QUOTE (ornot @ Apr 8 2008, 11:54 AM) 
What a genius idea! And people on the matrix would laugh at the PCs continually.
Have it set in LA and make a reality show out of it!
Full Version: You know, i think i know why im wary of nerfs
Have it set in LA and make a reality show out of it!
Yep... The Legend Of The Mall Ninjas is now an up and coming children trid show that stars a lovable bunch of retired runners who must thwart dastardly plots from the comfort of their cushy "Retail Center" jobs.
QUOTE (toturi @ Apr 8 2008, 05:54 PM)
Yes, and this is why you'd want that massive dice pool. I am not talking only about combat dice, but dice pools in general. When running the legwork, you want more dice to find out more. Getting the layout and security, you want more dice, to find out more and to make sure word doesn't leak that you are interested. Getting in, you want more dice... Planning, you should want more dice, but usually the GM would prefer you to "roleplay", so maybe there's your challenge, but realistically(in the sense that whatever happens in the game world is governed by the game mechanics) your dice should decide whether your plan was good or bad and you'd want more dice for that too. You don't necessarily require more dice, but you'd want more dice anyway. Your plan should come together when you have the necessary amount of hits/successes/etc; if not, well, maybe you should have bought more dice then. And when you don't have the requisite number of successes for a smooth run, then that's when your combat dice comes into play and hopefully you brought more dice than the NPC did.
We don't roll dice and ask the GM to give us a plan based on the number of successes we rolled, we come up with a plan...
The info gathering and actual running has rolls in it, but the planning is pretty much diceless...
And a plan shouldn't work just because you can throw enough dice during it's execution...
Sure, when you have to roll, anyone would go for the 15 DP over the 10 DP...
But I always thought the whole point of planning was to remove the reliance on random elements...
With good planning for combat, you can easily take out a clearly stronger force...
Expecting no challenge leads to bad planning, which in turn leads to making new characters...
Player 1: "Ok lets come up with a plan guys!"
*party creates a good workable plan*
GM: "Roll your knowledge small unit tactics, security procedures, engineering, and smuggling routes. Ok so none of you have small unit tactics so I think you need to devise a different plan."
Player 2: "Lamez!!one!1"
There is rolling large dice pools and then there is the pornomancer. Large amounts of dice are nice, but opening up your dice bag, and then asking everyone around the table for more dice, and then asking the GM for some dice...
*party creates a good workable plan*
GM: "Roll your knowledge small unit tactics, security procedures, engineering, and smuggling routes. Ok so none of you have small unit tactics so I think you need to devise a different plan."
Player 2: "Lamez!!one!1"
There is rolling large dice pools and then there is the pornomancer. Large amounts of dice are nice, but opening up your dice bag, and then asking everyone around the table for more dice, and then asking the GM for some dice...
Heh, yeah...I mean, when people talk about overinflated dice pools...I mean, IMO...the firearms adept that throws 16-18 is not overinflated. 20 means they took 6(+2), have an 8 Agility(optimized for what they do, yes), a couple levels in Firefight to help ease the in-close modifier and a smartlink. Thats 18 dice there. Move it to Agility 5(7), Firarms 5(+2) and a smartlink and it's an easy 16, and that's not even overly twinked.
But i mean...yeah. Pornomancers and their 30+ DPs...a liiittle bit out there.
But in the end, the buckets and buckets of DPs come from non combatants, 90% of the time. Due to the Agility limits and the extreme costs of maxing out Physical attributes, getting the genetech and the stats to surpass them, and then being an elf if you REALLY wanna squeeze every combat point out, and then not totally ditching other physical stats since you're a combat character, and then getting other ware to boost the whole lot of them, and then get the skills as high as you can...to get those massive, massive combat pools, it's a sight more expensive. (Adepts have improved ability, but it is of course twice as expensive as the non combat monkeys.)
The non combat monkeys, they have it easy to explode their dice. But really, in the end, i find before nerfs have to come into play, we deal with things 'gentleman's style'.
