Topic: Fixed -vs- Variable DP

[Ecthelion]

Variable, we never had a problem with them. Can anyone tell me why fixed DPs should be better or why variable DPs are a problem?

[jolt]

Fixed; for pretty much the reasons listed here already.

Though I've been playing with the same group for a long time now (many of whom were friends before I started gaming with them) and so while we'll experiment at times having one character be uber compared to the others just gets stale.

jolt

[WoeRie]

@Ecthelion: Some players put 20DP each level in Stats, just because the DP. This resulted in very weak characters in the first 1-3 levels, but afterwards they were totally uber. With 60+DP at level 6 and still growing. One player had all stats at 91 (except Presence) at level 6 while others only had 35. This very much unbalanced the group and resulted in Munchkinism.

[jolt]

Variable, we never had a problem with them. Can anyone tell me why fixed DPs should be better or why variable DPs are a problem?

No, I can't.  Because what might be a problem in my game could be a non-issue in yours and vice-versa.  That being said, it was my players who elected to go the fixed route.  If they really wanted to go variable I don't think I'd have any problem with it.  I might prefer fixed because I think it's a tad quicker and players can hardly complain about imbalances when everyone starts on the same foot and had the same opportunities on the choices they made.  Just my opinion.

jolt

[Ecthelion]

@Ecthelion: Some players put 20DP each level in Stats, just because the DP. This resulted in very weak characters in the first 1-3 levels, but afterwards they were totally uber. With 60+DP at level 6 and still growing. One player had all stats at 91 (except Presence) at level 6 while others only had 35. This very much unbalanced the group and resulted in Munchkinism.

What you describe is typical for any investment. The player investing 20 DPs into stats per level had to live with his character being weakest of all for some levels but after perhaps level 10 or so his investment paid out and he had more skill ranks. This per se is not a problem. But I agree that it can be a problem if it is handled differently across the group and some players envy the higher amount of DPs and the PC being superior at later levels - not uncommon I think. If all spend a similar amount of DPs into stats or can live with the differences, then this isn't a problem. As jolt mentioned, it might be different from group to group.

[Karizma]

@Ecthelion: Some players put 20DP each level in Stats, just because the DP. This resulted in very weak characters in the first 1-3 levels, but afterwards they were totally uber. With 60+DP at level 6 and still growing. One player had all stats at 91 (except Presence) at level 6 while others only had 35. This very much unbalanced the group and resulted in Munchkinism.

What you describe is typical for any investment. The player investing 20 DPs into stats per level had to live with his character being weakest of all for some levels but after perhaps level 10 or so his investment paid out and he had more skill ranks. This per se is not a problem. But I agree that it can be a problem if it is handled differently across the group and some players envy the higher amount of DPs and the PC being superior at later levels - not uncommon I think. If all spend a similar amount of DPs into stats or can live with the differences, then this isn't a problem. As jolt mentioned, it might be different from group to group.

This is true, but I think an important factor here is the group's grasp of the system.  For example, if all players understand that this is a valid option, then they'll understand ten levels later why they are stronger/weaker than another.  But new players (like my group) grasp different parts of the systems at different times.  For example, I have only one person thinking about parrying now (second session). While one person understands spell casting pretty firmly.

[WoeRie]

I totally agree. Each player is different and each player has different priorities during level up. Nevertheless was the gap between the players dramatical at level 5. Of course if all players level their characters in the same efficiency it wouldn't be a problem. I DON'T think the variable system is broken, I only prefer the fixed system.

Maybe it is also because one of my player is a real munchkin and two other hate rules and raising levels. SO, I always try to even them maybe even if it is not really necessary.

[Mormegil]

Variable, we never had a problem with them. Can anyone tell me why fixed DPs should be better or why variable DPs are a problem?

Because you have players like me who work the system in a group with players who just whip a character up in the 5 minutes between leaving work and heading off for the Friday night game. The GM knows that he has players like me in the group and sets encounter strength accordingly.

Everybody dies because most characters aren't that optimised. 

Seriously - I don't see variable DP as that big a problem. It does lead to munchkinism but since I'm a munchkin I'm ok with that.

[Ecthelion]

Seriously - I don't see variable DP as that big a problem. It does lead to munchkinism but since I'm a munchkin I'm ok with that.

Ditto 

[Pat]

Pat, Tim released Stat Gain Rolls for HARP in The Guild Companion.  That's what I use!  It's much simpler than RM (as it doesn't have Potential Stats), and has two options.  It's definitely worth a look!

Thanks Karizma...I'll have a look.

[janpmueller]

I switched to 40 + 1/lvl recently.
Now, players usually increase stats on levels with odd numbers of DP, because when raising skills 1 point will remain. I always liked how that reflected a very slight increasing of background stats.

