I think you could take all the cyberware and bioware and make that the foundation of magic items. You still could enforce an Essence limit, but you could also break it down to item slots (which would take some more math). But, the mechanics stay the same, but now you've got a Ring of Improved Reflexes + 1, which which is just wired reflexes 1.

I think you can leave the magic relatively the same, but you might want to use different spell names.

I think you can leave melee relatively the same. What makes range so powerful in SR4 is that two bullets are going to do major damage. But, if now your range is a sling bullet, bolt, arrow or maybe a shuriken, well, now being able to throw get them out in simple actions isn't that big of a deal. Swords and other melee weapons are going to reign supreme, damage wise, even if the range guys are firing often.

Maybe make melee a Simple action, or make archaic (sling, bow) ranged weapons take Simple actions to reload? Part of the reason firearms in SR are more powerful than melee is because they're twice as fast.

I like the idea of allowing training to offset (lack of) speed. I can shoot a bow, but I can't speed shoot and someone who was trained could.

It's already possible in SR to ready and fire a bow in the same IP. I'd make reloading a crossbow a complex action (the trade-off being that low-STR can effectively use powerful crossbows), which isn't an issue in SR, what with the autoloaders.

Melee needs to remain a complex action.

And in Sr Crossbows are powered and self drawing. I would want to get readying the wep down to a 1 second task

Would leave TM's in. They do get less useful, but the things that they can do get mighty specialized Sprites= research Assistants.

Think making SR into D&D is little ...well pointless, just play D&D. A medieval/Fanstay SR setting be cool and might intrest your players (like Vampire: The Dark Ages is a spin-off from the Vampire: The Masquerade), but tryin to copy D&D and fit it into SR rules I dont think works, just really different types of games.


(Sorry to be Buzzkill)

Piffle. The decoupling of core mechanic from setting is perfectly natural for RPgamers to explore.

My point was more, that instead of tryin to recreate "D&D" instead maybe the aim should be to create a SR in a medieval fantasy setting, because its not D&D theres a reason they use different systems. Im not saying dont change the setting or try new things, just dont think you can convert one into another, the ethos and core ideas of the games and systems are different (IMO). If your players are D&D fans then they are going to compare your "D&D SR" to D&D and I think they'll be disappointed as it doesnt convert over, but if you offered them another medieval fantasy game based on D6's then they might enjoy it more and not be comparing it to D&D.

Ov this just my 2 cents and if you can create a D&D game using SR rules then all power to you

My problem with thrown is that even with lower armor ratings it still kinda blows. You HAVE to make called shots to make it worth the doing.

My gaming group got to the point where we really don't like D&D as a system, so years ago we decided to convert SR3 to a strict fantasy setting as an alternative. We had some fun with it, but ultimately decided it was, on the whole, a failure. Much of the problems we encountered will remain in the SR4 system. Basically, the SR mechanics are tied strongly to the setting (which I consider to be an advantage on the whole, but not for this). If you pull out advanced technology, including augmentation, the matrix, vehicles and especially guns, you're not just pulling from the setting but also cutting out 2/3 of the system, leaving the remainder imbalanced and trying to pick up the slack. The SR melee system works as an alternate combat system, but it doesn't carry the game well once it becomes the predominant combat system. Most archetypes will also be eliminated, and without the augmentation options to balance, players are pushed to a much smaller selection of magical options. To really make it play well and not feel like you're not playing with half a game, you'll have to rework a huge chunk of the game, not just make a few tweaks. Your time would be better served looking at alternate systems that are made with fantasy settings in mind. Or just custom-building your own system to suit your group's play style, which is what we ended up doing for some of our fantasy campaigns.

The SR system ports okay to sci-fi settings that have some equivalence, but that's it. Near-future style (no really exotic technology beyond some FTL spacheships) with pervasive magic or magic-equivalent (psi!). Mutant Chronicles worked well, for instance, but we didn't lean much on that setting's steampunk components.

Not really, no...
My Ninja Throwing Master STARTS at 8P... No real need to call a Shot, but it is the best option to increase damage if you have sufficient Dice.

