Is arguing about who is calling which edition by which name being nice? Or even on topic?

No and no.

I don't find SR4.5, SR4A or SR4 Anniversary Edition offensive at all. I know that close to a year ago it was a bit of a hot button, but really, let bygones be bygones. Everyone knows what one is talking about when referring to SR4A or SR4.5. If you don't react to it, then it doesn't mean anything. If someone says it to take a dig at the devs, so be it. No one really should care.

1. There is no "official abbreviation". SR4.5, SR4ALE, SR420, SR20 are all in common use on Dumpshock and many other RPG forums.
2. SR4.5 is just as valid, and more descriptive, than SR4ALE or most other descriptions. It describes the changes in terms other gamers might understand better.
3. I certainly don't mean it as an insult. D&D 3.5 is a fine product. If you think I'm taking a dig at D&D, we can discus that.
4. I have many PoV's on many subjects. What's the big deal with having an opinion?

To get this back on topic, I do think the rules changes from SR4.0 to 4.5 are analogous to the changes between D&D 3.0 and 3.5. Not as extreme in some ways, but it does become easier to scrap your old characters and rebuild them from XP/Karma. That's not to say that SR4.5 is an inferior product to SR 4.0, either. Just that there are some profound changes between the two, and character conversion can be a pain.

I have been with SR since 2nd edition, and obviously fell in love with it at that time, defining each new edition against my first love. I am not the type of gamer who buys the next edition without question, but I have to say I have never enjoyed SR more than I have in SR4.

I do miss the metaplot from SR2 & 3, but I have to say the quality of the fluff is as good, if not better than, the previous editions. There certainly isn't enough of it yet...

There have been rules issues with each iteration of the game, but the rule set seems to work really smoothly (that is, staying out of the way of the game) in SR4.

The merging of Hackers and Riggers was a great idea... It just makes more sense for the setting and makes characters more flexible/useful. Similarly with the Shamanic and Hermetic traditions. The flavor of each is still present, it's just not hardwired into the rules.

As for Unwired, it has really helped me as a SR GM. It's just so much easier to build the matrix run into the other parts of the adventure. That's worth whatever setting-shock I might have felt losing the Decker... But I really do miss the Deck... Ya know?

But THAT is something that I think most of us (as well as a few of the writers) will miss most... I mean, my group will continue to tell various "frag-faces" to "slot off," but the ridiculous street talk will be missed in the fiction.

Ah... since so many people talk about exactly they liked in each edition and i am in the mood for some typing (hm...hm), here some opinions of mine:
What edition did something best? (Never played 1st... sorry)

Initiative: 2nd. You roll and if some combat monster is raging out: YES IT CAN DO two orthree things before the poor schmucks can even raise the gun. Allowing EVERYONE to be active in the first IP now is just a crutch for the WEAK *g*. Also having a perfect human (6 agi, 6 int) able to do two rounds if he rolls a 5 or 6 on the die was nice. Now the humans are supernaturally slow. (It is VERY easy to shoot four+ round in three second, easy...)

Magic: 2nd/3rd. Come on... Splitting shamans, hermetics and voodoo was VERY nice. Allowed for nice different play. And the Spirit/Elemental rift was beautiful too. Shamans didn't enslave or bargained... but were helped by spirits in their domain with tricks, powers and wisdom while the Elementals just mindlesly destroyed and burned shit for money and karma. And NEVER was there the question: But isn't X better... isn't that unfair? Also now that magic is so unbelievable MIGHTY that only another mage can protect you... that is not good. Very bad is more like it. How did they go from Spell (and allocated spellpool) vs. Attribute to Skill+Attribute+Mods vs. Attribute? Urg...

Damage and Healing (and mutilation): 2nd/3rd: I have no idea what they thought on the developement of the 4th edition on that one. But people get RAPIDLY healed... There are no useable stress rules (not even optional) and street docs are pretty much unimportant other than installing new crap. There are no surgery rules. And all cyberware is now too tame. I LOVED having systems RUINING your body. Move-By-Wire, or untriggered boosted reflexes, or having just TOO many biosystems in you for extensive bioware stress. THAT really needs revision for the 5th edition. This isn't D&D where you can just get a healing potion and everything is good again. CYBER(and BIO)punk man...

Skill (and overall rolling dice) system: 3rd. I thought it was VERY elegant. Building on your attribut and refining into skills/specializations. The jumping difficulty with the TN and the rerolling of sixes. BEAUTIFUL. Now any modifier is like any other and stacking ones still don't complicate anything as long as your pool is big enough. Also the extended tests... totally suck now... and if your pool is big enough no problems CAN ever occur.

