 QUICKLY 4th - 3rd ed. Comparison, Does anyone have any suggestion? |
  |
 Nov 14 2005, 08:51 AM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 15-September 03 Member No.: 5,619  |
Your answers start to be interesting to me.
For the moment I have decided to not try 4th edition. Maybe I will have a look on the book but do not start playing anything. We do not play that often (due to things like university, job, etc..) and we still have problems familiarizing myself with some of SR3 mechanics, especially rigger 3 & Matrix. I find these books wonderfull for the level of detail...but chaotic in letting one learn things. There is no sense for me in starting now a new thing, especially if I consider all the money I've spent to get all SR3 books. A strange thing is that Fanpro tried to give a good, playable, simplified version of vehicle rules (and matrix...but it is too simplified for my tastes) in Mr.Johnson's little black book, which is one of the latest of Sr3. OK, it's not a complete, whole set of rules but a just a simplification of old stuff. However one get rid of all these stupid "scores" even in vehicle vs vehicle combat (which was not suggested by the Rigger 3 simplified optional vehicle vs people system). Why did they did it so late when one was supposed to leave Sr3 for Sr4? Anyway what really sounds odd is the 4 months of playtesting of Sr4. As far as I know D&D3 was developed and playtested in about 2 years. OK D20 has still plenty of problems (without considering the disgusting robbery which is doing a 3.5....) but, at the end of the day, it was a sincere, real improvement from AD&D2....a sentence that really few people can criticize because it is objectively true! They get rid of all the senseless limitations of AD&D2. Why Fanpro let SR4 come out so soon? What real limitations they get rid off? Maybe they were developing the game for longer but were 4 months of playtesting enough to understand if the new game was really improving something? I do not know since I've not yet read the SR4 book, maybe I will have a look. |
 |
 
|
|
Nov 14 2005, 09:59 AM
Post
#27
|
|||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Well don't completely shun it. Like it or not, SR4 is the future, and you'll have a hard time keeping up with the jonses if you stick with old editions. The game itself isn't all that bad either. It's just that whenever I look at the rules I see places where the writers just adopted things from SR3 that didn't fit, even outright cut-and-pasting in the spirits chapter. I see places where they threw in half-thought-through ideas because they were running on such an arbitrary and stupid self-imposed deadline. I see places where the book's layout could have been altered just a little bit to improve readability. I still disagree with some of the basic philosophies behind the design--I still think that it's possible to implement variable TNs *and* include thresholds without destroying the game's playability. But I can still see where they're going with this, and I'm disappointed that the book and the rules aren't great, rather than merely adequate.
That's another thing that disappoints me. They didn't get rid of any limitations at all, except for the part about all simsense (rigging, decking) work being done in a coma. They in fact added and tightened limitations: limitations to skill levels, limitations to attribute levels, limitations to the power of starting characters and how they can grow, limitations to what each sphere of specialization can affect and how. Some of these will be loosened in the supplements, but the world seems to press more tightly now than it did in SR3. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 14 2005, 11:58 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Mystery Archaeologist Group: Members Posts: 2,906 Joined: 19-September 05 From: The apple tree Member No.: 7,760 |
I've found they removed some major limitations. It is now possible to run a mage who use the matrix, one of my group is an adept break in artist who has some hacking skills for opening sec systems up. Sure she is not as good as the pure hacker but in the group but thats the price of playing a multi class character.
It is now possible to play a useful mundane un-cybered character. Sure magic progression is uncapped but when wasn't it? Cyberware is now priced at prices that mean you don't have to save for an entire ten week campaign to gain one point of reactions (I believe the bill was close to 3 million, for 1 extra point of reaction...) Technomancers (what otaku are now) actually have a point rather than being obnoxious kids who the real hackers outstrip in a couple og weeks play. I can now explain the system to a newbie and they get it first time. I saw this a limitation, one of the brightest player I know was I a game of mine and after ten sessions was still getting her head round the various pools. I've played shadowrun for years and think SR4 is the best iteration of the rules, Its certainly better than SR3 which was oddly broken in to many places. As to why fanpro pushed it to get to release date? They wanted to release at GenCon for the marketting buzz... thats business sense to me, maybe they could have waited a year, but thats what it would have been. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2005, 01:54 PM
Post
#29
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Got one of those in my SR3 game.