I don't know. I have a friend that uses SR4A for his Wheel of Time Fantasy Setting. It works out pretty well, in my opinion. Obviously there are no Augmentations, No Guns, No Vehicles, No Major Technology. Adepts are still available, as are Magicians and Mystic Adepts. Interestingly enough, There are no players who chose those options. After all, It is all in how you present the game.

I think you might want to ask the players if they'd be willing to play something like Pathfinder or 3.5 or OSR or even Earthdawn before deciding to convert Shadowrun to D&D.
If what your players really want is the fantasy setting, then there are a myriad of fantasy settings they might enjoy, a SR4 conversion being one of them.

I suspect, based on their intransigence to anything not 4E, that what they want to play is a miniatures game, focused on combat and a quick rewards system. If that is the case, they probably won't want to learn a system that has a more sandbox and improvisational approach to play. The setting they really want is a grid map.

I don't know, I still think that all you end up losing through a conversion like this is matrix and vehicles. Big whoop, right?

I can't believe anyone would remove augmentations...I mean, what the hell do you think magic items are?

I would tend to agree with the previous post. Yes, decoupling them is fine to play with, but the mechanic, to a degree, defines the world. D&D is defined by a mechanic where characters regularly can take multiple blows from a sword and basically walk it off with no medical attention. Shadowrun doesn't roll that way. D&D is 'epic level fantasy', SR is 'gritty level sci-fi fantasy'. The epic/grit part is built into the system. You can change the SR hit points system to permit epic play like D&D, but after a point, you're not using SR mechanics any more.

I would indeed work first on getting the players to accept there's a world beyond D&D first, then introduce them to class second. Just like you don't take your stoner brother and give him a fine chardonay first. You give him a mid-range merlot first and teach him that maybe 'how fast you can chug it' is not the quality he should be looking for in his drinks.

I was actually just making a joke about 'exploration'. I agree: while fluff and crunch can usually be decoupled, crunch self-evidently defines the 'kind of game'. It'd be almost trivial to run a SR4 game in a medieval fantasy setting, in comparison to making SR4 a class-levels-and-dungeon-crawl game.

Based on their intransigence to anything not 4E that what they want to play is...4E.

Draco18s, we all know that's impossible. Therefore, there must be another explanation.

Maybe they should try HeroQuest.

Did your friend find that he had to make significant alterations to the system other than just cutting? How much importance does his group place on mechanics?

For some context, my group tends to play RPGs in more of a free-form war-gaming style than an emphasis on deep characters, plots, etc. (You'd think D&D would be perfect, but the hard class system and steep power curve really bugged us.) For us, it was obvious that we were playing with half a system when using a fantasy-only SR3, because we like to use lots of game mechanics to control our game. The further you are from this style, the less gutting SR4 will matter.

nezumi also raises a good point about connection between game system and style. SR is fairly cinematic for a modern game, but definitely gritty for a fantasy system. One of the issues we encountered related to this was the severity of the death spiral (get wounded -> can't hit, can't dodge -> get wounded faster), particularly in melee. The SR4 melee system is not as punishing in this regard as the SR3 system, but it will still shape the game style, say, away from a care-free swash-buckling aesthetic.

What the SR system is really good for is maintaining a certain minimal level of threat from basic enemies. When you're playing something like D&D, you eventually (pretty quickly, really) get to the point that the people and monsters you faced when you started constitute zero threat without regard to their number or tactics. You have to take on bigger and badder, or else combat is a joke.

Shadowrun doesn't really have that feature. The Lone Star beat cop with an Ares Predator and 5 dice to roll has a legitimate chance to ruin a runner's day. The benefit I see in using SR to replicate a D&D-esque environment is basically one of scope. With SR-style rules, running into a dozen orcs or goblins would always represent some threat, and allow you to move away from being the only adventuring party on the planet to consistently wander into things with a CR value approximately equal to your average party level.

Basically, a D&D-type system can't really represent a "living world" the way SR can, because the power levels get all crazy as the players reach higher levels. Village #1 has to have a goblin problem and Village #2 has to have a bandit problem and Village #26 has to have a Greater Demon of the Infinite Abyss of Pain problem, or else things get boring (or else the goblin problem in Village #26 has to involve giant mutated hell goblins who eat fire and bleed lava). And the party can't ever approach Village #26 before going through the previous 25 villages, or else they'll die horribly and the GM will look like an ass. And stepping back down to help out Village #1 is just an exercise in time-wasting.

