Never once have the surgery rules been mentioned on these boards without -- yes, call it hate. The reason most commonly given is that they are insanely complicated.
I never found them so. Quite the contrary: once I caught the mechanic, they seemed some of the most straightforward in the entire set of rulebooks. After all, the core of it was simply determining
(a) the category of surgery;
(b) the risked negative options and desired positive options; and
(c ) location/technology/condition:
all of which together gives a target number and the required number of successes for bad things not to happen and for each potential good thing thereafter.
The combat rules are considerably more complex: yet reaction to any single part of these is far less visceral. Spellcasting even has a similar structure of rules, with the balancing act of ideal Force level echoing the balance of desired surgical options against acceptable TN.
The surgery rules do, however, insert an element of risk that is not within the PC's direct control: something almost unique throughout the rulebooks. What's more, that risk cuts directly at a keystone of the PC's sought-after superiority.
Interestingly, I have noticed that many of the most welcomed SR4 changes cut out precisely this kind of risk, or indeed most situations where a PC would be required to find a way to work with others and perhaps even have to trust them. For example, Astral Gateway is no longer a power for which the PCs have to negotiate with a free spirit; but one which an Awakened PC can command of a Guidance spirit as soon as Invoking is learned.
Perhaps in parallel, other commonly welcomed changes in SR4 involve anything that reduces negative consequences of power. The constant risk of focus addiction is gone. At least in the core books through Augmentation, the objective potential for drug addiction has vanished. With Edge, even imminent death has become -- less than relevant.
(In fact, one of the most fought-against new rules continues to be the concept of aspected Essence holes, even with the simultaneous release of genetech to undo Essence holes altogether ... so permanent Essence loss becomes another negative consequence which becomes far less relevant in SR4. The argument against aspected Essence holes is that it's an unnecessary complication. I can't help but notice that the point of contention happens to be over one of the few remaining limitations on the power balancing act.)
And the surgery rules are gone.
What really underlies the hate of the surgery rules?
Full Version: Surgery
They were horribly complex and open to monstrous min/maxing. They were also yet another set of rules that were retconned into place, requiring existing characters to either lose out on the opportunity to use them, or do a decent amount of paperwork (and perhaps end up with headaches due to die rolls) to try and get their character "official" again.
It was just an unnecessary complication to the game. Surgery costs were always assumed to be part of the implant's cost, including the grade of the implant.
It would have been like including intricate rules over ten pages for improving skills and attributes beyond the base rules that already covered all the important aspects of doing just such a thing.
They simply went overboard rules-wise for something that would rarely come up for most characters or even most groups. "Downtime between runs" has always been ambiguous enough to do what you needed to do with regards to character advancement in a game that was based almost completely on ambigious rules. The orange orchid didn't need a lemon tree, especially a lemon tree with sour fruit on it that few people needed to eat as the oranges provided all their dietary requirements.
It would have been like including intricate rules over ten pages for improving skills and attributes beyond the base rules that already covered all the important aspects of doing just such a thing.
They simply went overboard rules-wise for something that would rarely come up for most characters or even most groups. "Downtime between runs" has always been ambiguous enough to do what you needed to do with regards to character advancement in a game that was based almost completely on ambigious rules. The orange orchid didn't need a lemon tree, especially a lemon tree with sour fruit on it that few people needed to eat as the oranges provided all their dietary requirements.
I was quite fine with the surgery rules, except for the usage some people made of them (nothing mention that you can't take 10 times the reduced essence cost positive quality... With a good doctor, with plenty of karma and all possible positive modifiers you could fit a Move By Wire in 1 essence point).
The rules I had some problem with were the serious wounds rules. They were cool because they added scars, trauma, etc. But they required too much time and dice rolling. I remember how it went :
"Ok. D wound: you're out. Here's the book, deal with the consequences while I finish the combat sequence, it should keep you busy for at least half an hour."
The rules I had some problem with were the serious wounds rules. They were cool because they added scars, trauma, etc. But they required too much time and dice rolling. I remember how it went :
"Ok. D wound: you're out. Here's the book, deal with the consequences while I finish the combat sequence, it should keep you busy for at least half an hour."
I've never had cause to use them (I don't actually play), but I actually like the surgery rules in M&M.
I can see the scenario where someone wants to get surgery and actually has to think about the risks of doing so - balancing the additional benefit of further implants (or cosmetic surgery) against the potential for disaster. Finding the right surgeon - one with skill that you can trust becomes a key part of it.
I agree somewhat on the cost issue (maybe there could be a reduction in the actual cost of implants to compensate?), but don't understand the point about having to adjust existing characters - surely just use the surgery rules for anything after that point?
I can see the scenario where someone wants to get surgery and actually has to think about the risks of doing so - balancing the additional benefit of further implants (or cosmetic surgery) against the potential for disaster. Finding the right surgeon - one with skill that you can trust becomes a key part of it.
I agree somewhat on the cost issue (maybe there could be a reduction in the actual cost of implants to compensate?), but don't understand the point about having to adjust existing characters - surely just use the surgery rules for anything after that point?
I personally don't like them because, at least to me, they don't add anything enjoyable to the game. Do I really want to deal with planning out a surgery? Hell no.
They took something that should have been highly abstract -- ie, just generate a TN based on the type of surgery (Healing? Cyber? Bio?), add complications (Damage level {L,M,S,D}, Cyber Grade {N,A,B,D}, Bio type {N,C}, Facilities {Poor,Average,Good,Excellent}, Staffing {Insufficient,Sufficient,Elite}, etc) -- and stripped most of the abstraction out of it.
It just feels like a bunch of busy work to me.
