Making Characters - Open Discussion

284 posts / 0 new
Last post
Theliel Theliel's picture
Question -

Quote:
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. I'd also say neither of us are big on penalizing low social skill PCs from participating in NPCs talks if a more socially skilled PC is "leading" the interaction. (E.g., the NPC is going to pay more attention to the words of the fixer with Persuade 80 than the socially graceless enforcer, unless the enforcer is making a point of being a huge jagoff).

Do we say to do this in the rules? Not really. I think it's a GMing style/play culture thing that comes out of years of playing and reading about lots of different social skills systems and ways of using them as GMs across many games. At any rate, it's not our intent that the system sideline low-social PCs from roleplay.

I get where you are coming from trying to keep everyone involved, but it seems to be this only applies to social characters specifically. There's nothing to keep low-combat characters involved in combat in a way other than getting mauled, and with Infosec one of two skills that can't be defaulted there's a clear desire to keep low-hacking characters out of the info realm.

If there's no penalty to being a low-social skill character because player skill can make up for it, what does the guy who bothered to not dump-stat SAV & get the various skills get out of it?

It's a longstanding question, but given all the other things that being a clever player just can't get you that you could be up to in EP it seems if the design is to deprioritize social skills & stats why is there so much kit that fiddles with skill values, or multiple social skills? Why not just have the implants/ware grant Moxie points & have a single 'talking' skill?

I'd say that having a design that devalues social skills directly leads to MurderHobo & Jackass Savant Syndrome.

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.

ETA -

Quote:

I think we'll need to see the updated Jamming material before making that call. The 1E rules were written with the 1E skills in mind, and I'd be shocked if they didn't streamline the skills involved. We already know that Interfacing is used to operate the onboard weapons for bots and jammed vehicles ("Interface is also used to attack with non-portable weapon emplacements and weapons mounted upon bots, vehicles, or spacecraft…") so there's no need for your Hacker/Jammer to pick up Guns unless he needs to.

Missed that bit, so it's even more criminal that Jammer doesn't come with Interface. Like that package needs to have a warning that says "I know this says it has what you need to fly, repair & know all about drones, but it doesn't actually include the skill to use anything on the drone, stay connected, or use weapons on it."

And by "Jam" I'm using the "jam frequencies" from the Interface skill description on page 15.

While in 1E your Muse came with some basic skills, 2nd should look to increasing them to include infosec (your muse has got Norton/Avast or Lavasoft installed) - otherwise add an infosec skillsoft onto the list of 'must have survival equipment' if you want to do anything on the mesh w/out the skill trained.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
Notes on the Gear!

Gear:

Very glad to see that the blueprints are included! That resolves a lot of my worries. Implants included? Interesting. I guess that's why the Medit gets a Healing Vat (and BPs for it. Hmmmm, a firewall team with a half week of prep can come in basically fully loaded )

I know that we've called them "Makers" since 1st edition, but if they only do food and drink, I really think we should call them "food machines" instead. That or we're allowed to have things like ammo makers that make bullets but not full weapons. Cheap because they're specialized and are taking shortcuts a proper fabber wouldn't.

Firewall Gear Pack should IMO have medichines as standard, it got talked about quite a lot in build advice. Backup Insurance: is it for the same grade of Morph as your natural, or do you only get a splicer back?

For some reasons Academic has medichines and glands, which strike me as... odd. I think Academic would rather have some sort of Mesh upgrade, or a Multitasking implant.

Covert Operative seems like they're missing a knife. unless the Covert Ops Tool can turn into a stiletto as well. (which it probably does)

Enforcer looks good, though "smart monkey" strikes me as the oddball there. I like it, it's just odd.

Explorer looks good, (though would be affected if Firewall set gets medichines as standard)

Face looks alright, but now I find myself wondering what happens if your prefered morph has a lot of the same implants you already have? I suppose the blueprints can still come in handy if they're something you rely on alot.

How come Genehacker doesn't get a smart monkey too? I say switch out the sex switch to make room. (one of my recent char Ideas recently has been a genehacker specializing in birds of prey. Smart-hawks and such)

Hacker's "Tracking" might want to be named "Tracking Soft" so it sounds more like what it is.

Investigator is nice, with basically all the perception implants. COuld put them in a spot during egocasting though.

Medic gets an entire healing vat? How are they supposed to lug it around? I think I like it, but consider also getting car service so they can ambulance into position.

Mindhacker feels like they need one agressive option, perhaps a sleep poison?

Scavenger looks good to me. Generally useful and in theme.

Scientist feels like what I expected from the Academic (which is fine, they overlap a lot)

Soldier seems fine, though I imagine some people will be sad about not getting much choice in favored weapon.

Techie is probably my personal favorite, it looks a lot like what my EP1 techies tended to load up with.

Ok, now for my real concern: I like the idea of gear packages, but I think it should be... cut apart a bit more. Perhaps each career has an A and a B pack, and you pick TWO packs, but only one has to be from your own career. That way you could try to hybridize some gear wise, or play up your secondary interests.

A slight smell of ions....

Decivre Decivre's picture
Trappedinwikipedia wrote:Yeah

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:
Yeah, that's what I get for using mental math, but the point remains that the "magic numbers" at 33 and 66 won't exist, and it won't be possible to get critical and superior results at the same time, which I suspect has pretty profound ramifications.

Note that criticals supercede superior results. If you get the former, you don't get the latter.

o11o1 wrote:
Ok, now for my real concern: I like the idea of gear packages, but I think it should be... cut apart a bit more. Perhaps each career has an A and a B pack, and you pick TWO packs, but only one has to be from your own career. That way you could try to hybridize some gear wise, or play up your secondary interests.

While I like what they've done, I too am a bit saddened about the lack of option.

Perhaps instead they could create an item list of Major, Moderate and Minor item options for each career. You get a set number of Major, Moderate and Minor items off of those lists, your choice, along with all the free stuff for your campaign choice.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
Personally, I'd say I'm for

Personally, I'd say I'm for both the Gear Packs as a starting point and then similar to skill packages an explicit "Hey, you can swap an item of gear in your pack for it's equivalent in complexity if you need to" should be made. If that's not in there already, I was very tired when I read the playtest packet. And then say yes to spending CP on additional gear outright at creation. While obviously old hat players will want the full point-buy CC in the future, the very explicit "Hey you can tweak this" to basically every component of CC basically means that players can smash together an archetype really quick, but also adjust to their intended goals if they need to.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
RobBoyle wrote:Ultimates have

RobBoyle wrote:
Ultimates have indeed been dropped as a PC faction. As you noted, we pushed them more in the fascist/x-threat direction, and we don't want to be encouraging people to play fascists.

