Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ My Main Problem with SR4
Posted by: Union Jane Jul 24 2006, 05:56 PM
Used to be, I'd meet some dodgy NPC and realise straightaway that he was easy meat. After all, he was only rolling a single die for initiative, right? And here I was, tossing out three at a time. I was bound to gun him down before he ever got off a shot.
Well, sometimes that wasn't true. More than once, I'd watch in horror as my GM rolled the goon's initiative . . . and that d6 would roll a 6, and then another 6, and before I knew it, I had a serious fight on my well-manicured hands.
These days there are no surprises. I know exactly how many times I'm going to act each round, and when I gauge an NPC to be a zero threat, I no longer fear that he'll end up with more actions than me. Where's the fun in that?
Sigh.
With every target number a 5, gone are the days when I clung to a prayer that I could somehow hit that target-number 17 on two small dice. I liked that suspense. Everybody always had a shot, no matter how distant. The exploding d6 added an element to the game that I dearly miss.
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 24 2006, 06:03 PM
IIRC, the rule of six didn't apply to initiative tests, but that doesn't invalidate your point.
The longshot test as a means of resolving very difficult actions seems to be one of the more dissatisfying parts of SR4, just judging by the noise on this forum.
Posted by: Butterblume Jul 24 2006, 06:04 PM
On the other hand, that old lady with her holdout pistol can seriously wound you, so I think it's a fair trade.
In SR3, I also knew how often my char could act, if she wasn't wounded (Initiative 10+1W6).
Posted by: Demon_Bob Jul 24 2006, 06:07 PM
Don't forget NPCs can spend edge to go first as well.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jul 24 2006, 06:09 PM
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| IIRC, the rule of six didn't apply to initiative tests, but that doesn't invalidate your point. |
Lightning Reflexes allowed it, but only if you spent too many points and crippled your character in six other ways.
~J
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 24 2006, 06:10 PM
Do you tell the PCs if an NPC is doing this? Do they have a chance to "match" the little old lady by spending their own edge, or does she just get to go first? i.e.:
GM: The little old lady is spending edge to go first.
Player: Screw that. I spend edge too!
-or-
Player: Heh, heh, Little old lady. This'll be easy.
GM: Roll initiative. She beats you.
Player: Wha?
GM: She spent edge. She shoots you. Ha-ha!
Player: Bummer.
Posted by: Butterblume Jul 24 2006, 06:18 PM
In my case, I don't use edge for most NPCs. Only the special ones, aka the bad bosses or the good guys, like connections.
Edit: Good and bad is here solely used to describe allies or enemies 
.
Posted by: CradleWorm Jul 24 2006, 06:21 PM
| QUOTE |
| The long shot test as a means of resolving very difficult actions seems to be one of the more dissatisfying parts of SR4, just judging by the noise on this forum. |
Note, the the rule of six does not apply to the Long Shot test either.
Also, since your only rolling your Edge in dice, which would give you at most 8 (for lucky humans) I don't think you can complete any "very difficult" tasks. On average you'll only roll 2 2/3's hits on 8 dice. If your task is "very difficult" the threshold will higher then two.
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 24 2006, 06:23 PM
Well sure, but it's still possible as long as the threshold is less than or equal to your edge. Rolling 6 dice against a threshold of 4 can still provide that tense moment that Union Jane is looking for, I think.
Posted by: Union Jane Jul 24 2006, 06:32 PM
Moon-Hawk: Nice sig. Hile Roland.
I do like many changes in SR4. It seems like the rules are more universal for different situations, thus requiring less study on my part as the system as a whole is easier to learn.
But all target numbers the same? Bah, what's the fun in that? Isn't there some way I can keep my old target-number system and exploding 6s whilst still playing with large chunks of the SR4 rules?
Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jul 24 2006, 06:41 PM
Thanks. Unfortunately, I have to edit the middle line of my sig because it's just over the character limit. Oh well.
It seems like there are a number of people who want a "compromise system" between SR3 and SR4. Some are trying to incorporate all the SR4 stuff they like into SR3 rules, and some are trying to house-rule SR4 to be more like SR3. It seems like a TN bonus/penalty in SR3 is roughly comparable to a dice pool penalty/bonus in SR4, but I think you'll find that anyway you come at the problem, it gets ugly quickly.
Posted by: booklord Jul 24 2006, 06:42 PM
Personally I don't allow the use of edge to go first in an initiative pass.
IMHO edge should only be used to increase the chance of success. It should never provide instant, outright success.
Now if you like exploding dice just have all dice treated as exploding all the time. (Edge or no edge) Spice things up a little. I've experimented with this. It does add a little more chance to the rolls, but on the flip side it slightly slows down game play.
Posted by: Union Jane Jul 24 2006, 06:55 PM
| QUOTE (booklord) |
| Now if you like exploding dice just have all dice treated as exploding all the time. (Edge or no edge) Spice things up a little. I've experimented with this. It does add a little more chance to the rolls, but on the flip side it slightly slows down game play. |
Example?
Posted by: stevebugge Jul 24 2006, 06:57 PM
| QUOTE (Union Jane @ Jul 24 2006, 10:55 AM) | ||
Example? |
It depends on your players a bit, but I have had players who take a long time to physically complete the act of shaking and throwing dice, and rerolling every six just adds to it. Also separating the hits and misses can slow some players down, though if you use Aaron's Color Coded Dice Scheme much of that problem is eliminated.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jul 24 2006, 07:24 PM
| QUOTE (stevebugge) | ||||
It depends on your players a bit, but I have had players who take a long time to physically complete the act of shaking and throwing dice, and rerolling every six just adds to it. Also separating the hits and misses can slow some players down, though if you use Aaron's Color Coded Dice Scheme much of that problem is eliminated. |
Interesting item to note here, if you have the HeroScape board game (go go miniatures!) then the blue dice used for defense mark 2 of the 6 sides with shields which works well with none-edge rolls in SR4.
