Charon
Apr 23 2005, 11:24 AM
QUOTE (BitBasher @ Apr 21 2005, 11:26 AM) |
I love the non linear dispersion of TN's. Since those things are leaving that makes this new mechanic system somewhere near d20 in my mind. |
What?
D20 dispersion is linear, but the dispersion of a D6 pool of dice with fixed TN isn't even remotely linear and thus has nothing to do with D20.
For one thing, with D6 pool and fixed TN you are looking for a number of successes while on D20 you are just looking for a range of numbers on a singlde die. It's not even the same paradigm. What's similar?
EVLTIM
Apr 28 2005, 04:14 AM
In a word no .
I have everything for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. In some cases multiple copies of the same book . I have spent thousands on SR . I am not buying another edition .
Critias
Apr 28 2005, 05:30 AM
Thousands?
Really?
Maybe if you didn't get "multiple copies of the same book" you might not be out so much money. Or did you just get bum deals?
sapphire_wyvern
Apr 28 2005, 06:22 AM
I'll probably switch.
But if I don't, I will definitely reverse engineer some of the rules changes.
I'm going to be replacing SR3's tactical pools with something more consistent and fair.
I'm going to replace the very Cyperpunk but not very playable Matrix with something that I would want PCs to be good at.
Fortune
Apr 28 2005, 09:04 AM
QUOTE (Critias) |
Thousands?
Really?
Maybe if you didn't get "multiple copies of the same book" you might not be out so much money. Or did you just get bum deals? |
Considering there are close to 100 role-playing books in the Shadowrun line (counting all editions), even before the 40-odd novels are thrown in, I can easily see thousands. Not everyone lives in the States either. Each new book over here in Oz is about $60, or even more.
Garland
Apr 28 2005, 02:21 PM
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern) |
I'm going to be replacing SR3's tactical pools with something more consistent and fair.
|
Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be inconsistent and unfair about the current incarnation?
blakkie
Apr 28 2005, 07:47 PM
QUOTE (Garland) |
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern) | I'm going to be replacing SR3's tactical pools with something more consistent and fair.
|
Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be inconsistent and unfair about the current incarnation?
|
He might be refering to the pools only covering limited group of skils? There are some optional rule pools, in the Shadowrun Companion i believe. But they still only cover a further subset.
EVLTIM
Apr 28 2005, 10:10 PM
QUOTE (Critias) |
Thousands?
Really?
Maybe if you didn't get "multiple copies of the same book" you might not be out so much money. Or did you just get bum deals? |
Yes thousands . Some of those books are hard to track down .Some of the multiple stuff is from buying lots of books and having a few copies of the stuff laying around . (I used this kind of stuff to turn Stumps on to SR .) Some of it is I want a copy for the game , and one to keep in decent shape . Some of it is replacing books that fall apart because so far just about every SR book has a crappy binding .
Catsnightmare
Apr 28 2005, 10:56 PM
QUOTE (Critias @ Apr 27 2005, 11:30 PM) |
Thousands?
Really?
Maybe if you didn't get "multiple copies of the same book" you might not be out so much money. Or did you just get bum deals? |
I've probably spent at least a grand+ myself as well, since I've had to sell and then later re-buy several of my Shadowrun books.
[edit] I sat down and did the math out of curiosity, I've spent roughly $880+ on Shadowrun books alone over the years. I think I'm gonna get some more good use out of my existing books rather than spend any more on SR4.
sapphire_wyvern
Apr 29 2005, 12:07 AM
QUOTE (Garland) |
QUOTE (sapphire_wyvern) | I'm going to be replacing SR3's tactical pools with something more consistent and fair.
|
Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be inconsistent and unfair about the current incarnation?
|
I consider the method in which dice pools are generated and accessed to be inconsistent, and I consider the fact that only a very limited subset of skills have access to pools to be unfair.
I mean, really, why should a mage have access to 5-8 bonus dice to throw on a Sorcery skill test but not on their Conjuring tests? Or their Enchanting tests? Or their Etiquette rolls?
I like tactical pools, but on reflection I frankly don't see the need for more than one.