Attributes: 4th. Yes, Intelligence HAD to be split into Logic and Intuition. And Reaction needed to be a standard attribute. BUT hardcapping them? Still HATE THAT. Nothing in SR should be capped... makes the powerlevels weird. (Also synergistic effects should always stack)

Rigger rules: 4th. While i don't like it that riggers now don't have to pay massive amounts of essence and money for there toys at least the RULES for vehicles are now a lot smoother. I mean really... that damn Maneuvre rating and the three different channels... GRAH

Decker/Hacker: 3rd. Conveyed much more the stress and lack of time. The system was ALWAYS watching... making the notches as a gm, watching it go closer to the entry: "25 points: Release 2 black ice" was great... also it somehow felt better as a decker. You had more to think about: download rate, active program memory. I liked that better. But yeah.. it took a bit more gametime.

Combat: Ah here i am a bit torn. While i liked armor and damage rules from 2nd/3rd more i like the attack rules of 4th. Finaly you can balance weak weapons with skill... but the rest: meh. Also the "Old Master" in melee was nice (One man with just an insane skill beating up much faster and numerous mooks in hand-to-hand). Now that you don't (normaly) do damage when defending... Also i like rolling in the defense... but also miss the old combat pool.

Well... i guess i have a lot more (Karma and Money, the setting, the matrix itself, Otakus vs. Technomancer etc.), but this should do for now.

See ya

This, for me. I don't know anything else.

Fourth Edition streamlined a lot of the game play (whether that's really a good thing or not), but lost most of the feel of Shadowrun. I had the Dragon Magazine which reviewed 1st Ed Shadowrun, and started playing in like junior high. That's how silly long I've been around this game. And I've never been fully satisfied with any of the editions (contemplated converting it to 93 Games Studio's new Reflex system, which works awesomely for their Twilight 2013 game. And no, that has nothing to do with vampires), the source material was always solid. Meta plot got a little out of hand shortly before and after FASA folded, but that's all just fluff a GM can ignore anyhow.

Glaring problem of 4th Ed:

Technomancers. A terrible idea. I guess somebody looked at the tag line from SR1 (looking at my hardcover right now, lol) and took it way too seriously. Magic and machine, sure. Not at the same time. It's just stupid. I understand that with magic as a reality, anything is possible, but it's a little too silly.

Minor problems:

The new wireless AR Matrix and Hackers. Anyone with a brain saw for years and years that the difference between a rigger and a decker is kinda small. However, the terminology change seems pointless, especially since they still differentiate them in the sample archetypes. Like some have pointed out, I liked the Matrix topography. Much of the new Wireless Matrix better grasps the evolution of modern technology (as opposed to the evolution of late 80s, early 90s tech as others have mentioned), however, much of it also makes no sense. Nice job trying to bring the Decker players into the game by making so much stuff AR and wireless, but at the same time, you've lost the entire Gibsonian feel to the world. Sure, decking was always the toughest part about running Shadowrun, balancing play time for Matrix versus real world action, but now it just seems silly. Deckers were rarely the kind of characters who would feel comfortable or have a place breaking into shit. Just like the Rocker was a stupid archetype, trying to pretend the little computer nerd is going to be running alongside the ex military covert ops specialist is stretching it too. There was a lot of charm and flavor to many old school Decker characters, and there's more to a game of Shadowrun than the run itself. Decker characters still fit in just fine to a well crafted story. And a good GM was able to run concurrent Matrix/Real World action. It needed fixing, but instead they kinda just broke it. What needed to be done was figure out a way to modernize the Matrix without making it stupid. If I run another campaign like I plan to, going to have to figure out a more realistic and atmosphere retaining blend of the two.

Gibsonian Feel. Have to revisit this one. Neuromancer (and its related works) is obviously the source material of all source material for this game. The whole tech noir aspect of the game has disappeared. Not really sure in favor of what. Kind of a Ghost in the Shell feel to it, at least if you refer to the SAC series and not the original film. Whatever it is, they've taken a lot of the shadow out of Shadowrun. There were always conceptual issues with Shadowrun (again, the Rocker archetype), but the future of the older editions was dark and grimy with a glittery top. Shadowrun was so awesome because they so blatantly ripped off William Gibson. Tolekinizing Neuromancer was a bit silly, but it worked. The less you thought about it the better typically. Was never 100% pleased with the whole metahuman aspect and how absurd some of the fluff on it was, but if FASA was good at one thing, it was taking other people's good ideas and making games out of them.

