Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What's your preferred edition here?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Shev
Pretty straightforward poll: What edition do you like the most?

Right now, I'm waffling between third and fourth. Since I have yet to run a game in fourth, or even finish reading the book, I can't really decide which I like better yet. What are people's thoughts?
Cain
You're kinda asking in the wrong forum. In a site dedicated to SR4, you're naturally going to get a skewed number of SR4 hits.

Representative statistcs lesson done, I prefer 3rd. It's got it's flaws, but it's truer to the essence of Shadowrun than 4th is. SR4 may as well be SR d20 for all it cares for the mechanics and storyline of Shadowrun.
Thane36425
You might think about adding a hybrid option.
fistandantilus4.0
Moved to 4th edt forum at Shev's requeast.
JonathanC
I'm not sure. I like the organization of the SR4 rules a bit more, and many of the changes made rule-wise. I do think that it's a bit more skewed towards Awakened characters, and the new armor stacking rules kind of nerfs anyone playing a street samurai (and I have no idea why anyone would bother with cyberlimbs anymore).

3rd Edition had serious issues with power creep through the various books, however, and the rules for Riggers were so complicated that I have yet to meet anyone in person who actually understands them. In fact, every 3rd Ed GM I've met (again, in person) has basically outlawed Riggers as a PC archetype as a result.
Kagetenshi
I highly recommend SR3.

I also believe strongly that complaints about Riggers like JonathanC's are the result of the intimidating nature of the rules, rather than their actual complexity.

~J, Rigger player for several years now
JonathanC
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
I highly recommend SR3.

I also believe strongly that complaints about Riggers like JonathanC's are the result of the intimidating nature of the rules, rather than their actual complexity.

~J, Rigger player for several years now

I think they intimidate people because they're complex. Even ignoring the options opened up by Rigger 3, after owning the SR3 book for many years I *still* wouldn't be comfortable running vehicle combat in that system. There are too many things to remember, too many stats, and too many modifiers to them. Really, that was kind of the problem with most of the tech rules in SR3, though I do agree that the game, even just taking the core rules (ignoring the expansions for both editions) was much more balanced across character types.

On the downside, the metatypes in SR3 seemed less balanced, and the karma benefits for humans ensured a fairly meta-free gaming group most times that I played.
Matsu Kurisu
I think 4th Ed has better overall rules mechanic, however 3rd had better feel.
There is too much blur between the boundaries e.g. want a smartlink / just get glasses instead, hackers can rig just as good etc.
4th Ed still needs LOTS of work on Matrix rules, Cyberlimbs, Rigging rules
However all in all I am looking forward to the future ....
Kagetenshi
Most of the modifiers are the same or similar across the different tests. MIJI is the most complicated part, but it's rendered almost useless by the encryption rules (which isn't exactly a solution, but it means you almost never need to know about it). The next most onerous part is the maneuver score, which isn't complicated but does force you to know the exact speeds of all vehicles (which you can otherwise play fast and loose with, even though you really shouldn't)—it's a number that always stays the same for a single vehicle, a number that will probably be the same for all combatants, the result of a simple open test, and a number easily derived from the Speed.

~J
JonathanC
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Most of the modifiers are the same or similar across the different tests. MIJI is the most complicated part, but it's rendered almost useless by the encryption rules (which isn't exactly a solution, but it means you almost never need to know about it). The next most onerous part is the maneuver score, which isn't complicated but does force you to know the exact speeds of all vehicles (which you can otherwise play fast and loose with, even though you really shouldn't)—it's a number that always stays the same for a single vehicle, a number that will probably be the same for all combatants, the result of a simple open test, and a number easily derived from the Speed.

~J

You're basically trying to argue that while it is incredibly complicated, it's a simple kind of complexity. And hey, if that works for you...great. 3rd edition has the benefit of a ton of sourcebooks and tweaking over the years, yes. But I can say from personal experience that I could not get my friends to play SR3 after their first taste of it. They wouldn't do it. And I wasn't all that hot on running it myself, either. It was impossible to find someone willing to GM it. SR4 is a much easier sell to my gaming group.
Kagetenshi
If you're getting an admission of complexity out of anything but my reference to the MIJI rules, I clearly failed to express my opinion on the topic well.

