NEWS

6th Edition in 2019?

  • 174 Replies
  • 15845 Views

PMárk

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 121
« Reply #105 on: (14:56:50/04-08-19) »
Well, i got a good laugh, but at the same time, a little feeling of dread, for SR ever going this way, truly.

 These days (talking from the esteemed age of 30 years...) there are not many rpgs out there, sadly, that I like as system goes, since I generally prefer classic rpg rules design. Many games I like just went down the drain for me, as the new editions rolled out, in the past several years. Shadowrun is one of the few remining and I hope it'll stay that way.


I agree.
4e dnd rules killed dnd for me.... (thankfully Pathfinder kept the favor going).

I have yet to check of pathfinder 2.0 as I am so busy, I haven't fully read the last 3 SR books yet :(

(Maybe a vacation is in order... when is DragonCon again??)

Heh, I didn't even count D&D 4e. :D I wasn1t a fan of it either, went forward with PF too. I'm curious about PF2 and really-really hope it won't go as practically all the other games I like, these days.

 D&D 5e? Nice system for a "basic" rpg. good if you need a fast, plug and play game. I'm willing to play one-shots with it, but it's just too restricted, the classes too locked for me. Also, I hate how they treate the settings.

 7thSea 2e? I was very glad when I saw it'll be a thing, then the ruleset killed it for me, totally.

 Unknown Armies 3e? Same thing as above. don't like the visuals, don't like the rules.

 Vampire 5? Perhaps the worst offender, partly because I liked it soo much. Many interesting ideas, that could have been good, but he end result got me totally disinterested, which I never thought I'll ever say about VtM/WoD. It's just so not what that games is for me, on every level.

 Laughably, the most recent rpg I found that I liked and very much so is Carella's Witchcraft and it's from '98...

 Truly, among the contemporary games it's practically only SR I still like (and maybe CoC) in the form of their latest iterations and I hope they will remain that way.
If nothing worked, let's think!

mcv

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 107
« Reply #106 on: (10:51:50/04-16-19) »
Being fairly new to 5th edition and having only briefly brushed 4th, I'm not exactly an expert on everything that's right or wrong with these systems. Personally, I would strongly prefer a new edition that is mostly compatible with 5th but with better editing and fixing various details and imbalances, than one that completely changes everything.

I certainly have some issues with 5th: hosts seem too big to properly deal with small systems; 4e nodes seem much more flexible, but I have too little experience with them to know what was wrong with the 4e Matrix rules. On the whole, Matrix rules are vague and it's a big mystery to me how to run Matrix stuff properly. Redoing that would be awesome.

For the most part, though, I'd like to stick with what I just started. If the new edition is not compatible, chances are small that I'm going to use it.
« Last Edit: (03:24:22/04-20-19) by mcv »

AnotherUser

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
« Reply #107 on: (11:49:34/04-17-19) »
Full disclosure. We did one campaign with 5th Ed by now. The last time we played SR was ages ago. Edition 2.01 I think. The black book with some Elf about to jack into a snack vending machine while AfroTatanka and David Bowie were covering his ass.

There is alot of new stuff that I like. The effort to modernize the world and the game is admirable. There is also way more freaky stuff, which Iīm split on. I generally approve of it. But playable mutants and AIs may be the wrong incentives. (Also, remove Asamando. Itīs just incredibly stupid.)

But what surprised me most is that the things that bugged me about 5th Ed are almost 100% the same things that bugged me all that time ago.

The matrix. Mechanically clunky. And, after all these sourcebooks, the worst thing is that I still have a hard time to describe my players how it is supposed to work in the gameworld. The stackable +2 dice deity of some Technoshaman gets page count, while we do not know if traffic lights are part of a host or not.

The power creep. After the core rules every īmechanicalī sourcebook beyond that is just a list of upgrades. Stupid ones with stupid justifications. Some even undermining all the worldbuilding that was done before. (Looking at you, TMs-who-died-for-our-sins)
And for no good reason. Yes, yes. Powerfantasy. Fine. But why do you even need 12 more dice than a ganger? You come with 8 more than him straight out of chargen. It just gets silly.

