 A Few Answers Regarding SR4, On the site now... |
  |
 Mar 22 2005, 10:37 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 30 Joined: 16-March 05 Member No.: 7,178  |
I vote for Burninators! :D
Lets just take netrunner. I don't think that's being used anymore. |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 10:52 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i might slime the system when i get my hands on it, but i doubt the developers will be. familiarity breeds contempt, and all.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 10:54 PM
Post
#28
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 256 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,709 |
I would say that there is a snowball's chance in a mythological fiery underworld of that happening. That would divide resources in a line that's already got problems keeping up a strong release schedule. Besides, nobody who writes for SR is interested in the old SR game. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 22 2005, 10:46 PM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Not exactly. The core mechanic is likely to remain the same, and some stuff will be left untouched. Wired Reflexes, for example, are exactly the same as they were in SR1. (Initiative changed, though.) Having lived through all the rules changeovers to date, I can tell you that the odds are, the system will still be recognizeable to you. Excepting the matrix stuff, of course; but then again, the matrix rules have had the most radical changes from edition to edition. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:03 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
A big fat heartfelt screw you to FanPro for releasing the PDF's of books which they are about to obsolete. I just bought over a hundred bucks worth of PDF's only to find out now that all older rule books are obsolete.
This is one absolutely fantastic way to screw me over, and any other gamers. This is also one fantastic reason for me not to buy SR4, as it's like a freaking reaming for my cash in light of my recent purchases. On a less vitriolic and unrealted note, over the several year span between System Crash and sr4 The name of a subculture wouldn't change. Deckers would still be deckers even if they didn't physically use a deck. It would be a vestigal word but it would still be used. That and I despise anyone calling themselves a hacker, it's a 1337 asshat subculture based on stupidity. All the really competent people I know would never call themselves a hacker, they leave that to the AOL wannabees running Kiddie Scripts. EDIT: incidentally, I'm all for the way it looks like deckers are going. That I have no problem with, but I hope to god they maintain a sense of internal consistency, because the decker=>hacker thing does not bode well for me, even in the atmosphere adjustment. If someone says "I'm a hacker" most everyone I know giggles and thinks they're a retard. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:04 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
So we've just learned that SR4 will be so different from anything preceding it that ALL PREVIOUS RULES WILL BE UTTERLY OBSOLETE AND USELESS, and the big discussion here is whether we prefer the word "decker" or "hacker".
I was optimistic about the new edition, because I thought the changeover would resemble previous edition changeovers, where 2 wasn't so different from 1, and 2 was recognizable as 3's ancestor. Now I learn that FanPro is taking a system we all love and chucking the whole thing out the window. There's an explanation for this? Besides "we're a bunch of knuckleheads"? (Yes, of course there is...White Wolf did it!) If 3rd edition is so nonfunctional that it needs to be burned to the ground, why do we want the same people who wrote third edition to bring us this new and improved Sixth World? I knew that there was a high level of incompetence when books were missing their release dates by six months and a year, but I stilled hoped that this ship of fools could make it all the way to the squared-off edge of the world. I am filled with doom and despair, and terror of this new edition. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:02 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
I wouldn't go that far, I think they have done some damn fine work in the past with 3rd edition.
Their ability to playtest and provide intelligent, consistent and well balanced mechanics and the justification for those mechanics worries me however. Especially considering the latest FAQ answers which contradict existing rules and are a detriment to the game world. If the people that are responsible for the FAQ are actually making the new 4th edition rules, God Help Us All. In 3rd edition, the FAQ is the primary target of my hate, and the primary reason I feel that if anyone involved with it is working on 4th edition, then we're screwed, because the faq, which is NOT an erratta, is often totally inconsistent with the rules in the books. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:06 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
what's this "we" stuff, paleface? i've been hoping to see SR3 burnt down and rebuilt for years, now. the explanation is, they don't want to have to deal with all of the insanity and idiosynchracies that come packaged with SR3. and as well, they're interested in drawing in new players, which the current rules strongly discourage by virtue of their insanity and idiosynchrocity. if that's even a word.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:10 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
That I agree with, totally. The current rules are a bitch to learn, and hard to introduce new folks to. That SHOULD be changed, I have nothing inherintly against a 4th edition.
I do however have serious reservations about a 4th edition written by anyone involved in the FAQ. This does not inspire me with hope for a well written, internally consistent and sane 4th edition that plays well. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:13 PM
Post
#35
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Heh. Man, I was thinking the exact same thing. By the way, idiosynchronicity. Though that's a little gentle, I'd say.
