Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Shadowrun 5th Edition Errata Released
Posted by: Patrick Goodman Feb 9 2014, 02:13 AM
http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2014/02/shadowrun-fifth-edition-errata-now-available/
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 9 2014, 02:24 AM
Yay now adepts with Astral perception cannot take the assensing skill.
Posted by: Fatum Feb 9 2014, 02:30 AM
Yaaaay! And only half a year has passed!
p.172 - the damage code that Wombat is getting is still wrong.
p.205 - glad to see a tank's armour is still no protection to the crew against a missile.
Still can't run Common programs on a commlink, the only correction to the wireless bonuses is fixing the periscope.
Impressive! Ggggodlike!
Posted by: Mantis Feb 9 2014, 02:37 AM
Thanks Patrick. I know you've been working hard to get this to be a thing.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.
Also, yeah as Shortstraw pointed out, no assensing for adepts with astral perception? Huh?
Posted by: CanRay Feb 9 2014, 02:58 AM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 8 2014, 10:30 PM) 
Yaaaay! And only half a year has passed!
Rather it never come out at all? 
Posted by: Fatum Feb 9 2014, 03:11 AM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Feb 9 2014, 06:58 AM)
Rather it never come out at all?
No, of course I am ecstatic to get an errata. Finally! I've waited long sleepless nights for it! And now, all the issues with the fifth are fixed! I will be moving over my campaign starting today!
Posted by: CanRay Feb 9 2014, 03:26 AM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 8 2014, 11:11 PM)
No, of course I am ecstatic to get an errata. Finally! I've waited long sleepless nights for it! And now, all the issues with the fifth are fixed! I will be moving over my campaign starting today!
Hey, better than no errata at all, neh?
Posted by: Fatum Feb 9 2014, 04:01 AM
Certainly, I've never said otherwise. It's good to see CGL improving quality control - it is of critical importance in a core book of a new edition, after all. Hooray to errata!
Posted by: CloisterCobra Feb 9 2014, 04:56 AM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Feb 9 2014, 03:58 PM)
Rather it never come out at all?
Actually, I thought six months was pretty quick, time to find out what the issues are, time for obscure things to start to come out and time for layout etc. Putting it out earlier would mean that you would have to put out several errata as new things come out.
Edit: Not to say that there won't be more, of course there will be.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 9 2014, 05:45 AM
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 8 2014, 08:24 PM)
Yay now adepts with Astral perception cannot take the assensing skill.
Probably need additional errata explaining that "magic-specific" skills mean "Magic Attribute linked" skills.
Otherwise, an Adept could never Initiate.
ETA: I guess you could look at the Magic Skills section in the Magic section for clarification, but that really needs to be in the skills section.
Posted by: Glyph Feb 9 2014, 07:12 AM
Well, SR4 had about eight or so errata, and then SR4A, so I wouldn't expect the first errata for SR5 to fix everything. I still have a lot of issues with SR5, but I applaud them for going back to putting out errata again. It's a step in the right direction.
Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 9 2014, 07:32 AM
One step of many, I hope.
Or one of a few really big steps.
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 9 2014, 08:08 AM
QUOTE (SpellBinder @ Feb 9 2014, 05:32 PM)
One step of many, I hope.
Well the errata thread had 535 posts and there were 38 sections in the errata document.
Posted by: Smash Feb 9 2014, 08:51 AM
QUOTE (Mantis @ Feb 9 2014, 01:37 PM)
Thanks Patrick. I know you've been working hard to get this to be a thing.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.
It reads that way but I doubt it. Most pistols would then have a fairly pointless recoil statistic.
Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 9 2014, 09:22 AM
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 9 2014, 12:08 AM)
Well the errata thread had 535 posts and there were 38 sections in the errata document.
Which also included numerous spelling, grammatical, and page reference errors. Which the document even states that they aren't going to directly address until they add the errata to the PDF of the core book.
Posted by: Fatum Feb 9 2014, 09:33 AM
QUOTE (CloisterCobra @ Feb 9 2014, 08:56 AM)
Actually, I thought six months was pretty quick, time to find out what the issues are, time for obscure things to start to come out and time for layout etc. Putting it out earlier would mean that you would have to put out several errata as new things come out.
I'll just notice that all the large stuff fixed was spotted in, like, the first day because it was never supposed to go into the print version to begin with.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 9 2014, 12:30 PM
QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 9 2014, 07:12 AM)
Well, SR4 had about eight or so errata, and then SR4A, so I wouldn't expect the first errata for SR5 to fix everything. I still have a lot of issues with SR5, but I applaud them for going back to putting out errata again. It's a step in the right direction.
I would expect it to fix everything since it took 6 months to produce and we had tomes of errors collected here with provided fixes that they completely ignored. It's a nice gesture but really more insulting than releasing nothing considering they broke more stuff with this release anyway.
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 9 2014, 01:04 PM
I just want them all fixed so my group can give it a fair shake and see if it is worth switching editions.
Posted by: DrZaius Feb 9 2014, 04:29 PM
I am thinking about this like Triage. While I'm sure they wanted to fix every little thing, I think it's good that they're releasing this version of errata for stuff they're sure they want to fix / change. My guess is that a lot of the minor stuff (grammatical errors, page reference misdirects, etc.) will be covered by the 2nd printing without having an errata document released.
-DrZ
Posted by: BishopMcQ Feb 9 2014, 04:56 PM
Play nicely with each other. If you have feedback, make sure that it's constructive. Whining and complaining alienates those who have worked hard to help you out.
Thanks Patrick for pushing this through. I know it's been a struggle on many levels. Like others, I hope that this is the first step and that now the boulder is rolling down the hill, it will be easier to keep it going and get other errata posted.
For my two cents, I will also weigh in that I don't care about the "Add a comma" and "delete this hyphen" editing stuff. The big rules changes and clarifications are more important to me and my group.
Posted by: Sengir Feb 9 2014, 05:03 PM
Quite sparse, but one thing that I'd definitely see more often:
QUOTE
The document is a layered PDF, meaning you can print it without all the background material to save you some printer ink.
Posted by: Sponge Feb 9 2014, 06:11 PM
Huzzah, finally. Hopefully this is the beginning of an ongoing process and the next revision of errata will not take quite as long 
One problem I've noticed in the errata so far:
QUOTE (SR5-Errata)
REGISTERING SPRITE LIMIT (P. 256,
REGISTERING A SPRITE, PARAGRAPH 2)
After this sentence: “Your registered sprite will stay with
you as long as it still owes you at least one task.” Add: “You
can register a number of sprites equal to or less than your
Logic attribute.”
REGISTERING A SPRITE, PARAGRAPH 2)
After this sentence: “Your registered sprite will stay with
you as long as it still owes you at least one task.” Add: “You
can register a number of sprites equal to or less than your
Logic attribute.”
Using Logic to limit the # of Registered Sprites contradicts the "Additional Purchases & Restrictions" table on p98, which at the bottom reads "Can only have a number of Registered Sprites equal to the character's Charisma."
Posted by: Fatum Feb 9 2014, 09:11 PM
QUOTE (BishopMcQ @ Feb 9 2014, 08:56 PM)
For my two cents, I will also weigh in that I don't care about the "Add a comma" and "delete this hyphen" editing stuff. The big rules changes and clarifications are more important to me and my group.
Agreed. That's completely excessive, especially minding that the errata itself has (at a cursory glance) an unclosed parentheses and an unclosed quotation.
Posted by: Prime Mover Feb 9 2014, 10:05 PM
A "BIG THANKS" to the errata crew !
Posted by: hermit Feb 9 2014, 10:39 PM
Well. I never thought I'd see the day. Congrats, Patrick, and a step in the right direction for CGL as a whole.
QUOTE
Hopefully this is the beginning of an ongoing process and the next revision of errata will not take quite as long
To be fair, 6 months is not THAT long. Better than "when hell freezes over", anyway.
QUOTE
Using Logic to limit the # of Registered Sprites contradicts the "Additional Purchases & Restrictions" table on p98, which at the bottom reads "Can only have a number of Registered Sprites equal to the character's Charisma."
Because mancers who like sprites don't need to be just pretty, they also need to be smart. I'd rule both apply. No contradiction, but another leg iron.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 9 2014, 10:47 PM
QUOTE (hermit @ Feb 9 2014, 04:39 PM)
Because mancers who like sprites don't need to be just pretty, they also need to be smart. I'd rule both apply. No contradiction, but another leg iron.
LOL! Yeah, TMs definitely need something else to keep their rampant power in check in SR5...
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 10 2014, 12:37 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 9 2014, 04:51 PM)
It reads that way but I doubt it. Most pistols would then have a fairly pointless recoil statistic.
unless they spend a lot of time firing semi-automatic bursts...
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 10 2014, 12:38 AM
QUOTE (Jack VII @ Feb 10 2014, 06:47 AM)
LOL! Yeah, TMs definitely need something else to keep their rampant power in check in SR5...
Amen. I saw a technomancer... succeed in a data search check. My god, the metahumanity!
Posted by: Smash Feb 10 2014, 01:09 AM
QUOTE (FuelDrop @ Feb 10 2014, 11:37 AM)
unless they spend a lot of time firing semi-automatic bursts...
Good point. I'm just not sure that dropping back to a single shot every now and then is enough. I'll have to see it play out I guess.
Posted by: tete Feb 10 2014, 01:13 AM
AWESOME!!!! any idea when it will see print? I'm guessing another 6 months but at least now I can print it myself.
Posted by: tjn Feb 10 2014, 04:11 AM
QUOTE (Samoth @ Feb 9 2014, 07:30 AM)
I would expect it to fix everything since it took 6 months to produce and we had tomes of errors collected here with provided fixes that they completely ignored. It's a nice gesture but really more insulting than releasing nothing considering they broke more stuff with this release anyway.
This is why we can't have nice things
I understand your feelings, but at the end of the day they're humans just trying to do their best at what is essentially just a hobby. Is it perfect? No, but it's a step in the right direction and it's progress towards a better game. It's almost impossible to get everything perfect on the first, second, or third try, as such it should be an iterative process and I look forward to the next effort. Thank you Patrick and everyone else involved with making this a reality, and may tomorrow's Shadowrun be better than today's.
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 10 2014, 04:20 AM
Amen. Errata is good keep them coming!
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 10 2014, 04:20 AM
Errata: Ignore double post from user FuelDrop.
Posted by: RHat Feb 10 2014, 04:29 AM
QUOTE (hermit @ Feb 9 2014, 03:39 PM)
Because mancers who like sprites don't need to be just pretty, they also need to be smart. I'd rule both apply. No contradiction, but another leg iron.
Imagine applying the same to magicians and spirits for a second - certainly you can see where the issues with inter-tradition balance would set in, yes?
Posted by: Medicineman Feb 10 2014, 05:42 AM
QUOTE (Prime Mover @ Feb 9 2014, 05:05 PM)
A "BIG THANKS" to the errata crew !
Yeah
A Thanks from Germany too
I hope more Erratta will follow
HougH!
Medicineman
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 10 2014, 05:56 AM
QUOTE (Medicineman @ Feb 10 2014, 03:42 PM)
Yeah
A Thanks from Germany too
I hope more Erratta will follow
HougH!
Medicineman
A Thanks from Germany too
I hope more Erratta will follow
HougH!
Medicineman
With a missing dance?
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 10 2014, 06:05 AM
Errata: Post 35. Above the line HougH! insert 'With an errata'd dance'
Posted by: Thanee Feb 10 2014, 07:50 AM
A question about Mystic Adepts: Can they buy new PP for 5 Karma when they raise their Magic Rating post-chargen?
Bye
Thanee
Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 10 2014, 08:08 AM
QUOTE (Thanee @ Feb 10 2014, 12:50 AM)
A question about Mystic Adepts: Can they buy new PP for 5 Karma when they raise their Magic Rating post-chargen?
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
Probably not, but it's what I'd allow & do.
Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 10 2014, 08:36 AM
QUOTE (Thanee @ Feb 9 2014, 11:50 PM)
A question about Mystic Adepts: Can they buy new PP for 5 Karma when they raise their Magic Rating post-chargen?
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
Here's what the errata says on the matter:
QUOTE
POWER POINTS AND MAGIC CLARIFICATION
(P. 279, POWER POINTS PARAGRAPH)
Change to following sentence: “You get a free Power Point
whenever you increase your Magic attribute, and you can gain
a Power Point through Initiation (p. 324) instead of gaining
a metamagic.” To: “If you’re an adept, you get a free Power
Point whenever you increase your Magic attribute (though this
doesn’t apply to mystic adepts, and you can gain a Power Point
through Initiation (p. 324) instead of gaining a metamagic.”
(P. 279, POWER POINTS PARAGRAPH)
Change to following sentence: “You get a free Power Point
whenever you increase your Magic attribute, and you can gain
a Power Point through Initiation (p. 324) instead of gaining
a metamagic.” To: “If you’re an adept, you get a free Power
Point whenever you increase your Magic attribute (though this
doesn’t apply to mystic adepts, and you can gain a Power Point
through Initiation (p. 324) instead of gaining a metamagic.”
