Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: I was a playtester...
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
blakkie
QUOTE (Nyxll @ Jun 30 2005, 05:38 AM)
My question is, if Rigger 3 was the worst book published, (which I am going to borrow and find out for myself), how did it get out of the playtesting phase?  Sounds like a systemic problem with the development process not just the writers.

There are a few people that apparently use it verbatum. But the level of complexity in the rules, and the bizzare results of some of the vehicle design rules (think custom firearms on a larger scale), is a stunning marvel to behold. smile.gif

When the author posted here about his background (engineering degree with a number of years working on Sigma 6 QA and such) it made a lot of sense. He is a man with the ability and trained instinct to create intricate models. Left to his own devices R3 seems a natural result.

I believe that there was so much errata to R3 that it was actually rereleased (or reprinted) with the errata. But to 'fix' it required much beyond that. A lot of issues flowed from the foundations of vehicle rules back in the BBB. R3 just dutifully extended and built upon them in that image. frown.gif

P.S. I don't think the writing was that bad, or that there were a lot of "errors". It was just the direction that they went in.
Cain
QUOTE
Come on, be fair, just because you didn't use it doesn't mean it wasn't necessary. A lot of campaigns can spiral up quickly and the use of military gear and city destroying weaponry can happen. Even if it is the rigger saying, "Oops," after jacking into the battleship for the first time.

If you're running naval battles on the high seas, you've long since left the shadowrunning scene and gone into something else. You might as well break out the Axis and Allies board. I certainly would have wanted more rigger gear and options, and more on security systems, rather than 10 pages on submarine combat.

QUOTE
My question is, if Rigger 3 was the worst book published, (which I am going to borrow and find out for myself), how did it get out of the playtesting phase? Sounds like a systemic problem with the development process not just the writers.

Some of it was a holdover from R2, which had some hideously broken aspects in the vehicle creation rules. However, the holes weren't obvious until a dedicated munchkin went over them. By the time R3 came around, there was still a need for a vehicle creation program, and that was what they had on hand. This *is* an area where they should have started fresh, instead of patching the old stuff.

Blakkie has it right, though. Jon Szetzo is an incredibly bright man, so he tends to forget that the rest of us can't run the numbers as easily as he can. From his standpoint, the maneuver score is probably a good realistic model. However, for the rest of us, it brings gameplay to a screeching halt. I get nervous whenever I see a crunch section written by Jon Szetzo, and I try to preemptively think of house rules to patch those areas. Now, I'm scared that I'll need to patch an entire ruleset.
Ellery
I don't think everything can be explained by Jon being bright. If that were the case, one would expect the rules to model things better than they do. Try getting across the Pacific, for example. I suspect time pressure (or other factors leading to a degree of inattention) also played a role.
Nyxll
QUOTE
However, the holes weren't obvious until a dedicated munchkin went over them.


If they are not catching this in playtesting, they are not playtesting with the right people. Admittedly I am one of the first people to look at exploits ... those should be easy enough to spot.

QUOTE
Jon Szetzo is an incredibly bright man, so he tends to forget that the rest of us can't run the numbers as easily as he can. From his standpoint, the maneuver score is probably a good realistic model. However, for the rest of us, it brings gameplay to a screeching halt.


Again I am questioning the people that they pick for playtesting. I can store rules and figure out target numbers very quickly, but half of the people I used to play with would bog things down. I would up having to figure it out for many of them. They were smart people that came up with ideas that would derail my plots so, I know they were not dumb people or players.

I hope that somehow we are proven wrong and the playtesters manage to catch the combersome rules. I know from programming that I cannot test my own applications. I have to go find the lowest user that I can to get them to test. Maybe that is not reflected in this process. (it would be easy to overlook since you want your cream audience to playtest, but it reflects in the product)
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Cain)
If you're running naval battles on the high seas, you've long since left the shadowrunning scene and gone into something else. You might as well break out the Axis and Allies board. I certainly would have wanted more rigger gear and options, and more on security systems, rather than 10 pages on submarine combat.

