First magicians dealing direct damage is bad. Now buffs are bad too?
If it's a problem in your game, it's easy to fix. Just put up a mana barrier (circle of protection ritual, magical lodge, mana barrier spell, or ward ritual). For those active foci to get through, either the magician has to attack the barrier, which automatically alerts its creator, or try to press through quietly using Magic + Charisma [Astral] v. barrier’s
Force x 2 Opposed Test. Each net hit allows only one friend to come along (spirits, active foci, sustained spells, or other astral forms).
So now the magician will be stuck. Either let the group continue without her, or set off the alarm and get the whole group killed. Or, she can just drop the spells, recast, take drain, spend more hundreds of nuyen on reagents, and leave her astral signature all over everything.
Edit: This is in response to a few posts earlier in the thread.
Full Version: 5th Edition Thoughts
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 17 2013, 09:58 AM) 
You would need to get to where you are taking 10p or less for it to just be rather painful. Having seen even combat monsters with 20 Dice rolling only a single soak success (even with reroll from edge), soaking anything higher than your total body boxes is really going to hurt.
Back to this:
An HE (14P -2AP) grenade at ground zero against an average mook (Body 3) with an armor vest (Armor 9) will do about 11P, incapacitating him but not killing him. Every meter reduces this by 2P until the damage is below the modified 7 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 9P, 7P, 5P, 3S, 1S, 0.
A fragmentation (16P +5AP) against the same target will do about 11P, same result. Every meter reduces this by 1P until the damage is below the modified 14 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 10P, 9P, 8S, 7S, 6S, 5S, 4S, 3S, 2S, 1S, 0.
This shows that an HE grenade against a common target has an effective serious injury radius of 3m, and an expected damage radius of 5m.
The frag grenade against a common target has an effective serious injury radius of 2m, and an expected damage radius of 10m.
Conclusions and Observations:
1) Anyone prepared for combat (that is, wearing at least an armored vest) is likely to survive a point-blank grenade blast, assuming no other injuries. Security armor almost guarantees that the damage will be Stun.
2) Frag grenades are very dangerous to consider using indoors, since the blast radius is so high -- you have to throw at least 10m to keep out of the actual damage radius, which probably means at least long range (-3 dice pool), and which probably isn't happening indoors unless you're in a warehouse.
3) HE grenades are probably going to be thrown at least medium range (-1 dice pool).
4) Throwing to the other side of cover either means a Blind Fire penalty (-6 dice pool) since you can't actually see the target location, or throwing to a location you can see farther back. Combined with the above two points, this means that throwing a grenade at the feet of some guys in cover is going to be between a -6 and -9 dice pool penalty. Assuming you're an all-star quarterback with 15 dice, you'll still be crossing your fingers hoping for those 3 successes.
5) Grenades are a great way to injure a tight cluster of guys -- a group of guards in a small room, for example -- but they're expensive and can be tricky to use. When it comes down to dropping a single target, a 24 nuyen assault rifle burst of explosive rounds at 12P -3AP (-2 to defense) with 12 dice behind it will probably do more damage (12 dice vs 4, so 15P -3AP, so 12P) to the target, which is far more cost (24 nuyen vs 100) and action (simple vs simple+simple) efficient.
QUOTE (Surukai @ Oct 18 2013, 08:58 AM)
3 hits on average require 9 dice. Average stat (3) + average skill (4) is not enough to do that reliably, but 5-6 stat + 5-6 skill does it quite often and more often than not, even a 1-2 hits short will end up on target. I roll 2 hits it means 1d-2 scatter, that is still 33% of hitting target directly.
If you load up stun grenades (10S, AP-5, area 10 no falloff whatsoever) you cant miss. DOn't bother rolling dice. It is guaranteed to hit*! Stunbombing is in no way oneshotting though, but it is still extremely effective to deal reliable stun to a collosal area (over 300 sq meters)
*Critglitch is a possbility if you have a really low pool)
Most buffs are just effect, not power. Armor, Combat Sense, Increase Reflexes, Oxygeneate, Invisibility, etc.
Drams + reroll misses (or high edge) means you can get 10+ hits on Increase Reflexes and enjoy +10 (+3d6) initiative. Background count does nothing to foci now
5-6 hits Invisibility for 2500 nuyen and 120 per cast at the start of adventure is a pretty good deal. With foci addiction kicking in after Magic total force it normally takes some consideration what buffs a mage decide to keep on her but with 6 extra buff slots for a mere 100-ish nuyen once per adventure day is a complete nobrainer.
Though, I made an error in my earlier post, increase attribute is thankfully not affected, it explicitly requires Force = stat to boost to work. (Good design!)
If you load up stun grenades (10S, AP-5, area 10 no falloff whatsoever) you cant miss. DOn't bother rolling dice. It is guaranteed to hit*! Stunbombing is in no way oneshotting though, but it is still extremely effective to deal reliable stun to a collosal area (over 300 sq meters)
*Critglitch is a possbility if you have a really low pool)
Most buffs are just effect, not power. Armor, Combat Sense, Increase Reflexes, Oxygeneate, Invisibility, etc.
Drams + reroll misses (or high edge) means you can get 10+ hits on Increase Reflexes and enjoy +10 (+3d6) initiative. Background count does nothing to foci now
[ Spoiler ]
5-6 hits Invisibility for 2500 nuyen and 120 per cast at the start of adventure is a pretty good deal. With foci addiction kicking in after Magic total force it normally takes some consideration what buffs a mage decide to keep on her but with 6 extra buff slots for a mere 100-ish nuyen once per adventure day is a complete nobrainer.
Though, I made an error in my earlier post, increase attribute is thankfully not affected, it explicitly requires Force = stat to boost to work. (Good design!)
Interesting since my MysAd in SR4a functions okay in a BGC of up to 3. Yes, Foci become less useful, but then, if you plan for that, it is not that big of a deal. *shrug*
I heavily dislike BGC as a Dice Penalty, becasue tHEn you can do stupid things like center the penalty away.
You're also assuming that people are throwing Grenades rather than just using underbarrel Launchers which raises Short range to 5-50M. Both uses require a skill roll, the only difference is that throwing will end up using your Physical Limit vs the Acc limit of a weapon (which is admittedly much easier to increase, allowing additional hits)
Always thought the blind fire penalty for grenades in SR was silly.
Unless you are trying to land it on someone's open mouth behind a low wall. Otherwise, you are just lobbing into a space, physical contact with the target isn't required like for a bullet.
Unless you are trying to land it on someone's open mouth behind a low wall. Otherwise, you are just lobbing into a space, physical contact with the target isn't required like for a bullet.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 18 2013, 11:50 PM)
Back to this:
An HE (14P -2AP) grenade at ground zero against an average mook (Body 3) with an armor vest (Armor 9) will do about 11P, incapacitating him but not killing him. Every meter reduces this by 2P until the damage is below the modified 7 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 9P, 7P, 5P, 3S, 1S, 0.
A fragmentation (16P +5AP) against the same target will do about 11P, same result. Every meter reduces this by 1P until the damage is below the modified 14 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 10P, 9P, 8S, 7S, 6S, 5S, 4S, 3S, 2S, 1S, 0.
An HE (14P -2AP) grenade at ground zero against an average mook (Body 3) with an armor vest (Armor 9) will do about 11P, incapacitating him but not killing him. Every meter reduces this by 2P until the damage is below the modified 7 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 9P, 7P, 5P, 3S, 1S, 0.