They took something that should have been highly abstract -- ie, just generate a TN based on the type of surgery (Healing? Cyber? Bio?), add complications (Damage level {L,M,S,D}, Cyber Grade {N,A,B,D}, Bio type {N,C}, Facilities {Poor,Average,Good,Excellent}, Staffing {Insufficient,Sufficient,Elite}, etc) -- and stripped most of the abstraction out of it.
It just feels like a bunch of busy work to me.
Basically, they were a totally uncontrollable risk you had to take any time you wanted to add cyberware, and one that didn't apply to most Awakened. Dying on the table because the NPC cyberdoc rolled badly isn't fun, and neither is having to consider whether or not to try to get major surgery to improve yourself while the party mage is learning how to deal 3S damage to an area 150 meters in diameter (IIRC) for very little drain.
It's an unnecessary disadvantage, unequally applied, that has only small benefits to the game (it is vital that implantation cost be separated from 'ware cost for fencing 'ware to make any sense at all) and none that couldn't have been gotten some other way. The complexity doesn't even enter into it--it's uncommon enough that almost any amount of complexity is acceptable.
~J
It's an unnecessary disadvantage, unequally applied, that has only small benefits to the game (it is vital that implantation cost be separated from 'ware cost for fencing 'ware to make any sense at all) and none that couldn't have been gotten some other way. The complexity doesn't even enter into it--it's uncommon enough that almost any amount of complexity is acceptable.
~J
I have dabbled with the surgery rules and still use them in a modified manner thanks to in-game reasons.
I like the realism they provide but highly dislike the added complexity and time they bring.
SR3 is basically four rule sets hung together with a common background. The surgery rules add a fifth set that only introduces the desire to get all your ware at character creation to avoid complication and risk. As I actively have to encourage my players to get more ware during game play this was counter productive.
The cyber element of cyber punk becomes harder to intergrate with the surgery rules due to the downsides but does high light the punk element in the need for cred for safe treatment.
Personally I think the logistical headache compounded by increased cost and risk for cyber characters combine for the hate on the forums.
We play for fun and one or other of these elements reduces most peoples fun.
I like the realism they provide but highly dislike the added complexity and time they bring.
SR3 is basically four rule sets hung together with a common background. The surgery rules add a fifth set that only introduces the desire to get all your ware at character creation to avoid complication and risk. As I actively have to encourage my players to get more ware during game play this was counter productive.
The cyber element of cyber punk becomes harder to intergrate with the surgery rules due to the downsides but does high light the punk element in the need for cred for safe treatment.
Personally I think the logistical headache compounded by increased cost and risk for cyber characters combine for the hate on the forums.
We play for fun and one or other of these elements reduces most peoples fun.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Basically, they were a totally uncontrollable risk you had to take any time you wanted to add cyberware, and one that didn't apply to most Awakened. Dying on the table because the NPC cyberdoc rolled badly isn't fun, and neither is having to consider whether or not to try to get major surgery to improve yourself while the party mage is learning how to deal 3S damage to an area 150 meters in diameter (IIRC) for very little drain. It's an unnecessary disadvantage, unequally applied, that has only small benefits to the game (it is vital that implantation cost be separated from 'ware cost for fencing 'ware to make any sense at all) and none that couldn't have been gotten some other way. The complexity doesn't even enter into it--it's uncommon enough that almost any amount of complexity is acceptable. ~J |
...as I know all to well with my original Tomoe. For a genetic treatment (Phenotypic Alteration) I ended up writing a spreadsheet to calculate all the time and associated costs. Too much like RL which is what I play the game for to get away from.
I don't use them in my campaigns however, I also do not make implantation an "instant "process (unless it is something mimor like a chipjack or datajack). I just use the basic wound recovery table without added costs since I also agree this is implied in the price of the 'ware itself.
But like I said in what you quoted, it can't be implied in the price of the 'ware--not without making selling cyberware totally undefined!
~J
~J
Delta Ware is a myth. What Delta clinics actually do is implant Betaware and tell you that it's Delta ware. Between the reduced TN for implanting Beta instead of Delta and the TN reduction for having higher grade tools than Beta calls for they can layer on a couple of Essence reductions and still come out ahead.
And that is emblematic of basically every single thing that was wrong with the M&M surgery rules. I am absolutely certain that the authors didn't think that they were retconning Deltaware out of existence, and indeed it takes quite a bit of reading and comparisons to realize that this is the case.
---
It's why when we wrote the surgery rules for SR4 they didn't really look like the Man and Machine rules on the subject. After spending hours mapping out exactly what the steps and effects of the rules in M&M actually were... we decided to make the new ones completely different instead.
-Frank
And that is emblematic of basically every single thing that was wrong with the M&M surgery rules. I am absolutely certain that the authors didn't think that they were retconning Deltaware out of existence, and indeed it takes quite a bit of reading and comparisons to realize that this is the case.
---
It's why when we wrote the surgery rules for SR4 they didn't really look like the Man and Machine rules on the subject. After spending hours mapping out exactly what the steps and effects of the rules in M&M actually were... we decided to make the new ones completely different instead.
