Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Vampire: The M/R vs Shadowrun 4
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Nerbert
In another thread I was quoted as saying that Vampire and Shadowrun 4 bear "no resemblance to each other". Much care has been taken to point out that everything I have said about the subject is wrong because I stated that there is "no resemblance" when there is, in fact, smilarity.

I'm starting this thread to be a discussion of how the fixed target number, attribute + skill +/- situational modifier, multiple dice per roll game system and how it relates to Vampire.

First of all I'd like to point out that the nWoD fixed TN is 8 on a d10 whereas the TN of SR4 is 5 on a d6. From a mathematical/statistical perspective, there's a 33.33~% of a SR4 success, but only a 30% chance of a nWoD success. So, even at their most basic level, the games are very different.

Now, just to start this off, what do the games have in common, besides their dice system?
Eldritch
QUOTE
First of all I'd like to point out that the nWoD fixed TN is 8 on a d10 whereas the TN of SR4 is 5 on a d6. From a mathematical/statistical perspective, there's a 33.33~% of a SR4 success, but only a .30% chance of a nWoD success. So, even at their most basic level, the games are very different


Can I assume you meant a30% chance in nWoD? .3 seems kinda slim.....

And if you are trying to compare odds, 33% vs. 30%, I wouldn't consider that a significant difference.

But Okay, I haven't picked up a WoD book in a long time...

WoD Caps skills and Attributes at 6? or 5? Don't remember. SR caps at 6.

Edges and flaws? Point based char gen?
Nerbert
Ask any d20 player about how important a 5% difference can be on a saving throw.
Critias
Hahahah. A 3.3 percent difference in probability for a single die, and you're gonna say "so, even at their most basic level, the games are very different" -- right after you rattle off that both use attribute + skill +/- situational modifier, with a fixed TN. Hahahah. And you're serious, that's the best part.

And you can't say "what do they have in common besides their die system," because their die system is what people are all talking about. That's ALL people are comparing, at this point.

How far have you taken this probability "difference" you're harping about? Have you compared the average successes when an average WoD character (2 skill, 2 attribute) and an average SR character (3 and 3) both roll at their "very different" base difficulty/target number? What about when a world class (5 + 5 in WoD, 6 + 6 in SR) set of characters rolls off?

Of course you didn't. Because -- despite both system being as close to a 1/3 chance as is possible for their well-nigh trademarked dice flavor -- they two are so "very different."
Nerbert
This is exactly my point. Fixed TN is so utterly meaningless to how the games are played relative to each other.

Take a group of five Vampire characters. Attack a secured office building. Kill 20 guards. Do this 10 times. Those five characters will no longer be playable. You'll have to throw them out and start over.

Take a group of five Shadowrun characters. What's their primary goal in life? Isn't it pretty similar to "attacking secured office buildings and killing guards" in the long run?
Critias
No. That isn't your point, or you wouldn't be disagreeing with me.

Do that math. Compare the average characters, and the super character, and even the superhuman characters. You'll find that the smaller die pools in WoD (compared to SR4) make up for the larger chance of success in SR4 (compared to WoD), largely negating the mind blowingly important 3% difference you're hung up on.

And the "take a group of five Vampire players..." notion is inherently flawed: what kind of vampires? What faction? What clan? Are they all built to be as combat effective by nature as your average Shadowrunner? What sort of gear do they have? What sort of mindset? Are they too busy angsting and moaning about the Beast within to cover one another in a firefight? Are they going to try and out-seduce one another, or will they shoot the guards? What skill set do they bring to the group that's doing the storming?

And -- on top of all that, which is just me drumming in that your average vampire character and Shadowrun character are very different on purpose -- there's the simple fact that the focus of the games is very different (in case you missed me harping about it, last paragraph). Shadowrun characters are made to storm buildings and pull heists. Vampire characters are made to wear black and cry blood. The similarities between the two system's die mechanics do not carry over into the combat rules and player mindsets, necessarily.

That doesn't mean the two die mechanics aren't well-nigh identical, though. No matter how big a deal you think 3% is.
Nerbert
The simple fact of the matter is that every time a Vampire kills someone, mechanically they risk losing humanity and gaining a derangement.

And unlike Masquerade, where there was a way around this with Paths, there's no such thing in the nWoD. The game which you're so spastically enthusiastic about comparing.
Critias
I just said what you said. I acknowledged that was a point. I acknowledged, however, that the point has nothing to do with a basic comparison of the core die mechanic. I made it very clear that the die mechanic does not necessarily carry over into the combat rules or player mindsets. I did.

