Sixth Edition, Release Announcement Options

[Kyoto Kid]

I always read or heard people who are not in the RPG thing talking about the Addiction Test rules. It's a pretty strong focal point. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)
With the slimming down of the rules, leaving addiction to the individual groups to handle with custom tests or just ignore completely seems the plan.
But, I am guessing they will add them later.

...my concern is what will occur for Missions play (which where I live is my only involvement with SR)? With the 5E rules, we currently use the addiction/drug interaction rules as written.

So is there still the Addicted quality? Wouldn't make sense to include it without a mechanic that outlines the negative effects.

[Nstol_wisper]

...my concern is what will occur for Missions play (which where I live is my only involvement with SR)? With the 5E rules, we currently use the addiction/drug interaction rules as written.

So is there still the Addicted quality? Wouldn't make sense to include it without a mechanic that outlines the negative effects.

There is a Severity table as with other editions I believe. And a rule for penalties per each level of addiction on the table.

[Nstol_wisper]

There is a Severity table as with other editions I believe. And a rule for penalties per each level of addiction on the table.

Just create an addiction test to your liking and Boom! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/read.gif) You're Done. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dead.gif)

[bannockburn]

"Just do the job the professional authors should have done yourself and boom."

[Stahlseele]

i think the "" should only go around the word professional in that sentence by now.

[Remnar]

i think the "" should only go around the word professional in that sentence by now.

Sigh. I just bought 6th and it's what expected, sadly. There are good concepts sandwiched between the horrible glaring issues, surely.

I actually like the edge system well enough on first glance, we'll see how she goes after I fully digest.

[binarywraith]

We'll be here once you try it in play and realize it is up there with shaped charges and vehicle collisions on the list of poorly thought out SR rules. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Nstol_wisper]

I was hoping for Hosts rules to explained in more detail in the Core rules.
We will have to wait for that in the Supplement along with Agents and, Um.....Programming Specialization. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/notworthy.gif)

[Jaid]

We'll be here once you try it in play and realize it is up there with shaped charges and vehicle collisions on the list of poorly thought out SR rules. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

i'm not convinced that new edge is inherently bad as a mechanic. i personally don't like it even a tiny bit, and i think the execution was terrible, and it really bugs me that essentially everyone in the universe has an edge power that in the lore has essentially been reserved for great dragons and powerful free spirits and the like.

but i mean, there are games out there that use a conceptually similar mechanic that do it well, so it isn't that the mechanic is bad... it's just that the shadowrun dev team have their heads so far up their own asses that they can't hear what their playtesters and errata team are telling them. or possibly they just have their heads up their own asses and simply don't care what the playtesters and errata team are telling them. it's hard to tell.

[hermit]

What playtesters?

[Jaid]

What playtesters?

oh, they *have* playtesters. mostly they're people who wrote the rules and their groups, so you can bet it's a whole lot of everyone agreeing that the stuff they wrote is top notch, and in addition to not having proper playtesters i doubt they have enough of them, but they do have them.

you just can't tell that they have playtesters or proofreaders or errata teams because none of the management at CGL seems to give a rat's ass about what their (unpaid volunteer) proofreaders and playtesters and errata team say.

it seems CGL would rather vomit out more garbage than take the time to do a decent job of... well, most things, really. editing, promoting their product, interacting with their fans, keeping an eye on their finances... honestly, now that i think about it, i'm not entirely sure what it is that the management on the shadowrun side of CGL actually do.

[binarywraith]

So far as I can tell, the management side of SR for CGL consists of Jason Hardy.

Who is also the line dev and primary writer for the CRB.

[Jaid]

considering the quality of work CGL's shadowrun side is turning out, if you were on that team would *you* want to be public-facing? i mean, you might keep working there because paying jobs in the RPG industry aren't exactly everywhere, but... would you want to be stuck talking to fans of the setting who have watched production quality go down the toilet?

the head of the division doesn't have the guts to do it. why should anyone else volunteer to go into the firing line for their work if the line developer is setting an example of "pretend that everything we're doing is great and ignore all the bad feedback".

[binarywraith]

To quote a post on the CGL forums, here's Hardy's take:

As asked on facebook by a user on the official forums

I asked him on his Facebook page why he or members of his team don't come out more to defend the game. This was his response....

——-

The main reasons I don't speak out are:

1) Internet kerfluffles are not always as large as they seem. Each internet channel--Reddit, forums, Facebook, Twitter--have their own constituencies, and none of them, as far as I have been able to tell, represent the player base at large. So it's not great for me to assume that because one channel, or many, have gone negative that I absolutely need to do something about it.

2) Even if I did do something about it, arguing about a creative work where people can form their own opinions rarely leads anywhere good. People are seldom talked into liking something they don't like, and arguments with the more vitriolic detractors don't go anywhere. The work, flawed as it might be, has to stand for itself. So we issued errata to make it as easy as possible for people to play the game. But directly engaging the critics tends to be time-consuming and mire people in a discussion that goes nowhere.

I have one book at the printers, another about to go on sale electronically, a third close to going to print, and another I need to try to get to print in just over a month. I trust players to decide for themselves whether they like them or not, and I have my hands full getting them out!


So as usual, denial is more than just a river in Egypt.

[hermit]

Well, not putting out shitty products might help, but hey, I guess they'll lobby for punitive measures against R. Talsorian RPGs now to protect their little monopoly. Or maybe they just call in a hit squad the police on Pondsmith. The products' shittyness, however, sure is no reason to rethink anything. They're the best rpoducts, amazing and very great, and that's true.

Personally, I could care less what they have to say to defend their shitty work. I would care if they committed to not be the people who put out ghastly shit like SR6, but I guess that's not going to happen with someone as unwilling and unable to reflect on his own mistakes as Hardy is.

