There's been a lot of talk upthread about eliminating magic loss for deadly wounds. I'm certainly in favor. Does anyone like those rules?

I do, but I'm not deeply committed to keeping them. Why eliminate?

~J

#1: As Kyoto Kid said, they fall disproportionately on adepts, who are the least able to mitigate the magic loss.

#2: It's simultaneously severe and random. Losing a point of magic is huge (though, again, huger for adepts), and its loss isn't something you can control, really. I mean, you can avoid taking D wounds, but you're avoiding that anyway. D wounds are never fun, and having taken one you're at the mercy of fate. Which brings us to...

#3: It's a kick in the teeth. You just took a deadly wound, so something already went badly wrong and your life sucks. This is especially true if you can't heal right away. To have that failure permanently memorialized with a point of magic loss is beyond harsh, it's mean.

PS: WTF? When I first replied, the forum listed Lindt as the most recent responder. After I previewed, Kagetenshi was listed as the author of the last post. I reiterate - WTF?

...it basically makes no real sense other than a half-baked way of imposing an extra limitation on the awakened. Basically there are enough other factors that can adversely affect MA and magical activity including:

Permanent Loss
...Essence/Body Index loss due to Implantation (voluntary or involuntary)
...Essence loss due to grievous wounds/dismemberment
...Essence Drain Critter Power

Temporary Loss/Reduction
...Mana voids
...Background Counts

The key here is the relationship of Essence and MA. If Essence is unaffected, MA should not be permanently lost.

Which leads to the impossibility of a single-grade Initiate ever burning out (or someone whose Magic has exceeded their Essence, if using a system where starting Magic may not be 6. Also, I'm ignoring cyberzombification because I think it's exceptional enough to ignore). There are principles that can be used, but that one is a non-starter for me.

~J

Dear God. I had no idea that rule existed; your comments make much more sense now. No, I don't use that. In fact, I have an SR3 core PDF; I'm going to go find that rule, cut it out of my hardcopy book, and burn it. I'm not at all kidding, and I know the pages are two-sided, but I am seriously that unhappy.

Ok, back. I couldn't find it, but I can never find anything in the paper books anyway. But for reals, no fooling, every time you take deadly injury, if your essence is < 1 you have a 1 in 6 chance to just die? That's even worse than permanent attribute loss, which is how I'd thought that worked. What a stupid, meaningless death that would be.

And yeah, ok, Initiation makes Magic = Essence a nonstarter, I agree. Initiates should be able to burn out.

Well, you get a Body roll against TN 4 to prevent losing any attributes, but you have an n in 6 chance of autodying if you fail that test where n is the number of attributes other than Charisma (oddly enough, but including Reaction) that you have a natural 1 in.

Worse yet, it reduces your RML by one, which in turn reduces your attribute max by one or two. Yeah, I hadn't thought about it, but it deserves a place on the chopping block. Or maybe we should tie wild horses to its limbs and send them running to the corners of the earth.

Anyway, in light of the fact that geasa for magic loss are deader than the dodo, I guess I'll give my stamp of approval to removing the magic loss for D wounds rules.

Edit: I should clarify: I'm eliminating the rules for losing attributes from Deadly damage. The rules for permanent damage as in having to buy some replacement organs don't offend me nearly so much, and I'm inclined to keep them, though the doubled healing time for zero successes may be excessive (especially in the SotSW style of game, where even the base times are nigh-eternal).

~J

Wait, wait. You lose a point from a random attribute, where "attribute" is defined to include both Essence and Reaction but not Charisma? WTF? WTFFFFFF? No mortal internet can contain my hatred for this. In fairness, though, if anyone else likes this rule, or Magic loss for that matter, they should probably say something. I am, after all, hating on this rule without having ever used it.

PS: Where is it? I'd still like to destroy it physically. And maybe read it.

On Preview: Yeah, organ loss is fine with me too. It sucks, but at least you can fix it. Doubled healing time would probably also be ok in a game with a normal amount of downtime and access to real medical care; the heart of bug city is not a great test bed for that sort of thing. People running online games, what's your experience?

I'm not just considering the heart of Bug City—think about your game before Bug City went down, or my game. We've been playing three years real-time, and your game has advanced about two months (so someone with a Deadly wound healing at the doubled base time would have just healed down to Serious) while mine has advanced about a month.

Edit: also, it turns out that Alex only needs ten days of rest. I figure that should be vastly easier to come by than fourteen, though it still may be three more years real-time before I lose those wound mods

As for the section, as I've been saying in my unclear fashion, it turns out that Essence is not in fact at stake. It's on pages 127 and 128. Apparently the writers couldn't conceive of physical trauma reducing your force of personality, which suggests that they did no research whatsoever. C'est la vie.

~J

The problem with increasing the severity of those rules is that, for the most part, they only punish player characters. Any given PC will have more attacks aimed at him throughout the course of a campaign than any given NPC. Most NPCs that take a Deadly wound, well, die. Those that don't are likely as good as dead, because the odds are they're out of the game anyways.

Those most likely to suffer from the permanent injury rules are player characters -- if that's what you're after, great. But it's something to keep in mind.

I never minded that sort of crippling stuff in CP:2020, but in Shadowrun it's a little more serious. In Cyberpunk, shit. Blew out your knee? Just go buy a NEW leg, y'know? The prices were lower, no one loses magic for it, Essence/Humanity work differently enough (hell, a basic new cyberleg is normally going to be 1/6th of the cyberware a given character can ever have!)... that it just doesn't work out in Shadowrun that way.

With Awakened characters, especially, it is often a character-ending set of die rolls. Their chances of losing Magic outright can really screw a character over, and any replacement limbs (assuming they can afford one) will result in more mojo loss, y'know?

I guess it just comes down to how lethal you want your game to be (with "lethal" extending to "including just making someone worthless as a Shadowrunner," not just killing them outright).

@Kyote Kid + Response to Magic Loss conversation at the end.

The rule is on page 128. It does *NOT* include essence, kage misquoted. The only way you can lose essence due to deadly damage is if some bit of ware is implanted (which is conceivable).

I do like the current rules. Granted, I don't recollect ever having to use them, so I don't think my opinion is worth very much. I agree with WR, but from the other side of the field. I generally think I'm too easy with my PCs. They really have to earn their deadly wounds. As a consequence, when they do get to that point, I think it has to have some bite. Without attribute loss, assuming the person doesn't go into overdamage (which is generally pretty rare in my games. If the guy is down, he's down.) Sure healing is expensive, but it isn't a real stick.

Oh, before I forget, does dropping attribute (and magic) loss from deadly damage include the magic loss from not accepting the +2 modifier 'target is awakened' penalty on first aid checks? I would argue that these numbers most certainly should be kept.

Ooh. Hm. I would not be opposed to retaining the option to ignore the special treatment for Awakened in exchange for risking Magic loss. It's an even bigger decision now that they aren't just making a check anyway.

Does anyone have an opinion on the temporary magic loss from non-cloned transplants?

