Maybe Open Test have become the standard, now you'd need to make an Open Test for the shooters TN, or OT to be the subject of any other attack/spell what-have-you.

...so much hate for the Open Test.

I understand that probability is less predictable when you're making an open test, and it turns a fairly simple "beat this number" die mechanic on it's ear and complicates issues...but...

What are you saying, here?

You don't seem to get that the more dice you roll, the better your odds to come up with something ridiculously high. Open tests take greater skill level into account just as much as a regular TN based test does, it's just harder to predict with any decent accuracy level, and much more likely to feel like a roll of the dice. Six dice is better than four. Sit down and rull four dice in an open test a hundred times, and six dice in an open test a hundred times, and I bet that on average the six-die test is going to have higher "best" shots. Ditto with, say, six dice versus four hundred and sixty three. You can see that more dice is better, can't you? There's no reason to stop at the magical 6-skill-dice. You know that, right?

That said, I can't think of many times at all open dice come up, except for...two situations, off the top of my head. One is intimidation, wherein the intimidating character sets the TN for the intimidated character's Will test (if I recall correctly). The other is stealth, wherein the sneaking character sets the TN for the spotting character, right?

They sort of make sense, there, in those two situations. It makes sense that trying to scare the crap out of someone you may or may not know (who may or may not know you) is a highly variable situation. There are times a single cop flashing his badge will get a half dozen gangers to back down. There are times the entire US army throwing it's weight around makes half the world flip them off. It's chaotic and random and full of unquantifiable variables. I'm fine with open tests being used there. It makes the 'Runner less likely to get everything he wants by dropping his name and glaring at someone -- the unpredictable nature of the open test makes it less of a sure thing. If it wasn't, every Shadowrunner in the world would get some vat grown pheromones, cultivate a high Intimidation skill, and never ever do anything ever again (because the TN mods listed in the book, the rep mods, and Mr J's LBB's crazy mods would make Intimidation a sure thing most of the time, and you could just browbeat anyone into doing anything you said).

I also feel an open test makes sense for sneaking -- likewise, if it becomes too much of a sure thing to sneak around...? Well, a lot of the suspense is gone, and a lot of PCs (a lot more PCs) will die without ever seeing what's shooting at them. Sneaking and spotting should be things you never feel certain about. There should always be a chance someone gets lucky and turns his head at the right second, looks away from his buddy to cough and spots you, sees a reflection or hear a piece of gear jingle no matter how stealthy you are. The random nature of an open test reflects that -- you can still very very much stack things in the sneaker's favor (I once rolled a fifty-something, after mods, to sneak past some people), but it's not a sure thing (I once rolled a four with that same character, while tippy-toeing up on the brainwashed head of security for the Deus-run Renraku Arcology, at a critical moment).

The issue is that six dice are not better enough than four dice to warrant the expense. Let me inject some figures:

On the left, we see the number of dice rolled. On the right, we see the expected value of an open test made with that many dice.

1 - 4.217978
2 - 5.792721
3 - 6.8916106
4 - 7.6336365
5 - 8.266773
6 - 8.842815
7 - 9.371663
8 - 9.681032
9 - 10.077892
10 - 10.416958
11 - 10.7442255
12 - 11.064394
13 - 11.30267
14 - 11.629637
15 - 11.79942

Variance is pretty low (I've not done the math, though), decreasing with the number of dice. We see that, for example, the difference between four dice and six is about 1.2. Not small; someone with six dice will consistently beat someone with 4. But is that worth 16 karma? The difference is more pronounced between six dice and nine, which is worth another 1.2 of final result but the expected increase per karma point spent is tiny...especially compared to what you'd get if you spent that karma on another skill or two.

Here's the code I used to produce the above, if you care. Edit: or not. The code is here, but the board ate the indenting and the code tag doesn't work inside the spoiler tag.

I think im in agreement with this guy...I gusse Im what you call a late bloomer when it comes to shadowrun...really I've been ajusting to SR3 from 2 for about a year and half, maybe two years. now Ive had alot of set back, but bascally I feel its got a nice hard solid system. so leave it alone and give it some more sorce books and stuffers to work with. SR4...ok idea...contuineing SR3 great idea. say what you will of me...but I stick with what I say.

Arg, I don't feel like cracking open my stats book open but that can't be right.

The expected value of an open test using one D6 dice just has to be 3.5

Don't make me do a demonstration, I suck at demonstrations! But I know that 2 +2 = 4 and that the expected value of 1D6 is 3.5

Therefore I can't trust the other numbers you provided.

Is there really any reason not to fix something so obviously fuck up and yet so simple?

It's really not *that* wrong is it? I know alot of folks really want firearms to really emulate real-life more, but the system hasn't done too bad has it? The exploits aren't that extreme are they? Guess I just don't see the current system as a problem.

