Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Implications on the core mechanic
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Edward
Implications on the core mechanic
Stat + skill target 5.

I finally got of my bum and read the SR4 FAQ and I noticed some implications of the core mechanic. Do you agree that they will occur and do you think that they will be bad.

1: defaulting is more attractive. In SR3 defaulting to stat 3 created a very low chance of success. Buy my maths you now have a better than 70% chance of success (if there are no other modifiers). For some things (pistols) I see this as a good thing, for others (cracking a mag lock) I see it as a bad thing. A rigger (specialist vehicle hacker) with no skill in computing but a high logic (I assume that will be the linked stat)will be a competent computer hacker (hell somebody with high int and no experience could pick up the tools and perform as well as a les intelligent person with significant experience)

2: there is such a thing as imposable. In SR3 no mater the penalties you could take a roll and have a chance of wining, even if the TN was 35 it could happen. Under SR4 these tasks will be imposable. This is fine for really hard things the difference is minuscule but consider a low skill use. Stat 2 skill 2 taking a shot at short range SR3 2 dice target 4, SR4 4 dice target 5. Now apply a 2 point glare and a 2 point range penalty. SR3 2 dice target 8 (achievable with luck) SR4 no chance.

3: les for thought required. Without pools that have to be spread out over multiple actions you wont need to consider latter needs for thinks like spell pool or combat pool, if the total pools do need to be split over multiple actions then what about a character that casts a spell with one action and then fires a gun. These use very different pools so he will evade the downside. This will be a non issue if the initiative system doses not grant multiple actions in a turn but that would return initiative to a D&D like importance, going often is a lot more significant than going first.

That is all I can think of for now.

Opinions pleas.

Edward
Critias
So, right. That about sums up what the rest of us have been saying, more or less, for a few weeks now. Attributes have the potential to become more important than skills, your characters might never just luck out at a dramatically appropriate moment ever again, and any jackass smart enough to pick up a handfull of dice and throw them can do well.

The only opinion I've actually got about your post is that you might want to smack that "spell check" button once or twice before submitting, next time. It was genuinely difficult to read, at times.
mfb
yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".
Taki
#1, this trouble do not bother me - since the GM does his work and choose to add penalties if the skill rank is not sufficient.
#2, I see 2 possibility to make test possible when the penalty is stronger than the dice pool
A) explosive dice. It does complicates the statistics for all dice tests, and make it "possible" to have any number of hit for any number of dice.
B) avoiding 0 dice. A bit tricky. Just consider the minimum of a pool is 1 dice. If the penalty increase by X, add X dices, throw all the dices(X+1), and keep the smallest result
eg: Stat 2 skill 2 taking a shot at long range +2 and bad visibility +3
initial score 4-5=-1 so 0 dice. in this technic take 4-3=1dice, and add the remaning penalty (2 dices), throw the 3 dices. Keep the worst result. If you score only 5 and 6, you get a hit, otherwise you fail.
probability of scoring 1hit: 1/9 for initial score = 0, 1/27 for initial score =-1 ...
This doesn't change the stats on other test (pool bigger than penalties), and does allow if lucky to have 1 and only one hit if the pool is smaller or equal to penalties.
Doesn't permit success if more than 1 hit is needed.
#3a, I am not sure as I could be a strategic place for splitting your pool (skill+att) between action in SR4 ...
#3b, Initiative can't have a D&D importance, since in SR you can easily kill your opponent in one action - or at least give him significant penalties.
Dizzo Dizzman
That assumes that you can still kill an opponent in one action. If the difficulty for resisting damage is 5, I can see combats lasting a lot longer. What ended combats fast in SR3 wasn't the amount of damage, but the huge damage codes.
Taki
That (#3b: initiative is important) assume effectively combat is still lethal in SR4. Which seems both mandatory to keep Shadowrun what it is, and not hard to do at all ... Ther is so much way to achieve that, that I don't see the point to discuss it without knowing the actual playtest mechanic.
Of course the wound penalty will often(actually on test you have a lot of dices to throw) be less important than before (a penalty in SR4 seems to mean "only" 1/3 hit less).
Edward
I didnít think of damage.

I am assuming that damage resistance tests will be body + armour Ė power (I am not thinking of other options ATM) this will keep damage deadly (moor so as you cant get lucky with your large number of dice).