~J

...@Sphynx, Thank you for the clarifications.

I looked over it a bit more at home and really really do like it. I'm not going to Retro the awakened characters already in my campaign, but in the future I will be using the system for new characters.

@Critias, yes you are correct, part of it is style, but part is also from experience, I have seen that KK's unarmed attacks usually "bounced" a lot more frequently than her blade attacks (unless she was beating up on lightly or unarmoured norms). Even with 1 level of Strength boost the Base power TN would be 7 which equates to a 6, which in the example I gave still leaves the target rolling 2s to stage down. Against her WF the TN is 5 and with her Fineblades (dikote) its 4. So yes, in her case edged weapons are better. Another thing when an opponent is swinging a blade at you, you better have something better than your bare hands to block it (at least that is the way my GM played it).

To qualify things her WF is indeed a reach weapon. She usually carried her Fineblades on most missions where concealment was necessary and she was not going up against Spirits or other nasty awakened threats.

[edit]
OK, more in tune with the topic at hand. Any chance we may see a power similar to the Critical Strike power? Each level would add +1 to the Power rating of unarmed attacks only. I would make it at least .5PP per +1 rating up to a maximum of +3.
[/edit]

Now the train can be put back on the track.

Bump, don't want this thread to die out, as I'm dying to hear more about decisions made and decisions needing made. How are we doing on it all? Were there any thoughts on expanding the Psionics in the game? I know I spent months making sure the Psionics were perfectly balanced, but I also know some people feel psionics don't belong in SR. Is there a page where the decisions that have been made are posted for perusal? Anything actually set in stone yet?

No need to bump it—it's survived lulls much longer than this. It helps that two active games are feeding it. Part of the issue right now is that my parents came to visit for the 4th, and the other part is that I'm trying to set up Trac so some procedural issues might get easier.

Edit: decided issues are on the first page of any given thread, though they are not guaranteed to be up-to-date.

~J

I'd like to be alot more active on this project, if you don't mind (it's the only reason I came back to the forum really). I'd be glad to 'donate' my web server which includes an FTP server to the cause. I'd be glad to write pages with things that are decided/etc, or if you know how to html, give you and your partner access via FTP to my web server so you can do it yourself.

Just to keep it all in a readable, don't have to search a bunch of threads place. Not as a co-partner or anything, just as a friend with the services you can use. Give the id/password to whoever you want.

Much appreciated but I've already got webspace (mostly disused) and a Subversion repository, I just need to get Trac installed for project management and slap together some templates (still deciding between LaTeX and ConTeXt) for rulebook sections.

That said, I'm glad to have you on-board with regard to the project. Comments on revised chargen rules for Mages coming Real Soon Nowâ„¢.

~J

Coolness. Looking forward to the page opening up.

I have no problem with psionics being added to SR, but it should be in the MitS section, like where it is currently, not part of the main rules. As such, I also would consider it very much a 'back burner' issue unless we can settle it right away.

SR3R will not have partial or optional rulesets. That said, it's pretty low on my priority list (I always did like that SR had the guts to up and label an entire view of magic wrong, though it annoyed me that they didn't do it with everything but Hermeticism and Shamanism).

~J

Ressurecting.

Much appreciated!

~J

So I’m about halfway through a reread (and wanted to apologize to Eyeless for being kind of a dick in March 2007, not sure what was going on but thanks for taking it in stride), but in classic run-it-up-the-flagpole-and-see-if-anyone-salutes fashion I wanted to hoist one of EB’s ideas back into visibility:

I was also tickled by the idea of letting Mundanes cover other people at Touch range, allowing them to join hands and think happy thoughts to ward off the evil mage… but the Sorcery restriction puts the kibosh on that. Anyway, I’m not sure if it’s desirable or even what the consequences would be in the system we were working towards, but I figure it deserved a place on these pages.

~J

I'd be happy to let mundanes have some spell pool to reflect the magical equivalent of a barrier rating, as it were.

However, I wouldn't let them intentionally manipulate it so as to protect others. Not a mage? You don't get magical agency. At best, you get to resist magical influences instinctively.

The 'barrier rating' concept ties in with the dice modifier for healing spells on people with Essence loss. I've always felt that that particular modifier should apply to all direct magic spells.

Yeah, I suppose “power of friendship” is a bit of a stretch for Shadowrun when you get down to it.

I seem to remember the “low Essence should be protective” thing being bandied about once upon a time, I’ll have to see if I can unearth the discussions.

(Also, as a project note, one of these days I hope to restore access to the SR3R fora and maybe start making summary notes on what happened there to post here. Don’t hold your breath, though, it’ll be a while.)

~J

Since we no longer have to keep S3CKS at arms-length from SR3R, I went ahead and added it to the project navigation sections (and gave it navigation itself).

~J

So rereading and rethinking, I’ve come back around to the idea that I kind of like magic loss for Deadly Wounds… as a temporary drawback. I don’t know how wedded I am to the idea, since the main thing I like about it is that it keeps the option to ignore or not the Target is Awakened penalty, nor do I know what would be appropriate for rules to regain the Magic—I think giving back a lost point on Initiation is fair, but there should probably be other ways as well—time plus karma spent doing magical things, maybe?

I’ll have to mull it over.

~J

One thing that recently came up is the at times awkward rules around AoE spell radii and the withholding rules for shrinking it—I like the idea of control being taxing, but Harlequin needing to withhold more than 100 dice from his Sorcery test to cast something with a single-digit radius seems… excessive (Harlequin is a “high double digit” initiate, let’s be generous and say 70 Magic (64 Initiations), a 9m radius requires withholding 61*2=122 dice).

Any thoughts on this? As noted I’d like to preserve the basic idea of difficult control, maybe a way to apply TN mods in place of some withheld dice? (We’ve bandied about other dice-for-TN-mods-or-vice-versa ideas before.) Worst comes to worst there’s always “restricted range” spell variants analogous to extended range variants… not sure how to mechanically implement them, I don’t think I’d want to reduce Drain but I’m not sure increasing Drain is necessary either…

Anyway, something I’m mulling over, let me know if anyone has thoughts.

~J

These are mostly just pain points in the existing ruleset. If SR3R can address many of these, that would be fantastic. I haven't read the sr3r.net forum contents to understand what discussions have led to the decisions made so far.


Mechanics:

Many SR3 mechanics specify that a TN is "reduced by half, round down" (for example Ultrasound Vision). This needs clarification because it is needlessly ambiguous:

• "reduced by (half, round down)": 5 - (half of 5, round down) = 5 - 2 = 3
• "reduced by half. Then round down": 5 - (half of 5) = 2.5; then round down = 2

"reduced TO half, round UP" would be a much clearer way of arriving at the same result as the official calculation.

For alphaware, "reduce the Essence Cost of the cyberware by 20 percent (round up)" to what? (SR3.297)

Defaulting to Attribute causes TN +4. Open Tests have no TN. Clarify that Defaulting to Attribute on an Open Test reduces the value of all rolled dice by 4.

