I've been away from Shadowrun for quite some time, haven't played in an active game in a few years, and that was 3rd edition, which I really enjoyed. That didn't stop me from buying all of the 4th edition books as they came out, I even bought extra copies of the core 4th edition book when it came out in anticipation of getting a game together that never materialized. I finally have a gaming group together again and we're looking to play Shadowrun. Only a couple of the other guys have played any Shadowrun, and they stopped at 2nd edition. The guys that are going to GM haven't played any versions of Shadowrun (I'm not going to be GM'ing). No one has played 4th edition. I spent all last evening reading over the 4th edition rules, created a couple characters, read the threads on here, and I'm pretty sure I don't want to play 4th edition. It doesn't seem to do anything better than 3rd, and seems to do a few things worse. I far prefer chargen in 3rd edition. I'm a consumer whore too, I love new and shiny things, new and shiny toys. It should be easier than this to get me excited about a new edition.

So, I need help with these three things:
1) Some 4th edition zealots show me the light and point out all of the really cool things one can do with 4th that you can't do with 3rd. Convince me to play 4th.
2) Assuming 1 fails, I've lost a few 3rd edition books, and need to fill in some blanks in my collection. Suggestions for the best place to pick up a big 3rd edition collection of books?
3) Also assuming 1 fails, links to your favorite 3rd edition house rules. I also lost my house rules file.

Thanks folks!

Personally I enjoy Fourth Edition more than Third Edtion simply because the rules are more streamlined. However this comes at a cost, the rules are more "vague" than I remember Third Edition as being.

Also Fourth Edition uses Fixed TNs, so the game literaly breaks at high dicepools, so make sure that your players understand that ( Rating 4 ) is literally what used to be ( Rating 6 ) and that there are hardcaps now.

The Matrix is way better in SR4. AR and wireless bring the Hacker/Decker back with the party, doing something practical.

Magic is way more unified and streamlined now. You don't have those spells where either Force or the Spellcasting test makes no difference, and all traditions have been unified so it's not like you have to learn a whole new Magic sub-system for each new Tradition.

Those are the two changes that I have heard most consistently positively endorsed by both SR3 and SR4 players. The remaining changes mostly fall into the realm of "personal preference." The SR4 rules lend themselves to faster play, but leave a lot of the details to individual GM ruling.

An example of a "personal preference" change: Dice Pools are gone. Now, the people that I played SR3 with universally said "good riddance." We never really like having to allocate them and track them and what not. Other people lament the loss of Dice Pools greatly.

I encourage you to actually play SR4 before making a final decision on it. I don't believe simply reading RPG rules is an effective way to evaluate them. RPG rules are meant to be played, and many design decisions in the rules may seem strange in reading turn out to be the done because they are optimized for play.

Depends. Remember the Third Ed Rules?
Play 3rd Ed.
Can't remember most of it?
Start over with 4th Ed.
Nice Toys in there.

the only reason i dont play fourth right now is because i dont want to buy the books. play what you have. you have both. try out sr4 for a game or two. if you dont like it back to third.

Do you feel that character optimizer players have a greater chance of breaking 4th edition than 3rd? I don't remember it being an issue with 3rd, at least not with our players.

4th is more simple in some ways more complicated in others. 3e is the most "complete" edition IMHO but its very chunky and rules heavy. Theres a few books that simplify some things like Mr Johnsons little black book. 4e changed a lot both in terms of world and rules so it may feel less complete than 3rd and they are still working the bugs out, it is however a much more consistent system (with a couple exceptions).

In 3rd you were king if you could get your TN reliably down below 4, no matter what. Then you could do silly awesome stuff even with skill of 4 and Combat Pool.
In 4th Ed you are king if you can get your Dicepool reliably to 20 and above, no matter what. By then it is not that hard to roll the required sum of successes . . err . . HITS . . stupid slang-change <.<

Anyone here loved 3rd edition, tried 4th, and went back to 3rd? Or who loved 3rd edition, tried 4th, and have really enjoyed it?

Tete, so you prefer 4th to 3rd then? Were you a big fan of 3rd? Your signature seems to indicate you were a bigger fan of 2nd.

Malachi (nice name) - In any of the 4-5 3rd edition games I played in, I don't think we ever had a PC decker, and maybe only 1 rigger that entire time, so even though it would be a system improvement to have seamless decking in the game, I'm not sure how much of a vote for the system it is. The streamlined magic thing on the other hand would be nice. That was always wonky with 3rd edition. I'm a fan of resource management, so I liked dice pools, myself. The whole argument about trying before judging doesn't work for me anymore. People used that argument on me to suck me in to trying 4th edition D&D (I really liked 3rd edition). I didn't like the looks of the system from reading it, and 10 sessions and 5 painful months of gaming in, my opinion was worse. I'd rather not waste a bunch of time learning a system that I'm going to ultimately dislike. On the other hand, my opinions of 4th edition Shadowrun aren't nearly as negative as my opinions of 4th edition D&D are, so with enough positive feedback, I'd still give it a shot.

