All characters get some utility out of the attributes that are not the primary ones for their archetype. There's always some pretty core activity tied to the attribute that you're going to need to be doing routinely. Or to put it another way, if you bring a character to the table with a 1 in some attribute, your GM and your fellow players are immediately thinking "jeez, we're gonna get fucked now coz this person can't..."

Wil - resisting spells, memory, composure
Log - first aid, memory
Int - perception, judge intentions, surprise
Rea - initiative, surprise, piloting
Cha - bluffing and lying to people, composure
Agi - hitting people with things
Bod - everybody hurts (sometimes)

What is Strength for that is as important as any of these? Even in 5e, it was arguably already the weakest stat unless your role demanded it. Now in 6e, we've lost its effect on melee damage and on recoil.

[Lormyr]

I agree with Hobbes that Strength, Agility, Charisma, and Logic are all tempting dump stats for particular builds.

But Penllawen is also correct that Strength is far less impactful for non-unarmed melee builds (whom should find the attribute most useful) than every other attribute is on the builds that rely on it. Not only that, but it is also senseless to not have a direct impact on melee capability (either to hit or damage).

[penllawen]

Not only that, but it is also senseless to not have a direct impact on melee capability (either to hit or damage).

I am still staggered by this. And the associated weirdness that trails behind it, like characters doing less damage when they pick up a sword.

[Hobbes]

Yeah.  "Strength is a dump stat!"  Unless you're building for Unarmed damage.  "Logic is dump stat" unless you're a hacker.  "Charisma is a dump stat" unless you're the face.  ect. ect. ect.

This is misrepresenting the criticism that is being made.

All characters get some utility out of the attributes that are not the primary ones for their archetype. There's always some pretty core activity tied to the attribute that you're going to need to be doing routinely. Or to put it another way, if you bring a character to the table with a 1 in some attribute, your GM and your fellow players are immediately thinking "jeez, we're gonna get fucked now coz this person can't..."

Wil - resisting spells, memory, composure
Log - first aid, memory
Int - perception, judge intentions, surprise
Rea - initiative, surprise, piloting
Cha - bluffing and lying to people, composure
Agi - hitting people with things
Bod - everybody hurts (sometimes)

What is Strength for that is as important as any of these? Even in 5e, it was arguably already the weakest stat unless your role demanded it. Now in 6e, we've lost its effect on melee damage and on recoil.

Unarmed damage, Ye ole bend bars/lift gates and Climbing tests.  How often these things come up is table and character dependent.  If you want to argue that Memory tests are more important than Climbing tests, go ahead.

You want to argue Str is poorly implemented re: Melee Weapons.  I totally agree, I think everyone does.  House rule away and hope for Errata.  Really nothing else to be done there unfortunately. 

Will, Bod, Intuition, Reaction are universally needed Attributes for any Runner who is physically tagging along with the team.  The "stay in the Van" sorts can dump Bod, Reaction if they really want to.  Every other Attribute is really only needed by specific Archetypes.  Yes 'runners should all have a few dice in skills like Perception, Stealth, Con, Influence.  But you don't need to have a 5 Agility and Charisma on every 'runner. 

Yes, there are more Archetypes that can get by with 2 Str than 2 Agility.  But that has been true for many Editions.  Monowhips have been around since First Edition.  Strength has always been a "Dump Stat".

But unless Unarmed Damage gets some kind of Errata, I'm willing to bet every third Missions character is going to have a high Str for that sweet, sweet Panther Cannon Punch damage.  Strength is not Mechanically undervalued because Unarmed Damage is really good for combat characters.  In fact, short of the Anticipation of Doom build the Panther Cannon Punch build (IMO) is next in line for overall effectiveness.  And you can do both on the same character without much difficulty, you need a high Str combat chassis that picks up Ambidexterity.

[Shinobi Killfist]

I don’t people think 5 or bust on any stat outside the prime stat for that runner. Less than 5 isn’t a dump. we’re talking 1s and maybe 2s. I mean there are 8 stats and only 24 points to spread around with A in attributes. Some will be dumped most likely.

I’d agree that logic is probably just as much as a dump stat, though I don’t see many people dumping it entirely. I think aesthetically people are more okay with a weak character than a dumb one. But I don’t think any other stat is a dump stat. Can you, sure. You can dump almost any stat. But charisma tests come up often even if your face takes the lead.

There is pretty much no cost in dumpling strength or logic unless it’s directly tied to your build.

As an aside I pretty much hate all of the edge actions. They are terrible design imo.

[penllawen]

If you want to argue that Memory tests are more important than Climbing tests, go ahead.

I’d agree that logic is probably just as much as a dump stat, though I don’t see many people dumping it entirely.

I concur that Logic is the next least painful stat to dump, unless your archetype needs it. But now let's compare which archetypes need Logic vs which ones need Strength:

Logic: hermetic mages, deckers -> many
Strength: unarmed combat specialists -> few

I think it's fair to see why people feel like Strength is underwhelming compared to other attributes.