This is such a weird thing to say when Jovians are still playable. Now, I'm all for making the Jovians less ridiculously fascist, but you've already said you're not going to be making all that big changes to the setting and the Jovians as written are explicitly and literally fascist-loving authoritarian jerks that hate personal liberties.

So you're basically saying that the pseudofascist Übermensch-wannabes warrior-ascetic aren't OK because you don't want to encourage playing fascists, but playing the actual, literal fascists is something you do encourage.

jackgraham wrote:
Do we say to do this in the rules? Not really. I think it's a GMing style/play culture thing that comes out of years of playing and reading about lots of different social skills systems and ways of using them as GMs across many games. At any rate, it's not our intent that the system sideline low-social PCs from roleplay.

If that's your intent I would really encourage designing the system to not discourage low-social PCs from interacting socially with NPCs. EP1e's rules for interacting with NPCs were extremely bare bones - practically non-existent - but the way they were written were such that if you wanted something from an NPC, it was best accomplished by having the Faceman do all the talking while the rest of the PCs perused the scenery. Once Faceman starts talking, there's nothing in the rules that would let Jenny Average help out.

At least in combat, for all that I harp on it, everyone can contribute in some manner because all else being equal, a friend with a gun is two extra attacks with a semi-auto rifle attached to a body that has its own health track. A friend with a smile can't actually contribute anything to a negotiation.

@-rep +2
C-rep +1

Decivre Decivre's picture
RobBoyle wrote:Ultimates have

RobBoyle wrote:
Ultimates have indeed been dropped as a PC faction. As you noted, we pushed them more in the fascist/x-threat direction, and we don't want to be encouraging people to play fascists.

I think that's a real shame. The Iconists served as an interesting moral group within the faction. Plus, I liked to think that everyone is an X-threat to some degree; one underlying theme is how we are most dangerous to ourselves.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

atamajakki atamajakki's picture
Really unhappy with this. I

Really unhappy with this. I always saw the fascist Ultimates as a radical munority, whereas the vast majority of the movement cared more about pursuing self-perfection and testing themselves. My favorite character is an Ultimate who was a warrior-poet who believed that transhumanity was full of potential, and this was the core of the Ultimates as I read them from day one; disavowing them as pure antagonists does the setting a major disservice.

And by this logic, shouldn't the Jovians be off the list as well? The average transhuman is infinitely more likely to have a pleasant interaction with an Ultimate (who, at worst, will deride them as inferior) than a Jovian (who, guaranteed, sees them as a soullless synthetic horror trying to kill everything they stand for).

I can't express strongly enough how much I dislike this decision. If you're worried about fascism at the game table, then say "THE FASCISTS ARE EVIL" instead of cutting away vibrant parts of the setting that have nothing to do with fascism.

atamajakki atamajakki's picture
The Jovians are regressive

Almost every bloc in the game has an "evil" element, so saying that some Ultimates are an x-threat while allowing everyone else at the table is nonsensical; I'm sure there are serparatist Mercurials, Barsoomian terrorists, and Argonaut mad scientists just as capable of fucking things up as any Ultimate. And if fascism is a concern, then why are the actual no-shit facists (the Jovians) still allowed? What about the Planetary Consortium, who practice ruthless capitalism and widespready slavery? You can rock some guanxi for being a soul-trafficker with no worries, but being part of the same group as someone who calls people genetrash is right out.

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
What could I say?

What could I say?
Just look at my nametag.

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
atamajakki wrote:Really

atamajakki wrote:
Really unhappy with this. I always saw the fascist Ultimates as a radical munority, whereas the vast majority of the movement cared more about pursuing self-perfection and testing themselves. My favorite character is an Ultimate who was a warrior-poet who believed that transhumanity was full of potential, and this was the core of the Ultimates as I read them from day one; disavowing them as pure antagonists does the setting a major disservice.

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.

That said, the Iconics were an underutilized moral faction within the group that could have easily been the closest to Firewall sympathizers.

They made Exhumans playable in Transhuman. EXHUMANS!!! I absolutely hate their mindset, but still applaud their inclusion... because inclusion is a key element. Eclipse Phase is all about exploring fringe moralities, philosophies and ideas. Don't whittle that down because of the worst aspects of current events.

atamajakki wrote:
I can't express strongly enough how much I dislike this decision. If you're worried about fascism at the game table, then say "THE FASCISTS ARE EVIL" instead of cutting away vibrant parts of the setting that have nothing to do with fascism.

The self-perfection aspects of the Ultimates so intrigued me that I consider them my favorite faction to this day, and I wouldn't call myself a fascist by any measure. I like House Davion in Battletech, but I'm not a feudalist. I think the Jedi are cool, but I'm not about to worship some fictional force.

If it is feasible for me to play a sociopathic octopus with psychic powers without anyone getting uncomfortable from the implications, then I should be able to play a fascist mercenary as well. It's not about promoting an ideology, it's about giving your players freedom to explore your setting without boundaries.

That said, even if they don't change their minds it's fairly easy to create a faction in the new Edition. 30 in Interests: Ultimates, and a motivation of "+Ultimate Interests". Easy to remember, too.

CordialUltimate2 wrote:
What could I say?
Just look at my nametag.

This has been my profile pic since I've had one.

I rise, for I am worthy.... :P

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
Decivre wrote:They made

Decivre wrote:
They made Exhumans playable in Transhuman. EXHUMANS!!!

Actually, Exhumans have been playable from the start.

They're called "asyncs". :^^^^^^^)

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

mellonbread mellonbread's picture
TheGrue wrote:Decivre wrote

TheGrue wrote:
Decivre wrote:
They made Exhumans playable in Transhuman. EXHUMANS!!!

Actually, Exhumans have been playable from the start.

