NEWS

Combat is SR6?

  • 311 Replies
  • 8707 Views

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2393
« Reply #60 on: (19:54:35/07-11-19) »
A lot of people play missions so they are kind of stuck with raw and canít house rule things. And house rules are a bit finicky in that itís not like you play tested them so it can take a while to get it to work.

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Telling it like it is
    • Building Better Security
« Reply #61 on: (19:55:22/07-11-19) »
Maybe I'm the only one who feels that way, but it sure seems like that's what you're saying despite denials. You keep talking about how your style of play is lost, and have been dismissive to the point of rudeness when others of us talk about how we like what we're seeing and how it can improve our table, or when games with other players have left people overall positive.

Even just from the quick start rules I can see a lot of ways to make things very black trench when I want to. I'm sure there'll be even more things I can find once I get my paws on a CRB.

If you review my posts you will find (i hope) that I have repeatedly said that 6e should work great for Pink Mohawk / MiB style of play and that's fine for those who like it.
Personally I hate it, and I have expressed why.
I am 100% confident that 6e is wholly unsuited to Black Trenchcoat style of play and I am very disappointed by that.
I am expressing my disappointment and noting what those points of needless crapness are.

I AM NOT judging you for having a different playstyle than me, period.

Hephaestus

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • "Milk Run" is a mighty weird way to spell TPK
« Reply #62 on: (22:53:46/07-11-19) »
So, the main split seems to be realistic/simulation-ist/black trench coat style gameplay versus the fantastical/game-ist/pink mohawk style gameplay. And both sides have made some valid points.

One the one hand, we are debating a game that has taken pretty much every major sci-fi and fantasy trope there is, thrown them in a blender with corporate espionage, and poured it all over a dystopian near-future. It makes it hard to say that "reality" is an important factor.

On the other hand, playing a game where difficultly is hand-waived into a generic pool of "+1 advantage" can cheapen the experience for people. And the farther away you go from reality, the harder it is to identify with actions you are taking as a character, and the harder it is to care about the results. And a lot of the time, once players stop caring, they stop playing.

The thing that has stuck out to me, though, is the seeming lack of relativism in the new edition. I get that some modifiers were melted down to streamline gameplay, but it seems that they have been watered down a bit too much.

Take the sniper duel example. The 5th ed path is that both would receive a crap-ton of penalties, to the point that they would need to edge a roll to be able to hit at all. The 6th ed path is that it's a wash on the dice, and both would roll their respective pools because they are at similar disadvantages. In this situation, the 5th ed path seems more logical because both snipers have the same relative disadvantages to deal with. This also extends to things like melee damage. I understand that the devs wanted to streamline weapon stats, but a pixie should not be able to swing a bat like a troll (unless they got some serious mojo).

It doesn't matter how realistic or abstract you make a game, if there is no clear and consistent way to guage the relative difficulty of things like combat, then the experience will feel hollow. And from what has been said so far, it looks like the entire burden of consistency has been dumped on the GM. So they have to abstract with little support from the rules, and the response from a lot of people is to just house rule things. But if you're just going to house rule everything, then why even bother with a new edition?

tenchi2a

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 110
« Reply #63 on: (23:16:37/07-11-19) »
So, the main split seems to be realistic/simulation-ist/black trench coat style gameplay versus the fantastical/game-ist/pink mohawk style gameplay. And both sides have made some valid points.

One the one hand, we are debating a game that has taken pretty much every major sci-fi and fantasy trope there is, thrown them in a blender with corporate espionage, and poured it all over a dystopian near-future. It makes it hard to say that "reality" is an important factor.

On the other hand, playing a game where difficultly is hand-waived into a generic pool of "+1 advantage" can cheapen the experience for people. And the farther away you go from reality, the harder it is to identify with actions you are taking as a character, and the harder it is to care about the results. And a lot of the time, once players stop caring, they stop playing.

The thing that has stuck out to me, though, is the seeming lack of relativism in the new edition. I get that some modifiers were melted down to streamline gameplay, but it seems that they have been watered down a bit too much.

Take the sniper duel example. The 5th ed path is that both would receive a crap-ton of penalties, to the point that they would need to edge a roll to be able to hit at all. The 6th ed path is that it's a wash on the dice, and both would roll their respective pools because they are at similar disadvantages. In this situation, the 5th ed path seems more logical because both snipers have the same relative disadvantages to deal with. This also extends to things like melee damage. I understand that the devs wanted to streamline weapon stats, but a pixie should not be able to swing a bat like a troll (unless they got some serious mojo).

