 SR3 or SR4 which one has more |
  |
 Jan 16 2007, 06:26 PM
Post
#76
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;  Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,548 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760  |
I'm running on 7 hours of often interrupted sleep, so I'll try to keep up with your blinding brilliance. Excuse me for my comprehension errors.
I did read your above post and, as Kage said, it didn't make a lot of sense to me. I read your below post and it's largely non-applicable. I've never seen an opposed test in the manner you describe, after... wow, 8 years of playing Shadowrun. That isn't to say it can't come up, but it seems unusual. (Granted, I try to avoid 'epic level' campaigns.) You gave an example of a strength test, for instance if two people are pushing against each other or against a door. As the two push from either side, they both find it is far more easier to be stationary than to make progress. I think this is a reasonable statement. If you watch a tug of war, where there are two very 'strong' opponents, progress is slow and much of the time is spent just 'digging in' and resisting the other side. So in this particular case, your complaint is that the rules seem to accurately reflect reality, in that sometimes when dealing with a pair of opposed tremendous power, progress is fairly slow. The only other example where I can see this coming up is banishing a spirit where, IIRC, the spirit rolls force against the mages Magic rating and vice versa. If the two are truly uber, both are probably safe from being banished without being softened up through conventional combat. Defense is sometimes easier than offense, fair enough. Since magic isn't something that happens in the real world, again, I find the mechanics acceptable. Sometimes you'll simply need to figure out another method of getting what you want because some tactics won't work between powerful creatures.
So what? I don't have to negotiate while in combat, so the mechanics are different. When someone gets to roll his CP in addition to his skill when shooting me, and I don't get a pool in addition to my negotiation skill to talk the bullet out of hitting me, I'll complain. Until then, with few exceptions (generally because one party or the other lacks the appropriate skill and therefore can't apply any pool), if one party gets to use a pool, the other does as well. If your complaint is that negotiations, combat, matrix stuff, magic and rigging each have their own ruleset and could stand to be a little more consistent to each other, you'd have an argument. The argument that some aspects of the game use tactical pools and some don't is really completely irrelevant, as long as non-pool skills aren't directly resisting pool skills (and I haven't seen a case where this can happen).
Number of dice is modified by your skill. Anything that modifies your ability to perform modifies the number of dice. Anything that modifies the difficulty of the task modifies the TN. This is why a master is a master whether he's shooting a point blank target or making an impossible shot.
Again, excuse my confusion, sleep has blinded my senses. I had not realized that 'objective' is defined by 'what Serbitar's brilliance tells us is correct'. |
||||||||||||||
 |
 
|
||||||||||||||
|
Jan 16 2007, 08:00 PM
Post
#77
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
I have no desire to hammer this out yet again but I will repeat what I've said on other ocassions: SR4 has outsold all previous editions of Shadowrun in the same time period following release, continues to be one of the top sellers with the big distributers every month, and more importantly IMHO was one of the best selling games on the market in the past couple of years (and that includes several WW relaunches). Furthermore, sales, as well as distribution and customer feedback at various cons indicate that a significant number of players who had given up on Shadowrun because of SR3 have returned because of SR4 (this matches testimonies from numerous RPG forums on the net and FLGS feedback). We've also had more completely new players flocking to the convention booths and mailing in requests for more information than ever before. We're going to a 4th printing at a time when RPG sales are supposedly on the downturn. Sales of Street Magic indicate SR4 was not a fluke and both books remain on distributers best seller lists. SR4 was nominated and then won the fan-voted Eenie Awards for Best Rules and Best (overall) Product - people can diss it all they want, but more fans went and voted for SR4 in those categories than hard-core fans of Mutants and Masterminds did (and if you know anything about the following of that game, you know that's saying a lot). Read those facts as you will. FanPro is very pleased with SR4 and Wizkids is too. Did we lose a lot of old timers with the transition? Yes. We expected that. In fact you'll find that a lot of the people Sphynx is referring to as returning to SR3 are long time players. But like it or not, the people who contol the SR property decided it needed a revamp and revitalization to survive in the current marketplace and to draw the current gamer, and that required a new system was needed as part of the facelift - fortunately the gamble FanPro took has paid off better than expected. SR4 isn't just doing well, it's thriving, and that's despite the scarceness of new releases. With SR3 sales were stable but the overall gamer population was dwindling. Individual players were buying more books, but playing less. New players weren't making up for those retiring and in large part this was due to the percieved difficulty of getting into SR3. SR4 took us in the direction needed to keep SR alive for another decade - even if it cost us some of the old fanbase. Some say SR4 dumbed down the game. Some say they don't care for the new setting. Some don't like the WoD-style mechanics. Fine, everyone's entitled to an opinion. I'm a hardcore SR gamer who has been playing since SR1, I liked SR3 so much I even took the time to teach people how mistaken they were about the Matrix rules' complexity, I got into freelancing because I loved the game at the time and the mechanics behind it in all their flawed beauty... and, as a fan, I disagree on all counts. Does SR4 currently lack the depth of SR3, yes. We're behind on the core books and I have no doubt the complete set will broaden play options. Heck, I've got a bunch of drafts on my HD for upcoming books that virtually guarantee it. But let's get this clear and get over it once and for all: like it or not SR4 is here to stay. As I've noted the game is not only healthy, it's thriving. We're making future fluff books as easily accessible as possible to people who prefer staying with SR3 rules by keeping mechanics out of setting books, but make no mistake SR3 will no longer be supported, nor will it be revived. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 16 2007, 08:24 PM
Post
#78
|
|
|
Mystery Archaeologist Group: Members Posts: 2,906 Joined: 19-September 05 From: The apple tree Member No.: 7,760 |
Look what you guys have done you woke Synner up. Now stop bickering and lets talk productively otherwise he'll get even more cranky and we'll never get our new books.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2007, 08:49 PM
Post
#79
|
|
|
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 |
...Well put Synner. Yes, I have my small peeves (that's what houseruling is for), but overall, the more that I have played and GM'd in SR4, the more I can say, it has grown on me. For one, I find hacking runs don't make the other players have to go off & play cards, or Civ III, or something like that. Other things, like the change to Rigging, took a little getting used to (considering this is my favourite archetype), but then a character no longer needs an essence sink like the old VCR in order to be a good driver, just skill and a good Reaction.
Over the last 10 months or so of playing and GMing SR4, I find the system works just fine. The only thing that is holding me back from opening a full fledged campaign is the wait for more of the core books (I don't particularly care for revisionism). (BTW: I'm sure there are still AD&D junkies out there who bemoan the release of Ver 3.5) Do I miss SR3? Yes. I loved all the detail even if a few of the rules were unwieldy. Heck, I was disappointed FASA dropped the skill web in in the transition from SR2 to SR3. Would I GM in SR3 again? Yes, for I still wish to refine my "hallmark campaqign" Rhapsody in Shadow through an additional playtest or two. I have considered adpting the SR4 rule mechanics and keeping everything in the same time frame (2061 - 62). The only rub here is with the wireless matrix still being on the horizon. Traditional "hardwired" Decking would be a real pain to retool. Do I enjoy playing and GMing in SR4? For the most part, Yes. Will I continue playing and GMing new missions and eventually a new campaign in SR4? Absolutely. Like you have said. It is here to stay. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2007, 08:54 PM
Post
#80
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Check the forums at kenzerco and dragonsfoot if you want to find a bunch of die-hard AD&D (or even OD&D) players.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 12:33 AM
Post
#81
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I think you are looking at the past through rose-colored memories, because I sure as hell recall this very same kind of thing happening with the release of SR3. Over the years there have been many people (here and elsewhere) that have bitched and moaned about SR3, and how they still play by the older (SR2 or even SR1) rules. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:16 AM
Post
#82
|
|||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Ditto. They could have kept both lines alive. The decision looks to have been to abandon SR3 and force the purchasers to take up SR4 to keep getting their SR fix. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:25 AM
Post
#83
|
|||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
With variable size damage tracks? Or the fully healed from Deadly wound in 2 days simplicity? :S
Or who liked playing with the game as a simulation rather than just roleplaying/fudging your way through things.
I totally agree, and the part I bolded is why shadowrunning should be extinct in SR4. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:29 AM
Post
#84
|
|||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Origins and/or Gencon. :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 04:05 AM
Post
#85
|
|||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
From reading your posts, it seems you favor luck over tactics or strategy. Why? You seem to abhor dice pools, which do alter the number of dice rolled in SR3 (just to contradict one of your fallacious statements.) In your scaling examples, you would rather have the outcome determined by a die roll than by the underlying stat, someones skill or attribute they have invested in. In SR4 the identical stat vs rating opposed rolls are rolling the same number of dice at the same target number of 5 or 6. So there is a greater chance for more variance in their outcome than your example of SR3 and TN12 or TN40 outcomes. Not only is it harder to gain a success, but it is just as hard to gain multiple successes. As a player, or a great dragon, I would be pissed if I was defeated due to a single bad roll. ;) At least the near impossible high TNs tell one that it is nearly impossible to succeed in such an action, not that with a little luck everything is possible. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 17 2007, 09:38 AM
Post
#86
|
|||||||||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
So you have never made an opposed test? The symptoms of the problem do not only apply at ratings of 40. The start at 5-6. A good example is the preference of spells with a force rating of 6. this has completely vanished in SR4.
