Making Characters - Open Discussion

284 posts / 0 new
Last post
gleech gleech's picture
Quote:

Quote:

Yep. Exactly like baseline human. Except the armor. And the claws. Also the capability to handle low temperature environments. Or vacuum. And the gills. Also the built-in oxygen tank. And the capability of remote control.

But other than that, totally just like a baseline human.

I mean, that's a fair point. But note, most of those things are available to splicers as biomods, and many of those things - other than a penalty for the social stigma attached to pods - would not have any impact when just walking around a hab. It's still also true that I used to be significantly stronger than a human all the time, but now I get to pick three moments over the course of a day when I get to display that my body is a shell and I have hacked it.

To consider a starker comparison, consider a morph tuned for savvy, or for enhanced cognition. One of my players sleeved a Menton: he used to get significant bonuses to his mental stats all the time; now, he just gets to be "smarter than your average human" in three discrete bursts throughout the day. It really cuts into the reward (and incentive) to embrace the transhuman ethos and alter yourself: why bother hacking your mind or altering your body if the best it's going to give you is one shining moment of smrat?

Quote:

The big issue was derived attributes. Your lucidity changes when your willpower changes, for example. Other things changed as well. This was a hassle mechanically, especially as you could accidentally turn yourself into a drooling mess of a human switching to the wrong body with a WIL penalty, if you had a lot of stress to deal with.

Which makes perfect sense. In terms of psychological impact, I always thought that changing bodies should have an impact sort of comparable to a present-day person moving houses. If you're already held together with bailing wire and hope on a psychological level, that *should* push you over the edge. Also, how on top of dealing with Stress where characters in your game? Because my players usually wouldn't ever let their Stress get that bad, they'd deal with it before then (which lead to some good roll-play moments, since our Router-of-Record had Medicine: Psychology 80).

Edit: I'm also curious how often that even came up, as an async player might quickly notice that there aren't many morphs that give you a (fixed) +WIL. I guess you played with a lot of people who assigned a flexible morph bonus to WIL?

Quote:

If it's the narrativist aspects, remove them. They work just fine as universal check boosts.

People keep saying this, but it's not true. If the game incorporates a resource into the balance and design, and a player receives (differing amounts of!) the resource throughout character creation, and then the GM just says "I'm not having this shit in my game!", it's not going to work. Players will be mad that they lost a legit resource, and that it was replaced by nothing.

Now, if the rules included an alternate system, so that GMs (or players, or whole groups) could replace Flex with something else, you would be right. I would be OK if Flex actually was relegated to an option rule, that I could reasonably choose not to use, without disrupting the rest of the game.

Quote:

Think of C-Rep as akin to your stock portfolio and your financial assets today (or for hypercorps, C-Rep is literally their stock value). With the right assets to show off, you can open a lot of doors.

It still doesn't make any sense that the same rep network covers both Mars and Jupiter, given how poorly those two polities get along, and how separate (in practice) their economies are. Mars and Venus I can see, and maybe even the Extropian belt, but *Jupiter*? If I'm rich and popular in Elysium, is that really going to help me make a good impression on the Pope, or on TAHI?

Maybe if they split off a separate rep network specifically for the Jovians - or maybe for Biocons, if you wanted to make it a little broader? That might also spend in the LLA, and among reclaimers. Or maybe for "Authoritarians," if you wanted to put the Ultimates in a base rep-group.



gleech gleech's picture
Quote:

Quote:

Because Shopping: The RPG isn't very fun. Even with cool gear like EP has.

This is actually not true. For whatever it says about me, I actually really like kitting out my bots (and morphs) with exactly the tools I want, and going into great detail about what I got (and how low I can get the cost for the total package. :P )

A player in my group - who always played SAV characters - asked me for permission to apply some robot mods to guns, for the same reason: it's fun to design exactly the kill-a-majig that you want, if the game doesn't just hand it to you.

Please consider that maybe *some* of your players did actually really like this, even if some of your other players didn't; *completely* removing these mechanics may not be an idea that's good for everyone.

Quote:

I've explained this elsewhere, but aptitude modifiers required recalculation of skills when you resleeved. That was easily one of our top complaints about EP1. It slowed things down. So aptitude modifiers had to go. We still wanted to keep the concept of morphs having an impact on your capabilities, though, so that's why we introduced pools

Again, this isn't true for everyone. Some people could manage the complexity and thought the book-keeping was worth it.

Not to be a really pissy baby, but it seems particularly like you're throwing some of us under the bus to better appease another group of players who already have Transhumanity's Fate anyway...



Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
I'm in the same camp of

I'm in the same camp of wanting morphs to be more than just dur, pools, and preset mods, but I'm not going to just say to put aptitude bonuses back since they have their reasons for removing them in the first place.

Rather, I think it would be neat if morphs (at least the weirder ones) had unique abilities unobtainable through mods, or at least for far cheaper.

Kojak Kojak's picture
Urthdigger wrote:Rather, I

Urthdigger wrote:
Rather, I think it would be neat if morphs (at least the weirder ones) had unique abilities unobtainable through mods, or at least for far cheaper.

I haven't really chimed in much on this stuff, but I really want to get behind this idea. I think it would solve a number of problems at once: mollify at least to some extent the folks who feel that the pools system robs the setting of some of the "enhanced-ness" feeling from having a better morph, gives the morphs something that really distinguishes them from just taking the equivalent bonuses in augments, and adds to morphs a distinctness that the relatively slight stat boosts from 1E don't always communicate very well on the table.

EDIT: To clarify, the second part (giving certain morphs "discounts" on certain augments) would also help in these regards, at least IMHO.

"I wonder if in some weird Freudian way, Kojak was sucking on his own head."
- Steve Webster on Kojak's lollipop

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
Kojak wrote:Urthdigger wrote

Kojak wrote:
Urthdigger wrote:
Rather, I think it would be neat if morphs (at least the weirder ones) had unique abilities unobtainable through mods, or at least for far cheaper.

I haven't really chimed in much on this stuff, but I really want to get behind this idea. I think it would solve a number of problems at once: mollify at least to some extent the folks who feel that the pools system robs the setting of some of the "enhanced-ness" feeling from having a better morph, gives the morphs something that really distinguishes them from just taking the equivalent bonuses in augments, and adds to morphs a distinctness that the relatively slight stat boosts from 1E don't always communicate very well on the table.

EDIT: To clarify, the second part (giving certain morphs "discounts" on certain augments) would also help in these regards, at least IMHO.

Just to clarify, by discounts I mean that getting a morph with those built in being significantly easier/cheaper than kitting out a different morph to do so. Mostly because not every morph has an obvious trait to give that isn't already an augment somewhere.

I would prefer the unique bonuses where possible though, making morphs kinda like picking out an extra cool augment, except you're limited to just one out of the list.

Kojak Kojak's picture
Yes, that's what I understood

Yes, that's what I understood you to mean. If there is any piece of feedback thus far I can fully put my weight behind, it would be this one.

"I wonder if in some weird Freudian way, Kojak was sucking on his own head."
- Steve Webster on Kojak's lollipop

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
Kojak wrote:Urthdigger wrote

Kojak wrote:
Urthdigger wrote:
Rather, I think it would be neat if morphs (at least the weirder ones) had unique abilities unobtainable through mods, or at least for far cheaper.

