![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
I mentioned this in another thread, and Neraph wanted to take a peek. So as suggested, I'm posting them in their own thread. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
HOUSE RULES v1.4 14 June 2012 BOOK LIST I own copies of the following books: Primary Sources:
Expanded Sources:
MISSIONS This will be a “closed” Missions campaign – that is to say, I will be using the published Missions adventures, but will not be using the limitations imposed on Missions characters. Additionally, while Missions uses none of the various Optional Rules suggested in many of the published books, I like some of them, and even have a couple of my own. Also, characters for this game are only for this game - and vice versa. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
OPTIONAL RULES
The following optional rules will be in use: (Arsenal) Maximum Armor Modifications, p44 (Augmentation) Tweaking the Rules, pp22-23: Implant Maintenance (Digital Grimoire) Tweaking the Rules, p12: Alternative Possession MechanicsSpirits may only be commanded to Possess a vessel that is in LOS of the conjuror. (Parabotany) Expansion of the Location Test, p45 (Street Magic) Tweaking the Rules, p31: ArcanaArcana is linked to the Drain Attribute of it's Tradition. (Unwired) Tweaking the Rules, p39: Using AttributesYour attribute limits total successes per roll. Technomancers are limited by the Fading attribute of their Stream (so generally: Charisma, Intuition, Logic, or Will). |
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
HOUSE RULES Vehicle Modification: Weapon Mounts … to allow smaller drones to carry very small weapons, and to make mid-sized drones not always carry an LMG, the following changes are used: Basic FrameMini Mount (Minidrone); 1 slot / 500 nuyen; kit, threshold 3 (Armorer)Can mount Holdout and Light Pistols. Suppressive Fire: the weapon's Recoil Compensation is added to the die pool – you can put more bullets into useful places if your weapon is easier to control. Free Contacts: you gain free points of contacts equal to Charisma + Intuition + Etiquette. Stick and Shock ammunition has a DV of +1S(e) – that is to say, a DV of one more than the weapon firing it. Commlink Hardware Optimisation is available for System and Firewall, also. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Cyberlimb Armor uses the following rules:
Cost:Obvious Armor (Obvious limbs only): Rating * 500 nuyen, Rating * [2] Capacity Firearms Skills: There is no such skill as “Automatics”; that is instead a specialisation of other skills. Skills in the Firearms Group include Pistols (Holdouts, Light Pistols, Heavy Pistols, Machine Pistols, SMGs), Longarms (SMGs, Shotguns, Assault Rifles, Battle Rifles, Sport Rifles), and Heavy Weapons (Grenade launchers, LMGs, MMGs, HMGs). Yes, that means SMGs can be fired using either Pistols or Longarms. Knock yourselves out. High Powered Ammunition is not a separate type unto itself; many kinds of ammunition are available in high powered ("HP") variants. (Disallowed HP ammunition includes Stick-and-shock, Capsule, Gel, and Subsonic.) Firearms must be modified to fire such rounds, and once modified can fire only HP ammunition. Any firearm, including assault cannons, can be modified in this way. Modifying a weapon to fire High Powered ammunition costs 2 slots, has a threshold of 20, requires an armorer's shop, and costs as much as the original weapon (with an availability of 7R). This modification is incompatible with Extended Magazine and Increased Cylinder. HP ammunition gains +1 damage and -1 armor piercing, in addition to the base values for that type of round. Price is multiplied by four, and availability increases by +8. When fired, all recoil is doubled before compensation. Additionally, HP ammunition is especially loud and has a large muzzle flash. Attempts to detect or pinpoint the firing of HP ammunition gain +3 dice for hearing tests, or +1 die for visual tests (these modifiers are cumulative with silencers / suppressors). Edge and Spellcasting: If you spend a point of Edge, to add your Edge attribute to your spellcasting die pool, the maximum hits limit is increased by your Edge attribute. That is to say, it changes from [Force], to [Force + Edge]. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#5
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Adepts; Improved Physical Attribute (Cost: 0.5 PP/level) Unlike in the core rules, this power does not affect the Karma cost for raising your attributes. It is, however, limited to giving a bonus no larger than half the unaugmented attribute (round down). That is to say, if you have an Agility of 4, you cannot benefit from more than two levels of “Increased Physical Attribute (Agility)”.
