... Or maybe not !
Other sourcebooks don't mean extra-rules... It could just mean new vehicules and datas for the rigger, new weapons for the streetsam, new spells for the shaman/magus and backgrounds linked to those characters... I don't think (and I do hope !) that they will write new set of rules in the sourcebooks, that's what they are trying to avoid with the new core book, if I haven't misunderstood the idea... And I think it's a pretty good one...
One rule, and more background !

well, they are eliminating some of the problems. a lot of the problems, actually. for instance, take magic. if the main rulebook contains rules for initiation and the like, that will be a huge leap forward--future books will contain new metamagics and the like, but you won't need those books to initiate.

Anyone who doesn't like a more streamlined, easier to learn system never had to try to teach someone first-edition Shadowrun.

I hated SR2 when it was introduced. I couldn't figure out how they'd get rid of staging without screwing the whole game up, but they did, and it worked. I disliked SR3 when it came out, because I couldn't figure out how in the world they could possibly base skills on attributes and it still be SR. But they did, and it worked.

Now given, this is a whole new company doing it this time rather than FASA, but I think it'll turn out fine, in the end.

If you say it's just to draw a new fanbase, then good. More players means more books sold, and therefore the game continues on. Even if they screw up here and there... every group has its own house rules. I was using dodge pool ten years before it was implemented in SR2. I still use modified melee rules, because I don't agree with how SR melee combat works, something I hope will be fixed in this new rules system.

I really hope one thing is fixed. I hope the classes are more balanced. One staple of SR I've never liked is that if you don't have a mge and they have magic, you're fragged. If you don't have a sam and they have a sam, you're (not so much, but still a little) fragged. If you don't have a rigger, and they do, et cetera, et cetera. Sure, being a creative GM helps, but that takes away from your creativity in other areas.

End of file. I'm rambling.

What it all boils down to is that this will still be the sixth world, and that's the important bit, chummer. That's why we play, not because of certain rules, but because of the fraggin' story. The unique world that is the backdrop that we love. At least that's why I keep slotting it.

Exactly. Sure, you can make a game for any group. but if you want to include magic in the story, and they don't have any mages, they're hosed. If your story features the Matrix in any way, and they don't have a decker, you have to rewrite your story.

The specialization of SR "classes" is good on a roleplaying level, but it makes it hard as hell to handle a game sometimes.

But I wouldn't know how to fix it. I'm not a game developer.

Which I will actually say is a good thing about the new edition (if I'm reading it right). I love the fact that SR is classless, but technically it's not. You're either magical or you're not. It LOOKS like SR4 will take away that binary answer, which is actually a neat idea. So you can have the street sam be a 'little' magical.

You could see it as binary, but you're blinding yourself. It's discrete, with multip... Oh wait. You're being obtuse.

Let's see how obtuse I am after some time in solitary Mr Dufresne!

I support the change. I always found the original rules to be too detailed and mired in endless minutiae. A simplified rule set would be a boon to Shadowrun. Apart from the name change for deckers, the new rules seem more logical. The rules and some source material is being updated for the new century, and thank god, because I've always felt that Shadowrun was like playing in the 1980s. I want new real-world technologies, new geopolitical developments and altered social ideas integrated into SR. About time.

I'll be buying this.

And flying cars dag nab it! I was promised fly cars in the new millenium!

:0

(disclaimer: I really don't want flying cars in SR....Jet packs however.....)

Eech, no flying cars, please. Flying cars are hard because of physics--it's hard to suspend dense, solid objects in air. Lots of tech is hard because of lack of knowledge--once we figure out how to do it once, doing it a million times will be easy.

[/nonsensical rant mode]

You'll hear this repeated ad nauseum, but when FASA closed shop SR was its bestseller, a good seller in the overall market, and was profitable enough to delay FASA's demise along with Battletech.

Aside from that, yeah, I want a dumbed-down system as much as I want a kick in the nuts.

