NEWS

Updated Core Rulebook uploaded to DriveThru 1-20-2019

  • 132 Replies
  • 23388 Views

penllawen

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 804
  • Let's go. In and out. Twenty minute milk run.
« Reply #15 on: <01-18-20/0512:43> »
Except that the errata note an Edge 'Action' (they meant Expenditure) cannot be discounted to 0, so for rerolls it's the difference between 'can I get any discount or not'.

And yes, it needs official clarification/errata. It's come up. Fortunately, I have no idea what the errata team's opinion is on it, so I can state 'I'm functioning under assumption X'.
There doesn't appear to have been any update or clarification to how multiple uses of the "reroll 1 die for 1 Edge" mechanic interacts with buffs that reduce the cost of Edge action.

penllawen

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 804
  • Let's go. In and out. Twenty minute milk run.
« Reply #16 on: <01-18-20/0522:35> »
Or you can go with Hephaestus´ idea of APDS denying Edge gain from AR/DR.
You already gain that advantage by using an imaging scope....

I still think it would be better if APDS reduced target's armor rating by 2.
(the effect would be similar to +2 AR as it have right now, but it would have a bigger impact on targets with hardened armor).
Hardened Armor is yet another subject I can't comment on due to NDA... =/

How does 'nullifies 2 autohits of Hardened Armor' sound as possible houserule, so that against Hardened Armor it's actually +1 DV instead of -1 DV? But only if they have strong enough for 2 autohits?
Hardened armour hasn't changed (page 224.) Neither has APDS (page 262.)

Chummer 5 is Alive

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
« Reply #17 on: <01-18-20/0550:18> »
Do you really need to make a dozen posts?
Damage code for unarmed melee is now a fixed 2S, not the (STR/2) that was previously inferred from the grapple rules.
Rules are less consistent, as the 'damage the opponent' grapple rules still refer to the base unarmed combat damage being str/2 and astral combat is tradition attribute /2.

penllawen

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 804
  • Let's go. In and out. Twenty minute milk run.
« Reply #18 on: <01-18-20/0601:14> »
Do you really need to make a dozen posts?
I knew I was going to get interrupted so I started with one post per thing. Then I didn’t get interrupted until later, so ended up with more posts than I expected to make.

Finstersang

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 751
« Reply #19 on: <01-18-20/0719:38> »
Damage code for unarmed melee is now a fixed 2S, not the (STR/2) that was previously inferred from the grapple rules.

Which is at least mechanically consistent with armed melee, but means Strength is less important than ever.

Apparently, We´re supposed to add Strenght to the AR of Melee Weapons now (which I´d consider a step in the right direction, as it gives a consistent purpose to strenght in melee).

However, that can only be extrapolated by an updated Combat example on p.109 and a statement that "Whips add the attackers Reaction instead of Strength to the Attack Rating". No actual rules text to reflect this change, and multiple places where the previous role (or non-role) of Strenght in melee combat remains the same. 

Fuck sake. Anybody ever heard about CRTL+F? Heard it´s all the rage now in the editing biz. 
« Last Edit: <01-18-20/0721:21> by Finstersang »

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #20 on: <01-18-20/0737:48> »
Finally I can start compiling houserules! ^_^
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

penllawen

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 804
  • Let's go. In and out. Twenty minute milk run.
« Reply #21 on: <01-18-20/0738:16> »
However, that can only be extrapolated by an updated Combat example on p.109 and a statement that "Whips add the attackers Reaction instead of Strength to the Attack Rating". No actual rules text to reflect this change, and multiple places where the previous role (or non-role) of Strenght in melee combat remains the same. 
Yo dawg

I heard you like errata

Well now even our corrections have mistakes

So you can errata while you errata

Finstersang

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 751
« Reply #22 on: <01-18-20/0745:13> »
However, that can only be extrapolated by an updated Combat example on p.109 and a statement that "Whips add the attackers Reaction instead of Strength to the Attack Rating". No actual rules text to reflect this change, and multiple places where the previous role (or non-role) of Strenght in melee combat remains the same. 
Yo dawg

I heard you like errata

Well now even our corrections have mistakes

So you can errata while you errata

It´s an old meme, but it checks out.

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1095
« Reply #23 on: <01-18-20/0911:18> »
Well I might get my hand slapped for this but there are many many things that we (the errata team) submitted that do not show up in the corrected CRB. So ... either that means stuff got rejected or there are still more changes coming. That I don't know.
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #24 on: <01-18-20/0913:15> »
Fortunately I don't know either, so I can compile a public list of houserules without having to worry about violating the NDA. ^_^ Gonna be fun! Been waiting for a while to be able to do so. O_O
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

0B

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #25 on: <01-18-20/0919:17> »
I am a bit curious- are the missing errata a case of "not approved yet" or "did not fit in the layout"?

And, if the NDA no longer applies, can we get a full list of your "house rules"? :)

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #26 on: <01-18-20/0955:17> »
I know parts of what got submitted for errata, and a tiiiiny bit of discussions on them, but since on those and other items I don't know where it falls under 'not approved yet', 'denied', something else, I am simply discarding all my knowledge of the submissions and making houserules. ^_^ I'll post a first batch once I manage to make time to start using my Shadowland blog again for them.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

0B

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #27 on: <01-18-20/1340:53> »
I've started to find some contradictions in different errata sources-

In the German CRB, the price of the Colt M23 (Previously 5,100) changed to 1,500.
In the JAN20 errata, the price changed to 2,100.

I'm guessing there will be other errata that contradicts the GCRB errata- GCRB completely reworked archetypes and a lot of the stats in Wildlife- but which one is official? Is it up to GM preference, or are we going with the English version as the most official CRB, and therefore the last word on rules?

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #28 on: <01-18-20/1425:55> »
Like I mentioned before, evidence suggests Pegasus is just making their own decisions. There's no secret back channel for them that helps them create errata, they make their own judgement calls. Sometimes there seems nothing wrong with those, occasionally they really miss the point and screw up. But when it comes to errata, their decisions do not hold any more value than anything from you and I.

What people do at their tables is fully up to them. Use whatever errata, judgement calls and houserules you desire. But in SRM, I fully expect that only official errata and the SRM FAQ count.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

0B

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #29 on: <01-18-20/1507:17> »
Ah, I was under the impression that every change the GCRB team made had to be cleared by CGL- I will try and find a source on that, since it's just something I've heard. Edit: (Sauce- they differentiate between errata requests to CGL that Pegasus has made, and approved errata. They also talk about consulting with CGL before making changes.)

I don't mind if they're given creative latitude, and something that minor isn't going to be a big deal for a group. But if there's a split on something like Unarmed Damage, or Anticipation, there could be contention in international groups.

I guess we can just say that the English one is official because it's the main, and comes direct from CGL (Rather than just being signed off on from CGL), but then what happens if the GCRB fix is "better" than the English fix? I guess it's GM fiat, like you said.
« Last Edit: <01-18-20/1511:34> by 0B »