Critias
Apr 29 2005, 05:32 AM
Okay. Well, I guess some of you just get really shitty deals on SR books, then, or blame Shadowrun for your hobby of buying everything two or three times. I think the average price I've paid for most of my SR supplements is about $7.50 apeice.
But, hey. If buying a bunch of books instead of a small car, and then blaming the books for that instead of yourself, and then turning your back on the companies involved in making those books (instead of at least going for consistency) floats your boat, knock yourself out. I guess.
Wounded Ronin
Apr 29 2005, 05:48 AM
Mmm, over many years I might have spent just under a hundred dollars on all my SR books?
Regardless, I probably won't buy SR 4 for another 2 years since I'll be away from the US for a while. Maybe I should just wait for 5th edition.
Fortune
Apr 29 2005, 08:41 AM
I think everyone has the right to say 'enough is enough' when it comes to what they are willing to spend. That isn't necessarily 'blaming the books', nor is it really 'turning your back' on the company. Personally, I don't mind spending money on Shadowrun because I like following how the world grows.
Over the years though, I have spent in excess of $10,000US on roleplaying books of all kinds, not to mention trips to tournaments and all the peripherals. That was and is my choice, and nobody held a gun to my head and forced me to. I do, though, as does everyone else, have the right to stop purchasing at any time, and for whatever reason.
Not that I will, mind you.
Critias
Apr 29 2005, 08:55 AM
A lot of people, though, have been complaining about how SR4 is just a money-grubbing scheme (and have been saying as much since the first whisper of SR4's announcement). Claiming that it's only being done to make old books obsolete, claiming that the mention of Street Magic proves that there's even more and more books you'll "have" to buy, whining about not having enough money for any more books (while simultaneously bragging about how many they have)...
...and it just gets a little old after a while. No one's held a gun to your head and said you needed every single book, just like no one's holding a gun to your head and saying you need to buy the new ones. Making the release of the new edition some sort of straw that broke your camel's back, forcing you to draw some defiant line in the sand -- well, it's a little melodramatic.
You make a choice to buy stuff, then you deal with it. You don't need to complain that a business is making money, you don't need to complain that books aren't free, etc, etc.
Fortune
Apr 29 2005, 09:00 AM
QUOTE (Critias) |
Making the release of the new edition some sort of straw that broke your camel's back, forcing you to draw some defiant line in the sand -- well, it's a little melodramatic. |
All I am saying is that this is as good a reason as any other. Having the complete SR3 line of books seems to me to be a half-decent place to 'draw a line in the sand' and say enough is enough, if one was so inclined.
Skeptical Clown
Apr 29 2005, 01:49 PM
That's not really an intuitive argument, Critias, nor is it really the point. Granted, no one is 'making' anyone buy books. But particularly in a niche market like RPGs, but particularly in a niche market like Shadowrun, there is more or less a contract between the consumers and the producers of the product. The consumers say, 'We will buy your books if they are of good value'; good value, it can be assumed, means a good proportion of quality to price. The producers must then take this agreement and make it profitable, if only that they might continue to produce. And ideally, they make the product valuable enough that the greatest possible percentage of potential buyers turn into actual buyers of the product.
Yeah, buying books at a bargain price is great. But that's not doing game creators any good. In the short term, someone who just wants some games can buy off the bargain rack and do fine. But if you have any long-term investment in the gaming market, be it sentimental or otherwise, then buying at the retailer's release value is necessary to keep that market buoyant. I too have spent at least a grand on Shadowrun products; I begrudge very little of it. When I stopped liking the books, I just stopped investing in the product. That contract between consumer and producer was broken, at least in my case.
For the record of course, I don't think SR4 is a moneymaking scheme, but rather a creative one; it is merely an attempt to remold SR into what the people making it now want it to be.
Pthgar
Apr 29 2005, 01:57 PM
QUOTE (Skeptical Clown) |
For the record of course, I don't think SR4 is a moneymaking scheme, but rather a creative one; it is merely an attempt to remold SR into what the people making it now want it to be. |
I think it's both and, you know what? I'm okay with that. Half-Life 2 was a money making scheme to produce a sequel to Half-Life, but it was also a beutiful game. People gotta feed their kids some-how. If they can do it buy being creative and doing something they love, while at the same time producing something I love, I'll support that with my money.