I just said that. Just now. Look up from your post, like, four inches. You're repeating me, only not finishing the sentence (or the thought).
Bigity
Maybe Shadowrun needs an Insanity mechanic, like WHFRP.
Nerbert
Critias, losing Humanity is a CORE MECHANIC of Vampire.

Or is the dice system for performing actions the only core mechanic a game is allowed to have?

Ok, lets look at tresholds. nWoD has no thresholds. One success acheieves the result and five achieves an exceptional result. You're always allowed to reroll.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Bigity)
Maybe Shadowrun needs an Insanity mechanic, like WHFRP.

Dear god no. smile.gif
frostPDP
Nerbert, in another forum I mentioned something about the core of an apple. In calculus its called derivation - How you get all the other junk.

That is att + skill +/- situationals.
SR 4 uses this formula.
V:TM uses this formula.

End of discussion. Same core mechanic. Let me list two other popular-on-this-board games I have some degree of friggin experience with.

D20 uses 1d20 +/- modifiers.
SR3 uses the skill as the number of dice to roll, occasionally added to/subtracted by tactical pools, etc.


As to fixed TN.

Shadowrun used variable TN based on situational modifiers.
D20 (D&D my specialty) uses variable TN based on situational modifiers. Similar, but not exactly. (Knowledge check? Well your char is in a library and has 6 ranks of skill + 2 from intellegence...)
V:TM uses, from what minimal knowledge I admittedly have, fixed TN.
Shadow: The Running (I like this one!) uses fixed TN.

Four seperate games, four drastically seperate dice mechanics (In that V:TM uses d10 and SR4 d6. Netting an amazingly difficult 3% chance of failing.). You neglected to mention one other thing: In SR4 you have a 1/6 chance of "glitching," WHATEVER that is, because we don't know, and some things can't be done but improperly (I fired the gun but umm..5 hits and 1 glitch? Oh it jammed? BS, get me my D20! 2 maybe, but 1?) So the +3% chance to hit in SR4 over V:TM is made up with by a 16% chance to glitch in SR4 as opposed to a 10% chance to get a 1 in V:TM.

Nerbert, correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument isn't holding to well. The games are not the same - If we were all playing vampires in SR, we'd have a problem on our hands - but they aren't looking terribly different, either.

Furthermore, just to completely derail one line of argument, we have to keep in mind that the dice mechanic, target number, and such things are a -system.- That system can be applied to anything with some imagination. D&D could easily be moved up to Shadowrun (D20 modern, I believe, is the closest thing to it. Never played it, myself.) while you could use SR rules to play as characters in the Earthdawn years. You could play a Vampire in 2000 or 1000. Or 0. Just use appropriate story developments/restrictions (I.E. if a clan isn't known yet, you can't be one of them. If firearms aren't around, you can't use them.) and you can do it.

Therefore, arguing that a Shadowrun character and Vampire character are different is moot. Of course they are - They are a product of their times. Fortunately, a reply made earlier int his forum also applies: The Dice mechanic does not weigh in the character's mind.

When I RP, my character might say "Hmm, this sounds like a cool spell. Let me research it. Levitation...Wish I had that when I fell out of that helicopter at the Hilton. Would have saved me a trip to Tir Tangiere..." He doesn't say "I need another point in strength so I can roll another die, letting me have a great chance to overcome that troll's Body of 10."

This being said, Vampire characters are made more for general RP than shadowrunners. By general I mean they don't weigh everything towards their job, which is guarenteed to be illegal stuff in some fashion or another. One vampire character may be a politician. Another might be a performer. Mine? Well, he's an enforcer for the Boston Prince, soooo he's a swordsman. But that's fine - He has a personality which still works in the V:TM world (though parts of it certainly could carry over to SR, the bondage and all that.)

Anyhow, I have to wash my car. Nerbert, I think we as a forum group get your point about the games not being identical. I think you even get our point about the similarities being incredibly forward and annoying. If you have an argument, remember that the core is the center of all that is, and that the core is, by your own admission, the same.

Then maybe I can start figuring out why this forum exists? Besides as fun discussion, of course.
nezumi
QUOTE (Nerbert)
The simple fact of the matter is that every time a Vampire kills someone, mechanically they risk losing humanity and gaining a derangement.