A fragmentation (16P +5AP) against the same target will do about 11P, same result. Every meter reduces this by 1P until the damage is below the modified 14 armor and it becomes Stun. The track looks like this (1m steps): 11P, 10P, 9P, 8S, 7S, 6S, 5S, 4S, 3S, 2S, 1S, 0.
One problem, Grenades do full 2 more damage than that (still ignoring chunky salsa!). My physical book says 18P for frag and 16P for HE. This might not seem much but it is a world of difference between getting 9 boxes and still live/be awake and 11 boxes and getting knocked out.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 18 2013, 11:50 PM)
This shows that an HE grenade against a common target has an effective serious injury radius of 3m, and an expected damage radius of 5m.
The frag grenade against a common target has an effective serious injury radius of 2m, and an expected damage radius of 10m.
Conclusions and Observations:
1) Anyone prepared for combat (that is, wearing at least an armored vest) is likely to survive a point-blank grenade blast, assuming no other injuries. Security armor almost guarantees that the damage will be Stun.
2) Frag grenades are very dangerous to consider using indoors, since the blast radius is so high -- you have to throw at least 10m to keep out of the actual damage radius, which probably means at least long range (-3 dice pool), and which probably isn't happening indoors unless you're in a warehouse.
3) HE grenades are probably going to be thrown at least medium range (-1 dice pool).
4) Throwing to the other side of cover either means a Blind Fire penalty (-6 dice pool) since you can't actually see the target location, or throwing to a location you can see farther back. Combined with the above two points, this means that throwing a grenade at the feet of some guys in cover is going to be between a -6 and -9 dice pool penalty. Assuming you're an all-star quarterback with 15 dice, you'll still be crossing your fingers hoping for those 3 successes.
5) Grenades are a great way to injure a tight cluster of guys -- a group of guards in a small room, for example -- but they're expensive and can be tricky to use. When it comes down to dropping a single target, a 24 nuyen assault rifle burst of explosive rounds at 12P -3AP (-2 to defense) with 12 dice behind it will probably do more damage (12 dice vs 4, so 15P -3AP, so 12P) to the target, which is far more cost (24 nuyen vs 100) and action (simple vs simple+simple) efficient.
The frag grenade against a common target has an effective serious injury radius of 2m, and an expected damage radius of 10m.
Conclusions and Observations:
1) Anyone prepared for combat (that is, wearing at least an armored vest) is likely to survive a point-blank grenade blast, assuming no other injuries. Security armor almost guarantees that the damage will be Stun.
2) Frag grenades are very dangerous to consider using indoors, since the blast radius is so high -- you have to throw at least 10m to keep out of the actual damage radius, which probably means at least long range (-3 dice pool), and which probably isn't happening indoors unless you're in a warehouse.
3) HE grenades are probably going to be thrown at least medium range (-1 dice pool).
4) Throwing to the other side of cover either means a Blind Fire penalty (-6 dice pool) since you can't actually see the target location, or throwing to a location you can see farther back. Combined with the above two points, this means that throwing a grenade at the feet of some guys in cover is going to be between a -6 and -9 dice pool penalty. Assuming you're an all-star quarterback with 15 dice, you'll still be crossing your fingers hoping for those 3 successes.
5) Grenades are a great way to injure a tight cluster of guys -- a group of guards in a small room, for example -- but they're expensive and can be tricky to use. When it comes down to dropping a single target, a 24 nuyen assault rifle burst of explosive rounds at 12P -3AP (-2 to defense) with 12 dice behind it will probably do more damage (12 dice vs 4, so 15P -3AP, so 12P) to the target, which is far more cost (24 nuyen vs 100) and action (simple vs simple+simple) efficient.
I don't need to care any about the aoe effect, that is just bonus. A underbarrel grenade launcher will hit your intended target with no penalties. Getting more than 3 hits has no effect whatsoever so any accuracy of 4+ is wasted since targets get no roll to defend.
AS a bonus, a frag grenade causes boxes of damage several meters from the impact, a HE grenade has much smaller effective zone but tends to be physical more (and sometimes a smaller effective area is desireable).
You need 30 damage resist dice to make a HE/Frag grenade to a mere "serious" injury instead of "Deadly" (SR3 terms but a good measure stick, 1 box is light, 3 is moderate, 5-6 is serious and 10 boxes is deadly, grenades are almost always deadly, but big orcs can reduce it to serious, sometimes even moderate but that is rare).
The problem isn't really that they work, the problem is that you have 18P ignoring all defences compared to 11P vs full defence dice pools with a regular gun (auto fire reduces defences but at a cost). Characters are presented a world of guns that targets a defence roll and a world of grenades that are pure "pve", rolls 3 hits and win.
More damage, easier to hit, bonus aoe effects, far less recoil, ...... any high threat fights will be with grenades only since they are far far far far superior, making guns/melee/spellcasting a small niche (using silencers ofc). It is a problem to ignore defence mechanics alltogether. Just like Direct combat spells were a serious issue in SR4 targeting a weak stat and ignoring all other defences.
I rather not let that happen since that kind of meta-play can destroy so many character concepts and washes out combat when it becomes apparent for everyone that it is really just about one trick.
QUOTE (Surukai @ Oct 19 2013, 04:39 PM)
One problem, Grenades do full 2 more damage than that (still ignoring chunky salsa!). My physical book says 18P for frag and 16P for HE. This might not seem much but it is a world of difference between getting 9 boxes and still live/be awake and 11 boxes and getting knocked out.
Eh, I was going from memory and typing on my phone. Shift everything up by 2.
5th edition has one massive weakness: no fire-based weapons. yet.
Okay, now I'm just pandering to my reputation. But it's so fun!
Okay, now I'm just pandering to my reputation. But it's so fun!
QUOTE (FuelDrop @ Oct 19 2013, 08:27 PM)
5th edition has one massive weakness: no fire-based weapons. yet.
They do, they are called Dragons
QUOTE (Sendaz @ Oct 20 2013, 09:58 AM)
They do, they are called Dragons
Not man-portable enough.
But they can carry you. That's worth something, at least 
QUOTE (bannockburn @ Oct 20 2013, 10:02 AM)
But they can carry you. That's worth something, at least
I hadn't thought of that.
remember the shrek donkey
My issues with SR5 aren't exactly the rules. The problem is layout and editing.
Are there problem rules and blips that should have been caught? Yes, and the problem isn't the rules themselves, but the editors who should have caught the errors. Layout was one thing I felt SR4.5 got right, and now we're back to a mess that makes SR1 look organized. That's also an editorial mistake.
There's gems in SR5, but they're buried and hard to find. From what I've experienced of the system, actually finding rules for what you need is a nightmare. For example, try finding the attribute maximum. It's not in the ToC or index, so you have to search page by page to find it. Character creation, when using the pdf and without an experienced guide, takes the experts on RPG.net two to four hours to complete. (Often more.) The issue we all come back with is that we can't find the rules we're looking for when we need them.
I don't have issues with the freelancers, who undoubtedly did their best. My issues are with the editorial team, that took a bunch of great ideas and slapdashed them together, making it nearly unusable.
Are there problem rules and blips that should have been caught? Yes, and the problem isn't the rules themselves, but the editors who should have caught the errors. Layout was one thing I felt SR4.5 got right, and now we're back to a mess that makes SR1 look organized. That's also an editorial mistake.
There's gems in SR5, but they're buried and hard to find. From what I've experienced of the system, actually finding rules for what you need is a nightmare. For example, try finding the attribute maximum. It's not in the ToC or index, so you have to search page by page to find it. Character creation, when using the pdf and without an experienced guide, takes the experts on RPG.net two to four hours to complete. (Often more.) The issue we all come back with is that we can't find the rules we're looking for when we need them.
