You wrote the same thing, somewhat differently worded, two pages back. The implication that highly skilled SR3 characters are better than everyone else only at completely trivial tasks was nonsense then, and is still nonsense now.

Its interesting to hear you say this. You, from your ravings before it was even out, atleast to me, have come across as a complete nay sayer. Someone who is going to talk bad about the system regardless. I think I've probably come across as the opposite, someone who's kinda like a yes man.

But there's a reason why I haven't had too much bad to say about it. I've played in games using a extreamly similar dice system. I know how the dynamic of said systems work. 24 dice? 26 dice? Not all that great. Especialy in the world of shadowrun. In the lethality thread, its almost a hinderance, or can be. Oh look you just one shotted two guards in the same round. Guess who the other 3 are going to focus on to probably the exclusion of the rest of the team? The guy who's the biggest threat, Mr. One Trick Pony.

Most of the people here finding these 'exploits' seem to be trying to do it. Trying to find a reason to say sr4 is broken and sucks.

I've heard a few things that I'll come out and say that I'm not sure about. Mainly future advancement. WW with their systems, you have all the nifty powers that soak up experiance so once you get some of your skills and all up theres still a xp sink for you, and other than mages and adepts, and posibly technomancers (don't think theres been a lot of explaining about these guys on the forums yet) you realy don't have that. Theres gear and stuff, but xp expendature wise? meh. theres not a lot to spend it on in my opinion.

But we'll see how that goes.

But to the topic at hand. I think you guys are more of looking for reasons why its bad. The dynamic of the game is different, and I don't think most of you have ever tried a system with a dynamic like this, and thus all these little things seem like exploits.

Depending on the system? In this case, the flaws themselves have not really changed other than becomming easier to see. Easier to see = easier to use = less ingenuity in the use of.

Does that logically make the flaw any worse or better than before? No. And nor did I say it

Yeah, there's always that nagging "other possibilities" problem.

The problem is GMs who cannot handle it or do not have the experience to attempt to handle it. It takes little experience for someone to produce a min/maxed character and a lot of experience to handle the character in game in a way that keeps the game even and fun for everyone, as well as requiring experience with producing characters to recognize min/maxed from non min/maxed. That's part of why my group requires the GM to also be a player in some sessions, something I would recommend for all groups.

However, the real issue is always going to be experience. In an experienced group, you likely are not allowed to use a min/maxed character or there is some way of dealing with them in game that reduces their effectiveness or outright kills them. Or, you get a group that is all min/maxed characters and plays on a different level as a result. What some of us would like to see is a system that allows the GM to gain the experience necessary to deal with the min/maxers before actually having to face them. I'll admit it's probably a pipe dream. However, that doesn't stop us from pointing out the flaws in the system so those GMs can at least be forewarned and watch out for them.

Holy carp!! You play like this? How can the players 'win' against the GM, he's GOD!

The way I see it is RPG's like this are meant to be FUN for EVERYONE. That happens to include the roleplayer AND the rollplayer. Changing rules from under them is NOT FUN for someone who likes doing the math. It'd be like if you were playing a computer poker game, and once you started winning, the computer started drawing all aces. The rules change on you and it's not enjoyable any more.

This was a very easy example for you to come up with, and I presume you can come up with many, many more. Don't you think that perhaps that's a flaw in the rules? And unless I want to run it pretty much without rules, it would make sense for me to get some FUNCTIONAL rules? Cuz that's more or less how I see it. It's like buying a boat full of holes so you can enjoy plugging them. I'd prefer to spend my time rowing, thank you.

There are many games which are very hard to 'break' but are still quite simple. In fact, generally the simplier the game, the harder it is to break. Tri-stat, for instance, seems quite easy indeed to run, and difficult to break.


Just so people are aware, I am very used to both role and roll players, being a member of both groups. I've had games where I was trying to keep things balanced and players complained they weren't enjoying themselves because I kept hobbling them.

