SR4 FAQ #5--The Real One - Dumpshock Forums

SR4 FAQ #5--The Real One, No, I don't know why I'm up this late

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*	May 14 2005, 12:37 AM Post #76
Guests	Ask their players.

Cynic project

May 14 2005, 12:39 AM

Post #77

Running Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 6-August 04
Member No.: 6,543

QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0)

QUOTE (apple @ May 13 2005, 02:55 AM)

QUOTE (chevalier_neon @ May 13 2005, 03:53 AM)

If I aml mistaken, well... :D

I would rather say, that, for example, if you have counterspelling, you can now add shilding possibilities to the skill.

But my question remains, where does Centering fit into all of this?

Is it a tertiary magical skill you should buy at chargen, or does it become an aspect of your magical skills? If so, and this would suck, do you have to purchase it for each skill? Does it even require a test anymore to use, or what?

Well, the way I see it it could go a few ways. One you don't need the skill centering. you just need the art skill that is linked to it. Such as singing, debating dancing or what not.

Or you could use centering like adepts, and just be thankful that they are least still giving you cake with your sodomy.

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*	May 14 2005, 12:56 AM Post #78
Guests	Well, I'd prefer not to have the sodomy in the first place though. I guess I'm just crazy like that.

Cynic project View Member Profile	May 14 2005, 01:02 AM Post #79
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,032 Joined: 6-August 04 Member No.: 6,543	But that is not what is at stake. What is at stake is if you get to have cake or not.

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*	May 14 2005, 03:09 AM Post #80
Guests	What kind of cake?

Kesh

May 14 2005, 06:26 AM

Post #81

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 293
Joined: 27-January 03
From: Kentucky, USA
Member No.: 3,958

QUOTE (SR4 FAQ @ Part Five)

Now to get back on track with SR4 FAQ updates. Here are a few answers regarding magic:

Ahh, been looking forward to this.

QUOTE

Q. Will Magic skills be broken up like firearms in SR3?
A. Magic is roughly divided into two categories for the core book, Sorcery and Conjuring. Rather than being skills of their own, however, those are general categories. The Sorcery skills are Spellcasting, Ritual Spellcasting, and Counterspelling. The Conjuring skills are Summoning, Banishing, and Binding. Those are the skills that do most of the heavy lifting for magic in SR4.

Works for me. I'm especially interested in that Ritual Spellcasting skill... perhaps we'll finally see ritual magic get a bit more attention than before.

QUOTE

Q. Will there still be Metamagic?
A. Yes, though it’s not exactly the same. Rather than relying on a host of new additional skills, we’ve redesigned metamagic techniques to grant new abilities to skills the magician should already have access to. Metamagic does not make a huge appearance in the core book, however. There just isn’t enough room to include it all.

Very interesting. I'm going to make a wild-ass assumption and say that metamagic like Centering or Geasa will simply add dice to whatever skill you're using when it's in effect.

QUOTE

Q. Do we still have Mages and Shamans?
A. Yes. In addition, however, a flexible tradition design system has been included, allowing players to model existing traditions easily, or even to create their own along with their GM. Both Hermetic and Shamanic traditions have been created for the main book and are included as the default choices.

Thank (insert deity here)! :D

QUOTE

Q. What are you trying to do with Magic?
A. In setting out to design this, we had a few things in mind that we wanted to do as improvements over the old system. First, we wanted to make sure we were laying the groundwork for something we could expand upon later. One of the big problems with the Magic system up until now is that it simply didn’t accomodate additions. It was built to be what it was, and if anything got added, it had to be an entirely new method of doing things. Nothing was ever built upon the existing mechanics, in large part because the original existing mechanics weren’t built to accomodate other uses. The result was a system that accumulated rules detritus like a ship gathers barnacles. That’s not good design.

