 Damage Codes / weights revisited? |
  |
 Mar 17 2005, 04:29 AM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087  |
Oh.
Right. Sorry. It's getting late isn't it? Lack of of sleep and all that. :oops: |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 02:39 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
I agree weights are a bit wonky, but is it really such an issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 02:48 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 3-August 04 Member No.: 6,535 |
I tend to treat open tests as opposed tests instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 05:49 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
I'd like it if they offered some basic dimentional data on weapons. What size is a Panther Cannon? Since it has no "real" counterpart, it would be helpful for some non-traditional items.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 05:45 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Personally, nice as good descriptions could be, I'd prefer they prioritized getting things right in general.
Is there really any reason not to fix something so obviously fuck up and yet so simple? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 17 2005, 05:55 PM
Post
#31
|
|||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
It's really not *that* wrong is it? I know alot of folks really want firearms to really emulate real-life more, but the system hasn't done too bad has it? The exploits aren't that extreme are they? Guess I just don't see the current system as a problem. What I wouldn't like to see is additional detail that bogs down combat situations unless it's made it into something simple. I've seen before some systems have a "basic" and "advanced" combat sytem, so you can choose depending on what kind of game you'd like to play, maybe that's one solution. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 17 2005, 06:45 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
No, I'd say it is that bad. Lack of any reasonable consistency with reality is bad enough; it already disassociates the game from reality and make immersion more difficult with no goal, benefit, or reason for doing so. But lack of internal consistency or reasonable balance? That's sloppy design layered on stupid design.
There is a deep flaw in thinking that more complexity means slower play. Not only is the current system hardly streamlined or intuitive, but a system that reflects reality (let's say, for example, the bulk of Raygun's stuff) is not cumbersome. It aids in immersion and ultimately ends up being reasonably intuitive. And it's been done. D20 Modern and Spycraft both proved something I had been saying here for some time: you can make a game with plenty of realistic rules, and if it's well designed, it's still accessible, intuitive, and enjoyable, and it can beat the ever loving shit out of SR3— a game that was ostensibly designed with all that abstraction in order to make it playable and problem free. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:05 PM
Post
#33
|
|||||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
So why do you play then? Is it just the great story?
I have no problem getting immersed into SR. It's not about "how real" it is for me, but about the people, the situations and the jobs. We each play for our own reasons obvious you have more requirements for it being real to get into the game.
Then go play something else. /shrug |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:23 PM
Post
#34
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 88 Joined: 22-August 03 From: Central New York Member No.: 5,531 |
Could we please refrain from mention that abomination that is D20? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:40 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 157 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Perdition Member No.: 108 |
Open tests seem like an add-on mechanism which really doesn't work, in my opinion. Whoever came up with the idea must have really thought he had something going, though. The problem is that they're an extra mechanism that the game doesn't need.
And Ombre is right; an Open Test is not based mainly on skill, but on luck. A person with a Stealth of 2 has a slightly less chance of pulling some ungodly target number out of that Test as a person with a Stealth of 6. All skill levels get you is more dice to throw at the Invisibility Lotto. While they do seem to have their place in low-level games where luck plays an integral factor in such things, Open Tests don't need to be a core mechanic of the game. If you run a higher-power game, then they don't really need to be part of the game at all; the randomness can throw the power curve out the window. Please, please, take them out of the core rulebook, or make them an optional rule, not a core mechanic. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:33 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
but lots and lots of other people do. for instance, the many people who say they don't use deckers in their game because decking disrupts the game. or the many people who don't use rigging because the rules are just too complex. it's a definite problem when people are cutting out entire sections of the game because they don't like playing them. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
The context of my comment is about firearms, not SR3 as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 17 2005, 07:51 PM
Post
#38
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
I like this argument. "So what if this system is really bad in some ways? Go play another game then. Fixing or tweaking things is bad." Consider something like the Damage Codes of firearms (specifically, those of Light and Heavy Pistols, ARs, LMGs and HMGs) or weights of items in SR3. As they are, they are illogical, unrealistic, internally inconsistent, and just plain wrong. They do not in any way promote game balance -- in fact, some of those things severely detract from balance, such as the piddly-ass LPs vs. ultra-powerful HPs. And all those things could be (or could have been) fixed without introducing any complexity into the system. I've never understood the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If something functions, but is really crappy, you shouldn't make it better? Anyway, you could make a very good case for at least the above things being broken. Once again, this doesn't really have much to do with SR4, since I should think the game designers will not reintroduce the same fuck-ups in details if they already went through all the trouble of reworking much of the basics.
Spycraft and to some extent D20 Modern do have a few strong points, but they both have at least as many mind-blogginglystupid rules. Actually, I'd say D20 Modern has far more of those, while Spycraft (with some optional rules) is pretty closely tied. Yay, I'm (at least) a level 8 Dedicated Hero in D20 Modern! (D20 Shadowrun, to D20 or not to D20?) This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Mar 17 2005, 08:01 PM |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 17 2005, 08:02 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
We obviously have different criteria about what makes a game good or not, but it's definetly hard to find any one game that has it all. When I find a game that offers alot of good things, I tend to let that temper the not so good parts.