Thistledown
Apr 29 2005, 04:26 PM
I think I'm probably just going to grab the decker/rigger rules, and leave the rest to stay with SR3. If I can, anyways.
Eldritch
Apr 29 2005, 04:28 PM
QUOTE |
A lot of people, though, have been complaining about how SR4 is just a money-grubbing scheme (and have been saying as much since the first whisper of SR4's announcement). Claiming that it's only being done to make old books obsolete, claiming that the mention of Street Magic proves that there's even more and more books you'll "have" to buy, whining about not having enough money for any more books (while simultaneously bragging about how many they have)...
...and it just gets a little old after a while. No one's held a gun to your head and said you needed every single book, just like no one's holding a gun to your head and saying you need to buy the new ones. Making the release of the new edition some sort of straw that broke your camel's back, forcing you to draw some defiant line in the sand -- well, it's a little melodramatic.
You make a choice to buy stuff, then you deal with it. You don't need to complain that a business is making money, you don't need to complain that books aren't free, etc, etc. |
If you want to continue to play the game - with the rest of the gamers in the world, then you will have to buy the new edition - eventually. That's all there is to it. I like to play, I've played for 15 years, I can see that I would have continued to play.
And yeah, I could continue to play 3rd - and will. But eventually that well will dry right up. There will be so few SR3 games out there....
Give it 2, maybe 3 years and SR3 will be virtually extinct. (ASsuming SR4 is a success. But even if it flops, what will Fanpro do?)
Yeah, no one's putting a gun to your head to buy it. And no one's putting a gun to your head to go to the movies, rent dvd's, buy books, buy albums, eat out, or anything like that. But we do. And we want to. And we will. (But I won't buy SR4. I think they';ve seen enough of my money in core rule books)
What if, when SR was first published, on the first page there was a notice:
Attention: We will republish the rules for this game every 4 to 5 years, making the previous edition rule books obsolete. You should be able to continue using adventures, place books, and events - with some minor (Maybe major) tweaking.
If that was the first thing you read about any game back then, would you have bought it? Yeah, some of us might have - but it would have turned a lot of people off.
blakkie
Apr 29 2005, 05:15 PM
QUOTE (Eldritch) |
What if, when SR was first published, on the first page there was a notice:
Attention: We will republish the rules for this game every 4 to 5 years, making the previous edition rule books obsolete. You should be able to continue using adventures, place books, and events - with some minor (Maybe major) tweaking.
If that was the first thing you read about any game back then, would you have bought it? Yeah, some of us might have - but it would have turned a lot of people off. |
For me putting that attention notice in would be like putting a label on a pencil eraser Attention: Continued use will cause eraser to wear out. *shrug* This just isn't something new to the market at all. Besides the SR3 BBB is about 7 years (and at least 11 reprints) old. That's a pretty good run.
Tomahawk
Apr 29 2005, 05:21 PM
I'd say that the market is pretty split on periodic re-writes of games. On one hand you have several games that seem to upgrade periodically with new information. But there are also some other games that have at this point never been re-done. Now more source books I would say is standard but as far as rule re-writes thats not universal.
Not saying either side is right or wrong in this either. Really it probably depends on how polished the system really is to determine just how long it can go without being tuned up as it were.
I would say that given Shadowrun's evolving storyline that more source books shouldn't surprise anyone. I think the big fear is not the buying new material, but the fear that the new material won't be as good as what people are accustomed to. Frankly in that respect a good chunk of people are very conservative in their actions (i.e. not wanting change.)
Eldritch
Apr 29 2005, 05:26 PM
QUOTE |
This just isn't something new to the market at all. Besides the SR3 BBB is about 7 years (and at least 11 reprints) old. That's a pretty good run.
|
15 years ago it was something new. Not many games had gone to a second edition by then - iirc, D&D had just recently gone 2nd.
Now it's considered an industry standard, and the lemmings just go along with it. Yeah, I've been a lemming. But I' m done now. The industries more interested in all the kiddies than the vetrans. Or in trying to keep both.