I don't have issues with the freelancers, who undoubtedly did their best. My issues are with the editorial team, that took a bunch of great ideas and slapdashed them together, making it nearly unusable.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 16 2013, 01:15 PM)
To be honest... I was so insulted by the time I got to Page 107, that it was just another data point along the way. And the insults don't stop there, either. I hold no hope for the continuation of SR5 under the current developmental leadership, and will only play it if there is no other choice.
THIS...SO MUCH THIS ^^QUOTE (Cain @ Oct 20 2013, 01:15 PM)
My issues are with the editorial team, that took a bunch of great ideas and slapdashed them together
Sounds like all the SR release since Jason Hardy took over. Except that all ideas weren't always great.
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Oct 18 2013, 10:47 PM)
First magicians dealing direct damage is bad. Now buffs are bad too?
If it's a problem in your game, it's easy to fix. Just put up a mana barrier (circle of protection ritual, magical lodge, mana barrier spell, or ward ritual). For those active foci to get through, either the magician has to attack the barrier, which automatically alerts its creator, or try to press through quietly using Magic + Charisma [Astral] v. barrier’s
Force x 2 Opposed Test. Each net hit allows only one friend to come along (spirits, active foci, sustained spells, or other astral forms).
So now the magician will be stuck. Either let the group continue without her, or set off the alarm and get the whole group killed. Or, she can just drop the spells, recast, take drain, spend more hundreds of nuyen on reagents, and leave her astral signature all over everything.
Edit: This is in response to a few posts earlier in the thread.
If it's a problem in your game, it's easy to fix. Just put up a mana barrier (circle of protection ritual, magical lodge, mana barrier spell, or ward ritual). For those active foci to get through, either the magician has to attack the barrier, which automatically alerts its creator, or try to press through quietly using Magic + Charisma [Astral] v. barrier’s
Force x 2 Opposed Test. Each net hit allows only one friend to come along (spirits, active foci, sustained spells, or other astral forms).
So now the magician will be stuck. Either let the group continue without her, or set off the alarm and get the whole group killed. Or, she can just drop the spells, recast, take drain, spend more hundreds of nuyen on reagents, and leave her astral signature all over everything.
Edit: This is in response to a few posts earlier in the thread.
Buffs aren't bad, damage isn't bad either. The problem is when an unintended (I hope) consequence of a side rule makes the normal way of doing things vastly inferior to how it appears to be done. It breaks money and gear progression for mages when they already get best-in-slot version of foci out of chargen and never have to bother with things like foci addiction, high availability or even time it takes to find the best gear due to cost > 10000.
It is similar to how Assault Cannons were described as big dangerous guns when really a tiny tiny machine pistol shooting full auto was an order of magnitude more dangerous (13P using bog standard crapammo, 17P with SnS and High velocity mod). (Or that a one handed SMG or machine pistol has LESS recoil and raise than a heavy machine gun... I don't know anyone who has fired a MAC-10 and an LMG claim the MAC-10 was more accurate and easier to handle in full auto...)
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Oct 20 2013, 01:54 PM)
THIS...SO MUCH THIS ^^
I'll ask you as well then, as I don't think TJ ever got around to answering. What exactly 'insults' you about 5th edition?
I can get not liking it, although I do, and I can understand it's not for everyone, but I just can't see how anyone could find it insulting.
QUOTE (mister__joshua @ Oct 21 2013, 08:05 AM)
I'll ask you as well then, as I don't think TJ ever got around to answering. What exactly 'insults' you about 5th edition?
I can get not liking it, although I do, and I can understand it's not for everyone, but I just can't see how anyone could find it insulting.
I can get not liking it, although I do, and I can understand it's not for everyone, but I just can't see how anyone could find it insulting.
I'll answer, although the question's not directed at me specifically.
I'm a bit insulted because this is the level of quality they thought was appropriate to charge $60 for.
In some cases, to charge several hundred dollars for.
There are errors in here that would be caught by MS Word's spellcheck. There are obvious and admitted leftovers from earlier drafts. It's almost 50/50 odds if a page reference is correct, or if a chart is on the same page as the rules it references. Whole sections of very important rules, such as bricking devices, are written as two paragraphs of half-fluff half rules concept with no clear mechanics and no clear idea of how they interact with other rules.
The only reason errata are even in the works is because Bull has to have the game playable for Missions convention games, and because the freelancers have pride in their work.
If the book we've been presented with is what they think the fans deserve for their support and hard-earned dollar, then damn straight I'm insulted.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 21 2013, 04:06 PM)
I'll answer, although the question's not directed at me specifically.
I'm a bit insulted because this is the level of quality they thought was appropriate to charge $60 for.
In some cases, to charge several hundred dollars for.
There are errors in here that would be caught by MS Word's spellcheck. There are obvious and admitted leftovers from earlier drafts. It's almost 50/50 odds if a page reference is correct, or if a chart is on the same page as the rules it references. Whole sections of very important rules, such as bricking devices, are written as two paragraphs of half-fluff half rules concept with no clear mechanics and no clear idea of how they interact with other rules.
The only reason errata are even in the works is because Bull has to have the game playable for Missions convention games, and because the freelancers have pride in their work.
If the book we've been presented with is what they think the fans deserve for their support and hard-earned dollar, then damn straight I'm insulted.
I'm a bit insulted because this is the level of quality they thought was appropriate to charge $60 for.
In some cases, to charge several hundred dollars for.
There are errors in here that would be caught by MS Word's spellcheck. There are obvious and admitted leftovers from earlier drafts. It's almost 50/50 odds if a page reference is correct, or if a chart is on the same page as the rules it references. Whole sections of very important rules, such as bricking devices, are written as two paragraphs of half-fluff half rules concept with no clear mechanics and no clear idea of how they interact with other rules.
The only reason errata are even in the works is because Bull has to have the game playable for Missions convention games, and because the freelancers have pride in their work.
If the book we've been presented with is what they think the fans deserve for their support and hard-earned dollar, then damn straight I'm insulted.
Fair enough. Maybe people take offence at things a lot more readily than I do, but it's not for me to decide what you do or don't find insulting.
For me, I can't imagine ever finding a book 'insulting' unless it either directly and deliberately attacks something I believe strongly about, or directly attacks me personally.
Being insulted infers that the Shadowrun Dev team deliberately and knowingly put out a product inferior to what they could have produced solely to make money from people. And with 5th edition I don't feel that's true in the slightest (although I believe that IS true about Cyberpunk v3, but that's a different story). I think the book is a good size, the publishing quality is high, the art is good, it's hard-backed. Nothing I'd argue about price over (in my case, £40). I even bought the PDF separately.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 21 2013, 10:06 AM)
I'll answer, although the question's not directed at me specifically.
I'm a bit insulted because this is the level of quality they thought was appropriate to charge $60 for.
In some cases, to charge several hundred dollars for.
There are errors in here that would be caught by MS Word's spellcheck. There are obvious and admitted leftovers from earlier drafts. It's almost 50/50 odds if a page reference is correct, or if a chart is on the same page as the rules it references. Whole sections of very important rules, such as bricking devices, are written as two paragraphs of half-fluff half rules concept with no clear mechanics and no clear idea of how they interact with other rules.
The only reason errata are even in the works is because Bull has to have the game playable for Missions convention games, and because the freelancers have pride in their work.