Adepts; Initiation and Power Points Adepts may forgo learning a Metamagic in order to gain an additional Power Point (without increasing their Magic rating). An Adept may have only as many power points as their Magic rating plus their Initiate Grade. Mystic Adepts; Magic Rating Mystic Adepts use their full Magic Rating to determine the maximum rank of any Adept power, and to determine the maximum Force rating of spells they can cast. The split ratings are used to determine Sorcery and Conjury die pools (etc), and to determine both Initial and Maximum power points for adept powers. Armor: Conversion to Stun damage Damage converts to stun only if the attack's DV is less than HALF the relevant armor rating. Armor: Encumbrance The maximum value of armor you may wear before incurring Encumbrance is equal to Body + Strength, rather than twice your Body. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#6
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
OPTIONAL RULES (Unwired) Tweaking the Rules, p39: Using Attributes That is some really harsh technomancer nerfing. Has anyone actually played a technomancer under these rules and not been very sad about how much worse they are than a mundane hacker? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#7
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
I've yet to run the game these are for, Umaro.
But to address each item in specific: "Using Attributes" - given that Technomancers will have reasonable Will, Intuition, and Logic scores (since they derive their matrix attributes from them), I don't see that this will impact them any more than it does hackers. "Security Tally" - doesn't seem any harsher on a Technomancer, than on a Hacker. Am I missing something? "Complex Forms" - I was confused why you would think that this nerfs technomancers ... until I realised that it would apply Fading to them far, far too often. Thank you for helping me catch that, I shall change that part of it immediately to: "no fading up to Resonance, stun fading up to 2x resonance." Again, thanks for catching the problem with Fading in that last rule. Always best to fix problems before they cause trouble ...! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#8
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
Using attributes: under the core rules, no, technomancers really don't need Logic* much. It sets their maximum number of known CFs at chargen (3 is enough for almost everyone), and their System, which is only used by Technomancers in some really rare edge cases.
Also, hackers can easily pump their Logic with Cerebral Boosters; technomancers would have to take 'ware that costs them resonance. So it's only marginally limiting to hackers (who often want a decent logic anyways for synergy with Log-linked skill boosters and non-hacking Logic skills, and can get "enough that the hits cap doesn't matter" for a trivial investment, but harshly limiting to technomancers who have to struggle to get more than 5, and didn't even want 4 before anyways. *It's not clear to me when Intuition or Willpower should actually be used to limit hits. They're still going to be the minority of tests anyways, though. Security Tally is a big fuck you to technomancers because it removes Stealth from its main use, and being able to get huge Stealth ratings and thus be sneaky sneaky was the main thing technomancer hackers had going for them. If you look at what it does, Hackers effectively come out ahead unless they are breaking into milspec systems or running milspec stealth (and milspec systems will pretty much just auto-detect you no matter how rad you are anyways, under this rule). CFs: Under that rule, you can't use a CF you don't know. At all. This basically means technomancers don't work; there's just too many CFs that you have to be able to at least sorta use in order to get jack squat done. I'd be happy to offer some more constructive suggestions; I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to accomplish, though. I gather the Using Attributes thing is the classic solution-looking-for-a-problem of not wanting 1 logic hackers, but I'm not sure why you like the Security Tally or Complex Forms rules. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#9
