Analyze, browse, command, Edit, encrypt, reality filter, and scan. The common use programs. I really can't imagine better names for any of them, or any way to make it any more self explanatory as to what they do. Reality filter is the only one I would imagine needing to look up for what -exactly- it does.

Now, for the hacking programs you have Armor, attack, data bomb, defuse, decrypt, medic, and stealth which are all basically no brainers.

Biofeedback filters requires a touch of knowledge about SR, but are fairly easy.

Black hammer and blackout are basically the same, and once again are fairly intuitive once you know basic SR things.

Sniffer, spoof, and eccm might require require you to actually read the rules to know what they do, but for the most part aren't that difficult. ECCM counters ECM, sniffer I actually don't remember off hand, and spoof spoofs stuff, which I thought was a basic English word, and not a technical term, because I've known it for so long.

So yeah, you have three programs which might actually require you to glance at the rules to know what they do in 4e, as opposed to having to try and remember what the esoterically named 3e programs do.

That and it seems easier to go 'I chuck Attack+cybercombat vs Response + firewall' instead of trying to figure out what color system I'm in and figuring out TNs and whatnot.

Same goes for combat in general. Personally I always had trouble working out TNs in 3e during combat, so much easier to just throw Blade + Agi vs dodge/melee skill + Reaction and see who gets more hits.

Please show me a reference where it dictates that you must create NPC's with BP's... I cannot find such a reference...
And if this WAS the case, then why do none of the NPC Templates follow such a rule?

I believe the rules SUGGEST creating "Prime Runner" NPCs using the BP system, for the sole purpose of balancing the NPC's power level with the PCs' power level, but that's about it. To my knowledge there is no hard and fast NPCs-MUST-be-made-using-BPs rule.

AGAIN... PRIME RUNNERS... not all the NPC's you will ever face...a Prime Runner is your equal or better...
Now, some HTR teams may well be your equal or better, but they are NOT statted out as Prime Runners...

Just wanted to point that out...

Keep the Faith

There is one area where I find SR4 to be easier than almost every game I've played, and that's how the dice mechanic works at the table. Tell the GM what you want to do. He tells you the modifier, you grab the appropriate number of dice, roll, and just count. No addition or rerolling (outside of edge). Rerolling always takes up time as the players have to pick out the dice that explode from their mass of dice. And I have always had players who get hung up for several seconds doing simple addition, not because they don't know how, but because their brains aren't well wired for it.

So, in my experience, actions take less time to roll out. As a Gamemaster, I can toss my handful of dice, quickly pick out fives and sixes, and move on.

My only wish is that all modifiers could be to the threshold. That would really speed up play, but as it is, there would be a loss of nuance.

The two main problems with that are that +/-1 TN is like +/-3 DP, and often you want to be able to make a smaller adjustment than that.

Edit: The other main problem is that most tests are opposed, which you can't really adjust the TN of.

Also, I don't know why people constantly go on about TNs being adjusted. There is hardly anything in the game that modifies TNs, virtually everything is adjustments to dice. This is because almost everything in the game is an opposed test, and not a simple success test. So yeah, as much as everyone talks about it being so complicated to have DP and TN being modified instead of just TN in 3e, but really, 4e almost never adjusts TN.

Agreed, It is pretty rare indeed...

Perhaps whoever said that NPCs HAD to be built using BPs confused Prime Runners with standard, run-of-the-mill NPCs.

Under the old system you had TNs and also had thresholds. This bugged me. I like the new system better.

The only thing I miss about the old system was group karma pools. I think it added a lot to the group dynamic. Maybe it would be worth adding that as an optional rule for group edge.

Karoline, I find your posts offensive, maybe its late and I'm tired but it feels like you are attacking my wife and her opinion directly. As the original poster I ask you to please stop.
I would respond to your matrix post but I feel I could not do so right now without being rude.