This is part-true, but I've yet to see an explanation why it should be. If being born magical or giving up chunks of your body doesn't give you the edge, what's the point?
Wrong question. It is now comparatively more uncapped due to the tighter caps on mundane progression. As karma approaches infinity, all mundanes approach the same skill/attribute set.
If you're going Delta-grade, sure. At Basic grade not even Move-By-Wire IV costs three million.
No, technomancers are now just "guys who do stuff" rather than a unique character type with flavour embedded in the system.
You must be a remarkably poor teacher, then. Pools are not a difficult concept.
So a game that is more bizarrely broken in more places is better? I can certainly see it being closer to the game you want to play for whatever reason, but objectively speaking the holes in SR4 are way past anything SR3 has to offer.
You'll excuse me if I'm unsympathetic. ~J |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Nov 14 2005, 01:56 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
Can you explain what you mean by these criticisms? Examples are good. How difficult would they be, do you think, to fix? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 14 2005, 03:30 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
They range from nearly impossible to fix (flaws in the entire attribute+skill(+/-)modifier system) to time-consuming (completely redo the modifiers to damage for ammunition, remembering this time that one point of DV is roughly equal to three damage resistance dice) to relatively easy (redo the concealability chart, or scrap it and go back to per-item concealability). They're so pervasive, though, as to in my opinion render the game not worth fixing. I'm speaking of the end-user, here—if and when FanPro gives a go at SR5, I'll probably take a look.
Examples, mostly cut and pasted from my posts in other threads or other forums: Characters rolling large numbers of dice (there's some vagueness on how high you can go, but I've seen up to eighteen on builds that I'm pretty sure are legal) get Immunity to Normal Modifiers. If you have eighteen dice and are running (-2) in melee combat (-3) in full darkness (-6) at extreme range (-3), you still expect a success—80% chance of one. The comparable situation in SR3 involves a TN of 9 (range) + 8 (full darkness) + 2 (melee) + 4 (running), or 23. With twenty-four dice (insane by SR3 standards), that's under 4% chance of success. In SR3, when you try to hit someone you can't see at extreme range while you're running and someone's beating on you, you actually miss. APDS, flechette, and gel ammo are mechanically nearly identical. APDS is more likely to cause physical damage and is more expensive, gel round is the least expensive. Physical tracks are, both on average and for the maximum, longer than stun damage tracks, therefore stun is more desirable anyway. EX-EX, meanwhile, is flat-out more effective in terms of average damage dealt, though admittedly it's likely to cause stun. Note that this is the case even against armored opponents—rounds designed to break apart on impact kill people in heavy armor better than rounds designed to penetrate armor. A two-foot stick is just as hard to conceal as a submachine gun or a sword. A machine pistol (glorified light pistol) is harder to conceal than a heavy pistol, and equal in concealability to a medkit. (The following are examples of additional significant flaws, not examples of the above-mentioned items) To dodge, you must trade a complex action for your opponent's simple action. Edge varies dramatically in power based on game length and refresh amount. For a one-shot campaign, the character with seven Edge will eat everyone. In a long-term campaign it's much less important unless refreshes occur regularly. This is also the case in SR3, but Karma Pool was not something you paid for. Game balance by GM fiat. "We're going to make some powerful magical ability really cheap, but don't take it unless you really mean it!" (Example: adepts, technomancers) And the stuff Eyeless already mentioned. I could keep going, but I've got laundry to do. ~J |
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2005, 04:22 PM
Post
#32
|
|||||||||||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Same here, and he's noticing a distinct drop in performance in both areas of expertise now that he's being converted.
He's really not that useful, either. Sure, up to eight times per session (depending on how often your GM refreshes; that seems to actually go down when Edge values go up, so it remains lagely the same regardless) he can do something useful, but the rest of the time he's got nothing else going for him. Whee.