So basically, Initiation is the only way you're getting any PP if you're a mystic adept.
Posted by: tjn Feb 10 2014, 09:43 AM
QUOTE (Thanee @ Feb 10 2014, 02:50 AM)
A question about Mystic Adepts: Can they buy new PP for 5 Karma when they raise their Magic Rating post-chargen?
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
I think (and I could be wrong) the official interpretation, for Missions and the like, is that the only way a Mystic Adept can get additional PP post-chargen is when initiating, and then the character selects a PP instead of a metamagic technique. I also think this is the most common interpretation due to fears of Mystic Adepts being overpowered.
However, neither the errata nor SR5 explicitly states that the 5 karma per PP up to your magic rating is only limited to chargen, so under a strict interpretation, buying PP up to your current magic rating for 5 karma would be RAW. That being said, the Missions errata specifically states you can buy PP up to the characters starting magic rating, not current magic rating, which, if read literally, has some nonsensical results.
As a house rule, I wouldn't have a problem with it as it lowers the demand to buy all 6 PP in chargen which then opens up spending the chargen karma for a more well rounded character, and if the character is already at the magic limit, going through the process of raising the magic rating is karma intensive enough as to make me shrug. And really, compared to grabbing another spell for 5 karma, 1 PP usually isn't enough to sweat.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 10 2014, 11:36 AM
QUOTE (tjn @ Feb 10 2014, 05:11 AM)
This is why we can't have nice things I understand your feelings, but at the end of the day they're humans just trying to do their best at what is essentially just a hobby. Is it perfect? No, but it's a step in the right direction and it's progress towards a better game. It's almost impossible to get everything perfect on the first, second, or third try, as such it should be an iterative process and I look forward to the next effort.
Thank you Patrick and everyone else involved with making this a reality, and may tomorrow's Shadowrun be better than today's.
I understand your feelings, but at the end of the day they're humans just trying to do their best at what is essentially just a hobby. Is it perfect? No, but it's a step in the right direction and it's progress towards a better game. It's almost impossible to get everything perfect on the first, second, or third try, as such it should be an iterative process and I look forward to the next effort. Thank you Patrick and everyone else involved with making this a reality, and may tomorrow's Shadowrun be better than today's.
Just a hobby? Maybe for you and I, but it is literally their job to create a usable/accurate product. On this site alone there is a 20+ page thread of eratta. Aaron, Patrick, Bull, and others have said they were working on a full eratta and we get this 2 1/2 page single-lined document that breaks more things and doesn't address issues known since June. The SR regime under Hardy is making the SR3 run under Rob Boyle and Steve Kenson look like the freaking Golden Age.
Some people here seem to be ok with paying real world money for terrible customer service and a spotty product, but forgive me for not sharing that sentiment.
Posted by: hermit Feb 10 2014, 11:52 AM
QUOTE
Just a hobby? Maybe for you and I, but it is literally their job to create a usable/accurate product.
Hardy's job. All the others are freelancers who live off actual jobs.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 10 2014, 01:02 PM
QUOTE (hermit @ Feb 10 2014, 11:52 AM)
Hardy's job. All the others are freelancers who live off actual jobs.
Yeah, I know? Catalyst are responsible for the ultimate product but when freelancers tell us "the eratta is in the works" and "this will be in the eratta" and then it's not, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in them either.
Posted by: Patrick Goodman Feb 10 2014, 02:43 PM
QUOTE (tete @ Feb 9 2014, 07:13 PM)
AWESOME!!!! any idea when it will see print? I'm guessing another 6 months but at least now I can print it myself.
They're working the changes into the book as we speak; I'm not sure when the updated PDFs should be out, but it shouldn't be too much longer now, IIRC. You should get an email from your PDF purchase place when they're ready.
If I'm reading things correctly, the changes should make it into the third printing, but I'm not certain about that. Depends on when the second printing sells through.
Posted by: Sengir Feb 10 2014, 05:04 PM
QUOTE (hermit @ Feb 10 2014, 12:52 PM)
Hardy's job. All the others are freelancers who live off actual jobs.
If a freelancer gets hired to do job X, it is his job. That's why they are freelancers and not fanfic writers. Anything above and beyond (and drafting a clear agreement where to border to above and beyond lies) is obviously not their job, but "if it's a side job you're not responsible for quality" is just wrong.
Posted by: Fatum Feb 10 2014, 05:29 PM
Oh why the heat up.
We've already discussed in another thread that doing the job for money is the only thing that makes you a professional; no responsibility or self-consciousness is implied.
Why are you constantly on CGL's case, people are just pursuing their hobby to the best of their ability.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 10 2014, 05:52 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 10 2014, 06:29 PM)
Oh why the heat up.
We've already discussed in another thread that doing the job for money is the only thing that makes you a professional; no responsibility or self-consciousness is implied.
Why are you constantly on CGL's case, people are just pursuing their hobby to the best of their ability.
We've already discussed in another thread that doing the job for money is the only thing that makes you a professional; no responsibility or self-consciousness is implied.
Why are you constantly on CGL's case, people are just pursuing their hobby to the best of their ability.
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you defending Catalyst for putting out a broken product and then not offering any official fixes for over 6 months? Nobody is blaming the freelancers.
My gripe is that there are two giant communities of fans (here, and the official forums) that would happily bug check and re-format the base files FOR FREE and they don't bother to take advantage of the fan base OR even listen to what we're saying in terms of real life playtesting and fact-checking. Maybe there are legal issues I am unaware of in regards to letting freelancers fix the product, but as a hobbyist I have done far less exciting work for no pay, and would happily do all the formatting and error checking for $1 and a freelancer credit in the book if that's what it took to make it legal.
It just comes off as lazy and insulting when there are errors noted in the eratta thread from day one of the PDF release that somehow didn't make it into this eratta document, including several instances where changing merely one word can make a huge difference in understanding the rules as intended, but they didn't address them.
Now, will they release more fixes? Probably, but with the amount of errors we've seen from the core book alone that were not addressed for whatever reason in this first fix, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence - that goes for the supplements that have been released as well, most notably GH3. I fear we're going to be looking at a SR5.5 release in a couple years since they don't seem in any hurry to address a long list of issues that keep large portions of the game in houserule-only territory.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 10 2014, 05:56 PM
QUOTE (Samoth @ Feb 10 2014, 11:52 AM)
My gripe is that there are two giant communities of fans (here, and the official forums) that would happily bug check and re-format the base files FOR FREE and they don't bother to take advantage of the fan base OR even listen to what we're saying in terms of real life playtesting and fact-checking. Maybe there are legal issues I am unaware of in regards to letting freelancers fix the product, but as a hobbyist I have done far less exciting work for no pay, and would happily do all the formatting and error checking for $1 and a freelancer credit in the book if that's what it took to make it legal.
Given the unpaid internship boondoggle over at Conde Nast and some of the other big magazines, there probably is. With that said, I believe there are several gaming company websites that state that anything posted to the website is property of said company. Seems like that could be a work-around...
Posted by: Sponge Feb 10 2014, 08:49 PM
Maybe some kind of "rules wiki" as a live document that people could contribute to (with probably some amount of moderation/validation) could work. There'd be plenty of devilsome and time-consuming details involved - it would probably require some detailed annotation concerning what's official and/or approved and what's still "pending suggestion", voting/"liking" on suggestions, a trusted review committee, and viewing it might have to be login-restricted to those who have purchased a PDF - but ultimately it could alleviate a lot of the apparent bottlenecks involved in finding and fixing stuff.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 10 2014, 08:58 PM
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 10 2014, 02:49 PM)
Maybe some kind of "rules wiki" as a live document that people could contribute to (with probably some amount of moderation/validation) could work. There'd be plenty of devilsome and time-consuming details involved - it would probably require some detailed annotation concerning what's official and/or approved and what's still "pending suggestion", voting/"liking" on suggestions, a trusted review committee, and viewing it might have to be login-restricted to those who have purchased a PDF - but ultimately it could alleviate a lot of the apparent bottlenecks involved in finding and fixing stuff.
+11ty Billion
Posted by: Fatum Feb 10 2014, 09:09 PM
QUOTE (Samoth @ Feb 10 2014, 09:52 PM)
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you defending Catalyst for putting out a broken product and then not offering any official fixes for over 6 months?
I am defending CGL for putting out the best ever Shadowrun edition with just a couple of minor issues, which they addressed in such a prompt manner.QUOTE (Samoth @ Feb 10 2014, 09:52 PM)
It just comes off as lazy and insulting when there are errors noted in the eratta thread from day one of the PDF release that somehow didn't make it into this eratta document, including several instances where changing merely one word can make a huge difference in understanding the rules as intended, but they didn't address them.
It might surely "come off as lazy and insulting" to us that it takes half a year to push through an errata addressing the errors found on day one after release (and some even prior), all the while adding a few bloopers more, but the fine folks up at CGL are professionals, and who are we to tell them how to do their job?Posted by: KCKitsune Feb 10 2014, 09:19 PM
I just wish they would bring back the cyber/bioware essence discount for the type that has the lower Essence. Without it, Sammies become less worth playing. *MagicRun becomes more real every time they don't help the sammies.*
Also for the love of God, PLEASE fix the damn Wireless bonuses. You need them to make SENSE! Why would a 'Runner run with wireless crap on?!? It's like advertising "Hey look at us! We're doing illegal drek!"
Posted by: binarywraith Feb 10 2014, 09:56 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 10 2014, 03:09 PM)
I am defending CGL for putting out the best ever Shadowrun edition with just a couple of minor issues, which they addressed in such a prompt manner.
It might surely "come off as lazy and insulting" to us that it takes half a year to push through an errata addressing the errors found on day one after release (and some even prior), all the while adding a few bloopers more, but the fine folks up at CGL are professionals, and who are we to tell them how to do their job?
It might surely "come off as lazy and insulting" to us that it takes half a year to push through an errata addressing the errors found on day one after release (and some even prior), all the while adding a few bloopers more, but the fine folks up at CGL are professionals, and who are we to tell them how to do their job?
If this is your idea of a 'couple minor issues', remind me not to let you build anything I might have to interact with.
My vote's still out on best ever edition until they get around to publishing the splatbooks with the actual rules in them for stuff they used in the fiction sections of the core book. Although given the terrible, terrible statting on some of the stuff (especially That Damn Carbine) in GH3, I'm not holding my breath that anyone in charge of rules writing at CGL today is capable of operating a pocket calculator. As for 'who are we to tell them how to do their job?'
We're the people who pay them. If they can't generate and support a quality product, we're the people whose business they're going to lose, to their regret.
That said, hey, we got some errata. Woo! Slightly less shit I have to houserule to make the game playable!
Posted by: Samoth Feb 10 2014, 10:50 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 10 2014, 09:09 PM)
I am defending CGL for putting out the best ever Shadowrun edition with just a couple of minor issues, which they addressed in such a prompt manner.
Our definitions of "prompt" vary greatly.
QUOTE
It might surely "come off as lazy and insulting" to us that it takes half a year to push through an errata addressing the errors found on day one after release (and some even prior), all the while adding a few bloopers more, but the fine folks up at CGL are professionals, and who are we to tell them how to do their job?
Your right, my purchasing dollar as a consumer shouldn't matter.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 10 2014, 10:52 PM
I think you guys are kind of missing Fatum's sarcasm...
Posted by: DrZaius Feb 10 2014, 11:24 PM
QUOTE (Samoth @ Feb 10 2014, 05:50 PM)
Your right, my purchasing dollar as a consumer shouldn't matter.
Your dollars buy you a certain amount of griping, which you are in danger of exceeding.
I can't remember where I read it, but it reminds me of the anecdote of "Two people arguing about how many words Inuits have for snow, without either knowing an Inuit, or having seen snow, or really anything to do with the base of the argument".
I get that you're frustrated with the product CGL released. You also feel the errata is incomplete. My wager would be that they know that. Why isn't the entire errata thread incorporated into that document? I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT IN PUBLISHING. That's the crux of the argument. This is a niche fan board of a niche game of a niche hobby. As pointed out before, the majority of the people involved are freelancers, i.e. people who get paid to do something else with the majority of their time. Do you know what would make me, personally, hesitate to dedicate my free time to a pursuit? Having people complain that the extra work I'm doing isn't going fast enough for their tastes.
YMMV.
-DrZ
Posted by: Fatum Feb 10 2014, 11:49 PM
QUOTE (DrZaius @ Feb 11 2014, 03:24 AM)
This is a niche fan board of a niche game of a niche hobby.