Core mechanics are completely in tact, there were a few small changes though. He Removed the Magician Quality completely, recosted the Adept/Mystic Adept Qualities, added a few new qualities to implement things from the WOT Novels, Purged the Augmentation/Vehicles/Matrix Sections completely. I think that he also removed Direct Damage Combat Spells completely, if I remember correctly. He also recosted the basic equipment, and altered the BP to Funds ratio for Character Creation. Races were re-flavored, Humans, Ogier, Trollocs, Aiel, etc. Other than that, everything works as in the rule book.

It retains the harshness of combat, which I think is good. The Flavor is definitely Wheel of Time.

I think it works out as well as it does because the GM is also an Author (and a pretty good one at that). So he is able to provide the correct tone and atmosphere for the game world he is using, which is all important in my opinion. And he has cast the game about 500 years prior to the events in the novels (But after Artur Hawkwings time), so it works out quite well.

I do not agree with the final paragraph. Instead, I would say that the average DnD GM does not want to take the time to make the game a living breathing world, as it takes a great deal of effort.

I have solved this problem by changing the tone of the game away from the constant grind of the Dungeons/Save the Villages Routine, and towards a political game where the characters are responsible for things greater than themselves. I currently have a long standing campaign that has spanned 23 years, and this has worked absolutely wonderfully. I am currently on my 6th group, with a continuous storyline that spans just over 200 game years. It is totally awesome.

As a note. I use DnD 3.5 ported with the Black Company Ruleset (Has evolved from AD&D 2nd, through the various upgrades in that line, through DnD 3, DnD 3.5 and now Black Company). I use the Harn Setting for the game world. And believe me, My high level characters (15-18th Level) still fear Orcs (or whatever), as they are still a threat. Black Company Rules are not the rules of Forgotten Realms, so things have been brought under control in that regard. For example, The highest Armor Class in the group is a 20, if I remember correctly. You do not see Armor Class reaching the insane 30's for the PC's, like in Forgotten Realms. Magic is both more powerful and less powerful, and the proliferation of Magical Items present in other game worlds is not an issue here, as there is no proliferation. Magic Items are more personal, and are not created on an assembly line; it is alos harder to come by, as it costs the crafter a portion of their power (not XP like in other systems). And, you can be killed with a good hit by a City Guardsman if you are not careful (a Critical Hit can reduce you to 0 Hit Points regardless of your actual total). It has happened more than once in my game. All in all, a perfect system for my High Fantasy Games.

You haven't meet two of my GMs.
Both of them invented their own worlds, both worlds were very much alive.

In one, at level...5? I think we were, we signed up for a quest to go slay a giant sand worm and bring back its heart. Some NPCs came along.

The bard turned everyone's attack bonus into "his level" which was 15. He promptly got eaten by the sand worm.

We still won, lost about half of the level 15 NPCs, collected the valuable bit (worth about a million platinum), went back to town and...

...got scammed out of all the money by the auction house. IIRC we got 10,000 gold for the party.

Oh, I should point out. This world had two new and unique magic systems, as well. And a non-euclidean dungeon.

The other world had a system of how the two human "races" traded power (each king was succeeded by a king from the other race). Up until this one emporer, who outlived four of his successors. So our first job, as a one-shot 400 years prior to the campaign, was to kill the emperor. He wasn't human, but was the legitimate heir to the thrown (some magic was involved determining who the right king was). The reason he hadn't abdicated was that when he was born a prophesy was told that when his rein ended, the kingdoms would fall apart and go to war, so he decided to stay in power as long as possible, which would be a really long time, as he was in truth, a gold dragon.

Somehow I and the GM managed to plan things really well. My character in that fight was a Gold Dragon Disciple. Basically, my "hero" had devoted himself to worshiping gold dragons and got Special Powers for it. So there I was going, "No, this is wrong. You can't be a lawful good gold dragon" and made some awesome speech because of it.

We totally murdered him.

I don't recall much from the actual campaign that came after though. I do remember a crazy king of some province who was convinced there were meremaids in his fountain (no one knew what mermaids were or why they were dangerous). His cat was secretary of war, IIRC.