I'll put it this way: what, specifically, is complex about Rigging?

~J
Darkest Angel
SR3 all the way for me. Not that I've tried SR4 to be honest, but from what I can gather it doesn't seem to have fixed what needed fixing, but has simplified things, presumably to make it more accessible. I really don't like the concept of Riggers and Deckers being one and the same, nor Shamans and Mages.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Darkest Angel)
I really don't like the concept of Riggers and Deckers being one and the same, nor Shamans and Mages.

You must have hated the Matrix SB then.
lorechaser
SR5 is really my favorite.
nezumi
Just so you're aware, this being in the SR4 forum, the end result will be SR4. Similarly, if you asked "D&D or Shadowrun" on a Shadowrun forum, the vast majority of people would vote for Shadowrun. So yes, expect this to be a very flawed survey.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (Darkest Angel @ Apr 24 2007, 09:30 PM)
I really don't like the concept of Riggers and Deckers being one and the same, nor Shamans and Mages.

You must have hated the Matrix SB then.

Maybe you have a different Matrix sourcebook? Mine says that Riggers get penalties for trying to deck with the same datajack they rig with for no good reason whatsoever, and provides a way to make a really weak, expensive attempt at using drones via a cyberdeck.

~J
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Apr 24 2007, 02:37 PM)
QUOTE (Darkest Angel @ Apr 24 2007, 09:30 PM)
I really don't like the concept of Riggers and Deckers being one and the same, nor Shamans and Mages.

You must have hated the Matrix SB then.

Maybe you have a different Matrix sourcebook? Mine says that Riggers get penalties for trying to deck with the same datajack they rig with for no good reason whatsoever, and provides a way to make a really weak, expensive attempt at using drones via a cyberdeck.

You mean, like a program and a piece of hardware every real rigger needed to have anyway, then using a cheap wireless link - and completly emulating an expensive RCD?

Oh, and BTW - it must indeed be different, since mine says that you just need the VCR-equivalent of a reflex trigger to completly negate those penalties - no new datajack needed.
Thane36425
The SR3 rules weren't that bad. I do like the cleaner damage, drain and spell force rules for SR4 though. My main complaint with SR4 is that they went too far in simplifying and abstracting the game. It does lend an unfinished feel to the game that previous incarnations didn't have.
Kagetenshi
Yes, a reflex trigger is the other way around it, at a cost of an additional .2 Essence and ¥13,000. Again, for no good reason.

Meanwhile, over in droneland, we have Remote Control which can be used in conjunction with a RPEM to be able to control a drone in captain's chair only, and without access to any kind of pool. It's the same kind of "rigging" you get with a datajack and a RCD. Note that unless I've missed rules for subscribing multiple drones via a wireless link, you still need a remote-control deck hooked up to your cyberdeck to control more than one drone at a time (well, that or be connected to a CCSS network, but I don't think I need to consider that as a normal situation).

Edit: also, the RPEM absolutely is not something every real Rigger needs—its entire purpose is to do something that encryption makes almost impossible.

~J
Rotbart van Dainig
Without having to pay for a RCD, yeah. And no, contrary to the RCD, the deck had no restriction on numbers of drones at all.

BTW - a reflex trigger was the only way arround those penalties.
Shrike30
Played SR2 and SR3 for years, vastly prefer SR4. Core mechanical elements of the earlier SR versions bugged me (mostly the incredible shift in probability that occurred when your TN bounced around in the 2-6 range, and the sudden flatness that was the curve afterwards). SR4 is simplified without being neutered to stupidity the way some other major game systems have gone with their latest editions, and it's a lot easier to get new players into.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Apr 24 2007, 03:10 PM)
Without having to pay for a RCD, yeah.

And being restricted to captain's-chair mode! That's not rigging at all!

~J
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
Without having to pay for a RCD, yeah.

And being restricted to captain's-chair mode!

Who cares? That's all you would have gotten out of your expensive RCD without an additional VCR anyway.

Of course, commanding drones via the onboard computer was much more efficient, since it could be done with a tortoise - like, your cell phone.
Kagetenshi
A Rigger is, in SR3 at least, someone with a Vehicle Control Rig. If we're not even going to talk about the same thing, we may as well not have this discussion.

