 FAQ Updated |
  |
 Apr 5 2005, 03:05 AM
Post
#1
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 669 Joined: 25-May 03 Member No.: 4,634  |
Well, lookie here:
Interesting. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:06 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Chrome to the Core Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,152 Joined: 14-October 03 From: ::1 Member No.: 5,715 |
OK, so instead of adding/removing dice like Kagetenshi thought, we're increasing/decreasing the number of successes required.
I don't like that... Especially with the removal of the actual Pools. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:07 AM
Post
#3
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
Wow, it's ShadowExalted with d6s instead of d10s. Not that this is (necessarily) a bad thing! |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 5 2005, 02:01 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
Given the way the scale of attributes has been changed, and their now-direct contribution to dice rolls, I expect that the racial bonuses have been reduced significantly.
I would be very surprised if trolls still get +4s and +5s to attributes! |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:18 AM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Württemberg, AGS Member No.: 2,068 |
Just as I thought...
Well, not quite. You see there're still "modifiers" mentioned that influence dice pool size. Most likely cyberware etc. but still there are two kinds of difficutly modifiers. (Ok, "still" as in opposed to three before...) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 02:22 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
So basically it's a combination of my two proposed ideas. Neither of which, I might add, I liked in the least.
Ah, the bittersweet taste of being right. ~J |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 02:27 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I was not fond of much of SR3's mechanics, as most people who've been around in the last couple years probably know, but I must say I am distinctly unhappy with turning Shadowrun into Exalted. This fucking sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:40 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 47 Joined: 28-November 04 Member No.: 6,853 |
It does sound a bit like White Wolfs d10 system. That isn't a particularly bad thing, but it is going to be a bit...odd. I think that system will work fine for combat/social/even rigging and decking...sorry Hacking, but I wonder what effect this rule set will have on the Magic systems.
Also I know it has been expressed that Shadowrun is more about the story than it is about the system. But, I felt that the system was what gave the story its life. The SR rules were unique, making the whole experience unique. I have no doubt they will make a fun, new experience, its just the further along we get, the less it starts to sound like the Shadworun I enjoy. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 02:35 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
Looks remarkably similar to the system I suggested...and yes I borrowed somewhat liberally from White Wolf.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 02:39 AM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
Look, a similar mechanic does not make this the same game. I am an experienced Exalted player and GM. I have also GMed the odd session of nWoD (an adventure for mortal characters in the World of Darkness). The two games have similar mechanics, but in no way similar atmospheres. In fact, I believe that most people who read the nWoD corebook will come to the same conclusion I have: that it is, basically, Shadowrun at a lower tech level. It is every bit as creepy, dark, and gritty as SR - if not more so. Fixed TNs are a good thing. You wouldn't believe how much faster tests are to resolve when no TN needs to be calculated. In particular, it removes the hideousness of the SR3 test vs. secret TN (eg, hacking a maglock) where the GM had to personally inspect every single die rolled to determine whether success had occured, and how long the attempt took! The new mechanic also neatly solves all the difficulty about TN 6 vs 7 and the extremely rapidly diminishing chance of success at higher TNs. I am somewhat concerned about the 1/3 minimum chance to succeed (assuming a 1-success required task), however. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:05 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 226 Joined: 29-July 03 Member No.: 5,137 |
Hmmm, I have to admit I'm a bit worried about this. I always really liked the old dice pools, they added a nice element of strategy to combat and a much better way of determining focus on actions than WWs splitting dice pools (which I hate). I hope there is going to be something to replace that element without completely porting the WW system to d6 and putting in stupid pool splitting rules. I'm not saying the new system will not still be fun to play and even possibly work in the SR setting, but I feel that at least based on the info we have so far we're losing one of my favorite parts of the current SR system.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:08 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
hm. i don't see why the change is necessary (now, you raise/lower the number of dice rolled, instead of raising/lowering the TN--no real change in complexity, to me), but i don't really like it any better or worse than the old system.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:24 AM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
Well, currently a test is scaled four different ways: 1) How many dice are rolled 2) How many opposing dice are rolled 3) TNs for each set of dice 4) How many successes, or net successes, are required. This is being reduced to two different scaling methods (dice rolled and successes required), which is certainly inline with the stated goal of streamlining mechanics. I think the biggest advantage of the change is the removal of Open Tests and the dreaded Secret TN Success Count - possibly one of the most horrible mechanics in games of recent years. The biggest loss is removing a certain amount of the mechanistic flavour of SR, and turning it into Storytelling System with d6s instead of d10s. At least it's still a multiple-die, success-counting, levels of success system! On the downside, we have the loss of free dice pools that refresh every turn. On the upside, we presumably still have Karma Pool to allow people to decide when they really need to pass a test - hopefully its size or refresh rate will be increased (with proportionate increases in the cost of rerolls) so that it can fulfill the function previously provided by the Combat, Spell, Hacking and Control pools. In fact, I think that a frequently refreshing Karma Pool with cheap rates to buy additional dice would be a superior mechanic to the old dice pools, as it can be applied to any test. Under SR3, a spell cast out of combat will likely have a ludicrously large number of successes as the entire Spell Pool can be dumped into the Success Test, while there is no similar pool that aids in social tests, Conjuring, use of the Survival skill, and so on. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:28 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Personally, I think the Secret TN Success Count is invaluable; without it, the only recourse is to make the roll for the player, which both ups the GM's rolling load and takes away the player's ability to roll for their own character in many situations.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:30 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 112 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Württemberg, AGS Member No.: 2,068 |
Nothing has been said about opposed tests yet. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:34 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
Well, you can still hide the "Success Threshold", if I'm reading the FAQ right. Difficult tests will require multiple "hits" to succeed, so the players just report their "hits" and the GM determines if it exceeds the threshold.
