NEWS

Combat is SR6?

  • 193 Replies
  • 2294 Views

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 5653
  • Kids these days...
    • Coming soon!
« Reply #15 on: (13:28:48/07-11-19) »
A ) Timing - I'm going from experience running the games at GenCon with new players. Yes, it's much easier for us because we've been playing a while, just like BT Old Guard don't need to know the tables to figure how many missiles hit and where. You sit a new player down and give him a table of modifiers, it's going to take them a while to process what affects them. By then, they are disinterested in the game and you've lost a sale.

B ) I've only seen the Box Set yet, so I don't know all the details on what. Thanks to Chandra for explaining the Edge use more regarding the modifiers.

C ) Serbitar - I'm letting it slide on the Flamebaiting and not giving you an official warning. If you had said the same thing to any other poster, you'd get a warning. Just remember if you disagree with someone on the boards, you can still respond nicely.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #16 on: (13:44:59/07-11-19) »
Adding up Attack and Defense dice roll modifiers is the player and DM spending 5-15 minutes on their turn adding together all the modifiers that tells them what their chances are for firing a bullet in three seconds.

5-15 minutes??!
What?
Are you nuts?
At most you're looking at vision, movement and / or distance penalties.
Movement penalties are fixed, so you either get it or you don't.
AR's change with range so that was not "simplified away" but actually made more complex because now EACH weapon has it's own AR varying differently at range rather than a fixed range modifier.
At most it would take you about 60 seconds to look up your vision penalties.

Geeze if that's the basis of the change from modifiers to AR and DRs then no wonder 6e is so....nuts.

It jives with my 5e experience.

Yes, it takes a looong time to resolve stuff because of the amount of page flipping and rule hunting.
Maybe you've got range penalties memorized.  What about the increments? Gotta verify if 50 meters is the top of one band or the bottom of the next.  And it's different per class of firearm.

ok, maybe you've got THAT memorized too.  Or you have a GM screen/cheat sheet with that info handy and it's relatively quick to resolve. Even if it only takes say 5 seconds to verify, over the course of a single combat pass that can be a minute right there.  Stuff adds up.  It really does.

And that's the easy stuff, that you know both A) has a modifier and B) where to find it.  Stuff invariably comes up where you're not sure if you remember it's covered by the rules or if the GM will just have to wing it.  Obviously, every second spent hunting for something that doesn't exist is a wasted second, when the GM ultimately just makes something up anyway. For example: in "this one fight this one time" I was the GM, and I was convinced I read somewhere that when you spend a Take Aim action to reset your recoil counter, you don't gain any other benefit from that Take Aim.  When I informed the players of this, they unanimously agreed they never heard of such a thing (which they always do, even when they know damn well otherwise) so we consult the books.  I can't find it, after however much time I spent before realizing we're wasting way too much time, and I just decide to ignore it and move on.  Time sunk over a very piddling detail. In this case, a detail that doesn't even exist anymore in 6e (recoil).

And then there's the stuff that absolutely is covered, but isn't relevant most of the time.  Maybe this game has a decker who wants to do combat bricking. Usually noone bothers because of the shit action economy, but today the player doesn't care.  Trying it anyway.  Time to break out another chapter of the book entirely.  Look up matrix spotting rules, because that's never been satisfactorily explained anway. GM's gotta now decide how the matrix security is arranged, because NPC PANs have never, ever been codified (that I've ever seen, anyhow). Etc etc etc.

Maybe the magician is trying out new drek today.  How does critter power X interact with this combat?  Flip to a new chapter. Review a critter power entry.  Think.  Rule.  Oh, never mind that answer, let's go with this spell instead.  Break out another splatbook entirely.  Etc. etc.


