...such services from the criminal side would definitely come at a price, and a big one at that. Currently in RL our state is dealing with those Payday Loan places for improper practices, such as grossly overcharging on interest but not telling you up front) & these guys are licensed.
Now, let's have a Crime Syndicate run the "bank" you have your account at. You betcha these guys are going to want to profit off of you. They have no regulatory commission, no state examiner, no antitrust laws to worry about.
Any complaints about your account balance being off & a guy named Guido may come knocking at your door the next day with his "little friend" & a few bags of Quickcrete in the trunk of his car.
While I like the concept, the thing is I see few if any GM's actually running things this way. I know players would complain if at the beginning of the next session, they found their account balance down a couple thousand and they hadn't done their shopping yet.
Full Version: What's your preferred edition here?
Hehe. The way I see it the syndicates do have to maintain some degree of reliability - call it honour among theives - else all that lovely money would find its way to one of their competitors (read: the other syndicates), as while customer1 may be sleeping with the fishies, customers 3 through 6 could hear about it and give their money to other groups for safe keeping.
The syndicates can make more money through investment of money from people happily loaning them capital at nil or even negligible interest rates, than they can from knocking off legit banks. And there's less risk involved.
Most banking charges are pretty small, so long as you remain in the black. What happens if you go into the red doesn't bear thinking about. And of course, if you thought changing your bank account was tough in the present day...
The syndicates can make more money through investment of money from people happily loaning them capital at nil or even negligible interest rates, than they can from knocking off legit banks. And there's less risk involved.
Most banking charges are pretty small, so long as you remain in the black. What happens if you go into the red doesn't bear thinking about. And of course, if you thought changing your bank account was tough in the present day...
What! No votes for first? Aww man. 1st ed. never gets any votes. 
Was it that bad or is it that none of us, ever played it?
Was it that bad or is it that none of us, ever played it?
Everyone loves armor giving autosuccesses!
~J
~J
| QUOTE (Demon_Bob) |
| What! No votes for first? Aww man. 1st ed. never gets any votes. Was it that bad or is it that none of us, ever played it? |
The big differences between 1st and 2nd was Staging Numbers and Automatic Successes.
In a dice and TN game, auto-hits was a bad plan, so their removal in SR2 was a good thing. Other than that, the differences between 1st and 2nd were ppretty minor, so very few people are going to sing the praises of 1st when they can sing the praises of 2nd instead.
-Frank
I like and dislike various things about each edition, but overall I just like Shadowrun. I can play comfortably in just about any ruleset.
And how many here played/remember 1st ed?
While I have yet to play 4th ed I can tell by the rules it is more streamlined. Just worrying about net successes rather than the target number and level of successes made alot of sense. Now smartlinks won't be the end all be all of ranged combat.
While I have yet to play 4th ed I can tell by the rules it is more streamlined. Just worrying about net successes rather than the target number and level of successes made alot of sense. Now smartlinks won't be the end all be all of ranged combat.
| QUOTE (Warlordtheft) |
| And how many here played/remember 1st ed? |
I remember 1st edition. I remember making the switch from 1st edition to 2nd edition, where my character seriously stopped using a rocket launcher and started using a machine pistol. Also when the ideal ammo went from Explosive to APDS.
In SR1, the only important information was Staging Number (how many hits you needed to reduce the damage value) and Armor (how many automatic hits you got on damage resistance). Your Body was of importance only for resisting combat spells, because the chances of you actually getting a hit on the dice you rolled was directly comparable to that of a ball made of snow that was in hell.
When SR2 hit and suddenly your Body was the source of all of your hits, all weapons had Staging 2, and the TN went up and down with armor worn - well the world got a crap tonne more deadly and peple could be legitimately expected to get laid out with a double tap from a heavy pistol.
Thanks, you just made me feel like an old man.
-Frank
4th edition for mechanics, but its sorely lacking in supplements. But that will fix itself in time, even if its a large amount of time.
I really loved 2nd edition. but 4th is worming it's way into my soul, and that's why I vote for four.
...@Frank, I concur.
The crazy thing was adepts (which were first introduced as an "optional" Archetype outlined in the Grimoire) They could buy Automatic Successes for a skill as a power (the original KK had 3 levels) and Increased Reflexes 3 only cost 3 Magic points, what a deal.
Then there was Firearms skill which allowed you to shoot anything from a Hold Out Pistol up to an Assault Rifle. Now that is streamlined.
The crazy thing was adepts (which were first introduced as an "optional" Archetype outlined in the Grimoire) They could buy Automatic Successes for a skill as a power (the original KK had 3 levels) and Increased Reflexes 3 only cost 3 Magic points, what a deal.
Then there was Firearms skill which allowed you to shoot anything from a Hold Out Pistol up to an Assault Rifle. Now that is streamlined.
Um this is a board about sr4 specifically. you might get different results on the other boards.
