Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Are you switching?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Cable
Lets face it, simply put, theres a lot of great source for SR3. After playing many roleplaying games, I've found Shadowrun to be a great balance between fun, fast action and complex rules. I like don't like over complex rules, and SR3 balances them very well. I won't be converting, there isn't anything wrong.

I think they're pulling a "D&D" here. They're not changing editions to fix the system, they're doing it so we have to rebuy all the same old source again. I've owned three different mage, rigger and matrix books. I'm done. I like the way it is. The SOTA updates don't include a heck of a lot of stats, its mostly world source. I thinks I'll be alright.

Excuse me if someone's already ranted on this. I haven't read that post and would like to know how other gamers are taking it.
Critias
I've gotta see. As much as I hate to say it, every FAQ posting is making me less and less excited...but, I'm a fanboy. Gotta buy it, gotta try it. Gotta make up my mind totally, for myself, when I see the finished product.
Fygg Nuuton
as of right now, yes i am changing. But i'm all about progress and the belief that these people are professionals and can do a better job than i can do.

if its a twenty page book though, thats a different story
blakkie
I put down a "Yes", but it's more like a "Yes, for now". I haven't seen anything yet that would convince it's not worthwhile. If only for deckers to be mobile with the team (i.e. playable) and to have the rules organized rather than rambling.
psykotisk_overlegen
I'll definetly have to see more, because if this might turn out great. But as of now, I'm not changing.
Pthgar
I buy just about every new SR book that comes out. I would have bought whatever they would have published instead of SR4. In the end if I don't switch now I'll switch at some later date when I want to be current and am to lazy to do conversions.
If it really is easier to learn and smoother to play, I'll be very excited. I've had people give up on SR because it had too many rules. These were not casuall gamers, they were full on hard core nerds.
If we have to, my group will house rule what we cannot swallow with SR4, just like we did with SR3. I doubt we'll have to make more than we did with SR3.
Grinder
I'll wait until i bought the new BBB and read the rules. Then i'll decide if i (and my group) switch over or continue playing sr3 or a mix out of both. Guess the latter one is the most likely option.
Catsnightmare
No. Though I will somehow obtain a copy and see if anything is worth retro-converting to SR3.
Grinder
When it comes to music i'm sort of old-school biggrin.gif but in rpgs i always enjoy new influence - and i guess sr4 will have a lot of new ideas which will be appealing to me and my fellow gamers. smile.gif
Cable
Here's the problem, they're widening the fan base. Now from a developers stand point and, of course, the bank accounts stand point thats a good thing. But, its our shadowrun. If you wanted a simple game, you'd have tried it, hated it, and then played D20 MODERN.

Lets face it, we play SR for a reason. Maybe I'm nuts.
Charon
Am I switching?

Yes, I love switching.

QUOTE (Cable)
I think they're pulling a "D&D" here. They're not changing editions to fix the system, they're doing it so we have to rebuy all the same old source again.


Whoah, bad example. If you think that updating AD&D wasn't needed, then I'm assuming that no revised edition in the history of roleplaying has ever met your approval.

The upgrade from AD&D from D&D 3e was desesperately needed and turned out great. If ever there was a necessary and successful new edition, it's that one.
blakkie
QUOTE (Cable)
Here's the problem, they're widening the fan base. Now from a developers stand point and, of course, the bank accounts stand point thats a good thing. But, its our shadowrun. If you wanted a simple game, you'd have tried it, hated it, and then played D20 MODERN.

Lets face it, we play SR for a reason. Maybe I'm nuts.

Nuts? Nah, just machocistic. wink.gif
DragginSPADE
Hmm... I still need to see more. A week ago I would have said yes. But the more they post on the blog, the less excited I am about the new edition.
Pthgar
That's why there are NDA's and stuff. Any news that comes out before the whole picture can be seen isn't likley to make people feel better. The DevBlog was really a sop to us on DS. I would have been just as happy with totally secrecy and wild speculation (except maybe a "Definatly not D20") because incomplete info is just as bad (or worse) as no info to me.
Whizbang
I'm not the keenest on changing...I mean, I'm just starting to understand SR3... and now they're on to SR4. I just can't win.
Whizbang
QUOTE (Charon)
Am I switching?

Yes, I love switching.

