NEWS

My issues with 6th edition: "suspension of disbelief" vs. "the uncanny valley"

  • 399 Replies
  • 31436 Views

Lormyr

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 794
« Reply #345 on: <07-29-19/1653:46> »
The second part is only a systematic issue for tanky characters that strategize on getting attacked a lot, though.

While that would likely be the most common case, it is not the only one. My concern with raising the 2/round limit is less about defense use, or more about a collective offense collecting edge, and then passing it along to their allies so on their turns they roast the opposition's face off.

Quick example would be a boss man, his right hand, and the 2 groups of grunts. Grunts pass one to boss each, right hand passes one to boss, boss generates two on his turn and has 5 free points to spend. That example is hardly the worse possible situation either.

  • a.) still more realistic than a system where the amount of factors and perks that are allowed to play a role is arbitrarily limited based on a 3-second increment.

I don't have a strong opinion on this one other than to say game balance is more important than realism for me personally (not to say that setting realistic isn't a concern, because it is).

  • b.) quite fun to play out. And fun is important, right? RIGHT? ::)

Absolutely. And there is no right or wrong fun, just preference. I personally would have more fun with a more traditional approach to armor and strength, but I appreciate your meaning.

  • d.) counterable by properly employing grunt rules.

Only potentially. See my first response.

And if that´s still to "messy", what about that other alternative to the 2-Edge-cap that is often discussed: There is a Limit of 2 per round, but it only applies to edge tokens that are saved for later actions.

Again, doesn't really help the aforementioned bad guy gang up edge roast.
"TL:DR 6e's reduction of meaningful choices is akin to forcing everyone to wear training wheels. Now it's just becomes a bunch of toddlers riding around on tricycles they can't fall off of." - Adzling

Finstersang

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 665
« Reply #346 on: <07-29-19/1657:29> »
Two observations:

1. So you bank 2 edge and use the rest on the actions where you earned them. Or am I missing something here...?

2. Gaining an edge seem to just be half the equation. The other half seen to be to deny the oppression from gaining one. Even if you can't bank more edge you can still prevent the opposition from gaining one.

1. Yes, that´s the idea here. You would be able to get as much as you "rightfully earned" as long  as you spend it right on the action (offense, defense, soak...) where you earned it, but you can max. save 2 for other Actions or for the upcoming round.

2. That´s true, but it´s arguably quite a loss in verisimilitude (great, now I´m using that word too :P) when having a clear advantage on your side suddenly yields the same result as a draw.
"Firing Line adds a ton of Perks that modify Attack and Defense ratings"

"Cool, does this mean that the whole AR/DR comparison has a bigger impact now?"

"Haha No :D"

Finstersang

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 665
« Reply #347 on: <07-29-19/1727:32> »
This is not going to make SR6 "OMG literally unplayable" (unlike that commie 2-Edge-per-Turn-limit  :P) for me, but it´s definitely an issue that should be adressed. If not by some form of Errata, then at least in the following combat supplement.
"Commie" implies that it appears to work on paper and fails in practice because of the flawed nature of the humans practicing it, plus/minus sabotage from rival capitalist governments. This seems to fall apart on paper.

Hey, but you get the idea on why I call it the "commie" limit ;D

TBH, it´s a really fitting moniker: The whole thing is motivated by some vague idea of bringing "balance" and "equality" to the table, which it achieves by a) ignoring huge parts of reality and b) giving everyone less of the of the fun stuff on average. Truly a very communist rule :P   

Now I can´t help but assign the other 2 houserules their political counterpart:

2 Edge per round, but it´s only limiting amount of Edge that can be saved for later: Social Democrat
  • It´s likely the most "reasonable" alternative.
  • Might need more explaining until everyone gets the hang of it.
  • You don´t get less Edge overall, but you will sometimes be forced to spend it on "healthy" options like defensive rolls, which is a bit like socialized healthcare.

2 Edge per Turn (Variants: 2 Edge per Action, no Limits at all): Anarcho Capitalism
  • Requires minimal to no bureaucracy
  • Can probably be really fun if you know what you´re doing.
  • Is likely even more fun if you have a salvaged SWAT armor, a sawed-off Shotgun and psychopathic tendencies.
  • Probably a bit unrealistic, but looks cool in movies.
« Last Edit: <08-08-19/1143:13> by Finstersang »
"Firing Line adds a ton of Perks that modify Attack and Defense ratings"

"Cool, does this mean that the whole AR/DR comparison has a bigger impact now?"

