IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> SR4.5?, scary thought, but better perhaps?
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 08:38 AM
Post #1


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



Every time I turn around on these boards, I see something else that someone doesn't like about the mechanics of SR4 , be it skill caps, the technomancer and how they work, the strength of spirts, on and on. It seems that everything is rule based, and that these are the sorts of things that could have been ironed out with a little more time and care. Am I off base on this? I don't have the book yet (he keeps telling me next Friday!), so I'm not talking from my personal view point, jsut what I have seen thus far.

So I'm sitting here wondering if this could possibly go the way of D&D. They realized that some of the rules they left in with their new edition just didn't work right, and sold a revamped version. Anyone think that this is likely? Or would they possibly revise such weird things as the strength of spirits in Errata? Are spirits supposed to be that powerful !? (Sorry off topic)

I know at some point Adam or Bull or someone is going to say "no, there are no plans for a SR4.5", but there weren't any plans for a SR4 for the longest time either. ANd then there it was. Thoughts?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Sep 14 2005, 08:57 AM
Post #2


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



Seriously, I doubt that:
The 'Errata' on M&M showed that if FP sees fit, they have no problem to revamp rules completely between print runs of the same version.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 09:01 AM
Post #3


Dragon
********

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



The things that would fit into a 3 to 3.5 type transition are relatively few among issues people are talking about here.

Remember that 3 and 3.5 can be played nearly seamlessly side-by-side, outside of a few Feats that changed requirements, functioning, or disappeared, characters were virtually untouched. A good number of things here that people are discussing are deeper changes than that. Some like your spirit example can be errataed if they want to.

EDIT: Plus what Rotbart said, only i think/hope they would be a bit more conservative with limits on changes to the BBB.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 09:07 AM
Post #4


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



Part of me hopes that they woulnd't. Part hopes they would. Perhaps I'll see more clearly when I have it in fromt of me. But I hate major errata changes. Really, what are they gonna do, issue a book of revisions, and call it the "Epic Runners handbook"? Then use that to have the option of no skill caps? I dunno, I'm dissillusioned at the momnet I think, Thanks for the feedback.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Sep 14 2005, 09:30 AM
Post #5


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



The way the system is defined does not allow to remove those caps without removing the definitions in the first place.

And a supplement that redefines the main book is, well, ungood.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirBedevere
post Sep 14 2005, 09:39 AM
Post #6


Knight Templar
**

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



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
The way the system is defined does not allow to remove those caps without removing the definitions in the first place.

And a supplement that redefines the main book ist, well, ungood.

Double plus ungood :cyber:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 09:42 AM
Post #7


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



I agree, which is why I was wondering whether they would issue an 'apology edition', much like D&D3.5 and the last Highlander, or if they would just take the mess and run with it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Sep 14 2005, 09:53 AM
Post #8


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



The latter, I presume... for some factors:
First of all, they couldn't afford it - neither money-, nor image- wise.
Second, in fact SR4 is more 'concise' than 'messy', so the subjective need of in-depth-change is limited to a minority, judging even from the polls... and thus wouldn't pay off.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 10:30 AM
Post #9


Dragon
********

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



The stat caps can be entirely a non-issue for Fanpro, if they want it to be. From a marketing/costs POV i can't see them putting out something other than a optional sidebar in one of the books.

There is already a mechanism readily in place for raising the cap [at a heineous karma cost]. Allowing post chargen purchase of multiple Exceptional Attributes, and allowing them to stack up until reaching the highest metahuman natural maximum. So 10 Bod, 8 Agil, 7 Will, and so on. There aren't that many Attribute_A+Attribute_B tests, and the most common of casting drain would only end up at most 2 die higher than current max.

EDIT: Actually, i guess the highest metahuman natural maxes are Bod(11), Agil(9), Will( 8 ), because they can normally stack an Exceptional Attribute on top. Also allow 2 Luckys total for non-humans, and the 1 Lucky normally allowed for a Human.

EDIT2: Will( 8 )+Cha(9) is actually 2 higher than current max, changed above to reflect.

Then also allow buying up all the natural skill limits by 1 via that Quality (with an increase in natural skill raising the max skill from 9 to 10, this is not clearly stated in the rules, but have it happen). All resulting Attribute+Skill pools would then all sit within the range that they currently can reach, although a given character would be able to hit all the maximums instead of only one of them.

That extention would sink hundreds of points in karma. The PC would still grow stats ever-so-slowly, and Mages (and maybe Technos and Adepts) might still be dropping karma into Magic/Resonance instead, but the option would be there.

Now whether this would work or not? *shrug* But it does seem to hold some possibility since it utilizes and should fit inside the existing architecture.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 10:46 AM
Post #10


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



wow blakkie, a post without an ounce of sarcasm. Just wow.

Thanks, that was pretty much what I as looking for on at least one issue. Even if it is an atrocious amount on karma to throw in, I would like some way for PC's to progress beyond 6. That helps. My biggest beef I guess is that it's still sams-stop-here where magic-types technically have unlimited advancement. But thank you, that was very helpful. cookie for you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 10:49 AM
Post #11


Dragon
********

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



QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0 @ Sep 14 2005, 04:46 AM)
wow blakkie, a post without an ounce of sarcasm. Just wow.

Too bad you couldn't manage to string it into a 2 posting streak, we could have tied the DSF record. :( ;)

P.S. I owe it all to mom, the academy, and the fact there weren't any tards around that needed a kick in the ass.

EDIT: The real kicker? I had already posted about that a couple of times here, just not quite as much detail.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 11:09 AM
Post #12


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



you forgot God. Even gangsta-or'zet-rappers thank God.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 11:12 AM
Post #13


Dragon
********

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



QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0)
you forgot God. Even gangsta-or'zet-rappers thank God.

