Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Wanderer Apr 2 2009, 03:58 AM

Assuming one wants to show deep displeasure with recent horrible rule changes which according to this forum have been implemented in the Anniversary Edition, such as steep rise of Attribute costs, nerfing of Direct Combat Spells, outrageous OR tables, in the most effective way (by refusing to buy the book and willfully ignoring its existance), does one stand to lose anything else truly useful, by not having such hypothetical book ? Ignore references to gorgeous art. This poster finds it a trivial issue in judging the long-term value of a RPG book. Also assume all SR4 rule supplements are already owned.

Thanks for your answers.

Posted by: ElFenrir Apr 2 2009, 04:11 AM

Honestly? As long as you don't play an official game, which will use the new rules-there is absolutely nothing wrong with using the older editions.

I mean think about it-people still play and have fun with SR3 and even SR2, or 1, even now. Nothing wrong with that at all. I'm not a fan of the new rule changes, so I won't be using them. My buddies whom I play with aren't keen on them, either. We'll just go along playing with SR4, and no Thor shots will be hitting our house(I think. )

IMO, it's no different than preferring to play an older edition.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 2 2009, 04:16 AM

There's apparently some really nice lookup tables in the back.

Posted by: Cain Apr 2 2009, 04:36 AM

All the new rules should come out as errata, so there's no need to buy SR4.5.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 2 2009, 04:48 AM

You didn't understand. Under the assumption that the potential purchaser does not like the "errata" or new rules what are they going to miss out on?

Posted by: Cain Apr 2 2009, 05:49 AM

Oops. Well, the answer is still "nothing". There are people still playing SR2 games that I know of, so not switching to 4.5 isn't going to get the gaming police kicking down your door.

Posted by: Cardul Apr 2 2009, 11:48 AM

The awesome fiction, the extensive tweaks in the matrix chapter, the, in many cases, clearer worded stuff, the increased Karma amounts(we have already been told that the table in the pd4 was in error, and that you are supposed to be getting 9-10 Karma per run, so, while raising an attribute 6 under the old rules would take 18, or, assuming the average of 5 Karma per run, 4 runs to raise, under the new, raising that said attribute would take 30 Karma, or, 3 Runs, assuming high end of average... so it does not change the rate of attribute increase, but speeds up skill increase)

And, honestly, if you do not like the OR or the +1 Drain per net success that you voluntarily choose to spend on increasing direct combat spell damage? Just change them!

Seriously...the book, over all, is a large improvement.

It is also the standard by which all future books will be made under. Oh, and, you know: voting with your wallet is really not that good, as it means that CGL will lose money. Do you want WotC to buy SR from Topps? Someone who will look at it as only a business product, and as soon as they stop raking in enough to meet their calculated profit margins, drop it entirely, but hold onto the IP so no-one else can use it? Personally, I like what CGL has done with Shadowrun, and I would like them to keep it...

Posted by: Sir_Psycho Apr 2 2009, 12:28 PM

However, we shouldn't have to shell out money for a product we don't want just to keep a company afloat.

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Apr 2 2009, 12:49 PM

If you don't like/want the SR4A book, for whatever reasons you may have, you shouldn't buy it. It's really that simple. You certainly shouldn't buy a book just because you're worried about the future of the product. The numbers of sales that CGL sees of the SR4A book will probably influence future books, so "voting with your wallet" is effective. But I think voting with your wallet is more effective if it is paired with feedback to CGL, either about why you love the book or why you won't be buying it.

Posted by: raggedhalo Apr 2 2009, 01:09 PM

Remember that all future material will be using SR4A as the mechanics, so for example adepts will have more powers than they'd be allowed under SR4.

Posted by: Cain Apr 2 2009, 01:24 PM

Karma is rules, and he said he doesn't care for the rules. I have a feeling that he considers the fiction to be in the same category as the artwork. I know I personally haven't read any of the fiction in SR4.0 since I got the book, so it can safely be considered extraneous.


If you're that worried about it, buy two copies to make up for the one the OP won't buy. Buy extras, for all the pdfs that will undoubtedly be pirated. CGL is going to lose a few sales on SR4.5 anyway, so fretting that the sky is falling won't help matters.

Posted by: Wanderer Apr 2 2009, 02:25 PM

You are completely right about the fiction. And even if the amount of Karma per run is increased, I still consider a really bad move to increase the amount of Karma that is necessary to increase any single Attribute.



I am unaware of the rule change you are referencing, so please explain.



Even more forceful feedback than this thread ??? I tought CGL folks are going to notice it. If not, tell me who I have to e-mail and I shall.

Anyway, I restate my position just in case they do: because I think the new Drain rule for direct combat spells, the Karma cost increase for Attributes, and the new OR table are an helluva load of crap that screw my preferred character type, mages and mystical adepts, I hate them so much that I'm not going to buy SR4A to show my displeasure.

Posted by: Demonseed Elite Apr 2 2009, 02:44 PM

I don't know if this thread will be read by CGL devs or not. I know the devs do visit Dumpshock, but how often and what they read are anyone's guess. But there should be a feedback e-mail address on the official Shadowrun website.

Posted by: Dragnar Apr 2 2009, 02:50 PM

Ok. Then don't. No one forces you to buy anything. I still fail to see the point of the thread in the first place.
Just another "SR4A sucks!"-cry?
Like we haven't had enough of those...

(For the record, while I dislike quite some rules changes myself, especially the wierd "fix" to direct damage spells, I still think SR4A is on the whole superior to the original version)

Posted by: raggedhalo Apr 2 2009, 02:52 PM

The cost of several adept powers has been reduced.

Frankly, if you don't know what the whole package of rule changes are (for example, the change to sensors is both welcome and good) then I think dclaring that you hate the entire SR4A package and want nothing to do with is a bit premature.

Posted by: Wanderer Apr 2 2009, 02:57 PM

Good point, but the rules changes that I've already aware of, are so obnoxious IMO that several incredibly beneficial new/changed crunchy bits or setting items should be necessary to compensate. Especially because if the negative struff screws what I love most in SR, namely magic.

Posted by: raggedhalo Apr 2 2009, 03:05 PM

There are a number of very cool and positive changes, leaving aside the controversial ones*, that fix a number of issues. Use http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=25826&st=0 to get an idea of them. And as ever, you can always house rule out the bits you don't like.


*: I personally like the changes you dislike, but that's fine.

Posted by: Malachi Apr 2 2009, 03:15 PM

If you had trouble understanding the Matrix rules, then you'll be missing out on a much need rewrite of the Wireless World chapter in SR4A. Additionally, I'm assuming all future SR products whenever referencing the SR Core Rulebook will be using the page numbers from SR4A.

I know you mentioned that you find it superfluous, but layout and artwork really does make a difference. In a word, this book is simply gorgeous. I never realized how much was missing with the book not being in full colour. Strange as it may sound, I think the artwork and layout in a rule book really does affect how people view the game. The art in this book has really brought back the "feel" of Shadowrun that I thought had been somewhat lost the last little while.

I encourage you to wait until the book arrives at your FLGS just so you can flip through it and take a look. I have always changed things in the rules I didn't like or agree with, and I'm going to be changing some of things that are in SR4A so that's no different to me. But overall, I know that SR4A will be something that will be displayed proudly on my bookshelf for years to come, even after it becomes completely obsolete.

