[Ghost Rigger]

But you could just play another system with a Shadowrun hack. The Shadowrun system doesn't need to stop being a simulationist system for you to run the Shadowrun setting at your table.

Or, you could switch your game to a Shadowrun hack for your simulationist needs?

Or I could stick with the current edition of Shadowrun, or play a previous edition of Shadowrun. Which brings us back to the core issue: why did the developers feel that Shadowrun needs to stop being a simulationist game?

[Banshee]

But you could just play another system with a Shadowrun hack. The Shadowrun system doesn't need to stop being a simulationist system for you to run the Shadowrun setting at your table.

Or, you could switch your game to a Shadowrun hack for your simulationist needs?

Or I could stick with the current edition of Shadowrun, or play a previous edition of Shadowrun. Which brings us back to the core issue: why did the developers feel that Shadowrun needs to stop being a simulationist game?

you know I wasn't going to reply to this but it bugs me too much to let it go ...

This is the number one fallacy with the arguments one here, we did not make SR any less "simulationist" ... it is still VERY much a game about making the right tactical decisions at the right tactical moment. Are there things that could have been done better in my opinion... yes, and I have spoken on those before (I'm talking to you mister armor and strength) ... but that is one of the things you get when developing a game by committee, but that doesn't mean it is broken or useless and it doesn't mean it is any less "real" than it ever was ... it's just different.

[Shinobi Killfist]

But you could just play another system with a Shadowrun hack. The Shadowrun system doesn't need to stop being a simulationist system for you to run the Shadowrun setting at your table.

Or, you could switch your game to a Shadowrun hack for your simulationist needs?

Or I could stick with the current edition of Shadowrun, or play a previous edition of Shadowrun. Which brings us back to the core issue: why did the developers feel that Shadowrun needs to stop being a simulationist game?

you know I wasn't going to reply to this but it bugs me too much to let it go ...

This is the number one fallacy with the arguments one here, we did not make SR any less "simulationist" ... it is still VERY much a game about making the right tactical decisions at the right tactical moment. Are there things that could have been done better in my opinion... yes, and I have spoken on those before (I'm talking to you mister armor and strength) ... but that is one of the things you get when developing a game by committee, but that doesn't mean it is broken or useless and it doesn't mean it is any less "real" than it ever was ... it's just different.

Unless you guys have done a terrible job explaining combat and edge for many people I suspect your statement won’t be accurate.

[Banshee]

But you could just play another system with a Shadowrun hack. The Shadowrun system doesn't need to stop being a simulationist system for you to run the Shadowrun setting at your table.

Or, you could switch your game to a Shadowrun hack for your simulationist needs?

Or I could stick with the current edition of Shadowrun, or play a previous edition of Shadowrun. Which brings us back to the core issue: why did the developers feel that Shadowrun needs to stop being a simulationist game?

you know I wasn't going to reply to this but it bugs me too much to let it go ...

This is the number one fallacy with the arguments one here, we did not make SR any less "simulationist" ... it is still VERY much a game about making the right tactical decisions at the right tactical moment. Are there things that could have been done better in my opinion... yes, and I have spoken on those before (I'm talking to you mister armor and strength) ... but that is one of the things you get when developing a game by committee, but that doesn't mean it is broken or useless and it doesn't mean it is any less "real" than it ever was ... it's just different.

Unless you guys have done a terrible job explaining combat and edge for many people I suspect your statement won’t be accurate.

there is that too ... and just to throw this out there for clarification in case anyone wants or needs to direct a particular question at me for speaking up ... yes I was on the development team and worked on the overall core mechanics that everything is built around now but all I actually wrote was significant portions of the matrix and rigging chapters. I think things are explained pretty well overall, but that is most likely heavily influenced by my knowledge of what we intended it to be.

[Iron Serpent Prince]

I think knives do 2 and are physical damage. I think you could set unarmed at 1 and it would work. Then make the dice pool strength. While almost all stats get play in melee and unarmed combat it pure simulationist game the most correlation to one stat imo would be strength. Not body building strength as some try to portray it but the speed stat for things like running its the explosive movement stat. Add a strength minimum for weapons to their dv-1.

I agree with you that Strength + Skill would be better for attack rolls in melee.  However, I am certain that is never going to be an official option because it violates "simplification."
Shadowrun Sixth World will have all attacks be Agility + Skill, just so there aren't any outliers.

I totally support it for a house rule though, for what little that is worth.  And if some table wants to get even more simulationist, maybe Strength + Agility to hit, with damage based off of Skill.  Although, that will likely take damage too far up the weapon scale.

[Lormyr]

but all I actually wrote was significant portions of the matrix and rigging chapters.

Both of which I find to be considerable improvements from 5e, for what that is worth.

But you could just play another system with a Shadowrun hack. The Shadowrun system doesn't need to stop being a simulationist system for you to run the Shadowrun setting at your table.

Or, you could switch your game to a Shadowrun hack for your simulationist needs?

Or I could stick with the current edition of Shadowrun, or play a previous edition of Shadowrun. Which brings us back to the core issue: why did the developers feel that Shadowrun needs to stop being a simulationist game?

This is the number one fallacy with the arguments one here, we did not make SR any less "simulationist" ... it is still VERY much a game about making the right tactical decisions at the right tactical moment.

This is my take on the situation:

There is in fact a lot of combat options available, made available almost exclusively through action economy and Edge-fueled alterations. For the most part, actions are used to do everything from move and interact with objects to attack and provide defense (ranging from one minor action to defend against one attack to major actions to defend against all attacks for a round). For the most part, Edge mainly alters the potential outcome of actions, but is also used to allow some options to be enlisted.

Now as far as simulationist and how useful these tactical options are vs. just shooting the guy in the face? Situational, but that is also kind of the point of tactics to begin with.

Some people will simply not like the way those options are made available or handled, which is a perfectly fine preference. I am not a big fan of the new Edge system's impact on literally everything, nor how the specifics of that impact were decided.

For full disclosure, I think that overall 6e looks alright, with the following major exceptions:

1). Strength issues.
2). Armor issues.
3). Many defensive spells being useless or having redundant effects because of #2. For example, the spell combat sense adds to defense rating (not dice pools) and dice pools for surprise tests, while the armor spell adds to defense rating only. Why ever buy armor? (though they appear to stack affects you would never need both unless playing an armorless, body stat dumped character. related: as far as I can tell everything stacks except initiative, attribute augmentation past +4, and worn armor other than listed exceptions)
4). Still magicrun. High-level mage dice pools will demolish any opposition, in part because:
5). Foci are still completely nuts. For the love of God people, please limit the rating to something sane. Rating 6 should be major artifact level.
6). Still no defense test for non-spell AoE. Sigh...

[KatoHearts]

3). Many defensive spells being useless or having redundant effects because of #2. For example, the spell combat sense adds to defense rating (not dice pools) and dice pools for surprise tests, while the armor spell adds to defense rating only. Why ever buy armor? (though they appear to stack affects you would never need both unless playing an armorless, body stat dumped character. related: as far as I can tell everything stacks except initiative, attribute augmentation past +4, and worn armor other than listed exceptions)

Armor spell adds net hits to body and defense rating in 6e, if the qsr is to be believed.

[Lormyr]

Armor spell adds net hits to body and defense rating in 6e, if the qsr is to be believed.

It is not to be believed. See my frustration with qsr vs. crb up thread.

[Ghost Rigger]

"For full disclosure, I think that overall 6e looks alright, with the following six major exceptions...."

Oh wow. Talk about being condemned by faint praise.

[Lormyr]

"For full disclosure, I think that overall 6e looks alright, with the following six major exceptions...."

Oh wow. Talk about being condemned by faint praise.

Kindest personal opinion I can offer sadly.

[adzling]

Under no definition are numerical modifiers to die rolls a, “nod towards realism.”

When the replacement for those modifiers results in unrealistic outcomes that beggar belief then yes, they are absolutely related to realism.

Hyperbole doesn't make what you're saying more true.

That wasn't hyperbole, that was an opinion grounded in a close reading of the available material.
Where are your counterpoints of factual analysis?

The rest of your post is just sarcasm and does not address the points I made.
So, congratulations on your attempted humor?

[Shinobi Killfist]

Sounds like many defensive spells are just flat out worthless. I’m not sure it’s worth wasting 1,000 Nuyen in actual armor, using karma, sustaining it just for defense rating. But hey go go attribute boosts.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Under no definition are numerical modifiers to die rolls a, “nod towards realism.”

When the replacement for those modifiers results in unrealistic outcomes that beggar belief then yes, they are absolutely related to realism.

Hyperbole doesn't make what you're saying more true.

That wasn't hyperbole, that was an opinion grounded in a close reading of the available material.
Where are your counterpoints of factual analysis?

The rest of your post is just sarcasm and does not address the points I made.
So, congratulations on your attempted humor?

My reading at least from what’s been released as well. The whole you are both in a bad situation so it’s a wash discussion showed there is a disconnect between my line of thought and some of the designers.

And again they could have catered to both groups with a simple idea that you have a base threshold to hit a target modified by the situation and the defense roll. Dice pools always remain the same, it’s still quick and easy. It would be the same chart you are referencing for edge, just include some base threshold modifiers as well.

[adzling]

My reading at least from what’s been released as well. The whole you are both in a bad situation so it’s a wash discussion showed there is a disconnect between my line of thought and some of the designers.

And again they could have catered to both groups with a simple idea that you have a base threshold to hit a target modified by the situation and the defense roll. Dice pools always remain the same, it’s still quick and easy. It would be the same chart you are referencing for edge, just include some base threshold modifiers as well.

agree 100%

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Well, for argument's sake... if 6W erred on the side of too much simplicity it's easy to house rule in whatever you feel the system needs.  I'd prefer an under-complex game to an over-complex game... it's much easier to add in spice to taste than to take it out.