Agreed, this alone should silence any and all cavils. QUOTE (DrZaius @ Feb 11 2014, 03:24 AM)
As pointed out before, the majority of the people involved are freelancers, i.e. people who get paid to do something else with the majority of their time. Do you know what would make me, personally, hesitate to dedicate my free time to a pursuit? Having people complain that the extra work I'm doing isn't going fast enough for their tastes.
There is some part of me that doubts it takes more than a dozen writer man-hours to plug the most obvious holes in the rules (which have been specially prepared and listed in a separate thread at that), and more than a Posted by: RHat Feb 10 2014, 11:57 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 10 2014, 04:49 PM)
There is some part of me that doubts it takes more than a dozen writer man-hours to plug the most obvious holes in the rules (which have been specially prepared and listed in a separate thread at that), and more than a week month playtesting to check if the suggested fixes contradict the existing rules, which to that part of me suggests the six month reaction time is dictated purely by the professionalism of the publisher's inner workings. But then I realize I am not in publishing, either, and I silence that part with extreme prejudice.
I'm pretty sure part of the delay is set by all the other projects they have going on and contracted - working through freelancers, who are given a contracted deadline on the specific thing they are working on, is necessarily less flexible than working with in-house writers you can shuffle around as needed (not trying to insult the freelancers here at all - you guys are awesome, and I really want to thank Patrick for the extra work we all know he did here). So when you have to start looking at putting Errata generation into an already active and highly inflexible project schedule which includes:
QUOTE (JM Hardy)
[...]the Beginner Box Set, Stolen Souls, Splintered State, Gun H(e)aven 3, Run & Gun, Coyotes, Runners Toolkit: Alphaware, Shadowrun: Crossfire, Missions, Street Grimoire (upcoming magic core rulebook), and more[...]
[source: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=14801.msg268009#msg268009]
[source: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=14801.msg268009#msg268009]
I highly doubt it was remotely as simple as you make it out to be.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 11 2014, 12:25 AM
QUOTE (DrZaius @ Feb 11 2014, 12:24 AM)
Your dollars buy you a certain amount of griping, which you are in danger of exceeding.
Thanks for telling me what I'm allowed to expect from a product I spent real life dollars on...? It's just a game and doesn't impact my life in any meaningful way, but I don't think it's expecting too much to receive the product I paid my own money for in the form it should be used.
Posted by: Fatum Feb 11 2014, 12:26 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 11 2014, 03:57 AM)
I'm pretty sure part of the delay is set by all the other projects they have going on and contracted - working through freelancers, who are given a contracted deadline on the specific thing they are working on, is necessarily less flexible than working with in-house writers you can shuffle around as needed (not trying to insult the freelancers here at all - you guys are awesome, and I really want to thank Patrick for the extra work we all know he did here).
It could also happen that a certain freelancer who started the thread for gathering the errors, is listed in the special thanks section, and then presents it to the general public, did most if not all of the writing. Which, judging by the issues pointed out in this very thread, nobody bothered to really edit or playtest. It'd actually stand to reason to question the degree of his influence on this errata appearing at all, minding the precedents. But of course, knowing CGL's extreme professionalism, we can but guess and celebrate getting this fine work.
Posted by: RHat Feb 11 2014, 12:33 AM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 10 2014, 05:26 PM)
It could also happen that a certain freelancer who started the thread for gathering the errors, is listed in the special thanks section, and then presents it to the general public, did most if not all of the writing. Which, judging by the issues pointed out in this very thread, nobody bothered to really edit or playtest. It'd actually stand to reason to question the degree of his influence on this errata appearing at all, minding the precedents.
I find the suggestion that the creation of Errata would be a one-person process to be frankly ludicrous.
Posted by: KCKitsune Feb 11 2014, 12:42 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 10 2014, 07:33 PM)
I find the suggestion that the creation of Errata would be a one-person process to be frankly ludicrous.
I find the idea of it taking six months to publish this 'errata' to be ludicrous.
As others are saying, there is a 30+ page thread detailing all of the frak ups. They couldn't have just looked at that and go "Hey guys... we might have messed up on a few things." and FIXED them?
Posted by: RHat Feb 11 2014, 02:13 AM
QUOTE (KCKitsune @ Feb 10 2014, 05:42 PM)
I find the idea of it taking six months to publish this 'errata' to be ludicrous.
As others are saying, there is a 30+ page thread detailing all of the frak ups. They couldn't have just looked at that and go "Hey guys... we might have messed up on a few things." and FIXED them?
As others are saying, there is a 30+ page thread detailing all of the frak ups. They couldn't have just looked at that and go "Hey guys... we might have messed up on a few things." and FIXED them?
And who was supposed to immediately turn around to do that? Other than Hardy, I don't think there's anyone who'd be in a position to do so; freelancers had contracts and deadlines to worry about, and there might not have been any mechanism in said contracts for Catalyst to say "hey, can you actually work on this instead?".
Posted by: Smash Feb 11 2014, 02:13 AM
QUOTE (KCKitsune @ Feb 11 2014, 11:42 AM)
I find the idea of it taking six months to publish this 'errata' to be ludicrous.
As others are saying, there is a 30+ page thread detailing all of the frak ups. They couldn't have just looked at that and go "Hey guys... we might have messed up on a few things." and FIXED them?
As others are saying, there is a 30+ page thread detailing all of the frak ups. They couldn't have just looked at that and go "Hey guys... we might have messed up on a few things." and FIXED them?
It would take 6 months to seperate the wheat from the chaff in that thread.
Considering all the 'Wireless is stoopid because of NOW' bollocks that permeates the 5th Ed talk I'm surprised at the speed that it came out or that it came out at all!
Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Feb 11 2014, 05:23 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 10 2014, 12:29 AM)
Imagine applying the same to magicians and spirits for a second - certainly you can see where the issues with inter-tradition balance would set in, yes?
It would help balance the traditions quite a bit, which are currently fairly unbalanced towards Shamans. Though in this case logic helps technomancers a lot as they are already stretched hard in attribute dependency with charisma being he one stat in the mental arena they can dump the most especially now.
Posted by: RHat Feb 11 2014, 07:43 AM
Really? I don't see how taking away the chief benefit Charisma traditions have helps balance, particularly when that balance is pretty solid. That would horribly overpower Logic traditions.
Posted by: Samoth Feb 11 2014, 11:12 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 11 2014, 02:13 AM)
It would take 6 months to seperate the wheat from the chaff in that thread.
Considering all the 'Wireless is stoopid because of NOW' bollocks that permeates the 5th Ed talk I'm surprised at the speed that it came out or that it came out at all!
Considering all the 'Wireless is stoopid because of NOW' bollocks that permeates the 5th Ed talk I'm surprised at the speed that it came out or that it came out at all!
BS, the mods did a great job of keeping that thread to just eratta discussion, and if you need 6 months to read a couple of pages of an internet thread you might want to get your eyesight checked.
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 11 2014, 01:17 PM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 11 2014, 12:13 PM)
And who was supposed to immediately turn around to do that? Other than Hardy, I don't think there's anyone who'd be in a position to do so; freelancers had contracts and deadlines to worry about, and there might not have been any mechanism in said contracts for Catalyst to say "hey, can you actually work on this instead?".
Ze Germans? Get on the phone to Pegasus and say "yeah, we made some mistakes and since you are going to fix them anyway we will give you monies to fix them now so we can use them in our next printing".
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 11 2014, 01:57 PM
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 11 2014, 07:17 AM)
Ze Germans? Get on the phone to Pegasus and say "yeah, we made some mistakes and since you are going to fix them anyway we will give you monies to fix them now so we can use them in our next printing".
On that note, I am interested to know what the deal is with some of the reported changes in the German edition that did not make it into this errata document.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Feb 11 2014, 02:20 PM
After six months I surely expected more than a four page document.
Also, people really need to take their sarcasm-meters to an annual check-up.
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 03:02 PM
EDIT: Nevermind, can't read.
Also, hot damn I am building all my shooters around firing bursts with simple actions every pass.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 11 2014, 03:14 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 10:02 AM)
EDIT: Nevermind, can't read.
Also, hot damn I am building all my shooters around firing bursts with simple actions every pass.
Also, hot damn I am building all my shooters around firing bursts with simple actions every pass.
the obvious choice is to take aim
but yeah, looks like if you want errata for all the stuff that's borked, you're probably best off checking the missions forums - CGL can ignore borked stuff all they want, but missions kinda has to work
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 03:27 PM
Yea, I keep trying to get myself fired up for SR5 - and then stuff happens.
Like the example combat spell cast in the box using SR4 rules (where successes add to the base damage). Or no rigging rules despite having a rigger character provided as a starter character.
EDIT: Corrected statement about the combat spell.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 11 2014, 03:34 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 09:27 AM)
Like the example combat spell cast in the box using SR4 rules (where successes still pump up the damage).
Uh... I hate to point this out, but successes do pump up the damage. In fact, they're the only component of the damage value. The problem is that they were including the Force of the spell as a base damage value. But yes, I agree, QC is a pretty big concern on my part.
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 03:40 PM
Yes that's correct I'll update
Posted by: tasti man LH Feb 11 2014, 04:01 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 07:27 AM)
Or no rigging rules despite having a rigger character provided as a starter character.
Eh...you referring to the Beginner's Box? Because the core SR5 book most certainly does have Rigging rules.
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 04:02 PM
Yes, I am.
I mean, I can see leaving out the rigging rules in the starter box. Though I very much think rigging is a big draw for the setting.
But why include a rigger character if you leave out those rules?
Posted by: Sengir Feb 11 2014, 04:30 PM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 11 2014, 01:33 AM)
I find the suggestion that the creation of Errata would be a one-person process to be frankly ludicrous.
Well, got a better explanation?
Also, considering that Ghislain Bonnotte get a special shout-out in the credits, it seems zeh French actually contributed more
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 05:05 PM
Did Pegasus ever put together an errata document? Can one of our resident German runners answer that?
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 05:13 PM
QUOTE (Sengir @ Feb 11 2014, 09:30 AM)
Well, got a better explanation?
Also, considering that Ghislain Bonnotte get a special shout-out in the credits, it seems zeh French actually contributed more
Also, considering that Ghislain Bonnotte get a special shout-out in the credits, it seems zeh French actually contributed more
Because Zeh French are more Civilized and Cultured.
Oh wait - That's not it. I meant Constipated.
Go to Germany - They're Nicer.
Posted by: Medicineman Feb 11 2014, 06:10 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 01:05 PM)
Did Pegasus ever put together an errata document? Can one of our resident German runners answer that?
I helped put together the Errata for War!
so Yes,Pegasus does put together Errata
HougH!
Medicineman
Posted by: Ryu Feb 11 2014, 06:23 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 11 2014, 06:13 PM)
Because Zeh French are more Civilized and Cultured.
Oh wait - That's not it. I meant Constipated.
Go to Germany - They're Nicer.
Oh wait - That's not it. I meant Constipated.
Go to Germany - They're Nicer.
Not much of a difference, just a language barrier...
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 06:54 PM
QUOTE (Ryu @ Feb 11 2014, 11:23 AM)
Not much of a difference, just a language barrier...
Hmmmm... Okay. Better Beer, perhaps?
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 07:01 PM
QUOTE (Medicineman @ Feb 11 2014, 12:10 PM)
I helped put together the Errata for War!
so Yes,Pegasus does put together Errata
HougH!
Medicineman
so Yes,Pegasus does put together Errata
HougH!
Medicineman
Sorry, I wasn't specific. I meant for SR5 core.
Posted by: Ryu Feb 11 2014, 07:07 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 11 2014, 07:54 PM)
Hmmmm... Okay. Better Beer, perhaps?One might claim that. But "Bordeaux" seems to be a hard counter on the front of alcoholic beverages. "Seems" because we get to import the stuff.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 07:13 PM
QUOTE (Ryu @ Feb 11 2014, 12:07 PM)
One might claim that. But "Boreaux" seems to be a hard counter on the front of alcoholic beverages. "Seems" because we get to import the stuff.
Well, Okay then. All my illusions are shattered.
Hold on... How about Oktoberfest? There are a lot of little German towns in Texas (surrounding San Antonio), and I always liked Oktoberfest.
I do not get a good Oktoberfest in Colorado.
Posted by: Bigity Feb 11 2014, 07:18 PM
Mmmmm German style beer.
Time to go to Fredericksburg again!
Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 11 2014, 07:22 PM
The problem with german beer for the rest of the world is the fact that the good stuff is only made in germany and isn't good stuff anymore if it's shipped to anywhere else because of travel time and conditions usually.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 07:28 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 12:18 PM)
Mmmmm German style beer.
Time to go to Fredericksburg again!
Time to go to Fredericksburg again!
Lovely little town. Mmmmmm.....
Posted by: Ryu Feb 11 2014, 07:50 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 11 2014, 08:13 PM)
Well, Okay then. All my illusions are shattered.
Hold on... How about Oktoberfest? There are a lot of little German towns in Texas (surrounding San Antonio), and I always liked Oktoberfest.