Combat goes super, super, super slow in 5e.  Granted some of that stuff is edition agnostic (invoking seldom used rules, splatbooks) but 6e streamlines where it can, and I think that's a BIG help.
« Last Edit: (14:07:17/07-11-19) 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, youíre fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Serbitar

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #17 on: (14:14:24/07-11-19) »
I have nothing against streamlining, especially removing meaningless or useless modifiers. A modifier should alsways be meaningfull. If it is however, removing it means removing choices and tactical depth, though. There is no way arround it. If a combat system is too simple and does not offer any meaningfull choices its just dice rolling. Of course there is a sweet spot between speed, complexity and choice, and this spot is different for everybody.

@Fastjack: You could have answered my question, though.

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #18 on: (14:16:42/07-11-19) »
I have nothing against streamlining, especially removing meaningless or useless modifiers. A modifier should alsways be meaningfull. If it is however, removing it means removing choices and tactical depth, though. There is no way arround it. If a combat system is too simple and does not offer any meaningfull choices its just dice rolling. Of course there is a sweet spot between speed, complexity and choice, and this spot is different for everybody.

agree 100%

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #19 on: (14:22:10/07-11-19) »
Well the rub is that meaningless modifiers aren't just in the eye of the beholder, they're sometimes objectively more relevant some times than other times.  Like the oft-cited low-light vision enhancement in a dark alleyway.  If both sides in that environment have it, it's functionally meaningless besides adding extra complexity to both sides' rolls.

Boiling down most (note that 6e doesn't ditch ALL) modifiers to GM fiat awarding one side or none a point of Edge is about as slick and streamlined as possible, and I still daresay fair.  Sure, you have to trust the GM to be fair about weighing your advantage of higher ground atop the dumpster counts for more or less than the Ork's ability to see clearly in the dark alley.  Having to rely on GM judgement is a price i'm not just willing but quite quick to agree to, in order to dispense with most combat modifiers.  Boil several minutes of page flipping down to what might be uncharitably described as GM whim/fiat?  Yes, please!
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.

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #20 on: (14:22:25/07-11-19) »
It jives with my 5e experience.

Yes, it takes a looong time to resolve stuff because of the amount of page flipping and rule hunting.
Maybe you've got range penalties memorized.  What about the increments? Gotta verify if 50 meters is the top of one band or the bottom of the next.  And it's different per class of firearm.

ok, maybe you've got THAT memorized too.  Or you have a GM screen/cheat sheet with that info handy and it's relatively quick to resolve. Even if it only takes say 5 seconds to verify, over the course of a single combat pass that can be a minute right there.  Stuff adds up.  It really does.

And that's the easy stuff, that you know both A) has a modifier and B) where to find it.  Stuff invariably comes up where you're not sure if you remember it's covered by the rules or if the GM will just have to wing it.  Obviously, every second spent hunting for something that doesn't exist is a wasted second, when the GM ultimately just makes something up anyway. For example: in "this one fight this one time" I was the GM, and I was convinced I read somewhere that when you spend a Take Aim action to reset your recoil counter, you don't gain any other benefit from that Take Aim.  When I informed the players of this, they unanimously agreed they never heard of such a thing (which they always do, even when they know damn well otherwise) so we consult the books.  I can't find it, after however much time I spent before realizing we're wasting way too much time, and I just decide to ignore it and move on.  Time sunk over a very piddling detail. In this case, a detail that doesn't even exist anymore in 6e (recoil).

And then there's the stuff that absolutely is covered, but isn't relevant most of the time.  Maybe this game has a decker who wants to do combat bricking. Usually noone bothers because of the shit action economy, but today the player doesn't care.  Trying it anyway.  Time to break out another chapter of the book entirely.  Look up matrix spotting rules, because that's never been satisfactorily explained anway. GM's gotta now decide how the matrix security is arranged, because NPC PANs have never, ever been codified (that I've ever seen, anyhow). Etc etc etc.

Maybe the magician is trying out new drek today.  How does critter power X interact with this combat?  Flip to a new chapter. Review a critter power entry.  Think.  Rule.  Oh, never mind that answer, let's go with this spell instead.  Break out another splatbook entirely.  Etc. etc.