On the other hand, Karma is worth significantly less under the new system. For that matter, so are build points; a 400BP character under SR4 rules is about as powerful, though in some ways less so, as a 105BP character in SR3. So, even though the limits are tighter, it'll take about as long to reach those limits if karma/cash awards remain the same. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Nov 14 2005, 07:56 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
@Kagetenshi: My devil's advocate gene is kicking in here, but I don't really find many of those criticisms to hold that much weight.
Is "immunity to normal modifiers" really that bad? Surely somebody throwing 18 dice on an attack is supernaturally good? The character is going to need to know that there is somebody there, implying that they can hear the enemy, saw their position perviously (before the lights went out), or have otherwise been told where they were. It's understandable that someone should probably miss given the circumstances, but even the most dedicated and skillful human is only throwing 14 dice which is an automatic failure unless they're spending edge for a lucky shot. I'll wait ntil I've tried some proper gameplay before I make-up my mind about problems with the ammo and physical/stun system. It does sound like it might be a bit off, however. Technically you don't need to spend an action to doge either, as you get to dodge using your reaction anyway. You can spend a complex action to dodge, but that adds your dodge skill on defense against all attacks for a round. Thus one complex action may be worth 20 simple actions if 10 people are shooting at you. Edge refreshes every session... How would this make edge more valuable in a 1-off than in an extended campaign? Is making a non-serious adept wothwhile? Would it really be imbalancing? Isn't it more a case of game flavour by GM fiat? It costs a lot to be able to do anything with magic, and they're both impacted adversely by taking cyber. Have there been any examples of someone 'abusing' the cheap cost of adept/technomancy abilities 'when they didn't really mean it'? It strikes me that the 'unless they really mean it' restrictions are unnessecary writing rather than system faults. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2005, 08:05 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
edge refreshes when the GM says so, no sooner, no later. every session may be a guideline, and your GM may do it that way, but it is not "the rules", which basically say edge refreshes whenever the DM decides so.
as far as the observations that SR4 could have used more playtesting and better editting... i'll agree to that. i'm used to reading WotC stuff, and while you may or may not like D&D, i have to say i've gotten used to specific terms meaning specific things in the rules and whatnot, and it would be nice to see that same kind of quality control in SR products. i don't think it makes for that big of a problem, though. it's just something that would be nice... |
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2005, 08:06 PM
Post
#35
|
|||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 268 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Brisbane, Australia Member No.: 78 |
And under every previous edition, they suffered from hypersensitivity to wound modifiers. A smartgun link dropping a TN from 4 to 2 was a /massive/ boost, and the penalty of going from 4 to 5 in melee because you took a light wound effectively ended the combat. If you want a quick fix for SR4, then double the stated penalties. There is no corresponding quick fix for the non scalability of TN's. Personally, I call that an improvement. You may not, but it's certainly not a step backwards. At worst, it's a change when a change wasn't needed.
This I agree with, and it annoys the hell out of :)
No, that's an example of the reduced complexity of the system people have been saying doesn't exist. Simplfy it down to a few basic sizes, and you can know at a glance how concealable something is. If you want more granularity in your games, it's probably not a good thing, but for me personally, it won't alter my games one way or the other, because of the first issue you brought up (decreased effect of modifiers). In SR3 terms it's a huge issue, because altering the TN in any form /dramatically/ alters the end result.
The point being of course that you don't need to dodge, you only do it if you want to go on the defensive. Your standard PCs shooting at each other won't be dodging at all. It also works against any and all attacks coming your way, so if it's one person shooting at you once, it's a complex action for you vs a simple for them. But if your getting shot twice or more, it works out in your favour. This is a good change no matter how you spin it.
A real problem for one shot games I'll admit, but not a problem at all in campaigns, because whatever refresh time the GM sets, it will be consistent within that campaign.