I know a lot of younger gamers whose first RPG was SR. And they're still stuck to it. SR rules can be complex, but thats the problem most other RPGs have.

I guess I'm biased. I've only ever played SR, and I don't see the problem. If anything, from my POV some other games seem to treat the players like idiots.

I just don't know how to respond to Devourer of Souls parade of crap, so I won't.

One of the things I've always thought, though, and have expressed this to both Mike and Rob since I've become involved with the game as a freelancer: Shadowrun never assumed their players were stupid. They assumed that their players were too smart, and would be able to figure out some of those vague statements because they have a higher-than-average reading ability. This is what's led to the horrendous rules confusion.

I've been pushing, and will continue to push, for shorter, simpler declarative sentences and just plain nailing down some rules. I hate "It's suggested that players not be allowed to do this" kinds of rules.

I really need to get ready for work now. More later, I suppose.

She is witch ! Burn ! Burn !

By the way, Patrick, I do love your diplomacy skill !
You manage not say that SR3 was over-complicated with not so much gains (assuming your working on rules that are as fair, but simpler - I think it is possible)
I do like proportionnal use of creation pts / karma pts BTW ...
Because you said something like - munchkin is a player problem, I woul answer : except when design of rules push to be a munchkin ...

Good work to you ...

As someone who started playing SR in its earliest form(have played 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ed.) I can tell you that you do not have to have a group where every one knows and understands the rules frontward backwards and sideways, you do however need a core of the group who does.

I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to play in Patrick Goodmans campaign in Amarillo for several years and I would say on the whole over half the group only had a loose understanding of the game "mechanics" but because they could role play there charecters within the setting the games flowed well and we had fun playing.

What we also need to remember is that frequently the people we get into the games who are not the "hard core" gamers simply do not want to spend the amout of time it would take to read through all the rules to learn every thing. That is ok, they can still make excelent games.

As to the rules lawyers, I recall a phrase from our campaign that fits well when rules lawyering with a GM

"Tread lightly with Dragons, for you a crunchy and taste good with barbeque sauce."

I do agree with Patrick on the rules needing to be short and to the point, I recall that being a point our playtest group would frequently put forth during the FASA days.

Sorry to ramble all over the place but have been out of circulation for several years on the shadowrun front and wanting to get going again.

How're things in Oklahoma?

Currently cloudy and trying to rain, but I shot a good round of golf and I am off work today so life is good. Sent an email to your personal email, drop me a line when you have a chance.

myron

Well, sorry for being quite blunt on the other post, but anyway, due to some replies...

Since D&D 3rd was released, it got quite a fan base not only from old fans, but also a way-large new crowd. I started RPG with shadowrun, and yes, I play D&D 3.5 as well, and more often than shadowrun (intercalating sessions: two D&D 3.5 sessions, one star wars d20 session, one shadowrun session, one vampire the masquerade session).

Believe me. Take south america for example. In Brazil, local magazines develop simple rpg games for starters and perform integration programs at schools to bring rpgs to classes (I was skeptical at the begining, but the project so far has been a major success). Those people soon migrate for more complex systems (when I mean simple rpgs, believe me, it's CRUDE simple). And D&D becomes a very long stop for these folks (and, as far as I know, whitewolf products are side-by-side with D&D in the national scale).

And yes, I do realize that Shadowrun was the top-selling product at FASA at closing time. Just don't know if the figures and values were enough to keep the doors open. I'm way on the outside of that to be precise as clockwork.

Sorry Taki, in no way I intended to seem elitistic or whatsoever, and hope no offense was taken. I DO have a pretty good view of the statistics, and I'm not discussing the probability curve of exploding 6's, I guess everyone realizes how insane that curve can go. Older players aren't common as younger ones. I know a few who are hardcore veterans on AD&D (they didn't switch), and the older one on that group is around his 50's. When I was younger (emphasis on the younger, no, not enough, more emphasis), my father took me to a friend of his, to show me his lead miniatures. The man was around his sixties, was bent on lead miniatures, hand-painted them for a living, and was huge D&D (yeah, that first one, on the big box and all) fan, just lacking the play group. Yet, you got to see the other way 'round: most players quit the gaming tables after marriage, college and children. I got a little girl, five years old, and I'm still playing. Oh yeah, remember the "around 50's AD&D fan"? A judge. It depends from person to person.

