Theme-wise, I would say SR4 is much 'lighter' compared to other editions in someways. The introduction of AIs/Infected/Changelings/Drakes/Shapechangers/Technomancers as potential PCs opens up the world to the fantastic. There's been less on the global threat scope (e.g. no more Deus, no more Mr. Darke, less on the megacorp global machinations). I like this personally. If I want to play a more 'realistic' futuristic setting, I'd go play Cyberpunk. However, I like Shadowrun for the fantastic choices and the amazingly rich setting (far richer than any other RPG I've played). Oh and thank god they got rid of Fading for Otaku. That really pissed me off...

In many ways, rules have either been simplified dramatically (i.e. Matrix) and in some cases, really dumbed down (i.e. the approach to totems, different magic systems and spirits really comes to mind). So its not all roses but overall I really like it.

Technology has leapfrogged leaps and bounds since SR3 with genetic engineering and nanotech becoming the replacement to cyberware and bioware.

Personally, I quite like the approach although I'm expecting a lot more 'substance' books to really flesh out the world setting as I've come to expect for all the past authors of the Shadowrun setting. I have a huge collection of stuff from SR1 through to today so I can easily draw upon the material previously printed to flesh out my campaign so its not a huge loss to me right away.

For new players however I'd say this is a significant issue that should be prioritised. For veteran players/GMs, this WILL become a problem as the world has changed since the Crash and without more books to guide us/influence our perception of the world, we're left to guess - which may make it harder to incorporate future materials.

I guess my question to other GMs out there - how do you manage the gap? I plan on getting Ghost Cartels ASAP but I'm also looking for more substance on the new megacorps, their goals, new Threats (capital intentional), etc.

- J.

I'd hold off on Ghost Cartels for the moment. If you get anything, get Runner Havens for the Hong Kong section, it introduces the city beautifully. Seattle is a good example of how to build an insipid generic sprawl, though. I don't have Corporate Enclaves, but it might be another good setting book to get you started.

I'm using Seattle in my campaign as the main corner stone. I've got New Seattle which I'm using as my basis but I read Runner Havens and apart from a brief update on the current state of play, I was very disappointed. The Hong Kong section looks good though. I may wind up buying it out of necessity for the details on Seattle alone. I actually quite dislike the new format of the location books to be honest. I much preferred the old approach they used (one book per country or city).

BTW Cain, I read your review and found myself largely nodding in agreement.

I'd like to buy Corporate Enclaves for the details on Tenochtitlan. I got the Aztlan Sourcebook and was very impressed with it and getting more details on Tenochtitilan to help flesh out the city would be fantastic as its definitely a city I'd like be re-using.

- J.

I keep the adventures street level.

We plan to provide a global picture of the Sixth World's geopolitics and history in the The Sixth World Almanac. This will necessarily be a brief overview of the global status quo, but the most far-reaching to date.

We will continue to expand the core location books in the style of Runner Havens and Corporate Enclaves with the upcoming Feral Cities (spotlighting Chicago and Lagos). The format allows us to address some of the regional history and politics as well as the nuances of the sprawl itself. Other location books tentatively on the schedule include Awakened Haunts and Cities of Intrigue.

Note that Tenoctitlán gets only the shortest of writeups in Corporate Enclaves, it is one of the secondary locations spotlighted rather than one of the core ones.

Emergence actually fills in several gaps in the history regarding the aftermath of the Crash 2.0, but it is our intention to keep certain elements obscure, picking up plot threads 5 years later.

Further setting/background updates will be forthcoming in Vice (the new Underworld SB) and Corporate Guide (the...errr... corporate guide). The status quo depicted in Vice will be directly impacted by the turmoil unleashed in Ghost Cartels, but the later is very much a campaign book rather than a setting book.

Additional setting updates have been discreetly inserted in the fiction and setting material in the advanced core books.

Whatever happened to the Sixth World, it happened in Germany as well. Only with better gear. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

You mean like Tir Tairngire? Which got all of a paragraph in Runner Havens?

So, the book that establishes the norm is being released after the one that shakes things up? Strange.

Personally, I thought we'd seen the end of moneygrubbing RPG companies that release material spread over as many books as possible, which is pretty much has to be bought because it's all "core material" and are the rules referred to by other sourcebooks...
...But it seems that view is alive-and-kicking with SR v4.

Hi Synner.

Yep. Noticed that with Emergence and for my group where we are playing through the pre/post Crash 2.0 it is proving invaluable.

