Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Banshee on <06-18-19/1019:09>
-
Hi everyone, just through together a quick little survey that I would love you all to take a couple of minutes to fill out. Basically it's just a quick little market research project to figure what is most desirable to maintain and/or promote in Shadowrun for you guys as players and GM's both.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RTDC9MK
-
I tried to take the survey and it doesn't work. Answer a 2nd line and the 1st clears out. Maybe it doesn't work b/c I tried on a mobile device.
EDIT: worked fine from my desktop. My tablet's been kind of wonky lately, it was probably the culprit.
-
thanks, I will check into it. I did get one response so far though.
EDIT: Corrected to allow multiple response now
-
*Has a hard time not filling in 'very important' for practically everything*
Done!
-
Bump! Please take the survey peeps!
-
I would be happy to take the survey, but I don't know any of the various edition's systems, and thus couldn't give decent feedback. :-\
-
I would be happy to take the survey, but I don't know any of the various edition's systems, and thus couldn't give decent feedback. :-\
please take it anyway, it is not about the editions or variations between them per se ... just what you want to see continuing to be used.
-
thanks, I will check into it. I did get one response so far though.
EDIT: Corrected to allow multiple response now
So...when I took it, and could only select one item per rank, that wasn't working correctly?
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
Done as requested.
I would love to see the results
-
Done! And +1 to PiXeL01, I'd like to see the results too.
-
I'm going to give it some time to run it's course but, I will definitely post a summary of the results
-
Taken. And thank you
-
Done, and thanks for asking this grognard's opinion.
-
done
-
Thank you very much for putting out this poll. I've played since 1989 and have owned every version in their entirety. I noticed two things that I thought were very important Qs missing from the mechanics portion of the survey. I have found them very important because they are mechanics that directly result in several aspects of the iconic "feel" of the game.
Missing mechanics questions:
1) Success levels: barely succeeded, full success, exceptional excess with improved effects, etc
2) Non-flat odds for success. The same modifier has a different impact on your raw odds of success depending upon whether you're starting out with low, average, or good odds of success.
Thank you,
DimeStore
Edit: Ack! I missed the slider along the top. I would have selected pretty much balanced between. Here's hoping that's the default :)
-
Done
-
I would be happy to take the survey, but I don't know any of the various edition's systems, and thus couldn't give decent feedback. :-\
please take it anyway, it is not about the editions or variations between them per se ... just what you want to see continuing to be used.
I took the survey. Things I had no idea about I put in the middle of the rankings, and the rest I tried to answer as best as I could from what little I've picked up in the forums. I'll be able to answer better in the future once I get the boxed set and then eventually the main rulebook. It might be a good idea to run this same survey again after the release of the main rulebook, say 2-3 months after it releases everywhere, so that people have time to get used to the new system and get the kinks worked out.
-
The results so far. 556 responses so far and I am keeping it open since people are still responding.
Quick summary is that setting is obviously far more important than the mechanics .. but the mechanics need to work well (well duh .. I didn't need this survey to tell me that ;))
Explanation of what I am using as a standard then.
4.5 or higher = sacred ground (don't mess with it in anyway)
4.0-4.49 = very significant (better have a damn good reason for anything more than a superficial minor change)
3.50-3.99 = fairly important (better keep the basics in tact or else)
3.00-3.49 = good stuff (don't let it go away but some change isn't bad)
2.99 and below = insignificant
Mechanics(0) vs. Setting(100): 68
Survey Questions (1-not a factor to 5-very important)
D6 System: 3.26
Rolling large pools of dice: 2.82
Attribute + Skill: 3.67
Individual hits per dice (as opposed to sum total of dice): 3.24
Glitches and critical glitches: 3.38
Simple tests: 3.44
Opposed tests: 3.71
Specifically- Attack vs Defense: 3.26
Extended tests: 2.94
Teamwork tests: 3.15
Multiple detailed attributes: 3.83
Special Attributes: 3.94
Specifically-Edge: 3.52
Soak rolls: 3.13
Condition monitor/wound levels: 3.77
Separate physical and stun damage tracks: 3.69
Simplified skills: 3.24
Detailed skills and options: 3.49
Multiple pass initiative: 3.32
Flexible character generation: 4.60
Detailed gear options: 4.15
Flexible/open magic system: 4.29
Unified game clock: 4.09
Detailed combat and tactic options: 3.85
Fantasypunk setting: 4.70
Dystopian future: 4.45
Corporate intrigue: 4.49
SINless masses: 4.14
Magic: 4.37
Spirits: 3.88
Adepts: 3.88
Metahuman races and variants: 4.49
Awakened Politics: 3.87
Cyber/Bio ware: 4.71
Matrix: 4.47
Technomancers: 3.05
Riggers: 4.13
-
So much hate for TMs... :'(
-
Very interesting, large pools seemed to be the lowest followed by extended tests, That’s fascinating. People like cyber ware a little more then magic not very surprising there. That spirits and adepts have the same rating is also interesting.