Tomahawk
Apr 29 2005, 05:29 PM
There have been other games that were doing re-releases before D&D. Hero System comes to mind quickly. I'm thinking that Traveler, and some of the ICE games were doing it as well.
What D&D did was make it acceptable and mainstream to do it.
Critias
Apr 29 2005, 05:35 PM
QUOTE (Eldritch) |
Now it's considered an industry standard, and the lemmings just go along with it. Yeah, I've been a lemming. But I' m done now. |
Hard core.
EVLTIM
Apr 30 2005, 07:26 PM
After a few days of reflection . Even if I never play SR4 MY OC will probably kick in and I will snatch the books up . I swear SR is worse than Pokemon.
Penta
Apr 30 2005, 10:41 PM
Precisely. Gotta catch em all.

But if SR is Pokemon, what's the equivalent to Pikachu (the really cute Pokemon)?
Fortune
May 1 2005, 12:01 AM
An Ally Spirit inhabiliting a Tickle-Me-Dunky™ doll.
RunnerPaul
May 1 2005, 10:09 AM
QUOTE (Tomahawk) |
But there are also some other games that have at this point never been re-done. |
I'll admit it, I'm having trouble thinking of one. (Excepting games that were released, flopped, and are no longer being published.) Could you enlighten me with an example?
Charon
May 1 2005, 01:11 PM
QUOTE (RunnerPaul @ May 1 2005, 05:09 AM) |
QUOTE (Tomahawk @ Apr 29 2005, 12:21 PM) | But there are also some other games that have at this point never been re-done. |
I'll admit it, I'm having trouble thinking of one. (Excepting games that were released, flopped, and are no longer being published.) Could you enlighten me with an example?
|
Well, there are also those that, while successful, are too young to have developped a new edition. Like the Riddle of Steel (who pumps out variant rules on the core rules with every supplement, so seriousy they'll have to do a revised core book one day if they can afford to or people with supplements will be playing a different game from those who've just bought the core).
But yeah, I too would like to learn about a successful RPG that has gone, say, 10 years without a revision.
Charon
May 1 2005, 01:17 PM
QUOTE (Eldritch @ Apr 29 2005, 12:26 PM) |
15 years ago it was something new. Not many games had gone to a second edition by then - iirc, D&D had just recently gone 2nd. |
Basic D&D, AD&D (or first edition), AD&D 2nd edition, AD&D player's option...
15 years ago, not many game had gone to a second edition because 15 years ago there were not many games, period.
But if you want me to believe there was a golden age of roleplaying in which a game would go on for longer than SR3 did without a revision, you'll need to start pointing these out to us non-nostalgic gamers who can't see what you mean. And yeah, I was playing in 1990.
Fortune
May 1 2005, 01:34 PM
QUOTE (Charon @ May 1 2005, 11:17 PM) |
15 years ago, not many game had gone to a second edition because 15 years ago there were not many games, period. |
15 years ago I had already been playing RPGs for 15 years!
There were plenty of games on the market long before that.
blakkie
May 2 2005, 01:03 PM
I just find it amusing that someone would buy the third edition of a product expecting there to never be a fourth.
EDIT: BTW that's not to say anyone did that 10-15 years ago, because there was just the one. The initial comment on this thread hijacking was one about what you'd do if there was a note in the first book that there would be an edition every X years. But once the 2nd edition came out you had to think maybe, just maybe, there'd be another one or two in the pipe after that. After SR3 you should be picking up on a pattern. How many people here still play SR1 or SR2, not SR3?
Eldritch
May 2 2005, 05:46 PM
Yeah, there were a lot of games back then - not as many as today, but a lot.
The only one that comes off the top of my pointy head is Rifts. It came out about the same time as SR and has not had any subsequent editions. The entire palladium system has been around since what, the early 80's? And is still in use today - by a lot of gamers.
I can get into a game today using the same book I bought in 90.
I'll have to go through my archives to see if there are any others still around.
QUOTE |
I just find it amusing that someone would buy the third edition of a product expecting there to never be a fourth. |
I did that out of habit - I was a lemming remember?