They're called "asyncs". :^^^^^^^)

No, those are exsurgents. All the memes are piling up in your brain.

Did you hear the one about the guy who became a fence?

Spoiler: Highlight to view
They say he was a real posthuman
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
mellonbread wrote:TheGrue

mellonbread wrote:
TheGrue wrote:
Decivre wrote:
They made Exhumans playable in Transhuman. EXHUMANS!!!

Actually, Exhumans have been playable from the start.

They're called "asyncs". :^^^^^^^)

No, those are exsurgents. All the memes are piling up in your brain.

I don't like the memes, but the memes like me.

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

Decivre Decivre's picture
One thing that's bothered me

One thing that's bothered me since I've read this release... is a high infection rating a bad thing or good thing? You get more to start with higher psi, which could imply bad thing. You also get more from psi chi sleights, which could be a good thing?

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
So, finally went through and

So, finally went through and recreated a cluster of three interlinked PC-level NPCs from my current campaign using the EP2 chargen process. Given the importance, attributes aren't given much attention in chargen — Transhuman's attribute presets (Brawler, Dilettante, Thrill Seeker, etc) feel like a good fit for the package-based creation approach. Adding them in wouldn't even require a new step, as aptitudes are already discussed in step 5.

The characters: Caleb Reis, infugee combat hacker; Miriam Wiley, social butterfly and ne'er do well; Anthony Gillotti, criminal mastermind.

Generally speaking it's simpler than the Transhuman package system, because fewer packages means fewer point overlaps which means fewer re-jiggering attempts to keep hot spot skills under the cap. Contrary to my expectation, I found myself wishing I had more points for knowledge skills while I had plenty of CP and fudgeable skill points left for active skills appropriate for each character's specialties.

Caleb is an infomorph hacker/bot jammer. Miriam is his partner, the extraverted face who escorts him into otherwise inaccessible places with a ghostrider module. Anthony is their patron/boss (who also holds their significant debts) — most of their work is done for him.

The background/career/interest setup feels like a good mix (although attribute archetypes as mentioned above would be nice). The options included currently give about 2000+ possible combinations of different skill sets, and it feels pretty flexible. I had to juggle around some of the skills after package-picking to fit the concepts I was looking for (ditching Miriam's Interfacing skill in favor of Melee for the occasional up-close self-defense, swapping Anthony's Profession: Squad Tactics for Interest: Antiques, etc) but not too dramatically. Caleb's Piloting: Aerospace skill for drone jamming feels like it could also be useful for the occasional getaway, but we'll have to wait for vehicle rules to know for sure.

Gear packages being linked to career leads to a lot of really weird problems — the 'Face' career's gear pack, for example, comes with a bunch of biomorph implants... but I'd chosen a synthmorph. The strong career/gear package connection makes sense in some ways, particularly reduction in early choices, but adding an optional gear purchasing step to replace the career package feels like it's going to be a necessity for characters to "feel right."

I'll likely try to build out the full-fledged PC party members in my campaign next.

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
The permissions of those

The permissions of those characters aren't really open, you might want to make them easier to view.

Personally I'd be a little disappointed if the Ultimates are changing, but I don't really care about whether they're a listed faction or not, because it's so easy to roll your own factions. Exhumans are in the same boat for me.

Kremlin K.O.A. Kremlin K.O.A.'s picture
RobBoyle wrote:Kremlin K.O.A.

RobBoyle wrote:
Kremlin K.O.A. wrote:

They also ended up with gear that they cannot use at all (Armor vest, smart clothes, food maker) and no way to engage in a physical combat. (Got the skills but no access to a gun drone)

The gear system needs to be passed through the can again to take infomorphs into account.

Gear packs are still a work in progress, but we are open to suggested alterations. Most of them will probably start with a weapon of some sort.

As to infomorphs -- you will have the option of switching out gear for something of an equivalent Complexity with GM approval. I've also been toying with a package that is for infomorphs in place of their normal career gear pack, but still debating that one.

I would highly recommend going the 'separate gear list for infomorphs' option, at least for the Firewall gear.
After all, Firewall handing their new Sentinel an Ecto they can't wear, a set of clothing, with armored vest, that just falls to the ground, and a food maker that sits on the table. These kinda make Firewall look like clownshoes.

I would suggest replacing all four of those with a single armed drone for infomorphs. Maybe something with grippy arms as well. Let them interact with the physical world a bit.

ThatWhichNeverWas ThatWhichNeverWas's picture
Okay, had a bit more time now.

Skill Packages:

I'm actually okay with the skill package selections thanks to duplicates being replaceable without restriction, and the Bot Jammer is an Interest, not a Career.
It might be worth putting a line or two in the 'Choose Career' and/or 'Choose Interest' paragraphs to call attention to these details.

Skills in General:

I know it's been mentioned before, and I've made my stance on Knowledge Skills known, but do we even need the Academics/Interest/Profession difference any more?
I think it might make more sense to condense these all into the basic Knowledge Skills concept and have the collective 'Sample Fields' from these skills as 'Sample Skills', so instead of [Interest: Engineering] or [Profession: Engineering] we just have [Knowledge: Engineering].
We can then use the Skill Level for the Complementary bonus to define the depth of knowledge: 40-59 is an Interest, 60-79 is Professional experience and 80+ represents an Academic (Masters or PHD) level knowledge base.

Also, and this maybe going too far, why is Fray still at 50% vs Ranged? Even with it at 100% it remains an opposed skill check - hits will be common.
I'd like to see this dropped from the standard rules and replaced with a negative trait ("You're as slow as a human without Transhuman alterations! HA!")

Alternatively, this seems like a good fit for speed-enhancing augmentation like Reflex Boosters.
Just because Speed is gone doesn't mean we can't be inhumanly fast :D

Morphs and Gear:

It's hard to make real evaluations here without seeing the Acquiring Gear and Acquiring Morphs sections, but my initial impression is very positive.
It's hard to say how important starting gear is without knowing how hard it is to get stuff during play.
Some level of flexibility in the packages would be welcome, either defined by your resources trait or simply "pick 3 items from this short list".
The Firewall package should also contain at least a small pistol or concealable melee weapon.

