Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: steelybran on <09-19-19/1312:06>
-
For those who have a lot of chances to play 6e, I was curious:
How much work would it take to incorporate 5th Edition Armor/Weapon rules into the 6th Edition system? I.E. - Take the armor and weapons tables and inject them into 6th edition, or would that be impossible without overhauling a huge chunk of the rule book (instead of just applying armor for soak and the old damage numbers for weapons)?
-
If you're gutting the edge system for combat people, you're gutting the game.
-
Yeah, probably.
Unless you incorporated AR and a "Soak Rating", and Weapon Rating and Damage Rating
Armor Rating vs Weapon Rating for Edge
Soak Rating vs Damage Rating for Damage
-
In the game Im about to start I plan to slightly modify the AR DR relationship to improve armor effectiveness.
Attacker bonus remains mostly the same with one small adjustment; +1 edge for EVERY 4 AR above the target's DR and this can exceed the 2 edge per turn cap. It likely wont happen often but its nice when it does, and encourages people to wear armor even if that first 4 AR usually happens for an attacker.
Defender bonus: if the target's DR meets or exceeds the attacker's AR target may roll body+armor bonus for damage soak.
I feel like this makes armor a little more important without disrupting the existing edge system. Most of the time an attack will be a push, no edge or bonus for anyone. but if an attacker fires his shotgun at close range on a bare chested target it will cause exceptionally serious damage. But if you fire that same shotgun at its max effective range on a target wearing security armor you may hit him but that damage will most likely get bounced.
-
I like the first idea (I would maybe cap it at some value), and I rather like the second though it needs a bit of finesse to not make Steel Lynxes impossible to damage. I'm considering some form of range damage penalty to make ARs with a scope still suffer a bit at extreme range.
-
I like the first idea (I would maybe cap it at some value), and I rather like the second though it needs a bit of finesse to not make Steel Lynxes impossible to damage. I'm considering some form of range damage penalty to make ARs with a scope still suffer a bit at extreme range.
Glad you mentioned that. I didnt even consider drone and vehicle stats. I might just say that drones and vehicles just use the normal rules since their numbers are so high to begin with
-
I have red around the forum some ideas on why there is no armour soak and how to put armour back. I am not familiar with previous editions, but I can say that I have reasonable knowledge about firearms and armour.
First of all, if we are not slinging mojo, we can't fool physics. There is a LOT of factors influencing projectile hitting armour, mostly Energy.
A bullet is driven by the energy generated by the gunpowder and torque form the barrel. This energy hits the armour together with the bullet and creates shock, as the travelling energy hits body mass. The purpose of the armour is to stop the fragmented bullet (as it shatters when it hits the armour) and to reduce the effect of incoming energy.
Every time you are hit by a bullet to the armour, you will get damaged by the energy. Broken ribs, ripped tissue, possible damage to internal organs, concussion, and more are all effects of the shock, not the bullet.
Yes there are exceptions of course but in general, if a character doesn't want to get hit, take that cover!
By no means I want to attack your ideas or in general be a dreakhead, just offering my point of view.
-
I have red around the forum some ideas on why there is no armour soak and how to put armour back. I am not familiar with previous editions, but I can say that I have reasonable knowledge about firearms and armour.
First of all, if we are not slinging mojo, we can't fool physics. There is a LOT of factors influencing projectile hitting armour, mostly Energy.
A bullet is driven by the energy generated by the gunpowder and torque form the barrel. This energy hits the armour together with the bullet and creates shock, as the travelling energy hits body mass. The purpose of the armour is to stop the fragmented bullet (as it shatters when it hits the armour) and to reduce the effect of incoming energy.
Every time you are hit by a bullet to the armour, you will get damaged by the energy. Broken ribs, ripped tissue, possible damage to internal organs, concussion, and more are all effects of the shock, not the bullet.
Yes there are exceptions of course but in general, if a character doesn't want to get hit, take that cover!
By no means I want to attack your ideas or in general be a dreakhead, just offering my point of view.
In 5th, this was covered by the interaction between damage and armor rating. If the damage was less than your armor rating, then you had to resist stun damage instead of physical. This meant that wearing FBA allowed you to soak small arms as stun instead of chipping away at your physical health. The issue became skew characters that had jacked up BOD+armor pools of ~40 dice, and anything short of an assault cannon or rocket launcher was doing stun damage.
-
In 5th, this was covered by the interaction between damage and armor rating. If the damage was less than your armor rating, then you had to resist stun damage instead of physical. This meant that wearing FBA allowed you to soak small arms as stun instead of chipping away at your physical health. The issue became skew characters that had jacked up BOD+armor pools of ~40 dice, and anything short of an assault cannon or rocket launcher was doing stun damage.
