Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Statblock Discussion
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
ravensmuse
QUOTE (Tzeentch @ Sep 19 2012, 02:57 PM) *
-- Well, cost-effective gear packages for military/paramilitary NPCs was mulled over a long time ago. The problem being that this doesn't necessarily make the NPC as good as he should be "on paper" since it adds an additional layer of complexity for the GM with regards to tracking down rules references and effects (and Shadowrun has material spread over a lot of books even in 4e). Maybe this could be solved with a better short-form summary or going purely 'effect based' like the D&D 4e monsters? Also, you have to remember that some of the 3e material was written as a reaction to the "so badass we don't even give them stats, you just DIE" stuff from 1st and 2nd edition when it came to anything with the barest whiff of "military" on it and that toned-down assumption appears to have carried over. Maybe next edition will see every UCAS trooper running around with exoskeletons and drone packs?


QUOTE (ravensmuse @ Sep 19 2012, 04:45 PM) *
One of my biggest complaints with the Corebook is that the provided NPC statblocks are worth bunk. They aren't useful, they require looking up rules, and, let's be honest, don't stand up well against optimized players (which I'm thankfully not "blessed" with).

I realize that it's quick mental math to figure out dicepools, but they should already be in there. I shouldn't have to look up armor and damage for weapons. There should be more than one adept, one mage, and one decker (at Professional Rating 2, I think it was?) archetype. All of this adds up to me either having to bog down a game by checking page after page, or write down the statblocks the way I need them to be when I play (which I've done).

Personally? There should be more NPC stats in there in general, and that includes contacts. Contacts and NPCs are the lifeblood of Shadowrun, as much as figuring out how much to pay players and how to set up runs is. Shadowrun is an amazing game, but it needs to be more useful to GMs in general.

ETA:

QUOTE
Maybe this could be solved with a better short-form summary or going purely 'effect based' like the D&D 4e monsters?


I realize most of the folks around here would burn me for heresy for saying this, but this would actually be really useful. But I realize that the Shadowrun community is built more towards the 3.5 crowd than the storygaming crowd, and such effect based (instead of mechanic based) statblocks would probably really bother folks.


QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 19 2012, 06:01 PM) *
Hey, that would work for me, but it would likely drive up the prices of the physical books a bit (more word count results in more page count). Should not have too much of an impact on PDF's, though. *shrug*


So, Grinder asked us to move this discussion out of the Land of Promise thread and into its own. So who am I to argue?

Personally, statblocks need to be useful. They can't just be a paragraph of numbers and abbreviations, all lined up to be "referenced" as they're used. That is counterintuitive; I shouldn't have to be performing mental math or cross-referencing multiple books in order to do things. But I also realize that there isn't a great way to do that without making things either tough on the writers or their wordcount.

I'm also a fan of, as Tzeentch put it, effect based statblocks, like D&D4e used; IE, "Shoot gun, 5, 5P/-1" or something to the like. Thinking about it this morning, that could get redundant quick, though I don't know if I agree with Tymeaus that it would increase wordcount much.

For reference, here's how I format my own statblocks -

QUOTE
Ghoul

BOD 7 AGI 3 REA 5 STR 6 CHA 1 INT 4 LOG 2 WILL 5 MAG 1
Initiative 9, IP 1, Armor 6/4
Stun Baton 6 (6s(e)/-1/2 AP), Ares Predator 5 (5P/-1), Claws 6 (4P)
Assensing 3, Infiltration 7, Perception 7, Dodge 7


It's an abbreviated form of it, since that was from notes for last week's game.

Agree / disagree? Share how you format?
Makki
Many groups use Chummer nowadays. For NPCs created with chummer, there's a printout option called 'GM Summary'. It looks similar to yours.
Sengir
I'm not a huge fan of just printing dice pools, separate skills and attributes make it easier to modify NPCs on the fly or deal with effects that modify attributes.

But something I would really like with regard to NPCs would be separate ready-top-play record sheets in the back of the book, so one can just print out a few copies of mook X instead of having to manually copy the stats, draw a condition monitor and so on...at least for the PDFs it should be no problem to include those
FriendoftheDork
I always use dice pools as well. While the basic grunt can make do with simply skills and attributes, when something more close to a runner is involved, with modifiers from specialization, cyber, gear, magic etc. then I need the dice pools right away.
UmaroVI
I've got nothing against listing the dice pools also, but it really is a nuisance not to have base skills listed. Like, to figure out that example guy's total pool when using Full Defense in melee, it's a pain in the neck: you have to back-calculate Dodge skill by subtracting his reaction from his dodge pool (and make sure nothing else is in that pool), then add that back to the dodge pool.
FriendoftheDork
QUOTE (UmaroVI @ Sep 23 2012, 05:53 AM) *
I've got nothing against listing the dice pools also, but it really is a nuisance not to have base skills listed. Like, to figure out that example guy's total pool when using Full Defense in melee, it's a pain in the neck: you have to back-calculate Dodge skill by subtracting his reaction from his dodge pool (and make sure nothing else is in that pool), then add that back to the dodge pool.