A second problem was that, despite three editions of the game, Magic was largely still a legacy system (to borrow a bit of computer terminology). Instead of using things that worked and discarding things that didn’t, we largely had just kept it all and tried using tweaks and bailing wire to hold it all together. With SR4, we had the luxury of taking it apart, seeing what worked and what didn’t, and reassembling it into a working whole, with new parts to replace the missing ones or damaged ones. We also didn’t want the mechanics of the core game to work in a substantially different manner than Magic did, so we tried to find new ways to handle rules issues that before had given rise to special cases, created just for Magic. This is true of design all throughout the game, though, not just for the Magic system.

The third goal we had for design with this part of the game was to eliminate unnecessary complexity. We didn’t want to do away with the aspects of magic that gave the game its feel, like traditions, spirit summoning, drain, and so forth, but we did want to make sure we didn’t have a dozen different systems trying to accomplish what one could do. I think we went a long way toward accomplishing that.

Hmmm. I'll have to wait and see here, but I'm really liking what I see so far.

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*

May 14 2005, 06:35 AM

Post #82

Guests

QUOTE (Kesh @ May 14 2005, 12:26 AM)

Very interesting. I'm going to make a wild-ass assumption and say that metamagic like Centering or Geasa will simply add dice to whatever skill you're using when it's in effect.

Geasa? Oh, heh. Yeah. I forgot that some people don't just take the hit to magic, but have GMs who allow them take easily-circumvented impositions on their abilities to perform magic to be able to act at their full potential.

QUOTE (Kesh)

QUOTE

Q. What are you trying to do with Magic?
A. In setting out to design this, we had a few things in mind that we wanted to do as improvements over the old system. First, we wanted to make sure we were laying the groundwork for something we could expand upon later. One of the big problems with the Magic system up until now is that it simply didn’t accomodate additions. It was built to be what it was, and if anything got added, it had to be an entirely new method of doing things. Nothing was ever built upon the existing mechanics, in large part because the original existing mechanics weren’t built to accomodate other uses. The result was a system that accumulated rules detritus like a ship gathers barnacles. That’s not good design.

A second problem was that, despite three editions of the game, Magic was largely still a legacy system (to borrow a bit of computer terminology). Instead of using things that worked and discarding things that didn’t, we largely had just kept it all and tried using tweaks and bailing wire to hold it all together. With SR4, we had the luxury of taking it apart, seeing what worked and what didn’t, and reassembling it into a working whole, with new parts to replace the missing ones or damaged ones. We also didn’t want the mechanics of the core game to work in a substantially different manner than Magic did, so we tried to find new ways to handle rules issues that before had given rise to special cases, created just for Magic. This is true of design all throughout the game, though, not just for the Magic system.

The third goal we had for design with this part of the game was to eliminate unnecessary complexity. We didn’t want to do away with the aspects of magic that gave the game its feel, like traditions, spirit summoning, drain, and so forth, but we did want to make sure we didn’t have a dozen different systems trying to accomplish what one could do. I think we went a long way toward accomplishing that.

Hmmm. I'll have to wait and see here, but I'm really liking what I see so far.

Then could you translate it from crazy?

Demonseed Elite

May 14 2005, 11:07 AM

Post #83

Neophyte Runner

Group: Members
Posts: 2,078
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 67

QUOTE

Then could you translate it from crazy?

I can cite my own personal madness inspired by Shadowrun's magic system. Rob's right about it accumulating "rules detritus like a ship gathers barnacles." He's also right about the problems inherent in it being a "legacy system." I don't think I can even count the number of times, as a freelancer, I was driven to near madness trying to fit a regional belief system into Shadowrun's rigidly limited magic system. SR1, and due to legacy, SR2 and SR3 revolved around one interpretation of hermeticism (inspired by Western European tradition) and one interpretation of shamanism (inspired by Native American tradition). And they hardwired those two systems right into the rules. So anything that came after had to either fit into their two limited definitions of hermeticism/shamanism or it had to add systems. Many didn't fit very well, and so we added exceptions and systems for Voudoun, Wuxing, Wicca, etc. And with each one we added, the rules got more out of hand. New spirit types were added, new types of foci were added, new mechanics for summoning spirits were added, and so on. All because we couldn't fit what we wanted to do into what we were originally given and were forced to either shortchange the accuracy or add systems.

So if SR4 makes for a more flexible system right out of the gate, that would make me happy.