[Iduno]

honestly, now that i think about it, i'm not entirely sure what it is that the management on the shadowrun side of CGL actually do.

Especially now that they're not (obviously) embezzling anymore. I'm guessing "nothing of value."

As per binarywraith's quote, they don't think some or many forums complaining about your rules being bad is worth looking into.

[Jaid]

i'm curious if he thinks the errata job is done, actually, because he's saying here "So we issued errata to make it as easy as possible for people to play the game."

with no mention of further errata being on the way.

now i bring this up because the errata team are DEFINITELY not convinced the errata is done. they've made it clear that there's a second round of errata on the way, dealing with other errors and contradictions and such, which they've been working on for some time, and they're expecting CGL to release that, too.

so far as i'm concerned, the work is definitely standing for itself... but it's standing in an "i feel no interest in investing my money into that product" sort of area at this point.

why should i spend my money on their garbage when they can't even be bothered to take accountability for actually doing a good job. sure, there's some things that aren't necessarily wrong (much as i personally don't like what they've done with edge, it seems like some people love it like it's their firstborn child). but if the management's response to criticism is to essentially say that they don't care about quality, they're too busy pushing out quantity, then why should i want to spend my money on encouraging that behaviour.

[Sengir]

arguments with the more vitriolic detractors don't go anywhere. The work, flawed as it might be, has to stand for itself. So we issued errata to make it as easy as possible for people to play the game. But directly engaging the critics tends to be time-consuming and mire people in a discussion that goes nowhere.

Is it just me or does this sound like they only issued errata to make obnoxious consumers STFU?

[hermit]

Hardy sure is a stable genius all right.

[Iduno]

Is it just me or does this sound like they only issued errata to make obnoxious consumers STFU?

Hardy's position that errata means admitting you made a mistake, and is therefore bad, is pretty well known.

[hermit]

Like all weak, spineless, craven bosses, Hardy can't own up on his mistakes, instead doubles down on them (SR6 is full of this, see the crainial bomb that is the new headware commlink) or offers half-baked, insufficient "errata" to appease people.

"We have made out product as playable as possible" is a great selling point for a game, btw.

[Nstol_wisper]

To quote a post on the CGL forums, here's Hardy's take:

As asked on facebook by a user on the official forums

I asked him on his Facebook page why he or members of his team don't come out more to defend the game. This was his response....

——-

The main reasons I don't speak out are:

1) Internet kerfluffles are not always as large as they seem. Each internet channel--Reddit, forums, Facebook, Twitter--have their own constituencies, and none of them, as far as I have been able to tell, represent the player base at large. So it's not great for me to assume that because one channel, or many, have gone negative that I absolutely need to do something about it.

2) Even if I did do something about it, arguing about a creative work where people can form their own opinions rarely leads anywhere good. People are seldom talked into liking something they don't like, and arguments with the more vitriolic detractors don't go anywhere. The work, flawed as it might be, has to stand for itself. So we issued errata to make it as easy as possible for people to play the game. But directly engaging the critics tends to be time-consuming and mire people in a discussion that goes nowhere.

I have one book at the printers, another about to go on sale electronically, a third close to going to print, and another I need to try to get to print in just over a month. I trust players to decide for themselves whether they like them or not, and I have my hands full getting them out!


So as usual, denial is more than just a river in Egypt.

He did say He was working hard on getting books printed, released.
That's alot of responsibility!
Who would give a damn about criticism with so much work to do.

[hermit]

Typically morose. A friend of mine works in publishing. At any given time he has four or more projects pending publication, and several more in various stages of pre-publication. It's a full-time job for a reason. And still, every screw-up is your fault and you have to stand up for it. It's how jobs work. If you had ever had one, you'd know.

Unless, of course, you work at CGL.

[bannockburn]

He did say He was working hard on getting books printed, released.
That's alot of responsibility!
Who would give a damn about criticism with so much work to do.

Just because someone's working hard doesn't mean that he's working well.
Not everyone is good with responsibility, as evidenced a LOT of times by now.
And to answer your rhetorical 'question': everyone who's interested in putting out a better product.

Now, all this being said: He's not completely wrong. You can't please everyone all the time and you need to decide which criticism you take to heart (often on the basis of how it's formulated).
HOWEVER - since at least late 4E, early 5E - it seems that CGL (and specifically Hardy) is surrounded by a self-congratulating echo chamber where everyone tells everyone else how good a job they did.

Unfortunately, self-made participation trophies do not mean that the product is great, or even good.

[Jaid]

the fact that you can't please everyone doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do a good job, it means you should understand that even if you do a good job not everyone will be happy.

it seems particularly disingenuous to claim that since no one outlet represents the whole, that they should ignore all of them... when you consider that every outlet i've seen has some of the same problems. oh, not every member of every outlet has the same problems. even when it comes to the garbage editing, a few people actually seem to think everything is wonderful. but i can go to reddit and find people talking about the same subjects as i can find people talking on dumpshock or the official forums.

each individual location may not represent the whole, but when taken all together, the locations collectively will paint a pretty decent picture.

and the picture they paint is that while there are certainly some who are pleased with 6th edition, the same concerns keep coming up, and even amongst those that like the edition most of them are disappointed by the poor quality of editing.

so while i can understand to some extent hardy ignoring that a large portion of the fans think edge breaks verisimilitude badly, or that a pixie with a sledgehammer does the same damage as a troll with said sledgehammer, or that armour doesn't really *do* anything, there are, at the very least, nearly-universally-held opinions that the editing sucks, and if nothing else, at the very least *that* should be addressed.

but honestly, i'm not sure i'm going to get around to *ever* buying 6th edition any more. why should i? so far as the line developer is concerned, my opinion is a meaningless distraction that is getting in the way of spamming out ever more product.