I've considered painted 5's and 6's, but it looks like someone beat me to it.
Posted by: stevebugge Jul 24 2006, 08:38 PM
| QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Jul 24 2006, 11:24 AM) | ||||||
Interesting item to note here, if you have the HeroScape board game (go go miniatures!) then the blue dice used for defense mark 2 of the 6 sides with shields which works well with none-edge rolls in SR4. I've considered painted 5's and 6's, but it looks like someone beat me to it. |
The color coded dice work pretty well. When I first saw the idea I thought it was kind of cheesey but my inner MythBuster got the better of me so I went out and got some cheap dice and some sharpies. Needless to say I've been pretty pleased with the results. One thing I might add to Aaron's original system is a color for the 6 to speed the recognition of potential exploding dice.
Posted by: Geekkake Jul 24 2006, 09:19 PM
As I've said before, allowing Long Shot tests to explode mitigates the situation to a certain extent. That fixes the SR4 equivalent to TN 17 tension so that, no matter how high the Threshold, no matter how many dice are removed from your pool, your unlucky Ork can still throw his one Edge die and conceivably, in some distant eigenstate, pwn the ever-loving Hell out of a panzer with one punch.
Posted by: Union Jane Jul 25 2006, 03:02 PM
| QUOTE (Geekkake) |
| As I've said before, allowing Long Shot tests to explode mitigates the situation to a certain extent. That fixes the SR4 equivalent to TN 17 tension so that, no matter how high the Threshold, no matter how many dice are removed from your pool, your unlucky Ork can still throw his one Edge die and conceivably, in some distant eigenstate, pwn the ever-loving Hell out of a panzer with one punch. |
Sounds good to me. Think I'll toss this idea into the mix!
Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jul 25 2006, 03:19 PM
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| IIRC, the rule of six didn't apply to initiative tests, but that doesn't invalidate your point. The longshot test as a means of resolving very difficult actions seems to be one of the more dissatisfying parts of SR4, just judging by the noise on this forum. |
...actually in the old SRC there was an Edge, which I think was called "Lightning Reflexes" or something like that. It allowed for the Rule Of 6 on initiative tests but only for characters who did not have any initiative boosting (via either implants, spell, or adept powers).
Posted by: Brahm Jul 25 2006, 04:31 PM
| QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Jul 24 2006, 02:24 PM) |
| I've considered painted 5's and 6's, but it looks like someone beat me to it. |
I've got a set of sixteen custom SR4 [EDIT: 16mm] dice built from blank white d6 dice. They are engraved with a Dremel and then enamelled in the engraving, not just colored. Each die was first marked 1-6 with a pencil and checked for balance. The sides to engrave were then selected based on that give close to theoretical odds, in some cases closer than in their factory condition.
The hit sides are marked 'X', for the exploding side, and '/' and colored with the same green enamel used to simmulate green lights on model railroads layouts (translucent and shiny, has sort of the appearace of glowing). Two sides are left blank, one side is engraved with an 'O' and one with a single small pip in the middle. The 'O' and the pip are filled with a metalic purple that was created with a 5:1 mix of a metalic red and metalic blue, because purple is hard to find and metalic purple I was unable to find.
I like how the hits/glitches stick out. I nixed the idea of just using a permanent marker on them since that tends to rub off fairly quickly with handling. I am considering also colouring the sides with permanent markers to further speed hits/glitch recognition. Haven't decided yet.
Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Jul 25 2006, 04:48 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) | ||
I've got a set of sixteen custom SR4 25mm dice built from blank white d6 dice. They are engraved with a Dremel and then enamelled in the engraving, not just colored. Each die was first marked 1-6 with a pencil and checked for balance. The sides to engrave were then selected based on that give close to theoretical odds, in some cases closer than in their factory condition. The hit sides are marked 'X', for the exploding side, and '/' and colored with the same green enamel used to simmulate green lights on model railroads layouts (translucent and shiny, has sort of the appearace of glowing). Two sides are left blank, one side is engraved with an 'O' and one with a single small pip in the middle. The 'O' and the pip are filled with a metalic purple that was created with a 5:1 mix of a metalic red and metalic blue, because purple is hard to find and metalic purple I was unable to find. I like how the hits/glitches stick out. I nixed the idea of just using a permanent marker on them since that tends to rub off fairly quickly with handling. I am considering also colouring the sides with permanent markers to further speed hits/glitch recognition. Haven't decided yet. |
Pimp my dice!
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 25 2006, 05:15 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| I've got a set of sixteen custom SR4 25mm dice... |
You oughta offer sets for sale.
Posted by: Aaron Jul 25 2006, 05:37 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| I've got a set of sixteen custom SR4 25mm dice built from blank white d6 dice. They are engraved with a Dremel and then enamelled in the engraving, not just colored. Each die was first marked 1-6 with a pencil and checked for balance. The sides to engrave were then selected based on that give close to theoretical odds, in some cases closer than in their factory condition. The hit sides are marked 'X', for the exploding side, and '/' and colored with the same green enamel used to simmulate green lights on model railroads layouts (translucent and shiny, has sort of the appearace of glowing). Two sides are left blank, one side is engraved with an 'O' and one with a single small pip in the middle. The 'O' and the pip are filled with a metalic purple that was created with a 5:1 mix of a metalic red and metalic blue, because purple is hard to find and metalic purple I was unable to find. I like how the hits/glitches stick out. I nixed the idea of just using a permanent marker on them since that tends to rub off fairly quickly with handling. I am considering also colouring the sides with permanent markers to further speed hits/glitch recognition. Haven't decided yet. |
Good grief.
I think I owe you thanks. I used to think that the prep I did on my dice (seen http://pavao.org/shadowrun) was a bit obsessive. I don't think that any more.
Do post pics, if you can.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 25 2006, 05:56 PM
| QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 25 2006, 12:37 PM) |
| Good grief. I think I owe you thanks. I used to think that the prep I did on my dice (seen http://pavao.org/shadowrun) was a bit obsessive. I don't think that any more. |
You are welcome?