To me, SR is not so broken that it's unplayable nor do I find myself so tethered by having to belive the reality SR presents that I can't enjoy myself. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 03:11 AM
Post
#40
|
|||||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I hope not. I do like them.
As I mentioned elsewhere, that's not a fair comparison with regard to Stealth Tests: keep in mind that one success is only enough for the person making the perception test to know that something is there. That something could be Bubba the Love Troll, the cat next door, or dear Aunt Sue. It takes a second success to guess the general type of thing, and a third to have a fairly concrete idea. All in all, I'd say it works just fine. ~J |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 18 2005, 07:24 AM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
incidentally, if SR4 shotguns are able to hit multiple targets with one shot, i'm going to show somebody exactly what shotguns do and how they work.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 07:33 AM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
RL shotguns can hit multiple targets with one shot too.
Providing that both targets are pressing together and that the shot is aimed directly at the point where they're touching, that is… ~J |
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 11:34 AM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Or if you have this kind of "shotgun".
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 03:02 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
The next BFTG?
~J |
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 03:46 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 527 Joined: 30-January 04 Member No.: 6,043 |
RE: Austere's link:
Eeearrgh!!! |
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 03:58 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 486 Joined: 4-August 04 From: Fomorian Wastes Member No.: 6,538 |
BFTG, definately need one of those or just maybe something other than a Honda Viking built for and sold to trolls.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 05:39 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 468 Joined: 17-March 05 Member No.: 7,185 |
I'd definitely favor DMG codes based on Ammo rather than classes. 9mm x 19 should remain roughly the same DMG code accross platforms (baring some wierd technical reason for increased or decreased power).
Of course I'd be in favor of more of the weapons being slightly advanced version of real world weapons rather than game system constructs after all the 1911 has been around for nearly a century in some form or another and it's still a relevant weapon. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 18 2005, 05:54 PM
Post
#48
|
|||||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
That doesn't really matter. There are massive chunks of the combat section that everyone has found problematic, and if it weren't really the most central set of rules to the game, there probably would be people who tried to ignore it as much as possible. Austere has summed up my feelings on the system fairly well. It's deeply flawed, and while not technically incapable of functioning, it does very little well without heavy modification.
I overstated in mentioning D20 Modern, but for a specific point: both games have released fairly massive weapons compendiums and both are substantially more mainstream than Shadowrun. Beyond that, I don't really like Modern. Spycraft, on the other hand, while not a game I honestly think I'd like to play, is a game I respect and appreciate. It manages a cohesion in its design that I find admirable and refreshing, especially in light of Shadowrun, which looks like the patchwork ramblings of a streetcorner psychotic in comparison. The thing about SpyCraft its rather sizable Modern Arms Guide is that the game is still casual, still accessible, and still mainstream, and yet the guide provides a wealth of detail (which, for what it is, manages to be both quite attractive and pretty accurate, most of the time). It doesn't overwhelm or confuse anyone— which, ironically, is exactly what Shadowrun manages to do to just about everyone. It explicitly beats the shit out of the Abstraction-Is-The-One-True-Word crowd in proving that detail is immersive, useful, and if done right, not at all inaccessible.
If you have to divorce yourself from believing the reality created by the game to enjoy it, the game has fucked up pretty goddamn badly.
Just so long as this doesn't create any silliness with barrel length being ignored, I'm all for it, as I'm sure you could notice. Same for changing weapons back to something reasonable and believable. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Mar 18 2005, 07:28 PM
Post
#49
|
|||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,754 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Modesto, CA Member No.: 6,465 |
Hardly divorcing myself from reality of SR. There are plenty of game mechanics, stories and concepts that make it fun. Fact is I simply don't require ever aspect of a game to be as life-like and realistic as possible for me to play it. Yes the SR universe isn't perfect, but what game is? My group stopped playing D&D in search of something that had more to offer. We found something else, played it, moved on again. SR (as a whole) has alot more to offer my group than many other games we've played, if it didn't we'd move on instead of pissing an moaning about "How borken it is". SR has managed to hang around for atleast 3 editions and there is obviously enough interest for FanPro to make a 4th edition. Despite what we'd like to think, they aren't just making the 4th edition to make us feel better about the rules. Hell we get to keep all the soucebook. I am not sure how long you've played SR but I can see your distress with SR is deep-rooted, so I'll ask the question again: Why play SR then if it doesn't meet your needs? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 18 2005, 07:21 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
because the game universe is compelling. because the genre is largely unique. because when the rules are good, they're very good. i bitch about SR because i like it, and because i want to see it made better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th May 2026 - 10:50 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.