SirBedevere

May 14 2005, 11:16 AM

Post #84

Knight Templar

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 212
Joined: 20-June 04
From: Ipswich, UK Just South of the Stinkfens
Member No.: 6,424

QUOTE (Eldritch)

"The sky is falling, the sky is falling!"

No it isn't. The earth is rising! :D

blakkie

May 14 2005, 12:23 PM

Post #85

Dragon

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

QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0 @ May 13 2005, 06:37 PM)

Ask their players.

Huh? You are the one that knows the players. Do they post on DSF?

BTW all the massive Karama, pre-SR3 PCs i know retired some time back from active play. The only time they show up at the table they are unto NPC gods, nearly statless (although one, non-awakened, got roasted good when a trunkload of autocannon ammo and grenades cooked off).

Zen Shooter01 View Member Profile	May 14 2005, 03:58 PM Post #86
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042	I think what we've seen so far looks very interesting. One thing that's very popular in RPGs is "half magic" characters. A lot of players like characters who have a few magic tricks, but aren't 110% wizards. Look at the popularity of Fighter 1/Wizard 2, Rogue 3/Sorcerer 1 types in D&D. By making magic a purchasable attribute and splitting up the skills, a lot more possibilities open up for characters to dabble in magic. In SR thus far, it didn't make any sense to have "a little". Once you invested a huge chunk of points in just having a magic attribute, there was no sense in having low Sorcery and Conjuring. It's like spending a hundred grand putting up a house but then putting no furniture in it. With the new rules, you can buy as little or as much magic ability as you want. The complaint that this will make characters lower-powered at generation is totally absurd in light of the fact that we know character generation will be on a point-buy system. It will be the easiest thing in the world for GMs to raise or lower the number of points to their taste. And I think the designers do have the brains to anticipate that if they create an environment where a beginning character needs a higher number of skills, that character will need a higher number of build points to buy them. The relentless negativity of siezing every nugget of FAQ information and then using it to cast the vast unknown continent of SR4 in the worst possible light is no good to anyone. While we're all eager to read whatever previews the FAQ has to offer, we won't really know what's what until we have a new BBB before us.

Eldritch

May 14 2005, 06:46 PM

Post #87

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 19-August 02
Member No.: 3,139

QUOTE

One thing that's very popular in RPGs is "half magic" characters. A lot of players like characters who have a few magic tricks, but aren't 110% wizards. Look at the popularity of Fighter 1/Wizard 2, Rogue 3/Sorcerer 1 types in D&D.

Then play Urban Arcana. That's not SR, never has been. in the SR Setting magic was a rarity. Yeah as PC's in the world we see more of it than a regualr citizen. With what we are assuming; that with magic being bought in stages, maybe that'll mean you can have someone that dabbles in magic - magic will become much more common. Yeah, that will eventually happen anyway with the rise in mana levels, but not in just a few years, it should be taking hundreds of years.

QUOTE

The complaint that this will make characters lower-powered at generation is totally absurd in light of the fact that we know character generation will be on a point-buy system. It will be the easiest thing in the world for GMs to raise or lower the number of points to their taste. And I think the designers do have the brains to anticipate that if they create an environment where a beginning character needs a higher number of skills, that character will need a higher number of build points to buy them.

IF they make the point buy system completely linear then yes, You could set the points at what ever power level you want.
And IF they provide guidelines for differing campaing levels; ie 100 for the ganger/street level campaign, 200 for the professional level (Similar to what we have now) and 300 for the prime runner campaign.

It is a WAG, but everything points to them changing to a lower powered campaign. But we won't know till they either say something, or we get the book.

QUOTE

The relentless negativity of siezing every nugget of FAQ information and then using it to cast the vast unknown continent of SR4 in the worst possible light is no good to anyone. While we're all eager to read whatever previews the FAQ has to offer, we won't really know what's what until we have a new BBB before us

Well that just some of us speaking our peace, some of us are speaking positively about the change. It seems like 'reletless negativity' becuase those of us that oppose the changes presented to us seem to be in the majority. Those of you thta are positive about it either aren't posting, or aren't here :)

Ellery

May 14 2005, 06:54 PM

Post #88

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 778
Joined: 6-April 05
Member No.: 7,298

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

I don't think I can even count the number of times, as a freelancer, I was driven to near madness trying to fit a regional belief system into Shadowrun's rigidly limited magic system.

