Until then, I'll keep re-reading the sourcebooks starting with 1st edition moving up.
Full Version: Whats the problem with Shadowrun 3E ?
I appreciate the offer and will keep it in mind
Until then, I'll keep re-reading the sourcebooks starting with 1st edition moving up.
Until then, I'll keep re-reading the sourcebooks starting with 1st edition moving up.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 12 2011, 08:00 PM) 
Yea, being able to set aside a set time is my problem. My third kid is 4 weeks old Friday 
Kid in the lap while playing with your older ones at the table.Corrupt 'em all young!
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 12 2011, 09:12 PM)
I appreciate the offer and will keep it in mind
Until then, I'll keep re-reading the sourcebooks starting with 1st edition moving up.
Until then, I'll keep re-reading the sourcebooks starting with 1st edition moving up.
I started a play by email conversation run. That worked pretty well. It allowed us to RP when we had time. It allowed us to do life but move the game along. We were corresponding about 12 messages between us a day. Better than nothing. Don`t forget to read some of the short stories. Dragon talk for instance.
Lovely third edition ... IMO, they mechanics were just about the best of the Shadowrun line; plenty of granularity, very deadly, space for tactical thought, but not hugely imbalanced in favor of any one class. If you're bringing it back, there are some tweaks I would make, such as to autofire. Check out sr3r for some smart changes (yes, the project is still alive, just veeeeery sloooow. Still, you can pick and choose among great ideas.) Of course, you can run any other mechanics you want, but be aware, the mechanics DO define the world to a large degree.
Regarding the setting, I feel like it was two-fold; firstly, the publisher needed to keep making up new content to keep selling books. Some of their forays were ... less than genius (YotC). Secondly, the real world proved aspects of Shadowrun wrong. SR4 was a good business move, but they certainly could have just updated SR3 if they wanted.
If I were to redo the setting, it would depend on my players. Are they children of the 80s? If so, play up those aspects. If not? I'd play them up more Don't tie Shadowrun to what the world will actually be like in 2060. This is an alternate timeline, and some stuff just is not available. Things need to be dirty and desperate. Play up the horror-movie aspect, play down the action-movie. Tie it in to the '99%' and banks 'too big to fail'. Make it personal. Give points for style, but make sure the cops bring down the hammer on any runners who get too cocky and stick around for long.
Regarding the setting, I feel like it was two-fold; firstly, the publisher needed to keep making up new content to keep selling books. Some of their forays were ... less than genius (YotC). Secondly, the real world proved aspects of Shadowrun wrong. SR4 was a good business move, but they certainly could have just updated SR3 if they wanted.
If I were to redo the setting, it would depend on my players. Are they children of the 80s? If so, play up those aspects. If not? I'd play them up more
Don't tie Shadowrun to what the world will actually be like in 2060. This is an alternate timeline, and some stuff just is not available. Things need to be dirty and desperate. Play up the horror-movie aspect, play down the action-movie. Tie it in to the '99%' and banks 'too big to fail'. Make it personal. Give points for style, but make sure the cops bring down the hammer on any runners who get too cocky and stick around for long.
QUOTE (Platinum @ Oct 12 2011, 06:31 PM)
<Cool stuff for cool gaming with cool people>
I like this list, and am definitely printing it out and hanging it over my design desk. I do need to ask about a few items, though.
2: magic needs to be nerfed. bring back grounding.
For us kiddies who missed 3E, but agree that magicrun is silly, how did this shut things down? Was it something like WoD's Paradox where too much magic could make the world start twisting you back?
3: change initiative back. If you are not fast or a tank, you are dead. it reflects reality, he who moves/reacts faster goes first and many times (also helps to nerf magic)
4E's initiative pass system seems to work like this already. Are you saying the sam should get his 3 passes before the face gets his 1? While I agree that having a guy who's absolutely essential to the team's success having no combat options aside from finding a good piece of cover and wetting his pants is cool and hilarious, it's not very fun to BE that player from a gamist perspective.
8: undo anything ever Rob Boyle touched in shadowrun (eclipse phase is his sweet spot)
10: get Jim Butcher to write some novels.
Again, for the kids, what are you referring to here? Which mechanics need to be excised?
QUOTE (Zaranthan @ Oct 13 2011, 12:45 PM)
2: magic needs to be nerfed. bring back grounding.