Also, you couldn't control drones from a cellphone, unless I've missed cellphones that have MPCP ratings (and thus are able to run Remote Control) somewhere. SR3 may have divided Riggers and Deckers too much, but it absolutely did not merge them.

~J
Darkest Angel
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (Darkest Angel @ Apr 24 2007, 09:30 PM)
I really don't like the concept of Riggers and Deckers being one and the same, nor Shamans and Mages.

You must have hated the Matrix SB then.

How exactly does that work? Last I checked, your Rigger was your scout, fire support and getaway driver, where the hell does that come into a Decker's job description? So what if a decker can use a many thousands of nuyen deck to control a drone? That's not Rigging.
Demon_Bob
4th edition rules are more streamlined and eisier, which can make it more appealing to newer players, along with (cough, umm) still being in print. They seem more balanced currently. Still not sure about the current matrix rules, talking to group about using some house rules I found on-line. Don't quite like the way Armor works, however, group can not seem to agree on a different way. World has a good Dark Future Sci-Fi feel to it.

3.5 edition is my current Fav.

3rd edition rules suffer from power creep, but are more than compleate. However, I feel the Matrix & Trolls had to fall under the rules of all or none. Also I would recomend that GMs not allow certian items not in the main book. After several years of game play several house rules were made up, some refferring back to things liked in 2nd, some made up fropm things proposed from 4th.

2nd edition Caution must be taken to avoid munchkin charactors here, its the biggest thing I remember about the system. Yes, I know that munchkin characters are possible in every system. Matrix rules hurt my head. Game seemed to have an odd feel to it. Kinda like watching Science Fiction written in the 50's.

1st edition. Never played. sniff. Was told there was not really a consistant set of rules from one group to the next. That the rules in some ways were kinda vague. Sometimes I like that, sometimes not.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
If we're not even going to talk about the same thing, we may as well not have this discussion.

Sure. I'm talking about the gradual merging of technologies in Matrix and Rigger.

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Also, you couldn't control drones from a cellphone, unless I've missed cellphones that have MPCP ratings (and thus are able to run Remote Control) somewhere.

You may want to re-read the rules for tortoises in Matrix and the rules for the on-board computer in Rigger.

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
SR3 may have divided Riggers and Deckers too much, but it absolutely did not merge them.

With Matrix and Rigger, deckers constantly invaded the rigger's world.
A trend which usually results in unified protocols.
Kyoto Kid
...picked 3rd ed.

It actually was a hard choice & I almost voted for 2nd for I liked a lot of the assiciated sourcebooks and run modules (such as the two Harlequin ones and my two favourite fluff books Shadowbeat and The London Sourcebook).

I have run scenarios in all editions, and while I have come to appreciate the more streamlined system presented in SR4 (particularly when introducing new players to the game) there are a few of the "old school" concepts I still prefer, most notably...

....The clear distinction between Shamanic and Hermetic mages particularly with regards to spirits. by "genericising" the spirits I feel some of the original flavour has been lost.

...The true concept of being SINless. As I mentioned in another post shadowrunners were more of an "invisible" factor since all transactions could be (and usually were) done clandestine. Nobody need know your name, even if it was an alias.

[edit (@wilcoxon, thanks for reminding me): The notion of everyone needing a commlink kind of contradicts the whole notion of living in the shadows.]

...Deckers as "lords of the Matrix" and Riggers as true "kings of the roads, skies, and waterways".

...and I thought I would never say this, the dice pools. Yeah, a pain but it made the players think more about character actions since it had to be portioned out throughout the entire combat turn. Sometimes the faster a character was could actually work against the her as it was easy to run short of pool dice.

For me these were some of the elements that helped define the feel of the game and the setting.

Another thing is, after having been spoiled all these years with a plethora of source material, is the feeling of having to in a sense, start all over again. Being a GM who enjoys designing very detailed and extensive campaigns, the current lack of support material feels somewhat a hinderance. This is not to hammer on FanPro, who with such a small staff, really do have their work cut out, especially when a quality product is a high priority.