-
So much hate for TMs... :'(
I'll I'm the first that would like to see them die in a fire, that may not be what people are saying...
They ranked a 3.05, so there is an interest, but that interest may be saying they need work (which we can all admit they do!), not that they are disliked.
Except for me, I have a pale, lighter fluid, and bucket of water for the Technomancer draft going back to 4e....
But I also admit I'm a minority, so I'll go back to my corner now...
-
They're the third lowest rated so... :P
One day I'll introduce a flaming TM and name him Reaver in your honour.
-
I think I rated technomancers a 2 or 3, not because I hate them but because I don't find them core to the game. I like having them, but if they disappeared ('the new-new-NEW matrix is not compatible with technomancers, so they are just ordinary people now') I think the game could still be recognizably ShadowRun.
-
I rated them Zero.
I see no need for deckless deckers.
-
What interests me is that there doesn't seem to be many universally accepted "must have" game mechanics. Flexible chargen, flexible magic, detailed gear and unified game clock are the only items to break past 4.0. OTOH it seems like almost all the settings items are considered "must have" by a large majority. Of course we wouldn't all be here if it weren't for the setting elements I guess.
On another note at least flaming TM's would be able to provide something useful; heat and light. :D
-
I used to be on the technomancer hate wagon, though now I’ve reached a slightly higher level of tolerance. Still I wouldn’t mind if they completely disappeared as they are the kind of mix of magic and technology that originally the settings was against. Technology drained magic, magic couldn’t affect technology so well but now here we have technomancers who can ignore technology’s effect on their “magic”.
Come to think of it, I probably would prefer that they vanished with the new matrix. Null sect having killed them all. Please?
-
I used to be on the technomancer hate wagon, though now I’ve reached a slightly higher level of tolerance. Still I wouldn’t mind if they completely disappeared as they are the kind of mix of magic and technology that originally the settings was against. Technology drained magic, magic couldn’t affect technology so well but now here we have technomancers who can ignore technology’s effect on their “magic”.
Come to think of it, I probably would prefer that they vanished with the new matrix. Null sect having killed them all. Please?
I have to second this, TM have never made any sense in the game as has been stated tech trends to cancel out magic.
How can Magic interact with technology in this way when you lose essence for replacing a lost finger lol.
-
I used to be on the technomancer hate wagon, though now I’ve reached a slightly higher level of tolerance. Still I wouldn’t mind if they completely disappeared as they are the kind of mix of magic and technology that originally the settings was against. Technology drained magic, magic couldn’t affect technology so well but now here we have technomancers who can ignore technology’s effect on their “magic”.
Come to think of it, I probably would prefer that they vanished with the new matrix. Null sect having killed them all. Please?
I have to second this, TM have never made any sense in the game as has been stated tech trends to cancel out magic.
How can Magic interact with technology in this way when you lose essence for replacing a lost finger lol.
I rated TMs very low but just killing them all seems sloppy. If the Null Sect could pull that off they could rampage across the world and I am really opposed to another Crash or some sort of apocalyptic Matrix war story also seems bad. TMs aren’t something I like but don’t blow up the world to remove them.
-
This is your destiny, metahumanity. Don’t be afraid of it. It is an exciting moment not only for you, but the universe. Play nice.
–S
> That’s a whole lot of crazy, but the opening and closing make my blood run cold. Someone is messing with us. The question is, in what direction?
> Kay St. Irregular
> I spend a lot of time with Resonance, and I can’t say this squares with my impressions. But for some reason, I can’t help but wonder if that’s my problem, not this writer’s.
> Netcat
> I side with Kay. This is crazy.
> Pistons
> As was the Awakening.