For us kiddies who missed 3E, but agree that magicrun is silly, how did this shut things down? Was it something like WoD's Paradox where too much magic could make the world start twisting you back?
For us kiddies who missed 3E, but agree that magicrun is silly, how did this shut things down? Was it something like WoD's Paradox where too much magic could make the world start twisting you back?
Grounding was a metamagic feat that let mages cast spell on material targets from the astral by targetting a dual natured object or critter, ie. a sustaining focus.
Although it actually makes magicrun more silly, not less, a PC mage would summon a F1 spirit, have it materialize next to the enemy, and then Fireball it (killing the enemy).
Actually it wasn't a metamagic, nor did it work through spirits.
It was just something any caster could do. An active foci let something from the astral plane channel a spell through that foci, 'grounding' it to the physical plane.
You could cast an AOE spell at that focus, it would affect all targets within the area of effect, on the physical plane. The spell had to 'beat' the focus first, then the spell would cast on the physical plane, with the focus as the center. Or you could use a single target only spell, but it would only affect whoever was holding/wearing the focus. Only physical spells worked this way though. I think only combat spells worked this way as well.
So, some mage have a spell lock up that is making you sad? Ground a fireball through his focus and fry him and his buddies standing around him from the astral while your body is safely behind a wall or two.
Basically grounding was the penalty for active foci, not addiction junk. You rocked the spell lock, you took your chances. It was the balance to having spell locks cost 1 karma to bond, using one with a smart mage/shaman around was literally sticking your neck way out there.
It was just something any caster could do. An active foci let something from the astral plane channel a spell through that foci, 'grounding' it to the physical plane.
You could cast an AOE spell at that focus, it would affect all targets within the area of effect, on the physical plane. The spell had to 'beat' the focus first, then the spell would cast on the physical plane, with the focus as the center. Or you could use a single target only spell, but it would only affect whoever was holding/wearing the focus. Only physical spells worked this way though. I think only combat spells worked this way as well.
So, some mage have a spell lock up that is making you sad? Ground a fireball through his focus and fry him and his buddies standing around him from the astral while your body is safely behind a wall or two.
Basically grounding was the penalty for active foci, not addiction junk. You rocked the spell lock, you took your chances. It was the balance to having spell locks cost 1 karma to bond, using one with a smart mage/shaman around was literally sticking your neck way out there.
QUOTE (Zaranthan @ Oct 13 2011, 11:45 AM)
10: get Jim Butcher to write some novels.
Again, for the kids, what are you referring to here? Which mechanics need to be excised?
Don't teach you kids to read any longer?Again, for the kids, what are you referring to here? Which mechanics need to be excised?
Jim Butcher is a novelist that's put out a few series (But so far nothing for Shadowrun, he wasn't writing when Shadowrun Novels were being put out), one of which, The Dresden Files, is very Shadowrun in feel. Aside from being in Modern Times.
If you look for them, ignore the horrible TV show, just look for the novels. Jim is, literally, counting the days until the IP for TV returns to him so that he can get someone that will do it right. (Honestly, a HOCKEY AND DRUM STICK for magic tools? Did they blow the budget on illicit drugs?).
He also took The Lost Roman Legion (An idea that's been done to death) and Pokemon, combined them together, and made a series full of AWESOME!
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 13 2011, 02:06 PM)
Actually it wasn't a metamagic, nor did it work through spirits.
Ah, I was off. I only know of the mechanic through what I remember reading on the forums.
No worries. I just happen to be readng through old rulebooks lately
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 13 2011, 01:31 PM)
No worries. I just happen to be readng through old rulebooks lately
Though Technically, you cannot cast a Physical Spell on the Astral Plane (You can only cast Mana based Spells) so the Grounding of Elemental Spells is really right out as well.
Could be remembering incorrectly (for SR2), though.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 13 2011, 02:41 PM)
Though Technically, you cannot cast a Physical Spell on the Astral Plane (You can only cast Mana based Spells) so the Grounding of Elemental Spells is really right out as well.
Could be remembering incorrectly (for SR2), though.
Could be remembering incorrectly (for SR2), though.
You can ground any physical spell through the focus. They were usually combat spells like hellblast because they have lower drain. If you tried grounding lightning, or acid through you would most likely drop dead. Drain is physical on astral.