Certainly. On the other hand, if your runners are somewhere being bombarded from offshore (the Yucatan, for example), it's pretty useful to know the splash on a naval gun. Likewise, if your runners are trying to accomplish something before one submarine destroys another, it's pretty useful to know what will cause that condition.

I would probably still buy it, but I would consider a book without those rules to be massively less valuable to me.

~J
blakkie
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Jun 30 2005, 12:29 PM)
I would probably still buy it, but I would consider a book without those [edit:NAVAL] rules to be massively less valuable to me.

I wouldn't put it in the "massively less valuable" catagory, but i did appreciate having a smattering of a wide variety of different vehicle types from boats to combat jets to snowmobiles.
blakkie
QUOTE (Ellery)
I don't think everything can be explained by Jon being bright. If that were the case, one would expect the rules to model things better than they do. Try getting across the Pacific, for example. I suspect time pressure (or other factors leading to a degree of inattention) also played a role.

Time and space complicated by the pure massiveness of what was written. Plus every model has its deviations from what it is modeling. It is an odd effect that sometimes trying to get model it too precise as measure by one set of parameters can actually put the model farther out of wack elsewhere.
mfb
QUOTE (Cain)
If you're running naval battles on the high seas, you've long since left the shadowrunning scene and gone into something else. You might as well break out the Axis and Allies board.


you could also be running a pirate campaign, which is what the ship damage rules were originally designed for. i don't think the ship combat rules are perfectly-executed, but i don't mind them having a place.
Cain
QUOTE (mfb)
QUOTE (Cain)
If you're running naval battles on the high seas, you've long since left the shadowrunning scene and gone into something else. You might as well break out the Axis and Allies board.


you could also be running a pirate campaign, which is what the ship damage rules were originally designed for. i don't think the ship combat rules are perfectly-executed, but i don't mind them having a place.

If you're running a pirates campaign, you still don't need the battleship rules. You only need rules for smaller vessels, unless your pirates are running against aircraft carriers. Besides which, a pirate campaign isn't going to be focused on being several hundred klicks from each other, flinging anti-ship missiles.

I can see these rules having a place in Cyberpirates 2, or maybe a military splatbook. But not in the main rigger expansion, which is supposed to focus on things shadowrunners will likely encounter. I kinda feel the same way about the cybermancy rules, which really should belong in a book all their own-- heck, cybermancy could have been the core of a totally new adventure/rulebook.

IMO, those things would have been better handled in a dedicated book/section-- like the merc section in SOTA, or like Fields of Fire. You could go into those rules and settings in greater detail, and not clutter up the main expansion books.
Penta
That just creates the "searching many SBs" problem everybody has.
mfb
eh. if you're going to make a ruleset, you need to make sure it works at both the low end and the high end. better to have all the ship stuff in one location, developed all at once, than to develop only half of it now and hope that the guy who ends up writing the other half uses your notes. to the extent that they work, the ship rules are at least integrated and self-consistent.
Taki
I would prefer a lot a rule book with initiation and all the magic rule part, than having rules for battleship !

EDIT : upsidedown.gif
silly.gif

I always thought those bloody rigger should have been mage instead ...
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Taki)
I would prefer a lot a rule book with initiation and all the magic rule part, than having rules for battleship !

Unless you're seriously advocating magic rules in a Rigger sourcebook, the two are completely unrelated to each other.

~J
tisoz
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Jun 30 2005, 12:29 PM)
On the other hand, if your runners are somewhere being bombarded from offshore (the Yucatan, for example), it's pretty useful to know the splash on a naval gun. Likewise, if your runners are trying to accomplish something before one submarine destroys another, it's pretty useful to know what will cause that condition.

I would probably still buy it, but I would consider a book without those rules to be massively less valuable to me.

~J

The naval weaponry is not covered in those 10 pages though. If you want naval weapon stats and hull ratings and massive turrets, you can add a few more pages to that 10 count.

The time limit for a sub destroying another? Make it up just like you would for the equipment they were using to find/evade each other.