I ask ''please, for your face/stealth shadow ninja/Uber Fixit Techdude, don't make someone with a 35 DP to seduce or hide or build a bomb out of a tampon, a rubberband and shampoo.'' They ask me if 20 is fine. I have raptures that someone plays a social or stealth or fixit character with only 20 dice. I say yes. Problem solved and nothing had to be changed in the book.
but yeah, i know, sometimes, things can't always go that smooth.
But i mean...yeah. Pornomancers and their 30+ DPs...a liiittle bit out there.
But in the end, the buckets and buckets of DPs come from non combatants, 90% of the time. Due to the Agility limits and the extreme costs of maxing out Physical attributes, getting the genetech and the stats to surpass them, and then being an elf if you REALLY wanna squeeze every combat point out, and then not totally ditching other physical stats since you're a combat character, and then getting other ware to boost the whole lot of them, and then get the skills as high as you can...to get those massive, massive combat pools, it's a sight more expensive. (Adepts have improved ability, but it is of course twice as expensive as the non combat monkeys.)
The non combat monkeys, they have it easy to explode their dice. But really, in the end, i find before nerfs have to come into play, we deal with things 'gentleman's style'.
I ask ''please, for your face/stealth shadow ninja/Uber Fixit Techdude, don't make someone with a 35 DP to seduce or hide or build a bomb out of a tampon, a rubberband and shampoo.'' They ask me if 20 is fine. I have raptures that someone plays a social or stealth or fixit character with only 20 dice. I say yes. Problem solved and nothing had to be changed in the book.
but yeah, i know, sometimes, things can't always go that smooth.
Ooops. Hit submit by accident... editing....
edited.
It's not too bad if you use the skill rolls as kindof a legwork extended task to see how long the actual getting together of the details that don't really need played-out interaction with NPCs takes. But yeah, needing the tactics roll is a bit much
edited.
QUOTE (masterofm @ Apr 8 2008, 09:51 PM)
Player 1: "Ok lets come up with a plan guys!"
*party creates a good workable plan*
GM: "Roll your knowledge small unit tactics, security procedures, engineering, and smuggling routes. Ok so none of you have small unit tactics so I think you need to devise a different plan."
Player 2: "Lamez!!one!1"
*party creates a good workable plan*
GM: "Roll your knowledge small unit tactics, security procedures, engineering, and smuggling routes. Ok so none of you have small unit tactics so I think you need to devise a different plan."
Player 2: "Lamez!!one!1"
It's not too bad if you use the skill rolls as kindof a legwork extended task to see how long the actual getting together of the details that don't really need played-out interaction with NPCs takes. But yeah, needing the tactics roll is a bit much
QUOTE (ElFenrir @ Apr 8 2008, 05:52 PM)
Heh, yeah...I mean, when people talk about overinflated dice pools...I mean, IMO...the firearms adept that throws 16-18 is not overinflated. 20 means they took 6(+2), have an 8 Agility(optimized for what they do, yes), a couple levels in Firefight to help ease the in-close modifier and a smartlink. Thats 18 dice there. Move it to Agility 5(7), Firarms 5(+2) and a smartlink and it's an easy 16, and that's not even overly twinked.
But i mean...yeah. Pornomancers and their 30+ DPs...a liiittle bit out there.
But in the end, the buckets and buckets of DPs come from non combatants, 90% of the time. Due to the Agility limits and the extreme costs of maxing out Physical attributes, getting the genetech and the stats to surpass them, and then being an elf if you REALLY wanna squeeze every combat point out, and then not totally ditching other physical stats since you're a combat character, and then getting other ware to boost the whole lot of them, and then get the skills as high as you can...to get those massive, massive combat pools, it's a sight more expensive. (Adepts have improved ability, but it is of course twice as expensive as the non combat monkeys.)
The non combat monkeys, they have it easy to explode their dice. But really, in the end, i find before nerfs have to come into play, we deal with things 'gentleman's style'.
