[Marcus]

We already ran math on Action Economy before, showing it's very subjective as to how 'borked' it is. Asides from 'let's throw 40+ iniative around' people, it's not as badly twisted as claimed, and the Minor/Major system actually lets the augmented pick between an extra attack and more tactical options. All in all it's subjective as to how good/bad the new system is. Meanwhile, Edge Economy is indeed up but the benefits per point are smaller, making it less of a '7 Edge player can easily outdo the 2 Edge player whenever it matters the most', but none of y'all mention that.

I see a lot of soak, armor and damage complaints combined, which ignore the fact these are a combination that sum up to, as already discussed before, less 'either you're massively armored or the big toys oneshot you', making combat more tactical and less shock-and-awe. They're pointed out as single negative points, but the bigger picture and the math run to show it's not as bad is simply tossed aside. Frag, the second thing I did with SRM was save up for a Barrett 122, so I could try to one-shot the heavy opponents, so they couldn't one-shot me. I wiped out an entire squad of PR6 mooks in a single attack in Dragon Song 1, while my brother one-shot a lot of heavy encounters simply by overcasting and spellshaping an AoE spell. If you throw that at a player group, they'd also get butchered. So I for one welcome our new less-deviation damage overlords.

Y'all talk about the 'core playerbase not liking stuff' and risk of gatekeeping, yet at the same time by treating the 'core playerbase' as a monolith you're basically saying 'all those that disagree with me are obviously not core players'. To add to that, y'all are actually questioning the identity of a lurker who's been around longer than half of y'all, all because they dare to disagree with you and stopped lurking to combat the negativity spiral. (If postcount matters so much, what makes me then?) Heck, y'all can't even agree if SR6 is too Pink Mohawk or too Black Trenchcoat, so what is this about one opinion?

On top of that, y'all are so eager to claim playtesters were ignored and demand a player survey, but ignore the well-known fact that it was playtesters that went 'hey, how about you merge the combat advantage system with the edge system', playtesters went 'hey, how about you add status effects to make those things more explicit', and that obviously there also were plenty of playtesters that love the new mechanics otherwise CGL wouldn't have gone with it. This is not 'we toss it down and that's it', this is 'we try things, evolve things, and eventually we make decisions that obviously not everybody agrees with'.

Speaking of the writing process: First there were attacks on the writers for 'not knowing what makes shadowrun shadowrun' and none of y'all disagreed with that, then suddenly people go 'writers are cool, let's blame catalyst', a 180 so sudden it gave me whiplash and dumpshock.

There's complaint after complaint about the 'lack of quality control', meanwhile the errata team literally got the book weeks ago so they can go through it and provide fresh insight into what might have slipped during the changes during development, so that this time around CGL can be on top of things with the errata process. Frag, I'm actually jealous of the errata team because whenever I check Who's Online, I see constant activity of "Nothing, or nothing you can see", aka they're actually doing something meaningful while I'm stuck speculating. All I was able to do was provide some feedback to the Beginner Box.

And on top of all of that, we had several topics discussing positive feedback and reviews from those that played the game. Heck, y'all participated in those. Yet when I dare reference those, multiple people thought it was necessary to pretend I'm making it up. Let me reiterate: y'all participated in those topics, but me referencing them suddenly means I'm full of it.

Given how CGL isn't paying me for this, I don't see any reason why I'd respond to your Beginner Box data demands while at the same time y'all's default mode is 'MC is full of it'. I already received a (well-deserved) official warning here and I don't intend to get a second one. So for now I'm just going to try to survive a false heatwave, prepare a Beginner Box session, and work on some ideas I have for SR6. If anyone wants Beginner Box info, just PM me some requests and I'll see what I'm comfortable sharing (can't just copy the entire thing or JM Hardy will extract me for re-education).

See you in the shadows, chummers

Goodness Chandra that's solid wall of text. Please put me back on your Ignore list.
I saw your "math on the Action Economy", and the only thing it proved was my point.
Do you recall when turn 2 started? Yeah that was the part proved my point.

Anyways when you get done telling us all how terrible we are, and how everything we are doing is wrong please let me know.

Until then please enjoy your shade, and your demo! I hope it goes great!

[Marcus]

My Goodness, what a show. Gonna just keep hammering the party line? I'd love to see something new if you can think of something.  Where did Moonshine Fox come from?

Ohio.

Been around a while, even made the 5th edition character sheet portfolio. I just didn’t comment much for a while do to the math-run crunch of 5th turning off my groups to the game, something I’m looking forward to changing with the new edition.

Good to know, Welcome back!

[Marcus]

My Goodness, what a show. Gonna just keep hammering the party line? I'd love to see something new if you can think of something.  Where did Moonshine Fox come from?

As for sounds from people who actually played: We also got a lot of positive reactions from people who tried out the Box. So all in all I'd say it's too early to judge or let things scare us.

You got something to back this up? I haven't heard anything like this. Where is that being said? It's not on any of the online groups that I am aware of.  Locally all I keeping hearing is that while it is said to be in the pipeline no one seems to be getting their hands the QSR as yet. Out on the west coast?

Here's the reviews I've seen so far.
6th World Box Set Play Experience
Meeple Mountain
EN World
GeekDad
GeeksAGoGo

So lets talk about this.

The group picked up the new Edge system quickly and loved it. There were times I forgot to give edge and the players reminded me. I wish there were more circumstances to give edge. The group loved that dynamic. It felt like the Edge system was put on top of the existing 5e rules system. That is a good thing, see baby with bath water above.