Combat goes super, super, super slow in 5e.  Granted some of that stuff is edition agnostic (invoking seldom used rules, splatbooks) but 6e streamlines where it can, and I think that's a BIG help.

much of what you describe above are not modifiers but just the problem with rules that have to cover magic, tech and matrix worlds.

the complexity of 6e's edge mechanic vs. 5e's modifiers seems very similar to me, but without the semblance of reality.
i mean in 6e EACH WEAPON has variable AR that changes with each range category.
that means you cannot simply "know" that short range for weapon x is y, so if it's over apply this modifier.
now you have to look up each weapon to understand how it will effect the edge mechanic.
to top it off cover modifiers are not removed, so that's a wash from the old system.
so why remove some modifiers, but not others (see cover), why remove range modifiers and replace them with ARs that vary by range and by EACH specific weapon (not even weapon category)?

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #21 on: (14:26:03/07-11-19) »
Stainless how is any of that improved by 6e. If you donít know the rule you still need to look it up. So if the decker is trying something new he is still looking it up. The modifiers going away but potentially granting edge I assume still means you are looking up charts to see if this grants edge and if your ware cancels the enemy from getting edge etc. it may be a bit simplified so a bit quicker but looking up is looking up. And the timing of that has less to do with the rules but the editing/organization of the book.

Unrelated but  Iíd expect there are a lot of ways to simplify modifiers without removing them and replacing it with edge.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #22 on: (14:30:48/07-11-19) »
Stainless how is any of that improved by 6e. If you donít know the rule you still need to look it up. So if the decker is trying something new he is still looking it up. The modifiers going away but potentially granting edge I assume still means you are looking up charts to see if this grants edge and if your ware cancels the enemy from getting edge etc. it may be a bit simplified so a bit quicker but looking up is looking up. And the timing of that has less to do with the rules but the editing/organization of the book.

Unrelated but  Iíd expect there are a lot of ways to simplify modifiers without removing them and replacing it with edge.

As I said, certain problems are indeed edition agnostic.  I.E. not all of 5e's problems are because 5e is the way it is.

But, 6e is a new paradigm. No longer is it a question of identifying and codifying all the circumstances, and rolling a dice pool modified by that net amount.  6e is a game of "your dice pool for the most part goes unmodified, but the GM decides at any given interaction who has circumstantial advantage over the other, if anyone".  Obviously the former takes way more time to impliment than the latter, even in a best case scenario where all the modifiers are right there handy.
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.

Serbitar

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #23 on: (14:36:00/07-11-19) »
Well the rub is that meaningless modifiers aren't just in the eye of the beholder, they're sometimes objectively more relevant some times than other times.  Like the oft-cited low-light vision enhancement in a dark alleyway.  If both sides in that environment have it, it's functionally meaningless besides adding extra complexity to both sides' rolls.

Boiling down most (note that 6e doesn't ditch ALL) modifiers to GM fiat awarding one side or none a point of Edge is about as slick and streamlined as possible, and I still daresay fair.  Sure, you have to trust the GM to be fair about weighing your advantage of higher ground atop the dumpster counts for more or less than the Ork's ability to see clearly in the dark alley.  Having to rely on GM judgement is a price i'm not just willing but quite quick to agree to, in order to dispense with most combat modifiers.  Boil several minutes of page flipping down to what might be uncharitably described as GM whim/fiat?  Yes, please!

I dont disagree with that. But you dont need Edge for that. You could (if you wanted, that is up to the goal of streamlining) do the same thing with some extra dice for the roll instead. Streamlining can be done without the gamey Edge system. Edge  adds more complexity and gives not much benefit in additional options (and adds MUCH abuse potential like the healing stuff). Its just the "new and hip" system that SR6 uses to differentiate it from other systems and editions (and sells it as necessary for streamlining).

With the very gamist Edge system SR6 just alienated a lot of more simulationist oriented gamers (in an even worse way than SR5 did with shoehorned wireless boni and limits).

TLDR:

SR6 Edge = Gamist
SR6 Edge is not required nor helps streamlining, removing most modifers does
« Last Edit: (14:45:43/07-11-19) by Serbitar »

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #24 on: (14:44:53/07-11-19) »
I'm not prepared to agree with the premise that Edge stuff is abusive in 6e.

