I'm about to start a 2 players game (+ the GM). We're coming from a D&D background (except me, the GM, which played SR1 through SR3). The group is heavy on role-playing. We can go without dice rolling for several sessions in a row. Characters have a rich background, NPCs have a personality and usually a 1-page description including a picture, and so on. We even start the game with a 'Chronicle' period where each player comes prepare with a story about an event that marked him during the previous game(s).

Like I said, it's more ROLE-playing then ROLL-playing, if you catch my drift...

I've been reading a few posts and saw a couple about how characters were powerhouse compared to the opposition and also how much dice rolling SR4 can be. A saw a suggestion where NPCs were always using the buy hit rule, which I like and will ease the GM's job.

Still, I find that combat involves a lot of dice rolling. One of the gritter rule talks mentions using thresholds based on range instead of an opposed test. Did any of you experienced that optional rule ?? What modifiers counts for increase pool vs increase threshold ?? How do you apply this rule for melee combat ?? How does a skill like Dodge is affected by this rule ??

Can you describe the threshold test (I can't find it).

I think with melee combat you should always do an opposition test as there is the chance that the defender can do damage to the attacker. An opposition test best reflects this situation.

Sorry Pat, I don't have experience with that optional rule. I'm just preparing to start a 4th edition game and we noticed that the opposed roll doesn't really add much time. At first, sure, but as everyone got combat down people would toss the defense dice while I was looking for hits from the attacker or even while I was rolling. You may just want to stick with the standard rules for simplicity sake. Also, that rule looks pretty deadly and SR can be scary enough, especially for a two runner team. I suppose you could use the buying hits table for most rolls if you want to speed things up. If you've got a rules lawyer + a human calculator in your group then your narratives should barely be interrupted.

Are you including NPCs to fill in the role gaps? My group has only three runners and I made sure that they are covering the 3 realms of combat (Physical, Matrix & Astral). Oh, and we just figured out that mages and riggers with a bit of money are frightening and can probably cover for the physical aspect.

Threshold test and other optional rules on pg 69 of SR4 core book btw.

And how exactly would this come about?

My group gave it a whirl a few years back. We didn't care for it, but we also haven't been bothered by the number of rolls in an opposed test.

Essentially, modifiers always went to increasing or decreasing the attackers die pool. Thresholds were static based on range. (Threshold 1 - Short, 2 - Medium, 3 - Long, 4 - Extreme.) Hits in excess of the threshold added to weapon damage as usual.

Example:
Character firing his Light Pistol (4P) at a target at medium range, rolls 2 hits. As the threshold was met, it deals 4P damage. If he'd rolled 4 hits, the target would've had to resist 6P damage.

IMO, Vision Magnification is the big thing that breaks the system. Suddenly, everything is at short range, and when the target doesn't get a dodge attempt to cancel out a hit or two, things become much more lethal.

Edit to add: Missed the question about using Dodge -- Dodge didn't factor into the equation at all when we tried it out.

I may be thinking SR3 but I thought if the defender's successes outnumber the attackers successes then the defender hits the attacker. Let me go back to the rules to check it out.

Edit:
I stand corrected. Defenders can't damage an attacker. I guess if I want to keep this I will have to house rule it. Though I think that if I create this house rule you would only do damage if the defender is NOT using dodge (that could get broken).

Page 69, Alternate Combat section, first bullet (sorry, not Grittier section. My bad).

I can see how the Alternate rules would make ranged combat faster but it states that you can't use it for melee combat (states that it is used for ranged combat). I would say you have to do ranged combat as an opposed test still. But I would assume you can apply the alternate damage rule to melee combat (reducing the amount of rolling there). The only thing I don't like about the alternate combat rules is that it plays up armour for defence and I think that damage resistance is a vital part of SR since the early days. But it is your game.

I've never found any game system itself to be the cause of roll vs role playing. That's entirely on the shoulders of the GM and players. Having come from the D&D-to-Shadowrun crossover myself, at first, yeah, it seems like there's a lot of dice rolling (which is usually bad), but it's just the normal bugs of getting used to a new system. Once you get a bit more familiar with it, the SR system tends to go just as smooth as most others.

I know one of them is a mage lover, so he'll go this way. The other is still a "don't know yet". I already ruled out the technomancer, not because I don't like the character, but because I find the technomancer is a bit dry outside the matrix. I think a technomancer can be an excellent 3rd or 4th player, tho.

I though about adding a hacker/technomancer NPC to cover the matrix if need be, but when I realized that riggers/hackers don't need cyberware, a whole new world opened to me. I would not be surpised if I find myself with a mage and a physad, each also owning either rigger/hacker...

The only commonality I've see is that game systems that are highly lethal tend to encourage players to find approaches other then combat to solve problems. Or they get really good at making characters. SR4 can be a very lethal game system if it's run/played that way.