Until every piece of armour is tabulated against hit locations, remove any references to hit locations (mm.35) or Called Shots to hit them (SR3.114, cc.85).

Flechette ammunition (SR3.116) refers to frangible ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=2661 ).

Wards can be placed on vehicles (SR3.174). Vehicles can enter other vehicles. Wards can collide. What happens? ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35879 http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...765#entry544765 ) What if a Lodge is set up inside a van and that van then drives down the freeway (heedless to any City spirits in the way) or into a warded warehouse / ferry ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...38#entry1002681 )? Why not Ward bullets? ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t&p=1046516 ).

I would like to propose merging the Warding Ritual into Ritual Sorcery. The "Slow Death" spell (T:AL) provides precedent for self-sustaining semi-permanent spells (halfway between Sustained and Permanent) like traditional Wards are. The Quickening metamagic can be used to pay Karma to make the Ward enduring, just like traditional Wards.

Ways of mitigating Fatigue penalties are provided by:

• Sleep Regulator bioware (MM.074); 3h sleep / day; 48h of wakefulness before TNs apply; 0.3 Bio index
• Glucagon bioware (SotA64.28); double times when dealing with fatigue; 0.3 Bio index
• Sustenance adept power (SotA63.68); 3h sleep and 1 meal/day; 0.25 PP
• Long Haul (M&M.120); 4 days of wakefulness before TNs apply; then 8d6 hours sleep or +6 TNs; 500¥

and CC.79 makes reference to sleep deprivation after 12 hours of activity. At the polar caps, characters get "appropriate target number modifiers for lack of sleep and exhaustion." (TWL.122) However, Fatigue rules do not exist (well, there are fatigue rules on SRC.47 that cover how long you can sprint before getting winded, but that isn't really the same thing). The closest the rules come to this is on MitS.111 where a magician spends days awake in an extended Summoning ritual. Fatigue here is applied by making a daily Willpower test against the TN of the task + the cumulative number of days, dealing 1 Light Stun each failure; this damage does not begin to heal until the character gets proper rest. For mitigating fatigue TNs to be meaningful, there must be some fatigue TNs in the first place. Perhaps SR3R can add some.


Attributes:

DNQ (Critters.27) have animal level intellect which is "3/3" and Animals (Critters.19) are at a similar value. 3 is average Human Intelligence (SR3.41). This seems wonky.

"Magic is the only Attribute that can have a value of 0" (SR3.56). "Those with no Magic Rating have no magical capabilities". "A character who cannot use magic has no Magic Rating." (SR3.41) "Those with no magical ability (a Magic Attribute of 0) are known as mundanes by the magical." (SR3.42) Despite this, Nerve Strike (MitS.150), Decrease Attribute (SR3.193), drugs (M&M.119), and the Pain Editor (M&M.73) take an Attribute to zero. "Care must be taken to distinguish between natural, unmodified Attribute Ratings and those augmented by cyberware and magic." (SR3.41) "Any changes to these Attributes from spells or cyberware will result in ratings known as augmented Attributes. Augmented Attribute Ratings are noted in parentheses after the natural Attribute Rating." (SR3.56) "Because bioware is created to match the user's physiology, any Attribute bonuses conferred by bioware are treated as natural and unaugmented. In other words, they count as changes to the character's base Attributes." (M&M.77) "Note that the Attribute increases a physical adept receives [...] are treated as natural, not augmented, ratings." (SR3.41) So what's the difference between having a Natural, Unaugmented Attribute at zero versus having an Augmented Attribute at zero? SRC.34 versus SR3.193 are "insane, mindless beast" versus "stands about mindlessly". Fix this.


Pools:

"Some pools" (SR3.43) limit the number of dice to the Skill rating. Those Pools which do, explicitly state that they do (Combat Pool, Astral Combat Pool, Control Pool, Hacking Pool). Those Pools which do not, do not (Task Pool, IVIS Pool, Astral Pool, Adaptation Pool, Ritual). For example, an Intelligence 1 Grade 5 Initiate would roll 6 dice for Astral Perception. A Ritual Leader who has donated their entire Sorcery Skill to the Ritual Pool orchestrates casting of a spell with perhaps 20 Pool dice and 0 Skill. Tabulate which Pools "some Pools" refers to as a quick lookup point of reference.

Elemental Manipulations have higher Drain codes than Combat spells. This is offset by the fact that Elemental Manipulations are cast using Ranged Combat rules (SR3.182, 183, 196) using COMBAT POOL and then their Drain is staged with Willpower and SPELL POOL as normal. "A player can only use Combat Pool dice to augment or resist magic-related tests in the case of elemental manipulation spells." (SR3.44) "Unlike combat spells, these spells are treated like normal ranged attacks (SR3.109) using Sorcery as the Ranged Combat Skill." (SR3.196, SR3.183) "The attacker makes his or her Success Test using the appropriate Combat Skill, modified by dice from the character's Combat Pool." (SR3.109) "Spell Pool dice may be added as normal." (SR3.183) Elemental Manipulation attacks are therefore able to benefit from Enhance Aim (MitS.141). Using Combat pool for casting spells seems to be obscure / unfamiliar to a number of experienced players / GMs, so I think p44's sentence "Combat Pool dice TO AUGMENT or resist magic-related tests" needs to be emphasised somehow, or an example scenario be provided which uses this. Can a magician make a Called Shot with an Elemental Manipulation? Even if, for example, "Magicians cannot use magic to target individual portions of a vehicle." (SR3.150)?


Powers:

Please rename either Manifest or Materialise. Nubs keep thinking that if the first two letters are the same, the Power must be the same, and it's arduous clarifying the difference. Is psychic manifestation *selective* such that a Watcher can Manifest at the location of an Invisible opponent and keep pace with it (not through Wards, of course) such that the summoner's team can see the Watcher but the opponents *cannot*?

Materialisation is a Physical Power (SR3.264). Physical Powers are only available to beings who are already present on the Physical plane (SR3.262). Please change Materialisation to be a Mana Power so that it becomes possible to use this Power.

Concealment hinders what tests? Primary five senses (Touch, etc.)? Sensor Tests? Ultrasonic echolocation? Radar? Sonar? Astral Perception? Clairvoyance, etc.? How do Concealment + Invisibility spell + Stealth spell + Stealth skill + Ruthenium used simultaneously interact?

Elemental Strike adds Secondary Elemental Effects to an adept's strikes. These spells are Physical and cannot be Mana based. Adepts can Astrally Project (through Limited Astral Projection Power, Alchera, Altyerre (TAL.109), being a Shapeshifter adept forced through a barrier, etc. etc.) and "Adept powers function normally while the adept is projecting." (SotA64.63) What effect does Fire, Blast, Lightning, et al have on purely astral forms?


Spirits + Conjuring:

MitS does not specify an Ally Spirit's attack damage code although the Ally tracking sheet (MitS.172) has a space to record this value.

