While I don't understand the issues people had with the battle rifle (ok,maybe the range issue but what was it going to use other than automatics? I don't recall any full auto weapons that use long arms) you're leaving out the option of actually publishing errata that one doesn't need to pay for. If a company isn't going to publish errata then they need to publish books that don't need errata.

There are lots of folks working for "free". Lots of smart folks who love the product and have loved it forever. I call that a good thing.

Back to the pdf:

I simply love it. It fills a lot of gaps in weapon choices, and it is just a fun read. The art is perfect for the style, I totally dig the little pointers describing the guns anatomy.
You always have the one dude who wants to come to the table with a 1911 (me) and now there are stats for it.

My biggest problems with it is I want more. Also, a table in the back would rock, but life goes on.

Well, I did specify that it wasn't a major issue.

There appears to be at least two sets of weapon artwork in the PDF. One set appears to be edited photos of weapons. These are more or less fine from a mechanical point of view.

The other is clearly much more a drawn style of artwork. (Some of it pretty darn outlandish looking - seems to suffer from "It's from the FUTURE! It must have weird bits all over it and have bizarre shapes!")

The second set is where I was seeing mechanical problems, ranging from "How the heck does the ammo actually get from the magazine to the chamber?" to "If the magazine is all the way in the back of the weapon, I mean ALL the way, where is the bolt?". Nevermind that twin magazines in line on in front of the other is just silly.

Again, this is more of a pet peeve. As far as game rules the PDF seems to be fine, and I'll probably use it for my home games.

As far as Paid vs Not Paid, it's an old adage. Unless you're doing it for charity, never do work for free that you could be getting paid for. It has nothing to do with the quality of your work or your professionalism. In fact, some folks will say that if you do it for free you are DEVALUING your own work - if you're good enough to get published, you're good enough to get paid for it, and if people get the idea that you'll accept less, they'll give you less.

That said, I have done published writing and artwork for free in the past, so clearly I don't completely believe in that old adage myself.




-k

Gotta love it. When proofreading lets through stuff like War!, folks pitch a fit and ragequit the game, insisting the current batch of "scabs" don't care about or understand Shadowrun and can't be bothered to edit documents. When freelancers step up to do extra proofreading and get more eyes on each outbound document, we get ridiculed and preached at for being idiots who work for free.

You dance with who brung ya. If the way we can get out Spy Games instead of War! is to take a more active role and "work for free," do you really blame us? Which would you prefer, we writers stubbornly refuse to communicate and coordinate with each other, don't check over one another's work, and let out slipshod product that's edited by folks with a whole ton of stuff on their plates? Because I, for one, would rather have my name on a product I've read over and am proud of, than the alternative. They can't all be solo products. When they're not, it's in our own best interest to work together, communicate, proofread for one another, and put out a book with the fewest errors we can.

If that makes us idiots for working for free, fine. I'd rather work for free than have my name on a shitty book, myself.

Usually a errata shows up near a new print run. And right now i think CGL is focusing on printing new books to ensure a positive revenue flow.

CGL needs to publish errata for the books that are already out before they publish more books that need errata.

What's more, they should crosscheck rules before making up new rules, and playtest rules they make.

Much of my current problems with their product seem to stem from the drive to publish fast, much and often to turn a quick buck, resulting in several products being released that just could use more polishing.

Yeah, I know, that's nagging again, and totally not positive ... but you know what? I wouldn't die if Gun Heaven had spent a few more weeks in the proofing and editing stage, because that'd mean most of the problems I have with it might have been caught.

Bubba the Love Troll, who else?

And you know he'll be hammerin' all night long, baby!I'm with Squinky on this. Especially as when I first tried to run the game someone wanted a Beretta M92, because that was his favorite pistol. (Me, I'm a John Browning fanboy, and grok the Colt M1911 and Browning M1935 "Hi-Power". Which is why one of my characters carries an Ultra-Power, BTW. And has a Titanium-Gold Alloy Plated 150th Anniversary Edition M1911A1 on his mantel.). It's actually the M1991 that there are stats for, but aside from some minor design changes to make it more ergonomic, it's a 1911.