Back in the day of full plate mail, peasants had nothing to penetrate the armour of French Heavy cavalry. What they did was that they grouped up, pulled the knight down from his horse and hit/pierced the joints. Elbows, knees, hips were shattered and than they took the knight captive. Like a smashed tin can of beans. Seems to me as a grunt group using its edge and tactical thinking properly ;)
In this system, you are rolling to defend - reducing opponents net hits - and than to soak, reducing damage value together with net hits. Armour gives you, or denies the opponent Edge - which is used to do cool stuff, including dice manipulation. So Armour is actually in play, because for that edge, I can bump up one of my 4 to 5, escaping any damage if I am in a tie situation. I can re-roll my dice, or re roll opponents dice. Armour should not solely protect me from getting damage, than I can just stand there, in the middle of a firefight.
There is still cover and also dodge - that is a lot of defence bonuses in my opinion. Combat should feel deadly and characters should get hit. Also, the aspect of healing has to be taken into the context. I heard that in previous editions, healing had to be sustained and it was slow. Now it's fast. The value of healers and combat medics just rose quite high. So now we have an incentive to move tactically, talk to each other and co-operate, incorporate all our assets as a group to put up a good fight and succeed. Shoot, move, communicate.
Also the realism aspect, that if you know how to make holes in people, you probably should know how to treat them.
Being able to resist assault rifle at far range with a lined coat is not the way action shoot out rpg looks like in my imagination.
-
I heard that in previous editions, healing had to be sustained and it was slow.
This is correct. Heal was a Permanent spell, which meant sustaining it (hello sustaining penalty!) for <Force> (which you would want set equal to the damage you wanted to heal) Combat Turns. And a Combat Turn for most people was 2 Initiative Passes. In contrast, any fight that wasn't a bunkered down with lots of negative modifiers fight, tended to end within a single Combat Turn. So healing 4 damage would basically take far more than most fight durations. You'd have to use Reagents to set a high limit, cast at Force 1 and roll excessive hits you could use to reduce the sustain duration to heal faster. Plus using Heal meant you could not apply First Aid on that set of wounds afterwards.
Now, Permanent doesn't come with a lengthy sustain duration, it just means the effect becomes part of this world. And Heal can come before First Aid, so you can cast Heal during combat without having to worry about permanent (during the run) damage if you don't heal off all the boxes.
-
What are people’s thoughts on developing a weapon mod/acc system that dovetail in with the Edge system?
-
I think Edge Boost discounts would be interesting. Or some bonus with as downside more expensive edge boosts. And of course the classic +1 AR on melee personalised grips.
-
Just some ideas from the top of my head.
-Flash light - if used in low light or total darkness gain edge for your attack roll against the illuminated target. Flair compensation negates. Range limitation - Near (possibly use the same rule as with tracers- see below) Mount: under
-Foregrip/C clamp - Gain edge when attacking using full auto mode of fire. This edge has to be used for that attack. ( it could work for burst as well, but I am afraid of it's effects in conjunction with burst fire and anticipation.) Range limitation: Near. Mount: under
-Tracer rounds- If using tracer rounds, grant an edge to every team-mate attacking the same target after your successful attack lasting until your next turn. (single target, careful about bursts and full autos) However enemies which are attacking you afterwords will gain edge. ( tracers are going both ways, you grant your team a trace towards enemies position, but enemies can see from where those tracers are coming from, suggested for Machine gun nests 8) or situations where you are using range advantage, perhaps sacrificial drones ) No range limitation (note: the word team-mate is not defined in rules, it might actually apply to anyone attacking that particular target, not just team-mates)
-Laser sight should have Range limitation: Near, also having laser sights active could give enemy edge for perception checks and surprise checks (it's easier to spot you). Different modes of laser (low light, thermal) can grant edge only to enemies with matching vision enhancement. Range limitation: Near.
With this in mind, I am thinking that wireless bonus for laser sight could be: you can switch between modes without spending minor action. Finally I am thinking if laser sight bonus would apply for full auto, but I might be nerfing it too hard here.
-Taped mags- Common trick to reduce reloading time, tape two mags together. Useful only for assault rifles and SMGs'. Reloading from 1st to 2nd mag costs Minor action, however than you must use Major action to insert fresh magazine (can be another tapped mags) I would reduce the attack rating by 1 and decrease concealment by 1 (it's easier to spot) not an edge mod, but something which I assume was mentioned in previous editions.
-Extended mags- Increase capacity of the magazine by 10 rounds, doesn't apply for machine guns and shotguns. Decrease concealment by 1. (easier to spot)
-Precision heavy barrel - installed for machine guns and sniper rifles, gain edge when attacking at far and extreme ranges, maybe it doesn't need to be edge, just attack rating boost, which could or could not result in edge gain. Range limitation: Far, Extreme
Considering armour:
-Fire resistance armour mod could negate explosive round damage.