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Using attributes: under the core rules, no, technomancers really don't need Logic* much. It sets their maximum number of known CFs at chargen (3 is enough for almost everyone), and their System, which is only used by Technomancers in some really rare edge cases. Also, hackers can easily pump their Logic with Cerebral Boosters; technomancers would have to take 'ware that costs them resonance. So it's only marginally limiting to hackers (who often want a decent logic anyways for synergy with Log-linked skill boosters and non-hacking Logic skills, and can get "enough that the hits cap doesn't matter" for a trivial investment, but harshly limiting to technomancers who have to struggle to get more than 5, and didn't even want 4 before anyways. Hmm. That is a concern. The thing is, I want Logic to matter for Hackers (the first SR4 character I tried playing was a hacker, and discovering the hard way that his Logic of 5 didn't impact his ability to actually hack ... well, it still irks me.) QUOTE Security Tally is a big fuck you to technomancers because [...] Hrm. I'll have to put some thought / re-thought into that one then. QUOTE CFs: Under that rule, you can't use a CF you don't know. At all. This basically means technomancers don't work; there's just too many CFs that you have to be able to at least sorta use in order to get jack squat done. ... bugger, you're right about that. Damnit. QUOTE I'd be happy to offer some more constructive suggestions; I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to accomplish, though. I gather the Using Attributes thing is the classic solution-looking-for-a-problem of not wanting 1 logic hackers, but I'm not sure why you like the Security Tally or Complex Forms rules. Obviously, my relative inexperience with 4E rules means I'm not seeing all the ramifications. (Thank god I already planned to go over them with everyone, and discuss any flaws/drawbacks the players wanted to bring up.) So okay, if you're going to volunteer some feedback ... let me explain my reasoning behind these three: Attributes limiting success: I want attributes to matter for everyone, or at least, for as many of 'em as possible. I think, though, that I have a workable solution for Technomancers: instead of hard-locking it to Logic, I'll set it to the Drain attribute of their Stream - IOW, Int, Cha, or Log. Whichever they're going to be naturally inclined to have at reasonably high levels. After all, I've already done the equivalent for the Arcana skill, so it's a logical next step. Security Tally: it just makes sense to me that detecting an intruder should be an Extended Test, rather than a series of all-or-nothing gambles. You're right that Stealth should play a role, though. So ... what about adding the intruder's Stealth program (if any) to the Threshold for the tally? Would that work, do you think? Complex Forms like Spells: Hmm. My main goal was to simplify building (and, I thought, playing) technomancers. Obviously, the effects I didn't realise would require houseruling in ways that would complicate actual play. So now I'm inclined to just toss this one entirely. Oopsie! Now I'm doubly thankful - to you for the feedback, and to Neraph for prompting me to post this thread in the first place. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#10
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
(All of which means, I am now on v1.5a (draft 1), dated 19 June ... heh!)
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#11
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
My suggestions would be:
The "CFs like spells" rule is honestly terrible; if you don't have a strong conceptual reason for wanting it, it really shouldn't exist. Attributes limiting success: the change you suggested is one I've seen elsewhere and is the least bad variant of the attributes for hacking thing I've seen. It doesn't really mess up the balance; you still have Logic stream being the best hybrids/generalists, Charisma being the best hackers, Intuition being the best riggers, and Willpower being the best at cutting themselves and wishing they had a better conceptual understanding of the matrix. Security tally: I would probably make the Threshold based purely on Stealth, and fiddle with the formula a bit. My suggestion would be that the threshold is Stealth x 2, but that if any single roll ever gets more hits than your Stealth, you get caught immediately. It does change the tactics of hacking in some ways; it makes Hacking on the Fly comparatively better, and makes some tactics (like Disarming analyze or hacking yourself a better account after getting a hacked low-level account) bad ideas, and others (like hacking yourself multiple accounts and then going in sequence to do stuff, and making legitimate backdoor accounts) better ideas. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#12
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 386 Joined: 27-February 12 From: Nebraska, USA Member No.: 50,732 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#13
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Right, then - CF-like-spells is gone. Drainas-limiting-attribute sounds workable. Security Tally ... eh. I think I'm just going to ditch it for now; I'm not THAT enamored of the idea. ^_^
And so v1.5b (draft 2) ... hehehe. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#14
|
|
Target ![]() Group: Members Posts: 93 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Chicago, IL Member No.: 390 ![]() |
