More news of Origins, yeah..I saw the good stuff |
More news of Origins, yeah..I saw the good stuff |
Jul 15 2005, 08:13 PM
Post
#251
|
|||||||
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
You didn't even get to "fix" him? He just dropped one day because the universe shifted to the left? |
||||||
|
|||||||
Jul 15 2005, 10:27 PM
Post
#252
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i, uh... yeah. my gm and i would have had a talk.
|
|
|
Jul 15 2005, 11:57 PM
Post
#253
|
|||||||||
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Well, how would you fix something like that? Keep in mind that the character may have been played online (or similar environment) where one just can not bend the rules to accomodate one player because it would give them an advantage over all the other characters. [edit] I guess one fix is to let them play cyberzombies. [/edit] I have had several characters become obsolete because of rule changes, or just plain screwed over. Like a magician who got mnemonic enhancer installed the session before it got toned way the hell down. Btw, it is kind of humorous to me that they are changing bio index to essence. When Shadowtech first introduced bioware, I (and the group) treated bio index as essence loss. Skipped right over a few rules. :P |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
Jul 16 2005, 12:22 AM
Post
#254
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
it's a rules change. even on shadowland, we accomodate rules changes in ways that don't overly screw a character. if they change the rules in a way that would make your character drop dead, no online community in its right mind would not allow you to remove enough cyber/bioware to make him a viable character again. i mean, jeesh, that's harsh.
|
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 12:36 AM
Post
#255
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Ok, that is a solution, and I suppose they get all the costs back, too. But what if the character needs every bit of augmentation for the concept and maybe to be worth a damn? Like the mnemonic enhancer thing, it did not hurt my character, but it sure did suck and if the ruling had occurred prior to my character getting that piece of 'ware, he would not have gotten it. The GM thought it was kind of funny. I thought it sucked, but my character was like, "Hmm, this thing doesn't work near as good as I heard it did."
|
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 12:58 AM
Post
#256
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 407 Joined: 22-March 04 Member No.: 6,183 |
In my game, tisoz, I would have given you the option to not have it installed. That type of cirucmstance was outside the game, due to a rules change, so I wouldn't make your character be stuck with it.
As to rules changes screwing over characters, we as a group vote on what errata we use. We do it as a group because of stuff like tisoz's situation. I might not care about a new ruling for Mnemonic enhancer, but a player who has one most likely will. @ Topic: (kinda) I think that with the combination of Bio Index and Essence, a few of my characters might just have to retire. That's one mechanic (among many) that I'm very interested in seeing. |
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 01:59 AM
Post
#257
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
I'm really curious about how the conversion rules will work. I mean, I got a decker with a computer skill of 6, and an Int of 5.
Do I have to split my 6 computer skill points among the new computer skills group that Computer got split into? That would make my character less than what he was. Get 6 in each new computer skill? That doesn't sound right. And Int. Do I get 5 points in each of the skills int was split up into? Or do I get to split them up - once again, severly weakening my orginal character.. Not that I plan on using the conversion rules, I'm just wondering how they will execute them. |
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 02:08 AM
Post
#258
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Mfb I just played an ork adept next... new campaign began with 3rd ed so it was easier.... Then I played a wierd shaman (Jaguar totem... except in his mind the totem was the car, not the animal)
|
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 03:44 AM
Post
#259
|
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
No sane and/or decent GM in the world wouldn't give characters a chance to update themselves to match a new rules-set. If "Man and Machine II: OMG So Much Chrome!" were to come out tomorrow, and in addition to adding a bunch of new stuff it doubled the Essence costs of every existing piece of cyberware, people would get the chance to have stuff pulled out of them instead of having their characters spontaneously combust.