-If you have installed biomonitor in your armour, person performing first aid on you gets and edge to use for that test. Urban explorer jumpsuit is now a cool option. Maybe too cool. 8)
-Flak vest - gain bonus defence rating against grenades and missiles. Reduced capacity
-Buckler- Does not protect against firearms, + 1 defence rating in melee, gain edge when using Block action. ( don't know if it should be limited for Block test or not) Special attack - Damage 3S, AR 4 (or 5). Bucklers are amazing in close combat, they are a good defence/interceptor of incoming attacks as well as for hitting meta humans in the face. Zap versions are possible.
-
Flechettes/"Splinters" are a kind of a missed opportunity right now, especially in regards to Armor interaction. In previous Edition, there was a Damage boost that was counterweighed by increasing armor as well. While this was a bit questionable in execution (increasing Armor just meant that the average soak roll eats up most of the damage bonus, unless the target either has no Armor at all or hardened/vehicle Armor), the intent was clear: Flechette is supposed to be less effective against armor.
In 6th Edition, there are Flechette Rounds for Shotguns, which are just a worse version of the already pretty questionable APDS rounds, the Tiffany Needler and the Ares Viper Slivergun (both of which have stats that suggest that Flechette Rounds should in fact increase the DV and not decrease it ::)), and finally, Frag Grenades. The later 2 of them even have the legacy P(fl) listed in their Damage codes, despite there being no special rules for Flechette Damage ::)
Adding some kind of "Armor helps against this"-effect to Flechette damage (and changing the modifiers of Shotgun Flechettes to a bonus , as it should be...) would help to give this kind of Ammo a clear purpose: Good against lightly armored targets, increasingly worse against the tanky stuff. It would also make armor a bit more valuable and also slightly nerf Frag grenades, which are strictly better than Hi-Ex grenades atm. I´ve already posted some suggestions on this in the house rules thread.
-
What are people’s thoughts on developing a weapon mod/acc system that dovetail in with the Edge system?
First, I'm not here to rain on any ones parade. If you are into this idea, and are having fun working it, then you go <insert pronoun of choice here>!
Just be aware, if you start adding situational Edge gains into gear you are creating the exact same problem that the Sixth World Edge system was supposed to fix.
Instead of tracking down all the little +1s and +2s that only apply in some situations and to some rolls you will be having to track down all the little Edge gains that can be gained under some situations and on some rolls.
You will be taking the "simplified" out of Sixth World.
Again, go for it if'n ya like it!
-
For those who have a lot of chances to play 6e, I was curious:
How much work would it take to incorporate 5th Edition Armor/Weapon rules into the 6th Edition system? I.E. - Take the armor and weapons tables and inject them into 6th edition, or would that be impossible without overhauling a huge chunk of the rule book (instead of just applying armor for soak and the old damage numbers for weapons)?
The easier way to do this, is take the features you like from 6e and move them back to 5e. If you like the simplified skill list great just use that in place of 5e skill list, you will have to make some choices concerning xp costs, but in the grand-scheme of things that's not very hard. Some section can be moved more easily then others.
-
What are people’s thoughts on developing a weapon mod/acc system that dovetail in with the Edge system?
The simplest solution I can think of along this line, is to make the net deference between DR and AR become a die pool bonus or penalty to the relevant attack pool. Doing this would mean AR and DR have a direct interface between the relevant ratings and relevant pool. (IE if your AR is 12 you opponents DR is 9, your gain 3 dice to your attack pool, or if your AR is 6 and your opponent's DR is 11 you take a -5 die penalty to your attack pool.) It would kill the argument that these Ratings have no relevant value. I know that doesn't go well with high ranged stuff, but such is life. It's the simplest solution I can come up with and your going to be doing that math anyways so it's only adding one small step to the process.
More complex option include deriving values based upon AR and DR and modifying related pools. This could also done fairly cleanly, and wouldn't do much to change the factors. But it's not as simple as the one above.
-
If you went with the above solution something else you could add would be to add strength or half str become as a AR bonus on melee weapons. This would solve the Pixie Troll melee weapon problem in a useful way.
Drop the per round edge limit and edge spending limit. If the game is going to be focused around edge then embrace it and stop killing the whole point of your blankity, blank system. Keep the edge attribute cap in place and make it so that any edge generated cannot spent until the next time the character goes or is attacked, those should be the only relevant limiting factors, attributes are supposed to mean something in 6e so there you go they are. Sure things will get wild in the first turn. Guess what your playing SR. If stuff doesn't get nuts in the first turn you did it wrong.
Fix the priority attribute and skill value, if your going to cost skills and attributes the same then just do it, I think it's totally weird to value them same but that's what your math says that you want so let your crazy flag fly and go with it.
