IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

11 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> What Do You Think of the Matrix Rules?, And remember, this is for posterity, so be honest. How do you feel?
Draco18s
post May 12 2009, 02:56 AM
Post #51


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 11 2009, 10:50 PM) *
Is it though?

Though I guess that you Could program a rating 7+ Command Program... Of course, you lose out on your high rating Reaction in that case, substituting in your Program Rating... could be a wash, but probably not...



Fluff-wise. Not mechanics. Obviously by RAW someone with 1 reaction and a rating 6 command drives better using Command. But why?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post May 12 2009, 03:03 AM
Post #52


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (Draco18s @ May 11 2009, 08:56 PM) *
Fluff-wise. Not mechanics. Obviously by RAW someone with 1 reaction and a rating 6 command drives better using Command. But why?



I would say that the deciding factor in that argument would be the character's Pilot Skill... And probably because teh worls is so computerized and connected, it is natural for people to be more familiar with command interfaces than the real thing...

Bad example, but here it is... how many Kids are crazy skilled with game consoles and the various games that support them... Need for Speed, Halo, etc.? Hand/Eye coordination via electornic interface is quicker and more responsive than the meat interface for mechanical control...

in 2072, this is the obvious extension of that using the Command Program...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Octopiii
post May 12 2009, 03:10 AM
Post #53


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 10-January 09
From: Des Moines, WA
Member No.: 16,758



QUOTE (Larme @ May 11 2009, 07:18 PM) *
No, you don't just send general instructions through Command. That's not the remote control feature, that's the captain's chair. If you give commands to the drone and tell it to act on its own, then it uses its Pilot rating, not your skills. With Command, you take hold of the virtual wheel, push the virtual pedals, and drive the van through boring traffic just as if you were sitting in it.

The Command program is universal because it links electronic functions to virtual controls. A good command program has an intuitive interface which gives you fine control over throttle, steering, weapons, and all of that. It's like a radio transmitter pad you'd use for an RC car, but it's infinitely more complicated, and also virtual.


And this virtual transmitter pad works with every electronic device, instantly, without needing to take time to interface with it? Eh... I'm not entirely sold on either the concept or that's how it is intended to be, fluff-wise. I'm not sure the devs knew how command interfaced with devices when they wrote that in the core Matrix section, considering the obliqueness of their description. It's there though, I just think it detracts from Rigging by being Rigging Light.

QUOTE
So you're saying basically to fold Data Search and Software into Computer. I think that would probably make sense. I don't think it's absolutely required, because again, agents can do all that grunt work. I'm not sure what's unintuitive about Agents. It's like if you did your computing through the paper clip guy on MS Office, only if the paper clip wasn't stupid and worthless, but actually just did whatever you typed into that little box with no fuss.


No, not required, but it would make the matrix easier to understand. As it is now, to use your Agent idea, you would have to understand these skills, understand they are of limited utility, and understand that you can run a program that can run a program to do actions that you would otherwise need to have a skill to use. My first read through I didn't get that Data Search is an extremely limited skill that can be easily run by a cheap program. I just got "Oh, if I need to find something on the matrix, I need this skill and this program."

QUOTE
And since my data's getting corrupted with all the drift, let me ask another question that will help me clarify the data I've gleaned so far. Of those who find the Matrix rules confusing, how many are basing this feeling off of a reading of SR4 alone, how many off a reading of SR4A alone, and how many off of a reading of both


Yeah, sorry. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif) . SR4 and Unwired, mainly. I haven't looked too much at SR4A. I'm not sure looking at SR4A now would let me know how much easier it is to understand, though, since I've already managed to mostly muddle my way through it and would have the benefit of hindsight.

Also, I wish there was a good way to make the logic stat relevant. Maybe give a dicepool bonus after a certain level, such as how STR gives a recoil bonus after a certain level.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post May 12 2009, 03:14 AM
Post #54


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (Octopiii @ May 11 2009, 08:10 PM) *
*snip*

Also, I wish there was a good way to make the logic stat relevant. Maybe give a dicepool bonus after a certain level, such as how STR gives a recoil bonus after a certain level.



But is that really necessary?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Octopiii
post May 12 2009, 03:14 AM
Post #55


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 10-January 09
From: Des Moines, WA
Member No.: 16,758



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 11 2009, 07:50 PM) *
Is it though?