This may sound like the crazy babblings of a mad GM, but some players actually ENJOY tweaking their characters. They like to sit down and do the math behind how best to spend combat pool in different situations. That's what they LIKE about the game. If someone spends two days tweaking his character and shows it to me, assuming he did everything according to the rules, I should be able to rest assured that his character will be reasonably balanced. I don't want to have to bother saying 'make sure you can get your butt whupped by the street sam!' or 'oh, I know this is in the rules, but I have to take it back because the rules are faulty, sorry'. That's ot fun for anyone. Not for me, not for him, not for the group.

Again, good for you that you have players who don't get a kick out of two days tweaking numbers. Seriously, your games must be delightful. But that's not the world I live in, and I want rules that will support my players in being stable, and me in not having to be double checked or house ruled into oblivion.

In tame conditions I would hope so. Most of the time the skills people are focusing 20 dice type things into will never be under tame conditions of two people standing in a open field 5 feet apart without moving and taking a single shot at each other.

Afterall, I hope someone who has a phd in physics or math matical sciences can figure out a complicated calculus problem atleast 4 times quicker than me given the same resources and our ideal/tame environments.

"You wrote the same thing, somewhat differently worded, two pages back. The implication that highly skilled SR3 characters are better than everyone else only at completely trivial tasks was nonsense then, and is still nonsense now."

Reading comprehension... It's a good thing.

So, inguinuity in system raping should be rewarded with acceptance? I'm not sure I follow. If -both- scenario's are just as bad, where is, as they say, The Beef?

If the group experience is the issue, then it is inherient with the individuals, and not the system itself, as both have their full share of problems; Different issues exposed at different points of the math curves.

-RM

I also, prior to those ravings, made a post saying I only had the art to complain about and, in the beginning of those ravings, made a post saying I liked everything except the art. My opinion of the art has changed since then.

You see, I don't just represent my opinion on here. If I did, I wouldn't have anything to say on this forum other than to indicate I like the changes. There are a few areas I have concerns about, but those concerns are also about SR3 and were inheritted by SR4. And, really, those concerns are not anything that cannot be dealt with in a way that leaves the system alone.

My group is a bunch of chickenshits who feel that a single member on this forum is enough. Recently, they've gotten on my bad side because of their words involving SR4 and the undue stress I was put under. Adding to my problems and causing a stress overload (admittedly easy with my system) is not a good way to get someone to be kind in representing your views.

I always thought that would be the point they would fall back to a more defensive position (and one that is both pitch black and full of cover) and use drones for their main line of attack.

And, I'll be honest: They've only found one that isn't also in SR3, and that measely one is easily dealt with. With 20 dice, you can get four automatic successes against a Threshhold of 4. However, if there is a -4 mod, suddenly they have to hope to generate a success with the remaining dice. And -4s are amazingly easy to generate if you know what you are doing.

Actually, this is where I think the supplements will come in. If FanPro is smart, they'll provide so many ways to soak up Karma that most groups will never have enough for what they want. A book similar to the Companion is a must.

Actually, I have. I used to play V:tM a lot, back before it got too many books to keep track of. That's part of what I like about SR. White Wolf prevented the problems this system has by splitting attributes and skills into two entirely different groups. If FanPro really wanted to use the White Wolf system as a base, why not learn from their experience and copy more of it?

The Beef is with the idea that SR4 doesn't require less ingenuity than SR3.

Which would be nice if they were not all in the same equation. No problem with a game is just a singular problem, and no problem with a game ever exists without the people to exploit it. It is the people who exploit it and how much it is bitched about that determines the strength of the problem. If a problem is bitched about enough (like, say, the magic system), it tends to get adjusted with a new edition.

So then, I suppose, would be understanding the system that you're supposedly trying to defend. And while you're at it, you'll note that in regards to reading comprehension, there are several keywords you've somehow managed to overlook. It's understandble, but being a generous fellow I'll help you out.

Ahh. An average of 500% net successes, at worst, compared to Character B, in this example. Right-O, Jolly-Good-Quote.

Ahhh-Sooo. Funny thing, that reading comprehension bit. So, effectively what I said, and must have been glossed over, is that -the most dramatic difference in performance will be noted in the easiest tasks-.

And.

-The least dramatic difference in performance will be noted in the most difficult tasks.-

And.