Another implication becomes a los of mechanical differentiation between cyber armour (dice to resist damage) and worn armour (reduced target numbers)

And in D&D there are spells that kill you outright. Several of my wroat tournament builds involved outragesly high initiative, disintegrate and quickened phantasmal killer. But it seeses to be the be all and end all.

If we loos the multiple actions for high initiative I think brick shithouse builds (obscenely high mounts of armour) with pain editors (or pain resistance) will become far more common than the present favourite speed sami.
Consider this example.

Speed samy verses 8 gangers with moderate professionalism ratings

SR3
Actions samy 3 gangers 1
Samy shoots 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoots 2
samy shoots 2
end of round
next round
samy shoots 2

initiative dose not gain actions, samy will win initiative
samy shoots 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
4 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
2 shoot samy
samy shoot 2

if he isnít getting his extra actions he needs to soak twice as many bullets. A tank samy would go like this (assuming win initiative half the time, he is a little faster than the gangers so we will have him win first action).

Samy shoot 2
6 shoot samy
round 2
6 shoot samy
samy shoot 2
round 3
samy shoot 2
2 shoot samy
round 4
2 shoot samy
samy shoot 2

he has to take 4 extra hits because he cant reliably win initiative but with the essence and nuyen he would have spent on speed boosters he should be able to get enough armour to soak heavy pistols every time (at least you could in earlier editions)

Edward
Taki
QUOTE (Edward)
If we loos the multiple actions for high initiative I think brick shithouse builds (obscenely high mounts of armour) with pain editors (or pain resistance) will become far more common than the present favourite speed sami.

Even if you have taken the best example : Speed samy against several uncybered opponent, I would modify the statement.
If multiple actions doesn't exist armour seems to count better.

What if the damages are MORE deadly than in SR3, and no dices to doge ?
What if, comparing with the customized badass is done in SR3 with good initiative, and very strong skill : let say attribute 7(with cyber) gun7 and of course 2dices for the weapon interface : 14 dices.
Now imagine: pool can be fragmented

OK, lot of IF ...

Anyway in your example the samy in the best case kill 2 ganger in is first phase, then is the target for 4*2 simples actions ... Need to bee well armored anyway !

Finally I would say that initiative was over powerful in SR3 anyway ...

An A. Predator will always be quicker in the hand in a Samy, than in a corporate normal agent ... Even if his finger is clenched on the trigger ! spin.gif
Vuron
I think you are also forgetting that instead of simply modifying the dice pool with modifiers you can also modify the number of successes based on the difficulty increasing.

Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success. That way you can have lots of potential modifiers to the dice pool but also mess around with difficulty levels.

Now I'm not saying that this method is used but based on my past experience with fixed TN dice pool systems it seems to work pretty well.
Taki
"Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success"
I do not agree at all ... It depend to much of 1) the initial SR and 2) the number of dice ...

You have 4 dices sr5, do you mind having 1 dice sr4 ?
You have 14 dices sr5, do you mind having 17 dices sr6 ?

In both case the stats of first choice are much higher ...
The stats will change a lot in SR4, THANKSFULLY ... Too much troubles in SR3
Vuron
QUOTE (Taki)
"Statistically speaking 3 dice is pretty much equal to an increase in difficulty of 1 success"
I do not agree at all ... It depend to much of 1) the initial SR and 2) the number of dice ...

You have 4 dices sr5, do you mind having 1 dice sr4 ?
You have 14 dices sr5, do you mind having 17 dices sr6 ?

In both case the stats of first choice are much higher ...
The stats will change a lot in SR4, THANKSFULLY ... Too much troubles in SR3

Perhaps I explained it a bit badly but what I meant to say was that you generally average 1 success per 3 dice rolled. Considering the dice pools (even if they significantly decrease racial attribute modifiers and cyberware modifiers) are often going to be between 6-9 dice I don't think that a system in which only 1 success is needed for various tasks generates enough failures to make it playable.
Taki
No, you explained it well.
I just rode it wrong notworthy.gif
You are quite right !
NightHaunter
Why do people insist in sticking the SR3 rules into the SR4 mechanic?
Is it not obvious that the rest of the rules are gonna change around the new mechanic?
Give it them time to publish either by FAQ or book some actual rules then work out if its gonna work.
Tried not to be too offensive with this.
Taki
I don't see the offence ?
By the way most of that thread discuss on issue considering the official FAQ for SR4 ... (I think so ? - maybe my brain is off today ???)
Edward
I had assumed that for combat successes would stage damage rather than requiring multiple successes to achieve a hit. Of cause assumptions are the brother of all fuckups.