And sorry Patrick, I do realize the problems in some rules on their proper explanation, I do agree such things should get as many improvements as they could, and since you're more at par with the FASA closedown than me, I do realize that much of my opinion may sound like crap to you, but from the outside, it's all I can see. Hope no offense was taken.

Ok, now I believe I made a pretty long post, again...

I don't see the point at all here...
Just to say that in my opinion, you can find a lot of players having played SR when they were 15 year old or so... And the rules were not a problem...
What makes the difference between 15 and 50 year old players is just the RP and the use of the background, in my mind... But I have never seen a system too "hard" to masterize... I was playing rolemaster when I was 13, and believe me, I am not a genius...
What has changed is that nowadays, I am more keen on "playing" my character than throwing dices everywhere each 2 minutes...

I've changed my mind. I'm not switching.

I'll buy the SR4 book, sure. But I am not going to play this game, because this game is not SR. I've been weary of making that comment compared to some of other users who already have. However, it has been my perception, and specifically in light of the fifth bowel evacuation, er... FAQ, that no matter how much the devs and playtesters think that they are not changing the game, not changing the story or the style or the focus, that they are IMO deluding themselves. The mechanics in many ways define the story. A starting mage can't cast a Force 50 Fireball spell to kill Lofwyr because the mechanics don't allow it (or rather, it becomes virtually impossible under the mechanics in place). The skill distribution, the powers and how they are used, and specifically how spells and metamagics are cast/used do have a storyline effect that will be changed just like they were when editions changed and you could now do stupid shit like astrally fly through a crowd of mundanes. The mechanics define the story, they provide a foundation and set up limitations on what can and cannot be done. Only in the most macro scale can that perhaps not be the case. People will still have various motivations and powers, and they will do things that should require tests like walking and chewing bubblegum. However, beyond that level the storyline will change. It is a given. And combined with the mechanics, and the fact that they will change the story into something else, I am sick of giving Fanpro the benefit of the doubt. I never should have. I should have remained entirely distrusting of everything they do, say, insinuate, or do not do. I am completely and utterly skeptical of SR4, its mechanics, its storylines, everything. They could finally fix the Matrix (not that they didn't have 16 years to do it or anything), but I don't care. SR4 will have to blow my socks off, and then maybe I'll play it. But until then I don't have any plans to do so.

So what do you think the SR4 storyline will become, defined by the changed mechanics?

Something weaker, weaker even that the street level grittiness of SR1. Those days have come and gone. There is a theme, an atmosphere that disappeared when SR2 was released. it wasn't just the mechanics, although the mechanics did change the theme considerably when combined with an assinine attempt to inject actual metaplotline into the game that involved stupid shit like the Horrors and IEs. SR1 worked because no one knew or expected those things, and you could put little references througout the game about weird, sick shit and shadowy dealings. But the game now is different. It's a more powerful, complex and intricate world. They seem hell-bent on eliminating the complexity of the system, of the mechanics, and thereby having a negative effect on the complexity of the world. I see a world where you either focus with laser intensity or become a useless jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none, only in thise case it's more like master of nothing, adequate at best, and useless most of the time.

If they want to go back to the idea, as was suggested in one of the documentaries on the Heat SE DVD that high-end crews eqv. to the one in the movie are rare then they are deluding themselves in suggesting that SR is a game about those people. You can't unmake these rules and mechanics and not change the world. SR1 had its time and place, and while it was cool it also had plenty of ridiculous elements. SR2 had its time and place, and SR3 has had its--and frankly I prefer SR3 with all of its flaws to something new because most of the flaws are in the one thing that they seem to want to protect above all else--the story. And the story's going to change because of what they do, and as far as I can tell they don't get it. I think the story for SR has been weak for a long time, and the more I think about it the more it is still weak, but just differently now. And I am sick to death of this being the one thing they don't want to change. If I was going to fundamentally alter everything about SR, I would specifically seek to burn down the story and how it's presented and rebuild it because right now the more I think about it the more it sucks.