Posted by: Kingboy Apr 2 2009, 03:23 PM

It's a shame then that they have yet to hire someone that actually knows what they are doing when it comes to laying out text. In just the cursory examination I've given it so far, there are misplaced section headers, orphan paragraph sections and other nonsense that shouldn't be there, and in some cases don't need to be there as the space is available (or would be, if the layout was done correctly) to eliminate these problems.

As far as the artwork...mhe, most of it's pretty good,but there are some stinkers in there. Too each their own on that score. None of it is good enough to distract me from the text layout issues though, since the the text is the important part.

Posted by: Wanderer Apr 2 2009, 03:43 PM

What is SR4A going to provide that Wired and the "live off the grid" chapter of RC don't already provide ?



Nowhere reason enough for me to use my money to encourage rules changes I despise. I can always use Indexes and I generally have a decent grasp of where important stuff is in a RPG rulebook.



I made myself a strict rule that I never buy a novel, a DVD, a videogame, or an RPG manual because of art alone, either cover or interior or fluffy DVD extras. The net is chock-full of free and cool art. Quality of the text or movie of game is what matters alone. Saves me a lot of money and never had to regret my choice.

Posted by: Malachi Apr 2 2009, 04:12 PM

A better treatment of the core Matrix rules. However, like I said, if you didn't have any problems understanding them before then no problem. The chapter is better organized and much clearer now, however.

PS I assume you meant "Unwired."

Posted by: Cain Apr 2 2009, 05:08 PM

I use printed-out pdfs exclusively these days. Due to cost issues, I always get them printed in B&W. So the artwork in SR4.5, while nice, is somewhat lost on me.

Posted by: suppenhuhn Apr 2 2009, 05:31 PM

The drain rule is pretty sucky, but direct combat spells are 99% of the time way more effective then indirect ones and that should be represented somehow, eg by raising their drain.

Karma cost increase isn't really an issue since karma gain has been increased dramatically which allows you to initiate faster, learn spells quicker and bind more spirits. The point where your character development is slowed by the increased cost lies somewhere in the 3 digit magic range.

Sensor OR according to what i have read is supposed to be 4 generally, 6 being the rare exception. RAW differ from RAI apparently.

Posted by: The Mack Apr 2 2009, 06:04 PM

The drain rule is seriously ridiculous.

You should not be punished for success, nor should you be punished for not wanting to use the indirect combat spells which should have been designed better originally, or at the least improved in SR4A.




Who cares. More shoehorning, trying to force people to use spells they don't want to use because they are mechanically poor.

Why suck all that drain to use an indirect combat spell when you can use a grenade?

Or hell, just summon a Spirit with "Elemental Attack" and choose your drainless, indirect combat spell of choice on your newly summoned turret.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 2 2009, 06:08 PM

Oh, certainly. I never said I didn't like the entirety of the SR4A rules. I was merely clarifying what the OP was asking.

However, I/my group won't be buying the book in any case. We're relatively happy with the rules as they are, though there are some things we go "huh?" at, but none of that was addressed with SR4A (with possible exception of the matrix rules, which I haven't seen, so I can't make any judgments). When things don't work for us, we ad hoc something better. Chunky Salsa was getting too deadly for the NPCs, so it was removed from our game. Mages have never been Gods of Combat Destruction (or God of Hide and Sneak), so we don't need a "fix" to OR and Direct Combat spells (in fact, one of our last mages used Acid Ball and Toxic Wave because he had a character concept and was rather effective with them (maybe "overly effective," the Acid Ball once took out 5 targets....and 60 bystanders and hurt one PC).

That was also the session we blew up a fireworks factory and got all the blame pinned on one PC (the player himself was new, but was having a ton of fun and was OK with what happened, he admitted that the mistakes he made justified the result).

Posted by: Ancient History Apr 2 2009, 11:29 PM

What? You mean you're willing to miss out on the two (2) short stories I wrote for SR$A? I am hurt, yea, e'en wounded...

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 2 2009, 11:31 PM

Ah, SR$A, that's what we should call it.

TBH, I don't read much of the fiction in the source books.

Posted by: Cain Apr 3 2009, 02:32 AM

I don't think I even fully read Buzzkill; and I flat-out ignore the opening chapter pieces.

Posted by: toturi Apr 3 2009, 03:35 AM

Not as wounded as I am for you to admit that it is indeed a $ edition.

Posted by: The Mack Apr 3 2009, 03:52 AM

That damned caps button, revealing all dark secrets!

Posted by: eidolon Apr 3 2009, 04:29 AM

Did I accidentally log onto the WotC boards?

Posted by: Matsci Apr 3 2009, 05:21 AM

Nah, all the Nerdrage left there. I think it came here.

Posted by: darthmord Apr 3 2009, 11:44 AM

I read *EVERY* short story in SR4A. I liked them. So nyah!

Posted by: Larme Apr 3 2009, 01:14 PM

One thing I've enjoyed about SR4A is that they fixed some of the inexplicably bad choices about layout that the first version (was it Catalyst or FanPro?) made. For instance, the way you have stock commlinks on one page in the Wireless World section instead of the gear section, stock operating systems on another page, software upgrades on another page, and hardware upgrades on ANOTHER page... SR4A takes all that stuff and puts it in the same place in the gear section where it rightfully belongs. It also codifies the fixed sensor rules that allow you to upgrade sensor packages, as well as giving ratings and capacities for hearing and vision aids. It's still a little confusing, but it's nice to have. Overall, it's just an easier book to use, especially with the master index that greatly helps when finding stuff when you're not even sure where to look for it.

As for voting 'no' by not buying it... Well they can't de-publish the book, can they? I think a 'no' vote is a day late and dollar short at this point. Obviously, you don't have to buy it if you think there are more bad rules changes than good ones, but then again Catalyst has stressed that nobody has to buy this book in the first place -- it's not much more than an errata with a new format and some new art. It's an updated shiny new version of the same book, it's not Shadowrun 4.5. I don't think they expect everyone to buy this book, especially seeing how they're releasing an errata for free that contains all the changes. I think they're simply banking on the fact that no matter if a few dozen dumpshockers hate whatever they do, they continue to sell out of each printing of the books. If you want them to hear your voice, I'd suggest you contact them directly. Not buying the book is something that millions and millions of people who've never heard of Shadowrun do -- they're not paying attention to who doesn't buy it. And carping on dumpshock is only sporadically attended to buy the devs, and it's hard for them to take it seriously when it's just a small group of people who seem determined to complain no matter what.

Posted by: deek Apr 3 2009, 01:26 PM

I'm not currently running an SR campaign, but I just pre-ordered the hardback. I figure that my current core book has enough changes to it that getting a new book that's up to date will be a good thing. Plus, it sounds like I'll be starting up a game later this year, so it will be nice to have a new starting point.

Plus, based on what I have read, the rules that have changed, I either like or they really never came up enough in game to warrant venom spitting at our table. And, the re-org of the sections and a master index...all worth the $30 to me.

What I have never been able to understand is people thinking they have to change additions or rules just because something is published. I don't know, maybe I just play with too many people that are into WoW. And when they change something, for better or worse, you just work with it and move on. Developers don't make changes to intentionally ruin our fun...they make changes to better balance or simply fix problems. Most of us don't like them because we've been used to playing a different way, and most people don't like change and will find negative in almost anything.