Though I guess that you Could program a rating 7+ Command Program... Of course, you lose out on your high rating Reaction in that case, substituting in your Program Rating... could be a wash, but probably not...


You can take 5 actions a combat turn with very little modification, and a Command 6 program costs a fraction over 1 bp. Reaction 5+ costs significantly more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Octopiii
post May 12 2009, 03:17 AM
Post #56


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 10-January 09
From: Des Moines, WA
Member No.: 16,758



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 11 2009, 08:14 PM) *
But is that really necessary?



There should be some way to reward people who are intelligent hackers, and not just script kiddies. Logic is the most dumped stat after Strength, which is too bad.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post May 12 2009, 03:26 AM
Post #57


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (Octopiii @ May 11 2009, 08:14 PM) *
You can take 5 actions a combat turn with very little modification, and a Command 6 program costs a fraction over 1 bp. Reaction 5+ costs significantly more.



Are you talking 5 Simpel Actions, 5 COmplex Actions or 5 IP's... if Complex Actions/IP's, it is not simple nor cheap to do so... and it will cost significantly more than a fraction over 1bp to accomplish...

Simsense Booster (4 Ip's in Hot VR) costs: 65,000 Nuyen... and .5 points of Essence
Simsense Accelerator (Comlink Modification, Raise to 5 IP's in Hot VR) Costs: 15,000 Nuyen...

So as you can see, definitely NOT cheap... equal to .5 Essence and 80,000 Nuyen (16bp) > 1...

Reaction enhancement provides additional benefits other than Piloting, but do cost some at chargen... 40bp for a human to get to a 5 and an additional 32,000 Nuyen for +2 Wired Reflexes and 20,000 for +2 Reaction Enhancer... Total Reaction = 9 and I can still afford the Simsense Accelerator (Comlink Modification, Raise to 4 IP's in Hot VR) Costs: 15,000 Nuyen... all for 67,000 Nuyen and 3.6 points of essence... (54bp)

As you can see... it is all relative... it is what you are wanting...

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post May 12 2009, 03:39 AM
Post #58


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Draco18s @ May 11 2009, 08:56 PM) *
Fluff-wise. Not mechanics. Obviously by RAW someone with 1 reaction and a rating 6 command drives better using Command. But why?

I'm thinking because it's easier to point and click and have software take care of the rest than to personally maneuver the car.

To offer another example, ever played Crimson Skies for the XBox? In that game, if you pulled down on both sticks and clicked the right stick button, you do a modern version of an Immelmann turn (or maybe it was a Split-S; I forget). If you were "behind the wheel" as it were, you'd have to simultaneously control the throttle, the ailerons, the rudder, and the yoke.

I believe that's the difference between a good Command program and just controlling the vehicle directly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kigmatzomat
post May 12 2009, 04:00 AM
Post #59


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 913
Joined: 26-August 05
From: Louisville, KY (Well, Memphis, IN technically but you won't know where that is.)
Member No.: 7,626



QUOTE (Aaron @ May 11 2009, 09:59 PM) *
And since my data's getting corrupted with all the drift, let me ask another question that will help me clarify the data I've gleaned so far. Of those who find the Matrix rules confusing, how many are basing this feeling off of a reading of SR4 alone, how many off a reading of SR4A alone, and how many off of a reading of both?


If you want clean data, use a poll. Comment-at-will surveys always requires significant parsing. The comments tend to be more valuable highlighting issues the pollster did not realize were issues.

As for your question, no one I know has an SR4A. Call it a dozen gamers and all have Sr4.

And who has a reason to buy the Anniversary printing? After all, it's not a new edition or anything, just errata, right? Nope, not SR 4.5 Revised.

Btw, there's no fluff anyone can write that would differentiate between stat+skill, stat+skill+program, stat+skill capped by program or skill+program. 10 dice is 10 dice.

And making one subsystem diverge uniquely from the otherwise universal resolution mechanic to enable "multi-tasking" is a suboptimal design decision. A proper design course (industrial engineering, software interface, architecture, etc) stresses that deviations from the normal pardigm, even when the "norm" is only in regards to a single system, results in reduced efficiency, decreased utilization of that subsystem or even avoidance.

Every RPG designer worth their salt should take an actual design course, preferrably software user interface design and documentation as it's the most accessible algorithmic design program.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post May 12 2009, 04:03 AM
Post #60


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



QUOTE (kigmatzomat @ May 12 2009, 12:00 AM) *
Btw, there's no fluff anyone can write that would differentiate between stat+skill, stat+skill+program, stat+skill capped by program or skill+program. 10 dice is 10 dice.


