Hardcore geeks hate anything new and they get angry when you point it out.

Anyway, the book.

Dislikes - The art on pages 47, 56, 78 and 81. I'm not arguing stylistic preferences here, those drawings look absolutely unprofessional, especially in comparison to everything else Catalyst has published. If I turned those drawings in for a high school art project I'd get my knuckles rapped. Poor shading, stiff anatomy, flat line quality, etc. They look like doodles or sketches, not a finished product. I'm hoping its a placeholder until the actual print. If it's not I take back every bad thing I said about Augmentation's cover because... ugh!

Likes - Everything else. New metavariants! Yay! New qualities! Yay! Updated lifestyle options! Yay! Group contacts, enemies and new contact archetypes! Yay!

On The Fence - The drawing of The Pimp contact who I have dubbed 2Pac 2.0. It made me laugh but my white-guy guilt also makes me think that it was a bit... racially insensitive. I think the old Ork Pimp route would have been a little less controversial. I don't know, I need to think on this for awhile.

That would have allowed you to play a centaur at my table, with +1 Karma to boot.

+1

WMS

Maybe 4th editions is that threshold of change that the old-guard cannot accept.
But I think that rationalisation is an easy way out of avoiding any deep thought on the issues.

In time, every publisher is going to make a mistake with their existing audience while trying to seek a new one.
eg. nWOD is a system that does not do some stuff well, that previous editions excelled in. (and the new Mage books are almost as hard to read as HOL).

4E is so focused on minis and skirmish combat rules, that they left out rules that some GMs need to run their type of game.

But I have not seen that issue with Shadowrun. The complexity that was the killer of games I have run on all previous editions has been mitigated really well while minimal impact on flavour.

4th edition is very good overall. It only has one blemish - the terrible matrix rules. The rest of the game is excellent, with a strong resolution system, one of the most workable magic systems in an RPG ever, strong character generation etc.

What edition did not have terrible Matrix rules? That is hardly a reason to hate it compared to it's predecessors.

Would it still be Shadowrun if it didn't have terrible Matrix rules though?

QFT

Those where so horrible i can't find the word to desripte them.

Oh boy, art. Well, some of it is nice, so to maintain a cosmic equilibrium, or something, some of it needs to be less than impressive. Also, like with terrible Matrix, no SR without terrible art.

I was just skimming over the Shapeshifters, and I realized there is no White Rabbit. Now I have an urge to stat it out, but am concerned it would be far to powerful...

I could, but what would be the purpose of that?
You appearantly already deem yourself ...



... "winner" of this "argument" and have nothing better to do than trying to insult me right there ~shrugs~
As I said, SR4 is not important enough to me to go through the hustle. I wouldn't even have answered in this thread anymore if it weren't for Johnny Jack's question concerning "hate" ...
______________________




I can't speak for others, but I for one do not hate SR4. That would require me to invest emotions into something that simply didn't "catch" me.

SR4 doesn't work for me simply because my overall feeling with the game's world is no longer the same as with previous editions. And no it's not SR4 specific. SR4 is just to culmination of developments that I already disliked in some of the later SR3 products.

I'm more than willing to give big thumbs up for the general game mechanics of SR4 when compared to previous incarnations, but the "new" world simply for me is too much of a straight copy of our real world instead of a development of the original SR-Universe. That particular feeling is mine and just mine ... although any number of people might share it to a certain extend. No sense in trying to argue it. Others don't care about events like retro-actively changing things like Chrysler-Nissan into Daimler-Chrysler-Nissan just because in our real world Daimler and Chrysler actually made such a "marriage" (I don't dare to ask if now that this "marriage" has been divorced the Jack-Rabbit producing Megakon now also is renamed back to Chrysler-Nissan) or renaming the ECU into Euro just because in our real world the currency changed its name, but I do. I'm aware that these particular examples stem from the SR3 era, but SR4 - as I said before - to me is the culmination of similar developments ... WiFi, RFID, Peer-to-Peer software-sharing and many other things that leave me with the impression of being introduced not so much because the SR-Universe itself developed into that direction but rather because the writers simply had no clue about how the game universe should develop and thus simply copied our present day world again ... like it was originally done when SR1 hit the streets ... Although I do see some differences even in the act of copying back then when compared to the present copy action.