Ally creation specifies costs for Active skills and Knowledge skills. "Language Skills are neither Active nor Knowledge Skills, but a little bit of both." (SR3.91). How does an Ally spirit (for that matter, how does ANY spirit) communicate with metahumanity, and is this means as creepily as unnatural as Dragonspeech telepathy (SR3.268, DotSW.178)?

Aspected Conjurors "cannot use Sorcery" (SR3.160) however "an ally has the Sorcery Skill at a rating equal to its creator's" (MitS.109). No exception is made for allies of Aspected Conjurors: indeed, "Free allies always have this power." (MitS.118). "Even characters who cannot cast spells (like adepts)" (SR3.174) can learn Sorcery for the purpose of Astral Combat and Aspected Conjurors can certainly engage in Astral Combat. Make it explicit that Aspected Conjurors can learn Sorcery but not use it except for Astral Combat and to pass on to Ally spirits.

Aspected Conjurors get 35 Spell Points but cannot learn spells. They should be encouraged to spend these Spell Points on Initiation (SRC.15) in a way that's a lot more visible than that.

A decker decking or a rigger rigging is hindered from using their physical body's senses due to the RAS Override. But how about using the Sense Link Power of their Ally Spirit? Astral Projection is obviously hazardous, but what about Astral Perception -- especially for permanently Dual Natured deckers/riggers?

Nerf Watcher Attack Pack (MitS.100):

• Watchers only get a Mental / Stun track
• Watchers only get a number of Boxes on it equal to their Force before they disperse

Nerf Friends in Mêlée (SR3.122):

• official: grant TN+1-4 to the side with more allies and TN-1-4 to the side with fewer allies
• proposal: decide which contestants participate as an Aggregate / Gestalt / Swarm against an opponent within Reach of every participant. An Aggregate acts with the lowest Initiative of its members. An Aggregate has a Reaction equal to the number of its members. An Aggregate uses its Reaction for attacks. Damage Power, Level and Reach are each (individually) the minimum (respectively) of the Aggregate's participants. An Aggregate can incorporate or shed (any number of) members as a Complex Action. Aggregates cannot Dodge or use Pools - they use their Reaction to Stage down incoming damage and every participant receives the staged Wound. Combatants not in mêlée with the Aggregate interact with its participants normally without regard to aggregation.

This way, a vertical grid of a hundred Devil Rats is an Aggregate that rolls once, 100 dice (don't be the slowest runner!) but at least when it comes to Astral FiM, the magician picks between spending 20 minutes rolling each pathetic pipsqueak (Watchers will get smashed with retaliation) or just rolling once, but effectively.

When a guard dog, or a Dragon, or an Elemental use Reaction for their attacks, is this Defaulting to Attribute with a +4 TN? "Most materialised spirits are also capable of physically attacking (using their Reaction)." "Reaction: used for physical attacks by the being." (SR3.265). "All the rules for Combat Pool for characters apply to dragons and spirits as well" (SR3.266). "Critters can use a number of Combat Pool dice equal to their Reaction for attacks." (Critters.5). The availability of Pool dice while making tests with raw Reaction suggests Critter combat is not considered to be Defaulting to Attribute (SR3.85) so should no Defaulting Penalty be imposed?

Is Astral Perception a magical activity compatible with Exclusive Actions? For example, Astrally Perceiving to target an Exclusive spell? Astral Pool (MitS.58) can help with spellcasting Drain; how about summoning Drain (since Conjuring is Exclusive: SR3.162, 189) unless the conjurer is permanently Dual Natured? The "Condition Geas" (MitS.32) requiring Astral Perception for all magical activity might prohibit all Conjuring if Astral Perception is considered a magical activity. Centring (MitS.73) requires Astral Perception and explicitly explains that it does not interfere with Exclusive actions such as casting Exclusive spells or Conjuration; does this set a precedent for Astral Perception or suggest that Astral Perception is usually incompatible with Exclusive actions?

Elementals can sustain spells of any Force for (elemental's Force) days (SR3.187); is this desirable? Should the spell's Force factor into the service? Perhaps they should sustain spells for (elemental Force x2 - spell Force) days to address F1 elementals sustaining F8 spells.

The Invoking metamagic (MitS.75) poses some confusion when it comes to shamans specifically due to Domains:

• nature spirits (including spirits of the elements) "can cross domain lines", allowing them to extend their influence by moving into non-contiguous regions of their domain (for example, a Hearth spirit can Search a block of flats, then cross the street (City domain) and Search the houses on the other side; a Forest spirit could Conceal itself and pursue a target out of the woods (Wind domain), across a stream (River domain) and back into the woods (Forest domain), re-engaging its Concealment power once back in its own domain)
• it is therefore useful to summon one and bring it along in astral form as a bodyguard during astral projection (SR3.189) where you are very likely to transit through multiple Domains on your journey

However despite all the perks Invoking a great form brings, there are many things it does not change, and they are important:

• the spirit cannot use any Power (including Materialisation) on targets (including itself) outside its domain (SR3.184, SR3.262)
• if the shaman leaves the spirit's domain (physically or psychically), the spirit's services expire (SR3.184)
• if the shaman leaves the spirit's domain (physically or psychically) while it is on stand-by in the metaplanes, it cannot be called back (SR3.186)
• the spirit can be summoned only within its domain (SR3.184, SR3.267)
• the spirit can be called back from stand-by on the metaplanes only within its domain (MitS.98)
• nature spirits stop materialising and depart to the metaplanes at dawn or dusk (SR3.186, SR3.264, MitS.16) (which could be months away if you're in a fast-moving vehicle (suborbital, satellite) or at the Earth's poles or using Astral Projection along lines of latitude near the poles) (Wilderness / Urban shamans (MitS.16) extend this duration by one day or night cycle)

If SR3R elects to bolster shamanic Invoking to lift some of these restrictions, shamans will begin encroaching on what makes hermetics worth playing, without any of the overheads. Either way, clarifying which limitations are unaffected by Invoking would help.

A shaman's Mentor / Totem advantage is applied to both the summoning (SR3.186) and Drain (SR3.187) tests. Could this be because "Dice from the Spell Pool cannot be used to augment Conjuring or any other magic-related tests." (SR3.44)?


Spells + Sorcery:

A shaman's Mentor / Totem advantage is applied to Sorcery (SR3.163) but not specifically spellcasting nor drain (SR3.183). Yet it is applied to both Ritual sorcery casting (MitS.36, 37) and Drain (MitS.38). Clarify.

What is the upper limit on Increase Reflexes? Can you spell-design Increase Reflexes +50 with a Drain Code of 97 Deadly Stun, cast it with a Trauma Damper, sleep off 9 boxes, and have arbitrarily high Initiative?

Petrify (SR3.198) doesn't transform cyberware (paid for with Essence) which violates fundamental principles. Change it to do so. "Because cyberware is paid for with Essence, it is considered an integral part of the body's organic system." (M&M.46) "Mana spells work against cybermodified living beings because the cyberware was paid for with Essence and so is considered to be integral to the being's organic system." (MitS.49)

Shapechange / Transform (MitS.148) incorporates cyberware (paid for with Essence) into the enchanted form. But what about cyberware that isn't paid for with Essence? Cranial bombs and Tooth compartments, for example?