I haven't really chimed in much on this stuff, but I really want to get behind this idea. I think it would solve a number of problems at once: mollify at least to some extent the folks who feel that the pools system robs the setting of some of the "enhanced-ness" feeling from having a better morph, gives the morphs something that really distinguishes them from just taking the equivalent bonuses in augments, and adds to morphs a distinctness that the relatively slight stat boosts from 1E don't always communicate very well on the table.

EDIT: To clarify, the second part (giving certain morphs "discounts" on certain augments) would also help in these regards, at least IMHO.

Discounting mechanical advantage in character generation depending on path is not good game balance design. Unique mechanics is a different thing, but I don't know that fits into the world.

Theliel Theliel's picture
Quote:Discounting mechanical

Quote:
Discounting mechanical advantage in character generation depending on path is not good game balance design. Unique mechanics is a different thing, but I don't know that fits into the world.

I think the general consensus is to treat morphs as a piece of equipment. One with special rules, but a piece of kit.
Just like tailored pheromones grant bonuses to various rolls you could do the same thing with morphs.
This keeps attributes from being adjusted but allows individual morphs tailored for specific roles outside of simply a list of ware/implants.

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
Theliel wrote:Quote

Theliel wrote:
Quote:
Discounting mechanical advantage in character generation depending on path is not good game balance design. Unique mechanics is a different thing, but I don't know that fits into the world.

I think the general consensus is to treat morphs as a piece of equipment. One with special rules, but a piece of kit.
Just like tailored pheromones grant bonuses to various rolls you could do the same thing with morphs.
This keeps attributes from being adjusted but allows individual morphs tailored for specific roles outside of simply a list of ware/implants.

Sure, and that's fine. But when the rubber hits the road, no matter what where you get the kit in your chargen path, you should pay the same cost for the same mechanical effect. Discounting mechanical benefit because of story reasons leads to mechanical imbalance.

(If you don't care about mechanical balance, go right ahead, that's Rule 0. But that's for your table)

Theliel Theliel's picture
Ian Argent wrote:Sure, and

Ian Argent wrote:
Sure, and that's fine. But when the rubber hits the road, no matter what where you get the kit in your chargen path, you should pay the same cost for the same mechanical effect. Discounting mechanical benefit because of story reasons leads to mechanical imbalance.

(If you don't care about mechanical balance, go right ahead, that's Rule 0. But that's for your table)

First, I don't think "this morph is tailored to install this list of ware, they are x cp/credits/rep/resource cheaper" is anymore a threat to balance than "this morph has hard points meant to accommodate weapons" - you already have a disparity based on ware already installed, giving a break on the cost of ware on the morph's "common ware list" isn't that big a deal. It's arguably less of a deal than giving a handling rating (aka - a bonus to flight or pilot rolls) to the various flying morphs to put them in parity with vehicles. Seriously "is easy to install this aftermarket upgrade on this model because it was designed that way" is fairly common in various enthusiast markets.

Second, EP isn't even approaching 4e levels of mechanical balence, which is where you'd need to be at to worry about this flipping the apple cart.

Decivre Decivre's picture
gleech wrote:I mean, that's a

gleech wrote:
I mean, that's a fair point. But note, most of those things are available to splicers as biomods, and many of those things - other than a penalty for the social stigma attached to pods - would not have any impact when just walking around a hab. It's still also true that I used to be significantly stronger than a human all the time, but now I get to pick three moments over the course of a day when I get to display that my body is a shell and I have hacked it.

To consider a starker comparison, consider a morph tuned for savvy, or for enhanced cognition. One of my players sleeved a Menton: he used to get significant bonuses to his mental stats all the time; now, he just gets to be "smarter than your average human" in three discrete bursts throughout the day. It really cuts into the reward (and incentive) to embrace the transhuman ethos and alter yourself: why bother hacking your mind or altering your body if the best it's going to give you is one shining moment of smrat?


Skill bonuses still exist for implants as well as aptitude check bonuses, just not aptitude bonuses for morphs as a whole. That said, these distinctions have never really been emphasized. Until Transhuman, carrying capacities and applicable strength for morphs weren't even covered.

That said, I disagree with the notion that a splicer who surgically got turned into a bipedal crab monster would not raise eyebrows. Or that it would be a minor modification. I think a large part of why they got rid of the social stigma trait is because social stigma is also heavily based on the choices the player makes in customizing their morph.

Also note that the number of uses of your pools that you have is also dependent on your use of rests. That menton might only have three points of insight, but he can utilize nine a day in theory.

It's not hard to use description to portray those distinctions. I personally just adjudicate what my PCs are capable of based on what their morph is. If they're suited in a fury, it makes much more sense for them to tear a man's arm off than someone in an Exalt.

gleech wrote:
Which makes perfect sense. In terms of psychological impact, I always thought that changing bodies should have an impact sort of comparable to a present-day person moving houses. If you're already held together with bailing wire and hope on a psychological level, that *should* push you over the edge. Also, how on top of dealing with Stress where characters in your game? Because my players usually wouldn't ever let their Stress get that bad, they'd deal with it before then (which lead to some good roll-play moments, since our Router-of-Record had Medicine: Psychology 80).

It depended on the missions they were on. Exsurgent threats oftentimes had my players low on lucidity. It's much easier to heal physical wounds fighting a wandering creature in the halls of an abandoned station than it is to deal with your inner demons during that same scenario.

That said, I don't think you should be rendered a drooling mess because your new body can't handle your level of sadness. It's one thing if they fail the alienation/integration test and take stress, but to be broken just by lucidity adjustments?

gleech wrote:
Edit: I'm also curious how often that even came up, as an async player might quickly notice that there aren't many morphs that give you a (fixed) +WIL. I guess you played with a lot of people who assigned a flexible morph bonus to WIL?

I like to run exsurgent campaigns. WIL varies between dump stat and god stat entirely based upon how many eldritch horrors your team will run into.

Yeah, it was a common morph bonus. And it meant that players could lose 10 lucidity in one fell swoop switching to a suboptimal body. I'd say that it only actually happened once... after that, players would generally stick to a body until stress was eliminated.

gleech wrote:
People keep saying this, but it's not true. If the game incorporates a resource into the balance and design, and a player receives (differing amounts of!) the resource throughout character creation, and then the GM just says "I'm not having this shit in my game!", it's not going to work. Players will be mad that they lost a legit resource, and that it was replaced by nothing.

Now, if the rules included an alternate system, so that GMs (or players, or whole groups) could replace Flex with something else, you would be right. I would be OK if Flex actually was relegated to an option rule, that I could reasonably choose not to use, without disrupting the rest of the game.


While I agree that it reduces the variety of what those points can do, it does little to reduce the power. I've already ran a test game... not only did no one use the narrativist mechanics of Flex, but I found that people relied on Flex only slightly less than Vigor. It's versatility is only overshadowed by extra actions.

It's like the colorless mana of Eclipse Phase's new system.

gleech wrote:
It still doesn't make any sense that the same rep network covers both Mars and Jupiter, given how poorly those two polities get along, and how separate (in practice) their economies are. Mars and Venus I can see, and maybe even the Extropian belt, but *Jupiter*? If I'm rich and popular in Elysium, is that really going to help me make a good impression on the Pope, or on TAHI?

Maybe if they split off a separate rep network specifically for the Jovians - or maybe for Biocons, if you wanted to make it a little broader? That might also spend in the LLA, and among reclaimers. Or maybe for "Authoritarians," if you wanted to put the Ultimates in a base rep-group.