[ Spoiler ]
QUOTE (Zaranthan @ Oct 13 2011, 11:45 AM)
I like this list, and am definitely printing it out and hanging it over my design desk. I do need to ask about a few items, though.
3: change initiative back. If you are not fast or a tank, you are dead. it reflects reality, he who moves/reacts faster goes first and many times (also helps to nerf magic)
4E's initiative pass system seems to work like this already. Are you saying the sam should get his 3 passes before the face gets his 1? While I agree that having a guy who's absolutely essential to the team's success having no combat options aside from finding a good piece of cover and wetting his pants is cool and hilarious, it's not very fun to BE that player from a gamist perspective.
3: change initiative back. If you are not fast or a tank, you are dead. it reflects reality, he who moves/reacts faster goes first and many times (also helps to nerf magic)
4E's initiative pass system seems to work like this already. Are you saying the sam should get his 3 passes before the face gets his 1? While I agree that having a guy who's absolutely essential to the team's success having no combat options aside from finding a good piece of cover and wetting his pants is cool and hilarious, it's not very fun to BE that player from a gamist perspective.
It was annoying to many of the slow players, like a face, but everyone gets their time to shine. The sammie sits and does nothing while the face roles and rolls. I played both ends of the spectrum and really, there are times when everyone shines.
It also teaches people to be more inventive with their actions. At the beginning the sammie is faster, but quickly the others find a way to speed themselves up.
Also if you want to bring the sammie down a peg, just throw some spirits at him. He won't have a foci to hit it with.
QUOTE
8: undo anything ever Rob Boyle touched in shadowrun (eclipse phase is his sweet spot)
I am hard on Rob, but he was the line developer who made shadowrun shiny. his vision was completely different from SR's roots.
QUOTE
[i]10: get Jim Butcher to write some novels.
Again, for the kids, what are you referring to here? Which mechanics need to be excised?[i]
Again, for the kids, what are you referring to here? Which mechanics need to be excised?[i]
Jim Butcher really is a talented writer. He beats up his protagonists and constantly kills off main characters. he does it inventively, and in a character developing manner. (grab the audiobooks from a library)
Oh ... and grounding was abused when people say they could summon a watcher spirit and ground through them from astral space, when manifested. (basically making them an astral bomb) We never did this thankfully.
Well as we see above, that wasn't legal anyway.
Where can I get an OCR PDF of the 2nd edition rules?
EDIT: I guess BattleCorps or DriveThru don't have em. Bugger all.
Where can I get an OCR PDF of the 2nd edition rules?
EDIT: I guess BattleCorps or DriveThru don't have em. Bugger all.
Wait, are you guys saying that Magicians can't be attacked through their active foci anymore? When did that happen? I'd always assumed that this was still the case. If you had an active focus, you were dual-natured and could be attacked by astral things.
QUOTE (JonathanC @ Oct 13 2011, 02:46 PM)
Wait, are you guys saying that Magicians can't be attacked through their active foci anymore? When did that happen? I'd always assumed that this was still the case. If you had an active focus, you were dual-natured and could be attacked by astral things.
Could not ground spells in either 3rd or 4th, from what I remember.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 13 2011, 01:59 PM)
Could not ground spells in either 3rd or 4th, from what I remember.
I'm pretty sure in 3rd edition that anyone with an active sustaining focus was dual-natured, which meant they were attackable in the Astral (ditto for anyone Astrally Perceiving). It's not the same as grounding (your teammates were safe), but it was definitely a disadvantage to using sustaining foci to keep Mage Armor/Enhanced Reflexes on yourself.
QUOTE (JonathanC @ Oct 13 2011, 05:35 PM)
I'm pretty sure in 3rd edition that anyone with an active sustaining focus was dual-natured, which meant they were attackable in the Astral (ditto for anyone Astrally Perceiving). It's not the same as grounding (your teammates were safe), but it was definitely a disadvantage to using sustaining foci to keep Mage Armor/Enhanced Reflexes on yourself.
You weren't dual natured. You can attack the focus with the dispel metamagic. That will deactivate it, and break the bond. You cannot damage a mage unless he was perceiving.
Rob Boyle didn't make Shadowrun shiny. He made it a bit more transhumanist, but he put the grit back in SR4 as well. I wonder if Mike Mulvihill hasn't done more to make Shadowrun shiny than Rob has.