On one hand you're telling me that that I'm wrong, but on the other hand you're telling me you had to significantly alter the ruleset to reduce the expected effectiveness and survivability of higher-level characters. Or, "we contradict what you say, but we don't actually play regular D&D either."



I'll stop you right here. I didn't say that GMs can't make highly creative and interesting worlds. I didn't even say that GMs can't make very full and rich game worlds with in-depth socio-political intrigue and a complex economic market. What I'm saying is that threats have to scale to the party, which introduces a complicated flaw into the system -- the bad guys after a certain point become implausibly powerful, such that the game world more or less has to center itself around the party, or else be chock full of threats so powerful that no civilization consisting mostly of Level 1 Peasants could ever hope to survive. At a certain point, the PCs have to stop randomly being held up, for example, by bandits on the road, or else those bandits have to become aspects of the minor demigod of banditry. Otherwise it's dumb (okay, roll initiative.. okay you kill all the bandits, moving on...).

In other words, the higher level the party is, the more high level threats that have to exist in the world. So either the PCs exude some bubble of high-level-enemy-attractant, or high level threats have to exist so commonly as to disrupt the plausibility of the world.

For an example of this, examine The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Once you get up to the higher levels, bandits on the road are wearing the best armors and using the best enchanted weapons and casting world-cracking magic spells.

The only way to get around this is to mod the system (like Tymeaus has) such that level increases produce diminishing returns.

I like D&D. I think you can have some very fun games. However, I sometimes get irked at never being able to take a mid to high level group and go take on problems (and have those problems provide a real challenge) that would realistically be common in a fantasy world, because you scale past them so quickly.

Then you should read it again, because I use the books as they are written. I have not altered the ruleset in the least. I did change Editions of the rules as they were introduced, and then adopted the final rules I am using when they were introduced. I use the rules straight out of the books, however. So...



Wrong in its entirety. If you continuously scale the threats to the characters, the world will eventually break (See your example of the Elder Scrolls). To avoid that, you keep the world believable by NOT scaling to the PC's. You scale the world to the WORLD. If the PC's become powerful, then so be it. I quickly found that when I used the World as the Challenge, rather than the Monster of the Week, the tone of the campaign quickly changed. Now, the Duke of Katahno is a threat, not because he is a 15th level Character (he isn't, last time I looked he is 3rd Level or something like that), but because he is the Duke of the Region. He has more resources at his beck and call than the PC's can ever hope to acquire. After all, PC's do not live long if they kill the nobles of the land. And I know what you will say next... "What is to stop them form doing so? They are more powerful than anything that can come against them." Well, the World stops them from that. My players would NEVER consider the idea that they are better 5than the NPC's because the world is a living, breathing place, where there are consequences for actions. When tehre is no such thing as Resserction (that Magical Talent does not exist as such in the Black Company Setting), then PC's become much more observant of those who can end their life, like the Lucky farmer with the Pitchfork. Or the Grand Duke of teh Ducky. Yes, the characters in my campaign can still be heroic, and exceptionally heroic at that, but they do not rely upon their level to insure that outcome.

And again. I have NOT modified the system in the least... what I did was moderate the premise on which I presented the world. If you do that, the rules take care of themselves.

And being the GM at current running Dragon Mountain I can tell you you're wrong.

My entire threat arsenal consists of:

Kobolds.
That's right, level 4 kobolds. For parties of 4-8 of character level 10-15.
And no, the kobolds aren't used like zerglings. There are a lot of them, but they still offer significant challenge for the party.

The last session involved them running down a 180 foot long corridor (with a jog to the left or right every 30 feet) where the kobolds were basically unassailable behind arrow slits. Every 30 feet the party had to stop and lift up a portcullis, and at the end of the hallway was a ballista (aimed down a flight of stairs).

Oh, the kobolds were using instant-death poisons on their arrows. Basically, if the player got hit, the poison made a secondary attack against fortitude (I'm running this 2E module in 4E) and if that hit, the player had a 25% chance of dying outright (two failed saving throws). I killed on player that way, almost killed one other through explosive arrows, and half-killed 3 more the same way. The explosive arrows only did 1d6 damage, but I was hitting two players every time one of them went, on average, as they kept grouping up, letting the AoE effect hit more than one person.

