Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: AJCarrington on <03-19-15/1406:02>
-
Saw this article over on io9, Shadowrun, The Cyberpunk Fantasy Game That Couldn't Keep Up With Reality (http://io9.com/shadowrun-the-cyberpunk-fantasy-game-that-couldnt-keep-1692250238?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_facebook&utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow), thought I would share here for comment.
While I can't say I agree with everything he says...at the end, he still wants to play...kinda the I look at it sometimes. I guess that resonated with me some level.
Thoughts/comments?
-
In fairness, the Matrix and rigging rules have always been the highest roadblocks to the game, so I can't really fault him for pointing that out. 5e has done a lot to improve that through more rules unification (I still have nightmares about 2e Matrix), but Matrix topography is a pretty esoteric topic for new players and exactly what (or which) Speed my control rig increases is an open question.
The wires and plug-n-play datajacks and whatnot of 1-3 were really just expressions of how we thought about computers at the time and, eventually, carry-over from previous editions. My iPhone today does much more than my first character's pocket secretary, which is crazy to think about. That Thatcherite fears that helped shape the game have largely passed, but I don't see that so much as not keeping up, but rather a "What if?" scenario.
-
I have to agree that rules wise that Shadowrun is a game that can't get out of its own way. Personally I'd like to see a battleaxe taken to the next edition to pare down the rule set to something more manageable. I'd also like to see fluff and rules better separated than what has been the case in this edition.
-
I wish that more reviewers, and yes players too, would take a step back and remember that the whole Shadowrun reality diverged in 1999 - so no internet, no Apple, no smartphones. The world was dealing with major stuff that diverted attention away from this kind of research.
Expecting that world to have the same level of technology is short-sighted.
-
I agree that the matrix and rigger sections have always been the weakest link in SR. But they have improved immensely.
After all you no longer have to worry about:
"You are on a green 4 much node, you can either move to an orange 3 cup node, a red 7 gateway node, or a black 4 much node. What do you do?"
"..... I shoot my deck. Then shoot the matrix. Then shoot, hang, and tar and feather the matrix engineer who designed the system!"
-
After all you no longer have to worry about:
"You are on a green 4 much node, you can either move to an orange 3 cup node, a red 7 gateway node, or a black 4 much node. What do you do?"
"..... I shoot my deck. Then shoot the matrix. Then shoot, hang, and tar and feather the matrix engineer who designed the system!"
Ahhhhh! Oh what I'm not having a flashback. Thank Ghost I was worried for a minute.
-
Oh wow. They REALLY have to take that editor away...
It changed all the M P C P and other entries to "much" and "cup"
-
This article pretty much just validates what most of the posts on many shadowrun forums indicate, which is that the rules are horrible written with many sections barely legible or completely unusable (vehicle rules, barrier rules, movement in combat, addiction etc).
It does boggle my mind how Catalyst could employ actual editors (they say they do) and still have the horribly written/ proofed/ structured books.
It's also rather mind-bending that they could write such horrific rules sets that do not work in many areas (see above) and claim they are play-tested and written by gamers.
It really does beggar belief.
The only answer I could come up with as to why the product is so poor in both editing and content is one that has been suggested before by others, which is that they rushed all this through with huge amounts of copy pasta and little or now time spent editing and playtesting.
-
For the life of me, I can't remember what book the list illustration in the post comes from:
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--CDO0FxlT--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/nfazfkszf5nbcmpc70ee.jpg)
Anyone?
-
I personally think the 4e matrix rules were fine, they were just poorly explained and not and laid out with a whole lot of thought. Matrix rules basically worked exactly the same in and out of the matrix, simple, used the same parameters that the rest of the game uses, also simple. The problem being book layout, lack of diagrams/tables that helped spell out how actually simple it all is. The matrix rules for 5e that I`ve read so far are a step in the wrong direction, and gimping the rest of the world to throw decker/crackers a bone was a bonehead move.
After playing/reading pathfinder, shadowruns books look like they were written by a golden god of editing though. Pathfinder being a game known for being "simpleñ and "easy to pick up". So it could be allot worse.
-
Heck I didn't have a problem with 2e matrix rules. I'd hate them today as my ability to focus and read through a rule book has been shot to hell. Now I read a paragraph of something I like to read and realize I spaced out half way through and read the words without understanding them. Dry rules don't stand a chance.