Stat 6, skill 4, program 5.

But 10 isn't 15 isn't 10 (max 5) isn't 9 dice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kigmatzomat
post May 12 2009, 04:09 AM
Post #61


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 913
Joined: 26-August 05
From: Louisville, KY (Well, Memphis, IN technically but you won't know where that is.)
Member No.: 7,626



QUOTE (Aaron @ May 11 2009, 11:39 PM) *
To offer another example, ever played Crimson Skies for the XBox? In that game, if you pulled down on both sticks and clicked the right stick button, you do a modern version of an Immelmann turn (or maybe it was a Split-S; I forget). If you were "behind the wheel" as it were, you'd have to simultaneously control the throttle, the ailerons, the rudder, and the yoke.


If I remember Crimson Sky, the only way to pull of that maneuver was to use the macro.

Which is the problem. If the code doesn't know the routine, it can't do it. Want to invert that CS trick maneuver? Sorry, no can do. Meaning that for a new, on-the-spot stunt the software does nothing except possibly interfere. And nothing says "on-the-spot" like being a shadowrunner in mid op.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post May 12 2009, 04:13 AM
Post #62


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



QUOTE (kigmatzomat @ May 11 2009, 10:09 PM) *
If I remember Crimson Sky, the only way to pull of that maneuver was to use the macro.

Which is the problem. If the code doesn't know the routine, it can't do it. Want to invert that CS trick maneuver? Sorry, no can do. Meaning that for a new, on-the-spot stunt the software does nothing except possibly interfere. And nothing says "on-the-spot" like being a shadowrunner in mid op.

It's also an issue if you start it and want to turn it into something else as you see an opening. Or a wall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Chrysalis
post May 12 2009, 04:39 AM
Post #63


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,141
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Neverwhere
Member No.: 2,048



@Aaron,

May I recommend a structured questionnaire style of answering. If you ask for what is good and just and bad and nefarious in the Matrix rules of SR4(A) you will get as many answers as there are posters. A multipart questionnaire with questions with scalar answers and free text boxes for explanations would be more helpful, even for people like me who are not big fans of arguing the minutae of rules. Furthermore, I recommend that it would be an online form which is filled.

This would avoid the inevitable topic drift, as there is no place to ridicule the rightness of the answers, except perhaps a thread such as this, where you could place the link. You could then also use the discussion and its divergent streams as being a representation of the intertextuality between the questionnaire and its target audience.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Octopiii
post May 12 2009, 05:10 AM
Post #64


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 10-January 09
From: Des Moines, WA
Member No.: 16,758



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ May 11 2009, 08:26 PM) *
Are you talking 5 Simpel Actions, 5 COmplex Actions or 5 IP's... if Complex Actions/IP's, it is not simple nor cheap to do so... and it will cost significantly more than a fraction over 1bp to accomplish...

Simsense Booster (4 Ip's in Hot VR) costs: 65,000 Nuyen... and .5 points of Essence
Simsense Accelerator (Comlink Modification, Raise to 5 IP's in Hot VR) Costs: 15,000 Nuyen...

So as you can see, definitely NOT cheap... equal to .5 Essence and 80,000 Nuyen (16bp) > 1...

Reaction enhancement provides additional benefits other than Piloting, but do cost some at chargen... 40bp for a human to get to a 5 and an additional 32,000 Nuyen for +2 Wired Reflexes and 20,000 for +2 Reaction Enhancer... Total Reaction = 9 and I can still afford the Simsense Accelerator (Comlink Modification, Raise to 4 IP's in Hot VR) Costs: 15,000 Nuyen... all for 67,000 Nuyen and 3.6 points of essence... (54bp)

As you can see... it is all relative... it is what you are wanting...


I'm not sure what point you are attempting to make. 54 > 16, and 3.4 > .5, no? Even taking out the Simsense accelerator, it's still 51 > 16. Factoring in the the commlink, the hacker is still far ahead. In fact, I just realized command is a Common program, so it doesn't even cost a full BP. So for a minimal outlay, the remote operation hacker gets two more initiative passes and a better dice pool than the physical driver. That's not even counting + 2 for hotsim. Hell, I have so much more extra BP than you I could add in Codeslinger (remote operation) for 2 more dice and not sweat it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post May 12 2009, 06:21 AM
Post #65


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



QUOTE (Draco18s @ May 11 2009, 09:35 PM) *
That raises the question of how using Command is better than just sitting behind the wheel.