[Mando]

Having all players trying to reach 91 in all stats just for getting more DPs is a joke and an insult to roleplaying. What about the "weak" wizard or "not so bright" barbarian you read about in the books? Did you read books or at least watch movies? Did you see all heroes as paragons with all stats maxed? I didnt. And, before going to adventure, the warrior trains his Presence and Resoning, so he can later learn more in brawling... So, in a HARP world, all heroes should have all stats above 90% of the populace. Pfff, come on, be serious here, we're playing ICE games after all... High Adventure Role Playing is the place where we want stupid bad ass warriors bringing all foes to the ground and old feeble wizard burning a city to flame!

Lets not even talk about proper development of a char which should go through 1 to 3 levels where the char doesn't know how to do anything, because he should puts all his DPs in stats, because he wants more DPs at the end. With all due respect to Rasyr, who's work I love and admire, bringing this DP system at the start in HARP, without stat max, is in my very humble opinion, a little flaw.

And, for the younger here, we old farts often heard of games stopping because a few gamers knew the rules perfectly and were using them at their advantage while other gamers were more "casual" and didnt even know about concepts of min-maxing. Difference in power between the chars becomes huge and the game fails at the end. I personnaly had two campaigns and a regular game session ended because of this.

The rules should enforce proper development of the chars and prevent, as much as possible, min-maxing.

Fixed DPs correct this, should they be 40, 40+level, 50 or what you want (a very fine spot for any GM to handle speed of progression of the chars or Power Level of a campaign), we don't care, just use them to play a honest role playing game.

[Ecthelion]

Having all players trying to reach 91 in all stats just for getting more DPs is a joke and an insult to roleplaying. What about the "weak" wizard or "not so bright" barbarian you read about in the books? Did you read books or at least watch movies? Did you see all heroes as paragons with all stats maxed? I didnt. And, before going to adventure, the warrior trains his Presence and Resoning, so he can later learn more in brawling... So, in a HARP world, all heroes should have all stats above 90% of the populace. Pfff, come on, be serious here, we're playing ICE games after all... High Adventure Role Playing is the place where we want stupid bad ass warriors bringing all foes to the ground and old feeble wizard burning a city to flame!

Lets not even talk about proper development of a char which should go through 1 to 3 levels where the char doesn't know how to do anything, because he should puts all his DPs in stats, because he wants more DPs at the end. With all due respect to Rasyr, who's work I love and admire, bringing this DP system at the start in HARP, without stat max, is in my very humble opinion, a little flaw.

Calm down a bit, Mando. The concept of a character with high stats being able to learn more than a character with low stats does not seem unlogical. E.g. a very smart guy might pick up academic skills faster than a rather dumb character. HARPs rule that up to 20 DPs per level can be put on stats, with no other restrictions, might indeed lead to PCs using exactly this stat raising mechanism to get more DPs at later levels. But if that is OK for the group then there is no problem.

And, for the younger here, we old farts often heard of games stopping because a few gamers knew the rules perfectly and were using them at their advantage while other gamers were more "casual" and didnt even know about concepts of min-maxing. Difference in power between the chars becomes huge and the game fails at the end. I personnaly had two campaigns and a regular game session ended because of this.

I am also one of the "old farts" here and I never encountered that problem. That very much depends on the group you play in. The GM should ideally ensure that not one or few players disrupt the group by taking advantage of the rules - and that is the case for any rule and not just the variable DPs rule.

The rules should enforce proper development of the chars and prevent, as much as possible, min-maxing.

No, they should enable the players to have fun with the game. And if players have fun in developing a good (in the sense of able in his skills) character then it should allow this. But what I also see is that the variable DPs rule is prone to abuse. Good character development can also be done without this rule.

Fixed DPs correct this, should they be 40, 40+level, 50 or what you want (a very fine spot for any GM to handle speed of progression of the chars or Power Level of a campaign), we don't care, just use them to play a honest role playing game.

But whether it is the best fix remains questionable. E.g. reducing the number of DPs that can be spent on stats to 10 or even 5 also makes it unattractive to invest into stats from a pure min-maxing POV because the investment pays off only after more than 20 or 40 levels. At the same time it prevents the players from creating PCs with all stats maxed (at least until after 20th or 40th level, which should be enough for most games), a point you also criticized. So some who have so quickly introduced fixed DPs should perhaps better have limited the number of DPs that can be spent into stats per level.

[Mormegil]

Did you see all heroes as paragons with all stats maxed?

No. Just the ones that rock 

[jolt]

I am also one of the "old farts" here and I never encountered that problem. That very much depends on the group you play in. The GM should ideally ensure that not one or few players disrupt the group by taking advantage of the rules - and that is the case for any rule and not just the variable DPs rule.

I agree (though I prefer the term "old uncontrolled gaseous rear-based bodily emission"  ).  Whenever I have a player starting in a game (any game) that they have absolutely no experience with, the first thing I do is whip out a pregen and run through a combat with them.  If I can get a few of the other players to join in (also with pregens) so much the better.  The pregens are specifically designed to highlight various aspects of the combat/magic system so that when they create their own character, they have some notion of how it all comes together.  Throwing a newbie to a system straight into character creation willy-nilly (regardless of how experienced they are as a gamer in general) is generally not a good idea, IMO.

jolt

[SamwiseSeven]

Tim does the Fixed DP Dance.  hehe.