If the book we've been presented with is what they think the fans deserve for their support and hard-earned dollar, then damn straight I'm insulted.
I'm a bit insulted because this is the level of quality they thought was appropriate to charge $60 for.
In some cases, to charge several hundred dollars for.
There are errors in here that would be caught by MS Word's spellcheck. There are obvious and admitted leftovers from earlier drafts. It's almost 50/50 odds if a page reference is correct, or if a chart is on the same page as the rules it references. Whole sections of very important rules, such as bricking devices, are written as two paragraphs of half-fluff half rules concept with no clear mechanics and no clear idea of how they interact with other rules.
The only reason errata are even in the works is because Bull has to have the game playable for Missions convention games, and because the freelancers have pride in their work.
If the book we've been presented with is what they think the fans deserve for their support and hard-earned dollar, then damn straight I'm insulted.
Just exchange SR5 with AD&D in the 70's, elfquest/runequest in the 80's AD&D 2nd ed. in the 90's. Same editing falls. I even remember whole sections of pages being left out of shipped material.....
It must be the culture.
But I hear Run and Gun will be out in March....
QUOTE (mister__joshua @ Oct 21 2013, 09:31 AM)
Being insulted infers that the Shadowrun Dev team deliberately and knowingly put out a product inferior to what they could have produced solely to make money from people. And with 5th edition I don't feel that's true in the slightest (although I believe that IS true about Cyberpunk v3, but that's a different story). I think the book is a good size, the publishing quality is high, the art is good, it's hard-backed. Nothing I'd argue about price over (in my case, £40). I even bought the PDF separately.
Can you look at the product and honestly say the dev team shouldn't have known it wasn't ready to go to press? There are mistakes in here we pointed out months in advance from the preview sections that were released. There are basic copyediting mistakes that any word processor would flag. This isn't rocket science, it's basic editorial responsibility.
This is symptomatic of a problem that's been ongoing for a couple years now. Although there are some really dedicated people working on SR, the overwhelming evidence is that there are folks at Catalyst that don't give a shit about producing a product that even has bare functionality so long as they get money. Unfortunately, they seem to be in positions of responsibility.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 21 2013, 10:55 AM)
Can you look at the product and honestly say the dev team shouldn't have known it wasn't ready to go to press? There are mistakes in here we pointed out months in advance from the preview sections that were released. There are basic copyediting mistakes that any word processor would flag. This isn't rocket science, it's basic editorial responsibility.
This is symptomatic of a problem that's been ongoing for a couple years now. Although there are some really dedicated people working on SR, the overwhelming evidence is that there are folks at Catalyst that don't give a shit about producing a product that even has bare functionality so long as they get money. Unfortunately, they seem to be in positions of responsibility.
This is symptomatic of a problem that's been ongoing for a couple years now. Although there are some really dedicated people working on SR, the overwhelming evidence is that there are folks at Catalyst that don't give a shit about producing a product that even has bare functionality so long as they get money. Unfortunately, they seem to be in positions of responsibility.
This... The Editorial and Business staff at CGL don't care about what they put out, as long as it goes out. Any statements to the contrary just do not hold up.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 21 2013, 01:34 PM)
This... The Editorial and Business staff at CGL don't care about what they put out, as long as it goes out. Any statements to the contrary just do not hold up.
Then it goes on to be a problem for distributers, retailers, etc.....
The consumer is the last line of defense. Is it readable? Is it playable thats what they ask, then the 'out to lunch' sign goes up....
QUOTE (mister__joshua @ Oct 21 2013, 09:05 AM)
I'll ask you as well then, as I don't think TJ ever got around to answering. What exactly 'insults' you about 5th edition?
I can get not liking it, although I do, and I can understand it's not for everyone, but I just can't see how anyone could find it insulting.
I can get not liking it, although I do, and I can understand it's not for everyone, but I just can't see how anyone could find it insulting.
I have ....2 main Issues with the SR5 Rules
the WiFi Ingame Background and the " You can make only 1 Attack in 1 Iniphase" .
Plus a couple of smaller complaints but these can be solved with Houserules( like the Prio System with which I can't make the Chars that I really want to play, or the Vehicle Rules, the Karma Rewards and Payment for Runs)
Major Issue #1
The WiFi Background of SR5 insults my IQ
I can't believe that CGL really thinks the Shadowrun world would accept WiFi just like that
The Army using (hackable) WiFi , the Gouvernments Secret Agencies , and also the Megacons ?
(and MI 1A is the implementation and the explanation that Hackers had nothing to do in a fight sequence in SR4A so now in SR5 they can participate significantly in a Fight, which I know from my own personal experience is simply not true
Oh, and Bricking is an Issue too, but its not mayor and can be solved by using Houserules )
MI #2
this nerfs the ...."my inner Action Hero " what good is a SA Weapon (or two if You wanna play an Akimbo Pistolero Adept) if You can shoot only once or have two use Burst and Splitt Pool Rules which spoil the Fun.
I'm not talking about 1 Shot Kills with 20 Successes that I'm after
but whenever I see a cool Action Movie with Bullets flying around I think to myself:
Cool I can do this with a SR4A Char but I can't do it with a SR5 Char.
And this....ails me really.
Shadowrun is my favorite RPG (or among the Top 3) but the SR5 Rules prevent me from having Fun (the Fun I'm having playing SR4A)
And yes You're right when You're saying : "then don't play SR5"
but ,hey I want to play SR5 ! I want to continue with the RPG I love, but the rules make it hard for me to love Shadowrun and Yes, I can houserule everything ,but thats not the point. The point is/was that I expected more from CGL/the Developer and ImO they failed with these (ImO) mayor points .
They had some good Ideas that I'm going to incorporate in my 3 Tables at Home but as long as those two mayor points aren't fixed I will never completely switch to SR5 (which I really wanted to at first !)
with a disapointed Dance
Medicineman
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 21 2013, 05:55 PM)
Can you look at the product and honestly say the dev team shouldn't have known it wasn't ready to go to press? There are mistakes in here we pointed out months in advance from the preview sections that were released. There are basic copyediting mistakes that any word processor would flag. This isn't rocket science, it's basic editorial responsibility.
This is symptomatic of a problem that's been ongoing for a couple years now. Although there are some really dedicated people working on SR, the overwhelming evidence is that there are folks at Catalyst that don't give a shit about producing a product that even has bare functionality so long as they get money. Unfortunately, they seem to be in positions of responsibility.
This is symptomatic of a problem that's been ongoing for a couple years now. Although there are some really dedicated people working on SR, the overwhelming evidence is that there are folks at Catalyst that don't give a shit about producing a product that even has bare functionality so long as they get money. Unfortunately, they seem to be in positions of responsibility.
I think maybe two decades of buying incomplete and broken computer games that are fixed 3 weeks after I bought them has numbed me somewhat to products having errors on release. I can't remember the last core game product I played that didn't need errata or houseruling.
To answer your point specifically, I honestly believe the team did as much as they could with the time that they had. I worked in computer games for a while and that's the same, deadlines have to be met. Some can slide, but they can't ALL slide. You can't leave a product sitting on a table indefinitely while the proofreaders have one more go.
I think in the end it probably came down to this: Cram in all they could, spit and polish, and release it, OR wait, make it perfect, miss all the conventions, miss Christmas, and wait a full year until a good opportunity to release it comes around again. Commercial concerns aren't a small thing, they have to be a large consideration in any project. Considering the sales of SR5 I think to argue it's been anything other than a massive success is false.