All right, I can see how that would be a problem for freelancers. Less so for players, though, as they less often come up with new regional belief systems and insist upon them being viable in SR. So I guess some of FAQ5 is comprehensible from the standpoint of a developer who doesn't want their rules to tie their hands.

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

Many didn't fit very well, and so we added exceptions and systems for Voudoun, Wuxing, Wicca, etc. And with each one we added, the rules got more out of hand.

Voudoun have totem bonuses and conjure as if they were conjuring nature spirits. They cast like everyone else. Wuxing--you mean Wujen, right?--summon spirits of the elements and use libraries and circles. Wicca are hermetic or shamanic as they see fit. That's it in terms of basic mechanics. How is that out of hand? Maybe it's not what the developers wanted, but as a player it's hardly out of hand.

There are new types of spirits with new powers. In this way, yes, different magical traditions do have some differences. If they're all the same, why even bother making the distinction? Just say, "This is a magician," and they can associate whatever regional flavor they want, which is completely meaningless except as flavor. That's pretty dull, and could be done even more than it was in SR3. No need to change everything. Just say, "They summon nature spirits and call them something else."

The problem comes only if you want a regional variant to have unique and different powers. And then you're really required to have different rules. So it's not as though you're going to get away from having different rules. If you can think of them all at the beginning, it's easier to find them, which is nice. But that's a matter of consolidation not "OMG, look at all the barnacles!". The rules won, in this case, and the added rules detritus was minimal (at the expense, perhaps, of the setting that the author really wanted to create).

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

New spirit types were added, new types of foci were added, new mechanics for summoning spirits were added, and so on.

Er, so you would prefer to have a system where every supplement was a piece of fiction only, and didn't introduce any new rules? That's not a very good business decision, if the profusion of D&D rulebooks is any indication.

So I'm still puzzled. My best guess is that the developers decided that they are tired of the magic setting they have devised for SR1-3, and want to revise the setting a lot. Don't forget: in SR1-3, most magicians were either hermetic or shamanic; one could summon elementals and bind them, while the other could summon nature spirits on the fly; one studied in libraries and the other in lodges; and you know, that was about it. If there are piles of viable traditions that warrant changing the basic mechanic to remove these distinctions, then it's a major change in the setting. I'm not saying this is bad, mind you. Its goodness or badness depends on how well it's implemented, both in fiction and in rules. But in that case the FAQ doesn't really explain why there is a change. I'd say instead:

"Over the years, many magical traditions have been added, and squeezed into the distinction of Hermetic and Shamanic magic, even when it's an awkward fit. We think we can better incorporate a wide range of magical traditions without the old emphasis on the Hermetic/Shamanic split. We've redesigned the magic rules so that each tradition, from Wicca to Voudoun to Druidic magic, can be as important as any other, using a common set of rules."

Something like this I could believe. I still don't see the barnacles.

QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)

The relentless negativity of siezing every nugget of FAQ information and then using it to cast the vast unknown continent of SR4 in the worst possible light is no good to anyone.

QUOTE (SR4 FAQ #5)

Nothing was ever built upon the existing mechanics, in large part because the original existing mechanics weren’t built to accomodate other uses. The result was a system that accumulated rules detritus like a ship gathers barnacles. That’s not good design.
. . .
Instead of using things that worked and discarding things that didn’t, we largely had just kept it all and tried using tweaks and bailing wire to hold it all together.

Well, maybe our negativity is spreading to the developers, or maybe it was always there, just unstated. I get the feeling, with all the changes, that the developers had some pretty negative things to say internally about SR3. So, you know, it's sort of fair game.