It should be explicitly clarified that Permanent spells (SR3.178) take effect immediately in exactly the same way as Sustained spells do; and that if inadequately Sustained, also go away in exactly the same way as Sustained spells do. But that if adequately Sustained, they become established and require no further efforts. This is how Stabilise works sooner than its target dies (SR3.194) although it could be modified to be Instant like Awaken is (MitS.141). Likewise Antidote (SR3.193) must be cast before a toxin deals damage which tends to mean a window of opportunity only 1 Combat Turn long (eg mm.121, 122). Treat can be cast mid-combat to plug leaks in a chummer, but if the caster can't Sustain it the full duration, all that damage comes back in a rush ("its effects disappear"). If the caster repeatedly closes his chummer's wounds and opens them again deliberately retrying for a better result without using Karma Pool, they should experience an elevating TN for retries.

Ignite potentially takes far longer to become Permanent than its effects last for http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=showtopic=42466 Is it even meaningful for such a spell to be Permanent? What happens to Ignite, Influence, and similar spells when they are not Sustained long enough to become Permanent?

There is no minimum Karma cost to learn a spell: cost is Force reduced by Astral Quests (MitS.94) and Limitations (SR3.60, SR3.180). Invent a sensible, artificial cap to the number of "free" spells obtainable within character generation (see http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=1915 ).

Make an official call regarding Detection spells such as Clairvoyance. Does it create (a sensor at a point within LoS) which can sense (everything within FxMm of it) or does it create (a sensor at a point within FxMm) which can sense (everything within LoS of that point)? Consider MitS.51. Can Sense Link (MitS.109) provide LoS for the purposes of *moving* the Area of Effect (not casting in the first place)? Does the Force of Clairvoyance need to overcome Object Resistance (SR3.182) such that a F2 spell would provide a view of a naked person in a W shape; a F3 spell would provide a view of a person in cotton clothing in that shape; and a F4 spell would provide a view of a person in cotton clothing, wearing a wrist phone, sitting on a motorised plasteel massage chair?

The block for Sensor Test Modifiers Concealed by Spell says: "Certain physical illusion spells, such as Improved Invisibility or Trid Phantasm, require a Resistance Test to pierce the illusion." (SR3.136, SR3.195) But that clashes with fundamentals such as: "Non-living, non-magical targets may not make a Resistance Test." (SR3.183) "Inanimate objects (including vehicles) do not make Spell Resistance Tests." (MitS.50) "If a rigger is within view, then a spell can affect him directly and a mana illusion spell is effective. A rigger using a vehicle or drone's sensors cannot be targeted by a mana illusion spell because the sensors are separate and distinct from the rigger. A spell must be physical to affect the sensors directly." (MitS.49)

Indirect illusion (SR3.195) / Manipulation (MitS.51) spells create an area of effect. This area can be moved an infinite distance (to anywhere within LoS) with every Complex Action (MitS.51). If the sorcerer desires the area to move slowly, repainting it once or twice every three seconds is probably adequate -- but if the area is positioned within a moving vehicle or on the surface of a spinning planet orbiting a star revolving around the centre of the galaxy, the area is quickly going to be left behind and repainting it once or twice a second is going to be really obvious / pointless. A similar argument applies to defensive area-of-effect spells such as barrier spells ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=3515 ) - do the recipients of the protection run the risk of smacking into the barrier if they ever begin moving faster than the sorcerer can repaint the updated location? Have the Sorcery/Spellcasting action include a declaration of a reference point (such as "my hat", "the motorcycle's chassis", "the surface of the Earth", etc.) and the illusory area will automatically remain at a consistent position relative to the location and orientation of the reference. A Complex Action can still offset the area (eg to prevent it passing through a solid object) but it continues to be tied to the position of the designated reference point while sustained.

Is the allocation of Spell Defence (SR3.183) applicable only to voluntary targets or can it be used offensively (obstruct healing and buffs (illusions, detections, telekinetics))?

Dispelling (SR3.184) involves the dispeller "must make a Drain Resistance Test as if casting the spell being dispelled." If the spell being dispelled is Limited (SR3.180) such as by requiring a Fetish in order to cast it, this would mean that a potential dispeller is incapable of attempting to dispel that spell unless the dispeller carries an appropriate Fetish ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...37#entry1335162 ). This turns a disadvantage (Fetish limitation) into an advantage (harder to dispel). I propose that (A) a dispeller treats the spell as if it has no Limitations and resists Drain accordingly. Spells which are Limited for the purpose of Drain are thereby more risky to dispel than casting them in the first place since dispelling does not gain the benefit of reduced effective Force for Drain. Furthermore, what's good for the goose is good for the gander: if (B) toting a menagerie of Fetishes is the hallmark of a hardcore dispeller, this could be formidable as it means the player characters need to come prepared with their own fetishes if they expect to be able to dispel NPC effects.

The Mindlink spell (SR3.193) explicitly states that LoS is not required after casting to Sustain. Invisibility logically demands that to be true. Hibernate (SR3.194) is used to seal someone into an airtight chamber, making it implausible to maintain Touch while Sustaining. Levitate (SR3.197) specifically requires LoS to be maintained whenever the caster wants to move the subject (in line with MitS.51). Spirit Powers (SR3.262) come right out and say explicitly "nor must line of sight be maintained". Make it explicit that the Magical Link (MitS.47) is required to establish the connection between spellcaster and subject/target but once the Complex Action to establish the spell completes, that Magical Link is thereafter inconsequential.


Foci:

Most foci need to stay in contact with their bonded Awakened owner to remain active. The Sustaining focus is an exception. It must be contact with the TARGET of a spell (SR3.190). For a Detection spell like Enhance Aim, that means you plant the focus on the victim you're trying to shoot. For Illusion spells like Invisibility, that means you plant the focus on everybody who could potentially attempt to observe you. For certain spells like Levitation, there IS no target of the spell so it cannot be sustained via a focus. Fix this by making Sustaining foci just like all the others: must remain in contact with their owner to remain activated.

SR3.180, 183 says drain is either Stun or Physical. The Power focus (SR3.190) indicates overcasting does "Physical and Stun" damage (both). This is bogus. Dispelling (SR3.184) a spell with Force greater than the Magic Attribute does physical damage "as well". This is unhelpfully ambiguous; "instead" would have been clearer.


Astral:

Where must Astral Signatures (SR3.172) be erased? If a magician goes to X; summons a spirit and sustains a spell; goes to Y with the spirit following; leaves the spirit there and abandons the spell; goes to Z; can the magician erase both Astral Signatures from there? What about from X? What about from Y?


Equipment:

Fake SINs on a forged credstick (SR3.239) seem likely to be exposed so rapidly they aren't a mechanic worth implementing. Invent a mechanic which is.

Permits lower Availability by 2. Does that mean that for +10% cost, items with 10P Availability are OK in chargen (SR3.273)?