QUOTE |
BTW that's not to say anyone did that 10-15 years ago, because there was just the one. The initial comment on this thread hijacking was one about what you'd do if there was a note in the first book that there would be an edition every X years. But once the 2nd edition came out you had to think maybe, just maybe, there'd be another one or two in the pipe after that. After SR3 you should be picking up on a pattern. How many people here still play SR1 or SR2, not SR3? |
Okay, but does it ever stop? Will the frequency increase? Are we eventually gonna just be okay with re-buying core rule books every 2 to 3 years?
They've got 15 years worth of playing in the basic system, and instead of sticking with it, they are scrapping it and starting over. Doesn't make sense.
if the same problems have plagued all three editions? yeah, it does make sense to go back and look at the system's basis, and rework it completely if it doesn't meet the criteria for what you're trying to do. what doesn't make sense is throwing out insane figures like "2-3 years" to help your case.
as for the Palladium system, it's been noted elsewhere that Palladium is a freakish abberation that breaks every statistic available on gaming. saying "Palladium did it, why can't Shadowrun" is like saying "Superman did it, why can't Jimmy Olsen".
blakkie
May 2 2005, 06:03 PM
QUOTE (Eldritch @ May 2 2005, 11:46 AM) |
Okay, but does it ever stop? Will the frequency increase? Are we eventually gonna just be okay with re-buying core rule books every 2 to 3 years? |
In the first 9 years two new editions came out, SR2 and SR3. Seven years between SR3 and SR4 seems to suggest a decrease in frequency.
Unless the sales go fabulously well, they aren't going to have the resources that WotC did to bring out a polishing mid-edition like 3.5. Plus unless they construct an OGL like D20 they won't have the cheap distribution channel that WotC did to pull that off.
QUOTE |
They've got 15 years worth of playing in the basic system, and instead of sticking with it, they are scrapping it and starting over. Doesn't make sense. |
The changes between SR1, SR2, and SR3 may not have been as deep as the jump to SR4 could be. But you can only pile turds so high until they fall over. If the reason for the revision is to get rid of a lot of old, mismatched sections of the rules that have built up over the last 15 years, you are likely going to need to cut deep to clear away stuff. The 15 year legacy has become the problem.
EVLTIM
May 3 2005, 09:00 AM
I usually play 2nd .
And Palladium has gone thru revisions also .
Specificly the Palladium Fantasy , as well as Heros Unlimited just off the top of my head .
Bigity
May 5 2005, 03:02 PM
I'm chaning my vote from "maybe" to "No". I'll just most likely get the core book at some point, to give it a chance, but at this time it just looks like it's not the game I love. Not saying it's bad, but just not the game I want to play.
I'm going to Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay now. It will be nice to have deadly combats that take 10 minutes instead of deadly combats that take an hour
BitBasher
May 5 2005, 05:30 PM
QUOTE |
The changes between SR1, SR2, and SR3 may not have been as deep as the jump to SR4 could be. But you can only pile turds so high until they fall over. If the reason for the revision is to get rid of a lot of old, mismatched sections of the rules that have built up over the last 15 years, you are likely going to need to cut deep to clear away stuff. The 15 year legacy has become the problem. |
See Baby v bathwater issue. Things need to be streamlined for the new users, the dice mechanics could be clearer and GOD KNOWS the books could be better organized. This is not a justification to also tear down the atmosphere of the game world and wholesale replace core technologies and even core principles. This isn't a new edition, it's apparently a new game with the SR name on it. Let's not delude ourselves here.
When the new books come out let's remove all specific class and item names and show both editions to someone that's never played SR and see if they even recognize it as the same game. At this point it appears the names are what keeps it familiar.
------------------------------------------------
EDIT: I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to bash the developers despite the fact that I seem to come out almost entirely negative against the new edition. I respect the work they have done on SR3 and I respect the fact that they think they're doing the right thing on SR4. I unfortunately also feel that from what I can see so far they are divorcing SR4 almost entirely from what I liked about sr3.