Also I was not assuming that a samy could kill 2 gangers an action. I was assuming he could achieve sufficient wounds to exceed there professionalism rating. Of cause under SR4 you may not be able to take 2 shots with a SA or BF weapon in an action.

Edward
NightHaunter
Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.
Vuron
QUOTE (NightHaunter)
Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.

Actually based on the discussions in the initiative thread the actual mechanics for how complex and simple actions etc are computed might still be up in the air.
NightHaunter
QUOTE (Vuron @ Apr 19 2005, 03:59 PM)
QUOTE (NightHaunter @ Apr 19 2005, 09:51 AM)
Actually one of the accepted facts is that simple and complex action are still gonna be around.

Actually based on the discussions in the initiative thread the actual mechanics for how complex and simple actions etc are computed might still be up in the air.

I was sure they said actions wernt changing but they didn't know how initative was gonna work for definate based on "hits".
Patrick Goodman
Last I looked, there were four variations on initiative using the new core mechanic. All of them work, some of them better than others. What we're working on right now is figuring out which one of them works best; my group has formed its opinion and told Rob and the other developers, so we wait for the next draft to see how that shakes out.

Combat is still in rounds. You still get 2 Simple Actions or 1 Complex Action per round. Free Actions also still figure into things.

There's a lot more staying the same than is changing.
Jon Szeto
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.
Taki
Will we still get more than one complex action by round, depending on initiative ?
...
Asking is free biggrin.gif
NightHaunter
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman)
Last I looked, there were four variations on initiative using the new core mechanic. All of them work, some of them better than others. What we're working on right now is figuring out which one of them works best; my group has formed its opinion and told Rob and the other developers, so we wait for the next draft to see how that shakes out.

Combat is still in rounds. You still get 2 Simple Actions or 1 Complex Action per round. Free Actions also still figure into things.

There's a lot more staying the same than is changing.

Booyah score one for my memory.
GrinderTheTroll
QUOTE (mfb)
yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".

Sadly I agree.

SR was really visionary when it came out, I just hope all the good being done "in the name of streamlining" doesn't white-wash SR into something we can get from some other RPG. When I read the comment about "painting the 5 & 6 side of die" I almost got sick to my stomach.

I guess the real indicator of success will be non-SR4-core rulesbook sales.
blakkie
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Apr 19 2005, 10:34 AM)
QUOTE (mfb)
yeah, i'm pretty much in agreement, especially with point #3. i really don't want to play yet another game where all i do is toss my predetermined number of dice every time. Edge won't have any real impact on the boringocity of the no-dice-pool thing, unless it's designed to come into play a lot more frequently than karma pool did. "a lot more frequently" as in "every round".

Sadly I agree.

SR was really visionary when it came out, I just hope all the good being done "in the name of streamlining" doesn't white-wash SR into something we can get from some other RPG. When I read the comment about "painting the 5 & 6 side of die" I almost got sick to my stomach.

I guess the real indicator of success will be non-SR4-core rulesbook sales.

Well, as once or twice mentioned in the Lament for Combat Pool thread, it might be possible to house rule a Combat Pool into SR4 that is very workable and close to the original. What it is derived from would be different (no more Int). A fixed size Combat Pool of 6-8 die or so (depending on the average number of rounds the system creates with an Initiative roll) available to everyone may be the simplest. At least at first until usuage of the system confirms the key balancing points of the system.

After that if the attributes are well balanced just averaging out all the stats to derive the Combat Pool, or staying with a fixed pool might be best. Also might have the dice be used for damage soak depending on what happens with the infamous Dodge.

I know it will likely be the second thing I look at when the details of the system come out. The first thing I'll look at is whether or not the gap left by getting rid of the Combat Pool is actually big enough to warrant it. smile.gif If it is i bet Combat Pool will quickly become a very common SR4 house rule.
Edward
If you where going to house rule in a combat pool you would use Intuition in place of intelligence, and agility in place of quickness.

If you really want to that is.

Edward
blakkie
QUOTE (Edward)
If you where going to house rule in a combat pool you would use Intuition in place of intelligence, and agility in place of quickness.

If you really want to that is.

Edward

My only concern there is the Combat Pool screwing with attribute distribution by seriously altering the game weight of 2 or 3 of them. Plus I kinda like the idea of a fixed pool. The beauty of the Combat Pool is strategy. Why sully that with the possibility of bloating with min/max techniques?