Posted by: eidolon Apr 3 2009, 01:30 PM

I vote this "best post made to Dumpshock in the last few weeks", and I wish it would fit in my sig.

Posted by: InfinityzeN Apr 3 2009, 01:48 PM

Seconded... the motion is up for general vote.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 3 2009, 07:08 PM

I'd just like to point out a flaw in the argument here:

"I don't want to buy the book, I don't like the changes."
"You don't have to, the changes are going to be released free as errata."

Excuse me. But I don't want the damn errata. That's the exact part of why I'm NOT BUYING the damn book!

Posted by: deek Apr 3 2009, 07:51 PM

You can buy my gently-used un-errata'd printing of SR4. I'll sell it cheap.

Seems to solve all problems:)

Posted by: Stahlseele Apr 3 2009, 07:58 PM

you added two short stories to SR4A?
ok, just for that i am buying . . i allready have very first printing of 4th ed, and i don't even play, so yeah, fanboy here *g*

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 3 2009, 09:02 PM

We have a copy, thanks.

Posted by: Cain Apr 3 2009, 10:47 PM

As a matter of fact, they can. The hardcopies haven't even reached the printers yet; I'll bet that errata and changes discovered on Dumpshock are going to make it into the final version. But indeed, they still could scrap the entire print run at this point, and refund the pre-orders.

As for voting with your wallet: if the book languishes on shelves, that's going to say something. Every dollar spent is a vote. If people don't buy the pdfs and hardcopies, preferring to stick to the errata and/or resorting to piracy, that's going to say something as well.

Really, all SR4.5 has got going for it is that it's shiny. It's got some cool artwork, more fiction, and just enough rules changes to keep things from being backwards-compatible.

Posted by: Stahlseele Apr 3 2009, 11:20 PM

how's that positive at all?

Posted by: Cain Apr 3 2009, 11:28 PM

Huh?

Posted by: Ancient History Apr 3 2009, 11:46 PM

Yeah. There's a story in how the stories got in there...but I'll save that for another time.

Posted by: Malachi Apr 4 2009, 12:30 AM

My favourite is the one AH wrote where FastJack fights the Crash Worm. Very, very good.

Posted by: Tyro Apr 4 2009, 12:36 AM

Where is that?

Posted by: Cain Apr 4 2009, 12:42 AM

Right next to the sidebar advertisement for Holostreets.

Posted by: Tiger Eyes Apr 4 2009, 12:52 AM

That story involves some winsome begging on my part.

Posted by: Tiger Eyes Apr 4 2009, 12:52 AM

My favorite too.

Posted by: Malachi Apr 4 2009, 01:24 AM

It's called "Happy Trails" just ahead of the History Lesson chapter.

Posted by: Backgammon Apr 4 2009, 02:34 AM

I'm not sure it was explicitaly stated, but making SR4A was also a legal thing. Now, Catalyst published that book, so they can generate errata'd copies as much as they want, whereas before they couldn't.

I mean, SR4A is distinc from the rules change. SR4A is just a pretty aniversary version. The rule changes are errata and were going to happen whether there is a pretty aniversary book out or not. Or, rather, as above, SR4A is the excuse that allows catalyst to publish the errata.

Note, I may be wrong here, but I thought I had understood that from stuff Adam had been saying.

Posted by: Larme Apr 4 2009, 03:20 AM

Yeah, except that's not my argument. If that was the argument making, I would be a huge retard wouldn't I?

My argument is: not buying the book accomplishes nothing, it doesn't "send a message" like the OP suggested they wanted to do. What I said about it being released as an errata is not a counter to anyone saying they don't want the book, it's a counter to the notion that not buying it would send Catalyst a message of some kind. They don't even expect all players to buy the book, because it is simply another printing which incorporates errata plus extensive reformatting. They are sending us the message: "hey guys, the new printing is really cool, buy it if you want, but if not, that's cool too." The fact that they're releasing the changes in an errata shows that they fully expect plenty of people not to buy it, further reinforcing how not buying it would fail to send them a message of any kind. Next time, you should consider asking for clarification rather than assuming I'm just a big retard. I'd like to think I extend people the same courtesy.

Though apparently, they do listen. http://www.shadowrun4.com/wordpress/2009/04/shadowrun-4-anniversary-core-rulebook-changes-document/ So bitching on dumpshock probably isn't as futile as I made it sound in my previous post, especially if you do it as long and as loud as people have been doing about SR4A. Which can only be a strike in Catalyst's favor, they're willing to admit their mistakes and acknowledge dissent, even if they don't agree with everything people say on the boards

Posted by: Cain Apr 4 2009, 03:38 AM

You're completely wrong.

CGL is a company, and companies exist to make money. If SR4.5 doesn't make money, that *will* send a message to the folks there. Right now, SR4 core books are apparently selling well. This is an experiment with the core book, to see if a new model will sell better.

If SR4.5 flops, I doubt the rules changes will be blamed, unfortunately. I think instead we'll see stripped-down books with less fluff and a lower price point.

Posted by: toturi Apr 4 2009, 04:03 AM

Of course not, the rules changes would have been deliberate and someone must have sold it to the upper management and some big money would have signed off on it. Blaming the rules changes means accepting responsibility for screwing up on purpose.

Posted by: Larme Apr 4 2009, 05:10 AM

I was not suggesting that the book would succeed if lots and lots of people didn't buy it. Rather I was suggesting that perhaps a few dozen dumpshockers are truly outraged about SR4A, and these are the same people who hate everything about SR4, and despite their years of forum-based guerilla warfare, every printing of the core book has sold out so far. That is, I suggest that the number of people who might vote with their wallets on the basis of this forum is infinitesimal compared to the larger SR4 audience, and that a handful of people from Dumpshock refusing to buy the new book will not make it into a failure. Thus, again, no message is likely to be sent if a few people here don't buy it. I was most certainly not making the retarded argument that it wouldn't matter if nobody at all bought it.

I guess I'm confusing people with two sides to my argument, which conflict a bit. So I offer a refinement: they probably do expect people to buy the new book, but not because of the rules changes, those are available for free. They expect us to buy it because it has a master index and they fixed all kinds of fucked up formatting in the original edition, and it's just a nicer product to use. And again, there aren't enough people shrieking on dumpshock to really make the difference of success or failure.



I really don't think your scenario of the book flopping is plausible. They managed to cram a whole new edition down the throats of every dissenter on Dumpshock, and it's been doing quite well. I even heard from a dev once that they believed there was an active campaign by a certain group to try and cause SR4 to fail. And look where we are, shiny new 20th anniversary edition. Shadowrun is a franchise, and it will take a lot more than controversy over rules tweaks to make it "flop." If D&D can stop being a PnP game and become a non-digital version of WoW without failing utterly, then Shadowrun can survive what are, in the long run, a short list of minor tweaks to game mechanics.

Posted by: Dwight Apr 4 2009, 06:10 AM

Whoa a tiny little 4 year old echo of an angry pipe dream!

WTF? That's crazy.

Well I suppose you could view what White Knight did as taking a crack at trying to get SR4, as it is, scuttled before going to press. Actually, come to think of it, that was his stated purpose? Do you think they were referring to him, Motorfirebox, and company? Or someone else?

