IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Cut Adept material
Zenmaxer
post Oct 21 2004, 01:11 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 20-September 04
Member No.: 6,682



I understand that some adept material in SOTA 64 was cut due to space concerns, and I heard some mention of a web release. Is there actually any chance of that, or should I just give up all hope of actually seeing the "Other half?"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Synner
post Oct 21 2004, 02:27 PM
Post #2


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,314
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado
Member No.: 185



A web supplement featuring bonus material that didn't make the Adept chapter is something I will be working on compiling with my co-authors and the rest of the freelancers, as soon as I wrap up my current project. Please note it won't include anything as ground-breaking as the stuff that actually made it, nor will it include material that in anyway contradicts it, but it should have some interesting bits like a handful of new powers, a couple more Way testimonies, a couple more groups and quite possibly the "magic group stats" for all the groups presented so far.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catsnightmare
post Oct 21 2004, 02:33 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 90



Thats what's been nagging the back of my mind about the new adept initiatory groups!
There's no stats for any of the groups in the book!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 02:35 PM
Post #4


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Oh come on! They didn't include that in the book?!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catsnightmare
post Oct 21 2004, 03:00 PM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 90



No kidding. I've been waiting forever to see an official-in-the-book physical adept initatory group stats to have at least a basis of comparison to make my own, and they finally get here and there's no stats for them!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Oct 21 2004, 03:32 PM
Post #6


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



why would you possibly need stats for the initiatory groups? woo, we don't know how many members the Sisters of Eglantine have. i'm all a-flutter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 03:37 PM
Post #7


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Last time I checked, dues, resources, and strictures were pretty important aspects of initiatory groups.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Oct 21 2004, 03:41 PM
Post #8


Freelance Elf
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714



Why?

Does it matter, really, unless a player plans on joining one of them? And if a player does, why shouldn't the GM just custom tailor it to fit their campaign, since having a PC as a part of a globe-spanning initiatory group could have a fairly serious impact on the game?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 03:45 PM
Post #9


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



If that's your belief, then why should they produce *any* rules. Let's make all the books fluff text and leave everything else up to the GM and players. Woohoo!

Or, to counter that point, why bother with fluff text at all? If a player plans on having his character join a group, why shouldn't the GM just custom tailor the fluff text to fit their campaign?

Hell, why have EITHER? Why not leave BOTH up to the GM and players. Why shouldn't the GM just custom tailor EVERYTHING to fit their campaign?

Because that's the entire point of buying a frelling sourcebook!

Sheesh.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Oct 21 2004, 03:53 PM
Post #10


Freelance Elf
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714



Wow, blood pressure medication much?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 03:55 PM
Post #11


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Ask a stupid question, expect an aggressive answer. Well, I tend to give aggressive answers to just about anything, stupid questions not required. Sorry if I came across badly. I try to keep that under control. :) It's just this is the fourth time I've seen mention that SOTA:2064 has completely left out some rules for relatively important information in the book, and it's seriously souring my view of the direction of the current bout of products.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dashifen
post Oct 21 2004, 03:56 PM
Post #12


Technomancer
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,638
Joined: 2-October 02
From: Champaign, IL
Member No.: 3,374



I guess I shouldn't comment since I cut initiatory groups from my game (I know, I'm a bastard) but I think it's a semantic problem. DocFunk sees the books as rulebooks whereas Critias and I see them as sourcebooks. What's the difference:
  • Rulebooks have rules (i.e. SR3, M&M, CC, MitS, etc) and some fluff but focus more on helping people learn to play the game.
  • Sourcebooks are heavy on the fluff (i.e. SONA, SOE, etc.) and less on the rules. Sure, there are some rules or stats but the purpose and focus of the book is to provide more fluff for GMs and players to use to shape the world and assume you already know how to play the game.
Edit: not trying to put words in you mouth, good Doc, just trying to put a different viewpoint on the board.

Edit2: Added last sentence of second bullet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 03:57 PM
Post #13


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



I have no problem with sourcebooks. But if you're going to include information detailing something like an intiatory group, you damn well better include the actual rules that go along with that -- especially if it's not a whole new system of rules, just the actual use of existing rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dashifen
post Oct 21 2004, 03:59 PM
Post #14


Technomancer
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,638
Joined: 2-October 02
From: Champaign, IL
Member No.: 3,374



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Oct 21 2004, 10:57 AM)
I have no problem with sourcebooks.  But if you're going to include information detailing something like an intiatory group, you damn well better include the actual rules that go along with that -- especially if it's not a whole new system of rules, just the actual use of existing rules.