Actually write some useful training times and relevant costs. How much do you want a player to get better from one game session? 1 die? Half a die? 1/4 of die? Figure out what you can sleep with at night put in a table and call it done. The point of a CRB is to be the arbiter of character advancement house ruling this can be fine but there needs to be useful base line. You already have skill and attribute rating caps in place trust them.
Fix the AoE rules so they are consistent between spells and explosives (IE Fix grenades so they use the same rules as spell AoE).
Next healing, make it out of combat and make it's difficulty scaled based upon how wounded the target was. (So health box before -1 is easier to heal the health box in over flow.) But keep it reasonable, yes this isn't D&D but dead character don't finish runs. We all want Characters to take damage and for that damage to be meaningful but make sure it's possible to keep them in the session so long as they have put some sort reason resources into it. Drop Edge healing.
Kill Mystic adept. That sacred cow as been problem in the system for far too long. Yes people will q-q, but you can point and say look we nerfed magicrun for reals. Make an optional rule to do it in the magic book as some sort of initiation/meta-magic option if you just can't live without it.
Take out the alchemy section and move it to it's own small book, and take some time to make it work. If you liked what was the end of 5e great use that, if you hate the idea of magic bullets great then make sure alchemy and weapons never mix.
That's the list i can think of I hope it helps.
-
The simplest solution I can think of along this line, is to make the net deference between DR and AR become a die pool bonus or penalty to the relevant attack pool.
If you went with the above solution something else you could add would be to add strength or half str become as a AR bonus on melee weapons. This would solve the Pixie Troll melee weapon problem in a useful way.
Drop the per round edge limit and edge spending limit. If the game is going to be focused around edge then embrace it and stop killing the whole point of your blankity, blank system.
Sure things will get wild in the first turn. Guess what your playing SR. If stuff doesn't get nuts in the first turn you did it wrong.
A person can be super strong but if the person does not posses agility to land the hit, the person won't hit. Also, net hits generated by agility + (combat skill) represent the hit placement as they add to damage. I am not against some modification of melee damage after the hit.
Taking away edge cap on gain and spent and combining it with AR and DR adding or subtracting dice is nuts indeed. Especially if I will be able to than pre-edge with exploding 6's or post-edge and re-roll all my failures.
Just be aware, if you start adding situational Edge gains into gear you are creating the exact same problem that the Sixth World Edge system was supposed to fix.
Instead of tracking down all the little +1s and +2s that only apply in some situations and to some rolls you will be having to track down all the little Edge gains that can be gained under some situations and on some rolls.
You will be taking the "simplified" out of Sixth World.
True, creating more combat edge modifiers can be an overhaul. But some edge generators can engage characters which are not so good in combat to do stuff, or to feel that they are not neglected, when combat mages, adpets and street sams are doing all these cool actions. Covert ops, medics and other supportive characters can easily be in a situation, where they don't generate as much edge in combat, because their characters are not built for that.
Edge in my opinion expands on characters creativity to solve confrontation via clever thinking, teamwork, usage of environment, vision and situation in order to create tactical advantage, which is such a crucial part of confrontation.
Everyone, including non combat built characters can be engaged in a confrontation due to the edge system, allowing them to push their luck and tactical advantage even if some non-combat dice pools are lacking behind their combat centred team-mates, players have a chance to generate and manipulate their success thanks to edge without needing a dice roller.
Finally, pardon me if I am wrong, but + or - modifier adds or subtracts from a dice pool, while edge allows to manipulate current dice pool to a certain extent. That in my thinking is not the same. The cap, 2 per round makes it easy.
Better attack rating, yes, gain an edge, better vision, yes gain and edge, move on, no other modifiers apply.
-
The simplest solution I can think of along this line, is to make the net deference between DR and AR become a die pool bonus or penalty to the relevant attack pool.
If you went with the above solution something else you could add would be to add strength or half str become as a AR bonus on melee weapons. This would solve the Pixie Troll melee weapon problem in a useful way.
Drop the per round edge limit and edge spending limit. If the game is going to be focused around edge then embrace it and stop killing the whole point of your blankity, blank system.
Sure things will get wild in the first turn. Guess what your playing SR. If stuff doesn't get nuts in the first turn you did it wrong.
A person can be super strong but if the person does not posses agility to land the hit, the person won't hit. Also, net hits generated by agility + (combat skill) represent the hit placement as they add to damage. I am not against some modification of melee damage after the hit.
Taking away edge cap on gain and spent and combining it with AR and DR adding or subtracting dice is nuts indeed. Especially if I will be able to than pre-edge with exploding 6's or post-edge and re-roll all my failures.
