[FastJack]

I've been playing shadowrun since 1990. I own every book/pdf, and have supported the game even when I didn't like the rules (5th edition). My comments are not about "apologizing" for Catalyst, but about how games change, even when the players don't want them to. My comments are not official, and I don't work for Catalyst. The only time my comments are on behalf of Catalyst is when I use my moderator voice and that's mostly to keep people playing nice.

My argument isn't that "grognards don't want change", but rather let's see the product before we complain about it. I know some of you were able to see stuff pre-release, and had signed NDAs about it, but I'm not on that list, so I have to go by the reviews I'm seeing of the game and waiting for me to get it in my own hands.

Most of the reviews I read talk about how the rules are easier to work with and how new players are excited for the game. I keep saying that, ultimately, that is the goal of every successful gaming company: to get new players.

Before these boards came about, I spent a lot of time lurking on Dumpshock. Lurking because nobody was welcoming new players, pointing players in the direction of where to find "X", or help them learn about the Shadowrun universe and play the game. These boards came out and it was full of that welcoming atmosphere and, even though we have hiccups, I like to think we keep that atmosphere.

When a new player comes to a gaming board, especially after a new product announcement that points them here, and the first thing they see is people complaining that this new rule sucks, or that the company doesn't listen to the players, you're heading to do one thing successfully: Forcing that new player to leave and ignore the game.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off a little harsh here, it's not my intention. I also do not intend on singling people out, especially because my duties here mean I have to be impartial on all matters, which I do my utmost to do. Whether I like you or not, as moderator, I try to enforce the rules with an unbiased opinion, and I've given out warnings and bans to posters I like and agree with, and also have cut through bullshit "reports" on posters I may not agree with, because the reporter was looking to pick on a forum member they didn't like.

To everyone on the boards to remember that you're not faceless hackers just throwing out comments, you're forum members that new and old players look to for your insights. I'm just asking that when you post about the new rules, whether you like them or not, remember that the new players first impression will be what you are saying and the tone you say it in.

[tenchi2a]

I've been playing shadowrun since 1990. I own every book/pdf, and have supported the game even when I didn't like the rules (5th edition). My comments are not about "apologizing" for Catalyst, but about how games change, even when the players don't want them to. My comments are not official, and I don't work for Catalyst. The only time my comments are on behalf of Catalyst is when I use my moderator voice and that's mostly to keep people playing nice.

My argument isn't that "grognards don't want change", but rather let's see the product before we complain about it. I know some of you were able to see stuff pre-release, and had signed NDAs about it, but I'm not on that list, so I have to go by the reviews I'm seeing of the game and waiting for me to get it in my own hands.

Most of the reviews I read talk about how the rules are easier to work with and how new players are excited for the game. I keep saying that, ultimately, that is the goal of every successful gaming company: to get new players.

Before these boards came about, I spent a lot of time lurking on Dumpshock. Lurking because nobody was welcoming new players, pointing players in the direction of where to find "X", or help them learn about the Shadowrun universe and play the game. These boards came out and it was full of that welcoming atmosphere and, even though we have hiccups, I like to think we keep that atmosphere.

When a new player comes to a gaming board, especially after a new product announcement that points them here, and the first thing they see is people complaining that this new rule sucks, or that the company doesn't listen to the players, you're heading to do one thing successfully: Forcing that new player to leave and ignore the game.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off a little harsh here, it's not my intention. I also do not intend on singling people out, especially because my duties here mean I have to be impartial on all matters, which I do my utmost to do. Whether I like you or not, as moderator, I try to enforce the rules with an unbiased opinion, and I've given out warnings and bans to posters I like and agree with, and also have cut through bullshit "reports" on posters I may not agree with, because the reporter was looking to pick on a forum member they didn't like.

To everyone on the boards to remember that you're not faceless hackers just throwing out comments, you're forum members that new and old players look to for your insights. I'm just asking that when you post about the new rules, whether you like them or not, remember that the new players first impression will be what you are saying and the tone you say it in.

While I respect and understand your position and responsibility.
I will not in anyway praise or promote a system that I do not agree with or find reasonable playable.
As I have said many times I find large parts of the rule to be good, but I find the core of the system (edge) to be largely underdeveloped and non functional in its current state. I don't feel the system replaces the mods and armor that it is intended to replace.
And I will be the first to jump on someone for ignoring or driving off a new player, but (even if it is not what you meant) I will never walk the corporate line to promote a system that I do not have faith in.
You talk about driving off players by scaring them about the new system, but you are equally at fault if you give false information about how  good you think the game is if you don't.
If CGL wants to have us not accuse them of ignoring the players them maybe they should not ignore the players.
While I did not truly expect them too, I have yet to see CGl make any effort to placate or even give a "It will make more sense in the full rules" response to any of the complaints.
And have hear multiple players who where in the play-test state that their complaints and suggestions where ignore.
And just to be clear I find major offence when told wither nicely or not that I should keep my opinions to myself on this game.
I also have not seen anyone say "this rule sucks", I have seen people say "I don't agree with how this rule is written" or "Armor should do more then +1 edge max" or them suggest option rules or fixes.