Remember that reputation networks are more than simply how much people like you. Fame represents your total fanbase and the pull you have in society. @-Rep is your legend in the outer system, and the name you've made for yourself.

C-Rep is a more classical standard in that it's basically the future evolution of stock values and credit ratings. When hypercorps look at those numbers, they are looking at your portfolio, your career, and industry awards you've received. And even when you're from another political bloc, financials matter to a business.

And of course having a lot of financial power makes you more likely to meet the pope! It also makes you more likely to have frequent traveler miles with the next transit to Jupiter, the credit necessary to get a hotel when you arrive, and access to a car service to take that drive to Neo-Vatican City.

As for why credit is so ubiquitous a currency, note that dollars today already act as a broadly-used trade currency. Market expansion tends to cause that to happen. Moreover, currency trades make most markets relatively compatible... you can take credits to be an abstraction of money and its ability to be converted in any classic economy. Or alternately, the PC's money is just that stable in comparison to alternatives.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
gleech wrote:

gleech wrote:

It's almost certainly been said before, but I'd like to see a few more backgrounds make the official list.

Anything specific?

gleech wrote:

I really don't like the "feel free to move your skills around however you want!" line. Why have detailed character creation rules at all if one of the last step is "now, make any changes you fucking feel like!"

Because by their nature, skill packages are inherently limited. The exact opposite of this complaint (which we've already seen from others) is "I can't build this exotic character concept using these skill packs." Being able to move the points around allows you to customize and do that, while still providing an easy framework for players that are new or just want to whip up something quick.

gleech wrote:

On a related note, I'd love a totally-separate optional section for "advanced players, here's how you can freeform-build your character by spending points on skills."

It's in an Optional Rules section, which may or may not make it into the book. If it doesn't, it will be a free web extra.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Urthdigger wrote:Kojak wrote:

Urthdigger wrote:
Kojak wrote:

EDIT: To clarify, the second part (giving certain morphs "discounts" on certain augments) would also help in these regards, at least IMHO.

Just to clarify, by discounts I mean that getting a morph with those built in being significantly easier/cheaper than kitting out a different morph to do so. Mostly because not every morph has an obvious trait to give that isn't already an augment somewhere.

So, technically, this already exists. If you look at the morph cost calculations (see first post), the morph CP costs (including the CP of all implants) are totalled and then divided by 4. So the morphs as listed are getting those implants at 25% cost. So, sure, you could get an exalt and maybe pump it with enough implants to get the same Vigor as a fury, but you'll be paying a lot more for it.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

MAD Crab MAD Crab's picture
So, I gotta ask... are you

So, I gotta ask... are you planning any mechanism to avoid the Omni-morph and Bluprint-library-of-congress effects that occur in longer campaigns? By this I mean the always-expanding library of blueprints and morphs with every single implant under the sun.

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
MAD Crab wrote:So, I gotta

MAD Crab wrote:
So, I gotta ask... are you planning any mechanism to avoid the Omni-morph and Bluprint-library-of-congress effects that occur in longer campaigns? By this I mean the always-expanding library of blueprints and morphs with every single implant under the sun.

But why would you do that? As the RezPoints by default are a trickle, these blueprints are the advancement system.

Exurgents wanna eat your ass and you are low on ammo? Register to mobile gear catalogue at eldrich.host.mesh! ORDER NOW! FOR FREE PLASMA MINIMISSILE PACK! *explosive delivery options included

Decivre Decivre's picture
MAD Crab wrote:So, I gotta

MAD Crab wrote:
So, I gotta ask... are you planning any mechanism to avoid the Omni-morph and Bluprint-library-of-congress effects that occur in longer campaigns? By this I mean the always-expanding library of blueprints and morphs with every single implant under the sun.

Why would they? I feel it's as much a part of this setting as the ever-expanding spellbook is a part of D&D wizards.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

MAD Crab MAD Crab's picture
Quote:But why would you do

Quote:
But why would you do that? As the RezPoints by default are a trickle, these blueprints are the advancement system.

Quote:
Why would they? I feel it's as much a part of this setting as the ever-expanding spellbook is a part of D&D wizards.

An advancement system that only works for a subset of your players is a very, very bad advancement system. Certainly the never-ending addition of mods is part and parcel of the EP experience, but that doesn't make it necessarily a GOOD thing, at least from a game perspective.

Decivre Decivre's picture
MAD Crab wrote:An advancement

MAD Crab wrote:
An advancement system that only works for a subset of your players is a very, very bad advancement system.

Any character can collect blueprints. Unless you are saying that it doesn't work in the sense that some people don't like it, I don't see how you can feasibly control it. As a post-scarcity setting, the accrument of data is the purest form of acquisition within it.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
RobBoyle wrote:Urthdigger

RobBoyle wrote:
Urthdigger wrote:
Kojak wrote:

EDIT: To clarify, the second part (giving certain morphs "discounts" on certain augments) would also help in these regards, at least IMHO.

Just to clarify, by discounts I mean that getting a morph with those built in being significantly easier/cheaper than kitting out a different morph to do so. Mostly because not every morph has an obvious trait to give that isn't already an augment somewhere.

So, technically, this already exists. If you look at the morph cost calculations (see first post), the morph CP costs (including the CP of all implants) are totalled and then divided by 4. So the morphs as listed are getting those implants at 25% cost. So, sure, you could get an exalt and maybe pump it with enough implants to get the same Vigor as a fury, but you'll be paying a lot more for it.

Good to hear! I would like to see unique bonuses as well, if possible. Nothing too powerful, but some flavor here and there.

Edit: Actually, a good example of such bonuses would be my preferred morph from 1st. ed, the scurrier. It had the small trait, which gave bonuses to dodging and penalties to unarmed combat, and the alien biochemistry trait which could lead to good or bad things depending on the whims of the DM.

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
There's some morphs with

There's some morphs with unique abilties in original EP as well, the Skulker and Blackbird (IIRC) both have normally illegal combinations of mods which give them some options which a standard Swarmanoid or flying robot morph couldn't have.

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Forests and Trees

Decivre wrote:
gleech wrote:
One thing I really *liked* about EP1 was that being a giant, replicant crab made you really different from a baseline human *all the time*. One thing I really hate about morph-linked pools, is that now my giant replicant crab functions like a baseline human, except that he gets 3 Moments of Awesome he can claim at random points throughout the day. That really isn't the same thing - it's a decision that could work very well in a different game, but it really undercuts the transhuman ethos, and very much is not the same thing.

Yep. Exactly like baseline human. Except the armor. And the claws. Also the capability to handle low temperature environments. Or vacuum. And the gills. Also the built-in oxygen tank. And the capability of remote control.

gleech wrote:

I mean, that's a fair point. But note, most of those things are available to splicers as biomods, and many of those things - other than a penalty for the social stigma attached to pods - would not have any impact when just walking around a hab. It's still also true that I used to be significantly stronger than a human all the time, but now I get to pick three moments over the course of a day when I get to display that my body is a shell and I have hacked it.

...That said, I disagree with the notion that a splicer who surgically got turned into a bipedal crab monster would not raise eyebrows. Or that it would be a minor modification. I think a large part of why they got rid of the social stigma trait is because social stigma is also heavily based on the choices the player makes in customizing their morph.