As clunky as the rules are, a streamlined rules would have a hard time pulling off the feel of difficulty shifts, enhanced reflexes, matric, rigging, magic all in one system. I'm not saying it can't be done. Just haven't seen a rule system that would feel like shadowrun if used.
-
This article pretty much just validates what most of the posts on many shadowrun forums indicate, which is that the rules are horrible written with many sections barely legible or completely unusable (vehicle rules, barrier rules, movement in combat, addiction etc).
It does boggle my mind how Catalyst could employ actual editors (they say they do) and still have the horribly written/ proofed/ structured books.
It's also rather mind-bending that they could write such horrific rules sets that do not work in many areas (see above) and claim they are play-tested and written by gamers.
It really does beggar belief.
The only answer I could come up with as to why the product is so poor in both editing and content is one that has been suggested before by others, which is that they rushed all this through with huge amounts of copy pasta and little or now time spent editing and playtesting.
Strange...I didn't come away with that impression at all. No doubt, some of the rules are challenging (think we're all looking forward to Data Trails) and for some, that may impact their enjoyment of the game. However, for me, that doesn't prevent my enjoyment of the game, setting and community...YMMV
-
I think that has generally been the problem with SR for a long while. you have so many elements trying to interact, it is almost impossible to get them to mesh well.
Combat...
Magic...
Rigging...
Decking...
We have separate rules for each one, and while they try to make them overlap as best they can, it's always one or two that are the Red Headed Step Children :(
-
Your always so even handed aj, your an asset to the community ;-)
This article pretty much just validates what most of the posts on many shadowrun forums indicate, which is that the rules are horrible written with many sections barely legible or completely unusable (vehicle rules, barrier rules, movement in combat, addiction etc).
It does boggle my mind how Catalyst could employ actual editors (they say they do) and still have the horribly written/ proofed/ structured books.
It's also rather mind-bending that they could write such horrific rules sets that do not work in many areas (see above) and claim they are play-tested and written by gamers.
It really does beggar belief.
The only answer I could come up with as to why the product is so poor in both editing and content is one that has been suggested before by others, which is that they rushed all this through with huge amounts of copy pasta and little or now time spent editing and playtesting.
Strange...I didn't come away with that impression at all. No doubt, some of the rules are challenging (think we're all looking forward to Data Trails) and for some, that may impact their enjoyment of the game. However, for me, that doesn't prevent my enjoyment of the game, setting and community...YMMV
-
Oh wow. They REALLY have to take that editor away...
It changed all the M P C P and other entries to "much" and "cup"
I admit when reading your post I didn't realise it had been edited and thought the cup and much nodes were actual game terms.
-
I personally think the 4e matrix rules were fine, they were just poorly explained and not and laid out with a whole lot of thought. Matrix rules basically worked exactly the same in and out of the matrix, simple, used the same parameters that the rest of the game uses, also simple. The problem being book layout, lack of diagrams/tables that helped spell out how actually simple it all is. The matrix rules for 5e that I`ve read so far are a step in the wrong direction, and gimping the rest of the world to throw decker/crackers a bone was a bonehead move.
After playing/reading pathfinder, shadowruns books look like they were written by a golden god of editing though. Pathfinder being a game known for being "simpleñ and "easy to pick up". So it could be allot worse.
The 4th ed Matrix was terrible and was nothing like the rest of the game. First off, you needed to use program + skill for dice pool, as opposed to every other test using attribute + skill. Then there is how everything is a painful extended test that took forever to resolve. Then there is the ambiguity of what security levels mean. Pretty much you always needed to hack admin writes just to make sure you can do what you need to do. Skinlinking shenanigans that make you unhackable.
5th's Matrix is a god send in comparison. Attribute + skill with gear acting for limits, like every other test in the game. Tests are all oppose tests which makes everything resolve faster. Actions have clear Mark levels to indicate what you can and cannot do with your privilege. Now there is clear incentives to be online so the hacker can hack.
-
For the life of me, I can't remember what book the list illustration in the post comes from:
Anyone?
Fan art, I think.
-
For the life of me, I can't remember what book the list illustration in the post comes from:
Anyone?
Fan art, I think.
http://jarow.deviantart.com/art/Shadowrun-Noir-365746873
-
While the author of the article talks about 'we have smartphones that can do more!!' in regards to the Matrix rules- and yes, having the ability to open up multiple search windows would have been great back in the day - one does have to remember that generally, what can be done in the Matrix as of the current edition is what can be done IRL as of the current edition, just with bells and whistles (i.e. full simsense). And honestly, I've rarely had a problem with either the matrix or the rigging rules. What one must also remember about them is that both sets, and the explanations for both sets, need to describe in sufficient detail an extraordinarily complex universe.