QUOTE (Cable)
I think they're pulling a "D&D" here. They're not changing editions to fix the system, they're doing it so we have to rebuy all the same old source again.


Whoah, bad example. If you think that updating AD&D wasn't needed, then I'm assuming that no revised edition in the history of roleplaying has ever met your approval.

The upgrade from AD&D from D&D 3e was desesperately needed and turned out great. If ever there was a necessary and successful new edition, it's that one.

The upgrade from D&D 3.0 to 3.5, however, wasn't.
Capt. Dave
I'll get the new BBB, read it over, try a few games with our group, and we'll all decide. I really want to like SR4, I just don't yet due to the small amount of info I've seen so far. Maybe we'll get used to the new system and love it. I hope so.
blakkie
QUOTE (Whizbang @ Apr 16 2005, 12:11 PM)
The upgrade from D&D 3.0 to 3.5, however, wasn't.

Yes, but it's shaping up that SR3 to SR4 is more akin to 2e to 3e. It has been, what, seven years since SR3? D&D 3e to 3.5e was more like 1/2 that time. Value to the player was dubious.

P.S. I personally just use the free electronic 3.5 SRD, which includes the key crunch for the DMG, epic (above 20th level), a lot of monsters, and psionics, (all that were separate books under 3.0). For me it wasn't much of a deal of new books, though there are people that had filled out the This & That series under 3.0 that certainly could feel compelled to buy the Complete Those heroic series.
Charon
QUOTE (Whizbang @ Apr 16 2005, 01:11 PM)
The upgrade from D&D 3.0 to 3.5, however, wasn't.

Considering that all you need to know about that has been put for free on the net by Wizard in their revised SRD, I don't see the problem. They've basically fine tuned the rules of 3e and let us use them for free. I haven't bought 3.5 but I do play with those rules.
blakkie
QUOTE (blakkie)
QUOTE (Cable @ Apr 16 2005, 09:45 AM)
Here's the problem, they're widening the fan base. Now from a developers stand point and, of course, the bank accounts stand point thats a good thing. But, its our shadowrun. If you wanted a simple game, you'd have tried it, hated it, and then played D20 MODERN.

Lets face it, we play SR for a reason. Maybe I'm nuts.

Nuts? Nah, just machocistic. wink.gif

BTW if you need any more proof of this machocitism go no further than the fact you are still posting here by don't plan on moving to SR4 even before you see actual details. I mean at least Catsnightmare is planning to umm, pirate parts of SR4 and try shoehorn it into SR3 as house rules. But apparently your answer is fixed already, but you are sticking around? spin.gif
Sunshine
I ran a test of the new game mechanic (as much as i know about it, that is) and it worked out quite fine. It turned out to be faster in resolving combat. As much as I know right now I will switch. But I am also a Fan of 7th Sea and it seems there are some similarities besides the fixed TN.

I'll get a copy of the Core Book anyway, just to see how the integration of De(Ha)ckers works out.

Charon
What's "machocitism" or being "machocistic" anyway?

In a thread about switching, you'd think people could spell "masochism" correctly. wink.gif
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Charon)


The upgrade from AD&D from D&D 3e was desesperately needed and turned out great. If ever there was a necessary and successful new edition, it's that one.

What? How can you say that? D&D 1st edition was the best. It was the funniest and most entertaining.

Like, in 1st edition Oriental Adventures, you could take a weapon proficiency in karate and do d6 damage per punch just like that. Also, if you assaulted someone with a pair of chopsticks you could do d3 damage per hit. How hilarious is that? Nothing satisfies you for the whole week more than hamming up a fake Japanese accent and busting out improbably damaging karate on the zombies that were rolled on the random encounter table.

1st edition also had the table where the DM could roll to automatically determine the disposition of NPCs that you hire in taverns. There was a small chance that you might end up hiring a psychotic torch bearer who would then try to kill you all in the dungeon. Nothing in 3rd edition gets that wacky, funny, or cool.

3rd edition just isn't fun. It lost all the quirky flavor from 1st and 2nd edition and replaced it with bland uniform material which is simplified and fast-tracked for the 12 year old power gamer. It has no personality; it's like McD&D or something.
Charon
Ah, sweet nostalgia. Makes every memory better.

There's still a lot of people with fond memory of D&D 1st edition. Not 1/1000th of these people still play, but they have fond memories.
blakkie
QUOTE (Charon)
What's "machocitism" or being "machocistic" anyway?