All-in-all, this is a place to discuss the rules and shadowrun in general bad or good and if you only want possessive CGL pleasing responses you should only allow CGL employees to post. 

[Michael Chandra]

I also have not seen anyone say "this rule sucks"

I have. I have seen people declaring, over and over, in multiple topics, that X sucks, Y sucks, SR6 sucks, that Catalyst is bad for the IP, that Catalyst has no quality control whatsoever and SR6 proves they're not listening to anyone, that SR6 writers obviously aren't real fans and don't know what makes Shadowrun Shadowrun, that if the game system isn't fully changed immediately they will skip the entire edition, with personal attacks against non-naysayers on top. Without even seeing the actual rules. Depending on people's negative claims and player and GM mistakes made, combined with hyper-focus on aspects they don't like. There are cases in this topic, though I do hope you'll forgive me for not going through it page by page to point them out.

All-in-all, this is a place to discuss the rules and shadowrun in general bad or good and if you only want possessive CGL pleasing responses you should only allow CGL employees to post.

This topic is 35 pages. There's other lengthy topics as well. There's PLENTY of negative feedback, and asides from the occasional warning to not make things personal, it is all perfectly allowed. Only the recent 'jump into a topic, immediately post about lack of catalyst quality control, claim sr6 sucks' trend made him reiterate the forum rules that we said we would follow when we signed up to this forum. Rules that I have broken in the past, and have been properly punished for. That I have seen people act as if they didn't apply to them.

And it's clear he's not blindly making people shut up, given how you're not banned yet and plenty of criticism since that warning still stands as well.


I'm going to be frank here: I don't like FastJack, because I hold my grudges. I still have some VERY negative opinions about part of the events here in the past decade. There's one thing he did that I never will forgive him for. But even then I would NEVER falsely accuse him of the things you're claiming he's doing. He is NOT trying to silence criticism here. He NEVER said 'keep your opinions to yourself' or anything even REMOTELY like that. He did NOT tell you to pretend you're positive about a system you don't like.

If you were attacking anyone else with those claims, I'd report you and move on. But to see you claim that about an admin, to their face, to someone who has acted (whenever he actually did) impartial in at the very least 98% of the cases that I've seen (and the other 2% are my subjective opinion)? And you're claiming that the very behaviour he started calling out with the rule-reminder, didn't happen at all, when everyone here knows that it did? I call horseshit. There is no way that you don't know he isn't doing the bullshit you're claiming he's doing, and there's no way you, after having been active in this topic, haven't seen the rule-7-defying behaviour he warned about as a moderator.

Let. It. Go. You want to dislike SR6, go right ahead. You want to be upset not all playtesters got what they want, because opinions vary? Go right ahead. You want to argue about how specific rules should be different, go right ahead. You want to criticise FastJack's Battletech remark, which indeed sounded rather combatative, go right ahead. But stop pretending everyone is playing nice when we all know they're not, and stop making up false allegations about FastJack just because you're upset you're not allowed to act out.

This is a place to discuss the rules and shadowrun in general good or bad. Not a place to pick fights about things that were never said to begin with. He posted the clarification of his intent, and it's a proper match to what he said before, so there's no need to act as if he's lying through his teeth. Let. It. Go.

[kyoto kid]

I’m all for crashing through Aztec’s front doors in a 45 ton Hatchetman mech! Gotta do a proper homage to a long lost runner.

...Leela would love to do that, in one with as much Grey Mana she can get. 

"Blood magic...very baaaaad."

[Marcus]

Well goodness, gotta air out all the old laundry tonight I guess. These little conversions are inevitable.

I'm certainly not in the "pro-6e" side. But I just want to take sec to add that I respect Fastjack. I think he does good job as a Mod. I have been warned by the mods in the past, and will probably be again, and I'll probably end up banned at some point. I personally always try to follow the rules, but I think most of our regulars know I call it like i see it, and folks sometimes apparently feel I'm less then Civil about it. I also personal don't agree with Fastjack on plenty of things. But I do think he always goes out of his way to be a responsible mod. I still suggest speaking truth to authority and if you disagree with a call, then I totally think you should say so.