The rigging rules for all intents and purposes need to describe the entirety of the Real World, physics and all - because the straight-out combat rules really don't do so - with various levels of telepresence thrown into the mix, which define how much assistance you can give or get in order to do something with your vehicle, whether it weighs 0.003 gram or 10,000,000,000 metric tons. Rigger rules also have to essentially explain WHY that happens, whether on the ground or in the air or in the water or (now) in space, which is a crapton of explanation and rules. Vehicle rules in EVERY game are an incredibly complex issue, which is why some games simply dodge the entire thing.
Creating Matrix rules faces issues at least as bad, because the rules of real world programming and networking are changing on a daily fraggin' basis. So not only do you need to describe - in layman's terms - how things work, but then figure out how a super-computer-geek is going to make them not work in her favor. On top of that, the designers had to then create how someone would not only find those rules they could bend and break, but figure out which rules were utterly immutable and which ones were ones that could be broken by those the Matrix (i.e. Resonance) really likes. And once that's figured out, not only explain their half-imaginary universe, but then create the rules describing it.
And in both cases, once they're done, they get to sit back and listen to people bitch about some little corner of it not being absolutely perfect and understandable. :/
-
While the author of the article talks about 'we have smartphones that can do more!!' in regards to the Matrix rules- and yes, having the ability to open up multiple search windows would have been great back in the day - one does have to remember that generally, what can be done in the Matrix as of the current edition is what can be done IRL as of the current edition, just with bells and whistles (i.e. full simsense). And honestly, I've rarely had a problem with either the matrix or the rigging rules. What one must also remember about them is that both sets, and the explanations for both sets, need to describe in sufficient detail an extraordinarily complex universe.
The rigging rules for all intents and purposes need to describe the entirety of the Real World, physics and all - because the straight-out combat rules really don't do so - with various levels of telepresence thrown into the mix, which define how much assistance you can give or get in order to do something with your vehicle, whether it weighs 0.003 gram or 10,000,000,000 metric tons. Rigger rules also have to essentially explain WHY that happens, whether on the ground or in the air or in the water or (now) in space, which is a crapton of explanation and rules. Vehicle rules in EVERY game are an incredibly complex issue, which is why some games simply dodge the entire thing.
Creating Matrix rules faces issues at least as bad, because the rules of real world programming and networking are changing on a daily fraggin' basis. So not only do you need to describe - in layman's terms - how things work, but then figure out how a super-computer-geek is going to make them not work in her favor. On top of that, the designers had to then create how someone would not only find those rules they could bend and break, but figure out which rules were utterly immutable and which ones were ones that could be broken by those the Matrix (i.e. Resonance) really likes. And once that's figured out, not only explain their half-imaginary universe, but then create the rules describing it.
And in both cases, once they're done, they get to sit back and listen to people bitch about some little corner of it not being absolutely perfect and understandable. :/
Touche
-
You know I pretty much agree with you (it's hard to write good rules) except for the last sentence.
While the author of the article talks about 'we have smartphones that can do more!!' in regards to the Matrix rules- and yes, having the ability to open up multiple search windows would have been great back in the day - one does have to remember that generally, what can be done in the Matrix as of the current edition is what can be done IRL as of the current edition, just with bells and whistles (i.e. full simsense). And honestly, I've rarely had a problem with either the matrix or the rigging rules. What one must also remember about them is that both sets, and the explanations for both sets, need to describe in sufficient detail an extraordinarily complex universe.
The rigging rules for all intents and purposes need to describe the entirety of the Real World, physics and all - because the straight-out combat rules really don't do so - with various levels of telepresence thrown into the mix, which define how much assistance you can give or get in order to do something with your vehicle, whether it weighs 0.003 gram or 10,000,000,000 metric tons. Rigger rules also have to essentially explain WHY that happens, whether on the ground or in the air or in the water or (now) in space, which is a crapton of explanation and rules. Vehicle rules in EVERY game are an incredibly complex issue, which is why some games simply dodge the entire thing.