What about adepts and technomancers? Yes, it's really cheap to buy the quality that makes you an adept or a technomancer. So what, it's next to impossible to abuse, because of the fact it only gives you one single point of magic (or the technomancer equivalent, the name of which escapes me), so if you put a single bit of cyberware in your body, you've just lost the benifit of that quality. To keep the quality, you have to sink more points in to buying up the stat, which in turn costs more and more points. The only possible way you can get out of character creation having got cheap "bonus" ability is if you're playing a fully mundane character with no cyberware. And I don't know about you, but in my games, if he wants to tell me he's secretly a technomancer that will one day discover his abilities, that's great, because he'll need all the help he can get running around with cyber sammies and fully developed awakened characters Half of the things you consider flaws aren't flaws. The others are at worst, changes for changes sake. If you don't like the changes, you don't like them, but as I said before, that doesn't equate to the rules being horribly broken |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Nov 14 2005, 08:57 PM
Post
#36
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mystery Archaeologist Group: Members Posts: 2,906 Joined: 19-September 05 From: The apple tree Member No.: 7,760 |
Well I, never did, well unless you count checking out Shadowlands, but never anything serious. I can rember the time in SR2 when magically active people got a penelty for decking. Maybe my players just limited themselves but the matrix rules were so complex no one could be bothered to learn them and live with the hassle of balancing a duel role. Also most mages avoid cyber which was nessercary, now it isn't which means they only lose out on having to learn extra skills.
Okay I agree with you there in part but I will (if I get a chance to play) try it out, I like face types and playing one with no (or minimal) enhancement who can once in a while do amazing things sounds cool too me. My main point was you can play a perfectly workable character with out becoming an extreme cybermonster.
I like the idea of magic developing on for ever, I like the balance of tech being easy to become the "best" at and peaking fast but early. Magic on the other hand is a long slow slog up an infinite slope. In the Background there are Immortals who have studied magic for millenia this is the only "there is always someone better" take I've ever really liked. The caps allow charcters like adepts to compete at start up with sammies. They may eventually exceed them but hey I can live with that.
actually I was talking delta grade :D But thats not the point ware was priced that aprt from somebasic bits a security guards ware cost more than three or four times his income... more particualrly for starting characters you had to explain how they had 1000000:nuyen: worth of stuff with out being serious bad asses, gangers who can drop 55000:nuyen: on wireds when this was enough to live in ahigh lifestyle for 5 months. Where in heck did they find the money? mugging just wouldn't work. In game I found the problem of justifying how the cyber monster got enough money to upgrade in an amount of time that meant the player didn't get annoyed. the big important peices that getting at a higher grade means you've got enough for your new toy cost silly amounts, so unless the team was working for silly money or they saved for weeks of real time they got nothing. I prefer the lower cost of cyber it makes bioware feel cool and cutting edge, it makes low cash concepts (eg ganger) with a small amount of cyber believable.
what and person blessed with weird link to computors isn't flavor? hell its the same damn flavor as otaku but with out the age limit. The fluff may be a little lacking but then again they haven't had several source books to be hinted at in yet. The mystery of origin is still there. I just like the fact that they start out a little weak in a "fistfight" and then eventually develope into the gods of the matrix. A more obvious case of the tech quick easy weird spooge ( I suspect magic and always did with otaku) slower but much more powerful in the long run.
No pools are not a difficult idea. the basic idea is cool and I loved it. Now comes the problem I had with them. Teaching players how to spend them during fights with out telling them what to do. The player was never sure how or when to spend them, she got the concept fine, implementation was the problem. Without me constantly holding her hand there was no good way of teaching her how and when to use them. I as a ref and the player had no desire to play lots of training sessions to get her used to doing it. Once players got how to use them they work great but spending nine weeks of a ten week campaign getting them used to it was silly and thats what I hated, the fact that many charcters have multiple pools and adding in karma pool didn't help. Too many player got confused on the basics rather than it being easy to learn and hard to master. The edge system has some of the charm of the pools (all combined) and is easy to understand what the limits of it are (that many uses per session). It is what I wish the pools had been, it makes a big difference in how an encounter goes, it is easy to pick up the basics, and the players are beginning to master the uses of it. Oh and in relationship to your reply. Please don't insult me, maybe I wasn't clear enough but there was no need for an insult.