I'm still worried about Morphs being a CP trap though - if getting your investment back isn't an option, I may have to houserule a Resources-like trait, or have morphs temporarilly reduce the resources trait.
Just saying... :P

Social Tests/Game Style:

Want to know a really easy solution to this discussion?
If a player isn't good at speaking IRL, then they can just roll - the result says if they were convincing.
If they're good at speaking IRL then they can talk before rolling, and how convincing thev Real Life argument is applies a modifier to the roll.
Because even the best argument in the world won't land if it isn't presented in a way the subject is willing to accept and/or they can't stand your stupid face.

Ultimates:

I'm a little sad to see the Transhuman-Wandering-Samurai leave the table, but I can understand the reasoning.
Even when they're run as good guys they (ironically) drift into one-trick-pony territory; they're great in gunplay-heavy scenarios, but getting them to work in any other gametype is a bleedin' nightmare.
It's possible, but a hell of a lot of work.

One thing I could see is an explicit Firewall subculture combining Ultimate-esque self-improvement with tradecraft to become the perfect 'guardians of humanities future' or somesuch.

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?

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
ThatWhichNeverWas wrote

ThatWhichNeverWas wrote:

Ultimates:

I'm a little sad to see the Transhuman-Wandering-Samurai leave the table, but I can understand the reasoning.
Even when they're run as good guys they (ironically) drift into one-trick-pony territory; they're great in gunplay-heavy scenarios, but getting them to work in any other gametype is a bleedin' nightmare.
It's possible, but a hell of a lot of work.

Remember that Ultimates are a full fledged faction. That means they are not a loose confederation of wandering samurai (bleh), but a nation of its own with researchers, engineers, teachers, scholars, children, entertainers and much more. In the X-risk there is a sidebar about them having a possibility of running away through the gates into the galaxy to build human civilization of their own. Could a Evil Mercenary Company #145, consisting of fascist bushido jerk-offs do that?

So I currently play an Ultimate/ex-Ultimate (hard to say) Nanotech Researcher who has only passable combat skills, but was considered a fully fledged member of the Ultimates for his competence in other skills.

Rimward states that Ultimates consider almost any sort of competence usefull. So you could be a Habitat Worker Ultimate. A freaking just poet-poet Ultimate. A xenoinsectology Ultimate, whatever suits you.
It's a harmfull stereotype that they are all MRDR-jacked overhumanists.

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

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
So, on the topic of

So, on the topic of roleplaying social interactions, the way I tend to do it in tabletop games is as follows: First off, conversation is free, you don't need a roll to keep from making an ass of yourself. This means all the characters can feel free to engage in conversation and add comments as need be, there's no risk there.

The rolls come into play when you're actively trying to change their mind. For example, you ask a contact if they're willing to help with a distraction, they say no, and you can't take no for an answer. In this case, it's less a matter of tact and etiquette and more a display of your ability to making a convincing argument based on logic (With provoke for convincing arguments based on emotions, and deception for trying to lie convincingly).

At this point, the players can attempt to make their case, which can mean modifiers if they point out good arguments one could make, but in the end the dice roll is still largely important as what the players wish to say and how well the PC argues the point are two drastically different things. Just like how I wouldn't ask someone to make up a barsoomian drinking song on the spot for a singing check or take someone out to the gun range for an attack roll, I'm going to accept that there is a difference in skill between the player and their character and respect that, for better or worse.

Decivre Decivre's picture
CordialUltimate2 wrote

CordialUltimate2 wrote:
Remember that Ultimates are a full fledged faction. That means they are not a loose confederation of wandering samurai (bleh), but a nation of its own with researchers, engineers, teachers, scholars, children, entertainers and much more.

I think this gets overlooked a lot. People obsess over the Ultimates and their fixation on warfare, but the truth is that they just have a more pragmatic approach to security; the only way to truly keep someone safe is to help them protect themselves. They treat combat skills the way we treat mandatory English and math today in public schools (they probably treat those and then some as mandatory learning, as well): as something everyone in their society should be competent at. It doesn't mean that it's everyone top skillset... but it's definitely a big one.

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
Put me in the "how odd" camp

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.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
Bring Back The Honorable Ultimates

I wish to add my voice in support of keeping the "be the best you can be" warrior-poets in the setting. To me, the idea of doing as much as you can to keep your species from being destroyed strikes me as.... rather a sane response. I always saw the facist bits as a parasitic memeplex attempting to infect and take over the original sane goals, actually very much like how the Jovians, with their own "the system is trying to kill us, we have to do all we can to hole up and protect ourselves" mindset is likewise being attacked from within by the same parasitic ideologies.

Politics is messy. Embrace it, allow it to be a source for drama, adventure, and activism, that you can have a large scale problem that you can't just shoot.

The comments made by the developers about the Ulitmates makes me think that they've been treating their own setting with a certain set of blinders on about who is who. If you, as writers, don't want players to be playing the bad guys, consider making the bad guys less bad? This applies to Ultimates, Jovians, and to some degree even Ex-humans.

A slight smell of ions....

swordchucks swordchucks's picture
Field Skills

I've been thinking about this pretty hard, and I think the best way to tackle field skills (on the active skills side) is actually to treat them like specializations wherein you can take multiple specializations. Thus, instead of Hardware: Electronics 60, you'd have Hardware 30 (Electronics +30). This does a number of good things in that it removes any need to default between the skills (if you are a generalist, you know all the fields, but if you specialize, the degree of specialization is clear).

On the other hand, I don't think this works so well on the Knowledge side, though you could probably merge the existing academics into a few meta-fields and then do that, etc.

...

On Ultimates, I'm fine with them dying as a unique faction. They were a faction but also a corporation, which was... odd. The fact that they had to have their own unique Networking and Rep stuff just made it unwieldy. I'd say nothing should specifically stop players from being Ultimates, but having a bunch of extra mechanics just for them is annoying.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
swordchucks wrote:I've been

swordchucks wrote:
I've been thinking about this pretty hard, and I think the best way to tackle field skills (on the active skills side) is actually to treat them like specializations wherein you can take multiple specializations. Thus, instead of Hardware: Electronics 60, you'd have Hardware 30 (Electronics +30). This does a number of good things in that it removes any need to default between the skills (if you are a generalist, you know all the fields, but if you specialize, the degree of specialization is clear).