Wireless everything. Gotta break this down. What's this stupidity with everything being wireless or it doesn't work? The entire idea behind cybernetic enhancement is that you're enmeshing technology and biology. Why would it all end up being Bluetooth? More Ghost in the Shell nonsense. I know the idea of cyberbrain hacking and taking over people's cyberlimbs is amusing, but it also makes little sense. Just like centralized system, the body's CPU is the brain. For a cyberlimb to (theoretically) work, it would have to be tied into the body's natural impulses and responses. What is it wirelessly transmitting to? Why would it even need a signal? It's hard wired already and I can't imagine a wireless signal is more efficient than direct pathing. Wireless smartguns transmitting to goggles? Cool idea. Your palm induction smartgun link sending wireless signals to your brain? Stupid idea. Building in a security weakness to a closed system that wasn't broken? No thanks. Requiring everyone to have a PAN that's turned on. So now there's a mandatory requirement for carried personal electronics? What the hell do poor people do in the future? And you think about how conscious people are today of identity theft. I'm not one of those paranoid people, but who the hell would want to carry around a device that was constantly updating everyone around them and containing all their personal info on a broadcasted signal? Jesus, I can't stand Internet advertising now. Pop-up ads in your field of vision? What a nightmare. There are a lot of people who can't walk and talk at the same time. Imagine that last teenage girl who almost ran into you trying to text and walk down the street. Now multiply that times everybody.

Combat. Well, let's not pretend that combat was ever that great in Shadowrun. It's always been one of the weak points. The older editions were too skill derivative. Grandma had no chance to kill you with a .44 magnum revolver. She just would never be able to stack enough successes to get to D. Even as time went on, the game was still more about trying to absorb damage rather than avoid it. Which is entirely counter-intuitive to modern combat. So the fact that 4e has mediocre combat rules is hard to hold against it. However, making initiative "fair" is incredibly lame. The street samurai sacrificed huge chunks of cash and flesh in 1e and 2e to be faster and get the jump on initiative. Eventually FASA added physical adepts (never a favorite of mine) who also used up a lot of their character's points to gain that same advantage. 4e negates a lot of that sacrifice by moving to passes. No wonder cyberware is cheaper (it really isn't; they just reduced the total starting resources accordingly).

I could go on, but that seems sufficient. Rules wise, I think there's no perfect edition, but 3e was the best when everything is taken into account. Its character creation allowed for capable shadowrunners, which was a vast improvement. To be honest, in the high tech future of corporate subterfuge, the kind of half assed smash and grab tactics displayed by Ghost, Sally and Dodger just wouldn't have worked, lol. And the fluff background of "newbie" Shadowrunners is amusing at best. Every runner should already be experienced and have some kind of background that explains how they got their skillset. A profession that requires defeating highly sophisticated electronics even at the lower end of the spectrum wouldn't be entered into by just anybody. A shadowrunner should be a cut above the rest unless you're playing an intentionally low powered campaign with gangers and other petty crime. It took a while for FASA's concept to mature, but you could definitely see the change in game philosophy and concept philosophy from edition to edition. The vast bulk of my experience was with 2e, but I think 3e streamlined a lot of its snagging points. Not all, but enough to be the best edition.

I agree with most of your post but I wanted to give some additions to some things

Magic 2e used Spellcasting skill(or some dice from it anyway) + Force, 3e used Magic Pool + Spellcasting. If you look at the 3e version and either assume you are going to use half the pool on drain or look at the 2e optional dodge pool where they basicly did that to your combat pool. Now for us oldtimers who miss our combat pool I suggest adding a reckless, neutral, and conservative stance (yes its from WFRP3). Each time you get an Action you can pick one which would shift your offensinve/spellcasting/etc +3 or -3 while doing the opposite to the defensive/drain/etc.

Attribiutes, Natural Attributes have always had a hard cap, sometimes they even had rules for hardcaping the modifications on attributes. However to my knowledge the only hard cap on skills were in video games.

Hacking you can still have those moments as the mechanics are just 1e alll over again. Yes thats right if you read it close we are back to the old matrix maps (plus the old mechanics of skill+program, ok not quiet true as it used to be reaction+skill+program) The only big change (other than removing reaction and variable target numbers) is that the net hits needed is no longer static and they did not tell us what the nodes specifically are (unlike the old SAN, SPU, etc)

What an incredible first posting o.o
welcome home newbie *snickers* ^^

Not technically my fist post, it's just been a while and I couldn't remember what my old email/user combo was, heh. Easier to re-reg than research. And if forum elitists want to pretend that post count equates to analysis validity, they're a lost cause waste of space anyhow.

