Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: New Update!
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Sabosect
Heh. True. Quite possible.
SL James
Bah. Edited, though I liked Sabosect's original post. Good deal.
mfb
with a hard limit of 6 on just about everything, how many levels of power are there, really?
Sabosect
There's these seven levels:

0- You have no clue how to attempt it.

1- You suck at it.

2- You don't suck as badly.

3- Okay, you're human.

4- Wow. You actually know some of what you're doing.

5- You just negotiated Lofwyr into selling Saeder-Krupp.

6- Bow down, mortals!
mfb
indeed. truly a wide range.
SL James
That sucks! (the range, not your ideas. Those are quite amusing.)
Nerbert
The quote lists no natural upper limit on skills. It seems plausible to me, given the nature of Shadowrun, that those skills have no upper bound and that skills merely become progressively more expensive.
Sabosect
Which is exactly my problem and the reason I have to spend 4-5 days in testing to make sure my adjustments are correct.

Now, I think the we've ground the bones into dust. Shall we let this dead horse lie?
Shadow_Prophet
Well you have some interesting concepts there Sabosect. Now first off, yeah, a weapon specialist could get imediately killed by the guards. But so could a 150 karma sam in sr3 if he's stupid enough not to do any recon. If you gm the way you sound like you gm, I'm glad I don't game with you.

4-5 days for tweaking a system you don't know weather or not it will be powerful enough or not. Out of curiosity are you planning on spending any time testing out how the base rules play? or are you going to flip to powering up characters (which I'll note i think is a horribly silly idea)? If you were going to do that I'd say if you wanted to effectively test out and adjust the power of the system, I'd say it'd take you about 6-10 good days of testing and tweaking. Begining with a test of the base rule set then proceding to your tweaks. I'm still not certain at all on why you need to apparently tweak the availability on things, but hey, I think its a silly idea to turn up the power level of the campaign like that.

I mean if you're just turning things up to get on a level you're used to as a gm it sounds like a bit of a crutch.

As for my coments revolving around the threshold system. From the looks of what they've put out about the dice system in 4th ed, it apears to be very close to the way exalted and the WoD is run currently by white wolf. Being that those are the well established systems out using a threshold system, and the comments they've made themselves, and the way the sheet is set up for that matter (wound penalties and such) one can easily deduce that the way threshold and dice pools work.

And no a -10 dicepool penalty does not nessicarily kill a player.
Sabosect
QUOTE (Shadow_Prophet @ Aug 18 2005, 05:44 PM)
Well you have some interesting concepts there Sabosect.  Now first off, yeah, a weapon specialist could get imediately killed by the guards.  But so could a 150 karma sam in sr3 if he's stupid enough not to do any recon.  If you gm the way you sound like you gm, I'm glad I don't game with you.

Recon is all well and good, but it still doesn't change the fact that sometimes you have to deal with guards.

As for my GMing style: I'm both a GM and a player in that game. I and another switch every session. The campaign style is a professional level with the PCs being the people you hire when every sane person refuses to go near. These are the people you would hire to extract an important scientist out of Bug City, or at least kill him before he spills too much information, and fully expect them to go in and come back out alive. The runs are gritty, dangerous, and challenging. And the players love it.

QUOTE
4-5 days for tweaking a system you don't know weather or not it will be powerful enough or not.  Out of curiosity are you planning on spending any time testing out how the base rules play? or are you going to flip to powering up characters (which I'll note i think is a horribly silly idea)?  If you were going to do that I'd say if you wanted to effectively test out and adjust the power of the system, I'd say it'd take you about 6-10 good days of testing and tweaking.  Begining with a test of the base rule set then proceding to your tweaks.  I'm still not certain at all on why you need to apparently tweak the availability on things, but hey, I think its a silly idea to turn up the power level of the campaign like that.


Actually, I plan on devoting the first day to it. You would be surprised what you can get done with a full twelve to sixteen hours devoted to something. Note that does not include time spent reading the book, as I plan to familiarize myself with it before I even start. As for turning up the power level: I'm planning on powering it up for my player's tastes. I have to test the items as well because I will not be familiar enough with the system to simply look at an item and decide to disallow it.

QUOTE
I mean if you're just turning things up to get on a level you're used to as a gm it sounds like a bit of a crutch.


Turning it up to the level the players demand. I'm perfectly fine playing a regular street mage trying to get by. The rest of the group isn't. They've mostly had enough of it with their time playing SR2 and 3 (I'm one of only two members who started with SR3). A good GM gets the players to agree to their campaign, but a great GM goes with the players.

QUOTE
As for my coments revolving around the threshold system.  From the looks of what they've put out about the dice system in 4th ed, it apears to be very close to the way exalted and the WoD is run currently by white wolf.  Being that those are the well established systems out using a threshold system, and the comments they've made themselves, and the way the sheet is set up for that matter (wound penalties and such) one can easily deduce that the way threshold and dice pools work.


So we're going to be playing Shadow: The Running? I'm thinking, though, that you're right.

QUOTE
And no a -10 dicepool penalty does not nessicarily kill a player.


Congrats, the explosion shot you out of the window. Next time, wait until you're out of the room to detonate. Or, at least, be close to the door. You're both nearly unconcious and nearly dead. Make an athletics test to grab the windowsill before you fall 50 stories to your death. Oh, and due to wounds, minus ten to your dice pool. What do you mean you only have six dice? Just use your edge. Oh, I see, you only have a three there... Well, have this lovely character sheet.
blakkie
QUOTE (Sabosect)
There's these seven levels:

0- You have no clue how to attempt it.

1- You suck at it.

2- You don't suck as badly.

3- Okay, you're human.

4- Wow. You actually know some of what you're doing.

5- You just negotiated Lofwyr into selling Saeder-Krupp.

6- Bow down, mortals!

You missed:

7 - Bow down lesser immortals.

Plus the extra levels created by combining with attributes that takes the working levels from 1 to something like 16. Not many SR3 PCs got up that high.
Shadow_Prophet
I'm sorry, this makes me laugh.

QUOTE
Congrats, the explosion shot you out of the window. Next time, wait until you're out of the room to detonate. Or, at least, be close to the door. You're both nearly unconcious and nearly dead. Make an athletics test to grab the windowsill before you fall 50 stories to your death. Oh, and due to wounds, minus ten to your dice pool. What do you mean you only have six dice? Just use your edge. Oh, I see, you only have a three there... Well, have this lovely character sheet.


From the sound of it you expect them to make that and survive. You also have ignored ALL my previous points I've made to you regarding, rules and story. But hey whatever.

Actualy reading the descriptions of what type of runs you guys like, they seem to in and of themselves contradict each other. We want a run that hey no one else in their right mind will take because its suicide, but this team here we know will come out alive. How hard can one of those missions be in all honesty if the teams expected to come back alive?

Oh and the Shadow: The Running comment. Witty, realy witty, yet i don't know. it doesn't seem to fit at all? Should we call all systems that use the D20 system <letter>&<letter> after D&D? Comments like that sound completely rediculouse. Do people not understand that the dice system does not make what a game is? Or is that all people understand? Story, plot, background, is what makes a gaming universe, not what you roll. Hell you can play shadowrun using GURPS for christ sakes, just because you're using a different dice system doesn't mean you're not playing shadowrun. You know what makes shadowrun Shadowrun? The megacorps, the crash of 29, VITAS, goblinization, The big D, Laughing Man, Fast Jack, Capt. Chaos. Not some silly dice system.
Sabosect
QUOTE (Shadow_Prophet @ Aug 18 2005, 06:18 PM)
I'm sorry, this makes me laugh.