-Unlike reality, the highly skilled shine, due to this much larger margin of success, when tests are easy, rather than when the real level of human limits are being strained against-.

If you would like, I can highlight, bold, and capitalize all three of those points for you.

Or, if you'd like, we could run a few silly SRIII situations that have cropped up over the years. Like rolling up newspaper, and slaying a troll. Or splattering someone's brain with highly skilled spitballs. I'd even be happy to break it all down, so you don't miss any of it, next time.

-RM

Yes I play like that. You're automaticaly assuming the worst ofcourse as well and blowing things out of porportion. If you're even a halfway decent GM you know the game is just that a game. Games are there for enjoyment and fun. Is it fun for the players if i throw them constantly at threats high above their level? No. Is it fun if i change the rules so I always win? No. Ofcourse not, and I rather resent the fact that you would imply thats the way I would play my game.

No. I send my players at threats, and puzzles, and situations that they should be able to handle. Everything they encounter for the most part is going to be difficult. There are certainly things they can do to make things cake walks. But I'm not going to plan it to be a cakewalk. Players are going to do things that I don't expect. Thats a given. They're going to do something that breaks my plan. That's a given.

There has only been one time I went for a tpk (total party kill) in my entire time GMing. That was when we started a new SR campaign and they insisted they were powerful enough as starting chars to take on the arcology. Now I didn't get a tpk. Didn't even get close. But they prety much got the hint this wasn't the place for them. To their credit, they did manage to make it up to the mall level from the ork underground entrance into the arc.

The game is about enjoyment. The rules say you can jump x feet + y feet, where y is the number of sux on a athletics test. But said runner goes to make the jump and is going to miss that jump by one foot. Damn looks like that runner who's jumping across those buildings is going to fall to his doom by the rules. You know what? I'm the GM. I know he's going to realy dislike it if his char dies to something so random as this. So you know what? I change the rules he lands, catches onto the edge, and with the help of his friends and himself gets pulled up and can get away. The rules are there to help the game. One of the rules I've seen for the GM in every single rpg book I've ever seen states that the rules are there as a guideline, feel free to ignore or change a rule to suit your story/game.

My players take about a week to twink out their chars. I still have final say. You have no idea how many times, in tweaking my own char out my gm has told me no. But one thing I've learned from him. Don't just say no, work something out, and be polite. He's my best friend, and his favorite phrase is "I'd realy rather you didn't do x, I'm not realy going to stop you from doing it cause the rules don't say you can't, but theres going to be x y and z as repurcutions because theres not a lot you can do to justify having x in city y" ect ect ect. He also if we want to do something cool he'll help us work out how to do it without completely breaking things.

Theres a fine line between enjoyment and allowing abuse. But then again my group is a bit different from some of the others I've seen. Our group typicaly enjoy's a good challenge, a puzzle. We like to be hard pressed. Heck when I actualy play. I know each and every one of my characters will die at some point. Its a given to me. My goal, is to keep then around for as long as possible, and as a player I see the GM's goal as trying to twart me on my way to mine. I have no qualms about loosing a character. This is not to say I don't spend alot of time coming up with the concept, who they are, or whatnot. I spend a great deal of time. Just from playing as much as I have I understand that well every now and then i'm going to loose a char or two.

These so-called "points" of yours have been addressed - well, demolished, really - several pages ago. You've said nothing new since, and your argument was based on completely misrepresenting the facts to begin with.

Glibness and sarcasm are easy - but they're worth shit when theyre the only things you've got. Get back to me when you have an argument based on something other than using a TN of 20 to prove your point and hoping people won't notice the absurdity if you make your post long enough.

Well to the whole thing of weather or not the 3 guys left standing. I did not say what they would do other than focus on the guy who's the biggest threat. Even if i'm running away from a situation if i can still run and fire i'm going to be sending lead, or even a grenade his way to slow him down till we can regroup and eliminate him/it.

With a pool of 20 dice yes you can burn dice for the automatic success'. Thats a given. All of the examples of this 20 dice stuff has not been in things where threshold realy plays a whole lot into things. Afterall this has all been combat stuff we've been talking about. Threshold doesn't play that much into combat unless you're using the optional rules. *shrugs* If you're talking on breaking and entering or cracking a computer code ect. Thats a different story and it might not work out the same way. I'm not sure.

to the third thing there, yes we'll see how it goes, hopefully they'll give us a few karma sink type things for the mundanes.