Then your disagreement would be ill-founded. I like cracking wise as much as the next guy, but a Splicer can have armour and claws and low temp tolerance and vacuum sealing and an oxygen tank and a puppet sock with no change whatsoever in physical appearance. Gills are a very small maybe, and you'd still have to roll Perception to raise your brow, let alone both.

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Skills, Pools, and Factions

jaunty Harrison wrote:

I have to confess I'm concerned to see that they've done away with the doubled cost for skills rated over 60. Sure the math was a nuisance, especially when you used life path or the pack system, but the diminishing returns of extreme specialization had a very positive effect on the gameplay at my table. It shall be a very different flow of gameplay when players can more easily get an 80 skill with +10 from specialization.

I admit this is a minor concern of mine too. It feels good to buy up a skill to 80 in chargen and know it's an investment in excellence, rather than a no-brainer.

jackgraham wrote:

Dilf Pickle wrote:

LatwPIAT wrote:
I don't like the design where everyone except the Faceman can zone out and play with their phones while Faceman plays a one-on-one game with the GM of convincing the NPC, but at least when it's Faceman's turn to do things, it's mercifully short.

Unless you, you know, role play.

I think you're being a little harsh there, but it does get at an interesting question of play culture (which doesn't always come out in rules). I'd say Rob & I are both the type of GMs who tend to let roleplay with important NPCs play itself out before we roll dice—if we roll dice at all.

Yeah, I get snarky sometimes, sorry. My goal wasn't to disparage LatwPIAT, who clearly expresses him/herself well and is in all likelihood a good RPer/GM, but to point out that combat characters shine in combat, social characters shine in social settings, and hackers shine in hacking. This paradigm has existed in Shadowrun and VtM for decades, yet they haven't seen fit to eliminate Wired Reflexes/Celerity. I really don't see the problem, unless social rolls and hacking rolls are also problems.

NotActuallyTim wrote:

Urthdigger wrote:

Pursuing your faction's interests so they don't kick the shit out of you is still pursuing your faction's interests.

Indeed. Memes don't care how they spread and alter behavior, only that they do.

But is sabotaging your faction subtly enough that they don't know you're the one whose shit they should be kicking out of, still pursuing your faction's interests?

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
Wired Reflexes

SR4 (and maybe SR3, too, it's been so long, I forgot who gets tied up) let everyone act in the first initiative pass, and then the people with extra actions got to bicker amongst themselves. Which means that in most combats every gets to put their two cents in.

Decivre Decivre's picture
Dilf_Pickle wrote:Then your

Dilf_Pickle wrote:
Then your disagreement would be ill-founded. I like cracking wise as much as the next guy, but a Splicer can have armour and claws and low temp tolerance and vacuum sealing and an oxygen tank and a puppet sock with no change whatsoever in physical appearance. Gills are a very small maybe, and you'd still have to roll Perception to raise your brow, let alone both.

Note that the implants I was talking about was from the novacrab morph. A novacrab's claws, shelled armor and other traits would be very obvious.

Obviously this is less true for the internal implants.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Speed / Fun / Verisimilitude

MagisterCrow wrote:
The problem was everyone else didn't necessarily have that and others would basically sit and do nothing. Removing it was necessary so everyone could enjoy the game. It's a matter of game practicality vs. realistic simulation. The realistic simulation might be more nuanced and visceral, but at some point, you need to give way to the fact that you are playing a game and the purpose isn't to have the most realistic simulation, but the most fun.

That's fair, but I'm among the minority(?) who find the realistic simulation the most fun.

TheGrue wrote:

Dilf Pickle wrote:

I return to the Know Evil example. I'm two-thirds of the way through and there have been multiple combats with Speed 2 (and one so far with Speed 3, IIRC) participants. Those 2nd and 3rd Action Phases are whipped out so quickly they're almost treated as afterthoughts. "Oh right, you have Speed 2. Roll attack... she misses her fray. Roll damage... she's still standing, but barely. Alright, new round!"

Not every playgroup is as well-oiled as the RPPR crew, nor does every group have the ability to edit out silences and pauses that would break the flow. Remember those guys are practised at recording games in a manner that is fun to listen to.

I see your point on the experience aspect, but JFYI they don't edit out silences and pauses in RP: http://slangdesign.com/forums/index.php/topic,495.msg8332.html#msg8332

LatwPIAT wrote:

The +1 from MRDR doesn't offset the problem much when other characters are running around with +3. MRDR is also a poor example because it has an onset time of 20 minutes, so it'll only give that +1 Speed bonus if you have time to prepare for the whatever. The character who gets Neurachem 2 and a Reflex Booster is going to have +3 actions in any combat situation. That's the heavy investment I'm talking about.

...whereas...

TheGrue wrote:

The problem with speed wasn't that it allowed combat characters to be good at their chosen field. The problem was that speed was so good and so easy to max, that there was never any reason not to max it. It was the opposite of a "trap" option; an option so good compared to the alternatives that not taking it was the trap.

So which is it, prohibitively expensive or ubiquitously cheap?

UnitOmega wrote:

Have we already moved past the point in this discussion where we mention Vigor lets you basically lump all your "I'm a rad supersoldier" bonuses together and all your badass combat morphs get a lot of it? Because from a standpoint of system efficiency that's way "cooler" you get to pile all your being rad-ness into a single pool and pick how you want to apply it rather than clunking up something which already flows slowly with just people who have extra actions.

See, I see the pool system as four moxies to track and hoard rather than just one. Plus counting the time until I can recharge again. "Sorry Neotenic, I can't open this jar for you, in case I get attacked in the next three hours".

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:

Ultrafast murder machines are definitely still around, but they'll eventually tone down

Toned-down ultrafast = regularfast.

Ian Argent wrote:
SR4 (and maybe SR3, too, it's been so long, I forgot who gets tied up) let everyone act in the first initiative pass, and then the people with extra actions got to bicker amongst themselves. Which means that in most combats every gets to put their two cents in.

EP 1ed4pr p.189 wrote:
Every character starts with a default Speed stat of 1, meaning they can act in the first Action Phase of the turn only.
Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Does this guy ever shut up?

Below are miscellaneous QFTs:

Decivre wrote:

If you recommend keeping aptitudes and skills on values divisible by 5, why cap the skill system at 98? I'm not even obsessive-compulsive and that's giving me an itch down my spine. Especially if Rez grants 5 skill points per point spent....

[...]

Obviously it's not a requirement. But it's also very odd that the game's overall cap is 98 instead of a multiple of 5.

My inclination would be to let people raise their skill to 100, which is nice and round and also helps when negative modifiers kick in. By the time a char has bought a skill up to 100 they should be acutely aware of what the 99 and 00 rolls mean in the system anyway. But it might be awkward to explain away in chargen.

Theliel wrote:
If someone doesn't take any social skills & dumpstats SAV and they get sidelined during 'time to negotiate' I'm not sure how that's any different from choosing not to have Fray or a weapon skill & having speed 1 in EP 1 - the player has clearly indicated that they're not interested in that part of the game.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Much like a goon can throw in the occasional "......yeah!" during the face's negotiation, the face can fire the occasional volley during the goon's murder-ballet.

Decivre wrote:
Let's pretend for a second that the Ultimates are exactly as evil as they are trying to portray them. I still say they should be a playable race for the same reason the Drow are playable in D&D.

I wonder if Drizzt Do'urden would ever have existed if Drow weren't playable. Certainly, the 'maligned' races would never have a chance to redeem their reputation by being able to point to a stereotype-defying hero.