I ask ''please, for your face/stealth shadow ninja/Uber Fixit Techdude, don't make someone with a 35 DP to seduce or hide or build a bomb out of a tampon, a rubberband and shampoo.'' They ask me if 20 is fine. I have raptures that someone plays a social or stealth or fixit character with only 20 dice. I say yes. Problem solved and nothing had to be changed in the book.
but yeah, i know, sometimes, things can't always go that smooth.
But i mean...yeah. Pornomancers and their 30+ DPs...a liiittle bit out there.
But in the end, the buckets and buckets of DPs come from non combatants, 90% of the time. Due to the Agility limits and the extreme costs of maxing out Physical attributes, getting the genetech and the stats to surpass them, and then being an elf if you REALLY wanna squeeze every combat point out, and then not totally ditching other physical stats since you're a combat character, and then getting other ware to boost the whole lot of them, and then get the skills as high as you can...to get those massive, massive combat pools, it's a sight more expensive. (Adepts have improved ability, but it is of course twice as expensive as the non combat monkeys.)
The non combat monkeys, they have it easy to explode their dice. But really, in the end, i find before nerfs have to come into play, we deal with things 'gentleman's style'.
I ask ''please, for your face/stealth shadow ninja/Uber Fixit Techdude, don't make someone with a 35 DP to seduce or hide or build a bomb out of a tampon, a rubberband and shampoo.'' They ask me if 20 is fine. I have raptures that someone plays a social or stealth or fixit character with only 20 dice. I say yes. Problem solved and nothing had to be changed in the book.
but yeah, i know, sometimes, things can't always go that smooth.
I know some don't like capping successes...but it works very well to remove the whole DP race from the game. Knowing you can only get a limited amount of successes to count, and unopposed only needing 4 for just about anything...well, that stops the munchkins from trying to go crazy extreme on the DPs.
With a DP of 14-18, you have about all the dice you will ever need and if things get really hairy, you use edge, get a few more dice plus explode all your 6s. Hence, my players will easily trade a mid to high 20 DP in one skill for a couple of low to mid teen skills. I mean, through in 3-4 edge, and those pair of 12 DP skills jump up to 15-16 plus exploding 6s...
The hit capping thing, yeah...not a big fan, though I can see where the benefits come in. I actually like how low skills are viable again; in SR3, if you had a Car B/R of 1 or 2, it was a flavor skill. Hell, ive seen Car B/R of 3 backfire horribly before. I like how the combination of attribute and skill allows someone with less training to at least be able to handle some stuff; that and how the 'bar is lower' so to speak, meaning someone with a 1 or 2 actually has some ok training; that 3 does it for a living. Sure, chances are, unless Edge is spent, the 5 Logic 1 Automotive Mechanic isn't hitting Threshold 3 really easy(4 successes on 6 dice is pretty rough.) But at least he can give it a nice shot.
And personally, 95% of the time, I too would take 2 13-15 DPs over 1 20, extremely easily. The only time I sometimes try for 'the supar skill' is if it's for a certain concept, like my current character. Yeah, I did a bit of scrounging to get my 7, but i just wanted to play someone with a 7, because i never did. There were sacrifices, but that kinda goes with the turf.
Otherwise, i'm all about spreading it out more.
And personally, 95% of the time, I too would take 2 13-15 DPs over 1 20, extremely easily. The only time I sometimes try for 'the supar skill' is if it's for a certain concept, like my current character. Yeah, I did a bit of scrounging to get my 7, but i just wanted to play someone with a 7, because i never did. There were sacrifices, but that kinda goes with the turf.
Otherwise, i'm all about spreading it out more.
I just never understood the compulsion to house rule, I paid for those rule books so I wouldn't have to make up rules, I am perfectly capable of running with out any rules what so ever, but I want to play Shadowrun... but then I guess there are people who house rule Monopoly, so, to each there own.
