20th Edition changes, List what you find is different here Options

[darthmord]

for some unknowable reason, indirect spells are now dodged/resisted/whateveryouwannacallit with reaction + counterspelling (previously counterspelling added to the damage soak test). they are also explicitly blocked by physical objects in between the magician and the target, which will cause the spell to detonate, and by magical barriers (potentially).

Umm, indirect spells were always blocked by physical stuff between you and the target. you see a guy through a window. You cast an indirect fire spell of some sort. The fire travels from you to the target. It will hit the glass and boom. It won't hit the target and boom.

Also means don't use a mirror to cast an indirect. Then again, if you are using a mirror, you are probably using a direct combat spell. In fact, with the previous example, while the fireball blows up against the window, the direct brainfry spell works unimpeded by the glass.

[Mäx]

Direct combat spells in SR4 (not SR4A) were underpowered compared to other ways of killing people, like firearms. A magician casts Manabolt, force 5, with 10 dice against a target with Willpower 3. On the average, 2 net hits, for seven points of damage. That's average - if the magician rolls one hit worse, and the target one hit better, the spell fails. Also remember that there are no negative modifiers that might apply to the Willpower roll, but the Spellcasting roll takes negative modifiers from light, smoke, cover, wounds, maintaining other spells, etc. The Spellcasting roll takes a complex action, and then the magician saves against drain. With a dice pool of 9 or 10 to save against drain, his odds are good, but something like one time out of three, he'll take some or all of the damage, and that can add up.

The above assumes no Counterspelling. Add four or five Counterspelling dice, and the odds get even worse for our magician.

Or it's a little better build combat mage, who is wise enought to not want to kill the guards. So she casts a Stunball, force 10, with 17 dice for average damage 14 and takes out multiple enemies. And then she saves against 6 drain with 12 dice for avarage damage of 2 that is lowered to 1 by platelet factories.
So 1 point of physical damage, from taking out a group of enemies isn't really that bad. Or she could cast it at force 6 and still take out those enemies and not take any damage, on avarage.

[DireRadiant]

Umm, indirect spells were always blocked by physical stuff between you and the target. you see a guy through a window. You cast an indirect fire spell of some sort. The fire travels from you to the target. It will hit the glass and boom. It won't hit the target and boom.

There was no explicit support for this in SR4.

So, we have SR1, SR2, SR3, SR4, and... SR4/20?

[Kev]

As p. 183 "Step 5:Determine Effects" says: "The spellcaster can always choose
to use less than the total number of hits rolled in a Spellcasting Test."

Ah yes, but then WHERE does the choice lie with the spellcaster? Does he now get to choose the NET hits used?

[Angier]

there is no indication that he does. the net hits increasing the drain result from the spell resistance test of the target. so he has to lower the used hits in advance.

[dionysus]

Ah yes, but then WHERE does the choice lie with the spellcaster? Does he now get to choose the NET hits used?

The piece you quoted says "total hits," which I think is read as "gross hits." So, you roll and get 5 hits. You decide to use 4 of them, defender rolls poorly and gets 1 hit, so your drain is increased by three - i.e. if the drain code is F/2 in the book, it's now F/2 + 3.

At least I think that's the simplest reading of the rules - it's a bit interpretive & ambiguous, but that's English for you.

"Time flies like an arrow." "No, they LOVE arrows."

[Draco18s]

True, it does. But at an initial pool of 8 or higher has a extremely low chance of ever rolling half 1s. Even at 5 dice (after mods and such) the likely hood of a botch is low enough that it can be discounted most times (1/216). So the odds of botching with 5 dice vs. 8 dice relative to each other is large, but compared to the likelihood of it occurring in a given roll is so small that it doesn't matter:

0.5% vs. 0.08%

At dice pools even higher it's even less likely.

3 dice: 3%
2 dice: 17%

[Aaron]

o, we have SR1, SR2, SR3, SR4, and... SR4/20?

I think it's being called SR4A (that's for "Anniversary" for those who missed it).

What I'm wondering is whether SR4A will be called the BBB (I read "Big Bad Book" somewhere) or BGB ("Big Gray Book").

[suppenhuhn]

While I do like the changes posted I really hope that there will be a free errata based on them because I don't think that publishing a collector's book that people have to buy if they intend to participate in open games is fair towards the customers.

[Angier]

It was already clarified that there will be an errata containing the latest changes.

[Muspellsheimr]

1) It is not a collectors edition. It is the new RAW; the previous 6 printings are now entirely replaced as far as future production is concerned. There is a limited edition available, but the only difference for that is a different cover, & numbered printing. The cover already presented is not the limited edition.

2) It has been very clearly stated that the changes are official errata, and errata will be released as soon as the production schedule clears up.


