Most of the gamers I have played SR with over the years kept complaining about one thing: The System. Either it was character generation, too many rules, the odd 6 or 7 TN or simply the complexity of it. I for one dislike the current system. In fact the only part of the system I like is the cyberware and magic rules.
So I figure with most of the SR4 hate going on here on dumpshock I am starting to think that the people here are just too in love with the game itself to see it changed in anyway. Of course people are not going to love everything about the new system, but seriously their is no way it can be worst then the chaotic pile of rules we have right now.
I say stop seeing all the negative or perceived negative untill we have a grander view of this new thing. No one will gain anything from saying I hate the new rules they suck I want combat pool. Just wait and see you might even like them better.
By the way I heard lots of comments of people bashing white wolf and exalted. Calling it retarded or worst. I would like to remind people that the game is really successful these days. Its quite a good and original Game. Fanpro could really learn a thing or two from White Wolf.
Full Version: Rant...
Righteous. I don't like the WW/WoD setting but my team likes to play the original Trinity as a break from SR. I love SR as much as the next guy and have been playing since 1st ed. If it's going to continue it needs new player. If this is the way to do it, I'm supportive as long as SR remains relatively SRish (I'll let you all decide what that means.) So far, it looks like 90% of the things I like about SR are still going to be around. It would only take 51% to keep me around.
How is SR complex compared to any of the other major systems? Most big systems these days are d20, and d20 is far too complicated for me. d20 has target numbers on a much bigger scale, endless modifiers, umpteen pages of feats, all these pumped up artificial character classes and prestiege classes with very specific amounts of EXP you need to level up and very specific powers that make you roll very specific dice, and on top of that it dosen't even make sense. It's like if you want to play a medieval fantasy game where getting into a sword fight with three guys at once is a suicidial proposition just like it should be in real life you have to go to Riddle of Steel or something; the d20 rule set is inherently counter-intuititve.
I think that d20 is extremely complex compared to Sr 3rd ed.
EDIT:
Oh, heh...
I think that d20 is extremely complex compared to Sr 3rd ed.
EDIT:
Oh, heh...
| QUOTE |
By the way I heard lots of comments of people bashing white wolf and exalted. Calling it retarded or worst. I would like to remind people that the game is really successful these days. Its quite a good and original Game. Fanpro could really learn a thing or two from White Wolf. |
Ah hah hah, that's the funniest thing I've heard all year. That anything or anyone could learn a "thing or two" from White Wolf. Hah, there's a reason that I've known about White Wolf for years, read through more than once sourcebook, and then very carefully avoided ever playing it.
So, like, when Fanpro goes to "learn a thing or two" from White Wolf, they can supercharge the background story with whiney vampire angst. Yes, *that* will make SR the most popular game ever!
Wrongtious. I would like to remind people that successful != good.
~J
~J
I played some Vampire and Werwolf stories even Mage and I never got comfortable with the system (ones cancelling successes 
). When I startet to play with a new Group two years ago they refused to play SR because the disliked the systems complexity. My players were ranting about haveing to read trough 2 to 3 books to know what their character "could" do. I hope the SR4 Edition will change their minds.
I think SR3 got too complex for "starters". To many books to wade trough to get an Idea what a rigger could or not, what a decker could do or not, and so on. Im with SR since 1ed and so I could figure out the changes a step at a time. Therfore a "start over" is timely.
sorry for the grammar, havent slept in a long time and am not a native speaker.
). When I startet to play with a new Group two years ago they refused to play SR because the disliked the systems complexity. My players were ranting about haveing to read trough 2 to 3 books to know what their character "could" do. I hope the SR4 Edition will change their minds. I think SR3 got too complex for "starters". To many books to wade trough to get an Idea what a rigger could or not, what a decker could do or not, and so on. Im with SR since 1ed and so I could figure out the changes a step at a time. Therfore a "start over" is timely.
sorry for the grammar, havent slept in a long time and am not a native speaker.
| QUOTE (Sunshine @ Apr 16 2005, 01:48 PM) |
| ... I never got comfortable with the system (ones cancelling successes ).... |
Ironically the guys i first played SR with had a house rule of exactly that, only they thought it was the correct rule.
Once I realised how painful it was to do anything with it i went through the rule book to make sure it was correct, and fixed up that situation straight away. 
EDIT: And it wouldn't be nearly as bad a rule with d10 as with d6.
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
| So, like, when Fanpro goes to "learn a thing or two" from White Wolf, they can supercharge the background story with whiney vampire angst. Yes, *that* will make SR the most popular game ever! |
Huh, isn't that where the inspiration for the IE Leonardo came from?
| QUOTE |
| How is SR complex compared to any of the other major systems? Most big systems these days are d20, and d20 is far too complicated for me. d20 has target numbers on a much bigger scale, endless modifiers, umpteen pages of feats, all these pumped up artificial character classes and prestiege classes with very specific amounts of EXP you need to level up and very specific powers that make you roll very specific dice, and on top of that it dosen't even make sense. It's like if you want to play a medieval fantasy game where getting into a sword fight with three guys at once is a suicidial proposition just like it should be in real life you have to go to Riddle of Steel or something; the d20 rule set is inherently counter-intuititve. I think that d20 is extremely complex compared to Sr 3rd ed. |
D20 has a huge depth of material for it, but that isn't a complexity of the system. The basic framework is a clean, professional definition of the system (in comparison to SR) allows you to mostly plug in all those different classes, spells, feats, etc. The basics aren't that tough at all. So the entry point is easy, but there is depth of material there if you want it.
d20 has an amazingly simple system for resolving tests (hence the name), and most games that use it have an amazingly elaborate set of modifiers to use for those tests.
You have to read multiple D&D books to know what your character can do. If you're the GM, you have to have a veritable library of class-specific books, monster books, etc. etc.. As a player, the D&D entry barrier seems to be about two books (PH and class-specific book), and as a GM, it seems to be about 15 (PH, all class books, monster books, setting books, etc. etc.). This stuff isn't just there "if you want it". It's forced upon you as GM because each player picks up stuff for their class. You could restrict it to the core books only, but then you can restrict SR to the core book only, too.