Ah, i see. I'd ask one of the Admins in this case though.

I always had massive storytelling problems because sams weren't threatening by anything except equally cybered opponents. Walk into a whole squad of mooks? Blam blam blam the 2-3 chars with wired gets 4-6 bursts off each before they get their first action. It was ridiculous.

That's more a shortcoming in your opfor tactics than in the game rules. If you're going to allow jacked up cyber-monsters, then the character should be such. Our group always shied away from creating a combat monster. Few, if any characters were ever trotted out sporting Wired 3 or some similarly absurd combination of cyber and bio.

However, the limitation you presented was engaging your street samurai solely with conventional tactics. Of course the mooks are going to get rolled if the character moves with astonishing speed. However, a wired character can only react to things he can perceive. If your typical combat scenario involves two sides meeting up face to face and duking it out, then of course your wired up sams are going to mince them. Tailor the opposition to challenge their strengths, but also to make them intelligently compensate fortheir weaknesses. Shadowrun's combat system, like I said, has never been ideal, but even the most jacked up of characters won't be able to simply walk through a good ambush or enemies using solid tactics, cover, etc. Allow the Sams to shine, but they should always have a little bit of that Call of Cthulu mindset where they realize that killing everything won't usually be the best, or even an, option.

Remember, mooks are real people who don't want to die, not kids playing an FPS with infinite respawns. And if they know the opposition is wired up, they're going to seek other advantages. Make your players think. It's role playing, and not roll playing for a reason. A street samurai (or any character in any system ever (except d20 because d20 sucks) is only as invincible as you allow him to be. Don't tailor encounters to defeat his fun, but at the same time if you're truly worried about storytelling, remember to think from the perception of your NPCs. Sure, if the Sams get the drop on three random mooks, let them have their Matrix moment.

Having played all four editions...

Things I miss from older versions:
1) The Skill Web - I really miss this.
2) Hermetic/Shaman split.
3) Previous edition methods for handling multiple actions per combat round.
4) Spell grounding
5) Mana not traveling from the caster

Things I was glad to see go
1) Control Rigs that ate all your essence and was a technologically incompatible with other computer technology.
2) Pocket secretary being the advanced state of wireless technology.
3) Having to learn spells at different force ratings

SR4/SR4A
1) The SR4A increased attribute cost was not only not needed, but is pretty crippling for magic and edge advancement.
2) SR4A should have errata that addressed the disparity of no visual clues to spell casting (just concentration, SR4A.181) vs Noticing Magic rules (SR4A.179)
3) SR4A should have balanced out movement across combat turns that can have more than 1 pass. This would have made for better tactical play.
4) SR4A should have balanced out multiple initiative passes to better reflect the actions of a person with 4 passes vs. a person with 1 pass.

Sure thing. But I wrote "walk into a whole squad of mooks". I meant that. A lot of situations, the PCs can afford to walk right in because any up front encounter, they'll mince mooks. They only have to worry about ambushes and SWAT-level reinforcements arriving. Making a stupid move and getting spotted isn't immediatedly dangerous, you just gun down the guards and your only problem is the reinforcement clock is ticking. If they can run in and out within the response time, they can just do a hit and run.

Bottom line is, the mechanics back then had you struggling to face the PCs with threat of violence. You either had to deck out the opposition with unrealistic implants, or have mooks set up equally unrealistic ambushes.

I like it better when mooks get a chance to shoot back - that puts the balance back where it belongs, where the players have to ambush them.

You say ridiculous, I say ridiculously awesome.

That is how I visualized wired reflexes working, thanks largely to the fluff and novels. And that is how I wanted and liked it working mechanically. I loved the idea of a guy handling multiple actions before anyone got to move, it was storytelling awesome to me not a problem. Everyone going in the first pass is a bigger storytelling problem for me.(it isn't a broken rule, but it lost cool)

As a player I can see being frustrated, not as a GM. When one player goes and goes and goes you have the pizza problem most people talk about with the deckers. I don't see this as a GM issue. The GM can bend the situation to fit what he needs for the sake of the story. Yes, I advocate cheating but this is because a GM should keep the story interesting and moving forward and not be adversarial. The GM should be on the PCs side you want your street sam to kick ass, that makes the story better. Mooks can still fire back. Reinforcements can come to up the ante. Steve D over on RPG.net said it best. GMs job is to make the story awesome by letting the character BE awesome. This doesn't mean you still can't have a bum surprise the street sam with a shiv in his back

Kruger: What's your problem with the "Rocker" archetype? I think it totally fit the feel of the older editions of Shadowrun. Very dystopian future type of character, kind of like fitting in to a future as seen by Running Man. Besides, it seems like it's very similar to the Face archetype in 4th...