At least what Kage tried doing was sort of positive in going out and putting together an alternative addressing [some of] SR3's issues. Sure it's something that is likely to all come together some time after people start sprouting Orc tusks (not long now! ) and with a girth that makes HERO look like $2 comic book. But in my opinion that is a bit more positive response.

Posted by: knasser Apr 4 2009, 09:56 AM

The errata document is now out. The vast majority of changes are positive ones and a couple of the more controversial issues have now either been changed again or made into optional rules. The assumption the OP makes that they are outraged about all the errata is a hard one to swallow. Is adding a capacity rating for Goggles so traumatic? Is a clarification of how Mana barriers affect targeting of non-living targets so very awful?

If the OP doesn't like the book then the OP shouldn't buy it. But it's not going to show up as any sort of protest. Probably the majority of people who buy it wont have an in-depth knowledge of the rules changes. And plenty of people do care about presentation and great artwork. Put the two editions next to each other and the difference is going to leap out at you.

It's also pretty nasty to complain about "getting someone who knows how to lay out a book." Does that poster want to site some actual examples of what is so very flawed? I've done some layout work myself and the book looks great to me.

Posted by: Cain Apr 4 2009, 11:10 AM

There's over a thousand registered members on Dumpshock, most of whom comprise the perfect target audience for SR4.5. I don't know how large the SR4.5 print run is going to be, but losing a thousand sales is going to hurt.

Didn't say it was. However, I do think they're relying on Dumpshockers, as die-hard Shadowrun fans, saying: "Ooh, shiny!" and scoring a thousand easy sales.

Posted by: Dwight Apr 4 2009, 02:11 PM

Of course there are 100% shrieking mad as hell, right? Or is it more like 10%, if that? For SR4 all of Dumpshock was a rolling, boiling pot of angst about that change. It was going to be Shadowrun's death, Fanpro's death!** To the point that the admins roped off corners. Roughly 25% of weekly visitors that logged into their account and ventured into SR4 corner to cast a vote in polls (it was like a couple hundred or so) were assured it was the doom of SR. I don't mean the worried fence sitters. These were the people that they just weren't going to take it up, ever.

Now how'd that go? Besides, you know, a slice of the hard core doomsayers sucking it up and getting it anyway?

So lets compare the boards. Sure there is your grumpy calls of SR4.5 (!), barely background noise even if we just focus on your posting history alone , and some sporadic hand wringing. I heard there was about a solid week's worth of WTF explosion? And now, that hard product is out? Meh, an occasional thread like this one. Comparatively this is a nice room temperature jug of water. In all about right for making a little Koolaid.

Would you like one ice cube or two in your glass?


** Turns out that Fanpro did go teats up but that had to do with the so long running financial problems with the Germany. If anything SR4 was a bright spot.

Posted by: Larme Apr 4 2009, 02:16 PM

Sure, and I think a lot of dumpshockers will buy it, and many will pitch a big hissy fit and still buy it, and a few won't buy it at all. I don't think their business model depends on all 1000 of us to buy every product.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 4 2009, 02:26 PM

After having looked over the complete errata sheet the main issues I had with the edition have been mitigated (direct combat spell drain is optional, the OR thresholds reduced, increased attribute cost in karma offset by increased karma awards) I can say that, yes, I will be telling our Treasurer that this book is worth buying.

There were many many things I'd liked about the new "edition" but stacked up didn't equal the cost of the things I didn't like (I of course, still think that rocket scatter is ridiculous), but with the final changes things are looking far more positive than before.

Posted by: Kingboy Apr 4 2009, 02:39 PM

I'd debate how "nasty" it is—snide perhaps—but sure, I'll give you the example that lept off the page(s) at me without even looking for it, and this was on my initial browse through.

The pages in question are 190-191 in the Awakened World section. The bottom section of the right column has the heading "The Astral World" above the enchanting table. No additional text, certainly no text that actually belongs to the Astral World section. So why is it here, instead of at the top of the following page, heading up the new section like it should?

Is there not enough space on 191? Let's check...

Hmm, looking at the bottom of the left column on on 191, there seems to be a three line white space sitting there. That's plenty of space to bring the heading for "The Astral World" over onto the same page as the actual text concerning the Astral World. Compare the heading as it is currently to the text in the opposite column to it on 190 and you'll see that the heading and its leading are easily under three text lines of space.

What does moving it change? Well, it makes the Astral World section look better and eliminates the weirdness of a non-related header sitting smack dab on top of a chart from the previous section. It gives some justification for splitting the paragraph that begins "Like physical perception...", which is better than the current state where a three line orphan section is moved to the next column to leave space for...a three line white space. It also allows the Enchanting Table to be moved up bit so that its bottom edge is no longer hanging lower than either the text on 190 or the Assensing Table on the opposing page, which would help unify the look of both pages.

So that's one easily fixable example. But that's certainly not the totality of changes that colud be made to the layout. I'd rather see more time spent on the actual typography—you know, that aspect of overall page design that when done well compliments the reading of text rather than distracts from it—than the shininess of the pages and how colorful they can be.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Apr 4 2009, 03:10 PM

I've got you beat. I'm still gradually acquring 3rd edition books, AND I don't play or GM anymore.

EDIT: If I walked into a radioactive cloud and developed super powers, I'd seriously use my powers for good by creating an SR2 mod for Deus Ex and there'd be lots of neon and trenchcoats with big collars.

Posted by: Dwight Apr 4 2009, 03:15 PM

Assuming you are serious, I'm curious to what end you are doing this?

Posted by: Dunsany Apr 4 2009, 03:35 PM

I'm not sure anyone is suggesting that the book *will* fail because they, personally, don't buy the book. What I do think people are saying is that since they dislike the book and can point to several reasons why they, and others, would dislike the changes that the book *might* not sell well. That and the fact that "voting with your wallet" is a basic tenant of our modern society. We may be alone in our opinion, and our "vote" will not change the outcome as we'd prefer. But that's sort of why we call it a "vote" and not an "order."

Also, I'd like to object to this claim that the "few dozen" dumpshockers that are outraged at the changes in SR4A are the same as the people that hate SR4. It seems to me that the "loudest" opponents to the new changes have come from people that are outspoken supporters of SR4 *and* Catalyst. Also, I'd further like to note that my "outrage" is not at the changes themselves, but the seemingly thoughtless manner in which some of them were made. The specific rules changes don't bother me as much as thinking that I'm going to pay someone for a poor product.

I haven't decided whether I'll buy SR4A. I will mostly likely wait to see what other things have been changed and how well they've been handled. Most people have mentioned a better layout and some other extra "fluff". As these are things that I'm interested in, I might very well buy the product if *that* work is worth the price.

Posted by: eidolon Apr 4 2009, 03:37 PM

I got into the game at 3rd ed (after brief exposure to 1st in my early teens), yet I now come pretty close to having every non-LE, English language book. Lots of us collect as well as (or instead of, or as a poor substitute for) play.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Apr 4 2009, 03:39 PM

Oh, it's nothing operatic or dramatic. I just got busy with a full time job and other activities, and I don't have the time anymore, and the old group I'd played 3rd ed. with for years on IRC dissolved a number of years ago. It's just a time and place thing. I probably wouldn't be able to take up RPGs again since you need a lot of things to come together to be able to play them.