For the most part my SR4 runs have been limited "one shots" (maybe a two session mission here or there) since developing a long running plot is difficult while so much is still in the pipeline and some background details remain sketchy (such as the TT, The state of NEEC politics, and what happened to the Seraphim).

I am sure once several of the forthcoming sourcebooks are released (in particular Arsenal, Corporate Enclaves, and Augmentation) and more of the "lost years" (2064 - 2069) are detailed, I will sit down and work up a campaign arc on the scope of Enemy of the Tir (SR2) and Rhapsody in Shadow (SR3)
wilcoxon
I bought 1st edition the first time I ever saw it. It was an amazing world and background. Unfortunately, after playing it once, it went on a shelf waiting for 2nd edition (the mechanics in 1st edition were horrible).

I bought 2nd edition as soon as it came out and loved it. I own almost all of the supplements and adventures (even though I've never played through most of the adventures).

I vowed never to buy anything for 3rd edition because FASA pissed me off. I was an avid fan and bought 1st and 2nd edition hardbacks plus most supplements and then FASA made the 3rd edition hardback a limited print run of 1000 only available at GenCon. Was I over-reacting? Probably but it annoyed the hell out of me.

I bought 4th edition when it came out. I prefer the dice mechanic in 4th edition as it gets rid of the odd probabilities. I like some of the other changes in 4th as well (ex: learning a spell rather than learning a spell at a specific force). I find the vagueness of other rules annoying (fire damage rules). I hate other rules (pretty much the entire hacking section especially the skill+program mechanic).

That being said, I much prefer the background of 1st-2nd edition (and presumably 3rd edition). Everything wireless is ludicrous and ruins the feel of the game, etc.
Thane36425
The whole wireless feel of SR4 might never come to pass. Currently there are stories out about how the wireless networks are worse for your health than cellphones, that they affect birds and may be partly responsible for the disappearance of the honey bees. Regardless of how true those are, hackers are already taking advantage of the free wifi and are hacking people's systems. The security threat as much as anything will probably see it fail.
Darkest Angel
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Apr 24 2007, 09:29 PM)
With Matrix and Rigger, deckers constantly invaded the rigger's world.
A trend which usually results in unified protocols.

Constantly? Umm no. Sure it was something they could try to a limited extent, but for the costs and it's effectiveness, it was definately a last resort if you could come up with the nuyen but not The Man™.

Deckers can only invade small portions of that world anyway, those parts being ostensibly sidelines of the Rigger's world as it is. Even then they're not even close to as good at it.

Being able to find top secret data on Sauder Krupp's standalone mainframe is one thing, being able to fly a T-Bird at bone crunching levels of G-force in combat is quite another. And that's how it should be.

Vectored Thrust Aircraft Skill =/= Computer Skill.
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (Thane36425)
The whole wireless feel of SR4 might never come to pass. Currently there are stories out about how the wireless networks are worse for your health than cellphones, that they affect birds and may be partly responsible for the disappearance of the honey bees. Regardless of how true those are, hackers are already taking advantage of the free wifi and are hacking people's systems. The security threat as much as anything will probably see it fail.

...more likely it will be the Cable, Satellite & telecom providers which see free wireless as cutting into their income. My hometown is in the process of going free access wi-fi citywide. There are also free nodes in nearly every coffee shop (except Starbucks which is on T Mobile @ 40.00$/mo, but hey, that's Starbucks), pub, and even hair salons and a neigbourhood laundromat.

I no longer have or feel I need a phone (land line or cellular), cable subscription, or satellite plan. The last thing I want is to go back to limited access (basically only from home) while shelling out 60$ - 70$ per month (or more) to a monopolistic cable provider which can and has in the past raised rates and changed service plans at whim. Considering the numerous benefits of almost unlimited connectivity, I think wireless is here to stay.

Since I do not make any "secure" transactions over the internet, the hacker threat for me is fairly minimal though I do have an extremely good firewall.
Kagetenshi
I say it will more likely be Mr. Claude Shannon and his little law, but whatever.

~J
Shrike30
Since when did die-offs ever really slow the march of progress?
WearzManySkins
I had no issues with Rigger 3 rules and such.