Redjack: And now you had me read the noticing spellcasting rules in yet even more detail. SR4A p179, Noticing Magic, you get +2 dice if a shamanic mask is present. Shamanic mask, p181, "A player can choose whether or not this effect is apparent for her character." What the hell? Why would you choose to have this? Definitely needs an errata.

2nd and 3rd edition were the best, mostly for the setting / feel of the game. Rules were pretty fun too. Only improvement for 4th was the idea of wireless (although that still has a ton of it's own problems) and not having to buy spells at a specific Force.

Here's a bad story: The protagonist is an unstoppable killing machine. He kills hordes of enemies face on without problems. The amount and quality of enemies and the tactics they use seem unrealistic, but at least it sometimes makes it dramatic.

Here's a good story: The protagonist is a professional. He overcomes his enemies through the use of sound tactics, surprise and stealth. When he messes up, he can normally recover from it - he is after a all quite a cut above mooks - but it is by no means risk free. When they sometimes manage to spring a trap or launch a counterattack, it becomes downright hectic.

In my experience, players only enjoy superpowers for a very short time. Then it becomes just another series of dice rolls. On the other hand, they will continue to enjoy applying their wits to overcome problems.

And sams in SR4 are still very, very powerful - the only difference is he only gets 1 action before mooks return fire, rather than 2-3, and that makes everything a lot more interesting. You could get the same effect earlier if the mooks had cover by delaying actions, but again, you'd have to engineer that situation with advance warning for the mooks, and really - they'd just hunker down or flee and wait for reinforcements.

No matter how many bulets you can send flying, magical opponents were always a weakness. Spirits especially those with immunity to normal weapons can really ruin a sammie's day. Any mage or adept with a weapon focus is going to be the go to person. I think it's all balanced. Not to mention that the combat monsters that invest that much into just initiative are usually 1 trick ponies. (usually). there is no way you are going to be able to get skill wires, tactical computers or other ware that can be crucial.

Sorry, but the differences are a matter of taste, not quality.

what makes a story good is the telling. People put up with the pizza problem, then and now, because there's promise of a good story if they jump through some hoops. In the case of your two stories, the first one, told well, would be infinitely more interesting than the second one told badly.

BattleRun is the best!

Having only played SR4, it's obviously my favorite-- but the rest of my group has been around for most versions of the game, and I get to hear stories about the differences in systems and whatnot. SR3 seems to be more comprehensive, but that's to be expected since SR4 is still in it's infancy, in the broad spectrum of things. As a general rule, with the exception of White Wolf WoD system, I usually like the newer system better than it's previous system.

Indeed...

SR3 for me, but I'm told that's only because I never played 2.

SR4A seems to be a solid rule set, but there were a couple things that put me off "on principle". Adding attributes to a skill check for example. I like the idea that a person who works hard could be just as good as someone with a natural aptitude, which I think SR3 rules reflected, even if it's not the best system mechanically (or even an accurate reflection of reality). Not a complaint or really even a criticism, but enough to stop me buying a new set of books, though being broke doesn't help either.

This is WRONG. 3e has the same initiative system as 4e in terms of order. Everyone acts, subtract 10, continue. It was also used by Vampire Revised edition. This is one of the reason I think 3e is better overall even if it no longer fit the fiction, you didn't have a pizza party while the street sam went.



The first one is very John Woo, a valid playstyle, but I agree it can get boring because you have to up the ante. Though some people really like superhero games thats why Mutants and Mastermind, HERO, ICONs, and many other games exist. I prefer a bit more danger but that doesn't mean you can't have 523 karma (my personal high) and still get killed by a bullet. Even with my several million nuyen Renraku could destroy me without even flinching. Red Samurai have better access to high tech shit than I do. They can bring to the table every last resource to fry my ass. If I got wired 3 they got Move By Wire 3 and Assault helicopters. Having me rob a stuffer shack is silly, having me run the archeology... well thats the stuff you either retire after or die in a blaze of glory. Point being when you hit the story 1 end of karma and cash you shouldn't be slumming in the barrens doing jobs for gangs, you should be working for one of the megacorps directly as a specialist. Both are legitimate stories, but to be a bit on topic 4e doesnt do high karma games well unless your a mage. (its pretty easy to fix if you remove skill caps though)

I think second edition used the 'high init does everything while everyone else goes to grab dinner' method. Of course to be fair, now you have 'everyone goes once, then everyone goes to dinner while the 4IP guy finishes everything off'. But at least everyone gets some action (in 3e and 4e)

@Karoline, yes and 1e did to sorta but it maxed at 4 IPs and the split lowered with each IP so it was easier to hit 4IPs but just as hard as 2/3e to hit 2IPs. And yes you can have the pizza party after, but as a mundane face with very little cyberware player for many years. Thats more fun than waiting for your turn. At lease I got to shoot something with my firearms of 9!