Riot shields (SR3.284, SotA64.98) need clarification regarding what effect Reach 2 has. Does it:

• offset the TN +2 penalty per shield?
• eliminate the TN +2 penalty per shield and apply Reach without spending it on offsetting the shield?
• disregard the bonus to Impact armour the shield would have provided?

When FFBA, forearm guards, and Second Skin are tailor-made for a specific client, does their price subsume Dwarf/Troll modification surcharges?

Provide an official position on Dikoting monomolecular filaments.


Decking:

Emphasise that "Deck Rating" (as determined by MPCP) excludes the CMT Avatar (SR3.207, 304) from the Rating 6 character generation cap (SR3.270) the same way a Remote Control Deck with a Deck Rating of 7 would be excluded.

A decker can use their Data Brokerage skill to write their Evaluate Utility (mat.70). Evaluate's Rating deteriorates over time to represent SotA. If their Data Brokerage skill is provided via a Skillsoft, it also ought to experience the same Rating deterioration due to the same SotA progression.

The core book says deckers get Hacking Pool whenever using a cyberdeck (SR3.207) but Matrix says they only get Hacking Pool when using Hot ASIST. "The majority of CyberTerminals and some CyberDecks are equipped with the standard ASIST interface (also called cold ASIST)." (Mat.18) So tell us EXACTLY WHICH models by default ship with Hot ASIST, because access to Hacking Pool is not insignificant.


Rigging:

What effect does Dikoting a vehicle/drone's increase to Body have on nominal mass (R3.62), hardpoints/firmpoints (SR3.132, R3.135, M&M.40), cost of fitting vehicular armour (R3.131), etc.?

Bench Seats (r3.153) cost 150kg of Load to install. "Removing a bench seat frees up ... 200 kilograms". Paying your Mechanic contact to repeatedly install and tear out a Bench Seat from every drone and vehicle you own apart from your motorcycles would be very advantageous indeed.

It is not possible to obtain a Remote Turret (R3.141).

• Turrets and Remote Turrets on R3.141 have their Availability derived from the final cost of the drone they are fitted to.
• This is kind of like saying a light bulb for a mansion will cost a million times as much as a light bulb for a dunny.
• This tends to result in Availability 267/61years ×2 for a Strato-9 (R3.176) to get a Turret.
• A character needs 10^35 dice in Etiquette in order to expect to hit this Target Number; more dice than any casino in the real world would stock. Many Shadowrunners would be retired (one way or the other) before 61 years of career have elapsed even if they did hit that TN in their teens.
• With a Permit (SR3.274) and sufficient cash to expedite the process (SR3.272) this Availability can be transformed into 2/63y ×28.
• If you can get 4 successes on your Etiquette test, express delivery will have the package at your door 16 years after you place your order. Hopefully that's long enough to save up the 140,000¥ you'll need to cover the express delivery Street Index (base price was 5,000¥).

A more reasonable Availability is provided on SR3.312 for basic Turrets. I propose using this Availability for all Turrets.


Cyberware:

There are Chipjacks and Datajacks for matching price and Essence cost (SR3.298). There is also a cybereye-mod Eye Datajack for higher price and Essence cost (M&M.13). No such equivalent Eye Chipjack is listed. A chipjack is a "specialised type of datajack" (SR3.298) so I propose the invention of an Eye Chipjack.

Alphaware, Betaware, Deltaware. The Gammaphobia in Shadowrun and Eclipse Phase is just bizarre and surreal. What did Gamma ever do to you?


Smartlink:

Formally consider Smartlink to be exemplary/archetypical DNI-modification ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=42399 ).

MM.32 breaks down the four components of Smartlink and Rigger 3 explains how riggers with smartlink cyberware can get its benefit while using Gunnery. "When jacked in, a rigger can use smartgun bonuses with vehicle weapons that have smartgun links." (R3.27) "The System channel also routes data for auxiliary tasks such as smartlink signals." (R3.36)

• Display: eye display, imagelink, goggles; performed by the VCR (r3.27)
• Posture: limited simsense rig, simrig; performed by the VCR (r3.27)
• Routing I/O: induction pad, datajack; performed by the remote control network + smartlink integration kit (R3.139)
• Integration: ballistics processor; ???

Where is this ballistics processor?

• It is not necessary implanted, or else it wouldn't work having an entirely external Smartlink system with no cyberware (External Smartgun Adapter + Smart Goggles) providing a -1 TN instead of -2 TN (SR3.112, M&M.32). Perhaps this is because the smart goggles can only infer very limited information on body posture and without a simrig, the smartlink processor has a higher margin of error. "If a smartlink system is not entirely cybernetic, the smartlink provides only a -1 bonus to ranged combat." (M&M.32) "Smartlink modifiers apply only if both the gunner and the vehicle weapon are outfitted with smartlink hardware." (SR3.151) "Vehicle gunners who do not have a VCR need the full smartlink package to take advantage of smartgun-equipped vehicle weapons." (R3.28) "If the gunner using a vehicle smartgun does not have smartlink cyberware, treat the gunner as if he is wearing smartgoggles." (R3.139)
• If it is built into the Smartgun adapter weapon accessory, customers with a full Smartlink implant (0.5 Essence) have a redundant processor.
• If it is built into the Smartgoggles, should the VCR take over this functionality for riggers (R3.27) the way it takes over other functions of the Smartgoggles? "The chips in the gun feed into receptors in the goggles, producing red cross hairs where the gun is pointing." (SR3.281) "The VCR substitutes for the eye display and simsense rig components." (R3.27) ... but nothing is said about this midbrain-to-machine bridge crunching ballistics calculus.

There is needless redundancy here:

• Range Finder (5P-N) Smartlink accessory cyberware; Reduced Long / Extreme Range TNs (mm.32); Reduced Grenade Scatter (mm.32); Immediate Grenade Detonation (cc.107)
• Range Finder (Legal) Weapon accessory modification; Reduced Long / Extreme Range TNs (cc.33)
• Grenade Link (6-K) Weapon accessory modification; Reduced Grenade Scatter (cc.32); Immediate Grenade Detonation (cc.32)

Just collapse all three of those into stock standard Smartlink.


Skills:

Consider making Enchanting & Talismongering (MitS.30, MitS.40), Chemistry (M&M.101), Spell Design, Programming into Build & Repair skills since that's what they are. Let them benefit from Microscopic Vision, Enhanced Articulation, etc.

Some usages of Complementary Skills (SR3.97) don't really work. For example, SR3.231, Perception is an open test so hitting TN 4 might show you some vehicles behind you; TN 6 might confirm one of them has been there for some time; TN 10 might let you catch sight of a logo or slogan; so you inevitably have some "successes" (of variable quality) and can roll Stealth(Awareness) against... which TN? And if you've already hit TN 10 with your Intelligence dice, what does getting 5 extra successes on TN 4 with your Stealth(Alertness) dice actually do for you? For another example, let's look at reverse-engineering a spell (MitS.48): (1) spend a Simple Action to Astrally Perceive; (2) spend an Exclusive Simple Action to Observe in Detail; (3) spend a Simple Action to "make an Astral Perception Test" (probably Assensing Test was meant); (4) "One success is sufficient to provide the inspiration for figuring out the spell's formula."; (5) make a Complementary Skill Test with Spell Design Knowledge Skill... but what's the benefit of getting more successes after you've already figured it out?