I'll see if I can snap a couple of pictures and put it up on Flickr or something. The biggest chunk of time was lining up and buying the materials, picking the design, and setup time. You'll see included in the set is one prototype die that seemed to require too much material removal to roll proper afterward. I haven't tested it after adding paint though, so it might be OK now. I was also concerned about the enamel chipping out of the engravings on that prototype easily as they are very wide compared to what I finally used.Once I got down to the task of building them the time to do it wasn't that much, maybe 15 minutes tops per die including rolling. I just rolled the die till it came up with at least 25 hits on each side and compared the totals. I was amazed how far off from theoretical some of the dice were. A couple that scored way off I rolled for another 25+ and it came up with similar results, so it wasn't just a statistical anomoly. If I was really insistant about perfection though I should have taken it out to more rolls than that. I don't have a T table handy, but I don't think 150 rolls minimum is all that precise.
It might take a while for the pictures, the rechargable battery for my camera isn't right now.
So I'll need to find my wife's digital. I'll make sure to include in it the picture for the stencil I made for the 'O' using the base of a dice container, everything else I just freehanded with a pencil and then a Dremel, and I'm NOT any sort of art & craft inclined person.P.S. If I had any good sense about it I would have just done what you did.
Posted by: the_dunner Jul 25 2006, 09:06 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| The hit sides are marked 'X', for the exploding side, and '/' and colored with the same green enamel used to simmulate green lights on model railroads layouts (translucent and shiny, has sort of the appearace of glowing). Two sides are left blank, one side is engraved with an 'O' and one with a single small pip in the middle. |
Alright, at the risk of sounding dumber than usual ...
X = 6
/ = 5
. = 1
O = ?
I'm not sure why you have only have 2 blank sides instead of 3.
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 25 2006, 09:09 PM
I read it as the O and . are on the same side. But rereading it, I'm not sure that's what it says.
Posted by: Method Jul 25 2006, 09:27 PM
I was thinking the pip was opposite the O side to offset the weight lost when the O was engraved...
Posted by: McGravin Jul 25 2006, 09:33 PM
Brahm, where do you find your blank d6's?
I just looked on the Chessex website, and they offer blanks, as well as "Shadowrun® d6" but with no picture or description.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 25 2006, 09:59 PM
| QUOTE (the_dunner @ Jul 25 2006, 04:06 PM) |
| Alright, at the risk of sounding dumber than usual ... X = 6 / = 5 . = 1 O = ? I'm not sure why you have only have 2 blank sides instead of 3. |
No, 'O' is the 1. The single pip is for the '2', which gets used for determining Glitches on rushed Extended Tests. I don't think I've ever seen the rule used because it is fairly obscure. I also think there somehow could have been a better solution for providing the option for a faster Extended Test. But the rule is there so I thought I might as well craft the dice to support it.
The pip, which I made smaller than a normal 16mm die's pip, is not really that noticable compared to the 'O' or the other markings, which are all about 7mm across.
| QUOTE |
| Brahm, where do you find your blank d6's? |
I bought mine from my FLGS. They cost 75 cents/each in the store, here in Canada. They only a few is stock when I first checked, I had to wait for them to place a dice restocking order to pick them up. Still not a bad deal for me given what it would cost me to have Chessex ship direct.
However I have since seen some in bulk online at a much, much lower price (about 20 cents each). Especially if you happen to be in the states, where this web store was located, even with shipping it could be less. The rub is I think they were in a shrinkwrap of 50 or something. So it'd still be something close to $20 once you got them to your doorstep. Still not bad though if you are throwing in with someone else to make two large sets, or even 3 sets of 16 if you play in a lower-end game like I do, or if you might have another use for blank dice in the future. Which I expect I will.
Unfortunately I didn't save the URL so I can't provide it to you right now.
| QUOTE |
| I just looked on the Chessex website, and they offer blanks, as well as "Shadowrun® d6" but with no picture or description. |
I have no idea either what those SR dice are. But given they've been around long enough for a model number change I asssume they aren't associated with SR4.
P.S. Camera seems to be on the lamb right now. I'll try again later tonight. Oh, and I just realized that they are 16mm dice. Doh.
Posted by: hobgoblin Jul 25 2006, 10:09 PM
an obscure one indeed, i had totaly missed it.
hmm, at half an hour pr test in a "probe for weakness" test in VR, nasty.
Posted by: Shrike30 Jul 25 2006, 11:01 PM
I did something similar to Aaron's, but using model paint... I used black dice with white pips, blacking in 2, 3, and 4. Then I put red in the 1's, silver in the 5's, and gold in the 6's. Metallic colors are a hit, reds should be watched for in case of glitching. Gold is always king 
Posted by: Rajaat99 Jul 26 2006, 02:02 AM
| QUOTE (Union Jane) |
| Used to be, I'd meet some dodgy NPC and realise straightaway that he was easy meat. After all, he was only rolling a single die for initiative, right? And here I was, tossing out three at a time. I was bound to gun him down before he ever got off a shot. Well, sometimes that wasn't true. More than once, I'd watch in horror as my GM rolled the goon's initiative . . . and that d6 would roll a 6, and then another 6, and before I knew it, I had a serious fight on my well-manicured hands. These days there are no surprises. I know exactly how many times I'm going to act each round, and when I gauge an NPC to be a zero threat, I no longer fear that he'll end up with more actions than me. Where's the fun in that? Sigh. With every target number a 5, gone are the days when I clung to a prayer that I could somehow hit that target-number 17 on two small dice. I liked that suspense. Everybody always had a shot, no matter how distant. The exploding d6 added an element to the game that I dearly miss. |
That's funny, your problem with SR4 is similar to my problem with SR4. You don't like it because the dice don't explode and I don't like cause it sucks.