But after all, even Robert N. Charette's books are more "epic" and heroic than bleak and gritty. And the world they describe isn't the one people seems to remember from the first editions.
But after all, even Robert N. Charette's books are more "epic" and heroic than bleak and gritty. And the world they describe isn't the one people seems to remember from the first editions.
Does anyone know if Neo-Anarchism is referrenced in SR4 at all? I'm not trying to slag the edition I'm just curious if the movement is still around.
FastJack toasts the old Neo-@s in the beginning of SR4 when he complains that it should be Captain Chaos writing this.
I'd say the movement is still around (Black Cross and Black Crescent are both mentioned), but it's taken a serious blow as there's been a serious shift away from all the PoliClubs in general.
EDIT: Until this year, I'd have thought the people in the First World had forgotten how to do a good, proper riot, really. Some days, I feel like Spider Jerusalem... Only I don't get access to all the nice drugs he does...
I'd say the movement is still around (Black Cross and Black Crescent are both mentioned), but it's taken a serious blow as there's been a serious shift away from all the PoliClubs in general.
EDIT: Until this year, I'd have thought the people in the First World had forgotten how to do a good, proper riot, really. Some days, I feel like Spider Jerusalem... Only I don't get access to all the nice drugs he does...
"The feel in the older stuff was that being running the Shadows was because the system didn't want you, or wouldn't let you in. You had to do the corps' dirty work in order to survive. Now? It reads like it's some sort of trend. Like getting a tribal or tramp-stamp tattoo. "
God, THIS.
We play 3rd and our best comes from being hardscrabble, or smart enough to not exist, to fall through the cracks. A lot in the early stuff was safetly and security = the corps, freedom and self-determination = a corpse.
Yes, we want comfort, but not in a plushy coffin.
It really looks too safe now - re-read Queen Euphoria (Still best published adventure) and the descriptions of her lavish digs vs the squat where your hardcase sleeps fitfully.
Yes, once Fanpro choked there was some severe creep and a lot of was "it worked for <insert different game here> let's try that".
Dunkie buying it was biiig, major and with less colour to it than some of the lesser splatbooks. Sure, Dunkie's bequest tried to make up for it (Sorta wish they'd made at least an official attempt at chasing down each plot thread that can-of-worms created - you could have gotten 4-8 entire adventure books from some of the behind-the-scenes bastardry that was going on, but everytime I tried, the players looked at me, looked at each other and said, "Don't fucking deal with dragons or their shit") but considering the UB (and that was some serious evil right there) and the the crap from Deus and the SCIRE (Oh, look, it's the world's biggest dungeon! Again!), it was ripples, because noone wanted to rock the boat when it came to the Dragons.
Year of the Comet - eh, for introducing the Sheldim, it's a sorta pass. For introducing the Changlings, it gets beaten with a phonebook.
Threats! Threats 2! Where's fucking Threats 3?
Could you see some of the big-ass baddies in SR4 filling the pages with horror, like reading though and understanding that 2 of the biggest Dragons in the 6th world were discussing how best to bomb Chi-Town back to the stone age with chemical weapon-grade insecticides? And that it was only the start?
There it is - you can see the other side and reach it in time with the later versions. In SR2-early SR3, it was far and away from you. You could smell it sometimes, when the wind was right, but you went on and ate your damn soymeal and felt better than the guy down there in the street grilling his devil rat familiar.
-Tir
God, THIS.
We play 3rd and our best comes from being hardscrabble, or smart enough to not exist, to fall through the cracks. A lot in the early stuff was safetly and security = the corps, freedom and self-determination = a corpse.
Yes, we want comfort, but not in a plushy coffin.
It really looks too safe now - re-read Queen Euphoria (Still best published adventure) and the descriptions of her lavish digs vs the squat where your hardcase sleeps fitfully.
Yes, once Fanpro choked there was some severe creep and a lot of was "it worked for <insert different game here> let's try that".
Dunkie buying it was biiig, major and with less colour to it than some of the lesser splatbooks. Sure, Dunkie's bequest tried to make up for it (Sorta wish they'd made at least an official attempt at chasing down each plot thread that can-of-worms created - you could have gotten 4-8 entire adventure books from some of the behind-the-scenes bastardry that was going on, but everytime I tried, the players looked at me, looked at each other and said, "Don't fucking deal with dragons or their shit") but considering the UB (and that was some serious evil right there) and the the crap from Deus and the SCIRE (Oh, look, it's the world's biggest dungeon! Again!), it was ripples, because noone wanted to rock the boat when it came to the Dragons.
