IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> House Rules, A discussion for possible House Rules.
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 01:38 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



Our group has been playing SR4 for about 3 years now, and though we started with just the core rules, we've found that there are a variety of house rules that we either have already implemented or are considering implementing. A complication has shown itself though, when we introduce new players to the game or just to our group. Usually, we only introduce 1 or 2 at a time, but we'll soon be moving and teaching the game to 7 or 8 new players. I'd just like to hear some opinions on what other people think of these rules, and to perhaps share some of their own house rules. Please keep in mind that our group prefers a slightly lower starting power-level than the standard rules set, so that we can grow into our characters.

Seattle Demographics
[ Spoiler ]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dumori
post Feb 23 2009, 01:50 AM
Post #2


Dumorimasoddaa
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,687
Joined: 30-March 08
Member No.: 15,830



I really dislike the limiting of meta-types and magical power. As well as min and max attributes. Your almost giving each player a cut out and say stick what you want, but not this cos you fidnt roll high enough.

I can think of a few builds that would be unplayable including all matrix users as you allow only 2IPs this is ignoring the fact that hot sim module is 12F. Again I find the essence limit unneeded but the min of 126BP on skills is odd and I don't see it's point at all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jesusofthemonkey...
post Feb 23 2009, 02:39 AM
Post #3


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 27
Joined: 27-January 09
Member No.: 16,817



yeah, I really dont understand why you do most of the stuff that you do. The whole reason for a point based Chargen system is so you take the randomness and rolling out of the character creation. Not that I prefer either or (in fact I'm kind of sad that 4e D&D is leaning more towards a point based system. I still do the whole 4d6 thing.) I'm just confused as to why you would combine the two.

Also I kinda liked the whole min log/attribute thing. I've always hated characters that min/max than roleplay the asshole dwarf because they sacked charisma. That that I would ever impliment these rules, because they are waaaaaaaaay to restrictive, but when I read that I smiled.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Heath Robinson
post Feb 23 2009, 03:01 AM
Post #4


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,263
Joined: 4-March 08
From: Blighty
Member No.: 15,736



I would hate to be the group that rolled Astral Sight, Mage, Adept (in that order) for Awakened character options. Having the possibility dangled in front of you and then creully snatched away is worse than not having.

This is why random rolls are not desirable at chargen unless you are generating more than 2 characters each, in my opinion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 03:08 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Dumori @ Feb 22 2009, 05:50 PM) *
I really dislike the limiting of meta-types and magical power. As well as min and max adribues. Your allmost giving each player a cut out and say stick what you want ok but not this cos you fidnt roll high enough. I can think of a few builds that would be unplayabe including all matrix users as you alow only 2ip. Again I find the essabce limit unneede. But the min of 126BP on skills is odd. And I don't see it's point at all.


For those of us that try to stick closer to canon, it seems like a step in the right direction. Obviously, if you're campaign is centered around a bunch of adepts kicking a** and taking names, you can just throw the magic rules right out the window. You're right about the Matrix-part with the 2 IP limitation, but I also just forgot the Hot-sim exception for Cybercombat.

As a side note, your argument would be a lot more compelling if your post didn't look like it was b***-f***ed by a speak-and-spell. It's the 21st century, grammar and spell checks are in every application and take all of 20 seconds to use.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 03:13 AM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Feb 22 2009, 07:01 PM) *
I would hate to be the group that rolled Astral Sight, Mage, Adept (in that order) for Awakened character options. Having the possibility dangled in front of you and then creully snatched away is worse than not having.

This is why random rolls are not desirable at chargen unless you are generating more than 2 characters each, in my opinion.


So, you'd hate to be the guy with Magic 1 Astral Sight, Magic 3 Magician, and Magic 1 Adept and game start, even though you can still increase the mage's Magic from 3 to 4 after 2-3 runs, and the adept's magic after 1-2?

Anyways, the GM is still sitting there and can change something if it gets jacked up, or isn't going to work. The rules aren't concrete, they're just guidelines.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Heath Robinson
post Feb 23 2009, 03:16 AM
Post #7


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,263
Joined: 4-March 08
From: Blighty
Member No.: 15,736



QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 23 2009, 03:08 AM) *
For those of us that try to stick closer to canon, it seems like a step in the right direction.