It's like with Program Carriers, from 1st Edition. They ruled that using them gave characters cancer (or something similarly lame), in order to make that piece of chrome no longer available, so they could sort of "make room" for Otaku (not wanting normal deckers to be able to jack in without a deck any more). I don't think very many GMs went "Oh, hah hah! Your old decker has Program Carriers! Now he has cancer! Now he's dead! And so is Dodger, and Fastjack, and your mom!" I'd say most GMs just went "Huh. Oh well. That piece of chrome isn't available any more. We'll pretend you never had it, or you can get something else instead with that Essence, or something. Edition changes suck, sometimes, huh?" I mean, if your GM is such a jackass that he doesn't give his players at least the option to update/evolve a character to keep up with a rules change, he doesn't deserve to have very many players. |
|
|
Jul 16 2005, 03:52 AM
Post
#260
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
seriously. what about all the 2nd edition mages who used un-nerfed anchoring to complete their runs and survive ambushes? do they suddenly die because the drain they should have taken at activation would have imposed enough wound penalties to get them killed? what about the deckers with rating 1 datajacks--do they suddenly gain hundreds of thousands of nuyen because they would have been able to complete their runs faster with SR3 datajacks? killing a character because the edition change screwed them over is just silly.
i mean, okay, if you decide you don't want to play the same char in the new edition, great. your choice, and all. but i'm just saying, if someone's GM forced the issue by using an edition change as a weapon, the GM ought to be dragged out and shot. preferably with a 1st-edition rocket ripple. |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 02:48 AM
Post
#261
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 98 Joined: 26-July 05 Member No.: 7,517 |
Yay! Be astounded as I lob in my two-cent grenade! As my current focus is on Magic, I'll comment on that, chiefly.
You no longer have to buy spells at a specific force: Yay! Jack up the cost however much you like, I don't care. I always thought this mechanic seemed a bit...mechanical, anyhow. And I didn't like how a lot of spells had no reason to be bought beyond a certain force. It was also bloody annoying that you had to keep paying for the same spell you've had since forever rather than getting newer, wizzier spells. Also, I disliked how it made it brain-dead to get anything but force 6 good spells at the beginning, since getting them at 6 increased the amount of time until you had to upgrade. Feelings: Positive. Magic starts below 6 and must be bought up Yay! It's possible to make characters who are not all that great at magic but who still have it. Boo! I'm worried about too many players "splashing" a bit of magic ability for some utility. I like this change if and only if they prevent every bloody character having magic because it's no longer such an investment. Feelings: Guarded Hermetic Mages and Shamans can now each Bind or Spontaneously Summon Yay! Mages can summon on the fly! Boo! I feel less distinction between myself and shamans now, something that I treasure. I always liked that there were small but vital differences in the way these two traditions worked. It was a simple choice: If you wanted an on-the-fly ace-in-the-hole, be a shaman. If you wanted a more tactical game where you planned ahead and worked out contingencies ahead of time, you played a mage. I'm really going to miss that. Feeling: Cautiously optimistic, but worried Drain seems more likely to affect you Boo! As a mage I enjoy being able to cast for long periods of time so long as I am more judicious with the power level of my spells. So long as I can still resist the occasional damage level S-equivalent spell, I'll be happy. If casting things with an M causes even light fatigue to a dedicated, well-played mage then I'll probably be switching to a sammie. Not that I mind, I enjoy playing everything. Feeling: Really Quite Worried If there's one thing I really, REALLY hope they fix about mages, it's to nerf the hell out of Foci of all kinds. In my opinion, they are ridiculously, game imbalancingly powerful, and I feel dirty and used any time I make use of them. I mean really, who needs these things to be so powerful? I've never, ever felt that I needed them to be successful (except the occasional sustaining focus or spirit focus.) I wish they would make it such that you could only have one of each type bonded to you at any given time, and that the total force of all foci bonded to you at a time could not exceed, say Int or int x 1.5. I feel more than capable without them, so I really hope they tone them down a bit. Off-Base Rant: And who says that a mage wouldn't buy smartlink + whatever even if it cost .01 essence? :) My current mage (former bodyguard) has cybereyes, a smartlink, and several pieces of bioware (Total cost < 1 Essence) and I'd pit him against a mage with magic 1 higher any day of any week you can imagine. Even this small bit of cyberware has opened tactical possibilities impossible to most mages. I'm seriously questioning if I'll ever play a non-cybered Awakened character again. OSUMacbeth |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 07:24 AM
Post
#262
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
The ability to cast force 6 spells was important in SR3, but won't be with the new mechanic, so the penalty for starting mages to take cyberware will go down. If you combine that with presumably cheaper costs to get partial magical ability, I'd expect to see many more mages with a bit of cyber, or street sams with a bit of magic.