No, really, I don't like it cause if I want to play WW, I'll play WW.
Posted by: Samaels Ghost Jul 26 2006, 02:16 AM
What's WW?
Posted by: BlueRondo Jul 26 2006, 02:18 AM
I assume he's referring to White Wolf.
Personally, I don't see the problem with having a similar dice mechanic to another game. If the objection is that the dice mechanic doesn't work, I can understand that, but if the objection is simply that it resembles another game, I don't see the issue.
Posted by: Samaels Ghost Jul 26 2006, 02:27 AM
That is a weird comparison.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 26 2006, 02:51 AM
| QUOTE (Samaels Ghost @ Jul 25 2006, 09:27 PM) |
| That is a weird comparison. |
Yes. About the only thing the two share are that they both use dice pools and they have the same average number of hits per die in the pool. There is a little less chance of a 8-9-0 on a d10 than a 5-6 on a d6, but because WW's dice always explode the average is the same as for regular SR4. Edge rolls are of course a different matter as the odds are obviously different than d10 TN8 exploding on 10. But even when the average number of hits in the same the distribution curves of the number of hits is somewhat different, as well as a lot of the other parts of the mechanics and rules, that gives a decidedly different feel to it.
Anyway here are the photos. http://www.flickr.com/photos/58097803@N00/198488131/ is on a wood table, but the antique light fixture in the room produces a bit of a yellowish light that looks positively piss-yellow with that camera and the glare off the wood polish. http://www.flickr.com/photos/58097803@N00/198488168/ is of a Glitch, and taken on a counter under whiter light, but in my shadow. The camera isn't very good at close up shots, and the dice's factory finish is glossy enough that I had to turn off the flash or even direct white light otherwise they turn into white globs of glow in the photo.
The second photo also shows the dice case base I drilled a hole in to use as a template. You snug the die up in the corner on the side shown and then flip it over and pencil in the circle on the other side. There are two holes, the larger one being from an initial test that turned out to be too big. The problem is that the dice are not perfectly symmetrical, so if you make the circle too big the closeness to the edge of the dice really accentuates that the 'O' isn't quite centered.
Posted by: McGravin Jul 26 2006, 05:56 AM
Those are pretty sweet, Brahm. If I can find some d6 blanks, I think I'll borrow a Dremel and give your method a shot.
After reading this thread today, out of curiousity I took some of my disposable dice (I have a huge back of like 40 black-pips-on-white d6's) and tried just coloring the sides with red and green Sharpies. The 1-side got colored in red, the 6-side got colored in green, and the 5-side got a thick green border on the outside. It works, and it looks pretty okay, but the red tends to rub onto the other sides, turning the 2, 3, and 4 to a shade of pink. I can confirm that this method works, but not well; I wouldn't recommend it.
Anyway, back to the original topic in the thread. I loved the Rule of Six, too. Once, in SR2, with only a 1d6+something initiative, I rolled a 73. Twelve 6s in a row, followed by a 1. Yeah, yeah, I know the Rule of Six isn't supposed to apply to initiative, but just try to tell me that when you're the new runner on a team and all the other guys have Wired Reflexes and Synaptic Accelerators, you wouldn't beg your GM to let you keep a 73, just once.
Anyway, my friends and I tried a couple games where we houseruled-in the Rule of Six, but did so in such a way that it was not completely a good thing. First of all, it was a purchasable positive quality, costing 15BP. That meant that theoretically some of the players might have it while others would not, but we found that once one player bought the quality, they all wanted it. Second, it was still very possible to glitch with the Rule of Six.
For example, one player was rolling a dice pool of 8, and came up with 1, 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6. He was now effectively rolling a total of 10 dice (8 in the original pool, plus two rerolled 6s), and ended up getting both 1s on the rerolls. So now he had five 1s from 10 dice, giving him a glitch, whereas if he hadn't rerolled his 6s, he would have been fine. So the Rule of Six ended up biting him in the ass with the Rule of One.
We also did something special with rolling Edge so that it was still very advantageous. I think we made it impervious to the Rule of One, so that it was impossible to glitch while rolling Edge. Either that, or the player would win back a point of Edge for every double-6 rolled (that is, roll a 6 on a die, and then roll a second 6 on the reroll of that same die). I can't recall which of the two we settled on.
So, yeah. If you're such a big fan of the Rule of Six that it just doesn't feel like Shadowrun without it, try fiddling with some house rules until you can work it back in. Personally, we found that our Rule of Six houserules were a little bit cumbersome, and somewhat unappealing in that they could come back and bite you in the ass frighteningly often.
Posted by: Shrike30 Jul 26 2006, 05:03 PM
The similarity to White Wolf that I don't like isn't the fixed TN die pool bit... that's a really basic mechanic, not something that any one game can really lay claim to. The similarity that I don't like is the use of stat + skill which, IMO, really diminishes the value of skills in low- to mid-range applications (you'll note that they didn't have to tell you "no spending more than 200 points on skills"...). This is also not a WW-exclusive thing... just something that SR4 shares with WW that I don't like.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 26 2006, 06:04 PM
| QUOTE (Shrike30 @ Jul 26 2006, 12:03 PM) |
| (you'll note that they didn't have to tell you "no spending more than 200 points on skills"...). |
They did put an even more serious limit on Skill Points expendatures, just not a total Build Point expendature. As well I've found in practice that one or two points in a Skill is now actually useful as opposed to prior in SR3 where it was a total waste.
That aside I really don't understand the need to put a limit the Build Point spending on Attributes either outside of a helpful rule of thumb to players to keep from gimping their characters.
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 26 2006, 06:09 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| As well I've found in practice that one or two points in a Skill is now actually useful as opposed to prior in SR3 where it was a total waste. |
Gotaa agree on this one. Even just getting a single point can make you good at something if you have a natural aptitude for it (i.e. a good stat). That one skill point is worth two dice because it gets rid of the -1 defaulting penalty.
