 SR4 FAQ #5--The Real One, No, I don't know why I'm up this late |
  |
 May 13 2005, 12:42 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Tilting at Windmills  Group: Members Posts: 1,636 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Amarillo, TX, CAS Member No.: 388  |
The bastard would put that up on my wedding day, when I don't have the time or energy to participate. Monster! :) I'll be interested in seeing where this goes while I'm away. Try not to eat each other.
Oh, and Crimsondude? It's not that bad. I know you don't tend to take my word for it, nor should you, but I like the magic chapter (mostly; I do have a couple of issues to take up with the author in my copious unstructured free time...). Have fun, guys. See you in a week. |
 |
 
|
|
May 13 2005, 12:46 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 126 Joined: 17-April 05 Member No.: 7,341 |
I don't see what's bad if the new system is more simple (ie : dices) and more accurate...
But, this is not the thread to discuss of such a thing... |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 12:54 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
At least this FAQ told us something. Not, y'know, a lot; and nothing short of the finished product will be enough to satisfy this community (possibly not even then). I don't want to say that this FAQ was detailed, but at least it was less vague than some of the previous ones.
As for the streamlining issue, we tend to compare it to SR3 and say, "That's not streamlined, it's different here, and has more bits over here," but I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. I think to evaluate the "streamlining" we have to compare it to the rest of SR4, which we know nothing about. Now don't get me wrong, I'm as negative about the changes we've heard about SR4 as anyone. I don't like what I'm hearing about the direction, but if we're not going to like it, I just want to make sure we're not liking it for the right reasons. PenAgain: Bad comparison, IMO. With a switch to an att+skill system, rolling 8 dice in SR3 will be in no way comparable to rolling 8 dice in SR4. Saying that magic 6 plus skill 2 in SR4 is like having a skill of 8 in SR3 isn't valid. We know attributes aren't changing much (they're still on a 1-6 scale for humans), so I would expect skills to be on the same scale, which means we can expect roughly double-sized dice pools. 6 dice (total) for average ability, 12 dice for someone very skilled, and up around 20 dice for someone really amazing at something. Of course, we can't add any dice to this from our combat pool or spell pool anymore. Dang it, Grinder. Why'd you have to bring up combat pool and get me all pissed this morning. :P |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 01:03 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
How many folks have lamented that it's an entirely different game when you play a mage or a decker or a rigger in SR1~3? By re-designing the subsystem from the ground up you bring it in line with the new system. Less intensive cross-over training. The new folks coming into this down the road won't have to be told "learn the combat system first, then add X then Y then Z to your games as you have time to learn the other subsystems" I've seen advice like that on this board. It's sad and I think that's what the developers want to be rid of. With a more unified set of subsystems, you get much easier translation between them, and it becomes easier to balance them against one another. The Awakened at high end level of play are monstrous, partly due to the fact that 90% of all they do is covered in 2 skills, where the street sam or other mundane types have what, like 5 different ranged combat skills to make use of depending on the situation, plus the close combat stuff and other skills like stealth, etc. By splitting out the magic skills to be more in line with other work-horswe categories like driving and combat, yuo balanc ethe karmic sink-hole effect. I have a feeling that new techniques will become available as you increase yur magic attribute, that the magic attribute will no longer require 3 times the karma to increase, and that reduced expenditure is balanced by additional skills. If your Wiz-kid doesn't concern himself with conjuring anything, don't put much into that skill. This could also be the key to aspected and adepts in the new mechanics, but that may be reaching.
I can only hope that the decking subsystem is receiving a similair overhaul. With different skills coming to bear (along with a redesign of the Electronics and Electronics B/R skill useage). There should be more to your specialty than buying 1 or 2 skills and bamn you're the best there is until a new book comes out and you're rendered obsolete. |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 01:15 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Speaking of the opposite of good. Honestly, after having thought about this I think the answer to the psionics question should have been to just leave it out, mention in passing that there are some crackpots who think they've got powers but they're wrong. This is not GURPS, and magical traditions are slightly more world-defining than firearm creation. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 01:36 PM
Post
#31
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 749 Joined: 22-June 02 From: Parts Without Member No.: 2,897 |
Actually, I've got to disagree with you there, Kage. The nature of magic is world-defining, but the traditions that invoke it are not. At the risk of sounding slightly meta, the fact that all traditions will have to follow the same rules for magic means that there is one unified magical system at work in the SR universe (I feel dirty for saying that there is a relationship between a game mechanic and a game reality, but so it goes). What we've seen so far in the SR world is that there are all kinds of interpretations of the magical energy that pervades the 6th world. What every good hermetic in the game knows is that it doesn't matter what window-dressing (tradition) you throw onto your magic-- it's still the same basic magic. Having multiple traditions will make the SR world more vivid, more detailed, and more realistic. Guess what-- controlling the primal astral forces of the universe does make people crackpots who believe all kinds of things about how they weild their powers. Vive la difference. That's what I say. So long as magic cannot alter time, teleport matter, or ressurect the fallen, it's still SR magic to me. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 01:57 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
yeah. SR tried to embrace all real-world magical traditions and several they'd made up, but then cubbyhole them all into 'shaman' or 'hermetic'. it just didn't work--witness the arguments over christian hermeticism/shamanism.