You HAVE played 5e, right?  1 edge to ignore limits AND add dice AND impose the rule of 6?  or even better: post-edging and rerolling ALL failures?  Entire swathes of the book become moot when you just spend a measly 1 point of your edge pool.

Sure you can do a lot more with edge in 6e... but those two (I daresay problematic) applications of edge are either moot (no Limits anymore to ignore) or solved (costs a lot more than 1 edge for those effects now). I don't even see healing as being a problematic expenditure of edge. Why is it any less realistic to "walk it off a bit" than to remove boxes via magic? Or via a medkit?  If you spend edge to remove damage, it's akin to the pain receding somewhat/revealing that the wound wasn't really as bad as it looked at first/whatever.
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.

Serbitar

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #25 on: (14:47:03/07-11-19) »
I'm not prepared to agree with the premise that Edge stuff is abusive in 6e.


The fact alone that you will have to prevent players from doing menail tasks to generate Edge and heal with it answers the question. That is wrong on so many levels. If you do not find this poblematic we do not have a common enough ground for any discussion.
« Last Edit: (14:48:52/07-11-19) by Serbitar »

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #26 on: (14:51:12/07-11-19) »
I'm not prepared to agree with the premise that Edge stuff is abusive in 6e.


The fact alone that you will have to prevent players from doing menail tasks to generate Edge and heal with it answers the question. That is wrong on so many levels. If you do not find this poblematic we do not have a common enough ground for any discussion.

I don't follow your logic here.

You have a problem with 6e preventing menial tasks from accumulating edge which could have then be spent on healing?  or that you fear there won't be such a restriction?  Because... SCN finally bothered to reveal it and I feel like I can comment on that.. there IS such a rule in place.
« Last Edit: (14:52:48/07-11-19) 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, youíre fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
« Reply #27 on: (14:58:08/07-11-19) »
Healing 1 box in itself I can say itís walking it off. Repeated use healing from a near mortal wound to healthy is a stretch.

If the goal was to mostly keep the dice pool the same which yes speeds up play. Modifiers could have been thresholds modifiers. With edge along with it. Edge maybe covering minor changes and larger effects being a threshold change.

The 2 people in a wind storm example bothered me. Yes they are equally screwed but itís still a hard shot. And if neither gets edge that is not reflected at all.

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1928
« Reply #28 on: (15:05:38/07-11-19) »
Yes two snipers shooting at each other across the barrens during a hurricane should be less accurate than two snipers shooting at each other across the barrens during clear weather.

But that's apples to oranges.

When the two snipers are shooting at each other during the hurricane, who cares what they "could have done" if the hurricane weren't there.  It IS there.  Rolling the same dice pool in both cases is a non sequitur as to who's going to outperform who while the hurricane either is or is not raging.

How they would have performed without the hurricane is only relevant in the event another sniper is simultaneously involved who isn't affected by the hurricane.  And if so, then it's a no brainer as to who gets the Edge.
« Last Edit: (15:08:24/07-11-19) 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, youíre fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Serbitar

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 33
« Reply #29 on: (15:14:14/07-11-19) »
I'm not prepared to agree with the premise that Edge stuff is abusive in 6e.


The fact alone that you will have to prevent players from doing menail tasks to generate Edge and heal with it answers the question. That is wrong on so many levels. If you do not find this poblematic we do not have a common enough ground for any discussion.

I don't follow your logic here.

You have a problem with 6e preventing menial tasks from accumulating edge which could have then be spent on healing?  or that you fear there won't be such a restriction?  Because... SCN finally bothered to reveal it and I feel like I can comment on that.. there IS such a rule in place.

I have  a problem with the existance of healing by edge and the stupid (house?) rules that are required to keep the consequences in check. Thats extremely unelegant rules design par excellence.
And of course all the other gamist edge abuse possibilities (have already been discussed in different threads).