Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ SOTA 2063 and 2064
Posted by: JesterX Jun 13 2006, 05:07 PM
How good are the SOTA's books?
Is it worth purchasing them?
Posted by: HMHVV Hunter Jun 13 2006, 05:11 PM
Don't have 2064, but I do have 2063 and I liked it.
There's sections on genetech, new metamagical techniques, mercenaries, corporate security, and a pop culture section (including the top 10 albums and movies of the year, which is a nice peak into the future of popular entertainment).
Posted by: Witness Jun 13 2006, 05:23 PM
Both something of a mish-mash, but both are an entertaining read with lots of adventure seeds therein.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 13 2006, 05:53 PM
I'm a big fan of '63, and much less a fan of '64. It needs to be remembered, though, that not everything within is actually SOTA (I mean, if you really want to declare that large mortars didn't get rediscovered until 2063, I guess it's your game…).
~J
Posted by: HMHVV Hunter Jun 13 2006, 05:56 PM
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| (I mean, if you really want to declare that large mortars didn't get rediscovered until 2063, I guess it's your game…). ~J |
Or that Claymore mines didn't exist until then (even though I've seen Shadowrun Quotefile references to them long before 2063 came out)
The way I'd see it is that they just didn't get mentioned much until then because most people in the shadows aren't going to have a need for mortars or anti-personnel mines.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 13 2006, 06:21 PM
Ridiculous. 
Really, I think claymores are significantly more useful to Shadowrunners than the standard short-range omnidirectional mines in Cannon Companion. Denying a hallway can be very useful.
~J
Posted by: nezumi Jun 13 2006, 06:33 PM
Both books are very good for what they do, which is give you support in particular areas of running. '63 seems to focus mostly on merc campaigns and genetech, neither one was especially interesting to me personally. '64 focused on law enforcement, politics and espionage, which are far more interesting to me.
Posted by: JesterX Jun 13 2006, 07:02 PM
Thank you all for your support. I'll purchase both...
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jun 13 2006, 08:47 PM
...I prefer '64 for the same reasons Nezumi mentioned as well as the section on Adepts.
Posted by: SL James Jun 13 2006, 09:07 PM
I prefer '63 because the information given on intelligence-gathering (I'd say espionage, but there isn't actually anything about HUMINT espionage in the book) and law enforcement is so bad it makes Baby Jesus cry.
Plus I used to game with the guy who wrote Keeping The Rabble Out.
Posted by: nezumi Jun 13 2006, 09:46 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| I prefer '63 because the information given on intelligence-gathering (I'd say espionage, but there isn't actually anything about HUMINT espionage in the book) and law enforcement is so bad it makes Baby Jesus cry. Plus I used to game with the guy who wrote Keeping The Rabble Out. |
I think you mean 2064. Glancing at the 2063 table of contents, there's nothing on intelligence gathering. Genetech, new metamagics, Soldiers of Fortune, Keeping the Rabble out (which was a good chapter - that's on building security) and Culture Shock.
Posted by: mfb Jun 13 2006, 10:05 PM
he means he doesn't like the info on law enforcement and intelligence in SOTA64.
Posted by: SL James Jun 13 2006, 10:31 PM
Yes, I meant 2064. I foolishly assumed people would pick that up after the "I prefer '63" part.
Posted by: mfb Jun 13 2006, 10:59 PM
SOTA64's intelligence stuff was neat, but it seemed designed more for an intelligence-oriented campaign, a la Missions, where you play a government/corporate/whatever spy. you could apply some of it to 'normal' SR games, if you wanted to, but you'd have to work at it for a lot of the material.
Posted by: SL James Jun 13 2006, 11:00 PM
Or write your own mini-supplement.
*ahem*
I'm just blessed to have players who know that espionage isn't as James Bond (or worse, MI:2/3) as it's presented in SOTA:2064, contrary to the ludicrous assumptions of certain people with whom I've corresponded with in the past.
Posted by: mfb Jun 13 2006, 11:03 PM
haha. yeah, it'd be nice if someone wrote a full-sized article on how intelligence work intersects 'normal' shadowrunning. they could do all sorts of neat stuff with such an article, such as linking it here for download!
the cigarette rockets in SOTA64 gave me a serious case of the belly laughs. i haven't decided if that's good or bad.
Posted by: SL James Jun 13 2006, 11:06 PM
It was amusing in the Compendium of Modern Firearms. It was gratuitous and silly in Games of State. Of course, so was most of Games of State.