It doesn't matter how realistic or abstract you make a game, if there is no clear and consistent way to guage the relative difficulty of things like combat, then the experience will feel hollow. And from what has been said so far, it looks like the entire burden of consistency has been dumped on the GM. So they have to abstract with little support from the rules, and the response from a lot of people is to just house rule things. But if you're just going to house rule everything, then why even bother with a new edition?
+1

tenchi2a

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 110
« Reply #64 on: (23:34:39/07-11-19) »
After doing a write-up of the combat system for 3rd it dawned on me.
IMHO, They seem to be trying to pull a D&D 5th edition and revert back to a more popular streamlined version of a previous edition. (streamlined 3rd in the D&D case)
Here they seem to be trying for a 3rd edition fallback, but streamlined it way to much and lost all the bite in the 3rd system.
I could be wrong but this seems to be the case to me.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2728
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #65 on: (23:35:44/07-11-19) »
Shadowrun has been designed and described as more realistic, it's original conceits included no Teleportation, no Resurrection, and no magic regeneration so saying reality isn't relevant is totally against one of the primary tenets of the SR setting. Which was intended to not be high fantasy.

Further calling the new Edge system gamiest is drastic miss-use of the term. As revealed so far the Edge system is arbitrary and static, both very not gamiest concepts. Why aren't the edge use limits linked to something? Why is it solo? Most system added to this sort of thing are linked the team mechanic as whole not to character specifically. Why generate a system that totally core to this edition and say it replaces all penalties when it really doesn't. Wound penalties are still in the system. Why make something so core to the system then implement flaws that completely negate it?  A penalty to could be understandable, but to totally negate it is a really huge step. Is there any other flaws in the game negate a core stat totally?
 
And no one has responded to my earlier question, I guess, everyone on the pro side is just ok with it going out with a huge error in the edge generation limit rules? Really? 

So for all those reason I don't think 6e is promising for ether pink Mohawk or MiB. I don't think it's promising as a version of SR. I think the best option right now is pause and pass it back for another play test pass and make sure what goes out the door is what is actually intended.

I know that's not going to happen, but to me it's the best option for everyone.

« Last Edit: (23:38:07/07-11-19) by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

tenchi2a

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 110
« Reply #66 on: (23:44:25/07-11-19) »
Shadowrun has been designed and described as more realistic, it's original conceits included no Teleportation, no Resurrection, and no magic regeneration so saying reality isn't relevant is totally against one of the primary tenets of the SR setting. Which was intended to not be high fantasy.

Further calling the new Edge system gamiest is drastic miss-use of the term. As revealed so far the Edge system is arbitrary and static, both very not gamiest concepts. Why aren't the edge use limits linked to something? Why is it solo? Most system added to this sort of thing are linked the team mechanic as whole not to character specifically. Why generate a system that totally core to this edition and say it replaces all penalties when it really doesn't. Wound penalties are still in the system. Why make something so core to the system then implement flaws that completely negate it?  A penalty to could be understandable, but to totally negate it is a really huge step. Is there any other flaws in the game negate a core stat totally?
 
And no one has responded to my earlier question, I guess, everyone on the pro side is just ok with it going out with a huge error in the edge generation limit rules? Really? 

So for all those reason I don't think 6e is promising for ether pink Mohawk or MiB. I don't think it's promising as a version of SR. I think the best option right now is pause and pass it back for another play test pass and make sure what goes out the door is what is actually intended.

I know that's not going to happen, but to me it's the best option for everyone.

+1

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6065
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #67 on: (00:32:51/07-12-19) »
Fox that is literally what Iíve been asking for. A threshold system for opposed tests. But their blog/post whatever itís called,  today explaining combat said as long as both sides are penalized itís just a wash and there is no edge, dice pool changes, threshold modifiers etc.  and Iíve seen nothing to indicate a threshold modifying system for combat at all yet. Against the environment sure, combat not yet.

Quote from: Quick Start Rules, Beginner Box Set, p. 5
Opposed Tests

In an Opposed test, another character, object, device, or entity is actively (or passively) resisting your efforts, so you must exceed their effort to succeed. In an Opposed test, two parties (usually the player as PC vs. the gamemaster as NPC or object) roll dice pools and compare the number of hits. The one with the most hits wins. The difference between the higher number of hits and the lower number of hits are the net hits in these tests, and they are often applied to the action in some wayófor example, in combat, net hits from the attacker are added to the Damage Value of their attack.

(Emphasis mine) I'm not sure if this is exactly what you meant by thresholds modifying system for combat, but net hits do add to damage. On the same page, the Threshold Guidelines for Simple test are also given, from 1-7 and using shooting at a person as an example.
« Last Edit: (00:36:27/07-12-19) by FastJack »

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2393
« Reply #68 on: (00:51:15/07-12-19) »
Fox that is literally what Iíve been asking for. A threshold system for opposed tests. But their blog/post whatever itís called,  today explaining combat said as long as both sides are penalized itís just a wash and there is no edge, dice pool changes, threshold modifiers etc.  and Iíve seen nothing to indicate a threshold modifying system for combat at all yet. Against the environment sure, combat not yet.

Quote from: Quick Start Rules, Beginner Box Set, p. 5
Opposed Tests

In an Opposed test, another character, object, device, or entity is actively (or passively) resisting your efforts, so you must exceed their effort to succeed. In an Opposed test, two parties (usually the player as PC vs. the gamemaster as NPC or object) roll dice pools and compare the number of hits. The one with the most hits wins. The difference between the higher number of hits and the lower number of hits are the net hits in these tests, and they are often applied to the action in some wayófor example, in combat, net hits from the attacker are added to the Damage Value of their attack.