Posted by: Cain Jul 27 2006, 08:57 AM
On the other hand, they totally overpowered specializations. One point of skill plus one specialization gives you three bonus dice, right off the top. On that regard, it's no better than before: you only picked up a single point in a skill in SR3 if you planned on specializing.
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 27 2006, 05:30 PM
Specialization hasn't been an issue in our games. If you're doing it with a weapon you'll probably want more dice. With other skills you're still weak in the other aspects of the skill.
Posted by: Rajaat99 Jul 28 2006, 02:14 AM
| QUOTE (James McMurray) |
| Specialization hasn't been an issue in our games. If you're doing it with a weapon you'll probably want more dice. With other skills you're still weak in the other aspects of the skill. |
James, don't take this the wrong way, but you seem like a drone. Anything FanPro does is fine with you. SR4 is the greatest, blah, blah, blah.
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 28 2006, 03:14 AM
Then you're not looking close enough.
I've mentioned several things I don't like about the game (hacking still isn't where I'd like it to be), things I wish they'd done better with (why give us encumbrance but no weights?), and things I've flat out ignored (agent blitzes), to anme just a few. I've also griped a bit about the release schedule, but with the addon that if it means more balanced rules thanks to much more playtesting I'll be happy.
I think that overall SR4 is a good game. I prefer it to SR3 because the rules flow a lot better between the various aspects, it's easier to teach and to learn, and the book is laid out much better. I also prefer the "feel" of it, but that's a highly subjective thing that I can't even really define myself.
Maybe it's because I frequently (but not always) disagree with Cain, and he frequently (almost always) bashes SR4.
Posted by: Shrike30 Jul 28 2006, 05:34 PM
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| On the other hand, they totally overpowered specializations. One point of skill plus one specialization gives you three bonus dice, right off the top. On that regard, it's no better than before: you only picked up a single point in a skill in SR3 if you planned on specializing. |
With the RAW-optional "max hits equal to skill x2," I haven't found skill 1 specialists to be a huge problem.
Posted by: Rajaat99 Jul 29 2006, 01:30 AM
| QUOTE (James McMurray @ Jul 28 2006, 03:14 AM) |
| Then you're not looking close enough. I've mentioned several things I don't like about the game (hacking still isn't where I'd like it to be), things I wish they'd done better with (why give us encumbrance but no weights?), and things I've flat out ignored (agent blitzes), to anme just a few. I've also griped a bit about the release schedule, but with the addon that if it means more balanced rules thanks to much more playtesting I'll be happy. I think that overall SR4 is a good game. I prefer it to SR3 because the rules flow a lot better between the various aspects, it's easier to teach and to learn, and the book is laid out much better. I also prefer the "feel" of it, but that's a highly subjective thing that I can't even really define myself. Maybe it's because I frequently (but not always) disagree with Cain, and he frequently (almost always) bashes SR4. |
Geez, try to piss a guy off and he doesn't get mad? What's this world coming to?
I agree that rules are more simple, I, however, dislike that aspect. It doesn't seem to be as realistic when you simplify things. I also don't like attribute heavy systems, when SR4 is. I agree that the book is laid out better (FASA was known for bad layouts). I don't like the "feel" of it, it seems like a less gritty, campy, Shadowrun.
Posted by: James McMurray Jul 29 2006, 03:21 PM
I don't see less grit, but I definitely see less camp, and like it that way.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 29 2006, 04:28 PM
| QUOTE (Rajaat99) |
| It doesn't seem to be as realistic when you simplify things. |
Even though that is often illusionary, and the reverse is just as easily true.
| QUOTE (Rajaat99) |
| I don't like the "feel" of it, it seems like a less gritty, campy, Shadowrun. |
Because there is colour on the pages? Because it isn't the slightly fuzzy print on dull pulp type paper? Is it that asthetics? Because the game itself is, well, there is that word grit again. It is about as useful as saying some game is more 'strawberry' than another game, or that a game is really 'waxy'. Because it doesn't actually described much by itself, and can have so many different meanings.
Posted by: BishopMcQ Jul 29 2006, 04:34 PM
| QUOTE (Shrike30) |
| With the RAW-optional "max hits equal to skill x2," I haven't found skill 1 specialists to be a huge problem. |
Shrike--Not that I disagree with you, but can you give me a page reference. I remember reading something like this, but cannot find it.
Posted by: the_dunner Jul 29 2006, 08:03 PM
| QUOTE (McQuillan) | ||
Shrike--Not that I disagree with you, but can you give me a page reference. I remember reading something like this, but cannot find it. |
It's p.69, on the Tweaking the Rules chart. First entry for "Grittier Gameplay."
Posted by: Rajaat99 Jul 30 2006, 11:06 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm @ Jul 29 2006, 04:28 PM) | ||||
Even though that is often illusionary, and the reverse is just as easily true.
Because there is colour on the pages? Because it isn't the slightly fuzzy print on dull pulp type paper? Is it that asthetics? Because the game itself is, well, there is that word grit again. It is about as useful as saying some game is more 'strawberry' than another game, or that a game is really 'waxy'. Because it doesn't actually described much by itself, and can have so many different meanings. |
I'd like you explain the "illusion" more. And explain how the reverse is true.
Color? No. The print? No. Asthetics? No.
grit·ty
adj. grit·ti·er, grit·ti·est
1. Containing, covered with, or resembling grit.
2. Showing resolution and fortitude; ex: a gritty decision.
grit
n.
1. Minute rough granules, as of sand or stone.
1. The texture or fineness of sand or stone used in grinding.
1. A coarse hard sandstone used for making grindstones and millstones.
1. Informal. Indomitable spirit.
Also, I don't like skills maxing out and I don't like the cursing. I don't like reading the opening story and having it filled with garbage.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 12:19 AM
| QUOTE (Rajaat99 @ Jul 30 2006, 06:06 PM) | ||||||
I'd like you explain the "illusion" more. And explain how the reverse is true. |
I'm pretty I remember reading a really good example somewhere here in regards to the Cyclops metavariant from SR3. Ah, via the miracle of Search, http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=12826&hl=cyclops Basically there extra complexity added for what appeared to be some sense of realism that was in truth far less realistic than just leaving it out entirely. That's the wierd thing about simulations. As you attempt to add precision your accuracy can get completely out of wack.