QUOTE (Lyonheart @ Apr 10 2008, 03:33 AM)
I just never understood the compulsion to house rule, I paid for those rule books so I wouldn't have to make up rules, I am perfectly capable of running with out any rules what so ever, but I want to play Shadowrun... but then I guess there are people who house rule Monopoly, so, to each there own.
It's simple: No game designer will ever make a game that's perfectly suited for my and my friends' taste. So, we house rule it.
It's like when you buy a car, you adjust the seat so you are comfortable, you don't simply keep the seat in the position where the factory left it. And if needed, you add a cushion, new cover, cup holder, replace the sound system, tune the engine, etc.
House ruling just means you customise your game. We do it with cars, with houses, with our computer desktops. Why should we not do it with Shadowrun?
QUOTE (Fuchs @ Apr 10 2008, 03:00 PM)
It's simple: No game designer will ever make a game that's perfectly suited for my and my friends' taste. So, we house rule it.
It's like when you buy a car, you adjust the seat so you are comfortable, you don't simply keep the seat in the position where the factory left it. And if needed, you add a cushion, new cover, cup holder, replace the sound system, tune the engine, etc.
House ruling just means you customise your game. We do it with cars, with houses, with our computer desktops. Why should we not do it with Shadowrun?
It's like when you buy a car, you adjust the seat so you are comfortable, you don't simply keep the seat in the position where the factory left it. And if needed, you add a cushion, new cover, cup holder, replace the sound system, tune the engine, etc.
House ruling just means you customise your game. We do it with cars, with houses, with our computer desktops. Why should we not do it with Shadowrun?
Because you cannot customise the laws of physics. You can add NPCs, you create your own PCs instead of using the ones in the book, that's customisation. You alter the cosmetics with customisation, but when you house rule, you are essentially altering the underlying "physics" of how your "car" works. Sure you can house rule, but realise that when you do so, depending on the degree of "customisation", you can also have an experience totally unrecognisable as Shadowrun.
Toturi, you are without a doubt the single most biased against house rules poster on this forum. So, I won't get in any discussion with you about house rules.
Blerg, I may have lost track of the original points somewhere. For those saying "I paid for a game to avoid making up the rules" I have only to say that you don't lose your investment for houseruling things, you can still keep most of the rules and you also get a lot of lovely setting material - and if your houserules don't work out you still end up learning the system so you can revert to the original. If you're into game design or appreciate systems at all, you learn something from seeing other peoples' products. If you just can't understand why the hell people would want to houserule you can read below.
If you happen to regard the published rules as the word of god, then I can't help you understand anything here, but I don't think that is a healthy attitude towards something that, in the end, is only a suggestion that you volunatarily accept. The rules that a game uses are agreed upon by the participants; there is nothing that is enforcing the rules amongst peers except their agreement that the rules work appropriately - they produce the right game experience.
People house rule for the same reason that not everyone plays Shadowrun; the "physics" of the "universe" are designed to produce a particular kind or tone of game, a genre so to speak. People have different preferences with regards to tone, sometimes their preferences are distinct enough from that of a major game such that the game doesn't produce the tone they like most but can be changed in a simple way to fit better.
I agree that extensive modifications to the system mean that the game may not be as good a fit to your play habits as another, but most people are more willing to modify a set of rules that are common knowledge and relay those changes to potential players than handing their new players a hundred or so pages of word processed text that outlines their own system. Most new players are going to be accepting of small changes to a system they know than to learn a whole new system just for a game run by one person. Yes, you can say that they're doing it wrong, but I think that it's the fastest way to get people to understand how your game is going to play - by allowing them to reuse the knowledge they already possess to reduce the time it takes to learn the system you will be playing.
Yes; some people don't want to play Shadowrun but do want to play a game very much like Shadowrun but is a better fit their play style. If you want to argue that they should create their own entirely new system and make people learn how to play it (nevermind the fact that those people may say "Shadowrun is better, why don't you play that instead?") then you are being entirely unreasonable.
