NEWS

5e dnd vs 6e SR. Seeking simplicity and why edge failed,

  • 119 Replies
  • 3587 Views

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9483
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #60 on: <06-26-20/0430:34> »
D&D 5e is still a simplification compared to 3.5, and it kicks ass. So I disagree that simplifcations cut out the soul. SR6 reduced Knowledge Skills to binary rather than ranked, and I find it excellent and better. Heavy crunch should be an option, not mandatory.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

Reaver

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6206
  • 60% alcohol 40% asshole...
« Reply #61 on: <06-26-20/0445:42> »
D&D 5e is still a simplification compared to 3.5, and it kicks ass. So I disagree that simplifcations cut out the soul. SR6 reduced Knowledge Skills to binary rather than ranked, and I find it excellent and better. Heavy crunch should be an option, not mandatory.

No experience with DnD 5e. They lost me with DnD4e, as my table transitioned to Pathfinder. And since we enjoy Pathfinder and have the books, we felt no need to buy and learn DnD 5e.

And like I said, it could just be me that wants the crunch back...
Where am I going? And why am I in a hand basket ???

Remember: You can't fix Stupid. But you can beat on it with a 2x4 until it smartens up! Or dies.

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 888
« Reply #62 on: <06-26-20/0658:13> »
It is not just you, I too and many people I know like the crunch.

The trick is finding that right balance, there is definitely a thing as too much. I love all of the options and detail but I don't want to have so much that it bogs down play.
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9483
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #63 on: <06-26-20/0719:43> »
That's why I want a lot of crunch to be in the customizing parts. During play it won't matter if a gun has slots left, that only matters when you're further modifying it in your downtime. The exact stats you can establish then, during play you just grab the statblock. And at the same time the options need to be doable. Two dozen magic traditions that each have significant different rulesets is impossible to handle. If I could add a small Customisation layer on top of a base framework, then suddenly the choices are manageable. Six lifestyles which have some restrictions to how you can mod them, is doable. I can dive into details or stick to basics.

I want a basic Crunch of 6 with options that make it a 7.5. Not a basic 4 that becomes a 6, or an 8 that becomes a 9. So far SR6 is going the right way for me.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

Banshee

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 888
« Reply #64 on: <06-26-20/0856:46> »
That's why I want a lot of crunch to be in the customizing parts. During play it won't matter if a gun has slots left, that only matters when you're further modifying it in your downtime. The exact stats you can establish then, during play you just grab the statblock. And at the same time the options need to be doable. Two dozen magic traditions that each have significant different rulesets is impossible to handle. If I could add a small Customisation layer on top of a base framework, then suddenly the choices are manageable. Six lifestyles which have some restrictions to how you can mod them, is doable. I can dive into details or stick to basics.

I want a basic Crunch of 6 with options that make it a 7.5. Not a basic 4 that becomes a 6, or an 8 that becomes a 9. So far SR6 is going the right way for me.

I mostly agree ...
I absolutely think that the heavy crunch can be on the front end and not during play. Build as possible into things that can be precalculated and just put on a character sheet.
But I think 6E fell short in some of that by putting too much into the AR vs DR relationship.
Robert "Banshee" Volbrecht
Freelancer & FAQ Committee member
Former RPG Lead Agent
Catalyst Demo Team

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
« Reply #65 on: <06-26-20/1741:27> »
I agree with Reaver, complexity creates depth and depth is good for nuance.

The challenge is to balance complexity / depth against ease-of-play / quick to learn.

6e's core failing was that it tried to eradicate all nuance and force it into AR/DR, which ended up being meaningless.

Which of course, because everything is now related to AR/DR, results in almost everything in the ENTIRE GAME becoming meaningless.

Now your tactical and nuanced decisions all boil down to "how do I best harvest edge" and even those decisions are mostly meaningless because of the 2 edge cap. The hard tactical decisions that drive suspense and tension no longer exist in 6e 'cause you're always gonna hit that 2 edge cap.

6e tossed out the nuanced, deep and meaningful decisions of 5e (along with the at time needless complexity that drove it) and replaced it with a shambolic, board-game mechanic that is divorced from reality and meaning and only sightly reduced complexity while at it.

Nu-edge is, at it's core, idiotic for an RPG.

It would be perfect for a board-game version of Shadowrun however.