No it doesn't always happen. But then I never said always.
Another thing that can happen is forgetting the abstraction of the rules. Often I have seen people, on this forum and other places with other games, saying "well the rules don't account for this" when in fact it appears that whatever this is seems to have in fact been accounted for. Just not with an explicit mechanism, but within the functioning of the larger. Then they go off and try to add realism and end up doubling some effect, usually with the end result of screwing up the tuning of the game and generally mucking stuff up.
| QUOTE |
Color? No. The print? No. Asthetics? No. grit·ty adj. grit·ti·er, grit·ti·est 1. Containing, covered with, or resembling grit. 2. Showing resolution and fortitude; ex: a gritty decision. grit n. 1. Minute rough granules, as of sand or stone. 1. The texture or fineness of sand or stone used in grinding. 1. A coarse hard sandstone used for making grindstones and millstones. 1. Informal. Indomitable spirit. |
Exactly. So how is that relavent to the use of the word in regards to RPGs? So painfully close to saying "Parinoia is a really waxy, strawberry game."
| QUOTE |
| Also, I don't like skills maxing out and I don't like the cursing. I don't like reading the opening story and having it filled with garbage. |
Using Church Lady made-up word substitute curses conveys a resolute, indomitable spirit in which way? I'm also really curious about how having a Skill cap makes it less gritty.
Or this is just something else you tossed in there since grit is actually just an empty, posteuring word and you thought you'd give a reason with substance? Because the starkness of real curse words makes you feel uncomfortable and prefering fudge curse words is a real reason for the dislike as that is used in the character speech I think about 4 times in couple of places.
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 12:24 AM
another Brahm classic. hey, guys, we can't use the word 'gritty' to describe stuff anymore, because Brahm says it's inapplicable and makes no sense!
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 12:40 AM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Jul 30 2006, 07:24 PM) |
| another Brahm classic. hey, guys, we can't use the word 'gritty' to describe stuff anymore, because Brahm says it's inapplicable and makes no sense! |
Another classic mfb. I never said he couldn't use it, I'm just saying it doesn't actually mean anything in the way he used it. Just like you can use street or strawberry to describe a game.
Those words just doesn't actually mean much by themselves, and typically are just bullshit postuering words. EDIT Well street is at least. The meaning of strawberry is slightly, but only slightly, less clear. 
Of course coming up with examples to explain what he means by that word does help. Like apparently for him real curse words are less gritty than totally made up meanings like frag. I'm not sure where he comes down on dreck though since at one point in time that was German or Yiddish word for shit, or something like that. So at least its sort of a real swear, although you can say it on TV.
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 12:55 AM
i don't believe his complaints re: skills, cursing, and the first story are related to the grittiness thing. as for the grittiness thing itself: if you want to know what he means by 'gritty', maybe you should ask him. you know, rather than doing something completely unrelated like attacking his position as being baseless.
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 01:08 AM
You can say a lot of curse words on television just as long as they aren't the Evil Seven or sacreligious.
Posted by: McGravin Jul 31 2006, 01:21 AM
I've heard the adjective "gritty" used plenty of times to describe movies, TV, and books, and I see no reason why it couldn't apply to Shadowrun. Though, I would define it as used here more like "tough, harsh, heavy, and sometimes cruel". I would use it to describe Batman, anything film noir, Bladerunner, most any crime drama on TV anymore, that sort of thing.
But, Brahm, it is definitely a word and it is definitely applicable to SR.
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 01:30 AM
I use it to describe http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065126/.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 03:33 AM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Jul 30 2006, 07:55 PM) |
| i don't believe his complaints re: skills, cursing, and the first story are related to the grittiness thing. as for the grittiness thing itself: if you want to know what he means by 'gritty', maybe you should ask him. you know, rather than doing something completely unrelated like attacking his position as being baseless. |
I asked him. He copy and pasted from the dictionary, which of course explains squat. The only other thing he did was tack those two things onto the end of his post. EDIT Correction, he did clarify that it wasn't that the pages include a second color and nicer paper.
Since the dictionary quote was entirely uninformative I then asked him if those were what he was talking about. Of course if you had bothered to actually read my post that you initially responded to that would be entirely clear. Because, well, it's all there.
I happen to think that his dislike of the real swear words is actually close to the opposite of his gritty assessment. So it nicely underlines just how meaningless his use of the word is.
But hey, maybe that dictionary copy-paste makes sense to you in explaining what he means, like maybe SR3 feels more like sand in his shorts? If so feel free to elaborate.
| QUOTE |
| I've heard the adjective "gritty" used plenty of times to describe movies, TV, and books, and I see no reason why it couldn't apply to Shadowrun. Though, I would define it as used here more like "tough, harsh, heavy, and sometimes cruel". I would use it to describe Batman, anything film noir, Bladerunner, most any crime drama on TV anymore, that sort of thing. But, Brahm, it is definitely a word and it is definitely applicable to SR. |
It might be vaguely applicable, and there is a better part of a thread about this recently in the other forum. But his use of it for qualitative level of some mystical grittiness is a load of turds. Proclaiming that he finds some sort of significant difference between SR3 and SR4, which are actually quite close in tone, is absurd without more specifics.
Then topping it off noting that the fictional characters swear actual real words when things go very wrong in the less gritty book?
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 03:41 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| I use it to describe http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065126/. |
Never seen it, is it about a http://www3.flickr.com/photos/germanswitch/173407494/
Posted by: Dr. Dodge Jul 31 2006, 03:48 AM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| Then topping it off noting that the fictional characters swear actual real words when things go very wrong in the less gritty book? |
i'm also pondering that
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 04:52 AM
Hardly.