Sorry, no. You dont get it. You could set the baseline wherever you want. You could make standard human strength 40 (instead of 3) and Dragon strength 533 (instead of 40). Nothing should change (if the system scaled right), but it does. Again, SR3 does not scale. Is that so hard to comprehend?
The point is, that there are two mechanics. In combat everybody has a hilarious ammount of hits. In most other skills, they dont. There is no way to compare the quality of pooled and non pooled test. Thats just counter intuitive and a big pain in the ass. And with the Few number of dice that are rolled in a non pooled test, the outcome is so completely random that it does not make much sense.
Yes, the single tests itself are consistent, but still, we have different mechanics.
We were talking abut the fact that even the smallest TN modifier +1, has severe consequences. Please do not turn the argument into something else.
Math, consistency and universality certainly are criteria that should be objective enough even for you. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Jan 17 2007, 09:58 AM
Post
#87
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
* I do not favour luck over tactics, that is an untrue assumption * I said that there are no dicepool modifers in SR3, nothing else * I do not abhore dicepools, I abhore different game mechanics, where there should be none. Either give pools to everything or nothing, mixing is silly * I do not get your critisism of my example. In every roleplaying game, the outcome of a test depends on dice rolls, if you abhore dice, play chess * maybe I shloud again explain what scaling means again: Scaling means, that when you multiply every stat in a test, the outcome of the test relative to the stat is still the same. This is not the case in SR3. 6 dice vs TN of 6 give you 1 hit per 6 rating points. 12 dice vs TN 12 should give you 2 hits, if it scaled (because rating 6 gave you one hit. But no it gives you 1/3 hits per 12 rating points. It is not scaling. Scaling means: Multiply everyting by 2, then the hits you get should be the hits before multiplied by 2. Is that so hard to comprehend? Ive explained that 3 times now. * Your reasoning about great dragons is flawed. I was talking about somebody with high stat ratings not being able to do anything against somebody with equally high stat ratings because of the flawed not scaling mechanics. why shopuld it be impossible for somebody with rating X to succeed against rating X just because X is high? The rating itself should be irrelevant for determining the outcome as long as they are equal. what counts are the relative ratings. but do to bad scaling, the absolute ratings do count. please think about this scaling issue first. It is a mathematical fact. I am not inventing it. And it is not hard to understand. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 10:14 AM
Post
#88
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
Ehh.. thing is look at the world today. Just about everywhere you go? You leave a data trail. Yet still to this day people manage to commit illegal acts and get away with it. The really smart criminals yeah either invest in a ultra high end commlink and have their hacker friends (I still keep wanting to call them deckers damit.) keep their software up to date. Changing a few bits here and there should more or less keep the heat off you. If your really paranoid. Yeah go the disposable route. And worst case? Wow... turn it of. Sweet jesus. Also while you leave a trail behind you. Also keep in mind just how many trails are created every nanosecond in the world of 2070. It's like taking 500,000 needles. Then telling a person to find you the one needle 'with a slighlty blunt tip' They can find it... in time. Assuming they dont get fustrated and give up. And by the time they do, is it still even relevant? Probably not. Sure they -might- get lucky but the odds are against them seeing a quick resolution to their problem. And their also likely to make a few mistakes along the way, thinking they'd found the needle with a 'slightly blunt tip' when really they found the needle with the 'slightly less sharp tip'. So then, if nothing else consider the time and resources it takes to track down this one needle. Is it -really- that important? Probably not most of the time. Mitsushima has one of it's labs hit and the prototype stolen. Finding the runners who did it is really not going to be one of their primary questions in most cases. Infact the biggest question should be "How the -hell- did the runners even know about it in the first place?" Find the security hole and plug it. Then find out who stole it so you know where the item will more or less eventually wind up. Track down teh runners maybe sure. But chances are they dont even really know who their working for and if they dont have the prototype with them at the time. You've really just wasted a whole lot more time, money and resources. Time far better spent in many cases on damage control and tighenting security so crap like that doesnt happen again in the future. There will allways be exceptions of course. But alot of the time it's just a setback. Instead of releasing a product in 4 years it's released in 6. It might not even really hurt them in the long run. I mean look how much Half-life or Half-life 2 was pushed back. The sales of both games in the end wasnt really hurt any by it. I mean really the only time a corp is goign to seriously crack down and do eveyrthing it can no expenses spared to track down a team of runners after a steal is when the products proffit is either guaranteed, or damn well likely to pay it all off in the long run. That new armor tech that's going to net them billions a year for easily 10+ years is sure well going to be worth spending another million or two when it's a 'sure thing'. But alot of the time it isnt sure fire at all. Or in other cases the deadline is so tight that even if you tracked down the team, it's far too late