Had a rigger that a DM "allowed" him to rig a motorcycle from an enclosed sidecar. Got some interesting looks roaring down the highways....sometime the party's Troll sat where most would think the person controlling the bike sat. But the Troll could use all his weapons while being taken for the ride too.

Even more fun when the group of us got surprised while in a garage, rigger was out of the sidecar. Bad guys came in with grenades exploding, rigger remained prone like he was unconscious or dead, he was not wounded.

Then the sidecar started popping weapons turrets. The top was down on the sidecar. Things went bad for the bad guys, they found their light weapons were not up to the task of hurting the sidecar's armor.

The bad guys kept shouting get the rigger in the sidecar, they never clicked to the fact the rigger was lying on the ground, got to love the VCR 3 with all the trimmings. Bad guys Intel was not as good as it should have been. They never "saw" the rigger outside the sidecar. They did not survive to tell anyone what he looked like.

I have accepted the 4th rules, just have to remember that ones does not start out as tough in 4th as they did in 3rd.
SuperFly
I'm keeping the peace and sticking with 3rd Edition ruleset for the most part, but sadly it's become a necessity of late to purchase SR4 so that I can keep up with all the #S-Runners -- who've embraced them.
Blade
I loved SR3 and wasn't bothered by its "complexity" or its "bugs" (except maybe the munchkinability) but after reading and playing SR4 I can't go back to 3rd ed.

And I'm really surprised by people mentionning the fluff difference. For me, there's not much difference (even the wireless part is not such a big change) except maybe that SR4 is getting away from the "superheroic" feel of SR3 to get back to something more gritty and street-level... Which, for me, can only be a good thing !
ElFenrir
SR3 most definately. Of course, SR4 is still coming out with books, so it still feels incomplete. Something about SR4 rubs me a little bit in the wrong way. It's definately not bad, and ive played it, and had fun with it, but to me, it just lacks a....something that SR3 had.

SR3 had it flaws for sure, but i preferred the system, the chargen base system(me's a big priority fan, but i like BPs as well), i also think that lumping spirits together loses quite a bit of the feel in the magic system.

While i do say that SR4 cleaned up the rigging/decking system, it also suffers a bit from ''clumped all together''. And im also a fan of the pools. As stated by someone above, it made people think a bit more during combats, do i go all out, do i hold back and go out at the end, do i balance myself, etc.

And as for plain flavor, i liked the SR3 book. To me, it felt much darker and grittier than SR4. To me, the fact that you start at a more rookie power level does not make it dark and gritty, it makes it so you start at a rookie power level. Easy enough to do in SR3, just play with the priorities if that's what you want. Skill groups are nice(hell, SR2 used them when you think about it), but i was happy with the SR3 skill setup, even though creating generalists could be quite challenging at times due to these broken up skills. (a firearms generalist could easily blow 2/3 of his skill points getting just reasonable scores in all the main firearms.)

SR2 had its benefits, but it also had some significant problems with it.(the magic system was more cluttered IMO, Though someone mentioned it was too easy to munchkin a character, i didn't see it. In fact, the characters were generally on a lower power level than SR3(less priority points, etc.), the only problems i thought came was when trolls and orks with max body discovered Bioware and spellcasters concentrated on summoning Elementals or Nature Spirits when the ONLY spirits they could summon were elementals or nature spirits. Adepts were sorely lacking in many areas. (The classic adept power problem, theyve seemingly always been too much or too little. SR3 adepts i thought were about just right, finally...though i know plenty of people would disagree with me here. I judge by having a group broken by one, which i never did have.)

SR4 seemed to me a bit....dumbed down in ways. To me, anyway. It has its high points, as i said, but as a whole something is really lacking from it. In some ways, it actually feels too limiting. For but one example, in chargen, ill use how it says ''only half of BP for attributes allowed, only 1 skill at 6 or 2 at 5, only one attribute at 6....'', im not a fan of that. Im no powergamer, but Ive always been the fan of ''Dont tell me i CANT do something...tell me i can, just make it hard and/or make me pay for it.'' SR3 simply layed out what you got, and suggested that if the GM wanted to toy with the power level of his games, he was free to do so, and gave suggestions how too. It was less...i dunno, handholding like. (Im just using this chargen piece as an example, there are other instances in the book where I wasn't a fan of the new rules.)