That's certainly a messed up aspect of Command. Because your reaction isn't used, if you had a rating 6 command and 1 reaction, you'd be a driving dynamo via remote control, even though behind the wheel you'd suck. I guess the only explanation is that Command does a lot of the work for you, your attributes don't come into play, just like every single other matrix program. Note that it's not automatically better than jumping in, though. Jumped in, you use Response instead of Reaction, so you've got the same deal where your reaction might suck but it doesn't matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post May 12 2009, 06:25 AM
Post #66


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



QUOTE (Draco18s @ May 12 2009, 04:56 AM) *
Fluff-wise. Not mechanics. Obviously by RAW someone with 1 reaction and a rating 6 command drives better using Command. But why?

Could be that the high rating program have logic in it that links actions? like say, that the user wants to turn, but the speed is to high to make the turn, then the command program will automatically adjust breaking to make the action happen?

Basically, driver assist tech taken to the Nth degree.

Sure, one could start to ask why this is not built into each and every vehicle out there. But as its the big corps that both make the vehicles, and the software? Nickles and dimes...

I guess one could compare it to playing a driving game and driving a actual car. Only that in this instance your doing both...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post May 12 2009, 06:30 AM
Post #67


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



QUOTE (hobgoblin @ May 12 2009, 01:25 AM) *
Sure, one could start to ask why this is not built into each and every vehicle out there. But as its the big corps that both make the vehicles, and the software? Nickles and dimes...


It is built into every car, it's called Pilot. Just like Command, a Pilot's rating is substituted for the attributes when a car does something by itself. Why not use virtual controls in all cars, effectively meaning that everyone just remote controls their car? Because it's even easier for people not to drive at all -- get a good Pilot in there, and you can read the screamsheet on your way to work instead of having to sit there and mind the controls like a peasant (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreyBrother
post May 12 2009, 06:40 AM
Post #68


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 619
Joined: 24-July 08
From: Resonance Realms, behind the 2nd Star
Member No.: 16,162



Wasn't there exactly such a thing in the third edition and didn't this thing give negative dice pools if you wanted to do something "illegal" on the street because you went up the speed limit and the system actually brakes?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post May 12 2009, 07:00 AM
Post #69


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



QUOTE (GreyBrother @ May 12 2009, 08:40 AM) *
Wasn't there exactly such a thing in the third edition and didn't this thing give negative dice pools if you wanted to do something "illegal" on the street because you went up the speed limit and the system actually brakes?

I think its called gridguide, but i cant find a similar negative effect in 4th ed.

Btw, i found that looking up how to use the command program is a troublesome subject.

The programs description lists page references for drones and agents, but neither of those lists the command program as a option in its way of control.

The only way to find something is by going to the index, and there it points one to page 221, but the actual meat is on page 220, controlling devices.

And even then the text is as generic as it gets...

I find myself wondering why the program exists at all...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larme
post May 12 2009, 08:14 AM
Post #70


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,653
Joined: 22-January 08
Member No.: 15,430



The rules we're talking about are indeed real... See SR4A p.245, "Remote Control." When you remote control, you roll Command + Skill to perform actions with the drone.

In my half-asleep state though, I noticed something interesting just now -- all actions are complex actions when you remote control. So firing a weapon in burst fire or semi-auto can only be done once per pass. Also, Use Sensors becomes a complex action. Everything else is pretty much already a complex action when controlling vehicles, but those are still significant.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Octopiii
post May 12 2009, 08:52 AM
Post #71


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 10-January 09
From: Des Moines, WA
Member No.: 16,758



QUOTE (Larme @ May 12 2009, 12:14 AM) *
The rules we're talking about are indeed real... See SR4A p.245, "Remote Control." When you remote control, you roll Command + Skill to perform actions with the drone.

In my half-asleep state though, I noticed something interesting just now -- all actions are complex actions when you remote control. So firing a weapon in burst fire or semi-auto can only be done once per pass. Also, Use Sensors becomes a complex action. Everything else is pretty much already a complex action when controlling vehicles, but those are still significant.


