Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-21-2012, 07:27 PM   #31
David Johnston2
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by roguebfl View Post
That's my point bought with money, but gear can be bought with points like Signature gear.
)
Thus it is infinitely better to buy gear with money.
David Johnston2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 08:44 AM   #32
BlackLiger
 
BlackLiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Late to the party here, but my interpretation would, in many ways, be the following:


Cash represents the ability to purchase the parts.
Points represent the ability to acquire them.

To whit: Just because I have a bajillion dollars doesn't mean I automatically know where the best parts are made, or which companies I can trust to produce these systems. As such, the slow build-up of points represents the time spend 'web browsing' for the parts, deciding which model suits best, researching how it interferes with the rest of my cyber parts.


It's rather like building a computer in that respect. Right now, I have the cash to get a new machine, near enough. But I now need to spend some time, around my job, and around my other hobbies (cough gurps cough) researching exactly what new hardware I want...
__________________
In the name of Kane
#Gurps IRC channel, irc.sorcery.net #gurps
BlackLiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 10:46 AM   #33
Kromm
GURPS Line Editor
 
Kromm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2 View Post

Thus it is infinitely better to buy gear with money.
That depends on table rules and campaign type, I think. I've run campaigns where points were "easy come, easy go," and character values jerked around in the ±50 points range due to things the players did, I did, and the environment did. Nobody cared, because points were mostly: (1) a character-creation currency, of little budgetary importance in later play, and (2) a really rough index of average character capability, this being the only reason we tracked them in play. Whereas cash . . . cash was hard to come by. In the specific case I'm thinking about, the PCs were from another world, had no legal ID, and had strange and somewhat unmarketable skills. They also had no money.

I could easily see a Gamma World-style game where random mutation, nanobot swarms, mad surgical robots, and plain old accidents regularly alter the PCs' point values up and down . . . but where widely accepted trade goods (the setting's stand-in for cash) are extremely rare, to the point where all the PCs are perpetually broke. I could also see a cyberpunk dystopia where being hacked up and reassembled, changing point values, happens all the time . . . but where the wealthy and powerful keep the PCs in the ghetto, as far as cash goes. In general, the idea of points being the be-all, end-all currency of the campaign isn't universal. Cash is often the harder thing to get and keep, making parting with it for improvements a harder call than parting with points.
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com>
GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games
My DreamWidth [Just GURPS News]
Kromm is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 12:23 PM   #34
wellspring
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

To me, money is just a social enabler, like Status or Rank. It gives you access to advantages you might want, must as an Unusual Background gives you access to weird advantages like Magery in a low-magic setting. It provides the in-setting pretext for how you might gain an advantage.

If you don't use cash, you need to have some in-game rationale for why a player suddenly gained an Advantage. Otherwise, verisimilitude suffers and players have a reduced incentive to pursue in-world rewards like money and power.

The concern here is that, in-game, your characters figure out some way to wildly inflate their bank account or social standing. Or create weird social connections that open doors that would otherwise be closed (that is, an Unusual Background). Having the characters load up on cash and then spend it on generating advantages is just a special case of this.

Other examples:
  • I somehow get promoted to rank 8 in Centrum... and immediately file a dozen requisitions for a long list of cybernetic implants.
  • I am appointed the Marquis of Crucis Court by the Emperor. As such, the local scientists and doctors are my subjects-- including the ones who implant biomod upgrades.
  • I do a major favor for Ilabrat the Attendant, and now I can ask him to get his boss to grant me magical abilities.

In each case, there's an in-game explanation for how to earn Advantages. The danger is power creep-- each situation potentially opens the floodgates for a multi-hundred point power bump for a particular player.

So there has to be a meta-game mechanism (CP's) that we use to balance characters against one another and against the challenges they face. We also want to manage power creep. Ideally, players remain roughly balanced against one another, we want challenges to be challenging but surmountable, and we want characters to develop steadily but slowly.

GM's don't have to use character points to accomplish this-- but even if they're winging it, these are factors that have to be managed somehow. That why ideally, you manage character power creep in a way that has both a mechanical basis (game balance) and an in-game rationale (verisimilitude).
wellspring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 12:44 PM   #35
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kromm View Post
That depends on table rules and campaign type, I think.
Well, certainly it's dependent on which rules you're using, but as long as you can spend points for money, and the amount of money you get for the point cost of a given item exceeds the cost of an item, it's better to spend money (the reverse is also the case; it's a simple exchange rate issue).
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 10:47 PM   #36
Daigoro
 
Daigoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by vierasmarius View Post
Unlike Weapon Mount, a Payload doesn't include means target an attack, so can only be used with munitions that are simply released (ie, dumb bombs, or self-guided missiles). However, if a character has a direct-fire weapon that's too big to fit in a Weapon Mount, adding Payload to make up the difference could work.
You know, I was quite unaware of this trait, had to go looking for it. But how do you calculate if a gun's too big for a Weapon Mount, just go off nominal Arm ST? The limitation says it's incompatible with Weak, but that would seem appropriate for a Pistol-only Weapon Mount or something similar.