Is this detail a core mechanic? Is it a part of the probability curves? I daresay, it's attached to the character, just like cyberware is in shadowrun (and mage), going crazy from eating blood is in vampire. It doesn't make SR4 mechanically different from Vampire any more than the general uselessness of mideival armor makes D&D 'fundamentally' different from D20 modern.
Shadow
I think a definition of what a "Core Mechanic" is would be in order.

I can try but I am sure I will fail miserably. A core mechanic is the dice system used in the game.

Shadowrun: Skill (in dice) against Variable TN with +/- modifiers

D&D: Dice (d20) against Variable TN +/- skill and modifiers

These are core mechanics, they are the only core mechanics. Everything else is built up around them and they effect the balance of the entire game. Change them and you risk changing the feel of the game. Notice that D&D still feels like D&D when you play 3ed. Thats because while they changed a lot of the ancillarary rules in the game, the core mechanic stayed the same.

SR can lay no claim.
Nerbert
See, but the assumption is that because the core dice mechanic is the same, SR4 will feel like nWoD when you play SR4.

Any anyway, does anyone want to comment on the Threshold differences?

QUOTE (Nerbert)
nWoD has no thresholds. One success acheieves the result and five achieves an exceptional result. You're always allowed to reroll.


That is part of the core Dice machanic, and it does greatly effect probability and game balance.

Actually, I started this thread because people have been comparing the two games a lot, and initially I thought that was a good thing, because I think the nWoD game is simple, elegant, and functional. Now, primarily because of the threshold issues discussed above, I've changed my mind.
frostPDP
I seperate (In my messed-up mind) the mechanic into two things for more practical purposes: How you derive the dice thrown/what kind they are and their application. But Shadow said it quite well; combined, they are the core of the game.

He also got it right when he said that a player gets a feel based on a mechanic. In old, old online RP (AOL's Rhy'Din, if anyone was around...) the starting point was 2d20, 15-19 is 1 hit and 20 is 2. You could of course advance, with every 5 being an extra hit and extra dice based on mortality. It wasn't a terrible system, just impossible to moderate, which is why the whole community has gone diceless pretty much.

[Edit to reply to above Nerbert post]

Furthermore, my nWoD knowledge is minimal but V:TM was in many cases a success-contest. I'd hit someone and he'd need to succeed at a soak test. If he performed at such-and-such a level, he'd reduce or negate my damage, even if I succeeded 10 times (I think my first hit on him was like...7 successes. I got the 2nd lowest level of damage.)

Sooo again, while 1 success is a success, 4 successes was better - A Shadowrun-esque thing. Now its more like SR4 is copying V:TM. The feel is the same and I haven't even played, which is never a good sign.
Cain
QUOTE (Nerbert)
The simple fact of the matter is that every time a Vampire kills someone, mechanically they risk losing humanity and gaining a derangement.

And unlike Masquerade, where there was a way around this with Paths, there's no such thing in the nWoD. The game which you're so spastically enthusiastic about comparing.

You keep missing the point, so I'm going to try it this way. I don't have the nWoD main book, so you'll have to tell me something: is the humanity roll a part of the rules for humans? For Werewolves? Mages? Changelings? Wraiths?

If the answer is "no", then the humanity mechanic is not part of the core system. It's a special-case mechanic applied in one specific situation, like spellcasting is in Shadowrun.

QUOTE
See, but the assumption is that because the core dice mechanic is the same, SR4 will feel like nWoD when you play SR4.

Which is true. Star Wars d20 feels more like D&D in space than the old WEG Star Wars d6 game. Luckily enough, Star Wars lends itself to heroic fantasy, being essentially a heroic space opera. But whenever the core mechanic of a game changes, the feel of the game itself is altered. This is inevitable.
Nerbert
nWoD is mortals, vampires, werewolves and mages. And yes, they all use a system of morals and derangements, although the specifics of what qualifies as "immoral" vary. And furthermore, it is a fundamental and unavoidable contributor to the "feel" of the game.

Its true that the "feel" of SR4 may very well change, its difficult to anticipate. but I can vitually guarantee that SR4 will not "feel" anything like nWoD.
nezumi
QUOTE (Nerbert)
See, but the assumption is that because the core dice mechanic is the same, SR4 will feel like nWoD when you play SR4.

This assumption isn't outright wrong, but it is flawed. Does D20 modern feel like D&D? Well, they feel similar, but not identical. The mechanics naturally lend themselves to certain mindsets, but not others. For instance, playing D&D lends itself to charging in and killing everything, since you're not (usually) worried about being killed in one hit. It also lends itself to specializing in one area, since multi-classing is so painful. So you end up with a lot of very courageous, very tough people fitting set archetypes based off their class.

