What would you play if given open choice in an SR video game (or what is the closest category to what you would play)

What else would you want to play as?

What if it was set up much like the pencil and paper character building system, where your character doesn't really have to conform to archetypes?

Well, obviously SR3 is very close to a class-less Rp system, but that doesn't generate very good statistics. Nor can you truly design a video game where you can allow everyone to be whatever they want to be because in the end you loosely fit in some category whether you like it or not.

Just pick an approximation and elaborate with your reply

Depends. Are the "classes" actually going to be balanced, or is Rigger going to eat everything except high-powered Mages like usual?

~J

Assume all classes would ultimately be balanced

Try thinking in the other direction, the developer just asked "You're an SR lover, what 'classes' should we try to make accomodations for while designing our game? What would you play?" (Make them all good isn't a legitimate response to that question [in the very least, it offers them no new information, of course they want to make them "all good"])

I almost always play physads because I can blaze through physad creation from memory in most cases in about 20 minutes.

If I don't want to get creative and just want power out of a box just make a troll physad with a claymore and IA Pole Arms so you're rolling 12 dice at least with -3 TN modifier. I can do that fast and get on with playing, so for a "pick up" game or a video game that's probably what I'd do.

The problem is, the answer to that lies with the developer. If I knew that somehow all input and UI issues would be solved, I'd go Rigger all the way. On the other hand, given that that would probably involve interface complexity approaching that of Freespace 2 (an utterly amazing game, but when you're using most of the keyboard plus most of the keyboard again chorded with two different modifier keys you know you aren't hitting the mass market), I have no faith that it would be done well—or at all, as it would be a separate control scheme for only the tiniest self-selecting subset of users.

~J

I'd play Street sam, but only if cyber-ware was tedious and complex. I love that crap. I love spending hours reading and referencing the rules, it's what I miss most in SR4, heh.

After that it would be adept, but it all depends on how it is implemented. I sometimes play classes based off the looks of the character model, over function.

What the drek, no option for "rocker"????

ya know, as strange as it is, i'd actually like to some how, be able to be play a street doc. A mmo called neocron has a doc like this, but it's painfully simple, of the aim and bar style, but i donno whats the matter with me, i think i'd enjoy it, to somehow have to instal cyber into someone. perhaps have your skill level increase the area in which you're "safe" while opperating, or something.

Would you be content to ONLY be a street doc in the install a limb here, heal a wound here sense (with no going on runs?).

Would you perhaps prefer that be like job-realted skills in other games (like blacksmithing in EQ) that allow participation in an economy and the expansion of certain skills related to your "job" that you can possess in addition to your hacking and slashing skills (in this case, runner skills)

i wouldnt want it to appear as a "tradeskill" set up, i honestly don't get that vibe from SR that it would be neccessary, or even appreciated in this style of game, where, why would you buy ares when BobTheBuilder can make you a better gun...

Also, the draw of SR is that that really arent any predefined "archetypes" that you HAVE to stick to... ii know it would be hard in an mmo to replicate that because, eventually, everyone could likely become good at everything, but i think some sort of broad base would be good

I do not wish to exclude the concept of a completely skill-driven (instead of class-driven) character capability system, I just wonder what the popular concepts are and what the unpopular concepts are.

The most important distinction between SR and other systems is that there are no class-abilities (magic could make the argument). Your "class" just represents a skill set that you have, so answer in that respect.

What skill set of the above would you assume if given an open choice?

honestly, i'd prolly try each one, to a point to start with before settling in on one, however, i fail to see where distinctions might lie, for instance, what constitutes a "ganger"? to me, a ganger would likely be a bard/rogue style character from "traditional" fantasy, encompasing a few abilities from everyone else...

but you can't do that without defined abilities for the other "classes", even if you do it purely skill based (gaining X skill at Y ability), you would have to kimit skill ranks by class (meaning, the max in fire arms for a weapon specialist, would be higher than say, the street doc idea) but then, how do you construct the ganger? letting them get equal ranks in all skills, but at a lower level than the max for everyone else? then you end up with poor endgame (whatever that might be for the game) characters, as they're bound to be using lower level skills than the character's they're matched up againist.

p.s. just got home from work, sorry for next to no formatting...

