Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft? At the moment, just with a critical eye. Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? Quite a few of the trait CP costs seem to be wildly off balance, along with some smaller rules issues. There are also a few instances of very small, fairly boring bonuses that I don't think the system needs more of. Things like Microgravity Fighter giving a +3 INIT boost in low gravity. Boring! I like having a trait that helps define a microgravity specialist, but that bonus isn't the way I want to do it. Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules? The mechanical flavour of particular traits, that while maybe not quite balanced yet, show the exact kind of things I want to be represented in traits. Freerunning Tricks, Repurposing Specialist, Trick Shot and Unarmed Combat Techniques are all really cool. They each have clear mechanical uses with good hooks for players to latch onto. They can really define what a character can do. They are cheap enough that they can be learned easily in play, which also helps mitigate a feeling of 'just adding 1s and 2s to already big numbers' that sometimes arises in my games. I would love to see these kinds of little tricks expanded to other skills, or maybe built into an entirely new subsystem separate from the trait system. Skill tricks or something. Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? AGI Socialization- I don't think that the extremely broad category of 'transhumans' is enough to limit the extremely beneficial bonus that you get by picking this trait. You are getting an awful lot of good stuff (80CP~?) for very little negative. I am not really sure how you could balance this one. AGI as a whole are very difficult to balance properly due to their interaction with their background. I do like the thought of giving someone the option to make an AGI who isn't socially autistic, but this doesn't seem to be the way to do it. Tacnet Sniper- I like the idea of having a sniper who doesn't have to see his target to make the shot, but I think that 20CP is way too expensive for what you are getting from it. However this isn't from play experience, just what I am thinking from someone who knows the game balance fairly well. I would say half the cost down to 10CP, but again, I haven't played with it during a game. Large Frame- The 'worst' trait in the playtest. It costs far too much for what you are getting, it ignored already implemented rules (Reach from the Core rulebook), and to be honest it is closer to a negative trait than a positive. While I do like the potential to make a giant octopus that is much larger than a normal person, this isn't how you should represent it mechanically. And it isn't just an issue with the high CP cost, it really needs a complete rewrite. Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? Were any of them not worth the cost or too valuable given their game effect? Any must-have or must-avoid traits? Please list them. What do you think the CP value for them should be? Not really. I have some issues with how some of the traits actually work, In Debt specifically seems overly fiddly, but nothing related to CP costs. Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn't think should be included? Was there anything that you would rather see handled by roleplaying, implants, or in some other way? Please list and explain. As I said above, traits like Freerunning Tricks, Trick Shot and Unarmed Combat Techniques. I like that you are giving us more options for skill use. I am not sure if the trait system is the best way to represent these. I definitely want them included, and I would prefer if they were something my players had to buy for about the same CP cost as they have now (5CP). But they seem to be something that you could develop into their own little subsystem, rather than tack them onto traits. Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing? Is there some aspect of the game that we should be capturing in a trait but have overlooked? Anything you would like to see included in a trait? If you are going to keep the 'tricks' as traits, then I think that you should expand them to include more of the skill list. If we have Freerunning Tricks, why don't we have Freefall Tricks? I would also like to see more support for AGI. We get two new traits kind of directed towards them, but I think that they could benefit from more.

Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft? Critical Eye. Q. 2 –What’s the most critical problem you’ve identified in these rules? The most critical problem I've found that a number of traits, for different reasons, seem to be flawed. They could have been thought out better. I'll list the traits I consider most troublesome bellow. There are others I have issue with, but I'm trying to keep things to high priority stuff. I don't like traits that increase the mileage of cp, or drain them from your character. I think that all characters, given the same cp, should be more or less equal to each other. Traits like "In Dept" or "Intense Relationship" can consume many times more cp than it grants. Traits like "Titanian Microcorp Owner" doubles the money that cp gets you. If allowed to continue, some characters will be vastly superior or inferior to others despite being given equal amounts of cp. I'm a player that tries to keep his inner munchkin under control, and traits like these don't make it easy. For the record, I don't like how the "Infolife" background (from the core rulebook) works either for its ability to distort cp efficiency at character creation. Another problem is that certain traits are far too specific and restricting. Take "AGI Socialization" for instance. If that trait is the product of training, then why can only AGIs learn it, and why only can they learn it at character creation? It seems like its something that anyone should be able to learn given enough time. I don't think that Brinker Solitude should provide a bonus when working alone. I think it should instead negate penalties you would otherwise suffer when working alone. Q. 3 – What’s the best part of these rules? There is more rules? Right now, I'm finding it easier to pick out problems I don't like than it is to find what I like. Please don't feel hurt if I'm sounding very negative at the moment. Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? Large Frame - Too expensive. There is no boost to toughness or defense. This trait makes you a bigger threat in the eyes of your opponents (it is justified). As such, I think that a morph with this trait would be targeted first in combat, and you paid plenty of cp for that privilege. In MMOs, the DPS characters need to dealing maximum damage otherwise the mob will stop attacking the tank and target the DPS instead. At this time, I see this trait being more useful to worker pods (to carry bigger cargo more easily) than anyone else. I would revise that trait so it would be a neutral trait, or as a trait no more expensive than 5 cp. Because it can be a liability in combat, I'm almost willing to consider it a negative trait. Repurposing Specialist - I'm debating if this should be 5 cp instead of 10. Smart Animal traits - I don't think it wise to be dumping too much cp on such traits. I think you would get better mileage through the use of automated robots. Just make sure you know to turn off the networking ability of your bots, or they may end up hacked and used against you. In a firewall game, you are likely to be ego casted around a lot. Unless you can take your animals with you, you're going to need some down time to make use of this trait. If events are rushed too often, you are not going to be able to train smart animals for you to use. That, or encourage the enemy to pick a fight on your home habitat where you should have many smart animals ready to be used. Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? No. Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn’t think should be included? As I've mentioned in question 2, I don't like traits or rules that distort your effective cp. For those reasons, I think that traits like "In Dept", "Intense Relationship", and "Titian Microcorp Owner" should be removed. I also think that there may be a shortage of opportunities to use the smart animal training traits, so I would argue that those traits be removed, and have the advantages those traits offer to be available to any character who skilled in the correct skills. Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing? Maybe. These ideas were inspired by reading some of your traits. Can't work with others (5 cp) - Negative trait. Inspired by Brinker Solitude. This character can't work well with others. This character does not benefit from team work bonuses. If this character tries to help, it is more hurtful than helpful. Finds others distracting (10 cp) - Negative trait. Inspired by Brinker Solitude. This character is easily distracted by others, whether they are doing something annoying in the character`s presence, or observing them through the mesh. More people equals worse penalties. Mesh Phobia (5 cp) - Negative trait. Inspired by Muse Phobia. This trait handles the part where a character can't handle the mesh well by itself. This frees up Muse Phobia to only needing to worry about phobias towards muses.

I've had yet another look. [b]Question 1: Review Technique[/b] I, and some friends and friends of friends, went over the rules with the objective to powergame as much of it we could. I've also tried generating a few characters to illustrate the weaknesses. [b]Question 2: Most Critical Problem[/b] We discovered the following problem: Anything that allows a character to gain a bonus to a social skill benefits an AGI more than it benefits non-AGI characters. Characters with the Infolife background can use the flat bonuses from Traits to get more effective CP than other characters. This becomes especially pressing when the traits are AGI-restricted. For example, my goal is to build a character who is an expert hacker and a social butterfly. I want Infosec, Interfacing, Programming and Research at 80, and I want Deception, Impersonation, Intimidation, Kinesics, Persuasion and Protocol at 70. I want 80 in one Networking skill, 70 in three other Networking skills, and 55 in five remaining. I also want 45 in Animal Handling. Built as an AGI: Infolife Mercurial (+10 Deception, +10 Persuation, +20 Networking) in a Dverger with +5 to SAV. COG 10, SAV 30, Social Butterfly. Total cost [i]with[/i] AGI Socialization: 575 CP Total cost [i]Without[/i] AGI Socialization: 965 CP Building the character, instead, as an Isolate (+20 Inforsec, +20 Interfacing), in order to get both +20 bonuses. (Any other background except Uplift, Hyperelite, Fall Survivor and Reinstated could substitute; the Isolate just makes the math easier.) Total cost: 745 CP It should be easy to see that AGI Socialization gives Infolife characters an unfair bonus in CP; with the build I chose, for example, the AGI has 170 extra CP to spend on skills compared to non-AGIs, and is more efficient than other AGIs by [i][b]390 CP[/b][/i] It should be noted that this is not only for AGI Socialization; all the other abilities that give bonuses to skills, such as Brinker Solitude, are similarly broken when given to an AGI character. [b]Question 4: Unbalanced Positive Traits[/b] [u]Specialist Guru[/u] The part that can actually be considered clearly-written rules text of this trait is the following. "The character chooses one of his Skill Specializations. For every level of Specialist Reputation, he gains a +10 bonus on any Social Skill or Networking Skill Test in which his Specialization is relevant." Hence, I can pick Academics: Psychology (Personality Psychology), or Academics: Psychology (Human transhumans), and get an instant +30 to all my social skills for just 15 CP. (...except Animal Handling) [u]Trick Shot[/u], also [u]Murder Simulator Addict[/u] and [u]TACNET Sniper[/u] There's not really any need for more ways to add bonuses or negate penalties in firearms combat. It's already dirt easy to get a 99% chance to hit a target at average range; there's no need to make it a 99% chance to hit multiple targets when you don't even have a line-of-sight to any of them target, in the dark, while the targets are behind cover and all are the size of a common housefly. [b]Question 5: Unbalanced Negative Traits[/b] [u]In Debt[/u] This Trait can be taken to add 30 CP to your CP-pool at character-generation. It will then drain 1 REZ each session. For any game expected to last less than 30 sessions, this trait is basically free points. For any game expected to last more than 30 session, this trait costs points and isn't worth taking. But, it can be bought off by taking a dangerous mission, possibly involving Exurgents or TITANs. Since the default campaign in EP [i]is[/i] fighting Exurgents and/or TITANs, the downside of this trait can be bought off by having the character do exactly what they were going to be doing anyway - meaning that it's simply 30 [i]free[/i] CP at character-generation. [u]Intense Relationship[/u] The same issue as with In Debt applies; this gives a character free CP as long as the game lasts 10 sessions or less. [b]Question 6: Traits I don't like[/b] [u]Brinker Solitude[/u] This Trait encourages people to act alone, and is hence detrimental to a coherent group of players and player characters. With this trait, it is in every players' best interest to have their characters avoid each other in order to get the maximum bonus they can out of it. Furthermore, as written, a player can put on a spacesuit, go sit outside alone, and tele-operate a robot to help the other players out, while getting the +10 bonus. The character with Brinker Solitude, as long as the other characters are not there to help them, always get +10; it doesn't actually matter that the character with Brinker Solitude can help the [i]other[/i] characters. [u]Intense Relationship[/u] As written, actually having any form of relationship at all beyond vague friendliness is represented by this trait, meaning that the base character in EP is a family-less, friendless loner, and having friends or family is a negative trait that will disadvantage you in long-term games. [u]Trick Shot - Point Defence Shot[/u] As written, a normal human in an unaugmented, normal Flat can take this and use it to shoot down micromissiles moving at mach 1 or greater. This should probably require to mental and physical cyber-augmentations to even use, at the very least. [b]Question 7: Missing Traits[/b] See previous report.

Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft? critical eye, and empiric simulation of its use (simply, I tried to imagine what they'd do in game) Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? well, some of them are really gadget or bling-bling with nothing existing rules or roleplay couldn't do. What really bothers me are tricks for free running or fightings. I feel, just by reading them, they would slow down the combats. When we played Ego Hunter this weekend, my players came up with them on the fly and the fights were fast passed and dynamic. What could be more interesting, as traits, would be affinities with this or that weapon kind, this or that branch of hacking or activities of genehacking. Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules? Drug fiend and In Debt. Those two are definite keepers! I would suggest Drug Fiend domain bound. One can't be metabolysing all the kind of drugs or alcohol or nanostuff. have domains like (Stimulants), (Petal), (narcosim) Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? AGI Socialisation is a really potent trait. Either pump the price up or fraction it by benefit. Or both. Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? others already have covered what I had in mind for that except maybe for Debt. It would be interesting to have the different debts counted separatedly and paid either in CP/Rez or in REP. So when you repay the dept in full, you regain the rep engaged in it Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn't think should be included? all the tricks, for reason said above. At most, keep them as specialization for related skills Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing? The affinities I mentioned before. Should provide bonuses on related skills (depending the situation) or cheapen the purchase of specialization for said affinity's skill oh and the positive version of In Debt, for those who own favor to you. Ressources related trait, either positive of negaive

[b]Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft?[/b] Critical eye, as well as some discussion/playtesting in our group [b]Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? [/b] [b]Specialist Guru[/b] We felt that this skill would be a lot simpler and logical if you applied it to field skills instead of skill specializations. That way its like you have a recognized masters degree or a PhD in your field. For gun nuts wanting to be experts at guns you always have Hardware: Armorer and Knowledge skills are also field skills so you can still be a specialist guru in anything you can dream about. [b]TITAN Hunter[/b] No. Just... No. [b]Large Frame (morph only)[/b] Change this to: +10 DUR +10 to hit this character Able to handle 2H weapons in 1H -20 to all checks handling fine items (Everything from assembling a jigsaw puzzle, to carefully petting a small animal) Has superior reach trait for melee combat. (+10 Defence, +10 Attack) [b]Intense Relationship[/b] This must be made more roleplayable. Instead of rez points, give the character stress points if he/she is away from his loved ones for too long. (Kind of like an Async gets stress if he's in a synth morph) Having to spend rez points doesn't feel like the right idea. The level of this trait should increase -modifiers and timeframe which the character can be apart from his family. -10, 20, 30 on all actions if he hasn't heard from his loved one 1 month, 1 week, 1 day can go by without hearing from the loved one Double stress points if witnessing loved one die no matter level [b]Socially Graceless[/b] Make this "Once per game, the storyteller can rule that a successful protocol roll is a failed roll since the character applied the rules of etiquette for a different faction instead of the intended one" [b]Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules? [/b] [b]Freerunning tricks, Trick shot, Unarmed Combat Techniques[/b] These were all very well received in our group, it gave some flavor as well as added functionality to a few skills that already see a lot of use. Seeing as we enforce the [i]maximum of 50 CP worth of traits[/i] it prevented the players from picking all of them. (If they wanted any other trait other than tricks that is) Some of these tricks seemed to make other skills useless, such as being able to climb/infiltrate with freerunning. But this was easily circumvented by disallowing them to use freerunning to climb/infiltrate in certain environments/situations. (Forcing them to still spend points in climbing/infiltration unless they wanted to risk hurting themselves if their freerunning didn't help them out) [b]Repurposing Specialist[/b] This was VERY well received, though perhaps mostly because my group really likes McGuyver. We did think that someone with the appropriate hardware skill should be able to do this too for certain things. (Hardware: Electronics, Hardware: Robotics etc) using scrounging as a way to get the parts only. We didn't think it should be possible with just scrounging without this trait (even with a -20 modifier) because we felt that the scrounging skill really should just enable you to find things of value and not actually use it if you don't use hardware skills. [b]Trusting Heart[/b] Love this. [b]Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? [/b] [b]Information Wants to Have Fun[/b] Remove the -10 to transhumans and lower the bonus to +10, or make this trait a 0 cost trait. The +20 to AGI beats the -10 to transhumanity so why should it cost CP as well? [b]Aquatic Streamlining (Morph Trait)[/b] Make this cost 5CP, or make it an enhancement bought with credits. [b]Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? [/b] Not at the moment, we will continue playing around with them. [b]Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn't think should be included? [/b] TITAN Hunter We also believe the smart animal traits should be something you can always do with animal handling. [b]Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing? [/b] Like before, we'd like some player housing traits. Like a base of operations, if not as a trait than perhaps at least some sort of descriptions of the cost of owning your own place (different sizes etc) Maybe some trait to make the morph smaller, like a neotenic sized steel morph.

Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft? The critical Eye Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? Several of these Traits are exceedingly campaign-specific. I.E., in some campaigns, noone would take them, and in other campaigns, everyone would take them. That's a problematic situation, IMHO. Additionally, far too many of these Traits create situations where CP must be spent to do things which previously were open to anyone who had the appropriate skill - vide Repurposing Specialist, whose existence suddenly weakens the combination of Scrounging and Hardware Skills by suggesting that these tasks cannot be covered using those skills without also having the Trait. Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules? Phoenix and Introspective Forker both seem appropriate to their costs and very H+. Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? AGI Socialization - This trait seems outrageously inexpensive for the benefit it offers. Effectively, this means that for 10 points, the AGI gets all of its usual Social skill values except against a fairly small percentage of other characters...Which most characters should suffer social penalties to deal with. In short, for 10 pts, your AGI gets its half-cost specialty skills without the penalty of having to pay double for social skills. Pays for itself as soon as you've put 10 pts into social skills. Aquatic Streamlining - Too expensive for a trait which will only be useful rarely. In a game where one knows much of the game will be spent in aquatic habitats it is worthwhile, otherwise it's ridiculously expensive. 5pts would seem more appropriate, and it will need to be applied to all extant aquatic morphs for free. Async Familiarity - Interesting because it puts a buy-in on not merely knowing about Asyncs but being able to spot them. Actually seems moderately cheap for the ability it confers. Brinker Solitude - Questionable. Except in a firefight, an awful lot of teamwork seems to be knowledge-skill based, so mesh access should prevent this triggering in my opinion. Effectively, if mesh access is allowed, the Brinker Scout becomes an exceedingly effective template who can handle all manner of things due to remote mesh-teamwork. Exsurgent Attack Survivor - I would halve the bonus to Stress Tests. +20 is immense, and this Trait would almost certainly only be pursued by characters expecting to participate in an Exsurgent game...In which case everyone would buy it. When a purchased character attribute is good enough that it becomes indispensable for all characters, I question it severely. Information Just Wants to Have Fun - This might as well be created as a default 'My Type Against All Others' trait. I.E., something similar for Uplifts, something similar for Clankers, Tongs, etc. to represent familiarity with one's own 'home society'. Large Frame - As others have commented, reach is handled elsewhere in the rules. The -20 penalty to skill tests with one-handed weapons and tools is easily obviated by having an extra limb or two which are 'normal sized' or simply buying the Smart Manipulators from Rimward. (Or, for that matter, having someone manufacture a grip for the small tool or firearm more appropriate to your scale. Seriously.) All that remains then is the combat bonus and enemy to hit bonus. Rethink this. And while we're at it, fix the whole business of Avian uplifts (child-sized) not having the small, difficult target bonus which Neotenics enjoy. Consistency! For that matter, consider putting 'Small Frame' in as a morph trait, with a penalty to use unmodified two-handed weapons, a bonus to fine manipulations, and a penalty to unarmed and melee weapon attacks against larger enemies as well as the penalty to hit due to small size. Mod Spotter - Given the ease with which a morph's appearance may be altered, I question being able to reliable spot many 'human normal' scale morphs as the morph they are, much less being able to determine if they have concealed 'ware. Additional sensory capability should also play into this, and is Kinesics really the right skill to be rolling with? Smart Animal Combat Trainer seems as if it should be subsumed into the basics of Animal Handling. Smart Animal Teamwork is rather more open-ended and seems reasonably to be its own trait. I would place an upper limiter on the number of teamwork tricks an animal can be taught. Specialist Guru seems reasonable, but emphasize that it is creditbility when discussing the topic, not actual use of the skill specialization in question. TITAN Hunter - I would remove the bonus to Stress tests, or all reference to Exsurgents, otherwise this stacks too easily and too powerfully with Exsurgent Attack Survivor. I also question the +3 Initiative bonus. This is another of those Traits which can be metagamed too easily into either 'This is not a TITAN/Exsurgent campaign, noone will take this Trait' or 'This is a TITAN/Exsurgent campaign, the Trait is effectively mandatory and everyone takes it and gets to use it all the time.' Trick Shot - Running Shot plus various cheap weapon add-ons results in no effective penalty for firing on the move. I question this benefit for a mere 5 pt expense. Unarmed Combat Techniques - Ground Fighter seems rather powerful - things which ignore armor generally do. Armor in EP is a problem in and of itself which likely should be addressed. Every EC campaign I have played in has had house rules regarding maximum armor use. Microgravity Fighter - I take issue with the implementation as a matter of initiative. Familiarity with fighting in microgravity shouldn't make someone inherently faster than they would be when fighting in normal gravity. I could see reduction of an initiative penalty (less time spent flailing around) but not this arbitrary increase to base initiative.