This is at least the second or third time I have answered that question; read the damn dev's posts next time.

[suppenhuhn]

Oh must have missed that.
I hereby retract my former statement and maintain the opposite. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wub.gif)

This is at least the second or third time I have answered that question; read the damn dev's posts next time.

There was no reason for you to do so as it had already been answered. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

[pbangarth]

Hmmm.... I am beginning to get an inkling of where the SR3 holdouts are coming from. Maybe I'll wait for the errata to come out before I decide to spend money.

The problem is, which edition will now be discussed as the default edition on Dumpshock, SR4, or SR4A?

[Angier]

SR4A as it is the actual, errataed BBB. Actually, there is no SR4A. It is the newest version of the basic SR rules set, given a certain name as the included changes came with the release of the 20th anniversary version of the BBB.

[pbangarth]

Have I just not been following the discussions on Dumpshock closely enough, then? Some of the changes mentioned here seem both large and out-of-the-blue to me.

[Muspellsheimr]

There was no reason for you to do so as it had already been answered. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

Check the post times - it was "already answered" as I was typing, probably by at most 30 seconds.

[Muspellsheimr]

Have I just not been following the discussions on Dumpshock closely enough, then? Some of the changes mentioned here seem both large and out-of-the-blue to me.

No, you have not. Once again, this is Official Errata to the Shadowrun 4 rules, and the new layout of all future printings of the Core Book. Not a new edition of the game.

[hobgoblin]

Speed is now a factor in Chase Combat. For every 20 Speed points that a vehicle is slower than its opponent, it receives a -1 DP modifier (pg. 170).

and we are back at SR3 rules with a new dice mechanic (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Draco18s]

Really. They errata'd adept powers down to being cheaper and buying attributes to be more expensive?
I mean, not that I mind the first, but I do mind the second.

[TheForgotten]

Uh, here's something that's guaranteed to be controversial.

SR4A, pg. 204.

"Direct Combat spells involve channeling mana directly into a
target as destructive and damaging energies rather than generating a
damaging effect. Affecting the target’s being on this fundamental level
with raw mana requires more focus and more power than producing
basic effects; as a result every net hit used to increase the damage value
of a Direct Combat spell also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1."

So now, Mana Bolt, Force 5, with 4 net hits, burns the caster with a Drain DV of 6.

That's really going to make astral combat a mess, not to mention making non lethal spellcasting (stunbolt, stunball) very difficult. Sigh, am I the only one who prefers a game where the character's don't have a body count that would make most serial killers proud.

[gobogen]

True, it does. But at an initial pool of 8 or higher has a extremely low chance of ever rolling half 1s. Even at 5 dice (after mods and such) the likely hood of a botch is low enough that it can be discounted most times (1/216). So the odds of botching with 5 dice vs. 8 dice relative to each other is large, but compared to the likelihood of it occurring in a given roll is so small that it doesn't matter:

0.5% vs. 0.08%

At dice pools even higher it's even less likely.

3 dice: 3%
2 dice: 17%

Wow your math is way, way off.

Probability of rolling at least 50% 1's on:
2 dice: 31%
3 dice: 7,4%
4 dice: 13%
5 dice: 3,5 %
8 dice: over 3%

[TheForgotten]

Hmmm.... I am beginning to get an inkling of where the SR3 holdouts are coming from. Maybe I'll wait for the errata to come out before I decide to spend money.

The problem is, which edition will now be discussed as the default edition on Dumpshock, SR4, or SR4A?

I'm pretty sure up not buying SR4A. Why on earth should I spend $65 for something that is going to start a big damn fight over which rules to use with anyone playing a mage (and get the rest of the group riled up about special treatment for somebody if I don't use the "official rules"), and to top it all off folks can pull out a hard copy of the CURRENT edition and make a very good case about having their character concept blindsided by a collectors edition/some errata that only a complete SR geek would know about. Games where I know that their is some bit of rules that could cause hard feeling by including/banning get moved down my list of games I'd like to run very quickly.

[Angier]

again: the 20th anniversary version IS the current and new bbb which comes ALSO as a LE. there will be no arguements as you would use the current standard RAW with it.

[Mäx]

folks can pull out a hard copy of the CURRENT edition and make a very good case about having their character concept blindsided by a collectors edition/some errata that only a complete SR geek would know about.

I wuold be pretty suprised if a player pulls out a hard copy of the book that hasn't been printed yet.

[Muspellsheimr]

It is not 65, it is 45. You are only paying 65 if you want a special cover & numbered printing.

If you use errata, you will be using this printing. If you buy a new book in the near future & on, you will be using this printing.

Last time I am saying this, this is an official update to the existing rules, in the exact same way the 5th printing included errata, the 4th included errata, and 3rd/2nd included errata.