Creating Matrix rules faces issues at least as bad, because the rules of real world programming and networking are changing on a daily fraggin' basis. So not only do you need to describe - in layman's terms - how things work, but then figure out how a super-computer-geek is going to make them not work in her favor. On top of that, the designers had to then create how someone would not only find those rules they could bend and break, but figure out which rules were utterly immutable and which ones were ones that could be broken by those the Matrix (i.e. Resonance) really likes. And once that's figured out, not only explain their half-imaginary universe, but then create the rules describing it.
And in both cases, once they're done, they get to sit back and listen to people bitch about some little corner of it not being absolutely perfect and understandable. :/
-
You mean they DON'T get to sit back and listen to people bitch? Wow!!
-
About half of what is being posted in this thread just looks like bitch ing about rules to me. I'm just gonna throw out a classic bit from white wolf. "If you don't like a rule don't use it."
-
Yes, Sithlis, that's a good advice.
We avoid vehicles when we can, because of the speed rules. The stuff we don't like might receive house rules over shorter or longer period of time.
-
Personally I don't know a system that me and my old group played that didn't have a rule or 2 that was flat out ignored or completely house ruled to make it better/fit our needs. No system is perfect, and the more complex it gets, the less perfect it usually seems to be. Shadowrun is fairly complex, thus theres alot of room for break-down. I personally feel that for what all the system covers, it does most of it very well. It has 3 worlds in 1 that all overlay and play along side one another, I haven't seen a system that handles that, much less many that would handle it well.
-
In all honesty once I got a couple well laid out hacking guides then went back and reread the rules they all made perfect sense and seemed much simpler, it`s not that the rules were bad 4e (the edition I play) it`s that they just werent laid out great in the book. They felt realistic and flexible, and in the rare occation I had to hack and fight at the same time I really didnt suffer. You just have to think tactically. Yes, you can munchkin to make yourself damn near unhackable, but then you`re dedicating a lot of time and resources to keeping your comlink that way, I`ll just find a way around it, like following your signal and dropping some neurostun on your ass.
-
haha no i mean its not just one little corner of the rules.
Rather there are whole swathes/ sections of rules that don't work/ are poorly written so as to make their intent a task of divination.(force 12 required to succeed).
You mean they DON'T get to sit back and listen to people bitch? Wow!!
-
It always amuses me when someone tries to call out one game as being needlessly complex, not realizing that pointing out the most complex bits and saying "What the crap?!" would be like me pointing to how difficult medical school is in real life and then getting angry at the entire economy for having some really difficult careers.
Especially since, by virtue of being essentially "a simulation that, rather than running on a computer, is running on your GM's brain", all paper and pencil RPGs are gonna be complex. It's not a videogame where your PS4 does all the work for you, and it's not a linear, 30 minute boardgame.
Not that every player needs to even know how it works, anyways. Most of my players don't understand most of the things possible in the game. They just state "I wanna try and do this." and then it's up to me to know/figure out how that'd be accomplished.
-
It always amuses me when someone tries to call out one game as being needlessly complex, not realizing that pointing out the most complex bits and saying "What the crap?!" would be like me pointing to how difficult medical school is in real life and then getting angry at the entire economy for having some really difficult careers.
Especially since, by virtue of being essentially "a simulation that, rather than running on a computer, is running on your GM's brain", all paper and pencil RPGs are gonna be complex. It's not a videogame where your PS4 does all the work for you, and it's not a linear, 30 minute boardgame.
Not that every player needs to even know how it works, anyways. Most of my players don't understand most of the things possible in the game. They just state "I wanna try and do this." and then it's up to me to know/figure out how that'd be accomplished.
ditto.
The thing is, most of the rules in SR are there to help the GM rather than the players. Certainly, you have rules lawyering going on; but the GM is the master storyteller, and some times you need to know how to deal with a variety of situations. (I haven't read the article). For me, SR4 is the best edition, having taken a look at SR5, and it's not something I'd run for SR. SR5 . . . was something my players rejected after I skimmed it and told them that I didn't see why they (you) needed to change things when so little had been changed.
Okay, segue finished. Moving back on topic. What you are all complaining about is quite simple. It's an RPG. RPGs are complex, even though streamlining does happen, ostensibly, with every new edition. I think some of the complaints about the game on this thread is the result of unrealistic expectations. There are numerous Shadowrun video games available on Good Old Games you can download and play if you want a better experience. Heck, you can even petition Sy-Fy to create a series for Shadowrun for an easier experience. Shadowrun is an RPG. It's literally a game you can play with or without the complexity. Sometimes you need the rules, and sometimes you can throw them out for what's appropriate.