If SR3 is to be changed, expect squawking. If it is to be changed to something that seems, on its face, to have serious problems or to remove aspects of the game that some people dearly love, expect a lot of squawking. People make a fuss when things change, but they make a much bigger fuss when they change in ways they don't like. It's a good idea to be aware of what they dislike, especially if you want to keep them as customers. The customer doesn't always know what he or she wants, but not paying attention is never a good idea.

blakkie

May 14 2005, 09:41 PM

Post #89

Dragon

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

QUOTE (Ellery @ May 14 2005, 12:54 PM)

QUOTE (Demonseed Elite)

New spirit types were added, new types of foci were added, new mechanics for summoning spirits were added, and so on.

Er, so you would prefer to have a system where every supplement was a piece of fiction only, and didn't introduce any new rules? That's not a very good business decision, if the profusion of D&D rulebooks is any indication.

Actually many of the D&D books add scant few rules. Mostly just ficiton and items that fit within the existing rules. There are the campaign books that add some more rules stuff, but even then mostly add items that fit within the existing rules (Green Ronin's Freeport is an example of that).

Then there are books that are more akin to rules replacements. They are built to contruct a divergent, sometimes very different world. The SR equivalent would be moving completely outside the current SR timeline, planet, etc. You need a huge customer base to support something like that, larger than SR is likely to see anytime soon.

The problem SR is going to run into, and has run into, trying to duplicate that is that the modern world is relatively well known to the players. So players overall tend to notice things that are not as they are IRL more. To help suspend belief the you can try tend to try model it closer. But doing that usually has the requirement of making more one-of rules.

Zen Shooter01 View Member Profile	May 14 2005, 09:44 PM Post #90
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042	I'm not denying people the right to have opinions. I'm saying, wait to have an opinion on the product until you have actually seen the whole product. You can't judge a car by the fuel injector alone. Don't start weeping and wailing over what merely "seems". And people are assuming that everything's going to be done badly. If the FAQ says, "point-buy chargen", posters immediately ask, "But is it going to be a slidable scale?" Of course it is. Slidable scale is one of the strongest advantages of a point-buy system. It's like someone saying, "We're building you a house," and you answering with, "Will it have a roof?" I'm not sure if this major overhaul was necessary or good. I'll only be sure once I have the SR4 BBB, and probably the first three supplements, as well. (Has anyone else noticed that Street Magic will get abbreviated here to SM? In this relationship, between FanPro and us, who's the top? ;) )

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*

May 14 2005, 09:44 PM

Post #91

Guests

And some customers know exactly what they want.

I'm sorry DE, but I'm not buying it. Of course, neither do I particularly concern myself with whether a new Tradition requires new rules. It has been my perspective that new rulesets for each new Tradition is a good thing (e.g., the SR2 Voudoun rules) as it makes a more clear distinction between them. Making the Traditions virtually indistiguishable in terms of rules mechanics, which is a wost-case scenario, is to me like ripping the heart out of the whole point of Traditions.

Zen... I'm being hard on SR4 because it does not do anyone any good to not be while the game is still in development and then when it is released someone realizes that, hey, maybe this wasn't a good idea. Shame someone never mentioned it before. I'm also being hard on SR4 because it is going to be a different game from my SR, which is just a little disconcerting.

QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)

And people are assuming that everything's going to be done badly. If the FAQ says, "point-buy chargen", posters immediately ask, "But is it going to be a slidable scale?" Of course it is. Slidable scale is one of the strongest advantages of a point-buy system. It's like someone saying, "We're building you a house," and you answering with, "Will it have a roof?"

Never assume anything.

If a contractor's building my house, goddammit I am going to make sure that he puts the roof on and not take it on some assumption that he will.

I'm not assuming anything about SR4, but it would be irresponsible of me not to point out holes, omissions, innuendo, and questions that arise from the FAQs.

Penta

May 14 2005, 09:56 PM

Post #92

Shooting Target

Group: Members
Posts: 1,978
Joined: 26-February 02
From: New Jersey, USA
Member No.: 500

QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)

(Has anyone else noticed that Street Magic will get abbreviated here to SM? In this relationship, between FanPro and us, who's the top? ;) )

I try not to imagine my gaming in a sexual frame.