Year of the Comet - eh, for introducing the Sheldim, it's a sorta pass. For introducing the Changlings, it gets beaten with a phonebook.
Threats! Threats 2! Where's fucking Threats 3?
Could you see some of the big-ass baddies in SR4 filling the pages with horror, like reading though and understanding that 2 of the biggest Dragons in the 6th world were discussing how best to bomb Chi-Town back to the stone age with chemical weapon-grade insecticides? And that it was only the start?
There it is - you can see the other side and reach it in time with the later versions. In SR2-early SR3, it was far and away from you. You could smell it sometimes, when the wind was right, but you went on and ate your damn soymeal and felt better than the guy down there in the street grilling his devil rat familiar.
-Tir
I think it was that the quality of the suppliments slipped. the 'fluff' that made the world richer was all but abnadoned in favor of just number crunching. THe play stystem itself was fine, we still use 3rd ed except for the hacking rules.
QUOTE (CanRay @ Oct 13 2011, 02:40 PM)
Don't teach you kids to read any longer?
Jim Butcher is a novelist that's put out a few series (But so far nothing for Shadowrun, he wasn't writing when Shadowrun Novels were being put out), one of which, The Dresden Files, is very Shadowrun in feel. Aside from being in Modern Times.
If you look for them, ignore the horrible TV show, just look for the novels. Jim is, literally, counting the days until the IP for TV returns to him so that he can get someone that will do it right. (Honestly, a HOCKEY AND DRUM STICK for magic tools? Did they blow the budget on illicit drugs?).
He also took The Lost Roman Legion (An idea that's been done to death) and Pokemon, combined them together, and made a series full of AWESOME!
Jim Butcher is a novelist that's put out a few series (But so far nothing for Shadowrun, he wasn't writing when Shadowrun Novels were being put out), one of which, The Dresden Files, is very Shadowrun in feel. Aside from being in Modern Times.
If you look for them, ignore the horrible TV show, just look for the novels. Jim is, literally, counting the days until the IP for TV returns to him so that he can get someone that will do it right. (Honestly, a HOCKEY AND DRUM STICK for magic tools? Did they blow the budget on illicit drugs?).
He also took The Lost Roman Legion (An idea that's been done to death) and Pokemon, combined them together, and made a series full of AWESOME!
Jim Butcher writing a Shadowrun novel.
Excuse me while I squee at the mere thought...
QUOTE (bibliophile20 @ Oct 16 2011, 10:30 AM)
Jim Butcher writing a Shadowrun novel.
Excuse me while I squee at the mere thought...
Very much so. I wish I had contacts with CGL about their Novel Lines and how to talk to Jim's agent...
Excuse me while I squee at the mere thought...
QUOTE (JonathanC @ Oct 13 2011, 05:35 PM)
I'm pretty sure in 3rd edition that anyone with an active sustaining focus was dual-natured, which meant they were attackable in the Astral (ditto for anyone Astrally Perceiving). It's not the same as grounding (your teammates were safe), but it was definitely a disadvantage to using sustaining foci to keep Mage Armor/Enhanced Reflexes on yourself.
In 3rd edition an active focus was dual-natured, and could be attacked by astral critters, or an astrally-perceiving mage was dual-natured and could be attacked. A beaten focus broke, a beaten mage went unconscious. Both could be averted by going physical-only, and neither were a direct threat to everyone around them.
2nd edition an active focus or perceiving mage were dual natured, and your astral-only mage could cast fireball at him -- which would then explode and cook everyone else in the room. This meant if you're a street sammie, you were suddenly very nervous about standing next to the mage, and a sustaining focus was a tool which threatened to kill EVERYONE, not just sink you $200k.
I am pretty sure only active foci could be used that way, not a perceiving magician.
EDIT: Nope, nez is correct
On another note, I can't find references to grounding in SR1 rulebook. Did it get added in the Grimoire?
EDIT: Nope, nez is correct
On another note, I can't find references to grounding in SR1 rulebook. Did it get added in the Grimoire?
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 17 2011, 09:25 AM)
I am pretty sure only active foci could be used that way, not a perceiving magician.
EDIT: Nope, nez is correct
On another note, I can't find references to grounding in SR1 rulebook. Did it get added in the Grimoire?