So gamers don't like new editions, this is a well known fact of life.  It's ok. It's naturally to fear what we don't understand.  I am certainly not criticizing anyone for speak their minds on the subject. It's not a secret that rules we have seen so far for 6e make me nervous.  I've said it before and I'll say it again I'm deeply concerned 6e will not be successful, and I know i'm not alone in that fear. 

To me, we are in Götterdämmerung, the "Twilight of the Gods" or in this case the system. 5e isn't dead, and 6e isn't alive. But that situation won't hold, we have a couple more months of this, and we just have to make the best of it. Things will get heated from time to time, try not to take things personally, try not to post mad. Waiting 24 hours can make a huge difference in your perceptions. In the end, we all love SR, and we all want what's best for SR. Disagreeing on what this is just simply human nature. No shame in it. 

So by all means please keep on expressing your concerns, lets just try to keep it to the specific issues wherever possible. I'm not saying let it go, but I'm suggesting folks to try and agree where you can, disagree where you can't and be as specific as possible where your concern are related and keep suggesting fixes as you come up with them.

[tenchi2a]

I also have not seen anyone say "this rule sucks"

I have. I have seen people declaring, over and over, in multiple topics, that X sucks, Y sucks, SR6 sucks, that Catalyst is bad for the IP, that Catalyst has no quality control whatsoever and SR6 proves they're not listening to anyone, that SR6 writers obviously aren't real fans and don't know what makes Shadowrun Shadowrun, that if the game system isn't fully changed immediately they will skip the entire edition, with personal attacks against non-naysayers on top. Without even seeing the actual rules. Depending on people's negative claims and player and GM mistakes made, combined with hyper-focus on aspects they don't like. There are cases in this topic, though I do hope you'll forgive me for not going through it page by page to point them out.

I also think we have a very different idea of "the game sucks", While I will be the first to say that I don't read every thread on the site for the ones I have read fully (mostly dealing with the 6th ed threads) I have never seen a player come out and said the game sucks. Now again, I am in no way say that they are all positive, most have been critical of the rule set. To me "the game defy logic or that rule makes no sense in no way translated into the game sucks.
As to "Catalyst has no quality control". The only place I have seen this is in the thread about the dice. And frankly the people complain bought the dice and have every right to complain about bad quality control if the product is not up to par.

All-in-all, this is a place to discuss the rules and shadowrun in general bad or good and if you only want possessive CGL pleasing responses you should only allow CGL employees to post.

This topic is 35 pages. There's other lengthy topics as well. There's PLENTY of negative feedback, and asides from the occasional warning to not make things personal, it is all perfectly allowed. Only the recent 'jump into a topic, immediately post about lack of catalyst quality control, claim sr6 sucks' trend made him reiterate the forum rules that we said we would follow when we signed up to this forum. Rules that I have broken in the past, and have been properly punished for. That I have seen people act as if they didn't apply to them.

And it's clear he's not blindly making people shut up, given how you're not banned yet and plenty of criticism since that warning still stands as well.
So if

I believe I was very clear in my statement that I was responding to what I read from the statement. "but (even if it is not what you meant) I will never walk the corporate line to promote a system that I do not have faith in". And again even if I misread his intend, my statement is still true.
The minute a site admin starts using the "it drives away new players" line they are give an please don't bad mouth the game its bad for PR vibe in corporate speak response.
If you don't see it that way that is your opinion as this is mine.
As to

I'm going to be frank here: I don't like FastJack, because I hold my grudges. I still have some VERY negative opinions about part of the events here in the past decade. There's one thing he did that I never will forgive him for. But even then I would NEVER falsely accuse him of the things you're claiming he's doing. He is NOT trying to silence criticism here. He NEVER said 'keep your opinions to yourself' or anything even REMOTELY like that. He did NOT tell you to pretend you're positive about a system you don't like.

Frankly your beef with FastJack is none of mine or anyone else's concern and should have remained between you and him.

As to what I read, if you read something different in what was said that is you. I have been around (in life) for far to long and have seen statements like this on to many business and game sites not to have learned to read between the lines.
Again, The minute a site admin starts using the "it drives away new players" line they are give an please don't bad mouth the game its bad for PR vibe.

If you were attacking anyone else with those claims, I'd report you and move on. But to see you claim that about an admin, to their face, to someone who has acted (whenever he actually did) impartial in at the very least 98% of the cases that I've seen (and the other 2% are my subjective opinion)? And you're claiming that the very behaviour he started calling out with the rule-reminder, didn't happen at all, when everyone here knows that it did? I call horseshit. There is no way that you don't know he isn't doing the bullshit you're claiming he's doing, and there's no way you, after having been active in this topic, haven't seen the rule-7-defying behaviour he warned about as a moderator.