Stahlseele - Yeah, I remember 3rd edition really well and can whip out a character in NSRCG in 20 minutes, and understand that character backwards and forwards. Wish they would've done an NSRCG for 4th.

Ravor - So you're saying the system breaks at higher power levels due to massive dice pools? Just how vague are the 4th edition rules, compared to 3rd? Any examples?

Edge seems kind of cool in 4th edition, that's one big change I think is cool.

The reason for playing SR4 can't be found in the rules! The setting's simply superior. No more dusty late 80s cyberpunk supposed near future with tech outdate by RL 21th century i-phones. No need to say more. Although I could mention vampires. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) *run 4 cover*

I've played every edition, and I find SR4 to be a very strong edition. I loved 2nd, I loved 3rd, and I love 4th. Personally, there's a few tweaks I'll make if I ever run a campaign again, but then, there were tweaks I made to every other edition as well (and damn near every other game I've played, really). So... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The wireless matrix is a huge step forward for the game, as well.

Loved 1st loved 2nd didn't get to play alot of 3rd.

Loved em all but liking 4th edition best.
1.Comprehensive
2.Inclusive
3.Streamlined
4.Customizable
5.Can count the number of minor tweaks I've had to make to my home game on one hand. (Other versions took fingers and toes.)

Play what you feel most comfortable playing/running. I'm a game junkie and I haven't always changed editions when a game line evolves due to dislike of the changes. This has not been true of SR, every edition has been an improvement. Have Fun and good luck.

Edit: And SR4A out on Aug 11th, just a sweet book.

Would 4th Edition be easier than 3rd for a couple of brand new Shadowrun GMs, with everyone in the entire group learning together, as opposed to 3rd edition with at least a couple of the players really familiar with the system (but still no GM Shadowrun experience)?

How about really cool toys only available in 4th Edition for players? Particularly players who love adepts, both weapon-foci melee adepts, and gun adepts?

Yes, to both.

Outright, SR4A is a simple, easy to follow system. Attribute+Skill, total up amount of rolls of 5 or 6. I would, however, recommend for a new GM not using Technomancers,
simply because they have alot more they can do then a normal hacker(potentially).

For Adepts, you can have the initiative boosting stuff more cheaply then in previous editions. Additionally, your adepts can boost the skills and attributes
required for those. You can even do some new things like Wall Running(if you have Street Magic).

And, yes, there are PLENTY of new toys only in SR4. Augmentation, Arsenal, and Runners Companion. Also, your characters in SR4 use their positive
and negative qualities to make characters that are more then just their gear, ware, and skills...

I'll ech this sentiment. I played alot of 2nd, only a little 3rd. But have been running the 4E game for over a year (come of all things AUG 11 (coincidence-I think not!!!! Break out the tin foil hats boys and girls! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/alien.gif) ). Overall the dropping of the dice pools makes combat easier to run-the lack of adjusted TN being a big part of this (IMHO)

OT---the 3rd vs 4E comparisons has caused some flame wars on Dumpshock. Lots of strong believers on both sides.
Can we all keep it civil-pretty please with Nerps on top? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/extinguish.gif)

Aye, personally I do believe that "optimized" characters break the game system more easily in Fourth Edition than in Third Edition but as long as the players agree to limit their dicepools and not go overboard the rule system runs perfectly. In my opinion the Char Gen Rules need some serious tweaking.

As for the rules being "vague", well the example that comes to mind first is that we know that active foci can be attacked in Astral Combat but we don't actually have any rules that describe how they defend themselves or what happens if they are "popped". But mostly the "vagueness" is more of a "feeling" I get, perhaps it would help if I compared Third Edition to GURPS and Fourth Edition to nWoD in the way that the rules "feel" to me.

I don't consider the Matrix 2.0 to be better than Matrix 1.0, just different. Sure, it's nice that Deckers can actually do their thing while the rest of the party plays and bunker Deckers are largely a thing of the past, but like in every edition of Shadowrun, the Matrix Rules just feels "wrong" in places.

On the other hand, I love the changes that they made to the Magic Rules.

Yes 2nd is my game of choice, because it has enough rules without getting bogged down (as long as you stick to the core and just flavor as you wish). 4th and 3rd which is better for me? That is a toss up. 3rd is far better in having solid rules laid out for most situations along with staying consistent with 1e&2e garbage that has been there forever. 3e also tried to make it more fun for all with less solo decker game & wired reflexes dude doing all the combat, etc. 4e is a great departure from what was (not a bad thing). They made its less crazy in the subsystems and tried to make the system be more logical and allow more character build options, however like 1e you get some very "did they mean to do that?" moments, 4A is more like 2e and while there is still plenty of buried crazy in there but it is less of it than any previous edition. For me I just never had a problem with early 2e level of crazy.