My suggestion for small groups is to have the characters more rounded. Frank's house rules for character creation worked fine for us. I'd also suggest that if you need more than trivial matrix stuff to have an NPC that does it and then handwave all the time-wasting stuff away. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using GM NPCs/PCs, but they have to be followers and they can't be better then the PCs in any area where the PCs have tried to be good. It's also useful if they are the ones who get "hit by random gunfire" if someone needs to.

Or they get really good at combat. 12/10 or better armor, 3+ Init Passes, 16+ dice to shooting/hitting, AP -5 etc.

When they take damage, they brush it off, when the deal it something dies. My group ends up falling into this rut a lot. Jim was our social monkey (because he is a social monkey) and provided a little balance. Not to mention the Good Plans for doing a run. Andrew provided the pacifism (one game Jim and a couple of us managed to get Andrew to build a new character because we were just that violent, Andrew's character decided that we were unfixably-violent and left, and this was a character that had been OK with the team using a tactical nuke on Bug City) and is also gone (finally graduated after some 15 years in college and no, not failing).

Our plans generally come down to "kick down the door and shoot everyone." But it takes us 2+ hours to get there (I never offer any ideas, I've come to this realization and like sitting around listening to half brained ideas about this or that).

Which works ok until you get in a fight with someone serious. It isn't just NPCs who get killed by AV Rockets, grenades in small concrete rooms, overcast manaballs, or force 8 spirits with armor 6 supported by countermagic.

As I said, SR lethality depends on how it's played.

Touche. Our GM doesn't like killing players, but it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Jim though, his one shots were pretty deadly (or insanely well planed, if not both). The last one had two undercover operatives, each with a different motive! (One from Lonestar who got my character arrested, most of the rest killed and one who snuck into a hotel and released some kind of air vector toxin into the HVAC system--though I honestly don't know what his pre-mission goal was).

The thing with the awakened and emerged is that their specialist skillsets and need to spend a lot on their drain attributes, as well as their special attributes, means they often are underdeveloped in complementary abilities. A magician can sometimes be decent in skill areas linked to their drain attribute, such as a charisma based magician with some secondary general social skills.

A mundane hacker just really need to throw some cash at a decent comm, programs and some BP at the electronics and cracking groups, and some augmentations and supplementary build points will allow you to branch out a little. The stealth group and maybe a few combat abilities are good choices.

My thoughts exactly. I envisioned a hermatic mage/hacker, where Logic would serve as both resist drain and the technical aspect of the hacker. Plus, the hermatic tradition fits very well with the hacker aspect.

And going in the same direction as you said, I thought about giving 50-100 extra BPs to fit the gaps. 'Giving' is a strong word. It's more the GM giving extra gears/skills over what the players already have, instead of using these BPs to let the player get stronger. For instance, I would not give Pistol skill ranks, but I could 'give' some programs, enhance a commlink, or even some ranks in the Electronics group.

BTW, I'm still estimating the system, so if you feel I'm not moving in the right direction, please advise. Tx in advance.

Well, keep in mind that most hacking and computer use is skill + program, so unless you're writing software or bypassing a maglock, logic isn't actually that necessary for a hacker. And like I said before, a hermetic mage will have to spend a lot on mental attributes and special attributes (Magic, in particular, though Resonance for TM's is similarly restrictive), and other abilities, such as the two skill groups, not to mention the resources (a decent commlink and necessary programs alone could set you back about 50k, not factoring in agents).

However, given you have a very roleplay focused group, as well as the small group size, choose whatever character type you would like to explore and story tell. If the GM isn't particularly adversarial, and won't punish a specialised team, you could play a team of magicians exploring magical threats and phenomena, as long as between the two you can throw a few social dice and use commlinks then that's perfectly acceptable. Because the Shadowrun setting is so multi-faceted, you can focus on and explore any element you like in detail, or the whole setting in general. For example, two players could roleplay a hacker and a technomancer, and spend most of their time co-operating to delve into the secrets of the matrix and compromising secure nodes with team-work.

In the magician example, however, there are still ways to use the matrix. One would be buying yourself a decent commlink and a rating 4 agent. Run Stealth, Armour and Analyze on your commlink, and that will make you pretty hard to hack. Let the agent use programs like attack/blackout/blackhammer, exploit, stealth, armour, edit, etc. and let it hack for you. It will generally only throw 8 dice, but if the power level of your games isn't too challenging, that should be enough for the odd hacking task.

Also, I'm not sure if you have Unwired, but there is a table of costs for hiring hackers to perform matrix services. So that area is not really necessary. Magic is very versatile, but I think social skills and perhaps a bit of stealth are fairly necessary areas to throw a few dice in too.