Then again I haven't had sleep in over 24 hours, so I might be right off my rocker. Time for bed.
GrinderTheTroll
Sure there will be some new concepts, main players, plots and all that, but I'll argue that If most of the background will be the same for SR4, then one of the main reasons to play SR4 is for the revision of the rules.

If you want to play SR4, then why House Rule things back to make them like SR3?
blakkie
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Apr 20 2005, 11:21 AM)
Sure there will be some new concepts, main players, plots and all that, but I'll argue that If most of the background will be the same for SR4, then one of the main reasons to play SR4 is for the revision of the rules.

If you want to play SR4, then why House Rule things back to make them like SR3?

When I was a student i moved into a bedroom in a 6 bedroom rental house. You know the type of place, sort of like a flop house but rented by the semester. In the closet i found a left behind, rather stiff, heavy thread cotton shirt with wood buttons, as was some sort of style-of-the-minute at the time. It had a visually brutal faux tropical print. When I say brutal I mean done in children's playground primary colors.

I washed it alone in the hotest water the house's washing machine had, twice, with a cup of bleach each time. You know, who's to say what was on it. The colours did NOT fade. I christened it the "bug shirt", so named because it had really bugged a friend/classmate of mine.

I nolonger live in a student flop house. I live in a nice place that doesn't have lowpile carpet in the dining room that is sticky from spilled "highballs", or wallpaper so out of date it'd make your grandmother wonder what era it was from. But many, many years later i still have that shirt, and though i have developed broader *cough* shoulders i still occationaly wear it. Even when i headed to somewhere alround much better i didn't leave everything behind.
mfb
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll)
If you want to play SR4, then why House Rule things back to make them like SR3?

becuase there are a number of things about SR3 that make it a good system--or, at worst, a deeply flawed system with some very good features that make it palatable. if those things are not present in SR4, it's not going to be a game i want to play. though, personally, if SR4 lacks these things, i'm more likely to drop the game completely than i am to write up a whole new set of house rules.

game rules impact the setting. if you're trying to make a dark, gritty, dangerous setting, the rules should be dangerous. otherwise, players are going to have to consciously ignore the fact that their character just soaked 200 rounds of autofire without flinching in order to maintain their sense of danger. things like combat pool make SR3 a setting that encourages smarts over, or at as much as, stats. it makes SR3 a setting where players feel like they're in control, where decisions are important, where thinking is important, where the situation is ever-changing and fluid--and therefore dangerous.

drop combat pool, and thinking suddenly becomes secondary to just rolling your allotted amount of dice. the system becomes static, boring, and predictable. it becomes a system that i'm not interested in playing.
GrinderTheTroll
QUOTE (mfb)
drop combat pool, and thinking suddenly becomes secondary to just rolling your allotted amount of dice. the system becomes static, boring, and predictable. it becomes a system that i'm not interested in playing.

I understand that we all are trying to get a handle of what's to come with SR4. These sneak-peeks into some of its underlying structure I think cause more panic than they do to soothe the masses.

I do agree with many of your points, I suppose I am just not ready to consider options without seeing SR4 as a whole.
mfb
heh. i'm not sure the FAQs are meant to be soothing at all. they create a lot of discussion, and get a lot of people excited about SR4, even if a significant portion of that discussion and excitement is negative. there's no such thing as bad publicity, right?
Dawnshadow
Depends on if the publicity makes you curious enough to get it just to see how 'bad' it is, or if it just makes you walk away, now doesn't it mfb?
blakkie
QUOTE (Dawnshadow @ Apr 20 2005, 03:05 PM)
Depends on if the publicity makes you curious enough to get it just to see how 'bad' it is, or if it just makes you walk away, now doesn't it mfb?

Or it creates a deamon in your mind that is later slain by the cold harsh reality of the final product, causing you to sigh relief and momentally lapse into a comsumer frenzy, not only buying the SR4 BBB, but a second one for your mother and a small Knightmage army. wink.gif

P.S. Looks like either Rob's email box got flooded with hate mail and requests for clarification, causing him to abandon the weekly FAQs. Either that or he had an important golf tee-off to make today, and couldn't get out a new FAQ today. smile.gif I guess the one that the Amazing Kreskin sent me will have to do.
Edward
I donít really think anybody will make a hard decision not by buy SR4 before they have reviews of the final product. Unless of cause they make it D20.