I have found no grossly bizarre breaks in it. But the I like the new rules. you seemingly do not. We have a differenc of opinion. the OP wanted both sides, so I gave mine. My answers are based on my opinions and experience oddly enough they are different to yours. I felt it was clear that I was not being objective. The differences we have are opinions I find the holes in SR3 more bizarre than anything in SR4, you find it the other way round, go figure. I guess I should add IMHO at the end of every statement then.
Yep I guess you have a point, but if they'd gone ooops not ready yet, people would bitch and they would loose money, as it was they went for the early release and people still bitch, damned if you do... I can understand the business reasons thats all, or more likely I willing to accept that it affects peoples decisions, honestly I think the only changes that would have been made would be errata not being needed. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Nov 14 2005, 09:10 PM
Post
#37
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Unfortunately that value isn't if the complexity convinces me to just end up dumping the whole section. *shrug* @Lilt, the SR4 Matrix and Vehicles are just flat out more playable. Even with the somewhat out-of-character for SR4 Program+Skill mechanism for Virtural Reality and the bizzare "bleed through" of SR3 of the Pilot column in the vehicle table (what this column represents isn't really explained, and it's presence on regular cars doesn't jive with the Rigger Adaptation and drone rules). That isn't the only place where direct text or artifacts from SR3 comes through, showing that SR4 was indeed built on top of a largely stripped down SR3. EDIT: Technomancers (wireless Otaku) are pretty cool, definately better suited to be a PC than the Otaku were (not surprising given the development history of the Otaku). However many people find their ability to access the Matrix with no hardware unsettling. For Magic, just comparing BBB to BBB, it's mostly a push with SR4 having a small edge in being more "complete". But that's mostly due to basic stuff from Magic In The Shadows in SR3 moving into the SR4 BBB. There are definately differences, but overall i wouldn't call SR4 a stunning improvement. Sure it's nice they got rid of Exclusive magical actions and having to track the Force you know a given spell at, but for the most part it is the old magic system converted to the new dice mechanics. There is one really bad issue with higher level Spirits being insanely powerful (again what appears to be another "bleed through" from SR3), but that's mostly localized and easy to *cough*correct. SR4 is intended to be extended in a way SR3 magic wasn't, so the real comparison of the two will come sometime next year with Street Magic. Weapons and combat? *shrug* They did clear some garbage out there, but IMO not nearly enough. There are also some interesting additions, and a very different take on initiative that is likely for the best as all different 'modes' of the game (astral, meat world, VR) now run a lot more insync. Then there is the wierdness that is Full Defense that added a complexity/options that could have been avoided. Inherited wierdness has also made the trip like Hardened Armor either protecting entirely or, for one step more damage, not that much at all. I guess that kinda reflects RealLife™, but i've always seen RealLife™ as a poor excuse for unfunness in a game. ;) Cyberware/bioware had a major adjustment in price that it makes it feasible to add 'ware after character creation without the GM allow enormous amounts of currency into play or falling back on having some cleary insane, spendthrift sponsor NPC pay for it. Also how you calculate the essense loss from cyberware and bioware is IMO an improvement. No more messing with Essense and Bioindex, yet the new system brings pretty close to same effect. Sadly post-chargen 'ware also provides an example of what is IMO is SR4's biggest issue. Areas of vague rules. No rules are given for :nuyen: or Essense costs when you upgrade the rating on 'ware you already have, or if you replace one piece with another. An SR vet is likely going to say something like "well you just put it in the Essense hole", basically following the common SR3 house rule (of the people that realised what the real SR3 rules were, even fewer used them since they were so innane). Unfortunately without SR background you don't even have that. It is like an assumption was made that it was explained elsewhere in the rules, but the "elsewhere" is the previous edition. Or it might be that the explaination was spread across multiple locations elsewhere in the SR4 