...Fisty moved it from the General SR Forum to here. He's a Mod, I don't argue with mods especially when their title is "Fisty of Doom"
Shev requested having his thread moved, but was less than specific, then decided that it was fine here. Maybe we'll give it the rounds here, then hit the other forum too. 
The SR4 forum does generally get more traffic anyway.
The SR4 forum does generally get more traffic anyway.
*blush* Yes, I wasn't very clear. I meant to have the "From decking to hacking" thread moved to this forum (it being a 4th edition question in particular), but this poll was moved by accident. In any case, it DID have some time on the other board, and it could feasibly go back there at some point to make sure we get a sizable portion of the Dumpshock community.
| QUOTE (Kyoto Kid) |
| The crazy thing was adepts (which were first introduced as an "optional" Archetype outlined in the Grimoire) They could buy Automatic Successes for a skill as a power (the original KK had 3 levels) and Increased Reflexes 3 only cost 3 Magic points, what a deal. |
Oh yeah. The Adept Auto-successes on skill rolls were... not a good idea. When you had auto-hits on one skill and defaulted to another, you bled off free hits as you walked through the skill web. It was noted that since Athletics auto-success was cheaper than weapon skill auto-success, that you could actually get a better deal just buying up a shit tonne of automatic successes in Athletics and letting the hits bleed off as you walked through the web than ever buying anything else.
The extreme character - the guy who got all Physical Adepts banned until 2nd edition came around in our group, was Übermensch. He just had 24 automatic successes in Athletics and a pile of knowledge skills. If I recall correctly, he didn't even have a driving skill, he just always succeeded in any pilotting test because it was only 12 dots on the skill web or something stupid. He didn't even play out a whole session before Physical Adepts just got hit with the "banned" stamp.
-Frank
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) | ||
Oh yeah. The Adept Auto-successes on skill rolls were... not a good idea. When you had auto-hits on one skill and defaulted to another, you bled off free hits as you walked through the skill web. It was noted that since Athletics auto-success was cheaper than weapon skill auto-success, that you could actually get a better deal just buying up a shit tonne of automatic successes in Athletics and letting the hits bleed off as you walked through the web than ever buying anything else. The extreme character - the guy who got all Physical Adepts banned until 2nd edition came around in our group, was Übermensch. He just had 24 automatic successes in Athletics and a pile of knowledge skills. If I recall correctly, he didn't even have a driving skill, he just always succeeded in any pilotting test because it was only 12 dots on the skill web or something stupid. He didn't even play out a whole session before Physical Adepts just got hit with the "banned" stamp. -Frank |
Yikes....ok, so I came into SR during 2, but i heard things about 1(and knew a few, like the auto-successes and the like, among other things).
So....24 auto successes....and tracing ANY skill on the skill web....oh dear, i think i see why they went and made Adepts useless in 2e.
Adepts certainly are an interesting class in the sense its taken them HOW many editions to balance them? And some still argue of the balance.
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
| Oh yeah. The Adept Auto-successes on skill rolls were... not a good idea. When you had auto-hits on one skill and defaulted to another, you bled off free hits as you walked through the skill web. It was noted that since Athletics auto-success was cheaper than weapon skill auto-success, that you could actually get a better deal just buying up a shit tonne of automatic successes in Athletics and letting the hits bleed off as you walked through the web than ever buying anything else. |
We quickly house ruled them, so instead of loosing 1 success for each dot, you halved (round down) the number of successes. It worked fine, and we had no problems with adepts.
What worried me even more was the nightmare of shooting full auto... You had to roll for each bullet, and reduce damage for each bullet. It took forever.
Lars
NOTE: I was going to throw this up on Wednesday but my cable connection went down for two days as soon as I finished it. Anyways...
I personally like every edition of SR, in one way of another. Some editions are stronger in certain areas than others, but they all have something going for them.
The first SR corebook I bought was the one for SR1, which I got a few years ago. I had been fascinated with the setting since seeing the mini-guide for the SNES game in a Nintendo Power back in the early 90s, so finding this was a treat. I was a bit disappointed to find that the rules entered "basket case" territory, but the setting and back story more than lived up to my expectations. In fact, I would go as far as to say that SR1 "got it" more than any other edition in terms of the setting. It just felt right. It even had some great art in between the sheets (much better than most of the art in later editions of the product). Of course, if you have Alex Ross and Tim Bradstreet working on the same book you kind of have to expect that.
The next core I got was SR3. Finding the first book jogged my memory of the game, so I when out and got the most recent update of the product (at the time). Obviously, the rules were a massive improvement over SR1. Improved combat and magic rules, improved gear, better clarifications and workable rigger rules. The Matrix rules still were in the rubbish bin, but hey. Even with these improvements, I was a little surprised to see how dramatically the "flavor" of the universe had diminished by the time of SR3. Again (like in the case of SR1), the glass was half full and half empty. Except the full part were the rules instead of the setting this time around.