Heck, I remember I'd been interested in playing Shadowrun back in middle school, when I realized that Shadowrun had the most culturally authentic 80s American orientalism I'd ever seen, but didn't have the chance for years. Then in 9th or 10th grade I finally got one friend to GM several sessions. Didn't really get the chance to actually play it regularly until college and grad school at which point I played every week for many years. Now that I think about it, it really just requires years of waiting for the chance to be able to play a good paper and pencil RPG, so you need patience and dedication on some level.

Posted by: ElFenrir Apr 4 2009, 04:04 PM

Honestly? I'm kinda in this boat as well. The drain change to optional was a great thing. In fact, that was something that I was all for...I'm all about optional rules. (Ok, yes, technically, ALL rules are optional. I know that. But sometimes just seeing other options that were tested already printed out is a big help, since sometimes houserules can break other things down the line they were not intended to.) Since my big concern was raising the Attribute costs and not lowering the skills, I felt that there was indeed a boat missed here in wanting to make skills look better. But then Karma awards were basically doubled...so it sorta...well, ok, didn't change much at all, kinda, in the long run. If I have to pay 15 points to raise my attribute to 5, or 10 points to raise my skill to 5, under the old system, its cheaper for the skill but the Attribute has more stuff linked, but I'm earning, say, 4-5 Karma per week. Now, I earn 9-10 Karma per week, but it costs 25 to raise the attribute but still 10 for the skill. Old system-it would take 3-4 weeks to raise the attribute. New system at 9-10 per week, it takes....3 weeks to raise the Attribute. I had to rub my eyes, but generally, it almost takes less time to raise the Attribute now. I concede my arguement that it was a bad change, since...jeeze, it almost works out BETTER now. But I think I can see the ''catch'', that since you are sitting on much more Karma, the skills look...kinda better to purchase, since one might think ''whoa! after 2 weeks, I can buy 2 3's to 4s, and a whole new skill at 1!'' or something of that matter.

It's one of those rules that looking at it piece by piece looks pretty bad, IMO, but all together(including the much higher Karma awards), isn't that bad. I would still end up giving 950-1000 Karma for the karmagen to keep the power level the way we like it with the x5 costs, but it's not as bad as I thought it would be(remember we play very sporadically and thus don't have fast advancement to begin with.)

I always gave my thumbs up for lower Adept power costs, even though I felt that the cost for Attributes(and what I used) were best at .5/1. At least having them .75/1.5 is a bit better.

All of THAT being said, actually buying the book is something I'm not sure I need to do. My resources are a bit limited, and while the art, from the bit I saw, looks very nice, I do have to put priorities in, and simply sticking with the old edition(or even deciding to try errata later), is in my best interest at the moment. But the fact that they actually listened to some of the suggestions(making the Drain rule optional, increasing Karma to offset higher Attributes, and lowering the OR threshold), makes me give a thumbs up for that.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 4 2009, 04:16 PM

The university pays for all of my group's gaming materials.

Ah, the pleasures of being a college organization.

(Though our budget was cut in half this year due to them remodeling the athletic building, but then, they took the money out of ALL clubs and organizations, so at least it was fair)

Posted by: ElFenrir Apr 4 2009, 04:19 PM

Well, I have another gaming addiction in videogames. That, and the fact that we don't play super-often at the table puts the books, while I like them, a bit lower on the list.

Though damn, getting stuff paid for via university sounds like a sweet deal.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 4 2009, 04:23 PM

The list of stuff he have is huge.
SR 3 and 4
D&D 3.5 and 4
Rifts
WoD: Mage/Werewolf/Vampire
Scion (Hero, Demigod, and God)
a whole bookshelf of board games:
Twilight Imperium
Race for the Galaxy
Power Grid
Tigris and Euphrates
Ticket to Ride
Settlers of Catan (and all expansions)
Arkham Horror (and nearly all expansions)
and a ton of anime DVDs.
And some stuff I'm forgetting

Posted by: MYST1C Apr 4 2009, 04:36 PM

I think there's a flaw in the basic outlook that many have voiced here - the assumption seems to be that SR4A is basically a money grab, introducing enough changes to make everyone already owning SR4 buy the core book again (à la D&D 3.5).
I see this new version of SR mainly as a means to recruit new players, people who didn't own SR4 before! Hence the new artwork and layout to bring the game up to current full-color standard, new fluff and reworked chapters. Everybody already owning older prints can simply use the released errata (BTW, where are we now in errata numbers - 1.9, 1.10 or 2.0?).

I know that I will buy SR4A - in its German translation. Because this will be the first new translation and release of the core book by Pegasus. All German SR4s currently circulating are from FanPro's 2005 and 2006 printings and are way outdated errata-wise...

Posted by: MYST1C Apr 4 2009, 04:40 PM

Well, FanPro did as FASA had done before - stop when you're still making money. But unlike FASA FanPro is still active (in Germany, that is) publishing novels, not games.
And they still make money from the DSA license given to Ulisses just like FASA still makes money from Redbrick's Earthdawn license.

Posted by: Adam Apr 4 2009, 05:20 PM

A simple last second flow error, easily created by making a correction on a previous page, and that didn't get caught in the original PDF. It's fixed in the latest PDF and in the print version.

Posted by: knasser Apr 4 2009, 07:11 PM

This confused me for a moment, but fortunately I still had the non-updated version of the PDF as well. This has been fixed in the latest version. The book looks great to me and a huge improvement on the previous one which I previously thought looked nice until SR4A came out and re-calibrated my aesthetics.

K.

Posted by: Larme Apr 5 2009, 05:06 AM

Well, just to be sure everyone is clear, they did fix most of the issues that people had a problem with. So now, there's not much excuse for anyone not to buy the book -- it fixes a lot of problems, it has vastly superior layout compared to the original core book release, and it has a master index. Fluff and art are in there too, but I would recommend it simply because it is quite a bit less painful to use, while still being similar enough that you won't have to re-learn a new book.

Posted by: Cardul Apr 5 2009, 09:19 AM

Well, I am not exactly "outspoken", but I have been playing SR since second edition, and Battletech for a long time. I think that, rules wise, SR4 is the most accessible to a new player. I still think it has area for improvement(Show me a perfect game system, though, and, with a mirror, I shall show you a delusional individual), but it is still better then SR3.
And, here is the thing: I have it on pre-order. And I am GLAD I do. I am looking forward to having it in my hands.

Now, then, as for the stories added: They help make Shadowrun more accessible to new players. They are stories from the past(Fastjack verses the Jormungar Worm Virus, the story of how Picador got revenge for Matador's death) and stories from today(most of them) that help set the mood for the world, show you the setting in ways that, well, honestly, I had almost forgotten about. They even have one with a "Pink Mohawk" working with "Black Trenchcoats"




Shoot....I am still trying to track some down for their fluff material...

Posted by: tete Apr 6 2009, 02:16 AM

Well for me if I don't buy SR4A then there will be even more holes in my all things SR collection (darn old gaming magazines that keep showing up with shadowrun stuff)

Posted by: Backgammon Apr 6 2009, 11:10 PM

Wow. Just bought SR4A. Worth every penny. Period. This book is a thing of beauty. There are SO many little added details that add so much, it's amazing.