[edit] Now that I have calmed down a bit lets see if I can show you where she is coming from. I'm a techie I can't speak 1 language let alone multiple. My wife is a linguist and generally has little to no interest in computers. She just wants to hit print and have a page spit out. She speaks enough languages to make europeans go wow and then she proceeds to speak to them in their native tongue. She played the shadowrun sega game a bit which uses 1e matrix rules and a couple sessions of 3e, she picked a decker of all things because she liked them in the sega game and was able to easily adjust into 3e because the language was the same as the video game. Now enter 4e, I created her character for her because if character creation is more complicated than vampire she already hates the game. Again she would be the decker/hacker by request. She takes one look at what used to be computer and build/repair computer and instead there is computer, cybercombat, data search, electronic warfare, hacking, hardware, and software. She was already unhappy with the result asking when does she use hacking or cybercombat, what is this electronic warfare thing etc. I offered to change it to the group skills for her but she decided to soldier on. She then looks at her commlink it looks different but she knows what a firewall is sorta and the other 3 were easy enough to explain. She looks over her programs and there are many that are farmilar but shes confused. How do I fool the system to break in? (she means deception for the 3e folks) she says... I tell her thats Exploit now... This is about the point where she starts getting pissed and uses her sailor mouth. When she calms down and we go over the programs (eyes now swimming, trying to absorb the information) we get on to game play. We have 1 4e book around the table so its being passed a lot. She gets frustrated by having particular skills matched to programs which is all new terms to her. Does exploit go with hacking or cybercombat? What does analyze and browse use as attributes? Why is it all so confusing and complicated? Why cant i just have my computer skill and hacking pool back, that was easy I only had to figure out what program to use.

That pretty much sums it up. I'm not bashing 4e, it is more consistent and easier to read, but somethings just are not as simple. Like I said 3e uncommon program had more gonzo names than 4e, but 4e chose for better or worse to try some real world terms. These terms don't always translate to people who are not in the field. I found the whole thing very interesting because everyone kept telling me how simple 4e was and to give it another go.

VR 2.0 matrix tns are not as complicated as you seam to think, they were for the most part made up. As a GM you just set the difficulty in the range of the color (Im not saying the colors were a good idea but we had them since 1e). The suggested way in 3e was to roll randomly for difficulty, this tells me you just set a tn within reason for the color. But thats old skool, you dont need the rules to tell you want to do just be a guide. If people played D&D by the book it never would have survived to 3e.

I'm not trying to be rude to your wife. I was simply pointing out that for the most part 4e has easy to understand names from the point of view of someone who has never touched SR before. I was also pointing out that the fact that your wife had played the SNES game alot, didn't exactly make her an impartial observer on which rule set was easier. Of course she found sleaze and schmooze easier than encrypt and spoof, because that is what she is used to. I was also pointing out that the fact that you are more familiar with 3e than 4e would have also made it easier for her to play in 3e.

Basically I was countering, very specifically, you presenting your wife's opinion as an objective newbie trying out both system. I wasn't saying that her opinions on the systems where any less valid than anyone else posting here, simply that she wasn't a newbie trying out both systems on equal footing like you kind of presented her as.

The reason I went into the matrix programs was to illustrate that most people who have no knowledge of SR are going to generally be more likely to know what a 4e program does than what a 3e program does because of the odd naming used in 3e compared with the largely straightforward 4e nomenclature.

I think what we'd really need is to have someone who has roughly similar experience with both system run a group of new players through both settings and see which they found easier. Preferably you'd do this with two different groups, running one through 4e then 3e, and the other through 3e then 4e, as there is a tendency to have the first system be considered 'easier' regardless of anything else (Which is why I think some of the people who have played for ages think 3e is easier, because it is simply more familiar to them.)

Your assuming I mean impartial, and I dont! She HATES shadowrun, the fact that I got her to play at all took weeks of persuasion. The fact that she enjoyed 3e was astonishing, cus every other time shes played it or 2e she quit before the game got going.



Assuming you use GM who know the systems inside and out that would be fine. With new GMs you have to consider age and bad writing. Older GMs will be used to wonky badly worded books. My group that is playing 4e right now is my wife, someone who played 2e, 2 completely new guys and someone who loves 4e and convinced me to switch from 3e after 2 sessions of 3e. So far I'm on the fence, I have a learning curve to go through. So far one player hates 4e, two dislike it, one is indifferent, and the guy who convinced me likes it. I plan on going at leased 10 sessions or so before making a final decision. There are things I really like in the new system, things I really dont like, and most stuff I am indifferent on.