"Haha No :D"

Moonshine Fox

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 589
  • Proudly serving our dragon overlords
« Reply #348 on: <07-29-19/1754:04> »
Total anecdote and all, but I just did an informal "trying the rules out" mini-game for the first time tonight.  I played a 3 strength covert ops elfy ninja thing wielding a humble combat knife.  I wanted to play a decidedly non-big melee type to get a feel for what you can do if you're NOT a big bad troll.

Without some prior personal hands on play experience, I hadn't grokked how important judicious edge use really is.  The DVs were almost besides the point in our combats.  Yes, we played full-blown shadowrunners taking on low-threat halloweener scrubs, but my pixie had little difficulty eliminating NPCs with one DV 3P attack each.  Went three for three on one-shot-one-kills.  It absolutely can be less about the raw DV value than how your spend your Edge (and how often you can generate it to fuel more of those expenditures).

I'm glad you enjoyed it. If you go again and fight something higher threat then some Halloweeners I'd be interested to hear more about that. Just to be clear you said Pixie. Were you referring to your elf as a Pixie or did you play a pixie? Beyond that I'm more interested to hear what you thinking on Adzling argument. What are your thoughts on It's Good Enough for RPG Purposes? I'd also be interested Fox's and Bladz thoughts on it.

My thoughts on the phrase "Good Enough For _____". Problem is there's two different ways to take this phrase. One is that the person/group/corp puts out something that barely passes muster, leaving it to their fanbase to either just suck it, or because they know the fans will mod it till they fix the problems so don't bother doing it themselves. This seems to result largely due to a company either having a loyal fan-base who will still buy their stuff even with problems, or they have a monopoly and people don't have much if any choice. I don't know Catalyst as a company, and while I could easily picture someone higher up who only cares about sales numbers making such a call, the actual people who put in the work building this upcoming edition I can't see having played that way and would find such a claim insulting.

The other way addresses the issue of scope creep by declaring that a particular point is "good enough" or the project risks getting deeper and deeper into ever expanding detail and either falls behind schedule and risks floundering, or becomes mystifyingly complex making it hard for a chunk of your intended player base to understand. For an example, most RPG systems have three stats representing the physical body, strength for raw power, agility/dexterity for speed, flexibility, and coordination, and body/constitution for stamina and endurance. They will call that 'Good Enough', and in all honesty, it is. It still doesn't address the various nuances and balances in each of those stats, but such starts getting into far to much detail that your average player will probably neither care about, nor really need to use over the more simplified trio. A much harder target to hit and you will never please all the people who are wanting to play your game, though I'm thinking 6th world may have gotten it pretty well on target. We'll be able to tell better with the full rules in front of us and a few games under our belt to see how it plays beyond the paper.

TL/DR: The phrase good enough for can be used in both positive and negative ways, but I feel 6th is more on the positive side. I do however reserve the right to change my mind after I've gotten experience with it.

Also, yes I find the difference between melee weapon damage being fixed and unarmed being str/2 (personally I feel it should have been body since the weapon you're attacking with is your own slab of meat). However without knowing anything beyond that fragment of information I'm not willing to call it broken or the system a lost cause. Snap judgment declarations without the full facts are never a good thing.

Hobbes

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 2887
« Reply #349 on: <07-29-19/1758:09> »
Snap judgment declarations without the full facts are never a good thing.

I'm not sure you get the internet.   :P

Moonshine Fox

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 589
  • Proudly serving our dragon overlords
« Reply #350 on: <07-29-19/1800:34> »
Snap judgment declarations without the full facts are never a good thing.

I'm not sure you get the internet.   :P

LoL! Don't I know it!

adzling

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #351 on: <07-29-19/1836:26> »
After the first playtests by the podcasters were released I came out publicly and said that the edge mechanic is not going to in any way represent reality or what happens IRL due to many factors.

Everything that has come out since, in these and other discussions, has only further reinforced that point.

IMHO it's a cheap, shallow, gamist mechanic that substitutes relative advantage in place for what actually is happening.

One can now see from SSDR's playtest that it in no way represents the combat space in any meaningful way and it degrades as the situation gets more complex (more smoke, running, positional advantage etc). This is clear because the amount of relative advantage is capped at a threshold well below that of the modifiers typically encountered in many fights add up to...never mind that fact that it ALSO has to factor in armor and other stuff that I am constrained by the NDA to not reveal.

Replacing realism with relativism results in the asinine "fight in blizzard/windstorm/fire/smoke" scenario whereby no one ends up affected by what should be a choice-limiting scenario.

It's gonna get worse as more of this comes out and more people with any significant experience use the system.

