Full Version: Street Magic
| QUOTE (hahnsoo) |
| I think the main complaint is that all the rules and the fluff are widely distributed across a boatload of sourcebooks, and that folks would rather have as much of the rules as possible condensed into a couple of books, and the fluff moved to other books. Ideally, one would only have to have SR3 for the rules and another setting book for the city the runners are going to be running in. |
Well honestly I'd kinda like to see something like this too. Keep all the crunch-rules for magic in one book; put the flavor in a second book. Rather like the Matrix/Target:Matrix split; that was a perfect way to split things up IMO. Both books complimented each other well, but you could do perfectly well without one if you were so inclined to make up everything in the other by yourself.
In a similar vein I'd like to see all the advanced crunch for, say, magic, in one book, with all the details of implimentation--arguments between schools, the area of wild magic over LA, the telesma wars in the SF bay area, academic arguments over Renewed Hermeticism versus UMT, etc--in a different book.
Yeah, I was a big fan of the Awakenings style expansion of magic - how to run it, what it looks like, what it feels like, a few new curiosities to add flavour and broaden options, but not the grimoire style sudden massive expansion in the capabilities of the awakened.
I'll second the request for a Target:Magic book. A book to cover what all the traditions are about, important magical groups, the powerplayers on the scene, magical research, magic and the law, magic and crime and magic around the world.
What would be neat is if they planned how to distribute content troughout the various books. Rather than first writing the basic magic rules, then the advanced rules and then added alot of new stuff in a T:M book, they should write it all at once. They have all the elements from SR3, organizing them shouldn't be much of a problem. A bit more consistency and flexibility would also be welcome (plug).
What would be neat is if they planned how to distribute content troughout the various books. Rather than first writing the basic magic rules, then the advanced rules and then added alot of new stuff in a T:M book, they should write it all at once. They have all the elements from SR3, organizing them shouldn't be much of a problem. A bit more consistency and flexibility would also be welcome (plug).
| QUOTE (The Eyes) |
| academic arguments over Renewed Hermeticism versus UMT |
I'm thinking (after the fierce discourse in this thread) that maybe UMT and Renewed should have arrived at a stage of "Post-Hermetic theory" by 2070.
| QUOTE (Demonseed Elite) |
| That's why I really liked Synner's stuff on the Old World hermetic traditions in SOTA64. |
cough cough...
Something catch in your throat, old chap?
| QUOTE (audun @ May 4 2005, 01:18 PM) | ||
cough cough... |
Audun was responsible for a lot of the Hermetic stuff in SOTA64 (Renewed Herm., Pythagorians, et al). There's was some stuff I was better acquainted with(Concordance, UMT) and there was stuff we co-wrote, but credit's due where credit's due. Unfortunately not all Audun's ideas went through because of implications of established canon, his ideas for some of the magic required a different paradigm from the one laid out in SR3/MitS.
Oops, my bad. Sorry about that, audun! Anyway, I'm a big fan of that stuff, covering significant movements in magic, and I think it should equally shape the way shamanism is presented. Because there are similar movements in shamanism, not only in European shamanism, but also in Native American religion. Just tossing out a bunch of stat box totems all with equal face-time is not the right way to do it.
Since it may have sounded like I was being pretty negative in the thread that audun linked to, I'd like to mention that I liked the Old World Magic chapter also. It was pretty good flavor. The only issue I had with it was "scientific" designation for Renewed Hermetics.
I'm not sure what to do about rules vs. setting, though. There're a lot of rules to add, so you need most of a book devoted to that for each major topic ('ware, magic, hacking, and gear). But if you have a separate fluff book for each topic also, you end up with an awful lot of books. So I'd suggest a rules book on the topics for rules, and then perhaps a single setting-heavy book like NAGRL that covers all the topics; setting can then be updated heavily while new rules are sparse in later releases.
An online summary of new rules by type would be really handy too, so one didn't have to look through a half dozen books when you can't remember where a spell was introduced.
(Incidentally, I think the term "fluff" overly trivializes the importance of developing a believable alternate reality. Good "fluff" makes the world come alive. Dead, boring worlds are no fun to play in regardless of the rules.)
I'm not sure what to do about rules vs. setting, though. There're a lot of rules to add, so you need most of a book devoted to that for each major topic ('ware, magic, hacking, and gear). But if you have a separate fluff book for each topic also, you end up with an awful lot of books. So I'd suggest a rules book on the topics for rules, and then perhaps a single setting-heavy book like NAGRL that covers all the topics; setting can then be updated heavily while new rules are sparse in later releases.
An online summary of new rules by type would be really handy too, so one didn't have to look through a half dozen books when you can't remember where a spell was introduced.
(Incidentally, I think the term "fluff" overly trivializes the importance of developing a believable alternate reality. Good "fluff" makes the world come alive. Dead, boring worlds are no fun to play in regardless of the rules.)
| QUOTE (Ellery) |
| (Incidentally, I think the term "fluff" overly trivializes the importance of developing a believable alternate reality. Good "fluff" makes the world come alive. Dead, boring worlds are no fun to play in regardless of the rules.) |
Without "fluff" we are just sitting in our parent's basement rolling dice.
As far as I can tell, the only reason FanPro has given current fans to want this change is that the rules will be streamlined. So the announcement of advanced rules released in follow-up books doesn't sit very well with me.
Sure, I would obviously expect business decisions, and even multiple books. But tell me you're streamlining a game I like (by completely overhauling it) and then go and tell me it'll likely take as many sourcebooks as the original (I tend to agree with the opinion that they seem to be following SR3 format: MitS, CC, Rigger, etc) and I have to wonder, what did you accomplish...besides turning a buck? I don't buy things simply so that someone can make money.
I realize it is quite likely to simplify the game in practice, "at the table," as it were. But I think this kind of announcement does justify scepticism. That, and it makes it pretty imperative that FanPro actually DOES streamline the game. Then again, it's questionable whether that would be beneficial, IMO.
So we'll see what they can pull off. But that did reinforce my scepticism.
Sure, I would obviously expect business decisions, and even multiple books. But tell me you're streamlining a game I like (by completely overhauling it) and then go and tell me it'll likely take as many sourcebooks as the original (I tend to agree with the opinion that they seem to be following SR3 format: MitS, CC, Rigger, etc) and I have to wonder, what did you accomplish...besides turning a buck? I don't buy things simply so that someone can make money.
I realize it is quite likely to simplify the game in practice, "at the table," as it were. But I think this kind of announcement does justify scepticism. That, and it makes it pretty imperative that FanPro actually DOES streamline the game. Then again, it's questionable whether that would be beneficial, IMO.
So we'll see what they can pull off. But that did reinforce my scepticism.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.