I'm sorry but being an admin in no way protects you from criticism. In fact it puts you in a position where what you say will receive even higher levels of criticism.
And just to be clear, Not sure from you response if you are implying it, but I have not received any warnings since I have been on this site, or any other sites.
And since it appears to be unclear I was not saying that he came out and said "keep you opinions to yourselves" in those words. I was say that is what I got out of the response. If you don't agree then that is fine, but never accuse me of lying.
Again, I also think we have a very different idea of "the game sucks", I have never seen a player come out and said the game sucks. Now again, I am in no way say that they are all positive, most have been critical of the rule set. To me "the game defy logic or that rule makes no sense in no way translated into the game sucks.

Let. It. Go. You want to dislike SR6, go right ahead. You want to be upset not all playtesters got what they want, because opinions vary? Go right ahead. You want to argue about how specific rules should be different, go right ahead. You want to criticise FastJack's Battletech remark, which indeed sounded rather combatative, go right ahead. But stop pretending everyone is playing nice when we all know they're not, and stop making up false allegations about FastJack just because you're upset you're not allowed to act out.

You have obviously not truly read any of my post before this one.
I do not want to hate 6th ed, and for the most part don't.
But as it stands right now with the armor, edge, healing, etc. rules as they are could not see myself playing it in its current condition.
The most combative posters I have see so far have been you and a few other 6th ed defenders.

This is a place to discuss the rules and shadowrun in general good or bad. Not a place to pick fights about things that were never said to begin with. He posted the clarification of his intent, and it's a proper match to what he said before, so there's no need to act as if he's lying through his teeth. Let. It. Go.

Again as a site admin, FastJack's should be held to a higher standard they everyone else, not protected by his title.
I not say that he is using that title for protection, but you comment that as admin he should not be allowed to be criticized is utterly wrong. 

[FastJack]

Criticize me all you want, as long as it's done CONSTRUCTIVELY. That is the point I'm making. Like, love, hate whatever, just be sure to post a reason for that opinion. I'm not asking you to tow the company line (hell, I don't think you should), but I am asking that you do post your opinions without emotion, and with the reasons you feel that way, just so that players can make an informed decision.

I guess I should have posted that the reverse is true as well when I first brought up Rule #7. If you're doing nothing buy being a corporate cheerleader, I'd be sending warnings about being constructive as well. The only reason I didn't put that in is because it hardly ever has happened.

Now that we've gotten all of this out of the way, let's get back on topic. Which, by the way, is sharing the information we do know about SR6, good or bad.

[Moonshine Fox]

I also have not seen anyone say "this rule sucks"

Have you looked at Reddit in the last few months? There are a not insignificant number of of people actively hoping this edition completely fails, and more, takes the company with it. That’s simply mental and displays more of a hate of new ideas and players then a love of the game. Thankfully I haven’t really seen those people here.

The rules aren’t out yet. Won’t be for several months, so trying to argue that rules should be changed is pointless because we DON’T KNOW THEM YET! There was a big to-do not long ago about how it was turning ‘Oops All Mages!’ Because drain wasn’t a thing! *scary face!* Turned out that was false and ignores that in literally every edition of this game a min-maxer build mage could throw balls of instadeath with no drain while his spirits run interference. This is an old argument, not something new with 6th.

As for why armor my not work as well anymore,  weapons technology has always moved faster than armor technology. here’s a fun little fictional news story.

<Sara Reads, VR Anchor>
In corporate news today, Ares Macrotechnologies has announced that their materials science devision has synthesized a new metal. Initially designed to replace steel, being stronger yet just a cheep to produce, the metal sadly had a tendency to warp under the pressure of use the buildings and vehicles they planned to use in operate under.

Not one to be defeated so easy, the arms division quickly realized that the metal retained it’s shape for several moments longer after impact then normal ammunition before deforming. This proved to make the bullets far superior to norm APDS rounds, while avoiding the problem of over-penetration. Independent testing confirm that the new ammunition’s penetration capabilities render most modern armors, obsolete.

The new rounds have quickly replaced normal ammunition in stores wherever Ares has a presence, while under mild protest from smaller security companies who complain about the lack of armor protection their guards now operate under.

[Michael Chandra]

So, likely the Beginner Box has same weapon stats as the final edition. There's 2 Light Pistols, 3 Heavy, SMG, Rifle, Shotgun, Taser, 3 Blades, 3 Clubs, 3 Armors, 3 Vehicles, 2 Drones, plus the rules regarding Direct and Indirect combat spells. Should I copy some of those so we can debate damage?