But you're dealing with 10-15 character, tops. No statistician worth their salt says that a sample that small should bear any relation to a sample millions of times its size. The existance, in canon, of wiz gangs and neighbourhoods where everyone is an Ork paints, to me, a picture that seems dramatically at odds to yours. You are going to get a Dryad Shaman, an Orc Astral Sighter, a nascescent Elf Face Adept and a Human with an SMG under your rules.

How the hell is that represented in canon? That kind of diverse group is no better or worse than just letting players get together and work out their characters together, except the fact that the characters built in a group with fewer limitations may work better as a team on account on being able to play to each others' strengthes more. Or having actually usuable magical support.

Just produce a pamphlet for your GMs detailing what should be considered unacceptable.

QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 23 2009, 03:13 AM) *
So, you'd hate to be the guy with Magic 1 Astral Sight, Magic 3 Magician, and Magic 1 Adept and game start, even though you can still increase the mage's Magic from 3 to 4 after 2-3 runs, and the adept's magic after 1-2?

Anyways, the GM is still sitting there and can change something if it gets jacked up, or isn't going to work. The rules aren't concrete, they're just guidelines.

The combination is worse than the group with 3 Astral Sighters in terms of frustration. The wasted potential is great. Equally, the actual loss in power compared to a rearrangement is great. Those possibilities are what hurts when people roll badly. They don't conceive of what could have happened if they rolled different. They first see how things could be better if rolls were attributed to different people.


I'm not even getting into the possibility of someone wanting to play a mage and rolling Astral Sight. The team frustration potential of someone rolling the only Mage and choosing to play an Astral Sighter or Adept (or else their frustration at the rest of the team forcing them to play a Mage instead of what they want) should also be considered.

The rolls for metatype and awakening are ridiculously overweighted in importance. This always generates frustration, friction, and makes people dislike games.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 03:29 AM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Feb 22 2009, 07:16 PM) *
But you're dealing with 10-15 character, tops. No statistician worth their salt says that a sample that small should bear any relation to a sample millions of times its size. The existance, in canon, of wiz gangs and neighbourhoods where everyone is an Ork paints, to me, a picture that seems dramatically at odds to yours. You are going to get a Dryad Shaman, an Orc Astral Sighter, a nascescent Elf Face Adept and a Human with an SMG under your rules.

How the hell is that represented in canon? That kind of diverse group is no better or worse than just letting players get together and work out their characters together, except the fact that the characters built in a group with fewer limitations may work better as a team on account on being able to play to each others' strengthes more.

Just produce a pamphlet for your GMs detailing what should be considered unacceptable.


I agree with some of what you're saying, and you're right as far as the full statistics go. With 5 characters in the Seattle sprawl, they would be around one millionth of the populace. And the canon wiz gangs, would be an example of a campaign concept where you'd want everyone to be Awakened, so those rules wouldn't be applicable. Neighborhoods where everyone is an ork, is balanced by the fact that Orks only represent about 16% of the local population. If you wanted to play a bunch of Ork gangers from the Ork Underground or a neighborhood in Redmond, then just discard the metatype rules. But would you still want all of your gangers decide that they all want to play shamans? What are the chances of an all-Ork Wiz gang from the Barrens? Especially with 1% of the global population being Awakened.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 03:35 AM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Feb 22 2009, 07:16 PM) *
The combination is worse than the group with 3 Astral Sighters in terms of frustration. The wasted potential is great.


I think that kind of group would be an interesting one, and a challenge to boot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Heath Robinson
post Feb 23 2009, 04:00 AM
Post #10


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,263
Joined: 4-March 08
From: Blighty
Member No.: 15,736



QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 23 2009, 03:29 AM) *
I agree with some of what you're saying, and you're right as far as the full statistics go. With 5 characters in the Seattle sprawl, they would be around one millionth of the populace. And the canon wiz gangs, would be an example of a campaign concept where you'd want everyone to be Awakened, so those rules wouldn't be applicable. Neighborhoods where everyone is an ork, is balanced by the fact that Orks only represent about 16% of the local population. If you wanted to play a bunch of Ork gangers from the Ork Underground or a neighborhood in Redmond, then just discard the metatype rules. But would you still want all of your gangers decide that they all want to play shamans? What are the chances of an all-Ork Wiz gang from the Barrens? Especially with 1% of the global population being Awakened.