We ended that session with everyone chest deep in boiling water (which I'll admit I didn't run well).

Level 4 Kobolds… *with unassailable instant-death poison arrows* is kinda burying the lede there, buddy.

Then what's all this?



You don't use an altered ruleset, except for that altered ruleset you're using? A critical hit knocking you to 0 HP regardless of your HP total is definitely not standard.



Sure, there are ways to make the weakest monsters a threat to the highest level characters. This almost always involves restricting player actions so sharply that it seems like cheating. You could trap the PCs at the bottom of a 1000' deep well with magically greased sides and a permanent silence spell, and have the kobolds start shoveling in dirt until the PCs die of suffocation, too. At this point the kobolds aren't the threat -- the GM is.

I didn't write it that way. That was all the module. The module is even more brutal than I am, if I went as strictly written, anyone hit by one of the poisoned arrows gets one "save versus poison" (in the 2E rules set, which means roughly 60% chance of failure--anyone have the rules for a "type E poison"?) or dies in one round.
But it was an encounter that was more "get to the end" than "kill everything" type.
The party still killed...15? kobolds. They are limited in number, it you manage to kill enough of them, they stop showing up.

Have you EVER played DnD 3.5 using the Black Company Campaing Book? If not, then you do not have any idea what you are talking about. I DO NOT CHANGE ANY OF THE RULES FROM THE BOOK... Can't be more plain than that. The Critical Hit example is one of those rules. And it brings a lot of balance back into the game (that often gets so ridiculous that it is laughable, especially in Forgotten Realms), regardless of whether you personally like it or not.

And your Last paragraph is entirely specious. Yes, a GM can do that, but that is being a Dick. Note that I said that I do not do that. I do not need to TRAP the PC's anywhere. My game runs around the PC's and their Heroics. But like all players, there are some plots that they like, and osme that they do not. They pursue the ones that they like. This does not mean that I discontinue the ones they do not like, and eventually, the plots come to fruition and then the PC's have to scramble to compensate if they want to have any say in what is going on. This is not being a Dick in the least. In fact, this is presenting a world that lives and breathes, regardless of the actions of the Players and their characters.

That's how many of the old 2nd Edition modules were. Save-or-die events were pretty common.

2E also had relatively low HP compared to 3 and 4E, since getting an HP bonus per level (as opposed to just the hit die roll) required a really high Constitution (and only Warrior-types could get the highest bonus). Saving Throws were a mess. Hit dice also capped at level 10, and you'd just start picking up +1 or +2 or so per level after that. A level 20 character might only have 20 or so more HP than a level 10 character.

4E characters would have the additional restriction of limited magical effects that would be on hand for 2E and 3E characters. Having 2 or 3 Dimension Door scrolls handy can solve a run-the-gauntlet encounter with minimal fuss, but it just doesn't work like that in 4E.

I have never even heard of the Black Company Campaign Book until you mentioned it. The rules in there are, by what you're saying, not standard D&D, which means they modified the system to get it to work like how you're saying. Since my point was that you have to use a different system to keep power levels from running away, I don't see where you're going with your argument. You're not playing D&D, you're playing some dude's modified version of D&D that is redesigned to prevent exactly what I'm talking about.



Trapping the PCs in a hallway with unattackable level 4 kobolds with exploding instant death arrows is, while not exactly the same as trapping them at the bottom of that well, in the same ballpark. It definitely doesn't mean that level 4 kobolds normally constitute a significant threat -- in Draco's example they have to have impenetrable defenses and super-powered weaponry.

Quite, which is why I toned them down. I wanted them to still be scary, but in line with 4E rules.
They've got an artifact of Resurrect anyway. Damn campaign gave them an item of "win this campaign" before it even really begins. 9..9



Also quite true. If the character saved vs. the poison mentioned above they took 20 damage (per original module).



The mountain takes care of some of that. As written teleportation effects don't work anwhere within a 5 mile raduis of the mountain. I have to let the players teleport, as the effects are MUCH more common (every single one of my players has at least one teleport power, yes, even the paladin) but also MUCH more limited. Longest range on any of them is 20 squares (100 feet) and it doesn't go through walls.

Yeah, I played through part of Dragon Mountain once, but wasn't really impressed. Also I hated the GM so I started effing around with the story NPCs. The Underdark campaign was pretty good, though.



