 Explain it like I'm stupid, The basics of the changes in SR4 |
  |
 Jul 25 2006, 06:13 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957  |
I'm interested in hearing a quick run-down on changes from SR3 to SR4, and I don't mean things like, "There are no more open tests."
For example: Combat in SR* is deadlier than in SR* Spellcasting in SR* is more [complicated, colorful, streamlined, etc.] than in SR*. Running the matrix is more/less . . . Hand-to-hand combat makes more/less sense . . . And such things as these. No need to explain your answers. And a final, bonus question: Why bother changing it from "decking" to "hacking" just because decks are no longer used? We still call it "typing" even though no one uses a typewriter anymore. There is a reason no one says "keying," even though we all use keyboards, and that reason is word inertia. Come on, get real: just because the world went wireless in the 2060s doesn't mean that everyone would suddenly refer to deckers as hackers because their equipment changed. "Decking" was a good, original, Shadowrun word. "Hacking" is silly and generic. (Yes, this latter bit is nothing but rant; please ignore.) |
 |
 
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 06:46 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
Biggest change is no more variable Target numbers. Fixed values of 5,6 and Tests are measured by counting "hits" or comparing "net-hits" for Opposed Tests.
Furthermore, no more dice pools to augment tests. All Tests use Attribute+Skill and modifiers to add/remove dice from the pool instead. More uniform rules for each area of SR like the Opposed Test for Combat is the same for Ranged/Melee/Matrix/Astral/Vehicle. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 06:57 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,635 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,006 |
-- Combat in SR* is deadlier than in SR*
Generally it is much easier to take some damage in SR4 than it was in SR3, but somewhat harder to die. At least straight off. Because of this pistols, even holdouts, are something to show a little respect to. Grenades are also harder to soak away all the damage from. -- Spellcasting in SR* is more [complicated, colorful, streamlined, etc.] than in SR*. It is still the cradle of power, and as much as ever you pretty much require magic to effectively deal with magic opponents. All in all, pending the contents of Street Magic, it all amounts to roughly the same thing. But using the general die mechanism that it shares with the rest of SR4. You'll likely notice a little less difference between Hermetics and Shamans in SR4 than SR3 during play, specifically around spirits. Or you might notice a lot of difference or next to no difference between Hermetics, Shamans, and other traditions. SR4 leaves more on the players and GM now to decide and describe things surrounding spirits and summoning since the differences are more based on colour than mechanics. -- Running the matrix is more/less . . . More often used. Less like filing out your income tax forms using Castle Wolfenstein. -- Hand-to-hand combat makes more/less sense . . . In practice roughly about the same as it ever did. EDIT Somehow missed the bonus question. I still refer to it as decking when someone is operating in VR for anything other than driving a vehicle. It just feels right to me and doesn't really cause any confusion with the other players even though nearly everyone else in the group never played Shadowrun before 4th and the one that did hadn't played since before 2nd edition came out. If everyone else in the group is a longtime 'runner it should be even more natural. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 07:37 PM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,148 Joined: 27-February 06 From: UCAS Member No.: 8,314 |
Because "technomancing" sounds even dumber. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 25 2006, 08:21 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 834 Joined: 30-June 03 Member No.: 4,832 |
I find that the system is fairly easy, straightforward, and universally consistant. The only time that it gets complex and convoluted is when there are vagaries in the rules, or if there were cut and paste from previous versions which don't make sense in the new one.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 08:32 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Ain Soph Aur Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,477 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Montreal, Canada Member No.: 600 |
The KISS explanation:
It's simpler, and playing a matrix oriented character is viable. "Simpler", of course, can mean good or bad, depending on how you like things. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 08:41 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 16-October 05 Member No.: 7,850 |
Well it is called Hacking now so similar to your statement about typewriters (which also have keyboards btw), why would they call it decking later on? That word inertia would actually be in support of hacking being used. I don't like decking and decker, it sounded really silly to me, and it still sounds silly actually. I mean now we don't say that guy is a great computerer, even though he is very proficient with a computer. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 25 2006, 08:47 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
I think the switch was their attempt to say, "This time we've updated the Matrix and made it better. It's different this time. No, really. We mean it this time. Like, for real, it's different and better, not like the last five times we said that. This time it's different. And better."
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 08:58 PM
Post
#9
|
|||||||||||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Retired Admins Posts: 1,784 Joined: 28-July 04 From: Cleveland, OH Member No.: 6,522 |
IME, in SR3, it just wasn't all that common for PCs to be lightly injured. This is entirely subjective, of course. But, it usually seemed like an attack would come in and it would either do very little or nothing OR it would obliterate the target. So, it was fairly uncommon to see somebody continuing to do stuff at some level of injury. In SR4, it's much harder to completely avoid injury. So, it's fairly common for characters to be operating at some level of injury. A random person with a hold out probably won't kill you, but he'll probably hit you and you'll probably be at a die penalty because of it.