I think d20 has that type of system locked up. If you want amazingly simple rules along with endless piles of elaborate modifiers, generating a time-consuming buffet of fancy choices that all boil down to a system of resolution that generates bizarre outcomes, d20 is the way to go, hands down. It's popular for a reason, and not just because of the marketing muscle of WotC. They've implemented that theme well.
So I think it's a mistake for SR to try to out-d20 d20. There's no reason to have a set of rules as fragmented and incoherent as SR3 has now, but there is a lot of room left for having rules that are faster to learn and are more coherently presented without using a dice system that changes the feeling of the world.
With a fixed TN system, I think the world is going to seem a lot more spastic, less predictable. Without combat pool, I think that encounters are going to be fairly dull things where two sides line up and go at it until one side falls over. (Keep in mind--multiple people firing on one target was a good strategy with combat pool, but it's not as useful without!) Without karma pool, favorite characters would have to take on really easy encounters, or they will die--whether edge can balance this is not yet clear.
To me, these changes don't just make things streamlined. Heck, if all the old modifiers are there, except as dice/threshold modifications, it won't really be streamlined at all. The changes make the system simpler, and they make it less rewarding to play a long-term game, where you really get to know your character, their strengths and weaknesses, and they come out on top not just because they have good stats, but because you know their capabilities and know where to apply them. Granted, this could be changed by more rules that we don't know about, but so far I think the picture is of shallow simplicity like d20, rather than deep elegance like...well...hm. Not many systems like that, are there?
You have to read multiple D&D books to know what your character can do. If you're the GM, you have to have a veritable library of class-specific books, monster books, etc. etc.. As a player, the D&D entry barrier seems to be about two books (PH and class-specific book), and as a GM, it seems to be about 15 (PH, all class books, monster books, setting books, etc. etc.). This stuff isn't just there "if you want it". It's forced upon you as GM because each player picks up stuff for their class. You could restrict it to the core books only, but then you can restrict SR to the core book only, too.
I think d20 has that type of system locked up. If you want amazingly simple rules along with endless piles of elaborate modifiers, generating a time-consuming buffet of fancy choices that all boil down to a system of resolution that generates bizarre outcomes, d20 is the way to go, hands down. It's popular for a reason, and not just because of the marketing muscle of WotC. They've implemented that theme well.
So I think it's a mistake for SR to try to out-d20 d20. There's no reason to have a set of rules as fragmented and incoherent as SR3 has now, but there is a lot of room left for having rules that are faster to learn and are more coherently presented without using a dice system that changes the feeling of the world.
With a fixed TN system, I think the world is going to seem a lot more spastic, less predictable. Without combat pool, I think that encounters are going to be fairly dull things where two sides line up and go at it until one side falls over. (Keep in mind--multiple people firing on one target was a good strategy with combat pool, but it's not as useful without!) Without karma pool, favorite characters would have to take on really easy encounters, or they will die--whether edge can balance this is not yet clear.
To me, these changes don't just make things streamlined. Heck, if all the old modifiers are there, except as dice/threshold modifications, it won't really be streamlined at all. The changes make the system simpler, and they make it less rewarding to play a long-term game, where you really get to know your character, their strengths and weaknesses, and they come out on top not just because they have good stats, but because you know their capabilities and know where to apply them. Granted, this could be changed by more rules that we don't know about, but so far I think the picture is of shallow simplicity like d20, rather than deep elegance like...well...hm. Not many systems like that, are there?
| QUOTE (Sunshine) |
| I think SR3 got too complex for "starters". To many books to wade trough to get an Idea what a rigger could or not, what a decker could do or not, and so on. Im with SR since 1ed and so I could figure out the changes a step at a time. Therfore a "start over" is timely. |
Unfortunately, I don't think that a new version will solve the problem of having to own multiple books. I was just looking at the description for Street Magic in the Fanpro Catalog and I am afraid that it will be more of the same.
From 2005 Fanpro Catalog
| QUOTE |
| Street Magic™ - Stock #: FPR 26004 The advanced magic book for Shadowrun, Fourth Edition. Details the nature of magic and its effects on society in the year 2070. Also contains advanced rules for alternate magic traditions, initiation and metamagic, enchanting, new spells and adept powers, the metaplanes of astral space, and a host of magical threats. Street Magic contains everything the players and gamemasters need for magic in SR4. |
Reads kind of like the old MiTS book doesn't it. I wonder when they are going to put out info on other books like cyberware, guns and equipment, and hacking.
Probably as soon as they can come up with a way to say, "You didn't have to buy all six SR3 rulebooks to run SR3, but it became expected, and we killed 3e because of it, but this time we swear it's different even though there are six supplemental rulebooks for 4e that look an awful lot like their 2e and 3e counterparts. But they just look the same. We're not adding rules or anything. Just like we're not adding rules into the SOTA books or place books, unless we are."
And this, fundamentally, is why I do not trust the release of 4e as a panacea for all the ills created by 3e.
Actually, since I wrote 3 pages worth of posts about this since last weekend on another site, let me just cut & paste my greatest hits.
And this, fundamentally, is why I do not trust the release of 4e as a panacea for all the ills created by 3e.
Actually, since I wrote 3 pages worth of posts about this since last weekend on another site, let me just cut & paste my greatest hits.
| QUOTE (Post 3) |
I do also see the irrational exhuberance for the system waning and waning quickly because the rules make no coherent sense so far as we can see. And like the previous editions, like I wrote in the longer post to the SR4 page, there will inevitably be a point in SR4 where the rules bloat and confusion will become so great that we will need SR5. I mean, looking at the SR3 book, they were well-intentioned in making the game simpler and easier to use for non-SR players. They were seeking an increase in market share, and in fact they were seeing an increase in sales up to the point where FASA went into bankruptcy. FANPRO, to my knowledge, has never recovered from that hit. I used to see SR books everywhere I went that sold books. Right now, the store I go to to rent DVDs and look at new books has one book, and it's the same copy of MitS that they've had since 2002. Hell, the used bookstore next to the only gaming store in the state has more SR books that the gaming store right next door does (albeit, those are mostly SR1 and 2 books. But it's also where I bought my copy of SR3 for half off) whereas the last time I went to the gaming store they had the SR1 GM Screen, WotC, New Seattle, and YotC. |
| QUOTE (post 2) | ||||||
I was flipping through my virtually-untouched copy of VR2.0 last night, and I read the introduction. This is what it said.
