NEWS

[6E] Second Look at 6E

  • 9 Replies
  • 1299 Views

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
« on: <04-13-21/1628:38> »
Maybe it's time and distance, or some kind of Stockholm thing, or maybe just the jones for SR that will probably never really leave me, but I am giving SR6 a second look.

To my surprise, it's not as bad as I remember.  I'm actually considering trying it now. 

I started out by trying to make a starter template for a decker, something myself or others could use to create a straightforward generalist decker that is rules legal to replace the one in the CRB, which (as best I can tell) still is not in the latest PDF.  I then decided that a quick explainer that walks people through how to be a decker would be helpful.  I usually have to introduce new games to my groups with pre-gens and cheat sheets, so we can all just sit down and play.  As I went through, I found I was starting to get a better sense of how it should all work together.  By focusing on just "how to be a decker" a number of challenges went away, and by aiming at teaching a new player how to do things with Edge, that wasn't as onerous as it seemed previously. 

I still wouldn't advise any fellow player to spend money on the product, but I think I might be interested in running a game to see how it goes. 

So, despite everything, I find I am diving into 6e after all.  Spirits help me. 

Reaver

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6344
  • 60% alcohol 40% asshole...
« Reply #1 on: <04-13-21/1758:07> »
Glad to hear you are warming to the newest system. It's gonna be here for a while!

Ironically, my table is regressing! All the way back to 3e no less...
Will have to see how that goes: what gets changed, what stays as 3e.

My personal feeling is that it will end up being a mix of rules by the end.
Where am I going? And why am I in a hand basket ???

Remember: You can't fix Stupid. But you can beat on it with a 2x4 until it smartens up! Or dies.

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
« Reply #2 on: <04-13-21/1817:29> »
I think its more fair to say my fiery rage about it is cooling  ;D.

I'd have regressed too, probably back to 2E, but converting the Matrix rules to avoid pizza decking was always too daunting.  Hard to keep compatibility and yet redo the core mechanics.

Good luck!

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
« Reply #3 on: <05-18-21/0452:06> »
Update:

Aaand I've given this idea up.  Too much rewriting required to explain it to a new table.  If I'm going to do that much work, I'm just going to make a better version. 


MercilessMing

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
« Reply #4 on: <05-18-21/1034:31> »
Sorry to hear that.  A good experiment though

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
« Reply #5 on: <05-20-21/0909:03> »
Yeah, I now know what I want the game to be like a little better.  It's not that complicated, just a lot of work. 

Reaver

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6344
  • 60% alcohol 40% asshole...
« Reply #6 on: <05-20-21/1319:57> »
Sometimes, its worth the work.

As I said, my table has regressed to 3e.... but we also found that posed some issues.

Iniatitive order, pools, and skills were the easy part.... The Matrix OTOH, is a nightmare!
Floating target numbers took a little to get used to, but now that we have the idea back in our heads, we actualky like them!

As for the matrix, well we took some ideas from the 4e 2050 book and the GM worked them around to fit what he and the Decker needed.

Still working out the small details, but at least we are enjoying a "Fresh take" on SR again.
Where am I going? And why am I in a hand basket ???

Remember: You can't fix Stupid. But you can beat on it with a 2x4 until it smartens up! Or dies.

Tecumseh

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3921
« Reply #7 on: <05-21-21/0940:37> »
I've been playing Shadowrun for 28 years - which makes me a hopeless rookie to some of you - and I'll be the first to admit that every edition has its flaws. I like every edition for different reasons.

That said, in my old age I'm actually drifting toward Anarchy. It's as imperfect as the others, but its imperfections are easier on everyone at the table. Lowest barrier to entry, lowest demands on the GM, lowest power differences between characters, etc. (Summoning needs work, as usual.)

Anybody else brushing off Anarchy or giving it a second look?

MercilessMing

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
« Reply #8 on: <05-21-21/1346:39> »
Last time I looked at Anarchy was 2019 when I was getting back into SR.  The shared storytelling aspects weren't going to fly with the group I was pitching it to - even if they were ok with the idea, they were totally new to the setting and it just wouldn't have worked.  Now I know I could have just tossed that and run it straight with a traditional GM role, but back then the timing of the new edition was pretty perfect so I went with that.  It's been long enough since I last looked at Anarchy that I can't remember the major mechanical differences.

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
« Reply #9 on: <05-29-21/0227:27> »
At this point, I'm lazily working on a "one ring" style homebrew, trying to take the best of the various published rules, plus some of my own ideas, and cobble something playable together.  If I'm going to rewrite anyway, might as well make it something I really want to see.