Honestly, spellcasting seems to be very similar between the two systems, at least in terms of balance. Some groups will complain that mages are all powerful, other groups will complain that they're dramatically underpowered. (In both systems!) In terms of color/flavor, sorcery is pretty similar. Depending upon character design, drain can be worse in SR4, but it isn't always. The biggest change is probably that in SR4, you don't have to worry about learning a spell at a particular force. Instead, you choose force, up to twice your magic attribute, at the time of casting. That can mean that when you need to lay it all on the line to cast an extremely powerful spell, it's possible to do so at risk of physical damage. In general, having Magic as a purchaseable attribute has also made magic a bit more common. It's fairly straightforward, now, to have an awakened character with just a little bit of magic at creation.
It's definitely more pervasive than it was in SR3. And, that's really the point of AR and wireless. Hackers are more integral to the game, and more essential to a team. The game's also aware of search engines now. Pretty much anybody can grab their commlink and start googling away to begin a legwork search. That way, when you get around to checking with your contacts, you've already got the basics of a situation down.
I never cared for the idea of a character dealing HtH damage when it wasn't their turn. That aspect has been removed. (Though, it remains possible to attack multiple characters at one time.) So, to me at least, that aspect makes a lot more sense. However, beyond that, the systems aren't dramatically different.
I'm of the opinion that this was pretty much a concession to new players. If you're sitting around with somebody who's never heard of shadowrun and you say "hacker" there isn't any further explanation necessary. If you say "decker" that's fairly meaningless. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Jul 25 2006, 09:22 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,026 Joined: 23-November 05 From: Seattle (Really!) Member No.: 7,996 |
I think I have to disagree with the fundamental premise that one system is better than the other. They are simply different systems, though I'm finding I prefer 4 to 3 generally. Economics: The Gear Pricelist in SR4 is much more reasonable than SR3. The highend gear is reachable, thew low end is cheap enough to be disposable and runs no longer have to pay excessive amounts just to facilitate character advancement. Magic: One wacky system traded for another Ranged Combat: Light and Hold-out pistols are actually capable of doing some damage in SR4. Light injuries are more common, however in comparison some higher end weapons seem a bit underpowered. Matrix: It's more inclusive in SR4, non-matrix specialists can get some basic use out of it, Matrix specialists no-longer are connected by a cord to single location. In general fewer total tests need to be made. Hand to Hand Combat: Just different not better or worse. Fewer different types of test and fixed target numbers generally have made the game easier to learn and much easier for a GM to wing it when there sin't a specified test written in to the rules. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 26 2006, 09:19 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Hey, thanks to all for the many contributions. This has proven to be a good summary of game-play changes, rather than just a list of rule changes.
Cheers, UJ |
|
|
|
|
Jul 27 2006, 08:36 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Combat: On the one hand, SR3 tended to go from "total soak" to "total smear" with very little room in between. SR4 is a bit more granular about it. However, it's harder to actually kill characters outright in SR4, particularily since armor can shift damage to the stun track.
Spellcasting: The good news here is that the rules are more constant. The bad news is that they're a whole lot more generic, and deliberately so. You won't find detailed descriptions of the Hermetic and Shamanic traditions; they're just two examples of what you can make with the build-a-tradition rules. My playtests have found the new rules to be bland and easily exploitable, and not a whole lot easier to use in practice. The Matrix: The matrix is more pervasive, but it's now harder to do a "slash decker": decker/sam, decker/face, etc; a good decker requires too many high skills to be useful at anything else. A decker/rigger is marginally easier, thanks in part to the rules merge and the removal of the hideous Maneuver score; but the vehicle rules are still a horrendous mess, reducing the overall benefit. Hand to Hand: Is about the same. They've removed the infinite counterattack issue that bugged people in 3rd ed, but that's about it. "Decking" to "Hacking": because they decided to go from a futuristic Gibsonian worldview to a modern Bluetooth worldview. They actually scrolled back the futurism of the game, in order to implement modern technology. Other rants: in general, the game is a lot more flavorless than ever before. They tried to emulate, instead of innovate; what's more, they tried to emulate several generic systems (the character creation systems looks suspiciously like GURPS) plus the New World of Darkness (the core dice mechanic is essentially the same, only using d6's instead of d10's.) |
|
|
|
|
Jul 27 2006, 12:51 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 984 Joined: 15-June 06 Member No.: 8,717 |
The Matrix: The matrix is more pervasive, but it's now harder to do a "slash decker": decker/sam, decker/face, etc; a good decker requires too many high skills to be useful at anything else.