But that's enough "off topic" ... This thread should be about the new Companion and I suggest that people refrain from making wild assumptions on "hardcore geeks" and their presumed "hatred" of new things.

Which was just as much a straight copy of the real world.

~sigh~ Great selective quote ... I just wonder why I wrote this: like it was originally done when SR1 hit the streets ... Although I do see some differences even in the act of copying back then when compared to the present copy action.

Most likely because I missed the "copy action", right?

Dude, are you really surprised? Rule number 12: Anything you say can and will be used angainst you.

Actually yes, I'm surprised by the stupidity of such a selective quote to "prove a point" when the text that quote belongs to already made that point itself.



I guess then I just used whatever you tried saying against you ... ~sigh~

T'be fair, cochise, you're not exactly unknown for quoting selective snippets yourself. I suggest sticking to the facts of an argument instead of shooting people down, it helps present a stronger case for whatever you're arguing for.

This is so true, sadly.

It's correct nontheless SR1 was a mixture of the 80ties with some early 90ies in it. There is nothing wrong to get SR in line with the way things develope a bit. Things change, even in Shadowrun, and it is good that way. Admitted SR4 gained some of the qualities Cyberpunk had, however, I really did like Cyperpunk2020 and the same goes for the evolution of SR. SR4 in many ways is not a simple remake of previous editions, it is more of the revolution I would expect of a new edition... a brave and welcomed step. While I liked every edition more than the previous, I did not like the direction that SR went before SR4. The 4th edition saved SR for me.

Did you?

Rule 11: All your carefully picked argument can easily be ignored.

Also, just stating you used it againt me does not mean you actually did, especially if you assume to know what i tried to say, which you don't. Hence you fail hard.

Is that your sense of fairness? ~laugh~ Try to show me a case where I blantanly ignored that someone had written himself what I was commenting on without acknowledging it when making my comment



And those "facts" would now be? I gave an more or less detailed answer to a slightly off topic question that lead to various off topic comments and ...



... someone tried "shooting" me down for it by trying to make a smart comment ... which I unfortunately had given myself already, including a restriction (that could have been elaborated more in detail in a different thread). And now you're blaming me for that? ~shrugs~



~hmm~ A matter of reading comprehension I guess ... I'm not argueing here for anything anymore. That ended when I said it ended. And I can't make and surely don't want to make a "strong case" for something that I already declared as a non-arguable feeling of mine.

Drakes, obsidimen...


Smart comments by themselves are not, as it were, worthy of comment. Your attitude for the last couple of posts isn't particularly endearing, however, and does nothing for how others perceive you.


Yet you keep replying.

Ironically, I thought I'd love SR 3rd ed, but ended up hating it instead. Conversely, I thought I'd hate SR 4th ed, but... well, I really dig it.

Go figure. *shrug*

-paws
EDIT for clarity

Huh? Where did I make a selective quote concerning drakes and obsidimen which I commented with something that the person I quoted had said in the very same text?
Please be "fair" enough to provide a quote on that ...



Yet they can be commented ... And I surely won't shy away, just because someone made such a "smart comment" .. especially after someone else already made a comment about leaving a lost argument



Just as non-endearing as uncalled insults or "smart comments" ...



Should I care? You yourself didn't care about something like that



So?

I was referring to a case where you focused less on the facts of an argument to who was arguing.


I'd prefer a smart comment to the defeatist attitude you've put up over the last few posts.


Says who? Public perception means different things to different people, but few people are asocial enough for it not to affect them at all.


Well, it is indicative of someone that isn't quite ready to let things go, no matter how "ended" they feel the subject of discussion is.

Which - disregarding my different PoV on how I might or might not have focused on what you deen "facts" - is something different than making a selective quote to produce an "appearant" counterargument that already has been mentioned by the person that is being quoted.



Defeatist? I ended a fruitless "argument" for which you more or less insulted me as "quitter".
I then gave an answer to a question that was totally unrelated and got another stupid comment. I see no defeatist attitude there.