Well I still remember the Riggeremulationprotocols ( I hope its the right translation)
Without these the Decker couldn't rig.And he needet not only a second Datajack,but a different one
Well for Me ,I never Understood,why the Two where so different even though they used the same "tools"



Its not only the writing (though i must admit that the German SR4A has the best written, easy explaning Matrix rules,that I've read ) It's also the rules that are Easier.The SR3 Colourcoding and the....(dammit)
Ok
As a Matrix Jockey you had to play in a very different way.You had to be fast an reckless, not hesitating for one Ini-Pass or the ICs would get you,but If you're too fast you make mistakes.If you want to be careful you'd end up Dead(Security Tally ?). If you want to Play that way as a Street Sam You'd end up just as Dead
So you needed two different Styles of Play in one Group,.... thats not very comfortable !
Also the Matrix Action used to take a long Time in SR3 (If we where really fast,neglecting some of the Rules or "Handwaving" some at least 15-20 Minutes) during which the other Players where forced to watch or do other things (Ordering Pizza f.e) that was a "Funkiller" too !
No in SR4 the GM can switch between Matrix and Mundane World and has a much better Grip at the whole story (no more Pizza for us) its fastpaced and Fun for all
(No thats not the new SR4A Advertising line thats how I think about It )

Hough !
Medicineman

I have to say that reading this did teach me one thing: for npc mooks, just use the same ratings that you would for common devices.

Probably read that in the book, it just never sank in. Kind of like how you don't have to use all 250 of your BP points on attributes.

Shouldn't skim sometimes, I suppose.

Oh! And 4e is the first edition of Shadowrun that didn't make my head wobble when I tried to sit down and figure out the rules. I tried reading the 2e rules the other night and I just blanked. Could it be that the writing was less clear? Quite possibly. But there are a lot of things that you have to watch out for, modify, double check - coming from someone who played WoD games regularly as a teen, 4e rules are a lot simpler to understand. You take the attribute and add it to your skill and roll to see how many five's and six's you get, hoping to hit higher than the eye-ball'd difficulty rating. For extended actions, keep rolling each time until you either fail outright or succeed, but that could take weeks of work. Everything else is usually just a small twist off of that base.

Not that hard.

so where is the first mission starting? and how did bug city end? in case old characters are brought back they should have some idea of how they got out of bug city.

I think you've got the wrong thread.

So unless your GM is describing the matrix in detail or your in combat... From VR2.0 and beyond it should really be quicker. Assuming your in the building...
1. Jack In
2. Run Analyze
3. Run Deception, if successful go to 4, otherwise cybercombat
4. Issue the command you want
5. Jack Out.

Now cybercombat could take just as long as regular combat but for most times this shouldnt come up unless the GM thinks he has to have cybercombat.
The other thing in VR2.0/3e that could slow you down is if your not physically jacked into the host you need to be. Then you'll have to repeat that process at leased once.

Well, I feel the game in general is simpler and more consistent between the different areas of the game system.

But I can understand your feeling : the matrix rules are more detailed and building (and playing !) a well-rounded hacker is now a much more involved process than before.

I'll give this one a shot. In SR4 a "system" or "node" (eg. "something the PC needs to hack") is defined by 4 attributes: System, Response, Firewall, and Signal. Under SR3 the equivalent is defined by 7 attributes: a colour code, a rating, Access, Control, Index, Files, and Slave (ACIFS). In SR4, if the Hacker sets off an Alert on the system the GM can determine a random system response with a single roll. Under SR3 an entire "security sheaf" needed to be generated, which (if done randomly), included a dozen or more "steps" or "responses" from the system at random intervals. If your SR3 Decker decided they wanted to intrude on a system that the GM had not pre-generated, the amount of game time taken up to roll one up on the fly was staggering. I actually wrote a program in QBASIC that did it for me. Under SR4, I can quite easily make up a system on the fly: 4 numbers and 1 random roll. Also, because Alert Responses by the system in SR4 are really up to the GM, it allows the GM to have the system respond a little more "organically" and in keeping with the story than the "mini-game" rules of SR3. For example, if the system's primary purpose is to protect some top-secret corp files, but there are also a bunch of other databases, it would serve to reason that the response to a perceived threat against those special files would warrant stronger countermeasures than against other files. The SR3 rules didn't allow nearly as much freedom in story-driven security response such as this.

