Full Version: I know Kung Fu....
No, it's an addon. And it also isn't necessary, it's just one of the available options.
not quite
Note I do not say it is a game breaker, merely a paradigm breaker.
The same way open tests were in SR3
Note I do not say it is a game breaker, merely a paradigm breaker.
The same way open tests were in SR3
I read what you said. It doesn't shift the way the rules set works, it adds something to a small part of it.
It's the best solution I've seen so far. And the problem isn't just longshot tests; some form of longshot tests are just an inevitable result of a fixed TN system where modifiers add/remove dice. To *really* fix the problem, you need to seriously rethink the entire concept.
Both nWoD and its clone cousin, SR4, have this problem. WoD deals with it by always guaranteeing 1 die, but changing the TN to 10 when you reach longshot territory. So, your odds of critical failure and success are now equal. Unfortunately, you can still pile on the modifiers without changing your odds; but the odds are somewhat higher now. Since Shadowrun uses d6's, this isn't a workable solution for us; d6's just don't have the granularity to pull it off. We need larger TN increases to realistically model this sort of thing.
As a result, we're abandoning the core concept of fixed TN. We're instead going to a default TN concept: generally, the TN is X, but circumstances Y and Z alter it. The effective difference now depends on how often Y and Z pop up-- and since it could happen anytime you remove dice, that means it occurs pretty often.
So, in order to fix Edge, we need to rethink the Longshot test mechanic. And in order to fix that, we need to rethink the entire dicepool penalty concept. And once we've changed that, we've pretty much left the entire mechanical basis in the dust.
Both nWoD and its clone cousin, SR4, have this problem. WoD deals with it by always guaranteeing 1 die, but changing the TN to 10 when you reach longshot territory. So, your odds of critical failure and success are now equal. Unfortunately, you can still pile on the modifiers without changing your odds; but the odds are somewhat higher now. Since Shadowrun uses d6's, this isn't a workable solution for us; d6's just don't have the granularity to pull it off. We need larger TN increases to realistically model this sort of thing.
As a result, we're abandoning the core concept of fixed TN. We're instead going to a default TN concept: generally, the TN is X, but circumstances Y and Z alter it. The effective difference now depends on how often Y and Z pop up-- and since it could happen anytime you remove dice, that means it occurs pretty often.
So, in order to fix Edge, we need to rethink the Longshot test mechanic. And in order to fix that, we need to rethink the entire dicepool penalty concept. And once we've changed that, we've pretty much left the entire mechanical basis in the dust.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| So, in order to fix Edge, we need to rethink the Longshot test mechanic. |
Why? There is a quite simple and cruel fix:
Remove it. It is still perfectly possible to take exploding Edge dice anyway.
not if the dice modifiers drop you to 0 dice
you don't get to go for a long shot if it is remove, and since the base pool is 0 no edge dice adding
tthis means Joe average CANNOT PULL A TRIGGER if the penalties are 2 or more
you don't get to go for a long shot if it is remove, and since the base pool is 0 no edge dice adding
tthis means Joe average CANNOT PULL A TRIGGER if the penalties are 2 or more
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| It's the best solution I've seen so far. And the problem isn't just longshot tests; some form of longshot tests are just an inevitable result of a fixed TN system where modifiers add/remove dice. To *really* fix the problem, you need to seriously rethink the entire concept. |
In your opinion. I prefer the idea of increasing the threshold for tests. An alternate way to do that which would apply to opposed tests would be to remove successes. You get the same effect as increasing thresholds but can now use it when the threshold is not a set number.
Kremlin: The guy can pull the trigger all he wants, he just won't hit anything unless he gets lucky, by spending some edge.
| QUOTE (Kremlin KOA) |
| not if the dice modifiers drop you to 0 dice you don't get to go for a long shot if it is remove, and since the base pool is 0 no edge dice adding |
Such rule does not exist in SR4.
I think he's referring to Joe Average not having an edge pool.
Actually I was referring o the simple point that even if he spends edge he won't hit
if edge dice from longshot tests can be reduced, or if threshold increased
if edge dice from longshot tests can be reduced, or if threshold increased
With a threshold increase he could still hit due to exploding dice. His odds are very low, but he's an unskilled and unlucky guy, so very low odds fits the situation well.
So, is the GM telling a player to stop being an idiot the next time he goes to max out his penalties because he's going to long-shot anyways qualify as a "game breaker" or a "paradigm breaker?"