I think they have gotten too close to the material and although I expect the game will be just fine I think it would be better as a new upstart of judging from the tech curve advancement they should be placeing the game FAR more than 5 years removed from "current" SR and should probably be marketing it as a separate product line. I think there is a serious lack of forethought to the ramifications of the wireless technology that the devs haven't even considered, in that it will require a whole shit-ton of suspension of disbelief to make this changeover work even remotely as presented now.
That doesn't change the fact that I do respect the devs, I just don't see it as the game I like SR3 for being.
SirBedevere
May 6 2005, 12:50 PM
BitBasher, you have said in a clear and concise manner just what I wanted to say. Thank you for putting it so clearly.
Erebus
May 6 2005, 10:06 PM
I need to update my opinion too... I'll switch so long as they don't make the matrix Cyber-Generation esque. If they do, I probably won't even buy it.
blakkie
May 7 2005, 04:51 PM
QUOTE (BitBasher @ May 5 2005, 11:30 AM) |
QUOTE | The changes between SR1, SR2, and SR3 may not have been as deep as the jump to SR4 could be. But you can only pile turds so high until they fall over. If the reason for the revision is to get rid of a lot of old, mismatched sections of the rules that have built up over the last 15 years, you are likely going to need to cut deep to clear away stuff. The 15 year legacy has become the problem. |
See Baby v bathwater issue. Things need to be streamlined for the new users, the dice mechanics could be clearer and GOD KNOWS the books could be better organized. |
If you are refering to the Matrix circa '49 to '65, that was one fugly baby from a gaming perspective. I've got two words for it, "buh" and "bye". Of course that isn't to say that in SR4 you can't travel the Matrix using the old paradigm of complete immersion with icons and such. I don't see why that wouldn't still be there, in some similar form. There certainly would still be a use for traveling around the world without leaving home.
QUOTE |
This is not a justification to also tear down the atmosphere of the game world and wholesale replace core technologies and even core principles. |
I don't recall specifically your entry in the past thread about what SR means to you, what do you define as "core principles"?
QUOTE |
This isn't a new edition, it's apparently a new game with the SR name on it. Let's not delude ourselves here. |
What i find delusional is assuming that the atmosphere of the game is vastly changed to the point of a "new game".
QUOTE |
When the new books come out let's remove all specific class and item names and show both editions to someone that's never played SR and see if they even recognize it as the same game. At this point it appears the names are what keeps it familiar. |
That and it is a corp controled, magic infused, criminal infested world? And so on.
About the speed of bringing in new RF networking; if the Matrix blew up good enough (fried lots and lots of hardware hooked up to it) that could remove enough of the infrastructure change barrier to allow technology that had existed in labs for some time to be rolled out enmass. Perhaps some enterprising party actually had prior knowledge of, or even created the '65 crash. So either they were ready to bring out new tech and push it into place. Or in a stroke of marketing marvel they expanded the potential market of the new tech by destroying vast swaths of hardware to make way for their product.
the changeover is made more viable by the fact that the WMI was pushing its way into the market already.
Orion
May 7 2005, 08:15 PM
Our group has decided as a whole, after reading the FAQs on Shadowrun 4, not to make the switch. As the GM I'll be buying the books and converting them to SR 3 format. Which means they're still going to get our money, but if SR 3 had continued I would have purchased game supplements as they were released anyway.
If the future of Shadowrun Verse isnt in a style that we like then I guess we'll strike it out on our own and maybe write an alternate verse to share with people.
Gambitt
May 8 2005, 10:15 AM
Our group will be switching on release.
What i dont understand is people complaining about it just being a big con, where they are just trying to make money out of the players. SR for me has one of the largest, in depth, fascinating campaign/source information i have ever seen. For me, if the world of SR is to continue and evolve then the developers need to make money to fund it. SR4 should also bring in new players and thus more money to spend on developing the game.... not just books with munchkin gear, but the worlds evolution. Its very easy to get in the old school frame of mind and say "dont mess with our world", or "they are just trying to make money out of us, the people who are the life blood of the game"
No new releases and the SR world will slowly die..... only other way i see is to make it a charity where the remaining players fund a group of developers to continue the story....
Our Group will be switching as soon as additional books for magic and cyber are available (Amongst the six of us, one english and one german rulebook will be bought on release date - or as close to that as metahumanly possible. "Must collect them all" indeed). We might even switch immediatly if at least mainstream bioware and adept powers wind up in the bbb.