Oh ya, her too. 8)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightmareX
post Sep 14 2005, 11:18 AM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 831
Joined: 5-September 05
From: LAX, UCAS
Member No.: 7,687



Actually, I would have no problem with SR4 if they came out with another Companion that included a bunch of optional rules for tweaking the system to an individual's taste (ala Unearthed Arcana).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Sep 14 2005, 11:20 AM
Post #15


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



To some extent, the even did that in the main book?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 11:22 AM
Post #16


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



QUOTE (blakkie)

EDIT: The real kicker? I had already posted about that a couple of times here, just not quite as much detail.

try wading through all the pages and pages of gripes some time and see if you can find something coherent. It's that "as much detail" that makes it worth while. This whole SR4 thread thing needs to be ...... condensed... even.... streamlined... ;)

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 11:27 AM
Post #17


Dragon
********

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



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
To some extent, the even did that in the main book?

There certainly are pile of sidebar suggestions in there for how the GM can adjust game feel, especially in the combat section.

Even in the rules themselves there is a lot of stuff that is suggested as a possible way to do something. Not just Edge, but things like how many Extended Test rolls are allowed. They suggest that there be a limit, an suggest that it be the number of dice in the dice pool. But i doesn't come out and say you must do this or use that number.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 11:29 AM
Post #18


Dragon
********

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



QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0)
QUOTE (blakkie @ Sep 14 2005, 05:49 AM)

EDIT: The real kicker? I had already posted about that a couple of times here, just not quite as much detail.

try wading through all the pages and pages of gripes some time and see if you can find something coherent. It's that "as much detail" that makes it worth while. This whole SR4 thread thing needs to be ...... condensed... even.... streamlined... ;)

It's easy to get the grain from the chaff. Just go to one of the pages and Edit->Find "blakkie". :rotate: ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Sep 14 2005, 11:31 AM
Post #19


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



now if only we could delete next.... ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Grinder
post Sep 14 2005, 11:37 AM
Post #20


Great, I'm a Dragon...
*********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 6,699
Joined: 8-October 03
From: North Germany
Member No.: 5,698



QUOTE (blakkie)
Remember that 3 and 3.5 can be played nearly seamlessly side-by-side, outside of a few Feats that changed requirements, functioning, or disappeared, characters were virtually untouched.

He! My Ranger's hit die had been downgraded from d10 to d8. That really affects my char ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blakkie
post Sep 14 2005, 11:48 AM
Post #21


Dragon
********

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



QUOTE (Grinder @ Sep 14 2005, 05:37 AM)
QUOTE (blakkie @ Sep 14 2005, 10:01 AM)
Remember that 3 and 3.5 can be played nearly seamlessly side-by-side, outside of a few Feats that changed requirements, functioning, or disappeared, characters were virtually untouched.

He! My Ranger's hit die had been downgraded from d10 to d8. That really affects my char ;)

But that's only ever 2hp because in 3.0 nobody ever actually took a second level in Ranger. Just 1st to get those freebie Feats. ;)

Ya, that was a bit of a hyperbole that it was just the Feats. Plus i tossed in the advertizer's get out of jail free card, "virtually". :wobble: But that was most of it, don't think they dropped any spells. Just changed a bunch of durations. You didn't actually convert your Ranger over, did you? I would think you'd just keep trucking using the old progression, otherwise you'd have to redo all his bonuses.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Grinder
post Sep 14 2005, 12:08 PM
Post #22


Great, I'm a Dragon...
*********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 6,699
Joined: 8-October 03
From: North Germany
Member No.: 5,698



You wish. I had to re-create my Ranger. He wasn't the same after it... :|

But we started a new d&d campaign last week, using the Eberron setting, with new characters. I stuck with the ranger, but this time he's a shifter (the former one was an elf).

Never kept track of all the changes between D&D 3.0 and 3.5, though. All i cared for was my ranger. ;) (Thank god i'm no GM at D&D).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Daishi440
post Sep 14 2005, 12:51 PM
Post #23


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1-September 05
Member No.: 7,663



haste got nerfed, as did harm.

Both good changes, but nothing that couldn't have been done with a pdf on the website.

3.5 was just a money spinner. "I know we will get everyone to buy the same three books again with the same content, and they will thank US for it"

Wizards are good at marketing that's for sure.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightmareX
post Sep 14 2005, 12:52 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 831
Joined: 5-September 05
From: LAX, UCAS
Member No.: 7,687



QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
To some extent, the even did that in the main book?

Yeah, obviously not enough to fix the problems the new system has. If they did, we wouldn't be here bitching about it. ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sapphire_wyvern
post Sep 14 2005, 01:18 PM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 4-August 02
Member No.: 3,064



QUOTE (Daishi440 @ Sep 14 2005, 10:51 PM)
haste got nerfed, as did harm.

Both good changes, but nothing that couldn't have been done with a pdf on the website.

3.5 was just a money spinner. "I know we will get everyone to buy the same three books again with the same content, and they will thank US for it"

Wizards are good at marketing that's for sure.

Haste? *Nerfed*? :rotfl:

It wasn't nerfed, it just changed. Sure it's not a great spell for mages anymore. But it affects one target per caster level. It's a whole party buff! In 3E, it only benefited one target. At party level 5 it effectively doubles the number of attacks the party can put out, and it's not much less significant later on either.

Anyway, near 100% of the changed content in 3.5 Core Books *was* put on the website, for free. It's called the System Rules Description, and it's still available. No-one actually had to buy the 3.5 core books if they had 3E unless they wanted pretty hard copies or didn't know about the SRD.

Anyways, that's more than enough about d20. Shall we talk about SR now? :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 12:09 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.