You are correct that the 'high init does everything while everyone else waits' was prior to third edition. Also, you do get the same affect when you back-load the extra actions as they have since 3e. That change in 3e is actually the inspiration for the way I house rule initiative. The 4e version is just to mix up the IP orders (4, 1, 3, 2), but in 3e I had a system that was a hybrid of 3e and 2e that did the same thing basically. Given the lethality that can be present in Shadowrun, extra actions have always been a tricky situation; give them early and everyone will need them to stand a chance, but if you give them late you severely hamper the Sammies and such. I like the simplicity of the passes used in 4e, and I found it easy to adapt for my group.

+1 for understanding front load and back load are the same magnitude of time.

I miss the days when Sammies were fast. Blazing fast, fiction fast. And it didnt matter as much if they got off the first 4 shots, not everyone was a glass cannon back in my day.... Game had dramatic damage and build up.


BlueMax
/adjusts the onions on his belt

Totally...
...Enhanced reaction time should mean you get to do things faster than unenhanced people - else what's the point.

After looking through the thread, I don't see your preference listed even though the thread was started by you.

That's quite correct.

This is for other people...
...And my views about Shadowrun are scattered all over DumpShock...

SR2 for stories & Critters! (The infected we

SR3 for the rules, fluff and McKenzie's NSRCG.

Oh, it's "Paradise lost", the Hawaiian SR adventure? Ta.

<Edited>

From Cain earlier:



Ohh, nail on the head for us. I asked my group RE:WOD and after they read through the books, there was this uneasy, "No, wait, they actually serious" look in their eyes...

IMHO:
Decking - yeah, SR3 (but keep the blue, green, orange, red, die ratings) The ease of access sort of put us off SR4...deckers were supposed to be weird pale things that occassionally caught fire when things went wrong on a run, AR is nice, but..hmm, overused? Needs more glitches.

Magic: Our group has a strong tradition of magic use, so the blending of SR4 was not appealing. As a GM, I love tossing in different magical traditions and watching them adapt or run away from. The players love tossing their own Magic builds at me to watch me cry.
We've not got our hands on Street Magic <looks over to the dog-eared "Magic in the Shadows", uneven but so damn useful> but different magical traditions leads to sooo much fun.

Vehicle Use: Not too heavy on this - they tend to have most of their fun on their own 2ish feet. Wasn't aware of the 1st ed vehicle rules...god, shall be whacking THAT in the homebrew now.

Guns, Guns, Guns! Initiative is a wonderful thing and rather than it lead to "who has the 1st called shot" it's more of "I shall use this time to make a plan and ruin someone's day accordingly"

DicePool: Combat pool could get broken, but only if the GM let it be so. Frankly, the "I'm putting it on the line!" emotion could carry huge rewards to the lucky player. Also, it could lead to reissue of handbooks and new blank sheets. It's not how good you are, it's how good your character is at that moment.

-Tir.

PS:
From comments, I've noticed that like and dislike seem based on historical exposure and to a greater extent, "Good Runs with Good Runners".
I suppose even WoD could be playable with...oh, man, sorry, couldn't keep a straight face.
(It was a simple case of "Burn it before it eats through the suit" for us. If we were going to play "Moody Superheroes with Issues" we'd roll...uh, about 5 other formats.)

What's wrong with the Rocker archetype? A part time musician who engages in corporate espionage for shits and giggles?

It was retarded. Almost no relevant skills, no relevant equipment, marginally useful contacts, and even the description of the archetype suggests that he/she is a half-assed runner at best. The Rocker is a contact. Not a usable character concept in anything except the most specialized campaigns, none of which had been explored in the Shadowrun universe yet. I mean, there's no shock that the Rocker archetype quietly disappeared after 1e and was never mentioned again.

Though I agree that it was just like the Face, if by that you mean that it was nothing like the Face at all.

Did you have Shadowbeat?
Because if you didn't I can see thinking it had no relevant skills. The game didn't have mechanics like Cyberpunk did for Rockers until Shadowbeat. Once you have the rules, rockers have a roll.

I think Rocker was in 2e but I am at the salt mine and cannot look it up. But I can agree that Rockers , like Riggers, were put out to pasture by the game developers. (no a hacker is not a rigger darnit)

BlueMax

Buckaroo Bonzai...