Being able to compare I think itīs safe to say, that these persistent problems all derive from the same source:
Every single thing in SR assumes that the players are in the process of doing a shadowrun right now.

The rules assume it, the worldbuilding assumes it, everything. Duh, I know, itīs in the name of the game. And I approve. But hereīs the rub. Instead of creating a world in which shadowruns make sense first and creating rules for that world, it is the other way round. There is the (ongoing) shadowrun and everything else is just attached to it. That is the source of much weirdness and thatīs why in any other situations the systems are prone to break down. Even if it is not the players but some NPC doing the shadowrun.
You hack the con laboratory, not the other way round. Thatīs why it doesnīt matter your stuff would be unhackable if it were slaved to some teenagerīs MetaLink, who is in a burmese PornHost all day. Same reason why the cons all agreed to have a matrix where changing some password requires Dan from IT to kiss his wife goodbye. (FFS data pulse!) And itīs also the reason for the constant armīs race to the point you would be forgiven to think you are playing Yu-Gi-Oh. Btw. we have anti-gravity tech now, just so you know. We use it for grenades, obviously.



And if you were about to post `If you hate it so much, then this is just not the game your you, omae` you should reconsider. It is just the right game for us. Otherwise we wouldnīt have come back to it after all these years. You donīt acquire any "rights" to be a fan by approving of every aspect. Leaving aside the fact, that a real fan would absolutely want the thing he likes so much to improve and mature.
And SR has indeed matured quite a bit over the years. I hope it can keep doing it. 6th Ed would be a good opportunity.
« Last Edit: (11:53:16/04-17-19) by AnotherUser »

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #108 on: (14:45:49/04-17-19) »
I think 5th has its issues, but in my opinion the Matrix rules are one of its strengths.  Everything is hackable, and 5th edition has come the closest Shadowrun has ever been to getting rid of the "Decker's turn to do his thing for a couple hours" aspect of game play.

The post before mine mentioned the ambiguity about hacking traffic lights as a negative.  I see that ambiguity instead as a positive. It's only a small number of variables that a GM has to invent, and they're all binary in nature.

1) Is the device wireless? It might be hard wired, or it might be wireless throwback... but generally this first variable is "Yes, everything's wireless unless there's a solid reason for it not to be".

2) Is the device slaved in a PAN or WAN? If no, Device Ratings are loose but easy enough to interpret.  Civilian grade electronics? Device Rating 1 or 2.  If not something cheap/expendable, it's probably 2. In the case of traffic lights, the answer as to whether they're slaved to a Host is dependent upon whether you want the traffic light to be hard to hack or not.  Best of all, you get to decide without forfeiting your prerogative to decide the other way on the next traffic light!

3) Is the device inside a Host? If yes, that host must be penetrated because you can't even see icons inside a host unless you're also inside that host.  No ability to target=no targeting with hacking actions. Note that this variable is independent of variable 2.  Saying yes to this is basically just telling the hacker that it's not an easy hack. (or: that you're going to need a Data Tap) A traffic light can be "inside" a host without being slaved by that host.

I like this edition's matrix rules because of its open-ended, infinite possibilities.

Player asks: Can I hack the guy's sneakers and make him trip?  Variable 1) No reason to be hardwired to anything, nor is there any reason most people turn wireless off on things, so sure. Yes to 1). Variable 2) his shoes could be part of a PAN, maybe. Even if you say yes, all it means is you need to figure out what DR his commlink is.  Variable 3) Clearly a no.  3 fairly quick and easy answers, so all you really need to do is figure out how to mechanically represent what actually is imposed upon the target if the hacker is successful and the shoes suddenly self-unbuckle or loosen.