On the other hand, I don't think this works so well on the Knowledge side, though you could probably merge the existing academics into a few meta-fields and then do that, etc..

So you're thinking that the Field skills would have a lower Generalist Cap to account for that? This sounds interesting overall.

A slight smell of ions....

Decivre Decivre's picture
o11o1 wrote:So you're

o11o1 wrote:
So you're thinking that the Field skills would have a lower Generalist Cap to account for that? This sounds interesting overall.

This I could get behind. Perhaps the field skill caps at 60, and from there you must purchase specializations for further training (with that cap, 5 specializations would equate to a maxed regular skill with single specialization).

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

CordialUltimate2 CordialUltimate2's picture
Field Skills

Just have them be cheaper. Like 3 points for 2 Active Skillpoints, or heck even 2 for 1. That way you can have a reasonable competence in them, everyone can buy some Groundcraft on the cheap and this flavourfull Exotic: Busking will not cost you your ability to dodge bullets.

That's how I will houserule that.

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

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
Pulled from the sample characters thread

Pulled this because it's relevant to the mechanics of the skills engine; in that having too many separate skills turns into a Skill Point Tax.

Theliel wrote:
What I consider Essential Skills (Save vs. Suck/Die) - Fray (trained, so you can crit), Guns or Melee, Infosec, Interface, Free Fall, Athletics, Perception. You *might* be able to skimp on Infosec, but only if you're in a biomorph. All of these should be above 50 or you'll get jammed/hacked/pulled out an airlock/miss constantly.

I'll start with saying that Perception isn't Save or Suck for each character, but for the party/sub-parties (if you do what you shouldn't do, but sometimes have to - split the party). Someone needs to be able to spot the thread/threat, but you can get away with having that as a party resource. Worst-case, get an AI (such as a muse) to cover the base. Which is good, because only 4 backgrounds, NO careers and 2 interests get it, and some careers who ought to get it, don't. (The combat-oriented ones, who would presumably want to spot the ambush first, don't get any good way to do so).

Fray and Guns/Melee are required to participate in combat in personal. Not everyone needs to do that in EP; especially if you ain't got no body, or your weapons systems are separate from your body (running gun drones); in which case you had best make sure you can keep comms up and can effectively issue orders (Infosec and Interface), and if physically present, you still need to dodge incoming. So, yeah, kinda necessary for everyone, not just the gunbunnies and kung-fu-fighters. Sometimes the face may have to resort to ultimate ratio regnum, and sometimes you run into Jovians whose gear you just can't hack. I always used to advise mages and in SR that "leadbolt has no drain, and works the same in areas with background count."

Athletics/Freefall - if you can't move well, you can't get past environmental obstacles. In micrograv, you might not be able to move at all. Explicitly the same skill, only one is used in grav, and one is used in micrograv; needlessly duplicative, as the baseline campaigns will commonly involve both environments.

Infosec/Interface: I'll have to see the hacking rules to decide whether Infosec is critical or not on a per-player or on a per-party basis. So far I would suspect this is highly important on a per-character basis, but mainly outside of combat; but necessary at a per-party level. More important than Perceive, less than Fray. On the other hand, Interface is not necessarily needed for every character, but most will want some, and some will want quite a lot.

swordchucks swordchucks's picture
Field Skills

Decivre wrote:
o11o1 wrote:
So you're thinking that the Field skills would have a lower Generalist Cap to account for that? This sounds interesting overall.

This I could get behind. Perhaps the field skill caps at 60, and from there you must purchase specializations for further training (with that cap, 5 specializations would equate to a maxed regular skill with single specialization).

How about field skills have the following rules:

Field Skills are skills which cover a wide array of related topics. You can purchase a field skill normally at any value up to 40 as normal. Once you have a field skill at 40, you may then opt to advance into specialized versions of that skills. By dedicating 5 skill points to a field of specialization, the character gains a +10 bonus to checks of that skill when the specialization applies. You may have any number of specializations in a field skill, but no more than +40 to any one specialization at character creation.

Example: A character can have Medicine 40 (Veterinary +30, Uplifts +40). This would give the character a 70 on a check to heal a wounded smartape, an 80 on a check to patch up a hominid, but only a 40 to treat a splicer. Assuming a COG of 15, this would cost a total of 60 skill points.

More radical suggestion:

Break up academics, interests, and professions into a series of broad categories and then do the same thing for them. For instance, Academics: Life Sciences 40 (Astrobiology +30, Biology +20) could be a thing. This would allow characters to have a certain base level in a bunch of related fields and then cheaply specialize into more narrow fields. This would somewhat relieve issues with some skills being too narrow and others too broad.

MAD Crab MAD Crab's picture
Quote:Athletics/Freefall - if

Quote:
Athletics/Freefall - if you can't move well, you can't get past environmental obstacles. In micrograv, you might not be able to move at all. Explicitly the same skill, only one is used in grav, and one is used in micrograv; needlessly duplicative, as the baseline campaigns will commonly involve both environments.

Just to take a slight issue with this - Running or walking is NOT the same as being able to maneuver in zero g. They are completely different skillsets, and zero-g is not intuitive for anything with an inner ear.

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
MAD Crab wrote:Quote

MAD Crab wrote:
Quote:
Athletics/Freefall - if you can't move well, you can't get past environmental obstacles. In micrograv, you might not be able to move at all. Explicitly the same skill, only one is used in grav, and one is used in micrograv; needlessly duplicative, as the baseline campaigns will commonly involve both environments.

Just to take a slight issue with this - Running or walking is NOT the same as being able to maneuver in zero g. They are completely different skillsets, and zero-g is not intuitive for anything with an inner ear.

Athletics covers a bunch of disparate skill types, explicitly, it's not just "running and walking":
Quote:
Athletics encompasses various types of physical activity in environments with gravity. Use Athletics to scale a wall, tread water, throw a grenade, jump a crevasse, vault a table, backflip off a ledge, or make a barrel roll with a winged morph.

And freefall is explicitly "do these things in microgravity"
Quote:
Free Fall is the companion skill to Athletics and Pilot, encompassing physical activities in microgravity environments or when free falling.