QUOTE
Congrats, the explosion shot you out of the window. Next time, wait until you're out of the room to detonate. Or, at least, be close to the door. You're both nearly unconcious and nearly dead. Make an athletics test to grab the windowsill before you fall 50 stories to your death. Oh, and due to wounds, minus ten to your dice pool. What do you mean you only have six dice? Just use your edge. Oh, I see, you only have a three there... Well, have this lovely character sheet.


From the sound of it you expect them to make that and survive. You also have ignored ALL my previous points I've made to you regarding, rules and story. But hey whatever.

Actually, it was intended as a joke, not a serious point. Realistically, I doubt I'll see a character have to worry about a -10. Oh, and the event in question is based on something in one of my games. The character made the save with ease. Edit: Just looked it up. They had a TN of 15 and five dice to roll.

QUOTE
Actualy reading the descriptions of what type of runs you guys like, they seem to in and of themselves contradict each other.  We want a run that hey no one else in their right mind will take because its suicide, but this team here we know will come out alive.  How hard can one of those missions be in all honesty if the teams expected to come back alive?


They're a team of highly skilled mercenaries. The average run involves breaking into a corporation, stealing their most valuable prototype, assassinating the scientists who made it, downloading and then erasing all of the data on it, and getting back out alive. They also do the occasional run of random property theft into Aztlan, as well as the occasional rescue of people who get chased into the Yucaton.

Last I checked, the other DM had Aztechnology put a bounty out on their heads.

QUOTE
Oh and the Shadow: The Running comment.  Witty, realy witty, yet i don't know.  it doesn't seem to fit at all?  Should we call all systems that use the D20 system <letter>&<letter> after D&D?  Comments like that sound completely rediculouse.  Do people not understand that the dice system does not make what a game is?  Or is that all people understand?  Story, plot, background, is what makes a gaming universe, not what you roll.  Hell you can play shadowrun using GURPS for christ sakes, just because you're using a different dice system doesn't mean you're not playing shadowrun.  You know what makes shadowrun Shadowrun?  The megacorps, the crash of 29, VITAS, goblinization, The big D, Laughing Man, Fast Jack, Capt. Chaos.  Not some silly dice system.


Actually, someone tried to make that point once. WotC released a d20 version of Call of Cthulhu a few years back. Most of the players who played it commented that it did not have the same feel to it as BRP does. Unfortunately, a dice system often does determine a game. Most of the time, the dice affect how the game feels to the players as well as the story. That's why most d20 games involve the players as heros, most WW games involve the players as monsters of some sort, and why BRP is most famous for Cthulhu. It's not something that can be easily explained and is certainly not logical, but I never saw anything that said everything in life has to be.
Shadow_Prophet
Nearly unconsiouse and nearly dead, yet manages to leap out the window grab hold while the explosion rushes out, and hold on so he doesn't fall 50 stories? And he made that easy? Right not going to touch that.

As for the second point, you missed my point. But whatever.

You're right the WotC released a Call of Cuthulu game. They've also released 'oriental adventures' more commonly known as L5R, but in a d20 setting. The issue with the D20 system is its far too bogged down in things. But, I very much encourage you, if you don't like the feel, don't play the game. The game is what you make of it in all honesty. You could very well be right, the new system could very much feel different, and people like yourself probably won't like it. In all honesty though, it still wouldn't make it Shadow: the running. The D20 system does not most of the time put the pc's in the hero position. It certainly tries to but theres nothing in any of the stories that forces them that way. If you look at most of the things typical PC's do? They're not heroic at all. Afterall your D&D group could be 'workign for the greater good' but all still be evil. The White wolf systems mainly focusing on you being a monster? No I wouldn't say so.

Exalted doesn't make you play a monster. Heck the main book you're the solars, the hero's of old reincarnated, champions of the unconqured sun! Aberant you're superhero's. the WoD with its -SETTING- makes you out to be monsters. No its not mainly the dice. Setting atmostphere and all that play a larger part. The dice system white wolf uses is streamlined, not to realy get in the way. Its there to enhance the setting. Whereas your D20 system more of controls the setting and slows things down. Systems either enhance or detract from the setting. The white wolf system was built to enhance the universes it was to support. The current (3rd ed) system for shadowrun I think detracts with how it slows combat down with the wonderful calculating of tn's.

But hey thats just my opinion ofcourse
Sabosect
What I want to know is where you got the idea he jumped out the window.

As for the rest: Dun feel like continuing it. We're straying too far from the topic.
Milo Simpkin
Has it been pointed out yet that the Weapons Specialist is in fact a Techie? Okay they have put some rubbish into the fluff text. I would think it obvious that she is not a master of unarmed combat and nowhere near 'equally skilled in builinding and repairing weapons' blah blah blah. It is obvious that her focus is much more in the B/R side of things, at least I am presuming that's what Armorer is and she does have it at 5!

She's not supposed to be a sammie. She's a support character type.

Major problem I have with the description to the stats, apart from the master unarmed rubbish, is the fact that she has someone as a contact who can get her tech, but no Etiquette skill wink.gif Of course getting hold of things rules might have changed a lot. Like it might make more sense and if you are asking someone to get you something _they_ roll smile.gif

hobgoblin
sounds reasonable. ie, the expert may allso be called a gun/weapons nut nyahnyah.gif

far from just having the soldiers basic knowhow about how to shoot, reload and do basic cleaning and parts replacement. this is a person that know hvor the gun works at its most basic level.

but far from being a weapons smith this person allso knows a bit about using said weapons i a fight. maybe not so much as a sammie but enough to deal with gang members and maybe a rent-a-cop if she manages to surprise him.

while the sammie will phone his fixer to get hold of new ammo the weapons expert most likely have the tools and knowhow to make her own.
booklord
QUOTE
Has it been pointed out yet that the Weapons Specialist is in fact a Techie? Okay they have put some rubbish into the fluff text. I would think it obvious that she is not a master of unarmed combat and nowhere near 'equally skilled in building and repairing weapons' blah blah blah. It is obvious that her focus is much more in the B/R side of things, at least I am presuming that's what Armorer is and she does have it at 5!


Gets better. Take a look at her equipment. She's spending an awful lot of money for someone who doesn't have any cyber. She has an "armorer's facility". ( probably 100,000 ) That has to be expensive. Her weapons ran the enitre gamut and in many cases are completely redundant. A bow and a crossbow? Throwing knives and shuriken? Two Katanas and a combat axe? She's more of a weapon generalist than a weapon specialist. She'd make a great contact, but a pretty mediocre runner.

For a more reasonable runner, I'd expand the mercenary side of her nature. Reduce Armorer to what she'd need to make field repairs on equipment, and lose the armorer's facility. ( Being tied to an expensive piece of property isn't wise anyway for a runner who might have enemies looking for her ) Then improve heavy weapons and demolitions. For thrown weapons specialize in grenades. Throw in ettiquette, stealth, athletics, and biotech specialized in first aid. ( Stealth is particularly important ) Lose archery. If any room remains pick up electronics specialized in security systems.

I can barely tell what sort of firearms since the sample character sheet lists the name of the weapon and not much on the function. she carries but she'll need......