Posted by: Cain Apr 7 2009, 01:19 AM

Yeah, but if all that's good about SR4.5 is that it's shiny, that's really not much of a selling point.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 7 2009, 01:49 AM

BUT... sometimes shiny is all you need...

Posted by: Backgammon Apr 7 2009, 02:04 AM

It's shiny, better organized (usefull for day-to-day usage) and full of extra fluff.

The shiny and fluff makes me happy, which is reason enough to buy a book. The better organization (reformating of text as well as addition of tables and such) makes it a worthwhile long term purchase.

I had my doubts, but that's how I'm calling it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 7 2009, 02:16 AM

I was sold on the organizational aspects alone... Three cheers for the combined index of 4e Books... It is about time...

Posted by: Cain Apr 7 2009, 02:16 AM

In a pdf, I like quick organization. Extra art and fluff make it harder to get to the rules I'm looking for. And while things look very nice on screen, I exclusively use printed-out pdfs. The art doesn't look as good in B&W, so it's somewhat wasted on me.

Looks cool, I'll admit, but I don't see shelling out up to $65 for it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 7 2009, 02:19 AM

I tend to prefer hard copy, but there are inded times that PDF's come in very useful... And yes, the cost is relatively high, but I am willing to pay a little more for exceptional output, and the new book layout is indeed exceptional in my opinion (far better than some others that I could name that cost as much or more)...

Posted by: Matsci Apr 7 2009, 02:23 AM

...






I think your off about 40$ for your price quote.



----------------
Now playing: http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/disturbed/track/haunted
via http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 7 2009, 02:28 AM

I think that he meant shelling out $65.00 for a Printed Book (Limited Print Price if I remember correctly)...

Though I would say that unless he is printing his PDF on his own print system (and maybe even if he is) that a Printed PDF can cost a bundle in and of itself (over the cost of the Original PDF)

Posted by: Cain Apr 7 2009, 04:16 AM

Correct


All the Dumpshock ToS will allow me to say is that it all depends. Having a brother in law who works at Office Max helps, though.

Posted by: imperialus Apr 7 2009, 02:10 PM

Hey, it could be worse...

At least we can http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1172698 of our books.

Not to hijack but seriously Wizards... Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 8 2009, 02:51 AM

That must indeed be nice...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 8 2009, 02:58 AM

Definitely some bad behavior on WOTC's part... Fortunately I no longer support that company in any way, shape, or form...

Posted by: HardSix Apr 8 2009, 06:54 PM

I'd love to have the new SR4A, but I'm flat broke , and not nearly talented enough to deck myself a better lifestyle. So, I'll have to be content with the latest errata for now and pick up SR4A when I'm gainfully re-employed.

So Catalyst devs, if the economy was better, your pre-order numbers would be +1.

Posted by: Wesley Street Apr 8 2009, 08:44 PM

I do appreciate the Matrix rules rewrites as those were my major beef with the SR4 BBB that Fanpro produced. Made things much clearer to me (and it's nice to see that the optional Attributes rules from Unwired were included [and explained!]).

I haven't read through much else but the art is really, really nice. I'm moving away from print anyway so I don't mind $25 for a PDF that will be auto-updated to include errata. My goal is to have all of my Shadowrun materials on an eBook Reader that I can carry around with me in a small case. Gosh, that will be so nice and convenient. I worry about shoulder dislocation when I travel with all of my books.

Posted by: Daddy's Little Ninja Apr 9 2009, 06:27 PM

We held off on any of our team getting 4th Ed. amd have not bought any of the suppliments. We are just playing SR3 with the 4th ed spirits and hacking rules. Now, it's already ed 4.5 and more money. Nope. I have small children and they need the money more than the corp who are already effectively putting out rules 5th ed.

The change in rules, if you do not buy along with them means you can answer fewer threads here about rules since you cannot answer about them.

Posted by: Larme Apr 9 2009, 07:27 PM

Ok, I get that you don't want to spend money buying a whole new edition's books, but it sounds like you're actually attacking the company for making new products. If you play 3rd, and aren't even interested in 4th, why even care about SR4A? All this amounts to is a troll, something that might provoke one of SR4A's defenders with no possibility of constructively adding to the discussion.

Posted by: Matsci Apr 9 2009, 09:14 PM

I wouldn't call 3 pages of errata a brand new edition. The SR3 Core rulebook had 9 pages of errata

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 9 2009, 10:29 PM

All I know is that in both the first and second copies of SR4 I bought (someone stole the first one), there are typos galore - such as half the weapons in the BBB being listed as "machine pistols".

I'd be a lot more pissed about this were it not for the fact that Catalyst inherited a severely flawed product, and now have to sell it. If I've read this thread properly, they're releasing the updated rules as errata for SR4 - sure, it's not convenient, but it's free! They could have pulled a Hasbro (Wizards' parent company) and released Shadowrun 4.5, changing the rules just enough that none of the nifty new stuff out there will work with the old rules and requiring another $35 for a copy.

Also, before everyone starts yammering about illegal PDFs, I might point out that the only reason my GM can run a game is because the players (other than myself, all new) can read the rules without spending a lump of cash; if the game goes well for a month or two, the other players will likely pick a copy for themselves. There's enough rules in the add-on sourcebooks that anyone using them regularly will buy a copy of them, too - something I suspect was deliberate.

Posted by: Cain Apr 9 2009, 11:12 PM

This is what the thread is about: if there's any drawbacks to not getting SR4.5 As for trolling, usually it's the one accusing people of trolling that's the guilty party.


The Dumpshock ToS forbids us from discussing piracy in a positive manner. That being said, you do realize there were pirate copies of SR4.5 out within *hours* of the release?

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 10 2009, 12:02 AM

I'm not surprised in the least.

(Spore was pirated two days before it was released; conversely it took a week before World of Goo was pirated).

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Apr 10 2009, 02:04 AM

I for one appreciate that effort that has gone in to the minor revision that is SR4A

Posted by: Bull Apr 10 2009, 03:44 AM

We've said it before, and we'll say it again... We consider it trolling if you're posting in a thread for no other reason than to provoke a response, or to be an ass (also called Thread Crapping). So knock it off.




Yup. There's also been a copy of the screener for the new Wolverine movie floating around. And some jackass got fired for mentioing that he downloaded and reviewed it cause it was easier to go and see the press review screening. Doesn't make it right, doesn't mean it should be condoned, and doesn't mean it should be encouraged.

Downloading an illegal PDF of a game product, for any reason, from any source, does nothing but hurt the game companies. And talking about it here on Dumpshock is a quick way to get in trouble.

Bull

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 10 2009, 05:31 AM

A PDF was sent out with the release. I'm not sure if they're using any DRM, but I can assure you that most of the technology that makes it work becomes useless as soon as it's on a PC that completely ignores it.

I'm getting conflicting information: Are we getting all of the rule changes as Errata or not? If so, ducky - I'll download it iand that's that. If not, the heck with the lot of you - one of the main reasons I use Linux is because I don't like paying $200 every few years for a severely flawed OS before paying $200 more to fix it just so that I can have the privelidge of installing yet more overpriced software, and I don't want more of the same from my weekly table gaming.

Just a hypothetical, here, but when you make buying an E-book reader cheaper than buying a replacement set of books, those PDFs start too look really good indeed.



