NEWS

6th World Box Set Play Experience

  • 114 Replies
  • 3343 Views

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #15 on: (19:26:22/06-24-19) »
As an aside at least one of the edge powers felt like to me it would have been better implemented through minor actions.

The shoot multiple targets without splitting your pool. To me that seems like a good way to use minor actions as itís as its showing skill and enhanced reactions allowing you to bullet time it effectively. It doesnít feel like a luck momentum thing to me. I wonder how many edge moves are there because ďedgeĒ and not because it makes sense.

I think the one pass thing could have worked really well if they had really beefed up how minor actions could be spent instead of getting them diluted by removing frees and making minors majors etc.

So as a example major action autofire spreading shots. Can shoot up to 2 additional targets but you split your pool. For 1 minor action per target you can shoot additional targets with your full die pool or die pool -2 you know play test for balance. SA and burst fire same thing but max 2 targets.

Same type of action but vs one target unloading on someone. For each additional minor action spent the base DV of your attack goes up by 1. Max 3 for autofire, 2 for burst fire, 1 for SA.

Beta

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1604
  • SR1 player, SR5 GM@FtF & player@PbP
« Reply #16 on: (12:08:20/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.
Jawsey  --
speechthought

Moonshine Fox

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 548
  • Proudly serving our dragon overlords
« Reply #17 on: (13:05:32/06-25-19) »
I think once more people can get their hands on rules and start playing it will help. Even simple rules can be hard to piece together till you get a chance to get in and fiddle with everything.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8032
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #18 on: (13:09:12/06-25-19) »
Still 11 days before I host a Beginner Box Event. =/ Won't be able to share any impressions until after that. I do intend to have an actual adventure rather than just Food Fight 3.0.
CorpSec when an alarm is triggered;: "This is so sad, Alexa play Shoot The Runner"

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #19 on: (13:55:18/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.


I can guarantee it wonít feel as realistic. It may represent it on some abstract level but firing blind, in high winds, long range etc. 1 edge to the defender wonít come close to feeling like -4+ dice. With no penalties 6 die shooters are making impossible shots routinely. Dude gets just 1 edge for their defense. There may be some niche situation where that 1 edge gets you to the exact point where you can use x edge and now it represent a hard shot. But shot two you are now down to 0 edge or 1 edge and it doesnít come close to representing a hard shot.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #20 on: (14:00:32/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.


I can guarantee it wonít feel as realistic. It may represent it on some abstract level but firing blind, in high winds, long range etc. 1 edge to the defender wonít come close to feeling like -4+ dice. With no penalties 6 die shooters are making impossible shots routinely. Dude gets just 1 edge for their defense. There may be some niche situation where that 1 edge gets you to the exact point where you can use x edge and now it represent a hard shot. But shot two you are now down to 0 edge or 1 edge and it doesnít come close to representing a hard shot.

I'm going to go ahead and say something that maybe needs to be said more often:

A game about elves and dragons and fireballs isn't realistic to begin with.  Even without those fantasy elements, SR has always been firmly in the "cinematic physics" universe than something approximating real life.  Realism is not and has never been a primary concern for SR.
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, youíre fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Moonshine Fox

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 548
  • Proudly serving our dragon overlords
« Reply #21 on: (15:59:43/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.


I can guarantee it wonít feel as realistic. It may represent it on some abstract level but firing blind, in high winds, long range etc. 1 edge to the defender wonít come close to feeling like -4+ dice. With no penalties 6 die shooters are making impossible shots routinely. Dude gets just 1 edge for their defense. There may be some niche situation where that 1 edge gets you to the exact point where you can use x edge and now it represent a hard shot. But shot two you are now down to 0 edge or 1 edge and it doesnít come close to representing a hard shot.

I'm going to go ahead and say something that maybe needs to be said more often:

A game about elves and dragons and fireballs isn't realistic to begin with.  Even without those fantasy elements, SR has always been firmly in the "cinematic physics" universe than something approximating real life.  Realism is not and has never been a primary concern for SR.