rules, which since they seemed to use SR3 as a base is entirely possible. But then during editting it was cut from one spot (good!) without all the required info making it to the remaining spot (bad!). Fortunately these areas of vagueness can typically be delt with easily even by a semi-skilled, or at least semi-intellegent GM using "soft" house rules. SUMMATION: For someone without an investment of learning in SR3 the choice between SR3 or SR4 is clearly SR4. This isn't too surprising since that is what Fanpro seemed to be targeting the product at. For current, longtime SR3 players moving right now mostly comes down to whether the improvements in area of Vehicles and the Matrix are worth setting aside (or converting) much of the contents of the SR3 supplement rules (R3, MitS, M&M, CC). IMO the requirement for learning new rules mostly offsets the other improvements as generally people that are still playing SR3 either like or tolerate those canon rules, or have [more often] heavily house-ruled SR3 to ease the pain. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 09:08 AM
Post
#38
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 15-November 05 Member No.: 7,963 |
That is correct. After over a dozen attempts, I cannot create even a simple nSR character in anything less than 3-4 hours-- 5 if he's gear-heavy. There's too much back-and-forth, and you need to sift through the entire section on Qualities in order to get anything done. A one-page listing of qualities would have been better, with the detailed list being moved to the end of the chapter-- kinda like the spell section of the magic chapter. There is no overview of character creation. There's step-by-step examples, which are of varying use-- sometimes they help, and sometimes they make matters worse. There is a cost list, but it doesn't explain what step to take where. And again, having the Qualities section in the middle of the chapter really tosses things off-- if you buy something that affects an attribute or skill, for example, you'll need to go back and redo everything. Also, I'll put this up to Dumpshock as a whole, nSR fans or foes-- when you created a character, were most of your skills in the 3-4 range? Everyone becomes generalized, since they can only have one or two high skills-- and that doesn't even prevent abuse!
You can run the numbers yourself. Assuming just raw ability, Fastjack (Logic 7, Computer 7) versus Joe Wageslave (Logic 3, Computer 3), Fastjack will score an average of 4.62 successes, versus Joe's 2. A critical success is defined as 4+ successes, but Fastjack will only average 2.62 successes over Joe. Fastjact should run circles around this guy, and not just chug ahead slowly.
This is why I didn't want to get into a 3rd/nSR comparison. 3rd is probably just as bad about this sort of thing-- but in relation to other games, nSR's combat system is a complete mess. Remeber, my review was designed to compare nSR to other games, and decidedly not SR3.
Slight exaggeration-- my issue is that the skills constantly shift around on you. nWoD always gives you a linked skill and attribute that works together 99.9% of the time. We don't have that in nSR.
Take a look for yourself. Instead of the huge long list of actions listed for melee and ranged, the cybercombat rules only list attack and full defense as an option. Personally, I hate the "uh, I try to hit him again" combats-- don't you?
It's not. It's New Shadowrun, just like New Coke. New Coke is not Classic Coke, and nSR is not Shadowrun. Some people actually liked the taste of New Coke, and some people couldn't tell the difference. However, a lot of people did realize that the flavor wasn't the same.
I didn't, and I stand by that one. I stared an nWoD game, and I'm having more fun with it than with nSR. I was introduced to Savage Worlds, to Traveller, to New Rifts, to a bundle of new games all at once-- nSR didn't even make the top five of my favorites. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Nov 15 2005, 03:19 PM
Post
#39
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 349 Joined: 16-January 05 Member No.: 6,984 |
Just one thing first, can you just use the term SR4? It seems silly to try to introduce your own TLA at this point for no useful reason. SR4 is the accepted term, just use that.
Highest skill was 4, (I had a few groups), a few 3s and a couple of 1s.
What is this test for? Programming or something? Fastjack would also have hardware and software beyond normal availabilty, and in any case, chug ahead slowly? He is racking up the successes at nearly twice the rate as the wageslave.
True enough, the only real choice you get is what attack program you are going to use.