Oh, and mfb? http://www.geocities.com/crmsndude/Espionage_3.pdf (Warning: 330ish Kb PDF).
| QUOTE (Syriana) |
| FRANKS What do you think intelligence work is, Bob? BOB It's two people in a room and one of them is asking a favor that's a capital crime in every country on earth. A hanging crime. |
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 14 2006, 02:40 AM
What's that excerpt from? I don't recall seeing it elsewhere.
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 14 2006, 03:50 AM
Pick up both '63 & '64.
Posted by: SL James Jun 14 2006, 04:10 AM
| QUOTE (BookWyrm) |
| What's that excerpt from? I don't recall seeing it elsewhere. |
I'm gonna take a stab and figure from the Quote tag that it's from Syriana.
Posted by: Drraagh Jun 14 2006, 06:13 AM
I like both books for the fact that they are good at what they do, trying to add more flavor to the game. Sure, the Secret Ops stuff of 2064 may be a bit out of place for a standard Shadowrun game but I have issues with some stuff in each book.
As was said, 'Both books are very good for what they do, which is give you support in particular areas of running.' And I have some issues with each book, like in 64, I think it is, where they say something to the point of 'Give a cop 500ny and he'll ignore whatever you do'. But that's just because of the way I play. I look at it more like Robocop or perhaps even Judge Dredd. Where there are crooked cops, and there are some that are straightlaced, but most are in the middle. You can try and bribe them, but it'll be more than pocket change.
Posted by: SL James Jun 14 2006, 07:44 AM
| QUOTE (Drraagh) |
| I like both books for the fact that they are good at what they do, trying to add more flavor to the game. Sure, the Secret Ops stuff of 2064 may be a bit out of place for a standard Shadowrun game but I have issues with some stuff in each book. |
It's not out of place. 2064 was, for lack of a better term, the Year of Political Intrigue.
It's just that most of the information is lacking in utility. Saying "Well, it's just official shadowrunning" is just, well, false. There's more to it, and pretty straightforward applications of espionage into shadowruns (Stuff that should have been explained for newb and non-wonks in the main book or Companion), but none of that showed up in GoS.
Posted by: nezumi Jun 14 2006, 01:56 PM
Oops, helps if I read the whole sentence now and again, huh?
Yeah, the cigarette rockets were a bit... odd. Made me think of the finger rockets from CP2020. But overall, in a game about stealth, recon, planning and cautious extractions (of people or information) I've been surprised how skimpy the rules on intelligence gathering and drugs are.
Overall I will miss the SOTA books. Having books made specifically to fit particular areas of SR, as well as to add cultural flavor, were great.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 14 2006, 02:52 PM
Wait, what? I thought they were going to keep publishing them? I'm thrilled that they're dropping them, if that's true.
~J
Posted by: nezumi Jun 14 2006, 04:10 PM
I believe I had read somewhere that they were discontinuing that line. At least for the time being, since they have so many books coming out with SR4. I guess in 3 years, once they've gotten out their half a dozen other books, they might consider restarting the line.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 14 2006, 04:12 PM
I dearly hope not. Maybe every five years or so they could publish one, but a new SOTA book every year (or even every two) is an instant recipe for power creep.
Hm. Though I guess it doesn't matter for me anymore. Still weird realizing that.
~J
Posted by: Adam Jun 14 2006, 04:15 PM
I wouldn't expect to see another SOTA book for a couple years, but there's been nothing official said about whether they'll continue being published or not.
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jun 14 2006, 04:45 PM
| QUOTE (nezumi) |
| But overall, in a game about stealth, recon, planning and cautious extractions (of people or information) I've been surprised how skimpy the rules on intelligence gathering and drugs are. Overall I will miss the SOTA books. Having books made specifically to fit particular areas of SR, as well as to add cultural flavor, were great. |
...being a lover of intrigue, I used what I could apply and had to basically hack out the details. As mentioned in previous posts my Rhapsody arc had a good deal of espionage flavour and required a delicate (stealthy) approach to many situations in what was a potential international powderkeg.
Consider, an adept with Facial Sculpt, Menalin Control, Voice Control, Linguist, Cool Resolve, & Kinesics. Next give them Disguise skill, some minor implants (1 power point worth) such as Induction Datajack, Transducer, a little headware memory, and maybe some visual or hearing mods, then have the tools of their trade disguised as everyday common items. On top of this give them a heap of Language skills, a generalised Etiquette, with some social based knowledge skills, the Friends Abroad and Friendly Face Edges. You have a pretty good covert operative.
