Cyphire

Little forum acheology.... Kinda bored and digging through old stuff.

Style over substance? Why not?

Wait... I know, it's been answered here, but I mean it in a different way. You all are absolutely correct that substance matters, and it matters a LOT. But, I don't think that RTG meant that people should be sacrificing one for the other.

I would guess that they probably went to the extremes with that comment in order to get through to people. Most people NEED extremes of thought to be pulled into a reasonable range. If you're coming from AD&D, Rifts, and the like, you need to be told the opposite extreme to end up somewhere reasonable.

Not only that, I read it a bit more literally too - style OVER substance. Not "in place of". Here's an example, any Korean white-good 4 wheeled applience-mobile can be made to be fast. Custom widen the stock rims a bit, slap on some ultra sticky rubber, stiffen the springs, shocks, and sways, then put on a monster turbo, exhaust, and nitrous kit and flash the engine. It'll be as fast as it is boring. But it has substance.

The Jaguar XJ220, has STYLE, and it has it in spades, but it has substance too in the form of fast acceleration (quicker than a Zonda), over 200mph of top end, and immense amounts of grip. So it's style, OVER substance. (on top of, in addition to, etc)

Another less extreme example is the Murcielago (any of them, particularly the Spyder) vs Gallardo. They both have substance, and lots of it, but the Gallardo is too sensible, too Audi. It lacks the mad, manic style of previous Lambos - it has normal doors, smaller, tamer styling, no opening airvents, etc.

Remember what they said in the book - "They won't be impressed by your new H&K smartgun, unless you swagger into the club like you know how to use it - and are just itching for an excuse."

And in a world run by corps, who thrive on consumerism and trends, and with clothing and cosmetics being big deals, it seems very likely to me that people living in the "easy" environments of cities will focus on how they look far more than anything else. Especially since the bulk of them are just supposed to be middle class worker drones, right? But this sorta forces everyone else to follow suit. Just as you wouldn't expect to be hired for a black op looking like Axel Rose, you wouldn't expect to operate in a city (especially in clubs and other such locations) dressed like a 1 man combat machine.

I've taken it a bit further. Since people are so amped up about global warming, and since there is a cataclysm or collapse in just about every incarnation, I went with a pairing that resulted in a warmer climate than today, with cities that clean their air as much as they can afford. So in a So-Cal town like Night City, it's gonna be warm and sunny, and all about glitz and glamor, people showing off their sculpted bodies, tanned skin, jewellery, regular and tech tatoos, and cyberlimbs. That means the armor trench, BDUs and combat boots look is right out. You'd looks like you were ashamed of yourself and hiding (a freak), or a psycho and a danger, or at best, just weird and lazy. You'll never get into clubs, or bars or chic restuarants (and most of them are). Just wandering down the street you'll have people stare and pull away from you, and will stand out on the sec-net even more as a result.

By the same token, most city-dwellers aren't good at combat or the stuff most edge runners do. So that's the trick - look slick and cool enough (have enough style) to avoid negative attention in urban environments, but not sacrifice your ability to work as a result.

Now, if you're a high paid corporate solo who spends all his or her time on black ops, then it doesn't much matter if you fit in to the urban environment. But even there, your gear still has to be maintained and tidy and your clothes clean so you can look professional enough to your employers to get the contracts.

(also, I view most non-solo edgerunners as more city-folk who've decided that 9-5 isn't for them. They still have friends, go to clubs, and party, they just need to pay for everything without being stuffed in a cubicle, so they would be more likely to want to, and be able to, blend into the urban environment and enjoy having flash and wanting to get attention, but in a positive sense - not sure I can really put that into words properly)

I think that the limits of nanotechnology would be on efficiency. It's great for small stuff but you can still build a car a lot faster without it than with it. Why program something as hideously inefficient as nano-building a skyscraper when it's faster to use the old methods?

 

It's great for some stuff but the limitations are mostly in scale, IMO...

Mark(psycho)Phipps( HAHAHA! )

Yeah. It was great for it's 2020 uses - connecting nerves for implants, helping with healing, etc. But this stuff I'm hearing for V3 with self assembling cities is just nonsense that is really making V3 look bad.

A lot of "nano-tech" isn't likely to involve "nanites" at all, that is, not programed self mobile machines, but rather just advances in microscopic tech - integrated circuits, storage enhancements, etc.

Quotes from the rulebook:

 

Personal Grooming

 

This is the skill of knowing proper grooming, hair styling, etc., to maximize your physical attractiveness. Use of this skill allows players to increase their Attractiveness, and thus their chances of successful Relationships or Persuasion. A basically good looking person would be at +2. A fashion model might have a Personal Grooming of +5 or +6. At +8 or better, you could be major fashion model, film star, or trendsetter. You are always "together". And know it.

The bit about increasing the ATT stat in this case pertains to rolls. In that sense, handgun increases your ref when shooting (and making a roll). Likewise, when making an ATT based role, PG can be added in, effectively "raising" the ATT stat. I don't see it as a replacement for it.