Player asks: Can I hack the guy's soup he's slurping? Variable 1) again, unless there's a perfectly good reason to say no, you should be saying yes. Nanopaste broadcasting simsense is perfectly plausible, so sure, why not, it's possible to make his soup smell like poopy diapers so long as he's got a DNI (or oflactory booster cyberware). 2) Surely a no.  3) again, surely a no.  Go wild, decker!
« Last Edit: (14:52:43/04-17-19) by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

AnotherUser

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
« Reply #109 on: (18:54:06/04-17-19) »
Giving the decker more to do and a reason to accompany the team belongs to what I called `to modernize the worldī and is, in itself, a big plus of 5th Ed.
But I very much doubt that this goal absolutely requires a matrix that may kill the host owner when he tries to upgrade his own system. Or the worldīs economic leaders being silly enough to finance its creation.

Iīll leave aside how to handle traffic lights or comment on your approach, because that wasnīt my point. But the way you framed your answer actually underlines the approach that I think causes so many problems. And has so for multiple decades. The first thought is about what the player character can or can not do.
But the world has to make sense before the char is even generated.

And easily hackable traffic lights hardly do. So how vulnerable are they really? We do not know. What are corp drones actually doing in their offices 14 hours a day that an agent couldnīt do cheaper and better? We donīt know. I could go on with dozens of examples.
We may never get to know, because the books that are supposed to tell us such stuff are crammed with rationalizations for another +2 dice that might come in handy while sneaking through Secret Lab 51A.



(EDIT: Reading this again let me add I do not aim to single you out or anything. I was trying to point out that taking the perspective of the player group/protagonists and doing your worldbuilding/rule smithing from there will inevitably result in weirdness and contradictions.)
« Last Edit: (19:29:45/04-17-19) by AnotherUser »

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8032
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #110 on: (00:59:13/04-18-19) »
I'd note that sure, beating that ganger with more dice won't matter, but being able to hold off a team of Red Samurai or taking on a Force-8 Shedim / Insect Queen is absolutely something you need those bigger dicepools for. I had a player get petrified by those weird Spirits at some point, and one player got mindcontrolled by a Blood Mage and you can bet they invested in well-needed counterspelling dice after that.

As for the traffic lights: Depends on if you're in a GridGuide-controlled region, I guess. But there's things that don't require you to have them on paper from the start, as long as you and your players are willing to work together. The only time everything MUST be known before creating a character, is when you're playing AGAINST the GM. When you're making the game together, you could go 'say, those traffic lights in that region, are those on a Host?' and if they are, you know you find a traffic light outside camera reach (maybe thanks to a well-timed gunshot on said camera), hack it through a Direct connection, then control the lights you need without having to face the Host. If they're local, you know you have to consider getting close to them and hacking them directly. There's a lot of wiggle space for players and gms, and to most that's quite reasonable. If Shadowrun were to codify everything, we'd require thrice the books at least and the game would be way less fun. 'But page 859 of book Sprawls says!' Instead, we can do things like 'sure, of course you can hack their comms and trace icon all of them. AROs to fire through the walls? Sure, that counts as being surprised alright.'

I understand it's tough for some people to have a more open setting, where they have to make more judgement calls. But I think it fits Shadowrun better when things aren't always black and white setting-wise.

As for disclaimers: Asides from a few dozen open events, I also ran a campaign with 32 games in SR5 after 20 games in SR4. I grew my personal Seattle and the evolution of both setting and pcs was nice.
« Last Edit: (01:03:30/04-18-19) by Michael Chandra »
CorpSec when an alarm is triggered;: "This is so sad, Alexa play Shoot The Runner"

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
« Reply #111 on: (07:59:46/04-18-19) »
Giving the decker more to do and a reason to accompany the team belongs to what I called `to modernize the worldī and is, in itself, a big plus of 5th Ed.
But I very much doubt that this goal absolutely requires a matrix that may kill the host owner when he tries to upgrade his own system. Or the worldīs economic leaders being silly enough to finance its creation.

[/size]

I must admit this part of your post really has me confused, can you expand on it so I could then maybe understand your point of view better?
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8032
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #112 on: (09:38:05/04-18-19) »
Giving the decker more to do and a reason to accompany the team belongs to what I called `to modernize the worldī and is, in itself, a big plus of 5th Ed.
But I very much doubt that this goal absolutely requires a matrix that may kill the host owner when he tries to upgrade his own system. Or the worldīs economic leaders being silly enough to finance its creation.