In a thread about switching, you'd think people could spell "masochism" correctly. wink.gif

LOL, nitpicking spelling in conversation text. The last refuge of the lost. wink.gif
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Charon)
Ah, sweet nostalgia. Makes every memory better.

There's still a lot of people with fond memory of D&D 1st edition. Not 1/1000th of these people still play, but they have fond memories.

Actually, the last time I played 1st edition oriental adventures was about a year ago. I enjoyed it much more than any 3rd edition game I ever played.
Charon
Then that makes you one of the aforementioned 1 in a 1000.
blakkie
QUOTE (Charon)
Ah, sweet nostalgia. Makes every memory better.

There's still a lot of people with fond memory of D&D 1st edition. Not 1/1000th of these people still play, but they have fond memories.

Yup, fond memories, and would never return. The rough parts just wore to hard over the years to make up for the good ones. So I savour the old and enjoy the new.

P.S. D&D 3e is definately more clinical (polished, professional, clean, but not really "simplistic") at it's base. But fortunately the player base is big enough that some really wild and wacky D20 stuff exists. For example I think someone ported that bizzaro late Gary Gygax module, the one with the magical eggbeaters and stuff.
Aristotle
I think asking people to choose before any hard data is available is a little silly. We simply don't have enough information to vote on, so we are forced to vote based on our gut reaction or our fears. I voted yes, because I'll more than likely buy the books regardless of whether I find time to run a game of Shadowrun 4e.

This upgrade is nothing like the D&D 3.0 to 3.5 debacle. That revision was all about refining current rules and, as others have said, you could get the updates to your 3.0 books for free online. Shadowrun 4e looks to be a major change to the mechanics of the game, along the lines of AD&D 2nd to D&D 3rd. While not everyone liked that change either, it can't be argued that it wasn't a significant enough change to warrant a new edition or that it didn't widen the Dungeons and Dragons player base a great deal.

I stopped running Shadowrun 3rd because of the headaches of the rules. I *love* the setting, and I even love the implications of the mechanics (tactical thinking over chance, a 'fire for consequences' magic system, and so on) but the implementation has always been too complex for my tastes.

Some folks will hate a new edition regardless of what direction it goes. Many of us are skeptical now but will likely enjoy, or at least accept, the changes made once the book is published, and hopefully we'll see some new faces enjoying the game too.
blakkie
QUOTE (Aristotle @ Apr 16 2005, 02:09 PM)
I think asking people to choose before any hard data is available is a little silly. We simply don't have enough information to vote on, so we are forced to vote based on our gut reaction or our fears. I voted yes, because I'll more than likely buy the books regardless of whether I find time to run a game of Shadowrun 4e.

It's not that silly for Cable because he's already decided with the very limited info he has. Besides there is a "Maybe" entry, although I think there should have been at least 4 or 5 entries:
- Yes, I'm a consumer slave to my Fanpro masters
- Probably, but i'm not fully commiting till i see actual detail
- Perhaps, i don't like to rely on my tarot cards so i'll need to see more before making up my mind
- Unlikely, but perhaps the final product will win me back (or i'll shamelessly steal the parts i like)
- No, I am a rock and shall not sway!

wink.gif
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Charon)
Then that makes you one of the aforementioned 1 in a 1000.

Well, if the other 999 people would go ahead and karate chop a zombie killing it ("judo...CHOP!") without needing to be a monk they would realize how cool 1st edition is too.
blakkie
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
QUOTE (Charon @ Apr 16 2005, 02:48 PM)
Then that makes you one of the aforementioned 1 in a 1000.

Well, if the other 999 people would go ahead and karate chop a zombie killing it ("judo...CHOP!") without needing to be a monk they would realize how cool 1st edition is too.

But when my chainshirt clad, fireball tossing War Mage 5/Barbarrian1 rages for the 3rd time that day (Extra Rage x 2) and headbutts the zombie into undead goo (Improved Unarmed Strike feat says you get to name which part of your body does the attack) it gets close enough for me. smile.gif
Charon
Lol.