-
You mean they DON'T get to sit back and listen to people bitch? Wow!!
haha no i mean its not just one little corner of the rules.
Rather there are whole swathes/ sections of rules that don't work/ are poorly written so as to make their intent a task of divination.(force 12 required to succeed).
Which is exactly my point. You're pissing and moaning that 'whole swathes/sections of rules' are basically trying to describe either THIS entire universe of physics, or an entire universe of rapidly-changing logic, structure, and quasi-physics, and that you don't understand the rules that do so. Has SR5 had issues with people not talking to other people? Yes. Editing? Yes. Proofreading, even? Yes. Annoying people screaming that they suck? Oh, hell, yes. But people who love the game still write for it, and try to get shit right, and understandable, and internally consistent, and not-abuseable. If anything, it's a fucking miracle they manage as much as they do, because unlike some top-end games (such as Pathfinder), SR DOESN'T have an entire full-time staff dedicated to making sure everything meshes perfectly - just a bunch of people who have other shit like a 40-hour-a-week-job going on in their lives, thank you.
-
Guys: Play nice.
Adzling, do you need to drag up drek into every thread? Does it help the thread, the conversation, or your own well being to do so?
Wyrm: I appreciate what you're trying to do, but ultimately it doesn't help. Let stuff go, and don't cause fights.
Play nice, play friendly. Keep the forums a place people want to visit, read, and participate in. Arguments and drekslinging do not create that place.
-
I truly appreciate these forums and contrary to your assessment bull I do not always "bring up drek", many of my posts ask or answer questions about the rules and how to interpret them.
This thread was about a blog post that revolved around srun 5e's technological differences to modern day and the complex and unclear rules.
In this case my points are valid, or at worst relevant to the op.
I love the Srun universe and love playing the game.
Been at this game since 1990 off and on, RPGs since 1979.
I just wish we had better rules, professionally edited and better play tested.
Let's hope catalyst improves their effort for data trails as much as they did between the s.g. and run faster.
Then we might be back on track with something that is approaching well produced.
-
Sorry Adzling, not actually trying to single you out. The editing and proofing issue comes up incredibly often, usually dragged into threads where it's not originally warranted by folks with an ax to grind.
It's one of those things taht just frustrates everyone and honestly, at this point, does no good to keep dragging up and dragging out. because it's a known fact. It's something that 99.9% of us have no control over, and the .1% that does, they're aware of the issue, have made multiple public apologies, and are actively trying to find workable solutions. So it's just a dead horse that gets dragged out and beaten on a regular basis for teh sadistic glee of a few folks, or because they like pissing in peoples cheerios. And it got old a year ago.
I'm sick of apologizing for shit taht's not my fault. So is Patrick. So is Critias. So is everyone else. And the negativity that these discussions brings does NOTHING good for the community as a whole.
-
Well it's certainly not the freelancers fault. It's the process and management and lack thereof.
I gives me a sad that you guys feel these comments are directed towards you and for that I wholeheartedly apologize for any angst, stress or bad feelings they have engendered.
It's the lack of process/ management that has clearly damaged the quality of the product and I personally believe rightly or wrongly this sits squarely at the feet of catalyst and not its freelancers.
That being said I do own up to my tendency to be vocal and at times impolitic in my comments hereabout.
-
Off topic but I don't recall seeing that big red cranky face icon before, I like it.
-
That's Bull's standard 'ork button' icon - though the new setup has enabled it to be larger than it used to be ...
-
It is very large and very cranky, isn't it? :)
-
Naah - just very large. I mean, c'mon - it's smiling. But what I'd love is seeing it as one of the emoticon faces ...
-
It is very large and very cranky, isn't it? :)
It's the last thing that GOD agent sees before his deck gets bricked. I like it.
-
My 2� regarding the article (my game night was canceled, was going to be my first time a a player in SR in over 25 years, so I expect to be a bit cranky):
It starts off good, "one of the most iconic RPGs of all time," well, I'm feeling nerdically fluffed and the author continues with "it's really the brilliant blend of urban fantasy and cyberpunk tropes...original and compelling" and then levels off into some laymen background. Then some personal anectodes on how much fun the author has playing Shadowrun. Sweet!
Then it gets silly. "What I've always found hilarious about Shadowrun is how hard a time it's had keeping up with the real world... There was a period when the game's then-current edition still required characters to physically "jack in" to the network via ports installed in their brains, while smartphones that we actually had in our pockets could do vastly more."