 

The nice thing about HARP, is that it can be used by Munchkins and Non-Munchkins alike with a little house rule.   

[RandalThor]

but decided to use a fixed 50 DP (100 DP at first).

That's the number I tend to always go with, too. I like the idea of the characters being a little bit "bigger than life," so their skills & attributes and such need to be above the norm, which they need more DPs to get them. Plus, I think it goes with my weird number "problem" where I like to use/see certain numbers more than others (like: 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, etc.....) - just strange that way, I guess.

PS: In 2006 I was in Heidelberg, Germany with some freinds on vacation. Had lots of fun (those stairs up to the castle were a Bi*!) there, and in Fussen (spelling?). I almost bought (and should have!) the Shadowrun Germany Sourcebook hardcover, 300+ pages all in German in Heidelberg - eventhough I don't read any German.

[Mando]

But what I also see is that the variable DPs rule is prone to abuse.

Thanks, that was my main point

Good character development can also be done without this rule.

Better can be achieved without: if you build your char to reflect all his role playing aspects as you imagine them while creating him (Tilbur is strong, but a bit stiff, so his Agility wont break the roof, he's smart without being brilliant, etc, etc...), and that your DP distribution reflects that image, you don't have the impression of losing something. You respect role playing aspects, and you are not constrained or "directed" by the system to a "single way of building a good effective char".

Got my point here? (I ask, respectfully, because as you might know from my data on the left, I'm not a native english speaker, and maybe my difficulties to express some "finesses" in your language makes me sometimes appear more rude than I would like) Sometimes, I like to appear rude, but that was not the case here



And I also think that stat maximums as they exist in RM I think, might solve the other issue I have with variable DPs, that is, objective: all stats to 91 at least in the end of the character life (whatever this means in any campaign) to be effective.

[WoeRie]

PS: In 2006 I was in Heidelberg, Germany with some freinds on vacation. Had lots of fun (those stairs up to the castle were a Bi*!) there, and in Fussen (spelling?). I almost bought (and should have!) the Shadowrun Germany Sourcebook hardcover, 300+ pages all in German in Heidelberg - eventhough I don't read any German.

I think you meant F?ssen (near the Austrian border)? Nevertheless all RPG shops in Heidelberg are closed. Everything. So, you would't have any chance to get them there anymore  :'(
But... you still could use the Internet to order it However I don't GM Shadowrun and the few games I played were all located in the US, but I know that there was/is a market for german SR stuff, at least a lot of books were written by Germans and played in Germany.

[Ecthelion]

Better can be achieved without: if you build your char to reflect all his role playing aspects as you imagine them while creating him (Tilbur is strong, but a bit stiff, so his Agility wont break the roof, he's smart without being brilliant, etc, etc...), and that your DP distribution reflects that image, you don't have the impression of losing something. You respect role playing aspects, and you are not constrained or "directed" by the system to a "single way of building a good effective char".

Got my point here?

I see your point. I still think you see things too extreme here. The system does not constrain you. Only in the case you are trying to create a very effective character then you might get tempted to invest heavily into stats. But that does pay off - in terms of DPs - only after about 10th level. Quite a long time to wait. All the levels before the character would have less skill ranks than his fellows. IMO this is acceptable and not the terrible design flaw you make of it. Still I agree that the system should ideally not direct a player towards simply maxing out all stats just for the sake of more DPs in the long run.

And I also think that stat maximums as they exist in RM I think, might solve the other issue I have with variable DPs, that is, objective: all stats to 91 at least in the end of the character life (whatever this means in any campaign) to be effective.

Yes, this is another solution to the problem. If the maximum e.g. a Fighter can put into the Presence stat is limited in some way at character creation then there is nothing to max out, at least not to a point where this maxing pays off in terms of many DPs at later levels. But as said before there are a couple of ways to keep players from simply maxing all stats, e.g.:
- Fixed DPs: They might still max stats to get good bonuses, but at least they are less tempted to do so because they don't get more DPs.
- Reduce the number of DPs that can be put into stats per level to e.g. 5 or 10 points: Maxing stats is simply much harder and the point where maxing pays of in terms of DPs gets delayed at such high levels that it makes no sense to do so.
- Adding a potential stat defining the maximum a stat can be raised to, such as in RM: Increasing stats gets limited and usually only the stats important for a player at character creation can rise to higher ranges. Maxing "unneccessary" stats just for the sake of DPs usually makes little sense. The downside is that sometimes players might want to change the career path of their character at later levels and e.g. the Fighter that wants to become a Paladin due to some religious moment might feel restricted by the system if his maximum stat value in Insight is limited by some choice at character creation.