> Man-of-Many-Names
>>>>>(By the way, I've kept this one secret for some time now, but considering this discussion, why not re-post it. I originally found it on Shadowland back in 2011, tucked away on the introduction board where new hackers logged on to introduce themselves. It somehow was lost in all the furor of the dragons' first appearances—that same day, Shadowland purged the intro board of storage memory to free memory for the messages pouring into other areas. (They had, and still have, echoes from many other boards running at the time.) Here it is, exactly as I downloaded it at the time:
MESBASE: 102/a
DATE/TIME: 00:00:01/12-24-11
AUTHOR: >>STRUCTURE ERROR 0208<<
ROUTING: >>ROUTING ERROR 8092<<
SUBJECT: <unknown>
MESSAGE:
Good morning world. Welcome back. Play nice.
—Saeletra
That's exactly as it appeared. Now, I could simply be paranoid, but the message seems to indicate an existing knowledge of the Awakening. Sure, I've read the blather about “immortal elves” and such drek, but to this day something about that post still chills my blood.)<<<<<
—FastJack (01:16:45/5-19-55)
Remember, as much as you may "hate" technomancers, William Gibson hates Shadowrun even more. As much as you'd love to get rid of them from the game, there's another person that wants to get rid of Great Dragons and Immortal Elves. Every time you hate on Netcat, someone else hates on FastJack, and someone else hates on Sam Werner.
-
I rated TMs at 3, not hating on them or anything just thought they could use improvement.
-
One thing i do think there maybe room for reducing pool size, maybe modifying target numbers based upon the number of dice over 10 you would other wise have? or reducing it down to 3d6. I don't know I do think the d6 cube rolling is kind of a mechanic of the past.
-
I rated TMs at 3, not hating on them or anything just thought they could use improvement.
I think I rated TMs at 3 as well to be honest, although I don’t really think they fit. They rub me the wrong way. They are basically just Matrix Magicians with spells and spirits ...
But now at least I have reach a level of acceptance where I don’t outright ban them at my table. I even tried playing one just to get to know them better.
-
I put down, basically, that I'm okay with complexity for the sake of customization. While rolling handfuls of dice isn't a major draw for me, I don't think of it as a problem.
Also, while I'm not furious about technomancers, I just wish what they did was something other than "Explicitly Not Magic While Exactly Like It". I can understand why it'd work that way, and it's easier to put them like that, but I don't have any better suggestions.
-
So basically get definitely rid of everything under 3,
Get probably rid of everything in the low 3s or replace it with something
evaluate everything in the high 3s and
bring more stuff for 4+?
-
I don't hate TMs, but I don't love them either. I'm mostly ignoring them because it's yet another subsystem to learn which doesn't add a whole lot to the game. I'm fine with them existing in the background as plot devices, but they're about as essential to Shadowrun as Shedim or vampires. Just another cool thing, but I wouldn't miss them if we had something else in their stead.
So basically get definitely rid of everything under 3,
Get probably rid of everything in the low 3s or replace it with something
Why? A 3 is fine. It's average, not hated. Get rid of everything under 2, sure, but there's nothing there. A 3 is fine.
Look for ways to improve it, or put less focus on it. If it gets in the way, change it or remove it. But don't remove it 'just because'. That would be stupid.
-
I don't hate TMs, but I don't love them either. I'm mostly ignoring them because it's yet another subsystem to learn which doesn't add a whole lot to the game. I'm fine with them existing in the background as plot devices, but they're about as essential to Shadowrun as Shedim or vampires. Just another cool thing, but I wouldn't miss them if we had something else in their stead.
So basically get definitely rid of everything under 3,
Get probably rid of everything in the low 3s or replace it with something
Why? A 3 is fine. It's average, not hated. Get rid of everything under 2, sure, but there's nothing there. A 3 is fine.
Look for ways to improve it, or put less focus on it. If it gets in the way, change it or remove it. But don't remove it 'just because'. That would be stupid.
Agreed, that's like say let's not let the C students graduate.
-
Agreed, that's like say let's not let the C students graduate.
There is something to be said for that idea...
Anywho, TMs fall into the Mystic Adept trap, but for technology classes. (Mystic Adepts are Mages and Adepts, TMs are Deckers and Riggers.)
There is no real way to make them useful and viable without making them more powerful than their independent parts separately.