(Free fall also overlaps with Pilot: Aerospace quite a bit; basically depending if you're in a morph or a vehicle).

My argument is that - for PCs who are "normally" expected to be basically competent in both grav and micrograv, separating the two at the skill level is an unnecessary granularity. If you have a need to generate a PC who is not competent in one environment or the other, I proposed a negative trait; as basic exception-driven design. That's why I call it a Skill Tax; because the non-exceptional status is "you have to have both."

(This is driving a lot of the complaints about the Field skills as well, incidentally, in that a lot of character concepts will need to cover multiple Fields unless you define them very broadly)

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Theliel wrote:There's nothing

Theliel wrote:

While in 1E your Muse came with some basic skills, 2nd should look to increasing them to include infosec (your muse has got Norton/Avast or Lavasoft installed)

Muses had Infosec in 1E, and they will continue to have it in 2E.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

Decivre Decivre's picture
MAD Crab wrote:Quote

MAD Crab wrote:
Just to take a slight issue with this - Running or walking is NOT the same as being able to maneuver in zero g. They are completely different skillsets, and zero-g is not intuitive for anything with an inner ear.

I would argue that flight has more in common with micrograv movement than land-based locomotion. But I still prefer the idea that you use Free Fall when you aren't resisting gravity and Athletics when you are. It means that the skillset for space colonists is contrasted from the skillset of planetside civilians. A person who has never walked on a planet might have a very hard time of it, regardless of their agility on the ship. The same is true in converse.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Theliel wrote:

Theliel wrote:

I get where you are coming from trying to keep everyone involved, but it seems to be this only applies to social characters specifically. There's nothing to keep low-combat characters involved in combat in a way other than getting mauled

FYI we've included some in-combat uses for social skills in the Combat chapter.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
LatwPIAT wrote:RobBoyle wrote

LatwPIAT wrote:
RobBoyle wrote:
Ultimates have indeed been dropped as a PC faction. As you noted, we pushed them more in the fascist/x-threat direction, and we don't want to be encouraging people to play fascists.

This is such a weird thing to say when Jovians are still playable. Now, I'm all for making the Jovians less ridiculously fascist, but you've already said you're not going to be making all that big changes to the setting and the Jovians as written are explicitly and literally fascist-loving authoritarian jerks that hate personal liberties.

Not really. The Jovian government is fascist, doesn't mean all of its citizens are. Besides, they're the main population of biocons, and as much as I'm not a fan of biocons, I want them to be a playable faction. The ultimates are a monastic military order that you don't really join unless you agree with their proto-fascist core principles.

In any case, as I've said elsewhere: the ultimates are not going away, they're included in the book. We simply chose not to list them in the abbreviated section on choosing a faction in chargen. If you really wanted to still play an ultimate (hopefully a non-fascist one!), you still can, and it's as easy as choosing the Ultimate Faction motivation in that step -- just as you could with any of the other (mostly smaller) factions we don't include in the list. We just chose not to push them as a primary choice.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Decivre wrote:One thing that

Decivre wrote:
One thing that's bothered me since I've read this release... is a high infection rating a bad thing or good thing? You get more to start with higher psi, which could imply bad thing. You also get more from psi chi sleights, which could be a good thing?

Technically a bad thing. It's a test the infection makes to assume influence over the character. Since the infection is part of the PC, they get to make the roll -- but it's one they want to lose.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

Atlatl Jones Atlatl Jones's picture
TheGrue wrote:There are 24

TheGrue wrote:
There are 24 skills in EP 2E.

9 are linked to COG
5 are linked to REF
4 are linked to SAV
2 are linked to INT
2 are linked to SOM
1 is linked to WIL
1 is not linked to any aptitude

Clearly, not all aptitudes were created equally.

I noticed this too. COG and REF are uber-aptitudes now. This is especially odd, since a couple skills that feel like they're more about fine body control (SOM), Free Fall and Infiltrate, are currently REF skills. Similarly, Kinesics could easily be an INT skill.

Even more radically, perhaps the number of aptitudes could be reduced to make them more even.

(Also, Psi is listed as being linked to WIL in the chart on p.14, but in the description on p.17 it's COG linked.)

Overall I really like the condensed skill list, but agree with the others that there are too many Field skills, and/or that they cost too much. Either make the "Fields" much more broad, get rid of the fields entirely, and save the distinctions for specializations, and/or reduce their cost, like Knowledge skills. Similarly, many Exotic skills should probably be treated like Knowledge skills for cost.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
Atlatl Jones wrote:TheGrue

Atlatl Jones wrote:
TheGrue wrote:
There are 24 skills in EP 2E.

9 are linked to COG
5 are linked to REF
4 are linked to SAV
2 are linked to INT
2 are linked to SOM
1 is linked to WIL
1 is not linked to any aptitude

Clearly, not all aptitudes were created equally.

I noticed this too. COG and REF are uber-aptitudes now. This is especially odd, since a couple skills that feel like they're more about fine body control (SOM), Free Fall and Infiltrate, are currently REF skills. Similarly, Kinesics could easily be an INT skill.

Even more radically, perhaps the number of aptitudes could be reduced to make them more even.

(Also, Psi is listed as being linked to WIL in the chart on p.14, but in the description on p.17 it's COG linked.)

Overall I really like the condensed skill list, but agree with the others that there are too many Field skills, and/or that they cost too much. Either make the "Fields" much more broad, get rid of the fields entirely, and save the distinctions for specializations, and/or reduce their cost, like Knowledge skills. Similarly, many Exotic skills should probably be treated like Knowledge skills for cost.

Six Aptitudes results in some nice symmetries that we would lose out on by going down to anything other than just three. Not even Transhumanities Fate cuts it that tight.

Still, COG has managed to gobble up more than it's fair share of attached skills. Especially when many of them are field skills to boot, so a character may very well have multiple instances. I get that we shouldn't be trying to "min max" our characters aptitude wise, and instead have more of their character in it, it seems like being anything other than high COG or High REF is just not very well rewarded.

A slight smell of ions....

LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
I hate my faction and I want

I hate my faction and I want to support it!
"Note that faction allegiance does not necessarily mean you are a hardcore true believer. You may have been born or raised into a faction and reluctantly stuck with it, or you may be finding yourself questioning some of the faction’s tenets. You may be a dissident, trying to actively change the faction from within. For now, your faction allegiance indicates the transhuman grouping you are most familiar with and whose goals you at least nominally support."