Yeah, when I want to play wacky stuff, I play D&D. Halfling barbarian (love the image of 3 feet tall midget frothing at the mouth), Ogre painter... Once, after hearing of a senator elected posthumously in the USA, I decided to do that in my campaign. One of the PC was running for office and when he got killed during the campaign I got him to turn into a ghost. And he did serve a full term. I like D&D when I feel like playing silly stuff, which is most of the time.

Oh, and there was that bard/fighter I played who only sang about his own fighting prowess. I had these lyrics based on "Live is life" that all refred to the strenght and virility of my character and insisted that anyone who wanted to get the magicail bonuses linked to the song needed to sing along. rotfl.gif
Blitzen
QUOTE
But when my chainshirt clad, fireball tossing War Mage 5/Barbarrian1 rages for the 3rd time that day (Extra Rage x 2) and headbutts the zombie into undead goo (Improved Unarmed Strike feat says you get to name which part of your body does the attack) it gets close enough for me. 


Arhg. That's exactly why I don't play D&D 3rd. D&D use to be about adventures who were in many cases heroes, now its all about being a SUPERhero in a medieval fantasy setting.
Charon
QUOTE (Blitzen @ Apr 16 2005, 04:13 PM)
Arhg. That's exactly why I don't play D&D 3rd. D&D use to be about adventures who were in many cases heroes, now its all about being a SUPERhero in a medieval fantasy setting.

Superheros don't get killed like those guy. Being a D&D hero is the most dangerous RPG job for a PC that I know of if the DM doesn't pull punch.

Well, I'm hearing Chtullu and Paranoia are not conductive to long PC life either, but I've never played.

Beside, your heros are as wacky or epic as the DM and the player feel like making their campaign.
RunnerPaul
QUOTE (Charon)
Considering that all you need to know about that has been put for free on the net by Wizard in their revised SRD, I don't see the problem.

The sole exception being if you wanted to use one of the handful of "Iconic" D&D monsters, such as Mind Flayers, Beholders, and a few others, that WotC has designated as "non-OGL Product Identity Content" and thus not included in the SRD.
Dashifen
I've stayed quiet on the matter, but I'll post here. I've been playing SR3 through thick and thin and I'm excited to know that the current controllers of the game's future are interested and invested in seeing it have one.... a future that is.

Yes, I like third edition. I like the complexity of the rules. I like the dice pools the way they are and I'm a little leery of the directions that I've heard in the SR4 forum. But you know what, I don't see the ledger and the balance sheet. I haven't written for shadowrun (yet) and I haven't invested anything other than my spare time into this game that I love.

So, yes, I will be switching because I can only hope that those who are writing the source material and the rules as well as playtesting those rules and comparing them against other successful systems have done so with care, objectivity, honesty, and -- in the end -- with the game they love in mind.

Resistence to change only causes stagnation which, in the end, is the downfall of almost anything. If we don't change with the times, then the times pass us by. It's a simply biological rule that works pretty damn well in economics as well. If shadowrun doesn't re-invent iteself every now and again, then it runs the risk of going the way of the dodo. I look forwrad to GenCon and getting my shiny new SR4 core rulebook. I look forward to play testing it with members of my current SR3 group wou are all also looking forward to trying out the new system. Every member of the dozen or so people who play the game with me, discounting those here online, are interested in the changes and we intend to follow them, if for no other reason than to support the people who make the game we love.

/soapbox.
FrostyNSO
Yeah, just look at David Bowie (he's an immortal elf BTW). The guy has stayed with the times and has reinvented himself again and again, and the guy still sells out every venue he plays at.

I'm not thrilled with the prospect of having to buy a bunch of books again. I replaced my copy of the Matrix book and received it 2 days before they announced SR4, damnit. I like the SR3 magic system a lot. Still, I am hoping that the devs put forth an honest effort to improve the system but still retain many of the things that made SR feel SR. I like the setting, but for me, it was the rules and the settng that made SR what it was. The rules complimented the setting. If they can retain that same feel, I think SR4 will do well.
Vuron
At current I'm almost certain to upgrade to the new system. Considering I tend to lag way way behind in terms of the timeline the leap forward of 5 years won't be as useful to me.

Now if they rebooted the setting to a 2050 again with more plausible setting choices I'd be freaking ecstatic but as it is I'm pretty happy with things as is.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Blitzen)
QUOTE
But when my chainshirt clad, fireball tossing War Mage 5/Barbarrian1 rages for the 3rd time that day (Extra Rage x 2) and headbutts the zombie into undead goo (Improved Unarmed Strike feat says you get to name which part of your body does the attack) it gets close enough for me.