So tl;dr I don't think it's a problem specific to Catalyst but rather a games industry problem, and I think they did the best they could in the non-infinite amount of time they had.
QUOTE (Medicineman @ Oct 22 2013, 01:57 AM)
Major Issue #1
The WiFi Background of SR5 insults my IQ
I can't believe that CGL really thinks the Shadowrun world would accept WiFi just like that
The Army using (hackable) WiFi , the Gouvernments Secret Agencies , and also the Megacons ?
(and MI 1A is the implementation and the explanation that Hackers had nothing to do in a fight sequence in SR4A so now in SR5 they can participate significantly in a Fight, which I know from my own personal experience is simply not true
Oh, and Bricking is an Issue too, but its not mayor and can be solved by using Houserules )
The WiFi Background of SR5 insults my IQ
I can't believe that CGL really thinks the Shadowrun world would accept WiFi just like that
The Army using (hackable) WiFi , the Gouvernments Secret Agencies , and also the Megacons ?
(and MI 1A is the implementation and the explanation that Hackers had nothing to do in a fight sequence in SR4A so now in SR5 they can participate significantly in a Fight, which I know from my own personal experience is simply not true
Oh, and Bricking is an Issue too, but its not mayor and can be solved by using Houserules )
Considering that the real world has accepted WiFi just like that, it doesn't seem to be a big stretch. Real governments and corporations transmit highly sensitive data over wireless networks all the time.
QUOTE
MI #2
this nerfs the ...."my inner Action Hero " what good is a SA Weapon (or two if You wanna play an Akimbo Pistolero Adept) if You can shoot only once or have two use Burst and Splitt Pool Rules which spoil the Fun.
I'm not talking about 1 Shot Kills with 20 Successes that I'm after
but whenever I see a cool Action Movie with Bullets flying around I think to myself:
Cool I can do this with a SR4A Char but I can't do it with a SR5 Char.
And this....ails me really.
Shadowrun is my favorite RPG (or among the Top 3) but the SR5 Rules prevent me from having Fun (the Fun I'm having playing SR4A)
And yes You're right when You're saying : "then don't play SR5"
but ,hey I want to play SR5 ! I want to continue with the RPG I love, but the rules make it hard for me to love Shadowrun and Yes, I can houserule everything ,but thats not the point. The point is/was that I expected more from CGL/the Developer and ImO they failed with these (ImO) mayor points .
They had some good Ideas that I'm going to incorporate in my 3 Tables at Home but as long as those two mayor points aren't fixed I will never completely switch to SR5 (which I really wanted to at first !)
this nerfs the ...."my inner Action Hero " what good is a SA Weapon (or two if You wanna play an Akimbo Pistolero Adept) if You can shoot only once or have two use Burst and Splitt Pool Rules which spoil the Fun.
I'm not talking about 1 Shot Kills with 20 Successes that I'm after
but whenever I see a cool Action Movie with Bullets flying around I think to myself:
Cool I can do this with a SR4A Char but I can't do it with a SR5 Char.
And this....ails me really.
Shadowrun is my favorite RPG (or among the Top 3) but the SR5 Rules prevent me from having Fun (the Fun I'm having playing SR4A)
And yes You're right when You're saying : "then don't play SR5"
but ,hey I want to play SR5 ! I want to continue with the RPG I love, but the rules make it hard for me to love Shadowrun and Yes, I can houserule everything ,but thats not the point. The point is/was that I expected more from CGL/the Developer and ImO they failed with these (ImO) mayor points .
They had some good Ideas that I'm going to incorporate in my 3 Tables at Home but as long as those two mayor points aren't fixed I will never completely switch to SR5 (which I really wanted to at first !)
Pretty much all I can say to this is that SR4 poisoned Shadowrun by constructing its combat around rolling 15 dice vs 4 dice, in favor of the attacker. SR4 is the weird outlier game, here, not the gold standard.
QUOTE
To answer your point specifically, I honestly believe the team did as much as they could with the time that they had. I worked in computer games for a while and that's the same, deadlines have to be met. Some can slide, but they can't ALL slide. You can't leave a product sitting on a table indefinitely while the proofreaders have one more go.
I can't give specifics, but... some of the errors were caught by the proofreaders, and corrected long before the book went to print. I have no idea why the corrections weren't implemented, but they were done.
QUOTE (Cain @ Oct 22 2013, 10:26 AM)
I can't give specifics, but... some of the errors were caught by the proofreaders, and corrected long before the book went to print. I have no idea why the corrections weren't implemented, but they were done.
makes it worse actually . . to have errata and not to implement it.
par for the course, eh?
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 22 2013, 02:51 AM)
Considering that the real world has accepted WiFi just like that, it doesn't seem to be a big stretch. Real governments and corporations transmit highly sensitive data over wireless networks all the time.
Real world security doesn't connect anything useful and secure to a wireless Internet connection. Period. Because it is a known and controllable security risk.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 22 2013, 08:41 AM)
Real world security doesn't connect anything useful and secure to a wireless Internet connection. Period. Because it is a known and controllable security risk.
Exactly...
Actually real world does transfer things over wireless, but its a private wireless line that has the best Coders in the country working to make sure it is never hacked. & beyond that it is usually never extremely valuable information. The most private info is transferred in person in most cases.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 22 2013, 10:41 AM)
Real world security doesn't connect anything useful and secure to a wireless Internet connection. Period. Because it is a known and controllable security risk.
The real world would beg to differ. They'll secure things by requiring VPN connections with two-factor authentication and file encryption, but sensitive data moves over wireless connections all the time.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 22 2013, 10:25 AM)
The real world would beg to differ. They'll secure things by requiring VPN connections with two-factor authentication and file encryption, but sensitive data moves over wireless connections all the time.
There is a difference between Wired and Wireless, though. And I know companies (and have even done work for some) that DO NOT ALLOW WIRELESS CONNECTIONS on their servers. Period. End of Story. So the real world would beg to differ with you. If you want ironclad wireless protection, you never allow such a connection on your equipment. Now, that being said, yes, a lot of companies have moved to wireless capability and acceptance. Saying that all companies do so/have done so, however, is outright false.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 22 2013, 12:55 PM)
There is a difference between Wired and Wireless, though. And I know companies (and have even doen work for some) that DO NOT ALLOW WIRELESS CONNECTIONS on their servers. Period. End of Story. So the real world would beg to differ with you. If you want ironclad wireless protection, you never allow such a connection on your equipment. Now, that beoing said, yes, a lot of companies have moved to wireless capability and acceptance. Saying that all companies do so/have done so, however, is outright false.
So you've changed your position from:
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 22 2013, 10:41 AM)
Real world security doesn't connect anything useful and secure to a wireless Internet connection. Period. Because it is a known and controllable security risk.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 22 2013, 10:48 AM)
Exactly...
To "well some don't." I don't know about you, but I can't see where you've moved the fucking goalposts this time.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 22 2013, 10:59 AM)
So you've changed your position from:
To "well some don't." I don't know about you, but I can't see where you've moved the fucking goalposts this time.
To "well some don't." I don't know about you, but I can't see where you've moved the fucking goalposts this time.
Not a change... If Real World Security classifies Wireless Communications as unsecure, they do not allow such access on their networks. Period. Your assertion that they do is wrong. It really is that simple. You are trying to make an absolute out of something that is not an absolute. Look to yourself before looking to me.