MAD Crab wrote:
Put me in the "how odd" camp as well. Why worry about encouraging people to play fascists? Why continue pigeonholing the ultimates if that's the concern? Why remove them, but keep the Jovians as a faction? As I've said in other threads, you can't even PAY most people to play a jovian.

Well, I can give one answer: those of us already unhappy with treatment of the jovians would raise holy hell.

Jovian cheerleading aside, I agree that this is an obstacle to allowing nuanced protagonist Ultimates via the 'unreliable narrator' theme.

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Last one, I promise

Now that I'm done arguing on the internet (ha), here are my observations from a recent re-reading of the 'Making a Character' Open Playtest document (May 15th rev).

Full disclosure: A lot of the things I really enjoyed about EP1 seem to be going away in EP2, so I'm not a convert; but I still hope EP2 does well, and I'll try to make my commentary as impartial and constructive as possible.

  1. I like the multiple, yet not tedious, reminders that morphs are temporary and you may need to leave them behind.

  2. Aptitudes: Folding COO into REF makes sense.

  3. Pools: As a fan of dice pool systems like (o/n)WoD and Shadowrun, I was wary the EP1 percentile system at first, given its triangular distribution. But the interesting at-a-glance opposed rolls, the symmetry of criticals, the granularity of 00 and 99 rolls, and the sci-fi sensibilities of percentages won me over. Despite that, it seems to me that converting everything to dice pools would have made more sense than the awkward hybrid that seems to be coming about. The complexity of resleeving has been exchanged for the complexity of having four slightly-different Moxie pools to track instead of one, and now we have d6s to worry about.

  4. Package build system: Making this the default chargen method is a good newbie-friendly idea, and the few remaining problems aren't beyond some tweaking.

  5. Languages: The new mechanic is an interesting idea, but it could be a hindrance for those who want to be true "hyper linguists". 3 is NOT an impressive number of languages; in fact, it is the EU's basic language policy for all European citizens, the foremost of whom have a COG + INT of 20. This might not be so big a deal if languages weren't so expensive under the new system.

  6. Also, note that 75% of all modern humans speak 2 languages or more, so 2 should really be the default except for exceptionally low COG + INT egos. No offense to you unilinguals out there; the intelligence-independent monolingual realities of some polities today are almost certain to disappear after The Fall. Even Jovians probably speak English and Spanish.

  7. Aptitude Ranges: I like the simplified table.

  8. Athletics: The compression of all the athletic skills makes sense generally, but I'm not sure that winged flight should have been folded into Athletics. Then again, maybe that's what specialisations are for.

  9. Exotic Skill: I like this new catch-all.

  10. Fray: If everyone needs this skill and it merits being based off REFx2, why not just make it a REF aptitude check and knock one more redundant skill off the list? You can't really train to dodge bullets (except by developing your REF), and h2h mavens are going to counter martial arts with more martial arts, not ducking and running away.

  11. Guns: I'm not a big fan of this term over something more accurate and clear like "Firearms", but I suppose it's not a big deal since the Gunnery skill has been folded into Interfacing. But weren't we doing verbs? Why not "Shoot"?

  12. Perceive: As with Fray, if everyone needs this skill and it merits being based off INTx2, why not just make it a INT aptitude check and knock yet another redundant skill off the list?

  13. Provoke: I'm not sure about this skill name. I know "Manipulate" is kinda long, but it really gets the idea across better.

  14. Survival: Folding in Navigation is a good bit of simplification.

  15. Morphs: Just a random thought: newbie paralysis-by-analysis could be eliminated here by only offering, or strongly suggesting: flats, splicers, basic pods, cases, synths and digimorphs (maybe even all for free so there's no worry of loss). Other morphs could be included in the 'advanced chargen' section, along with point-buy.

  16. Hyper Linguistics: It should also give another language or two.

  17. Resources: Interesting.

  18. Starting Gear Packages: Another good idea borrowed from Transhuman.
LibraryDrone LibraryDrone's picture
except that the group of

gleech wrote:

Not to be a really pissy baby, but it seems particularly like you're throwing some of us under the bus to better appease another group of players who already have Transhumanity's Fate anyway...

except that the group of players being appeased" here is the vast majority of them. If the ep1 rules worked for you and yours then just keep playing that system. Because speaking from experience.... Transhumanity's Fate isn't really any better for player groups who like crunch just not THAT MUCH crunch.

“Science fiction is very well suited to asking philosophical questions; questions about the nature of reality, what it means to be human, how do we know the things that we think we know.”
― Ted Chiang

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
Dilf_Pickle wrote:

Dilf_Pickle wrote:

But is sabotaging your faction subtly enough that they don't know you're the one whose shit they should be kicking out of, still pursuing your faction's interests?

I would say if you're sabotaging your faction, you're not a member of that faction. You've just convinced a group of them that you are is all.

LibraryDrone LibraryDrone's picture
Is it just me or is the trait

Is it just me or is the trait list reduced by quite a bit in comparison to ep1? because the list seems shorter and i don't know that I like that.

and is there going to be a conversion table to transfer morphs from the old system to the new? because I'm SURE that all of them aren't included and I'd like to give my players some of the really cool expensive morphs at some point.

“Science fiction is very well suited to asking philosophical questions; questions about the nature of reality, what it means to be human, how do we know the things that we think we know.”
― Ted Chiang

o11o1 o11o1's picture
Here you go

LibraryDrone wrote:
Is it just me or is the trait list reduced by quite a bit in comparison to ep1? because the list seems shorter and i don't know that I like that.

and is there going to be a conversion table to transfer morphs from the old system to the new? because I'm SURE that all of them aren't included and I'd like to give my players some of the really cool expensive morphs at some point.

Over in the other thread, RobBoyle provided a dev copy of the spreadsheet they were using to develop morphs: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2882422/Morph%20Pools%20Spreadsheet%20051517.xls

Directly link to the comment in question: http://eclipsephase.com/comment/61130#comment-61130

Not really a "conversion" tool, but it's enough information to figure out to determine the appropriate costing of a semi-arbitrary morph. Pools might be a bit tricky, but we have enough examples you can probably get pretty close to any morph that isn't super weird.

A slight smell of ions....

LibraryDrone LibraryDrone's picture
Thank you! I missed that

Thank you! I missed that somehow

“Science fiction is very well suited to asking philosophical questions; questions about the nature of reality, what it means to be human, how do we know the things that we think we know.”
― Ted Chiang

Surly Surly's picture
eaton wrote:I'm still holding

eaton wrote:
I'm still holding out hope for:

Interface -> INT
Research -> INT
Free Fall -> SOM
Psi -> WIL (this one is inconsistent depending on where you look in the current play test doc.)

That shift would go a loooooong way towards balancing things a bit more, though WIL is still the red headed stepchild of attributes.

I endorse this. I think WIL is fine because of its high value for resisting social skills and going insane.
It's interesting that REF is so much more valuable than in 1E, where it was much more cost-effective to just buy up Fray. I like that. It's genre-consistent for reflexes to be important in combat, which they never were because Speed did everything.
Unlike in 1E buying up an Aptitude for skill boosts alone is now never worth it. This is fine, though I expect to see buying up Aptitudes to be even rarer than in 1E.

Empathy use of SAV clearly overlaps Kinesics.