I'm not a big fan of what they are proposing*, but it is more streamlined and far less complex. It allows players to make their dice rolls quickly with a guaranteed report (*roll* "I got 5 hits... does that work?"). * (for one thing, it makes Attributes far more valuable than they were before, a design "feature" that promotes maxing out stats rather than focusing on skills) |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:39 AM
Post
#17
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
No. SR3 is the only current system which requires a GM to inspect every die that a player rolls, as in the Secret TN Success Count. In d20, GURPS, and Unisystem, the player rolls against a secret DC, but knows his total result. They can then inform the GM what that total result was, and the GM can inform the player of the consequences. In Ironclaw, where all checks are against "secret" DCs because all checks are opposed, the players only need to know what the highest roll on their various polyhedral dice was highest. (Exception: damage rolls, which are always against open opposed rolls). In nWoD, Exalted, and SR4 the player rolls against fixed TN and informs the GM of the number of successes. The GM can then declare the outcome. Only in SR3 must a player roll a check where they need to know how many of their dice rolled above a secret number! The only way the action can be resolved is for the player to quote how many dice exceeded each number from 2 to their maximum roll, or for the GM to lean over the table and inspect the dice. The Secret TN Success Count fulfills an essential mechanical requirement (that of a check against an unknown difficulty) but performs it in the worst, slowest, most complicated fashion of any game currently in play. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:41 AM
Post
#18
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
If there are opposed tests, then the number of successes achieved on the opposed roll will either be the number of successes you require, or directly add to the number of successes you require. No additional complexity of probability scaling, just an additional roll - which will be fast, because the TN is known! |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 5 2005, 04:54 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
Precisely! A "hidden TN" mechanic for SR that doesn't suck! At last! This is the major advantage of fixed TNs for success-counting mechanics. Incidentally, I agree with you about the fact that Attributes are going to become more relatively important, especially since they have stated that both Attribute and Skill ranges from 1-6. This is a matter of some concern to me, especially since it is likely that Attributes will be more expensive to improve with Karma, thus encouraging players to load up with Attributes at chargen and buy the skills later as they are cheaper. One way to prevent this syndrome is to have a character generation system that weights Attribute and Skill purchases at chargen identically to how those traits are improved with experience. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:48 AM
Post
#20
|
|||||
|
Chrome to the Core Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,152 Joined: 14-October 03 From: ::1 Member No.: 5,715 |
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:51 AM
Post
#21
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 4-August 02 Member No.: 3,064 |
That post you linked to says that Open Tests have been removed - hooray! It says nothing about Opposed Tests, which are a completely different kettle of fish and usually an essential component of an RPG's mechanics. I'm told that the Buffy RPG has few to none, but that's definitely the exception rather than the rule. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Apr 5 2005, 03:54 AM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Chrome to the Core Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,152 Joined: 14-October 03 From: ::1 Member No.: 5,715 |
Oh, right.
Go me. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 04:01 AM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 47 Joined: 28-November 04 Member No.: 6,853 |
Either way, I don't like where this is leading. All these people who were going around saying they didn't want(with very good reason) the system to go d20....well it didn't, they just ripped on another system instead.
I was hoping that it would still hold some semblance of Shadowrun as far as rules were concerned, but this new update sees that hope dwindling. I am not saying they still can't do it, but its getting more and more difficult to see where it will be able to maintain any of the previous systems style. I enjoy the D10 system, so I am not saying the new edition (if the end product is as close to that system as it seems) won't be fun, I am just not sure that it will be Shadowrun. I know what has been said by playtesters and developers, but I just am not seeing it so far. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 04:03 AM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
it would appease the masses greatly if the next update or two focused on the similarities between SR3 and SR4--what's being kept, as opposed to what's changing.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2005, 04:03 AM
Post
#25
|
|||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I don't think you people get it. Further abstraction of mechanics fundamentally distances the player from immersing him or herself from gritty details and nuances of the world. SR3 alredy beats the shit out of you until you fall in line and accept Abstraction as the one true word. It did not need to get any worse. Exalted and the WoD systems are almost insanely abstracted, and the games are really designed around this. To apply that mechanic to a game that did not need more abstraction is a very bad idea. I'll wait and see, but suffice to say I do not have high hopes.
If you have no skill and the lowest possible attribute score, maybe. And that's assuming you only need one success, which does not seem likely. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 11th March 2025 - 04:16 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.