What I wouldn't like to see is additional detail that bogs down combat situations unless it's made it into something simple. I've seen before some systems have a "basic" and "advanced" combat sytem, so you can choose depending on what kind of game you'd like to play, maybe that's one solution.

So why do you play then? Is it just the great story?

I have no problem getting immersed into SR. It's not about "how real" it is for me, but about the people, the situations and the jobs. We each play for our own reasons obvious you have more requirements for it being real to get into the game.

Then go play something else. /shrug

Could we please refrain from mention that abomination that is D20?

but lots and lots of other people do. for instance, the many people who say they don't use deckers in their game because decking disrupts the game. or the many people who don't use rigging because the rules are just too complex. it's a definite problem when people are cutting out entire sections of the game because they don't like playing them.

I like this argument. "So what if this system is really bad in some ways? Go play another game then. Fixing or tweaking things is bad."

Consider something like the Damage Codes of firearms (specifically, those of Light and Heavy Pistols, ARs, LMGs and HMGs) or weights of items in SR3. As they are, they are illogical, unrealistic, internally inconsistent, and just plain wrong. They do not in any way promote game balance -- in fact, some of those things severely detract from balance, such as the piddly-ass LPs vs. ultra-powerful HPs. And all those things could be (or could have been) fixed without introducing any complexity into the system.

I've never understood the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If something functions, but is really crappy, you shouldn't make it better? Anyway, you could make a very good case for at least the above things being broken.

Once again, this doesn't really have much to do with SR4, since I should think the game designers will not reintroduce the same fuck-ups in details if they already went through all the trouble of reworking much of the basics.

Spycraft and to some extent D20 Modern do have a few strong points, but they both have at least as many mind-blogginglystupid rules. Actually, I'd say D20 Modern has far more of those, while Spycraft (with some optional rules) is pretty closely tied.

Yay, I'm (at least) a level 8 Dedicated Hero in D20 Modern!

(D20 Shadowrun, to D20 or not to D20?)

I hope not. I do like them.

As I mentioned elsewhere, that's not a fair comparison with regard to Stealth Tests: keep in mind that one success is only enough for the person making the perception test to know that something is there. That something could be Bubba the Love Troll, the cat next door, or dear Aunt Sue. It takes a second success to guess the general type of thing, and a third to have a fairly concrete idea. All in all, I'd say it works just fine.

~J

That doesn't really matter. There are massive chunks of the combat section that everyone has found problematic, and if it weren't really the most central set of rules to the game, there probably would be people who tried to ignore it as much as possible. Austere has summed up my feelings on the system fairly well. It's deeply flawed, and while not technically incapable of functioning, it does very little well without heavy modification.

I overstated in mentioning D20 Modern, but for a specific point: both games have released fairly massive weapons compendiums and both are substantially more mainstream than Shadowrun. Beyond that, I don't really like Modern. Spycraft, on the other hand, while not a game I honestly think I'd like to play, is a game I respect and appreciate. It manages a cohesion in its design that I find admirable and refreshing, especially in light of Shadowrun, which looks like the patchwork ramblings of a streetcorner psychotic in comparison.

The thing about SpyCraft its rather sizable Modern Arms Guide is that the game is still casual, still accessible, and still mainstream, and yet the guide provides a wealth of detail (which, for what it is, manages to be both quite attractive and pretty accurate, most of the time). It doesn't overwhelm or confuse anyone— which, ironically, is exactly what Shadowrun manages to do to just about everyone. It explicitly beats the shit out of the Abstraction-Is-The-One-True-Word crowd in proving that detail is immersive, useful, and if done right, not at all inaccessible.

If you have to divorce yourself from believing the reality created by the game to enjoy it, the game has fucked up pretty goddamn badly.

Just so long as this doesn't create any silliness with barrel length being ignored, I'm all for it, as I'm sure you could notice.

Same for changing weapons back to something reasonable and believable.

Hardly divorcing myself from reality of SR. There are plenty of game mechanics, stories and concepts that make it fun. Fact is I simply don't require ever aspect of a game to be as life-like and realistic as possible for me to play it. Yes the SR universe isn't perfect, but what game is?

My group stopped playing D&D in search of something that had more to offer. We found something else, played it, moved on again. SR (as a whole) has alot more to offer my group than many other games we've played, if it didn't we'd move on instead of pissing an moaning about "How borken it is". SR has managed to hang around for atleast 3 editions and there is obviously enough interest for FanPro to make a 4th edition. Despite what we'd like to think, they aren't just making the 4th edition to make us feel better about the rules. Hell we get to keep all the soucebook.

I am not sure how long you've played SR but I can see your distress with SR is deep-rooted, so I'll ask the question again: Why play SR then if it doesn't meet your needs?