"Art confers the ability to create and evaluate artistic endeavors. This is a particularly useful skill in Eclipse Phase, especially in the post-scarcity economies where creativity and vision can be a key component to a character’s reputation." This paragraph was one of the best pieces of worldbuilding in a game full of it. No need to make art a full skill, but put that paragraph in the Exotic Skill description!

I'd specify that you can't use complementary skills in combat, unless something like using Interest (morphs) to punch a weak point is intended. If that's intended, should still note not to let PCs do that every turn.

Is it necessary to list biomods, cortical stack, and mesh inserts for every morph? Could just describe them once and note flats lack them.
Every morph with a cyberbrain has access jacks and a puppet sock. Why not merge them? At least merge access jacks and puppet sock.

Give more fluff on the Steel morph! It was vague enough in 1E, and "it's like the galatea" gives nothing to go on. At least explain its Vigor.

Like in 1E where Synths were balanced by biomorphs usually having better attribute bonuses, biomorphs generally have better pools. Haven't done the math, but I think it'll work.

Clarify the "Or opposite" in the description of Chameleon Skin.

Definitely give an option to swap out items in gear packages for other items of the same complexity. Makes shopping-happy players happy, makes players who don't want to bother with that also happy. "Defaults to this but you can swap" is a great way to do things in general.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Like in 1E where Synths

Quote:
Like in 1E where Synths were balanced by biomorphs usually having better attribute bonuses, biomorphs generally have better pools. Haven't done the math, but I think it'll work.

Mmmmmmaybe?

i nerded out a bit and crunched the numbers:

Biomorphs Uplifts Synthmorphs Infomorphs Pods
1 4 0 0 3
2 4 1 4 3
4 5 3 5 3
6 4 3 5 3
4 5 5 - 5
4 4 5 - -
4 - 4 - -
6 - 5 - -
6 - 4 - -
6 - 8 - -
8 - - - -
8 - - - -
8 - - - -
8 - - - -
AVG 5.4 AVG 4.3 AVG 3.8 AVG 3.5 AVG 3.4
MED 6 MED 4 MED 4.5 MED 4 MED 3
STDDEV 2.3 STDDEV 0.5 STDDEV 2.3 STDDEV 2.4 STDDEV 0.9

Biomorphs have the highest average and median number of points by a solid margin, Uplifts actually come in a close second, and Synthmorphs are the middle of the pack. Pods are consistently middle-of-the-pack, without a low standard deviation in point pools but no really stand-out awesome options, either.

What's really interesting is that biomorphs are a STEAL if you just go by the CP-to-Points ratio. Biomorphs and uplifts, on average, get 1.5-2x as many points per CP spent as Synthmorphs and Pods. Not sure if this is intentional, but it's definitely noticeable.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Unlike in 1E buying up

Quote:
Unlike in 1E buying up an Aptitude for skill boosts alone is now never worth it. This is fine, though I expect to see buying up Aptitudes to be even rarer than in 1E.

Probably; even in EP1 I only ever saw one player (the hacker) dump points into attributes, and that was for COG. Honestly, I wouldn't mind freezing attributes after chargen. You can train up your skills, you can buy implants that boost your COG, you can use drugs that juice your REF… but you can't just improve core Transhuman aptitudes with *practice*.

Quote:
I'd specify that you can't use complementary skills in combat, unless something like using Interest (morphs) to punch a weak point is intended. If that's intended, should still note not to let PCs do that every turn.

Since complimentary skills are already restricted to knowledge skills, I'm not sure it requires clarification. What constitutes an acceptable complimentary skill for the situation is already subject to GM approval, and I'm happy to reward creativity if they can come up with a good reason why Interest: Acupuncture should compliment Melee in a given situation.

Quote:
Is it necessary to list biomods, cortical stack, and mesh inserts for every morph? Could just describe them once and note flats lack them.
Every morph with a cyberbrain has access jacks and a puppet sock. Why not merge them? At least merge access jacks and puppet sock.

I can see providing more variation in the stock morphs WRT to these implants, but I've seen a lot of characters and NPCs that have interesting variations — the paranoiac who only uses Ectos and doesn't even have a mesh implant, the hacker with access jacks for interfacing with airgapped systems but lacks a cyberbrain or puppet sock, etc.
ThatWhichNeverWas ThatWhichNeverWas's picture
So many words...

Phew, this thread is all over the place :)
Can we maybe have a board consensus on what topics go where? We've got a lot of redundancy ATM. Posting the same thing to multiple threads makes me sad.

@CordialUltimate2: I'm putting a response to your comment in the Ultimates thread :)
----------

I've already said what I think about the Knowledge skills, but for the Active Field skills how about we split the difference and say: "You can only have one Field in each field skill. Making tests for other fields within the skill is possible but at a -10 penalty, any you cannot critically succeed on these tests" or something similar.
Basically, they remain distinct but you can always default 'within' the skill.

----------

Maybe this has been said and I missed it, but I really get the feeling that COG is so skill heavy because it isn't used for much else, whereas other attributes will see a lot more independent use.

eaton wrote:
Honestly, I wouldn't mind freezing attributes after chargen.

Then buying anything other than attributes at CharGen is Wrong.
Seriously, if you're not seeing it happen often, then restricting won't do much. It's options which are so good they're fundamentally mandatory that cause problems.

Speaking of Speed, can we get off the "No Speed = Slow!" bit? The problem with Speed was that it's a bad mechanic.
I agree 100% that enhanced speed should be a thing, but we should be looking for new ways to represent it in-game, not just complaining that the old version is gone.

MAD Crab wrote:
Quote:
But why would you do that? As the RezPoints by default are a trickle, these blueprints are the advancement system.

Quote:
Why would they? I feel it's as much a part of this setting as the ever-expanding spellbook is a part of D&D wizards.

An advancement system that only works for a subset of your players is a very, very bad advancement system. Certainly the never-ending addition of mods is part and parcel of the EP experience, but that doesn't make it necessarily a GOOD thing, at least from a game perspective.

From the looks of things Blueprints may be much less important in V2 - the way the Resources trait is presented implies we're moving to a "Everything is available, but you can only have X at the moment" sort of thing, defined by GM fiat and time investment.

CordialUltimate2 wrote:
As the RezPoints by default are a trickle, these blueprints are the advancement system.

This may no longer be the case.

----------

Finally @Developers, would it be possible to incorporate skills/abilities from a character's Muse (and other AI if applicable) into the character mechanics instead of having them act 'purely' as independent characters?
I'm fine with them having stats for the off chance they need to act independently, but having them usually act as a type of gear could save a lot of headaches.

In the past we've had to compensate for weaknesses, finding quick solutions that only benefit a few.
But what if we never need to feel weak or morally conflicted again?

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
Even if Rez still comes at

Even if Rez still comes at the same slow speed, assuming it's still worth as much as 1 CP, it's still coming in about 5x faster thanks to how the scale is changing.

NotActuallyTim NotActuallyTim's picture
Dilf_Pickle wrote:

Dilf_Pickle wrote:

But is sabotaging your faction subtly enough that they don't know you're the one whose shit they should be kicking out of, still pursuing your faction's interests?

If it's too subtle, it's just advancing their interests while screwing up your opportunities to betray them. If it's not subtle enough, they hack ur ego. Treachery is a short term game, and it often ends with everybody unhappy, like a good compromise.

swordchucks swordchucks's picture
Morphs and Flex

Really, I think morphs should lose the Flex pool. Leave it an Ego-only trait because its uses are... really weird for a morph trait. It's also a weird case of "the rich get richer" in that the higher cost morphs also tend to have a higher Flex pool.