Posted by: SL James Jun 14 2006, 07:08 PM
hahahaha
You just described my Social Adept's best friend sans the cyber. Except you forgot to add "…plus 20 years of experience in espionage and counterintelligence field work for the CIA and Knight Errant."
| QUOTE |
| I've been surprised how skimpy the rules on intelligence gathering and drugs are. |
The drugs rules suck, and have always sucked. I'd be very happy for them to stay as far from them as possible.
As for intelligence-gathering, they wouldn't be needed if the social skills got more than a page and a half of barely-complete rules.
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jun 14 2006, 09:04 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||
| hahahaha You just described my Social Adept's best friend sans the cyber. Except you forgot to add "…plus 20 years of experience in espionage and counterintelligence field work for the CIA and Knight Errant."
The drugs rules suck, and have always sucked. I'd be very happy for them to stay as far from them as possible. As for intelligence-gathering, they wouldn't be needed if the social skills got more than a page and a half of barely-complete rules. |
...actually this was off the top of the head from one of the NPCs I had in the scenario I ran. This character also had extensive experience in espionage and psychological warfare.
I agree, the active social (and social knowledge) skills need better detail. When you look at it, these are what basically allow an operative to blend in to the woodwork so to say.
My Fallen Angel character that I ran a while back, while not an adept, was also very heavy on the Social, Cultural and Linguistic skills. She also had a boatload of contacts along with the Friends in High Places, Good Rep and Friendly Face edges. She also had a lot of fun spy toys designed using the concealing items rules.
Posted by: eidolon Jun 14 2006, 09:16 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||
I'm gonna take a stab and figure from the Quote tag that it's from Syriana. |
He meant the pdf file. I guess the need to snark overpowered your reasoning faculties?
It happens to the best of us.Oh, and Kage, nothing says the SoTA stuff has to exist in your game. That said, one a year might be a bit excessive. Besides, it won't matter that much to anyone that's sticking with 3rd. I suppose if they're fluff heavy one could always convert the stats, but it's likely more trouble than it's worth.
Posted by: SL James Jun 14 2006, 10:13 PM
No, actually I saw the word excerpt and the idea of it referring to the PDF did not even occur to me.
That said, the PDF isn't from anywhere. The book and chapter, if you look carefully, don't exist. It's an illusion, and apparently a pretty good one.
Posted by: Kalvan Jun 14 2006, 11:03 PM
I personally preferred the bioware section of SOTA '63 and the Old World Magic section of SOTA '64.
Posted by: eidolon Jun 14 2006, 11:42 PM
That illusion looks pretty good. I haven't had time to read it completely, but the layout and such is damn nice.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 15 2006, 12:08 AM
| QUOTE (eidolon @ Jun 14 2006, 04:16 PM) |
| Oh, and Kage, nothing says the SoTA stuff has to exist in your game. That said, one a year might be a bit excessive. |
Actually, something might very well say that everything in every SotA book published has to exist in my game. That's because, contrary to appearances, I don't always GM when I play. And new players? Do you expect them to immediately know to forbid all new SotA books?
~J
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 15 2006, 01:01 AM
| QUOTE (eidolon) | ||||
He meant the pdf file. I guess the need to snark overpowered your reasoning faculties? It happens to the best of us.Oh, and Kage, nothing says the SoTA stuff has to exist in your game. That said, one a year might be a bit excessive. Besides, it won't matter that much to anyone that's sticking with 3rd. I suppose if they're fluff heavy one could always convert the stats, but it's likely more trouble than it's worth. |
Yes, that's what I meant about the PDF.
Posted by: eidolon Jun 15 2006, 03:52 AM
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Actually, something might very well say that everything in every SotA book published has to exist in my game. That's because, contrary to appearances, I don't always GM when I play. And new players? Do you expect them to immediately know to forbid all new SotA books? ~J |
Everything you mention is up to the GM to regulate. If all of it is available, and you're playing, then why would it be a big deal? It's not up to you to keep track of all of it at that point, it's up to the GM. And if as a player it still bothers you that much, walk.
New players? Why would a new player not know ahead of making his or her character what books were or weren't available? Unless the GM isn't going his/her job, that isn't likely to happen. If you're GMing, and you want to ban the SoTA books, that's your call, but it's up to you to make that known.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jun 15 2006, 05:21 AM
| QUOTE (eidolon @ Jun 14 2006, 10:52 PM) |
| Everything you mention is up to the GM to regulate. |
Did you just stop reading or something?
| QUOTE |
| New players? Why would a new player not know ahead of making his or her character what books were or weren't available? Unless the GM isn't going his/her job, that isn't likely to happen. |
Unless, just maybe, the GM is a new player?
Hint: I'm not talking about my group.