Edward
Botch
QUOTE (Critias)
The only opinion I've actually got about your post is that you might want to smack that "spell check" button once or twice before submitting, next time. It was genuinely difficult to read, at times.

If the board came with a grammar checker you might not sound so petulant when castigating those who did not learn English as their first language.
Critias
Wah.

If Edward's feelings were hurt by me offering some advice, he probably would've said something some time in the four days between that post and today. He's a grown up. You don't have to leap to his defense.
Shinobi Killfist
IIRC they are still refering to this stat+skill method as a dice pool. Do we know yet how quickly this pool refreshes, or how quickly its components refresh. For example what if your skill component refreshes immediately, but the stat portion only refreshes once a pass or turn or whateve they have in 4th ed. So sure put all you 4 quikness into that shot, but now your 2nd shot is pure skill, and you have no quickness left to add to your blank skill later in the round to save you from certain doom.
Ellery
QUOTE (SR4 FAQ part 3)
In SR4, any time you make a test, the dice you roll are considered your dice pool. Dice pools consist of skill + attribute, +/- any modifiers.

That "any time you make a test" makes it sound to me like "dice pool" is now a phrase meaning "how many dice you roll". Maybe you can withhold dice from the pool on a roll to achieve unusual effects (e.g. a called shot), but it doesn't sound to me like you can use it up.
CradleWorm
QUOTE
2: there is such a thing as imposable. In SR3 no mater the penalties you could take a roll and have a chance of wining, even if the TN was 35 it could happen.


If I remember right, in SR3 there are some tests that are impossible. If you don't have a skill and have to trace I thought the maximum target number you could roll against was 8. If the target number was higher you can't roll and automatically fail.
Edward
That only applied if you donít have the skill. Even somebody with skill of one was allowed to try and hit the invisible mage, in the dark, in a sleet storm, with glare form street lights, with a shitty pistol at extreme range while on serious physical and serious stun having recently awakened from a dose of gama-scopolamine (target number 31 by my estimate) it is only somebody that has never fired a pistol that will not be able to try.

Edward
tete
This is a generic responce to all who think fixed TNs will ruin the game.
I picked up the World of Darkness main book about 6 months back and until I played it I would have agreed with you. You really have to change your core thinking about how dice pools work before you understand why a fixed TN is a good thing. First off forget numbers as you know them. Now everything is dice. Your Ares Predator is no longer 9M its more like 4 dice to add to your pool. Your at a medium range which gives you -1 die. Your dex is 3 so add 3 dice. Your skill is 4 so add 4 dice. The enemies Armor is 3 so -3 dice. That gives you 7 dice to hit your target. Each success counts as one box of damage. Now I know your thinking thats odd I mean you can use your gun as skill "dice" but think about it from a GM end. You can now just get hit by a bit of glass off the broken window from that near miss with the pistol. The GM may have to think out of the box more as to how you took one box of damage from a rocket launcher but I think thats a good thing.
Ok, so what about staging and penalties that take you in the negative dice. Well for staging in WOD if you roll a 10 (some gear may lower this number) you get add a success and roll it again. You can also never have less than 1 die however if you would have had 0 or less dice you must roll 10. I don't know how shadowrun will handle this but I really think it will be similar. Give it a try you never know you might like it. love.gif
Phantom Runner
QUOTE (tete)
This is a generic responce to all who think fixed TNs will ruin the game.
I picked up the World of Darkness main book about 6 months back and until I played it I would have agreed with you. You really have to change your core thinking about how dice pools work before you understand why a fixed TN is a good thing. First off forget numbers as you know them. Now everything is dice. Your Ares Predator is no longer 9M its more like 4 dice to add to your pool. Your at a medium range which gives you -1 die. Your dex is 3 so add 3 dice. Your skill is 4 so add 4 dice. The enemies Armor is 3 so -3 dice. That gives you 7 dice to hit your target. Each success counts as one box of damage. Now I know your thinking thats odd I mean you can use your gun as skill "dice" but think about it from a GM end. You can now just get hit by a bit of glass off the broken window from that near miss with the pistol. The GM may have to think out of the box more as to how you took one box of damage from a rocket launcher but I think thats a good thing.
Ok, so what about staging and penalties that take you in the negative dice. Well for staging in WOD if you roll a 10 (some gear may lower this number) you get add a success and roll it again. You can also never have less than 1 die however if you would have had 0 or less dice you must roll 10. I don't know how shadowrun will handle this but I really think it will be similar.  Give it a try you never know you might like it. love.gif

While I agree that the system as written for WoD works great for WoD, that is no true guarentee that it will work whole cloth for Shadowrun. There are areas where the WoD system can improve SR system, and there are areas where flavor and fun factor would be excised if WoD was used whole cloth.