I do not get a good Oktoberfest in Colorado.
Hold on... How about Oktoberfest? There are a lot of little German towns in Texas (surrounding San Antonio), and I always liked Oktoberfest.
I do not get a good Oktoberfest in Colorado.
Come over and we get you drunk, no need to be disillusioned (IIRC you are old enough
). Every month, not just October.
Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 11 2014, 08:10 PM
Gröningers Braukeller in Hamburg.
Very good Beer appearantly.
Since i don't like to drink alcohol much less Beer anymore, i can only tell stories i have heard of 5 to 6l on an evening and not even a headache on the next day.
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 11 2014, 08:19 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 11 2014, 02:13 PM)
Well, Okay then. All my illusions are shattered.
Hold on... How about Oktoberfest? There are a lot of little German towns in Texas (surrounding San Antonio), and I always liked Oktoberfest.
I do not get a good Oktoberfest in Colorado.
Hold on... How about Oktoberfest? There are a lot of little German towns in Texas (surrounding San Antonio), and I always liked Oktoberfest.
I do not get a good Oktoberfest in Colorado.
More is the pity.
Many many years back while at Lowry AFB we would go into Aurora for the mall as they had many fine eateries there, not all of them big chains like nowadays.
They had one German restaurant that was a constant Oktoberfest, with the staff decked out accordingly.
They did some unusual dishes on the side as well, Grizzled Grizzly for one.
One whole Grizzly Bear for like $50,000 and had to be ordered a week in advance and was said to feed 50.
Never actually seen anyone order that, but it did raise some eyebrows.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 08:31 PM
QUOTE (Ryu @ Feb 11 2014, 12:50 PM)
Come over and we get you drunk, no need to be disillusioned (IIRC you are old enough ). Every month, not just October.
). Every month, not just October.Definitely Old enough.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 08:31 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Feb 11 2014, 01:10 PM)
Gröningers Braukeller in Hamburg.
Very good Beer appearantly.
Since i don't like to drink alcohol much less Beer anymore, i can only tell stories i have heard of 5 to 6l on an evening and not even a headache on the next day.
Very good Beer appearantly.
Since i don't like to drink alcohol much less Beer anymore, i can only tell stories i have heard of 5 to 6l on an evening and not even a headache on the next day.
Not much of a Beer drinker myself, but having never actually tasted German Beer at the source, who knows.
Posted by: Jack VII Feb 11 2014, 08:32 PM
The ability of you bastards to derail a thread is on a more reliable schedule than Greman trains. LOL
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 08:33 PM
QUOTE (Sendaz @ Feb 11 2014, 01:19 PM)
More is the pity.
Many many years back while at Lowry AFB we would go into Aurora for the mall as they had many fine eateries there, not all of them big chains like nowadays.
They had one German restaurant that was a constant Oktoberfest, with the staff decked out accordingly.
They did some unusual dishes on the side as well, Grizzled Grizzly for one.
One whole Grizzly Bear for like $50,000 and had to be ordered a week in advance and was said to feed 50.
Never actually seen anyone order that, but it did raise some eyebrows.
Many many years back while at Lowry AFB we would go into Aurora for the mall as they had many fine eateries there, not all of them big chains like nowadays.
They had one German restaurant that was a constant Oktoberfest, with the staff decked out accordingly.
They did some unusual dishes on the side as well, Grizzled Grizzly for one.
One whole Grizzly Bear for like $50,000 and had to be ordered a week in advance and was said to feed 50.
Never actually seen anyone order that, but it did raise some eyebrows.
Helga's is still here (maybe a mile or two from my house), and not too bad for food, but insanely expensive compared to my Native Texas.
Posted by: Medicineman Feb 11 2014, 08:37 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 03:01 PM)
Sorry, I wasn't specific. I meant for SR5 core.
Ahhh,OK
It's only a guess but since the German BBB has the Hot Fuzz Errata included plus some other changes its an educated guess that Pegasus is using Erratta in coordination with CGL.
Wether they're doing it themselves I don't know but since they've done so often in the past why shouldn't they put them
together now ?
JahtaHow
Medicineman
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 11 2014, 08:38 PM
QUOTE (Jack VII @ Feb 11 2014, 04:32 PM)
The ability of you bastards to derail a thread is on a more reliable schedule than Greman trains. LOL
Just imagine what we could do if they hired us for errata.
Posted by: Patrick Goodman Feb 11 2014, 08:40 PM
QUOTE (Sendaz @ Feb 11 2014, 02:38 PM)
Just imagine what we could do if they hired us for errata.
You'd derail that, too...? <whistles innocently>
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 11 2014, 08:43 PM
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman @ Feb 11 2014, 04:40 PM)
You'd derail that, too...? <whistles innocently>
touché
But it would give them a excuse then for any delays.
Boss:Dammit where are those errata for the rigger section?
Staff: Um, think TJ and Sendaz said something about testing out the crashing rules out in the parking lot sir
Boss: You mean playtesting...
Staff: Ummmm...
*CRASH*
*rapid footsteps to the window*
Boss: My CAR!!!!
Posted by: Stahlseele Feb 11 2014, 08:50 PM
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman @ Feb 11 2014, 09:40 PM)
You'd derail that, too...? <whistles innocently>
Rules for making good beer.
Germans get a Bonus.
Americans and Australians get a Malus.
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
Posted by: Fatum Feb 11 2014, 08:53 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Feb 12 2014, 12:50 AM)
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
Ehehehe, have you tried Baltika?Posted by: RHat Feb 11 2014, 09:03 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Feb 11 2014, 01:50 PM)
Rules for making good beer.
Germans get a Bonus.
Americans and Australians get a Malus.
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
Germans get a Bonus.
Americans and Australians get a Malus.
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
What about Canadians, eh?
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Feb 11 2014, 09:08 PM
And Belgians. Belgians have some good beers too.
Now, is there anything on the errata about drugs and how alcohol (mostly from beers, also dependent on location) affect the runners?
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 09:15 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 11 2014, 01:53 PM)
Ehehehe, have you tried Baltika?
Russians make Beer? (Probably tastes like Vodka).
And do THEY have errata?
Posted by: Medicineman Feb 11 2014, 09:19 PM
English should get a Bonus too !!
IIRC Monty Pythons once said:
American beer is like making love in a canoe....
Fucking close to water
with a derailing Dance
Medicineman
Posted by: Sengir Feb 11 2014, 09:24 PM
QUOTE (Bigity @ Feb 11 2014, 08:01 PM)
Sorry, I wasn't specific. I meant for SR5 core.
Nope, and from what I've heard it's not planned, either.
And seriously, the only thing worse than this pissbrew-filled tourist trap down south are the knock-offs it has spawned abroad
(And why is everybody forgetting Czech beer?)
Posted by: Fatum Feb 11 2014, 09:44 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 12 2014, 01:15 AM)
Russians make Beer? (Probably tastes like Vodka).
And it's exported, too. Baltika 9 has been said to taste of vodka for its 9 percent of alcohol.QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 12 2014, 01:15 AM)
And do THEY have errata?
We don't have rules in Russian, to begin with. PnP RPGs are hugely niche, and most everyone in the hobby knows English. The RPG mainstream is LARP and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vla9fSyxnaQ I believe.So the closest we get to errata are the pages of houserules I write :3
Posted by: Sponge Feb 11 2014, 10:02 PM
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 10 2014, 03:49 PM)
Maybe some kind of "rules wiki" as a live document that people could contribute to (with probably some amount of moderation/validation) could work. There'd be plenty of devilsome and time-consuming details involved - it would probably require some detailed annotation concerning what's official and/or approved and what's still "pending suggestion", voting/"liking" on suggestions, a trusted review committee, and viewing it might have to be login-restricted to those who have purchased a PDF - but ultimately it could alleviate a lot of the apparent bottlenecks involved in finding and fixing stuff.
Another option might be tracking rules issues with bug tracking software like Bugzilla. People could then at least see what's been looked at, what's confirmed as an error, read and offer alternatives, etc even if there's no agreed solution yet.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 11 2014, 10:35 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 11 2014, 02:44 PM)
And it's exported, too. Baltika 9 has been said to taste of vodka for its 9 percent of alcohol.
Of course it does...
QUOTE
We don't have rules in Russian, to begin with. PnP RPGs are hugely niche, and most everyone in the hobby knows English. The RPG mainstream is LARP and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vla9fSyxnaQ I believe.
So the closest we get to errata are the pages of houserules I write :3
So the closest we get to errata are the pages of houserules I write :3
Understandable...
Posted by: Lurker37 Feb 12 2014, 12:21 AM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Feb 12 2014, 07:50 AM)
Rules for making good beer.
Germans get a Bonus.
Americans and Australians get a Malus.
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
Germans get a Bonus.
Americans and Australians get a Malus.
Everybody else is mostly neutral.
If it's good enough for us to drink, we don't export it.
Here, have some Fosters. *tries to keep a straight face*
I can't believe anyone buys that stuff.
Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 12:45 AM
3 pages raging about errata. 2 pages serious discussion about who makes the best beer.
Lets start with beer: Germany gets +4 , 2nd Belgium/ Czech Republic each get +2 but only with wireless on. Russians get free specialisation (Baltika)
About errata:
+ Better than no errata (if this is seriously a point)
+ Nice mystic-adept changes (was way to powerful)
+ fixed sample characters, while i dont need them i honestly think this is important to new players
- is somebody else missing backgroundcount?
- it took 8 playtesters, 2 "freelancers" and 6 months to get 3 and a half pages together, like really?!
- not all issues fixed, not even close
Also i kind of liked the new recoil-rule. Now it seems that noone ever again would use full-auto.
Edit:
QUOTE
The SR regime under Hardy is making the SR3 run under Rob Boyle and Steve Kenson look like the freaking Golden Age.
Liked that one!
Posted by: Valnar Feb 12 2014, 01:09 AM
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 11 2014, 11:02 PM)
Another option might be tracking rules issues with bug tracking software like Bugzilla. People could then at least see what's been looked at, what's confirmed as an error, read and offer alternatives, etc even if there's no agreed solution yet.
That's absolutely brilliant.
Legal Question: If one were to only reference the book and never cite any actual rules text, would there be any infringements of anybody's rights at all? Is it legal to post modified rules that are somewhat similar to what is in the book, as long as it is sufficiently different/creative on it's own?
Is there anything else that could legally stop people from doing just that? Because seriously, right now I have way more trust in the community than in CGL. They done goofed and I really don't want to wait several years for a new version of SR that is actually playable.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 12 2014, 01:34 AM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Feb 11 2014, 04:44 PM)
We don't have rules in Russian, to begin with. PnP RPGs are hugely niche, and most everyone in the hobby knows English. The RPG mainstream is LARP and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vla9fSyxnaQ I believe.
So the closest we get to errata are the pages of houserules I write :3
So the closest we get to errata are the pages of houserules I write :3
so... better than CGL, then?
QUOTE (CitM @ Feb 11 2014, 07:45 PM)
- it took 8 playtesters, 2 "freelancers" and 6 months to get 3 and a half pages together, like really?!
- not all issues fixed, not even close
- not all issues fixed, not even close
it probably took 8 playtesters, 2 freelancers, and a week to get much more than that together, actually. that doesn't mean the errata gets approved or released. they can make recommendations, they can point out weird stuff, they can put together a file... but they cannot release it as official errata. that requires someone else.
most likely the work has been done for months, for the most part, and has been sitting in someone's inbox waiting for them to care enough to bother looking into the matter at all (that is, if there wasn't a potential third printing in the near future, CGL probably still wouldn't be releasing any errata or checking in on what those freelancers have actually done).
the thing i find most funny is that there are things that even made it into the missions hotfix, but didn't make it into the errata i think
Posted by: Bigity Feb 12 2014, 01:34 AM
QUOTE (Medicineman @ Feb 11 2014, 02:37 PM)
Ahhh,OK
It's only a guess but since the German BBB has the Hot Fuzz Errata included plus some other changes its an educated guess that Pegasus is using Erratta in coordination with CGL.
Wether they're doing it themselves I don't know but since they've done so often in the past why shouldn't they put them
together now ?
JahtaHow
Medicineman
It's only a guess but since the German BBB has the Hot Fuzz Errata included plus some other changes its an educated guess that Pegasus is using Erratta in coordination with CGL.
Wether they're doing it themselves I don't know but since they've done so often in the past why shouldn't they put them
together now ?
JahtaHow
Medicineman
I was just hoping they had a compiled list of the changes they put in...in English preferably
Posted by: Bigity Feb 12 2014, 01:35 AM
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Feb 11 2014, 01:22 PM)
The problem with german beer for the rest of the world is the fact that the good stuff is only made in germany and isn't good stuff anymore if it's shipped to anywhere else because of travel time and conditions usually.
Fredericksburg is basically Texas' version of Germantown. Looooots of immigrant families there who still run microbreweries.
Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 01:51 AM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 12 2014, 02:34 AM)
it probably took 8 playtesters, 2 freelancers, and a week to get much more than that together, actually. that doesn't mean the errata gets approved or released. they can make recommendations, they can point out weird stuff, they can put together a file... but they cannot release it as official errata. that requires someone else.
most likely the work has been done for months, for the most part, and has been sitting in someone's inbox waiting for them to care enough to bother looking into the matter at all (that is, if there wasn't a potential third printing in the near future, CGL probably still wouldn't be releasing any errata or checking in on what those freelancers have actually done).
most likely the work has been done for months, for the most part, and has been sitting in someone's inbox waiting for them to care enough to bother looking into the matter at all (that is, if there wasn't a potential third printing in the near future, CGL probably still wouldn't be releasing any errata or checking in on what those freelancers have actually done).
You know that for sure? I mean how does it actually work? 8 playtesters, 2 freelancers and half a year of work tell "THEM" what to do and "THEY" just say "no, mentorspirit raven is balanced noone cares for backgroundcount" or what? I honestly dont think so.
QUOTE
the thing i find most funny is that there are things that even made it into the missions hotfix, but didn't make it into the errata i think
Yup, like backgroundcount
Posted by: RHat Feb 12 2014, 01:53 AM
Oh, please, you can't REALLY have expected to see Background Count - that wasn't a core element in SR4, either, and I'm gonna guess it wasn't in previous editions.
Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 02:16 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 12 2014, 02:53 AM)
Oh, please, you can't REALLY have expected to see Background Count - that wasn't a core element in SR4, either, and I'm gonna guess it wasn't in previous editions.
I was, it was, it was.
If its irony, screw me for being a german Hund.
Posted by: RHat Feb 12 2014, 02:18 AM
QUOTE (CitM @ Feb 11 2014, 07:16 PM)
I was, it was, it was.
If its irony, screw me for being a german Hund.
If its irony, screw me for being a german Hund.
You need to check SR4 again - background count rules were in Street Magic. Or perhaps I should specify that I don't mean extended core.
Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Feb 12 2014, 02:18 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 11 2014, 02:43 AM)
Really? I don't see how taking away the chief benefit Charisma traditions have helps balance, particularly when that balance is pretty solid. That would horribly overpower Logic traditions.
Because logic does not have a chief benefit it in fact does not have any benefit at all for magic, so giving it equally to logic mages would balance things. right now since charsma gets literally everything that is not magc attribute or astral perception(intuition) they are horribly overpowered compared to logic traditions. Every single mention of charisma should be drain stat, not charisma as there is not a single logic mention. want to punch something in the astral, oh charisma, want more bound spirits, charisma, want more watchers/minions charisma, your astral limit is either because oh noes if it was just liogic it might have balanced astral combat instead of again heavily swaying it towards charisma, want to resist a totem penalty guess what its charisma.
and hell outside of magic for mages charisma is more useful, there is a reason people always are building face/mages and not engineer mages.
Edit sorry i found one thing logic does it helps you gather reagents. Lol one thing, compared to a paragraph of crap all of which individually are more important than that benefit and the balance is solid now?
Posted by: Critias Feb 12 2014, 02:19 AM
QUOTE (CitM @ Feb 11 2014, 07:51 PM)
You know that for sure? I mean how does it actually work? 8 playtesters, 2 freelancers and half a year of work tell "THEM" what to do and "THEY" just say "no, mentorspirit raven is balanced noone cares for backgroundcount" or what? I honestly dont think so.
You're free to think what you want to think, but please be aware that the people who know, and who would dearly love to explain, aren't able to do so because NDAs prohibit the sharing of backstage discussions.
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 12 2014, 02:24 AM
I think RHat is referring to how BGC was not in the core SR4 book itself, but rather reintroduced in the Street Magic Book for 4th edition purposes.
3rd had its version and 5th will as well, but typically in the magic splat books for players wanting more detail in their magic.
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 12 2014, 02:25 AM
Those people who know should secretly include an unbound third party with a big mouth in their backstage discussions.
Posted by: CitM Feb 12 2014, 02:30 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 12 2014, 03:18 AM)
You need to check SR4 again - background count rules were in Street Magic. Or perhaps I should specify that I don't mean extended core.
Okay maybe i mixed up some things, but i really think BGC is elemental and since it was in the SRM hotfix, it would be just right to have it in official errata.
Posted by: Sponge Feb 12 2014, 02:55 AM
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 11 2014, 09:25 PM)
Those people who know should secretly include an unbound third party with a big mouth in their backstage discussions.
http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Cookie_Monster ?
Posted by: RHat Feb 12 2014, 06:31 AM
QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Feb 11 2014, 07:18 PM)
Because logic does not have a chief benefit it in fact does not have any benefit at all for magic, so giving it equally to logic mages would balance things. right now since charsma gets literally everything that is not magc attribute or astral perception(intuition) they are horribly overpowered compared to logic traditions. Every single mention of charisma should be drain stat, not charisma as there is not a single logic mention. want to punch something in the astral, oh charisma, want more bound spirits, charisma, want more watchers/minions charisma, your astral limit is either because oh noes if it was just liogic it might have balanced astral combat instead of again heavily swaying it towards charisma, want to resist a totem penalty guess what its charisma.
and hell outside of magic for mages charisma is more useful, there is a reason people always are building face/mages and not engineer mages.
Edit sorry i found one thing logic does it helps you gather reagents. Lol one thing, compared to a paragraph of crap all of which individually are more important than that benefit and the balance is solid now?
and hell outside of magic for mages charisma is more useful, there is a reason people always are building face/mages and not engineer mages.
Edit sorry i found one thing logic does it helps you gather reagents. Lol one thing, compared to a paragraph of crap all of which individually are more important than that benefit and the balance is solid now?
Ah, yes, that's right - Logic lost it's Focus implication. Really, the fix for that is to bring that implication back in some form (such as letting you have more foci active without risk of addiction). Given that Banishing works now, I might also suggest setting Astral Combat to use Logic rather than Willpower (given that Logic is Astral Agility, this just makes sense). In combination with the non-Magic advantages of Logic, specifically the massive Logic skill list, the Mental limit, the ability to directly augment your Drain stat... A Dwarf Mage can get their Drain pool up to 16 without need for active spells or Centering. The leftover Essence after the Cerebral Boosters can be used for something that can be very useful - Cybereyes to get you alternate spell targeting methods, for example.
Taking the spirit advantage away from Charisma traditions doesn't fix anything, and taking the sprite advantage away from Charisma streams makes the looming inter-stream balance issues so very much worse.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 12 2014, 08:55 PM
meh. all technomancers kinda suck right now anyways. hard to get worked up over the potential for charisma traditions to suck in the future when quite frankly, unless they massively buff technomancers they're *all* going to kinda suck in the future regardless.
Posted by: Smash Feb 12 2014, 10:45 PM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 07:55 AM)
meh. all technomancers kinda suck right now anyways. hard to get worked up over the potential for charisma traditions to suck in the future when quite frankly, unless they massively buff technomancers they're *all* going to kinda suck in the future regardless.
This is another supposed 5th Ed issue I just don't get. Is the main issue with technomancers in most people's eyes that they don't make Deckers totally redundant anymore? If so I can't really share the sentiment.
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
Posted by: RHat Feb 12 2014, 11:53 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 03:45 PM)
This is another supposed 5th Ed issue I just don't get. Is the main issue with technomancers in most people's eyes that they don't make Deckers totally redundant anymore? If so I can't really share the sentiment.
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
Oh, you're going to have to defend that statement. The basic issue, though, is that technomancers are simply less powerful AND less versatile than Deckers. a gap that begins in chargen and widens over time.
At least in SR4, they both had a place.
Posted by: Abschalten Feb 13 2014, 01:10 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 05:45 PM)
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
Ahahahahahahahaha....
....oh wait. You were serious.
Posted by: Smash Feb 13 2014, 01:13 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 13 2014, 10:53 AM)
Oh, you're going to have to defend that statement. The basic issue, though, is that technomancers are simply less powerful AND less versatile than Deckers. a gap that begins in chargen and widens over time.
At least in SR4, they both had a place.
At least in SR4, they both had a place.
Technomancers can do everything a Decker can do as well as as all their Technomancer specific abilities (like stay online indefinately without fearing GOD) and sprites, which are better than agents. Their living persona is basically a free $200k+ deck at character generation which gets better, for free when you raise your stats which is what you'd be doing anyway.......... Seems pretty sweet to me.
Arguments like I have to have high charisma to pull a technomancer off don't really cut it for me as a valid argument because you have to have high stats of particular types for all builds. A St Samurai with 1 charisma has it's own weaknesses just like a Technomancer with 1 strength has theirs.
Posted by: Abschalten Feb 13 2014, 01:30 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 08:13 PM)
Technomancers can do everything a Decker can do as well as as all their Technomancer specific abilities (like stay online indefinately without fearing GOD) and sprites, which are better than agents. Their living persona is basically a free $200k+ deck at character generation which gets better, for free when you raise your stats which is what you'd be doing anyway.......... Seems pretty sweet to me.
Arguments like I have to have high charisma to pull a technomancer off don't really cut it for me as a valid argument because you have to have high stats of particular types for all builds. A St Samurai with 1 charisma has it's own weaknesses just like a Technomancer with 1 strength has theirs.
Arguments like I have to have high charisma to pull a technomancer off don't really cut it for me as a valid argument because you have to have high stats of particular types for all builds. A St Samurai with 1 charisma has it's own weaknesses just like a Technomancer with 1 strength has theirs.
I wouldn't call that deck free, not after you've used a fairly high Priority slot to become a technomancer. You give up a pretty hefty opportunity cost in that regard. Then that "free" deck you get can barely be upgraded unless you a.) gut your Resonance abilities getting various implants or b.) spend oodles of karma to raise your attributes, meanwhile you're neglecting everything else, like your skills.
The deck the decker has is going to be upgraded more easily than the TM's living persona. And let's not forget the decker can actually provide protection to the team, something that TMs can't even do anymore.
The complex forms are a joke. If they are useful, they're typically way too high in their Fading values to be of any use. The one you mentioned Static Veil, just prevents your OS from going up over time, and does nothing to keep your score from going up due to your illegal actions. Which is great if you just want to sit there doing data searches at -2, but not so great if you want to actually be a hacker.
I could go on and on, but I've wasted too many words rebutting what is really an indefensible position - that technomancers can compete and keep up with a decker in SR5. The case against ever playing a techno in SR5, aside from RP purposes, is a slam dunk.
Posted by: RHat Feb 13 2014, 01:34 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 06:13 PM)
Technomancers can do everything a Decker can do as well as as all their Technomancer specific abilities (like stay online indefinately without fearing GOD) and sprites, which are better than agents. Their living persona is basically a free $200k+ deck at character generation which gets better, for free when you raise your stats which is what you'd be doing anyway.......... Seems pretty sweet to me.
Being a hacker is all a technomancer gets to do. And in that vein, they're worse at it (lower dice pools), and they're abilities are both generally weak and impose stupid-high Fading - and the few forms that are useful can just about knock you out from a single use. And for all that, there's a number of ridiculous costs associated with it.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you've really looked at the Technomancer rules as they compare to the Decker and Mage rules - especially if you can have the impression that sprites aren't horribly underpowered.
Posted by: tjn Feb 13 2014, 02:45 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 05:45 PM)
This is another supposed 5th Ed issue I just don't get. Is the main issue with technomancers in most people's eyes that they don't make Deckers totally redundant anymore? If so I can't really share the sentiment.
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
If anything Living persona still makes them too powerful.
Uhh... wow, do we have completely different takes on Technomancers in 5th.
What made hackers totally redundant in 4th was Adepts, not technomancers. I felt each had their strong points, but absent an infinite karma setting, it was close enough to balanced that I could work with players wanting to play either or add a few house rules to make everyone happy. In 5th, the only advantages a technomancer has are that bio-nodes can't be hacked, having a sprite for however long until GOD is automatically called on the sprite simply for existing, and the few tricks that resonance actions give you. However, in specific to complex forms, not only is the drain out of whack but every complex form requires two tests: one to thread the form and the second, which is a resisted roll, to actually do anything. Also since the second roll is limited by the successes of the first roll, this functions as a form of rolling for failure. On top of that, there is a significant amount of complex forms that be accomplished in another way, without drain or significant expenditure of character creation resources.
For those privileges, the character is going to be almost completely incompetent outside of the matrix, unable to slave any other icons to provide overwatch, unable to use cyber or bioware without serious impingement on his/her ability as a technomancer, unable to use normal decking while using anything technomancer related, and being unable to rig anything without going through submersion, and even then they're going to suck at it compared to a normal rigger until the character submerges twice more. Meanwhile that's Karma you're not spending on actually improving your role in the matrix, or on anything else, and to top it off, it's not like the character can spend Nuyen in any meaningful way to improve in his/her primary role. The only way to get programs is to submerge, which the character gets one program per submersion, which not only competes with other echos (see rigging), but is also a large karma sink. Oh, and guess what? The entire setting is prejudiced against technomancers and there is bounties on the character just for existing and some nations make it a crime to exist as a technomancer... which is punishable with death.