Panther cannon or Rocket launcher ( scoped )
Some grenades ( flash + fragementation )
Sniper rifle ( scoped )
Pistol (smartlinked )
Assault Rifle ( smartlinked ) with grenade launcher
Some good military grade explosives.

This character may not be able to stand up against a wired sammie in a straight up fight but if she plays it smart, she'll see him first and shoot first. And given her weapons he won't be shooting back.
hobgoblin
can you even scope a rocket launcher or a panther?
Spookymonster
She's a weapons specialist (someone that is equally proficient in all kinds of weapons), not a weapon specialist (someone this is exceptionally skilled with one weapon).

Sample characters are really only designed for beginners to use. They are simple, one-dimensional characters, devoid of any gear that uses complex rules or min/max 'power combos' that would confuse newbie players.

Given how veteran SR players are typically dissatisfied with the sample characters included in every edition of the BBB, I wonder if there might not be a market for a book of min/maxed and 'prime runner'-type character sheets?
booklord
Given the extreme range capabilities of a rocket launcher or panther cannon then yes I think you can scope them.

QUOTE
She's a weapons specialist (someone that is equally proficient in all kinds of weapons), not a weapon specialist (someone this is exceptionally skilled with one weapon).

Sample characters are really only designed for beginners to use. They are simple, one-dimensional characters, devoid of any gear that uses complex rules or min/max 'power combos' that would confuse newbie players.


The changes I suggested actually made her less of a min-maxer as I give her a bunch of new skills that would prove useful. This character's problem is that her main skill, armorer, and main expense, armorer's facility, are not assets that would come up very often if at all during a run. Even a beginner player might scoff at that when the other players get to use their main skill during the run. ( Such as the Combat Mage's spellcasting and they don't)
Brazila
Oh and the Shadow: The Running comment. Witty, realy witty, yet i don't know. it doesn't seem to fit at all? Should we call all systems that use the D20 system <letter>&<letter> after D&D? Comments like that sound completely rediculouse. Do people not understand that the dice system does not make what a game is? Or is that all people understand? Story, plot, background, is what makes a gaming universe, not what you roll. Hell you can play shadowrun using GURPS for christ sakes, just because you're using a different dice system doesn't mean you're not playing shadowrun. You know what makes shadowrun Shadowrun? The megacorps, the crash of 29, VITAS, goblinization, The big D, Laughing Man, Fast Jack, Capt. Chaos. Not some silly dice system.

I don't post much anymore, as I personally feel many posters are just out to be negative. But I just want to say "Right on man!" WHile the rules are a huge part of the game, they fall a distant second to the setting IMO.
Kagetenshi
You're entitled to your opinion. It just happens to be wrong.

(I kid, I kid. I just happen to disagree with you.)

~J
hobgoblin
QUOTE (booklord)
Given the extreme range capabilities of a rocket launcher or panther cannon then yes I think you can scope them.

yes logicaly they are scopeable in real life. but i was wondering if they in SR can have a top mount.

i cant look it up at the moment...
booklord
QUOTE
yes logicaly they are scopeable in real life. but i was wondering if they in SR can have a top mount.

i cant look it up at the moment...




Since the launcher or panther cannon would likely be fired from by a person after they placed it over their shoulder, I imagine the scope would be attached to the side of the weapon.

It also might not be a scope in the classical long cylinder sense. It might a see-through flap than extends outward over a person's eye as they hold the panther cannon or rocket launcher on their shoulder.
Ol' Scratch
All I have to say about this is: Why the frag didn't they use this type of art on the cover? Oy!
Nikoli
That's a darn fine question.
hobgoblin
but then it becomes just a advanced iron sight, no?

and i dont think the panther is a "over the shoulder" kinda weapon nyahnyah.gif
Rolemodel
QUOTE (Sabosect)
QUOTE
Worthless rant by Rolemodel who can't be bothered to do more than piss and moan because people are talking about something he doesn't care to.


If you really don't care, then do what those of us who evolved far enough to understand social etiquette do: Ignore it and grab one of the other convos in the thread. It's not like there's only been one talked about the entire time. And there's certainly other threads you can check out. In any case, don't act like a child just because you don't like what is being discussed. If you can't act like an adult, then just do everyone a favor and shut up.

QUOTE
All of the other idiocy by Rolemodel.


Ya know, I mostly like to avoid conflict on here. But, when dealing with a simiolus stupidicus erectus (for those of you who know Latin, that's not intended as a racial comment), I have to take exception to it.

Rolemodel, for once in my life, I'm going to say this: Maybe these forums are not for you. You see, most of us come on here for an adult conversation, to be able to state what we want within the limitations of etiquette and move on. You, however, come on here to prove that it is perfectly possible to know the English language with a very good familiarity and still not have enough knowledge in your head to figure out a simple case of "not allowing you parakeet mouth to overload your potato brain just because you don't like a subject being discussed," something most of us on here have figured out. Now, I must say that whoever attempted to teach you manners must be embarassed to be in the same room as you. I know I am. So, please, do all of humanity a favor by shutting up, getting in a car, and playing chicken with a train.

And yes, this is a personal attack. This is a very personal attack. I couldn't get more personal without insulting your heritage, and at this point I think you've done that enough.

Now, back to intelligent conversation.

See. It's at this point that I believe that your last line is the most telling; implying that any of the trite bullshit that has been spewing out of your brain, funneled down your fingers, and piped onto my screen, has been intelligent. Rather than, say, pretentious pseudo-elitism in some obscure form of forum penis-dangling.

You constantly state the obvious, and then distort assumption and speculation into somesort of Doctrine of Sabosect. A doctrine that apparently involves needing to tamper with every small nuance of a system in some failing justification of your existance. And the backbreaking straw, then, is that you propose that a system is broken because in your twistedly useless style of GM'ing, an arbitrarily proposed sample character of some generic power curve will not survive? And that, somehow by a stretch of imagination I cannot fathom, the problem is with the system, and not with your inability to process rational thought?

And the most ridiculous claim I've heard yet, is that the problem cannot be solved by adding more build points into the template? That the solution involves all sorts of tinkering, as you engineer out our perfect system for us? More pointedly, the solution could be acquired by your retirement as a GM, let alone a precious oxygen-consuming human being.

You are pretentious, pompus, and childish.

A small book could be filled with the ridiculous claims you've laid up and down all over these forms, bound in leather, and sold at most retailers for $19.95. Perhaps you could even hold a book release party, and sign a few of the covers: "To all of my fans, don't worry, I'll fix it someday, I promise! - Sabosect, pompus jackass."

This has absolutely nothing to do with my dislike of the subject being discussed, kid. If anything, it is my -enjoyment- of the subject matter that prompts the complete scathing of your contribution to database bloat.

For instance, if I wasn't interested in learning and discussing new little tidbits of information about our new shadowrun core system, I wouldn't be here to begin with. The frusteration mounts then, when it's not just a good idea, but nigh a requirement, to consistently filter out everything you say by the sheer volume of uselessness contained therein.

So, in closing, it is not merely that you a complete tool, nor a mere box of tools. While an Ace Hardware store -FILLED TO THE BRIM- with tools would be closer to the mark, I believe we need to hit the entire solar system composed of screwdrivers, and bald hammers before we're close to pinning you down.

That said, I'm glad to be doing my part to make sure complete rejects such as yourself are not left unchecked on our forums, filling reply, after reply with utter garbage while you masturbate to the quality of your own cesspool of ignorant text.