I am not trying to fight with you on this, but think on this... Your position is a bit ludicrous, since all it needs to be disproved is a single instance where it does not hold true. At that point, your position is completely invalidated. I am not saying that some companies do things in a nonsecure manner (because we all know instances where that is exactly the case). I am saying that NOT ALL Companies do so... And at that point, your position becomes invalid.
Nath says it better below, though...
These assertions are not mutually exclusive as some are about "governments", other "security" and finally about "companies". Actually, in a lot of government agencies and major companies, security doesn't get their say about how computer networks are implemented nowadays. This is evolving, but only slowly. The issue is not handled the same way at the US Rural Housing Service and the US Special Operations Command. The security of the CIA public website is nothing like the security of the CIA working environment and stations abroad.
A number of governments' regulations actually specifically forbid to transmit classified information over Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11) networks. Agencies handling such information may use still "wireless" appliances, within reserved frequency spectrum or commercial satellite links. And then regulation requires encryption qualified as secure enough (which would withstand decryption for a significant amount of time).
The thing is, in Shadowrun, encryption no longer works. Saying that people would not bother about that and still use networks (either wired or wireless) the way they did before is like saying since we drive cars now in spite of the risk of a car crash, we will still be doing so even with brakes removed. But it's a major element of safety removed.
That does not mean people will be able to adapt to a world without encryption or brakes. A lot of security breach actually happens because people cannot adapt to a secure working environment and want to do like they do at home or university or their previous job, taking documents out, chatting about their job with relatives, or turning the wifi on.
What is happening nowadays is that there is more money funneled into media and entertainment appliances than there is into most defense and security appliances. More brainpower is put into developing the iPhone or Android than in most defense projects. The F-35 may be cooler than any car you'll ever drive, but for the most part, the tools the military and government agencies aren't nearly as cool and shiny as what the average commoner may get. Soldiers would currently find their smartphone GPS easier to use for navigation that the one the regular one issued (if they're issued one!). But when an equipment becomes a liability rather than an asset, no matter if it's government issued or personal equipment, they'll stop using it.
A number of governments' regulations actually specifically forbid to transmit classified information over Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11) networks. Agencies handling such information may use still "wireless" appliances, within reserved frequency spectrum or commercial satellite links. And then regulation requires encryption qualified as secure enough (which would withstand decryption for a significant amount of time).
The thing is, in Shadowrun, encryption no longer works. Saying that people would not bother about that and still use networks (either wired or wireless) the way they did before is like saying since we drive cars now in spite of the risk of a car crash, we will still be doing so even with brakes removed. But it's a major element of safety removed.
That does not mean people will be able to adapt to a world without encryption or brakes. A lot of security breach actually happens because people cannot adapt to a secure working environment and want to do like they do at home or university or their previous job, taking documents out, chatting about their job with relatives, or turning the wifi on.
What is happening nowadays is that there is more money funneled into media and entertainment appliances than there is into most defense and security appliances. More brainpower is put into developing the iPhone or Android than in most defense projects. The F-35 may be cooler than any car you'll ever drive, but for the most part, the tools the military and government agencies aren't nearly as cool and shiny as what the average commoner may get. Soldiers would currently find their smartphone GPS easier to use for navigation that the one the regular one issued (if they're issued one!). But when an equipment becomes a liability rather than an asset, no matter if it's government issued or personal equipment, they'll stop using it.
To be fair, with the exception of Strong node encryption, encryption has been fundamentally worthless in Shadowrun for ages. I thought 4th was bad, and then I looked at what passes for data security in 5th. I kind of like that data transmitted via the matrix is so laughably insecure that only a heavily brainwashed public would be willing to use it.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 22 2013, 10:41 AM)
Real world security doesn't connect anything useful and secure to a wireless Internet connection. Period. Because it is a known and controllable security risk.
This was the absolute statement, and I provided the real world counterexample that real corporations and governments transmit use real wireless often. Trying to turn a counterexample into an absolute is your bag, not mine.
The Shadowrun extrapolation is that everyone uses wireless almost all the time for almost everything, which along with unsecure security is what makes the fantastical dystopia fantastical and dystopian. It's a path we could take, but probably won't.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 22 2013, 01:27 PM)
This was the absolute statement, and I provided the real world counterexample that real corporations and governments transmit use real wireless often. Trying to turn a counterexample into an absolute is your bag, not mine.
The Shadowrun extrapolation is that everyone uses wireless almost all the time for almost everything, which along with unsecure security is what makes the fantastical dystopia fantastical and dystopian. It's a path we could take, but probably won't.
The Shadowrun extrapolation is that everyone uses wireless almost all the time for almost everything, which along with unsecure security is what makes the fantastical dystopia fantastical and dystopian. It's a path we could take, but probably won't.
The term Secure precludes its inclusion in Wireless Networks, which we know to be fairly unsecure. Ergo, if you want useful data to be secure, you do not put it on a wireless network.
Hopefully you are right and we do not travel that path. Sadly, I am not holding my breath after seeing some of the security practices that are used to "Secure" nertworks these days. Fortunately, we still have some capacity for rational thought out there, but it often looks like it is not being utilized.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 23 2013, 04:34 AM)
Fortunately, we still have some capacity for rational thought out there...
Examples please? I think you're making that one up.
QUOTE (FuelDrop @ Oct 22 2013, 03:08 PM)
Examples please? I think you're making that one up.
I sometimes feel the same way... *sigh*
Data point: The company where I work allows wireless networking, but only allows connection by devices already registered to talk to the physical network. That means company-issued laptops and phones only. Any other device simply cannot connect, even if using a valid login from within the premises.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Oct 21 2013, 01:34 PM)
This... The Editorial and Business staff at CGL don't care about what they put out, as long as it goes out. Any statements to the contrary just do not hold up.
Hrm, actually ... I find this statement, and those related to it, to be the "crap" type. I admit wholeheartedly I do not completely like 5ed. And I have even posted numerous of my dislikes and such on these, and other, forums. That being said, I very sincerely believe that people do believe they do want and do care about getting material out. And they do care about "quality", but therein lay a term that is itself loaded. What is "Quality Work" for one person is more likely to be lain up against "Priority of Work Release".
I admit that it does feel that "the only reason" the errata is/was coming out is that Bull and the Missions Staffers needed it. I however seem to recall Patrick Goodman as spearheading that original goal and a fairly solid number of individuals (freelancers and just fans/players) coming out on the Forums here and putting forth material. I have known Bull just about since he joined up with the Shadowrun group(s). I've known Patrick (in online community mode) now for nearly as long, if not perhaps a bit longer *age does things to memory*). And there are a number of other people here whom have put forth what they can and will do for whatever they feel is valuable or necessary.
I made a statement not too long ago in another topic thread (that was closed shortly thereafter) that each published edition of a game is, in effect, one guys/one teams "house rules" and observed that it was incredibly interesting how so many people were already speculating on House Rules they would be enacting *BEFORE* the material was published even. This seems to hold true here. Anyone, and I do mean *ANYONE*, whom makes sweeping statements are very likely to be their own hypocrite and breakstaff of their own rules or observations.
Do I personally believe that 5ed is the best Shadowrun published? No. But I also feel that way for many reasons that are as much because of my game play experience as they are my personal bias and history. I will however give a list of what is Pro and what is Con so far IMO of 5ed. I want to give it not because I feel that mine opinion and that of my game group is better/more precise than what we have published ... but because we feel strongly for the game and we want to see it improved upon/expanded.