Also, to reiterate, I would really rather have the Resources system made a little more robust and have morphs be gear that you purchase just like anything else without dragging CP into it separately. If in-game, you purchase bodies just like you purchase an ecto, why is there a different system for it? I really like the idea of a renewable Resources pool for gear, I just want morphs to be part of that. Having morph traits be part of that costing and not part of the CP equation is also very good in my mind because it eliminates the weird meta-game aspects of getting bonus points for a temporary disadvantage.

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Love your hab; It's the Law!

Urthdigger wrote:
I would say if you're sabotaging your faction, you're not a member of that faction. You've just convinced a group of them that you are is all.

Yeah, that's certainly a way to look at it. But unless you've joined an enemy faction, -[Faction] Interest would still make more sense than a begrudging +[Faction] Interest.

NotActuallyTim wrote:
Dilf_Pickle wrote:

But is sabotaging your faction subtly enough that they don't know you're the one whose shit they should be kicking out of, still pursuing your faction's interests?

If it's too subtle, it's just advancing their interests while screwing up your opportunities to betray them.

Subtlety != Effectiveness

NotActuallyTim wrote:
If it's not subtle enough, they hack ur ego. Treachery is a short term game, and it often ends with everybody unhappy, like a good compromise.

Do you believe that treachery is in the victim's best interests unless the perpetrator gets caught?

It's very simple: someone with -[Faction] Interest wants to harm said faction, out of revenge or a hopelessness that it can be fixed/redeemed, whereas a +[Faction] Interest malcontent might still hope that things can be turned around.

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
swordchucks wrote:Really, I

swordchucks wrote:
Really, I think morphs should lose the Flex pool. Leave it an Ego-only trait because its uses are... really weird for a morph trait. It's also a weird case of "the rich get richer" in that the higher cost morphs also tend to have a higher Flex pool.

The higher cost of high flex morphs appears to be at least partially because of their fflex

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
swordchucks wrote:Really, I

swordchucks wrote:
Really, I think morphs should lose the Flex pool. Leave it an Ego-only trait because its uses are... really weird for a morph trait. It's also a weird case of "the rich get richer" in that the higher cost morphs also tend to have a higher Flex pool.

The higher cost of high flex morphs appears to be at least partially because of their fflex

gleech gleech's picture
LibraryDrone wrote:gleech

LibraryDrone wrote:
except that the group of players being appeased" here is the vast majority of them.

I'd like to see actual numbers on that. At the very absolute least, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's not happy about morphs getting more homogeneous. And I don't think I'm the only one who's annoyed that "I get way less benefit from an upgraded morph."

There might be a kind of compromise there: instead of getting x-points-per-day, could we get x-points-per-*turn* (and x-points-per-test when outside of combat)? That way, at least I'd be getting a consistent, all-the-time benefit (which is my major complaint).

Edit: I kind of like the idea of giving morphs "special abilities" completely separate from their pools and mods.

LibraryDrone wrote:
If the ep1 rules worked for you and yours then just keep playing that system.

I mean, you're not wrong, but that seems like a pretty trivial dismissal of opinions you don't like - and I doubt you'd be satisfied with that if you were on the "just stick with the 1st edition" end.

LibraryDrone wrote:
Because speaking from experience.... Transhumanity's Fate isn't really any better for player groups who like crunch just not THAT MUCH crunch.

I meant that core EP should be kept "crunchy", and Transhumanity's Fate should cover those who like narativist play (and/or don't like crunch). It sounds like you read me the other way?

I am, for the record, exactly a player who likes "crunch but not that much crunch."



Decivre Decivre's picture
I think I've figured out the

I think I've figured out the Flex pool, and why it is the size it is.

The Flex pool is how they handle distributions of points evenly between the three pools. Flats, for example, have but one point in any pool. But humans are traditionally portrayed as the "statistical average". So how do they average all three pools with a single point without using fractions?

Flex pool.

That's why no morph has more than 2 Flex points. If they have 3, you might as well just put one point in each other pool.

And if that's the case, it's a nice conceit. Even if it is weird-feeling to have as a morph trait AND ego trait, I get it a bit more thinking about it like that.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

gleech gleech's picture
Dilf_Pickle wrote:

Dilf_Pickle wrote:

That's fair, but I'm among the minority(?) who find the realistic simulation the most fun.

I'm right there with you.

Dilf_Pickle wrote:
LatwPIAT wrote:

The +1 from MRDR doesn't offset the problem much when other characters are running around with +3. MRDR is also a poor example because it has an onset time of 20 minutes, so it'll only give that +1 Speed bonus if you have time to prepare for the whatever. The character who gets Neurachem 2 and a Reflex Booster is going to have +3 actions in any combat situation. That's the heavy investment I'm talking about.

...whereas...

TheGrue wrote:

The problem with speed wasn't that it allowed combat characters to be good at their chosen field. The problem was that speed was so good and so easy to max, that there was never any reason not to max it. It was the opposite of a "trap" option; an option so good compared to the alternatives that not taking it was the trap.

So which is it, prohibitively expensive or ubiquitously cheap?

It actually is both! On the one hand, there were only a few pieces of gear that provided persistent, always-on bonuses to SPD; they were also costly (Reflex Boosters where [Expensive], f.ex.). On the other hand, the benefit they provided - getting to take up to 4 turns to someone else's 1 - was also massive, so much so that maxing out your SPD still gave far and away the best return on investment.

I generally agree that SPD as such needed to be replaced with something that was both simpler and a little more balanced.

Dilf_Pickle wrote:
See, I see the pool system as four moxies to track and hoard rather than just one. Plus counting the time until I can recharge again. "Sorry Neotenic, I can't open this jar for you, in case I get attacked in the next three hours".

I'm completely, 100% with you there.



NotActuallyTim NotActuallyTim's picture
Dilf_Pickle wrote:Urthdigger

Dilf_Pickle wrote:

Do you believe that treachery is in the victim's best interests unless the perpetrator gets caught?

It's very simple: someone with -[Faction] Interest wants to harm said faction, out of revenge or a hopelessness that it can be fixed/redeemed, whereas a +[Faction] Interest malcontent might still hope that things can be turned around.

Treachery is about intent, not effectiveness. However, thanks to EP, even intent is muddled. A character with +[Faction] can be a traitor with some memories removed and some psycho surgery. Likewise, a character with -[Faction] can secretly be working in the favor of said faction, through the same methods. And a character who wants to betray a faction without having had their ego scrambled might honestly be +[Faction] with sufficient incentivization, like the promise of getting the ego of someone they care about freed from another faction entirely.

It is far more complicated than merely 'Characters shouldn't have their +[Faction] meme forced on them at character creation.' How do you know that every faction doesn't use psychosurgery to guarantee loyalty? How do you know that even without psychosurgery, it can't be more complicated? Every character working for a faction, even the traitors, must act in the factions interests some of the time, and that's good enough for me to put +[Faction] down as a meme on a sheet.

It doesn't matter if they believe it. It only matters if their pro faction behaviors can spread memetically to others.

gleech gleech's picture
shameless tripple-posting RE: items

blueprint restrictions
Are there rules for Acquiring Gear that I'm missing?