-Frank
my biggest problem with the surgery rules wasn't their complexity, though they were certainly very complex. yes, the core concept was simple--figure out the TN, figure out the bad and good results, roll and see what you get--but the details were many. rolling against a TN is not simple if it takes you ten minutes of searching through modifiers to figure out what the TN is. moreover, surgery is something that happens only a few times in a character's life; there's no need to make it so complex.
but like i said, my biggest issue wasn't the complexity. it was the freaking cost. getting a datajack implanted with a fair assurance of not dying on the table or coming out horribly scarred could cost you five to ten times as much as the datajack itself. that's completley ridiculous when you consider that prior to M&M--all through the previous two editions, all through 3rd ed until M&M came out--the implant cost was assumed to include the cost of surgery.
re: the myth of deltaware, according to ShadowFAQ you can only take the same surgery option twice, positive or negative (though the wording in M&M strongly implies that only the negative is so limited). i can't be sure offhand, but if you use that limit, i believe it demythifies deltaware.
but like i said, my biggest issue wasn't the complexity. it was the freaking cost. getting a datajack implanted with a fair assurance of not dying on the table or coming out horribly scarred could cost you five to ten times as much as the datajack itself. that's completley ridiculous when you consider that prior to M&M--all through the previous two editions, all through 3rd ed until M&M came out--the implant cost was assumed to include the cost of surgery.
re: the myth of deltaware, according to ShadowFAQ you can only take the same surgery option twice, positive or negative (though the wording in M&M strongly implies that only the negative is so limited). i can't be sure offhand, but if you use that limit, i believe it demythifies deltaware.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| moreover, surgery is something that happens only a few times in a character's life; there's no need to make it so complex. |
I wholeheartedly reject this view--it's the exact opposite of correct. Something that you do only once, or only a small number of times, can have incredible complexity. If you do something three times, and it takes an hour each time, you've spent three hours on it. That's not a small amount, but in a lengthy campaign, three hours can be a tiny amount of your overall time.
On the other hand, take something that you do frequently. We'll call it twice an hour. If it takes you two minutes to do it, you lose twenty minutes per five-hour session to it. Nine sessions, and you've equaled the hour-long series of calculations. Woe betide you if you've got a truly long campaign.
Rare events are exactly where complexity can remain.
~J
rare events should not be complex because making something complex and unfamiliar makes it monumentally more likely that you'll screw it up. i agree that rare events should be... just woke up, so i can't think of the word. big, important, memorable, tense--any/all of the above. i don't think you should have to spend an hour looking up modifiers for something that comes up once in ten game sessions. but i do think something that comes up once in ten game sessions can/should involve a lot of die rolls. see the difference?
an astral quest is a good example of what i'm talking about. you don't go on astral quests everyday, generally, but when you do, it's usually an event. you do a lot of die rolling, you sweat a lot, but the actual mechanics aren't all that complicated, just variations on a theme.
an astral quest is a good example of what i'm talking about. you don't go on astral quests everyday, generally, but when you do, it's usually an event. you do a lot of die rolling, you sweat a lot, but the actual mechanics aren't all that complicated, just variations on a theme.
*laugh* -- I'm wondering at all the people who are arguing that surgery should not be complex, should be made more abstract (less realistic?) or even ignored altogether ... many of the exact same people who are arguing precisely the opposite wrt firearms in two separate threads.
Surgery is every bit as vital to a Shadowrun game as gunfire but much, much less frequently encountered: yet even this minimal detail is objected to. It's claimed to be unfairly risky, but a decent biotech skill possessed by a member of the team, combined with the teamwork and karma pool rules, should balance that out on a purely numbers basis. It's claimed to be complex: but for a given surgery, it's easy to run through full procedure and aftereffects in less than five minutes of gameplay. Even with the existing combat rules, except in a straightforward firefight, many combat situations can take much longer to rule.
(This, combined with the growing recent broad assumption that most situations reduce down to simple equations, tells me much about what some consider standard styles of play that should be entrenched in rulebook canon. I also suspect that metaquests -- a major Awakened parallel to the sammie's surgery -- are not being played at anywhere near the book-appropriate level of risk, let alone lethality.)
Rules should be rules. If more realism is desired, why only this or that pet project? Why not across the board? It's almost to the point of a Dumpshock truism:
1. Anything fully within the PC's direct control and of which the PCs can take primary advantage (preferably to inflict damage on NPCs) should be very detailed indeed.
2. Anything even a little outside the PC's direct control should be made abstract.
Note that this also accounts for the secondary hate reserved for any suggestion that social skills should not be primarily or solely reduced to the roll.
None of which would even be an issue except that player pressure does demonstrably bend the next generation canon rules in one direction or another, and the pattern of the shift has become absolutely clear.
Surgery is every bit as vital to a Shadowrun game as gunfire but much, much less frequently encountered: yet even this minimal detail is objected to. It's claimed to be unfairly risky, but a decent biotech skill possessed by a member of the team, combined with the teamwork and karma pool rules, should balance that out on a purely numbers basis. It's claimed to be complex: but for a given surgery, it's easy to run through full procedure and aftereffects in less than five minutes of gameplay. Even with the existing combat rules, except in a straightforward firefight, many combat situations can take much longer to rule.
(This, combined with the growing recent broad assumption that most situations reduce down to simple equations, tells me much about what some consider standard styles of play that should be entrenched in rulebook canon. I also suspect that metaquests -- a major Awakened parallel to the sammie's surgery -- are not being played at anywhere near the book-appropriate level of risk, let alone lethality.)
Rules should be rules. If more realism is desired, why only this or that pet project? Why not across the board? It's almost to the point of a Dumpshock truism:
1. Anything fully within the PC's direct control and of which the PCs can take primary advantage (preferably to inflict damage on NPCs) should be very detailed indeed.
2. Anything even a little outside the PC's direct control should be made abstract.
Note that this also accounts for the secondary hate reserved for any suggestion that social skills should not be primarily or solely reduced to the roll.