Sounds like those other books in the pipeline are what I'm after. I look forward to it.

I have two other quick questions:
1) Can you give some juicy hints on whats Horizon's goals/machinations? In many ways they sound like another 'friendly' megacorp like Evo?
2) I noticed that unlike other location books the new format are containing less details on venues/places to visit. As a GM this is really maddening. In future books, please leave out the short one-two page summaries are really maddening. In future can you please keep the number of locations down and increase the detail. Less is more as they say. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Thanks.

- J.

Evo is 'friendly'? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif)

All you need is the Shadowrun 4th Edition rule book to play. Everything else is supplementary and at your discretion. I'd hardly call that "money grubbing."

Unless, of course, you bring your character to another table or a Missions setting. Then, all of a sudden your character will get mowed under by all the new powerful and shiny toys that render your character obsolete.

Last I checked, they were a business. I expect them to try to make money off of me - Game developers have got to eat too. I don't invite people to come into my building and tell me I should build software for free, or that one application should cover all the functions my users want without ever needing patches or expansions.

For the most part, I usually feel like I'm getting value for what I buy in the SR4 line. There are some things that I don't like, but I recognize that they can't please everyone all the time.

I'm going to make this absolutely clear because I really don't want you misinterpreting my words (or Cain... no wait, its too late). My post in this thread was specifically in response to Jake's query regarding source and setting material.

Shadowrun, Fourth Edition was concieved to have a limited number of core rulebooks. I have no desire or intent to change that editorial direction. All the core rulebooks we announced (Street Magic, Augmentation, Arsenal, Unwired, and Runner's Companion) are now available—with the exception of Running Wild. We have no plans for further core rulebooks (though Mr. Johnson's Companion will likely be labeled "core" it obviously won't be aimed at everyone).

That said we are a game publisher and we intend to make money. We do have an ambitious schedule though and in a typical year hope to put out anywhere between 5-7 books (+ ebooks). Consequently we will continue to add to the setting through setting and plotbooks. With a dynamic timeline and an entire world to explore we have plenty of setting material to put out over the next few years. As I have explained, and I'll reiterate now for those who haven't been paying attention: in SR4, we've decided not to include rules or gear in setting books to avoid the dispersion and rules bloat that occurred in SR3. I fully intend to continue the direction Rob established with that As with the setting books that have been released, future setting books will not include rules or gear. Setting material and fluff always has been and always will be optional, some groups use it, others don't (whether it be the original Tir Nan Og sb or Target: Awakened Lands, or Corporate Enclaves). What I will promise you is that the material that we do release will be relevant to our ongoing storylines and setting developments (in much the same way as Ghost Cartels plugs into Runner Havens and Corporate Enclaves ).

Does this mean there will be no new gear or additional rules material in the years to come? Quite frankly, the answer is: No. The Sixth World is ever-evolving and it will continue to develop and introduce new technologies and refine existing ones.

However, we will be refrain from adding unnecessary rules and any future gear, augmentations, vehicles, etc that we do introduce will appear in (entirely optional) supplemental or expansion books, typically built around a theme (or two). These will not be "core" and will by no means be essential or even relevant to all groups. For instance, military grade vehicles, equipment, and even weaponry in the core books has been intentionally kept to a minimum and reflects items that would potentially appear on the streets or in the course of shadowruns in typical sprawls. We might, however, in the future do a Military-themed supplemental (not unlike Fields of Fire), with miltech gear, relevant setting background, and alternate campaign rules/guidelines. Likewise, we might do a Media-themed supplemental (Shadowbeat for the Seventies) with media/entertainment gear, relevant setting background, and alternate campaign rules/guidelines. Both of those fall beyond the traditional realm of shadowrunning (though there are the usual bridge points) and could even be categorized as alternate campaign material, hence they would be considered supplementals rather than core rules and their contents would be entirely optional.


A darker side to Horizon's image and agenda has been hinted at in Corporate Enclaves (okay, more than hinted at). It may not be what people were expecting but stuff like the Dawkins Group and the scary potential of Pito should suggest this is more than Apple+Google on steroids. Horizon will evidently be touched upon in Corporate Guide and we have plans for them further down the line.


Personally I like the secondary writeups and in my experience a lot of people have gotten a lot of mileage out of those short hook filled summaries. As for doing more individual locations in the long write up, there are other ways of doing that which are more useful for a wider variety of groups and we'll be exploring some of those in the future (keep your eye peeled).

Wow, hey, I get attacked before I poke holes in an argument!