And if we were talking rapiers or saber that might be relevant but we are talking combat axes and shotgun hammers. If you ever want 6e taken serious as Roll4it points out you have to solve the Pixie Troll problem. It's a systemic black eye as it stands, my solution is the simplest change 1/2 str and 3 to 1 conversation ratio is going to result in the lowest damage change possible. It also means it will actually merit people putting resources into AR and DR. As soon as the scope that killed Edge gain from DR was found, any argument that could be made about DR went out the window. Accept reality now, and you wont keep getting shutdown by the same arguments later.
Just be aware, if you start adding situational Edge gains into gear you are creating the exact same problem that the Sixth World Edge system was supposed to fix.
Instead of tracking down all the little +1s and +2s that only apply in some situations and to some rolls you will be having to track down all the little Edge gains that can be gained under some situations and on some rolls.
You will be taking the "simplified" out of Sixth World.
True, creating more combat edge modifiers can be an overhaul. But some edge generators can engage characters which are not so good in combat to do stuff, or to feel that they are not neglected, when combat mages, adpets and street sams are doing all these cool actions. Covert ops, medics and other supportive characters can easily be in a situation, where they don't generate as much edge in combat, because their characters are not built for that.
Edge in my opinion expands on characters creativity to solve confrontation via clever thinking, teamwork, usage of environment, vision and situation in order to create tactical advantage, which is such a crucial part of confrontation.
Everyone, including non combat built characters can be engaged in a confrontation due to the edge system, allowing them to push their luck and tactical advantage even if some non-combat dice pools are lacking behind their combat centred team-mates, players have a chance to generate and manipulate their success thanks to edge without needing a dice roller.
Finally, pardon me if I am wrong, but + or - modifier adds or subtracts from a dice pool, while edge allows to manipulate current dice pool to a certain extent. That in my thinking is not the same. The cap, 2 per round makes it easy.
Better attack rating, yes, gain an edge, better vision, yes gain and edge, move on, no other modifiers apply.
First you can call them edge modifier for the sake of saving face, but lets be clear these modify the attack pool directly. Edge alone does not constitute a direct modifier if you have 4 points of failure between you and something there is no direct interface. No one is going to take AR and DR seriously, and they won't until they have a direct influence the roll. 1 point of edge is too little to late. One can only effect 1 die and it better be the other guys die as if it your die you wasted the edge. Next 2 edge per is choking the whole point of your system, the Playtesters said so, and anyone who can follow what the system knows so as well. If you want 6e to be taken seriously by system folks then make changes outlined.
Along this line you should re-look at anything that is applies any weird misc penalty, change them to a bonus to AR or DR of the side using them. This will allow you to hold too the claim that the only bonus or penalties are the edge system. Something would be a lot better if it was true.
Btw you need something similar for riggers as well. The Engineering clarification is nice, but as everyone on here has reported rigger in 6e is doa until they can meaningfully show the their advantages over putting a sam with max pilot skill in the car instead. Your fight the much higher utility of having another sam who can also do something else. It needs to be much better then 1 die per rating per pilot test and it has to be more then just when jumped in.
Embrace the fixes for what everyone has identified as major problems and 6e will be seen as accepting the community feed back and might be redeemable, stick to the epicly flawed raw that is the 6e system currently and it goes down as a joke in gaming circles.
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
-
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Just because you have a favored nomenclature it doesn't mean anyone else who doesn't use your preferred language is using language to be divisive.
-
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Just because you have a favored nomenclature it doesn't mean anyone else who doesn't use your preferred language is using language to be divisive.
Who is using the term 6w SSDR? It's not the community at large.
The point is irrelevant, fix 6e.
-
the Tiffany Needler and the Ares Viper Slivergun (both of which have stats that suggest that Flechette Rounds should in fact increase the DV and not decrease
Yeah. It looks like Flechette should be something like this:
DV: +1; AR: +2/-2/?
-
What are people’s thoughts on developing a weapon mod/acc system that dovetail in with the Edge system?
The simplest solution I can think of along this line, is to make the net deference between DR and AR become a die pool bonus or penalty to the relevant attack pool. Doing this would mean AR and DR have a direct interface between the relevant ratings and relevant pool. (IE if your AR is 12 you opponents DR is 9, your gain 3 dice to your attack pool, or if your AR is 6 and your opponent's DR is 11 you take a -5 die penalty to your attack pool.) It would kill the argument that these Ratings have no relevant value. I know that doesn't go well with high ranged stuff, but such is life. It's the simplest solution I can come up with and your going to be doing that math anyways so it's only adding one small step to the process.
More complex option include deriving values based upon AR and DR and modifying related pools. This could also done fairly cleanly, and wouldn't do much to change the factors. But it's not as simple as the one above.