I still find it rather amusing when someone who - by his own words - doesn't care about such public perception tells others to take care of their public perception ...



It's an indication that "someone" doesn't want to "let go" a different aspect that was talked about in this thread



Am I still talking about Obsidimen?

Like, how could we know good if we didn't know evil? I honestly feel the art direction with all of the SR4 products I've seen has been very strong, despite my serious aversion to Poser art (Augmentation). Those Runner's Companion drawings were such a gigantic step back I have to wonder if my leg is being pulled. You don't even have to compare them to other SR products, put them up against the other illustrations in the same book. And that's all I have to say about that.

I don't understand what's so terrible about SR4 Matrix rules. God forbid there be a wireless system that allows hackers to actually run with the rest of the team rather than sit in a basement and a quicker Matrix/hacking resolution system rather than the "old way" which required the GM to run two different campaigns at the same time. I really don't get it.

This is a case where two people are talking but not communicating. Let's recap: you disparaged selective quoting, I mentioned that you're not adverse to quoting only the relevant bits yourself, you reply by asking for an example where you "blatantly ignored" what someone else has written, which I then conflated with the facts argument when I mentioned how you failed to address my assertions about drakes and obsidimen previously.

In other words, we weren't quite on the same wavelength which is why you were confused, for which I apologize.

Totally aside, we have to get a spellchecker on this board because you're literally killing me.


I never said "quitter." I was actually thinking a different and fairly more negative term. As far as your attitude:

This is a selective sampling, from a couple posts back, but it definitely establishes the general negative theme of your comments. Buck up, son!


Did you possibly miss the part of the last post where I talked about public perception? If I cared nought for public perception, why would I pursue such ruthless personal aggrandizement?


Conflating these two to save space; the fact is if you were truly tired of the subject and unwilling to talk about it further you'd stop replying. You haven't, ergo I surmise you're still hung up on the subject.

Because people whine about their Parapalegic hackers and how they're useless.

But we fixed that with the Heavily-Modded Horsemen.

It must be really hard to identify a typo like "deen" instead of "deem" ... or it's just another way of bringing across the next insult ...



Guess why again I chose to make use of quotation marks. I was well aware of your "different and fairly more negative term".



Really? All I see is the answer to something that you yourself described as something that is a "different and fairly more negative term" which can also be viewed as insult.



Like you? ... Btw. I'm not your son ...



Part of my expressed amusement stems from that ...



Good question ... But I'm not gifted with the talent of mind reading nor am I able to make an psycho-analysis over the internet. So the only person who can answer this is you ... The answer could get really interesting once you provide the rationalization for your own "aggressive" stance that caused some of the "general negative theme in my comments" ~smiles~



I still don't see me talk about what I said I wouldn't go through the hustle to talk about anymore.



I'm hung up to the (off topic) subject of assumed hatred against SR4 and whatever makes people try to get "witty" about what I said there. The way you make conclusions here I have to think of what's called "subjunction" in logic: A conclusion drawn from a false assertion is always true ... but still not correct.

But if it makes you feel more comfortable I'll now "buck up" and leave you with your feeling of "victory", because this kind of "debate" is overall even less interesting to me than SR4 as game ... and Jack got an answer to his question instead of wild assumptions.

Not a mod, but, come on guys.

Give it a rest. Pretty please?

-paws

Not a mod either, but quite interested in what Runner's Companion is about and whether or not I should buy it.

Which means I'm absolutely not interested in any bickering about Obsidimen, Cochise's attitude or Ancient History's not-name-calling.

If either of you would therefore be so kind as to can it, or switch to PN, so the rest of everybody else can talk/read about the real subject of this thread, PLEASE!

So... how about those sweet greek alphabet AR displays on pp. 135 and 143?


Though, they did screw up some of the sigmas.

This is an administrative posting.
Kill the snark. Keep it on topic. Or this thread will be locked and warnings will be issued.

Is there an errata thread somewhere?

I ask because I'm frantically creating characters for tomorrow and I ran into this..