This is because, imho, relative advantage is an inherently flawed mechanic that cannot represent what's going on in combat with any degree of accuracy, authority or consistency.

Sure it may be fun, at first.

But when you quickly realize that you can no longer reliably predict the outcomes of your actions because "who knows if i'm going to earn or lose edge or not" the entire premise of shadowrun turns to crap.

How do you determine if your plan has a chance to succeed when you cannot even vaguely assess the chance of success?

Welcome to relative advantage...

HOWEVER there is a possibility that this brings in many, many new players who don't care about that stuff and just want to roll dice at each other without having to think much or simply don't have the depth of experience to understand the inherent flaws in the system and how it impacts a game built on planning detailed actions in advance.

6e lost me when I realized that.
Time will tell if the new players it brings in feel the same way once the shine wears off immediate fun.
« Last Edit: <07-29-19/1954:13> by adzling »

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2607
« Reply #352 on: <07-29-19/1920:19> »
Yeah my group liked 5e d&d at first but the more we bumped into it’s disconnect  from reality for gamism the less we liked it. And that’s d&d which I think has a much higher tolerance for gamism. 

My hope is well be fine with 6e Sr long enough for the combat book to come out and for that or bring it back a bit.

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6170
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #353 on: <07-29-19/1931:01> »
We can now see from SSDR's playtest that it in no way represents the combat space in any meaningful way and it degrades as the situation gets more complex (more smoke, running, positional advantage etc). This is clear because the amount of relative advantage is capped at a threshold well below that of the modifiers typically encountered in many fights add up to...never mind that fact that it ALSO has to factor in armor and other stuff that I am constrained by the NDA to not reveal.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Stop using "we". "We" implies that we now are in agreement with your assessment. When speaking of your opinions on the rules, please use "I". You're able to stick with "I" elsewhere in your post.

I'm sorry, it just irks me when using "we" when stating opinions, because you are then saying "we" share your opinion.

adzling

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #354 on: <07-29-19/1938:51> »
I think my commentary is pretty clear and my use of the single occurrence of “we” fits with common usage, but for you my friend I will edit to use the impersonal third person pronoun of “one” as in “one can clearly see”.

Edited to replace the single use of the word "we" for "one".
« Last Edit: <07-29-19/1955:33> by adzling »

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6170
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #355 on: <07-29-19/1941:22> »
I think my commentary is pretty clear and my use of “we” fits with common usage but for you my friend I will edit to use the impersonal third person pronoun of “one” as in “one can clearly see”.
Thank you.

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
« Reply #356 on: <07-29-19/1947:12> »
Quote
HOWEVER there is a possibility that this brings in many, many new players who don't care about that stuff and just want to roll dice at each other without having to think much or simply don't have the depth of experience to understand the inherent flaws in the system and how it impacts a game built on planning detailed actions in advance.

I think this is getting at what my gut feeling is shaping up to be at the moment, which is that this is definitely a "beer and pretzels" version of Shadowrun that I can teach easily to the game group I currently have.  It brisk and approachable.  However, it trades that for the ability to have a satisfying campaign with a group of players who also tend to prefer Pathfinder over 5E D&D.  For one night, one-shot missions, sure.  Nobody will be that invested in the mechanics, and if the GM can keep his commentary down on the matter, many people will have a fun time. Stats nerds, power gamers, and SR vets will be the most likely to complain, if anyone does, I would guess.

Character advancement worries me a bit, since a lot of spells, qualities and gear will center around manipulation of the Edge mechanic, or the AR/DR ratio.  Neither element feels very satisfying to me as a veteran player, not like something I get excited to improve.  It feels more like expanding a menu of choices around how I can earn a metacurrency to do dice tricks, not necessarily to feel like my *character* did something inherently cool because of my build choices. 

Granted, my expectations are all set from prior editions.  I'm sure a lot of the things I don't find rewarding won't be noticed by brand new players with no basis for comparison.  I'm definitely in no rush to jump into 6E, even though it checks a lot of boxes for me in other areas.  Edge and AR/DR are the things I keep coming back to that is making it less appealing.  I'll be interested to hear what the buzz becomes when people get the rules in hand.

adzling

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #357 on: <07-29-19/1952:45> »
I suspect that your conclusions will be the most likely situation Typhus.

Time will tell.

Typhus

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 288
« Reply #358 on: <07-29-19/2121:06> »
May we both be wrong. I miss playing Shadowrun.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #359 on: <07-29-19/2134:41> »
Trying to predict what the fan base at large is going to like or dislike is generally a waste of time.

The Gaming community atlarge is more diverse then ever and I have no idea what they will think.
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking