Author Topic: [SR5] House Rules  (Read 76644 times)

chromeburner

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #45 on: (13:34:06/09-26-13) »
I want to start by saying that I love the setting and mystique of Shadowrun. Its probably one of the best, if not the best renditions of the cyberpunk genre out there. That said, I've played several sessions of Shadowrun 5e and at every turn it feels like the rules are getting in the way of experiencing that world. The players spend time planning only to find out that their depth of tactical choice is narrow, or we have to spend five to ten minutes resolving a group of mooks shooting someone. Time and again there are breaks in my player's and my own immersion because the rules are so weird. Lethality has been amped up, but its for the sake of making a "grittier game" rather than using it as the tool it can be. Rules still require a ton of cross-referencing, often with contradictory results--this creates a phenominally high barrier for entry.

Indeed.  I'm quite shocked and disappointed at how little the game improved from 4th edition.  Beyond the changes to the matrix, very little actually got any better .   I'm going to run your house rules past my group and see if they'll fly.  Thanks.

deek

  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • deek's World
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #46 on: (22:51:44/10-05-13) »
I'd say combat is much improved over 4A.  You have the return of the initiative score dictating IPs in a Combat Turn. The whole environmental modifiers table is streamlined, so figuring our modifiers is much quicker. Just those two things make a world of difference in the combats going on in my 5e sessions.

I started in a hybrid 1e/2e game years (decades?) ago, skipped 3e and jumped back in for 4/4A and now 5e and I certainly like the latest ruleset the most.

Cyber-Dave

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 139
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #47 on: (17:56:47/10-06-13) »
For the most part, I am pretty happy to use the RAW (with errata). But, there is one area of the rules that is totally broken right now. In order to fix that area of the rules, I would use the following house rules:

When a target is unaware of an attack, then no defense is possible. This does not automatically apply to defenders who are already engaged in combat. In such situations, the target must make an individual surprise check. On a failure they suffer the effects of surprise.

Meanwhile, if a character has 100% cover, the attack always hits the cover first.

Finally, when using burst fire or autofire against a surprised enemy, the benefits of burst fire/autofire change. Divide the penalty that would normally be applied to your target's defense roll by 2 (rounding one half up and one half down), expressed as a positive number.  Use the value (rounded down) as a bonus to your attack dice; additionally, use the value (rounded up) as a bonus to your accuracy rating.

Those three house rules pretty much get the game working as I desire.

Gryphynx (Sphynx)

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 106
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #48 on: (05:54:22/10-13-13) »
I have trouble with the Spell Drain options in the game.  While I made my character a Hermetic, it was only because I saw my Logic as being more important than my Charisma, but with the way I visualize and explained my character, Logic doesn't make sense... and neither does Charisma.  As a matter of fact, Charisma no longer makes sense for Shamans even, since they don't have Mentor Spirits.  So, while I'd allow players to use Intuition for Shamans, a stat that seems far more appropriate for their theme, I wanted to build a quick optional Tradition based a bit on my old 3e version of the same Tradition (found on my old 3e website: http://www.i-sphynx.com/Shadowrun).  Thoughts (leaving out the fluff since I'd hope everyone knows what a Psionicist is suppose to be :P)?

Psionicist
[spoiler]
Psionicist are created using the same rules as members of the Hermetic and Shamanic traditions, however they are self-restricted by their own uneducated view of the ways of magic.  They rely on intuition and self discovery to expand their knowledge of the power that courses through them.  As such, Psionicists are restricted in their forms of magic, unable to use Ritual Magic, Enchanting, or Artificing.  They also do not link any Element with School of Magic, since all their Schools of Magic are linked directly to the Mind.  This does however grant them the ability to summon Mind Spirits which appear, and act, as extensions of their own persona.  As a matter of fact, the similarities are so precise that it requires a minimum of 3 hits on an Assensing Test to identify which is the Spirit and which is the Psionicist.. 

Drain: Intuition + Willpower

Spirits of the Mind
BARSWLICEdgeEssM
F-2F+2F+2F-2FFFFF/2FF
Initiative: F*2 + 2d6
Astral Initiative: F*2 + 3d6
Skills: Assensing, Astral Combat, Perception, Unarmed Combat
Powers: Astral Form, Materialization, Sapience, Search
Optional Powers: Concealment, Confusion, Fear, Psyhokinesis
[/spoiler]

Michael Chandra

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #49 on: (06:01:30/10-13-13) »
If I were you, I'd just convert one of the traditions from Street Magic, and maybe one or two of the SM spirits.

Michael Chandra

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #50 on: (07:51:17/10-13-13) »
You made it sound like your problem is the combination of character/tradition flavor and drainstats, which Street Magic is a great answer to in SR4. It has quite a number of different traditions for each of the three drain stats.

If you're simply trying to convert Psionics from 3e, what is your approach to flavor-ties? With the normal traditions, you can only get support to your own magic from the right type of spirits, so you can't use the same spirit type to help you with for example Health and Combat spells. How would that work with this one?

I did a check in Street Magic and they don't really have stats for the Psionics "flawed understanding of magic being gradually eroded by its own inability to explain many of the everyday realities and accept the fundamental conventions of modern thaumaturgy", so I guess it's not possible to do an SR4->SR5 conversion of them.

Gryphynx (Sphynx)

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 106
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #51 on: (08:19:12/10-13-13) »
Fair enough on theme, I should have linked my character instead of assuming everyone had seen it.  He believes himself to be a Psionic because he's untrained.

As for magic support, I suppose that would be another limitation, spirits not helping (which would also be thematic since you don't see them as spirits but as an extension of yourself). 

incrdbil

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 167
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #52 on: (14:45:12/10-13-13) »
Well, the first round of house rules was agreed on by my group.

We've gotten rid of the limit of one attack action per phase.  Wasn't causing a problem in the last 4 editions,

We don't apply the reduced defense modifier per multiple attack to targets with heavy cover.  We also don't apply due to certain certain attacks: attackers uncoordinated with each other, or attacks that score no successes on the to hit test at all.  We're contemplating an ability or at least an Adept power to ignore multiple attacker modifiers to defense--seems very appropriate for at least melle combat, to simulate the super agile martial artists who can fight multiple opponents without simply being stomepd to mud by untrained thugs.

Successes over limits apply, simply one extra success per 3 net hits over the limit.  We may lower that to 2 in the future, or discard limits altogether, but were taking this in steps.

We're contemplating modifying how you take cover--making it a free action, or keeping it at a simple action, but you remain in cover as long as you stay in place, or move within the same covering item/position.  This is only if the cover is the type that needs to be closely adhered to, or the enemy has a superior position.  If it is naturally intervening without any needed action by the player, it applies a modifier without the need for a simple action.

I'm looking at limiting reagent use to the characters Magic attribute.

All4BigGuns

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #53 on: (15:17:28/10-13-13) »
Well, the first round of house rules was agreed on by my group.

We've gotten rid of the limit of one attack action per phase.  Wasn't causing a problem in the last 4 editions,

We don't apply the reduced defense modifier per multiple attack to targets with heavy cover.  We also don't apply due to certain certain attacks: attackers uncoordinated with each other, or attacks that score no successes on the to hit test at all.  We're contemplating an ability or at least an Adept power to ignore multiple attacker modifiers to defense--seems very appropriate for at least melle combat, to simulate the super agile martial artists who can fight multiple opponents without simply being stomepd to mud by untrained thugs.

Successes over limits apply, simply one extra success per 3 net hits over the limit.  We may lower that to 2 in the future, or discard limits altogether, but were taking this in steps.

We're contemplating modifying how you take cover--making it a free action, or keeping it at a simple action, but you remain in cover as long as you stay in place, or move within the same covering item/position.  This is only if the cover is the type that needs to be closely adhered to, or the enemy has a superior position.  If it is naturally intervening without any needed action by the player, it applies a modifier without the need for a simple action.

I'm looking at limiting reagent use to the characters Magic attribute.

You might consider applying the Physical Limit to Defense Tests as well. If the attack roll is held to a Limit, then the defense roll should be as well.
(SR5) Homebrew Archetypes

Tangled Currents (Persistent): 33 Karma, 60,000 nuyen

Michael Chandra

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #54 on: (17:57:28/10-13-13) »
Honestly I think it's a really bad move to make. You're slowing combat down again and risk ruining the balance between gunbunnies on one hand and spellcasters+melee characters on the other. With melee adepts no longer by far exceeding the damage of guns and direct combat spells nerfed down in damage, taking away their equality in attack-opportunities might make them far from combat-capable.

Crunch

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2268
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #55 on: (18:08:15/10-13-13) »
I agree with Michael here. 

incrdbil

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 167
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #56 on: (20:42:26/10-13-13) »
Honestly I think it's a really bad move to make. You're slowing combat down again and risk ruining the balance between gunbunnies on one hand and spellcasters+melee characters on the other. With melee adepts no longer by far exceeding the damage of guns and direct combat spells nerfed down in damage, taking away their equality in attack-opportunities might make them far from combat-capable.

Like I said, I haven't had a problem with it for all of the prior editions of the game. More importantly the players didn't the change either.  NPC's get to use it as well.  Given how fast recoil penalties build up, gun bunnies do other things fairly often anyway.  Mages have been doing well anyway, and have taken to indirect spells like ducks to water, as mana spells are outpaced even under the standard rules.

Michael Chandra

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • *
  • Posts: 6745
  • I do not work for Catalyst
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #57 on: (21:27:12/10-13-13) »
I'm just saying, if the entire game system is balanced around a combination of changes, reverting one of them has severe consequences. If you want to revert back to old editions, it's an all-or-nothing deal if you do not want to eliminate entire archetypes from the game. And if the system changes, what felt right before may no longer be balanced. If it's a risk you're willing to take, that's fine, but it's not good to turn a blind eye to the consequences of a houserule, unless you live in Egypt.

Besides, why did you houserule this change? Did the players really feel it was limiting them too much, did they dislike having to make tactical choices, did they feel mages and brawlers got to attack too often compared to them, were they simply missing getting to destroy their enemies without a single chance for the opponents to get back, or was there another reason for them to not want the 1 attack action per phase rule? Because let's face it, everyone knows "it was no problem in the previous editions" isn't a proper argument, so clearly there must have been something else going on that made your entire group uncomfortable about the new rules. Were they perhaps turned off by the increased lethality in play, resulting in their characters being in too much danger even against weak opponents? I'm curious as to what the problem was that you felt you had to resolve with such a houserule with such severe consequences.
« Last Edit: (21:35:06/10-13-13) by Michael Chandra »

incrdbil

  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 167
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #58 on: (01:00:18/10-14-13) »
If you want to revert back to old editions, it's an all-or-nothing deal if you do not want to eliminate entire archetypes from the game.

Kinds of a odd statement in a forum on house rules--if you change one rule, you may as well play the old edition? Since..well, RPG's have existed, GM's and players have tinkered with systems.


Quote
And if the system changes, what felt right before may no longer be balanced. If it's a risk you're willing to take, that's fine, but it's not good to turn a blind eye to the consequences of a houserule, unless you live in Egypt.

Certainly--if the rule adaptation isn't working well for the game, then we go back, or revise it.

Quote
Besides, why did you houserule this change?

Like every other house rule-I (and my players) didn't like the change between editions. We understood the intent, but didn't agree with the implementation.

 
Quote
Did the players really feel it was limiting them too much, did they dislike having to make tactical choices

I'd be happy to discuss the subject, but could you refrain from insulting my players?

Quote
Because let's face it, everyone knows "it was no problem in the previous editions" isn't a proper argument
,

Really? "If its not broke, don't fix it" isn't a idea worth discussing? As I said, my group didn't not find a problem with the number of possible attacks per action for characters to be a problem before, and feel there's more than enough reasons for players to choose to do other actions as well without a straight out rule.

 Were they perhaps turned off by the increased lethality in play, resulting in their characters being in too much danger even against weak opponents?

Actually, they enjoy the gritty nature of combat, and have been very appreciative that, unless you are really designed to soak damage like the tank archetype, its far better to never be shot at in the first place, and its far better to make successful defense tests than hope to resist damage.  And even with the change, take aim actions were very common in our last game, or other actions to take cover, ready items, or do helpful things--heck, the way recoil works in this game is going to do a great deal in making the gun bunnies take a pause on its own.

 Players realized that attacking twice has consequences--strict rules play, they can't even take cover without using a simple action.  There was lots of 'getup from behind object, fire, free action to drop prone) type actions going on.  Firing anything automatic means significant penalties build up rather quickly when double-firing.  As I'm very strict on just how much you can communicate with a free action, lots of simple actions are used for an additional free action to communicate, or observe in detail, then communicate. But as a group, we like the option existing for a player to really go on the offensive if they feel it is worth it.


All4BigGuns

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7538
Re: [SR5] House Rules
« Reply #59 on: (01:11:02/10-14-13) »
Heck, since you didn't say you made melee attacks complex actions again, may I assume that those melee warriors are making two attacks now too (in passes after they've closed of course)?
(SR5) Homebrew Archetypes

Tangled Currents (Persistent): 33 Karma, 60,000 nuyen