If you went with the above solution something else you could add would be to add strength or half str become as a AR bonus on melee weapons. This would solve the Pixie Troll melee weapon problem in a useful way.
Drop the per round edge limit and edge spending limit. If the game is going to be focused around edge then embrace it and stop killing the whole point of your blankity, blank system. Keep the edge attribute cap in place and make it so that any edge generated cannot spent until the next time the character goes or is attacked, those should be the only relevant limiting factors, attributes are supposed to mean something in 6e so there you go they are. Sure things will get wild in the first turn. Guess what your playing SR. If stuff doesn't get nuts in the first turn you did it wrong.
Fix the priority attribute and skill value, if your going to cost skills and attributes the same then just do it, I think it's totally weird to value them same but that's what your math says that you want so let your crazy flag fly and go with it.
Actually write some useful training times and relevant costs. How much do you want a player to get better from one game session? 1 die? Half a die? 1/4 of die? Figure out what you can sleep with at night put in a table and call it done. The point of a CRB is to be the arbiter of character advancement house ruling this can be fine but there needs to be useful base line. You already have skill and attribute rating caps in place trust them.
Fix the AoE rules so they are consistent between spells and explosives (IE Fix grenades so they use the same rules as spell AoE).
Next healing, make it out of combat and make it's difficulty scaled based upon how wounded the target was. (So health box before -1 is easier to heal the health box in over flow.) But keep it reasonable, yes this isn't D&D but dead character don't finish runs. We all want Characters to take damage and for that damage to be meaningful but make sure it's possible to keep them in the session so long as they have put some sort reason resources into it. Drop Edge healing.
Kill Mystic adept. That sacred cow as been problem in the system for far too long. Yes people will q-q, but you can point and say look we nerfed magicrun for reals. Make an optional rule to do it in the magic book as some sort of initiation/meta-magic option if you just can't live without it.
Take out the alchemy section and move it to it's own small book, and take some time to make it work. If you liked what was the end of 5e great use that, if you hate the idea of magic bullets great then make sure alchemy and weapons never mix.
That's the list i can think of I hope it helps.
The simplest solution I can think of along this line, is to make the net deference between DR and AR become a die pool bonus or penalty to the relevant attack pool.
If you went with the above solution something else you could add would be to add strength or half str become as a AR bonus on melee weapons. This would solve the Pixie Troll melee weapon problem in a useful way.
Drop the per round edge limit and edge spending limit. If the game is going to be focused around edge then embrace it and stop killing the whole point of your blankity, blank system.
Sure things will get wild in the first turn. Guess what your playing SR. If stuff doesn't get nuts in the first turn you did it wrong.
A person can be super strong but if the person does not posses agility to land the hit, the person won't hit. Also, net hits generated by agility + (combat skill) represent the hit placement as they add to damage. I am not against some modification of melee damage after the hit.
Taking away edge cap on gain and spent and combining it with AR and DR adding or subtracting dice is nuts indeed. Especially if I will be able to than pre-edge with exploding 6's or post-edge and re-roll all my failures.
And if we were talking rapiers or saber that might be relevant but we are talking combat axes and shotgun hammers. If you ever want 6e taken serious as Roll4it points out you have to solve the Pixie Troll problem. It's a systemic black eye as it stands, my solution is the simplest change 1/2 str and 3 to 1 conversation ratio is going to result in the lowest damage change possible. It also means it will actually merit people putting resources into AR and DR. As soon as the scope that killed Edge gain from DR was found, any argument that could be made about DR went out the window. Accept reality now, and you wont keep getting shutdown by the same arguments later.
Just be aware, if you start adding situational Edge gains into gear you are creating the exact same problem that the Sixth World Edge system was supposed to fix.
Instead of tracking down all the little +1s and +2s that only apply in some situations and to some rolls you will be having to track down all the little Edge gains that can be gained under some situations and on some rolls.
You will be taking the "simplified" out of Sixth World.
True, creating more combat edge modifiers can be an overhaul. But some edge generators can engage characters which are not so good in combat to do stuff, or to feel that they are not neglected, when combat mages, adpets and street sams are doing all these cool actions. Covert ops, medics and other supportive characters can easily be in a situation, where they don't generate as much edge in combat, because their characters are not built for that.
Edge in my opinion expands on characters creativity to solve confrontation via clever thinking, teamwork, usage of environment, vision and situation in order to create tactical advantage, which is such a crucial part of confrontation.
Everyone, including non combat built characters can be engaged in a confrontation due to the edge system, allowing them to push their luck and tactical advantage even if some non-combat dice pools are lacking behind their combat centred team-mates, players have a chance to generate and manipulate their success thanks to edge without needing a dice roller.
