IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Implications on the core mechanic, Stat + skill target 5.
Edward
post Apr 19 2005, 08:30 AM
Post #1


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



Implications on the core mechanic
Stat + skill target 5.

I finally got of my bum and read the SR4 FAQ and I noticed some implications of the core mechanic. Do you agree that they will occur and do you think that they will be bad.

1: defaulting is more attractive. In SR3 defaulting to stat 3 created a very low chance of success. Buy my maths you now have a better than 70% chance of success (if there are no other modifiers). For some things (pistols) I see this as a good thing, for others (cracking a mag lock) I see it as a bad thing. A rigger (specialist vehicle hacker) with no skill in computing but a high logic (I assume that will be the linked stat)will be a competent computer hacker (hell somebody with high int and no experience could pick up the tools and perform as well as a les intelligent person with significant experience)

2: there is such a thing as imposable. In SR3 no mater the penalties you could take a roll and have a chance of wining, even if the TN was 35 it could happen. Under SR4 these tasks will be imposable. This is fine for really hard things the difference is minuscule but consider a low skill use. Stat 2 skill 2 taking a shot at short range SR3 2 dice target 4, SR4 4 dice target 5. Now apply a 2 point glare and a 2 point range penalty. SR3 2 dice target 8 (achievable with luck) SR4 no chance.

3: les for thought required. Without pools that have to be spread out over multiple actions you wont need to consider latter needs for thinks like spell pool or combat pool, if the total pools do need to be split over multiple actions then what about a character that casts a spell with one action and then fires a gun. These use very different pools so he will evade the downside. This will be a non issue if the initiative system doses not grant multiple actions in a turn but that would return initiative to a D&D like importance, going often is a lot more significant than going first.

That is all I can think of for now.

Opinions pleas.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Critias
post Apr 19 2005, 08:54 AM
Post #2


Freelance Elf
*********

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



So, right. That about sums up what the rest of us have been saying, more or less, for a few weeks now. Attributes have the potential to become more important than skills, your characters might never just luck out at a dramatically appropriate moment ever again, and any jackass smart enough to pick up a handfull of dice and throw them can do well.

The only opinion I've actually got about your post is that you might want to smack that "spell check" button once or twice before submitting, next time. It was genuinely difficult to read, at times.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mfb
post Apr 19 2005, 08:58 AM
Post #3


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

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



yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 10:19 AM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



#1, this trouble do not bother me - since the GM does his work and choose to add penalties if the skill rank is not sufficient.
#2, I see 2 possibility to make test possible when the penalty is stronger than the dice pool
A) explosive dice. It does complicates the statistics for all dice tests, and make it "possible" to have any number of hit for any number of dice.
B) avoiding 0 dice. A bit tricky. Just consider the minimum of a pool is 1 dice. If the penalty increase by X, add X dices, throw all the dices(X+1), and keep the smallest result
eg: Stat 2 skill 2 taking a shot at long range +2 and bad visibility +3
initial score 4-5=-1 so 0 dice. in this technic take 4-3=1dice, and add the remaning penalty (2 dices), throw the 3 dices. Keep the worst result. If you score only 5 and 6, you get a hit, otherwise you fail.
probability of scoring 1hit: 1/9 for initial score = 0, 1/27 for initial score =-1 ...
This doesn't change the stats on other test (pool bigger than penalties), and does allow if lucky to have 1 and only one hit if the pool is smaller or equal to penalties.
Doesn't permit success if more than 1 hit is needed.
#3a, I am not sure as I could be a strategic place for splitting your pool (skill+att) between action in SR4 ...
#3b, Initiative can't have a D&D importance, since in SR you can easily kill your opponent in one action - or at least give him significant penalties.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dizzo Dizzman
post Apr 19 2005, 11:13 AM
Post #5


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 91
Joined: 23-January 05
From: Washington, DC
Member No.: 7,007



That assumes that you can still kill an opponent in one action. If the difficulty for resisting damage is 5, I can see combats lasting a lot longer. What ended combats fast in SR3 wasn't the amount of damage, but the huge damage codes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 12:01 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



That (#3b: initiative is important) assume effectively combat is still lethal in SR4. Which seems both mandatory to keep Shadowrun what it is, and not hard to do at all ... Ther is so much way to achieve that, that I don't see the point to discuss it without knowing the actual playtest mechanic.
Of course the wound penalty will often(actually on test you have a lot of dices to throw) be less important than before (a penalty in SR4 seems to mean "only" 1/3 hit less).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Apr 19 2005, 01:04 PM
Post #7


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



I didnít think of damage.

I am assuming that damage resistance tests will be body + armour Ė power (I am not thinking of other options ATM) this will keep damage deadly (moor so as you cant get lucky with your large number of dice).