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 04:56 AM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| It is about as useful as saying some game is more 'strawberry' than another game, or that a game is really 'waxy'. Because it doesn't actually described much by itself, and can have so many different meanings. |
that, Brahm, is where you failed at asking him for examples, opting instead to tell him that his choice of descriptor was bad--specifically, that it's as useful in describing an RPG as the word 'strawberry'. that apparently wasn't your intention. perhaps you should focus more on communicating clearly and less on acting like an overbearing cock to people you disagree with.
Posted by: WhiskeyMac Jul 31 2006, 07:41 AM
I thought the switch to real curse words was weird because for 3 editions before Shadowrun had been using their own version of curse words. Luckily, the new Shadowrun novel "Aftershock" uses them as well as some of the Or'Zet (sp?) ones as well. Not saying I don't mind it but once you've seen it for 10+ years, you kinda get thrown for a loop when someone says "Fuck" instead of "Frag". Night's Pawn summed it up pretty well when the main character said "Fuck off" to one of his opponents. "You actually said fuck. How quaint."
I think the setting is something the GM has to set not the BBB. My version of dystopian cyberpunk with magic is probably a lot different then your version of dystopian cyberpunk with magic. Setting is one of the main roles of a GM. Shouldn't have to have a book shove it down your throat. Create your own "grit", "pulp" or whatever we're calling it.
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 08:07 AM
| QUOTE (WhiskeyMac) |
| I think the setting is something the GM has to set not the BBB. |
it's a combination of both. you could run Snakes 'n Ladders as a grim, dystopian game, but it'd be much harder than playing Warhammer FRPG that way. the rules do strongly impact the feel of the setting.
Posted by: WhiskeyMac Jul 31 2006, 08:32 AM
True. I guess I meant to say the BBB should give you a basic structure of the setting (which it does) and then let the GM decide how to flesh it out. The metaplot helps and Shadowrun gives you plenty of that. I personally don't enjoy a lot of Shadowrun's metaplot but I still follow it, even if it is lame (i.e. Immortal Elves and Shedim). Shadowrun to me is a little more tech and reality based then "MAGIC IS THE BEST EVER!", but then I loved Cyberpunk (even if it wasn't reality based).
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 08:53 AM
| QUOTE (WhiskeyMac) |
| I personally don't enjoy a lot of Shadowrun's metaplot but I still follow it, even if it is lame (i.e. Immortal Elves and Shedim). |
Now I know you are insane, because Shedim are awesome like liquid Jesus.
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 09:02 AM
like Jesus? he was one of the living dead, y'know. remember how the apostles thought he was a gardener, when they first found the open tomb? don't you ever wonder what happened to the real gardener? his brains were eaten by the Son of God, that's what happened!
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 09:16 AM
I forgot that part of Scripture.
Posted by: Grinder Jul 31 2006, 12:00 PM
You never forget anything....
Btw, nice title/ member group.
Posted by: SL James Jul 31 2006, 12:25 PM
Oh noes! I've been brainwashed by the catechism!
And, thanks. I like it, too.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 12:48 PM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Jul 30 2006, 11:56 PM) | ||
that, Brahm, is where you failed at asking him for examples, opting instead to tell him that his choice of descriptor was bad--specifically, that it's as useful in describing an RPG as the word 'strawberry'. that apparently wasn't your intention. perhaps you should focus more on communicating clearly and less on acting like an overbearing cock to people you disagree with. |
I asked WTF he ment by gritty. I even provided the possibl specific example of the appearance of the physical paper because yes, that does mean something to some people. He got at least part of it since he at least tried to answer. You apparently aren't getting any of it though.
Answering that the paper and colour of the pages wasn't it was good. His answer of a copy-paste from the dictionary wasn't particularly revealing at all in the context that he used it. Of course him giving specifics would have been extremely helpful. As I've already pointed out.
So here we are, again. You busting my balls because of your inability to read.
EDIT Incidentally strawberry was an example, bordering on a simile, of how just using a single word doesn't really work that well in a situation like this. We like examples, right?
Posted by: Shrike30 Jul 31 2006, 05:39 PM
What he said
Posted by: mfb Jul 31 2006, 05:39 PM
strawberry was a bad example, Brahm. i can read well enough to understand the difference between asking someone for an example and undermining someone's position by making it seem ridiculous.
i'm perfectly willing to accept that you intended to ask him for examples. in the execution, however, you did what you always do: put on snottily superior airs and pursued the insult instead of the discussion.
Posted by: Brahm Jul 31 2006, 06:16 PM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Jul 31 2006, 12:39 PM) |
| strawberry was a bad example, Brahm. i can read well enough to understand the difference between asking someone for an example and undermining someone's position by making it seem ridiculous. |
I used an example that was somewhat of a hyperbole to underline the important part, the cryptic and/or empty meaning of the word in that use.
You can bitch and moan about how you think it was undermining him, but I put up real potential examples that sprung to mind. As in taking it seriously.
| QUOTE |
| i'm perfectly willing to accept that you intended to ask him for examples. in the execution, however, |
I intended to ask him to be more specific. Examples would be a way to do that.
| QUOTE |
| you did what you always do: put on snottily superior airs and pursued the insult instead of the discussion. |
That's a mighty big rock you are throwing for living in a glass house.
Posted by: Shadowboxer Aug 1 2006, 12:03 AM
I prefer chocolate shadowrun over strawberry shadowrun
will you join my club pleaaase?
Posted by: mfb Aug 1 2006, 09:31 AM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| That's a mighty big rock you are throwing for living in a glass house. |
you can continue to believe that. but the reason i'm not a pot, while you remain a kettle, is that i use invective to batter people into thinking clearly (or at least into thinking my way), while you use it to make yourself look better. i treat people as equals; you treat them as contemptible.
i've hijacked this thread long enough.