The chances of an all-Ork all-Shaman Wiz gang from the Barrens are better than the example team I threw out. You're in the Barrens, you're an Ork with "the art", so who are you going to talk to about learning to use it? The Wiz gang is probably one of your best bets for learning things.

Equally, there's a niche to be eked out for a fixer collecting nearly an entire team of awakened members as a special antimystic team to deal with runs that focus on the awakened aspects of the world. Perhaps there's a single street sam, rigger, or hacker in there to cover additional bases and provide skill or ability sets that the awakened members can't cover, but such a team could see good business.

QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 23 2009, 03:35 AM) *
I think that kind of group would be an interesting one, and a challenge to boot.

But you're dealing with other players. Players new to the setting who don't understand why a team with 3 Astral Sighters could be fun. They wouldn't enjoy it, unless they went into it with their eyes open to the consequences. They want to play Shamans, Mages, Adepts and Street Sams (y'know, the bits of the setting that kick ass and chew bubblegum through violence or mystical power). Astral Sighters are none of those.

Man chafes when he perceives senseless restraint lain upon him.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Muspellsheimr
post Feb 23 2009, 04:03 AM
Post #11


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,336
Joined: 24-February 08
From: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Member No.: 15,706



QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 22 2009, 08:35 PM) *
I think that kind of group would be an interesting one, and a challenge to boot.

I'm honestly not trying to be an asshole, but you are a fucking idiot. There's really not any other way to say it & get the point across.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 04:12 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 22 2009, 08:03 PM) *
I'm honestly not trying to be an asshole, but you are a fucking idiot. There's really not any other way to say it & get the point across.

You're not trying, yet you're doing so well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mickle5125
post Feb 23 2009, 04:15 AM
Post #13


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,745
Joined: 30-November 07
From: St. Louis Streets
Member No.: 14,433



QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 22 2009, 09:08 PM) *
As a side note, your argument would be a lot more compelling if your post didn't look like it was b***-f***ed by a speak-and-spell. It's the 21st century, grammar and spell checks are in every application and take all of 20 seconds to use.



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 22 2009, 10:03 PM) *
I'm honestly not trying to be an asshole, but you are a fucking idiot. There's really not any other way to say it & get the point across.


Try to play nice, lads. Hate to have the Admins come in and start knocking heads.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
WeaverMount
post Feb 23 2009, 04:18 AM
Post #14


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,069
Joined: 19-July 07
From: Oakland CA
Member No.: 12,309



QUOTE (Wombat @ Feb 22 2009, 11:29 PM) *
I agree with some of what you're saying, and you're right as far as the full statistics go. With 5 characters in the Seattle sprawl, they would be around one millionth of the populace. And the canon wiz gangs, would be an example of a campaign concept where you'd want everyone to be Awakened, so those rules wouldn't be applicable. Neighborhoods where everyone is an ork, is balanced by the fact that Orks only represent about 16% of the local population. If you wanted to play a bunch of Ork gangers from the Ork Underground or a neighborhood in Redmond, then just discard the metatype rules. But would you still want all of your gangers decide that they all want to play shamans? What are the chances of an all-Ork Wiz gang from the Barrens? Especially with 1% of the global population being Awakened.

Actually pretty high. Like attracts like. Bikers hangout together because they like to ride, work on, and talk about bikes. I think magicians would be the say way.

That transitions into my larger point, that you are trying to use rules to fix a story question. Your table doesn't like the teams generated by RAW because you don't like that stories required to accommodate such parties. That's cool and you should fix it. I don't think that house are the way to got, not because I'm RAW Nazi, but because more rules rarely fix stories. I would get your players together and sync your vision of campaign a bit. Do you want to run Neo-Anarchists Robin-hooding, sociopathic guns for higher, or a gang war for turf? Figure that out and all your race and magic "class" issues fall away. I do like the logic-intuition trade off, but the skills and attribute rules seem pointless to me. The consequences are pretty easy to see and if they work for you great. I also would really caution you away from the 8F rule. I looking to that one myself, at it really doesn't work. Availability is just to random. Some amazing equipment is still in reach and some basics are out. Also you totally bone hackers. Same thing with the whole IP deal. if you do that everyone becomes a rigger Hits VR and uses there weapons platform. When you run around gimping starting characters like this you will see lots and lots of people clinging to the couple "viable" builds.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Draco18s
post Feb 23 2009, 04:19 AM
Post #15


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 10,289
Joined: 2-October 08
Member No.: 16,392



Wow, these rules are just a dick move. I will never ever play with any of them and I'd encourage your players to seek a new GM.