Gearhead
Cost: 5 or 10 BP
The Gearhead character is a natural born driver or pilot. From
the first time the Gearhead sat behind the wheel/stick/controls
of a certain vehicle, it was like putting on a comfortable old
suit. She discovered an intuitive understanding of its limitations
and its capabilities, and she quickly learned to coax exceptional
performances out of the vehicle. During a single scene (duration
at the gamemaster’s discretion), a Gearhead can increase the
Acceleration of her chosen vehicle by 20 percent, or increase the
Handling modifier by +1. She also gets a distinct +2 dice pool
modifier when attempting difficult maneuvers or stunts in the
vehicle. This quality only benefits manual or VR control of the
vehicle.
For 5 BP, the Gearhead is gifted at piloting a specific vehicle
(i.e. a Suzuki Mirage racing bike or a MiG-67 panzer).
For 15 BP, the Gearhead is gifted at piloting any vehicle of a
given type (i.e. bikes, cars, trucks, rotorcraft).

I'm sure it was mentioned elsewhere, but do I use the costs in the header, or the costs in the text?

Fame has the same problem... I don't remember if others do as well.

Also the metagenics... does this mean I can make a human with low-light (5bp) and thermographic (5bp) vision?
I can understand how you switch between them with cybereyes... but naturally?

there IS no switch between them . . in cyber-eyes, you CAN switch them on and off, but usually, they are overlays over your usual field of vision . .

When there's a conflict between a quality cost in the header or tables and the written description the write up generally has the correct values and it was likely a case of late playtest tweaks to the book that weren't caught.

Hoi. Today i came back from holidays and BLAM! the runners companion is out. Damnit. I bought it as fast paypal could transfer my money to InMediaRes Productions.
And i looove the book. Ive been eating and readin it with my eyes. Its very nice, and it will bring some new and fresh shadowrun flavor into my group. BUT even i havent read thru the complete sourcebook i took the time too check the pictures ... And oh boy there are really a few "unexpected" pictures inside this book ... I know we had this here a few times ... but i cant keep my mouth shut. I am aware that shadowrun changed and that not the same artists are on board like they used to be 10-15years ago, but i still have to write down my opinion on things i think dont find that good.
Before i start, i want to, and i have have to! admit that the there are a lot of nice pictures, well painted, and really shadowrun stylish. But there are also really wired and maybe not well matching pictures that in my eyes are NOT helping the rpg system shadowrun. I remeber when not long ago a lot of ppl asked the catalyst game labs crew when will you publish this and that sourcebook, or why does it take so long and will you bring in that feature blablabla. So far i loved all of your publishings, and maybe i am sick but as soon a sourcebook gets published as PDF i buy it. And when the hardcover version gets available i order it here in europe. You guys have been publishin really a lot of stuff latley... But to be honest, i would be ready to wait another month or two, or even three if you would go maybe a 6th of 7th time thru the pictures you want to publish with upcoming sourcebook.
Some of the pictures are really horror. The contrast between the artistis is HUGE. Like they only got into contact thru a wormwhole or something like that!

Lets start the picture show, to understand what i mean:

Cover: In my eyes the best so far. Oldschool shadowrun!

Whoever painted the pics on site 7, 11, 14 CANT paint metahumans. Norms look ok ... But methahumans like elves, orcs and trolls ... Holysh#t! The same artist published a few of his "bests" also inside the arsenal ... and it doenst get better. Please no more!

Pics on site 21, 26, and 28, 31, 34 are lovley! THIS.IS.SHADOWRUN.

Pics on site 37, 41, 44 are lovley too. Like em. Lil bit dark, but thats SHADOWRUN TOO!

Pics on site 47, 56, 78, 81, CANT BE FOR REAL?! Please NOTHING MORE... I am still shocked. Sorry, if this sounds harsh.

Pics on site 50, 52, 54, 69, 73, 75, 82, 118: Looovley!

Pic on site 122 AND 128: Same guy that painted the first pics on site 7, 11 and 14 ... NO COMMENT

Pics used for the sample contacts look are very nice. All pics that followed the after the sample contacts: THUMBS UP! Extraordinary paintings on site 160, 163, 169, - 176. If i am not wrong the same artist did some work for the arsenal too. Thanks mate.


