[RHat]

For the setting to actually evolve, it has to build off the existing base.  Transhumanist technology wouldn't change the basic human motices that are at the core of creating Shadowrun's dystopia.

Still doesn't stop both from occurring, but the diehards seem intent on trying to keep the status quo on both aspects with ridiculous claims that allowing the setting to evolve on either or both would somehow "completely destroy" the setting entirely.

Ah, but at the same time if all the grime got wiped away, that wouldn't be evolution - it wouldn't be building off the existing base.

It's entirely possible to bring in the tranhumanist elements and still have the cyberpunk aspects, especially if you play up the inherently alien nature of a truly transhuman entity...

[All4BigGuns]

Ah, but at the same time if all the grime got wiped away, that wouldn't be evolution - it wouldn't be building off the existing base.

This idea is a perfect example of the problem, as it's basically just an extension of the ridiculous claim that any change to the setting destroys the whole setting.

[RHat]

Ah, but at the same time if all the grime got wiped away, that wouldn't be evolution - it wouldn't be building off the existing base.

This idea is a perfect example of the problem, as it's basically just an extension of the ridiculous claim that any change to the setting destroys the whole setting.

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

[All4BigGuns]

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

It should continue diminishing until it is eventually gone, but it of course shouldn't all go at once. That would make about as much sense as the diehards' desire to prevent any change from occurring at all.

[RHat]

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

It should continue diminishing until it is eventually gone, but it of course shouldn't all go at once. That would make about as much sense as the diehards' desire to prevent any change from occurring at all.

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards"), which means it can't just be done away with.  It's part of the essential DNA of the setting and some of that needs to stay around if it's going to be recognizable as the same setting.  Really, at that point it would be better to just publish a variant post-cyberpunk/transhumanist urban fantasy setting.

[All4BigGuns]

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

It should continue diminishing until it is eventually gone, but it of course shouldn't all go at once. That would make about as much sense as the diehards' desire to prevent any change from occurring at all.

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards"), which means it can't just be done away with.  It's part of the essential DNA of the setting and some of that needs to stay around if it's going to be recognizable as the same setting.  Really, at that point it would be better to just publish a variant post-cyberpunk/transhumanist urban fantasy setting.

But it's only those "diehards" that would really care one way or the other if it did eventually fade away entirely. I find it far more likely that the majority would just shrug and continue on.

[Crunch]

Well... with dystopia intact thay just sold out their first print run and set a record at Drive-Thru. Do you have any evidence other than "I want it" that indicates your shiny happy shadowrun would do better?

[GiraffeShaman]

My preference is for "Pink Mohawk" in the cinematics over "Realism" and "rule of cool" over CSI:Shadowrun sense.

I think it's also fair to say that for me Pink Mohawk harkens back to the Cyperpunk roots of SR rather than the recent (and boring as paste in my opinion) tendency to try and turn Shadowrun into a Transhumanist Mission Impossible clone devoid of any story or sense of drama.

Of course the great thing about pen and paper RPGs is that I can play it how I want to and for me that means taking the setting that I love, using the themes from SR 1-3 and Gibson et al, seasoning them with the corners of the game my characters are interested in and get a heady stew. That combination of setting and thematic elements was strong enough to keep me involved through 4E and now that 5E has started to (in my opinion) return the game to it's dystopic roots I'm ecstatic.

Well Transhumanism is really a completely separate thing from the PM/BT spectrum, I'd think. And it appears you set off another argument by mentioning it, heheh. Briefly though, I think the game benefits by having some transhuman elements. It's great when say you have some street level punk orks break into a Horizon corp site and see all sorts of weird drek. It really interested me what I read in another thread about the massive use of skillsofts at Horizon and how their employees are like pieces of hardware.

I think there's different ways to inroduce reality/BT elements in a game than CSI style. I hate CSI and try not to do that. I'm more shooting for drama than a bunch of obsessing about blood spots. Like having homicide detectives question characters to me is a fun and dramatic scene. I use shows like the Wire, Homicide, The Shield, and Burn Notice as sort of models for these interactions with Johnny Law. My goal isn't to force the players to obsess about what permits they are carrying or if they bleached that crime scene.It's to add tension and also create some unique interactions with NPCs. And maybe have some bribery of corrupt officials here and there as well.

Incompetent or nonexistent cops does have it's advantages, such as allowing the players to get away with more over the top stunts. But it also means there is no reason to do things like bribe cops or strategize about them. It's a trade off.

[Crunch]

Burn Notice though is a notably Pink Mohawk show (at least if you look at anyone in the show other than Michael).

[RHat]

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

It should continue diminishing until it is eventually gone, but it of course shouldn't all go at once. That would make about as much sense as the diehards' desire to prevent any change from occurring at all.

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards"), which means it can't just be done away with.  It's part of the essential DNA of the setting and some of that needs to stay around if it's going to be recognizable as the same setting.  Really, at that point it would be better to just publish a variant post-cyberpunk/transhumanist urban fantasy setting.

But it's only those "diehards" that would really care one way or the other if it did eventually fade away entirely. I find it far more likely that the majority would just shrug and continue on.

...

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards")

People don't just shrug and keep on keeping on when one of the main things they like about the setting goes away.

[Reaver]

Not at all - scrapping the base to build something new isn't the same thing as the setting evolving.  The "grime" is part of the DNA, part of the base that you're building from - it may be diminished as the setting evolves, but that is distinctly different from just flat out getting rid of it.

It should continue diminishing until it is eventually gone, but it of course shouldn't all go at once. That would make about as much sense as the diehards' desire to prevent any change from occurring at all.

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards"), which means it can't just be done away with.  It's part of the essential DNA of the setting and some of that needs to stay around if it's going to be recognizable as the same setting.  Really, at that point it would be better to just publish a variant post-cyberpunk/transhumanist urban fantasy setting.

But it's only those "diehards" that would really care one way or the other if it did eventually fade away entirely. I find it far more likely that the majority would just shrug and continue on.

...

Except that the dystopic elements are what some people like about the setting (and that's not at all limited to just "diehards")

People don't just shrug and keep on keeping on when one of the main things they like about the setting goes away.

yep,  just look at what happened to D&D/pathfinder.....

WoTC/hasbro changed the system radically from 3.5 to 4.... and the rage wars continye to this day....

[All4BigGuns]

Well... with dystopia intact thay just sold out their first print run and set a record at Drive-Thru. Do you have any evidence other than "I want it" that indicates your shiny happy shadowrun would do better?

There were aspects of the system drastically improved in the edition transition (notably the return to SR3 style Initiative) that probably had more to do with the reception than anything else.

People don't just shrug and keep on keeping on when one of the main things they like about the setting goes away.

I'm not convinced that the "dystopia lovers" form the majority. I still have a feeling that the majority could give a shit less one way or the other on that.

yep,  just look at what happened to D&D/pathfinder.....

WoTC/hasbro changed the system radically from 3.5 to 4.... and the rage wars continue to this day....

Where WotC fubared was that they completely ruined the system for the game.

[RHat]

Majority has no relevance in this context.

[All4BigGuns]

Majority has no relevance in this context.

Since that seems to be the only real argument in favor of the "never changing setting", it is quite relevant.

And even if it did turn out to be the case on the forums, that doesn't mean that it is for the majority of all SR players.

[JackVII]

Unless someone has access to a mailing list of a few thousands Shadowrun players, it seems unlikely this question will be answered on these forums. One could presume that CGL has done some market research on the matter and 5E is a reflection of the desires of a representative sample of the player base.

Or not.