Fair enough--I basically agree.

I'd just point out that if d20 has the largest market, it's not necessarily smart to compete head-to-head with it (as evidenced by the dieoff of many non-WotC d20 games that had only setting to distinguish themselves from each other and from WotC products). Handling number/power disparity is an area in which SR has traditionally been far superior to d20. Subtle (though not always realistic) distinctions between weapons is an area where d20 has typically outperformed. Crafting mechanics that are in some ways superior to d20 (and in few as possible ways vastly inferior) is a way to gain a niche and therefore a market. It's certainly not the only way, but it helps.

You know Synner, I am going to have some fun here...

I am going to see if I can recreate Ellery's logic process

If you want to debate me please just state if an assumption is wrong of point out where a section of logic does not follow. you need not say what the actaul facts are when you tell me an assumptions is wrong (thus protecting your NDA)


Assumption: The FAQs were not a bunch of lies and the material within them can be stated as 'fact'

Assumption: The FanPro people are not a bunch of Wankers who will completely go against their stated goals for no good reason

Assumption: The FanPro team are not mathematically incompetent.

Fact: The new SR4 system uses a Fixed TN basis

Fact: a Fixed TN basis produces a linear relationship between number of dice and number of successes

Conclusion: Therefore SR4 has a linear relationship between dice rolled and successes

----------------------------

Grandfathered in data: SR4 has a linear relationship between dice rolled and successes

Assumption: The fastest increase in dice rolled for spellcasting would be "Multiply dice by spell force"

Assumption: Ellery was talking about resisted spells here

Fact a "Multiply dice by spell force" formula would produce a 20% effectiveness improvement from force 5-6 or a 50% effect improvement from force 4 to 6

(Ellery already proved that using force as threshold merely means that force 5 is so devestating that force 6 is not necessary)

Fact SR3 has a 100% effect increase from force 5 to 6 and a 200% increase from force 4 to 6

Conclusion: the power increase from force 4 to 6 in SR4 will be less dramatic than the force 5 to 6 in SR3
-----

Fact: FanPro have stated that they plan to symplify and streamline the SR ruleset

Assumption: FanPro are not a bunch of Hypocrites

Assumption: FanPro are not so stupid to believe that piling on "patch" rules to specific situations, is an example of streamlining

Conclusion: Magic rules will follow the, already stated, mechanic. Therefore Magic will probably be opposed tests

-----

Assumption: Most people have a small amount of powergamer inside them. This usually manifests in the form of a cost/benefit analysis during character creation

Assumption: 1 essence point of Cyber will be at least as useful as it is in SR3 (If not then there is no way in Hell I am buying this game I am sick of 'due to years of research and development the technology became less effewctive'. If I want that, I will work for microsoft)

Fact: it has been said at Origins that "Essence loss for magic will work as always"

Assumption: "As always" means lose one essence, lose one magic

Fact: Synner said that Magic 3 or 4 magicians will be common.

Assumption: Synner was not talking out of his arse

Fact: Force of spellcasting is limited to 2*magic

Conclusion a: Magic 2 mages cast at force 4, magic 3 mages at force 6, and magic 4 mages cast at force 8

Conclusion b: since the difference of 2 force points is less than the 5-6 in SR3, and the Cyberware will be at least as useful, The cost benefit analysis for that essence worth of cyber will be considered favorable more often.

Conclusion c: There will be an increase in the number of lightly cybered mages

quod erat demonstrandum

---

Now Synner if you would like to tell me which assumptions or facts are wrong, or prove a logical hole between fact/assumption and conclusion. I would be happy to hear from you

Not bad, Kremlin. In the first section, your conclusion is not based on whether or not people at FanPro are mathematically incompetent, so you can drop that assumption.

I wouldn't assume that "multiply dice by spell force" is necessarily the way in which force is used. There are a number of possiblities (cap on sucesses, automatic successes, number of points of damage, multiplier to range/speed, gives additional dice for success test, subtracts from armor, etc.), but in each case the conclusion is the same: at most, 5 to 6 is a 20% improvement. Also, since the mechanic for everything is "attribute + skill", it is very likely that there will be "magic + magic skill" tests (I forget whether this was confirmed at Origins), but here the effect is even less than 20% (depending on the skill).

Also, at the time, Synner hadn't said that magic 3 or 4 mages would be typical. It had been widely reported that stats of 3 would be "average", however, and with assumptions about cost structure and so on based upon declared design goals, it's very likely that it won't be that expensive to be higher. It is thus safe to assume that at creation time there will be a fair number of magicians with over 3 magic.

Ellery is a great conversationalist. Always rational, always clear, never starts "flaming". And the others involved here too. Really a great read. It is awesome when these things stick to the point and don't degenerate into name calling. All involved are to be congratulated, this is good stuff.

I think SR3 rules are a lot more flexible than d20 rules, actually--SR3 already handles fantasy and technological settings quite well, for example. d20 is largely successful because of inertia (TSR/WotC produce the classic fantasy RPG setting). But it's also successful because products are well designed around the rules that they have, with an easy enough entry path, but lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of cool new toys and powerups to look forward to. The most popular MMORPGs do the same thing. It's a winning formula.

But they've already won with that formula. Unless they really drop the ball, their comptetitors are better off doing something else.

assuming you're refering to my asking about CrimsonDude2.0 and Hanhsoo, I was just asking because CD was always ... interesting, and Hanhsoo was always helpful with questions, and I was curios. Whether it has anything to do with debating sr4, I'd say probably for CD, and no clue for Hanhsoo, for what it matters.

Once again assuming that's what you were referring to.

Yes, specifically referring to Crimsondude. Some of his posts in this forum were just shocking.

Even with exploding dice, the expected number of hits scale linearly with the number of dice. It's just 0.4 hits/die instead of 0.333... hits/die.

Other than that, the posts are getting frightfully long and it's frightfully late, so I'm out for now.

Let's stick to important issue.

Bull thanks for the explanation, I always wanted to have a image put on the sound of your voice.

I hope for your years won't pass by too quickly for you, life of orcs is fast but short !

Synner I will concede the point about edge... I had overlooked it due to the references to it being 'like karma pool' and 'an advantage for non cybered mundanes' But exploding dice do not make the effect non linear (my years of Earthdawn showed me that)