Nothing in the ship section has much bearing on your examples.

QUOTE (blakkie)
i did appreciate having a smattering of a wide variety of different vehicle types from boats to combat jets to snowmobiles.


Yeah, snowmobile stats are nice and probably way more useful for shadowrunners given that the default setting sees snow and all immediate surrounding terrain away from the coast typically sees it, too. Too bad they are in Target Wastelands though.

Combat jets? Another piece of equipment riggers only dream about.

QUOTE (mfb)
you could also be running a pirate campaign, which is what the ship damage rules were originally designed for. i don't think the ship combat rules are perfectly-executed, but i don't mind them having a place.


That place should have been Cyberpirates! then. Even then, I have to agree with Cain. I really wonder about the viability of a pirate campaign with actual boats on the sea. The skill and payoff level should make it into a retirement run.

QUOTE (Penta)
That just creates the "searching many SBs" problem everybody has.
Having them in R3 instead of Cyberpirates! is itself a searching many sourcebooks problem.

QUOTE (mfb)
better to have all the ship stuff in one location, developed all at once, than to develop only half of it now and hope that the guy who ends up writing the other half uses your notes. to the extent that they work, the ship rules are at least integrated and self-consistent.


R2, Cyberpirates!, and R3 all came out relatively close together. I know I bought R2 and Cyberpirates! at the same time. And R2 was obsolete the next trip to the game store because SR3 came out. I do hope that any vehicle book for SR4 omits a section similar to the ship section of R3.

Since they have all the land masses covered by Shadows of... books, maybe they can stick them in a water place book (?).
Kagetenshi
QUOTE
The naval weaponry is not covered in those 10 pages though. If you want naval weapon stats and hull ratings and massive turrets, you can add a few more pages to that 10 count.

Sure, I've got no problem with that. You do realize that these rules will come up if the team hijacks a freighter, right? That's just the most frequent example I can think of.
QUOTE
The time limit for a sub destroying another? Make it up just like you would for the equipment they were using to find/evade each other.

Sonar rules. Making up rules sucks.
QUOTE
Having them in R3 instead of Cyberpirates! is itself a searching many sourcebooks problem.

Let's just say that I sincerely hope that the game designers aren't of a remotely similar opinion to you.

~J
mfb
QUOTE (tisoz)
That place should have been Cyberpirates! then.

a lot of it was in Cyberpirates!. it's also worth pointing out that even if all of it had been in Cyberpirates!, it'd have needed updating for 3rd ed anyway.
Lindt
QUOTE (blakkie)
When the author posted here about his background (engineering degree with a number of years working on 6 Sigma QA and such) it made a lot of sense. He is a man with the ability and trained instinct to create intricate models. Left to his own devices R3 seems a natural result.

Normally Id disagree and just call my fav. book a massive math error waiting to happen, but seeing as Im currently play testing a system written by a trio of math majors, I can see why it happend. Any system that requires a calculator to run char. gen. needs some simplifing.

Are the rules for riggers increadably complex and bulky? Yep. Needlessly so? I dont think so. And yes, I often use a calculator to do veich. generation.
Kagetenshi
I disagree that needing a calculator in a game is inherently undesirable. Even conceding that point, though, the primary use of a calculator is keeping track of a lot of additions and subtractions (a piece of paper and pencil works just as well, but takes longer).

~J
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (mfb)
to the extent that they work, the ship rules are at least integrated and self-consistent.

That's not much of an "extent", though. There are no complete rules for designing new ships, or indeed watercraft of any kind. (What's the relationship between Body and Hull for design options? What Signature modifiers affect Sonars and what don't?) Some of the specialized rules for naval combat are woefully under-developed. (What's the range of MAD sensors for detecting submerged subs? Do missiles (rigged or unrigged) get to make Dodge tests? What are the Sensor ratings for missiles? etc.) I'm pretty sure ship design and naval combat was never really playtested for R3.
mfb
oh, believe me, i'm not defending the rules themselves. just the space the rules occupy.
Shadow
I don't think needing a calculator to make a character or play the game is a bad thing. Roleplaying games are the primary reason I can do simple math really easily in my head. And by 'simple' math I mean addition, subtractions, multiplications, and division. I can do it quickly and with large numbers. Something I know a lot of people educated in the 'system' cannot.