to get the ball rolling again, you product wil be out after your competitors is and you loose the contract.... Unless.... You hire more runners to sabotage the competition in a bid to buy yourself more time? I think this is one thing I'm really loving about alot of the -old- books. Not the rules. Those change and there's allways complaints/arguments about it. But the fluff. THe fluff from some of the old games is just about priceless to the setting and in some ways I think it's a horrible crime you cant get these books new anymore, or at least in PDF format. Because quite a few of the older SR fluff books really seem to have their fingers on the pulse of the SR world. It may be old and outdated by SR3 SR4 standards. But by god it really explains alot about why things are the way they are now in later editions. I might even seriously contemplate murder to see such things updated and revised for release under SR4. Mmmm actually yes on serious contemplation it's really not worth murder. But I'd definately egg for it if I ever became 'T3h UbAr Rich!' And really when it comes down to 'what system has more' for on topic disucssion. I dont go by the rules. I go by the fluff. By fluff material SR2 beats out SR3 in many areas, in overall SR3 beats SR4 hands down. But the SR4 line is still a baby. What really is needed to make it all shine I think is to take alot of the old fluff as I've said, and just polish it up. Update it all and re-release it. I mean between all the old books I got my hands on I'm having a 'mental orgasm' with all the nifty stuff in all these books I missed before. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 02:21 PM
Post
#89
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Smartlink? There's probably tons of other examples, but the good ol' SL and SL-II is the most prevelant one. Someone mentioned astat of 533. Out of curiosity I plugged that into the dice probability calculator and got 0.00% chance of a hit. I multiplied the dice by 10 to try and find how many times you'd roll to get a hit and the response (for 5330 dice at TN 533) was NaN%. Not sure what that means. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 02:50 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Which calculator ?
The chance to hit 533 with one die is 1/(6^(round(533/6))*6/(6-533mod6)) = 1/900391296863322543191599475324929070727001310717574940220948163330048 You need about the inverse number of dice to have a roughly 50% chance to hit the TN. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:17 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~bcd/SR/dicerollcalc.html
Apparently it can't handle incredibly big numbers, but other than curiosity I've never needed it to, so I'll stick with it. :) |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:20 PM
Post
#92
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Well the amount of dice you need is on the order of magnitude of the atoms in the galaxy (plus minus 3 magniutes), so I think oyu are on the safe side using the calculator for realistic numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 03:52 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,222 Joined: 11-October 02 From: Netherlands and Belgium Member No.: 3,437 |
Just an FYI, I'm not going to say anything more negative about SR4. People know my take on it, but far too much effort went into it for me to give it a bad name, and truth be told, if not for SR3, I'd love SR4 alot. I'm not here to make enemies or hurt people's feelings. If you like SR3 better, join my thread on the projects page to continue the game at an unofficial capacity. I'm glad SR4 is doing well, I'll of course keep buying the books, even if I'm not playing the game. I want the game and community to stick around, and maybe a more WoD style is just the boost SR needed to keep my community active. :P
Anyhows, kudos to the SR4 team for not retaliating against comments like mine, which shouldn't have been made, with inflammatory comments. I know I'd be alot more inflammatory if it'd been the other shoes. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 04:10 PM
Post
#94
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,548 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 |
And you get upset with me for not paying attention. No, I've never encountered an opposed test with such high numbers that neither side has a chance of getting any successes. But that said, I'm still of the opinion that moving something with a strength of 500 should be, basically, impossible. It would be like trying to stop an asteroid the size of Texas from hitting the earth. You really shouldn't be able to do it. If another asteroid the same size hits, then it should be a damage test, not a strength test. In other words, I don't see your scaling problem in this example because some problems (not the dice system, but the real world problem) shouldn't scale. It ceases to become an opposed strength test and becomes a different test. Maybe if you made another example other than strength, an example where in the real world, something with a state of say 40 and something else with a stat of 40, come into competition in what would be an opposed test, and the results in the real world are different from the results in Shadowrun. If your complaint is simply that if you took the character sheets and multiplied everyone's stats by 10, that things would cease to work, I would say then don't multiply everyone's stats by 10. I feel like your argument is 'well I have this car that works fine up to 90mph. But if I put a rocket engine on and launch it into space, the steering goes out.' Alright... Well don't launch it into space. SR3 is made to handle a particular range of actions, and does so well. If you really, really want a system that can be expanded to ridiculous numbers, none of the Shadowrun systems (SR1-4) are appropriate. Don't use them for your Gods of Olympus game where character stats start at 10,000 and go up from there.