Another implication becomes a los of mechanical differentiation between cyber armour (dice to resist damage) and worn armour (reduced target numbers)

And in D&D there are spells that kill you outright. Several of my wroat tournament builds involved outragesly high initiative, disintegrate and quickened phantasmal killer. But it seeses to be the be all and end all.

If we loos the multiple actions for high initiative I think brick shithouse builds (obscenely high mounts of armour) with pain editors (or pain resistance) will become far more common than the present favourite speed sami.
Consider this example.

Speed samy verses 8 gangers with moderate professionalism ratings

SR3
Actions samy 3 gangers 1
Samy shoots 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoots 2
samy shoots 2
end of round
next round
samy shoots 2

initiative dose not gain actions, samy will win initiative
samy shoots 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
4 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
2 shoot samy
samy shoot 2

if he isnít getting his extra actions he needs to soak twice as many bullets. A tank samy would go like this (assuming win initiative half the time, he is a little faster than the gangers so we will have him win first action).

Samy shoot 2
6 shoot samy
round 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
round 3
samy shoot 2
2 shoot samy
round 4
2 shoot samy
samy shoot 2

he has to take 4 extra hits because he cant reliably win initiative but with the essence and nuyen he would have spent on speed boosters he should be able to get enough armour to soak heavy pistols every time (at least you could in earlier editions)

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 01:28 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



QUOTE (Edward)
If we loos the multiple actions for high initiative I think brick shithouse builds (obscenely high mounts of armour) with pain editors (or pain resistance) will become far more common than the present favourite speed sami.

Even if you have taken the best example : Speed samy against several uncybered opponent, I would modify the statement.
If multiple actions doesn't exist armour seems to count better.

What if the damages are MORE deadly than in SR3, and no dices to doge ?
What if, comparing with the customized badass is done in SR3 with good initiative, and very strong skill : let say attribute 7(with cyber) gun7 and of course 2dices for the weapon interface : 14 dices.
Now imagine: pool can be fragmented

OK, lot of IF ...

Anyway in your example the samy in the best case kill 2 ganger in is first phase, then is the target for 4*2 simples actions ... Need to bee well armored anyway !

Finally I would say that initiative was over powerful in SR3 anyway ...

An A. Predator will always be quicker in the hand in a Samy, than in a corporate normal agent ... Even if his finger is clenched on the trigger ! :spin:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vuron
post Apr 19 2005, 01:38 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 468
Joined: 17-March 05
Member No.: 7,185



I think you are also forgetting that instead of simply modifying the dice pool with modifiers you can also modify the number of successes based on the difficulty increasing.

Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success. That way you can have lots of potential modifiers to the dice pool but also mess around with difficulty levels.

Now I'm not saying that this method is used but based on my past experience with fixed TN dice pool systems it seems to work pretty well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 01:46 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



"Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success"
I do not agree at all ... It depend to much of 1) the initial SR and 2) the number of dice ...

You have 4 dices sr5, do you mind having 1 dice sr4 ?
You have 14 dices sr5, do you mind having 17 dices sr6 ?

In both case the stats of first choice are much higher ...
The stats will change a lot in SR4, THANKSFULLY ... Too much troubles in SR3
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vuron
post Apr 19 2005, 01:50 PM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 468
Joined: 17-March 05
Member No.: 7,185



QUOTE (Taki)
"Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success"
I do not agree at all ... It depend to much of 1) the initial SR and 2) the number of dice ...

You have 4 dices sr5, do you mind having 1 dice sr4 ?
You have 14 dices sr5, do you mind having 17 dices sr6 ?

In both case the stats of first choice are much higher ...
The stats will change a lot in SR4, THANKSFULLY ... Too much troubles in SR3

Perhaps I explained it a bit badly but what I meant to say was that you generally average 1 success per 3 dice rolled. Considering the dice pools (even if they significantly decrease racial attribute modifiers and cyberware modifiers) are often going to be between 6-9 dice I don't think that a system in which only 1 success is needed for various tasks generates enough failures to make it playable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 01:59 PM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



No, you explained it well.
I just rode it wrong :notworthy:
You are quite right !
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightHaunter
post Apr 19 2005, 02:28 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 360
Joined: 18-March 02
From: Plymouth UK.
Member No.: 2,408



Why do people insist in sticking the SR3 rules into the SR4 mechanic?
Is it not obvious that the rest of the rules are gonna change around the new mechanic?
Give it them time to publish either by FAQ or book some actual rules then work out if its gonna work.
Tried not to be too offensive with this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 02:36 PM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



I don't see the offence ?
By the way most of that thread discuss on issue considering the official FAQ for SR4 ... (I think so ? - maybe my brain is off today ???)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Apr 19 2005, 02:39 PM
Post #15


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



I had assumed that for combat successes would stage damage rather than requiring multiple successes to achieve a hit. Of cause assumptions are the brother of all fuckups.