Here are a couple other examples. To determine if a patrolling IC detects the intruder in SR4 is Hacking + Exploit vs. Computer + Analyze; this happens whenever the GM "feels" that the Hacker may have exposed themselves to detection. This mirrors the "meat world" equivalent action, which would be: Agility + Infiltration vs. Intuition + Perception. In SR3, the IC or system as a whole rolled vs the Decker's "detection factor" which (as a base) was the sum of the Deck's Masking + Sleaze Program / 2, unless the Decker had previously crashed an IC in cybercombat which decreased the Decker's detection factor by 1 unless the Decker sacrificed 1 die from their Hacking Pool to suppress that modified, which meant that the Decker and GM needed to remember that the Hacking Pool had been reduced for all further calculations. In SR4 when an intruder is spotted, then that's it they are "spotted" much like if a physical guard saw a character trying to sneak into some building, but in SR3 "spotting" a Decker merely added more hits which increased their "level" on the Security Sheaf which could mean any number of different things happened. This happened every Initiative Pass. (As an aside, the fact that Hacking Pool was a factor in Decking test pretty much required that they be resolved as "Combat Turns" so the refresh timing of the Pool could be tracked; in SR4 this is not necessary) Tracking Running programs and the swapping thereof is another area where SR4 is significantly simpler: you can run programs = Response (Unwired's extra options aside for a moment). In SR3 your Deck had "Active Memory" (basically RAM) and each program had a "size" that it took up in Active Memory (which needed to be recalculated if the rating of the program ever changed), so the Decker needed to add up all "active" programs to ensure that they didn't exceed the Active Memory on the Deck. If the Decker wanted to swap programs they needed to shut one down with a Simple Action (which is identical in SR4), then load a new one into Active Memory which required finding the size of the program to be loaded (which the Decker pre-calculated and wrote down 99% of the time) then dividing that by the Deck's I/O speed to determine how many Combat Turns it took to get the program into Active Memory (another reason that SR3 Decking actions needed to be run in individual Combat Turns all the time). The same I/O calculation needed to be done when grabbing a file from the system and downloading it into Storage Memory on the Deck, which also needed to be tracked and managed.

I do agree that the options given in Unwired kind of "splintered" things enough that SR4 Matrix stuff at the "lowest order" (to use that previous poster's term) has about as many different options as SR3 had (like Area Attack, Cascading, etc), the "base system" in SR4 is significantly less complicated, as my examples above show.

Thank you for the great explanation. My hierarchy scheme doesn't incorporate the number of variables needed to describe a system, so let's just scrap it. Your example demonstrates that fewer variables are needed in SR4 to fully describe a hacker, IC, and nodes. This pretty clearly shows that the SR4 matrix system is less complex.

I don't have my books handy, but I seem to recall that most of the problems you present about SR3 were optional rules. Second, the ones like security sheaves were as complex as you wanted them to be-- you could make it go from no alert to full alert only, just like SR4. When I get my books back, I'll be equally glad to show an overcomplicated example of SR4. At the very least, SR4 Matrix uses a different core mechanic than the rest of the book, something SR3 never did.

for the GM, (which is a valid point). However for PCs its MORE complicated. I guess I don't really look at it from the GM perspective as I've been running matrix stuff without pizza breaks since 1e. It wasn't easy in the early days but by the time I understood VR 2.0 it took no more time than the current system on my part. Actually less time but that I believe is because I'm not familiar enough with the 4e system to completely wing it yet.

if people are getting hung up on red - 6/9/8/7/9/6 or whatever its because it looks scary or your rolling randomly.
Basicly your going to pick a difficulty like Hard for Ares, or Easy for no name corp this will pick your color.
Then your picking how skilled they are from 2-12
Then your picking how tough the subsystems are from 4-12

For ares we might pick something like red-8/9/7/10/6/8, I tend to pick how skilled they are and then add or subtract a couple from that for each target number.
While more numbers its about the same complexity (other than the silly color part) as picking system+firewall. System+Firewall does have the advantage of not stringing 5 extra numbers along that add little to the game.

No,It doesn't !
It just switches Attribute and Programm thats all (and its not a different Core Mechanic,what are you talking about,why are you exagerating ? )
SR4 has also the optional Rule of streamlining matrix actions by using LOG & Skill (Maximum successes by Program Rating) Which we are using in one of our Gaming rounds succesfully !
@Malachi
Thanks . what you wrote is exactly what I wanted to say/post

Hough !
Medicineman

Once again people are arguing personal preference, subjective experience and not empirical fact.

Well, we could (and some are) arguing it along the lines of Occum's Razor (However you spell his name) in that the rule set with the fewest steps to accomplish something is the best (Or at least simplest in our case).