Then I read the Introduction to Shadowrun, Third Edition.
And the Developer's Say:
Some people... They never learn. Excuse me if I don't buy the hype ... of "easier," "streamlined," "simpler," or any of this other shit that they are flinging at us like deranged monkeys. The fact is that this is now the third time that they have felt the need to "simplify" and "streamline" the core rules, let alone the entirety of a set of mechanics for, say, the Matrix. It's not even funny to read, "if you pick up the Shadowrun rulebook, you don't have the rules you need to play the game... if you tell today's roleplayer that he needs to buy four or five books just to get the core rules of your game, you might as well fold up your tend and go home;" it's a ... tragedy. The same people who said that they were going to make the game simpler and easier and more accessible to the community at-large ended up created a system that made SR2 look simple because they succumbed to the same catastrophic failures of SR2: they verwhelmed the players with the requirement that you need SR3, M&M, CC, Matrix, MitS, SR3 Comp (you know, to have the jumping rules) and R3R for any semblance of a comprehensive campaign. They actually managed to succeed in making the game more complex than SR2 was. Now, frankly I am not that concerned with the complexity of the SR3 rules. But I think that the current developers are kidding themselves, and us, if they think that the current game mechanics are going to ever be "simple" or "streamlined." We already know of three supplements being released (or planned to be released) in Q4--SR4 GM Screen, On the Run (nice work ... not adding an adventure to the core rulebook), and Street Magic (already the SR4 version of MitS, which is quite encouraging)--and they are setting themselves up for failure if they expect to convince us that the rules are going to be simpler when they will inevitably release a whole new rulebook for hacking, combat, magic (see above), cybernetics, more hacking (because the core book and the first hacking book will of course contains errors, omissions, and ass-backwards rules), and the inevitable companion/ advanced optional rules book that includes such crazy ideas as "Combat Pool" or new staging rules, or "clarifications" or "suggestions" for new GMs who can't quite wrap their heads around the "complex" rules of SR4. And quite frankly, we can expect this all to be mentioned in SR5 when they say, as they did in SR3 and will in SR4, that there are too many rules, they're too complex, and that you needed umpteen books to run a basic game (which is pure BS to me in any edition). I have always played this game with the understanding that everything... everything... outside of the core rulebook was optional. You don't need any of the five game mechanics rulebooks. You won't need the book Street Magic any more than one needs MitS to start playing a mage in SR3. A new edition rulebook isn't going to solve the problem anymore than an 850-page tome would if the purpose is to give a starting player access to all of the rules and tech ever created (the NSRCG is for the latter), and it is self-defeating because eventually sometime in the future, in say 2007, there is going to be a SOTA2072 book which introduces some new skill, or metamagic, or technology. And eventually seven years from now 4th edition is going to be bogged down in rules bloat just like SR3 is if you judge the criteria of the complexity of the rules for beginning players as being the aggregate total of all of the mechanics and supplemental content in all of the books from August 2005 to when SR5 is released, plus the "fluff" in all of the supplements in the 16 years preceding the release of SR4. It's an impossible standard to meet if you assume that the new player to SR is going to want, or need, the six rulebooks for SR3 to start a game unless they are really optimistic, or really stupid. ... If they still use even the vague notion of "streamling" as they used in VR2.0 for the Matrix mechanics or SR3 to the previous editions, then we're screwed anyway because there will inevitably be some sort of rule bloat or complexity that is going to make the game more complex than what could be fit on a single sheet of paper, or a single sheet for the three main mechanics. The fact that the rules have been explained to be sufficient to explain in two or three pages per mechanics setting (physical combat, magic, and hacking), then my concern is what the rest of the core book will consist of besides those rules ... I have little doubt that the SR4 core book will be as long or longer than the ~325 pages of the SR3 core book, and in the 325 pages remaining for the actual game mechanics, beyond the 2-3 pages of basic mechancis for each "setting" there is going to be ample room to cause untold chaos which will have to be fixed in yet more rule books, and the cycle will begin again. ... I can't exactly appreciate the fact that they don't have enough respect for the existing fan base to include the SR3-4 conversion guide in the book, which should be no more than a couple of pages if you buy into the hype ... but rather stick it on the web. I can access it, sure, but I shouldn't have to just because I can... |
Shorter rant: Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. Just because the TN will be fixed doesn't mean that the rules will inherently be easier or "streamlined." And when SR4 releases Rigger 4, and Street Magic, and M&M 2.0, and SR4Comp, and Matrix 2.0, and Cannon Companion 2.0, there will no doubt be rules in them--Rules that aren't all noted as "(Optional)" any more than their 3e counterparts are. And eventually in seven years we will have rules in multiple supplements, place books, SOTA books, campaign books, sourcebooks, right next to the new toys and concepts (e.g., new magical traditions), and the rules bloat will never end.
SR3 was explicitly written to prevent rules-bloat and look how well they succeeded in that task. By their own admission, the system created in itself a condition where they doomed themselves when combined with FASA's bankruptcy. Like Mike said, "if you tell today's roleplayer that he needs to buy four or five books just to get the core rules of your game, you might as well fold up your tend and go home. (SR3, p.322. Emphasis mine)
So forgive me if I don't think that this is a set-up, because it sure smells like one.
I think people are overstating the complexity of the d20 system sure with Dnd 3.0 and 3.5 d20 ca be extremely complex but there are some really stripped down d20 variants like Mutants and Masterminds and Blue Rose that simplify the d20 core mechanics to a huge degree and stil evoke a huge amount of uniqueness to the setting.