This is it. My personal opinion. I would like to know how you others think on this, am I making this up or are there also a few of you that think that the contrast of the artist is a touch too big?! Or maybe some of you think, forget the pictures, the main thing is that the rules are worked out good. But thats not it ... Pictures of shadowrun have always been important for me like the rules that make the game up. They inspire and reflect the flow of the game. I like em ... And i think we need more of those good pictures.


PS: Forgive me my bad english.

for once, i'm actually going to have to agree (with the general idea of the previous post, not necessarily the specifics). i mean, i would be lying if i said i *liked* the cover for augmentation (which still has the usual 3d art problem of looking not-quite-right) or the arsenal cover (which i personally just didn't like the concept for the picture that much) but i don't remember coming out and ever saying i thought it was terrible.

but some of the art in runners companion is just downright bad. seriously. find some halfway starved artist and pay him. heck, wait for a busker's festival to show up nearby, i'm sure there are plenty of people who can do at least halfway-decent drawings of various metahumans etc. go visit a highschool arts class (really, any art class where it isn't a compulsory course should do). i'm not gonna complain about the book itself, but after seeing the awesome cover and some of the other art, it was a real letdown to see a few specific pictures that made it into the book.

good book and all, but some of the art really is bad. (though on the flipside, some of the art is really good, too)

47-56-78-81 is my new secret nuclear death launch code. Shhh! Don't tell anyone.

Is that an arm? A tusk? A knife? I can't tell! Aaaaah!

The artist responsible for the pictures you mentioned is Philip Hilliker. And i think he was very pissed at someone while he drew these images, because he did pictures like these before:

Manhattan by night

Up close and personal

And today's special is...

All shadowrun artwork, and these are by no means bad.

While i am not an artist myself, i think it is possible that there were different inkers for the pictures i linked and the ... things in the Runners Companion. Or, as i said, he inked them all by himself and simply did not give a damn

The pictures you posted look awesome. But this doenst change that the pictures on site 47-56-78 and 81 look bad. Is there nobody that checks the stuff that the artist want to publish? I think there should be an min level of quality that every artist has to keep ...

His sig (the funny p) is present in all these pictures, so i am pretty sure.

edit: aww, you edited, now my post makes no sense.

Anyway, i agree, the pictures in the book are bad. I just wanted to point out that the artist had done a much better job in the past.

edit2: The art director is named Randall Bills. Flame away!

Holy crap, I didn't know it was the same guy! Those were really good! Talk about a severe quality drop; he must have been phoning it in on Runner's Companion. If Catalyst had just swiped that three page metavariant spread from the 1st/2nd ed. Shadowrun Companion we would have been spared this.

Thumbed through a print copy at GenCon. Yep, Hilliker's sketches are still in there. Sigh.

This is the last I'll mention of it.

I doubt that its worth it. Nevertheless I will buy me a print copy of the Runners'c Companion, but as concerns all following Sourcebooks I wont spend money on them if the bad sketches continue to be part of any future Shadowrun releases.

I never buy books specifically for the art, just the text info. But if the art is good, it's like delicious icing on a sweet, sweet cake.

I want Hoop and Bergting back!

Of course the rules and settings in the books are of higher importance then the art. But if you bring to your mind that a lot of the stuff from augmentations, arsenal and the runner's companion has been already elaborated in previous editions, and now not everything, but a few of this availabe goodies had only to be converted for the 4th edition, I dont understand how things like art inside those books cant have the same priority as they did have in previous editions. I mean take a look at the pictures I flame about, its not like they have nothing to do with Shadowrun. They just look bad. Couldnt the art director take pictures from previous edition? Or put in some other "placeholders"?

Furthermore even if art is only secondarily, and you say you dont care about the art, only the text info. Imagine a sourcebook without any pictures ... or a lot of bad pictures. Its the first impression that people get of a RPGSystem.

Problem is, people will also complain if you recycle too many old artwork.
Still, i miss Bergting's art, too.
And Tim Bradstreet's.

New art makes new memories, and new connections...unless its utter garbage.

Then it turns people away.