I really try not to.

Eldritch

May 14 2005, 11:22 PM

Post #93

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 19-August 02
Member No.: 3,139

QUOTE

I'm not denying people the right to have opinions. I'm saying, wait to have an opinion on the product until you have actually seen the whole product. You can't judge a car by the fuel injector alone. Don't start weeping and wailing over what merely "seems".

But if you've seen the fuel injector, and you know somwthig about fuel injectors, then yeah, you can make a judgement call about the car.

If you see that the injector is the wrong size for the car, is not shaped quite right, and/or built buy a third world company that has a history of shoddy workmanship - then yeah, you can assume that there will be some problems with the rest car.

The same is true for the game. I have seen very little I like - neverminding the fact that I hated the idea of SR4 in the first place - the system mechanics and setting changes they are showing us is just awful.

blakkie

May 14 2005, 11:24 PM

Post #94

Dragon

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

QUOTE (Eldritch @ May 14 2005, 05:22 PM)

If you see that the injector is the wrong size for the car, is not shaped quite right, and/or built buy a third world company that has a history of shoddy workmanship - then yeah, you can assume that there will be some problems with the rest car.

To ride the metaphor into the dirt......a lot of what i see is people commenting on the appropriateness of the fuel injector in the wrong context. They are trying to put the new fuel injector in the old car and screaming that it doesn't fit.

QUOTE

The same is true for the game. I have seen very little I like - neverminding the fact that I hated the idea of SR4 in the first place - the system mechanics and setting changes they are showing us is just awful.

Just an aside, given your strong prejudice against SR4 if i was the developer i'd be inclined to put less weight into what you have to say. Not totally ignore, but since you are likely to be a total stalwart you take yourself right out of the market.

Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*	May 14 2005, 11:26 PM Post #95
Guests	Actually they're trying to install a new engine into an old car. So if the injector's messed up, what does that say for the rest of the engine?

blakkie

May 14 2005, 11:30 PM

Post #96

Dragon

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

QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0)

Actually they're trying to install a new engine into an old car. So if the injector's messed up, what does that say for the rest of the engine?

It's messed up in what way? It doesn't fit in the old engine?

Tonight @ 9: When Metaphors Attack!!!

Eldritch

May 14 2005, 11:33 PM

Post #97

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 511
Joined: 19-August 02
Member No.: 3,139

QUOTE

Just an aside, given your strong prejudice against SR4 if i was the developer i'd be inclined to put less weight into what you have to say. Not totally ignore, but since you are likely to be a total stalwart you take yourself right out of the market.

:) Trust me, I'm well aware of that fact.

I've been a SR fan since it came out of the warehouse. I've read all the novels and played a lot in the last 15 or so years. I'll continue to reead the books, but it is unlikely that I will change to this new game they are making.

Instead of calling it SR4, it should be Shadowrun II, First Edition. Becuase that is what it looks like we are getting.

blakkie

May 14 2005, 11:46 PM

Post #98

Dragon

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

QUOTE (Eldritch)

Instead of calling it SR4, it should be Shadowrun II, First Edition. Becuase that is what it looks like we are getting.

That's sort of what I'm hoping for. It'll still be Shadowrun, but with enough improvement to the rules to make it worthwhile buying new books. ;)

Kesh

May 15 2005, 06:25 AM

Post #99

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 293
Joined: 27-January 03
From: Kentucky, USA
Member No.: 3,958

QUOTE (Eldritch)

Instead of calling it SR4, it should be Shadowrun II, First Edition. Becuase that is what it looks like we are getting.

Shadowrun: Reloaded? ;)

Bandwidthoracle View Member Profile	May 15 2005, 09:29 PM Post #100
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 338 Joined: 17-September 04 From: Pueblo Sector of Denver Member No.: 6,672	I love what they are doing to shadowrun, the more I read the more I like… Although at this point I'm tempted to start yelling "Get out of my head". My players and I where talking about how some of the attributes needed to be broken up, and how the magic skills needed a major change since SoTA:2064 came out.

« Next Oldest · Shadowrun · Next Newest »