I think Catalyst would have been better off using nu-edge for Sprawl Ops or other Shadowrun related board game content and spent their efforts polishing 5e into something less complex and better edited.

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.

Lormyr

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 640
« Reply #66 on: <06-26-20/1918:22> »
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.

Yeeep, that's becoming a signature. I want you to know that I have never been pretentious enough to give myself a forum signature before now, so that is the measure of how much I laughed upon reading this.
"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

adzling

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3266
« Reply #67 on: <06-26-20/2017:17> »
i'm honored lormyr ;-)

xthorgoldx

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Magic's for quitters
« Reply #68 on: <06-27-20/0053:03> »
6e's core failing was that it tried to eradicate all nuance and force it into AR/DR, which ended up being meaningless.

The thing I think is ironic about AR/DR is that at the end of the day, it's just as complex as dicepool modifiers in terms of how much tracking the players and DM have to do - it just feels simpler because doing the math wrong has no meaningful impact and so it's easy to ignore.

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2467
« Reply #69 on: <06-27-20/0112:08> »
6e's core failing was that it tried to eradicate all nuance and force it into AR/DR, which ended up being meaningless.

The thing I think is ironic about AR/DR is that at the end of the day, it's just as complex as dicepool modifiers in terms of how much tracking the players and DM have to do - it just feels simpler because doing the math wrong has no meaningful impact and so it's easy to ignore.

Complex is always a weird word for me on these things as none of it is really complex. Annoying to track and remember, time consuming those are the kind of things i think people mean when they say complex.  And yeah its no better than 5e in that regard, maybe worse as you still have dice pool penalties, so you are tracking two different sets of modifiers .  They had a speed gain in reducing the turns to one action. But I think the edge moves slows it down almost as much if not more than was gained.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9483
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #70 on: <06-27-20/0405:53> »
6e's core failing was that it tried to eradicate all nuance and force it into AR/DR, which ended up being meaningless.

The thing I think is ironic about AR/DR is that at the end of the day, it's just as complex as dicepool modifiers in terms of how much tracking the players and DM have to do - it just feels simpler because doing the math wrong has no meaningful impact and so it's easy to ignore.
It also is far less dynamic. Your goon doesn't have different DR against different players, because the equivalent of AP is part of the AR, not the DR. It takes players and GM 1~2 combat rounds per fight to memorise if they get Edge or not. I can write down AR-ranges that provide Edge for goons, and quickly compare those to the AR of the player.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

topcat

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 84
« Reply #71 on: <06-27-20/1225:43> »
Removing Edge entirely from SR6 would've helped speed the game and reduce complexity.  Earning rates vary by archetype, spending options vary by archetype, edge actions are unbalanced, and it's all just a bit of a mess.

Dice are cruel sometimes, so what do you do to mitigate outlier rolls?  Karma.  If you want to reroll failures, you spend one of your hard-earned karma and limit your ability to advance.  Maybe limit it to defensive pools only (dodge, soak, etc.).  Players who have to burn more karma advance more slowly and the shadows pass them by.  Don't burn the karma and you may not advance at all, so it's a choice.  In any case, you're going to see a lot less usage (and time spent dealing with it), because the cost becomes real.

Modifier tables rear their ugly head again.  If you're comfortable with a soft approach, you can give the advantaged player additional dice appropriate to the degree of net advantage.  If not, go get your tables and have fun calculating how much everything impacts the attacker and defender - you're not going to really enjoy the game without them.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #72 on: <06-28-20/1707:04> »
There are lots of factors to discuss when consider the concept of Crunch. I look at it like I look at software, so I discuss it in terms of complexity and sophistication. Pathfinder was/is complex, and eventually by shear weight of pages it become fairly sophisticated, enough rules interactions, enough classes, enough systems piled on top of one another until you get a pretty sophisticated out come. 5e DnD is not complex, but it is sophisticated. Learning 5e is easy, particularly if you have experience with any other variant of D&D. Like every version of D&D it does have the problem nature of the game shift fairly rapidly as the level tier. But that something that not hard to adjust to with time at the table.  5e is easy to run, it doesn't have all the tools, built in that 4e developed by it easy to add them back in.