I think the key problem I had with SR3 and previous versions was that the rules for the various subsystems often had limited resemblance to the core rules. Decking and Rigging and some aspects of magic seemed to use significantly different rulesets than combat and regular skills. Instead of being based on a modular frameset the system felt like it had clunky bolt on rules
I think the key problem I had with SR3 and previous versions was that the rules for the various subsystems often had limited resemblance to the core rules. Decking and Rigging and some aspects of magic seemed to use significantly different rulesets than combat and regular skills. Instead of being based on a modular frameset the system felt like it had clunky bolt on rules
| QUOTE (Vuron) |
| I think people are overstating the complexity of the d20 system sure with Dnd 3.0 and 3.5 d20 ca be extremely complex but there are some really stripped down d20 variants like Mutants and Masterminds and Blue Rose that simplify the d20 core mechanics to a huge degree and stil evoke a huge amount of uniqueness to the setting. |
Hey, I've heard of Blue Rose, but never seen it. My friend who is an RPG store owner told me it was an effort to appeal to women by making the game less rules and combat-centric and emphasizing role playing more.
...wouldn't that off the bat offend women into not picking it up?
| QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0 @ Apr 16 2005, 11:33 PM) |
| Shorter rant: Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. Just because the TN will be fixed doesn't mean that the rules will inherently be easier or "streamlined." And when SR4 releases Rigger 4, and Street Magic, and M&M 2.0, and SR4Comp, and Matrix 2.0, and Cannon Companion 2.0, there will no doubt be rules in them--Rules that aren't all noted as "(Optional)" any more than their 3e counterparts are. And eventually in seven years we will have rules in multiple supplements, place books, SOTA books, campaign books, sourcebooks, right next to the new toys and concepts (e.g., new magical traditions), and the rules bloat will never end. So forgive me if I don't think that this is a set-up, because it sure smells like one. |
I won't bother replying to all of this. A lot of it makes sense and a lot of it is based on wrong assumptions.
What I will say is:
First, SR4 uses essentially the same mechanic for skills, rigging and decking. That alone counts as a huge amount of streamlining. Furthermore building a common system from scratch, rather than patching something onto an existing system, represents an approach that wasn't even attempted in the previous versions of the Matrix and rigging rules no matter what VR2 and Rigger2 say.
Second, if all additional supplements stick to the same core mechanics then rules complexity will diminish the impact of rules bloat. Yes, a certain amount of rules bloat is inevitable - companies need to make money and rulebooks sell better than sourcebooks- however, for whatever its worth let me assure you FanPro is attempting to keep the investment in "core" rulebooks to a minimum. Furthermore a new system and new books also allow for future Indexing on a level that was retroactively hard to accomplish in SR3, this should also keep complexity down by facilitating referencing in the face of inevitable rules proliferation.
PS: Personally I hope FanPro will continue with SOTA style updates after the first corebooks rather than spread around rules updates but right now post-SR4 formats are still up in the air.
| QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0) |
| Actually, since I wrote 3 pages worth of posts about this since last weekend on another site ... |
What site?
| QUOTE (Ellery @ Apr 16 2005, 04:24 PM) |
| d20 has an amazingly simple system for resolving tests (hence the name), and most games that use it have an amazingly elaborate set of modifiers to use for those tests. You have to read multiple D&D books to know what your character can do. If you're the GM, you have to have a veritable library of class-specific books, monster books, etc. etc.. As a player, the D&D entry barrier seems to be about two books (PH and class-specific book), and as a GM, it seems to be about 15 (PH, all class books, monster books, setting books, etc. etc.). |
WTF??? Look through multiple books??? If your PC summons a fair amount then you might want the MM, but actually the important bits for that that are available, legally, in a handy public domain type XLS file. But other than that the PHB is pretty much all you need unless the DM lets you go magic item shopping in the back of the DMG.
As can GM you can do it with 1 book, the PHB. At least books you pay for, all the rest is online in various electronic formats (including full hyperlink if that floats your boat). Typically it's GM with 3 (DMG, MM, PHB) as the base. That actually provides quite a bit.
Now if the DM/players want to open the floodgates into the the plethora of material available (outside of psionics or >20th level, the base of which is free) then 15 books/PDFs/etc. might not begin to cover it.
But the base classes are playable, well defined, and self-contained within the core. Plus comercial adventure modules are pretty much self-contained as well, assuming of course you have the core, unless they were designed specifically so as part of a campaign world.| QUOTE |
| This stuff isn't just there "if you want it". It's forced upon you as GM because each player picks up stuff for their class. You could restrict it to the core books only, but then you can restrict SR to the core book only, too. |
Puh-lease. The rules and data for the archtypes in SR3 are bare, bare bones compared to the trimmings (although there are a lot of those indeed) that extra D20 books provide for the base classes. The rules aren't even in the SR3. The extra stuff in the D&D supplements aren't even really rules, they are reference data that you use with the rules that are in the core. With SR3 not only were there substantial rules in there, the suppliments referenced each other. The SR3 supplemental books were really partially core books, partially supplemental.
D20 may give the cancer, and it has 3 core books for GMs (1 for players). But at least D&D is well organized cancer, and you truely can GM with only 1 book purchased.
P.S. As a tip, don't have the GM buy the suppulments. If the player wants to use something in some book somewhere he should be the one providing the required documentation. This rule helps take a huge load off the GM.
| QUOTE |
| WTF??? Look through multiple books??? |
Yeah, when you have your calculated armor class and you're wearing a piece of armor from the FR book, and have a prestige class from the Complete Warrior, and have dual-classed as a psion--and you put on a magical ring, you're telling me you don't have to go through each book to make sure that the ring's dodge bonus stacks with the types of bonuses given by all the other materials?
I don't know how you play d20, but I think the reason SR3 seems like it requires so many books in comparison is in large part because you're playing the two games different ways.
| QUOTE |
| The extra stuff in the D&D supplements aren't even really rules, they are reference data that you use with the rules that are in the core. |
That's true, to a large extent (if you don't pay attention to Unearthed Arcana). That's why it would be nice to have a SR4 that was more disciplined than SR3.
| QUOTE |
| P.S. As a tip, don't have the GM buy the suppulments. If the player wants to use something in some book somewhere he should be the one providing the required documentation. This rule helps take a huge load off the GM. |
The GM then can't use anything in that book for NPCs, but I guess that's okay. And if that's okay, then you can use the same policy in SR, also: :Want to initiate? Okay, get me the material from MitS. New piece of cyber? Let's see your copy of M&M."
| QUOTE |
| Most of the gamers I have played SR with over the years kept complaining about one thing: The System. Either it was character generation, too many rules, the odd 6 or 7 TN or simply the complexity of it. I for one dislike the current system. In fact the only part of the system I like is the cyberware and magic rules. |
I've been In SR since it was released. In fact I worked in a gaming shop at the time. I Sold dozens and dozens of copies of the Core book. We ran dozens of games and a very long lasting campaign.