EDIT: Nope, nez is correct
On another note, I can't find references to grounding in SR1 rulebook. Did it get added in the Grimoire?
No ... Grounding is in the second edition main rules only.
QUOTE (Platinum @ Oct 17 2011, 08:23 AM)
No ... Grounding is in the second edition main rules only.
And Good Riddance...
A quick house rule for grounding I did was that you can't cast a spell though a focus with a force higher then the rating of the focus. So casting fireball though a spell lock was kind of pointless. Through a rating 6 weapon focus, go nuts. Astral magicians (perceiving or traveling), were limited to there magic rating. Or was that as written? I can't remember.
Watch out for exploding mages!
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 17 2011, 09:35 AM)
And Good Riddance...
Heck no, grounding is/was an awesome rule.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 17 2011, 12:23 PM)
Heck no, grounding is/was an awesome rule.
Not Really...
QUOTE (bibliophile20 @ Oct 16 2011, 10:30 AM)
Jim Butcher writing a Shadowrun novel.
Excuse me while I squee at the mere thought...
Excuse me while I squee at the mere thought...
HELLO NURSE!!!!!
Nice to see some faces I recognise on here from the 3E days...
Personally I've not left them, in spirit at least. I can't really say I do much different under the SR4 engine than I did in SR3. I suppose it helps that my more experienced players also cut their teeth under the old system and come into the new with the same mindset.
SR4's given me a lot of advantages as a player and a GM. If anything it's lowered the power level, made things more gritty- the characters my players throw at me are, by and large, less heavily tooled and more in tune with the streets they work. And as a GM I can throw together games in half the time, and cover more ground- no more banning deckers as player-characters because I didn't want the rest of the group heading off on a beer run halfway through the session because they were bored.
Having said that, I do feel like I could tell a better yarn in SR3. I don't know if it was the state of the world in '60-'64, or the state of my mind when I was coming up with ideas, but I could keep a plot rolling a lot longer and come out of it feeling more fulfilled. I think the background of SR3 agreed more with me than the present. But then again, it depends on what backgrounds I'm handed as to where I think of going- if the characters are lower-level, so's the game. I could play at a higher power level- but then I may as well just dust off the SR3 books and practice my best maniacal laugh.
Personally I've not left them, in spirit at least. I can't really say I do much different under the SR4 engine than I did in SR3. I suppose it helps that my more experienced players also cut their teeth under the old system and come into the new with the same mindset.
SR4's given me a lot of advantages as a player and a GM. If anything it's lowered the power level, made things more gritty- the characters my players throw at me are, by and large, less heavily tooled and more in tune with the streets they work. And as a GM I can throw together games in half the time, and cover more ground- no more banning deckers as player-characters because I didn't want the rest of the group heading off on a beer run halfway through the session because they were bored.
Having said that, I do feel like I could tell a better yarn in SR3. I don't know if it was the state of the world in '60-'64, or the state of my mind when I was coming up with ideas, but I could keep a plot rolling a lot longer and come out of it feeling more fulfilled. I think the background of SR3 agreed more with me than the present. But then again, it depends on what backgrounds I'm handed as to where I think of going- if the characters are lower-level, so's the game. I could play at a higher power level- but then I may as well just dust off the SR3 books and practice my best maniacal laugh.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 17 2011, 01:23 PM)
Heck no, grounding is/was an awesome rule.
I disagree. It was a horrible rule.
Such that even the anti-magic types in my gaming group at the time didn't like it. That said something since they were all for punishing magic users.
We didn't use Grounding or Spell Locks. Those things had other drawbacks beyond Grounding (rating 1 doesn't protect against much attacking the spell it is holding).
Then again, we all had played SR1 as well. SR2 for us was simply SR1 but a whole lot easier and faster to play.
Bastards, the lot of you. 
I wanted to play 1st edition...
I wanted to play 1st edition...
I think what feels most different about SR4 is that it feels like the setting has mellowed. I'm not sure why, but I can picture proper suburbs now, and people living in them. Before it felt like you wither lived in a burned-out apocalyptic nightmare like Redmond, or in some 1984-esque Arcology where the corp controlled everything. I can't put my finger on what changed my perception of the sixth world in SR4, but something did.
Also, thanks to Nezumi for clearing up the SR2/SR3 difference.