-RM
"I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely."
Ellery
If nothing else, I suppose this is a decent test of the extent to which these forums are moderated.
blakkie
I'm trying to remember if i've ever seen Rolemodel start posting in a thread before 5 pages have gone by?
Sharaloth
Whee! I brought some marshmellows! If someone's got chocolate and crackers we can make smores!
nezumi
RM, I do believe that was a bit excessive. I don't agree with Sabosect either, but somehow I feel simply writing 'I disagree and this is why' suffices. It seems a fairly effective method, although perhaps not quite as personally fulfilling. I would highly recommend it over your current method, amusing though it is.
Sabosect
QUOTE (Rolemodel)
See. It's at this point that I believe that your last line is the most telling; implying that any of the trite bullshit that has been spewing out of your brain, funneled down your fingers, and piped onto my screen, has been intelligent. Rather than, say, pretentious pseudo-elitism in some obscure form of forum penis-dangling.

The more you speak, the more I am convinced that you are trying your best to derail this thread simply because you are not mature enough to handle the conversation as it has progressed. Well, too bad. Anyone who bothers to read this thing can tell that all you are spewing is bullshit, and bullshit not even based in solid information. I at least am man enough to stand up when I think I am right and admit when I am wrong. It's too bad you have not passed enough through puberty to reach that stage yet.

QUOTE
You constantly state the obvious, and then distort assumption and speculation into somesort of Doctrine of Sabosect.  A doctrine that apparently involves needing to tamper with every small nuance of a system in some failing justification of your existance.  And the backbreaking straw, then, is that you propose that a system is broken because in your twistedly useless style of GM'ing, an arbitrarily proposed sample character of some generic power curve will not survive?  And that, somehow by a stretch of imagination I cannot fathom, the problem is with the system, and not with your inability to process rational thought?


Ya know, that brain of yours must feel lonely, never having contact with the outside world. After all, those of us who bothered to do such simple things as read, pay attention, ask questions, and come to conclusions supported by the evidence present at the time. It's pretty damned hard to not come to a simple conclusion about the intended level of play when they have such quotes as

QUOTE
You’re a shadowrunner, a street operative, scratching out a living on the mean sprawl streets.


written into the description of the SR4 book. Wait, that requires you to use reading comprehension, something you have failed to do. After all, being able to comprehend what you read is a requirement to be able to see the utter worthlessness you are spewing and to see that you are more wrong about me than I was about Exploding Sixes in SR4. Worse, you are apparently also the lowest form of the idiot species, as any regular idiot can be bothered to read my posts and tell you exactly why I said I have to rework the system and who it is that is essentially requiring it. So, please, have your teacher go over my posts first so she can translate for you.

QUOTE
And the most ridiculous claim I've heard yet, is that the problem cannot be solved by adding more build points into the template?  That the solution involves all sorts of tinkering, as you engineer out our perfect system for us?  More pointedly, the solution could be acquired by your retirement as a GM, let alone a precious oxygen-consuming human being.


Ya know, I bet even my dog would be able to point out the flaws in your post. Tell me, where are you getting the idea I ever said any modifications I make have to be used by others? I mean, besides pulling it out of your ass. And, really, the points comment has got to be the most ignorant one I have seen. Have you not bothered to read the little book multiple posters, including myself, have effectively written on the issue? Wait, that requires reading comprehension. Oops.

QUOTE
You are pretentious, pompus, and childish.


Well gee, Mr. Pot, I guess you could say I am black.

Pots and kettles, sonny. Pots and kettles.

QUOTE
A small book could be filled with the ridiculous claims you've laid up and down all over these forms, bound in leather, and sold at most retailers for $19.95.  Perhaps you could even hold a book release party, and sign a few of the covers: "To all of my fans, don't worry, I'll fix it someday, I promise!  - Sabosect, pompus jackass."


Aye. A small book can. And that same small book would include the number of times I have been disproven, as well as the number of times I have admitted it. But, unlike a certain jackass I am responding to, I don't claim to know everything and don't claim to be right all of the time. Hell, I know I'm not and can point out three items on here with ease to prove it. I swear, when you finally get into your adult years, you're going to look back on these days and realize what a fool you were. But, until then, don't worry. You'll have plenty of us here who know better about the world to sit back and laugh at you.

QUOTE
This has absolutely nothing to do with my dislike of the subject being discussed, kid.  If anything, it is my -enjoyment- of the subject matter that prompts the complete scathing of your contribution to database bloat.


:sniffs: Smells like excrement to me. Now, try packaging that as fertilizer instead of logic. You'll actually sell it then.

QUOTE
For instance, if I wasn't interested in learning and discussing new little tidbits of information about our new shadowrun core system, I wouldn't be here to begin with.  The frusteration mounts then, when it's not just a good idea, but nigh a requirement, to consistently filter out everything you say by the sheer volume of uselessness contained therein.


Wow. I'm amazed at how hard it is. You mean to say you cannot simply read a few lines, decide you don't like it, and move on? Or simply see a name and scroll past their comments? Wow. That has about as much sense as saying California has no coasts. Tell me, how much would you like to pay for ocean-front property in Arkansas?

QUOTE
So, in closing, it is not merely that you a complete tool, nor a mere box of tools.  While an Ace Hardware store -FILLED TO THE BRIM- with tools would be closer to the mark, I believe we need to hit the entire solar system composed of screwdrivers, and bald hammers before we're close to pinning you down.


Ya know, that tool comment got me laughing. It's always amazing to meet someone who doesn't know the proper context of how to use it and expects it to be an insult when they misuse it. Now, let's get a dictionary meaning:

QUOTE
Main Entry: 1tool
Pronunciation: 'tül
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English tOl; akin to Old English tawian to prepare for use -- more at TAW
1 a : a handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task b (1) : the cutting or shaping part in a machine or machine tool (2) : a machine for shaping metal : MACHINE TOOL
2 a : something (as an instrument or apparatus) used in performing an operation or necessary in the practice of a vocation or profession <a scholar's books are his tools> b : a means to an end <a book's cover can be a marketing tool> c often vulgar : PENIS
3 : one that is used or manipulated by another
4 plural : natural ability <has all the tools>
synonym see IMPLEMENT


Well, from your usage, we can rule out "penis" as the intended meaning. But, the one that applies also doesn't. You see, as an insult it was intended as a way of telling people they are being used, usually in a way they shouldn't like. It is a way of indicating their ignorance. The problem is that no one even has to try to prove your comments are in ignorance. All they have to do is find a few quotes by me on here. They can also find a few quotes by others as well. If my comments were really in that much ignorance, I'm pretty damned sure I would have been slapped down by someone deserving of respect. Instead, I get the forum loser, the one person in this place guaranteed to have a lower rank than anyone, trying to gain points. Please. Go somewhere else and try someone else. I'm not impressed, and I'm pretty damned sure no one else is either.

QUOTE
That said, I'm glad to be doing my part to make sure complete rejects such as yourself are not left unchecked on our forums, filling reply, after reply with utter garbage while you masturbate to the quality of your own cesspool of ignorant text.


The irony of this statement knows no bounds.
Rolemodel
It struck me that the most appropriate response to your post would be to filter through various threads, pulling out each appropriately ridiculous claim, quote it here, and proceed to rip it to shit. And while it would have been an excellent means of demonstrating the mindless degenerate banter you have to offer, it would be a horrible way for me to spend my time.