[b]Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft?[/b] Critical eye. Ran past my players in trial character creation stress tests. [b]Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules?[/b] I'm not too fond of the traits that seem to treat Rez as a unit of time (Titanian Microcorp Owner, In Debt, Intense Relationship). In Debt should require money as an investment, not Rez (as that's what you owe); Intense Relationship should require time; Titanian Microcorp has some potential, but it shows that the game should finally expand on rules regarding managing and running a character-controlled hypercorp/microcorp. These entities are very important in-setting, and simplifying their existence down to a few skill bonuses and a money perk doesn't cut it. Also, the debt incurred from the In Debt trait seems crazy-high. Makes the trait largely not worth it. Lastly, the AGI Socialization trait seems like a bad patch for the Infolife background, which needs to be directly fixed, rather than with workarounds like this. [b]Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules?[/b] Freerunning Tricks, Trickshot and Unarmed Combat Techniques are some of the most interesting traits the game has released so far. They are interesting, expandable and my playgroup loves them. I think they could be the basis for a whole new skill subsystem that I think would improve the game vastly. I want to see more of these sorts of traits. [b]Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive?[/b] Large frame seems costly, considering that it makes the morph easier to hit in combat and eliminates its ability to effectively use smaller weapons. A durability or armor bonus might mitigate this issue, but otherwise I might recommend dropping the cost to 15 at most. [b]Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive?[/b] In Debt provides far too massive a penalty for its point benefit. A starting deficit of 5000 credits per level would have sufficed (so 15000, 30000, 45000 for total debt values). [b]Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn't think should be included?[/b] Microgravity Fighter could probably be merged with Freerunning Tricks or Unarmed Combat Techniques just fine. [b]Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing?[/b] More psi traits, plz. In fact, more psi everything. Some new hacking traits would be useful. There was one Shadowrun trait where the player's criminal record would strangely disappear after a time if they ever got one. That would be a very interesting trait in a setting like Eclipse Phase.

[b]Q. 1 – How did you review the material in this draft?[/b] I havn't had a chance to put them into play, yet. I've discussed them with a couple of my usual players, used them in character generation and modification to existing characters. [b]Q. 2 –What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? [/b] I found no 'endemic' issues with the traits. I do have a few suggestions; Why does factional Expertise *not* include a networking bonus? It probably should. Concerning skill tricks, if you keep these as written there must be an explicit statement that the 50 point cap to positive traits does not apply after character generation. One of the people I play with was very excited for this expansion but convinced that there's no way to take advantage with thier existing character because he is 'trait maxed'. Optionally; [b]Q. 3 – What's the best part of these rules? [/b] I absolutely love the expansion of tactical options allowed by skill trick traits. [b]Q. 4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? [/b] AGI socialization is too cheap, It's a +10 bonus to at least 7 skills it should cost 20 CP. Aquatic streamlining obviously only applies to non aquatic morphs it's too expensive and should only cost 5 CP. Murder Simulator Addict is too cheap as written. should be 15 CP Tacnet sniper requires several expensive (and usually restricted?) gear items. It's too expensive. Should be 15 CP [b]Q. 5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive? [/b] Faulty Education grant's too much bonus as written. It should be 20 CP (or apply to technical skills as well as knowledge skills) [b]Q. 6 – Were there any traits that you didn't think should be included? [/b] I'd nix the Drug Fiend trait. It's scientifically wrong as well as promoting a socially unhealthy myth. Or, turn it upside down and make it a negative trait. [b]Q. 7 – Are there any traits missing? [/b] I'd like to see Hardening (core p 214) available as a trait. It should cost 5 CP per condition and work exactly as written including lowing max Moxie or 10 CP without the Moxie hit. (Because I sometimes want to write a killer who's not squeamish and I don't think that certain uplifts should be bothered by some of the things on the Stress table.) I also would like Freefall Techniques MORE DRM morph drawbacks. Cross Faction Rep drawbacks. Something that represents the potential difficulties of having a Jovian Faction and High @-rep. Or Barsoomian Faction and High C-rep. Or just having high G-rep anywhere. Something equivalent to the Titanian Microcorp owner that is specific to The Consortium and Extropian factions. They should be power brokers and commodities traders extraordinaire. Trait's isnt' the place to do this but I'd like someone to expound on the hazards, (lack of friction, ability to duck or change direction), and the benefits, (jumping over houses running really really fast), of low gravity environments. Some of those could have been included in the Freerunning Techniques. I'd like to see trait's that support the *NON HUMAN* aspects of uplifts, (cause, frankly I get tired of "Dude in a animal costume" uplift concepts), Bonobo Libido, Territorial Imperative, Avian brain Structure, Nonsomatotopic motor complex, Chemoreceptive touch, Proprioseptive insensitivity, Microgravity shedding (The Hair! My god, the HAIR!) [/quote]

Heh. I find it kind of ironic that you do all this work for a game that highlights rep economics. I'm guessing you've saved the world about 10000 man hours of character gen so far. We should all get together and buy you a olivgarden gift certificate or something. :D I'm going to hold off submitting my ideas for a Lasershotgun and PlasmaNumchucks for now tho.