SR3 lends itself to the oppositte in both cases. You CAN get hit in one hit, and specializing, while useful, becomes more expensive. So you end up with more cautious, more thoughtful characters who dabble in a number of different fields (when's the last time you saw a mage or a decker who couldn't shoot better than your average security guard?)

V:tM lends itself also to certain ways of playing. Part of that is the character of the game (it's about vampires in the modern day setting), part of it is mechanics.

So yes, if SR4 used the V:tM mechanics, you would see some similarities. I don't play WoD enough to say what those similarities would be necessarily. However, they would be in no way identical, and will likely have some significant differences (like the difference between mage and vampire, d20 modern and D&D).
frostPDP
proof.gif - Sorry Kagetenshi, had to steal it for this one.

Neither of us have played SR4, so I admit that's a little strain on the system.

Regardless, if someone listed things in the below linear fashion, tell me which you (as a self-proclaimed V:TM fan.) would think of first.

Number of dice derived from attribute + Skill +/- any modifiers.
Fixed TN.

About here I know I would think "V:TM." If I didn't think it earlier. If all the information provided about the game was the two lines above, you would think of V:TM. (this is a guess, but its based on the fact you are far more experienced with V:TM than SR4 - Familiarity breeds such things as this. And contempt, of course)

Sooo you be honest and ask yourself if there won't be a large amount of familiarity. Don't mis-read me, they won't be the same. From what has been presented, it seems like SR4 will be more like V:TM than SR3 - Based solely on the two lines that almost certainly made you think of V:TM before SR3.
Nerbert
FrostPDP, you're talkign about Vampire: the Requiem, V:tR, the new world of darkness game, not Vampire the Masquerade. Vampire the Masquerade had a variable target number.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (frostPDP)
proof.gif - Sorry Kagetenshi, had to steal it for this one.

I know I'm pretty much the only one who uses it anymore, but last I checked it isn't tagged "Kagetenshi only—hands off!" in the smiley list wink.gif

~J
frostPDP
Hehe Kage, but you're cool so I felt like giving you cred.

Neb - Again, my V:TM experience is ONE playing session in person and ONE online. Not to sound too sharp-toned, but you completely ducked my question about what you thought of. Not a terrible duck, but in a way you also answered it.

So it wasn't V:TM you thought of you thought of V:TR. It was fun, though.
Cain
QUOTE
nWoD is mortals, vampires, werewolves and mages. And yes, they all use a system of morals and derangements, although the specifics of what qualifies as "immoral" vary. And furthermore, it is a fundamental and unavoidable contributor to the "feel" of the game.

Considering that Mage isn't even out yet, I find that statement hard to believe.

As I said before, I was mildly obsessed with M:tA for a while, and there is no morality mechanic in that game. Since Mage 2.0 isn't out yet, one cannot conclude that a brand-new morality mechanic is "fundamental and unavoidable contributor to the 'feel' of the game". In fact, since the specifics vary, it's pretty clear that the morals/derangements system is an additional system, not part of the core mechanics.

The old system of morals/derangements in V:tM was a game-specific mechanic, not part of the core dice mechanism. It wasn't part of everyday task resolution.
Nerbert
When I picked up SR3 I thought "Oh hey, multiple dice, variable TN, this'll be a lot like Vampire."

For all of about six seconds, then I opened the book up and actually looked at what else was going on.

I expect pretty much the same reaction to SR4.
Nerbert
Cain, morality is a fundamental part of the NEW World of Darkness. You might have to just take my word for it, or you can look at all the information that already exists about Mage. There's no question. As sure as you know that SR4 will have Edge, I know that Mage will have some kind of Morality scale.
frostPDP
Completelllly ignoring the fact that att + skill +/- modifiers is the same system as V:TM/V:TR, eh Nerbert? Surpressed evidence is a great technique until it becomes a fallacy.
Nerbert
Attribute + Skill +/- Modifiers

First of all, Vampire divides skills and attributes into Mental, Social, and Physical. There's three attributes for each of those categories and eleven skills for each category.

Somehow, I don't see Shadowrun doing anythign even remotely similar to this.
frostPDP
...Lemme see if I can include the new skills properly.

Physical: Strength, body, reaction and whatever else quickness was broken into.
Mental: Perception, Knowledge, Willpower, Charisma.

8 skills versus 11 isn't a gigantic difference, just as SR3's 6 weren't much different from D&D's 6.

I'd not be surprised if Charisma got broken down into multiple stats for SR4 as well. It would almost make sense.

