 SR4 needs work, Rehaul people! Rebuild the damn engine! |
  |
 Sep 9 2005, 12:44 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361  |
I personally !love! all of the concepts in SR4. The story, the backgroud, everything... except the damned rules!
It leaves almost no room for growth in skill. I'm fine if they have a cap on skills (even with magic and cyber) but to make it so low is disheartening. You want to make the dice pool smaller AND make skills all that more important (while still have the attributes with a say)? Have the attribute add half its rating to the pool damnit! Still simple and easy. Also... explain. more. crap. It says that instruction adds to the pool to learn skills. What. ..pool!? This system has so much potential but its a waste as is. You want to take more time to improve and tweak before releasing it? DO THAT! I can wait a few months ( won't like it but I'll fragging do it!) I have a number of other complaints on the system but those are what irk me on a major level. Is there a way to salavge it? Please tell me they're going to re-vamp it... so cool.... but such a waste... |
 |
 
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 12:54 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Austin, TX Member No.: 90 |
Should have just fixed SR3, it wouldn't have been that hard, you wouldn't have this gigantic new-rules mess, you wouldn't have alienated a sizeable chunck of the exsisting players, I could go on, but I won't. I'll just sit here and laugh at the fact that SR4 is already halfway FUBAR. There's already lists of house rules being posted and it's been out less than a month.
I'm sure I said something before about SR4 going to wind up a rules cluster-fuck. LOL |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 01:02 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
It wasn't any different with previous SR releases or with releases of new editions of other RPGs. Give it a rest.
The risk that any RPG company takes in changing the core mechanic includes alienating your core audiences of fans and missing "holes" in the rules. Suffice to say, SR4 has been doing both, but at the same time, it brings a lot of possibility to the aging SR mechanic. They couldn't have simply "revised" the mechanic because all of the holes from the original mechanic would still be there (6 is the same as 7, Open tests, etc.). |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 01:09 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
At first glance I don't mind the simplified set up. Fixed target number, thresholds, and such. Alright, thats fine. Altering armor a bit to add to body and make low caliber guns deal stun? Okay. Having reaction for dodging (this I like actually with the way initiative affects stats). Neat. Yes runners should be well rounded in many ways... but taking away the ability to focus and keep focusing on a set area... is just not fun.
I also enjoyed how previous editions held up skills as a bit more important than attributes. Then there was this crossover to White Wolf style game play. Well... White Wolf nWOD is an awesome system... very loose and flexible with little need for detail. Shadowrun... is all about detail. Its a game where you need to notice the small stuff (and which needs to be reflected in the rules). Anyway... I truely want this edition to go through... I just want a bit more quality in the content of the rules... |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 04:26 AM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
I have already made made at two other posts on this particular topic. Having to basically re-learn the mechanics all over in a setting that I have enjoyed immensely is a nusciance. Yeah, I dealt it with D&D 3.0, but in many ways WotC opened more possibilities instead of closed them with their overhaul. Limiting character growth IMHO takes one of the best aspects of the whole RPG concept away. It looks more and more that I will be sticking with SR3, idiosyncracies and all. No gaming system is absolutely perfect, Or can ever expect to be. Some are better than others. If you want really over done complexity, look back at some of the games FGU put out back in the 80s like Space Opera (which I actually did manage to run for nearly three years) and Chivalry & Sorcery (so fraught with miniscule rules that it was completely unplayable). On the other end are systems like BRP (Call of Cthulu) and of course D20 which are simple and elegant and still lend themselves to excellent background colour. I'll still pick up my copy of SR4 (when it finally ever comes in) just to have it in the gaming library. Eventually upgrade to the new timeline (when the campaign arc I am running ends), and work some of the new concepts in (like the WI-FI matrix, no magic loss from wounds, New cyber/bio etc.), But as for the mechanics, I think I'll stick to what already works for me and my group of players. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 01:57 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I don't want "over-done complexity". I want a rehash of a few rather important areas of the rules. I enjoy most of it and want it as is... but there are several rules that are rather silly, runners starting as almost perfect fighters, hackers, or gunners is just silly... this takes away the fun of earning a damned rep and gaining skill slowly. I don't mind a skill cap.... but such a low skill cap is silly. I'd prefer a skill cap much like the attributes (1.5 times max) with a modified dice max of double the base skill. This not only fits with the adept power, allows for more growth, but allows for the skill levels of the legendary persons like Fastjack and such. I'd prefer to make the dice pool smaller somehow and have the focus on skills again, but the current rules make that nearly impossible.
There are a few other issues like the instruction skill explaination (adds dice the the dice pool to learn a skill.... what pool? where?). I think the range needs work. Perhaps a -4 modifier instead of a -3 but that might just be nit picking there and comparing it to SR3 there. I HATE how they did movement. Its outright dumb. Know anyone who can walk 10 meters in 3 seconds? I don't. Just to shed some light on it its about 30 feet. Use the original set up for movement. Agility or reaction for walking speed, and x3 for running (or 2.5 ft you want to stick to the charts set up.) I like how they gave Dwarves a penalty and Trolls a bonus, but beyond that... it sucks. Agility is a bit too emphasized in the combat skills... lets see... about 18 of 75 skills which Logic ties in skills as well. Kinda makes strength useless unless you are a melee, bow, or thrown weapon fighter or running/swimming like hell. Not balanced when the skills agility has are all the gun skills, all the melee weapon skills, and so on. Much of it makes sense but there are a few skills that should be linked to strength. Like Clubs. Or they could just give strength a few more skills or something. This one isn't all that big a deal, I just feel that a bit of balance is needed. I like the technomancer, I like the magic set up (almost excessively expensive to raise a magic stat above 6 but I can live with that.) And I hope they bring back the quick draw adept power in Street Magic. I like.. no love the way they linked reaction (and the initiative boosting power/cyber) to oppose combat skills. This make me happy. :D I like this new edition's concepts and many of the rules, but many important rules seem to be bungled or at least hurried for publication. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 02:15 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
You don't have to start as world-class or even legendary if your character isn't... the system just allows you to, if you want your character to be. It's a shame that it is more restrictive on availability and ware, though. (If the cap on attributes and skills would be 5, this would be nearly WoD.) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 02:28 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 77 Joined: 5-December 04 Member No.: 6,869 |
If you have a problem with skills caped at 9, change it. I can guarantee that the Fanpro police won't come kicking down your door and haul you off to gamer jail if you up the limit to 12 (or higher).