Any missing traits? Answer yes, plenty. There is missing traits like, Ship ownership Indenturement Enslavement As I look through the game books I am bothered by a science fiction oriented game that is in space with nothing on ships. Either for characters to own or even something on the intersystem trade. Indenturement and slavery is mentioned and nothing more. Hell the flesh market would be big with all the downloadable infomorphs, the available ego's to reinstantiate, and lots of lonely to go around in deep outsystem.

I agree with OneTrikPony in that I feel there should be more Traits which relate to the transhuman condition. Unique advantages and disadvantages for various uplift types and AGIs. Perhaps some more stuff that affects psi, things to do with re-sleeving, uploading, forking and so on. All the things to do with skills are all well and good but they are things I can already do just by having those skills. More ideas on how to use those skills are cool but we don't need Traits for that. What we do need traits for are unique things, independent of skills and aptitudes, that let us show various personality elements, psychological views, social factors and so on.

nostromo1a1 wrote:

There is missing traits like, Ship ownership

I have to second this. For players who want to run characters that own businesses (like shipping and receiving, and for that matter any business which would be useful for black ops or smuggling), some sort of mechanic for ship and/or automated transport craft ownership would really help. Please, anything but "I'll just take 40cp off the top"!

[b]Q.1 – How did you review the material in this draft? [/b] I went through an exacting ten step process: 1. I tried to convince myself that I should wait for the second draft before looking. 2. I got curious and looked anyways. 3. I read through it with a critical eye and made detailed notes on what exactly was wrong with each trait. 4. I had a panic attack thinking that these traits would actually be included in the game. 5. I reminded myself that it was just a rough draft and the writers would listen to feedback. 6. I wrote an extremely snarky trait-by-trait review which I subsequently deleted. 7. I wrote twenty or so drafts of this post trying to get it perfect. 8. I gave up and wrote this. 9. The site stopped responding. I waited a couple of hours for it to come back. 10. I got myself psyched up enough to overcome my GAD and actually post. [b]Q.2 – What's the most critical problem you've identified in these rules? [/b] There are multiple, endemic problems in these rules (see my answer to Q.4). If I had to pick one thing that I would say is wrong though, I would say that the majority of the traits are written as D&D 4e feats not as Eclipse Phase traits and thus do not fit the system at all. Examples: [list] [*] In D&D 4e, taking a feat to improve your grappling skill to become a better grappler is perfectly acceptable because you do not allocate points to combat skills directly. However, in Eclipse Phase the way to become a better grappler is to increase your melee skills or to take the subdual specialization of a melee skill. [*]In D&D 4e, feats that let you use one skill in place of another or give you a bonus to one skill if you have another that is also applicable are acceptable. However, in Eclipse Phase, which has explicit rules for doing this (complementary skills), this sort of thing should be handled using those explicit rules, not as a trait. [*]In D&D 4e, there is nothing like the profession or interests skills so taking a feat to represent a profession or interest is a valid choice. Eclipse Phase, in contrast, does have those skills so having a profession (say as a cleaner) or interest (say in a faction) should be represented by taking those skills. If you want bonuses to other skills due to having that interest or profession, you use the complementary skill rules. [*]D&D 4e is a loosely simulationist setting at best. In it things like charging from above to deal more damage or finding smaller targets easier to hit than larger targets or somehow being able to take four shots with a gun when shooting grenades out of the air but not when shooting the much larger opponents who are holding the grenades don't have to make sense. In Eclipse Phase, a much more simulationist system, including these things leads to me writing extremely snarky trait-by-trait reviews which I then delete because I don't want to seem like a jerk. [*]D&D 4e is set up as a limited action option system. Each skill has exact applications, each combat option is exact and precise. Using feats to expand these options makes sense in that system. Eclipse Phase is the opposite. It is a permissive system. If you have Animal Handling you should be able to train animals, especially if you have a specialization in training, you do not need to have a trait that lets you do it. Likewise if you have the scrounging skill and a hardware skill, you do not need a trait that lets you scrounge for hardware parts, you already have that ability. [/list] In conclusion, I think that the majority of the traits presented completely miss the point of both Eclipse Phases mechanical system and the very nature of the game. [b]Q.3 – What is the best part of these rules? [/b] The following traits seem okay (barring further playtest): [list] [*][b]Introspective Forker[/b] [*][b]Phoenix[/b] [*][b]Low Gravity Adaption[/b] [*][b]Proprietary Tech[/b] [/list] [b]Q.4 – Were there any Positive traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive?[/b] [b]Aquatic Streamlining:[/b] The price seems a little high. It probably should cost 5 CP (equivalent to a high cost implant). It definitely should have an augmentation equivalent (both bioware and cybernetic) and it should list the morphs that already have it (octomorph, neowhales, cetus, etc.) [b]Drug Fiend:[/b] I like this trait but it needs actual play testing as the bonus/benefits may be to large, especially when combined with the addiction drawback. [b]Q.5 – Were there any Negative traits that you felt were too cheap or too expensive?[/b] [b]Faulty Education:[/b] This might be a bit overpriced (and thus hard to buy off if one's education improves). Maybe a 10 CP trait. [b]Q.6 – Were there any traits that you don't think should be included?[/b] Yes: [list] [*][b]AGI Socialization:[/b] This is obviously broken. [*][b]Async Familiarity:[/b] This is a skill specialization for Kinesics not a trait. [*][b]Brinker Solitude:[/b] 10 cp for +10 to every skill! That dog won't hunt monsignor. [*][b]Cleaner:[/b] This is the skill 'Profession: Cleaner'. [*][b]Exsurgent Attack Survivor:[/b] This is both overpowered (every firewall agent should have it) and redundant as the game already has rules for desensitization to stressors. Worse, it becomes wasted points once hardening kicks in. [*][b]Factional Expertise:[/b] This is another trait that should be a skill. Namely, 'Interest: [Faction]'. [*][b]Freerunning Tricks: Free Climbing:[/b] There is a skill in the game specifically for climbing. It is called 'Climbing'. This trait devalues that skill massively. Instead suggest free running as a complementary skill for climbing under certain circumstances. [*][b]Freerunning Tricks: Feint Jumping:[/b] as Free Climbing but for deception. [*][b]Freerunning Tricks: Defensive Freerunning:[/b] This is identical to a freerunning specialization of 'Full Defense' similar to the Fray specialization of 'Full Defense' that is already included in the core book. [*][b]Freerunning Tricks: Divebomb Strike:[/b] No... just no. Bad physics, bad balance, bad everything. Someone critically failed an Academics: Physics check when writing this one. [*][b]Freerunning Tricks: Silent Freerunning:[/b] See free climbing but replace climbing with infiltration. [*][b]Information wants to have fun:[/b] This seems like a negative trait trying to masquerade as a positive one. Similar effects can be achieved by reducing your SAV aptitude or social skills and using the points to buy specializations in social skills specific to dealing with AGIs instead. [*][b]Microgravity Fighter:[/b] I hate this. Eclipse Phase is already complicated enough without adding a bunch of fiddly little situational bonus to it. Also this trait makes no sense: why would someone in microgravity react faster than someone not? [*][b]Mod Spotter:[/b] This should be a specialty of Kinesics or Perception, possibly using the Hardware: Implants, Medicine: Implants skills, or an Interest skill as complementary skills. [*][b]Murder Simulator Addict:[/b] First conditional initiative bonuses needlessly complicate the game. Second, this is massively overpowered and required for every ranged combatant. Third, a person who plays video games for a couple of months is a better shot than a professional soldier who has fought for tens to hundreds of years? WTF. [*][b]Repurposing Specialist:[/b] By its very existence this trait makes the scrounging skill worse by making characters pay for a basic function of the skill. Everyone with scrounging and the appropriate technical skills should be able to do this anyways as this is one of the main purposes of scrounging! [*][b]Smart Animal Combat Trainer:[/b] see repurposing specialist. [*][b]Smart Animal Teamwork:[/b] see smart animal combat trainer. [*][b]Specialist Guru:[/b] There are already rules for this in the main book (page 173 under the heading 'complementary skills') that handle exactly this sort of situation. [*][b]Tacnet Sniper:[/b] This both completely negates the advantages of laser guided seekers and makes tacnet more powerful. This trait is both unnecessary and completely overpowered. It should be handled as a specialization (indirect fire) on a relevant weapon skill (which gives +10 effectively reducing the penalty to -20) or simply increasing the skill. [*][b]TITAN Hunter:[/b] This has many of the problems mentioned earlier: bad interaction with the hardening rules, a fiddly initiative bonus (how do you know if it is an exsurgent? Why does a real exsurgent and exsurgent like exhuman have different bonuses? What if an exsurgent joins the fight later on? Or an exsurgent is puppet socketing a bot?), and a fiddly defense bonus (exact same problems as the initiative bonus). [*][b]Titanian Microcorp Owner:[/b] What about a hypercorp ownership? An extropian business venture? A criminal enterprise? Handle this as a separate, optional mechanic rather than a