Regardless, you're still ducking the fact you have already acknowledged elsewhere - The formula for dice throwing is the same. I will not repeat it, it is annoying to type.

Of course, if you'd like to argue that SR4 won't be using "Attribute + Skill +/- Modifiers" (I said I wouldn't type it. I never said anything about cut and paste..) or that V:TM/V:TR don't use it...Go ahead, try.
Nerbert
Those aren't skills, those are attributes.

I'm not arguing that they don't use those systems. I'm arguing that just because they use the same dice system, doesn't mean the games will play, feel or operate in any kind of similar fashion.

And as for ducking points, you still havn't bothered to address the Threshold issue.
Eldritch
QUOTE (Nerbert)
Ask any d20 player about how important a 5% difference can be on a saving throw.

Heh, I am a d20 player - for a very long time. Yeah, 5% is +1, makes a bit of a difference.

But 5% is not 3.3% Anymore than 30% is 33.3%. 3.3% dosen't make any real tangible difference in d6 or d10 mechanics.
frostPDP
Sure I addressed it; earlier, when discussing how, at least in my V:TM game, successes were compared to create results. I discussed my char clocking a teammate who frenzied.
Nerbert
That was Masquerade again. Requiem has no thresholds.
frostPDP
Well, recalling the name of the forum for a moment, one can see how I could make such a greivous error. My deepest apologies.
Nerbert
Anyway. Its true that the two mechanics are the same, and its true that the mechanic has a lot to do with how a game works and feels.

However, I think that there are enough other things that go into the way an RPG is played that will make SR4 play and feel substantialy different from nWoD.

And anyway, if you're going to steal, steal from the best.
Eldritch
QUOTE
And anyway, if you're going to steal, steal from the best.


Er, According to Synner's report on market share, that would be D20.

Think I'll go work on my 7th level street samurai.......
Nerbert
heh, White Wolf is the second best. And they stole from Shadowrun in the first place, so we all know where that 2nd place spot came from, right?
Shadow
See I think the thing you are missing is that we don't want a game that plays and feels like Nwod. We like our ORIGINAL game engine.
Nerbert
I think the thing that you're missing is that I'm saying that they won't feel the same at all.
Shadow
But the only thing we have to go on is that the two games are using the same engine. Your saying a game you have never played wont feel like another you have played.

We are saying since they use the same engine there is a good chance that it wont feel like Shadowrun anymore.

We have evidence to support our claim, please show me yours.

This isn't about being right or wrong, it is about our opinion of what this new game that Fanpro is making will do to Shadowrun. SR has used the same emgine since inceptioon, change it and you change Shadowrun.
Adam
QUOTE
Er, According to Synner's report on market share, that would be D20.

To be nit-picky, it would be D&D; 3rd party d20 support materials do not sell at near the levels of WotC D&D branded products, and never did, even during the height of the d20 boom.
Nerbert
Shadow, I've explained my evidence all through this thread, please read it and reply to it in specific.

And I'm definitely not arguing that Shadowrun won't be changed by new mechanics, it definitely will. But it won't be changed to Shadowrun: The Whingeing

And by the way, d20 went through this from 2nd edition to 3rd, World of Darkness is going through this right now. Who's to say some fundamental rebuilding isn't exactly what the game needs to be revitalized? Some of you might even like the new system better.

Of course, some of you definitely won't. Just, wait and play it and think about it before you decide.
Cochise
QUOTE (Nerbert)
Anyway.  Its true that the two mechanics are the same, and its true that the mechanic has a lot to do with how a game works and feels.

No that this is clear, let's look at what is slightly more important:

QUOTE
However, I think that there are enough other things that go into the way an RPG is played that will make SR4 play and feel substantialy different from nWoD.


The big "iffy" here is: Will that "substantial" difference be greater or less than the expected "substantial" difference of feeling between SR 3 and SR 4?
In terms of the used mechanics the odds here pretty much are against you ... and not only in a region of 3.3%

QUOTE
And anyway, if you're going to steal, steal from the best.


I seem to remember someone stating that WoD originally "stole" (better "was influenced") from (by) previous SR Editions. So this looks more like a copy of a copy. And since those copies aren't digital, the loss between those copy actions is very likely "tremendous".