I haven't found many problems with the rules. The rules with cyber limbs starting at all stats 3 and only able to raise to 6 without a cyber torso doesn't sit right when you consider trolls and orks. So I just have a cyber arm start at the minimum for the Meta type plus two and have them be able to raise it to their starting maximum without a cyber torso. I don't think I need to worry about the RPGustapo coming for me in the middle of the night because I changed the rules to suit my game better. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 02:53 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Errr... skills are capped at 6 not 9. 9 is the modified limit. So while karma brings it to 6 (or 7 with aptitude) your adept powers or cyberware can only add about three dice if you have the skill at 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 02:56 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Indeed. It's sooo sad Adept Powers aren't able to effectively double your dice anymore...
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 02:57 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 77 Joined: 5-December 04 Member No.: 6,869 |
Then make the unmodified limit 9 and the modified limit 12. Or take away the modified limit. Or hell, if you want, take away the unmodified limit. It's totally up to you. My point is if a rule totally rubs you and your group the wrong way, change it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:05 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I detect sarcasm there.
Eh. I just want base skill to be as important as attributes, at least. Adept powers shouldn't raise it ubber high. Having about three levels of Improved ability is enough. So a Skill cap of 9 (10 with aptitude) with a modifed limit of 12 (13 with aptitude) seems fair enough to me. Allows room to grow. Certainly either double karma costs to buy skills about 6 or raise the multpier by one. I'd do the same with attributes above the natural max... maybe... Seems like a nice set up to me. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:13 PM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,070 Joined: 7-February 04 From: NYC Member No.: 6,058 |
Except that the game isn't going to work if you get rid of the caps. The mechanics will break down, and then there's also the sheer absurdity of (routinely, as opposed to only when you're using the one skill you're best at and burning a ton of combat pool) physically rolling 15-20 dice to make a skill check to consider. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:18 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I don't mind keeping the caps, I simply want the caps higher. As is, the game has more of an emphasis on attributes with all the stat bonuses being thrown around. Skills become less important and specializations become.... very important.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:35 PM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
How is that different, though, that real life. I have a speciality that's very important, I'm a programmer. My other skills are less important to me that my raw ability to learn to program and my programming skill (please, dear goddess, do not let this dissolve into a debate about the skill + program rating rule). My speciality is in PHP and I'm growing some serious skill with Python, too. Thus, I have a specialization that is more important than my skill, but it's but my attribtues are importent, too, for the basic, raw potential for me to learn that specialization.
SR4 seems to represent that pretty well so far. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:44 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Its the number of dice it adds I'm concerned about. And your knowledge of programming is at least as much important as your logic. Sheer talent is good, but must be tempered with knowledge and experience.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 03:47 PM
Post
#17
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 338 Joined: 17-September 04 From: Pueblo Sector of Denver Member No.: 6,672 |
I would be inclined to argue that SR3 was not any better as far as throwing huge numbers of dice. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 04:11 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I'm all for reducing the dice pool a bit, but the current rules set makes that unlikely... in fact the rules set doubles much of the dice pool and increases chances of success anyway even with threshold (which I will modify... too few a number of successes are needed for "extreme" and with the buy success option, runners with large pools can easily accomplish "extreme" on a daily basis. This is with the original rules I might add).
The more I think about this... the more I want to know how much they playtested this before release... it has some issues several other people who are reading it are noticing. And they are completely new to Shadowrun. Some of them rarely agree with me on various subjects and in this case... most of them agree. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 04:49 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
if one of your characters was rolling 15-20 dice every time they made a certain skill check in SR3, you must have been playing a slightly higher-powered game than most (given that several dumpshock polls show that most SR3 games don't go past ~30 karma). rolling 15-20 dice in SR3 is a big, big thing. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 04:58 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Interesting, but not quite representative: As for suggested rewards, this would be 5-6 runs... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:02 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
It was also a big deal if you are rolling dice pools of about 10... oh wait... thats rather easy to do in the current rules set... *gasp* Oh no.
In fact, a standard starting character will have one, two, or maybe three different pools of 10 or more. So large pools are going to be a standard in thie new system and arguing that its so horrible to raise a skill cap is.... well... decide for yourself. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:08 PM
Post
#22
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Point build PCs you could be tossing mid to high teens in some skills, although the worst of those involved Centering dice. Which were really gross because they were either 2-stage rolls or one roll with two different coloured dice (what i normally did). I do disagree though with it being the same number of dice. SR4 seems to lend itself to about roughly 25% more dice after factoring in the SR3 Pools [EDIT: and rerolls of 6's], depending on circumstances and playing styles. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:09 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
I thought one of the goal was to reduce the number of dice thrown?
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:10 PM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Who said that? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:14 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I either remember something like that... or had assumed it so. Perhaps in stating that they wanted a "simplified, universal" system we had assumed they would reduce the number of dice rolled.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:16 PM
Post
#26
|
|||||
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
The Fanpro guys back in March and April. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:20 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Perhaps you assumed that, i never did. From early on in the FAQs i could see the extra dice taking shape. What they did though, it seems, is reduced the number of times you roll.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:21 PM
Post
#28
|
|||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Quote? |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:36 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
I thought it was to reduce the number of dice pools. I will do some digging myself...