I disagree, but this largely would stem from what is percieved as where the flavour lies, and what it is, so we end up having to agree to disagree. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Nov 15 2005, 04:25 PM
Post
#40
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
Gah. The rules recommend that edge be refreshed every session. Unless this game is somehow different from every one that has gone before then everything in the book is merely a recommendation that the GM can change at a whim. I've never seen anybody advise players not to buy ares predators because the GM might decide that they only do 1S damage with and AP of +10. The useless Ares Predator example is extreme, but you can't just deviate from the recommended system then claim that the system is faulty based on the change. The suggested refresh rate is around 1/session. To say that there is a fault with the system (edge being more or less useful depending on refresh rate) because some people might not follow what's recommended by the system is, I believe, a straw man argument (or at-least closely related to it). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 04:31 PM
Post
#41
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Normally perhaps, certainly in your example. But i have seen people often caution someone from assuming RAW in how the SR3 Inivisibility and Improved Invisibility spells function since it is often house ruled the minimize and/or eliminate the advantage of the Force 1 technique. Those rules weren't even specifically given as a suggestion. It seems like a good caution to throw in when a very common alternate ruling exists that can change the weighting. But that could just be me. *shrug* |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 04:48 PM
Post
#42
|
|||||||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 15-November 05 Member No.: 7,963 |
Not when comparing to other games. If nWoD is the accepted title of the World of Darkness, then New Shadowrun should fit as well.
Much like I suggested, then. Most characters will have their skills in the 3-4 range, with maybe a smattering of 1's and 5+'s-- fewer of the interesting highs and lows that other games can provide.
It's an example-- don't read too much into it. As another example, picture Michael Jordan in his prime versus a non-scholarship college athlete. Jordan should pwn all over the collegiate-- but instead, he won't score any critical successes, on the whole. If we use the "bought successes" rule, this becomes even worse.
I can live with that. Just don't be surprised when people say that they can tell the difference. Some people say that they could play Shadowrun d20, and notice nothing different-- I disagree, although that may just be because I'm oversensitive. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nov 15 2005, 04:51 PM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
Point taken, and I'm sure I've given similar advice to people in the past, but I don't think that the argument (originally posted by Kagetenshi) is a relevant gripe as far as flaws with the SR4 system goes. To say that Edge is too powerful given the recommended refresh rate is fine, and I might even agree with that, but to say that there's a problem because the refresh rate of edge may vary is a bit off the mark. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 04:58 PM
Post
#44
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Well ya, the refresh rate being variable is the solution to Edge being in or out of taste. Whether per session is too high or low depends somewhat on the type of game you want to play, and how much ground the characters cover during sessions....sessions being only a couple hours at some tables, and several hours for others. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 05:03 PM
Post
#45
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
And who says that Michael Jordan needs to roll critical successes to pound someone into the ground? Whenever there was an opposed test to do anything, the basket ball elite would win. Joe tries to dribble past, elite is there. Elite tries to take the ball off joe, elite wins. Joe tries to take the ball back, joe fails. Elite shoots, joe fails to intercept, and elite scores. What part of that doesn't strike you as the elite player pwning? There are no crits? Didums, perhaps try noticing that crits don't really matter. [edit]Also, does that mean that SR3 is a poor system as Michael Jordan wouldn't score any critical successes against an average joe under that system either?[/edit] |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 15 2005, 05:05 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,651 Joined: 23-September 05 From: Marietta, GA Member No.: 7,773 |
I prefer per-session Edge refresh just because it's one less thing to track from week to week.
But yeah, it largely depends on just how long your sessions are and how active your dice are. We do blocks of 5 hours, and some folks still cruise that without spending a single point (or possibly rolling dice at all, depending on what's going on). I haven't seen anyone use it willy-nilly yet just because it's burning a hole in their pocket. Although when the clock gets down to the last hour of gameplay, people do start using it a bit more often. :) |
|
|
|
|
Nov 15 2005, 05:20 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Micheal Jordan is a good example of a legend that isn't composed entirely of the skill he is generally known for. The legend was a mix of a lot of skills, on and off court, and the situation he was in.