If you happen to regard the published rules as the word of god, then I can't help you understand anything here, but I don't think that is a healthy attitude towards something that, in the end, is only a suggestion that you volunatarily accept. The rules that a game uses are agreed upon by the participants; there is nothing that is enforcing the rules amongst peers except their agreement that the rules work appropriately - they produce the right game experience.
People house rule for the same reason that not everyone plays Shadowrun; the "physics" of the "universe" are designed to produce a particular kind or tone of game, a genre so to speak. People have different preferences with regards to tone, sometimes their preferences are distinct enough from that of a major game such that the game doesn't produce the tone they like most but can be changed in a simple way to fit better.
I agree that extensive modifications to the system mean that the game may not be as good a fit to your play habits as another, but most people are more willing to modify a set of rules that are common knowledge and relay those changes to potential players than handing their new players a hundred or so pages of word processed text that outlines their own system. Most new players are going to be accepting of small changes to a system they know than to learn a whole new system just for a game run by one person. Yes, you can say that they're doing it wrong, but I think that it's the fastest way to get people to understand how your game is going to play - by allowing them to reuse the knowledge they already possess to reduce the time it takes to learn the system you will be playing.
Yes; some people don't want to play Shadowrun but do want to play a game very much like Shadowrun but is a better fit their play style. If you want to argue that they should create their own entirely new system and make people learn how to play it (nevermind the fact that those people may say "Shadowrun is better, why don't you play that instead?") then you are being entirely unreasonable.
I'm sure Toturi will change his mind now.
QUOTE (Heath Robinson @ Apr 10 2008, 05:56 PM)
If you happen to regard the published rules as the word of god, then I can't help you understand anything here, but I don't think that is a healthy attitude towards something that, in the end, is only a suggestion that you volunatarily accept. The rules that a game uses are agreed upon by the participants; there is nothing that is enforcing the rules amongst peers except their agreement that the rules work appropriately - they produce the right game experience.
People house rule for the same reason that not everyone plays Shadowrun; the "physics" of the "universe" are designed to produce a particular kind or tone of game, a genre so to speak. People have different preferences with regards to tone, sometimes their preferences are distinct enough from that of a major game such that the game doesn't produce the tone they like most but can be changed in a simple way to fit better.
People house rule for the same reason that not everyone plays Shadowrun; the "physics" of the "universe" are designed to produce a particular kind or tone of game, a genre so to speak. People have different preferences with regards to tone, sometimes their preferences are distinct enough from that of a major game such that the game doesn't produce the tone they like most but can be changed in a simple way to fit better.
The published rules are canon as far as I am concerned. But I also understand why people want to house rule and I am not going to say that they are wrong. What I am adamant is that they should not do is to house rule and claim that it is the way Shadowrun should be played. Or that when people ask about a certain rule, they should not come in and present their house rule as the way that rule should be played. In other words, I don't mind your blasphemy as long as you do not claim it to be canon, heretic.
QUOTE
I'm sure Toturi will change his mind now.
Why would I want to change the truth?
QUOTE (toturi @ Apr 10 2008, 02:34 PM)
The published rules are canon as far as I am concerned. But I also understand why people want to house rule and I am not going to say that they are wrong. What I am adamant is that they should not do is to house rule and claim that it is the way Shadowrun should be played. Or that when people ask about a certain rule, they should not come in and present their house rule as the way that rule should be played. In other words, I don't mind your blasphemy as long as you do not claim it to be canon, heretic.
Whilst I don't personally believe that's the right way to view a set of published rules, I do agree with you about people claiming that their set of rules is the One True WayTM to play the game. The same goes for those adamant that one must stick by the published rules and that all deviations are a heresy that must be rooted out. However, if you keep your convictions to yourself I don't see any reason for quarrelling. Equally, I'll try to keep my opinions on the rules clearly incidcated as opinions and I am eternally trying to supress all of my convictions.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.