Course I can't do calc or trig to save my life, but I don't use those everyday do I?
Nikoli
Basic math sure, hell, even some Algebra, X magazines at Y rounds per magazine equal z where z is the number of dead guys at the end of the night.
Taki
I do not use any calculator to create a sr3 character. I use a excel - or like software. To be honest, I don't see any other away to buy equipment ...
Even if I am not bad at calculating.

By the way I don't like needing a calculator for the rules - but even with the complex sr3 rules we don't.
Nikoli
I use excel for gear, and NSRCG for everything else in creating a SR character these days.

Love excel, I was working on spreadsheets for most rules heavy situations, combat modifiers,decking, etc. but am holding offon development until SR4 is released.
Taki
I love excel like stuff for sr3, I can't create a character without it (or my first one starting with 5000 Y)
I hate to need such complex thing for rpg ...
Eldritch
wink.gif And gee, How did I ever survive! I played the first 2 editions with only paper, pencil and a calulator! Oh WOe! smile.gif

But yeah, I do use NSRCG now. Couldn't live withouot it.

But thats the trade off for building characters that are above 'first level' - Shadowrun chars are expierenced and come with a load of skills/gear/ and or magic. So yeah, a calc may be neccessary to make a character.

Doesn't sound like that will be a problem in 4 - as they are lowering the 'level' of beginning characters.

Taki
It wouldn't be bad not having to buy so much things. I would like rules giving examples with "free ammo". because having to calculate :
1 gun as equipment, 1 gun as spare, the 2 shock pads, ammo (by type), the clips, the holsters (fast & concealable), silencer, built in mk ...

It is so stupid to take so much time for equipment.
Might work for a pc game, but when it is as easy to get 10 apds than 1000 apds I would just declare that at a certain level of simulation, rules are just pain in the ass.
I don't like spending more time on my character bank account, than time I spend on mine.

In rpg there is "roleplaying".
Shadow
Am I the only person who loved tricking out his equipment. For a sam(far and away my favorite type) buying your equipment and tricking out your guns was like a mage buying spells. Take that away, or reduce it to having whatever, takes it a step closer to freeform.

Buying the right gun, and putting the right gear on it was the difference between hitting and missing. I would like to see that stay.
Taki
Don't get wrong : I love tweaking my equipment to.
I just find stupid to have that much choice (who DON'T have a shock pad ?) why is there no pack which will be ok for almost all uses ?
I don't mind having rules to have the possibility to get the proper price for the right amount of ammo 10 ammo: 20 Y ( 1/50000 of an A priority).
Because I don't use it.

I just think that example and rules in rpg are a presentation of how to play the game.

Guess what ? Even when money is one of the main point in SR, I really don't think that counting the cost in ammo is the good way to "make it real". Do you count the tips during your game ?
Shadow
Well I'm a big tipper so yeah wink.gif But I understand what you mean. It is just for some of us, micromanaging our character is fun.
Kagetenshi
At least for me, infinite/uncounted/free ammo kills the suspension in ways that paying for tips don't. Besides, who says 'Runners can afford to eat at places that have real waitstaff? wink.gif

~J
Taki
As an adept firing only apds in my gun - average 2 by scenario - low class level, my account is about 136 k Y
I am a happy black dwarf samourai adept smile.gif
I can eat wherever I want.

(if they accept sin less person)

by the way for real shadowruner I think tips for information might be more important than stock of bullets (I don't speak of how much there is left in your gun) ...

Kagetenshi
Tips for info we absolutely keep track of. Tips for ordinary good service either get ignored or the entire team pulls a Mr. White.

Edit: I see part of the issue. Yeah, if it's important we keep track of it. Bullets for personal defense and 'Running get kept track of and paid for. We don't, however, usually keep track of costs for bullets spent on the shooting range, etc.