Additionally, if all the developers did was port over WoD's system but instead changed the dice, I would be extremely disappointed. Don't get me wrong, I love WoD, but it ain't Shadowrun....and extreme shoe-horning is a very very bad thing...(just look at Alderac's Farscape game for an example of bad shoe-horning...)

Fixed TN can and will (in my opinion of course) make the Shadowrun core mechanic much smoother...but it is my sincere hope that the similarities to WoD system end with the core...
blakkie
I'm not sure I'd like seeing enemy armor subtract dice. Besides the player having to wait for the DM to give up the NPC armor number before rolling, and the fact that the exact value is given up at all, that sort of thing causes all sorts of headaches when you are targetting two opponents. It doesn't happen as often with firearms, but with spells that are AoE or multiple target, or even unknown target at the time of casting, that is a senario that is going to be common.

And yes, i would like to see guns and magic (and vehicles and decking and melee) use as similar dice mechanics as feasible. Unlike SR3, which is the best 4 1/2 games I never played at the same time.
Ellery
QUOTE
I picked up the World of Darkness main book about 6 months back and until I played it I would have agreed with you. You really have to change your core thinking about how dice pools work before you understand why a fixed TN is a good thing. First off forget numbers as you know them. Now everything is dice.

Well, yes, of course. That's exactly the problem. The flexibility of a system that has only one metric, "number of dice", is much lower than one with multiple metrics. Shadowrun used to have a distinction between quality and quantity of success; it wasn't always uniformly applied, but it led to a very distinctive (and, I felt, both realistic and enjoyable) feel to the system. With a fixed TN system, the ability to measure quantity vs. quality is severely reduced. The ability to make tasks easy or hard is severely reduced. The ability to choose whether a bonus or penalty is more important for experts or novices is severely reduced.

A fixed TN system therefore throws away an enormous amount of depth in order to achieve a slight simplification in the core mechanic. It's a stupid move--or, perhaps, a move to benefit the stupid.

The reason why SR3 mechanics seemed impossible was not the core dice system, but because there were separate rules to handle every different case--even down to ranged vs. melee combat that had a different mechanic for applying damage in the two cases!

Granted, if you only have one type of test, it does make it difficult for the developer to make up too many different types of tests. There's really only two things they can do--change the number of dice, or change the number of successes required. If there isn't a consistent way to pick one or the other, the SR4 rules could seem just as inconsistent and complex.
Edward
I understand that shooting somebody with a pistol will work like this.

Attack roll, dex + pistols + - mods.
Dodge roll ????
Soak roll body + armour Ė power
Net successes modify damage level in some way.

This would mean that the only stat a GM would need to give over is the power of your opponentís guns (and that was always necessary)

I know how it works, I donít even think it is the work of the devil (although others seem to) it is a bit annoying that there are so many more things you can not even try to do. The best possible starting marksman (stat 7 skill 6 IA 6) in the situation I gave above would probably have -8 dice. That is to say no chance at all as apposed to a snowflakes chance in hell (which is what he would have had in SR3).

The WOD system described buy tete could be closer to what they use but I hope not. The one box of damage per success leads to a les deadly game than SR and I would prefer retain the importance of eth soak roll. (I know WOD has a soak mechanic as well but that just further reduces the deadlines of the game and is usually only available (at a useful level) to supernatural creatures and WAD has les boxes of damage than SR

The reduction of depth is great. For a specific example, who will benefit most from a high powered scope at long range, a novice that can barley hold the gun properly (skill 2) or an expert that has been using the gun for years, (skill cool.gif.

I donít however think this will make it a bad system, just one that could be better but when have you seen a game mechanic approach perfection.

Edward
blakkie
QUOTE (Ellery @ Apr 29 2005, 11:26 AM)
There's really only two things they can do--change the number of dice, or change the number of successes required.† If there isn't a consistent way to pick one or the other, the SR4 rules could seem just as inconsistent and complex.