I mean, these were the pictures of the archatypes in the very first book so many drew inspiration from. So very realistic. https://everythingexplodes.wordpress.com/2015/11/13/the-ridiculous-archetypes-of-shadowrun/

*wonders off laughing at how silly the late 80s were*

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #22 on: (16:04:10/06-25-19) »
Stainless I think you're a great part of this community and you add real value + personally I like you from all the interactions we've had.

However in this instance I think you're missing the point.

I often hear the old trope "it's elves and dragons and magic so who cares if it has any semblance of reality?" argument.

Which completely misses the core concept of cyberpunk / dystopian worlds, they are gritty and dangerous. It's hard to have a gritty, dangerous setting without some semblance of reality.

It's why Runequest (and other non D&D RPGs with more grounding in realistic combat) have a place in the ttrpg mix.

If you want something simple, quick and fantastical D&D works great.
If you want something that realistically reflects the effects of plate mail vs. leather and arrows vs. an axe you choose another system.

The same goes for shadowrun.
Historically it's been grounded in cyberpunk which, I would argue, inherently requires a semblance of reality lest you turn into Men in Black.

I would posit that 6e is now firmly in MiB territory, having left behind cyberpunk as the new rule system focusses on flashy, theatrical outcomes that have little relation to how things actually work in real life.

Remember the scene where Agent Smith pulls out the tiny "cricket" gun the size of a hold-out and is surprised when it fires off as massive, exploding, effects-laden shot that puts to shame the larger guns he has available?

That's 6e.

Its all MiB now baby.

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #23 on: (16:07:16/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.


I can guarantee it wonít feel as realistic. It may represent it on some abstract level but firing blind, in high winds, long range etc. 1 edge to the defender wonít come close to feeling like -4+ dice. With no penalties 6 die shooters are making impossible shots routinely. Dude gets just 1 edge for their defense. There may be some niche situation where that 1 edge gets you to the exact point where you can use x edge and now it represent a hard shot. But shot two you are now down to 0 edge or 1 edge and it doesnít come close to representing a hard shot.

I'm going to go ahead and say something that maybe needs to be said more often:

A game about elves and dragons and fireballs isn't realistic to begin with.  Even without those fantasy elements, SR has always been firmly in the "cinematic physics" universe than something approximating real life.  Realism is not and has never been a primary concern for SR.

I mean, these were the pictures of the archatypes in the very first book so many drew inspiration from. So very realistic. https://everythingexplodes.wordpress.com/2015/11/13/the-ridiculous-archetypes-of-shadowrun/

*wonders off laughing at how silly the late 80s were*

Sure they look dated / hilarious stylistically but you know I notice almost all of them wearing clothes that are likely armored.
There are a few exceptions of course, but exceptions are there to prove the rule.
Thanks for this.

Hobbes

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 2141
« Reply #24 on: (16:36:58/06-25-19) »

I'm going to go ahead and say something that maybe needs to be said more often:

A game about elves and dragons and fireballs isn't realistic to begin with.  Even without those fantasy elements, SR has always been firmly in the "cinematic physics" universe than something approximating real life.  Realism is not and has never been a primary concern for SR.

I don't require much Verisimilitude in my Shadowrun, but when the weekend Athlete picks up a Baseball bat or a gun and its a de-escalation of threat it's jarring enough to cause some head shakes.

"Oh good, he picked up a gun, we can just rush in and tackle him now!"  Said no-one, ever. 

  :P

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8032
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #25 on: (16:40:02/06-25-19) »
To be fair, I'm used to people pulling Elemental/Energy Aura. Tackling is ALWAYS a bad idea with those.
CorpSec when an alarm is triggered;: "This is so sad, Alexa play Shoot The Runner"

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #26 on: (16:54:50/06-25-19) »
The difference is the abstraction.