But if the rules exist, why reprint them (in another book)? I think the average GM if not the average player could come up with the stats for initiatory groups using MitS as a reference. Why expand the book and perhaps have to cut other sections for something that the GM can (and arguably should) have to decide on their own. Kinda like how matrix security sheaves are left up to the GM to decide for like 90% of the hosts (actually, I can't think of any published security sheaves for a specific host that weren't used as an example, but I don't have Target: Matrix so I'm probably wrong).

This post has been edited by Dashifen: Oct 21 2004, 04:00 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Oct 21 2004, 04:00 PM
Post #15


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



It gives a basis for comparison, Crit. And it is a hell lot easier for people like Bitrunner to write scenarios for SRMs. They might one day decide that only Canon initiatory groups be allowed in SRM. It makes standardisation easier and across the board. Granted a GM may allow custom groups, but it is a hell lot easier to write when the standard is clearer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Oct 21 2004, 04:04 PM
Post #16


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

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



QUOTE (Dashifen @ Oct 21 2004, 09:59 AM)
But if the rules exist, why reprint them (in another book)?

Because they're not a reprint of rules. They're a use of the rules. It's like detailing information on a new vehicle but not supplying a stat block for it. It's like detailing information on a new spell but not telling you what the Drain Level, Target, Range, or Type of spell it is. It's like detailing information on a new pistol without telling you how much damage it does, its ammo capacity, or its Concealability. It's like detailing a new cybernetic implant without telling you how much Essence it takes up, how much it costs, or what its Availability is. etc.

And just as a side note, Target: Matrix does include a large list of security sheafs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dashifen
post Oct 21 2004, 04:09 PM
Post #17


Technomancer
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,638
Joined: 2-October 02
From: Champaign, IL
Member No.: 3,374



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Because they're not a reprint of rules.  They're a use of the rules.


Okay, I see that distinction now. Still reserve the right to disagree with the necessity of the stats but I understand your PoV where I didn't before. I guess that's better, right :D

QUOTE
And just as a side note, Target: Matrix does include a large list of security sheafs.


Cool. Might have to check that out. Thanks!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Oct 21 2004, 04:11 PM
Post #18


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



*shrug* i guess it's just me. i've never once used the pre-generated initiatory groups in MitS.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dashifen
post Oct 21 2004, 04:24 PM
Post #19


Technomancer
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,638
Joined: 2-October 02
From: Champaign, IL
Member No.: 3,374



QUOTE (mfb)
*shrug* i guess it's just me. i've never once used the pre-generated initiatory groups in MitS.

Not just you. I hated all the bookkeepping for groups and so there are no initiatory groups in my games. You can still have a group of mages that work toward a goal (i.e. Aleph Society :evil: ) but they can't help you initiate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Oct 21 2004, 04:34 PM
Post #20


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



egad. no group initiation karma reduction? you mageochist!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kremlin KOA
post Oct 21 2004, 04:39 PM
Post #21


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,590
Joined: 11-September 04
Member No.: 6,650



*shudder* that is unusually cruel and counter productive, why would any PC EVER join a mage group in your game, joining one is a liability already, as the group can usually cause the poor magician to go running around for half the game time... I just never allow PCs to enter NICE initiatory groups, all the ones pcs get access to are consiratorial
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Oct 21 2004, 04:46 PM
Post #22


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



my PCs generally form their own. one of the advantages of playing in a persistent, public setting with hundreds of characters.

/plug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kremlin KOA
post Oct 21 2004, 04:52 PM
Post #23


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,590
Joined: 11-September 04
Member No.: 6,650



I usually have enough magicals to do that, but I discourage it slightly, if they persist I let the spirit guide also be friends with a free spirit and agrees to link IF the group gets sponsored by the free spirit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dashifen
post Oct 21 2004, 04:54 PM
Post #24


Technomancer
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,638
Joined: 2-October 02
From: Champaign, IL
Member No.: 3,374



QUOTE (mfb)
egad. no group initiation karma reduction? you mageochist!

But, I made initiation with ordeal = group initiation so there is a much larger benefit to ordeal initiations.

QUOTE ("Kremlin KOA")
*shudder* that is unusually cruel and counter productive, why would any PC EVER join a mage group in your game, joining one is a liability already, as the group can usually cause the poor magician to go running around for half the game time


That was actually pretty much the idea. My players were joining groups just to initiate and then were mad at me when I made the group a real entity in the game and made them honor those pesky oaths and scriptures. The solution was to provide a "discount" to initiation and then allow mages interested in roleplaying the group to be in one. Incidentally, I've still had mages join groups to roleplay their character. It's been a positive rule, actually. I didn't think the players would go for it, but they did. Maybe now that I'm playing with entirely new players in a different state I'll relax on that one, but it was a game-saver at the time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Oct 21 2004, 04:57 PM
Post #25


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

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



ah, i can see that working.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 01:51 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.