And as such, they will always be a wart on Shadowrun - just like Mystic Adepts.
-
Technomancer have one main story purpose: It allows you to have an enemy decker without having to worry about your players getting their hands on a deck that's more worth than the whole run...
-
Technomancer have one main story purpose: It allows you to have an enemy decker without having to worry about your players getting their hands on a deck that's more worth than the whole run...
There's less convoluted ways to handle that...just saying....
"I thought you said this was a biker gang! These dudes are cyclists!!"
"Can't have the players cashing in on a whole truckload of motorcycles! Are you crazy?!"
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
-
I thought looting was supposed to be impossible because everything is traceable.
-
Difficult is not the same thing as impossible, given what decks values are it's worth putting in the time to break the ownership. Even on a percentage deck values are high enough that it would for sure be worth more then whatever the mission paying.
-
I thought looting was supposed to be impossible because everything is traceable.
Yeah, as Marcus said it's much more of a pain to loot in Shadowrun than it is in games like D&D.
Generally you just sell whatever you capture for well under market value (see pg 418). You can either sell for pennies on the dollar to a fence, or try to be your own fence.... finding a buyer and not getting stung/pinched in selling your hot loot can end up being another shadowrun entirely.
-
My worry is more that in 6th, the streamlined matrix rules will make Technomancers and Deckers almost identical...
-
My worry is more that in 6th, the streamlined matrix rules will make Technomancers and Deckers almost identical...
Deckers still don't get Complex Forms or Sprites.
-
Deckers still don't get Complex Forms or Sprites.
And I'm betting Technomancers still don't use agent programs.
What I mean is, if the matrix rules are as streamlined as I saw in the SCN demo, then aside from the agent/sprite split, what will define a Techno from a Decker in a meaningful way?
-
Deckers still don't get Complex Forms or Sprites.
And I'm betting Technomancers still don't use agent programs.
What I mean is, if the matrix rules are as streamlined as I saw in the SCN demo, then aside from the agent/sprite split, what will define a Techno from a Decker in a meaningful way?
I don't mean to be snarky, but I wonder are you familiar with how they're different in 5e?
TMs: In addition to matrix actions and a free (in nuyen) Living Persona, they get "spells" and "spirits" and "initiation". They're called Complex Forms, Sprites, and Submersion, but they mirror the magic mechanics.
Deckers: No "matrix magic", but they do get to run cheap programs and easily reconfigure their programs and ASDF array. These are both because they use cyberdecks rather than a free Living Persona.
-
Technomancer have one main story purpose: It allows you to have an enemy decker without having to worry about your players getting their hands on a deck that's more worth than the whole run...
There's less convoluted ways to handle that...just saying....
"I thought you said this was a biker gang! These dudes are cyclists!!"
"Can't have the players cashing in on a whole truckload of motorcycles! Are you crazy?!"
-Jn-
Ifriti Sophist
Consider that even the cheapest deck in core is as expensive as four roadhogs, imminently more portable and easier to transfer ownership (Because the owner is dead or just lost access to the very device he'd use to track down his gear)
For a street level campaign a techno riding with a gang is much easier to handle and explain than a decker whose equipment is more worth than the combined rest of the gangs operation.
-
Deckers still don't get Complex Forms or Sprites.
And I'm betting Technomancers still don't use agent programs.
What I mean is, if the matrix rules are as streamlined as I saw in the SCN demo, then aside from the agent/sprite split, what will define a Techno from a Decker in a meaningful way?
I don't mean to be snarky, but I wonder are you familiar with how they're different in 5e?
TMs: In addition to matrix actions and a free (in nuyen) Living Persona, they get "spells" and "spirits" and "initiation". They're called Complex Forms, Sprites, and Submersion, but they mirror the magic mechanics.
Deckers: No "matrix magic", but they do get to run cheap programs and easily reconfigure their programs and ASDF array. These are both because they use cyberdecks rather than a free Living Persona.
Not to be snarky but in 5th Edition there is very little a Technomancer can do that a Decker can't (Matrix-wise). Different ways to get there, but there isn't a difference in the outcome. A Device is Controlled or Bricked. An NPC takes Dump Shock or gets fooled. A Decker uses a combination of Matrix Actions to accomplish the task, a TM may have a Resonance based short cut or use the exact same Matrix Actions.