That is true. I generally keep both. Attris, skills, and then dice pools for the most likely attack/defense and possibly skill, if enhanced.
ravensmuse
Maybe I'm weird in that it takes me forever to actually stat anything up, but beyond the important NPCs in a campaign (who often get shifted in and out, due to my player's interest / storyline relevance) I just want stats for quick mooks. And the quick mooks in the back of the corebook aren't useful.

There also needs to be more emphasis on contacts. We get maybe five in the core, but there should be more, and more examples of them, and they need to be front and center for players, not just tucked into the back section that's arguably for the GM. Contacts and legwork is the lifeblood of Shadowrun, so they need to be more front and center.

I like having both skills and dicepools, personally. Like Umaro said, you never know when you're going to have to use a skill for something other than combat (or a weird out of combat thingie). In general, a lot of the given statblocks within the core are useless, and that doesn't even go into the confusion you can get into for NPC hackers or agents or pilots or...

ETA:

Oh, also, I don't use Chummer because I don't want to install it on this computer. I had it going on our laptop for awhile, but found I was getting more distracted playing around with options than I was actually getting stuff done. I did like the GM handout print option though; very useful.
Emperor Tippy
It Catalyst was smart they would publish a 300 or so page PDF that is filled with nothing but NPC character sheets of various levels complete with names, suggested contacts, family/friends, character history, etc.

It should be relatively cheap as they don't have to make pretty much any new rules content (only some fluff, and even that can be relatively lite) and it would be of great help.
Sengir
QUOTE (Emperor Tippy @ Sep 23 2012, 02:59 PM) *
It Catalyst was smart they would publish a 300 or so page PDF that is filled with nothing but NPC character sheets of various levels complete with names, suggested contacts, family/friends, character history, etc.

It should be relatively cheap as they don't have to make pretty much any new rules content (only some fluff, and even that can be relatively lite) and it would be of great help.

Considering how they screwed up the stats in Street Legends...
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (ravensmuse @ Sep 23 2012, 08:47 AM) *
Maybe I'm weird in that it takes me forever to actually stat anything up, but beyond the important NPCs in a campaign (who often get shifted in and out, due to my player's interest / storyline relevance) I just want stats for quick mooks. And the quick mooks in the back of the corebook aren't useful.

There also needs to be more emphasis on contacts. We get maybe five in the core, but there should be more, and more examples of them, and they need to be front and center for players, not just tucked into the back section that's arguably for the GM. Contacts and legwork is the lifeblood of Shadowrun, so they need to be more front and center.


SR4 has a LOT of contacts, though they are spread out among at least 3 sources.

  • SR4A Anniversary Edition
  • Runner's Companion
  • SR4 Contacts.


Just thought that I woud point that out. smile.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Sengir @ Sep 23 2012, 09:29 AM) *
Considering how they screwed up the stats in Street Legends...


They screwed them up? How?
I ask, because I do not actually own the book. I am curious.
ravensmuse
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 23 2012, 11:00 AM) *
SR4 has a LOT of contacts, though they are spread out among at least 3 sources.

  • SR4A Anniversary Edition
  • Runner's Companion
  • SR4 Contacts.


Just thought that I woud point that out. smile.gif

Right, but look at how spread out all of those are.

That's where my problem lies - it's great that there's all these contacts out there, but they should have more prominence in the corebook and have more of them out there. I shouldn't have to throw three books in front of my players to give them all the stuff that's out there.

I realize that's my cranky self coming out though.
UmaroVI
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 23 2012, 12:01 PM) *
They screwed them up? How?
I ask, because I do not actually own the book. I am curious.


It's an error-ridden mess. Hackers with commlinks that can't actually run their ridiculously expensive milspec programs, people with qualities that don't actually exist, people with adept powers that don't exist, etc etc. If you want the full review, it's here.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (UmaroVI @ Sep 23 2012, 10:38 AM) *
It's an error-ridden mess. Hackers with commlinks that can't actually run their ridiculously expensive milspec programs, people with qualities that don't actually exist, people with adept powers that don't exist, etc etc. If you want the full review, it's here.


Thanks, I will go read it. smile.gif
TeOdio
QUOTE (UmaroVI @ Sep 23 2012, 12:38 PM) *
It's an error-ridden mess. Hackers with commlinks that can't actually run their ridiculously expensive milspec programs, people with qualities that don't actually exist, people with adept powers that don't exist, etc etc. If you want the full review, it's here.

It's because they were never to be viewed by mere mortals such as us. Or maybe, that's not a bug, that's a feature! Seriously though, I rely on the fluff for books like that as I have yet to see crunch in NPC's done to my liking. I try to stay as close to the book as possible when doing Missions at conventions and that makes me cry sometimes.
Critias
QUOTE (Emperor Tippy @ Sep 23 2012, 09:59 AM) *
It Catalyst was smart they would publish a 300 or so page PDF that is filled with nothing but NPC character sheets of various levels complete with names, suggested contacts, family/friends, character history, etc.

It should be relatively cheap as they don't have to make pretty much any new rules content (only some fluff, and even that can be relatively lite) and it would be of great help.

Just out of curiosity, but what makes you think it would be a "cheap" book, just because it's not full of new rules? It's not like writers get paid by the rule, or by the crunch, or by the piece-of-gear. We get paid either a flat fee, or by the word.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012