I appreciate the new Star Trek movie. I do not, on the other hand, appreciate it to the tune of $40, which is what it costs at a local red-carpet opening night first showing.

Posted by: raggedhalo Apr 10 2009, 09:17 AM

http://shadowrun4.com/resources/sr4a/sr4a_changes.pdf.

Posted by: Synner Apr 10 2009, 10:00 AM

Please note that the Changes Reference Document focuses on the major changes and additions to the game mechanics. Besides incorporating all the SR4 errata that had gone before, and 10+ pages of new minor errata detected by Catalyst proofreaders (and in the final print version fan-generated errata too).

SR4A includes numerous minor tweaks such as sections and rules that were rewritten for clarity (such as the Matrix rules) or added to the original (such as material contextualizing technomancers in the Sixth World society.) Even when we have not made a change to a rule we've done our best to clarify the intent behind the original rules (e.g. the clarifications on Edge burning, PC escape from death, and Indirect spell targeting). There are chapters where the tweaks are minor, and there are chapters that have substantial changes (e.g. The Wireless World) or additional content (e.g. The Awakened World and )Life on the Edge. In other chapters, a simple reorganization and addition of guidelines and advice has significantl'y enhanced usefulness (e.g. Creating a Shadowrunner).

I believe DFSer Larsine did quite a complete comparison of changes http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=25826&st=25.

Posted by: Larme Apr 10 2009, 04:34 PM

So, what the topic comes down to is this: If you don't buy SR4A, you won't have the index, or the improved formatting, or the latest errata included in your core book. But you will still have the latest version of the rules, because they've been released as errata. The drawbacks to not getting it are pretty much convenience related. I went ahead and sprang for it myself in .pdf format, in large part because the .pdf is nicely discounted, and the reformatting/adding in of errata really does make a big difference in how easy it is to make characters and play. As for voting 'no,' however, the only thing to vote against at this point is giving Catalyst more money for a new product, as they have fixed the erratas that people really had a problem with. If you're pissed at how RPG companies constantly print new books and new editions of the books though, you might want to invest in a video game console. All RPG companies do that, it's part of their business model, and objecting to SR4A from a price perspective is pretty much objecting to the entire PnP gaming industry.

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 11 2009, 12:37 AM

I've heard of things like modified costs for adept powers that make it possible to play one without a boatload of 'ware, and modifications to how spellcasters work. Unless I'm missing something obvious, these are not in the current errata.

While publishing new editions of the rules is all well and good (and necessary to keep people employed), these are just tiny changes to the old rules and layout that should have been there from the beginning. A revised and updated player's handbook with some optional new content is all well and good - anyone else here played 2E AD&D? - but reducing compatibility to the point where you can't use the old BBB means that groups will either have to stick with their out-of-print books or spend a collective few hundred bucks on new ones - and god forbid you have a new player with the wrong rules.

Of course, you could do a major re-write, changing everything from the build system to spellcasting. They would not need to be dramatic changes - AD&D 2.0 was not much different from AD&D 1.0, merely a little more polished and a little more streamlined. For this, I'd buy another BBB no questions asked.

Of course, I might just buy one anyway: the rubbish binding on my SR4 PHB has failed completely, surprising since it's hardly been used. I've got first edition AD&D guides in better shape.

Posted by: Matsci Apr 11 2009, 05:19 AM

The Adept Power Improved Ability now supports Vehicle Skills.
• The Adept Power Kinesics is now capped at Level 3.
• The Adept Power Improved Reflexes costs have been revised as
follows:
Level 1: 1.5 Power Points
Level 2: 2.5 Power Points
Level 3: 4 Power Points
• The Adept Power Improved Physical Attribute costs have been
revised as follows:
.75 Power Points per level
1.5 Power Points per level over Natural Maximum
• Direct combat spells have a new optional mechanic: for each Net
Hit applied to damage, the Drain Value increases by +1. For Area
of Effect spells, use only the highest Net Hits applied to damage.

Direct combat spells have a new optional mechanic: for each Net
Hit applied to damage, the Drain Value increases by +1. For Area
of Eff ect spells, use only the highest Net Hits applied to damage.

Posted by: The Jake Apr 11 2009, 05:45 AM

You're not far off the mark I suspect.

Speaking from my own experience, the recent release of D&D 4E not so long after 3.5 left a seriously bad taste in the mouths of my entire gaming group. When we read the 4E rules, we realised D&D had been dumbed down until it could be only loosely described as a table top version of WOW. This is what prompted me to blow the dust off my Shadowrun collection and check out 4E. I liked what I saw and decided to buy them up.

SR4A has come less than six months after I bought the BBB. And while we knew there would be an anniversary edition, I feel pretty bloody jibbed to have a new rules rewrite. So no, I won't be buying it and given that this book as come within less than a month of most of my other gaming buddies buying their rulebook, I feel confident in saying they won't either. Whats more, there was no forewarning that a new rules re-write was coming. Errata'd/updated to reflect the rules corrections - fine. But flatly changing the core mechanics on everyone is a definite no-no without clear warning to your player base IMHO. To be fair, it has been four years since the original rules for SR4 were released, so even from a commercial sense, I could almost support the release of a new edition. But IMHO, there's no excuse for not warning your players.

Bottom line, this is exactly the kind of move I'd expect from WOTC, not Catalyst. However, I expect it is an isolated incident.

And to whoever said we should tell the makers of the game and not just whinge, we are - right here, on their official forums.

- J.

Posted by: Bull Apr 11 2009, 05:51 AM

Well, i wwill say that the Anniversary Edition of SR4 was announced at Gen Con last year as part of the anniversary celebration this year. I don't think rules changes were really mentioned, but I do believe that it was mentioned that the book would be reorganized and cleaned up a bit. Though, to be fair, I do sometimes lose track of what I hear officially and unofficially.

Anyways, don't sweat the new edition if you have just recently bought an SR4 book, or you can't afford it right now. It's nice, it's pretty, and it's useful, but as has been said, all the changes are in the new erratta. Grab and use them as needed. And, down the road, if you decide you want or need a new copy of the book, or end up with the extra cash sitting around, pick it up then and enjoy it!

Bull

Posted by: toturi Apr 11 2009, 05:57 AM

http://www.shadowrun4.com/links.shtml

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 11 2009, 06:17 AM

That's the only forum I see on that page. And right near the top.

Posted by: Dwight Apr 11 2009, 06:22 AM

Yes, and it and the other entries in the Solid Contacts category don't have the "Official" label like the entries in the category about it does. It's always been a very close but unofficial relationship between whomever was Shadowrun's publishing company and Dumpshock. But there simply isn't a real official Shadowrun BB. I'm not sure there ever has been? I don't think so.

Posted by: The Jake Apr 11 2009, 12:43 PM

When it is referred to and linked to the News section, I think its officially "official".

- J.

Posted by: Dwight Apr 11 2009, 02:06 PM

Where's the link in the News section? I don't see it off hand.

P.S. Drivethru is linked in the news section. They aren't a Catalyst site.


EDIT: Or do you mean that Links page? The CIA is the official intelligence agency of Shadowrun? Who knew? Oh wait:



Dumpshock only contains official material in designated posts by Catalyst employees (and sometimes freelancers).