Also, thanks to Nezumi for clearing up the SR2/SR3 difference.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 17 2011, 02:23 PM)
Heck no, grounding is/was an awesome rule.
While I think grounding was cool, I do think it could have been implemented better. I would have removed the whole area of effect part of it and just left it at it hurts the focus and the person linked to the focus. You want that reflex boost spell in a spell lock fine, just don't be surprised when you eat a powerbolt. Combined with the 2e initiative system and mages end up being fairly balanced, especially if you don't create a bunch of dodges around the grounding things 2 supplements in. Which reminds me in general if you create a limit in the core rules don;t make a dodge around it in a later supplement. If the limit was wrong patch it out, don't backdoor a fix.
Not that 2e was perfect, but it was my favorite edition.
3e screwed up 3 big things IMO.
Split the combat skill. More general skills work better IMO, 4e improved it a bit with the skill groups, but honestly 2e and 1e just did the skill lists better. I might split some of the skills but I am talking like 5 or 6 in total, and none of them would be weapon skills.
Changed the initiative system. Yeah I get it slow people arr bored and might get shot to hell, Well the fast people frequently have point sin the game where they are bored as well, let them shine where they invested their points combat.
Grounding being fully removed instead of tweaked.
Mid to late 3e it started to go wrong with fluff and power boosts but that was not core to the 3e system.
QUOTE (JonathanC @ Oct 18 2011, 11:06 AM)
Before it felt like you wither lived in a burned-out apocalyptic nightmare...
Thanks, now I'm feeling homesick.
QUOTE (JonathanC @ Oct 18 2011, 09:06 AM)
I think what feels most different about SR4 is that it feels like the setting has mellowed. I'm not sure why, but I can picture proper suburbs now, and people living in them. Before it felt like you wither lived in a burned-out apocalyptic nightmare like Redmond, or in some 1984-esque Arcology where the corp controlled everything. I can't put my finger on what changed my perception of the sixth world in SR4, but something did.
Simple.... You got older and your perspective changed.
I'll borrow a saying of one of my dear aquaintance Mr Croup. "SR3 is four rules systems connected by a common game world."
With rules/fluff spread over to many rule books and power creep a revision was needed. Like a LAW rocket being more expensive than a ATGM for Frag sake!?
The actual ideas being introduced were not really flying but plodding and the fluff got too my special forces runner turned demi god and less my street punk surviving, (though they did telegraph the Crash 2.0 and wireless in Magic in the Shadows in mini plot FYI, the rest was save the world type affairs not what you can live with to see to tomorrow vs sticking it to the Man.."
Still run SR3 and love wringing SR4 for developments and things to surprise.
Each system has its flaws ~I just know them all in SR3, like vehicle combat rules should be avoided for a intense chase scene and dont let the deckers player think they can deck every system they can think of for hours of real world game play on pain of PAIN. And so you could cast magic when you were an embryo? magic user Nomad albino focused concentration... etc
"ah you have guessed my answer correctly player 1, please revisit your charater creation place or you may join the decker after his (last avoiding the game were here to roleplay) paydata month long crime spree penance."
It not that SR4 can not give great stories, its just that we have had lots of great stories with SR3 and dont really need to relearn a new set of tools to keep going.
CLG though needs to make money to pay for all that cool new stuff they are introducing to us so they can be creative and well eat.
With rules/fluff spread over to many rule books and power creep a revision was needed. Like a LAW rocket being more expensive than a ATGM for Frag sake!?
The actual ideas being introduced were not really flying but plodding and the fluff got too my special forces runner turned demi god and less my street punk surviving, (though they did telegraph the Crash 2.0 and wireless in Magic in the Shadows in mini plot FYI, the rest was save the world type affairs not what you can live with to see to tomorrow vs sticking it to the Man.."
Still run SR3 and love wringing SR4 for developments and things to surprise.
Each system has its flaws ~I just know them all in SR3, like vehicle combat rules should be avoided for a intense chase scene and dont let the deckers player think they can deck every system they can think of for hours of real world game play on pain of PAIN. And so you could cast magic when you were an embryo? magic user Nomad albino focused concentration... etc
"ah you have guessed my answer correctly player 1, please revisit your charater creation place or you may join the decker after his (last avoiding the game were here to roleplay) paydata month long crime spree penance."