~J
Taki
so you take some time to report 10% of your bullet used (since you practice regulary - and you are a shadow runner, not a mercenary) - and you still think free ammo is bad ???
several fees are hidden ... why taking a lot of time counting with such a precision obvious fees ?
Wounded Ronin
Keeping track of ammunition, external box magazines, and whether or not I drop them on the ground when reloading assists with my mental masturbation.
Taki
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
Keeping track of ammunition, external box magazines, and whether or not I drop them on the ground when reloading assists with my mental masturbation.

...

Have fun !
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Jul 1 2005, 11:44 AM)
I disagree that needing a calculator in a game is inherently undesirable. Even conceding that point, though, the primary use of a calculator is keeping track of a lot of additions and subtractions (a piece of paper and pencil works just as well, but takes longer).

~J

I had a friend named Matt who once tried to make the ultimate RPG system. It was ultimate in that it modeled reality as closely as he could manage it, and he had worked in it for many years. The rules were so complicated in terms of formulas and math that the game was designed to be played with a laptop computer nearby with a home-made console app running to handle the math.

I did just a little bit of playtesting for him.

It blew my mind and was the coolest system ever. If he ever ran a game on IRC or something, I'd be there playing it like a maniac, while screaming "HYPER REALISM OF DRAMA!" and hyperventilating.

EDIT:

So, my point is, you *cannot* get too complicated, as long as you're trying to be realistic. All you need to do is supply the C applications needed to manage the rules and you're golden.
Ellery
It's even cooler if you write the apps in Python.
Cain
QUOTE (Taki)
so you take some time to report 10% of your bullet used (since you practice regulary - and you are a shadow runner, not a mercenary) - and you still think free ammo is bad ???
several fees are hidden ... why taking a lot of time counting with such a precision obvious fees ?

The ammo he's talking about can be covered under the lifestyle rules. Heck, not all ranges allow full-powered ammo to be used. I'd certainly qualify it as entertainment, since I know many people who'll happily spend an afternoon feeding a few hundred rounds through their firearms.
Cheops
there's also a very big difference in the tracking of money between the different types of characters. Playing as an adept there is very little need for money. All you character development is based off of karma not cash for unless you play with the rules for buying karma then you don't need money. Sams on the other hand are ALWAYS desperate for cash because the only way to increase their "powers" is by paying docs to take pieces out of them and putting new ones in. The karma helps to increase skills to be sure but that will eventually lead to them being subpar compared to the mage or adept (or god forbid physmage). So how much a sam is paying for things, including such annoying things as bullets, becomes much more important for them in terms of character development.

In campaigns I've run that have gone any length of time the awakened characters always end up rich as kings but are always scrounging for karma. On the other hand their sam buddies are still living on the street learning how to shoot better so they can get more money.
Snow_Fox
Uh, guys, for the Battleship senario, anyone seen a movie called Under Siege. That's a shadowrun.
Guns of Naverone.

Beyond being bombarded by Aztecnology troops you could also be getting fire support. Big Red One, To Hell and Back, We Were Soldiers.

the bad guys have heavy weapons- Diamonds are Forever.

Blackhawk Down have airstrikes being called in.
tisoz
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Jul 2 2005, 09:51 PM)
Uh, guys, for the Battleship senario, anyone seen a movie called Under Siege. That's a shadowrun.
Guns of Naverone.

Beyond being bombarded by Aztecnology troops you could also be getting fire support. Big Red One, To Hell and Back, We Were Soldiers.

the bad guys have heavy weapons- Diamonds are Forever.

Blackhawk Down have airstrikes being called in.

Under Siege, good point, but do you need the 10 page section from 51-60 to run an adventure based on that movie? I do not think so. But this reminds me of the sequel on the train. Trains, especially subways or monorails, are something the runners are more than likely to encounter, but where the frag are the rules and stats for them? I would rather have seen the ship section omitted and a "train" section in its place. Maybe the writer is a former Navy guy...?