A bit later, around the time SR4 was announced, I got the SR2 core - more out of curiosity than anything else. I found it to be sort of a weird in-between step for SR1 and SR3. The setting had a bit more color than SR3, but not as much as SR1 (and vice-versa for the game's rules). The setting seemed to have a weird flavor in SR2, with sort of an "Earthdawn with rocket launchers"-feel to it. Not that I have a problem with the ED/SR link, in fact I am using quite a bit of it in my campaign presently. But ED and SR are separate games and need to stand on their own right, and not prop each other up.
Of course, as I progressed through the later SR2 sourcebooks I noticed that the game traded the weird feel for SR3's bland style - but I'm not sure that weird to bland was a good change. But SR2 works and I honestly prefer (the somewhat clarified in SR2 & VR1) Matrix v1.0 to the SR3 system of doing things, so I can't complain too much.
And now there's SR4. I'll just go right out and say that I really like the new rules so far. While I’m also a fan of SR3's rules as well (night and day, huh?), they're a bit heavy at times and that slows the game down a lot - a factor that has caused my home campaign a lot of hiccups over the years. SR4 doesn't have that problem, and the less explicit rules make it easier for me to mod my game to my specifications (I tend to really trick out my games). The style of the setting has also gotten back into the SR1 sweet zone a bit, though some SR2 weirdness has crept back in as well.
Only major two problems exist so far in regards to SR4 that keep me from switching over from SR3 presently. The first is that I don't want to start playing until whatever old SR gear that will be converted *is* converted to the new system. This means that I won't be running any games in the system until the last two or three core sourcebooks are released. The second is that there is quite a lot of errata coming out for the new products presently (which isn't a surprise considering that this is a brand new ruleset), and I'll feel a little more comfortable with SR4 when the core is a bit more stabilized.
Anyways...I personally like every edition of SR, in one way of another. Some editions are stronger in certain areas than others, but they all have something going for them.
The first SR corebook I bought was the one for SR1, which I got a few years ago. I had been fascinated with the setting since seeing the mini-guide for the SNES game in a Nintendo Power back in the early 90s, so finding this was a treat. I was a bit disappointed to find that the rules entered "basket case" territory, but the setting and back story more than lived up to my expectations. In fact, I would go as far as to say that SR1 "got it" more than any other edition in terms of the setting. It just felt right. It even had some great art in between the sheets (much better than most of the art in later editions of the product). Of course, if you have Alex Ross and Tim Bradstreet working on the same book you kind of have to expect that.
The next core I got was SR3. Finding the first book jogged my memory of the game, so I when out and got the most recent update of the product (at the time). Obviously, the rules were a massive improvement over SR1. Improved combat and magic rules, improved gear, better clarifications and workable rigger rules. The Matrix rules still were in the rubbish bin, but hey. Even with these improvements, I was a little surprised to see how dramatically the "flavor" of the universe had diminished by the time of SR3. Again (like in the case of SR1), the glass was half full and half empty. Except the full part were the rules instead of the setting this time around.
A bit later, around the time SR4 was announced, I got the SR2 core - more out of curiosity than anything else. I found it to be sort of a weird in-between step for SR1 and SR3. The setting had a bit more color than SR3, but not as much as SR1 (and vice-versa for the game's rules). The setting seemed to have a weird flavor in SR2, with sort of an "Earthdawn with rocket launchers"-feel to it. Not that I have a problem with the ED/SR link, in fact I am using quite a bit of it in my campaign presently. But ED and SR are separate games and need to stand on their own right, and not prop each other up.
Of course, as I progressed through the later SR2 sourcebooks I noticed that the game traded the weird feel for SR3's bland style - but I'm not sure that weird to bland was a good change. But SR2 works and I honestly prefer (the somewhat clarified in SR2 & VR1) Matrix v1.0 to the SR3 system of doing things, so I can't complain too much.
And now there's SR4. I'll just go right out and say that I really like the new rules so far. While I’m also a fan of SR3's rules as well (night and day, huh?), they're a bit heavy at times and that slows the game down a lot - a factor that has caused my home campaign a lot of hiccups over the years. SR4 doesn't have that problem, and the less explicit rules make it easier for me to mod my game to my specifications (I tend to really trick out my games). The style of the setting has also gotten back into the SR1 sweet zone a bit, though some SR2 weirdness has crept back in as well.
Only major two problems exist so far in regards to SR4 that keep me from switching over from SR3 presently. The first is that I don't want to start playing until whatever old SR gear that will be converted *is* converted to the new system. This means that I won't be running any games in the system until the last two or three core sourcebooks are released. The second is that there is quite a lot of errata coming out for the new products presently (which isn't a surprise considering that this is a brand new ruleset), and I'll feel a little more comfortable with SR4 when the core is a bit more stabilized.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.