Posted by: knasser Apr 11 2009, 02:22 PM

What "core mechanics" are you referring to? That the cost of raising Attributes has gone up and the recommended amount of karma has been raised? It's not that dramatic. Those and a clarification on Edge usage are all that I can think of that are "changing the core mechanics on everyone"

Posted by: Bull Apr 11 2009, 02:55 PM

Nope. While we are the largest Shadowrun board around, and many of the freelancers and devs frequent these boards, we are not officially connected to CGL.

We are as close as you currently get at the moment though, but that's a whole different thing.

Posted by: Glyph Apr 11 2009, 03:06 PM

The change to how combat spells work (now an optional rule, thankfully) was a huge change. As was the change in Object Resistance, which they have also revised somewhat now. Those rules changes altered what magicians could do in mid-stream, a huge change. Even the change in Karma costs, while offset by the increased Karma awards now, makes one of the character generation methods in Runner's Companion unusable until we get an errata for it (hopefully soon). The revision to the costs of a few adept powers, while not provoking outcries like the previous changes, is still a significant change. And the new restrictions on upgrading commlinks and other electronics made a lot of people's gear suddenly illegal. Thankfully, the addition of the modular components modification should make it a lot easier for people to get their gear rules-compliant again.

I have heard a lot of accusations of "whining" on the part of the people who picked apart these new rules, but for the most part, while they were understandably upset at having these rules changes suddenly sprung on them, the criticism was still constructive, explaining why they didn't think the new rules were a good idea. To their credit, Catalyst listened and tweaked the rules changes to where they are a lot less disruptive to existing campaigns.

Posted by: Bull Apr 11 2009, 05:01 PM

To be fair, there was a lot of whining. Constructive Criticism involves calm, ration explanations. Posted once or twice. Whining involves screaming over and over and over about how CGL just ruined the game because theyr'e all hacks.

Whining also involves screaming over and over and over about the people who are upset by the new changes.

It happened on both sides. It was annoying. Hopefully we're past it, and everyone should now drop it and move along. The new rules are set in stone now, so you either accept them and wait for additional errata to fix things like the Karmagen system, or you house rule it to use the old rules. In either case, no reason to keep hashing out old arguments pointlessly.

(Yes, I know, this is the Internet. Pointless arguments seem to be the entire reason some folks get online. Doesn't mean I can't do my best to fight it )

Bull

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 11 2009, 05:18 PM

I do believe I fell into the former here, Bull. I may have whined at some points (increased attribute cost, prior to increased Karma awards), but for the most part I was asking for explanation and giving my arguments as to why I did not agree with the rule changes as made. And I still don't agree with Synner's rationalization behind using OR for illusions.

Posted by: Larme Apr 11 2009, 05:33 PM

And herein is demonstrated the danger of relying on rumor and hearsay. Neither of those rumors were true, at least not as you understood them. The changes really, truly are contained in the SR4A changes document, and there's no need to buy the new book if you want to use them.

This is why the people who are complaining about having to buy a new book are sort of setting my teeth on edge. You (now I'm talking to 'you' in the general sense, not to SpasticTeapot specifically) are not forced to buy the new book in any way. You can download all the changes for free. The new book is better organized, it's easier to deal with the changes if you have them right in your book instead of in a separate document, but if you actually want to use the new rules, you don't have to pay a dime. This is nothing like D&D 3.5 or 4E, which people are freely comparing it to. In both of those cases, the only way to hold a copy of the most updated rules in your hand was to buy them. This is a free rules update accompanied by a new printing of the core book. I understand that people object, as a general matter, to having to buy new RPG books to keep up to date. But this is not a case where you have to do so. Everyone who objects on that basis is using transferrence -- transferring their angst against RPGs as a whole onto Catalyst, who has not actually done anything to cost them more money. The changes are free for you to use or not use as you please. Free is not the same as costing you money, but people are drawing this false equivalency over and over.

Posted by: Heath Robinson Apr 11 2009, 05:46 PM

Larme,
You've laid out my thoughts on the subject better than I could hoped to have done so.

People, the only reasons to buy SR4A are to appreciate the (generally quite nice) new art, to appreciate the layout updates, to make use of the master indices, to appreciate the latest attempts at making the Matrix rules easy to understand, if you want to have the latest version of the system in a nice package without extraneous notes, or if it's your first ever copy of the base book.

You are not mandated to purchase the anniversary edition in any way, and the analogy with D&D 3.5 is completely baseless. So would you please drop it; grandstanding when you have no ground to stand upon merely belittles your intelligence.

Posted by: darthmord Apr 14 2009, 12:04 PM

The big reason I picked up SR4A (Collector's, Standard, & PDF) was my SR4 copy is a First Run copy (hard cover). I like to have collector's edition books. It's a weakness of mine. (Yes Catalyst, this means I would buy Collector's Editions of your other books if they were available.)

Yep, you read that right. It's a FanPro book. V 1.0. I figured it was time to update.

The Jake, I wouldn't sweat it much as you noted, it's been a while since SR4 came out. You just happened to come in toward the end of the SR4 hardcover as it was transitioning to SR4A.

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 14 2009, 03:55 PM

One small suggestion: Put links to the rules updates everywhere. In huge, flashing letters. What I had found in the "errata" section was the old errata, which was one of the main reasons I was so cheesed - I was looking at the old stuff.

Posted by: Draco18s Apr 14 2009, 04:31 PM

You mean like the sticky thread in this forum?
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=25987

Posted by: Tiger Eyes Apr 14 2009, 09:03 PM

It has also been prominently displayed on the front page of shadowrun4.com. It still is (but John's post on GenCon events bumped it to the #2 spot).

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 15 2009, 12:35 AM

That's where I found it - it's not actually in the errata section.

I haven't played SR4 in a year or so, and figured that "errata" would be on the "errata" webpage, not the "news" webpage.

Posted by: Adam Apr 15 2009, 02:12 AM

The resources/errata page needs a cleanup, that's for sure. It's on the TODO list.

Posted by: Cain Apr 15 2009, 04:42 AM

I add, again, that many Shadowrun players don't even know about the various webpages and internet errata. If it's not in the book, it doesn't exist as far as they're concerned.

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 15 2009, 05:28 AM

And those of us who do know about the errata page expect it to contain the errata. (Especially considering that the errata currently posted is labeled the latest version. Weird, eh?)

Those of us who are used to ducks always being placed in the "ducks" bin and not the "alpaca" bin might get confused and start calling you WOTC-esque profiteers....

Posted by: Blade Apr 15 2009, 08:13 AM

The webpages URL are in the books.

Posted by: Adam Apr 16 2009, 03:21 AM

The SR4A Changes document is now in the Errata section of the Resources page: http://shadowrun4.com/resources/index.shtml#errata

Posted by: SpasticTeapot Apr 16 2009, 04:14 AM

Yes. It tells me to look in the "errata" section. Where the new errata isn't.

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

Posted by: Cain Apr 16 2009, 05:23 AM

Yeah. Shadowrunrpg.com, and FanProGames.com. Nothing about errata in my book, either.

Some of the older books don't have the current links, and it's doubtful that many players would even bother to check them. I know my group was surprised when I brought in five pages of errata, and their books were more current than mine.

Posted by: toturi Apr 16 2009, 06:39 AM