Neither, it's using the rules as written. 
| QUOTE |
| I prefer the idea of increasing the threshold for tests. An alternate way to do that which would apply to opposed tests would be to remove successes. You get the same effect as increasing thresholds but can now use it when the threshold is not a set number. |
Then we get some *really* wonky results. Increasing the threshold in combat screws with the entire damage system; and unless we allow exploding dice on longshot tests, we still run across the impossible everyday task. So, Joe Average still can't hit anything, with or without Edge, at only moderate penalties. Edge is supposed to allow amazing things to be pulled off, so we're going against the spirit of the rules right there. We also increase the number of situations where both parties fail an opposed contest-- what do we do when the defender critically botches a roll, but the attacker only misses because we artifically jacked up his threshold? Further, we're still hitting the player with double-jeopardy-- we're penalizing them twice, once by removing dice, and again by upping the threshold. Why penalize a character multiple times?
Removing successes reminds me entirely too much of the old WoD system, where more dice actually increased your chance of a botch. By removing successes, you're dramatically jacking up the odds of a critical bolo on a roll. And if the successes to be removed is greater than the number of dice, we *still* have an impossible everyday task.
So, unfortunately, simply raising the threshold doesn't work out mechanically. In fact, it causes about as many problems as it solves. We need a way of increasing the diffculty, instead of making things impossible, otherwise the system *still* doesn't work.
| QUOTE |
| Then we get some *really* wonky results. Increasing the threshold in combat screws with the entire damage system; and unless we allow exploding dice on longshot tests, we still run across the impossible everyday task. |
Edge tests already allow exploding dice. No need for a change there. Upping the threshold does make things odd for opposed tests, which is why I said to remove successes. It's effectively the same thing.
| QUOTE |
| Removing successes reminds me entirely too much of the old WoD system, where more dice actually increased your chance of a botch. By removing successes, you're dramatically jacking up the odds of a critical bolo on a roll. |
No, you've dramatically decreased the chances they'll succeed at their farfetched task. Go ahead and count the successes against botches but not for actual success. And for the record, reminding you of another system doesn't make something bad.
| QUOTE |
| And if the successes to be removed is greater than the number of dice, we *still* have an impossible everyday task. |
Ahem... Exploding dice are allowed on longshot tests.
| QUOTE |
| So, unfortunately, simply raising the threshold doesn't work out mechanically. In fact, it causes about as many problems as it solves. We need a way of increasing the diffculty, instead of making things impossible, otherwise the system *still* doesn't work. |
Not quite. But nice try though.
I hate to do this, James, but:
| QUOTE |
pg. 67 You may make a long shot test (p. 55) even if your dice pool was reduced to 0 or less; roll only your Edge dice for this test (the Rule of Six does not apply) |
I have to say, I feel a little cheated that you've occupied this much of the forums' time debating a rule you apparently haven't read.
I have read it, I just didn't have it with me and forgot. In that case, just make the rule of six apply to longshot tests with no base pool. There you have it, still no need to rewrite the entire system.
Fair enough. Allowing Rule of Six on long shot tests might be a solution.
Just to play devil's advocate, why isn't Rule of Six allowed on long shot tests, by the RAW? It very explicitly is not, so why did the designers decide that it should be that way? I want to understand their logic for disallowing it before I change a rule to allow it.
Just to play devil's advocate, why isn't Rule of Six allowed on long shot tests, by the RAW? It very explicitly is not, so why did the designers decide that it should be that way? I want to understand their logic for disallowing it before I change a rule to allow it.
It was probably done as a means of keeping unlucky people from pulling off incredibly lucky things. At least that's teh explanation that leaps to mind.
an additional penalty for when you go beyond what skill can achieve and step into the realm of pure jaggy luck
I think exploding dice on Longshots was the very first thing I houseruled. It makes no damned sense. It is, by definition, a "longshot", like hurling a basketball from full court at the last second. For most people, freaks and expert players aside, it has more to do with luck than skill or innate ability. Consequently, as a luck-reliant, "here goes nothing" attempt, it makes absolutely no sense to restrict exploding dice.
In fact, I'd ultimately like to see it errata'd out.
In fact, I'd ultimately like to see it errata'd out.
Well, dice don't explode on normal tests. When you're making a Long Shot, it's essentially a "normal test" of your Edge alone.
If the threshold for a test is higher than your Edge pool, you just aren't riding that mythical beast called Edge hard enough to be able to pull something that freakishly hard off.
If the threshold for a test is higher than your Edge pool, you just aren't riding that mythical beast called Edge hard enough to be able to pull something that freakishly hard off.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.