Finally, pardon me if I am wrong, but + or - modifier adds or subtracts from a dice pool, while edge allows to manipulate current dice pool to a certain extent. That in my thinking is not the same. The cap, 2 per round makes it easy.
Better attack rating, yes, gain an edge, better vision, yes gain and edge, move on, no other modifiers apply.
First you can call them edge modifier for the sake of saving face, but lets be clear these modify the attack pool directly. Edge alone does not constitute a direct modifier if you have 4 points of failure between you and something there is no direct interface. No one is going to take AR and DR seriously, and they won't until they have a direct influence the roll. 1 point of edge is too little to late. One can only effect 1 die and it better be the other guys die as if it your die you wasted the edge. Next 2 edge per is choking the whole point of your system, the Playtesters said so, and anyone who can follow what the system knows so as well. If you want 6e to be taken seriously by system folks then make changes outlined.
Along this line you should re-look at anything that is applies any weird misc penalty, change them to a bonus to AR or DR of the side using them. This will allow you to hold too the claim that the only bonus or penalties are the edge system. Something would be a lot better if it was true.
Btw you need something similar for riggers as well. The Engineering clarification is nice, but as everyone on here has reported rigger in 6e is doa until they can meaningfully show the their advantages over putting a sam with max pilot skill in the car instead. Your fight the much higher utility of having another sam who can also do something else. It needs to be much better then 1 die per rating per pilot test and it has to be more then just when jumped in.
Embrace the fixes for what everyone has identified as major problems and 6e will be seen as accepting the community feed back and might be redeemable, stick to the epicly flawed raw that is the 6e system currently and it goes down as a joke in gaming circles.
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Just because you have a favored nomenclature it doesn't mean anyone else who doesn't use your preferred language is using language to be divisive.
All that and this what you take issue with SSDR?
-
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Just because you have a favored nomenclature it doesn't mean anyone else who doesn't use your preferred language is using language to be divisive.
Who is using the term 6w SSDR? It's not the community at large.
The point is irrelevant, fix 6e.
It wasn't my point; I was responding to the point you made. If noone's using that language, why bother complaining about people using it? If there ARE people using it and you're dismissing them as not being part of the community at large, then it's not THEY who are being divisive but you.
As for fixing 6we: literally, that's being worked on. Whether 6we could have or should have been published without need for lots of errata is besides the point. Wishes and fishes and all, because it was published the way it is and noone has a time machine to go back and do it differently. However, for whatever real or imagined faults CGL had in publishing it, they are working at making it better than it currently is.
-
Also stop with 6w nonsense. D&D next didn't work ether no one took it serous, it's 6e shadowrun, stop trying to divide community via language. We know it's 6e it's not gonna change.
Just because you have a favored nomenclature it doesn't mean anyone else who doesn't use your preferred language is using language to be divisive.
Who is using the term 6w SSDR? It's not the community at large.
The point is irrelevant, fix 6e.
It wasn't my point; I was responding to the point you made. If noone's using that language, why bother complaining about people using it? If there ARE people using it and you're dismissing them as not being part of the community at large, then it's not THEY who are being divisive but you.
As for fixing 6we: literally, that's being worked on. Whether 6we could have or should have been published without need for lots of errata is besides the point. Wishes and fishes and all, because it was published the way it is and noone has a time machine to go back and do it differently. However, for whatever real or imagined faults CGL had in publishing it, they are working at making it better than it currently is.
I asked you who used it, and you haven't answered.
As to the rest, yes 6e CRB was even worse then I had ever imagined it would be. But as you said we can't change the past. I'm putting forward my suggestions on what could be done, take'em or leave'em.
-
As to separation I'm using the common language of the community. Those whom choose to use other language have divided themselves. 6e vs 6w. Last time I check w is not an e.
-
What are people’s thoughts on developing a weapon mod/acc system that dovetail in with the Edge system?
First, I'm not here to rain on any ones parade. If you are into this idea, and are having fun working it, then you go <insert pronoun of choice here>!
Just be aware, if you start adding situational Edge gains into gear you are creating the exact same problem that the Sixth World Edge system was supposed to fix.
Instead of tracking down all the little +1s and +2s that only apply in some situations and to some rolls you will be having to track down all the little Edge gains that can be gained under some situations and on some rolls.
You will be taking the "simplified" out of Sixth World.
Again, go for it if'n ya like it!
Fair point. In a perfect world, I’d take the time to come up with a system to model the weapons...but, I guess I could just play GURPS too :) I appreciate the efforts to simplify, but like the complexity of a more “simulation” feel. I’d like to have my cake and eat it too ::)
-
the Tiffany Needler and the Ares Viper Slivergun (both of which have stats that suggest that Flechette Rounds should in fact increase the DV and not decrease
Yeah. It looks like Flechette should be something like this:
DV: +1; AR: +2/-2/?