None of which would even be an issue except that player pressure does demonstrably bend the next generation canon rules in one direction or another, and the pattern of the shift has become absolutely clear.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| *laugh* -- I'm wondering at all the people who are arguing that surgery should not be complex, should be made more abstract (less realistic?) or even ignored altogether ... many of the exact same people who are arguing precisely the opposite wrt firearms in two separate threads. Surgery is every bit as vital to a Shadowrun game as gunfire but much, much less frequently encountered: yet even this minimal detail is objected to. It's claimed to be unfairly risky, but a decent biotech skill possessed by a member of the team, combined with the teamwork and karma pool rules, should balance that out on a purely numbers basis. It's claimed to be complex: but for a given surgery, it's easy to run through full procedure and aftereffects in less than five minutes of gameplay. Even with the existing combat rules, except in a straightforward firefight, many combat situations can take much longer to rule. (This, combined with the growing recent broad assumption that most situations reduce down to simple equations, tells me much about what some consider standard styles of play that should be entrenched in rulebook canon. I also suspect that metaquests -- a major Awakened parallel to the sammie's surgery -- are not being played at anywhere near the book-appropriate level of risk, let alone lethality.) Rules should be rules. If more realism is desired, why only this or that pet project? Why not across the board? It's almost to the point of a Dumpshock truism: 1. Anything fully within the PC's direct control and of which the PCs can take primary advantage (preferably to inflict damage on NPCs) should be very detailed indeed. 2. Anything even a little outside the PC's direct control should be made abstract. Note that this also accounts for the secondary hate reserved for any suggestion that social skills should not be primarily or solely reduced to the roll. None of which would even be an issue except that player pressure does demonstrably bend the next generation canon rules in one direction or another, and the pattern of the shift has become absolutely clear. |
Talia, now that we know that you're female, will you marry me?
I actually think that realistic surgery rules, in principle, would be very interesting. What could be more fascinating to study than different types of surgery? How is surgery done in a hospital versus a combat zone? What kinds of operations are safe and what kinds are risky? What is the risk of death in each case? Just how often do surgeons really drop the scalpel and do things like amuptate the wrong leg? I'd love for there to be rules for that, especially if that meant that rules were more realistic regarding disability incurred by injuries.
I would love to see something like a Raygun of surgery, where there's a lot of medical background information about various common surgical procedures and their principles and then some accompanying rules.
Maybe I'll start reading some dusty surgery textbooks left over from the 80s that are lying around here so I can begin to enlighten myself...
You mean my participation in the How to have female players enjoy an SR Game ? thread didn't make it absolutely clear? But not looking, thanks 
Still, I'm curious as to what gave me away this time? I hadn't thought that the primacy of consequence-independent gun culture was so primarily male. I had thought it -- along with the Raygun rules -- was primarily United-States homegrown, with strong Auzzie influence.
Still, I'm curious as to what gave me away this time? I hadn't thought that the primacy of consequence-independent gun culture was so primarily male. I had thought it -- along with the Raygun rules -- was primarily United-States homegrown, with strong Auzzie influence.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno @ Aug 2 2007, 06:45 PM) |
| You mean my participation in the How to have female players enjoy an SR Game ? thread didn't make it absolutely clear? But not looking, thanks Still, I'm curious as to what gave me away this time? I hadn't thought that the primacy of consequence-independent gun culture was so primarily male. I had thought it -- along with the Raygun rules -- was primarily United-States homegrown, with strong Auzzie influence. |
I dunno. Actually, with flesh and blood females who come from places like the south, a lot of them seem to enjoy shooting, in my experience.
I grew up in New York State and there most people don't like firearms because they tend to be ideologically left wing. I cannot escape my destiny and am also ideologically left wing, BUT because I played Doom back in the day that also makes me a sociopathic gun wielding murder simulation expert. Lots of people you talk to in New York, male or female, don't know anything about firearms and end up saying incorrect things like referring to an Army guy standing outside of the Port Authority in New York City with an automatic carbine as holding a "semi automatic machine gun" or something like that.
But once upon a time I journeyed to the south and subsequently was able to interact with people from that area, including some females. In general, both males and females demonstrated knowledge about firearms.
So in my experience gun culture is NOT a gendered thing, but rather a reigional thing.
There is nothing wrong with complex surgery rules. The problem comes when complex surgery rules are completely insane and bear no resemblance to anything that could be considered real surgery while simultaneously crushing the flavor created by every bit of fluff that had existed previously.
We go from having the installation of cybereyes, datajacks, and other ubiquitous and fashionable pieces of cyberware being simple outpatient procedures commonly preformed at boutiques located in shopping malls to all cyberware instillation being this huge life threatening thing with long recovery times.
We go from having the installation of cybereyes, datajacks, and other ubiquitous and fashionable pieces of cyberware being simple outpatient procedures commonly preformed at boutiques located in shopping malls to all cyberware instillation being this huge life threatening thing with long recovery times.
you can only run through a surgery that quickly if you're as familiar with the surgery rules as some of us are with the combat rules--in other words, no need to look up most of it. considering how rarely surgery comes up...
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| *laugh* -- I'm wondering at all the people who are arguing that surgery should not be complex, should be made more abstract (less realistic?) or even ignored altogether ... many of the exact same people who are arguing precisely the opposite wrt firearms in two separate threads. |
Not everyone's quite hypocritical when it comes to that sort of thing.
There's a natural desire for people who fancy themselves a fan or a pro of something to want to see that hobby in a more accurate portrayal whenever they come across it. Gun nuts, for instance, often get frustrated or annoyed by the abstract systems used in Shadowrun when it comes to using firearms, but couldn't give a wit's end about how abstract everything else is. It's a bit hyprocritical, sure, but it's completely understandable, too.
That said, the Surgery rules are exactly the reason why I'm personally against more realistic firearm (or anything else) rules in a game like Shadowrun. It's unncessary, overly complicated, easy to get confused by, slows the game down, and -- most importantly as far as I'm concerned -- threatens to potentially undermine game balance.