Rather than focussing on how things would happen IRL to gain advantage you focus on the highly abstracted challenge of "how do i gain edge".

That's not a good thing imho.

RPGs (for me at least) are about getting into character and responding in character to the world in a realistic way.

You are assuming here, I think, that how you get and sprnd edge will feel less realistic, and less related to natural play strategies, than the current list of combat modifiers.  It is possible (even probable) that you are right - - to me it feels a bit abstract that getting cover may contribute towards getting an extra action - - but do recall that we have had years to get used to, and stop seeing, some of the weirdness of the current system.  I think actually playing the new system and seeing how it feels once we have the hang of it might be a good idea before locking in strong opinions.


I can guarantee it wonít feel as realistic. It may represent it on some abstract level but firing blind, in high winds, long range etc. 1 edge to the defender wonít come close to feeling like -4+ dice. With no penalties 6 die shooters are making impossible shots routinely. Dude gets just 1 edge for their defense. There may be some niche situation where that 1 edge gets you to the exact point where you can use x edge and now it represent a hard shot. But shot two you are now down to 0 edge or 1 edge and it doesnít come close to representing a hard shot.

I'm going to go ahead and say something that maybe needs to be said more often:

A game about elves and dragons and fireballs isn't realistic to begin with.  Even without those fantasy elements, SR has always been firmly in the "cinematic physics" universe than something approximating real life.  Realism is not and has never been a primary concern for SR.

Sure it has elements that are not realistic at all like magic. Itís combat and rules arenít perfect reality simulators and have unrealistic elements. But there is a scale from perfect depiction to toon town. Itís far more towards toon town now. The realism we are talking about is things like trolls hit harder than pixies. Or harder tasks are harder. Thatís kind of the barest level of realism a game should have.

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #27 on: (17:35:55/06-25-19) »
well said Shinobi.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #28 on: (17:54:38/06-25-19) »
Sure it has elements that are not realistic at all like magic. Itís combat and rules arenít perfect reality simulators and have unrealistic elements. But there is a scale from perfect depiction to toon town. Itís far more towards toon town now. The realism we are talking about is things like trolls hit harder than pixies. Or harder tasks are harder. Thatís kind of the barest level of realism a game should have.

The RPG system I'm most familiar with other than Shadowrun is Pathfinder 1st ed. And in that game system, it's quite easily done where you can have a strength dump stat but use some features of that system to get bonus damage from a high agility score instead of strength. So yes, that pixie-like thing could very well hit just as hard as a big ole troll-like thing.  So I suppose that while yes I agree it seems counterintuitive at first brush that strength doesn't help DVs in 6e, I may be somewhat conditioned to tolerate it by other game experiences.
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, youíre fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #29 on: (18:12:53/06-25-19) »
Sure it has elements that are not realistic at all like magic. Itís combat and rules arenít perfect reality simulators and have unrealistic elements. But there is a scale from perfect depiction to toon town. Itís far more towards toon town now. The realism we are talking about is things like trolls hit harder than pixies. Or harder tasks are harder. Thatís kind of the barest level of realism a game should have.

The RPG system I'm most familiar with other than Shadowrun is Pathfinder 1st ed. And in that game system, it's quite easily done where you can have a strength dump stat but use some features of that system to get bonus damage from a high agility score instead of strength. So yes, that pixie-like thing could very well hit just as hard as a big ole troll-like thing.  So I suppose that while yes I agree it seems counterintuitive at first brush that strength doesn't help DVs in 6e, I may be somewhat conditioned to tolerate it by other game experiences.

Sure, but I think itís for a limited set of precision weapons and itís recognized as a pure gamest rule due to how their attributes work. Their game math fails when core attacks fall behind and donít use the stat your class will max.  They were open for pretty much any stat subbing in for certain classes in similar d20 games. Also high fantasy is intentionally absurdist. You literally can routinely fall from orbit pick yourself up and function normally.