Yeah like I said personal preference. The problem is we all like it different. Maybe to varying degrees,but different. In the end no one's really wrong, rather just different.

Like you I like most of my game to be simple, and involve the fewest steps. However I'm sure we both have some variety, and in the end I just prefer to say as long as you're having fun you're doing it right. Saves a lot of time.

Ok, I went back and checked SR3. When crashing an IC, it doesn't modify the Decker's Detection Factor, the Rating of the IC that was crashed is added to the "security tally" (the number of hits that the System has scored against the Decker), but the Decker can sacrifice a point of Detection Factor in order to "suppress" this increase in Security Tally. This is a mechanic in the SR3 BBB, so it's core.

However, having gone flipping back through my SR3 BBB I can add a few mechanics to my list of "not sorry it's gone" from SR3: LTG's and RTG's, IC Initiative and Damage varying by Color Code, the TN IC needing to hit an Intruder varying by Color Code and whether the intruder has a "legit" Account or not, and different "kinds" of IC. I think it is much simpler to say that IC are simply Agents run in a defensive role, with their capabilities being determined by the program loadout that the GM happens to give them. This is easier than remembering that "Cripplers/Rippers" attack Deck attributes, "Tar Babies/Pits" crash Utilities, and "Killer/Blaster/Sparky" IC attack (with varying degrees of lethality). It was almost like you had to remember two different "terms" for things: 1 was the name of the program that that the PC used, and the other was the name of the IC that performed the equivalent.

Here's the thing: none of the SR3 Matrix rules were overly complex in and of themselves. Each one, individually, was fairly straightforward and had a logical reason for existing. However, when you stack enough of them together you create enough "little things" that the PC and GM must remember to make the system slow as someone forgets something and needs to go look it up. I had a Decker PC in my main SR3 group and my runs regularly included a Decking element. We were able to do about 1 "deck" per session with a fair degree of success, but I find I can integrate Decking/Hacking related actions in SR4 and resolve them faster with less "bogging down" of the overall session.

So, Cain, when crafting your counter-example, take note that I have used mechanics from the Core rulebook only. I will concede the point right now that both Unwired (SR4) and Matrix (SR3) added unnecessary complication with the expanded number of options they presented.

However, in the end Paul is entirely correct. A game's system is just the means of facilitating fun. As long as everyone is having fun, it doesn't really matter what system is in use.

Like the awesome "Head or Tail" rule set, I just made up?

Say what you want to do, then flip a coin. Head: It works as intended, and you describe the outcome. Tail: It fails, the GM describes the outcome.

Doesn't go much quicker.

Bye
Thanee

That sounds like an awesome system. Expand it into 300 pages and sell it to someone

White Wolf might buy it.

That would be switching a core mechanic... If you state my system uses attribute+skill but make an exception that certain tests will be different those tests are no longer following the core mechanic. It an easy change in this case but its still not following the core mechanic. If Log+skill was in the core book (like it is in SR4A, but not as the main method) then matrix actions would follow the core mechanic.

d20 has long stated "simple rules, lots of exception", to which I would say then its no longer simple... Shadowrun has always had exceptions because of the subsystems. Before 4e none of the subsystem matched up. Now some of them do, some do not. Perhaps thats why I don't see it being any more simple (overall, certainly there are places where it is), they still have exceptions when I was expecting none where as in 1-3e I expected the exceptions.



Yes but the book would talk about this amazing fliping system and how it never gets in the way of your story and then they would add charms, disciplens, merits, feats, humanity, etc where you needed more coins and different ones. Ok if the copper come up with more heads than the nickles your ok but if the nickles get more than half tails...

After all the years it has been dead. I find it interesting that 3rd edition still has as much interest as it does. All this has been argued back and forth countless times before that with enough searching could be found in the archives here.

At my FLGS all the local 4e games are winding down and I see a lot of people looking for 3rd edition groups to play with. Unfortunately because there is no product to sell the game store doesn't want to support it.

If you put together a regular 3rd edition game tete let me know.

For the record, I always hated the pre-SR4 die mechanic. Probability of success scaled non-linearly with increasing TN and TN 6&7 being identical drove me nuts. The complexity of SR never bothered me much. In fact, I like some crunch. The change to the die mechanic in SR4 sold me on the spot.

So, I think we've pretty much beaten the specific question the OP asked to death. Now we're just going back and forth on subjective preferences like the one I just stated above.