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:37 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
To many threads to go through. Not worth digging through. Like I said "I thought" from some of the things that were talked about when it was first anounced.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:42 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
the problem is that the system is broken coming and going. on one hand, there's almost no difference between the best in known history (att 7 skill 7) and the best you're likely to find (skill 6, att 6). granted, the same problem existed in SR3, but at least in SR3, you could argue that the skill level lables were insane (8 is the best in the world, but you can hit 14 if you try hard enough...?). on the other, if you raise the skill and attribute caps, you make modifiers even more insane than they already are. it's bad enough that a human at max ability and no augmentation can bullseye a different 500m target every three seconds with unerring accuracy; if you ignore the skill/attribute caps, a normal human will be able to bullseye a different 500m target every three seconds with unerring accuracy in total darkness.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:47 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Well theres got to be a way to fix it somehow. I enjoy many of the ideas they have within the system; the background, the magic set up, the technomancer, initiative, reaction opposing combat skills and so on. I want it to work... I just know they way it is now is a waste and will not be be near as fun as SR3 is.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 05:52 PM
Post
#33
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 637 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,528 |
On the first rate shooter WITH skillcaps in place: Can he "bullseye" the target that is hit the rather small (5cm in diameter IIRC) area at the center ring or can he HIT THE TARGET that is hit a man sized object? And under what circumstances? At the range? And for how long before he tires (Real life people, unlike RPG things do) Big difference. Very big difference. I could not do the former but the latter is actually quite do-able for a trained military shooter with a good Battlerifle. What happens if I throw modifiers in his direction? Most often problems with a combat system are due to the GM ignoring modifiers like target movement etc. On the second one: How much Karma will he need for that? Birdy |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 06:00 PM
Post
#34
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 338 Joined: 17-September 04 From: Pueblo Sector of Denver Member No.: 6,672 |
My last campaign was played almost every week for ~2 years, it started off low power, and by the end, 20 dice was not unheard of. Also a munched otaku can start the game throwing 20 dice for computer skill in SR3 |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 06:08 PM
Post
#35
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 16-August 05 From: Bug city Member No.: 7,557 |
I wholeheartedly agree. At the beginning my Night One Decker was above average at Decking and nothing else. At the end of all things, he could learn any skill he wanted almost instantly due to maxed (and exceptional) Intelligence + Encephalon + Cerebral Booster + Mnemonic Enhancer. He also rolled 40 dice for programming (a Red-18 server was almost half the dice, but still...) By that point, Otaku with Black Hammer were also *quite* scary compared to most security deckers. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 06:09 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
a) re-read. i'm talking about comparisons between levels of ability. (for the record, the best-in-history shooter will average 3.67 successes, meaning he'll bullseye the target 2/3 of the time and hit really close to the bullseye 1/3 of the time.) b) it doesn't matter. in real life, getting a 500m bullseye every three seconds, in perfect conditions, on a different target each shot is... impressive. impressive enough that not every runner group should have a member capable of attaining such a feat (which, even at skill 6 att 6, you can). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 06:44 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I'll throw out a few quick ideas on how to reduce the dice pool while still keeping the emphasis on skills.
Only half the attribute counts towards the dice pool... I'm not really fond of this one. The dice from the attribute is equal to the attribute... minus 2 or 3. (To reflect an average of sorts.) Still not quite what I'm looking for but better. Anyone else have some ideas? Lets brainstorm on this, wether you like my opinion or not, lets try and make the system the best it can be. :) |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 06:58 PM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Well, it seems that with att 6, skill 6 you are indeed... Impressive with a big I - actually, you are world class. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:23 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
that's part of my point. every competent runner group has at least one person who can accomplish this feat, or a similar one. truly impressive levels of skill are commonplace, in SR4--which makes them not-impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:27 PM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Perhaps rather than a dice penalty, require a threshold for ranges, and every success beyond that threshold adds to the damage? Or have both a dice penalty and threshold.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:30 PM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
that was one of the proposed mechanics (i think it's even suggested as an option in the final version of the rules). there are problems with it, as well, mostly tending towards the opposite end--high skill people have a problem ever hitting extreme-range targets, and low skill people have no chance at all. it could probably be balanced with some work.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:31 PM
Post
#42
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 637 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,528 |
And you didn't answer my questions. a) How accurate is the hit location system. In SR-3 it basically was "You hit the man". Does SR-4 state "You hit him exactly there?" If it still uses the SR-3 style, the firing becomes much less impressiv. As stated, that's stuff most well-trained infantryman can do, so the "best" are actually not good enough under the SR-4 system. b) What happens if you throw modifiers in the mix Birdy |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:32 PM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
You know every runner group? And who/what forces a player to spend karma in a way he doesn't see matching his character? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:36 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Hmm... how about... Short range has no threshold or penalty, medium range has only a -1 dice penalty, Long range has a -2 dice penalty and a threshold of 1, and Extreme range has a dice penalty of -3 and a threshold of 2?
I'll throw out a few more just becuase [Range [Threshold [Modifier Medium 1 - Long 2 -1 Extreme 3 -2 [Range [Threshold [Modifier Medium 1 -1 Long 2 -1 Extreme 2 -2 |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Boise, Salish Sidhe Member No.: 584 |
Rember a few years ago with WOTC released the all new AD&D 3.0. Didn't they have to release AD&D 3.5 within a year? Maybe this is the road we are looking at. I didn't watch any of the AD&D boards at the time (to busy playing Shadowrun and not interested in AD&D). Wonder if those forums looked like this one.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Just remove hits instead of dice? (This would be a treshold)
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:43 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i know the character creation mechanics, which means i know the most likely types of character builds. i know that skill 6 and attribute 6 can be achieved without sacrificing too much ability in other areas, which means i know it shouldn't be all that uncommon--after all, if X is good, and everybody knows it's good, and it's not hard to get, everybody will have X.