Consolidate redundant skills in the book. For examples of good skills and their specialisations, Athletics (running, climbing, lifting, jumping, escaping, swimming) and Projectile (longbows, crossbows, slingshots). Bad skills include:

• Assault Rifles: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there're three puffs of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Clubs: hurt things 1 metre away from you
• Cyber Implant Combat: hurt things close to you
• Edged Weapons: hurt things 1 metre away from you
• Gunnery: in this video game, line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Heavy Weapons: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Laser Weapons: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Launch Weapons: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a pall of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Pistols: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Pole Arms + Staves: hurt things 2 metres away from you
• Rifles: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Shotguns: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there's a puff of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Submachine Guns: line up this object, squeeze a trigger, there're three puffs of smoke, and the neighbour's cat won't soil your garden again
• Unarmed Combat: hurt things close to you
• Underwater Combat: hurt things close to you while wet
• Whips: hurt things 1 metre away from you

Omae gawd! Do we really need nine skills that do the exact same thing? Squeezing a trigger on a tazer versus squeezing a trigger on a rocket launcher must have at least as much in common as swimming across a river has in common with climbing a tree, or as drawing a longbow has in common with winching a crossbow. Consolidate this redundancy down to two new skills:



There's absolutely no need for it to be any more specific than that. When one thinks of cyberpunk, what comes to mind more than cyberlimbs, datajacks and cybereyes? They're the epitome. How many types of cyberlimb are there?

• obvious
• synthetic
• Kid-Stealth

and how many datajacks are there?

• datajack
• induction datajack
• eye datajack

For the sake of comparison, how many pistols are listed? 44! What the actual Tamagotchi‽‽ Someone in the SR production team had a seriously pathological fetish for firearms and enough clout to push hard for GunRun 3rd Edition. We don't have 44x Chopper motorcycles all named and specced out. We don't have 44x MPCP-6 cyberdecks with their unique blinkenlights detailed. We don't have 44x bone lacing offerings with each lovingly described down to which font typeface they use for the engraved serial number. So in SR3R let's delete all the guns and take a leaf out of Rigger:

NSRCG's GEAT.DAT has ~115 lines of mêlée weapons and ~1440 lines of firearms (including SR2, CB, etc.) so my proposal is to truncate that bloat down to 3 melee weapons and 9 firearms total, as above, bringing it in line with the game's flagship elements.


Gibberish:

MitS.73 "An initiate can center when using any Magical Skill except for astral projection."
M&M.21 "The encephalon does not boost ... magical perception"


Cash and Karma exchange:

Karma is given a Nuyen value several times:

• SRC.80: 1050¥ (average) per 1 Good Karma point
• MitS.100: 1000¥ per 1 Good Karma point
• MitS.169: 1000¥ per 1 Good Karma point
• SotA64.30: 1000¥ per 1 Good Karma point

and the cost-benefit ratio of the Mnemonic Enhancer is finely tuned to this exchange rate. Some GMs disturb this economy by a coefficient of five or ten and then complain that the Mnemonic Enhancer is horribly unbalanced, oblivious that they're complaining about a problem of their own construction. I think a helpful section within SR3R would be to exhibit this interplay and highlight to GMs the pitfalls of helping mundanes finance their toys by radically deviating from payout suggestions (SRC.100), leading to distorting the exchange rate, leading to resenting magicians implanting Mnemonic Enhancers. It's balanced as presented. Perhaps offer a table of coefficients that can be used for each of these facets so that GMs can tip their own game in favour of their pet archetype without breaking things connected to that economy.

A very impressive wall that will need to be digested in parts. To start:

I might say “halved (round up/down/away from zero/towards zero/whatever)”. Though this is a little bit like the organization problem where we only really can fix this by essentially producing a complete book, which may not be practical. But yes, it would be good to get a clarifying note in there.


Does this even need to be rounded, is my question? Sure, it’ll let you cram a little bit more ‘ware in, but… unless we can demonstrate some balance issue, losing benefits to rounding in games is one of my pet peeves.


I’ll have to chase down those references and what they entail; the idea was for Called Shots to be reserved for Special Effect stuff like shooting out the tires or shooting someone’s weapon out of their hands, there was also a proposal about a different called shot mechanic to trade TN mods for ignoring specified amounts of armor, but it was all abstract. Though the hit location thing is going to try to work its way back into games any time someone does something like reach through a hole to try to grab something and a Devil Rat chomps down on the hand. I guess I should just look at this more closely.


It might have been on the currently-inaccessible boards but there’s definitely been discussion about this. My main concern is, again, unless and until I reach a point where I am somehow putting out a self-contained book I don’t know how hard I should fight against something like the abuse of “flechette” as a term when players will still be consulting parts of the canon rules that will refer to them as flechettes. There’s also the issue that people with knowledge of ammunition are probably already identifying “explosive” rounds as frangible. But in principle I’m in agreement.


This will indeed need examination; my off-the-cuff thinking is that if Wards are brought into conflict like this it would be handled like the Shifter in the elevator. The Ward bullet is a repugnant conclusion; I want to patch it with something like a minimum Ward size but I suspect it won’t be that easy.

That’s what I have right now.

Edit: one more thing:


I should warn you, you’re convincing me to split up Athletics and Projectile Weapons

It’s true, the game has a lot more granularity surrounding things you do in combat that have multiple viable options than things you do out of combat or which have fringe applications like Projectile Weapons (which, let’s be serious, might as well be renamed Ranger-X Bows. And yes, we’re setting aside how the Gun Cane and the Gun Bracer and the Eye Gun and every little weird gun that no one would ever use because of its inherent disadvantages also comes with its own skill.). And there’s definitely an argument to be made that the ranged firearm-like weapons should all be the same skill until rating 3 or 4. But accurate shooting and maneuvering with a pistol is very different from doing the same with a rifle, which in turn is surprisingly different from how experienced shooters use a shotgun, and then we get into laser weapons where you need to unlearn everything you ever learned about windage and bullet drop and recoil and also probably hold the weapon on target for just a fraction of a second longer…

Likewise melee. You can’t wield a sap the way you would a knife and expect to get away with it. A baseball bat and a sword are very different beasts, both from each other and from a halberd. Some are closer than others—Japanese cane arts and swordsmanship have a very high degree of overlap—but it doesn’t feel unreasonable to me that these are different skills that can default to one another.

But you’ll definitely have opportunity to try to change my mind.

Edit 2: and of course I’m being a big hypocrite here, I’m happy to appeal to realism when it supports my position but to say my goal isn’t realism when it doesn’t. I’m just not bothered by most of the combat skills (I combined Rifles and Assault Rifles and put all the funky weapons together) and kind of like it.