Yes, the consistancy and simplicity of the rule(s) in the application of modifiers is very important. Though they'd have to work at it to get it to the complexity level of SR3 with it's medley of variations and combinations of open tests, success comparisons(opposed tests), success subtractions (dogding), damage staging, threshholds, multiple level threshholds (such as Assensing), TN of 10-Essense, fixed TNs, TNs equal to the opponent's abilities, +/- die modifiers, and +/- TN modifiers.

EDIT: Actually offhand i can't think of any modifiers in SR3 for the subtraction of dice. Are there any?

@ Edward Where did you get that understanding from? I haven't seen anything even hinted at by the playtesters regarding armor or attack/weapon power, or even if there is soaking that in anyway resembles SR3 soaking.
Ellery
QUOTE
For a specific example, who will benefit most from a high powered scope at long range, a novice that can barley hold the gun properly (skill 2) or an expert that has been using the gun for years
In SR3, they'd both be helped equally--though arguably, the TN change is more important for the expert than the novice, because the expert with the scope will be able to hit reliably, while the novice will go from being extremely unreliable to very unreliable.

In SR4, the novice would be helped much more. They might double the number of dice they get to roll, making success much more likely, while the expert will be lucky to get 25% bonus dice.

QUOTE
Soak roll body + armour Ė power
That doesn't make armor very useful unless we see armor ratings that are high relative to body. An unarmored person with body 6 shouldn't fare as well against gunshots as a body 2 person with a bulletproof vest. Granted, SR3 has its own problems here (well-armored low body people are automatically killed, once they run out of combat pool, because they can't throw enough dice to counteract successes even at TN2), but this wouldn't be an improvement, and might actually make things worse (e.g. charging unarmored into gunfire without fear of dying).

QUOTE
Though they'd have to work at it to get it to the complexity level of SR3 with it's medley of variations and combinations of open tests, success comparisons(opposed tests), success subtractions (dogding), damage staging, threshholds, multiple level threshholds (such as Assensing), TN of 10-Essense, fixed TNs, TNs equal to the opponent's abilities, +/- die modifiers, and +/- TN modifiers.
Well, that would be hard, but they can get close: opposed tests, success subtractions, thresholds (# successes), +/- die modifiers, +/- threshold modifiers, fixed threshold, threshold of (10-Essence)/2, thresholds that depend on the opponent's abilities, etc..

There's nothing stopping them, save for common sense and a desire to be consistent.
blakkie
Under SR3 the lower skill shooter is helped a lot more if the weapon's base damage is S or D (sports/sniper rifles), and if the target isn't allowed it's Dodge Test (many GMs rule this way if you can't see the shooter, a situation that should be common if the shooter really is a "sniper"), and the GM doesn't implement house rules for staging damage past Deadly or implement the optional Deadlier Over-Damage rule (and the Body of the target is low enough, which it usually is with really good sniper rifles).

In that case a single success, or two if the base damage is S, is the same as a half-dozen or more success. Once the expert is rolling 10ish dice the scope advantage is fairly minimal. It's basically protection against an incredibily unlucky roll or huge negative TN modifiers such nursing a Serious wound while shooting blind from the back of a galloping camel.

Making any assumptions about who is helped more by a scope under SR4 is completely wild speculation given we know next to nothing about how ranged combat targeting tests and damage system.
Ellery
And if the low-skill person is shooting an unarmored target who has low body--that is, if it's already an easy kill, the expert doesn't need the advantage of the scope, which makes sense to me.

The problem with the SR4 method is that it's hard to imagine how having a scope (or a smartlink) could ever be much help to an expert.
blakkie
QUOTE (Ellery @ Apr 29 2005, 08:28 PM)
And if the low-skill person is shooting an unarmored target who has low body--that is, if it's already an easy kill, the expert doesn't need the advantage of the scope, which makes sense to me.

The problem with the SR4 method is that it's hard to imagine how having a scope (or a smartlink) could ever be much help to an expert.

My gut says SR3 sort of models RL, but i don't know enough to be sure. I do know that someone that is well trained with an iron sight is generally better off than a novice with a scope, but that the addition of a scope certainly does help the novice.

EDIT: I'm guessing a scope helps an expert a significant amount too, or it would be just dead weight in the field. Likely as the target gets a long way off. At close range a scope can present it's own problems if the target is moving across the field of view quickly and erractically.

If an SR4 scope simply slides the range down a catagory, then hopefully it matters. Otherwise it won't matter to the expert whether he is standing next to you or shooting at you a block or two away. smile.gif
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