Erm, so would I. This is happening? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:14 PM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
You think the people running the FAQ *aren't* involved in SR4? I was told the line developer maintains the FAQ, hence my distress.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:27 PM
Post
#37
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 496 Joined: 28-June 02 From: Orlando FL Member No.: 2,915 |
nobody is an awefully limiting word, and not quite accurate... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:21 PM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
most of the FAQ is okay. there are a few... problematic answers that have been discussed in other threads. but even some of those can't really be laid at the FAQ writers' feet. called shots, for instance--there are problems with the FAQ answer, but definitely fewer problems than the existing rules (in which there are no less than three different and distinct methods of handling called shots, depending on what weapon you're using).
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:45 PM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Gotta love the Shadowrun Supplemizzle! :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:48 PM
Post
#40
|
|||||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Well, you know, that probably *was* kinda the point. I mean, who's gonna buy the stuff they have out now when the new edition's gonna sell in six months and make it all obselete? Heh, I'm damn lucky I didn't do the same thing myself ( have a general policy for optional expenditures: wait three weeks. If you still want it, then get it. Lucky for me three weeks was "long enough")
Now now, I wouldn't read too much onto that. I'd say they were trying to say that the new book is going to have *some* different rules in it enough that trying to use those rules and the stuff in SR3 will be very difficult and cause lots of contradictions. I predict, for instance, alot of the decker utilities in Matrix will cease to exist, so usng the old Matrix book will lead to problems. Etc etc.
Oh hell you're right. God save us all if the line developer can't even keep the *current* mess straight. Lets hope that Invisability won't be granting LOS in the new edition. :( |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:41 PM
Post
#41
|
|||||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Even if there aren't decks anymore, decker is a term that will have been ingrained in the game world for years; regardless of the existence of the deck, they still deck. There's no good reason, IC or OOC, to replace the term. Trogdor the Burninator would suit me just fine, though. ~J |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:57 PM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
But there was a good reason, IC or OOC, to replace hacking?
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 22 2005, 11:56 PM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
There's a whole hell of a lot better reason for a subculture term to change over 60 years (2+ generations) than 5 years (I have socks older than that). :) Even without a deck, I still think the term " decker" makes a whole lot of sense, because in the context of SR it has a global identity. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 12:04 AM
Post
#44
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Ah ha, but, and I quote:
Substitute "hacker" for "decker" and you'll see what everyone's been saying in the new wireless Matrix subculture about the old dinosaurs running on those fossilized obselete old *decks*. :D Btw, "hacker" was actually quite a respectable term in the 70s, 80s, and early-to-mid 90s. But the moment the media latched onto it and started calling those damn script kiddie crackers "hackers" in an obvious and stupid mass misunderstanding of the word, it's instantly become taboo, to the point that noone even uses it anymore. Sounds like a good analogy to the sudden culture shift in 2065-2070 to me. :) Though I would have perfered Slicers or netrunners, or even nethacks to hackers. Rehashing an old buzzword to fit a new aerchtype is as stupid as people trying to revive "groovy" now. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 23 2005, 12:21 AM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Hacker is still a respected term. You'll see it on slashdot, sourceforge, etc. Used by very competent people, at that. It isn't just for script kiddies.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 12:54 AM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Hacker as a respected term has nothing whatsoever to do with system penetration and very little to do with computing.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 01:19 AM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 256 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,709 |
btw, what's with the implication that Deckers were once called Hackers? Honest mistake, or just an extra layer on the severing of ties with the old Shadowrun game?
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 02:31 AM
Post
#48
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
But it has everything to do with a response to Bitbasher's earlier comment. Regardless, I have no problem with deckers disappearing and hacker returning as a term. A lot of stuff is getting thrown out in order to shake off the 80s legacy that Shadowrun was firmly rooted in (it never was visionary science fiction, after all), and it got to the point where the only way to do that was to, at points, ignore that it wasn't necessarily believable within the storyline because things were already pretty damn hard to swallow. Personally, I'm completely fine with that. I don't think we need to wait 20 more ingame years for cell phones to drop from 1k to 100g. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 23 2005, 02:32 AM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 256 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,709 |
Again, what is this "return"? Decking has always been decking. It was never hacking.
But whatever. I know, it's necessary to cut all ties with Shadowrun, because nobody actually likes Shadowrun. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2005, 02:42 AM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,353 Joined: 5-June 02 Member No.: 2,840 |
I smell a reverse "Vampire: The Requiem" coming.
By that, I mean this: I hated "Vampire: The Requiem" because I missed the old storyline and setting material (from "Masquerade") and haven't touched the book since. The rules were just fine though. It seems as though in this case, I'm going to like the setting material, but hate the new rules. Whether that means I'll never touch the book again depends on the severity of the rules changes. I really have a bad feeling about this... |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 13th June 2026 - 01:48 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.