Off the top of my head Diagnostics power, Resonance Veil Complex Form aren't easily replicated by Matrix Actions, but can be done using other skills. (Leadership, Con, Impersonation, ect...)
IMO it would be nice if TMs had more toys like Diagnostics so you'd have a meaningful mechanical difference in capabilities. As far as most Runner teams are concerned a Hacker is a Hacker. TM or Decker makes no real difference. YMMV of course.
-
True, but those outcomes are basic things that any hacker would be expected to do, regardless of method. I also liked Diagnostics & Resonance Veil, and hoped that there would be more stuff like that.
Sort of why Cyberadepts appeal to me more than Hyperthreading/Giant Sprites: instead of doing it like magic only on the Matrix, they get to do something intuitive with technology that you otherwise couldn't do.
-
Both street sams and adepts can kill people but people still want adepts. I like having a different kind of hacker around, the only problems are balance and making the tactic differences big enough.
-
Both street sams and adepts can kill people but people still want adepts. I like having a different kind of hacker around, the only problems are balance and making the tactic differences big enough.
Right but there are enough combat options that even two Adepts could play very differently, narratively and mechanically. I've seen plenty of TMs at the table just stick to Matrix Actions to get things done. In fact, that is how most TMs play, they could be a Decker with an implanted Deck the rest of the team wouldn't know.
I do sincerely hope that TMs turn out to have some meaningful differences from Deckers.
-
I'm confused what are we discussing now?
Yes in 5th at street level TM have an advantage or at-least make certain amount of sense, why? b/c Cash a deeply restricted option in that level of play.
As to 6th I'm confident TM and Decker will be different. I haven't read anything relating to TM and Decker in 6th. But there hasn't been anything I seen in the simplifications that would suggest archetypes have lost any level level uniqueness.
Could i be wrong? Sure. We don't have the CRB, and 5e was huge revival deckers, so them taking some level of hit is probably likely, but 5e was also disaster for TM. I doubt that they would nerf that archetype two editions running. We'll see when the CRB drops.
-
here is a link to the final results, thanks for everyone's input ... now let's see what I can do with it
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1p43EYgC1BIXoVyuPqow7C3iOjffW4euJ
-
Interesting results. Some things I expected, others I did not.
-
Interesting results. Some things I expected, others I did not.
As someone new to Shadowrun and cyberpunk in general, could I ask you to elaborate on that please? Which things were expected? I'm guessing robust character creation, gear selection, and magic options? More importantly which were surprising?
-
Interesting:
- 75% of the participants skipped the Experience and Edition questions.
- Rolling large pools of dice and Soak rolls tied for the third of least things liked in Core Mechanics. They also have a pretty high deviation, meaning both are pretty contentious, so lots of disagreements between the participants on the answer.
- Likewise, Technomancers and Spirits were voted low, and their deviation is high as well. (Lots of disagreement that they are important).
- 75% also skipped the Neo-Anarchy and Tribal Resurgence questions, meaning they either didn't care or didn't know about those elements.
Excpected:
- Top mechanics are Flexible CharGen, Detailed Gear, Flexible Magic System, and Special Attributes. These have all been standard in all editions.
- The top Setting/Lore answers are also standard for all editions.
-
Interesting:
- 75% of the participants skipped the Experience and Edition questions.
- Rolling large pools of dice and Soak rolls tied for the third of least things liked in Core Mechanics. They also have a pretty high deviation, meaning both are pretty contentious, so lots of disagreements between the participants on the answer.
- Likewise, Technomancers and Spirits were voted low, and their deviation is high as well. (Lots of disagreement that they are important).
- 75% also skipped the Neo-Anarchy and Tribal Resurgence questions, meaning they either didn't care or didn't know about those elements.
Excpected:
- Top mechanics are Flexible CharGen, Detailed Gear, Flexible Magic System, and Special Attributes. These have all been standard in all editions.
- The top Setting/Lore answers are also standard for all editions.
The problem with surveys is it’s a yes no system and not a why system?
As an example imo spirits are pretty integral to the setting and should be part of the rules. But for all of 4e and 5e they were ridiculously broken. A lot of people who focus on the broken part might vote no, and that’s not really a spirits bad vote it’s a bad implementation is bad vote.