Synner, I'll level with you. The decision to not put rules and gear in setting books is probably a good one. But the problem is, SR4 is doing the reverse-- increasingly adding setting elements into rulebooks and adventures. That creates just as much bloat as anything else. It's also an interesting way to pump up sales, since if players want to keep up with the setting, they need to buy the adventures, which traditionally aren't good sellers in any case.

Like the Jake said, Less Is More. The more you try to cram into a single book, the further you dilute your good material, rendering the whole product mediocre. I just got a hold of Ghost Cartels, and that's one of the first impressions I have: the good material is spread out all over the place. Instead of doing one thing well-- present a campaign-- it seems too focused on showing off a new format, and doing a lot of things middling-well. The fluff-to-meat ratios are getting very high in the latest books.

And since I know you're going to blow this off unless I make at least one snarky comment: Yes, Catalyst is a game company, and they deserve to make money. That's fine and dandy. I'm sure the Shadowrun fans feel very happy that their favorite game is being run by the exact same corporate money-grubbing mentality that they like to fight against in game. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Thanks Synner.

Apart from the new CORE books I haven't purchased many (my local gamestore does not stock Corporate Enclaves, Runner Havens or Ghost Cartels - despite my repeated requests). I may have to resort to ordering it online just to get a copy before Christmas.

I like the description the format of the books based on the description and reviews of Ghost Cartels, so I'm looking forward to it. So long as NPCs are statted out and it means less work for me, that makes me a happy camper. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Having said that, I strongly disagree a GM can get much use out of a one page description of a city. Unless said GM has already fully fleshed out that city and just wants some flavor text and politics... in which case why does he need a one page summary in the first place? I guess we will just have to agree to disagree there. I'd like to know what the feedback is from other GMs here who have had experience with these other books and the shorter summaries.

On a side note, I am working on fleshing out 'new' Seattle 2070 in my campaign setting as that's where I want my focus to be for awhile. I also plan on establishing/writing up several large cities which key metaplots in my campaign revolve around. Cities I am definetely writing up are: Montreal (since my PCs are ex-Seraphim/CATCo agents dealing with being unemployed as of 2064) and Boston (since its a hop-skip-jump from Montreal - plus my PCs were there when the Crash occurd). Cities that are very high on the wishlist are Tenochtitlan (I like Aztlan), somewhere in Russia, probably Vladivostok and finally somewhere exotic. Based on what Cain's writing, I'll probably set it in Hong Kong but I'd love to see some juicy material on Amazonia and/or Azania. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Cheers

- J.

Synner, how could you do this! You add background to rulebook...To make them interesting and make me buy them...You're so EVIL. EVIIILLLLL



And do not forget: If you play 7th Sea, then you're probably a pirate.
If you play StarWars, then you are a Jedi...


I like people to accuse Roleplaying compagnys to make money. Devs are just fat-asses drinking champagne and eating caviar while we, poor folks, buy every 3-4 monthes one of there 20€ to 40€ product, that we use for years.

I'm not sure, I understood the Jedi comment but as to the evils of game developers and the like. That the game devs operate in a market based system isn't their fault, they could go and produce the material for free but I'm guessing that's not cost-effective and besides I like the pretty books.
I look at role-playing games first as I would any book (in that I find them nice to read) and secondly as a game/investment. The book end is so and so in some cases (D&D 4th ed I'm looking at you) but it's the game/investment end of things where RP products really start to see value. If I torrent Shadowrun books for free and play that game 8 hours a weekend 4 weeks a months etc etc, I've gained an almost comically high value from virtually nothing. Now I torrent all sorts of stuff so normally this wouldn't bother me, my heavily left-leaning (marxist) views propagate that media distribution via methods like torrenting are in fact a moral imperative by virtue of how much money the companies whom I typically torrent from have. In the case of Catalyst games and a number of smaller record labels, I actually buy their products. Why is this? Because I want to them to continue to produce content and I appreciate both the way in which they conduct buisness and necessity they have on the consumer due to their small size. Now once Catalyst becomes WotC and is making crazy bank for a corp, I look at buying the books as a gift to the company who produces them and am happy to pay them.
Everytime an addition to a game comes out whether it's D&D, M&M, SR, or whatever there is a plethora of complaints that the company is operating in it's best interest versus the consumer. But why would they do that? What's the benifit to them? If they alienate their fanbase they have no consumers. I think the gamer consumer market is a savvy one and no one likes to spend more money than they feel they have to, or have material that was useful now seem less useful because it's no longer used but there's no such thing as the perfect RPG and eventually one wants something new. When D&D 3rd ed had well and truly run its course and done everything it could practically due, it produced a new edition. I can think of a couple of more 3e books they could have put out but they're not really necesarry books and don't advance the edition in anyway. If you're really wanting game companies to not produce new content and only support existant content than just give them charitable donations.