And Weapon Mount doesn't imply concealment, so you'd need Payload for that anyway.
__________________
Collaborative Settings:
Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation
Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse
And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting!
Daigoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 11:15 PM   #37
vierasmarius
 
vierasmarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daigoro View Post
You know, I was quite unaware of this trait, had to go looking for it. But how do you calculate if a gun's too big for a Weapon Mount, just go off nominal Arm ST? The limitation says it's incompatible with Weak, but that would seem appropriate for a Pistol-only Weapon Mount or something similar.
The Weapon Mount trait itself doesn't specify. In UT, Bionic Hand and Arm Mounts have capacities of 1/2 BL and full BL, respectively, though they are priced the same.

Quote:
And Weapon Mount doesn't imply concealment, so you'd need Payload for that anyway.
Yeah, that would make sense. Payload is notably lacking from the aforementioned UT cybernetics, despite the implication that they can be concealed.

Maybe instead of limiting what weapons can be mounted based on weight (which I can only find reference to in UT, not in the Basic entry for Weapon Mount) it should instead be based on the MinST of the weapon, with the assumption that anything heavier than that won't fit anyways. Also, for normally two-handed weapons (ie, rifles) you'd need to take two Weapon Mounts, or brace it with another limb, else you'd suffer the normal penalties for firing a rifle one-handed (Tactical Shooting p13). I do like the suggestion of requiring Payload if the weapon is concealed, though that adds quite a lot of expense (10cp per BL lbs) and doesn't match the assumptions from UT and TS.

Actually, looking through TS:Changing Times, they seem to use Weapon Mount and Payload interchangeably - WM for small weapons, and Payload for large ones or individual ordinance. For example, the UCAV has a Payload that is typically loaded with a 15mm emag cannon plus ammo, but doesn't have a Weapon Mount. This means I was wrong before in my assumption that WM was necessary to aim and fire a weapon stored as payload...

So I guess Weapon Mount should be used for anything carried and fired "externally" (and thus limited by MinST rather than overall bulk, though it does add to encumbrance) and Payload for anything carried "internally" (and its weight doesn't add to encumbrance).

Last edited by vierasmarius; 03-22-2012 at 11:19 PM.
vierasmarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2012, 12:21 AM   #38
Daigoro
 
Daigoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by vierasmarius View Post
Maybe instead of limiting what weapons can be mounted based on weight (which I can only find reference to in UT, not in the Basic entry for Weapon Mount) it should instead be based on the MinST of the weapon, with the assumption that anything heavier than that won't fit anyways.
I think stick with weight instead of MinST- it's more general, so can cover non-weapons in the mount, and it meshes more easily with the Payload rules.
And some characters might like to carry an overpowered weapon on their mount, with a high MinST, and just wear the to-hit penalties for being under strength.

As for the expense of Payload, could it be limited by type of object to make it cheaper?
__________________
Collaborative Settings:
Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation
Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse
And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting!
Daigoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2012, 10:31 AM   #39
Greg 1
 
Greg 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

I'm a big believer in cash only for an ongoing cyberpunk game. It reduces the distance between the players and the character and encourages players to play their character realistically rather than meta-gaming.

The character wants $10,000 for a mod and the player wants $10,000 for a mod.

The character won't hold off on getting a mod that they want and have in-game access to on the grounds that the player wants to use those points elsewhere.

I feel the same way about any Advantage gained directly in the game world. If you make a friend, you get a friend - you don't have to save up and spend points for them. If you find some treasure, you get some treasure - you don't have to save up and spend points for it. If you achieve something awesome in a public place, you get a reputation, etc.
Greg 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2012, 11:02 AM   #40
JCurwen3
 
JCurwen3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Default Re: Cyberpunk: Cash vs. Points Implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg 1 View Post
I'm a big believer in cash only for an ongoing cyberpunk game. It reduces the distance between the players and the character and encourages players to play their character realistically rather than meta-gaming.

The character wants $10,000 for a mod and the player wants $10,000 for a mod.

The character won't hold off on getting a mod that they want and have in-game access to on the grounds that the player wants to use those points elsewhere.

I feel the same way about any Advantage gained directly in the game world. If you make a friend, you get a friend - you don't have to save up and spend points for them. If you find some treasure, you get some treasure - you don't have to save up and spend points for it. If you achieve something awesome in a public place, you get a reputation, etc.
This has always been my approach too; as Kromm said of some of the games he's run, I use the points system primarily for character creation, and then keep track of changing values in PCs and relevant NPCs as a (very) rough gauge of overall character capability, as well as in instances where someone has an ability tied to point values (Modular Abilities, DR with Absorption, etc); that and bonus points for advancing any skills or other abilities used in game, where appropriate.
__________________
-JC
JCurwen3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cash, cyberpunk, design, money, points

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.