birdy, i didn't answer your questions because they're completely tangential to my point. since you seem to be missing my point anyway (or, at least, you're not addressing it), i'll go ahead and answer. a) levels of success indicate general hit location--lots of successes against a metahuman target mean you hit a critical spot (because the extra damage is likely to kill them), while fewer successes mean you hit a less-critical spot. the same principle can be applied to target-shooting; if you get lots of successes, you hit closer to the bullseye. 4 successes, in SR4, are defined as being extra-good; if you get 4 net successes, that means you've accomplished your task almost perfectly. i think it's therefore safe to say that 4 successes on a target-shooting roll = bullseye. b) modifiers generally reduce the number of dice you roll. if you're rolling 14 dice, even total darkness (-8 dice) leaves you with two successes on average, or one success if you want to purchase it. i'll note again that neither of these points are really salient to a comparison of level of ability. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:46 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I think threshold rather than a modifer works well. And to smooth it out a little, you could (like I was arguing earlier) raise the skill caps a little to compensate, and have a slightly higher threshold for the rest of your skills. Compensates nicely, allows for a bit of character growth, allows skills to be reemphansized, and makes me far happier with the system.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:56 PM
Post
#49
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
So this is why everybody plays Ork Mythical Adepts with Ware and maxed Commlinks? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 07:56 PM
Post
#50
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Odd, though, that I have worked now with 13 different people to create different characters and not one of them has an attribute at 6 nor does any of them have a skill at 6. None of them. Granted 13 isn't the best sample size, but I wonder, mfb, if you're just making assumptions or if you've worked through character generation with a large group of people? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:02 PM
Post
#51
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
that's hard to achieve. you're likely to spread your character too thin, and be good at nothing instead of being good at everything. dashifen, i'm going to hold your 13 people up to the hundreds of character sheets i've seen across multiple game systems over a decade or so of gaming. most of those character sheets had stats that put the character at or near the top end of their chosen specialty/specialties. they weren't necessarily all min-maxed to the limit, but they almost all took at least the obvious choices that would make them good at what they chose to do. maybe SR4 is magically special, or something, and everybody who plays it will be compelled to create characters with lower stats and skills across the board. but i doubt it. besides which, the problem still exists (in reduced form) at 5/5. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:07 PM
Post
#52
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Yet, it 'can be achieved without sacrificing too much ability in other areas', and will outclass everybody on the long run... seems perfect for a game with hard caps, doesn't it? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:11 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
Robert, are you a jackass on purpose? Or is it an accident?
Lets clarify... are we talking about before or after cyber/bioware? Cause I just made a mage with a 6 agi and an effective 7 in Pistols with minimal trouble. And it was my first character. Did I have to do that? No. But it fit my image of the character. It is pretty easy to make a mage with 4 or 5 spells, 2 points of cyber, and some skills. Mages rule this new game supreme? Why? Because there is no reason for everyone to not be a mage and have at least one point in magic. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:18 PM
Post
#54
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Uhm, Shadow? Perhaps you should a) decide who you are referring to b) decide what you want to state c) do it without being too offensive and, finally d) consider wether what you wrote supported what you wanted to state. ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:22 PM
Post
#55
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Well, I guess I have to say 1 out of 14 now, if this character's for Interception :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:25 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
read my entire statement, rotbart, instead of just the part you can argue with if you ignore the rest. i specifically said that "after all, if X is good, and everybody knows it's good, and it's not hard to get, everybody will have X." X, in the example you're using, is hard to get. therefore, not everybody will have X.
i'm not saying that everybody will make min-maxed munchkins. i'm saying that players tend to make characters who are good at what they do. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:26 PM
Post
#57
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 16-August 05 Member No.: 7,558 |
Just by calling 3rd Edition D&D, AD&D 3.0 tells me you don't know what your talking about. And the time from 3.0 to 3.5 is about 3-4 years not 1. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:29 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 16-August 05 Member No.: 7,558 |
Just a question.
How many of you have actually played a game using SR 4? How many are in a campaign of SR 4? |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:42 PM
Post
#59
|
|||||||||
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
You.
You are acting like a jackass.
I am sure your a great guy in reali life, but on these boards you are being insulting.
I think so. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:42 PM
Post
#60
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
Agreed. Again my namesake is one heck of an athlete having doubled all her dice & has Articulation & Synthcardium 2 (forgot that one in an earlier post) to boot. She's almost able to go Faster than the proverbial Speeding Bullet and leap tall buildings (well at least fences & walls) in a single bound. In many ways she moves almost like Trinity from the Matrix (man I love that wall running scene). Of course I still miss the non segmented movement in SR2 (huh...?? where'd the brat go, I had her in my sights just a...*sound of Katana slicing through bone & various cyber implants* ). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:53 PM
Post
#61
|
|||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Rest assured, I certainly put great attention to your wording - I just don't follow your PoV. As Shadow stated, it is by far not that hard to be awakened, chromed and be good at something else, too - especially, if being an Orc essentially means 20 free BP as stated in another thread. The Hacker part was indeed exaggerated, but not that much - it is really cheap to max a commlink.
Actually, you did neither - you stated that everybody will make characters that are world class at what they do. In SR4, good would be 3, perhaps 4, while 5 is already exceptional. The fine point is - why stop there, if you already stopped worrying about the concept of the character (and just adjusted it to fit the numbers)? But, if your concept, as Shadows, is to have a chromed Mage that is a worldwide legend with Handguns - wouldn't it be rather restrictive of a creation system not to allow that?
If you are offended by my sarcasm, I am truly sorry. Yet, I'd rather be helpful and sarcastic than 'helpful instead of sarcastic'. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 08:53 PM
Post
#62
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I've GMed about four adventures and the problem for my players is that theres not much more to go after raising a skill they consider their specialty to 5 or 6. They still have grown in other areas but they want to be able to grow a bit more. Many of them also found the focus on attributes rather annoying and boring. I'm having to up the thresholds just to make it challenging for them, and many of them are new to Shadowrun. And trust me, I don't make things easy normally (in D20 systems and nWoD I commonly had them outnumbered in combat, with a twisting story of hidden facts which they sometimes gathered through dice rolls and ingenuity. I'm not an easy GM by any means...but that makes it more fun when they win, partially win, or sometimes manage to escape with their skins.)
I've stick to these core rules... and I find them to be lacking, so changes are in order. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:03 PM
Post
#63
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 16-August 05 Member No.: 7,558 |
Well, if you feel that the players are constrained about the skill caps. Just lift them and double cost to raise a skill over the normal cap. Edit. I was just thinking. Add a quality called 'Focused Skill'. Which lifts the skill cap on one skill and doubles the cost to raise it over the normal skill cap. Give it a cost of oh I don't know, 5 karma. Also have a prerequisite of Aptitude quality in the chosen skill. Just to respond to your post. Why do you consider the game to be too easy for the players then if your having to up the thresholds? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:06 PM
Post
#64
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
sounds interesting... might need some work and some balance but could work..