I guess not. Like I said, why should things scale if you intentionally bump stuff up to unreasonable numbers? There's no conceivable reason to use numbers like 533. If two dragons get in a strength test trying to force a door, just say each lays on their side of the door and no progress is made. Have you really had a strength test with a dragon that was so terrible it made you hate SR3?
I can agree with this, and I feel that the unifying systems aspect of SR4 was a plus. But when that single, unifying system sucks, it kinda takes away from that plus.
I believe I answered your question and you conveniently snipped out that paragraph.
Smartlink makes the target easier to hit. It helps identify the target and adjust for things like wind and bullet drop, which are things external to the character. It just means your equipment functions better, basically. It's like the difference between shooting with a pistol and shooting with a rifle (which determines the TN in the first place). I would argue that wound modifiers should affect the number of dice thrown though. Your wounds should decrease your effective skill, forcing you to shoot below your ability, rather than making the shot more or less difficult. The shot is just as difficult as it was before, you're just not as good. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
Jan 17 2007, 04:23 PM
Post
#95
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Just to make the scaling thing clear (4th time):
The examples of dragons, Strength 40 and so on were just that, examples. There everybody can see the problem. Of course it already starts at SR3 level ranging from an average of 3 to 12. The scaling is broken even from 3 to 6, though it is not so easy to see. Just to calculate the scaling difference: 3 dice vs TN 3 get you 3*4/6 = 2 hits. doubling everything: You should get 4 hits with 6 dice vs TN 6. You get 1. Scaling broken by 400%. It is thus an inherently flawed system that uses the dice number as target number because they scale differently. Is that so hard to understand? Problems arise in every opposed test. Opposed tests of equal strength on low ratings are over in an instant. High ratings take forever, although in both cases the ratings are equal. Further problems arise in all tests where TNs rise with dice value (or attribute value) like drain, banishing, ward combat, spell resistance, matrix tests and more. Concerning the +1TN is to coarse point: You said that you could take dice away which would be finer. I say, that there are no modifiers that alter dice pool in SR3. there is nothing to say against that. Skill levels are something completely different. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 04:33 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Let's take a step back here: you're assuming that it's obvious that scaling should be linear. Why should it?
~J |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 06:11 PM
Post
#97
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Scaling has very little to do with linearity. Although that a system that is linear in all aspects automatically scales correctly. But a system that scales quadratically in all aspects also scales correctly. But a system that scales with function A in one aspect and function B in another does not scale. Like SR3 that scales linearly with dice but kind of exponentially with difficulty to achieve hits (TN).
Again: Scaleing means, that you get the same result independent of your baseline, your zeropoint. You can say that the average humans strength equals a value of 3, 100 or 1000. That is just a matter of definition, everything else (Dragons, Elephants, Cats) is then scaled to this baseline value. In a system that scales, like SR4, the baseline is irrelevant. In SR3, that does not scale, it is not. And again: in quintessence scaling means that a test, X vs X has always the same relative result (compared to X). No matter the value of X. That is not lilnearity. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 07:09 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Your scaling argument is flawed. The baseline is based on the standard die, if you change the baseline from 3 to 100, you need to switch from a D6 to a D200.
So far you have been ignoring the factor that the die itself plays in defining the norm. The die is irrelevant in SR4 because each one represents a 1/3 success before things like edge change the rules. Since SR3 actually uses variability in the meaning of each die, changing the baseline without properly adjusting the die as well is a false scaling. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 07:37 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
edit: ugh, no. not getting into this.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 08:20 PM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
You are aware that FanPro doesn't exactly have unlimited resources, right? What, two full time employees, one of which is fully dedicated to keeping Classic Battletech going, so he's not available for helping with the Shadowrun workload. Besides, even with the differences between 2060 and 2070, the games concepts are still virtually identical, so the two products would be in direct competition with each other for market share. Ever play tic-tac-toe by yourself? Best you can hope for is stalemate. Same principle applies to selling two near-identical products. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 10th September 2025 - 02:29 AM |
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.