If foci stay powerful, then maybe you'll still be able to cast a M-drain spell without taking stun. Perhaps you shouldn't wish for them to be toned down! I don't quite understand why you're cautiously optimistic about the merging of mage and shaman summoning. Your comments are almost entirely negative. Is the "woo, new toys!" factor big enough to offset all the disadvantages of having new toys (i.e. that the richness of subtle distinctions is gone)? Or might you better be characterized as tentatively pessimistic, but still openminded on that one? |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 07:42 AM
Post
#263
|
|||||
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
And you'd be jumping to conclusions on both counts. I have no idea where you're getting the "ability to cast force 6 spells was important in SR3, but won't be with the new mechanic" but its just plain wrong. At the very least if the average Att is now 3 and Magic is treated as a normal Attribute then Force 6 is the highest Force a "typical" mage will be capable of casting and he will be taking Physical Drain for exceeding his Magic. Regardless there are also such relevant facts as: it has been suggested that Drain might be harder to resist, how Drain is calculated, and you don't know how Force/hits/successes factor into spells, etc. Regarding mages and cyber in general, until you know how Essence and Magic relate under the new rules - comments at Origins suggest they function just like they always did - you're assuming way too much. While it may be cheaper to pick up "partial magical ability" it might prove useless to a wired magician depending on how Essence (and Bioware which now costs Essence) factors in.
You're right here. Foci will still be a vital component of a mage's arsenal just like a gun is to a sammy. With the new system their bonding costs and prices will probably be adjusted to reflect the new system's balance, but I figure they'll be as important as ever if not more. |
||||
|
|||||
Jul 27 2005, 10:24 AM
Post
#264
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 527 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,118 |
Well, I hope at least one of the conclusion she's jumping to is valid, regarding cyberware and partial magical ability.
If characters with reduced Essence need to buy multiple points of magic in order to have any magic rating at all (i.e. a character with 4.5 Essence needs to buy Magic up to 3 in character creation in order to get Magic 1 in play), then... eh, it's a design choice, but it's not a design choice I would make. I hope that magical ability in minor amounts, even with cyberware, is relatively easy to get. The alternative, as outlined above, just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The idea that I liked the best would be to have a character's Essence impact their maximum magic, not their current magic. It's a crude oversimplification to suggest they function as they always did. Magic does not function as it used to, so nothing related to it can "function as it always did". If my above example is correct, but magic burns out at 0 "like it always did", does that mean that characters with Essence lower than 6 cannot ever Awaken later in life, as they will Awaken, automatically assess the Essence reduction to their new Magic rating of 1, and burn out instantly? Does having Magic directly linked to Essence, given Magic's new maximum rating of 6, result in Magic working as it always did? I think that there are too many changes in the basic attribute mechanics of magic, and dice mechanics of the magic rules, to think that preserving certain outward functions that were existent in SR1-SR3 in an eye of keeping things the same will actually result in the same system behavior. The system's different, and if you want the same (or similar, "the same" is virtually unachievable) behavior, it's probably going to require a lot of mechanical dissimilarity between editions. |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 01:07 PM
Post
#265
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 109 Joined: 26-April 05 Member No.: 7,360 |
I have to say that for me that spells M U N C H K I N like nothing else. If a character can have three essence points of cyber/bioware and then purchase a few points of magic with no alteration in the cost for those magic points then why would anyone go for a mundane character? Sure the mundane has three aditional points of essence to play with but the powers of magic would more than balance that out, and even if the characters essence limits the maximum of their magic attribute foci can counteract that drawback. I don't mind magical ability with cyberware as long as there are obvious and truly limiting drawbacks for doing so. Only if the SR4 rules have some serious power limitations based on a character's magic attribute would I consider changing my position, and I'm not sure I would want that kind of power cap. |
||
|
|||
Jul 27 2005, 01:11 PM
Post
#266
|
|||||
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
I hate using foci, or rather, it always seemed to me to be more appropriate to expect the shit to hit the fan if the foci came out, or for the foci to come out once excrement encountered the air-moving appliance. |
||||
|
|||||
Jul 27 2005, 02:35 PM
Post
#267
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,925 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 948 |
uuhm, ok, so according to Bull we have a condition monitor that is 8+1/2 BOD for physical and 8+1/2 WIL for mental, fine, now, here's my little question.