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:17 PM
Post
#65
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 16-August 05 Member No.: 7,558 |
Well if the players are having problems spending their karma just give them some more ways to do it! If they can see a way to possibly improve a maxed out attribute+skill then give them a out. Make it expensive but give them a chance. Though as a GM, I would hit them where they were weakest. So your got a maxed out Sammie that is as deadly with his swords as anyone in the world. Have him fight on a slick ice covered bridge with a couple of snipers trying to take him out from across a canyon. :D
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:21 PM
Post
#66
|
|||
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
As has been said in numerous other threads, it breaks the system. You have to up the power level of your opponents to ungodly status just to challenge the players. SR4 has a lot of cool ideas, scalability and long term play aren't on the list. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:26 PM
Post
#67
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
*sigh* fine, let me clarify, since you seem hellbent on twisting everything, and willfully ignoring the point. players tend to give their characters the maximum available rating in skills and attributes related to the character's field of expertise. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:47 PM
Post
#68
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I haven't used the upped thresholds yet, but it should make it more interesting at least. They don't roll THAT well. :)
Its merely having the option of doing that... eventually that makes me feel better. It has to do with several things... like the skill level of legends like FastJack... they should be better than only one step away from a PC. Two or three steps? Certainly. :) |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 09:55 PM
Post
#69
|
|||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Since you seem to spin a phenomena to the point where it serves your assumptions and arguments, I would say that taking you by word does not twist what you wrote, but rather shows that what you initially wrote (and what sounded so easy to swallow) does not support your theory at all.
Fine, this is a thesis one can work with. So let's get this straight: First, you assume that some players tend to min-max their characters - sometimes even regardless of their initial concept? This phenomena exists, indeed - but it's far from being general. Second, because SR4 allows a player to do so, it is a broken system? Only if you expect a system to enforce a guidance that keeps players from doing so. Third, with hard caps this becomes directly visible? Quite sure - when you hit the wall of a hard cap, there is less excuse for not 'staying in character'... as this is the only point where the problem can arise: If you did 'stay in character' and your concept states that the character is at the pinnacle of his development... then there is nothing wrong. Whats my point? What is perceived as a problem is in fact a system that in some respect restricts players less than previous editions... I would rather blame the player, than blame the system, as the system assumes, that the player is aware of his choice. So this boils down to the ultimate question (well, exaggerated, indeed ;)): Doe one value the freedom of choice over the safety of guidance, or not? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 10:06 PM
Post
#70
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
So as a mechanic you'd rather blame the driver and tell him to keep driving it rather than fix the problem. Gotcha.
The problem is that the system is too condensed. Expand it a little and you give players something to look forward even if they rarely reach it. Even an expert, elite, or even legendary person in a skill knows they can always improve further (ever talk to someone who's considered the best? Many will tell you there'll always be someone better. There are many an article and interview that bring up this point). There are little tricks as well as unconcious timing and coordenation that improve the more you use the skill. So the cap, as low as it is, is silly. A cap in particular is silly but I'm willing to have one just to have a hint of canon. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#71
|
|||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
You assume there is a problem, so you missed the point:
Thats more a question of flavor than a problem - the system of WoD is widespread with a scale even smaller. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 10:28 PM
Post
#72
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Indeed, problem is WoD is one thing. Shadowrun SHOULD be something else. They should not be blurred mirrors of each other. Period. I love the WoD system... but when I want to play Shadowrun I want something different because it should be handled differently. If I want to play Shadowrun with WoD rules... I'll do that.. but I want Shadowrun with SHADOWRUN rules.
Wether or not you see a problem is not the point. Thats fine. You play it canon and thats your choice. I see a problem and I want to make it better for me and others. Its a matter of opinion. I respect your opinion and theres nothing wrong with it. I simply disagree and will continue to disagree. And in WoD you CAN raise your abilities AND skills over the max if you're supernatural, it just takes time and effort. Not so condensed as long as you aren't totally a normal human. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 10:46 PM
Post
#73
|
|||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
And thats fine and fair for you - nobody forces you to do otherwise. If you want a more distinctive feeling, this might just be hard to acquire by just modifying SR4. The mechanics of SR4 are, though seemingly the same, something entirely different - most of the distinctive elements are out of the window. (Yes, it is impressive that SR4 at least feels somehow like SR3... nice work of the devs, but unfortunally, this is what causes most of the quarrel.) To get them back, you basicly would have to redo the whole system - or maybe you want to join the SR3R-project.
I understand your point, but as do you with mine, I don't share it, though valueing it.
Erm, well - supernatural entities in Shadowrun can cross this cap, too - and in the WoD, most of the times the cap for supernatural PCs was just a bit higher than for mere mortals... but this is just a sidenote, too. ;) |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Sep 9 2005, 11:01 PM
Post
#74
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 316 Joined: 18-April 05 From: France Member No.: 7,343 |
I really hoped the character creation system in sr4 wouldn't be as screwed as in sr3 ...