It's not quite as bad as Temple of Elemental Evil, where in the first or second room a slime drops off the ceiling onto one of the characters. If it hits (or if they fail a save or something), the character is engulfed, dies, and turns into another slime.

Playing classic modules really requires a stack of spare characters to choose from when yours gets crushed or eaten or dissolved or obliterated by a sphere of annihilation.



I didn't remember the teleport restriction. But there were also Stone Shapes and Passwalls and Ethereal Jaunts and Walls of Ice and whatnot that could be used creatively to circumvent the defenses or prevent the attacks entirely.

4E doesn't really let you be that creative with powers (or use them more than once, for the most part), so I can see how the party would've gotten into a world of hurt in that sort of trap.

It's been a little hit and miss in places, but overall we've been enjoying it.



From the book:




True. The powers are fairly limited in some regards. It's a table top combat game now, not so much an RPG. I like what they did with the game in some ways and dislike it in others.

Fighting Infyrana (the dragon of the mountain) will be diabolical. The game actually expects the party to blow their load too soon, and that's more painful in 4E than in 2E, as ALL of their powers (except the At-Wills) are limited in use.

I do have to be careful what I say on this board, though. I don't think any of my current group regularly visit Dumpshock, but others have in the past.

Until you have actually read the setting, you should really refrain from commenting... As for changing systems. I used the system that was available, and upgraded until I found exactly what I liked. The campaign never really altered since Setting is not related to Mechanics. Any good GM can keep them completely separate.



Interesting that you say this, because my player characters were absolutely terrified of the Kobolds in my campaign during the time that I used them extensively. A threat does not have to be overly powerful if you use cunning. Nothing like watching an 11th Level Paladin run from just spotting a Kobold. Quite entertaining. Currently, it is Orks that are the main threat in the campaign area that is being developed. It should also be noted that I do not care for CR encounters. I place what should be in the world and let the players (and their characters) lose upon it. They choose their encounters, not I. I run a story (I wish I was a better novelist, but alas, I am not), not an endless supply of encounters for loot and XP.

They actually don't. Past that part (the place is a dwarven fortress) the kobolds don't get those luxuries.

I can't imagine why there's so much (wildly off-topic) animosity in this silly thread, but it's too much trouble to find out.

If the goal is to recreate the D&D *system* in SR4 rules, I agree that it's not worth the effort (if possible). If you *want* a class/level-based dungeon crawler with hit points, you obviously have to have a system that uses classes, levels, and hit points. I still think that you could have fun playing 'pseudo-medieval fantasy SR4'.

I suggested (1/4-joking) that all the players nominally be Adepts, with the implication that you'd use PP as a major part of the leveling mechanic (clearly, a big change). I think this (along with metamagics and metamagic prereqs) could be used with distinct traditions to emulate any desired 'class feature' (including 'levels of spellcasting' with MysAd) and leveling aspects (with the advantage of less linearity).

I also saw the suggestion that augmentations be 'ported' to a magic item/magic item location system (sounds like Incarnum?), which sounds promising. The Essence system could be scrapped, or altered to limit the total magic a character can use at once (very un-D&D, but possibly a good idea; maybe it scales with 'level' or can be directly increased with Karma?).

What are the other major problems? Is the goal here to port actual D&D modules (and every aspect of the game), or just make something that's D&D-like?

Have you never read the basic rules to any edition of D&D? You've described rules in your whatever campaign that do not normally exist in D&D, namely whatever mechanism that can cause critical hits to kill regardless of damage. I don't know how extensive the rules changes are, but they are obviously not basic D&D rules. The setting doesn't enter into it.

I made some innocuous statement about how SR-type rules allow for more normalized power levels as opposed to D&D which is very disparate at the ends, and this guy's yakking at me about how his D&D-based non-D&D game breaks that conception because it's D&D and peasants can kill high-level knights and whatnot (even though it's not actually D&D).



I think the goal here would be to replicate a D&D-style fantasy game using the SR ruleset. It obviously wouldn't be D&D, but I think drawing some general expectations and flavor from D&D, and modifying some of the systems accordingly, would be ideal. Magic would need the biggest overhaul.