[/size]

I must admit this part of your post really has me confused, can you expand on it so I could then maybe understand your point of view better?
I'm guessing it's related to Host rules that involve risky stuff when you, even as the owner, try to upgrade it. Because Hosts are scary. I don't recall the detailed rules.
CorpSec when an alarm is triggered;: "This is so sad, Alexa play Shoot The Runner"

Beta

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1604
  • SR1 player, SR5 GM@FtF & player@PbP
« Reply #113 on: (10:21:03/04-18-19) »
There is a lack of any explanation of how normal users operate in a host.  i.e. as written, to edit a file is a contest that most people would lose when in a higher rated host.  By RAW this is an everyday work conversation:  "Smith, do you have the updated sales figures?"  "Sorry boss, I've been trying all morning but the system won't let me edit them."

Of course you could hand wave it and say "Oh, legitimate users don't face those access restrictions."  To which any face worth their salt will perk up and respond "You don't say?  And exactly how does it decide who a legitimate user is?" (meanwhile the decker/'mancer is demanding "What is the point of the marks system, if not to show who a legitimate user is?).

Throw in an intrusions expert and the team is soon going "We can get a copy Smith's fingerprints and retinal scans and names of his first pet and childhood hero and whatever, and we can get Smith's link, and have someone sitting at Smith's desk who is indistinguishable from Smith if that is an easier way to access the data we need." 

But yes, there are also some things that can only be done with a foundation run, IIRC, and there is no 'safe mode' on foundation runs.
Jawsey  --
speechthought

AnotherUser

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
« Reply #114 on: (20:36:08/04-18-19) »
... taking on a Force-8 Shedim...
The players wonīt enjoy beating a Force-8 shedim any more than beating a Force-6 one, when the mechanical power difference to their own chars remains the same. (Which it will, for dramaturgical reasons.)
Itīs not like the GM runs out of shedim at any point. There is no highscore board.

I must admit this part of your post really has me confused, can you expand on it so I could then maybe understand your point of view better?
In my example I refer to Datatrails, page 127. Please note, this is re-translated, so itīs not verbatim:

"Sometimes the owner of a host has to make some upgrades. Perhaps he wants to change the interior design or improve the IC or maintain the archive. In any case, it should be easy for legal users to get access to the nodes, right?
Wrong. Foundations runs are just as dangerous for legal users as for illegal hackers..."


So if you get bored of your caribbean host theme, someone is going to risk his life. You actually pay (costly?) experts who might get their brain fried. This has nothing to do with `a more open setting` it is just plain stupid. It makes no sense whatsoever.
And the only reason I can imagine such a design decision was even considered is `game-ist` to its core. Because, as Beta points out:
Quote
Of course you could hand wave it and say "Oh, legitimate users don't face those access restrictions."  To which any face worth their salt will perk up and respond "You don't say?  And exactly how does it decide who a legitimate user is?" (meanwhile the decker/'mancer is demanding "What is the point of the marks system, if not to show who a legitimate user is?).

The authors clearly WANT you to make foundation hacks. They made 10 pages of rules for them, after all. So they invent reasons for why you, as a team of runners, canīt possibly circumvent one. Reasons that only make sense in the context of `a roleplaying game is going on right now and this is meant as a challange`. Reasons that undermine the gaming world and the suspension of disbelief.