We do like the complexity of SR3 for its variety of options, not the difficulty of learning the rules. At least two of us will profit greatly from a simplified rules system.
BitBasher
May 9 2005, 04:01 PM
QUOTE (blakkie) |
QUOTE (BitBasher @ May 5 2005, 11:30 AM) | QUOTE | The changes between SR1, SR2, and SR3 may not have been as deep as the jump to SR4 could be. But you can only pile turds so high until they fall over. If the reason for the revision is to get rid of a lot of old, mismatched sections of the rules that have built up over the last 15 years, you are likely going to need to cut deep to clear away stuff. The 15 year legacy has become the problem. |
See Baby v bathwater issue. Things need to be streamlined for the new users, the dice mechanics could be clearer and GOD KNOWS the books could be better organized. |
If you are refering to the Matrix circa '49 to '65, that was one fugly baby from a gaming perspective. I've got two words for it, "buh" and "bye". Of course that isn't to say that in SR4 you can't travel the Matrix using the old paradigm of complete immersion with icons and such. I don't see why that wouldn't still be there, in some similar form. There certainly would still be a use for traveling around the world without leaving home.
|
I wasn't referring to the matrix at all actually. I was referring to the books as a whole and the need for better organization and more than likely an adjustment and streamlining for the divergent and somewhat heavy use of totally different dice systems for different things such as matrix/rigging/combat.
QUOTE (blakkie) |
QUOTE | This is not a justification to also tear down the atmosphere of the game world and wholesale replace core technologies and even core principles. |
I don't recall specifically your entry in the past thread about what SR means to you, what do you define as "core principles"?
|
I feel Shadowrun's core principles are that the game is NOT a high sci-fi tech game. The world of SR is really not far removed from our own world technologically except in the fields of medical science (cyberware and bioware) and magic. Even the cyberware is not entirely out of the realm of possibility based on extrapolation from today's tech, and many similar prosthetic pieces are being tested today. By "core values" for me that means the game's atmosphere. The game world for the average citizen does not differ a whole lot from today. The routine is the same, just the names change.
With the move to SR4 they're trying to do a wholesale world tech shift in 5 years. That's insane. That completely changes the flavor of the game world, and although I like the idea of the wireless interface deckers, the whole thing is totally implausible that the technology would be "ubiquidous" like was mentioned. This causes the game world to lose a significant amount of suspension of disbelief.
I'd have been happier of they did a rewrite and said "we're making it all wireless for gameplay reasons, and it's been that way since the crash of '29. Much like grounding from 2nd to 3rd.
QUOTE (blakkie) |
QUOTE | This isn't a new edition, it's apparently a new game with the SR name on it. Let's not delude ourselves here. |
What i find delusional is assuming that the atmosphere of the game is vastly changed to the point of a "new game".
|
Yet everything I have seen indicates this is the case. Atmosphere is a direct result of a lot of things, and the "neo tokyo everything is wired" atmosphere where the entire world's infrastructure can be rebuilt and all our cyberware can be altered in 5 years. In the real world there are still many, MANY companies running on old and outdated computer hardware because even many large companies cannot afford to replace their entire infrastructure because it's out of date. The freaking space shuttle runs on 386's. I'm not the only one picking up on the atmosphere change. See all the references to GITS on this forum.
QUOTE (blakkie) |
QUOTE | When the new books come out let's remove all specific class and item names and show both editions to someone that's never played SR and see if they even recognize it as the same game. At this point it appears the names are what keeps it familiar. |
That and it is a corp controled, magic infused, criminal infested world? And so on.  |
Yep, but those elemnts alone doesn't make it SR for me.