Attributes limiting success: the change you suggested is one I've seen elsewhere and is the least bad variant of the attributes for hacking thing I've seen. It doesn't really mess up the balance; you still have Logic stream being the best hybrids/generalists, Charisma being the best hackers, Intuition being the best riggers, and Willpower being the best at cutting themselves and wishing they had a better conceptual understanding of the matrix. Could also just use resonance as the limiting attribute. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#15
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
While we're at it:
1) Implant Maintanence is a pretty harsh nerf on a very specific concept (street samurai) that doesn't hit anyone else. It's also odd that better quality ware is harder to maintain. I might be inclined to make it 1% of the base (ie, before grade modifiers) cost. I also think it might just be too high and too punishing on a concept that's already got plenty of drawbacks compared to magic. 2) I can't find the "hard-hitting cyberlimbs" tweaking option. I assume it's just making them S/2+1 or S/2+2 or something, though. 3) If you're using the "Adepts and Gaesa" rule it might be a good idea to come up with some "acceptable/not acceptable" gaesa examples, based on my experience with that one. 4) I'd suggest moving Battle Rifles from "Standard" to "Reinforced" and HMGs from "Heavy" to "Reinforced." HMGs are only marginally better than MMGs or LMGs and don't even play in the same league as vehicle mounted weapons. Battle Rifles are actually better than LMGs and MMGs and really need to be in Reinforced. 5) Suppressive Fire: you probably want a "up to the maximum RC that the weapon can normally use" ie max of 9 for FA, 11 for HV, 14 for Miniguns; otherwise you get wierdness. 6) I'm not sure I'd be making SnS that good; it's already really good. I'd suggest -1S(e), not +1S(e). Half armor, +1 DV, and a bunch of side benefits makes it way too good. 7) Does IPA still cost double above unaugmented maximum? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) I don't understand how an adept could get more PP than their Magic+Grade in the first place. Why do you need a rule restricting that? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#16
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
While we're at it: 1) Implant Maintanence is a pretty harsh nerf on a very specific concept (street samurai) that doesn't hit anyone else. It's also odd that better quality ware is harder to maintain. I might be inclined to make it 1% of the base (ie, before grade modifiers) cost. I also think it might just be too high and too punishing on a concept that's already got plenty of drawbacks compared to magic. Hmm. I'm actually looking for a "money sink" for the non-mages. But not just the Samurai. QUOTE 2) I can't find the "hard-hitting cyberlimbs" tweaking option. I assume it's just making them S/2+1 or S/2+2 or something, though. Extreme bottom right of P23. Makes the unarmed damage of a cyberlimb (STR+2)P. After all, if you have a cyberlimb it is kind of like having brass knuckles (or hardliner gloves) permanently installed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) QUOTE 3) If you're using the "Adepts and Gaesa" rule it might be a good idea to come up with some "acceptable/not acceptable" gaesa examples, based on my experience with that one. Good advice, thanks. QUOTE 4) I'd suggest moving Battle Rifles from "Standard" to "Reinforced" and HMGs from "Heavy" to "Reinforced." HMGs are only marginally better than MMGs or LMGs and don't even play in the same league as vehicle mounted weapons. Battle Rifles are actually better than LMGs and MMGs and really need to be in Reinforced. I'll give them a closer look. QUOTE 5) Suppressive Fire: you probably want a "up to the maximum RC that the weapon can normally use" ie max of 9 for FA, 11 for HV, 14 for Miniguns; otherwise you get wierdness. Good point, so noted, and so done. QUOTE 6) I'm not sure I'd be making SnS that good; it's already really good. I'd suggest -1S(e), not +1S(e). Half armor, +1 DV, and a bunch of side benefits makes it way too good. I hadn't wanted to nerf it too far from the 6S(e) you coud already throw out of Light and Heavy pistols ... QUOTE 7) Does IPA still cost double above unaugmented maximum? No. It works like an augment to that attribute, period. QUOTE (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) I don't understand how an adept could get more PP than their Magic+Grade in the first place. Why do you need a rule restricting that? No particular reason - just an urge to close that door "just in case". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#17
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
Can you elaborate on the money sink thing a bit? What do you mean by "non-mages" - do you include Adepts and Technomancers? What do you mean by "money sink" - do you mean, like, a consistent drain on resources? Why don't mages need one?