Arhg. That's exactly why I don't play D&D 3rd. D&D use to be about adventures who were in many cases heroes, now its all about being a SUPERhero in a medieval fantasy setting.

That's why I went and bought the Riddle of Steel sourcebook. So that I have the remote chance of someday playing a game where if someone stabs you...you actually die.


nyahnyah.gif
RangerJoe
So.... what color is the new BBB going to be anyways? It would be rough to have to come up with a new acronym like BMB (Big Mauve Book just doesn't do it for me....)
RunnerPaul
Beige.
Dan Difino
burgundy.
Glyph
I'll wait and see. The problem is that for many people, the new rules might seem like a giant step backwards. The assortment of SR3 sourcebooks gave a lot of options (metaraces, bioware, edges and flaws, drakes, new spells and totems, etc.), and the SR4 main book may not offer all of those options. It should, if they are really "streamlining" the rules.

I don't mind paying for a new edition. I don't even mind paying for additional sourcebooks later. But I do mind if they deliberately omit things, simply to leave it for the next sourcebook. Like SR III leaving smartlink II's and dermal sheathing out so they could have some "improved" 'ware for M&M. It's like D&D - classes like the paladin and monk started out as optional characters, but eventually were part of the core rules.

Now, I don't mind if some stuff gets left out - they can't get everything in there. But the essentials should all be there: initiation, the most common edges and flaws, and don't omit the "best" 'ware, guns, or spells to sweeten up the more specialized sourcebooks. Give us NEW content for those, and try to curb the "power creep" that has doomed so many other games.
FrostyNSO
QUOTE (Glyph @ Apr 16 2005, 10:20 PM)
But I do mind if they deliberately omit things, simply to leave it for the next sourcebook.  Like SR III leaving smartlink II's and dermal sheathing out so they could have some "improved" 'ware for M&M.

I can almost guarantee you that is going to be what happens. I pray that I'm wrong here, but...
blakkie
QUOTE (Blitzen @ Apr 16 2005, 03:13 PM)
QUOTE
But when my chainshirt clad, fireball tossing War Mage 5/Barbarrian1 rages for the 3rd time that day (Extra Rage x 2) and headbutts the zombie into undead goo (Improved Unarmed Strike feat says you get to name which part of your body does the attack) it gets close enough for me.


Arhg. That's exactly why I don't play D&D 3rd. D&D use to be about adventures who were in many cases heroes, now its all about being a SUPERhero in a medieval fantasy setting.

That's the thing, he isn't particularly overpowered. I even mixed in his race, Neanderthal, from a entirely different source book. But he doesn't really dominate (like core Druids can wink.gif ). I play him as a tribal shaman warrior (spontaneous arcane casting of combat orientated spells), often even seriously. Well battle tactics are ALWAYS serious, but other times too.

I'd never try to use D20 in a SR like environment (no D20 Modern for me, chemotherapy is such a drag). But 3e breathed a lot of fun back into D&D for me. It has such a breadth of options from the silly to the serious to the *sigh* melodramatic and so on.

Not that SR doesn't have that too, which is why i put up with the warts in the rules.
The Horror

Well, I've already sold all my SR3 core books. Did it within a week of the announcement for 4th ed. So yes, I will be converting over.


The Horror
mintcar
No question about it, Im switching.
Charon
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Apr 16 2005, 08:15 PM)
That's why I went and bought the Riddle of Steel sourcebook.  So that I have the remote chance of someday playing a game where if someone stabs you...you actually die.


nyahnyah.gif

I was intigued by that post and checked it out.

Well, this isn't anything like D&D and doesn't have the same appeal but... Man, this looks like a blast!

I'd love to use that system with the 7th Sea setting. Thanks for the insight.
Synner
QUOTE (FrostyNSO)
QUOTE (Glyph @ Apr 16 2005, 10:20 PM)
But I do mind if they deliberately omit things, simply to leave it for the next sourcebook. Like SR III leaving smartlink II's and dermal sheathing out so they could have some "improved" 'ware for M&M.

I can almost guarantee you that is going to be what happens. I pray that I'm wrong here, but...

You do realize there is a limit to what can feasably be crammed into a 340 page book?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012