The only complaint I've ever heard about the rules is the Matrix not being easily integratable with the rest of the group. Yeah, there was a learning curve - but we all got past it. First time gamers and expierenced gamers alike. I don't buy that the entire system was broke. Ya, it had flaws - but they all do.
| QUOTE |
| So I figure with most of the SR4 hate going on here on dumpshock I am starting to think that the people here are just too in love with the game itself to see it changed in anyway. Of course people are not going to love everything about the new system, but seriously their is no way it can be worst then the chaotic pile of rules we have right now. |
No, I think most of the 'hate talk' is form the 'they don't need to completely rewrite the rules' camp. It wasn't broke so bad that an entire overhaul was needed. It did need some reorganization in the MRB, and a couple tweaks to the main rules. I like the sound of the wireless matrix bringing the decker back into the group. Never had a problem with the rigger being out of sorts - but they did have the most complex rule set to mess with.
| QUOTE |
| I say stop seeing all the negative or perceived negative until we have a grander view of this new thing. No one will gain anything from saying I hate the new rules they suck I want combat pool. Just wait and see you might even like them better. |
Sorry again - but we will discuss what they have told us. It's expected. And we will say what we don't like. If you've been following it all you'll see that some of the initial supporters are backing off, and that some of the initial 'haters' are swinging around. But you have to admit, a lot of what we've been told is a radical change form the original rules. And most of us posting here have been playing those rules for a long, long time. And we like them - with all of there idosyncrsies.
| QUOTE |
| y the way I heard lots of comments of people bashing white wolf and exalted. Calling it retarded or worst. I would like to remind people that the game is really successful these days. Its quite a good and original Game. Fanpro could really learn a thing or two from White Wolf. |
I do agree with you here. I'm tired of other games getting slammed. I've played WOD - I liked it. The only reason I stopped was that my gamers all drifted off. I've played tons of other systems. I like D20 - I've just recently gotten into that system, and I don't see why so many are negative about it. Except maybe they don't like it because it is popular, and everywhere. Yeah it's amazing what happens to a system when you put tons of money behind it - and OGL the rule set.
On conclusion, I disagree - the game needed to be repaired, not rebuilt. And it needed a promotional program.
| QUOTE (Ellery @ Apr 16 2005, 10:30 PM) | ||
Yeah, when you have your calculated armor class and you're wearing a piece of armor from the FR book, and have a prestige class from the Complete Warrior, and have dual-classed as a psion--and you put on a magical ring, you're telling me you don't have to go through each book to make sure that the ring's dodge bonus stacks with the types of bonuses given by all the other materials? I don't know how you play d20, but I think the reason SR3 seems like it requires so many books in comparison is in large part because you're playing the two games different ways. |
Nah, it's because they are "organized" differently. Even when using extra source books with D&D it's easier because stuff generally is distilled down to a stat block or less. Seriously, how many times do you look up the AC for a piece of armor??? If it's really rare it gets written down in the character sheet on the line with the armour, and it's done with.
| QUOTE | ||
That's true, to a large extent (if you don't pay attention to Unearthed Arcana). That's why it would be nice to have a SR4 that was more disciplined than SR3. |
That's the key thing. In SR3 it isn't the extra gear, it the extra rules spread all over the place. D&D becomes a bear too when you go way out there. But there is years of gaming of territory to cover before that, unless your group is looking for something different.
| QUOTE | ||
The GM then can't use anything in that book for NPCs, but I guess that's okay. And if that's okay, then you can use the same policy in SR, also: :Want to initiate? Okay, get me the material from MitS. New piece of cyber? Let's see your copy of M&M." |
As a DM i feel i am not really constrained in such trivial matters.
The core books provide more than enough gear (with the magic item system), the core classes, multiclassed as needed to add spice. I always use sligtly custom monster stat blocks to thwart those sniveling little bookworms reading up on monsters they shouldn't be. 
The only thing the MMs could provide there is CR, and frankly i trust my judgement more given the general uneveness of weighting in the MMs and situation dependancy of challenges.Plus expropriation as needed applies, copy down the couple of stats i need, or check the blurb on how the character's class works, and it's all good. On the other hand, once again with SR3 it's the rules and the cross-referencing that is the killer.
EDIT: BTW as a DM you are far better off not trying to go too far out of the core rules for NPCs and such. The more information clutter you bring to the table the harder you make it for yourself. Those core classes are pretty much as good as it needs get for power, and with multiclassing and some good ol' RP flair (without the need to actually play a character up through the levels) the number of combinations is simply assounding.
| QUOTE (Ellery) |
| Yeah, when you have your calculated armor class and you're wearing a piece of armor from the FR book, and have a prestige class from the Complete Warrior, and have dual-classed as a psion--and you put on a magical ring, you're telling me you don't have to go through each book to make sure that the ring's dodge bonus stacks with the types of bonuses given by all the other materials? |
I don't, because, the rules for whether or not bonuses stack are a basic concept spelled out in the PHB and DMG. (Anyway, it's a trick question, because while Dodge bonuses always stack, spells or magic items never grant dodge bonuses.)
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul @ Apr 17 2005, 12:07 AM) | ||
I don't, because, the rules for whether or not bonuses stack are a basic concept spelled out in the PHB and DMG. (Anyway, it's a trick question, because while Dodge bonuses always stack, spells or magic items never grant dodge bonuses.) |
Oops, I missed answering that. Ya, what he said. Basically I don't have to because of the rules for stacking are all in the core, and are tied to the names of the bonuses. You just write down the names of stuff you need. Actually in practice you only write down the names of the oddball stuff because as RunnerPaul points out there are strong conventions of what gets what name of bonus.