I reckon it is a very little less. Why the fuck didn't they introduce a simple single build point system ? "should I take 6 in automatic weapons in creation, or should I wait until it will be worth so much karma points ?" What did some fasa crew said ? minmaxing is a trouble with gamer, not with a game. but the system induce min maxing. waiting for becks sr4 |
|
|
|
|
Sep 9 2005, 11:55 PM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,665 Joined: 26-April 03 From: Sweden Member No.: 4,516 |
I think I've arrived at a tentative 'fix' to the system that may work, and I'd like some input:
Use the following: - Total hits cannot exceed Skill Rating x 2, unless Edge is used. - Skill caps put at 9(10 with aptitude) - possibly x3 cost to increase above 6. - Attributes cost x5 Karma to raise (not Magic, Resonance and Edge though). Possibly keeping it at x3 up to half the unmodified attribute, or half the racial maximum. I'm also considering adding: - Half of Attribute rolled with Skill for tests, and use Rule of 6 for all skill tests. - EX Explosive ammo: DV +2, AP -1. No huge changes, but what do you think? |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:00 AM
Post
#76
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
If you are going to house-rule that attributes count for less, you probably don't need to increase the Karma cost, or vice versa. I'd either stick with attributes counting for half (attribute/2 + skill... making them analogous to the old SR3 pools) or attributes costing more Karma, but not both.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:11 AM
Post
#77
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 288 Joined: 7-December 04 Member No.: 6,873 |
Bolded for truth. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:16 AM
Post
#78
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,070 Joined: 7-February 04 From: NYC Member No.: 6,058 |
So the people that you helped create characters somehow ended up with characters that share a certain trend... And you're wondering if there might be a problem with your sample? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:49 AM
Post
#79
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
I certainly like this: - Total hits cannot exceed Skill Rating x 2, unless Edge is used. - Skill caps put at 9(10 with aptitude) - possibly x3 cost to increase above 6. We can do some play testing with this: - Half of Attribute rolled with Skill for tests, and use Rule of 6 for all skill tests. - EX Explosive ammo: DV +2, AP -1. And add this: - Skills cost x3 to increase above 6, then cost x4 to raise to 10 if applied to aptitude - Increasing skills to a rating above 6 requires a powerful teacher of at least the new rating and gives no bonuses to the pool to learn the skill |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:54 AM
Post
#80
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,665 Joined: 26-April 03 From: Sweden Member No.: 4,516 |
You do have a point there... lesse...attribute from 3 to 5 = 27 karma skill group 3 to 4 = 20 karma, from 4 to 5 equal 25 karma. Hmm...still not totally pleased with the implications in that math - maybe attributes at x3 up to half racial, and at x4 above that? Attribute 3 to 5 = 36...hmmm, abit much maybe. =/ Will have to discuss those specifics further with my group. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:59 AM
Post
#81
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 502 Joined: 14-May 03 From: Detroit, Michigan Member No.: 4,583 |
I'm not at all surprised. In SR4 6 is no longer the magic number it used to be. What's more the cost of getting a 6 is quite significant compared to a 5. Finally if anyone gives it any thought whatsoever they'll realize that it is far far cheaper to get a 6 through karma. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 01:34 AM
Post
#82
|
|||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,665 Joined: 26-April 03 From: Sweden Member No.: 4,516 |
Yup, and that's a good thing insofar that it encourages people to diversify and not hit the cap until they've done at least 3-4 runs. But it's bad insofar that it severely penalizes the player who does get that 6, by making him/her spend alot of BPs on almost nothing. In short, the system encourages using loopholes to gain an advantage... |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 02:50 AM
Post
#83
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 7 Joined: 23-August 05 Member No.: 7,600 |
I like the former suggestions on skill gain, however I would add in addition to the karma cost a Negative Qualities BP cost to raise an attribute/skill beyond 6 of 5/10/20. This represents the PC having to sacrifice certain aspects of his life to BE THE BEST. Olympic athletes suffer drug testing and addiction. Pro sports players/TV/TRID stars suffer celebrity and privacy invasion. Another way to look at it might be that a person who devotes himself to a skill/attribute neglects other aspects of his life. Another option might be to have another attribute decrease as one is raised, if you're pumping iron you may not be as studious as you used to be.
At the very least, a marksman who can hit repeatedly a 5cm target within 3 secs would be renowned, and thus the target of his competition, ala the sniper wars in WWII Russia. The dice pools in SR3 were craziness, I had to buy D6 in bulk to play the stinkin game. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2005, 02:56 AM
Post
#84
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
no, i conclude from the relevant data (ie, the many character sheets i've seen, created by hundreds of different players) that most players tend to come up with character concepts that include being very good at the character's chosen specialty. in other words, when most people create a decker, they create a decker with high decking skill because they want to play a decker who is good at decking. most players understand, consciously or not, that SR (and most other RPGs) are roleplaying games, with an emphasis on both the roleplaying and the games. most players enjoy "winning" the game, as well as exploring the personality they've created. if they only enjoyed the roleplaying aspects, they'd join the Drama Club instead of spending so much time gaming. add to that the fact that roleplaying games are for many players a vehicle for acting out their fantasies, and that most people fantasize about winning rather than losing. therefore, since it's hard to "win" a game if your stats suck, and since most players don't like to imagine themselves as losers (part of the RPG vehicle is the fact that you are, in some sense, your character) will create a character with high skill in their chosen field.
no. it's a broken system because it allows players to create characters who are the best in the world at what they do, with no room for growth in their chosen field.
damn right i do. it's a game, remember? yes, it's a game that involves roleplaying, but it's not just roleplaying, or we wouldn't be quibbling about rules in the first place--there wouldn't be any rules. the rules are there to allow the players and the gamemaster to reasonably determine the results of actions taken in a given scenario, which is in turn based on a combination of the gm's imagination and the setting information. SR's setting information suggests that runners do not tend to be anywhere near the best in the world at what they do, but the rules tend to create characters who are the best, or nearly the best. that means that there's a clearly-visible line between the roleplaying and the game, and that means that it's hard to reasonably determine the results of actions taken in a given scenario. after all, if the rules and the setting don't match, how do you determine what's reasonable?
no. hard caps have an array of problems, but the specific problem i'm pointing out is not a result of simply having hard caps. it's a result of having hard caps during character creation which match the hard caps that exist for character advancement.
except that, as i mentioned above, the roleplaying information in SR4 does not support the commonality of world-class characters in the shadows. the rules do. that's a dichotomy in the rules and setting which will result in dichotomy in character concepts and character stats. if you go by the book definition of skills, skill level 6 is enough to make you very, very special in the world of SR. but if you go by the chargen rules, skill 6 is not all that special at all--most runner groups are going to have someone who can at least match you, if not beat you. your character is no longer special at all, despite supposedly being nearly the best in the world at what he does. is he special or not? dichotomy. bad.
you would rather everyone strongly followed your roleplaying paradigm, rather than allowing for the creation of rules that support a variety of paradigms.
these are not mutually exclusive design goals. you're limiting game design to a binary choice. poorly-designed games are constrained by choices like that. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 03:09 AM
Post
#85
|
|||||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
I don't find that this is a "broken" system because of that particular reason. I think a character creation system should support the ability to be the best at what you do, with no room for growth. Why? Because sometimes that's how real life works... some people just are at the top (Tiger Woods, Bobby Fischer, many Actors/Actresses), and reach the ceiling of human ability at a young age. It doesn't make for much stat-growth while you are in the game, certainly, but the option should be there. Otherwise, you'd simply be playing "that other game", with Skill points and attribute points instead of "leveling up". Shadowrun isn't much for the "leveling up" part of the game (unlike some roleplaying games)... you can improve your characters, but it only makes you more capable, not more powerful (a big difference there... a Panther Cannon will still kill you regardless of how many "levels" you gained. The same can't be said about DnD). |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 03:14 AM
Post
#86
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
by capping characters at chargen, you're taking a hell of a lot away from the game. the ability to run up against someone better than you, for instance; the joy of becoming better, for another.