The BIG weapons are not listed in those pages, and I do not think anyone is complaining about their inclusion, so the people bringing them up are basically arguing with no one.
sanctusmortis
I think they're just obsessed with water. Diving, Drive Submarine, the whole section in R3... they have issues, I tells ya!
Kremlin KOA
Yes, and tyhe Idea that a GM might want to run a game in Polynesia or the Carribean league is so preposterous... No GM should be Allowed to perform such a breach of what is Shadowrun... let alone have actual Development time and resources devoted to helping them out... Why, it's sacreligous!


(FOr those who can't spot the sarcasm.... I am most disappointed in you)
Cain
You still don't need the ship rules for Under Siege. All you need is a map of the Missouri. The Hunt for Red October would be a better example, but if you're giving your players nuclear submarines, you're definitely not playing in the standard shadowrun power levels.

If you want to run a Cyberpirates! game, you can do so with with normal boats. Again, the average pirate isn't going to be flinging anti-ship missiles at their targets; and their opposition won't want to waste 750,000 nuyen.gif missiles on small targets.
Snow_Fox
'Red October is a good example, if you use the movie, not the book, because they don't actually shoot them islses and Ryan is na analyst, not a field operative.

"This gentleman has a plan, I think it's stupid but the admiral backs it. But I don't have the personel to wate on it, so you lot are going to be the compromise."

"remember somethings in here don't react well to bullets."

Similarly rescue on damaged ships- USS Oklahoma (in Pearl Harbor), USS Squalus (sub off the East coast of the US in the late 1930's), K-19 Soviet sub with radiation leak, Kiev, soviet sub that sank after catastrophic explosion in forward torpedo room. From movies
For You Eyes Only and Tomorrow Never Dies, James Bond movies where he must dive to a sunken warship. Thunderball, another Bond film with a downed bomber.

For those who question the need for so much attention to water in SR 1-3, uh chummers, look at Seattle. It's a port. on the coast. Puget sounds, Vancouver, NAN, Smugglers, dumping bodies. You should have lots going on in water.
Cheops
But as far as rules bloat is concerned it is another set of rules that is completely different than all the other rules. My main complaint with using the big ships in games is that it takes another rule set to play them and it is not worth the effort for the occasional time I'd use it. Plus it is really hard to integrate the typical runner team into the action because they are not equipped for it. A lot of those rules are campaign specific and thus a general waste of time for all but a couple of uses.

If I'm running a shadowrun on a ship I don't need all the rules for its operations--I just need a layout, security system, and crew stats--all of which I can do myself.

Just general information about life at sea, nautical stuff, and ship information would have been good enough to give us landlubbers more idea of what sailing is like.
tisoz
We always played the water as terribly polluted and filled with things that are hungry. Kind of like the feeling everyone had after watching Jaws for the first time.

I still think that space could have been better utilized for trains, planes or human powered wheels like bicycles/skateboards or whatever. Like Cain is saying, the scale is a bit out of the league of the majority of shadowrunners. Might as well had a section on rockets and space shuttles.

[edit] Did they even mention actual sail power and how to figure speed or anything? Sail power is way more relevant to a shadowrunner and have had it come up in a game. The player wanted an auxiliary means of power. When travelling long distance, economy of fueled engines comes into play. How does the spread of the sails affect signature? [/edit]
Cheops
No they didn't ever deal with actual sail vessels. And I do agree with the sentiment that some space should have been given to trains, bicycles, monorails, etc but they should have taken the place of the lame vehicle design rules instead. Vehicle design, to me, seems to be more out of the realm of typical runners than just about anything else. I see no need for the rules to design your super runnermobile or why every runner should have a custom built Jackal-style gun.
Capt. Dave
They mentioned sail power, and give speeds based on the type of boat/ship they were propelling, same for signiature. Good signiatures and economy (obviously), bad speed and accelleration. It's in those vehicle design rules Cheops hates so much.

I personally love the vehicle design rules. It gives players and GMs options to cover needs/wants not covered by the few standard vehicles offered in each vehicle class. The more options the people of the Shadowrun world have, the better.
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