But, given that I do receive some small degree of satisfaction at grinding my polished-to-inspection-order size twelve’s into the fragile ego's of the socially and intellectually inept, I will go as far as to pull a few of my favorite claims out and proceed to waste a bit of my time, if only a bit. wink.gif

QUOTE
Considering the fixed TNs and the average possibility of getting a 5, I would say that this character's skills are mostly a waste of points if they face anything that I suspect this system would define as challenging. The lucky edge for this character isn't a blessing, but a requirement. I'm sorry, but I'm beginning to see a DnD-style run progression with this. I can also see my typical first adventure outright killing a group of runners before they even have a chance to get to the actual challenge.


It took me a few seconds to jump to the front of this thread, and grab this particular piece of trash. While I'm sure there are plenty more gems to be had, I like this one in particular because it touches on several key points that define your complex of idiocy. Let's begin with the obvious, shall we?

So, you say that when this character faces something challenging, it's skills will be wasted points. Obviously an overstatement, and at the least, more than that, a -moronic- overstatement. To boil down that first sentence to it's core components, you are implying that this character will not be able to stand, on it's own feet, to what has vaguely been labeled as 'challenging'. 'Challenging', I might add, being an entirely subjective term. Yes, subjective, even when tagged with your qualifier as '...this system define(s) as challenging.'

And so, my dear idiot, you state the obvious, albeit over-exaggerate it. I could rewrite your comment to read: This character have a difficult time with something challenging. But then again, fucktard, -anyone will have something difficult with something challenging-. Difficult being a defining portion of the word challenging. Ring a bell? You seem to be more comfortable with text straight out of the dictionary, would you rather hear it from Webster than from me? This character in question stands alone, complete. It is, then, the circumstance and basis of comparison for challenge that determines whether or not '...this character's skills are mostly a waste of points'. And if this character is designed for a low-power campaign, then in a low-power campaign it will function as designed.

Dipshit.

Then at the end, you just reinforce your blatant pattern of imposing your phallic standards on the rest of us: '...see my typical first adventure outright killing a group of runners before they even have a chance to get to the actual challenge.' As if this was a matter that anyone to give a shit about, except for the poor individuals that have been forced into some dominatrix style submission with you as their GM Overlord? Dear lord, if you're incapable of tailoring a challenge to the level of the players at the table, I know I wouldn't sit down at your table; Overlooking every other piss poor quality you exhibit as a gamemaster, let alone a human being.

I fail to see how -your preferred level of power in a campaign disqualifies this template as useful-. And the reason I fail to do so, is because -your preferred power level of campaign does not disqualify this template as useful-. The only thing disqualified, unfortunately, is your own ability to add something constructive to this forum without the self important airs of a critical wannabe-intellectual.

Oh. Here's another great one.

QUOTE
Even a good GM must deal with the occasional stupid action.  If a person falls off the top of a 120 story building and I set a TN of 40 for them to live, they can quite possibly survive.  In this case, I set a threshold of 12 and they're simply dead.

As for rerolling 6's: Unless they changed the mechanic, it won't apply.  There are also factors that affect the TN itself, raising or lowering it.  Even with rerolling 6's, it will take this person some luck to even get a chance at a reroll, and even then I can simply set the TN too high for them to be able to meet.


Ahh. What a little jewel. Here we have you caught red handed trying to exercise that little mind of yours! It's so cute! I can almost feel the smoke churning out from the gears. However, try as you might, you -still- can't manage to make a lick of sense. Let's poke around, and find out! Come on, it'll be fun!

Here you introduce the notion that someone falling off a building should be very difficult to survive. Something that I completely agree with you about. It is rapidly after that agreement, that you make your first fatal mistake. You present that a TN of 30 is somehow the equivalent of a threshold of 12, ignoring that we've already been told that a threshold of -4- is reserved for extremely difficult tasks.

So, demonstrating that contrary to claims, you have no understanding of the mechanics of one system, or the other, you go about attempting to mathematically prove one system is superior to the other. And while that can be an opinion that you hold, math, my dear, has nothing to do with it.

Observe that as a GM you choose both the TN and the threshold in both situations. Now, in the first situation, you give an arbitrary number that is difficult, yet attainable. And in the second...? You provide an unattainable threshold. Yet, if -you- as the GM are the deciding factor, how can you presume to imply that the two scenario's are even. If the threshold is mathematically impossible to obtain, then the TN must also be mathematically impossible to achieve. That would make the situations -equal-. After all, you are modeling reality on an abstract dice system, no? If a TN of 30 in one scenario can be hit, albeit difficultly, -then you must ALSO- create the same situation with the second system, using thresholds.

OBVIOUSLY (dipshit) a threshold of 12, if it cannot be attained, is the same as a test made with an infinitely difficult target number. So, you have several options: First, adjust the TN to infinitely. -Or- Second, adjust the threshold to simulate an extremely difficult, but possible roll. -Or- Third, shut your fucking mouth and think about what you say, next time, before flooding my screen with stale logic.

The last line, you admit that as the GM you have the power to set the threshold too high for the player to hit. What you are essentially saying is that in this system, the GM will be more obvious about abusing the system. Whereas, a bullying asshole GM could say, "TN:30, roll 'em." in the previous system, now he is given clearer accountability to his players in a more transparently tracked means: Thresholds.

I suppose being an asshole of a GM, unable to use creativity to create challenges, and relying simply on dice, rather than tact, that's bad news for you, huh?

QUOTE
Ya know, that sounds awfully like the character that caused my group to ban me from playing street sams for a few months...


This last line changes the pace up, because it does not fault you in an intellectual light, or a basis of argument, but as a person. I think so many things that I have read from you can be tied to the attitude behind this quote.

You'd like to be one of the big dogs. You want the attention you deserve. You want to be funny. You'd like the people you hang out with to fear your capabilities. Your potential. You want people to understand how great you are, and how wise, insightful, and educated you are. You, you, you.

Unfortunately, you're not one of the big dogs. You're only getting attention because I'm sick of listening to you run your mouth on and on, and brought this in the light. You're not funny. The people you hang out with see you as a self-centered, insecure, pseudo-intellectual with a shallow understanding of the world around him. You have no potential. You are not great, you are not wise, you are not insightful, and your education is tied strictly to the fine art of being a dipshit. Yes, you, you, you.

Were you expecting us to care, when you said that? Did you want a 'ROFLMAO!!!11!!111 Serious d00d!? n0 way, b4da$$!!!!111!!!' response? Did you want us to ask you what magnificent achievement you, the mighty Sabosect, were able to make that would -ban- you from playing Street Samurai? "What possibly could have gotten you banned, Sabopimp?" - "I'd tell you, but you just wouldn't believe it!" - "*Gasp* You're such a cool dude. Hang out with me, I want to be like you."

Heh.

You want to be something, but you're going around it the entirely wrong way. In the detached life of text based interaction, you are ultimately the words you put on the page before me. When those words are so consistently self-absorbed and worthless, -you-, in turn, become worthless.

So. That's pretty much that. In closing, let me suggest you take this like a man, accept the beating, salve the bruisings, and take your sorry ass home. Take a few notes. Take a little time. And in the future don't waste our time.

Moron.

-Rolemodel
"I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely."