Btw. You somewhere asked why people seemed to hate (n)WoD that much, despite it being the second biggest game on the market: At least my answer is, that I don't hate (n)WoD, I pretty much enjoy any occasion that I can play the old WoD, despite some of its problems in terms of mechanics (just as I enjoy SR despite some of its problems with mechanics). It just a very different game to me and I wouldn't like SR to be going even remotely into that direction (or any other for that matter). So yes, copying that "core mechanism" of nWoD is something that drives me "crazy" and into a position where "wait and see" becomes less attractive.

So far I bought any SR rule- or sourcebook that had a theme that was relevant for me any my gaming experience without taking a closer look, before going to the store keeper and pulling my wallet. This surely isn't going to happen with SR 4 ...
frostPDP
The difference between SR3 and 4 will be almost like playing Baldur's Gate and then playing Neverwinter Nights. Same company, same basic idea (D&D), completely different format.

If they used the Aurora engine to build BG again, it would still be a different game. Same plot, different feel.

BG 1 and 2, however, shared tons of feel because they were based on the same engine, despite revisions.

This is the difference between SR 3 and 4.
Nerbert
Now that I absolutely agree with.
Eldritch
QUOTE (Adam)
QUOTE
Er, According to Synner's report on market share, that would be D20.

To be nit-picky, it would be D&D; 3rd party d20 support materials do not sell at near the levels of WotC D&D branded products, and never did, even during the height of the d20 boom.

Sorry, I was referring to Wotc d20 in general, and yeah, D&D in particular.
Cynic project
QUOTE (Shadow)
But the only thing we have to go on is that the two games are using the same engine. Your saying a game you have never played wont feel like another you have played.

We are saying since they use the same engine there is a good chance that it wont feel like Shadowrun anymore.

We have evidence to support our claim, please show me yours.

This isn't about being right or wrong, it is about our opinion of what this new game that Fanpro is making will do to Shadowrun. SR has used the same emgine since inceptioon, change it and you change Shadowrun.

Aberrant, adventure and NWoD use about the same rules for dice. They do not feel anything each other.

This is with basically the same character sheets, skills listings and same writers.

Shadowrun can have the same amrou system it has now, witch is different from NWoD. It has the fact that there aren't as many morlas that have game rules to bap you on the head for. The items can have greater viratity.So a ma-dues feels different from a sniper rifle. It doesn't have to have rules for playing the whining gothic undead, most modern religious zealots, or tree hugging leg humpers.

It has made no indication that it make you play characters that are doomed to fail, lose their humanity, become a beast, go insane and or hump dead corpses. At least it doesn't have rules for those sort of thing.

It has signs that the dice pools will be larger than NWod. That youa re still not playing the run of the mil people. you are playing something hard core. Not nesarty a hard core fighter, but if you character is a Liberian, he could be one damned good one.

But in the end, why it will not fall to the D20 blandness is because it is not made to be comparable with NWoD. A street same doesn't have to balanced with a gangral, or what the fuck they are calling werewolves inthe new books. They do not have make both ma-dueses do the same amount of damage hell they don't even have to have the damage system so, yes on some levels they re alike,i don't think they are nearly the same as you seem to think.
Shadow
QUOTE (frostPDP)
The difference between SR3 and 4 will be almost like playing Baldur's Gate and then playing Neverwinter Nights. Same company, same basic idea (D&D), completely different format.

That’s funny, cause my big problem with Neverwinter Nights was that it didn't feel anything like D&D. It was Diablo with a hacked up D&D ruleset.

Baldur’s Gate was DEAD ON D&D. I was very disappointed in Bioware for NWN. While the game was still outstanding I never thought of it as D&D.

SR4 could (and I stress the could) have the same problem.

Going back to your game analogy. It was obvious when they wanted to do NWN that they were going to need a new engine. The old engine just couldn't keep up.

It isnt obvious to most of us why the current system has to be completely scrapped (and make no mistake, it is) for a new one.

Of all the complaints I ever heard for SR3 not a single one was... damn that core mechanic it just doesn't work for me. In fact most of the praise it ever got was for its highly original and unique (not created by Fanpro) core mechanic.

Suddenly 15 years later that isn't good enough? I find that highly unlikely. What I find more likely is that 4th ed is ego driven.
Nerbert
See, Neverwinter Nights is straight up 3rd edition D&D. Which is a huge difference between 2nd edition. Which, right there, ought to tell you a lot about what the similarities in dice mechanics mean. So just because you're throwing d20s around doesn't mean the two games will behave in any similar fashion.
Eldritch
QUOTE
Suddenly 15 years later that isn't good enough? I find that highly unlikely. What I find more likely is that 4th ed is ego driven.


I'm beginning to see aa bit of that myself.
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