[Finstersang]

Criticize me all you want, as long as it's done CONSTRUCTIVELY. That is the point I'm making. Like, love, hate whatever, just be sure to post a reason for that opinion. I'm not asking you to tow the company line (hell, I don't think you should), but I am asking that you do post your opinions without emotion, and with the reasons you feel that way, just so that players can make an informed decision.

I guess I should have posted that the reverse is true as well when I first brought up Rule #7. If you're doing nothing buy being a corporate cheerleader, I'd be sending warnings about being constructive as well. The only reason I didn't put that in is because it hardly ever has happened.

Now that we've gotten all of this out of the way, let's get back on topic. Which, by the way, is sharing the information we do know about SR6, good or bad.

Tru dat.

However: The best way to encourage constructive criticism instead of red-headed venting is - well - listening to it. And maybe, just maybe, use it to actually construct something. Even and especially if you are tired of hearing a certain complaint over and over again from different people, because this is usally a good indicator for the ones that aren´t just nitpicks. Yes, it might be the case that those complaining, f.i., about strenghtless melee weapons are just a vocal minority. But it´s much more likely that it´s just the tip of the iceberg and that many other players are also put off by this change. Same goes for myriads of houserules poppin´ up.

I´m on the fence about many many things right now (mostly, the usual suspects: Strenght and Melee weapons, Armor-Edge-Meddling, Spirits being overpowered once again...), but there is one very good thing I can see in the new details about SR6 so far: It´s probably a lot easier to supplement, modify, houserule etc. than SR5. F.i., unlike SR5´s Limit mechanic, the Edge mechanic isn´t rotten from the core (at least IMHO) and can be tweaked in many different ways.

So please, make something out of this. There are already so many houserule ideas for modifying the effect of armor. Take some of them, test them and then present them as optional/additional rules in the upcoming combat book. That´s not a "sign of weakness" or a sign that the core was totally disfunctional shit and needed a patch (but yes, the "Grognards" will claim that. Give them their little win and move on). It´s just a sign that someone gives a damn.   

[Moonshine Fox]

So, likely the Beginner Box has same weapon stats as the final edition. There's 2 Light Pistols, 3 Heavy, SMG, Rifle, Shotgun, Taser, 3 Blades, 3 Clubs, 3 Armors, 3 Vehicles, 2 Drones, plus the rules regarding Direct and Indirect combat spells. Should I copy some of those so we can debate damage?

Actually I’d like the pistols or smg. Haven’t managed to meet up my friend who grabbed a box for me at Origins and I have my suspicions I know why they did the armor like they’ve apparently done.

[Michael Chandra]

Hold-Out/Light: 2P (but different attack ratings)
Heavy: 3P/4P (varying attack ratings and mods)
Uzi: 3P (Both SA and BF modes, attack ratings slightly worse than pistol)

[Finstersang]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

[Shinobi Killfist]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

Yup. Though I actually like the base damage. As the game should be able to reflect a flesh wound even against unarmored targets. I think the issue is the rate DV increases per net hit. Using 2e pistols did moderate damage of 3 boxes but 4 hits for you to deadly and with base TNs of 4 potentially 2 with a smart gun and no built in dodge you got to deadly fairly often even with their smaller pools. I’m not expecting staging back but 2dv per net hit would help here. You barely  hit and hey great your pistol doesn’t one shot them. But a feasible number of hits can.

I did the math earlier and for a 4dv heavy pistol no armor, unaware office drone you need 7 hits or 21 dice pool. A aware office worker you’d need 9 hits or a 27 dice pool. To drop a random wage slave you needed to keep quiet.

I think narratively people can adjust to not one shoting random security guard in armor, shooting back. But this is a big narrative leap.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

To me, that´s a bigger concern than the "Armor is worthless"-hubbub (it´s two sides of the same coin, though): It´s almost impossible to reliably one-shot a standard metahuman goon - even in an ambush, even if the target wears no armor, even when blasting out your accumulated edge, even if it´s a shriveled up Body 1 office drone. That´s neither fun nor realistic and it´s a big problem for running stealth situations properly.

That's fair. Since house rules are already being bandied about, I'll reiterate one I plan on using that's aimed right at this phenomenon:

Allowing a "one shot one kill" attack against an unaware opponent. No defense roll, but against a threshold instead (maybe linking threshold to Professional Rating, which automatically means the rule can't be used on PCs nor on "named" opposition...).  Meet it and DV and CMs be damned, you disabled the guy!