Re: SnS: Even at -1S(e), SnS is still a competitive ammo type. +1S(e) makes it the go-to ammo type and you only load other things occasionally for specific purposes. SnS really does need a nerf; keep in mind that it's not like light pistols with SnS are now useless; 3S(e) isn't much but it still forces a Don't Tase Me Bro check, it still applies the -2 electrical penalty, and you still can stage it up with burst-fire and net hits. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#18
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Can you elaborate on the money sink thing a bit? What do you mean by "non-mages" - do you include Adepts and Technomancers? What do you mean by "money sink" - do you mean, like, a consistent drain on resources? Why don't mages need one? In the most convenient order: Read "mages" as "the Awakened". And I guess I would include Technomancers in that - they aren't Awakened in the magical sense, but their interactions with Karma-versus-Nuyen is similar. And perhaps I'm just showing my age, but in prior editions at least, the Samurai had an easier time upgrading themselves, compared to Mages: they could spend Karma on some skills, then spend nuyen to improve their implants. QUOTE Re: SnS: Even at -1S(e), SnS is still a competitive ammo type. +1S(e) makes it the go-to ammo type and you only load other things occasionally for specific purposes. SnS really does need a nerf; keep in mind that it's not like light pistols with SnS are now useless; 3S(e) isn't much but it still forces a Don't Tase Me Bro check, it still applies the -2 electrical penalty, and you still can stage it up with burst-fire and net hits. Good points, good points. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#19
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 681 Joined: 23-March 10 From: Japan Member No.: 18,343 ![]() |
For the Security Tally we have a House Rule based on the side-bar... This is what we use:
QUOTE After the hacker has hacked the node: Every Node should make a perception test on a regular basis to determine if a hacker is present. I would recommend either scanning based on a number of combat turns elapsed (higher security means more often) or scan every time the “Hacking” skill is used. If the hacker is using the “Software” skill this would not trigger a scan as it is a legal command as far as the node is concerned. This is an opposed test. Node rolls: System + Analyze or IC Rolls: Rating + Analyze Vs. Hacker’s System rolls: Firewall + Stealth More hits wins. This can then be handled one of two ways: 1. Treat this as a perception test where the node reacts based on how good of a success it has on detecting the hacker. 2. Use a Security Tally and add the hits to the hacker’s tally. Once the threshold is reached an alarm is triggered. The suggested threshold is 14 - System. 2a. The Security Tally starts with any hits the Firewall got during the breaking in phase of the hack attempt. 2b. The hacker can reduce the security tally by first locating the System Log (this is a data search test, the threshold shouldn’t be too high as the system is accessing the log often). After finding the log the Hacker makes a Computer (or Hacking) + Edit test, each hit reduces the Security Tally by one. Once the log is located, it doesn’t need to be located again unless the hacker leaves the node. *Note: For the Hacker roll I would recommend using Firewall + Stealth if you are using the perception test based system. If you are using the security tally system cut the hacker's dice pool to Stealth only. This will allow the system to generate more hits for the security tally and force the hacker to edit the tally more often. Either choice is very viable. The first choice allows for more of the "breaking into a warehouse" feel to the matrix. The second one has more of a traditional computer feel. When I wrote this we were still discussing house rules, we opted for #2 and hacker rolling Stealth only. It's worked pretty well for us so far. -D |
|
|
![]()
Post
#20
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,700 Joined: 1-July 10 Member No.: 18,778 ![]() |
And perhaps I'm just showing my age, but in prior editions at least, the Samurai had an easier time upgrading themselves, compared to Mages: they could spend Karma on some skills, then spend nuyen to improve their implants. That's not all that true anymore - the main thing is that mages get better over time more than Samurai, and the augmentation tax would make this worse. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#21
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Hmm, I'll accept that on faith then, Umaro, and drop that optional from the list. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
See, this is why I like forums: I can tap into the collective experience of MANY minds beyond merely my own! |
|
|
![]()
Post
#22
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 ![]() |
Regarding the money sink: how often do you plan on collecting your players' lifestyle costs? AFAIK, it's one mission per month, so lifestyle should be factored in. Also, make sure that your players do the bookkeeping correctly; Mundane characters in particular spend a great deal of their income on ammunition and disguises, while everyone needs new fake sins and disposable comlinks on a semi-regular basis.
In my experience, Sammies advance very slowly in play, since higher grade 'ware is prohibitively expensive. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#23
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 662 Joined: 25-May 11 Member No.: 30,406 ![]() |
I would third Umarov and Elfenlied, compared to awakened characters mundanes can only expect big jumps in performance when they can upgrade/add to their 'ware. Because of this, awakened characters tend to be more cash-rich than their mundane counterparts, and get a pretty decent power boost every time they initiate and/or raise their Magic.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#24
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,150 Joined: 15-December 09 Member No.: 17,968 ![]() |
Some interesting ideas going on in this thread.
I'll just say this though - Do you not like the optional serious wounds/heavy damage rules in AU? Really? They're my favourites. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#25
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Validating Posts: 2,492 Joined: 19-April 12 Member No.: 51,818 ![]() |
Do you not like the optional serious wounds/heavy damage rules in AU? Really? They're my favourites. Page number? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 17th May 2025 - 12:27 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.