6e SR is complex, not by intention, but b/c edge bleed into every where like the purple plague. But it lacks sophistication, it's gear values have no real meaning, the combat system should have been simple and edge use was clearly intended to add sophistication to it. But that failed, to many trap options, to many useless options, to much spending edge to gain edge, and ridiculously capped cycle. Output isn't overly changed but the through put is just capped unnecessarily and frankly bazaarly,whatever number cruncher that picked 2 edge was clearly looking at some strange, fringe use case.

Heroes system in it's current state is still quite complex though somewhat reduced, and still sophisticated. There just so many options and way to build and shape a power set, the system carries lots of depth. Still most people would consider it too complex.

But the fact is Complexity is not what's leading in the industry. Sure PF2 is a hold out, it's complex and fairly sophisticated. But it's also not going to push boundaries of the gaming community. Those who like it generally are Players whom are used to Complex games.

Clearly the spectrum of crunch is personal. I'm very happy with have both 5e DnD and PF2. I think there is a lot to be said for it. I love that we are seeing the rise of community based gaming platforms (as problematic, judgement, and often cranky as the gaming community is.) We all want more content creators,  we also want content in more/different forms, we want a return to expanding the lists of settings. We should acknowledge the failures of our community. Embrace the fact that diverse gaming community is a stronger better gaming community and press forward. We can have all those things, and keep the community growing. As the dev said SR6 stands on its own, I personally consider SR6 more to be passed out in the corner drunk on edge then standing, but hey that just my opinion. More books will be come down, and it will ether get better or worse.

I'm happy with what I outlined in this thread to date, and I plan to finish writing it up, sometime after I finish writing up my 5e stuff. I doubt it will ever go beyond my table but that's fine with me.  I don't see 6e changing direction, tragically they really don't believe that AR/DR thing is a problem. So I gonna have wait for and put my hope on 7e , the upside I doubt it will be all that long. lol



« Last Edit: <06-28-20/1710:20> by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Shinobi Killfist

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2467
« Reply #73 on: <06-28-20/1901:46> »
Unrelated but since Marcus brought up Hero system.  Man I wish hero would come out with a 7e which was a unholy blend of 4e and 6e. 4es fantasy hero was the best of it, it used I think rule masters setting for its base assumptions on how magic worked but used hero to stat it out.  They needed some martial powers magic sets and then it would have been perfect. If I can dig up my books i may home brew some martial magic sets and run a 4e fantasy hero game. WTF turn it into a cyberpunk setting.  Their fantast hero stuff and well most their stuff went downhill after 4e, some good stuff in the core of 6e, but the supplements were too generic I think. We get it you can build whatever you want.  I buy the supplement books to reduce my workload, not have you make it so generic I still have to put in loads of work to use it.

Leith

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 95
« Reply #74 on: <06-28-20/2008:54> »
"AR/DR is useless" is how I felt about a lot of the subsystems in 5e. Recoil is a good example cuz on the one hand it will affect your dice pool so you have to build around it. But if you buld your character right you don't have to worry about it 99% of the time. Like, you've got to check your Rc but if you built the character right it's never important. So why not just play without it? This is where people think depth comes in but this kind of complexity just adds tedium not depth.

AR takes all of those subsystems liek recoil and AP + DV vs Armor and limits and fire mode and rolls them into one; which so called "simulationists" may gripe about but that particular issue is just taste, one subsystem or 8 doesn't determine if you've got a good game.

Tying AR to edge creates interesting opportunities because it is a non-diagetic trait (I know there is a real term for this but I can't remember what it is). This has the upshot of making the game more abstact further upsetting "simulationists."

Which is also why "2 edge per turn" fits, whether you think it works or not. Edge is too powerful to be allowed too accumulate rapidly. You could make it less powerful but then you lose the opportunity to create a dynamic series of action options and boosts to interplay with various archetypes and gear (opportunities which I feel the designers have thus far made little use of). In any event having an arbitrary limit is much like D&D5e where advantage cannot be multiplied. Whatever it is you think you ought to have gotten another bonus for, you already have it, move on. Were the game to hand out bonuses for every single advantage, in a form not edge related, then bonus/minus dice would make the most sense (that is what recoil compensation and fire modes were).

Anyway, it's not perfect. The execution leaves much to be desired but it is new and interesting and tied to a setting I really love. Most importantly for me, it is more appealing than 5e,  and I know many people who feel the same. Maybe we'll end up hating it after a while like 5e, but we're gonna try playing it to find out.