in return, you gain quote-unquote realism. you're making a huge assumption: you're assuming that Tiger Woods can never improve his game. you're assuming that there is a point in real life in which you can never get better at a given task, and you're assuming that Tiger Woods has reached it. i don't see any evidence that warrants that assumption. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2005, 03:30 AM
Post
#87
|
|||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
The "joy of being better" is not necessarily a goal for a roleplaying game. I know that I don't play Shadowrun to start low and level up. I play Shadowrun because I can play a professional who is the best right out of the box. I don't want to start with a longsword and leather armor and work my way up to +5. The equivalent in SR would be starting with a Streetline Special and Armor Clothing, I guess. The point is that each group has their own goals when playing an RPG, and that having a hard cap doesn't necessarily mean character creation is inherently broken. And have you seen Tiger play lately? He hasn't really exceeded the performance that he achieved 6 years ago. He's reached the ceiling. This doesn't mean that the ceiling of human effort cannot be raised eventually (there's a good section in the Tri-Stat core rules about the 4 minute mile that talks about this). He may very well get better someday by taking golf to a transcendental level that we can't even dream about (we can only hope). But at the moment, he's stuck. Look, I'm not a big supporter of hard caps either. I understand that the issue is with the hard cap being close to the top of human ability, and I agree that it isn't necessarily the most conducive thing for character creation. But all of this crying about hard caps reminds me of the folks in the d20 system complaining that Level 20 was the highest non-epic level you could achieve, with a healthy dose of GURPS "I can min-max everything using points to be the bestest!". If one were clever, they can design a system that introduces soft caps simply by design, I suppose (an incremental cost, for example, but this leads to incredible levels of complexity just for character creation, assuming you unify character creation with advancement mechanics). But even SR3 had hard caps at 6, with the option of specialization and other methods to make you better than the most skilled person who has ever lived in that field (that's what all of those extra rulebooks are for, hrm?). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 10 2005, 03:47 AM
Post
#88
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
So you assume.
Thanks for this unnecessary reminder of trivial psychology - do you even consider the possibility that to be able play at all, people must be willing to loose?
No, in fact, they will never be the best.
Reference, please.
Which stills needs some sort of proof.
So basically you are saying that growth for growths sake is good, and therefore, everybody should start small. Thats not a problem, thats flavour.
As there is no mythical entity choosing 'The One' out of all existing characters... how, without a cap, can you even be halfway sure?
So special in fact, that they list multiple, popular examples who is just as good as you are...
My paradigm? Amazingly, SR4 allows more than one when allowing one to max out a character to an absolute.
As it is neither binary, nor not mutually exclusive, in fact, it's just a scale. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 04:22 AM
Post
#89
|
|||||||||||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
you're right, rotbart, i'm assuming that the hundreds of character sheets, created by hundreds of players across a variety of system, are representative of the whole of the RPG-playing population. where can my scientific detachment have gone! i may as well assume that i will fall out of bed if i roll too far left or right, simply because it's happened so many times before.
the game devs stated many times that their design for SR4 was intended to promote more street-level gameplay. best in the world != street-level.
yes. multiple examples of people who are famous for the very abilities they're being listed as exemplifying. but if every runner group out there has someone just as good as these exemplars, why are the examples so special?
yep. the flavor of SR is supposed to be street-level. the rules don't support that flavor. that's a problem.
exactly. you can't. you'll never know who "the best in the world" really is, only who the best you've ever met is.
how, exactly? if you've got 7 stat, skill, and edge, you are the best, period paragraph. what paradigm is going to change that? your paradigm is that players shouldn't take advantage of the rules just because they don't match the character concept. my paradigm is that the rules should support the game world whether the players are good roleplayers or not. obviously, that's not ever going to be a goal that's wholly attainable. but it can be achieved to a far greater degree than SR4 manages.
yes. that's exactly my point. but you made it binary by making it an either-or question, in your last post. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 04:45 AM
Post
#90
|
|||||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Speaking from the point of view of someone that: - has had to maintain a fairly high-tempo schedule for 5+ years that doesn't always allow for constant gaming, which leads quickly to the feeling that things are developing much faster than it would seem to someone that plays a game every weekend (hope that makes sense, sorry if it's a bit unweildy) - has been playing AD&D/D&D in many forms for many years, including the "Time of Trouble" (RL version, during the 2 to 3 switch ;) ) - is a forum junkie at WotC boards, when I have the time to be I can state that the effect Gomez was referring to did indeed occur, and yes, this feels extremely similar. Change the game: piss some people off; make some people happy; start a generation of players of game "X" that don't know diddly about the game except for the "new" version; hack off fanboys; make new fanboys; make a boatload of money (which SR4 hopes to accomplish) etcetera, etcetera. So, my point is, aside from not realizing that they'd dropped the "Advanced" from the game title, Gomez's point was sound. No need to try and out-cool someone for making a good comparison. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 04:50 AM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
MFB, give it up man, he's just like Creepwood. Roleplaying elitism at its finest. There is no problem with the game that Roleplaying wont fix. Heaven forbid you just put out a good product to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:25 PM
Post
#92
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
This is, indeed, an assumption from experience.
Which, in fact, didn't make it into the book. So not only supporting the ones wanting to play street-level, but also the ones playing high-level. How dirty of them.
Every runner group? Many? Some?
No. There is not a single word in the book that states 'thou shalt crawl the streets'.
Oh, uncertainty is sooo cool - so if one wanted to create a character who is world class in what he does, he is never allowed to be sure that his character really is... how very fun. How does this compute the phenomena stated by you, that many players want to 'win the game'? They would never be able to, as there is no absolute. Which lead to endless discussions about what 'world class' really was back in SR3.