Do I believe that apparently leadership could be improved upon? Yes, but that is also because of the sheer magnitude of what we (on the purchasing/fan side) of the curtain are exposed to. I know from mine own experiences that this may be very, very, different on the Contributor/Editor side and the directing staff (J. Hardy & Co.) are doing what they feel is necessary and compassionate about in order to keep the game world/system going. I know that Jason has many very loyal companions in the work, good friends and coworkers. I know that I have seen he help coordinate the community (even just a small fragment of it) to help a beloved community member in a time of great loss and pain. Those are qualities that I find EXTREMELY necessary and INCREDIBLY lucky to see displayed by J. Hardy & Co. That means we do have people whom care about the game just like we do.
And besides, you know what this "mechanics debate" really is don't you? It means far too great a conflict with the loss of the "R" in "RPG". A subject I've witnessed elsewhere in a saddening amount as well.
QUOTE (Cain @ Oct 22 2013, 04:26 AM)
I can't give specifics, but... some of the errors were caught by the proofreaders, and corrected long before the book went to print. I have no idea why the corrections weren't implemented, but they were done.
I have often wondered if this has to do with the PUBLISHER or PUBLISHING AGENCY. I seem to recall real nightmares back in the days of 3ed and Proofreading/Editing done in house, only to have it done "AGAIN" by the publishing agency, which would re-insert/add anew various forms of mistakes.
And now for back OT:
What I do like about 5ed;
I do like the ideas of "Interupt Actions" and how to make them work after a die roll for Initiative is determined.
I do like having "Leadership" and it's impact upon not only Initiative but Team Effort has finally been given some real review.
I do like having Enchanting written up with greater encompassment and influence on the game.
I do like having "Riggers" and "Deckers" moved apart again more. The blurring/erasure of that line in 4ed just bothered me.
I do like seeing where "Matrix Interfacing" can improve the functioning of various items, especially cyberware.
I do like seeing full-damage systems for melee and thus helping with the potential lethality of the game (just the threat is often good enough to avoid a real conflict, and it should be that way).
What I do NOT like about 5ed;
I do not like the Priority System of Character Creation. I have never liked it in over 25 years. It turns race/species and career into hyper-competitive point systems. This is obvious just a purely personal thing on my part.
I do not like having two Karma costs for character modification; one at Character Creation and another at Character Improvement. I am simply not satisfied with what is nothing more than a muddying of the terminology to the players.
I do not like the system of "Limits" (Accuracy, Limits, etc) as created. It is not evened out thoroughly IMO, especially with regards to Melee Accuracy ratings.
I do not like what so far appears to be a spell design system used by the creators that is very "this is what I think". I am hopeful this will be clarified sufficiently in the future, but I feel personally that in order to correct it, that the material in the Core 5ed book will be rendered out-of-date.
I do not like the need to "Mark" something a Matrix action and then "Hack" the item afterwards. This to me is double-hacking/double-work in a system that just didn't need it.
I do not like the idea that "Matrix Damage" can "Brick" something to the point that "Matrix Remediation" cannot make it functional again.
I do not like the still linear comparative mechanics for Damage for both organic and non-organic objects. There are such easy ways to fix this and they are simply never being applied (fix it in the Condition Monitor mechanic).
I do NOT like a system that still seems to hyper-prefer magicians over all other character archetypes in long-term development. I feel that everyone should have options and opportunities that are simply not being taken advantage of.
What I do like about 5ed;
I do like the ideas of "Interupt Actions" and how to make them work after a die roll for Initiative is determined.
I do like having "Leadership" and it's impact upon not only Initiative but Team Effort has finally been given some real review.
I do like having Enchanting written up with greater encompassment and influence on the game.
I do like having "Riggers" and "Deckers" moved apart again more. The blurring/erasure of that line in 4ed just bothered me.
I do like seeing where "Matrix Interfacing" can improve the functioning of various items, especially cyberware.
I do like seeing full-damage systems for melee and thus helping with the potential lethality of the game (just the threat is often good enough to avoid a real conflict, and it should be that way).
What I do NOT like about 5ed;
I do not like the Priority System of Character Creation. I have never liked it in over 25 years. It turns race/species and career into hyper-competitive point systems. This is obvious just a purely personal thing on my part.
I do not like having two Karma costs for character modification; one at Character Creation and another at Character Improvement. I am simply not satisfied with what is nothing more than a muddying of the terminology to the players.
I do not like the system of "Limits" (Accuracy, Limits, etc) as created. It is not evened out thoroughly IMO, especially with regards to Melee Accuracy ratings.
I do not like what so far appears to be a spell design system used by the creators that is very "this is what I think". I am hopeful this will be clarified sufficiently in the future, but I feel personally that in order to correct it, that the material in the Core 5ed book will be rendered out-of-date.
I do not like the need to "Mark" something a Matrix action and then "Hack" the item afterwards. This to me is double-hacking/double-work in a system that just didn't need it.
I do not like the idea that "Matrix Damage" can "Brick" something to the point that "Matrix Remediation" cannot make it functional again.
I do not like the still linear comparative mechanics for Damage for both organic and non-organic objects. There are such easy ways to fix this and they are simply never being applied (fix it in the Condition Monitor mechanic).
I do NOT like a system that still seems to hyper-prefer magicians over all other character archetypes in long-term development. I feel that everyone should have options and opportunities that are simply not being taken advantage of.
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Oct 22 2013, 12:25 PM)
The real world would beg to differ. They'll secure things by requiring VPN connections with two-factor authentication and file encryption, but sensitive data moves over wireless connections all the time.
As I said, wireless Internet connections. Intranet connections are no big deal specifically because they have no outward-facing access points to anything public. The DOD's SIPRNET is a good example.
QUOTE (NeoJudas @ Oct 22 2013, 07:20 PM)
Hrm, actually ... I find this statement, and those related to it, to be the "crap" type. I admit wholeheartedly I do not completely like 5ed. And I have even posted numerous of my dislikes and such on these, and other, forums. That being said, I very sincerely believe that people do believe they do want and do care about getting material out. And they do care about "quality", but therein lay a term that is itself loaded. What is "Quality Work" for one person is more likely to be lain up against "Priority of Work Release".
I admit that it does feel that "the only reason" the errata is/was coming out is that Bull and the Missions Staffers needed it. I however seem to recall Patrick Goodman as spearheading that original goal and a fairly solid number of individuals (freelancers and just fans/players) coming out on the Forums here and putting forth material. I have known Bull just about since he joined up with the Shadowrun group(s). I've known Patrick (in online community mode) now for nearly as long, if not perhaps a bit longer *age does things to memory*). And there are a number of other people here whom have put forth what they can and will do for whatever they feel is valuable or necessary.
I made a statement not too long ago in another topic thread (that was closed shortly thereafter) that each published edition of a game is, in effect, one guys/one teams "house rules" and observed that it was incredibly interesting how so many people were already speculating on House Rules they would be enacting *BEFORE* the material was published even. This seems to hold true here. Anyone, and I do mean *ANYONE*, whom makes sweeping statements are very likely to be their own hypocrite and breakstaff of their own rules or observations.
Do I personally believe that 5ed is the best Shadowrun published? No. But I also feel that way for many reasons that are as much because of my game play experience as they are my personal bias and history. I will however give a list of what is Pro and what is Con so far IMO of 5ed. I want to give it not because I feel that mine opinion and that of my game group is better/more precise than what we have published ... but because we feel strongly for the game and we want to see it improved upon/expanded.