It not that SR4 can not give great stories, its just that we have had lots of great stories with SR3 and dont really need to relearn a new set of tools to keep going.
CLG though needs to make money to pay for all that cool new stuff they are introducing to us so they can be creative and well eat.
Groundout spells through focus/fetish/locks/fancy undies whatever was that great tool the first time you let fly with it on the other guy, but the momment you realized it went both ways-it meant people were terrified of spending karma on their own stuff for fear the GM would burn it out 2 sessions later. It killed off the entire line of magic tools
Not really. It kept them from being so commonplace you don't leave chargen anymore without 3 or 4, and made them powerful tools you used when you had to, not because 'why not?'.
QUOTE (Pendaric @ Oct 19 2011, 09:52 PM)
Still run SR3 and love wringing SR4 for developments and things to surprise.
I was going to say I knew a GM doing that to good effect, then I realised it was you.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 19 2011, 08:59 PM)
Not really. It kept them from being so commonplace you don't leave chargen anymore without 3 or 4, and made them powerful tools you used when you had to, not because 'why not?'.
You consider essence loss and penalties to drain tests "why not" material?
QUOTE
I was going to say I knew a GM doing that to good effect, then I realised it was you. wink.gif
Cheers.
QUOTE (Bigity @ Oct 19 2011, 08:59 PM)
Not really. It kept them from being so commonplace you don't leave chargen anymore without 3 or 4, and made them powerful tools you used when you had to, not because 'why not?'.
I dislike grounding both mechanically and for explaination to a new player.
The ease of saying nothing passes between the astral/ meat unless on dual natured target, SO ONLY MANA SPELLS from astral is a lot easier.
Mechanically, in SR3 the foci costs in nuyen and karma made them serious equipment with a serious investment. You may have a few sustaning/ expendable foci at char gen but not much else. And if your less than mini maxed or split skill, you need them badly.
Ever tried to magicaly heal a street sam with effective negative essence on the TN, for example?
QUOTE (Pendaric @ Oct 20 2011, 08:12 AM)
I dislike grounding both mechanically and for explanation to a new player.
The ease of saying nothing passes between the astral/meat unless on dual natured target, SO ONLY MANA SPELLS from astral is a lot easier.
Mechanically, in SR3 the foci costs in nuyen and karma made them serious equipment with a serious investment. You may have a few sustaning/ expendable foci at char gen but not much else. And if your less than mini maxed or split skill, you need them badly.
Ever tried to magicaly heal a street sam with effective negative essence on the TN, for example?
The ease of saying nothing passes between the astral/meat unless on dual natured target, SO ONLY MANA SPELLS from astral is a lot easier.
Mechanically, in SR3 the foci costs in nuyen and karma made them serious equipment with a serious investment. You may have a few sustaning/ expendable foci at char gen but not much else. And if your less than mini maxed or split skill, you need them badly.
Ever tried to magicaly heal a street sam with effective negative essence on the TN, for example?
The bonding costs were the same in 3E as 2E. Instead of spell locks there were sustaining foci.
What grounding did was get rid of the guy running around with 20 active spell locks with spells of different ratings. It was difficult to ground through a focus of 4 or more. Quickening made things even more difficult if you doubled the karma input.
If a mage initiated, then he/she just masked them in his/her aura. Plenty of our mages carried foci. I don't remember anyone having been grounded through. We were selective on when we activated them, and generally kept them at high levels. 1 karma wasn't a lot to lose, and if something was grounded, there was always shielding.
QUOTE (Pendaric @ Oct 19 2011, 04:52 PM)
I'll borrow a saying of one of my dear aquaintance Mr Croup. "SR3 is four rules systems connected by a common game world."
Some people liked that
Although to be fair, some of those rules systems really didn't work (like vehicle combat, which you mentioned).As for the rules ... SR3 didn't suffer from power creep as much as rules creep. A street sam with all the books would have only a slight advantage of a street sam with only the core book, if they went toe-to-toe. However, the former would be able to do a lot more, and have a lot more special rules and exceptions which apply. (But there were bugs, again, Rigger 3 holding a huge share.)
QUOTE (Zaranthan @ Oct 20 2011, 07:30 AM)
You consider essence loss and penalties to drain tests "why not" material?
Focus addiction existed before SR4, so it's not like they added that in to replace grounding.
And grounding got less important after spell locks became sustaining foci, but it was still a counter for low level foci.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.