If you get a +1 modifier for every 3 boxes of damage it will get a bit confusing when we compare a normal human and say a Troll with a body of 16 (yes, excessive but I just use it to get my point across.) Human: 10 Boxes Troll: 16 Boxes Human: 9 boxes of damage= +3 / 12 boxes of damage= overdamage and unconcious Troll: as above but when taking 12 boxes of damage is a +4 modifier and if they take 15 boxes of damage (as with the human 1 box of damage from unconcious) they have a +5 modifier. Percentage wise they have basically taken the same amount of damage to their body but the troll has a harder time of doing anything worthwhile whilst the human has an easier way with "only" a +3 modifier? |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 03:17 PM
Post
#268
|
|||
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Flawed logic: percentage wise they have not taken the same amount of damage. At 12 boxes the human has taken proportionately (a higher percentage) more damage to his total Body than the troll (human = 100% / troll=75%). While they have taken the same amount of damage (number of boxes) to their bodies, the troll has the ability (just like any higher Body character/critter's ability) to take more overall damage, because it is bigger, tougher and there's just more to damage (always bugged me no end that the difference between an elephant and a tiger was just five Body dice to reduce Damage). The point is that at 12 boxes of damage the human is dead, while at 12 boxes the troll will be still standing and operating at +4 (or -4 to be perfectly correct). |
||
|
|||
Jul 27 2005, 03:35 PM
Post
#269
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
The fact that a Troll can have taken less damage than a human in wound boxes/total boxes but have more penalties really sticks in my craw.
~J |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 03:49 PM
Post
#270
|
|||
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
How'd you figure that? The mechanic is -1 for every 3 boxes of Damage. Penalties are identical all the way up to the point where a troll has more boxes than a human. 5 boxes will still be -2 whether your a human or a troll. 9 boxes still means -3 for both. At 10 boxes an average human (Bod 3) is dead or unconcious and the troll is at -3... |
||
|
|||
Jul 27 2005, 03:54 PM
Post
#271
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Human, 8 boxes out of 10 boxes: -2.
Troll, 12 boxes out of 15 boxes: -4. Wound boxes/total boxes: .8 in each case. I pulled the Troll's maximum boxes out of my arse, but it's the same for 12 boxes: 9 boxes out of 12 is -3, but is less of the total condition monitor than 8/10. ~J |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 04:00 PM
Post
#272
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
In my opinion, a strong troll with 75% of its damage boxes full (12 of 16, using the example above) should function the same as a weak human with 75% of its damage boxes full (8 of 10). Instead, the weak human is only mildly impared, while the troll is barely walking.
|
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 04:02 PM
Post
#273
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 126 Joined: 17-April 05 Member No.: 7,341 |
Yes... but remember that the Troll has got more strength and body than a human. SO even with a -3 or -4, he won't suffer too much...
|
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 04:03 PM
Post
#274
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 19-August 02 Member No.: 3,139 |
Once again, I'm no math wiz, but I think I see where they are coming from:
Human 9 boxes Troll 15 boxes. they both take 3 boxes of damage. For the human, that's one third of his total, and he's +1 now. For the troll, thats one fifth of his total, and he's at +1 as well. The troll has taken less over all damage - when comparied to his total - than the human, but has the same negative modifiers. Now let's take it to 6 boxes. The humans is over half way to dead, with a +2 modifier. The troll is less than half way, he is also at +2. Yeah, they've taken the same amount of damage, but not when compared to the entire condition monitor. That human, at 8 boxes is a shot up, quivering mass of blood- with what, over 90% damage?. That troll should still be able to function - he's only a little over 50% damaged. |
|
|
Jul 27 2005, 04:05 PM
Post
#275
|
|||||||
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
If that's what you meant your post should have read:
As is my answer stands. He's taken just as much damage, he just keeps going longer. Even if you had noted that it was less damage proportionately to total body, you'd still have to agree that the total amount of damage being soaked is still higher on a troll. To introduce proportional modifiers would complicate rather than streamline the system and this way the system reflects that the troll's (or high Body individual/critter) not any less damaged, he just has more innate toughness to keep him going after a human would go down (which is in keeping with the fact that the damage tracks reflect the amount of damage you can take, not how well you resist damage or its effects - the function of the Body/Damage Resistance roll) |
||||||
|
|||||||
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th November 2024 - 12:33 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.