 Resolving SR4 issues, Instead of whining like little girls |
  |
 Mar 24 2006, 11:57 PM
Post
#76
|
|
|
panda!  Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242  |
alltho a pain in the ass...
and with a right high dicepool you still get some interesting results from one die ;) btw, why didnt you suggest this in the first place, rather then make post after post about how messed up SR4 is? |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 25 2006, 08:49 AM
Post
#77
|
|||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
First of all, that's something of a redundancy, since you can already spend Edge to score a critical success. (Which is another issue I have, although it's not nearly as bad as it was under SR1: "I attempt to summon a force 200 spirit. Hm, no successes? I spend a point of karma. :grinbig:) Second, that opens up the can of worms as to rather or not you're allowed to burn a point of Edge you've already spent. According to the RAW, you can; which in turn leads to the immortal character issue. ("I get hit by a direct THOR shot? No big deal, I burn a point of Edge.") If we don't allow that, we end up right back where we started-- no Edge left means no chance to even try. There's not much middle ground, unless we start making up a lot of specific-case rules; and *that* would rapidly get unnecessarily complicated and confusing.
That actually cuts both ways. The player spent the Edge because you, as the GM, convinced him that it was the best choice he had. If we GM's had presented him with other options, and made them look equally attractive, would he have spent that edge? Is it really his choice, when we're telling him that it's his only chance? What's more, there are plenty of situations where a character should have the chance to get lucky, with or without spending Edge. The aforementioned spray-and-pray situation is a good example-- no one knows where those bullets are heading, so anything could happen. Maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe not. But Edge or no Edge, the player should get a chance to try. Even trying and failing is a lot more fun than never being allowed to try at all. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 25 2006, 11:30 AM
Post
#78
|
|||
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
i guess that makes its offical then. alltho i must say that only sticking that rule into a list of what you can do with edge and not into the text of the long shot test itself is basicly stupid... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 25 2006, 01:18 PM
Post
#79
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
Another approach to help is to treat things more like Assensing is treated. You get partial credits for any hits you do score. For example I failed a Test driving a boat that was forced by a spirit using the Accident power. Rather that doing damage, which wasn't really as important to the story as time lost, the GM ruled that I was going to lose 6 CT turns minus 1 CT per hit. So the top Threshold was 6, but really there was a condition for Threshold 1 through 5 too. So even if didn't have exploding dice, and my dice count was less than 6, there was still meaning to my roll. Without exploding 6's some things were possible, others were not, and they all could happen on the same roll. It also allowed the GM to set a really high Threshold without setting up the PC for complete failure, which is probably what they were worried about when they wrote about Threshold 4 being the top Threshold. And then broke that rule for Assensing. Another example is a PC trying to jump rooftop to rooftop. If the gap is 4m then the Threshold is 2. If the PC only gets 1 hit you could give them another Test to see if they manage to grab onto the ledge on the other side, or perhaps carry forward enough to at least only fall part way down before crashing onto a balcony or fire escape or even wide window ledge to take a lesser crunch. Roll no hits though and you are taking a taking a swandive into the asphalt pool. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 29 2006, 01:49 AM
Post
#80
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Is it just my faulty memory or was it impossible to destroy a hardened underground bunker with a sling shot in SR3? If so, then I can definitely understand why people wanted to move away from that system. After all, everything should be possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 29 2006, 01:54 AM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
My biggest problem so far with SR4 has been that there seems to be a lot of unneccessary fluff in between the fron cover and the table of contents. There's also a lot of it in between the back cover and the index.
Whose bright idea was that? Whoever it was apparently also works for the World of Darkness folks, as they did the exact same thing. My solution: sticky tabs by the index and ignoring the table of contents. If my copy wasn't all leatherbound and sweet I'd just cut those offending pages out. And for and Fanpro folks reading now: PLEASE DON'T DO THAT ON FUTURE BOOKS!! An index is nowhere near as useful if you have to spend time looking for it. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 29 2006, 02:59 AM
Post
#82
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 515 Joined: 19-January 04 Member No.: 5,992 |
Well, from what little I've seen of the SR2 books, they also contained fluff. And, frankly, that fluff made VR 2.0 about fifty times better than Matrix. I actually like the flufftext. It gives you a better feel for the world. Now, I can see what you mean about having the story _after_ the ToC for ease of use, but, hey.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 29 2006, 04:31 AM
Post
#83
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I don't mind the fluff at all. Without fluff there's no SR, just a set of rules. It's the fact that it makes it hard to find the ToC and index that gets on my nerves.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 29 2006, 05:40 AM
Post
#84
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 28-March 06 From: Ottawa Ontario Canada Member No.: 8,409 |
Here's a suggestion for Long Shots; When all the penalties to your rolls are compiled, you always get ONE die, even if you have zero or negative dice to roll otherwise. However, the target number increases now... you need to roll a 6 on one die if you have 0 dice after modifires, you need to roll a 7 if you have -1, you need to roll an 8 if you have -2, if you have -3 dice you need a target number of 9, and so on. Then, make this single die roll subject to the old rule of 6. When your target number is 5, it can easily be ignored, speeding up play. In a "Longshot" situation, when you've got zero or negative dice and your target number is higher than 6, you roll that single die again and again if you keep hitting sixes. Bear in mind however, you're only going to get one single hit out of it... Unless you start using your edge... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 29 2006, 05:56 AM
Post
#85
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i wholeheartedly approve of the idea of using variable TNs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th June 2026 - 08:23 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.