As a cinematic game, Shadowrun doesn't need rules to make everything ultra-super-realistic-and-detailed. It needs rules that simply actions, allow players tons of leeway, and invites over-the-top gameplay when the need arises. Ultra-super-realistic-and-detailed rules get in the way of that -- as demonstrated by M&M's Surgery rules -- is a prime example of why that's a Very Bad Thing™. It's also an example of why the Surgery rules themselves are a Very Bad Thing™. They're simply unnecessary and add nothing worthwhile to gameplay.
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| As a cinematic game, Shadowrun doesn't need rules to make everything ultra-super-realistic-and-detailed. It needs rules that simply actions, allow players tons of leeway, and invites over-the-top gameplay when the need arises. |
that's great for a cinematic game. not all of us think SR should be cinematic, though. or, at least, not that kind of movie.
I know.
of course, one problem with the surgery rules is that they're not realistic. a good street doc (skill 6) in average conditions (no modifiers) will inflict some kind of debilitating condition on his patient with ridiculous frequency. something like a third of the time, i think?
Wounded Ronin: I think you made my point for me.
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| The problem comes when complex surgery rules are completely insane and bear no resemblance to anything that could be considered real surgery while simultaneously crushing the flavor created by every bit of fluff that had existed previously. |
Because we have so much real-life experience with enhancement cybernetic surgery, and nowhere do we ever hear of things going horribly wrong.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| you can only run through a surgery that quickly if you're as familiar with the surgery rules as some of us are with the combat rules--in other words, no need to look up most of it. considering how rarely surgery comes up... |
Let's see: M&M core surgery-related rules run (including the Emergency Care Table) pp.142-152. Combat rules in the BBB alone run from pp.100-126, not counting supplementary rule- and sourcebooks.
I'll tell you right now I don't have either anywhere near memorised: but I do understand basic research principles, so I can usually find quickly what I'm looking for. There's a lot less to look through for surgery than for combat, and the key tables are every bit as easy to find and use as, say, melee/range/defender modifier tables in combat. (I could wish that my books didn't automatically fall open at those spots. Only a matter of time now before the pages really start falling out.)
Now, if an individual player chooses to virtually memorise one part over another: that's not exactly a weakness in the rules themselves.
| QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein) |
| There's a natural desire for people who fancy themselves a fan or a pro of something to want to see that hobby in a more accurate portrayal whenever they come across it. |
Absolutely true. My concern comes in only when a particular viewpoint tries to dominate and suppress all others in a wide-capture ruleset, to the point where (a) it tries to force itself into canon, and then (b) reject all viewpoints that are not canon. I did link a blog entry examining the pattern (in a wider context) into the other thread, but apparently to examine the psychology involved and its end results is considered an "edge personal philosophy" and thus off-topic.
Talia, you're using numbers to obscure and ignore the reality. the reality is, most people have a much harder time figuring out the surgery rules than the combat rules. it's an issue that crops up again and again in a wide array of groups. whether or not you think that's reasonable is irrelevant--the problem exists, and it exists in a wide enough sample to show that the problem is in the rules, not the players.
Yeah, I have participated in heart surgery in the back of an ambulance on an air strip. And the Man & Machine rules made my head explode.
When I went to make the surgery rules for Augmentation I seriously just made it an extended test and left it to glitches for bad things to happen other than the surgery damage and healing times.
I generally expect that surgeons will be professional and make few enough life-threatening errors that they will be allowed to continue working as surgeons.
-Frank
When I went to make the surgery rules for Augmentation I seriously just made it an extended test and left it to glitches for bad things to happen other than the surgery damage and healing times.
I generally expect that surgeons will be professional and make few enough life-threatening errors that they will be allowed to continue working as surgeons.
-Frank
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno @ Aug 2 2007, 06:30 PM) |
| I also suspect that metaquests -- a major Awakened parallel to the sammie's surgery -- are not being played at anywhere near the book-appropriate level of risk, let alone lethality. |
No, they are not remotely a parallel. All of the common activities that can be assisted with an Astral Quest (learning a spell, learning a formula, learning a metamagic, initiation ordeal) can be done without an Astral Quest. A Streetsam can't add or upgrade 'ware without surgery.
The Astral Quest rules could be changed to say "a character who goes on an Astral Quest dies instantly", and mages would still be able to advance in their core capabilities. A streetsam does not have that luxury.
Frank: I think you just summed up one of the fundamental changes in tone that I object to from recent books—you assume surgeons will be competent. Flavour from older books suggested you shouldn't assume surgeons to have had formal medical training.
~J
| QUOTE (FrankTrollman) |
| I generally expect that surgeons will be professional and make few enough life-threatening errors that they will be allowed to continue working as surgeons. |
Surgeons, yes. Illegal street docs who have no less than 15 warrants for practising medicine without a license, maybe (depends on why they don't currently have a license).
If your street doc was a true, trained, and certified surgeon, then he should have some skills. If he uses a bootleg skillsoft downloaded from a dark and disturbing corner of of the matrix, .... maybe, maybe this time he'll hit the flaw where some of the original code wasn't properly deleted (in which case, you may be marinated and stuffed as part of a bustergophechiduckneaealcockidgeoverwingailusharkolanbler recipe).
So, how well you should live is directly related to how picky you are with your medical contacts. In real life, doctors are less common than full mages in SR, so you may not have as much opportunity to be discriminating as you would prefer, given how some of them even try to stay legal (the shock and horror).
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| Talia, you're using numbers to obscure and ignore the reality. |
Now there's something you don't hear said everyday to me on Dumpshock.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| the reality is, most people have a much harder time figuring out the surgery rules than the combat rules. |
And I'm asking why that is: given that the surgery rules have considerably less complexity than, for example, the combat rules. It's not an intrinsic result of the surgery rules structure.