Also why would i check the Complete Warrior? The class has nothing to do with it, unless it has one of those class based ACs, and that info all belongs on the character sheet right from character creation.
| QUOTE (Ellery) |
....I like D20 - I've just recently gotten into that system, and I don't see why so many are negative about it.... |
The thing about D20 is that it's a great hammer, but when you have a great hammer a lot of things start looking like nails. The SR world is not a nail. You could implement the SR world with D20, but you'd have to rip so much appart and change it that basically it would be D20 because you are using a 20-sided dice for pass/fail tests. It could be done, but it would be brutal....and in the end would be just enough like D&D that it would totally screw your mind trying to switch between the two.
Plus there is the ol' competitiveness, like those Calvin stickers on the back of truck windows where he's urinating on a logo of another brand of truck. *shrug*
| QUOTE (blakkie) | ||
|
You might want to check who you're attributing quotes to....
| QUOTE (Eldritch) |
| I like D20 - I've just recently gotten into that system, and I don't see why so many are negative about it. Except maybe they don't like it because it is popular, and everywhere. |
I've played AD&D since first edition, and D&D before that. It has its strengths, but they are different strengths than SR's system. I'm negative about its weaknesses and positive about its strengths, and I think its weaknesses are bad for the feel of SR.
| QUOTE (blakkie) |
| that info all belongs on the character sheet right from character creation. |
So why not do that for SR, too? It's not like the mechanics prevent it.
It's just the poor organization of the books. If they cleaned up what they have, rather than starting from scratch, they could organize it so it was easier to find what you needed. As it is, starting from scratch is going to cause the same problems again, most likely, since there will be all sorts of really important stuff forgotten in the core book that will have to be put into the companion.
Maybe we actually agree here--I think there's plenty to look up in D&D, because I don't have it memorized any more (e.g. I could have sworn there was some druidy magic thingy that gave a dodge bonus, but maybe it was some other unusual bonus I had to look up), but they've made it easier to look things up by keeping things consistent.
I found the high-ish level d20 campaign I was playing at the time [Forgotten Realms] much more manageable once I started using d20 Character Folio from Green Ronin, which was the primary inspiration behind the Shadowrun Character Dossier -- which certainly didn't suceed 100%, but was IMO an improvement over the SR3 character sheets, and one I certainly hope will carry over into SR4.
I think "Rules creep" is inevitable in any system, eventually you need to introduce something that just doesn't fall in the normal rules, D20 has this too.
The only problem I saw with SR3 was alot of very *basic* info was spread across multiple books (Like chemical/surgery rules in M&M, and basic things like swimming in the Companion).
Expecting to just buy one book and be "set for life" is naive at best.
The best bet is to include all the basic information in the core book, including any advanced/simple varients. And then leave "rules" for new books involving solely the content of those books.
Like if you introduce a new piece of equipment that simply does not operate like anything in core, its expected you need some minor rules to cover it(as I said..D20 has that too). Thing is, if you don't own the book to begin with, you don't need the rule, thus, not owning it puts you at no significant disadvantage.
As I said..problem with SR3 is basic things like swimming..are in a supplement.
If supplements stick solely to own content, or expanding on core content, it works, but SR3 didnt do that.
Example would be: Street magic, if initiation rules are only in SM..thats bad.
However if the initation rules are in the core book, and SM just adds new metamagics, spells, traditions,levels of initation etc.
Then thats great, and should be how it goes.
Again, major complaint with Sr3 wasnt "rules bloat"..every system suffers from that, its unavoidable, it was simply what should have been core rules, not in core book.
The only problem I saw with SR3 was alot of very *basic* info was spread across multiple books (Like chemical/surgery rules in M&M, and basic things like swimming in the Companion).
Expecting to just buy one book and be "set for life" is naive at best.
The best bet is to include all the basic information in the core book, including any advanced/simple varients. And then leave "rules" for new books involving solely the content of those books.
Like if you introduce a new piece of equipment that simply does not operate like anything in core, its expected you need some minor rules to cover it(as I said..D20 has that too). Thing is, if you don't own the book to begin with, you don't need the rule, thus, not owning it puts you at no significant disadvantage.
As I said..problem with SR3 is basic things like swimming..are in a supplement.
If supplements stick solely to own content, or expanding on core content, it works, but SR3 didnt do that.
Example would be: Street magic, if initiation rules are only in SM..thats bad.
However if the initation rules are in the core book, and SM just adds new metamagics, spells, traditions,levels of initation etc.
Then thats great, and should be how it goes.
Again, major complaint with Sr3 wasnt "rules bloat"..every system suffers from that, its unavoidable, it was simply what should have been core rules, not in core book.
My biggest problem was/is that the rules are different for every aspect of SR.
Seriously. It's not only the combat/magic/matrix/rigging rules that are different. Hell even the rules for ranged/melee combat are different. That's not funny... that's insane.
Seriously. It's not only the combat/magic/matrix/rigging rules that are different. Hell even the rules for ranged/melee combat are different. That's not funny... that's insane.
DarusGrey pegs it.
Personally, in terms of organization, GURPS does it best, IMHO. The 2 big books of the Basic Set contain everything you could possibly need for basic stuff, with the supplements going into extreme detail on one subject. But if you don't need that detail, you don't really need the supplement.
Personally, in terms of organization, GURPS does it best, IMHO. The 2 big books of the Basic Set contain everything you could possibly need for basic stuff, with the supplements going into extreme detail on one subject. But if you don't need that detail, you don't really need the supplement.
| QUOTE (Ellery) | ||||
You might want to check who you're attributing quotes to.... |
Oops, sorry about that.
| QUOTE | ||
So why not do that for SR, too? It's not like the mechanics prevent it. |
It heavily discourages it if you need to transcript a lot of information. In D20 the rules framework is more robust, so less extra info is needed.
I guess out of all this, I'm not in a "hate SR<insert edition here>" mode ... I'm more beginning to feel like : "If it feels like SR, then it's SR... but if a new edition of game mechanics doesn't have what most would call a net level of improvement over the previous set of game mechanics then all that has been done is a new set of problems have been created and the old set of problems were never completely addressed."
I mean, I guess, with the various version of fixed target numbers the guys and I here have been bouncing around on own just to feel out potential, I'm left with a couple of basic responses.
A- FANPRO hasn't answered all the problems of the original game mechanics and do not feel that given the current game mechanics that they are able to do so. I personally feel this is at the core of the game mechanics issue. Sad too really, it's kinda like Social Security in the USA ... it's not completely broken but the government has made so rules surrounding it that they have rendered themselves incapable of truly fixing it in it's current manifestation.