But what are Technomancers best at that are hard to replicate? Buffing/debuffing other matrix personas. Which turns out decently if you want to troll someone else, summoning a sprite to do everything for you, or working as sidekick to the team's decker. Trolling doesn't actually get anything done. Summoning sprites can either lead to narrative problems where the player tries to summon a sprite to do accomplish everything without any risk to the character, or it has tactical problems when it gives the player another set of actions per sprite per turn. Playing sidekick has spotlight issues in tabletop play, and unless the player specifically signed on for that, can cause OOC problems due to always being in the shadow of another player. Further, if the technomancer is using the debuffing to enable his decking, he's taking two actions (one to lower the resistance, one to do something) that generally takes a decker just one action.
I might be missing something... but for the life of me, I cannot think of a reason anyone would want to play a technomancer outside of infinite karma games, the general novelty and roleplaying experience of playing a technomancer, or if the team has already got a decker and the player specifically wants to play a supporting role. On top of that, it's also probably one of the most demanding roles on the player as far as rule mastery, so I can't even tell the new player to play the "bard" until they find a role they want to explore further.
Posted by: Smash Feb 13 2014, 03:02 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 13 2014, 12:34 PM)
Being a hacker is all a technomancer gets to do. And in that vein, they're worse at it (lower dice pools), and they're abilities are both generally weak and impose stupid-high Fading - and the few forms that are useful can just about knock you out from a single use. And for all that, there's a number of ridiculous costs associated with it.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you've really looked at the Technomancer rules as they compare to the Decker and Mage rules - especially if you can have the impression that sprites aren't horribly underpowered.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you've really looked at the Technomancer rules as they compare to the Decker and Mage rules - especially if you can have the impression that sprites aren't horribly underpowered.
What do you expect a sprite to be able to do? I'm seeing them as free agents with special abilities. What more do they need.
I don't understand how a deck is easily upgraded when in fact they can't be upgraded at all, besides adding a program or 3 for some minor effects. So essentially if you want your deck to be better you have to throw your $250k deck in the bin and spend another $300K on another one! The games I play in that's probably hard that accumulating 100 karma for a few stat upgrades.
Posted by: RHat Feb 13 2014, 03:09 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 08:02 PM)
What do you expect a sprite to be able to do? I'm seeing them as free agents with special abilities. What more do they need.
I don't understand how a deck is easily upgraded when in fact they can't be upgraded at all, besides adding a program or 3 for some minor effects. So essentially if you want your deck to be better you have to throw your $250k deck in the bin and spend another $300K on another one! The games I play in that's probably hard that accumulating 100 karma for a few stat upgrades.
I don't understand how a deck is easily upgraded when in fact they can't be upgraded at all, besides adding a program or 3 for some minor effects. So essentially if you want your deck to be better you have to throw your $250k deck in the bin and spend another $300K on another one! The games I play in that's probably hard that accumulating 100 karma for a few stat upgrades.
As far as sprites, I expect them to be balanced against their closest comparator - which is not agents, but rather spirits.
And decks are easily upgraded in that rather than spending a crapton of Karma, you can just go an buy yourself a new deck while using that Karma to actually get better at decking.
Posted by: Smash Feb 13 2014, 03:45 AM
QUOTE (RHat @ Feb 13 2014, 02:09 PM)
As far as sprites, I expect them to be balanced against their closest comparator - which is not agents, but rather spirits.
And decks are easily upgraded in that rather than spending a crapton of Karma, you can just go an buy yourself a new deck while using that Karma to actually get better at decking.
And decks are easily upgraded in that rather than spending a crapton of Karma, you can just go an buy yourself a new deck while using that Karma to actually get better at decking.
As opposed to the technomancer who can go spend his money on rocket launchers and VTOLs?
Karma is only limiting in campaigns where people get given too much money. you can quite easily halve the money you give out and double the karma and suddenly you have the opposite problem.
As for sprites being equivalent to spirits: What do you expect them to be able to do? And then think to yourself, if they do whatever that is, why would you play a decker?
Posted by: Jaid Feb 13 2014, 03:55 AM
a technomancer can buy a VTOL or a rocket launcher (well, a rocket launcher anyways)... and then realize they don't have the skills. physical attributes, or augmentations to make that matter. frankly, i'd rather have the guy who can't hit the broad side of a barn *not* armed with a weapon that has chunky salsa rules attached to it.
with that said, if you meant that he can basically give up his share of the loot since he has no meaningful way to spend it, and give it to others that do have meaningful ways to spend it... i'm still waiting to hear how that's an advantage for a technomancer.
Posted by: Smash Feb 13 2014, 04:10 AM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 02:55 PM)
a technomancer can buy a VTOL or a rocket launcher (well, a rocket launcher anyways)... and then realize they don't have the skills. physical attributes, or augmentations to make that matter. frankly, i'd rather have the guy who can't hit the broad side of a barn *not* armed with a weapon that has chunky salsa rules attached to it.
with that said, if you meant that he can basically give up his share of the loot since he has no meaningful way to spend it, and give it to others that do have meaningful ways to spend it... i'm still waiting to hear how that's an advantage for a technomancer.
with that said, if you meant that he can basically give up his share of the loot since he has no meaningful way to spend it, and give it to others that do have meaningful ways to spend it... i'm still waiting to hear how that's an advantage for a technomancer.
If you can't build a technomancer who can make use of VTOLs or heavy weapons mounted on said VTOLs then I don't know what to say. Yes you might have to wait a little bit but your unlikely to have the money to buy those things initially anyway.
This still just feels like 'we hate Technomancers now because you might actually choose to play a Decker instead' to me.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 13 2014, 04:51 AM
ok, so you remember how we covered the fact that a technomancer needs:
- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.
and then you remember how we also covered that they can't effectively compensate for their low physical attributes with augmentations or magic, right?
and at this point, they also have to be human or elf, with at best moderately good edge.
none of this is sounding new to you, i hope?
so then, they need 8 skills *just to have basic levels of proficiency* in their specialized area.
now, in addition to this, i'm going to posit that in order to function on a basic level as a shadowrunner, they're also going to need a defensive skill, at least one offensive skill (general purpose), and at least 1-2 social skills, all at a moderately decent level. plus perception. more is better, of course; our current theoretical technomancer likely won't have any melee capability at all, for example, and stealth is a very useful skill to have as well.
so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].
so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).
so please, do tell... how is this competitive with a decker that needs two fewer skills, can spend priority A on resources and B on skills (C can go to race, there's not a *huge* difference between C attributes and D or E, and our decker doesn't need incredible attributes like our technomancer), gets to use a deck that swaps attributes and programs around at will, gets to use programs *at all*, doesn't need to spend karma or priority on an extra special attribute, and can upgrade both his core and secondary skill sets with augmentations? heck, if we *really* want to drive the point home, we *could* choose adept in priority D since we only really need 1-2 points of essence in augmentations, and now we've got even more bonuses (increase our limits, add to our hacking dice pools, etc) plus the ability to use qi focuses to adjust our abilities as needed.
Posted by: Redjack Feb 13 2014, 04:56 AM
QUOTE (DrZaius @ Feb 10 2014, 05:24 PM)
This is a niche fan board
Surely you mean that other board, not this one. Posted by: Sponge Feb 13 2014, 06:30 AM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 12 2014, 11:51 PM)
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance.
I don't disagree that TMs have some tough choices in terms of priority, but IMO this is actually one of the better ones. Spend 3 points from Meta Priority D (Human 3) on Resonance, and some Karma on CFs. Sure, low Edge is a downside, but there's a downside to any other selection, and this is one of the cheapest downsides (karma-wise) to address and you have some pretty strong dice pools out of the gate.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Feb 13 2014, 02:01 PM
Any Edge value below 3 and you are asking for trouble, in my opinion (at least this wwas true on 4th edition, haven't had the chance to play 5th yet).
Posted by: Sengir Feb 13 2014, 03:07 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 02:13 AM)
Technomancers can do everything a Decker can do
Like running programs, you mean?
QUOTE
as well as as all their Technomancer specific abilities (like stay online indefinately without fearing GOD) and sprites, which are better than agents
Being able to put the GOD timer on pause is not an advantage, it's a stopgap measure against the shitload of OS sprites generate.
Did you know that Resonance actions actually do produce OS? It's just that when the guys at GOD have a TM on their radar, the reaction is like "meh, that dude will fry his own brain with Fading in the next few minutes"
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 03:45 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 12 2014, 09:10 PM)
If you can't build a technomancer who can make use of VTOLs or heavy weapons mounted on said VTOLs then I don't know what to say. Yes you might have to wait a little bit but your unlikely to have the money to buy those things initially anyway.
This still just feels like 'we hate Technomancers now because you might actually choose to play a Decker instead' to me.
This still just feels like 'we hate Technomancers now because you might actually choose to play a Decker instead' to me.
Entertainingly, it was always the other way around for me.... I ALWAYS chose Hacker over Technomancer in SR4A. Yes, a TM is strong and their sprites are pretty cool, but my Cyberlogician ALWAYS gave the TM a run for his money, and was often better than he was, both IN the Matrix, and Most Definitely OUT of the Matrix.
I had to come up with reasons to play a TM in SR4A. And in the end, I never actually played one, because Hackers were just better in most ways, in my opinion. *shrug*
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 03:49 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Feb 13 2014, 07:01 AM)
Any Edge value below 3 and you are asking for trouble, in my opinion (at least this wwas true on 4th edition, haven't had the chance to play 5th yet).
Really? In my book, any Edge value above 3 was a waste of resources.
Posted by: psychophipps Feb 13 2014, 04:09 PM
Thanks to all that have commented on this thread thus far, y'all have saved me $60! You're like GEICO, but more interesting.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 13 2014, 04:46 PM
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 13 2014, 01:30 AM)
I don't disagree that TMs have some tough choices in terms of priority, but IMO this is actually one of the better ones. Spend 3 points from Meta Priority D (Human 3) on Resonance, and some Karma on CFs. Sure, low Edge is a downside, but there's a downside to any other selection, and this is one of the cheapest downsides (karma-wise) to address and you have some pretty strong dice pools out of the gate.
sure, hope you don't mind only being able to choose human. you now have what is perhaps least crappy option for technomancer.
oh, and don't mind the fact that you're still about as effective outside of matrix actions as a newborn baby, and that the decker is both more versatile (can do more things outside of the matrix, is very flexible in the matrix compared to you with the ability to rapidly change their setup to match the situation) and more effective than you (better dice pools). and can add insult to injury by being an adept, and thus pushing even further back your theoretical extremely far off superiority in the matrix that may someday come.
there's basically 2 possibilities: one, they will introduce some completely ridiculous broken nonsense for technomancers, and technomancers become situationally extremely powerful but still completely useless outside of the matrix and mediocre in any matrix task they don't have a special superpower in. two, they don't, and technomancers are just trash compared to deckers all the time.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Feb 13 2014, 04:55 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 12:49 PM)
Really? In my book, any Edge value above 3 was a waste of resources.
Well, 3 was surely the sweet number of benefit/cost ratio. But on our games, if something bad was going to happen, our GM would ask us to roll Edge, the one with less successes was the one to be hit with a rock on the head (or a sniper shot from far away);
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 05:11 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Feb 13 2014, 09:55 AM)
Well, 3 was surely the sweet number of benefit/cost ratio. But on our games, if something bad was going to happen, our GM would ask us to roll Edge, the one with less successes was the one to be hit with a rock on the head (or a sniper shot from far away);
Rarely did I ever go above an Edge 3 (for Humans OR Meta's) unless the concept called for it (2 characters out of about 50 or so). Yeah, same with us.
Posted by: SpellBinder Feb 13 2014, 06:27 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 08:45 AM)
Entertainingly, it was always the other way around for me.... I ALWAYS chose Hacker over Technomancer in SR4A. Yes, a TM is strong and their sprites are pretty cool, but my Cyberlogician ALWAYS gave the TM a run for his money, and was often better than he was, both IN the Matrix, and Most Definitely OUT of the Matrix.
I had to come up with reasons to play a TM in SR4A. And in the end, I never actually played one, because Hackers were just better in most ways, in my opinion. *shrug*
Funny thing, in the SR4 games I've been in or ran, there have been more technomancers than hackers, and this is even with me not using the software degradation rules in Unwired. As for Edge, my players are currently saving their karma to get to 3 (we'll see if they shoot for 4).I had to come up with reasons to play a TM in SR4A. And in the end, I never actually played one, because Hackers were just better in most ways, in my opinion. *shrug*
For a friend's game that's in SR5, no one yet has played a technomancer while there have been a few deckers among the players that have cycled through. Funny thing, the deckers have done more shooting in combat than decking (combat shotgun with APDS & BF is apparently better than a cyberdeck
). Same thing the hackers/technomancers have done in my SR4 games.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 06:50 PM
QUOTE (SpellBinder @ Feb 13 2014, 11:27 AM)
Funny thing, in the SR4 games I've been in or ran, there have been more technomancers than hackers, and this is even with me not using the software degradation rules in Unwired. As for Edge, my players are currently saving their karma to get to 3 (we'll see if they shoot for 4).