Kagetenshi: within the broader picture you're right. I was just borrowing the astral quest as one common example Awakened types used to ease their own acquisition of magical power: ie to reduce karma costs. It's not immediately relevant to this thread, but I'd have no problem with building in an equivalent risk to all initiation attempts.
Can you see the reaction were I to suggest it?
like i've said, it's the fact that the surgery rules don't get used much. they're not really more complex than the combat rules, but the combat rules get used every single game. the surgery rules, not so much--which means, given the way most people's memory works, that you have to relearn the rules every time someone gets surgery. if people only used the combat rules once every few games, then you'd get a lot (more) people complaining about how complex they are.
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) | ||
Surgeons, yes. Illegal street docs who have no less than 15 warrants for practising medicine without a license, maybe (depends on why they don't currently have a license). If your street doc was a true, trained, and certified surgeon, then he should have some skills. If he uses a bootleg skillsoft downloaded from a dark and disturbing corner of of the matrix, .... maybe, maybe this time he'll hit the flaw where some of the original code wasn't properly deleted (in which case, you may be marinated and stuffed as part of a bustergophechiduckneaealcockidgeoverwingailusharkolanbler recipe). So, how well you should live is directly related to how picky you are with your medical contacts. In real life, doctors are less common than full mages in SR, so you may not have as much opportunity to be discriminating as you would prefer, given how some of them even try to stay legal (the shock and horror). |
The chances of something going horribly wrong in SR4 surgery depend very much on the abilities of the doctor. A Logic 1, Medicine 1 Street Doc installing alpha grade cyberware is probably going to glich. A Logic 1, Medicine 1, Edge 2 Street Doc installing alpha grade 'ware through a rigger-adapted medkit is will unquestionably kill the patient by leaving him pen on the table since he has 0 surgery dice after modifiers and doesn't have enough edge to make finish via longshot tests .
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| but the combat rules get used every single game. |
... you use every one of the combat rules across three (four?) separate books -- not just the basic ruleset in the BBB -- every single game?
I'll put it this way:
One of the first things we did at SotSW was discard the surgery rules. Despite that, after three years of play (and that's six, because two games run under the umbrella of SotSW), no character has implanted 'ware post-chargen.
(Granted, a big reason for this is that most of the characters who would get 'ware (non-incompatible, non-Awakened) already have well in excess of five points worth, requiring multi-million-nuyen upgrades to get anything meaningful)
We have not used every combat action from every book in that time. I don't think anyone has tried a Kick Attack or a Kip-Up. Nevertheless, we have achieved substantial coverage of combat rules, including vehicle gunnery (both types) and MIJI (or the tiny subset that isn't rendered useless by encryption), most of it frequent.
~J
One of the first things we did at SotSW was discard the surgery rules. Despite that, after three years of play (and that's six, because two games run under the umbrella of SotSW), no character has implanted 'ware post-chargen.
(Granted, a big reason for this is that most of the characters who would get 'ware (non-incompatible, non-Awakened) already have well in excess of five points worth, requiring multi-million-nuyen upgrades to get anything meaningful)
We have not used every combat action from every book in that time. I don't think anyone has tried a Kick Attack or a Kip-Up. Nevertheless, we have achieved substantial coverage of combat rules, including vehicle gunnery (both types) and MIJI (or the tiny subset that isn't rendered useless by encryption), most of it frequent.
~J
no, but i use the basic combat rules--into which all those other rules fit, more or less smoothly--every game. i don't use the basic surgery rules every game, so not only to i have to relearn all the applicable modifiers, i have to relearn all of the steps i have to go through.
It's a matter of running down the list of, what, three tables? four? And they're all in the same place!
FWIW, life took me away from SR for over a year before I managed even to return to these boards. I hadn't touched the surgery section since even before that.
It took me five minutes to go through the entire section, before opening this topic. The only relevant points not in that section are covered in the BBB damage/healing section: again, brief and limited.
It takes me much, much longer to pull in overbearing, and surprise/ambush, and martial arts, and overdamage, and the relevance of perception and range modifiers within this or that combination of scope/lenses/cybereyes, and armour reduction, and the specific rules involved with specific types of ammo ... They don't all fit neatly into the basic combat structure; and the various tables and in-text rules are all over the place. Since I've returned I've been involved in SR combats, but I haven't yet had a chance to re-read all the combat rules yet.
FWIW, life took me away from SR for over a year before I managed even to return to these boards. I hadn't touched the surgery section since even before that.
It took me five minutes to go through the entire section, before opening this topic. The only relevant points not in that section are covered in the BBB damage/healing section: again, brief and limited.
It takes me much, much longer to pull in overbearing, and surprise/ambush, and martial arts, and overdamage, and the relevance of perception and range modifiers within this or that combination of scope/lenses/cybereyes, and armour reduction, and the specific rules involved with specific types of ammo ... They don't all fit neatly into the basic combat structure; and the various tables and in-text rules are all over the place. Since I've returned I've been involved in SR combats, but I haven't yet had a chance to re-read all the combat rules yet.
no, it's a matter of knowing what tables to check, in what order. and then making sure of what modifiers apply--and maybe making adjustments to the situation to get better modifiers. and then going through all the positive and negative options to fill out your list. and then tallying up all the factors that go into the pricetag for the surgery, and maybe jiggering the mods again because you can't afford some of them. and then figuring out what to roll. and then doing the roll and rp'ing the whole thing (if you choose to).
look, you think it's simple. bully for you. i think the SR3 Matrix rules are simple, but i get shouted down all the time by masses upon masses of people who find them ridiculously complex. at some point, you have to accept that you're are the outlier.
look, you think it's simple. bully for you. i think the SR3 Matrix rules are simple, but i get shouted down all the time by masses upon masses of people who find them ridiculously complex. at some point, you have to accept that you're are the outlier.