Or things like large pools. Large pools means different things to different people. I’m from
1e in phase. In 1-3e I’d say most pools were 6ish dice and could be boosted to 12 with a associated pool. 4e/5e 12+ dice was normal. What’s large to one group might be normal to another. But in a sense it just means bigger than normal pool which most people will say is bad just due to the nature of the terms. But it has no meaning out of context. Are they saying yeah 40 die pools is to much or are they saying d20 for life.
-
Interesting:
- 75% of the participants skipped the Experience and Edition questions.
- Rolling large pools of dice and Soak rolls tied for the third of least things liked in Core Mechanics. They also have a pretty high deviation, meaning both are pretty contentious, so lots of disagreements between the participants on the answer.
- Likewise, Technomancers and Spirits were voted low, and their deviation is high as well. (Lots of disagreement that they are important).
- 75% also skipped the Neo-Anarchy and Tribal Resurgence questions, meaning they either didn't care or didn't know about those elements.
Excpected:
- Top mechanics are Flexible CharGen, Detailed Gear, Flexible Magic System, and Special Attributes. These have all been standard in all editions.
- The top Setting/Lore answers are also standard for all editions.
The problem with surveys is it’s a yes no system and not a why system?
As an example imo spirits are pretty integral to the setting and should be part of the rules. But for all of 4e and 5e they were ridiculously broken. A lot of people who focus on the broken part might vote no, and that’s not really a spirits bad vote it’s a bad implementation is bad vote.
Or things like large pools. Large pools means different things to different people. I’m from
1e in phase. In 1-3e I’d say most pools were 6ish dice and could be boosted to 12 with a associated pool. 4e/5e 12+ dice was normal. What’s large to one group might be normal to another. But in a sense it just means bigger than normal pool which most people will say is bad just due to the nature of the terms. But it has no meaning out of context. Are they saying yeah 40 die pools is to much or are they saying d20 for life.
That's where the deviation comes in, that says that there is less of a difference between the count of the lowest and highest votes. When the deviation is higher, that means there's more people that disagree with how you might have answered.
-
Interesting:
- 75% of the participants skipped the Experience and Edition questions.
- Rolling large pools of dice and Soak rolls tied for the third of least things liked in Core Mechanics. They also have a pretty high deviation, meaning both are pretty contentious, so lots of disagreements between the participants on the answer.
- Likewise, Technomancers and Spirits were voted low, and their deviation is high as well. (Lots of disagreement that they are important).
- 75% also skipped the Neo-Anarchy and Tribal Resurgence questions, meaning they either didn't care or didn't know about those elements.
Excpected:
- Top mechanics are Flexible CharGen, Detailed Gear, Flexible Magic System, and Special Attributes. These have all been standard in all editions.
- The top Setting/Lore answers are also standard for all editions.
The problem with surveys is it’s a yes no system and not a why system?
As an example imo spirits are pretty integral to the setting and should be part of the rules. But for all of 4e and 5e they were ridiculously broken. A lot of people who focus on the broken part might vote no, and that’s not really a spirits bad vote it’s a bad implementation is bad vote.
Or things like large pools. Large pools means different things to different people. I’m from
1e in phase. In 1-3e I’d say most pools were 6ish dice and could be boosted to 12 with a associated pool. 4e/5e 12+ dice was normal. What’s large to one group might be normal to another. But in a sense it just means bigger than normal pool which most people will say is bad just due to the nature of the terms. But it has no meaning out of context. Are they saying yeah 40 die pools is to much or are they saying d20 for life.
That's where the deviation comes in, that says that there is less of a difference between the count of the lowest and highest votes. When the deviation is higher, that means there's more people that disagree with how you might have answered.
exactly, and that's why I included deviation ... the lower the deviation the more consensus but also why I included a comment section for people who felt strongly about something or wanted to talk about something that was not asked.
-
I don't think I even saw a few of those questions when I took it. Ack.
Sorry if I bent the survey!
-
Same! O_o
-
That drifted surprisingly far from the first round. The other thing that interested me we had only about 1/3 answer the first two questions. After that I’m surprised riggers made a much stronger showing then I had expected over all. All very interesting.
-
yeah, I added a couple of questions before it was added to a general rpg subreddit so I could judge the possible skew based on how familiar they were with SR
-
I didn't see the survey, and so didn't take it. Perhaps there were others.
-
I guess I got the survey before the extra questions were added.
I love the Native American angle and nature fighting back.