So yeah, in the end, SR3 for me. grinbig.gif
MITJA3000+
There are many things I liked in SR3 that SR4 don't have. Pools, especially karma pool, for example. I'm also considering about buying MitS which I sold, just because of the totems/idols. I really dislike how the magic traditions are now technically pretty much the same and I pretty much hate how the mentor spirits are now more like archetypes. And the attribute and skill maximums, boy do I hate those. But on the other hand I never used Matrix or rigging in my games, and with SR4 there definitely more playable. So my choice is definitely SR4, and I loved Street magic, so I really do have high hopes of Arsenal, Augmentation and Unwired.
Kyoto Kid
...funny, how the vote is more than 2:1 for SR4 but most of the comments have been what we like about earlier editions.

As I (and several others have mentioned) 4th ed has many good points, some of which, (like doing away with that ridiculous Magic loss rule for wounds which IMO crocked adepts more than mages) I have houseruled into my SR3 campaign. I also do like the skill group option as well.

@ElFenrir: well put about the colour of the game. I agree, SR3 (& earlier editions) did have a much darker feel. I think part of is did come from, like I mentioned the fact that Shadowrunners were truly "in the shadows" since anonymity wasn't compromised by the now ever present commlink & required SIN (even if it is a fake one). The shadows were in and of themselves an entire society that lived off of the "left edge" of the SINnned. Since the crash of 64, the SINless have been forced to dovetail more with normal society. Basically someone, somewhere has your "real" name.

One of the other things I miss is the more comprehensive list of Edges & Flaws. There were a lot more cooler ones in SR2 - 3. Yes, it is nice these (as Qualities) were included in the 4th ed Core Book (as were Initiation/Meta Magic and Bioware), but many others were omitted (such as Phobia, Vehicle Empathy, Flashbacks, Friends in High Places, etc,) or were poorly re-written (such as Infirm).
cleggster

I feel that they got it right with 2nd edition. Vast improvement from 1rst, rules wise. 3rd essentially added a bunch of fixes to 2nd. Some improvements, some not. So it balances out. I still run my games using what I called 2.5ed. Essetialy 3rd, with some rule throwbacks to 2nd. especially concerning astral space.

ornot
Personally I prefer SR4. SR3 had the problem of rules creep, which SR4 hasn't yet developed (and I remain hopeful that the developers will limit any that does occur). When I played SR3, the matrix and rigging wound up largely unused, as most of my group couldn't be bothered to learn the rules.

I recall one game where the GM explicitly forbid dedicated hackers and riggers; after bad experiences with endless matrix runs and a rigger in a truck with more armament than a tank. This is mostly a criticism of him rather than the game.

My biggest problem with previous iterations was the probability curve, which was effectively probability 'steps'. As has been mentioned a TN of 7 was essentially the same as 6, while anything less than 6 was usually acheived with ridiculous ease. 8 through 11 was tough, 12 and 13 again equivalent, and so on.

The necessity of a runner maintaining a false identity adds an interesting side to the game, although I can see where one might consider it restrictive. I find that limiting those areas where you are likely to actually get scanned to the nicer areas of the city helps. In my world police drones don't stray too far from physical patrols due to the likelyhood of their getting hacked, and physical patrols stick to the nicer areas where the influential folk live. This leaves plenty of shadowy places where SINless runners can lurk.
ElFenrir
QUOTE
One of the other things I miss is the more comprehensive list of Edges & Flaws. There were a lot more cooler ones in SR2 - 3. Yes, it is nice these (as Qualities) were included in the 4th ed Core Book (as were Initiation/Meta Magic and Bioware), but many others were omitted (such as Phobia, Vehicle Empathy, Flashbacks, Friends in High Places, etc,) or were poorly re-written (such as Infirm).



I like this point you made. IMO, in addition to SR3 having a bigger variety, they were in general more balanced. If a player took the full 6 point allotment in SR2-3 of Flaws, it wasn't that unbalanced what they got(some attribute increase, or some other Edge, or a whopping 6 more BP.) And what they had to go through to get those 6 BPs or edge was pretty extreme. Hunted 6 was something that no runner would want to deal with(unless it was a very brave player). Likewise, the Edges weren't all that gamebreaking, either. They provided a bit of edge, and the flaws provided some fun for the GM or something interesting tacked to the character.