Would I love more, hells yes! Vintage firearms are certainly still out there. (There are some militaries using the SMLE No. 4 as a main longarm after all, and that model going on 65-years old now! Older if you include the SMLE Mk.3/No.1!), and newer weapons are certainly always welcome. I liked the inclusion of "Designed For Civilian Home And Personal Defense" firearms, I just wish that the art for them had been... Well, yeah. But it's worth the US$8 I'll have to pay for later!

That heavily depend on their economics, sadly. Sale of new books provide direct revenue, while erratas at best provide indirect revenue via positive customer relations.

Quantity versus quality, short-term profit with long-term damage to the product versus long-term sustainable (but probably narrower) profit margins.

Patrick Goodman, Critias and anyone else that works on these great products thank you. For one thing it gives a little crunch if I want to add Grandpa Street Sam to my world. I am also glad to see clarification on the Battle rifles. Our large gaming group in Seattle is taking all these recent publications and really throwing them in the grinder; it has made our gaming world better with your contributions. Again thank you.

Yeah, but it really wouldn't take longer then an hour to release errata for the most glaring problems, it's not like the erratas have to fix all the mistakes at once.
Seriously releasing a PDF titled WAR_errata_1.01 that says:
P.154 Battle Rifles
Add the following sentence to the description: “The Battle Rifle requires the Automatics skill to use effectively"
Should take at max 5 minutes

I think there's more wrong with War! than just battle rifles. It'd take more than five minutes for it.

Even the PDFs have their issues (Remember the acceleration issue with This Old Drone?). But, well, let's get off that topic and complain about the new guns and how the old guns from 1st Edition were better.

Thats why the file name had a version number 1.01

And to complain about guns, i do have to question why anyone would ever take Steyr Minotaur Antimaterial
Rifle over a Barret 121, considering that it's not better in anyway and is more expensive.
Also the Ogre Hammer not having an internal smartlink while costing 38K is pretty sad.

On an other front, HK MP-7 equip with a Red Dot Sight is challenging P93 as my SMG of choice.

Marketing. Availability. Special deals with Steyr that includes their assault rifle line that Barret doesn't have (For Security/Government/Military contracts.). A hatred of Barret for some reason?

38k? Wow. That's pricey. It sounds like it also suffers from the Gauss Rifle Laser Sight syndrome as well.

And negative customer relations provide negative revenue when customers decide they've had enough of this shit and play something else where any errata are dealt with promptly instead of buying new books that increasingly screw up the system due to error that haven't been fixed for years. Hell, a lot of the needed errata is just laying around in German waiting for someone to translate it from what I understand.

Errata: Line 3 should read "due to errors that haven't been fixed for years.

Not sure about that. One may have to dig up the notes, or get hold of the person that wrote the chapter and try and figure out what the idea was. Then formulate a change that carries the idea across in a clear way. I got a book here that contains a chapter on the early days of M:tG, and it mentions a card that one player claimed gave him a instant win on playing. The creators go "not possible!" but then investigate the wording more carefully. I think the card have 3-4 revisions before they where reasonably sure the majority of players would get the intention of the card.

Sometimes it is straight forward, sometimes it is not. But all the time someone has to sit down and organize the corrections. As such, they are more likely to appear when there is a new print run to be done. Hell, the pdf covering the SR4 to SR4A changes is still "preliminary". Have there been new print runs of SR4A?

Not sure about the german stuff. German editions have a history of adding and changing things for the hell of it.

Sadly even thats not happening, we still don't have an errata for RC, but as far as i have understood from few posters, there is a new printing of RC that has errata in it

Well it does come with an internal 6/6/6/6 commlink.

In that case, too cheap! Hehe.

Nobody's pitching a fit or ridiculing here. Seriously, ya'll need to take a step back an realize not everything is an attack. Folks might have criticisms about the product, but I don't see anyone earnestly attacking any writers or editors on a personal basis.

"Never work for free" is an old aphorism. I mean really old. It means, really, to know your own self-worth, and never let anyone take advantage of you by paying you less than you are worth. It's generally given as friendly advice, or in jest. I can't ever think when it would be used as an attack. Well, I recall a video of Harlan Ellison ranting on the subject pretty angrily, but he's known as a bit of an ass, so that might not be the best example.

It's also not always true, but it's not a bad thing to keep in mind. People often don't realize what they're worth, and accept less than they deserve.