trait. [*][b]Trick Shot: Disarming Shot:[/b] Another trait that should be a skill specialty, or handled by just increasing the base skill. [*][b]Pinpoint Shot:[/b] This has a verisimilitude problem: you are better at hitting small things but not large things? How does that even begin to make sense? This should be handled by increasing the weapon skill (accuracy with a weapon is a big part of the skill) or, if absolutely necessary, a skill specialty. [*][b]Point Defense Shot:[/b] Basically you could do the first part of this trait anyways. The difference is in the shooting a number of grenades equal to speed per turn which is nonsensical and broken: I can shoot four very small grenades out of the air with my pistol but I can't effortlessly nail 4 much larger guys with the same pistol. But what if those guys are all holding grenades? Can I shoot all of them then? No? But I can shoot the grenades if they actually throw them? MADNESS! [*][b]Multi-Shot:[/b] Not as bad as point defense but it suffers from the fact that it is a trait that increases weapon accuracy. Why do we even have weapon skills? Not needed, simply increase the weapon skill. [*][b]Running Shot:[/b] Essentially a poor man's gyromount. This should be handled with a skill specialty instead. [*][b]Cover Shot:[/b] This is good. This is really good. This is downright essential to all combatants. This should not be in the game. [*][b]Unarmed Combat Techniques: Knockout Strike:[/b] There are already rules for knocking someone out with damage. This is redundant and weird: Why can you do this with unarmed but not clubs? What about people with cyberbrains? Why is it just as easy to knock out a neotenic with brittle bones than a fury with reinforced metal bones? [*][b]Unarmed Combat Techniques: Speed Training:[/b] Another situational initiative increase. Also why doesn't speed training just merit increasing a base aptitude (probably reflex)? Why can't you have speed training with other weapons: say knives or swords? [*][b]Unarmed Combat Techniques: Grappler:[/b] This is a skills specialty that [b]IS ALREADY LISTED IN THE CORE RULEBOOK![/b] Also you need to keep your terminology straight: make sure to refer to grappling as subdual. [*][b]Unarmed Combat Techniques: Ground Fighter:[/b] This is basically a much improved called shot without the penalties, MOS requirements, and inflicting +1d10 damage. Way overpowered. Also how does this interact with pneumatic limbs? Or an exoskeleton? Cyberlimbs? What about grappling with a grappling aid? Stick with the normal called shot rules and get rid of this trait. [*][b]Unarmed Combat Techniques: Sweeping Attack:[/b] Just increase the base skill or take a specialization. [*][b]Firewall Rival:[/b] This is just the enemy trait from the corebook. Take that instead. [*][b]Identifiable Quirk:[/b] This one would be okay except for the last part. Ability to take a negative penalty for points and then suppress the penalty with a test is pure cheese. This is better handled as the 'incompetent (impersonation)' trait from the main book or by simply reducing the characters impersonation skill by 10 points. [*][b]Intense Relationship:[/b] This one is way to specific to a firewall focused game. It also seems very fiddly. Maybe rewrite it more generally? [*][b]Muse Phobia[/b]: This might be better as a mental disorder with specific rules attached. That way you can gain it from taking traumas. [*][b]Socially Graceless:[/b] This is incompetent (protocol) but slightly better in that it doesn't suffer the -10 penalty and slightly worse in that skillsofts can't be used. My opinion is get rid of it and just stick with incompetent (protocol). [*][b]Unfocused:[/b] This is mental disorder (ADD) or mental disorder (ADHD). It does not require its own trait. [/list] [b]Q.7 – Are there any traits missing?[/b] This is a little late but I felt that small size should have been encompassed in a morph trait. So that small morphs like the neotenics and the spare have the small sized trait (which gives a -10 penalty when attempting to hit them). You would also have a large trait which does the opposite (gives a +10 bonus to hit them, and naturally you can't have both). You sort of have this with the Large Frame trait, but including it like it is really borks up the rules. In short I would like something like this (but better written): [b]Small Size (morph only, 0 cp):[/b] You are significantly smaller than a normal adult human. You may have trouble using very large items such as plasma rifles and some types of gear (such as armor) sized for normal humans. Your small size gives opponents a -10 penalty to hit you in combat. You cannot have both the small size and large size traits. The following morphs described in other books have the small size trait (neotenic, spare, etc.) [b]Large Size (morph only, 0 cp):[/b] You are significantly larger than a normal adult human. You may have trouble using smaller items but may use some of the smaller two handed weapons one handed (provided they have customized grips for your use). Your larger size gives opponents a +10 bonus to hit in combat. The following morphs described in other books have the large size trait (list the various whales and stuff here).