Ok last point you made. V:tM is nothing like the current dice system that white wolf is using. The old V:tM had a tn that shifted, max of 10. The system was broken and abused. They changed the system when they put out exalted. Every roll is skill + stat. They further improved on this system when the new WoD came out.

From the looks of things thats exactly what FanPro has done. Taken that system that white wolf has taken the time to work out and remolded it for the shadowrun universe with a few minor changes. So if you haven't played either exalted, or the new WoD, your experiances from the old WoD and V:tM and such won't realy help you as they're outdated and don't play out anything like the current system.

I am so incredibly lazy today. So, I'm numbering the sections the same way you did.

1) Fair enough. Personally, I would prefer them to shout a run away command and act like they are running away. Half the time in my games, they are. The other half, they are not. The players are never really sure which is which.

2) I cannot continue this portion due to insufficient information.

3) Agreed.

4) Meh. This is what happens when you don't keep up with games. I knew they changed the system, but apparently my info was off on what areas.

Agreed.

As for you Sabosect....

As stated in another thread, I run my guards differently depending on the exact situation, how trained they are ect. Sometimes they run, sometimes they hold their ground. The highly trained professional, career military man, who's been told to defend a position with his life, isn't normaly going to fall back right away. Ect. All realy depends on the situation.

Actually no, its been well established that you're either that, or a god among men, one touched by the gods with infinte power.

Perhaps it is about people living on the sinless streets trying to get by? (That's how I have done my campaign in sr3 at least, and we had to tone down a ton)

And this I have a serious problem with.

Look. The point is fairly clear, and yet you've failed to address it in any way other than to say, "That's nonsense!" To support this theory of nonsense, you insist that the game "Works Better!" inside of a different TN range. Fine, I understand and accept that. SR4, then, can obviously be said to work better in some situations over others.

The point that you are missing entirely, then, is that -yes, there is a tendancy of the dice to display this curve in SR3, and no, it is not a system devoid of mathematical shortcomings-.

Certainly. I will be glad to introduce additional shortcomings into the system, after you address the fairly clear cut issue already presented in any means aside from blatant unfounded dismissal. That's hardly the point, however. The -point- is that in -both- systems compensation is made to accomodate their shortcomings. And it is laughably niave to point out one, and then dig in to defend the other without accurately identifying them both.

-RM

You know, after that initial response, this line here lingered with me, and after a few minutes of ample sidetracking myself, I couldn't help but to come back with it.

Why would I 'get back to you' when I have an argument based on something other than using a TN 20 (And, consequentially a TN 2) to prove my point, when, you know, a TN 20 (Don't forget the 2!) is such a great example?

Let me put it into effect for you.

Fact: Damage is staged up wound levels, in increments of 2 successes.

Point: At a TN of 2, 4 skill dice will most likely change L--> S prior to being staged back down by the 'defender'. At a TN of 2, 20 skill dice will most likely change L --> D+++.

Conclusion: I could add more '+s' for emphasis, but the fact is that our system refects high skill having the biggest impact in simple scenarios. But that's a direct repurcussion with basing linear effect off exponential probability. Why is this so hard to swallow? Because it's an extreme example that demonstrates the degeneration of the system?

Of course it is! But what, then, are these examples thrown back the other way to include 21+ dice wielding SuperAdepts? Extreme examples? Exactly!

How can you show so much obvious bias to so hungryly gobble up one, and then so distastefully -overlook- the other? If it boils down to personal preference, then fine, naturally you are imbued with the ability to formulate your own preferences, and opinions, even throwing out facts.

But then, that heavily discredits any neutrality you may profess to have, when evaluating a presented number system, and commenting upon it.

-RM

What blatant dismissal? I stated my position clearly - and provided proof for it.

You ignored it, and re-posted the same lies and misrepresentations a couple of pages later. When called on it, you declined to provide a reasoned argument, and decided instead to put words in my mouth and pretend I failed to explain my position.