(Emphasis mine) I'm not sure if this is exactly what you meant by thresholds modifying system for combat, but net hits do add to damage. On the same page, the Threshold Guidelines for Simple test are also given, from 1-7 and using shooting at a person as an example.

So Iím saying letís say I have 6 dice on my defense test because unlike the box set examples Iím not captain America with perfect stats   I get 2 hits on my defense test. Effectively the threshold to hit me is 2. A threshold difficulty system would say the threshold to hit you is increased by x in these circumstances. Like poor visibility maybe Iíd need 3 hits to hit you instead of the two. Your diecpool would never change but youíd potentially miss or lose net hits because itís a harder shot.

The real play things and comments from people on this board to the blog thing have stated that doesnít happen that itís pretty much just edge outside a couple specific dice pool modifiers like wounds. That thresholds are used only for non opposed tests. Itís my opinion that edge on its own. doesnít do a good job of reflecting the inherent difficulty of certain attacks. Like long range, poor visibility etc. it can reflect more minor shifts in difficulty but not large ones.

« Reply #69 on: (03:10:13/07-12-19) »
So much of the issues with edge seem to not come from whether it's 'realistic' or not (because systems with narrative permissions can be as real or fantastical as the GM running it wants to be) but with how much it's scrunched a whole load of factors into one place.

Which isn't really the poor edge system's fault so much as the designers apparently just hating armour being useful to soak.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 8994
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #70 on: (03:24:55/07-12-19) »
the designers apparently just hating armour being useful to soak.
Or, y'know, most playtesters liking the new system. Since as we know, and is confirmed in the blog, they tested a LOT of things.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

« Reply #71 on: (03:30:13/07-12-19) »
I mean, I fully believe it functions better than 5e because *gestures at 5e*.

Just, for as much as I actually like the idea of compressing all the niche factors down into fungible currency for runners to be cool with, a lot of the way edge hangs off the system is just weird.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2728
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #72 on: (03:33:22/07-12-19) »
So much of the issues with edge seem to not come from whether it's 'realistic' or not (because systems with narrative permissions can be as real or fantastical as the GM running it wants to be) but with how much it's scrunched a whole load of factors into one place.

Which isn't really the poor edge system's fault so much as the designers apparently just hating armour being useful to soak.

The mass combination of factors is really more the Attack and Defense rating choice stacked on top the decision to (As you point out) not have armor add any kind of soak.

The edge system's issues is more of a laundry list of problems, the pro side doesn't seem to have particular interest or possibly capability to address those problems. What happens, happens. All we can do is ask the question and pray it gets addressed.
 
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 594
« Reply #73 on: (07:56:55/07-12-19) »
You're comparing a shot through a hurricane to a shot that's not through a hurricane.  It's a purely academic and functionally meaningless exercise.

And here is where you are failing to see what is being said.

Allow me to simplify (read: streamline ;) ) the example a bit.

Instead of two snipers in a hurricane, let's use two opposing forces (can be anything (really) having a gunfight in a warehouse.
The terrain effects both sides equally.
- In 6e, this results in no change in the rules.
- In 5e, there might be situational modifiers applied to both sides.

Now, the fear - and I will say it: the possibly unfounded fear - is that when you introduce something into the combat that affects both sides equally, 6e won't reflect that.

In the warehouse example, what happens when someone "drops smoke" either through a smoke grenade, spell, spirit power, whatever?
- In 6e, as long as neither side has Thermographic vision:  Nothing changes.  At all.  In spite of their being...  Well, situations that equally blinding both sides would be beneficial, in 6e there isn't any change to how the game plays.
- In 5e, both sides get Blind Fire penalties (if neither side has Thermo) allowing your side an easier time withdrawing - or even advancing to a better position.

So comparing shots in and out of a hurricane doesn't have to be academic at all.

now this is an example I would like to chime in on ...
In 6E how you would handle the above situation would depend on how you want to use the situation to your advantage. If both side are still just want to shoot it out with each other then yeah it's a wash and doesn't matter ... but if Side A that dropped the smoke (or whatever) is then wanting to use the "cover" to tactically move or withdraw, and the Side B can't perceive, then Side A has the advantage and earned Edge as they move

At least that is the intention of how the system should be used
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Iron Serpent Prince

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
« Reply #74 on: (08:09:57/07-12-19) »
I don't think you are helping your cause there Banshee.

If the combat is going down and everyone is having their base chance to hit each other, then someone puts up a smoke screen between them...  And no one has a harder time hitting their targets?

That is the point that is sticking in some peoples craw.

With the new modular spell crafting, a mage can blanket an entire city block in darkness.  As long as no combatants have Low Light Vision, nothing changes at all.
A different mage fills the battlefield with buffeting winds, and no shots are more difficult.

Physics.
What is it good for.
Absolutely nothing.
Say it again.