Ever seen those pics of celebs caught out of makeup? Some of them are not really all that attractive. Yet I know women who are very attractive without makeup. In fact, 1 girl I know not only doesn't wear makeup, she's really not good with doing her hair, or picking out clothes. Very low PG and W&S I'd say, yet despite that, she has a very high ATT (in the 6 to 8 range I'd say (depending on personal preferences)).

Wardrobe & Style

 

The skill of knowing the right clothes to wear, when to wear them, and how to look cool even in a spacesuit. With Wardrobe +2 or better, you are good at choosing clothes off the rack. At +6, your friends ask you for wardrobe tips, and you never buy anything off the rack. At +8 or better, you are one of those rare people whose personal style influences major fashion trends.

I've wondered about this one before. A p-suit is not really a customizable piece, not if you want it to work that is. Seems to me that to make something like this "look good", the person *in* it has to look good. Which would be a high ATT.

The real trick is that there are 2 kinds of ATT, physical, and "other" (which are how one carries themselves, how they interact with people, how they make others feel, etc). The "other" part is somewhat based in what the COOL stat is meant to reflect, but someone can have high COOL and still be unattractive, so I don't personally think that re-linking ATT skills to that is the way to go.

From a game perspective, it's probably easies to just fudge it, roll both aspects of attractiveness into 1 stat and just go with it. Cuts down on the number of stats needed, and the amount of calculation needed.

Although, it might be an interesting idea to use ATT as pure physical beauty, and take part of EMP and part of COOL (maybe .5*EMP and .25*COOL or something) and modify the target difficulty for the related skills. It might allow some more flexibility, and help make things seem a little more realistic (less fudged). Or..... it might just slow things down and provide no benefit at all. lol

Fads/trends/styles, like those you mention, are started by the famous. They often end up looking good/ok only because of their commonality after the trend takes off.

Nobody, it would seem, no matter how skilled/good looking, can pull that off without the clout of fame and fortune.

I think there's a little hyperbole there.

But "wardrobe and style", by it's name, implies someone who can pick out good clothes and match them well. While "personal grooming" implies basic hygene and makeup/hair styling.

Here's an example - my personal gooming skill level is basic. Probably a 3, maybe a 4. I can handle the basics and a few not-so basics many guys don't, and style my hair in a basic, and acceptable fashion with a fair amount of ease and speed.

However, I go to my hairdresser, she does things to my hair, puts all this crap in it, and makes it look good, but different. She also does it like it's second nature. The next day I try to duplicate it, and fail miserably, and end up being forced to make what she cut, look as close to my old way as possible.

So that could be a good use of the skill from a mechanic aspect - make the player roll on it every time they go out of the house, if it's something involving products and gravity defying stunts. Just make sure they don't fumble, and tick a point each time.

But W&S? Maybe Bookwyrm hit it on the head. It may be there for the same reason seduction and such are. A way out for players. But still, it seems, you set it and forget it (a skill level, at creation, that is).

The idea of making bad clothes look good - interesting one. It only seems to go so far though, and it's more about personality than skill. James Bond in goth would not look so cool. A low energy, subtle, guy would not look good in flashy flamboyant clothes. Etc.

And most any guy, with the right help (read - wardrobe, hairstylist and make up artist) can look good in fashion clothing (or a suit). But if they don't feel confident, they won't. The more I think about it, the more I think that might fall under a cool roll (no pun intended). But really only be applicable to styles are outside the norm for a given character.

Heck you can be wearing an armani, but even an armani is gonna look retarded if you wear it with orange socks and a plaid tie.

True, but I think most people know this. And if the player says he's got a specific ensemble in mind, and either describes or shows it to you, it's pretty apparent what is intended. To turn around and say, ok, and you pair it up with (insert hideous item that wasn't named because it was assumed to be a given, here), that's kinda low, and would be sure to irk the player I'd think. I know it would irk me if it were done to me.

Don't mind the forum archeology by the n00b. I'm just getting here late. Sorry. lol

Wardrobe and Style and Personal Grooming are odd skills. They make sense in the context and mechanics of the game, but(!).... what if the player says "my character is dressed (like this)" and describes in detail exactly what he/she wants. Ditto with hair, makeup, etc.

If everyone in the group (GM included), concur that it looks good, where would a roll come into play? (for either skill)

On the other hand, it's not really a bad thing to have, because the truth is, both are real skills that need to be developed and honed (for some more than others, at that). So logically, a character, if he/she were a real person, would have spent time learning these skills. On that basis, I think it makes sense to have them as skills and to spend points on them during creation. But then what? The GM could insist on a certain skill level based on the players concept of the character and their style, but that might arbitrarily harm the other skills too much. And it's likely, that if they were a real person, over time that would improve, at least somewhat. But if we skip the rolls in game, then the prevents it from ever getting better (no IPs earned towards it), and ought to require the GM to prevent the player from improving his character's style as his own RL sense of it improves.

It's things like this that make Rifts so appealing. lol "Who cares how I look, let's blow $#|7 up!"