Maybe it's just me, but it's not that the surgery rules are highly complex, it's that I'm not interested in the surgery rules, and so any amount of complexity above "basic" is unacceptable to me.
For the same reason, I don't want ten pages of rules on how to handle it when you have to solve a math problem, or ten pages of rules on how to handle it when you want to perform in a play, etc, etc.
Surgery is important in Shadowrun, but unless I'm playing a surgeon, I just don't need any level of complexity.
For the same reason, I don't want ten pages of rules on how to handle it when you have to solve a math problem, or ten pages of rules on how to handle it when you want to perform in a play, etc, etc.
Surgery is important in Shadowrun, but unless I'm playing a surgeon, I just don't need any level of complexity.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| at some point, you have to accept that you're are the outlier. |
Never said I wasn't.
That being said, it still doesn't explain why you find the Matrix system more straightforward over the surgery system; and why people generally are more likely to find the combat system straightforward over the surgery system.
I repeat: it's not something intrinsic to the rule structure.
Nor is it simply familiarity, because the sheer number of rules involved with either combat or Matrix mean that it's very nearly impossible to be using all of them with a frequency equal to how often surgery is needed.
Sometimes people object to some part or another of combat or Matrix rules on the basis of over-complexity or over-realism or non-realism, but it's never with that same sheer hate.
Maybe I'm wondering why people who do want to keep upgrading their PCs don't want to become comfortable with the surgery rules.
After all, if you don't like a concept, rejecting it out of hand is a very easy way not to have to think about why. And in SR, it's been demonstrated that enough hate, whether or not that hate has any objective grounding, will get the rules changed.
And then, of course, the arguments change to screaming oneself RAW.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| That being said, it still doesn't explain why you find the Matrix system more straightforward over the surgery system; and why people generally are more likely to find the combat system straightforward over the surgery system. |
i didn't say that. i said i don't find the Matrix system to be overly complex. for its role, for the frequency it gets used, i find the Matrix rules to be of enjoyable complexity.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| I repeat: it's not something intrinsic to the rule structure. Nor is it simply familiarity, because the sheer number of rules involved with either combat or Matrix mean that it's very nearly impossible to be using all of them with a frequency equal to how often surgery is needed. |
yes, it is. it's a combination of both. the rule structure is too complex for the level of familiarity most players have with it. what you're not getting is that most players, when they open up the surgery section have to learn or relearn the basic structure of the surgery rules. when looking up obscure rules in combat or the Matrix, i already know the basic structure of the rules, so it's easy for me to slide the obscure rule into my understanding.
as for why i don't want to become familiar with the surgery rules? i'm not here to play surgeryrun. i don't want to have expend significant amounts of OOC and IC resources on every minor upgrade. it screws with my suspension of disblief--if surgery is this hard, why is cyberware so popular? if a good street doc under normal conditions has something like a 1 in 3 chance of scarring you for life, why aren't there more horribly scarred runners around?
| QUOTE (mfb) | ||
yes, it is. |
Ah, the objectivity illusion.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| it's a combination of both. the rule structure is too complex for the level of familiarity most players have with it ... when looking up obscure rules in combat or the Matrix, i already know the basic structure of the rules |
That almost defines a circular argument: too complex for the amount of familiarity players have, yet players don't become more familiar with it because of the amount of complexity.
Or, alternately: if something is not already known, why try to become familiar with it?
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| as for why i don't want to become familiar with the surgery rules? i'm not here to play surgeryrun. |
You're also not here to play lifestylerun: yet I've heard no particular Dumpshock-wide hate for the optional lifestyle rules. (About the same amount of detail in those rules btw.) If body modification is a relevant factor for most SR PCs, then so is how the PC gets that modification. Just pay for it and forget it? Availability rules in themselves suggest it's not supposed to be that simple, and then we have the whole "third party" rules whenever someone tries to obtain or learn something through the FoF. Although I'm guessing your style of play probably glosses over most of those also?
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| it screws with my suspension of disblief--if surgery is this hard, why is cyberware so popular? |
Ask exactly the same question about cosmetic surgery today ... and then search out some of the cases where things went horribly wrong: by professional surgeons, in licenced hospitals.
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| if a good street doc under normal conditions has something like a 1 in 3 chance of scarring you for life, why aren't there more horribly scarred runners around? |
A street doc's reputation depends on word of mouth. Thus the reputable street doc has incentive to throw in their own Karma pool to avoid a catastrophic result. And the less reputable street doc? Well, you get what you pay for.
@ Vaevictis:
I think we've discussed elsewhere the increasing reduction of Shadowrun to pressing the I WIN button equations. Removing the surgery rules -- and thus any possible complications to the equation -- is another expression of that same syndrome.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| After all, if you don't like a concept, rejecting it out of hand is a very easy way not to have to think about why. And in SR, it's been demonstrated that enough hate, whether or not that hate has any objective grounding, will get the rules changed. |
I'm just curious, here, but how often does that happen, really? You've brought it up a couple times now, and you act like it happens all the time; the devs read an angry thread on Dumpshock, and according to you all sorts of rules change as a result.
Can you point to any instances of this happening? Particularly with any sort of regularity?
Possibly because I see variations of it in the way people behave every day: and increasingly I'm seeing it as the most common behavioural reaction to any kind of having been stymied. I did point to one example directly in that blog entry you found irrelevant, but it's really not difficult to find others around you. Just watch your average office politics in action.
As to Dumpshock: with v.4, we have seen rules changes happen, in the specific directions I have already indicated in this thread. The regularity is only insofar as it happened with the new edition.