P.S. Re: Tool - The magnitude of your Toolocity™ can only be counted in quantum measurements, my good man. And so to call you a tool, singularly, would not have done you justice, as you and you alone take it to a level of plurality previously unknown to man.

Unfortunately Webster's didn't have an easy breakdown of that, for you, or you could of saved yourself the embarrassment of me explaining it to you.
mfb
ever notice that the longer a post is, the less likely it tends to be worth reading?
Clyde
I only have three words: "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!" Only thing I miss about Junior High . . . grinbig.gif
Nerbert
The forums have achieved Terminal Toolocity! Everyone brace for impact!
Rolemodel
QUOTE (mfb)
ever notice that the longer a post is, the less likely it tends to be worth reading?

I would have liked to have kept it brief, but there's only so much mileage you can get out of saying, "You're an idiot, shut your mouth," before you need to explain it to them in no uncertain terms. wink.gif

-Rolemodel
"I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely."
NeoJudas
My Take on SR4 with what I have seen of it so far (books in possession).

A) No, I do not agree with absolutely everything I have seen or discussed so far that has been changed. HOWEVER!!!!!

B) What I have seen I must admit does streamline the overall speed by which a combat scenario can be implemented. We here (HHH.com group) have not had time to really play the new version yet, but we are not so far disturbed as deeply as we felt we could have been.

Initial Considerations:

A) As I figured, the mechanics *for the most part* simply move what was previously a modifier to a target number into becoming a modifier towards the number of dice rolled towards a test. On a fundamental level, this means the game has truly become a "numbers game" with regards to how many dice one can manage to roll. For those of us with the PDA and/or Laptop/PC dice rollers, we're safe. Everyone else should do okay with not much more than 12 dice on the outside for beginning/street level characters. Trolls exemption potentially here, but you all get the idea.

B) I am very grateful that at least the beginnings of Initiation as well as Technomancers (the former Otaku) are included in the base/Core rule book. I wish enough space could have been implemented for spell design, but with everything else included I can also respect the reasons not to include such.

C) I know that Rob feels that "weights" were really something that weighted down the game insofar as the overall amount of bookkeeping a player-character and/or GM might have to perform ... but at the same time I feel that by not including weights for all the items/gear it leaves the game open in the end for some really poor initial development/judgement by players. Common Sense as always should rule some aspects of the game, but at the same time the tools for the GM to say "hey wait just a second here....how much ammo are you carrying?" would have been good. On the other hand, it does save ink-space.

D) It saddened a LOT of people at the 'Con that System Failure was not out prior to the SR4 book ... including Rob and the rest of the staff at FanPro and Wizkids. However, I am grateful that there is an updated map in the Core book as well as a "5 Year in Review" kinda thing. Not as meaty as the "Shadows of ..." books we are starting to see, but still it was helpful. Would have be nice to have known that the big SR Tournament games were the SF game/story however. I might have adjusted more of my schedule to have at least watched some of the games if not outright joined them then.

E) I finally remembered one of the questions I messed up and forgot to ask Rob at the "What's Up With..." Seminar this morning. The question is "during the several storylines that are being wrapped up, and given that in Loose Alliances there is some significant mention of the Yucatan situation being resolved in the near gameline future, is that storyline also finally done?" It might be in some part of the Core book I have missed so far, and if so cool ... otherwise, hope he hears I'm asking this here.

F) A statement I made at some point here on Dumpshock about "we're presuming Staging-2/Net Successes are being kept." Well, they are not. Everything is one-to-one now. The "Hit is It" so to speak. The new system is odd compared to the old in how this is handled in nearly every aspect, but not soooooo much so that the system feel is so dramatically altered at this time. Please remember, we have not had time to really play with the new system yet, so this opinion may yet change.

That's it for now.
Ellery
It will take some thought and/or experience to notice all the implications of the change in mechanic. For example, while combat is probably going to be faster, the outcomes and good strategies are likely to be a fair bit different (especially those things that really make or break a combat). You may or may not like the change.

Edit: funny you should mention ammo, though, since those values were one of the least realistic in SR3.
SL James
QUOTE (NeoJudas @ Aug 20 2005, 06:54 PM)
C)  I know that Rob feels that "weights" were really something that weighted down the game insofar as the overall amount of bookkeeping a player-character and/or GM might have to perform ... but at the same time I feel that by not including weights for all the items/gear it leaves the game open in the end for some really poor initial development/judgement by players.  Common Sense as always should rule some aspects of the game, but at the same time the tools for the GM to say "hey wait just a second here....how much ammo are you carrying?" would have been good.

"Common sense" isn't.
Backgammon
I would have prefered a "cumbersomeness" value. 3 shotguns, 5 pistols and 3 boxes of loose ammo isn't going to make you sink into the mud. But how the hell are you gonna carry it?? You gotta stick those guns somewhere.

I'd see a system where guns have this cumbersome value, and people have maximums. You can pick up gear, such as slings, holsters and ammo pouches to increase your capacity to hold stuff.

Obviously as a GM you once again go with "common sense", but hey, this is a rulebook, there should be rules fro these things.
Sabosect
QUOTE (Rolemodel)
It struck me that the most appropriate response to your post would be to filter through various threads, pulling out each appropriately ridiculous claim, quote it here, and proceed to rip it to shit. And while it would have been an excellent means of demonstrating the mindless degenerate banter you have to offer, it would be a horrible way for me to spend my time.

Translation: I was planning on making sure I only looked at the posts that proved my point and ignoring the others. However, I'm incredibly lazy.

QUOTE
But, given that I do receive some small degree of satisfaction at grinding my polished-to-inspection-order size twelve’s into the fragile ego's of the socially and intellectually inept, I will go as far as to pull a few of my favorite claims out and proceed to waste a bit of my time, if only a bit. wink.gif


Wow. Tell me, does your ego enjoy the feel of your shoes?

QUOTE
QUOTE
Considering the fixed TNs and the average possibility of getting a 5, I would say that this character's skills are mostly a waste of points if they face anything that I suspect this system would define as challenging. The lucky edge for this character isn't a blessing, but a requirement. I'm sorry, but I'm beginning to see a DnD-style run progression with this. I can also see my typical first adventure outright killing a group of runners before they even have a chance to get to the actual challenge.


It took me a few seconds to jump to the front of this thread, and grab this particular piece of trash. While I'm sure there are plenty more gems to be had, I like this one in particular because it touches on several key points that define your complex of idiocy. Let's begin with the obvious, shall we?


Yeah, let's begin with the obvious. Let's take a look at the fact you, in your lack of bothering to read, missed a part of the post that has relevance. Here, let me post it for you.

QUOTE
Still, I'll give it a better examination when I have more information to work on.


First sentence right after the section you quoted. Maybe, next time, you'll bother to use the sense God gave bacteria and look for a connection.

QUOTE
So, you say that when this character faces something challenging, it's skills will be wasted points.  Obviously an overstatement, and at the least, more than that, a -moronic- overstatement.  To boil down that first sentence to it's core components, you are implying that this character will not be able to stand, on it's own feet, to what has vaguely been labeled as 'challenging'.  'Challenging', I might add, being an entirely subjective term.  Yes, subjective, even when tagged with your qualifier as '...this system define(s) as challenging.'


Uh huh. And what part of the words "I suspect" translate into "I know"? Better yet, how could you fail to see the little item about "a better examination when I have more information to work on" that came after that section? Any common idiot can read that, see it is speculation, and have enough sense to wait until I give that better examination. I'm not saying the statement is right, but pointing out how your use of it makes you a moron.