The NBA is centered on a star system, and players up the scale basically get referee 'leaway'. Roughly speaking you are allowed a 1/2 step traveling per year after 2 years in the league. Who gets assigned the foul, if any at all, in a collision is determined by a mixture of total value of endorsement contracts, whether or not you play on the Lakers, minor points to other big market team members, minuses to teams like the T-Wolves that people only watch by accident, and of course seniority. ;) Ok, that's partially tongue in cheek. But if you ever watch the video of Micheal Jordan's last basket watch closely how he uses the defender as a freakin' stepladder. He was a smart player, [mostly] kept his public nose clean, and had stunning physical ability for a period. But he wasn't all that for nearly the time people think, and a lot of it was him standing on the shoulders of his teammates, and they on his. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 15 2005, 05:24 PM
Post
#48
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,420 Joined: 30-October 03 Member No.: 5,776 |
In the Shadowrun community, if not the RPG community at large, the new edition is refered to as SR4. Here you are addressing that community so it would be more acceptable to use SR4.
So there is less min/maxing. Are you seriously trying to claim that is a bad thing? Also, in the games I have been running the players are actually going with only a couple skills at 4 or higher and everything else at 1-2. Maybe that is abnormal, but so far that has been my experience thus far.
You seem to be under the false impression that critical successes are a normal occurrence and are necessary as proof of superior ability. Its not. The book even says it should be a rare occurence. with 7 attribute and 7 skill, Jordan would beat the average collegiate every time if both were using the "bought successes" rule and most times without it. Sure if the collegiate were lucky and/or Jordan unlucky it would be possible for the collegiate to when a single test, but even the best player in the world can have a bad day and even the worst can have a lucky day. Also, as blakkie said, it was more than just straight skill.
The system mechanic is part of the game yes. But it is not the only part of the game. Play Shadowrun d20 would have a different feel to it because of the ill-fit of converting some concepts to that system, but it would still be recognizable as Shadowrun as long as the background was maintained. Just because SR4 has a new mechanic doesn't mean that the flavor can't be maintained. Like you said though, its all about tastes. I can "taste" a difference but I see it as an improvement (what I'd expect with a new edition), not a completely different "taste". |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Nov 15 2005, 05:57 PM
Post
#49
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,965 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland Member No.: 2,032 |
Yep, it looks like talking about elite versus joe is a better way to talk about this sort of thing. I think it can be safely assumed that unless a current sporting personality is an IE or spike baby elf or dwarf (could Micheal Jordan have been a spike dwarf?) then they'll have long passed their prime and joe average (who, it's noteable, is actually quite competent with skill 3) would probably have little trouble beating some of the current sports personalities in 2070. The fact that the 'some' they'd beat are the ones that are dead by then is another matter entierly :). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 20 2005, 06:23 AM
Post
#50
|
|||||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 15-November 05 Member No.: 7,963 |
There is not less min/maxing-- there are fewer highs and lows. Min/maxing and power-munching occurs in every system, and nSR is not an exception. In fact, nSR is at least as abuseable as SR3-- given the increased importance of attributes, any boost to quickness/agility translates into more raw combat power than previously.
The book also says it allows PC's to "add whatever flourishing detail she likes when describing it." That's a direct quote from page 59. There's no mention about critical successes being rare-- but being "pwned" doesn't mean that the other guy pulled ahead by the skin of his teeth, or even by a comfortable margin-- it means that he pulled it off with grandiose flair. Jordan in his prime wouldn't just beat a collegate athlete, he would humiliate him. In order to score that kind of humiliation under the nSR rules, you require a critical success-- which is not at all likely to happen. Thus, the power levels are not at all accurate.
The setting would be recognizeable, yes. However, the game itself is not recognizeable-- this is almost what you would expect if SR3 were ported to the nWoD rules. The setting flavor can be maintained, but the game flavor cannot be-- I haven't been posting here long, and I've seen people saying they can "taste" the differences between SR1-2-3! This is not Shadowrun, this is New Shadowrun. It's not Classic Coke, it's New Coke. You may like the new taste, or you may not. But let's not pretend that there is no difference, mmkay? |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 7th May 2026 - 08:44 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.