Who knows yet what direction v.5 will take?
As to Dumpshock: with v.4, we have seen rules changes happen, in the specific directions I have already indicated in this thread. The regularity is only insofar as it happened with the new edition.
Who knows yet what direction v.5 will take?
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| Possibly because I see variations of it in the way people behave every day: and increasingly I'm seeing it as the most common behavioural reaction to any kind of having been stymied. I did point to one example directly in that blog entry you found irrelevant, but it's really not difficult to find others around you. Just watch your average office politics in action. As to Dumpshock: with v.4, we have seen rules changes happen, in the specific directions I have already indicated in this thread. The regularity is only insofar as it happened with the new edition. Who knows yet what direction v.5 will take? |
What? I thought that most of the old timers are totally not happy about the direction that SR4 took, and what people spend the most time complaining about is firearms realism, which we didn't really see more of in SR4.
Some oldtimers, yes. You'll have noticed the post-SR4 schism, which wouldn't have happened had all or even most oldtimers agreed.
But what demographic do game developers have to keep tapping (and thus listen to) to stay profitable?
But what demographic do game developers have to keep tapping (and thus listen to) to stay profitable?
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| Some oldtimers, yes. You'll have noticed the post-SR4 schism, which wouldn't have happened had all or even most oldtimers agreed. But what demographic do game developers have to keep tapping (and thus listen to) to stay profitable? |
So you're telling me that in fact most of the oldtimers didn't like firearms realism and that's why we didn't get any but at the same time game designers ignore oldtimers and cater to new audiences which also dislike firearms realism?
Fair enough point.
I'm suggesting that only those oldtimer points -- and remember, most of us aren't old, after all -- which would also appeal to a younger, videogame-raised generation were accepted. (Consider the new use of Edge v. the old combat pool in this context.)
As to the rest: remember the way of Kagetenshi's attempted revisions?
I'm suggesting that only those oldtimer points -- and remember, most of us aren't old, after all -- which would also appeal to a younger, videogame-raised generation were accepted. (Consider the new use of Edge v. the old combat pool in this context.)
As to the rest: remember the way of Kagetenshi's attempted revisions?
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| @ Vaevictis: I think we've discussed elsewhere the increasing reduction of Shadowrun to pressing the I WIN button equations. Removing the surgery rules -- and thus any possible complications to the equation -- is another expression of that same syndrome. |
What a load of horseshit. It's not the risk I have a problem with, it's having 10 pages of rules that add nothing to the game except a bunch of busy work.
EDIT: Which is to say, I don't have a problem with there being surgery rules, or there being risk associated with them, I just don't think that having 10 pages of rules for it is beneficial or enjoyable in a game like Shadowrun.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| That almost defines a circular argument: too complex for the amount of familiarity players have, yet players don't become more familiar with it because of the amount of complexity. Or, alternately: if something is not already known, why try to become familiar with it? |
it's not circular, it's self-reinforcing. if you want to bash players for being too lazy to learn unfamiliar rules that are going to see rare usage, be my guest. it won't stop them from being too lazy to bother learning the rules, which means the rules are too complex to be used in most games.
if you seriously think the lifestyle rules are anything remotely similar in level of complexity to the surgery rules, then you are either seriously misunderstanding the surgery rules or seriously misunderstanding the lifestyle rules. with the lifestyle rules, you select options, add up their value, and check that value against a single chart. the surgery rules... i've already gone over what the surgery rules entail. and, looking back, i didn't even mention the part about getting a medical profile and a surgery plan created.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| Ask exactly the same question about cosmetic surgery today ... and then search out some of the cases where things went horribly wrong: by professional surgeons, in licenced hospitals. |
professional surgeons in licensed hospitals do not, statistically, have a one in three chance of screwing up horribly. hell, the screwups at Walter Reed that were recently in the news didn't have a ratio that bad. i mean, you are seriously suggesting that a professional doctor with a good, clean working area, the correct tools, and full knowledge of his patient's medical profile should have to pull a miracle out of his ass every third time he installs a datajack.
| QUOTE (Talia Invierno) |
| I think we've discussed elsewhere the increasing reduction of Shadowrun to pressing the I WIN button equations. Removing the surgery rules -- and thus any possible complications to the equation -- is another expression of that same syndrome. |
so, what, everybody who played SR1-2 were just unrepentant munchkins?
*laugh*
Vaevictis, I wouldn't expect you to feel any other way.
For mfb's reference: if you wish to consider that bashing, then it's bashing. Do note though that I never called or considered it that.
The distinction between circular and self-reinforcing lies only in whether or not you want to find a reason for having entered the circle in the first place.
Btw I'd summarised the lifestyle rules separately for my own use -- came out to eight pages of densely worded charts at 6 pt font.
As to the real chance of major screwup, check those rules again, using the modifiers you just cited for a basic surgery such as only a datajack. One of the points of those rules is that the more modifications you have, the harder future surgery gets. Run-of-the-mill datajacks -- only -- don't have anywhere near that high a risk within the conditions you describe.
Vaevictis, I wouldn't expect you to feel any other way.
For mfb's reference: if you wish to consider that bashing, then it's bashing. Do note though that I never called or considered it that.
The distinction between circular and self-reinforcing lies only in whether or not you want to find a reason for having entered the circle in the first place.
Btw I'd summarised the lifestyle rules separately for my own use -- came out to eight pages of densely worded charts at 6 pt font.
As to the real chance of major screwup, check those rules again, using the modifiers you just cited for a basic surgery such as only a datajack. One of the points of those rules is that the more modifications you have, the harder future surgery gets. Run-of-the-mill datajacks -- only -- don't have anywhere near that high a risk within the conditions you describe.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.