QUOTE
And so, my dear idiot, you state the obvious, albeit over-exaggerate it.  I could rewrite your comment to read: This character have a difficult time with something challenging.  But then again, fucktard, -anyone will have something difficult with something challenging-.  Difficult being a defining portion of the word challenging.  Ring a bell?  You seem to be more comfortable with text straight out of the dictionary, would you rather hear it from Webster than from me?  This character in question stands alone, complete.  It is, then, the circumstance and basis of comparison for challenge that determines whether or not '...this character's skills are mostly a waste of points'.  And if this character is designed for a low-power campaign, then in a low-power campaign it will function as designed.


A challenge, dumbass, doesn't automatically mean something the players can survive. Winning chess against a pro is a challenge. So is surviving being dropped 150 stories and having C4 strapped to your chest blow up. Now, using proper reading comprehension skills, let's rewrite that statement to show what everyone who paid attention in English class knows it to mean: "If they face what is defined as a challenge, they lose." Now, using common sense, that would mean that the definition of a challenge in the speculation is beyond the ability of the characters to survive.

As for a low-power campaign: No shit, Sherlock. Wow. You discovered the obvious. Now, what does said low powered campaign define as a challenge? Keep in mind that varies from system to system before you spew your bullshit.

QUOTE
Then at the end, you just reinforce your blatant pattern of imposing your phallic standards on the rest of us: '...see my typical first adventure outright killing a group of runners before they even have a chance to get to the actual challenge.'  As if this was a matter that anyone to give a shit about, except for the poor individuals that have been forced into some dominatrix style submission with you as their GM Overlord?  Dear lord, if you're incapable of tailoring a challenge to the level of the players at the table, I know I wouldn't sit down at your table; Overlooking every other piss poor quality you exhibit as a gamemaster, let alone a human being.


Oh, wow, Mr. "I know what I'm talking about" once again proves a potato could outwit him. Hey, stupid shit, you ever consider the players might be the whole reason I even stated any of that? Of course not. That's too much like using common sense. Or too much like checking your misinformation to see what the truth it. I swear, for as much as you accuse me of having no touch with reality, you seem to have even less. So, tell me, what's it like in Candyland?

QUOTE
I fail to see how -your preferred level of power in a campaign disqualifies this template as useful-.  And the reason I fail to do so, is because -your preferred power level of campaign does not disqualify this template as useful-.  The only thing disqualified, unfortunately, is your own ability to add something constructive to this forum without the self important airs of a critical wannabe-intellectual.


Sonny, just because you are a wannabe intellectual doesn't mean all of us are. Stop projecting your problems onto others. That's how you got your ignorant ass into this arguement in the first place.

Okay, I shouldn't even nhave to state whose preferred power level it is. Really. I've bitched about it enough that even Nerbert figured it out. Here, since you are too much of an ignoramus to figure it out, let me spell it out for you.

QUOTE
As for my GMing style: I'm both a GM and a player in that game. I and another switch every session. The campaign style is a professional level with the PCs being the people you hire when every sane person refuses to go near. These are the people you would hire to extract an important scientist out of Bug City, or at least kill him before he spills too much information, and fully expect them to go in and come back out alive. The runs are gritty, dangerous, and challenging. And the players love it.

QUOTE
In my case, note that I am talking about adjusting the system to create a high-powered game more towards what my players are used to.


Now, stop and use logic and try to see if you think it is really me who is pushing for the power level. And if you say it is again, I'm going to have to verbally beat you like the little fungus you are.

QUOTE
Oh.  Here's another great one.

QUOTE
Even a good GM must deal with the occasional stupid action.  If a person falls off the top of a 120 story building and I set a TN of 40 for them to live, they can quite possibly survive.  In this case, I set a threshold of 12 and they're simply dead.

As for rerolling 6's: Unless they changed the mechanic, it won't apply.  There are also factors that affect the TN itself, raising or lowering it.  Even with rerolling 6's, it will take this person some luck to even get a chance at a reroll, and even then I can simply set the TN too high for them to be able to meet.


Ahh. What a little jewel. Here we have you caught red handed trying to exercise that little mind of yours! It's so cute! I can almost feel the smoke churning out from the gears. However, try as you might, you -still- can't manage to make a lick of sense. Let's poke around, and find out! Come on, it'll be fun!


This should be interesting. It'll be interesting to see how you manage to use this one while ignoring the whole conversation that happened at the time. This is going to be a great indicator of how immature you are.

QUOTE
Here you introduce the notion that someone falling off a building should be very difficult to survive.  Something that I completely agree with you about.  It is rapidly after that agreement, that you make your first fatal mistake.  You present that a TN of 30 is somehow the equivalent of a threshold of 12, ignoring that we've already been told that a threshold of -4- is reserved for extremely difficult tasks.


Which is: 1) Information I did not have at the time and was generally not available from the official sources (the FAQs), 2) A couple of numbers I very obviously pulled out of my ass. Oops. Maybe you need to consider the time scale it was posted in instead of proving you have no concept of time, and 3) Wrong, as you didn't bother to get the fact the TN I set was 40, which says a few things about your reading skills and brings into question how much you bother to read before making an ass out of yourself through assumptions.

QUOTE
So, demonstrating that contrary to claims, you have no understanding of the mechanics of one system, or the other, you go about attempting to mathematically prove one system is superior to the other.  And while that can be an opinion that you hold, math, my dear, has nothing to do with it.


Uh huh. And how did you come to that conclusion about the first system? Or, for that matter, decide that knowledge I had back then is equal to knowledge I have now? The answer is that you did not bother to consider the issue of how much time has passed and assumed that I, like you, do not grow in knowledge level about something in a few days. Oh, and interestingly, I wasn't using math for that.

QUOTE
Observe that as a GM you choose both the TN and the threshold in both situations.  Now, in the first situation, you give an arbitrary number that is difficult, yet attainable.  And in the second...?  You provide an unattainable threshold.  Yet, if -you- as the GM are the deciding factor, how can you presume to imply that the two scenario's are even.  If the threshold is mathematically impossible to obtain, then the TN must also be mathematically impossible to achieve.  That would make the situations -equal-.  After all, you are modeling reality on an abstract dice system, no?  If a TN of 30 in one scenario can be hit, albeit difficultly, -then you must ALSO- create the same situation with the second system, using thresholds.


Okay, let's use common sense. Under SR3, I set the TN to create an AI at 200. For SR4, I could set the Threshhold at, just to choose a random number, 40. Now, lets say the player has six dice in both situations. Under SR3, the player has a possibility of doing the near-impossible and rolling a 200. Now, under SR4, there is no way in Heaven, Hell, or anything in between a player can ever roll a 40 using just those six dice. And, no matter how high I set the number in SR3, it can theoretically be attained at some point. Even if the number is close to infinite.

QUOTE
OBVIOUSLY (dipshit) a threshold of 12, if it cannot be attained, is the same as a test made with an infinitely difficult target number.  So, you have several options: First, adjust the TN to infinitely.  -Or- Second, adjust the threshold to simulate an extremely difficult, but possible roll.  -Or- Third, shut your fucking mouth and think about what you say, next time, before flooding my screen with stale logic.