|
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 02:22 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 23 Joined: 9-May 05 Member No.: 7,382 |
I like the idea of splitting up the skills, because that might be a good way to counter-balance the streamlining of the dice mechanics.
As in, we'll still have a very high degree of control when it comes to making our characters unique, even though the rules/mechanics are all more uniform. Hell, they may even find a way to incorporate some strategy into the gameplay, using such changes. The old rules pretty much needed the wildcard of extra pools, but maybe this system won't? (I don't pretend to forsee how.) I also like the idea of allowing for more control when it comes to traditions. To me, magical/spiritual traditions are more personal than gun design. Also, as mfb pointed out, the old system lead to some serious questions. That's a specific example of trying to add rules onto a system that didn't accomodate new rules, the way I look at it. In sum, this FAQ was encouraging, to me. They said more than I expected, and they did reveal their perspective/motives. Whether I agree or not, it's good to know that they think the magic rules were kind of slapped together with duct tape and chewing gum, and think they can de-Balkanize them. |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 02:28 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
Yeah, I don't think it's ever been the case that the magical traditions themselves have been world-defining. And where it has been tried, it has mostly failed. Instead, it's become increasingly visible in Shadowrun that the traditions themselves aren't defining (the guy who worships the prairie dog slings spells as well as the guy immersed in centuries of hermetic tradition), but that the magical organizations that back up one tradition or another are (which themselves are usually propped up by the lasting strength of a belief system). The guy worshipping the prairie dog can cast a spell as well as anyone, but prairie dog doesn't have the social weight of the Roman Catholic Church, the Illuminates of the New Dawn, the False Face Society, etc., etc.
|
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 02:29 PM
Post
#35
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
What he is likely talking about there is, for example, how as spells were added over editions and time that they started doing entirely different things with TNs, resistance, Force, etc. on a case by case basis. In a lot of ways out of nessasity, there was no extendable framework in place. The result is a grimore that is very patchwork and uneven. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 02:29 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 349 Joined: 16-January 05 Member No.: 6,984 |
And you can finally make that Toaster shaman one of the books mentioned in a shadowcomment. :P |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 02:47 PM
Post
#37
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Hmmm, looks like I'll need to ask for a refund from the Amazing Kreskin. He got the general topic right (magic). He even got a few of the questions pretty close (are there still mages and shamans), but the answers look a -bit- different. ;)
Hmm, if that means by taking skills i can do a bit in each the metamagic fields but not have the full power of them without gaining metamagic that is what i have most dearly wanted since i first read MitS. That idea seems to be supported by the list of skills. As Crimsondude pointed out the text certainly leaves the door open for more skills, if not outright implying there are more, perhaps Centering is no more? At least in any form resembling the current. I can't say I'll miss much it's clunkiness, but i liked the concept of special concentrating to give you an edge. :( I'm not sure how they'd get rid of Aura Reading, unless it is a specialization of a Perception skill?
Fire goooooood. :D EDIT: One thing he didn't mention keeping there was the choice of simultaneos casting. I hope that doesn't get lost. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 13 2005, 05:26 PM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 152 Joined: 24-October 04 Member No.: 6,785 |
Did we get any mention of Specializations in the SR4? They seem to be breaking a lot of skills down, but that could be because the're removing Specializations and making base skills cheaper.
I mean, 6 skills for sorcery and conjuring would be pretty expensive now, but maybe less so in 4th edition (Binding and Ritual Sorcery wouldn't be particularly missed during character creation, anyway). Removing specializations in favor a slightly longer skill list wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea, but I don't think they've mentioned removing them officially anywhere. |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 05:59 PM
Post
#39
|
|||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 41 Joined: 23-April 05 Member No.: 7,354 |
:| What kinda runs do you throw at a character with a Karma Pool in the 50-100 dice range? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 13 2005, 06:07 PM
Post
#40
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 669 Joined: 25-May 03 Member No.: 4,634 |
I guess I stand alone here, but IMO this FAQ qualifies as Really Good News to me. In fact, it's the best news I've heard in any of the FAQs so far. I won't say that bashing every new release of information has become a knee-jerk response for some, but it sure seems that way, and I was honestly quite surprised by all the negativity.