SR4's +/- qualities have some issues. I won't say they are terrible, or even whoppingly game breaking(ok, the Lucky + quality is pretty damn strong, ive known some to kick that one out), but they lack something. Again, GMs can adjust as needed, but i really liked the older ones. And yes, some are poorly rewritten.

Oh yeah, i might be a minority here, but the fact you have to take your tote....erm, Mentor Spirit as a + quality i think is absolutely dumb. The totems worked for three damned editions, why the hell fix what isn't broken? They came with inate bonuses and penalties as it was, no need to make players pay for them. Only 5 points, sure, but it's the idea behind it. nyahnyah.gif

And ive also noticed, even tho the SR4 option is leading by more than half, the actual posts seem to support the older editions. Come on, folks, if you like it more, say why now. grinbig.gif

(doesnt count toward those who have already posted, of course. smile.gif)
Blade
QUOTE ("Kyoto Kid")
@ElFenrir: well put about the colour of the game. I agree, SR3 (& earlier editions) did have a much darker feel. I think part of is did come from, like I mentioned the fact that Shadowrunners were truly "in the shadows" since anonymity wasn't compromised by the now ever present commlink & required SIN (even if it is a fake one). The shadows were in and of themselves an entire society that lived off of the "left edge" of the SINnned. Since the crash of 64, the SINless have been forced to dovetail more with normal society. Basically someone, somewhere has your "real" name.


I don't really agree.
First I think that anonimity was already a big problem in SR3. You didn't need a wireless matrix to have cameras and drones scanning your face everywhere you went. You didn't need a wireless matrix to have your credstick send data to the places you were going to. It was really hard to go without a fake SIN (in good neighborhoods I mean), and these were really expensive.
Now it's a little bit more balanced. Of course, it may be more difficult not to burn your fake SINs, but they are much cheaper now, and you can change them regularly. With SR3 you were supposed to do it, but they were so expensive that most GM preferred not to consider it.
And there still are a lot of places where you can go without a commlink in SR4, just not the A+ security rating areas.

And I find that SR3 has some kind of a superheroic feel. As long as the guy wasn't shooting at least a full burst of APDS you were invincible. The worst average attribute rating you could have with the priority systems were supposed to be the standard attribute rating. And SR4's fluff looked a lot more gritty to me. (I am comparing to the late SR3 fluff, not to SR1/2 which were closer to the cyberpunk's roots)

As for the dumbed down criticism, I think that most of the time it's just people not understanding what streamlined really means. Most of the time, it doesn't mean dumbed-down. It just means that you don't have to learn a new ruleset for each and every aspect. Even without the dice pools, combat is still very tactical and I don't feel restricted compared to what I could do in SR3.
Generally, I have the impression that most people who criticise SR4's rules do it more out of a need to criticise it, or because they see it through their own a priori ideas. It fells like even when they play it, they don't want to enjoy it, or they want it to be not as good as SR3.

About the Edge&Flaws issue, I have the impression that they removed all the E&F that didn't have a clear implications in the rules and were up to the GM or Player to include in the game.
Kyoto Kid
...when I was speaking of anonymity, I was referring to day to day life, not so much pertaining to the mission at hand. When you made routine purchases you used a credstick, & often it was certified. You could use one at the local stuffer shack, at the bar, club, Weapons World, etc. There was no datatrail to tie the transaction back to the character as there is with a commlink. A little theatrical makeup, a wig different clothing and most security cameras on the street or in stores were of little consequence as long as you were not breaking the law.

However, now, unless you spoof (or have a hacker buddy spoof for you) your datatrail, you have basically left your "fingerprint" behind. Yes you don't need to activate your commlink in a B or C neighbourhood, that is until you want to get a pack of smokes and a 40 of Spud Lite at the corner Stuffer Shack. Bingo, there is your commcode fingerprint again. With credsticks that wasn't the case. There was also the "feel" of actually exchanging something physical at a meet rather that "oh one minute" got it". Meanwhile, what did the Johnson or his hacker backdoor out of your commlink? I look at commlinks vs the old credstick as the difference between carrying plastic instead of cash in RL today. That was the feel I liked about the previous setting.