I had one, we switched to 4e at leased till the end of the year. I wanted to give it a fair chance. So far there are some changes I like but overall I still prefer 2e over all others. I will probably end up with some 2e/3e/4e hybrid in the end much like I did with Vampire.

While I agree with you that fun is all that ultimately matters, the ease-of-use of a system certainly makes a huge difference. And the empirical fact is, SR4 isn't any simpler or loophole-free than SR3. I *do* feel that SR4 has much better writing, making it seem simpler and more streamlined. But if SR4 was written with the same clarity and layout that FASA was famous for, people here would complain about how impenetrable it is. I think the SR4 writers deserve some serious kudos for bringing things up to industry standards. (And yes, that is an opinion. Compliments always are.)

When more time is spent playing the game and less time is spent over the rules that is always a good thing.

Well thats "Engel" ,a German RPG by Feder & Schwert (Translators of World of Darkness)
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_(Rollenspiel)
I'm afraid but I can't find an englisch Page.
Its a Post apocalyptic RPG an the Players are Angel fighting for the Angelic Church vs Demons that Plague the Country
(but there is a very Dark and sinister Secret regarding the Chars,the Angels.They're not quite what they appear to be)

He who dances with Angels
Medicienman

Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engel_%28role-playing_game%29.

We've always had this house rule at our table: No more than 45 seconds can spent debating any rule at the table, or looking up rules then the GM makes a ruling. Right, wrong or indifferent this ruling stands until after the game is over, and someone decides it's worth going over.

By the by-I like Shadowrun but I feel SR4 feels outdated, old even compared to how SR1 felt like it really was cutting edge. SR4 feels old. I'm not sure I'd give the people at the helm kudos just yet, but obviously I'm still buying product so there doing something right.

There's one I haven't heard before. What do you mean by "old" or "outdated?"

SR 1 proved if you had a cool concept and a lot of top notch background and adventures you don't need a working combat system.

Games have sold on worse. Look at D&D 4e. (And anyone who thinks any published Shadowrun adventure is good has mental health issues.)



When SR1 hit the scene, and even through much of SR2 much of the tech was beyond cutting edge. You looked at SR1 and said "Wow! That could happen." Much of the tech in SR4 has already happened. It's so rooted in today that's it not really transhuman or on the edge anymore. When I looked at the art in SR1, at the time, I felt like much of it was also on the edge. It took a style we hadn't previously seen. SR4 feels like a bad combination of crappy anime, crappier punktech, and worse bad television spin offs.

Shadowrun when it hit the scene redefined the genre. Shadowrun 4 is all too often described by people by using phrases like "It's like the Matrix, but cooler!" And that's kind of sad for me.

All of that said, yup I'm still buying the product. And yes, I get I can ignore the parts I don't like and make changes as I see fit. I'll make Shadowrun 4 my own game, just like I did previous editions.

Personally, that strikes me as pretty harsh, but to each their own.

AJC

I think the reason it feels old, is some of have been playing it off and on since 1st Ed came out. In 1989-Cell phones were just becomming common. Even then you average cell phone cost a couple hundred minimum. They had wristphones and comminks as headware in the . Nowadays you could get a cell cheap for like 20 bucks and some airtime. In some respects they tried to play catchup with the wireless and other computer advancements since its introduction, but until 4E-the matrix (pre crash 2.0 fluff) required to much bandwith to use a wireless connection. Now that bandwith is there.

Paul makes a good point. In SR1, a lot of the tech stuff was still pretty far off in real life, so there was a lot more of that wow factor feel to the stuff in the game.

Looking at SR4, yeah, we still have 'ware, but there's not really a whole lot new since earlier editions and we have wireless today in real life, so its not a huge leap. Plus, the 2070s aren't that far off. I mean, we are playing in the same century, so its just not as far removed.

I don't know how much the developers have done to really look to the future and get creative. I mean, it obviously didn't take much to write in wireless stuff for SR4. It would be nice to have some creative minds think about what's next, and no matter how crazy that sounds today, run with it...

The problem I see with "being creative" with the future and that gets obvious when reading Augmentation is that you quickly enter transhumanism territory. And while I like transhumanism, it'd clearly shift the game in a completely different direction.