Or you could realize these items: 1) It's theoretically possible to hit a TN of infinity, just very improbable. 2) A Threshhold of 12 can actually be hit if one uses Edge dice. 3) At the end of the day, there are plenty of numbers in SR4 that will be impossible while SR3 will always have a system that is mostly improbable.

QUOTE
The last line, you admit that as the GM you have the power to set the threshold too high for the player to hit.  What you are essentially saying is that in this system, the GM will be more obvious about abusing the system.  Whereas, a bullying asshole GM could say, "TN:30, roll 'em." in the previous system, now he is given clearer accountability to his players in a more transparently tracked means: Thresholds.


Actually, if you look, I said TN. Which was later proven wrong by Kat when it comes to SR4. But, it still makes a point: I can set numbers the players cannot reach, only under SR4 it's not as obvious.

QUOTE
I suppose being an asshole of a GM, unable to use creativity to create challenges, and relying simply on dice, rather than tact, that's bad news for you, huh?


Nah. That's what the sleeping hellhound inside the rat shaman's lodge is for.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Ya know, that sounds awfully like the character that caused my group to ban me from playing street sams for a few months...


This last line changes the pace up, because it does not fault you in an intellectual light, or a basis of argument, but as a person. I think so many things that I have read from you can be tied to the attitude behind this quote.


Actually, that has to do with a history of me and sams. I accidentally blew up a large portion of Seattle using a rocket launcher. The GM said nothing about the methane in the sewers or the fact of how close we were to the waste treatment processing plant, and for some reason mapping systems didn't work. He's learned since then.

QUOTE
You'd like to be one of the big dogs.  You want the attention you deserve.  You want to be funny.  You'd like the people you hang out with to fear your capabilities.  Your potential.  You want people to understand how great you are, and how wise, insightful, and educated you are.  You, you, you.


And you are exactly the same way, in every regard. But guess what? I at least have an idea of where I stand on this board. You don't. So, really, get off your high horse.

QUOTE
Unfortunately, you're not one of the big dogs.  You're only getting attention because I'm sick of listening to you run your mouth on and on, and brought this in the light.  You're not funny.  The people you hang out with see you as a self-centered, insecure, pseudo-intellectual with a shallow understanding of the world around him.  You have no potential.  You are not great, you are not wise, you are not insightful, and your education is tied strictly to the fine art of being a dipshit.  Yes, you, you, you.


And, I find it interesting you are under the self delusion you are one of the people who matter. A self-delusion that, in the end, doesn't hold up. You think Mfb's shot was just at me? He was talking about you as well. I can at least say I'm doing this for entertainment value. You actually think you are being taken seriously by those who matter on the forum.

You might want to take your own advice and realize every statement you said in that quote applies to both sides of this arguement. I'm just mature enough to see it.

QUOTE
Were you expecting us to care, when you said that?  Did you want a 'ROFLMAO!!!11!!111 Serious d00d!? n0 way, b4da$$!!!!111!!!' response?  Did you want us to ask you what magnificent achievement you, the mighty Sabosect, were able to make that would -ban- you from playing Street Samurai?  "What possibly could have gotten you banned, Sabopimp?" - "I'd tell you, but you just wouldn't believe it!" - "*Gasp* You're such a cool dude.  Hang out with me, I want to be like you."

Heh.


Actually, I was making a point. Everyone here who has read the quotes from back then knows exactly how rediculous the games were. My point was that the character stats in question are rediculous enough that even my group of the time wouldn't accept it. These days the group is serious, but the fact that a group which pulled goofball items all the time back then wouldn't accept something like that is saying something. And, really, no one needed to ask because they could look back to those posts and get an idea. Nor did I expect people to ask.

QUOTE
You want to be something, but you're going around it the entirely wrong way.  In the detached life of text based interaction, you are ultimately the words you put on the page before me.  When those words are so consistently self-absorbed and worthless, -you-, in turn, become worthless.


And tell me, who is more self absorbed? Me, who is willing to admit their mistakes, or you, who is acting like an idiot and thinking they are something hot? I'm doing this for the entertainment value of others. You're doing this because you think you are actually proving something and because your ego is so big you have to attack someone simply because you dislike their posting style. Well, too bad, dipshit. Life doesn't give a damn about you. And you're not going to change anything by doing this either. In the meantime, I'm playing the role I chose to play and enjoying the comedy value of your posts.

QUOTE
So.  That's pretty much that.  In closing, let me suggest you take this like a man, accept the beating, salve the bruisings, and take your sorry ass home.  Take a few notes.  Take a little time.  And in the future don't waste our time.


Wow. I didn't know the voices in your head counted as multiple people. As for wasting time: People don't have to respond. If they don't want to, they don't. That's life. It seems to work pretty well for the intelligent people on this forum. Why don't you try it? And, really, you've only beat yourself, mainly by proving that your intelligence is really much lower than even my insults claim it to be.

QUOTE
P.S. Re: Tool - The magnitude of your Toolocity™ can only be counted in quantum measurements, my good man.  And so to call you a tool, singularly, would not have done you justice, as you and you alone take it to a level of plurality previously unknown to man.

Unfortunately Webster's didn't have an easy breakdown of that, for you, or you could of saved yourself the embarrassment of me explaining it to you.


Actually, you used it wrong. You don't use plurality, but size. For example, saying that in the tool world someone would be a jackhammer. If you wanted to try that insult, you should have used the Word of God as a tool for it. However, instead, you had to undergo the embarassment of giving an explanation to back your lack of logic and me having to correct you. If you are going to use old-style insults, at least use them right.
Serbitar
QUOTE (Rolemodel)
[...]

Thanks Rolemodel. Though your speech is a "bit" rude, which I think is more a sign of weakness then of superiority, you mention exactly the points that I meant before.

Blaming the system for his or others bad GM performance is just outright ridicoluos. Add flawed reasoning and flawed math to this and it gets embarrasing.
Sabosect
Hey, Serbitar, I thought I got you to shut up already. Now, provide nonhypothetical examples of me blaming SR4 for decisions. In fact, find any place where I blame the system that doesn't also involve people being to blame.
Serbitar
Sorry Sabosect, but I was not talking to you. Believe what you want, but my time is too precious to post pages and pages to argue with you. You can even conclude that Im trying to hide, that I have no "examples"at all, if that makes you feel better. I dont care.
Sabosect
No, but you were talking about me and apparently thought I wouldn't reply.

All I'm asking is one example. Considering the amount of posts on here, do you think it's really that hard to find?

Edit: And, if your time is so precious, why waste your time commenting at all?
Autarkis
QUOTE (Sabosect)
Hey, Serbitar, I thought I got you to shut up already. Now, provide nonhypothetical examples of me blaming SR4 for decisions. In fact, find any place where I blame the system that doesn't also involve people being to blame.


Here is something that can be construed as you blaming the system...

QUOTE (Sabosect)
Considering the average person starts off with 6 dice to play with for a skill, I'm betting that the average Threshold is 4-5. A challenging threshold would be 8, really challenging 10, majorly challenging would be 12, and superhuman would be 13+.

The problem is that we end up with a system where it is harder to magically pull off the impossible. No little old ladies lifting up trucks to save their grandchildren, no matter if it is an event known to happen in real life or not.

Basically, the system screws the players.


Note, that this was before the SR4 rules were widely known, and was earlier in this thread.

Now less name calling everyone and more discussion. biggrin.gif
Kagetenshi
For fuck's sake, will both of you just shut up already? Take it to PMs or something.

~J
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