My hope was that flechette be something like: AR-2, add a wild die to the attack. Hunters pick shot over slugs because it trades penetration for an overall easier shot to make.
-
In 5th, this was covered by the interaction between damage and armor rating. If the damage was less than your armor rating, then you had to resist stun damage instead of physical. This meant that wearing FBA allowed you to soak small arms as stun instead of chipping away at your physical health. The issue became skew characters that had jacked up BOD+armor pools of ~40 dice, and anything short of an assault cannon or rocket launcher was doing stun damage.
I was thinking about this and remembered one instance in the US, when a bunch of guys robbed a bank. What they did was that they put quite a few winter jackets underneath their bulletproof vests. That caused the effects of severely reduced shock, to the point, that they were able to stand their ground. They did utilise cover and helmets in addition to the armour, but the precedence stands. - Thanks for pointing this out!
Continuing with that train of thought. When a ballistic plate or kevlar stops a bullet, it deteoriorates and looses function, to put in a simple way, it gets destroyed.
How could we express this in game mechanics ? It can be assumed that armour does not cover the whole body, even with full body armour, there are vulnerable spots. I was thinking about a specific action, maybe a 3 Edge action, where you could do a one time bonus to soak from armour which than gets destroyed, or something in a similar fashion.
I do understand that the idea to add more bonuses is contradictory to what edge is trying to achieve and that is a valid point, but maybe going with an action instead of a bonus could be a way forward. There actually is a 5 edge "Create special effect" action and together with the possibility of giving 1 edge to a team member via spending 2 of your own, could add armour soak and doesn't demand to introduce a new mechanic because of it.
What do you think ?
-
5e had the Armorer skill to cover repairing armor, but the rules never (to my memory) provided a mechanic for armor to be degraded in the course of protecting a shadowrunner.
So for all of 5e's crunch and detail, what happens to armor when it catches bullets for you was always just handwaivy GM fiat anyway. Of course, the same thing appears to be true in 6we, although having a pip of degraded performance is of course a bigger deal at 6we's granularity compared to 5e's.
-
In 5th, this was covered by the interaction between damage and armor rating. If the damage was less than your armor rating, then you had to resist stun damage instead of physical. This meant that wearing FBA allowed you to soak small arms as stun instead of chipping away at your physical health. The issue became skew characters that had jacked up BOD+armor pools of ~40 dice, and anything short of an assault cannon or rocket launcher was doing stun damage.
I was thinking about this and remembered one instance in the US, when a bunch of guys robbed a bank. What they did was that they put quite a few winter jackets underneath their bulletproof vests. That caused the effects of severely reduced shock, to the point, that they were able to stand their ground. They did utilise cover and helmets in addition to the armour, but the precedence stands. - Thanks for pointing this out!
Continuing with that train of thought. When a ballistic plate or kevlar stops a bullet, it deteoriorates and looses function, to put in a simple way, it gets destroyed.
How could we express this in game mechanics ? It can be assumed that armour does not cover the whole body, even with full body armour, there are vulnerable spots. I was thinking about a specific action, maybe a 3 Edge action, where you could do a one time bonus to soak from armour which than gets destroyed, or something in a similar fashion.
I do understand that the idea to add more bonuses is contradictory to what edge is trying to achieve and that is a valid point, but maybe going with an action instead of a bonus could be a way forward. There actually is a 5 edge "Create special effect" action and together with the possibility of giving 1 edge to a team member via spending 2 of your own, could add armour soak and doesn't demand to introduce a new mechanic because of it.
What do you think ?
They already started to do this in 6th with the resistive coatings armor mods. It cancels a status (Corrosive, Chilled, Burning, or Zapped) X number of times before it degrades and can't be used again (X=rating at purchase). You could do something similar with armor, but I would make it last considerably longer than protective coatings (Rating x5 or x10). But this would also mean that armor would need a rating, which seems like complexity for complexity's sake.
Or, you could just say every hit you take over the course of a mission tallies up as the repair threshold/cost for an armorer test after action. Then you raise the question of whether the time/nuyen cost is worth the repair, or if it would be easier/cheaper to buy new armor. That also means your soak tank character will need to upkeep their armor more than the decker who stays in the van.
But honestly, I don't know why they took armor out of the soak pool to begin with. They re-normed both weapons and armor downward, so the effect would be mostly the same. The best armor combo you can do in 6th is FBA (+5) with a helmet (+2) and a ballistic shield (+2). That would be +9 dice to the soak pool, or an average of 3 extra hits. But it would also be impossible to disguise, you could only use one-handed weapons, and a grenade will still ruin your day. Your average runner will be wearing something in the +3 to +4 range (i.e. a lined coat or armor jacket), which would only be an average of 1 extra hit on a soak test.