Shadowrun

Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: MercilessMing on <08-09-21/1212:33>

Title: [6e] Jumping
Post by: MercilessMing on <08-09-21/1212:33>
Will there be errata on Jumping coming in the next release?  the rule buried in Hydraulic Jacks is terrible, and the German rule isn't much better.

The English rule buried in Hydraulic Jacks pg 290: ATH + STR test, character jumps .1 meter vertically for each hit,  or .2 meter horizontally for each hit.  Hydraulic Jacks add their rating as a dice pool mod.

German rule (as I've heard it from Reddit): Dex + Athletics, each success lets you jump 1 meter/yard from standing and 2 meters/yards with momentum. Also, 0.5 meters/yards per success straight up into the air, up to 1.5x[your height].

The English rule is terrible because the numbers are so low and leave out standing vs running jump.  The German rule is terrible because the numbers vary wildly by success total.
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <08-09-21/1316:13>
Short answer is yes. The new rule will abandon determining  exact distance/height. Because, in play, that typically doesn't matter. What matters is did you jump high/far enough, so it's going to a standard, threshold-based success test.

I can't say when it will go public (because I don't know), but I have my hopes that you'll see official publication for Gen Con.
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Smogg on <08-11-21/1350:03>
What matters is did you jump high/far enough, so it's going to a standard, threshold-based success test.

That makes so much sense!
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: MercilessMing on <08-11-21/1510:43>
Short answer is yes. The new rule will abandon determining  exact distance/height. Because, in play, that typically doesn't matter. What matters is did you jump high/far enough, so it's going to a standard, threshold-based success test.

I can't say when it will go public (because I don't know), but I have my hopes that you'll see official publication for Gen Con.
Thanks.  Hardy said in that recent interview that he hopes the Seattle edition of the CRB will be available at Gen Con; if that's true and it contains the errata does that mean it's all final now because printing is happening?
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <08-11-21/1621:48>
I hope so.

I cant promise or say for sure, because errata team is separated from what's published by a couple layers.  Sometimes what gets printed isn't what was put in to BE printed...see the "strength adds to AR" chaos.  For what it's worth, THAT is supposed to be fixed once and for all, too :D we'll just have to see, in the end...
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: MercilessMing on <08-12-21/1041:34>
Okay.  I really hope it's in there, it would be shortsighted to release a  new edition right when errata is coming out.  I'm looking forward to actually getting a print copy of the CRB and if this round of errata isn't in it, that's really going to ruin it for me.
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1216:41>
It's still under Hydraulic Jacks and with no info on how jumping works normally elsewhere.  It just refers to the Threshold Chart.   :(
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <09-16-21/1313:36>
It's still under Hydraulic Jacks and with no info on how jumping works normally elsewhere.  It just refers to the Threshold Chart.   :(

Right.  The GM establishes a threshold based on the attempted jump on question.  Under the circumstances, making it from this rooftop to that one might be threshold 4.  Another gap might be 3.  Another might be 6.  GM discretion, as with basically all thresholds.
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1351:29>
Which isn't stated anywhere in relation to jumping.  There's literally no guidance for the GM on how to handle that.  It leaves a lot of questions unanswered.  Also jump rules really belong under Athletics. 

(Not your choices, I know.  I guess I'm just grumping.)
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <09-16-21/1434:05>
Which isn't stated anywhere in relation to jumping.  There's literally no guidance for the GM on how to handle that.  It leaves a lot of questions unanswered. 

But... that's how the threshold guidance chart works.

is the task at hand, after you weigh all the variables and considerations, most comparable to the example given for threshold X?  Then use threshold X. 

Jumping example: maybe a runner wants to leap from one rooftop to another, which is separated by a narrow alleyway.  GM weighs whether there's a good bit of room available for a running start, whether the destination rooftop is slightly higher or lower than the current one, how far the gap is, whether you're carrying heavy equipment/extractees, etc.  The guidance chart isn't going to cover all those variables.  Maybe, when it's all said and done, the gm figures this is a doable but challenging task.  Going by the guidelines, that's about a threshold 4.  Maybe, if the runner wants to leap in another direction, across a major boulevard to a higher rooftop, the gm might determine it's theoretically possible, but would be a remarkable world-record style feat, and call the threshold 6 or even higher.



Quote
Also jump rules really belong under Athletics. 

No argument there, but just couldn't make them fit on pg. 93.  One of the hard rules errata has to work within: the layout cannot be changed (too many headaches, particularly with tables of contents and index)
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1442:31>
I'm not asking for everything, I'm asking for anything.  There's not even a rule that says "Jumps are a matter of making a (X+X) test to clear the gap.  Refer to the Threshold Chart to set the Threshold for jumping".  I don't think that's an unreasonable ask. 

Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <09-16-21/1446:31>
I'm not asking for everything, I'm asking for anything.  There's not even a rule that says "Jumps are a matter of making a (X+X) test to clear the gap.  Refer to the Threshold Chart to set the Threshold for jumping".  I don't think that's an unreasonable ask.

I suspect I'm not following your criticism, since it does literally say:

"When making jumping tests (Athletics + Strength)..."  Rather than saying "this is the threshold for a broad jump of x meters, this is the threshold for a high jump of x meters, and etc" it just says "establish an appropriate threshold to roll against, using the guidance provided."  Does that not give you what you're asking? (even if it's not located under the athletics skill, like we both prefer it could have been)
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1455:38>
On mine it says:

"When making jumping tests (Athletics + Strength) subtract the hydraulic jacks rating from the threshold
(see Threshold Guidelines p. 36), with a minimum modified threshold of 1." 

End of statement.   

Questions become things like: Well, what's the farthest I could jump?  Where should the GM say yes/no/roll for it?  I'm fine with the idea, I'm just saying it could be more specific.  Considering what climbing and swimming have written, it's barely anything to go on.     
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <09-16-21/1519:28>
On mine it says:

"When making jumping tests (Athletics + Strength) subtract the hydraulic jacks rating from the threshold
(see Threshold Guidelines p. 36), with a minimum modified threshold of 1." 

End of statement.   

Questions become things like: Well, what's the farthest I could jump?  Where should the GM say yes/no/roll for it?  I'm fine with the idea, I'm just saying it could be more specific.  Considering what climbing and swimming have written, it's barely anything to go on.     

If the GM says that under the circumstances, a 100 meter jump is physically possible, then that's possible under those circumstances.  GM will tell you what the threshold is.  And if you have that cyberware, you reduce that threshold by the given amount.

If you ask "what's the threshold to jump from here to the moon" the GM will probably say "that's not possible".  But if they instead say "10 billion", then your threshold is (10 billion - hydraulic jacks rating)
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1522:59>
Which people would only know for sure is true if they came to this forum and read what you just typed. 
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Stainless Steel Devil Rat on <09-16-21/1525:53>
Which people would only know for sure is true if they came to this forum and read what you just typed.

Maybe, but in my mind being told to establish a threshold in accordance with the guidance on pg 36 couldn't be any clearer?  Sure, the direction had to be compressed to fit inside the space we had to work with... but still.  Barring getting to rewrite the layout, I don't see what could have been done differently/better.  And of course if literally rewriting the book were an option, it would have gone under Athletics skill, of course.
Title: Re: [6e] Jumping
Post by: Typhus on <09-16-21/1532:18>
I totally get that space considerations are the more relevant factor here.  That is what it is.  The difference is in explicitly conveying intent vs not.  It's just nicer and easier for players when it's conveyed directly (even if that seems redundant).  It doesn't need to be overly detailed, just present.

Anyway, all this amounts to a quibble on my end.  The rule itself is fine.  Thanks for the discussion.