B- FANPRO has long since realized that tabletop RPG's are simply phasing themselves out. Sure, there are some new players to replace the old and those numbers may possibly be able to match and/or exceed the old. The reason I bring this up is because you *HAVE* to have net growth as a business or the business dies. Problem is nowadays (at least from this old timers POV) that current day gamers don't have the initial patience to learn a more complicated set of mechanics. Simplification/Streamlining at least means a chance of obtaining and keeping the interests of this new gaming pool.
C- FANPRO is a business and as a business must make business decisions to continue to survive. This means generating lots of attention to it's material through various means and mediums of advertisement. This includes Blogs, Web Boards and other types. As a business with a relatively small (would tightly restrained be more appropriate here?) operating budget they are forced to make their decisions based upon at least partially that restriction. This includes development of new material and the testing thereof. I was looking at the example of how many potential playtesters were involved in the SR4 material on another post here on DS. It caused me to blink based upon mine own experience. If those estimates were even remotely accurate, and FANPRO gave it's playtesters similar bennies to what FASA used to ... wow, that's a sizable hit in the paycheck. So I'm also curious here.
D- FANPRO is still based upon people and people have personalities and the personal biases that go with them. Those biases also go into the base material development that is then put forth to the playtesting body. Problem as I have always seen it is that quite often those biases with regards to Game Mechanic Development is that how one person or group of persons view one mechanic is nearly always not how a majority of people will see it let alone interpret it.
I always have respect for the amount of time and effort a developer of any kind has to put into a product before it becomes a marketable and desirable thing. But with the couple of basic variations we've hacked around here over the last couple of weeks ... I think the success of SR4 is also going to come down to a financial one for the players and would-be players as well. And after looking at purely raw data of the numbers, I don't think a new edition of SR4 is going to save the franchise no matter what the hopes are.
I truly believe we, the tabletop gaming market, has achieved our plateau. SR4 will at least continue to give most gamers their die-fixation ... that tactile sense of satisfaction in roling bunches of dice in order to achieve something. But I think it's going to ultimately have to make harder decisions in the future.
I truly pray I'm wrong ... but the market numbers just don't play out here from what I can find and learn.
I mean, I guess, with the various version of fixed target numbers the guys and I here have been bouncing around on own just to feel out potential, I'm left with a couple of basic responses.
A- FANPRO hasn't answered all the problems of the original game mechanics and do not feel that given the current game mechanics that they are able to do so. I personally feel this is at the core of the game mechanics issue. Sad too really, it's kinda like Social Security in the USA ... it's not completely broken but the government has made so rules surrounding it that they have rendered themselves incapable of truly fixing it in it's current manifestation.
B- FANPRO has long since realized that tabletop RPG's are simply phasing themselves out. Sure, there are some new players to replace the old and those numbers may possibly be able to match and/or exceed the old. The reason I bring this up is because you *HAVE* to have net growth as a business or the business dies. Problem is nowadays (at least from this old timers POV) that current day gamers don't have the initial patience to learn a more complicated set of mechanics. Simplification/Streamlining at least means a chance of obtaining and keeping the interests of this new gaming pool.
C- FANPRO is a business and as a business must make business decisions to continue to survive. This means generating lots of attention to it's material through various means and mediums of advertisement. This includes Blogs, Web Boards and other types. As a business with a relatively small (would tightly restrained be more appropriate here?) operating budget they are forced to make their decisions based upon at least partially that restriction. This includes development of new material and the testing thereof. I was looking at the example of how many potential playtesters were involved in the SR4 material on another post here on DS. It caused me to blink based upon mine own experience. If those estimates were even remotely accurate, and FANPRO gave it's playtesters similar bennies to what FASA used to ... wow, that's a sizable hit in the paycheck. So I'm also curious here.
D- FANPRO is still based upon people and people have personalities and the personal biases that go with them. Those biases also go into the base material development that is then put forth to the playtesting body. Problem as I have always seen it is that quite often those biases with regards to Game Mechanic Development is that how one person or group of persons view one mechanic is nearly always not how a majority of people will see it let alone interpret it.
I always have respect for the amount of time and effort a developer of any kind has to put into a product before it becomes a marketable and desirable thing. But with the couple of basic variations we've hacked around here over the last couple of weeks ... I think the success of SR4 is also going to come down to a financial one for the players and would-be players as well. And after looking at purely raw data of the numbers, I don't think a new edition of SR4 is going to save the franchise no matter what the hopes are.
I truly believe we, the tabletop gaming market, has achieved our plateau. SR4 will at least continue to give most gamers their die-fixation ... that tactile sense of satisfaction in roling bunches of dice in order to achieve something. But I think it's going to ultimately have to make harder decisions in the future.
I truly pray I'm wrong ... but the market numbers just don't play out here from what I can find and learn.
| QUOTE (Eldritch) |
| The only complaint I've ever heard about the rules is the Matrix not being easily integratable with the rest of the group. |
then, honestly? you haven't been listening. page through the boards here. hop over to shadowland and ask around. look through the SR (not SR4, SR) threads at RPG.net and the other boards that've been mentioned. there's a hell of a lot to complain about.
| QUOTE (mfb @ Apr 17 2005, 12:39 PM) | ||
then, honestly? you haven't been listening. page through the boards here. hop over to shadowland and ask around. look through the SR (not SR4, SR) threads at RPG.net and the other boards that've been mentioned. there's a hell of a lot to complain about. |
Ya, even people at DSF that don't like the idea of moving to SR4 have come to realize it requires a major redo. If you look through that thread you can see that Kagetenshi is focusing the scope a lot because there is so much that needs work. But even within that scope focused in they are basically going through with a weedwacker to cut out the deadwood.