And as far as in the Shadowrun universe, its well established. Maria Mecurial being the most well known Rocker type but there are many more. Its been an archetype since 1e.

Rocker was not in 2e. I checked when I posted originally, but I also knew that because from the beginning of 1e, when I was just a young munchkin, I still knew the rocker was a stupid archetype for a game about futuristic corporate intrigue, lol.

Aside from in extremely specialized campaigns. Nothing is going to stop you from running a rocker RPG. That's fine. Seems kinda silly, but hey, ymmv. You could also run a campaign about normal sararimen (gotta love the borderline open racism of the early editions, lol), or the day to day life of a small business owner. But, where the rocker didn't fit in was in the core game type of Shadowrun.

And remember, not everything FASA ever published was gold, lol. And while Cyberpunk was a fun game, it was pretty damned silly at times. And the Rockerboy wasn't too much better for that game than it was for Shadowrun.


BTW, riggers weren't put out to pasture. They got three sourcebooks dedicated to them, across three editions of the game as well as plenty of new vehicles in other supplements.

Laugh while you can monkey boy.

And while that movie is quite entertaining, it's also highly tongue in cheek and certainly not a model for any kind of serious, or even semi-serious game of Shadowrun. Again, for the third time, highly specialized campaign types that fall outside the realm of the core game type. Repetition is the key to learning for many people. Let's see how you guys fare.

Oh, and Maria Mercurial is not a very good example as she was a very early 1e creation. She was also not technically a Rocker archetype, nor really anything even remotely close to it.

Hey, I made a Troll street sam/rocker named Chromed Demon. He was pretty effective....oddly all you need is perform (music) specialization of 3(5) and he was pretty decent with his axe in 4E.

And still silly.

I mean, if you want a character who enjoys playing music as a hobby, and occasionally plays small gigs in dive bars or something, that's one thing. A character who is a rocker and has a full time band and then just does shadowruns for the thrill of it is stupid. And that was what the Rocker archetype was. And was why it died a quiet death, alone and unloved.

The Rocker is the rebel out there fighting the evil corporations.... With music. The Rocker was a person embedding himself in the armed resistance, shadow community, where "Information is ammunition".

The rebel rocker is part of the genre, like it or not. Just like the corporate tool rocker.

Rockers fit under the same umbrella as Investigators, gateways to the public.


BTW Silly is good sometimes. If I wanted more "real", I'd schedule more meetings.
BlueMax
/There are no Riggers in 4th ed, only hackers with pilot.
//just escaped meeting hell

I respectfully disagree...

Rockers have a place in the Shadows, just like the Media who blows whistles on the Corps, and the Priate Trid Broadcasters... it is just that the Editions have not caught up yet... Attitude will hopefully bring the Rocker into the 4th Edition...

That is all...

I feel like I'm banging my head into a wall here. Do any of you actually read? I know it's a skill no longer as emphatically pursued in our public school systems... but Jebus.

Yeah, the Rocker exists in the world of Shadowrun. Just as the sarariman does, and the stuffer shack clerk, and the bus mechanic, and the homeless guy trying to wash your windshield for tips. None of them fit in as Shadowrunners in the traditional sense. Again, (four times, should we count this Sesame Street Style Ah ha ha?), only in a specialized campaign outside the traditional boundaries of the concept of Shadowrunners. Which is, again, why they met their demise as a player archetype. There isn't much more you need than that little bit right there. Out of all the stupid crap that the various creative teams have tried to jam pack into Shadowrun, they have purposefully left the Rocker out since the early days of 1e. We're talking almost twenty years now. I don't know what editions you're waiting for to catch up, but the Rocker didn't survive to 2e, or 3e, and there were a pile of books made for both of them. Heck, 3e even expanded the core archetypes significantly, and still ignored the Rocker.

Sure, the rocker is "the rebel out there fighting the evil corporations.... With music. The Rocker was a person embedding himself in the armed resistance, shadow community, where "Information is ammunition"". And how exactly does that translate into a playable character? I mean, the pirate radio broadcaster is doing that too, and yet he's not an archetype for the game either. The world is full of NPCs. And the Rocker is an NPC. It's a flavor character that could be a hook for an adventure, or a useful contact in certain types of campaigns.

The Rocker as a PC Shadowrunner is just one more unclaimed body in the morgue or washing up on the beach somewhere half eaten by fish. There's no room for half assing or tourism in the shadows. The Rocker as a PC in a "street" level campaign might work out I guess, but that's an alternate gaming type for Shadowrun, not the core game type of futuristic corporate intrigue. Though I guess part of the impasse here stems from an incomplete understanding of what a shadowrunner is by some of you.