Having a motivation of "+[Faction] Interests" seems weird when you're supposed to pick a faction even if it means you're reluctantly going along with it, being a dissident, or simply having grown up and being familiar with it.

@-rep +2
C-rep +1

o11o1 o11o1's picture
LatwPIAT wrote:I hate my

LatwPIAT wrote:
I hate my faction and I want to support it!
Having a motivation of "+[Faction] Interests" seems weird when you're supposed to pick a faction even if it means you're reluctantly going along with it, being a dissident, or simply having grown up and being familiar with it.

I suppose it could be neat to run a character who's breaking away from their family and wants to rebel against them, thus having "-[Faction] Interests" instead. Defined by their opposition, rather than working towards something.

A slight smell of ions....

Urthdigger Urthdigger's picture
LatwPIAT wrote:I hate my

LatwPIAT wrote:
I hate my faction and I want to support it!
"Note that faction allegiance does not necessarily mean you are a hardcore true believer. You may have been born or raised into a faction and reluctantly stuck with it, or you may be finding yourself questioning some of the faction’s tenets. You may be a dissident, trying to actively change the faction from within. For now, your faction allegiance indicates the transhuman grouping you are most familiar with and whose goals you at least nominally support."

Having a motivation of "+[Faction] Interests" seems weird when you're supposed to pick a faction even if it means you're reluctantly going along with it, being a dissident, or simply having grown up and being familiar with it.

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

NotActuallyTim NotActuallyTim's picture
Urthdigger 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.

Theliel Theliel's picture
Thoguhts on Morph Bonuses

Hey, since equipment is back to doing The Thing that makes character generation & morph transitions suck (which of those bonuses to skills were implants? Which were morph trait bonuses? Which are ego? Now recalculate based on your new morph!) why not give various morphs specific bonuses to actions? Like you could give the larger morphs a +15 to tests of strength, or +15 to tests of endurance to the hybernoid? Just treat the morph as a special kind of equipment. Nothing to recalculate, just another fiddly bonus to remember which is OK since those didn't get dropped in this edition.

Baribal Baribal's picture
...and now for my 0.02 points

...and now for my 0.02 points of @-rep:

1. Summing skills and their redistribution is weird. When, for instance, I get 30 and 60 points in "Academics: Psychology" for being an Enclaver Mindhacker, then I could choose to keep the 30 and move the 60 into any other knowledge skills? Shouldn't there at least be a minor caveat like "keep at least the highest skill point block, at least until it gets you to 80 points for that skill"? (I've got COG 25, so with 60 points I already broke the 80-point cap.)

2. At least for me and on the first try, the character generation turned out to be quite stingy with freely allottable skill points. Most were the product of redistributing skill sums, which happened to be in knowledge skills, so my active skills became rather anemic. Right now I'm looking at Fray 10, Free Fall 10, Guns 35, and no way in sight to get those to at least mediocre levels. This isn't a combat character, and by coincidence a most-of-the-time infomorph, but when the shooting starts, I'd like to at least sometimes jam a pod to interact with the battlefield physically; if only to jam a connector up an opponent's socket to break into their TacNet that more easily. Well, maybe I *could* leave those activities to my muse; that'd make for a nice inversion of what how things work by default. I'll need some rules for extending pleasure pod AIs, thank you very much.

3. Expert Training. Is it intended and / or implied that this raises the skill cap only after allotting and redistributing skill points, and that the points from 80 to 90 have to be bought with CP?

4. I think that morphs should wholly be treated like equipment. To invest CP directly in a morph is counter to the very notion of the ego-morph distinction.

5. Resource trait; may we get a bit of an essay about how to launder money in the panopticon that is the EP universe? After all, you can't very well spend your main identities riches while being undercover for Firewall.

6. If you want to push the Ultimates in the direction of Fascism (and as they're a mercenary company that has become a polity, sure, why not), I'd really, really like the Iconics to break away and become a faction (I propose Culminates as their name) of their own, emphasizing the self-improvement / self-realization aspect of the Ultimate philosophy, instead of the apparently top-down direction setting of the Ultimate polity. That would also help to stress what Ultimates are and what they are not, by providing a similar-but different group to contrast them with, allowing to shine a stronger light on those subtleties.
As for discouraging people to play fascists, I see no reason at all to do that. Not only are roleplaying games just that, games, they're also games about exploring alternatives. Having fascist player characters adds all the more possible permutations of interaction within the player group, and with their environment, allows for the exploration of an even broader set of mentalities, adds tension and drama, heck, if played to the hilt, it'd lead to bloodied stacks being thrown out the airlock. Just as morphs are temporary and exchangeable shells for characters, so are characters shells for players; exchangeable, tools to interact with the game world, but of no consequence outside of it.

Morgan's Butchery | Body bank, morph individualization and upgrades | Psychotherapy and Psychosurgery, therapeutic and recreational | http://eclipsephase.com/comment/59484#comment-59484

Decivre Decivre's picture
Theliel wrote:Hey, since

Theliel wrote:
Hey, since equipment is back to doing The Thing that makes character generation & morph transitions suck (which of those bonuses to skills were implants? Which were morph trait bonuses? Which are ego? Now recalculate based on your new morph!)

Note that unlike in 1st Edition, morphs and implants DO NOT affect your base aptitudes. That's the important distinction, because the hassle in 1st Edition was recalculating your lucidity, initiative, and other secondary traits, not skill bonuses. No one's hated skill bonuses.

The closest they come to modifying the aptitude is when they grant bonuses to the check, like muscle augmentation.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Ian Argent Ian Argent's picture
Skill customization

I read the relevant part of skill customization as "you can rearrange your skill points freely, as long as you don't move knowledge skill points to active skills." If you are limited to the skills in your packages only, and can't start up new skills, you're REALLY constrained in package choices.

Quote:
Players should feel free to switch their skills around as long as the
number of points remains the same, and as long as Knowledge skill points only go toward other Knowledge skills.