Well, Augmentation, is my least favorite SR4 sourcebook. I don't know why I feel that way, but the writing is dull and it reads more like a technical manual than anything else. Plus, I have a hard time incorporating anything in that book to my campaigns. They would have done better if they just took all the gear and rules out of that book, published a few online PDFs and called it a day. Augmentation has zero positive effect in SR4...

We've had tranhumanism since SR1 as every piece of 'ware is an improvement, in some way. I really don't see that being a shift. Augmentation just took it to some extremes and is more of a novelty. Seems like a lot of pages wasted for such little impact to the game.

Maybe all the ideas have dried up? Besides the streamlining and incorporating wireless, there's not much different from earlier games...

Maybe all the ideas have dried up? Besides the streamlining and incorporating wireless, there's not much different from earlier games...
Technomancer ?
Some of the Runners Compendium stuff (Nartaki,sentient Critters, free Spirits,f.E.) ?
Creating your own Magic Tradition ?
For Me thats quite a lot new Stuff compared to SR3 and whay much more compared to SR1

HokaHey
Medicineman

Well, in a canon sense, Augmentation is a technical manual. It's three or four augmentation catalogues stitched together with shadowtalk and a discussion of black box science: cyborgs, cyberzombies, and bio-drones. So if it reads a little dry, think of it that way. Imo, I think Augmentation is one of the best for the core line (I actually think that Arsenal is the weakest, myself).

The problem with cyberpunk, as someone who is far more literate than I am in the subject (think it was Wesleystreet; what happened to that guy?) put it, is that the environment that created cyberpunk is deader than dead. Japan is no longer a big boogeyman (well, the Chinese are), and there isn't this pervasive feel of dread when it comes to technology. In fact, we've actually embraced it full on and integrated it into the full spectrum of our lives. The environmental situation has marginally improved (based on your own thoughts on the subject) but we're definitely more aware of our impact on the world and the steps we can take in order to live greener.

Plus, a lot of people (like myself) find cyberpunk grimdark just kind of...boring now. I will fully admit to being closer to the fluffy bunny / pink mohawk range than the grimdark grittypunk that many players of earlier editions found so interesting, mostly because I'm far more interested by transhumanism and what technology can do for a person.

(Slight aside: it still astounds me, and I think this is two / three years after the fact, that someone had that big a problem with there being breast and penis implants in Augmentation. Let's face the facts: people buy all sorts of hookum now that claims to be able to enlarge and expand your manhood, even with the vast amounts of literature out there that prove it wrong wrong wrong. I wouldn't be surprised if genital implants were like, the second thing ever invented within the Sixth World - and think about it from the perspective of a runner. There are all sorts of devious things you can do with an implant, especially if you've become Lothario, Destroyer of Worlds.)

I don't find the Shadowrun adventures to be terrible, myself. Most of them work pretty good, with the usual amount of tailoring one would have to do to make it suitable to a group. I was running On the Run just fine for the group I had a year or so ago. Yes, I was making edits - what GM doesn't? - but what was there worked just fine. To say that they're so bad they're terrible is just...an odd thought process to me. And this is from someone coming from a background in White Wolf material...

But as someone said earlier, much of this is subjective, so yeah...

Totally agree here. Much of the cutting-edge near future fiction being written right now is buying into one version or another of the Kurzweil/Vinge Singularity theory. Kurzweil would have it take place by the 2030s. Obviously the events of the 2010s and 2020s in Shadowrun would slow things down. Still, by 2070?

Anyway, the point is that the cutting edge of futurism right now postulates a civilization-changing threshold beyond which it is nearly impossible to predict what things will be like. That's totally different from what the mid-80s cutting edge of SF was like. The future is a whole lot more unknowable than it used to be if you go along with the transhumanists. Just about every piece of fiction I've read dealing with transhumanism and the Singularity is from the point of view of those left behind after some flavor of Singularity and therefore living a sort of life that is still knowable to us. See Eclipse Phase (rpg) and Ken MacLeod's "Newton's Wake" for good examples of this model.

Applying the post-human Singularity model to Shadowrun would be such a radical change as to make it mostly not Shadowrun anymore. This leaves the developers in a rough spot. Unlike the SR1 developers, they can't just borrow liberally from the contemporary SF zeitgeist. If you do that, you get games like GURPS Transhuman Space and Eclipse Phase. Instead they have to pick and choose elements of futurism that they feel will enhance SR without making it not SR. This is my long-winded way of explaining why I think that SR4 seems like it only projects a short time, from the present, into the future of technology and society.