And this is why I do not even mention the traffic lights in this post. Itīs not about them. Itīs not even about the foundation hacks. It is about the approach. An approach that has consistently produced game-ist weirdness for 20 years.
« Last Edit: (22:59:32/04-18-19) by AnotherUser »

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8032
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #115 on: (02:59:17/04-19-19) »
... taking on a Force-8 Shedim...
The players wonīt enjoy beating a Force-8 shedim any more than beating a Force-6 one, when the mechanical power difference to their own chars remains the same. (Which it will, for dramaturgical reasons.)
Itīs not like the GM runs out of shedim at any point. There is no highscore board.
Look mate, I'm not telling you how to run your game, but at the very least you couldn't start bashing mine. The stuff is there for reasons, and in my campaign people had plenty of reason to use some of that stuff. If in your games you don't feel like that, that's utterly fine. But I'd prefer if you don't go pretending any game that uses the heavy stuff is ridiculous.
CorpSec when an alarm is triggered;: "This is so sad, Alexa play Shoot The Runner"

Ghost Rigger

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 427
« Reply #116 on: (18:06:46/04-19-19) »
I think 5th has its issues, but in my opinion the Matrix rules are one of its strengths.  Everything is hackable, and 5th edition has come the closest Shadowrun has ever been to getting rid of the "Decker's turn to do his thing for a couple hours" aspect of game play.

The post before mine mentioned the ambiguity about hacking traffic lights as a negative.  I see that ambiguity instead as a positive. It's only a small number of variables that a GM has to invent, and they're all binary in nature.

1) Is the device wireless? It might be hard wired, or it might be wireless throwback... but generally this first variable is "Yes, everything's wireless unless there's a solid reason for it not to be".

2) Is the device slaved in a PAN or WAN? If no, Device Ratings are loose but easy enough to interpret.  Civilian grade electronics? Device Rating 1 or 2.  If not something cheap/expendable, it's probably 2. In the case of traffic lights, the answer as to whether they're slaved to a Host is dependent upon whether you want the traffic light to be hard to hack or not.  Best of all, you get to decide without forfeiting your prerogative to decide the other way on the next traffic light!

3) Is the device inside a Host? If yes, that host must be penetrated because you can't even see icons inside a host unless you're also inside that host.  No ability to target=no targeting with hacking actions. Note that this variable is independent of variable 2.  Saying yes to this is basically just telling the hacker that it's not an easy hack. (or: that you're going to need a Data Tap) A traffic light can be "inside" a host without being slaved by that host.
Except you forgot 0) Does the device have any electronic components complex enough to be hacked? A question, might I add, to which the answer is no for both your examples. You can't trip someone by hacking their shoes unless they have stupidly expensive myomeric shoelaces, and you can't hack soup because there's nothing there to hack.
After all you don't send an electrician to fix your leaking toilet.

A Guide to Gridguide

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #117 on: (18:09:18/04-19-19) »
Except you forgot 0) Does the device have any electronic components complex enough to be hacked? A question, might I add, to which the answer is no for both your examples. You can't trip someone by hacking their shoes unless they have stupidly expensive myomeric shoelaces, and you can't hack soup because there's nothing there to hack.

I didn't forget it; it's incorporated into variable #1.  Is there a compelling reason the device has no wireless functionality? By default everything is/should be, unless there's reason to say "No."

Self-tying shoes are a staple of futurism.  You can say these particular shoes are self tying, or you can say they're not.  You can say there's simsense-broadcasting nanopaste in the food, or there's not.

One answer is fun and allows the player to do what he wants, and the other answer is saying No you can't do what you want. Either way it's a binary "can it even BE (wirelessly) hacked?" question.
« Last Edit: (18:12:40/04-19-19) by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Mirikon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8974
  • "Everybody lies." --House
« Reply #118 on: (22:38:07/04-19-19) »
Self-tying shoes show up in one of the Back to the Future movies. Everywhere else either has straps or seals instead of laces if they are self-sealing.
Greataxe - Apply directly to source of problem, repeat as needed.

My Characters

AnotherUser

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 22
« Reply #119 on: (23:53:24/04-19-19) »
Look mate, I'm not telling you how to run your game, but at the very least you couldn't start bashing mine...
That wasnīt my intent. I am not telling you your fun is wrong.
If you think 16 minus 12 is preferable to 12 minus 8, by all means.

I pointed out that the GM can create any dice pool he wants. Itīs not an arms race.

It wonīt help him make the encounter more fun, though, if the justifications for the bigger dice pools donīt make much sense. Mechanically or lore-wise.