Why?

Because I picked up Runner's Companion and Augmentation the same day and leafing through them I immediately had three great builds I wanted play:

1) Drake Adept (already a statistical anomaly by your random rules)
2) Cybered up something or other (the new cyber in Augmentation plus the qualities in Runners Companion made me drool--maybe a Chrome Critter? Statistical anomaly again, not to mention the cost and availability limits)
3) Awakened AI running around in a pack of minigun wielding drones (ack, cost AND availability limits like crazy)

By the way, concept 1 here is piles of fun.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrome
post Feb 23 2009, 04:25 AM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 14-August 08
Member No.: 16,237



if i was new to rpgs entirely i would think these rules were cool. but the minute i talk to someone that plays in a group that actually gets to design the characters by their choice alone, i would quit and probably never play in a game you run.
or on the other hand i might just think its too restrictive and just not play. especially if i wanted to play a full mage or mystic adept and rolled bad and you straight said i could not have the character i wanted. this reminds me of first or second dnd where you are limited to what you roll deciding what you play.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 04:25 AM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Feb 22 2009, 08:00 PM) *
The chances of an all-Ork all-Shaman Wiz gang from the Barrens are better than the example team I threw out. You're in the Barrens, you're an Ork with "the art", so who are you going to talk to about learning to use it? The Wiz gang is probably one of your best bets for learning things.

Equally, there's a niche to be eked out for a fixer collecting nearly an entire team of awakened members as a special antimystic team to deal with runs that focus on the awakened aspects of the world. Perhaps there's a single street sam, rigger, or hacker in there to cover additional bases and provide skill or ability sets that the awakened members can't cover, but such a team could see good business.

Again, I see your point, but you're still talking about specific campaign concepts.

QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Feb 22 2009, 08:00 PM) *
But you're dealing with other players. Players new to the setting who don't understand why a team with 3 Astral Sighters could be fun. They wouldn't enjoy it, unless they went into it with their eyes open to the consequences. They want to play Shamans, Mages, Adepts and Street Sams (y'know, the bits of the setting that kick ass and chew bubblegum through violence or mystical power). Astral Sighters are none of those.


When dealing strictly with new players, I agree with you. In this case, its just part of the GM's job to make sure the group will work and the team isn't just some random amalgamation of characters. Though I've also seen my share of motley crews that have done very well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrome
post Feb 23 2009, 04:27 AM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 14-August 08
Member No.: 16,237



QUOTE (Draco18s @ Feb 23 2009, 04:19 AM) *
1) Drake Adept (already a statistical anomaly by your random rules)

By the way, concept 1 here is piles of fun.


ive seen it played and it is piles of fun as long as someone is not telling you what you can and cant do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 04:29 AM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (WeaverMount @ Feb 22 2009, 08:18 PM) *
Actually pretty high. Like attracts like. Bikers hangout together because they like to ride, work on, and talk about bikes. I think magicians would be the say way.

That transitions into my larger point, that you are trying to use rules to fix a story question. Your table doesn't like the teams generated by RAW because you don't like that stories required to accommodate such parties. That's cool and you should fix it. I don't think that house are the way to got, not because I'm RAW Nazi, but because more rules rarely fix stories. I would get your players together and sync your vision of campaign a bit. Do you want to run Neo-Anarchists Robin-hooding, sociopathic guns for higher, or a gang war for turf? Figure that out and all your race and magic "class" issues fall away. I do like the logic-intuition trade off, but the skills and attribute rules seem pointless to me. The consequences are pretty easy to see and if they work for you great. I also would really caution you away from the 8F rule. I looking to that one myself, at it really doesn't work. Availability is just to random. Some amazing equipment is still in reach and some basics are out. Also you totally bone hackers. Same thing with the whole IP deal. if you do that everyone becomes a rigger Hits VR and uses there weapons platform. When you run around gimping starting characters like this you will see lots and lots of people clinging to the couple "viable" builds.