I disagree. One of my players does exactly that. Hacker/Sam/Street Doc/Rigger. Believe it or not. A very useful 400BP character. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 27 2006, 04:37 PM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 7-November 04 Member No.: 6,811 |
I think of it more that they took the same leap Gibson did, for the 21st century. Augmented Reality and the wireless Matrix is just as unreal as the old stuff, it's simply unreal using updated technology referances. Though in my current group, we still refer to any particularly outlandish bit of hacking as "haxorzing teh Gibson." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 04:49 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
I'll have to disagree. I'm not sure how you can say that given you can make any char a Hacker in SR4 with zero essence cost and the same effectiveness of going full cyber. Mage/Hacker, Adept/Hacker, Mystic Adept/Hacker, Anything/Hacker wasn't really that good in prior versions given the cyber requirement alone. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 05:30 PM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 27-July 06 Member No.: 8,968 |
I didn't know ethernet and fiber optics were considered obsolete. There's nothing futuristic about wi-fi, and hardlines go about 100X faster in all cases. To say nothing of signal decay. Are you telling me there are gigantic radio dishes for intercontinental communications, instead of cables? That's why I'm still of the opinion that a hardline decker would trounce a wi-fi hacker. I don't have any stats for that, but hardline speed so far as I know always beats wi-fi in terms of bandwidth. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 05:32 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Perhaps Unwired will have rules that give a hacker a bit of an edge if he has a hardwired connection.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 27 2006, 05:48 PM
Post
#18
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
This has been debunked elsewhere ya big silly head. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 06:00 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 7-November 04 Member No.: 6,811 |
I chose the term technology reference instead of technology carefully. I do not particularly care about the real state of computer science, since it has precious little to do with our fantasy game of elf hackers in 2070. The Matrix has always been completely unreal and it continues to be so. However, the popular concept of technology and the appearance of the Internet have changed. I appreciate that they integrated these when they rewrote the system, just as I prefer modern science-fiction writers use "space ship" instead of "rocket ship to the MOON!" even if both accurately reflect modern space travel. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 06:44 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
That's funny. I'm of the opinion that SR4 is pretty much a concession to new players. ;) :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 06:56 PM
Post
#21
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 39 Joined: 27-July 06 Member No.: 8,968 |
Oh, of course. Which is why we had to update SR4 to make it concurrent with real world advances. Then why change the Matrix at all to begin with? Sorry, you can't use "concurrence with real world technology" as a reason for an update and then turn around and say "The Matrix doesn't have to make sense to your puny meat brain". (Edit note: Edited back in my original comment. I thought it was a bit snarky in tone, but eidolon already commented on it. Damn, I was too slow.) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 07:01 PM
Post
#22
|
|||
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
One of the least necessary and more tiresome aspects of the new edition, IMO. Why would a fantasy, fictional, nonexistant world have to suddenly fit more closely with our current, unconnected timeline? So that little Jimmy wouldn't hurt himself thinking? Do people that enjoy this change and think it necessary also have a hard time with reading Star Wars material because we don't have the force? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 07:13 PM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 7-November 04 Member No.: 6,811 |
Unreal != "The Matrix doesn't make sense." It means simply that the Matrix is...well, unreal. Not a real technology. I apologize, but I don't know of a clearer word to use for this concept. The efficiency of wired transfer versus wireless versus Emperor Ming Death Rays is irrelevant to the artistic approach to the Matrix because it is not a real technology and does not need to abide by the real parameters of computer science. Good thing it doesn’t, either, because hacking as the game knows it simply wouldn't exist if it did. (Edited to continue, since I initially stopped too abruptly:) My original point is that this is "updated" not in terms of technology but the perception of technology. We live in a different world now then when Gibson started writing, where instead of a fantastical other realm of Cyberspace we're instead facing the continual merging of the Internet and connectivity into even the most minute parts of our lives. The 21st century brings us a new technological dystopia, which could encounter different horrors and wonders than what we thought it would bring us in the 80s. The technology itself and its precision doesn't matter to me, it's the nightmare of where it can take us that does. As far as that goes, Gibson's vision of the future is becoming outdated, even if his technology can still be accurate. This post has been edited by Conskill: Jul 27 2006, 07:21 PM |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 27 2006, 07:29 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Your reference all the way back to Gibson shows that you, like others, think that SR is still in need of those parent works to be playable/believable. I think it has grown to sustain itself, and needs not make silly attempts to send out tendrils to other works and realities in order to make "sense". The tech curve in SR is/was the tech curve in SR, not the RL tech curve, or the William Gibson tech curve. IMO, this is/was how it should be.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 27 2006, 08:46 PM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Retired Admins Posts: 1,784 Joined: 28-July 04 From: Cleveland, OH Member No.: 6,522 |
Except that it was pretty clear that Shadowrun was NOT sustaining itself.
Love it or hate it -- SR4 has revitalized the game.
I'm not saying that any one aspect of SR4 is responsible for that change. However, it's pretty clear that FanPro has done something right. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 2nd September 2025 - 06:23 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.