Of course the idea that there is no problem, or not much of a problem, or you can just patch it up a bit would be expected to be paired with resistance to SR4. Afterall if you think SR3 rules don't have problems then you might be inclined to think Fanpro is trying to pick your pocket by suggesting there is something better to be had. *shrug*
EDIT: It's funny, Kagetenshi (who is in the "a slim chance i'll switch to SR4" frame of mind) has spawned this SR3R idea that at it's core suggests there are some problems with SR3. But looking at the breadth of where it could go even 20 people working on it at 50 cents/hour would likely be better finacially to just rebuy BBB, Street Magic, and the another 1 or 2 other companion books....and then spend a week learning the SR4 front to back.
| QUOTE |
| I've been In SR since it was released. In fact I worked in a gaming shop at the time. I Sold dozens and dozens of copies of the Core book. We ran dozens of games and a very long lasting campaign. The only complaint I've ever heard about the rules is the Matrix not being easily integratable with the rest of the group. Yeah, there was a learning curve - but we all got past it. First time gamers and expierenced gamers alike. I don't buy that the entire system was broke. Ya, it had flaws - but they all do. |
Sorry if that was confusing, the context of the note "the only complaint..." was refering to the players at the shop I worked at. My personal expierences as a tabletop GM/Player and RPG sales person. Nof DSF. I have been keeping up with DS and it's members complaints about the rules.
| QUOTE (Eldritch @ Apr 17 2005, 01:44 PM) | ||
Sorry if that was confusing, the context of the note "the only complaint..." was refering to the players at the shop I worked at. My personal expierences as a tabletop GM/Player and RPG sales person. Nof DSF. I have been keeping up with DS and it's members complaints about the rules. |
If they didn't complain about the Matrix rules i'm...stunned. Do their other hobbies include hanging from their eyelids and having someone kick them in the groin till they blink?
| QUOTE (L.D) |
| My biggest problem was/is that the rules are different for every aspect of SR. Seriously. It's not only the combat/magic/matrix/rigging rules that are different. Hell even the rules for ranged/melee combat are different. That's not funny... that's insane. |
Amen L.D.
Well it may not be popular, but maybe they should consider a Players book and a GM;s book. They could cram quite a bit inot each book, keep the cost around $30 each. Allthe rules for playing in the gm book. And all the char gen, gear, magic spells, and Background materiel int he Players book.
A thought anyway. It would solve a llot of the rules creep problems.
Yeah, one book is cool. But organizationally two might make more sense.
A thought anyway. It would solve a llot of the rules creep problems.
Yeah, one book is cool. But organizationally two might make more sense.
I think the whole idea of organizing SR into less books is crap.
It's not possible because it goes against the core values of the very gameworld itself.
The creed of nearly EVERY runner out in the shadows is SOTA.
Words to live by, those are...It is every runner's JOB to stay ahead of the SOTA curve and that's what keeps them alive.
For the runner to be SOTA, the player has to be SOTA, and that requires owning every single book there is.
It's pure fragging genius on FASA's part...but that's the system we play in.
Live it.
Love it.
Buy some more books.
It's not possible because it goes against the core values of the very gameworld itself.
The creed of nearly EVERY runner out in the shadows is SOTA.
Words to live by, those are...It is every runner's JOB to stay ahead of the SOTA curve and that's what keeps them alive.
For the runner to be SOTA, the player has to be SOTA, and that requires owning every single book there is.
It's pure fragging genius on FASA's part...but that's the system we play in.
Live it.
Love it.
Buy some more books.
Yeah, FASA's really raping us again. 
| QUOTE (Critias) |
| Yeah, FASA's really raping us again. |
Duh, we all know FASA is gone...
But FASA made the system that way and you have to give credit where it's due.
This is something that will probably never be corrected...it's counter to the way the system works...
The very BEST that they can do is to put all of the additional rules in the SOTA book for each new game year.
| QUOTE |
| But looking at the breadth of where it could go even 20 people working on it at 50 cents/hour would likely be better finacially to just rebuy BBB, Street Magic, and the another 1 or 2 other companion books....and then spend a week learning the SR4 front to back. |
You're completely missing the point for many of us.
I have no qualms about buying all the books again--if they're better. I will even buy them again if they're only not much worse.
It's not a money issue. It's a game play issue.
The problem with SR4, from my perspective, is that it may make the game not fun to play, because you have little control over your character (making it a stats vs. stats contest instead of involving tactics, or having everything feel like a crapshoot), and a bunch of other screwy mechanics that substantially change the feel of the game. I'm not sure it will turn out this way, but fixed TN systems can have huge problems with that (especially at TN 5).
| QUOTE (Kaosaur) |
| I think the whole idea of organizing SR into less books is crap. It's not possible because it goes against the core values of the very gameworld itself. |
*smacks Kaosaur with a soggy, rotting mackerel*
WTF? Where to start with this, where to start.... I know, how organised and compact doesn't mean weak. Bloated spagetti of islands of rules spread across numberous books doesn't mean powerful.
| QUOTE |
| The creed of nearly EVERY runner out in the shadows is SOTA. Words to live by, those are...It is every runner's JOB to stay ahead of the SOTA curve and that's what keeps them alive. For the runner to be SOTA, the player has to be SOTA, and that requires owning every single book there is. It's pure fragging genius on FASA's part...but that's the system we play in. Live it. Love it. Buy some more books. |
I can understand the concept of 'runners wanting the whiz-hot stuff. But really, sprawling books does not equate to more power.
I understand how you feel, and even agree with you...
But I'm playing a bit of a Devil's Advocate here.
Information is every edge that you have in Shadowrun.
But I'm playing a bit of a Devil's Advocate here.
Information is every edge that you have in Shadowrun.
| QUOTE (Kaosaur) |
| I understand how you feel, and even agree with you... But I'm playing a bit of a Devil's Advocate here. Information is every edge that you have in Shadowrun. |
Well yes, they do release SOTA books periodically.
| QUOTE (NeoJudas) |
| Problem is nowadays (at least from this old timers POV) that current day gamers don't have the initial patience to learn a more complicated set of mechanics. Simplification/Streamlining at least means a chance of obtaining and keeping the interests of this new gaming pool. |
I don't see this trend at all. People on this thread have already complained that D&D is complicated. GURPS just came out with a new edition that is more complicated. HERO did the same thing. Even the newest version of Paranoia is more complicated than the old.
For a while in the '90s, with the runaway popularity of Vampire I was a bit worried that simple mechanics would become the indurstry standard, but not anymore.
SOTA is.
Thats all there is to it really.
Thats all there is to it really.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.