Not a big deal, so long as you get more "points" for skills at chargen (so to speak) than in SR3. Or maybe, as someone suggested, this will just encourage a bit more specialization, which could be good, I think.
Excellent. Well, maybe not that there won't be many in the core rules, but the fact that they're just upgrades for skills makes so much more sense to me. I don't see why some are so upset about Centering: I've long felt it cost far too much to get far too little. The obvious solution under this setup is that there is no Centering skill, you simply add an artistic skill to your pool when performing magical tasks (or something similar). Much more elegant, much more cost effective.
A slight bit woried about tradition creation rules, but so long as it's the GM's tool only, it should not be so bad (i.e., the GM can just opt to not use it at all, or only when it fits his/her purposes). I always hated the kludgey way traditions like voodoo, wujen, and path of the wheel got shoe-horned into the existing paradigm. At least such a system, if it's the basis for all tradition design, will allow such oddities to be integrated into the whole system instead of feeling like jellyfish thumb-tacked onto a bicycle. Which leads to the next point:
I honestly don't understand the confusion here. Look at things like voodoo and wujen and path of the wheel. Look at psionics. Look at the Idol system (a good, but flawed, idea IMO). Look at Anchoring, for chrissakes. It's hard to articulate in words the psychological cringe that overcame me when I read the rules for these systems. They were so haphazzard, they just felt thrown in. Why does voodoo get its own totems and spirits when every Native American tradition from the North Pole to Cape Horn gets lumped under the generic Shamanism? Why can't I, with Anchoring, make a bloody staff that shoots lighting bolts and can be used more than once and doesn't make the crafter of the staff feel drain whether he's actually the one using it or not? Am I really the only who sees what's being talked about here? Who has felt, or just intuitively known, how much the SR magic system, designed for a few specific roles, strained with every new addition trying to interpret one common theme of magic after another in terms of rules that were just never designed for that kind of expansion? The fact that the designers of SR4 have seen this and are actually taking steps (like their tradition designer and metamagic implementation, for example) to make a system that can grow and accomodate the new ideas is very encouraging. Now if only they'd mentioned something about adepts... |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
May 13 2005, 06:13 PM
Post
#41
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I see it. I'm all for stripping out most of the traditions, but not for adding new ones, and especially not for making it easy to add new ones. Though I must admit a certain fondness for vodoun, I think most of the rest of non-Hermetic, non-Shamanic traditions simply should not have gotten their own rules. As for the rest of it, it ranges from more of the same bad news to nothing terribly interesting, in my opinion. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 06:20 PM
Post
#42
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
Yeah, spells were added over editions. And subtracted. But you shouldn't have been using spells form the first edition rule book in a 3rd game. Not without tweaking them to the new rule set. The spells they wanted in the game were reprinted with each new rule set - 2nd, 3rd, etc. I still don't see it. And I agree, I think that when we see some mechanics on the decker, we'll see that the computer, electronic, and electronic b/r skill all broken up into sub skills. Sounds like we may see a skill list that is quite long. And streamlined of course ;) Sure, breaking skills up like the did makes sense from a realism stand point, but it will certainly complicate things a bit. I know! Lets help Fanpro think of a new name for this new game they are designing! **************************** And have a good day Patrick :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 06:25 PM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
Yeah, spells were added over editions. And subtracted. But you shouldn't have been using spells form the first edition rule book in a 3rd game. Not without tweaking them to the new rule set. The spells they wanted in the game were reprinted with each new rule set - 2nd, 3rd, etc. I still don't see it. And I agree, I think that when we see some mechanics on the decker, we'll see that the computer, electronic, and electronic b/r skill all broken up into sub skills. Sounds like we may see a skill list that is quite long. And streamlined of course ;) Sure, breaking skills up like the did makes sense from a realism stand point, but it will certainly complicate things a bit. I know! Lets help Fanpro think of a new name for this new game they are designing! **************************** And have a good day Patrick :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 13 2005, 06:26 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 226 Joined: 29-July 03 Member No.: 5,137 |
Overall, this FAQ was pretty good by me, and I agree with most of the ideas behind it. Later I'll go through the books and pull all the different things that use different or crappy systems in an attempt to work with the core magic mechanic, don't have time right now.