For a friend's game that's in SR5, no one yet has played a technomancer while there have been a few deckers among the players that have cycled through. Funny thing, the deckers have done more shooting in combat than decking (combat shotgun with APDS & BF is apparently better than a cyberdeck). Same thing the hackers/technomancers have done in my SR4 games.
For a friend's game that's in SR5, no one yet has played a technomancer while there have been a few deckers among the players that have cycled through. Funny thing, the deckers have done more shooting in combat than decking (combat shotgun with APDS & BF is apparently better than a cyberdeck
). Same thing the hackers/technomancers have done in my SR4 games.I always have interesting ideas for Technomancers, but few of them (none really) are for their hacking abilities, which are often eclipsed by a Hacker. *shrug*
In Combat, Hackers SHOULD be shooting and not trying to hack/brick opponents. Shooting is more effective, and always has been.
Posted by: Sponge Feb 13 2014, 07:11 PM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 11:46 AM)
hope you don't mind only being able to choose human.
This is not the fault of Technomancers so much as the fault of the SR5 Priority system and how much it (over-)charges you to be a non-human metatype, an entirely different rant topic.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 07:17 PM
QUOTE (Sponge @ Feb 13 2014, 12:11 PM)
This is not the fault of Technomancers so much as the fault of the SR5 Priority system and how much it (over-)charges you to be a non-human metatype, an entirely different rant topic.
Priority Gen is just an inferior System all the way around. But you are right... Wrong thread for that.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Feb 13 2014, 07:39 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 03:50 PM)
In Combat, Hackers SHOULD be shooting and not trying to hack/brick opponents. Shooting is more effective, and always has been.
We actually had a saying for that on our group: "Don't bring a computer to gunfight."
Posted by: Glyph Feb 13 2014, 07:48 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 07:49 AM)
Really? In my book, any Edge value above 3 was a waste of resources.
In SR5, mundane humans start with a minimum Edge of 5.
Edge is a wonky Attribute. It is not essential, but on the other hand, everything else being equal, a high Edge can make a huge difference. I played a character with an Edge of 6 in a one-shot PVP game, and it was a major factor in keeping her alive.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 09:00 PM
QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 13 2014, 12:48 PM)
In SR5, mundane humans start with a minimum Edge of 5.
Edge is a wonky Attribute. It is not essential, but on the other hand, everything else being equal, a high Edge can make a huge difference. I played a character with an Edge of 6 in a one-shot PVP game, and it was a major factor in keeping her alive.
Edge is a wonky Attribute. It is not essential, but on the other hand, everything else being equal, a high Edge can make a huge difference. I played a character with an Edge of 6 in a one-shot PVP game, and it was a major factor in keeping her alive.
Which I HATE - Just something else added to the List, though. *sigh*
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 13 2014, 09:01 PM
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Feb 13 2014, 12:39 PM)
We actually had a saying for that on our group: "Don't bring a computer to gunfight."
Indeed...
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 13 2014, 10:06 PM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 12:51 PM)
ok, so you remember how we covered the fact that a technomancer needs:
- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.
and then you remember how we also covered that they can't effectively compensate for their low physical attributes with augmentations or magic, right?
and at this point, they also have to be human or elf, with at best moderately good edge.
none of this is sounding new to you, i hope?
so then, they need 8 skills *just to have basic levels of proficiency* in their specialized area.
now, in addition to this, i'm going to posit that in order to function on a basic level as a shadowrunner, they're also going to need a defensive skill, at least one offensive skill (general purpose), and at least 1-2 social skills, all at a moderately decent level. plus perception. more is better, of course; our current theoretical technomancer likely won't have any melee capability at all, for example, and stealth is a very useful skill to have as well.
so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].
so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).
so please, do tell... how is this competitive with a decker that needs two fewer skills, can spend priority A on resources and B on skills (C can go to race, there's not a *huge* difference between C attributes and D or E, and our decker doesn't need incredible attributes like our technomancer), gets to use a deck that swaps attributes and programs around at will, gets to use programs *at all*, doesn't need to spend karma or priority on an extra special attribute, and can upgrade both his core and secondary skill sets with augmentations? heck, if we *really* want to drive the point home, we *could* choose adept in priority D since we only really need 1-2 points of essence in augmentations, and now we've got even more bonuses (increase our limits, add to our hacking dice pools, etc) plus the ability to use qi focuses to adjust our abilities as needed.
- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.
and then you remember how we also covered that they can't effectively compensate for their low physical attributes with augmentations or magic, right?
and at this point, they also have to be human or elf, with at best moderately good edge.
none of this is sounding new to you, i hope?
so then, they need 8 skills *just to have basic levels of proficiency* in their specialized area.
now, in addition to this, i'm going to posit that in order to function on a basic level as a shadowrunner, they're also going to need a defensive skill, at least one offensive skill (general purpose), and at least 1-2 social skills, all at a moderately decent level. plus perception. more is better, of course; our current theoretical technomancer likely won't have any melee capability at all, for example, and stealth is a very useful skill to have as well.
so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].
so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).
so please, do tell... how is this competitive with a decker that needs two fewer skills, can spend priority A on resources and B on skills (C can go to race, there's not a *huge* difference between C attributes and D or E, and our decker doesn't need incredible attributes like our technomancer), gets to use a deck that swaps attributes and programs around at will, gets to use programs *at all*, doesn't need to spend karma or priority on an extra special attribute, and can upgrade both his core and secondary skill sets with augmentations? heck, if we *really* want to drive the point home, we *could* choose adept in priority D since we only really need 1-2 points of essence in augmentations, and now we've got even more bonuses (increase our limits, add to our hacking dice pools, etc) plus the ability to use qi focuses to adjust our abilities as needed.
I'm not sure your math with attributes is right. You start with attribute 1 and buy up from there, so Attributes C for example would allow you 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5 if you were suicidal enough to dump all your physical stats.
Posted by: Critias Feb 13 2014, 10:09 PM
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
Posted by: Fatum Feb 13 2014, 10:20 PM
Nah, we trust CGL's judgment.
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 13 2014, 10:52 PM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 06:09 PM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
attributes were fine, it was the skills where I was wanting a few more
greedy I know
Posted by: Glyph Feb 13 2014, 11:39 PM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 02:09 PM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
I think the problem is that SR4 limited how many Attribute points you could get, because they were so comparatively valuable. But the thing is, people would usually take the 200 points, both for that very reason, and because 200 points was honestly not that much spread out among eight Attributes. That's four 4's and four 3's - even getting one or two 5's usually entailed some sacrifices.
So that's a big problem when you try to shoehorn Attributes into a priority system. The maximum is also the minimum. They made it slightly more workable by having a bit more at the A priority, but that still means most people will want A or B for Attributes, maybe C if they are playing a metatype with good Attribute bonuses, but no one will want D or E for Attributes. Especially since SR5 tried to make every Attribute essential for something, meaning low Attributes will hurt you even more.
Posted by: RHat Feb 14 2014, 12:09 AM
QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 13 2014, 04:39 PM)
I think the problem is that SR4 limited how many Attribute points you could get, because they were so comparatively valuable. But the thing is, people would usually take the 200 points, both for that very reason, and because 200 points was honestly not that much spread out among eight Attributes. That's four 4's and four 3's - even getting one or two 5's usually entailed some sacrifices.
So that's a big problem when you try to shoehorn Attributes into a priority system. The maximum is also the minimum. They made it slightly more workable by having a bit more at the A priority, but that still means most people will want A or B for Attributes, maybe C if they are playing a metatype with good Attribute bonuses, but no one will want D or E for Attributes. Especially since SR5 tried to make every Attribute essential for something, meaning low Attributes will hurt you even more.
So that's a big problem when you try to shoehorn Attributes into a priority system. The maximum is also the minimum. They made it slightly more workable by having a bit more at the A priority, but that still means most people will want A or B for Attributes, maybe C if they are playing a metatype with good Attribute bonuses, but no one will want D or E for Attributes. Especially since SR5 tried to make every Attribute essential for something, meaning low Attributes will hurt you even more.
You can actually wind up with something pretty workable for A Resources, B Skills, C Attributes, Human D. The trick is just that you wind up accepting a couple of 2's you buy with Karma. But setting just about anything to D or E kinda hurts - you're not gonna want very much to touch Skills D or E without a serious offset either, for example.
Posted by: Smash Feb 14 2014, 01:51 AM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 14 2014, 09:09 AM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
I agree. This is why the complaining that technomancers need every stat at 6 doesn't really hold any water. All characters start with low stats and god forbid I want to max my agility, body, str, reation, intuition with my samurai AND have a character with a silver tongue.
Posted by: RHat Feb 14 2014, 01:56 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 06:51 PM)
I agree. This is why the complaining that technomancers need every stat at 6 doesn't really hold any water. All characters start with low stats and god forbid I want to max my agility, body, str, reation, intuition with my samurai AND have a character with a silver tongue.
Well that's a complete misunderstanding. If we're gonna have THAT conversation, you simply have to differentiate between primary, secondary, and tertiary attributes. You've intentionally stretched the attribute requirements of the character.
Posted by: Smash Feb 14 2014, 02:10 AM
QUOTE (Jaid @ Feb 13 2014, 03:51 PM)
ok, so you remember how we covered the fact that a technomancer needs:
- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.
.................
so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].
so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).
- high priority for attributes since each mental attribute is rather important
- high priority for technomancy since otherwise you can't be a technomancer
- high priority for skills to cover the full set of skills that a regular decker needs (two skill groups, or 8 skills), plus either another skill group or two more skills. all of which need to be at high values.
.................
so then... you tell me. what priority is going to skills that you expect them to have *any* room at all for heavy weapons which are unsuitable for general use? bearing in mind that even with priority A in attributes, the best they're going to be able to put into their mental attributes is a total of 16 points above baseline (so they could have 1/1/1/1/5/5/5/5, for example. of course, realistically, this individual will be useless in attacking others, useless in defending himself, and useless in any other sort of physical activity such as being stealthy or climbing a wall (both of which are examples of fairly common requirements in a shadowrun) unless you really max out the related skills as well.
or, maybe you could put attributes to B so you can put skills in A, and have only C for resonance. [sarcasm]i'm sure your 3 points of resonance and 1 complex form are going to make the average decker green with envy.[/sarcasm].
so then, maybe we put attributes to C, skills to A, and resonance to B? oh wait, now we only have *16* attributes to spread around. that's enough for 1/1/1/1/3/3/3/3 in the attribute line. yeah, i'm sure that decker, with only needing to max log and have a decent willpower for most tests (and being able to use augmentations to boost his lackluster physical stats and increase his log even further), is just *quaking* in his boots in terror that he might meet this guy in a dark (matrix) alley. plus, that still leaves us with only 2 complex forms. which isn't all that bad, really, since the most we can start off with given our trash stats is 3 anyways. also not that bad since most of the complex forms suck royally. too bad our fading resistance stat sucks unless we go human and dump edge. (elf isn't even an option if we want higher than 3 resonance from priorities).
Here's your problem. You are the kind of player that seems to think that every stat and skill a character has at creation must be maximised. This is not the case. Yes you probably aren't going to be optimised for both the matrix AND combat AND rigging at creation, and yes you will probably be less efective (note this does not mean IN-effective) than a hacker off the bat. Where the rigger shines is the scope for improvement. No matter how much you bitch about how stat heavy a technomancer is, etc a Hacker can NEVER EVER summon sprites or use any technomancer special abilities. Yes they have drain, but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.
Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?
But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
Posted by: RHat Feb 14 2014, 02:17 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 07:10 PM)
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?
Actually, the rules are completely explicit on that point. This goes back to "please actually read the technomancer rules".
Posted by: tjn Feb 14 2014, 02:35 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 09:10 PM)
but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.
This is where you are taking the left turn at Albuquerque. You are dismissing the advantages a decker has, just because they kinda do the same thing, does not mean the Technomancer can do everything the decker can. Especially in 5th, the decker got a lot of love with the customization and utility of their role. This is on top of the limitation that technomancers can't use their technomancer powers if they are jacked into a normal deck.QUOTE
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices?
Page 251, first column, second paragraph: "You cannot reconfigure your living persona or run programs, as those are abilities unique to commlinks and cyberdecks. You are not a device, so you cannot be a slave or master, nor can you be part of a PAN or WAN."QUOTE
But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
Not going to say it's impossible, and I could see a sorta melee ganger/budding technomancer thing going on as a hook for roleplaying, but there will be a distinct power level differential between the character and another that's been finely tuned optimization wise.