This could probably be better adapted to some sort of quasi-Eastern monk/martial-arts game. Samurai and ninja and whatnot.



The magic item system would require some work. Honestly, you could probably dip into your handy D&D magic item lists for most things. Magic weapons could obviously just be treated like weapon foci (Force 1 = +1, etc) and magic armor would be just as easy (Force 1 = +1 to all armor ratings). Attribute boosters could just be toned down to 3 or 4 levels to give a per-level bonus to attributes. Magic items that just do stuff, like bags of holding, could just function straight out of the text.

The problem would come in with trying to add SR-specific modifications, like Initiative Passes. Sure, you could add some item like a Ring of Improved Initiative +2 that gives +2 Reaction and +2 IP, and have it be some super-powerful item. But them you have to remember that Mages in Shadowrun can only access this stuff normally by casting and sustaining spells --- anything else is an Essence trade-off. It's what prevents a Mage from being just as good a warrior as a Street Sam. They can achieve the same skill levels, but the Sam is going to be augmented like crazy, something the Mage just can't pull off. If you remove that restriction and let the mage load up on magic items like everyone else, they'll dominate unless some other major restrictions I haven't thought of are put on them.



For me, it would just be making something D&D-like. I like D&D, except when the power levels start to scale out of fashion with the established setting.

That's kind of my point for the Adept idea: people have the tradeoff between Wires (whatever it's called) and, say, spellcasting points. Warrior vs. Wizard, Sam vs. Mage. I'm not saying everyone is an Adept in *fluff*, but that everyone is an Adept in crunch. Fighter (no spells, but PP in melee skill boost, etc.); Barbarian (Berserk, Ability Boost, High Pain Threshold?); Wizard (PP in spellcasting, Concentration, etc.); whatever, be creative. Tradeoff is built right in, and people can increase PP with Karma.

So, you are saying that you heavily altered the rules set & gameplay of D&D to support a "living world", and use this as the basis of your support that D&D can be ran as a living world? Bullshit.

You are not playing D&D - you are playing modified d20 in a fantasy setting. And no, D&D cannot support a living world.

Wait, quick question. Why can't DnD support a living world?

I don't even know what a 'living world' is. Sounds dumb.

Is that inability something that needs to be ported into the SR4 conversion, or should we leave it out?

Well, what I meant by 'living world' was a game world that could exist without the machinations of super-powered PCs. In SR, PCs aren't really world-changers. In D&D, once characters get to level 10 or 15, they're a huge dragon-slaying world-altering force that stand apart from mundane armies and nations. Nothing day-to-day in such a world can contend with or hope to stop them. So to challenge them you have to throw them against other world-altering forces. In SR the PCs are always hoping not to get shot by a lucky security guard.

I dig. More like 'big world' or 'strong world', maybe. I don't really agree, because there are always new, stronger (increasingly implausible…) enemies in D&D. It evens out. I do agree that it standard D&D does seem to have a much wider *range* of 'power/existence' than SR, from 1/4 HD nothings to literal gods. *shrug* That's certainly a pertinent difference in discussion a D&D-to-SR-mechanic conversion.

That is actually exactly the problem. Epicedion explained it quite well above.

I know. I was there when he said that. I disagree.

It's more a question of D&D having a vastly *wider* reality, one which includes worthless peasants *and* armies of archons. The only 'problem' is that PCs can progress from Level 1 threats to Level 20 threats, which strains credulity. It's not a problem that Level 20 threats *exist*. I think the 'village' phrasing is very misleading. Chapter 1 might be goblins, and Chapter 26 might be Demons, but that doesn't mean it's as comical as 'this village has a demon problem'. If anything, D&D has been good about letting you drag PCs into Mordor and across planes of existence in search of new threats to steal treasure from. It's all in your perspective.

His point was phrased as 'the problem is that PCs are world-changingly powerful'. My response is that no, they're not… unless they're matched up against the wrong part of the world. An adult can wreck toddlers, but adults don't compete with toddlers.

Ohhhhh I see what you're saying now. So for someone who isn't to experienced with fantasy systems (I no longer play DnD and my last two systems have been Eclipse Phase and Shadowrun) any ideas of what a good fantasy system/world would be? And not GURPS. I've had enough experience with that to last a lifetime.