And if it seems that I'm angry about SR4, as the posts in the FAQ 5 thread indicate, it's because I am. I only decided to post here in the hopes that someone would listen, a dev or a playtester, and first of all just think about what they're doing and consider some ideas about where I want the game to go within the entirety of the SR world. But they obviously have their own plans, their own ideas, and for me it's become as interesting, as fun, as useful as if I punched myself in the balls for the last two months. Maybe it's because I'm getting dumber in my old age and accustomed to things like this that I thought I could maybe trust them a little bit, maybe sway them a little bit. Was I stupid, or what? I should never, ever have trusted the devs, the playtesters, or anyone else because there are always going to be problems in a new edition. There will be fixes, and changes, and sooner or later we get SR5. And sooner or later the changes and fixes brought upon by SR4 and the fixes to SR4 render the game completely different from what it is now. Like I said, for all of its flaws I have been able to work around SR's insanity. It's a safe insanity. I'm finally old enough to appreciate and work around things and have a more legitimate perspective on the story, on the mechanics, and on the system as a whole.

I am not liking what I'm seeing, my ideas are in the minority on DS so they may as well have never been said if they were to change the minds of people who matter. I give up.

You should go and play Magic the Gathering...
Oups sorry, I am tired, I think it's the right time for me to go to bed... I just don't understand why you don't still play SR1 in this case...

Why?

SR1 had its own flaws. It was cool, but parts of it sucked a lot.

SR3 however has been the most adaptable for me. Besides, SR1/2 were for me another gaming lifetime ago. The story was also different that it is now for the rules that were given in their respective editions. The rules change. The story for SR1 was different with thing like auto successes, and SR2 was different with things like the Threat Pool. Like I've said, I stick with canon. If canon is 3e, then fine. It also makes more sense, and doesn't create some of the same situations and storytelling elements at the micro-gaming level that SR1/2 did with those and other elements.

But sometimes one has to draw a line in the sand. This is my sandline.

Moreover, since I only game online on Shadowland, I stick with their rules. When it was started by Dave Hyatt, it was 2e rules. When SR3 was released, the community adapted SR3 for the common areas, and it quickly became default everywhere. Likewise now, there has been a discussion about what will happen when SR4 is released, including the fact that being the most technologically-advanced interactive fiction website around it will have to have a new diceroller if, for example, 6s explode in SR4. Will it be SR4? No one knows for sure. And this of course doesn't help anything that I may lose the one place where I game if I don't buy into the SR4 rules.

I want to apologize to you, Crimson Dude, I was re-reading my post, and what I said was quiet stupid, and I didn't want to offend you...
My point is just : we don't know how SR4 will be... we should just wait and see... If they are just keeping all the things that made of SR3 a big hit, but just changing the rules, in the end, it won't change anything in the way to play SR... I don't think that in the end the impact on the world, on our SR, will be so big...
Just my two cents, and once more, sorry for my outburst... .It's quiet late here

And now we're likely to see the equivalent of the SR1 version of the Ares MP Laser from SSC with its Staging Code a whopping 8. Imagine that, needing 8 successes to stage up or down from an M wound (and the Power Level wasn't an "easy" TN). Of course, this is why it was helpful that Body Armor gave auto successes (A Predator did 4M2 damage. Frankly, you'd probably have done more damage if you fed it to someone than shoot them if they wore an Armored Jacket). Combat was a miserable nightmare before SR2 gave a flat Staging Code of 2.