I can compound hypocrisy with appeal to authority by saying that Raygun was broadly in favor of keeping Rifles and Shotguns as separate skills.

~J

On the cyberlimbs, I completely agree. It is a dream of mine to support a whole upgrade web connected to cyberlimbs, including features such as cybertorsos letting cyberlimb stats start being used for skill and pool calculations, interchangeable mounts of various grades to allow swapping limbs, the ability to recreate Batou’s arm from Innocence that breaks open to reveal a shotgun in the upper arm, I want to see the Streetsam going to town with design and customization like the Rigger does with Rigger 3.

I don’t know that I agree with you on datajacks. They’re datajacks, they do what we need them to, I don’t see much reason right now for them to be more complicated regardless of how iconic they are. But if you have a suggestion I’m all ears.

Regarding guns, my position is: if we were making a brand new game, or even a game that is as big a break from SR3 as SR4, your argument to get rid of most of the guns would be reasonably compelling. There is a real sense in which we still don’t have enough guns (selectable magazines seem like a reasonable idea! Not a single canon gun has them!) but yeah, I probably wouldn’t make a bunch of the pistols (the exact details of how many I’d make would depend on the degree to which Light/Machine Pistols can be salvaged as a category).

But we aren’t. The work is already done. We aren’t even looking at putting something printed out into the market where pagecount matters; unless we dramatically overhaul the whole way firearms work, all the extra guns are free even if no one will ever use them for their mechanical properties. Even if we do partly overhaul the way firearms work with a penetration value or something it still seems low-cost to just give them some values.

~J

A short note on the Rigging section that caught my eye:

FanPro got to Rigger 3 Revised before I did; the bench seat load rebate is changed to 150kg, while the formula for the turrets is

Which may or may not fully address your concerns, I’ll have to do the math in the morning.

https://www.shadowrunrpg.com/resources/r3_to_r3r.html

~J

I currently believe that the payout suggestions are simply unworkable for the game as presented, and that consequently balance decisions tuned to it are also fundamentally flawed (and for the record while I do resent the Mnemonic Enhancer I don’t associate it specifically with mages who at least pay a very slightly higher price for bio-index). My thinking is as follows:

Take the highest fixed pay rate, 20,000¥ for Extractions. There’s some handwaving about the quality and number of the runners affecting the pay (with no actual guidance!) but it seems reasonable to expect that this is the assumption for a team of four ‘Runners fresh out of chargen.

That gives us a four-way split of 5k¥ per person per month, which keeps everyone in a Middle lifestyle with no discretionary income. They do gain karma, so maybe after a year or three of play their extra skills and Karma Pool will get them more pay, but that’s off the guideline chart. We’ll assume that no one reads mmu1’s law and notices that stealing and fencing (at base 30%) one Ford Americar a week (four per month) will get them 24,000¥ without the hassle of facing security on home ground, so maybe some of the team accept Low lifestyles in exchange for 4k¥ in disposable income.

At this rate and lifestyle the Rigger can afford to maintain 400k¥ of vehicles and drones with no money to spare and assuming no Stress or repairs are incurred ever. Of course, the Rigger could always maintain a smaller stable in order to save money; let’s say she maintains a single Strato-9 and nothing else (34,500¥, 345¥/month upkeep assuming no Stress). This allows her to squirrel away 3,655¥ a month, meaning that in ten months with no other expenditures past 255¥ she’ll be ready to replace the Strato should the worst happen (she is Connected, right?). In twenty or thirty months she might even be ready to buy a second Strato-9!

The Streetsam, meanwhile, saves up to upgrade her ‘ware. By living on the street she can sock away the whole 5k¥. Maybe she wants to upgrade to Wired-III. Ignoring implant costs, that’s just an easy 100 months of roughing it! Eight years and change, no problem.

So my argument is that the pay guidelines screw mundanes in favor of the Awakened, right? Enter the team Hermetic Full Mage. 5k¥ gets them one Force 4-5 Elemental per run in exchange for approximately his entire pay. Woe betide him if he wants to upgrade a Library! It’s not even all roses for the Shaman or the Physad, who might eventually want to buy a focus or even just a fancy gun, but their core abilities and the upgrade paths don’t inherently intersect with large amounts of nuyen in the same way.

As a tangent on the canon cash-for-karma rules, a Shaman (or indeed a Hermetic who accepts that he’ll effectively be a Sorcerer who can project for the foreseeable future) who maintains a Low lifestyle can turn that 4k¥ into 4 karma, month in month out. That gives three and a half months to first Initiation assuming no group and no Ordeal. Keep in mind that by the canonical formula, one Strato-9 is worth 34.5 points of karma, meaning that (again, no ordeal no group) the Strato-9 is comparable to someone’s 6th Initiate Grade; a Rigger with 6 Strato-9s is valued higher by this metric than a Grade 6 Initiate.

So yeah, that’s my rant on the topic of canon pay guidelines. I am of course fully open to counterarguments.

(There’s another discussion to be had about other sources of karma savings like Astral Quests, both in terms of balance—if you can drop the cost for learning a spell to 1kp without ongoing limitations, that puts the value of such spells at 10 spells per one skill improved from 6 to 7, which seems absurd—and in terms of pernicious effects—the Mnemonic Enhancer serves as a small tax on anyone who learns skills without taking it first, and the Astral Quest reduction appears to me to mean that anyone who learns spells without sprinting straight for Initiation first is outright throwing karma away, possibly as much as 5 karma per spell—but I need to immerse myself in the Awakened lifecycle more before I start proposing changes on that front.)

~J

Wasn’t there a target/subject dichotomy that should be getting used here? It feels like the intention is that Enhance Aim foci are supposed to be in contact with the person whose aim is being enhanced, Invisibility the person being made Invisible… but this is a little awkward when applying the spells to non-living objects. I’ll think about this one but yeah, the distinction might be more trouble than it’s worth.


This is an interesting question. It’s a neat idea; I like the creativity of offensive use but the idea of simply negating Voluntary Target by designating someone feels like it goes too far, I’m also not sure if I like the idea of being unable to protect neutral parties who aren’t specifically consenting… my inclination is to thread the needle by not restricting Spell Defense allocation but allowing Voluntary Target to override that. Could also look at how messy it would be to let Voluntary Only spells still fire if resisted with Spell Pool.

Did you have thoughts on how this should work beyond “should be defined”?


I think I concur with A, yes, that the dispeller does not need to fulfill the limitations and gains no benefit from them seems like the cleanest way to handle this.

~J

I'm lurking and reading your posts as they come.

Awesome work, people. Thanks for the effort and keep it up. Much appreciated.

For my 0.2 cents worth, fetishes have an effect on the caster themselves, whether acquiring the spell in the first place or suffering effects of the spell, not on the nature of the spell being cast. Once the spell is out there, it is just the same as one cast without a fetish. So I throw in a vote for the choice that Dispelling shouldn't be affected.