-k

The intent was, in fact, "Geez, this is a big fucking gun!" It was orriginally a Trollhammer, but someone pointed out that there was already a motorcycle named that and the decision was thus made to change its moniker.

As I said elsewhere...what? Ogres don't use hammers?

We're not leaving it out, we just haven't finished that battle. It's ongoing, I assure you.

Thats not right at all.

Augmentation errata exists.(1.32, the german guys have it. Even dumpshock has it leaked somewhere) Book was published in 2008, wasn't it?
RC errata exists. Adam was on the board a while ago, confirming it got sent off to the printers for the next printing.

It exists. Its out there. Catalyst is sitting on it. Pegasus has it in german. Even the printers have it.
And the customers don't. The books have been out for how long now? 5 years?


I don't even know whats going on. I'd -like- to, but I suspect the new management got off on the wrong foot during the coleman scandal, and a combination of dumpshock whiners driving the point home whenever they can, not trusting the old guard, and being busy making actual product(the quality of which is debatable), and hiring replacement staff are responsible for the current situation.



What actually IS going on with that battle? If, you know, you're allowed/able/willing to say.

Believe it or not, Hermit, but we're largely on the same side here. I don't make the schedule, so I'm rather limited on what I can do. I may or may not be limiting my ability to do more by having this conversation in the first place, but that's a chance I'm willing to take.

I do what I can in the time I'm given. It's all I can do.

I'm not saying you have to like it that a less-than-stellar product made it out, and I know you're not blaming me for things. I'm likewise not saying that anyone has to bow and scrape before me, or anything like that. I'm not in this for glory, I'm in this because I love the game and am trying to keep it the game I love. Basically, I'm trying to say that there's no hard feelings on my part; I shouldn't take it personally, despite the amount of time I've got invested in this game in general, and this particular product in general.

I like professional credits I can slap on my CV, but I was thinking I was going to have them take my name off this one at the beginning of the process. If it hadn't been vastly improved by release time, I would have had my name taken off. I take my reputation...in this industry, in this forum, in this game...very seriously. You see my name on something, good or bad, I just want you to know that I fought for that product. I fought for this one. I'm not saying that you have to like it, but a lot of you have known me for a lot of years, and you should know the kind of shit I've dealt with as a writer for this game.

I might let you down here and there, but I'm not doing it without a fight.

Don't have a lot to show for it right this second, but the need for errata is something that is known. Soon as I have something more positive, I'll let you guys know.

It's a problem with fiction-vs-reality.
The Urban Combat's full name – as stated in the book it was introduced in, 1992's Deutschland in den Schatten – is Heckler & Koch MP7z "Urban Combat".
How should they've known that 10 years later HK would actually produce an Uzi-style SMG then adopted by German military as "MP7"? Of course, the real-world MP7 neither has an integral silencer nor is it built from scanner-defeating ceramics...

A somewhat related problem arose when SR3's Cannon Companion was published in Germany: This book presented a "Steyr TMP" as a machine pistol – unfortunately, an earlier German SR2 sourcebook set in Austria had already contained a Steyr TMP as an SMG...
(IRL Steyr doesn't even manufacture the TMP anymore – blueprints and manufacturing rights were sold to Swiss company Brüger & Thomet which now sells this gun as "B&T MP9".)

In the past, yes. With SR4 and Pegasus as the German licensee emphasis is put on trans-atlantic compatibility. All changes and additions (or omissions) made in German books are communicated to and approved by CGL!

That's why it's so hard to grasp just why CGL doesn't publish the errata they have – after all it's them who give these errata to Pegasus for inclusion in our translations...

And uses the same name. And is mentioned in an American release ... but admittedly, a bunch of lists of this stuff would probably help research. Well, they're in German (mostly), and I'm not going to translate them, but fwiw, here're my flufflists. Semi-complete and almost completely sourced. It includes stuff from nearly all SR publications to date, including German- and French-only sources, and novels, again including german-specific novels.


Releasing Errata would in my opinion go a long way to restore trust in CGL's dedication to the line (other than to make a buck to rid themselves of their debts). So I hope this is a fight you'll win.


I don't doubt that, and from what you wrote here, I'm afraid the original file was about as bad as War's gear section, so I guess you mademuch of a difference already. The pdf isn't totally worthless or anything, it just could have needed a round of polishing and some research, like into the MP7 / Urban Combat matter.