So, watching this come back as the logical step in a Fixed TN system, I'm pretty skeptical. Like I said, SR1 had its place. Decking was long and drawn out, but in its own way much less complicated. Rigging was pretty simple compared to SR3. However, the changes that were made in the SR3 core book improved the game, its playability, and its atmosphere. SR4 is a devolution. Now, MitS and R3R may have made me want to kill the authors, but I don't buy into this "legacy system" bullshit. They added rules wholesale, and could have done so in whatever manner they wanted. There have been sourcebooks which replaced entire chapters of the core book before (VR2.0), so I don't see why they decided to become squeamish about revising rules while they were revising the storyline. They added rooms to the house, but the rooms didn't really hurt SR as a system. And where there are problems, they could have knocked down the walls first and remodeled. Instead they burned the house down to the foundation and are hoping the insurance company won't suspect arson and not pay out as they build a small condomium building on the property.


But just to give you an example of how the changes can effect a PC and their world, consider this. The Firearms skill disappeared when SR3 was released. A person's PC was a Firearms expert, and would continue to have and pursue high skills across the board in Firearms because that was the kind of PC he was. However, in SR3 it became ~8 (I can't even recall anymore) times harder to increased his across-the-board mastery of all firearms in SR3 (and at the skill levels of some existing PCs I've seen, that karma expenditure becomes incredibly high to boost them all by 1 point), and he begins to focus on a couple of the old faves (Pistols, especially) and lets the other skills languish even though he's supposed to be the badass with any gun. So it does make a difference IC and in how the story is played. The same thing is going to happen with the Magical Skills, too. I can see people foregoing Ritual Spellcasting completely, and some PCs will focus their progression on Counterspelling (God that's stupid. Why not stick with Dispelling?) since their Spellcasting is probably pretty good for a while and you can never have too much Spell Defense. The same goes with Conjuring, and IC and story-wise it does make a difference, because someone might find themselves rarely if ever Banishing Spirits, but in SR3 they can rely on the fact that if they ever did their training in Conjuring as a field has given them the necessary background to Banishing said Spirit. Meanwhile, in SR4 if they neglect their Banishing skill and one day find themselves under attack by a freed spirit because its summoner just got nuked to Hell by their teammate they will suffer the consequences of neglecting their Banishing studies when it becomes mechanically and story-wise much more difficult to Banish said Spirit, and in turn that Spirit cripples or kills him, his teammates, or some hapless bystander.

Oooh.... Sarcasm.

Variable success thresholds are the logical progression, like I've said here for several weeks. Don't be an idiot, or at least don't act like one when you know better.

If magic is the linked attribute (and if it's not, what will magic link to?), you're not likely to be incompetent simply by virtue of having no skill to speak of. You'll still have quite a few attribute dice.

The sensible thing to do will be to increase magic as much as possible, except supposedly the numbers have been run, so there will presumably be some reason why you shouldn't just neglect all your magical skills and raise your magic through the roof (unless magic is capped at some low level, regardless of initiation).

Oh, and wouldn't that be swell.

Yeah. On the surface, I like that your Magic attribute suddenly takes a much more active role in what your mage (or whatever you want to call them) does, every day. In the past -- a few metamagics aside -- Magic was just sort of there, reminding you that you were stupid to try and cast spells any more poweful than it. In SR4, at least, a character's raw magical ability (ie, Magic attribute) will be something they very actively use, which makes it, I think, a little more exciting and usefull.

On the down side...I just...well, yeah. Don't like anything else about the idea.

Hey, just think about how easy it will be for Him to reach the maximum potential of his new Magic Attribute now!

Although this does kind of throw a wrench into how Adepts go about gaining more Power Points.

*fingers crossed*

No Adeptness Metamagic... No Adeptness Metamagic...

The higher someone's Magic attribute gets, the harder it is to deal them Deadly damage and make it an issue. Yes, the GM can come down on them like the wrath of god if he wants to (and whenever he wants to) for the sole purpose of forcing a Loss Check -- but if your GM does that sort of thing only to "enforce" a cap on the Magic stat, maybe you need a better GM.