For me the dice roller programs roll basically randomly for 2-3 sessions, then they need to be retired as they begin the 2-hit system again. I've bought new dice, even the really expensive "Vegas" craps dice (actually used at the tables in Vegas) and still see only 2 hits on average. *sigh* The dice fairies hate me.

The trick, then, is to appease the Faeries...

*sigh* I wish I knew how, so instead I ply the GM with food and drink. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Had a game session tonight (Pathfinder).
On the d20 I only rolled above a ten twice. Both were skill checks (and the 11 was still a failure).
On the d4s, I rolled 1, 2, 1, 3.

And people wonder why I take 2/3rds on my hit dice and have never once played a class, used a weapon, or purchased an enchantment that had an "on crit" ability.

Sorry for answering so late, but RL really costs a lot of my time. ^^

I am wondering, if you ever played SR5 or if you just read the books. I mostly have made completely different experiences, so here are my 5 cents:




1) Indeed, it is. I can agree, that this is basically the only field SR5 wins over SR4 without any discussion.
2) They are still a downer, especially if you are used to handwave decking. ^^ But it is basically the same question as before, so we already agreed.
3) You got higher damage and more dodging. I have some experience in SR5 in the meantime, so i strongly disagree. Combat is different, but ZERO quicker than before.
4) No, it isn´t. Now the first 2 spells a mage takes are control thoughts and mob control.
5) They also had a point before. Now they deal more damage, like everything else. Where is the improvement? Especially if you spells now do the same damage as a hold-out. Embarrassing.
6) It still takes the same amount of time. Come to my group, they will all say the same to you.
7) Do we read the same books? Where are they an tactical choice? You had to choose before, too. The only difference is, that you now only decide how many dodge-dice you will subtract, in the past you also raised your damage (if you can withstand recoil). You see improvements i don´t see.
8 ) Is this a joke?
9) No they haven´t. But they weren´t as inconsistent as in SR5. If there are problems, an improvement consists of analyzing these mistakes and wiping them out. Not fixing things that were perfectly fine.
10) Limits are mostly higher than the number of successes you can achieve. And if you are really lucky, your hits don´t even count. Luck gets punished. Great improvement. Especially in a gambling-game.
11) They are worse. Or lets say: there are more worse things than good ones.
12) You still have a table, that is now even more confusing than before. Just because the table is different, i don´t see it being easier.

If you can only attack once your turn is going to be 1/2 as long (ok maybe 60% as long given that people didn't always attack twice. So even if the combat took the same amount of time people are still getting back to their turn more often and not sitting off to the side being bored. That's not even considering that guns do more damage therefore......



That's odd, as someone like me who has only read the rules and not played (apparently..) can see that those 2 spells are WAY less effective now given that their resist pool is also derived from 2 stats rather than just 1.



So before when holdouts did 4P you would need to get maybe 6 net hits to take someone down assuming that they have no body or armour. Now that number is 3-4. Yes they have more armour now but the difference want be 3 hits worth. Some bad-guys may not even wear armour at all.



As what? Maybe the 4th Ed priority system? If you're talking about build-points or karma there's just no way.



I guess you could call the difference between narrow or wide bursts tactical, but single shots? lol, they were for pistols and NPCs. Recoil was never an issue in 4th ed given enough cash (and we're not talking more than a couple of thousand). At least in 5th recoil matters (you can't just keep firing full-auto).



No. Knowing stuff your cars can do, like transport multiple people, is kinda important sometimes.......



Fine is subjective and what you should probably consider is that dumpshock does not house a perfect gamer cross-section. Also, go back and read your 4E rulebook, you know the one before the 20th edition...no no, the first printing. It is the worst ordered book of all time......



I always have to lol at this. If you roll 6 dice you will not always get 2 successes. Sometimes you may even get 6 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) ...or 0 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)



lolwut? It's stepped now..... so like if you are getting -6 because of light levels and....... you know you have low-light..... you know like the steps are the same............ meh, who can be bothered.

I suppose the limitless ease of how movement works now also sucks? Nothing better than 4th Eds divide by initiative passes malarkey which left your samurai frozen in space between cover while rentacops glided effortlessly from one point to another. It's probably more 'real' or something right?

Which, if you had read what he said, you would have understood.
If you have a DP of 12 (Not Unreasonable in SR5), your average Hits will not come into conflict with the Limit (and if he rolls less than average, well, again, no interaction with the Limit). HOWEVER, if you get lucky and manage to gain a phenomenal 10 Hits because, you know, you got lucky, you have just been punished for that success, because you are only allowed to apply up to your limit.

Limits aren't supposed to come into play much unless you start stacking up dice pool increases without doing anything about your limit.

I do understand that, but they still punish players, in my opinion.
Getting the lucky roll is supposed to be exciting. With limits in place, they don't even matter any more... Ho Hum...
And that is boring and dull, if you ask me. *shrug*

Obvious solution: Find something to do with hits above the Limit.

You mean like special effects or....?

Something like that, yes. I'm not really sure what, though. For First Aid (for example), might ease off on wound penalties or something... 1:1 loss of soak dice for attacks?

OTOH you'd have to balance the hits-above-limit effects with hits-below-limit such that it's more desirable to have hits-below-limit or we'd end up in a very strange boat indeed.

Easy for attacks: Hits above accuracy add to damage but not to the threshold for dodge, meaning that a really lucky shot will still deal a metric ton of damage if it hits but is still theoretically dodgeable.

And easing off wound penalties in the manner of "count as having N less boxes of damage for determining wound penalties" or taking away soak dice (thus adding 0.33 damage per extra hit) would certainly cover off that. But that really only gets us started...

Not sure about wanting it to be more desirable to have hits below level, but the benefits of going over limit would have to be carefully gauged otherwise if the special effects are too good, people will intentionally use a lower accuracy weapon so as to have a better chance to go over limit setting to gain the bonus effect, even if it means lower initial damage.


That has potential...

If it is an opposed test, you could just invert the order of operations and have the limit apply after net hits are calculated (and assessing drain based on a post-limit net hits calculation)

So instead of 7 hits reduced to 4 hits due to weapon accuracy opposed by 2 hits netting 2 hit, you would have 7 hits opposed by 2 hits netting 5 hits, reduced to 4 total net hits due to weapon accuracy.

I've used edge multiple times to keep an awesome roll, I didn't feel cheated. It felt like a decision with ups and downs, I thought it would suck but I like it. I just wish accuracy was a modifier on your base limit. Having it a set number in such a crucial part of the game seems to defeat the purpose of inherent limits. Oh and I'm not that happy with how the physical limit is calculated, i get the game balance side of it but it just seems off.

Eh. I sorta like the idea that you can roll at or above the other guy's limit, and thus he cannot succeed.

I can kind of agree with that.

The thing about limits is that they make you make choices (not specifically you Shinobi). Don't like having your great rolls reduced? Work on your limit. Don't want to work on your limit? build up your edge. Don't want to do either? Work on your lower skills first.

Character creation and development is about trade-offs. If there is no trade off then characters become homogenised and boring. A lot of the complaints I hear about 5th Ed seem to always come down to: "I don't want to have to make hard choices. Why make me choose? Why can't I have both?"

They really don't... at least not for me. *shrug*
For me, at least, it is not about the Hard Choices. It is about punishing the players for being lucky. I hate that.

That's kind of my point.

A lot of rules punish players (and NPCs for that matter alike).
The point is, that with a dicepool system like shadowrun, using low dicepools (lower than 15), the vararity is just too high.
With 5 dice you may get practically anything between 0 and 4 hits.

@Choice or Punishment
So you get punished if you get lucky and you have not worked on your limits. The choice is right there.
Every choice can be seen as a punishment or a reward, depending on where you stand.
As a matter of fact, rationally, you can not regard it as punishment, because you do not get any kind of reduction. It would be a punishment if it would be like: You hit the limit +1, you get only get limit -1 hits. If you would have had limit hits, you would have got limit hits. That would working as a punishment. (Or if you would get -1 too all dicepools for your next action everytime you would roll over the limits)

See, I disagree... Limits do not come into play enough to even be in the game (hell, even some Freelancers/Playtesters have commented as such), as far as I am concerned, but when they do, they are a punishment. I agree that you can work on your Limits, but then you take something that is rarely an issue, make it more of a rare issue, and then when you roll lucky, you are STILL punished for that luck. It is just stupid. *shrug*

Your example makes no sense. If I have a Limit of 7, and I have 10 Hits, that is a reduction of at least 3 Hits, and potentially more, since they do not count for the oppositional comparison. Punishment.

Yea...
...
...
Limits where put in place as a response to over-inflated dice pools...
So therefore it is a punishment for those gamers who play on the moderate side by not having dice pools over 15... Yes, you may see more of a swing with lower dice pools but not being able to use them is a kick in the balls. A better way to go would have been to decide what they wanted as the max dice pool capable and adjusted everything else to match that. Does it still affect the lower dice pool characters, of course it does, but then I would not expect a beginner (or expert even but someone fully kitted out to the max?) to be able to shoot a moving target 1000 yards away in windy conditions on a moving vehicle. Limits are a crutch to shore up a failing part of the game and not a true fix.