OTOH, it looks like some missed editing, as the immediatley previous paragraph says

Quote:
If a character acquired the same skill more than once, those points
may be added together or the additional points may be applied to any other skill of the player’s choosing. Note that points for Knowledge skills may only be used for other Knowledge skills; however, points for Active skills may be used for either Active or Knowledge skills.

So I think we need some clarity here. The first does not directly contradict the second, but the second is a good deal more open-ended.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Still, COG has managed

Quote:
Still, COG has managed to gobble up more than it's fair share of attached skills. Especially when many of them are field skills to boot, so a character may very well have multiple instances. I get that we shouldn't be trying to "min max" our characters aptitude wise, and instead have more of their character in it, it seems like being anything other than high COG or High REF is just not very well rewarded.

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.

It would almost balance out the mix of active skills, and I think INT is really a better place for those skills anyways...

Decivre Decivre'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.)


I like Free Fall being SOM. Interface and Research, however, I think should remain under the same aptitude as Infosec and Program. Search algorithms don't strike me as intuitive, and Interface includes one's ability to adapt to new interfaces (which takes some cognitive work in my opinion).

WIL should definitely be the Psi aptitude.

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

Never forget that Willpower is not only your resistance against mental stress and psi, it's also the source of your lucidity score. The durability of the mind.

That, by itself, makes it potentially important as hell. At tables I've been at, it's anywhere between dump stat and god stat entirely based on how much the GM likes TITANs and Exsurgents.

eaton wrote:
It would almost balance out the mix of active skills, and I think INT is really a better place for those skills anyways...

Any aptitude with a field skill is scarcely in need of more material. It's the field-less aptitudes that are lacking love.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

gleech gleech's picture
drunk thoughts

I admit that I have not gone back over the last 100+ comments.

For all the parts where it tells you that you can bank a character-creation resource and assign it during play, please god change that to "your GM may allow you to..." This is one of those things where different groups will have different standards: personally, I would want to choke like out of a player who decided, at a climactic moment, "shazam, suddenly my character is a hacker, and suddenly he speaks mandarin!" I see nothing wrong with a GM wanting to have a fairly fixed party when play starts, and expecting players to, you know, *ask* if they're not clear on how valuable something's going to be.

It's almost certainly been said before, but I'd like to see a few more backgrounds make the official list. On the other hand, I'm glad that "indenture" is on the new list, and it's probably a huge improvement (from a balance perspective) to take away the "Infolife buy tech skills at half CP" thing (even if we still bought things with CP).

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!"

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." With the doubling-at-60 gone, it looks like that could be extremely simple -- something like "take 200 ranks in active skills, 100 ranks in knowledge skills, and spend 100 ranks however you want," or whatever the actual numbers are.

At this point, I'm sure it's a fight I've already lost, but, if morph apt-maxes are gone, and if doubling-at-60 is gone, why not just remove the point-pools and go back to morphs geting "+10 to APT"? In the current edition, that would result in "+10 to APT-linked skills" in a very direct, math-free sense.

(Yes, I know you used your ego aptitude and not your morph-modified aptitude when you bought skills, and so doubling-at-60 had nothing to do with morph bonuses. This still confused new players.)

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.

Speaking of fights I've already lost, having seen the morph rules, I still completely detest Flex, and really want rules to remove it from games I GM. I know nobody cares, but I hate Flex to an "I will just keep playing EP1" degree.

Oh, I note that C-Rep is still one rep network that covers more-than-half the solar system, including "capitalists." Finding some way to break that into smaller networks might be a good thing. (It never made much sense to me that C-rep spends in the Jovian "Republic", Extropia and Venus.)

Edit: upon reading up just a little, if the problem was recomputing derived stats, that completely mystifies me. Those are trivial to do, I have no idea how that's hard - especially since DUR, WT and DR are still morph-derived and go on the same line as INIT, LUC, TT and IR. Did people actually have that much trouble putting four numbers on a 3x5 notecard?

Edit 2: The Firewall standard gear pack is good! I ran a Firewall game, and I had more than one player ask me if he could safely access the Eye if he didn't have active Anonymous Mesh Services. Just giving all Firewall characters a Utilitool, a tac-net and encryption software is probably a very good idea. On the other hand, I'd like to see better support for non-Firewall games and non-Firewall characters - one thing my group has had fun with is a party that mixed one Proxy, several Sentinels and several Useful Locals, and I'd hate to see doing that get harder (or less rewarding).

Edit 3: I also oppose making "+Faction Interest" a fixed first motive. In EP1, I don't think I've ever had a player pick +Faction as a motivation voluntarily, and I don't see anything good coming from telling, for example, Extropian players that they have to be +Extropian by default (that could also easily lead to some insufferable roll-playing moments). I think downgrading that to a suggestion - possibly with the warning that "failing to contribute to your faction will lead to a loss of rep" - would be a good idea.

Edit 4: I like that Survival made the skill list. I had several characters - notably a gatecrasher - "fake" it with Interest: Survival. It's also an appropriate skill for a Barsoomian nomad to have. It came up enough - "How do I represent that my character knows how to 'rough it'?" - that it probably deserves to be a skill. I'm also happy to see the networking skills as such go, as they were CP drains on non-SAV-based characters.



Decivre Decivre's picture
gleech wrote:At this point, I

gleech wrote:
At this point, I'm sure it's a fight I've already lost, but, if morph apt-maxes are gone, and if doubling-at-60 is gone, why not just remove the point-pools and go back to morphs geting "+10 to APT"? In the current edition, that would result in "+10 to APT-linked skills" in a very direct, math-free sense.

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.

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.

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

gleech wrote:
Speaking of fights I've already lost, having seen the morph rules, I still completely detest Flex, and really want rules to remove it from games I GM. I know nobody cares, but I hate Flex to an "I will just keep playing EP1" degree.

I kinda like it as the replacement to 1st Edition's moxie. The fact that it can be enhanced by bodies is a bit odd to me, but I'll chalk it up to extra edge granted by precise harmony with the mind.

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

gleech wrote:
Oh, I note that C-Rep is still one rep network that covers more-than-half the solar system, including "capitalists." Finding some way to break that into smaller networks might be a good thing. (It never made much sense to me that C-rep spends in the Jovian "Republic", Extropia and Venus.)

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.

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

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Pages

Topic locked