I mean, sure, you can ban all the power-creep-inducing books, but it makes a piss-poor advertisement to say to new players "you should really try this game, but make sure you don't let your players use anything from SotAs 2066-2069."
~J
Posted by: SL James Jun 15 2006, 06:02 AM
| QUOTE (eidolon @ Jun 14 2006, 05:42 PM) |
| That illusion looks pretty good. I haven't had time to read it completely, but the layout and such is damn nice. |
It better be considering that it took me 10x as long to make it look good as it did to write the article (30-40 minutes for the text, 3.5 hrs for the layout).
Posted by: Drraagh Jun 15 2006, 06:04 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||
It's not out of place. 2064 was, for lack of a better term, the Year of Political Intrigue. |
From what I read in the rulebooks, a standard Shadowrun in the essence of Shadowrunners would be like the A-Team for example. The Secret Ops stuff, yes it can add flavor, sort of like the way with the two xXx movies or even the Dragonheart saga and such. I'm not saying it was out of place in the way that it shouldn't have been there, as the previous line said it gives more flavor for the game.
Posted by: eidolon Jun 15 2006, 06:28 AM
Ha. Which one of us is missing the point exactly? You aren't in those groups. It doesn't matter to you. And a new player is GMing? You think SoTA is the biggest worry a new GM has? That's rich. Maybe they could put a warning label in the front cover:
Warning, there are other books with other rules that are compatible with this game. Kagetenshi would like to make sure that you know that as GM, you are allowed to allow or disallow whatever you'd like in your game. We know we state this pretty much explicitly in every RPG ever made, but he didn't think you'd catch on.
Ooh. Or maybe they could just avoid publishing anything other than the BBB? That would solve "power creep" pretty nicely wouldn't it? And think of how many new games there would be to choose from if all of the designers and authors could only make one book per game!
All I'm saying is it seems that you're the one with SoTA issues. Your not wanting "power creep" seems a silly reason not to continue a nifty series of books.
Posted by: nezumi Jun 15 2006, 07:51 PM
Speaking for myself, I can agree with kage that power creep is a genuine concern. On the flip side, the main shadowrun books have a fairly narrow focus unfortunately. As I've said, espionage is largely ignored, which has always upset me. The SOTA books gives them a chance to write books that expand the Shadowrun universe in a particular area - international travel and rings, espionage, politics, law enforcement, etc. without having to build an entire book JUST on that topic. That I do enjoy.
Posted by: eidolon Jun 15 2006, 08:34 PM
That's one of my favorite things about them. The topics have done nothing but expand our knowledge of the world that's already there, in a way. A lot of it is the type of stuff that probably won't/wouldn't come up unless you were specifically running a game that dealt with it directly (espionage, etc.).
On "power creep" though, I don't really see any one thing upping the power level any more than another. If a character has genetech, another has cyber, and another has bio. All of it pales in comparison to a decently powered mage anyway .
Posted by: SL James Jun 15 2006, 10:05 PM
| QUOTE (nezumi @ Jun 15 2006, 01:51 PM) |
| As I've said, espionage is largely ignored, which has always upset me. |
Indeed. One of these days there may actually be something official written about how it works beyond ZOMG TEH TOYS!!11!!!LOL!11!!11
Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 16 2006, 12:33 AM
| QUOTE (eidolon) |
| If a character has genetech, another has cyber, and another has bio. All of it pales in comparison to a decently powered mage anyway . |
Or you could have a magician adept with genetech, trauma dampner, a litle bit of cyber and the Virtuoso Metamagic.
RPG power creep doesn't come from new options on their own. RPG power creep comes from combining new options with those that already exist in ways that the writers did not think of at the time.
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 16 2006, 12:43 AM
OK, so where is the PDF excerpt from???
Posted by: SL James Jun 16 2006, 03:20 AM
It's not from anywhere.
I wrote it myself.
I then ripped off the layout design by photoshopping the header from my Loose Alliances PDF, figured out how to duplicate the footer, had the arrow buttons for the comments made for my own use years ago and applied those, and then used FrizQuadrata for the font before I saved it as a PDF in Word.
Like I said. It took me about 3-3.5 hours for the layout. The actual content pretty much wrote itself in about 30 minutes, plus another 15 to get the tone of the comments right since most of the posters are other peoples' PCs.
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 16 2006, 06:59 AM
NICE job, SL James. The works had me fooled completely, & I'm not easy to fool. I'm adding it to my hardcopy files. :ok: 
Posted by: SL James Jun 16 2006, 10:05 AM
I just wish I didn't have to write it.
Posted by: BookWyrm Jun 16 2006, 03:42 PM
But you did excellent work. Be proud of that, at least.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)