QUOTE |
About the speed of bringing in new RF networking; if the Matrix blew up good enough (fried lots and lots of hardware hooked up to it) that could remove enough of the infrastructure change barrier to allow technology that had existed in labs for some time to be rolled out enmass. Perhaps some enterprising party actually had prior knowledge of, or even created the '65 crash. So either they were ready to bring out new tech and push it into place. Or in a stroke of marketing marvel they expanded the potential market of the new tech by destroying vast swaths of hardware to make way for their product. |
That doesn't change the fact that many, many corps across the world would fold as a result. The virtually identical situation happened earlier in SR's history and it was called the crash of '29 and we took a serious step backwards. Coprs just don't have the cash, especially the smaller ones, to replace their infrastructure. If anything they go back to using OLDER systems to keep working. Even if the tech existed in labs it still costs tons to implement as it's new cutting edge tech. Even if they could know the crash was going ot happen they couldn't provide the infrastucture for a PLANET in 5 years. There would be a financial impact of epic proportions if all those systems died and had to be replaced.
For reference, see Crash of '29.
QUOTE (ryu) |
Our Group will be switching as soon as additional books for magic and cyber are available |
I thought one of the main points of SR4 was that no magic and cyberware books would be necessary, to condense all such rules into the core book.
Eldritch
May 9 2005, 04:30 PM
QUOTE |
I thought one of the main points of SR4 was that no magic and cyberware books would be necessary, to condense all such rules into the core book. |
That was what I thought their goal was as well - but it's really something like "All you'll need is the core rulebook to play the game. Other books are only neccessary to enhance game play."
Or something like that. But that's been true since 1st edition; All you really ever needed was the core book. It was all the other books that 'muddied the waters' for some players. (Or a lot, or half - depending on who you are listening to and your point of view)
The atmosphere of SR is going to be changed - to some degree or another. We're just gonna have to wait till GenCon to see how bad it really is.
In due time - SR4 will be in the same boat aas Sr1, Sr2, and Sr3. Tons of 'core rule books' to 'enhance' your game. And there will be new rules in the books, new gear, new spells, etc - and you'll have to have 4 books open to make a character. And possibly more to play. 'The rigger wants to what? Thats not in the core book is it? Rigger 15? Or SOTA 3011?'
Unless They Hire Mackie on to make a 4th edit char gen and sell it with the core book. With upgrades available as the books are released

But that will only help out those that are able to use a computer for char gen - there are a lot of unfortunates taht don't have that kind of access. So I guess thats not really fair....
<Sarcasm>I know! Every year publish an all inclusive Char Gen Book! Yeah, all the char gen rules, skills, spells gear, cyber - everything - with descriptions! That would be cool! And every year We'd have to buy a new one for continued 'game play enhancement'!!
Oooohhhhhh...</Sarcasm>
Penta
May 9 2005, 09:38 PM
Eldritch, I hope you're eaten alive by a pack of stray chihuahuas.
i've seen other people post the same complaint that you have, eldritch, and not one of them has come up with a satisfactory answer to that complaint. what, exactly, should be done to alleviate the 'problem' of games that are developed and expanded beyond the main book? should the game simply be frozen, never to advance further? should all books after the main book be made free of charge?
and 'problem' actually does deserve to be in quotes, unlike 'enhance' in your post. those quotes indicate that you should take the word or concept with a grain of salt, that the word or concept is somehow being misused by others. in the case of 'enhance', the word is not being misused at all, as evidenced by the fact that lots and lots of people play SR3 just fine with nothing but the BBB. those games could be enhanced by, say, M&M or Matrix, but they're certainly not necessary.
in the case of 'problem', though, it's much more appropriate. the 'problem', here is that the game is progressing. instead of stopping, and sinking into obscurity, the game is alive and growing. that really doesn't seem like a problem at all, to me.
Eldritch
May 9 2005, 10:20 PM
Please don't misunderstand me - I don't have a problem with the additional books - rigger, magic, cyber, etc. If I can't afford nothing else - those are the ones I buy.
Yeah, i know you can't cram everything into one book.
The problem I have is that one of the reasons they (The Devs) claim SR4 is being done is to eliminate some of the 'problems' caused by having so many core rule books. And thats just not going to happen.
Rules creep, or bloat or whatever you want to call it. It will continue in order for the game to progress. For them to say that they are trying to prevent/cure that is just dumb.
No Matter what - if you want 'enhanced' play you will have several books on the table. (Or hopefully, several PDF's loaded on the puter.

)
Oh, and bring on the Chihuahuas