Technoshaman.

Having played a third edition shadowrun mud for over a year I can say a system can be made that allows any combination of shadowrun skill sets one wants, its just a matter of coding in all those features. I've seen two trolls one which started out as a decker the other started out as a ganger, by the end of their careers they both had equal high skills in computers, several firearms, negotiations, and etiquettes. one was a smuggler badass and the other a playboy restaurateur scientist. Are these trolls street sams? sure. are they deckers? yes. are they faces? not as good as elven faces but still faces. does a shadowrun game need to penalize them in their shooting for taking some lessons in the matrix? no. whats my point about the trolls? you can have distinction in archetype and style without placing limits on a character because he started out with a particular focus.

The question that started this thread still has importance. You can make a shadowrun game without nature spirits, astral quests, captains chair mode, deck building, vehicle modification, VCRs, decking, or any number of countless features and each feature would probably need to be coded into the game seperately. And if your players aren't interested in the tradeskills or spell casting or any other feature you don't need to code it in. by choosing not to you limit your player base but keep your investment to a minimum.

my answer is I have had the most fun playing as a deck meister which neccessitated an understanding of the matrix so i would pick decker. the work of deckers is information manipulation and that allows me to have a stake in everything else that goes on in the sprawl.

Covert Ops Specialist.

Hell by retirement that Troll playboy was also a stockbroker, Leonized, a biochemist and up to his eyebrows in conspiracies

Including holding a WMD designed to wipe out all orks which had been developed in the Tir

No Face?

I would play in every possible "class"...

Maybe in the following order: Adept, Street Sam, Mage, etc...

I prefer to take the approach of a normal guy (or ork) who gets augmentation. a couple good combat skills, but with good skills other than combat. (besides, if i can default to 6 dice, then i dont have much to worry about unskille).

i do beleive i would add 'rigger' as a sub-class, when i had teh cash for the gear. drones are fun toys.

Maybe it was too far down to be read by everyone, but I said "The most important distinction between SR and other systems is that there are no class-abilities (magic could make the argument). Your "class" just represents a skill set that you have, so answer in that respect."

I'm not saying there would be some sort of list that you just click "rigger" from and suddenly you're a rigger. I'm saying that if given the ability to portray any type of runner on that list, seperate from the implementation in the video game's part, what would you and if you wish to interject a new type, then you should.

The "face" concept is a generally cool one to apply to games. Just last week I was reminiscing in another forum about Fallout 2, not to sound like a fanatic or anything, but FL2 had some of the best paths for social resolutions to problems available in an RPG. To the point that one hardly ever HAD to kill people (monsters yeah, sometimes unavoidable). I would definitely play a face if there was a similar dedication to maintaining social skills as an equally valid set of weapons as guns.

I follow you, Eralston. You're saying that you can pick whatever skills you want, but natural character development means that you're gonna follow some sort of "career path" as you learn. If I learn stunt driving one year, I'm more likely to study auto mechanics than theoretical thaumatergy the next. Yeah, that doesn't mean that I have to, but...
So what you're asking could be phrased as: "If you had an open, skill-based character, would the set of skills you develop follow any of the patterns recognized in the Shadowrun characters?"

I always build my characters based on what seems fitting to the campaign and the character background, but for simplicity I'll refer to them by archetype. If he's got a VCR, he's a rigger- good fighting skills, a street sam- good social skills, a face.

Oh, and my answer is street shaman. That's the best way to encompass all aspects of the SR universe, IMHO.

I don't like class...
In a SR game, of course, the better is to play one of my character...
After it depend of the kind of game and game possibility...

- Daegann -