BTW, were those replicas really bought for the PDF?

AK-112 features a "retreating stage of the Euro-Wars" in its description. I yearn for more info on that "retreating stage", minding that the Euro-War was stopped abruptly after the Nightwraith strike, the fronts having grind to a stalemate.
Or is it the second Euro-War they mean? I can hardly remember any AK-armed forces retreating, as well, minding that the Red Army stopped the Jihad at Caucasus...

More than (Soviet/Non-Soviet) Russia used the Kalashnikov. And even if the fronts ground to a stalemate, there would still be some areas that were contested and fought over, by the Politicos if by no one else. Border Skirmishes and the like were probably very common and might be what is being refereed to.

Also, another thing I like about the book is the fact that they're admitting there are different calibers. I just wish I knew what modern ones were used in the 6^th world. But, again, that's me. Some of the members of my group think that a "Nine" is an actual type of pistol. (As in a make and model.).

Oh can it about the calibers already!

Hey, it was a major part of the AK-112 and someone else brought that up.

Logistics of situations is something that rears it's ugly head in my mind quite often, actually, and I've been having a major problem of a time ensuring that all my emergency supplies use the same battery types. (For the times I'm too tired to use the Crank-Power Generator.).

.40 s&w, 6mm Gyrojet Plus, 9mm 8AA caseless, 10 x 30 mm Full Metal Jacket Hi-Ex, 10 mm DPU caseless, 40mm HE Ammunition, 9 x 19 mm, 30 mm, 9mm Hollowpoint, 5,56 mm

Those are about what was mentioned in canon to this day. Having little idea of actual weapons and caliber, I trust you can make more of this than I do.

.40 S&W is a variant of 10mm Automatic that Smith & Wesson put out to try and bridge the gap between the 9mm Parabellum and the .45 ACP (Range and recoil versus brute man stopping power.).

6mm Gyrojet is a rocket bullet. They had these IRL in the... 1960s I think. A lot larger caliber IRL, and was part of the cause that made legalizing rounds to only be a half-inch and no more.

9mm 8AA Caseless sounds like a type of caseless ammo, with 8AA meaning either the type of warhead or the shape and type of charge.

10 X 30mm Full Metal Jacket Hi-Ex sounds like a really powerful assault rifle or medium machine gun ammo. Maybe even a "Light" heavy machine gun.

10mm DPU caseless is 10mm Caseless (The Ares Predator caliber, as shows in SR4 BBB's image), with a Depleated Uranium Warhead.

40mm HE Ammunition is likely 40mm Launched Grenades, or a 40mm Light Cannon Round (IE: Panther Assault Cannon.).

9X19mm is one of the names for 9mm Parabellum (AKA: Luger), which is the most common pistol caliber found IRL in the Western World.

30mm might be a launched grenade or another light cannon round (IE: Panther Assault Cannon again.). The CIWS round, perhaps?

9mm Hollowpoint could be any of the various 9mm calibers out there, with a hollowpoint warhead (Bullet.).

5.56mm is likely 5.56mm NATO, the standard light rifle caliber of the Western World, and starting to gain common usage in hunting as well. (IIRC, A civilian version is out called the .223, which is the same style, but uses a lighter charge and cheaper brass.).

And it's likely well before this point that Hermit has gone, "Is he done yet? Can he shut up? Please?"

Not just hermit.

Actually, Patrick, I'd like to give you some credit.

"the weapon was a favorite in
the ancient films of the late 1900s"

That is actually correct and does not need to be changed to 1990s. Besides, it was produced in 1970, I'm sure there were some movies in the 80s that featured them as well.

FWIW, to me the MAC-10 always seemed more of an 80's action movie weapon. Hence the Ingram Smartgun in SR1. The earliest movie featuring the MAC-10 that I'm aware of is McQ (1974).

What, the Picador quote? And i thought the Apple faithful was nuts...

The ingram is an SMG, however, that stylistically resembles a cross between the MAC and the Uzi.

Is it just me or did the vintage guns actually look cooler than the high-tech additions. Most of the sci-fi weapons seemed not very ergonomic, not very pretty and had odd shapes and pointy bits.