Posted by: Bull Aug 1 2006, 01:42 PM
Indeed.
I wasn't watching this thread. Oops
Brahm, play nice. Same goes for the rest of y'all.
Bull
Posted by: Brahm Aug 1 2006, 03:32 PM
| QUOTE (Bull @ Aug 1 2006, 08:42 AM) |
| I wasn't watching this thread. Oops |
Nothing here to see, I'm shooting a hijacker that decided to take over the plane so he could urinate in the aisle.
@Shadowboxer Mmmmm, chocolate.
Just make sure you bring it to the next meeting and you'll get in the door no problems.
Posted by: Bull Aug 1 2006, 04:18 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| Nothing here to see, I'm shooting a hijacker that decided to take over the plane so he could urinate in the aisle. |
Well, long as there aren't any snakes on that plane
Posted by: Critias Aug 1 2006, 04:58 PM
| QUOTE (Brahm) | ||
Nothing here to see, I'm shooting a hijacker that decided to take over the plane so he could urinate in the aisle. |
Good to see you're playing nice now.
Posted by: Brahm Aug 1 2006, 05:03 PM
| QUOTE (Critias) | ||||
Good to see you're playing nice now. |
Thank you.
Posted by: Adam Aug 1 2006, 05:49 PM
Admin post: Now you can start being nice -- or at least, civil -- or you can not post.
Posted by: Union Jane Aug 2 2006, 04:56 AM
Meanwhile, I'm still missing my exploding d6 . . .
Posted by: Brahm Aug 2 2006, 05:29 AM
| QUOTE (Union Jane @ Aug 1 2006, 11:56 PM) |
| Meanwhile, I'm still missing my exploding d6 . . . |
Why? Because exploding 6's are still there in SR4, as is a measure of uncertainty about the number of passes your opponent will act on. Edge provides both of those. They don't actually interact with each other as you described in your inital post, but then they never have in RAW in Shadowrun.
Posted by: eidolon Aug 2 2006, 05:35 AM
No need to miss them. Play SR3 and enjoy it.
Posted by: Teux Aug 2 2006, 12:44 PM
| QUOTE (eidolon) |
| No need to miss them. Play SR3 and enjoy it. |
Or just implement the rule in SR4.
Heck, the book even suggests doing so under its alternative gameplay styles section.
It's a fairly simple rule to put in place, so if you enjoy it so much, just use it.
Posted by: Rajaat99 Aug 3 2006, 01:49 AM
| QUOTE (SL James @ Jul 31 2006, 01:08 AM) |
| You can say a lot of curse words on television just as long as they aren't the Evil Seven or sacreligious. |
I don't watch TV. In fact, I don't even own one.
grit·ty
adj. grit·ti·er, grit·ti·est
1. Containing, covered with, or resembling grit.
2. Showing resolution and fortitude; ex: a gritty decision.
grit
n.
1. Minute rough granules, as of sand or stone.
2. The texture or fineness of sand or stone used in grinding.
3. A coarse hard sandstone used for making grindstones and millstones.
4. Informal. Indomitable spirit.
I meant #2 on gritty and #4 on grit. It's the spirit.
Or, if you live in the barrens, it's #1 on gritty.
I don't miss exploding D6's, I play SR3!
Oh, and the #1 main problem I have with SR4, besides the cursing (although that is a big one, for me), besides the non-exploding D6's, besides the less grit, and all the other stuff.... I don't think a new edition was needed, except to take my money.
Posted by: Brahm Aug 3 2006, 04:07 AM
| QUOTE (Rajaat99 @ Aug 2 2006, 08:49 PM) |
| I meant #2 on gritty and #4 on grit. |
....still meaning diddly, not even explaining how that relates to an RPG for you.
You can't come up with at least a couple of concrete examples?| QUOTE |
| I don't think a new edition was needed, except to take my money. |
Then you are definately on the wrong forum. Not to mention in the minority, seemingly even among the vocal don't-like-SR4 DSF diehards.
Make sure to not let the door hit in the butt on the way out.
Posted by: Llewelyn Aug 3 2006, 06:33 AM
| QUOTE (Rajaat99) |
| I don't think a new edition was needed, except to take my money. |
Well it was the only way for them to get my money as I could not stand the earlier versions of rules. So I would have to disagree and agree with you at the same time.
I feel the new version is very worth while, if you miss exploding 6s then add them in, not that hard really. It wouldn't be hard to add in variable TNs either if you want to.
Posted by: Critias Aug 3 2006, 06:47 AM
| QUOTE (Brahm) | ||
....still meaning diddly, not even explaining how that relates to an RPG for you. You can't come up with at least a couple of concrete examples? |
Is pretending to be dense just, like, fun for you?
Posted by: Synner Aug 3 2006, 07:57 AM
Like Bull suggested, let's keep it civil...
Brahm, in his own inimitable way, is trying to get Rajaat to detail a few specifics on why he believes SR4 is less gritty (and in that context exactly what he means by gritty) because to him and others its not necessarily apparent. Examples would be helpful. There's nothing really wrong with that, and I'm sure others would like to know too.
Posted by: Brahm Aug 3 2006, 10:30 AM
| QUOTE (Llewelyn @ Aug 3 2006, 01:33 AM) |
| I feel the new version is very worth while, if you miss exploding 6s then add them in, not that hard really. It wouldn't be hard to add in variable TNs either if you want to. |
I disagree on the ease of changing SR4 to variable TNs. You'd have to largely dump the Threshold concept as varying the TN a little bit results in abrupt changes in the odds of multiple hits.
I agree that exploding 6's all the time are nearly a nobrainer to introduce. But they are there anyway for just about all the similar types of times they materially mattered in SR3. Depending somewhat on Edge refresh rates used, and save for the much despised Open Tests. For the tough odds, back against the wall, pulling your hoop out of the fire times you are likely to be rolling dice that can explode.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)