You mean Edge 8... or just any other racial modified limit... if maxed out with ware or magic. If that is what you wanted, so be it - you are now at the pinnacle of human achievement, rivalled only by chance and a slim creme de la creme... wheres the problem with that?
Um, not quite... my 'paradigm' (if one can even call it that way) that one should know what one wants, and act accordingly. Quite elitist, indeed.
Yes, this would be called an utopia... The Perfect Game.
Possible - which is the reason why things like BeCKS will exist in SR4, too. Obviously, SR3 wasn't perfect in this respect either - just more limiting in the basic rules, and simply a cop-out in setting up a coherent scale. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Sep 10 2005, 12:57 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
okay. have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 11 2005, 03:55 AM
Post
#94
|
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Rotbart, you have no idea.
Mfb was one of the SR4 playtesters. So, right now, he's got more *actual game experience* with the system than any of us do. If he says that things cap out too quickly, and the rules he played with are esentially the same ones we've got now, then his point is valid. And as a playtester, he's been more privvy to the design goals and processes than you have-- so if he says the game was written to bring things back to street-level (which has been repeated in just about every press release) then he is correct and you are not. Players min/max their characters. Always. No argument there. No one plays Joe Average in a game-- they always have some stats higher, and some lower. A character is always good in some areas, and weak in others-- that's what makes them a *character*, and not a pile of numbers. Playing to your strengths and working around your weaknesses is how roleplay comes into a game. As far as not reaching the absolute pinnacle goes-- part of roleplay and development involves becoming better at your chosen field. Many story elements come directly from that assumption-- the search for transcendential knowledge, looking for a lost master who can teach you something new, for example. Or consider this-- Inigo Montoya was driven to be the absolute best swordsman in the world, to avenge his father's death. The story would have fallen flat if the six-fingered man turned out to have hit the exact same limit that Inigo did. If you're really interested in roleplay and character development, then you accept that there's always further to go. A game is always restricted by its rules. Roleplaying elitism cannot cover for a bad underlying system. People who claim that roleplay can cover for stats are almost always *bad* roleplayers-- they refuse to roleplay their character's weaknesses. That means their "game" is essentially a personal power-trip-- it's not a roleplaying game, it's a game of "I win". |
|
|
|
|
Sep 11 2005, 04:08 AM
Post
#95
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 105 Joined: 28-August 05 Member No.: 7,637 |
I did the same exact thing |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 11 2005, 04:16 AM
Post
#96
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
Just because someone is a playtester, that does not automatically make them the end all be all, nor does it invalidate other people's opinions or perceptions. I will be the first one to say "Hey, I disagree with you, and this is why." If someone came back and said "Nuh-uh.....your wrong" and doesn't back it up...I will give them the same thought to their response that they put in their response. Alpha, Beta and release versions of games sometimes don't even resemble each other. <shrug> I give my hat off to all the playtester's, but they are not the Holy Grail of input when it comes to SR4. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 11 2005, 02:57 PM
Post
#97
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 399 Joined: 27-May 04 Member No.: 6,361 |
Its funny. He's playtested and I've run about four adventures, and we seem to come to the same conclusion. However, I'm curious as to how much experience various others in the board have had. How'd it go?
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 11 2005, 03:56 PM
Post
#98
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
If you say so - I'm amazed by your telepathic powers.
That I knew for about... four months? When he quitted playtesting and posted his rant, at last.
Well, let's say he has more 'actual game experience' with the playtesting draft he got.
I won't argue his subjective view. I will argue his generalizations.
Or he just dropped out, and has outdated info... The book, in fact, states that normal characters are comparable to 'Prime Runners' and Elite Forces.
'Always' tends to get your arguments screwed - so does it here. 'min/maxing' and 'some higher, some lower' are different pairs of shoes, too - it's a scale, but a difference nonetheless.
Sadly, this does neither have to do anything with min/maxing, nor SR4 in special. On the other Hand, it not even half of the truth - to become an actual character, there is a bit more necessary.
Personally, this sounds only cheesy. Yet, it can be achieved even in SR4 if one does create a character that way. The decision is: Do you want to tell that story in play, or do you want it have told when starting to tell others in play? This decision is not only valid but normal: One seldomly starts playing a Character with its birth.
'If you are really intelligent, then you accept that I'm right.' - thats a false dilemma, too... only a more obvious one. Sorry, but there is nothing that forces one into such an int-then routine, especially not with such complex themes.
What news - guess thats what rules are good for: to restrict. To claim that SR4 is restrictive because it does not restrict you to create characters that have (nearly) finished one aspect of their story is somehow... awkward.
'If you don't accept that I'm right, you are stupid.' - yet again... a false dilemma. It misses the point, too - which is not 'roleplay can cover for stats' but 'roleplay and stats should match'.
Refusing to play weaknesses is something that isn't in fact something exclusive for any type or any game, so its a moot point here.
Funny, this is what mfb associated to 'Joe average gamer', not 'elitists'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sep 11 2005, 04:05 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Grumpy Old Ork Decker Group: Admin Posts: 3,794 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orwell, Ohio Member No.: 50 |
Just a reminder to keep it friendly and steer clear of flaming and insults. It's not quite there yet, but toeing the line.
Bull |
|
|
|
|
Sep 11 2005, 04:09 PM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
So, since I have played Shadowrun since it first came out (I think back in 1989), my opinion holds more weight than someone who just got in the game because of my vastly superior gaming experience? If that is the case, Harlequin sucks and you all have to agree, 'cause my opinion rules! :D He playtested, but dropped out. Cain was quoting him as gospel and basically using that as a point to invalidate someone else's views. You have run four adventures, did you play them with your house-rules or "natural"? I would wager, based on your posts, that these 4 games were house-ruled, but I could be wrong. And, again I would wager, that your changes don't match my play style. So again, is it black and white that either of us wrong? Because if it is, then I am right and you are wrong. 8) I try not to invalidate other's peoples arguements off the cuff (but I sometimes do because I don't have the time for a rebuttal or just don't want to repeat myself) but attempt to understand where they are coming from. The fun and interesting thing with opinions, including my own vastly superior ones, is that they are right, because you can't disapprove an opinion, you can only invalidate the facts or perceived facts they are based on. :nuyen: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 7th August 2025 - 06:48 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.