My thoughts on centering is that it would be purchased once as a Metamagic, and then you would use whichever magical skill you are applying it to at any given time as your roll for it, or possibly even just you magic attribute (though that seems less likely). |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 06:28 PM
Post
#45
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
Yeah, spells were added over editions. And subtracted. But you shouldn't have been using spells form the first edition rule book in a 3rd game. Not without tweaking them to the new rule set. The spells they wanted in the game were reprinted with each new rule set - 2nd, 3rd, etc. I still don't see it. And I agree, I think that when we see some mechanics on the decker, we'll see that the computer, electronic, and electronic b/r skill all broken up into sub skills. Sounds like we may see a skill list that is quite long. And streamlined of course ;) Sure, breaking skills up like the did makes sense from a realism stand point, but it will certainly complicate things a bit. I know! Lets help Fanpro think of a new name for this new game they are designing! **************************** And have a good day Patrick :) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 13 2005, 06:32 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
Well, I'm good with the multiple magical skill. Very good, in fact. It will allow more distinction between various mages. I like what they are saying about metamagic too, and the hint that we'll get some in the corebook.
Nice. The rest is just a verbose justification for the changes we'll see in the overall mechanics when SR4 finally ship. ;) I think the magic system was one of the best integrated subsystem but I'm not gonna complain about a thrust to standardize all mechanics. |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 06:41 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
I agree. The core of the magic subsystem was built into the game from the beginning, but is very different at times from just about anything else. With a new system designed to be expandable (and hopefully retractable) we can make the system work for our games.
This makes me hopeful about the changes to rigger/decker subsystems moreso than any other faq. |
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 06:42 PM
Post
#48
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
Yeah, spells were added over editions. And subtracted. But you shouldn't have been using spells form the first edition rule book in a 3rd game. Not without tweaking them to the new rule set. The spells they wanted in the game were reprinted with each new rule set - 2nd, 3rd, etc. I still don't see it. And I agree, I think that when we see some mechanics on the decker, we'll see that the computer, electronic, and electronic b/r skill all broken up into sub skills. Sounds like we may see a skill list that is quite long. And streamlined of course ;) Sure, breaking skills up like the did makes sense from a realism stand point, but it will certainly complicate things a bit. I know! Lets help Fanpro think of a new name for this new game they are designing! **************************** And have a good day Patrick :) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 13 2005, 06:45 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Are you reposting that same message over and over or is the board going mad?
|
|
|
|
|
May 13 2005, 06:58 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 279 Joined: 21-March 05 From: Freeport NY Member No.: 7,205 |
Alright, I'm officially sad.
I'm gonna keep it as brief as I can while I digest other material and wake up. I'm also going to use the usual point-buy system. Previous cost to make a fully-skilled, full magician: 30 for awakened, 6 for sorcery and 6 for conjuring. New cost-equivalents: Presumably also 30 to be awakened, considering it would be pointless to cheap it, and 6 in each of these skills: The Sorcery skills are Spellcasting, Ritual Spellcasting, and Counterspelling. The Conjuring skills are Summoning, Banishing, and Binding. 18 for sorcery and 18 for summoning. So unless they find some way to cheap this down, Mages have been completely gimped. 1: While other people can spend skills on useless stuff like stealth, I need a specific skill for my spellcasting. 2: Breaking up firearms made some sense, though not along the lines they did it. For game balance, it works because this way every 30 BP into nuyen street samurai has some limits on what they can pick up and kill you with. So right now I'm completely confused as to how game balance will be kept. I'm sure they'll find something, but consider this: if they are going to do what has been done with most out-of-the-book characters, who have in the area of 7-9 active skills (With some exceptions, granted), Mages will ONLY be able to do magic, PERIOD. This might be great for people who think wizards are overpowered, but consider this: Can riggers ONLY drive, needing seperate skills to drive a Sedan rather than an SUV? Can Deckers ONLY use computers, using seperate skills for reading and writing then for sleazing? And for you street-sam lovers, the firearms groupings are wrong alright, don't mistake me on this - but breaking it into long-arms, short arms and heavy arms (with maybe gunnery as another skill, maybe) is still one half the divisions that mages face (3 skills versus the new 6 to fully be what you do; shooting versus spellcasting.) So while I'm curious to see how this plays out, more and more I think for the mages in my group: We just started and we're in 2060, so we ain't converting for a long time anyway. Too bad, no SR4 for us. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 6th November 2025 - 05:14 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.