I do agree about fake SINs in SR3, yes they were overly expensive and yes a lot of GMs tended to either ignore them, or (as I usually did) drastically reduced the price for temporary ones so the characters could get into "XYZ" installation or attend a meet at "Chez Ritzy" (these usually were loaded on advance payment credsticks and expired after a certain time).

As to comments of "Dumbing Down", I agree with your assessment that the rules have been streamlined and have said so in previous discussions. I have played SR4 for some time now and, aside from some GM style issues, have enjoyed it (there was one low power campaign, albeit too short, I was in that I found to be immense fun).

Yeah in an ideal setting you can houserule Edges & Flaws, but more often than not I find that is not the case. I'm not saying bring all of them back, but there were a couple of some pretty major ones that were left out which should have been included.

deek
Our group still uses credsticks quite a bit...

Same thing with multiple SINs...each player has at least three and they tend to add more on a regular basis.
ornot
I agree about the whole data trail thing, but I tend to make certified credsticks a whole lot more common in less reputable areas, and assume that PCs store and withdraw their funds anonymously via mob run banking services.

In B and C neighbourhoods I doubt the shops even worry too much about taking grey funds of this sort. They're all corp run, and all the corps care about is money and power. Consequently the store isn't going to ask for your SIN, and the data trail to your banking service is going to wind up at the front door of the mob, accessed via a grey-market, anonymous matrix service provider.

That's my justification for it, anyway, and I feel it adds to the gritty and corrupt feel.
ElFenrir
When it was mentioned about people having criticizing SR4 for being the newer edition, im sure some do, but im sure that some also have their own legitimate reasons. I played SR2 for awhile and loved it, but had nothing but praise for SR3 when it came out, and that was the newer version for awhile. Ive played plenty of systems where i do indeed like the new one better. (Reminds me, when i do music journalism on the side, the ol' addage of ''eh, the first demo is always the best.'' not always true, of course, but said mainly in jest.)

But with SR4, i did have problems that clashed a bit with my playstyle. I don't hate it, or even dislike it as a whole, but i dislike more aspects of it than i did SR3(which i also disliked aspect of). I think it does some things i like more, and some i like less, but in general, SR3 gave me more for the game. Many of us end up moving onto the newer edition by almost habit, and ive played in some SR4 games that we had fantastic fun in.

Theres no problem with critizicing a system if you have problems with it, though.

And as for ''streamlined'' vs. ''dumbed down'', its different for different folks. I dont think the entire system is dumbed down, but some of it feels so to me.

But i can agree with the cost of fake SINs in SR3. Man, were they expensive.(as were other things. One of my SR3 complaints, actually.) To even get ONE at a reasonable level required some decent resources. If you were playing a face or assassin type who needs to dissapear often, better get ready to free up that top priority.

More reasonable costs in SR4 i have lots of praise for, i will say. You don't have to be uber rich to be able to hide yourself. smile.gif

Kyoto Kid
...Maybe it was a GM thing for in the last group I was with every transaction even those at a Stuffer Shack were only done by commlink.

@ornot: I would tend to go this route more as a GM for I also feel it does lend more to the darker atmosphere that attracted me to Shadowrun in the first place.

Were I see the slight contradiction is a SINless person needing a "registered" bank account to get by in everyday life (even if it is under an assumed identity), whereas in the past editions, you just carried credsticks.

As a side note: in RL I do not carry plastic & perform all transactions via cash or prepaid money order. Nothing sinister about it, I just like maintaning as much of a private life as is possible in these days of junk mail, telemarketers, spam, and ID thievery.
ornot
I'm not sure whether the registered bank thing was addressed to me or not. In case it was, let me say that I suspect that virtually all SINless people with any money to speak of probably have unregistered banking services.

I see this as being a really big money earner for criminal syndicates. Think how much money legitimate banks make today, while criminal organisations are famed for running money laundering and lona sharking businesses. In 2070 there are people that don't legally exist and can't get legitimate bank accounts, so how much of a leap is it for syndicates to offer other financial 'services'?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012