Or, maybe just some of you have only ever played in incredibly B-movie style campaigns.

Or maybe people just disagree with you. I know it is unfathomable that people could disagree with someone who is as brilliant as you, but sometimes us lesser minds get stuck on a concept.

Just to jump in...



I think you might be misunderstanding what Shadowrun is...
...It's a world that contains people, of all sorts - not just criminals and wannabe mercenaries, but that appeals to the masses who want a videogame like experience.



If you look at the SR material, and fiction, you find most of the characters are not what you obviously consider to be the only sort of people who exist in the game...
...There are policemen, actors, private investigators, soldiers, spies, government operatives, bikers, politicians, native americans, and more.

Almost all the archetypes now foisted on players are people who's only purpose is to fight, which is a bit limiting in a world of billions - and doesn't represent shadowrun to any degree, nor the material it's based on.



Actually the Rocker is all sorts of things - streetpoet, artist, radio dj, musician...
...Like the character [Priss ??] in Bubblegum Crisis - one of the [generally] highly regarded classic pieces of cyberpunk fiction.


Do you understand what a shadowrunner is ?? what the game is about ?? the sources shadowrun and cyberpunk 2020 are abased on ??

There's obviously a lot of people who think shadowrun should be about more than wannabe thugs with delusions of glamour...
...So maybe the game can be played and enjoyed in ways you don't, and all versions of shadowrun are just as valid.

But if people don't like the way it is, pushed that way by people like yourself who think the only way to play it is to fight everything, and shadowrun folds because no-one buys the material, everyone loses...
...Except all the other cyberpunk games where people can play other roles - except there are barely any, because it's a niche.

Hey, I'm all for disagreement. But at least present some kind of argument instead of demonstrating a complete failure to read what I wrote. After two or three times, the condescending voice is going to come out. I mean, small children need to be told things more than once. Adults shouldn't. I said the Rocker was a bad archetype for the standard runner for hire campaign of Shadowrun, and I have people arguing that the rocker belongs in the genre (as if that was ever disputed), and using Buckaroo Banzai as an example. Come on kids. Let's not waste each other's time no?

I do like your signature though. Some people might find a movie like The Big Lebowski pointless to watch edited for TV, but it's almost as funny with the absurd changes.

And I actually LIKE both the Rockers that I have played over the Years... In a standard Game and everything... Go Figure...

The point is there isn't one shadowrun campaign where you can say this character fits as a shadowrunner. The rocker was pink mohawk since you did not like the A-Team movie I can guess that is not your cup of tea. Some people like the pink mohawk style and rockers fit it perfectly as shadowrunners. Was the archtype built perfectly, no not really, but can you say the weapon specialist in 4e is. I'd back the rocker vs the weapons specialist for a team spot any day.

If you only see shadowrun as the black trenchcoat style yes the rocker does not fit well as a fellow shadowrunner. But the game is not one style, the game is a multitude of styles no matter how hard the fluff writers of recent editions try to change it. They can try to kill the dystopea so they can shove there transhumanism religious cult down our throats, they can try to kill the metaplots, they can try to kill pink mohawk but many gamers are old enough to have played when the story's concepts rocked!

Synner, you have impressively failed to grasp the core of my argument and also impressively attempted to put words in my mouth and present concepts of your own devising and claim they are mine.

I have to give you a solid round of applause for effective propagandizing and for utterly failing to bring any kind of effective argument. Bravo.

Now, what I actually said was that the Rocker was stupid as a shadowrunner in the traditional sense. It didn't make any sense as it was written (a rock star wannabe who casually attempted to live in the high speed world of corporate intrigue). If the Rocker archetype had been presented like the Rockeryboy was in Cyberpunk, it might have made slightly more sense, but then again, the Rockerboy of Cyberpunk wasn't a very well fleshed out class type in that game either. I've got a library of Shadowrun material that includes books with publishing dates in the late 80s and early 90s and I didn't buy them used. My original copy of Neuromancer was so worn I bought the 20th anniversary hardcover just so I'd have one to loan to people that might survive the transfer.

The Rocker works just fine as a PC if you're not playing as shadowrunners. The net is vast and infinite. Play whatever campaign you want. And I am pretty sure I ceded that point in one of my earliest posts. So you can argue with me on that one all you want, but you're going to look stupid, because you're not addressing my original point, which was that the Rocker archetype from 1e wasn't a shadowrunner, and didn't belong.