I said it in a different thread, but, I liked keeping track of "this blueprint is licensed, this one is open source, this one is cracked," and keeping track of which bluep would work in which polity. It helped to make the different polities distinct, and it helped to underscore the different ways that different characters work (i.e. the Argonaut can get blueprints for very uncommon scientific equipment from other Argonauts, but his blueps would be open-source, so they might not work on a locked-down fabber on Mars, which might only produce licensed blueps). It also provided a way to introduce an Interesting New Challenge to a group that already had blueprints for top-shelf gear.

I bring this up because of how people get blueprints (without qualification) for items they get in character packs, and I'm wondering if now any blueprint will just print in any CM (which will make me Very Sad). At the very least, I'm hoping I (as a GM) can enforce some kind of reasonable restriction about what kinds of blueps a fabber won't print ("no, a public fabber in Octavia will not print your plasma rifle").

paying Rez for gear
Someone brought up using gear as character advancement, and someone mentioned making people pay the cost in REZ for any gear the GM gives them. I see where burning Resources works that way, but I don't see that it says that all gear works that way. Am I missing it?

If all gear now works that way, it will also make me Very Sad. As a GM, I enjoy being able to shower my characters with Interesting Gear - or deprive them of gear, using f.ex. fabber restrictions - as the scenario demands it, without having to worry about screwing up their Rez allotments. I'm going to be Very Sad if players now have to refuse gear because they don't want to have the cost deducted from their Rez, for example.

my daily "fuck Flex" post
It's probably pointless for me to say at this point, but I really hate people being able to magically Just Have an item using Resources and a Flex point. One thing I really loved about EP as opposed to some other systems was that it really encouraged people to be cautious and plan ahead. As a player, I invest a lot of effort into planning and preparing for situations ahead of time; as a GM, I expect my players to do that. I'm going to be Very Sad if, in EP2, my players can be mindless, impulsive idiots, and just spend Narrativium to get away with it.

I don't think Flex is a bad mechanic in absolute terms; I get that some people don't like to be burdened with keeping track of fabber queues and detailed gear lists. But, some of us do like dealing with those details. I'm not here to say that Flex is awful and nobody should use it; I just want to have the option to not use it in games that I run.

Anarchist Resources
How do resources and rep networks interact? It seems a little odd to me to have c-rep and resources, but not an analogous thing for @-rep.

Do Anarchists have an analogous system? Different Anarchists will have different standings with the community, or will be members of communities with different total resources.

For example, one of my characters lived on an Extropian Mutualist habitat, and we covered how he invested a lot of effort into doing technical work to maintain the ship, and earned an informal "trusted status" as a prominent engineer. Is there a Resources-for-Anarchists that we could use to represent that, or is that just having a high @-Rep?



Decivre Decivre's picture
gleech wrote:blueprint

gleech wrote:
blueprint restrictions
Are there rules for Acquiring Gear that I'm missing?

I said it in a different thread, but, I liked keeping track of "this blueprint is licensed, this one is open source, this one is cracked," and keeping track of which bluep would work in which polity. It helped to make the different polities distinct, and it helped to underscore the different ways that different characters work (i.e. the Argonaut can get blueprints for very uncommon scientific equipment from other Argonauts, but his blueps would be open-source, so they might not work on a locked-down fabber on Mars, which might only produce licensed blueps). It also provided a way to introduce an Interesting New Challenge to a group that already had blueprints for top-shelf gear.


During 1st Edition, I worked under the assumption that all blueprints acquired during creation were open-sourced, unless the player wanted otherwise.

That said, I agree. That info is somewhat important to know, even for other software. There has to be laws in the inner system regarding possession of pirated software.

gleech wrote:
Anarchist Resources
How do resources and rep networks interact? It seems a little odd to me to have c-rep and resources, but not an analogous thing for @-rep.

Do Anarchists have an analogous system? Different Anarchists will have different standings with the community, or will be members of communities with different total resources.

For example, one of my characters lived on an Extropian Mutualist habitat, and we covered how he invested a lot of effort into doing technical work to maintain the ship, and earned an informal "trusted status" as a prominent engineer. Is there a Resources-for-Anarchists that we could use to represent that, or is that just having a high @-Rep?


At first I was going to offer a counterpoint, but I agree with you on second thought. I've always told my playgroup that C-Rep represents your stocks, non-liquid assets, and career in the hypercorps. But there's no particular reason it couldn't also represent your money and credit accounts.

I think they should simplify currency down to one system. It might be more elegant in the long run. People who deal in money just either bead-count (if they're in the slums) or use C-Rep (once they have a career and financials).

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

LibraryDrone LibraryDrone's picture
gleech wrote:

gleech wrote:

I'd like to see actual numbers on that. At the very absolute least, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's not happy about morphs getting more homogeneous. And I don't think I'm the only one who's annoyed that "I get way less benefit from an upgraded morph."

There might be a kind of compromise there: instead of getting x-points-per-day, could we get x-points-per-*turn* (and x-points-per-test when outside of combat)? That way, at least I'd be getting a consistent, all-the-time benefit (which is my major complaint).

Edit: I kind of like the idea of giving morphs "special abilities" completely separate from their pools and mods.

I wasn't saying that the current solution is perfect, but until I got on this forum every single person I ever talked to about EP had major MAJOR problems with trying to do re- sleeving to the point where DMs were cutting out the re-sleeving in new morphs thing entirely and I'm having to beg people to try ep2 with me because they hated morph/re-sleeving system in ep1 so much that it turned them off the game entirely. Building the initial morph was a lot of fun, but changing morphs was SUCH a pain in the ass

gleech wrote:

I mean, you're not wrong, but that seems like a pretty trivial dismisal of opinions you don't like - and I doubt you'd be satisfied with that if you were on the "just stick with the 1st edition" end.

It's not that I dislike your opinion, I just disagree with it. Reading your posts on this thread... it looks like you hate pretty much everything about what they're changing. And I don't quite understand why your switching to ep 2 if you and your players actually LIKED the way ep1 worked. Your opinions on ep 1 are perfectly valid, but its mildly irksome to see this effort at making the game easier on those that couldn't handle the original system getting torn down.

gleech wrote:

I meant that core EP should be kept "crunchy", and Transhumanity's Fate should cover those who like narativist play (and/or don't like crunch). It sounds like you read me the other way?

I am, for the record, exactly a player who likes "crunch but not that much crunch."

What I meant was that While ep1 was TO crunchy (at least when it came to morphs/re-sleeving) Trashumanity's Fate is not NEARLY crunchy enough, even for my group which tends to like narrative more than combat.

I hadn't meant to come off as combative on my original replies btw. sorry if i did.

“Science fiction is very well suited to asking philosophical questions; questions about the nature of reality, what it means to be human, how do we know the things that we think we know.”
― Ted Chiang

Decivre Decivre's picture
LibraryDrone wrote:What I

LibraryDrone wrote:
What I meant was that While ep1 was TO crunchy (at least when it came to morphs/re-sleeving) Trashumanity's Fate is not NEARLY crunchy enough, even for my group which tends to like narrative more than combat.

I'm hoping the game has a narrativist/simulationist feel to it, rather than the cinematic/simulationist feel of the original. Greg Stolze's Reign is a good game of the style I hope they're aiming for. A game where you could theoretically nit-pick each piece of equipment you have if you want, and yet money is an abstract score from 1-10. My main group won't probably use the narrative mechanics much, and just stick to the dice swaps and extra actions. But I know people who like that sort of mechanic, and that might be a really good way to draw them into the game.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Pages

Topic locked