Do I believe that apparently leadership could be improved upon? Yes, but that is also because of the sheer magnitude of what we (on the purchasing/fan side) of the curtain are exposed to. I know from mine own experiences that this may be very, very, different on the Contributor/Editor side and the directing staff (J. Hardy & Co.) are doing what they feel is necessary and compassionate about in order to keep the game world/system going. I know that Jason has many very loyal companions in the work, good friends and coworkers. I know that I have seen he help coordinate the community (even just a small fragment of it) to help a beloved community member in a time of great loss and pain. Those are qualities that I find EXTREMELY necessary and INCREDIBLY lucky to see displayed by J. Hardy & Co. That means we do have people whom care about the game just like we do.
And besides, you know what this "mechanics debate" really is don't you? It means far too great a conflict with the loss of the "R" in "RPG". A subject I've witnessed elsewhere in a saddening amount as well.
I admit that it does feel that "the only reason" the errata is/was coming out is that Bull and the Missions Staffers needed it. I however seem to recall Patrick Goodman as spearheading that original goal and a fairly solid number of individuals (freelancers and just fans/players) coming out on the Forums here and putting forth material. I have known Bull just about since he joined up with the Shadowrun group(s). I've known Patrick (in online community mode) now for nearly as long, if not perhaps a bit longer *age does things to memory*). And there are a number of other people here whom have put forth what they can and will do for whatever they feel is valuable or necessary.
I made a statement not too long ago in another topic thread (that was closed shortly thereafter) that each published edition of a game is, in effect, one guys/one teams "house rules" and observed that it was incredibly interesting how so many people were already speculating on House Rules they would be enacting *BEFORE* the material was published even. This seems to hold true here. Anyone, and I do mean *ANYONE*, whom makes sweeping statements are very likely to be their own hypocrite and breakstaff of their own rules or observations.
Do I personally believe that 5ed is the best Shadowrun published? No. But I also feel that way for many reasons that are as much because of my game play experience as they are my personal bias and history. I will however give a list of what is Pro and what is Con so far IMO of 5ed. I want to give it not because I feel that mine opinion and that of my game group is better/more precise than what we have published ... but because we feel strongly for the game and we want to see it improved upon/expanded.
Do I believe that apparently leadership could be improved upon? Yes, but that is also because of the sheer magnitude of what we (on the purchasing/fan side) of the curtain are exposed to. I know from mine own experiences that this may be very, very, different on the Contributor/Editor side and the directing staff (J. Hardy & Co.) are doing what they feel is necessary and compassionate about in order to keep the game world/system going. I know that Jason has many very loyal companions in the work, good friends and coworkers. I know that I have seen he help coordinate the community (even just a small fragment of it) to help a beloved community member in a time of great loss and pain. Those are qualities that I find EXTREMELY necessary and INCREDIBLY lucky to see displayed by J. Hardy & Co. That means we do have people whom care about the game just like we do.
And besides, you know what this "mechanics debate" really is don't you? It means far too great a conflict with the loss of the "R" in "RPG". A subject I've witnessed elsewhere in a saddening amount as well.
You know, if it was a subjective matter of 'I just don't like these rules.' I'd agree with you, Neo. However, that isn't the case here. The problem is straight up piss-poor quality control, of the sort that is laughably bad given the power and versatility of modern publishing software. There are errors in this printing that can only exist if someone badly failed at their job, and most official responses are along the lines of 'Welp, you get what you get, buy it anyway!'
Edit, because that could totally be taken as an insult : I'm not calling out the writers here. I'm calling out whoever looked over the proofs and okayed them to go to print as-is, without even revisions that had previously been given by the writers.
QUOTE (NeoJudas @ Oct 22 2013, 05:25 PM)
I have often wondered if this has to do with the PUBLISHER or PUBLISHING AGENCY. I seem to recall real nightmares back in the days of 3ed and Proofreading/Editing done in house, only to have it done "AGAIN" by the publishing agency, which would re-insert/add anew various forms of mistakes.
This, I can be a little more specific on.
CGL's proofreading is all done in house. That is, they "pay" us proofreaders to go over documents and correct any typos and grammatical errors we find. CGL, to the best of my knowledge, acts as their own publishing agency; so what they produce goes straight to the printers. There's no more middle men; what CGL approves is what goes into print.
QUOTE (binarywraith @ Oct 22 2013, 07:50 PM)
As I said, wireless Internet connections. Intranet connections are no big deal specifically because they have no outward-facing access points to anything public. The DOD's SIPRNET is a good example.
If you're going with wireless internet itself -- that is, computer connects directly to The Internet™ as a standalone as opposed to wirelessly connecting to some gateway that then hits an internal network which then hits an ISP which then hits the internet backbone -- well, yeah, we don't do that. It's far outside the reach of our technology. Or direct-connection (say, laptop to server) wireless, which I don't think is much of a thing. But in terms of, say, wirelessly connecting to an ISP via the cell network and connecting to a secure network via VPN, well that happens lots. Which is the point I was making -- I'll explain below:
Back in Shadowrun, SR4 introduced the concept of the peer-to-peer connection in mutual signal range, where one peer was your commlink and the other peer was a host node, which made me ask the question, "Why would anyone ever do this ever?" The Matrix itself was virtually gone, replaced by overlapping signal fields of independently operating devices. That is, if you want to log in to check your bank account, you have to get within mutual signal range of one of your bank's access points, probably scattered all over the city and linked back to some central complex.
This was incredibly strange, and remarkably unsecure. There was no Matrix Police, because that would involve boots on the ground actively trying to catch misbehavers by aimlessly trying to wander within mutual signal range. Every node had to be an island fortress.
SR5 has fixed this by reintroducing the Matrix as one with an actual backbone. You connect to a grid, search for a host, and if you can acquire or fake the right permissions, you can log onto that host. The real world analogue would be connecting to the internet via your ISP ("grid"), and attempting to access the VPN ("host") of your target -- in the real world you'll usually be stymied by your lack of a user name and password (and probably multi-factor authentication involving a rotating pass code device or other hard token). Back in the SR universe, you have fast decryption, so security must necessarily consist of aggressive automated anti-intrusion programs and personnel, instead. SR5 also brings to the party the aforementioned Matrix Police -- GOD. You can only misbehave so much before your ISP cans your connection, or before the host you're on goes full-alert. On paper it sounds like GOD is a minor nuisance to hackers, but in practice you eat up that 40 OS pretty damned fast.
Now, the criticism of the SR5 architecture is that for any site, all of the Matrix eggs are in one host basket -- you don't have to pass through security gateways like you did in SR3 (connect to host, connect to subhost, connect to sub-subhost, etc). I'm not sure that the current "hack one hack all" state of singular hosts outweighs the benefit of making it impossible for intruders to hide in the labyrinth of your own architecture, though -- a decker can't just duck from one subhost to another to avoid one set of IC or a security decker, since his only two options are Be In the Host or Be Outside the Host.
QUOTE (Cain @ Oct 23 2013, 04:31 AM)
This, I can be a little more specific on.
CGL's proofreading is all done in house. That is, they "pay" us proofreaders to go over documents and correct any typos and grammatical errors we find. CGL, to the best of my knowledge, acts as their own publishing agency; so what they produce goes straight to the printers. There's no more middle men; what CGL approves is what goes into print.
CGL's proofreading is all done in house. That is, they "pay" us proofreaders to go over documents and correct any typos and grammatical errors we find. CGL, to the best of my knowledge, acts as their own publishing agency; so what they produce goes straight to the printers. There's no more middle men; what CGL approves is what goes into print.
wonder how much of it was:"no, that was intended, not an error, i'll change it back"
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.