I'm not sure I follow you, and I'm not really sure what you're complaining about above. So far the fluff material in the corebooks has been a resounding success and one of the most cited reasons for picking up the new edition (over say SR3's encyclopaedic approach).

It should go without saying that there is a obvious distinction between rules bloat and "fluff bloat" (something I've never heard anyone complain about with regards to Shadowrun). The advanced rulebooks include (unsurprisingly) advanced options and shiny new toys plus fluff material that grounds and contextualizes the book's contents in the setting — something that SR3 core rulebooks (at least until the SOTAs) generally lacked.

Furthermore metaplot, setting and timeline advancement has always been the perview of setting books (Bug City, Portrait of a Dragon, Universal Brotherhood), plotbooks (Renraku Arcology: Shutdown, Year of the Comet, and System Failure) and adventures (in Missing Blood, Super Tuesday/Shadows of the Underworld, and Brainscan), through all the editions. So I'm not sure what you're trying to say by pointing out that we've decided to keep to a tried and tested "strategy" that's served Shadowrun well over multiple editions.


I look forward to seeing your review of Ghost Cartels, since quite frankly I'm not entirely sure what you understand by "good material" and have no idea of what to make of your statement without further context.

Without further detail, I'm going to have to chalk possible confusion to this being your first pass of Ghost Cartels since the book is structured linearly (particularly compared to System Failure or Emergence whose hybrid formats called for more back and forth between fluff and game info) with fiction and game info sections clearly organized. In Ghost Cartels there is an over-arching fiction chapter up front, setting the scene and taking up roughly a third of the book. This initial chapter isolates the fluff from the Game Information with the exception of the fiction vignettes that lead each chapter. The remaining three chapters are exclusively campaign-oriented game information and the adventure frameworks. Each of the three story arcs unfold sequentially (though they may be played seperately) and the contextualizing game information is placed to (a) frame each arc, or (b) complement the adventure framework where it comes into play. Casts of Shadows and Grunts and Moving Targets and are provided at the end of each track/story arc, so they can be easily referenced and copied out. Reviews of the fluff content in particular have been universally positive and since the format has also gone over well (exactly as is), other fans don't seem to share your view.

You'll understand that with Ghost Cartels selling surprisingly well in a sluggish market and reviews exceptionally positive (despite a few nagging but minor problems that I freely admit slipped through), I'll take your preliminary review with the usual grain of salt.

Don't get me wrong, one person's opinion is as important as the next guy's and I'll listen to everyone who takes the time to provide coherent and constructive criticism. But the fact remains that you're obviously displeased with the direction Catalyst has been pursuing, in direct opposition to the continuing and growing strength of the line under that direction.


For the record, it's not the snarky comments that catch my eye or the now expected dissatisfaction with the direction we're taking, it's the growing disconnect between your heart-felt views and what our buying audience actually seems to want (as gleemed from direct feedback from buyers/fans and overall industry sales.)

The size of the company from whom one "torrents" is irrelevant. It's still theft and it's illegal.

That said, on-line exclusive giveaways and uber-cheap rules/settings downloads and handfuls of free ones are a must-have for any forward thinking game company. I've been quite happy with Crafty Games' $1-3 rules expansions for Spycraft 2.0. I'm not 100% thrilled to be paying for the New York Missions downloads but at the same time I know Catalyst probably isn't in the position to give away professionally written adventures, so I'm cool with it.

EDIT

Not really.

Don't forget Catalyst provides for FREE
25 Denver Missions
Quickstart Rules for GM and Players + Food Fight

Which means you can actually an entire 25 run campaign style game without buying anything. (Except the paper and access to the internet, but hey...)

always thoght that was a good idea to give away free rule sets ever since gurps and dp9 did it

good way to get people to try your game and with all the rpg out there and im sure it stop people from downloading the full game just to try it.

also think it cool that dp9 give people stuff to run demos for other gamers(not sure if it is good for bisnuess).

It's very rellevant given the moral position I was advocating. The idea of theft is 100% contigent on a given conception of property if your values on property differ than it being "theft" is an issue of legalities. And laws aren't morally right in and of themselves, they really only have as much power as they are enforced.