Posted by: Jaid Feb 14 2014, 03:02 AM
technomancers just flat out start with lower dicepools in and out of the matrix, and have less versatility in the matrix to boot (you must not have paid very close attention to programs or the fact that a decker can just swap around their matrix attributes pretty much on a whim... they don't just start with more total stats, they can adjust their stats to match their needs at any given time, plus they can use programs to boost their stats, plus they can use programs to boost their actions after boosting their stats).
their theoretical unlimited progression falls flat on it's face when put into practice. it takes an awful lot of karma to even get to where the decker starts at, and the decker will be progressing too, using both karma and cash. a decker can basically buy a +2 to most matrix tests in chargen with money *after* buying the best deck a chargen decker can buy. now, they may prefer to spend their money on other things too (like initiative enhancements and a cyber arm so that when a fight breaks out they're basically a street samurai lite instead of being best off assuming the foetal position in a corner and whimpering), but that's up to them.
they start off weak, it takes forever to get them out of that situation, and in the meanwhile the decker has been boosting skills, potentially being an adept at the same time.
not to mention most of the technomancer's unique tricks aren't terribly unique. there's not much they can do that a decker can't, given a bit more effort, and most of the special stuff they can do isn't that relevant (or requires so much fading that they're even *less* able to contribute if a fight actually breaks out).
Posted by: Fatum Feb 14 2014, 04:37 AM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 14 2014, 06:10 AM)
What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
Quick reminder: attributes cost new rating x5 in SR4; you rake 1 to 3 Karma per session. Advances that cost 30+ Karma (at least ten straight sessions to get!) are hardly thus "a no-brainer". Metatype choices that actually limit your Agility and Mental stats aren't, either.I'm getting the impression we're reading different rulesets here.
Posted by: Medicineman Feb 14 2014, 06:50 AM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 05:09 PM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
It depends upon how much Karma will be the Default Line for the Karmasystem.
If its ca. 1000 Karma then 1or two Attr.Points for the Priotable may be Ok.
If its much less (like 900 or so) than raising the Priority table will be totally unfair to those tables that want to ....Mix chars with different Creationsystems (....oO( I hope this post is understandable ?) )
with a mix of Dances
Medicineman
Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Feb 14 2014, 06:59 AM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 05:09 PM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
Attributes and skills for me.
IMO A is fine, maybe a bit low but fine, they both scale terribly as the priorities drop though. The thing that throws things is E is totally functional for race, or magic, or hell even resources. E is not functional for attributes or skills. D isn't functional for attributes or skills either. C's 16 should really be E for attributes. Scale 2 a level from there and it kind of works.
Posted by: Sengir Feb 14 2014, 03:09 PM
QUOTE (Critias @ Feb 13 2014, 11:09 PM)
Am I the only one that wants to scribble in the margins of my priority chart/page "fuck it, every attribute priority gets, like, four more points," or do other folks kind of feel the same?
That, and stop giving away Magic/Resonance for free, it messes up any calculation...or even better yet, strap the whole priority system to a rocket headed for the nearest blue giant
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 14 2014, 03:12 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 07:10 PM)
Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
I saw 5 times as many humans as ANY other archetype in SR4. Personally, probably 80% of my characters were Human, rather than Meta. Sorry, your argument does not hold up.
Posted by: Mikado Feb 14 2014, 03:56 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 13 2014, 09:10 PM)
Here's your problem. You are the kind of player that seems to think that every stat and skill a character has at creation must be maximised. This is not the case. Yes you probably aren't going to be optimised for both the matrix AND combat AND rigging at creation, and yes you will probably be less efective (note this does not mean IN-effective) than a hacker off the bat. Where the rigger shines is the scope for improvement. No matter how much you bitch about how stat heavy a technomancer is, etc a Hacker can NEVER EVER summon sprites or use any technomancer special abilities. Yes they have drain, but guess what if you never use them you still have as much utility as a decker.
Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?
But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
Next is the 'You have to be a human or Elf to be a Technomancer.... which is somehow a problem considering that they're the best choices anyway (I guess Dwarf is reasonable as well) and they can both be bought at priority D. So what's the problem here? You want to play a Troll? Sure, then expect to be less suited to the matrix. That's called a trade-off. What I'm seeing here is people wanting Trolls to be a cheap choice for Technomancers because 'trolls are less effective online' but quietly recieve all those durability and melee combat bonuses as just nice little freebies. Sorry, this is how 4th Ed worked with it's supposed excellent build points system where being an Ork or Troll was a no-brainer because it cost you almost no points to do it in the grand scheme of things. I'm not surprised people like it, it was hideously unbalanced!
3rdly, are the rules explicit that a living persona can not slave devices? I'm not sure to be honest but given that it works exactly like a deck and has a device rating like a deck and smells like a deck and quacks like a deck then oh I don't know, maybe they can slave devices like a deck too? If they definately can't and you think that's such a massive problem then why not just let them in your game?
But all that aside you've given me an objective to try and build a functional Troll/ork Technomancer that I would play in a game when I get some time to burn.
First...
None of the characters I played in 4th (3 of them) had attributes above a 4 except for one build who had a 5 in only one attribute. Everything else where 3's and 4's. Now that did not include magic or resonance where I had one of each with the attribute at 5. Well the technomancer had a resonance of 7 but he had 2 points of essence loss and the mage was a mystic adept and he split his magic due to house rules.
Second...
ALL of the 3 characters I played in 4th where human.
Third...
I recreated my technomancer in 5th and after some adjustments since he had cyber that has not been converted to 5th yet he was still a very pale shadow of his former abilities. On the scale of 10% his former effectiveness. Now I know what you will say but it does not matter since his dice pools in 4th where NEVER over a 10 for almost anything including hacking. The one thing he had a dice pool above 12 for was Disguise since he was made to be an infiltrator.
Now, there are some things I like about 5th... but the things I hate outnumber the things I like by orders of magnitude. The nerf to technomancers being one...
Posted by: Smash Feb 15 2014, 02:43 AM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 15 2014, 02:12 AM)
I saw 5 times as many humans as ANY other archetype in SR4. Personally, probably 80% of my characters were Human, rather than Meta. Sorry, your argument does not hold up.
The fact that the people you choose to play with chose not to powergame does not mean that there wasn't scope for it to occur. Maybe they just wanted to play humans?
If on the other hand your suggesting that the BP cost of trolls was too much in SR4 was too high then what's the difference between that and Trolls being A/B in the priority system?
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Feb 15 2014, 04:32 PM
QUOTE (Smash @ Feb 14 2014, 07:43 PM)
The fact that the people you choose to play with chose not to powergame does not mean that there wasn't scope for it to occur. Maybe they just wanted to play humans?
If on the other hand your suggesting that the BP cost of trolls was too much in SR4 was too high then what's the difference between that and Trolls being A/B in the priority system?
If on the other hand your suggesting that the BP cost of trolls was too much in SR4 was too high then what's the difference between that and Trolls being A/B in the priority system?
Not everyone chooses to powerplay (and it is not just my table; See Mikado's post above), and some of us actually want a living, breathing PERSON, not a stat monstrosity (and from my experience, Powerplay optimized characters do not produce what I would call "Real People." There are just too many logic gaps/character holes that need to be compensated for once the character obtains Karma in play)..
Just because the potential to powerplay is there does not mean you MUST exercise that option.
You will NEVER remove powerplay options from the game. They have existed since 1st Edition.
Posted by: Glyph Feb 15 2014, 09:02 PM
I think options need to be roughly balanced against one another (although some things can, and should, be suboptimal for the sake of verisimilitude - unaugmented mundanes, for example). In an open character creation system, though, not everything is going to be equal purely points-wise. Trolls are balanced compared to humans, but in an apples and oranges way. Their bonuses work out to 30 BP more than a human, and they also have +1 reach, thermographic vision, and a point of dermal armor. However, it is a package deal - Strength of 5 is more than most non-combat characters (and a lot of combat characters) really need. Furthermore, they have a lower cap on Agility and three of the mental Attributes, require specially-made gear, and live in a world sized for smaller people. Trolls are good in a fairly narrow range of roles, such as close combat specialist who can no-sell small arms fire. Sure, you can "save" some points if you make a troll technomancer, but considering that mental Attributes are so useful to them, you are shooting yourself in the foot.
Posted by: Machiavelli Feb 18 2014, 10:35 AM
I wouldn´t agree, that trolls were too expensive in previous editions. Besides the pure costs for attributes, there are other points that need to be summed up (dermal plating, reach, higher running distances and thermographic vision had already been discussed) that don´t count out at the first point. One of these things is, that you can generally raise your attributes 1,5 times the maximum attribute. The higher the base-attribute, the more advantage you get out of it (e.g. trolls strength addition is +4, but if you really max it out, you can reach strength 15 (10*1,5) and not only 14. Same goes for other metatypes.
In SR5 on the other hand, a lot of these benefits are gone. Running distance and bonus attributes are gone. Additionally you are penalized with a quite high priority and higher lifestyle costs (game-wise correct, I agree). This makes a troll quite unattractive, especially if you count in, that now every human can reach strength and body 10 and the maximum difference to a troll is now “just” +4. Before it was +6.
I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
Posted by: Sendaz Feb 18 2014, 10:58 AM
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 06:35 AM)
I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
I blame the IE conspiracy, trying to keep the orcs and trolls down! Posted by: Machiavelli Feb 18 2014, 11:47 AM
Agree. Buuuh to racism. Damned elves.
Posted by: Shortstraw Feb 18 2014, 02:35 PM
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 08:35 PM)
I wouldn´t agree, that trolls were too expensive in previous editions. Besides the pure costs for attributes, there are other points that need to be summed up (dermal plating, reach, higher running distances and thermographic vision had already been discussed) that don´t count out at the first point. One of these things is, that you can generally raise your attributes 1,5 times the maximum attribute. The higher the base-attribute, the more advantage you get out of it (e.g. trolls strength addition is +4, but if you really max it out, you can reach strength 15 (10*1,5) and not only 14. Same goes for other metatypes.
In SR5 on the other hand, a lot of these benefits are gone. Running distance and bonus attributes are gone. Additionally you are penalized with a quite high priority and higher lifestyle costs (game-wise correct, I agree). This makes a troll quite unattractive, especially if you count in, that now every human can reach strength and body 10 and the maximum difference to a troll is now “just” +4. Before it was +6.
I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
In SR5 on the other hand, a lot of these benefits are gone. Running distance and bonus attributes are gone. Additionally you are penalized with a quite high priority and higher lifestyle costs (game-wise correct, I agree). This makes a troll quite unattractive, especially if you count in, that now every human can reach strength and body 10 and the maximum difference to a troll is now “just” +4. Before it was +6.
I didn´t think trolls were overpowered before, so I don´t get this “nerf” at all.
Remember they can get 9 agility as opposed to 7 so they are better in a lot of other areas.
Posted by: Machiavelli Feb 18 2014, 08:01 PM
QUOTE (Shortstraw @ Feb 18 2014, 03:35 PM)
Remember they can get 9 agility as opposed to 7 so they are better in a lot of other areas.
Which IS an Advantage. Agreed. But the main-purpose of a troll is weakened.
Posted by: X-Kalibur Feb 18 2014, 10:31 PM
All derailing aside, thanks for the time and effort on the errata, Patrick. Although I'm disheartened it didn't really fix much.
Posted by: FuelDrop Feb 18 2014, 10:49 PM
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Feb 18 2014, 07:47 PM)
Agree. Buuuh to racism. Damned elves.
At least they burn nice.
Posted by: garner_adam Feb 19 2014, 11:47 PM
QUOTE (Mantis @ Feb 8 2014, 06:37 PM)
Thanks Patrick. I know you've been working hard to get this to be a thing.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.
The change to recoil, doesn't that basically make recoil just like it was in 4th edition unless you are taking either SA bursts or full auto bursts (the only ones which require a complex action)? Because for all other fire modes you are just using a simple action and you always have two of those available. I guess it works but I just wondered if that was the intention.
Really curious what the opinion is on this one.
Posted by: cndblank Feb 26 2014, 05:10 PM
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Feb 13 2014, 03:00 PM)
Which I HATE - Just something else added to the List, though. *sigh*
I have to say that Edge made my game a lot better.
Had a player who had serious bad luck with his dice.
I told him to take a good Edge and it really improved his enjoyment of the game.
Posted by: cndblank Feb 26 2014, 07:42 PM
Oh and the finally reasonable price and availability on Autosofts gets TWO THUMBS UP from me.
AUTOSOFT PRICES (P. 442, SOFTWARE TABLE)
The following listing should be inserted in the table before
Cyberprogram, common use:
Program/Software Avail Cost
Autosoft Rating x 2 Rating x 500¥
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)