You have a lot of solid points, thanks for the input.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrome
post Feb 23 2009, 04:51 AM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 14-August 08
Member No.: 16,237



are you going to let your players read through the rules themselves or are you just going to tell them?
how much book time are your players going to get.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Wombat
post Feb 23 2009, 04:55 AM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 16-February 09
From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS
Member No.: 16,883



QUOTE (Maelstrome @ Feb 22 2009, 08:51 PM) *
are you going to let your players read through the rules themselves or are you just going to tell them?
how much book time are your players going to get.

I'm giving them a month and a half of prep time, to read whatever material they want, and I've already given them a copy of Augmentation, Arsenal, Runners Companion, SR4, and Street Magic. I'm working alongside my players each step of the way and answering any question they give me, to the best of my ability.

Also, to prevent the players from getting blindsided with a House rule, I've drawn up a list of the house rules and another list of all the optional rules from the books that we use.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrome
post Feb 23 2009, 05:02 AM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 14-August 08
Member No.: 16,237



how long until the game starts?

how long do you want to run it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Glyph
post Feb 23 2009, 05:04 AM
Post #23


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,116
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,449



QUOTE (Maelstrome @ Feb 22 2009, 08:25 PM) *
if i was new to rpgs entirely i would think these rules were cool. but the minute i talk to someone that plays in a group that actually gets to design the characters by their choice alone, i would quit and probably never play in a game you run.
or on the other hand i might just think its too restrictive and just not play. especially if i wanted to play a full mage or mystic adept and rolled bad and you straight said i could not have the character i wanted. this reminds me of first or second dnd where you are limited to what you roll deciding what you play.

Actually, I think it has the opposite problem. It's fine for his group, which wants a "low-power" campaign and doesn't mind resolving assignment of metatype or awakened potential with dice duels.

If I was a brand-new player, though, and had skimmed through the main rulebook, I would probably be very turned off by the gimped power level and the restrictions on what you can play. The former would be a huge turn-off to someone coming into the game with visions of wizards, super-hackers, and cyborgs, only to be stuck with a two-bit thug. And the restrictions are even worse. Everyone has a "type" that they like to play - some people are always dwarves, or always hackers, etc. The pointless, arbitrary limits on metatypes and awakened characters mean that players are likely to be stuck in a role they have little to no interest in playing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrome
post Feb 23 2009, 05:11 AM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 422
Joined: 14-August 08
Member No.: 16,237



QUOTE (Glyph @ Feb 23 2009, 06:04 AM) *
Actually, I think it has the opposite problem. It's fine for his group, which wants a "low-power" campaign and doesn't mind resolving assignment of metatype or awakened potential with dice duels.

If I was a brand-new player, though, and had skimmed through the main rulebook, I would probably be very turned off by the gimped power level and the restrictions on what you can play. The former would be a huge turn-off to someone coming into the game with visions of wizards, super-hackers, and cyborgs, only to be stuck with a two-bit thug. And the restrictions are even worse. Everyone has a "type" that they like to play - some people are always dwarves, or always hackers, etc. The pointless, arbitrary limits on metatypes and awakened characters mean that players are likely to be stuck in a role they have little to no interest in playing.


actually i agree with you. whether i would play or not would be determined by what i knew before starting if i read the books after he told me his rules i would just straight quit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MatrixJargon
post Feb 23 2009, 05:14 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 5-June 08
From: Alabama
Member No.: 16,041



This might would work for your group, but as the posts here have shown I think the large majority of groups would be just completely unable to play with your rules. Many of them seem kind of pointless or downright silly and really don't make the game feel more realistic at all. The BP and priority costs already sort of represented the statistics of magically inclined and the races. Remember in third edition you have to have magic as an A or B rank priority to be awakened. Besides, although the canon only says 1%, if you do the number crunching and include population density in large cities like Seattle you'll find it wouldn't be that hard to locate a decent mage.

It feels like you're trying just to hard to make the game realistic. If you REALLY want the game to match your expectations talk it over with your group and talk about what everyone feels like would work. If your players are worth their weight they'll work with you to make a fun an interesting game. Even my old group, we bitch and bickered, but in the end we always had fun when we played.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th February 2025 - 10:11 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.