For a gun porn book having ugly guns just seems wrong

Anyway I'm not sure that game system is granular enough to really get into calibers in terms of damage and ranges. I mean if the differentiation between SMGs and Assault Rifles is 1P, -1 AP and different range bands I'm not sure that there is a ton of room to differentiate various assault rifles based upon whether they use 5.56mm or 6.8mm or 7.62mm.

No, it's actually quite interesting (depleted uranium, oh my! I guess this is anti-vehicleammo?). Those figures don't tell me much aside from "30mm must be some big gun. I checked, it's indeed a big gun, the Altmayr SP, a shotgun that supposedly can alo fire microgrenades (yes, wtf).

Most calibers are, I think, from art. I also have a number of ammo types that are just described as "SABOT ammo - high energy flechette ammunition" or something like that, but those have no caliber, going by Shadowrun's assumption of Duke Nukem physics.

I'm not sure about that. The Ingram Smartgun picture I'mfamiliar with is almost the same as a MAC-10 with a silencer/barrel shroud, except for the thingy added in front of the trigger guard (the smartlink?) and the charging knob having that weird extension down the side of the receiver.




Well, that's probably because the vintage guns are actual guns, not fancy futuristic illustrations. I guess most RPG illustrators aren't firearms engineers or gunsmiths. So a picture of a real firearm or one based on a real firearm will almost always look more gun-like.

Ok, who of those did the retreating?

Yeah, border skirmishes is one thing, retreating is another altogether.

Next thing they say is not all assault rifle rounds are interchangeable. :\

According to the Bloodhawk's fluff a large individual can use it as an improvised weapon. Since that's called out as a design feature, shouldn't it have melee hardening? Otherwise it's not saying much of anything at all, any gun can be used as an improvised weapon to pistol whip someone it's just the ones with melee hardening don't get damaged or accidentally go off when you do.

Also, the Ultimax 150 could have used information on the Kyoto Upgrade package mentioned by Picador. Looks like there was plenty of room left on that page right across from the info on the standard comlink.

Actually you brought up the AK-112, and thus I went off on my usual rant. You only have yourself to blame.
Actually, they do think that. And, for once, are right. But that's only because of the "Common" knowledge of the M-16 and the AK-47, and the major differences between them. One major thing being the difference in the round they use (5.56mm NATO versus 7.62mm Soviet.).

I have, however, had to educate them on a few other points, such as not all magazines working with other rifles. STANAG 4179 helped with that with NATO (And there are adapters and modifications for those that aren't), and the Soviets did it just by having a really good Assault Rifle that everyone and their dog copied.

After the Megas got into play, however, I see both of those items falling by the wayside damned quick, along with a return of "Everyone having their own ammunition variety" that happened pre-NATO/Warsaw Pact. Also, I'm not entirely sure that the AK-117 and the M22/23 magazines are compatible, despite using the same caliber.

There were some weird and wonderful ammunition back in the day, when half the world was Metric and the other half was Imperial, unlike today where there's only backwards and uneducated holdouts that use the Imperial system.

Nice to feel the love on the forums. Wow, someone actually interested in my ranting/educating. (I think the A-10 "Warthog"'s main gun is 30mm as well.).

Depleted Uranium Tipped Rounds are Armour Defeating Ammunition ("Armour-Piercing", in other words) that can almost do the "Hollywood Armour Piercing" that gun nuts like myself leave shaking our heads. It's used in tank rounds, where they're nicknamed "The Silver Bullet". I'm not entirely sure, but it might be used in smaller calibers as well. (As most of the forces that use these rounds face opponents that don't use body armour as standard issue, that might not be as likely. But, as I constantly say, I'm just a civvie puke.).

When did i mention the AK-112? I really hope your not confusing me with Hermit right now.

When did i mention the AK-112? I guess your confusing me with Fatum right now.


Huh. Thanks. Gonna keep that in mind, since I play an ex military rigger. Also, DU rounds for handguns should have a more potent charge, right? Because the warhead is thatmuch heavier? Can normal weapons (real ones) even handle such scaled up ammo without exploding like a softair you try to fire live ammo with?


Used to think that 19X0s refers to the decade beginning with X, whereas 20th century refers to the century. At least that seems much more common than "the 1900s" for a whole century.