Also I was not assuming that a samy could kill 2 gangers an action. I was assuming he could achieve sufficient wounds to exceed there professionalism rating. Of cause under SR4 you may not be able to take 2 shots with a SA or BF weapon in an action.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightHaunter
post Apr 19 2005, 02:51 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 360
Joined: 18-March 02
From: Plymouth UK.
Member No.: 2,408



Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vuron
post Apr 19 2005, 02:59 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 468
Joined: 17-March 05
Member No.: 7,185



QUOTE (NightHaunter)
Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.

Actually based on the discussions in the initiative thread the actual mechanics for how complex and simple actions etc are computed might still be up in the air.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightHaunter
post Apr 19 2005, 03:02 PM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 360
Joined: 18-March 02
From: Plymouth UK.
Member No.: 2,408



QUOTE (Vuron @ Apr 19 2005, 03:59 PM)
QUOTE (NightHaunter @ Apr 19 2005, 09:51 AM)
Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.

Actually based on the discussions in the initiative thread the actual mechanics for how complex and simple actions etc are computed might still be up in the air.

I was sure they said actions wernt changing but they didn't know how initative was gonna work for definate based on "hits".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Patrick Goodman
post Apr 19 2005, 03:20 PM
Post #19


Tilting at Windmills
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,636
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Amarillo, TX, CAS
Member No.: 388



Last I looked, there were four variations on initiative using the new core mechanic. All of them work, some of them better than others. What we're working on right now is figuring out which one of them works best; my group has formed its opinion and told Rob and the other developers, so we wait for the next draft to see how that shakes out.

Combat is still in rounds. You still get 2 Simple Actions or 1 Complex Action per round. Free Actions also still figure into things.

There's a lot more staying the same than is changing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jon Szeto
post Apr 19 2005, 04:11 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 102
Joined: 26-February 02
From: The freelancer crackhouse
Member No.: 119



Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Taki
post Apr 19 2005, 04:17 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 316
Joined: 18-April 05
From: France
Member No.: 7,343



Will we still get more than one complex action by round, depending on initiative ?
...
Asking is free :D
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightHaunter
post Apr 19 2005, 04:19 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 360
Joined: 18-March 02
From: Plymouth UK.
Member No.: 2,408



QUOTE (Patrick Goodman)
Last I looked, there were four variations on initiative using the new core mechanic. All of them work, some of them better than others. What we're working on right now is figuring out which one of them works best; my group has formed its opinion and told Rob and the other developers, so we wait for the next draft to see how that shakes out.

Combat is still in rounds. You still get 2 Simple Actions or 1 Complex Action per round. Free Actions also still figure into things.

There's a lot more staying the same than is changing.

Booyah score one for my memory.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Apr 19 2005, 04:34 PM
Post #23


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (mfb)
yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".

Sadly I agree.

SR was really visionary when it came out, I just hope all the good being done "in the name of streamlining" doesn't white-wash SR into something we can get from some other RPG. When I read the comment about "painting the 5 & 6 side of die" I almost got sick to my stomach.

I guess the real indicator of success will be non-SR4-core rulesbook sales.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Apr 20 2005, 09:44 AM
Post #24


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,718
Joined: 14-September 02
Member No.: 3,263



QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Apr 19 2005, 10:34 AM)
QUOTE (mfb)
yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".

Sadly I agree.

SR was really visionary when it came out, I just hope all the good being done "in the name of streamlining" doesn't white-wash SR into something we can get from some other RPG. When I read the comment about "painting the 5 & 6 side of die" I almost got sick to my stomach.

I guess the real indicator of success will be non-SR4-core rulesbook sales.

Well, as once or twice mentioned in the Lament for Combat Pool thread, it might be possible to house rule a Combat Pool into SR4 that is very workable and close to the original. What it is derived from would be different (no more Int). A fixed size Combat Pool of 6-8 die or so (depending on the average number of rounds the system creates with an Initiative roll) available to everyone may be the simplest. At least at first until usuage of the system confirms the key balancing points of the system.

After that if the attributes are well balanced just averaging out all the stats to derive the Combat Pool, or staying with a fixed pool might be best. Also might have the dice be used for damage soak depending on what happens with the infamous Dodge.

I know it will likely be the second thing I look at when the details of the system come out. The first thing I'll look at is whether or not the gap left by getting rid of the Combat Pool is actually big enough to warrant it. :) If it is i bet Combat Pool will quickly become a very common SR4 house rule.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Apr 20 2005, 03:51 PM
Post #25


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



If you where going to house rule in a combat pool you would use Intuition in place of intelligence, and agility in place of quickness.

If you really want to that is.

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 5th December 2019 - 08:42 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.