:edit: I should add I don't mind adjustable TNs as a GM, I can pretty much handle them on the fly without difficulty or flipping through a book. However I have probably GMed something like 100 sessions of Shadowrun 2e/3e and 50 or so of oWOD so its not unfamiliar. The fixed TN I don't see as an advantage or disadvantage for me but if I were to pick it up new I can totally see how a fixed TN makes it simpler.

Did your players avoid them because they weren't interested in the concept or because they knew the sub-systems were a giant time-sink? If you do go with SR4, I highly encourage you to give the Matrix stuff (Rigger or Hacker) another try. Otherwise (IMO) you're missing out on about 1/3 of what makes Shadowrun cool. Wait until the 20th Anniversary book hits the shelves. It re-wrote the entire Wireless World chapter from the previous printing, and it does a much better job of laying out the rules.

Malachi - I'm not sure, honestly. I don't think the concept was of much of interest to any of our players. But I can't really say for sure. It never interested me personally, it's not what I loved about Shadowrun.

How about combat? Assuming a state of system mastery, is 4th significantly faster than 3rd?

*personal opinion YMMV* I would say once mastered combat is about the same in 2, 3 & 4 with the core. The real advantage of 4 is it would more than likely take you less time to master the combat rules.

:edit: I take that back 4e would be faster all the way around if your 3e game had high target numbers just due to having to roll up the dice time.

I would say... nearly the same speed for both. Third edition MAY sometimes be slower, when much more is going on. But the old: Attack, defend, check armor, calculate damage, soak. is nearly the same. More things to consider in third; more dice involved in fourth.

I began playing the fourth edition a few months ago, and played mainly the third (and at the beginning the second) for years. I would say: the fourth is ok to play. Sometimes i am a bit puzzled or even annoyed or angry at some decisions they made for some rules or some background. (Limits for augmented attributes and arbitary limits on IP's per round i just hate, and the changes to the magic traditions i loathe. And i really don't like the wireless, unlimited memory for ALL - matrix) But all in all it still IS shadowrun. I even found things i like (Playing an AI is cool, the strategic vehicle-combat is VERY much cleaned up, even if sometimes a bit unrealistic and some mechanisms are really ok (edge for karmapool for example)

So overall. i prefer 3rd Edition, but i have no...well only few problems with playing the new one. I still having lot of fun. What really matters is that the people you play with are alright. (Also you can bug and beg do undo some rulechanges *g*)

I will add my voice the chorus of old school players that love 4e. I started playing SR the week 1e hit the shelves and I own every SR book published in English to date (in some form or another). I have multiples of most 3e core books because I played so much 3e that my books were in tatters (and I can't have that mussing up my collection). The other day I realized I have 3 copies of Rigger 3 for no good reason at all. In my short tenure as a playtester I have even read stuff that hasn't been published yet.

And I will say that hands down 4e is my favorite. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I like SR4 a lot, even while being critical of the matrix system. I wasn't very impressed by 3rd ed, it felt like a belt sander had been used to give SR2 more polish and somehow diminished the overall package. I found it sterile, I guess.

Having taught people how to play all editions, 4 is by far the easiest to learn. Dice pools, while great for those of us who can do statistics in our heads, drive everyone else nuts.

The fixed TNs are another blessing as a +-1 threshold is equivalent to +-3 dice. In prior editions a +-1 TN was anything from no impact (6<->7) to doubling/halving your successes (5<->6).

Magic is much cleaner. The rules on learned spell force mesh well with the magic-as-advanceable-stat aspect. Summoning is also viable for hermetics, which makes me happy.

Rigging wasn't bad mechanically in earlier editions but the sr4 drones are cheap and disposable while still useful. Before they were expensive and, depending on the model, overpowered compared to the other characters. If a rigger lost a drone it was a tragedy, now they are closer to a pricey operating expense, like APDS.

I was unfond of sr3's nerf on bio and cyber and while sr4 has similar limits, so much tech can now be worn that it feels much closer to the SR2 limits. The rescaling of costs also helps b/c you don't need to earn so much that you could retire just to by a piece of tech.

The matrix, well, apparently once you put "sr developer" on your resume your computer knowledge only comes from Tron, the Lawnmower Man, and Newsweek.
Go watch Ghost in the Shell:Stand Alone Complex and grab one of the many matrix rulesets if you want a hacker or 'mancer. If you don't have any, the RAW will do good enough for you GM to roll dice.

But isn't Tron and Lawnmower Man some of the big cyberpunk inspiration for Hackers?

Let's not forget that we are not playing a game based on real life, but a game based on fiction and film exactly like the two mentioned.

Lars