This is at false equivalency a worst or a poorly conceptualized comparison at best. The false equivalency is comparing biomedical technology allowing for a brain-to-computer interface with the browsing capabilities of a smartphone. But if the author meant to compare the computing power of decks with that of smartphones then he just failed.
Additionally, 2nd Edition came out approximately 2 years before IBM's prototype Simon phone and ~3 before AT&T's PhoneWriter Communicator; predecessors of PDAs and smartphones. And 3rd edition came out roughly 7 years before the term "CrackBerry," and 8 years before the iPhone.
One would expect a writer to understand that given production timelines for tens of 100+ page books by multiple authors, organizing story arcs spanning those books, over many many years that perhaps "keeping up with the real world" isn't the first priority for a fictional setting telling its own tale... but this is the age of drek-deep journalism so my expectation of any research to back up opinion in an article such as this is way to high.
This amazingly idiotic paragraph concludes with "And while Shadowrun's dystopian vision of corporate overlords and brutal security forces aren't mirrored perfectly by reality, it's easy to hear the echoes." Is this supposed to fall under the canopy of what the author has "always found hilarious about Shadowrun" or is this some random tacked on sentence to further wine and cry that a fictional corpus of work isn't real?
Next we're placated with "So everyone loves Shadowrun's setting." Oh frag off! Half the guys I played with in high school hated the magic side to Shadowrun and I hear it from other players now and again. I love Shadowrun's setting. It started to sound like the author did until he started talking about how hilarious he thought it was for not being real. So again the author is constructing a false argument, a duality of the setting is loved by all but the rules are not...failing to grasp that he's talking about the shadows at this point and there's a hell of a lot of fragging grayscale here, chummer. Journalistic integrity would demand the author to acknowledge that some love both, others hate both, others lie somewhere in between, but the author clearly left his at the door before slapping into his keyboard value bereft statements.
Next we're treated with 7 sentences covering the core rules. And then we're told where the "game stumbles" .... at simulating "complex subsystems" which is "a muddle of situational rules and pointless descriptions of multi-layered networks" where the example that's given is "several pages are spent trying to explain computer networks - you've got your own personal network made up of the devices you own, but there are also devices that are separate, just nodes on the greater network. Then there are specific corporate networks you might want to hack into. Then there are the networks you use to connect to their networks, essentially ISPs." Oh, sorry reality is so complex, wait, wasn't the author just complaining about how Shadowrun has a hard time keeping up with reality? But what makes his example an example of "pointless"? Where are the situational rules in his example? Are the core rules changed when dealing with computer networks? Are there situational rules to actions, like performing a Search, between doing so in a hacked in corporate network or when just on an ISP? His example is only a description of a complex (is it?) subsystem within the game without any actual information about what or where the "muddle" is.
Then, at the end of that paragraph, he just switches gears to vomit out coagulating crap about how "No one knows" how "riggers and drivers work." I thought being able to read was a requirement for writing articles. Or how about some stats? Like, how many of the "experienced Shadowrun players" that he interviewed about rigger and driving rules had "a hard time explaining" them? Can he prove they were having a hard time explaining the rules or was he just too excited to let loose the rant that he had "been saving up...literally [for] years" to actually listen to anyone except the devil rat of inanity scraping about his sloppy brain?
Second to last paragraph and he recognizes that people are going to call him an idiot for "not understanding this stuff"...no, just for his lazy writing of this article. The drek-ton of irony is at the end of this paragraph where he bemoans, "some level of abstraction is called for in the name of fun, surely."
Well..."To simulate [vehicle-only scenes], the Chase Combat rules abstract a great deal..." (SR5, pg 203.) Damn right it does, read a fragging rule book before you snarf up half-thoughts on your audience you fomorian knuckle-typist!
[Note: I'm sure, or at least find it highly probable, that the author is a nice metahuman and while my criticisms of the article itself I stand by, any and all personal attacks are purely argumentum ad hominem and meant to characterize my rant against his rant in a tongue-in-cheek light.]
-
snip
Bull just gets done posting how rants and attacks don't help and you post this? It's not even a coherent rant.
-
But at least the rant is about the article itself... 8)
-
Yeah. The writer is paid to blog an opinion piece. So he wrote his opinion. The writer, or the author, did get some of the facts wrong, though.
I have never did a vehicle chase in a Shadowrun game, though. So, I don't know what he's talking about.
-
But at least the rant is about the article itself... 8)
And it was in the defense of shadowrun.