Yes... including dodge tests, which is pretty punishing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post May 12 2009, 11:55 AM
Post #72


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (kigmatzomat @ May 11 2009, 10:09 PM) *
If I remember Crimson Sky, the only way to pull of that maneuver was to use the macro.

I don't remember if the game let you do a large loop with the left stick, but if it did you could.

Although that wasn't my point. My point was that a Command interface is probably an abstract layer over more manual controls.

QUOTE
Which is the problem. If the code doesn't know the routine, it can't do it. Want to invert that CS trick maneuver? Sorry, no can do. Meaning that for a new, on-the-spot stunt the software does nothing except possibly interfere. And nothing says "on-the-spot" like being a shadowrunner in mid op.

I think another thing that you (and kzt) are missing is the level of sophistication of the fictional programs of the 2070s. If we apply Moore's observation extremely conservatively, say a doubling of sophistication every ten years, then programs will be far and away better at anticipating needs and reacting to novel situations (a technology we have today, if in limited form). True, a driver would still need to make good decisions about driving, but I suspect that's why the dice pool is skill + Command rather than say Pilot + Command.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post May 12 2009, 12:11 PM
Post #73


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (kigmatzomat @ May 11 2009, 10:00 PM) *
If you want clean data, use a poll. Comment-at-will surveys always requires significant parsing. The comments tend to be more valuable highlighting issues the pollster did not realize were issues.

I thought of that, but I had trouble figuring out how to elicit spontaneous answers by offering a list of responses. I'd gladly take pointers on how to do that, though.

QUOTE
As for your question, no one I know has an SR4A. Call it a dozen gamers and all have Sr4.

And who has a reason to buy the Anniversary printing? After all, it's not a new edition or anything, just errata, right? Nope, not SR 4.5 Revised.

I'm pretty sure you don't need to buy SR4A, what with the errata available. However, the two Matrix chapters are, while mechanically similar, quite different in language and structure. In order to figure out what part of said texts are the confusing ones, the question needs to be raised.

QUOTE
Btw, there's no fluff anyone can write that would differentiate between stat+skill, stat+skill+program, stat+skill capped by program or skill+program. 10 dice is 10 dice.

Er ... I'm missing your point here. Could you elaborate?

QUOTE
And making one subsystem diverge uniquely from the otherwise universal resolution mechanic to enable "multi-tasking" is a suboptimal design decision. A proper design course (industrial engineering, software interface, architecture, etc) stresses that deviations from the normal pardigm, even when the "norm" is only in regards to a single system, results in reduced efficiency, decreased utilization of that subsystem or even avoidance.

I'd love to hear ideas on building a "multi-tasking"-enabled system with a more optimal design that doesn't deviate from the normal paradigm. Attribute + skill deviates not at all, but unless the attribute is one that applies to another shadowrunning role, you're losing out on the ability to mix roles. Attribute + skill + program deviates from the norm, unless you're doing an awful lot of first aid; I suppose you could assign a rating to EVERYTHING, but that would be a bit more tracking than necessary, I think. Attribute + skill capped by program is similar to spellcasting, but the spellcasting rules are a deviation from the normal paradigm. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that "programs replace attributes in the Matrix, use standard rules from there" has a very high level of deviation from the main paradigm of attribute + skill. But I'd love to hear novel suggestions.

QUOTE
Every RPG designer worth their salt should take an actual design course, preferrably software user interface design and documentation as it's the most accessible algorithmic design program.

Er ... I guess that would help. I'd prefer they take some solid stats classes and something that involves system analysis, or at least more analysis than interface design would require.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hobgoblin
post May 12 2009, 12:21 PM
Post #74


panda!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,331
Joined: 8-March 02
From: north of central europe
Member No.: 2,242



whats the saying again? designed by artists, played by mathematicians?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blade
post May 12 2009, 12:27 PM
Post #75


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,009
Joined: 25-September 06
From: Paris, France
Member No.: 9,466



QUOTE (Aaron @ May 12 2009, 02:11 PM) *
Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that "programs replace attributes in the Matrix, use standard rules from there" has a very high level of deviation from the main paradigm of attribute + skill. But I'd love to hear novel suggestions.


What about defaulting then? Everyone has Attributes, but not everyone has Programs.
Also with the standard rules it's skill+linked attribute. You can't have skill+linked programs when the link is the other way around.
Then there's the script-kiddie syndrome.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

11 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th May 2025 - 12:43 AM

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.