The group had some issue the whole AR versus DR mechanic. There was some debate of why Rude would even use a sword if his pistol was better, until Yu tried to steal it, it was better than his pistol. I am trying hard to like this mechanic. It simplifies combat and plays to edge. It's hard to get away from my simulation roots at times I guess. The teenagers love it so far, with the exception of sword.

So apparently the teenagers love it, well with perhaps the exception of melee. Good to know.

There’s so much to talk about in this box, and that’s a good thing; it’s overflowing with content. In some cases it borders on excessive, but it’s easy to imagine a new player poring over these pages for weeks to soak up all the details. One of the things that crops up again and again in perusing the box’s contents is just how consistently excellent the tone is. Though the setting can be grim at times, the authors know just when to lighten the mood with a joke. Little bits of practical advice are woven throughout: as one example, in a section on how many words can be realistically said in a single combat round, the solution is to simply time what the player wants to say. That’s a pretty useful tip for any GM, let alone a new one, and including it in a beginner box indicates that Catalyst has put a lot of thought into the kinds of things that might help out novices.

The phrase over flowing with content. If people can't handle the QSR rules how well do you think they are gonna do with the CRB?

"Still, for an introductory package, it’s nice to have access to a pretty significant portion of the rules, even if there are a few points where the writers have admitted that the information is incomplete."

Full points for being upfront.

EN World
So Enworld's review from Abstruse is probably the most en-depth, not surprising given Enworld.

The four pre-generated player characters are interesting, making a good mix but also having a lot of room to grow. There’s Frostburn, the Ork Combat Mage; Yu, the Elf Covert Ops Specialist/Face; Rude, the Troll Street Samurai (who actually doesn’t have much cyberware); and Zipfile, the Dwarf Decker. While I haven’t seen the character generation rules yet, none of the characters seem to suffer from the terrible unoptimized builds of other editions, so they’re actually playable as they are without tweaking. Each character has a single-page character sheet with all the info you need to run them. Yes, the character sheets are one page. Yes, for all the characters. That’s how streamlined the game’s gotten.

But this statement alone kills it for me. It is completely internally inconsistent, if you don't have access to the Gen rules then you cannot tell if those characters have good builds or not, at that point I can't take this seriously at all. A street Sam that has no wear is at best questionable, right out of the gate. Further they don't touch on any of the other major concerns echoed by the community.

GeekDad
Erik Stanfill from Geek Dad,  Full credit for having the best quality pictures in any of the reviews we discussed so far, does a nice job of laying out SR for newbies, and tell parent's not let little kids play. Nicely done Geek Dad.  Makes good and repeated use of the word Abstraction, doesn't really have meaningful insight and doesn't address any of my concerns. Does talk about playing and for basic review does fairly nice job.

GeeksAGoGo
William Paprocki this a guy who seems like they have some sense of humor and looks like he's played a game for SR or two, just not 6e.
He does win the award for most confusion explanation of edge options of all the reviews "allow for things like buy a single re-roll or add to the outcome of 1 die"
I don't know if that consistent with what we know or not, honestly. "add to the outcome of 1 die"? Where the other reviews pretty much read like boiler plate language, this one is a little more human, and does a nice job of selling the QSR in terms of value for money. But he doesn't actually discuss having run the rules.

So that's where I am at with them. I didn't learn anything from what said (Except that the teenager love it baring melee of course), and other then the on site review only one them even raised an issue that concerned me about the QSR. As written all of these lead you to believe that everything in there will be compatible with CRB. Which we know is not true. That leaves me disappointed in the whole concept.

[kyoto kid]

Part of the edge problem is if your entire system is based around it and players don’t buy in like they have edge 1 they are cut off from the mechanic that theoretically makes the game work. You can’t both have a core mechanic that makes a system worn and have it optional.

...I didn't like the introduction of it in 4E as essentially, it is a fixed "luck attribute".  At least with Karma Pool in previous editions (which was more limited) it started small and grew as the character did.

[Ghost Rigger]

You start talking about a core playerbase, you get into dangerous waters where you become elitist and think that you know what's best for the game, no matter what anyone else likes.

This ain't it, chief. The people in my group don't like it, almost all of the people on this forum don't like it, apparently the people on reddit don't like it either and I haven't checked but I would bet my own life that the people on 4chan HATE it. Take any group of people currently playing Shadowrun and you will find that the majority of them dislike the changes implemented for 6e. There's no way around it, CG dun goofed this time.

As it stands right now, I have serious doubts when the game actually does come out that you'll even give it a fair shake and judge it on it's own merits.

I don't have to eat shit to know that it tastes like shit.

[Finstersang]

Again I will put forth that the system at its core could work with a few changes.
1. Get rid of the +2 edge limit, it is one of the major issues with this edition.
2. Add some more intuitive edge expenditures to the list.
a) Spend 1-2 edge to add Armor rating to soak/ or cover barrier rating/ higher (3-4 edge) if #3 is used
b) Spend 1-2 edge to add Armor rating to dodge/ or cover barrier rating/ higher (3-4 edge) if #3 is used
3. AV vs DV grants +1 edge per multiple of 4
4. If you are going to punish players for having low essence on healing then allow them to use some form of mechanical skill to heal, since the point of this has always been they are more machine then man. This has been issues to me in all versions of the game.
5. Have some form of coup de gra from the edge system 4-5?
All this can be done from just adding a few lines to the edge chart and removing the edge limit.

And before anyone brings up, well just house rule it. I don't support games where I have to make them work at their core rules.

These are excellent ideas. Plus, stuff like additional edge expenditures can also be "patched on" in a supplement, without having to eviscerate the core rules to "fix" them.

I also like the idea of adding Armor to the Soak roll while also increasing the additional Damage per Net by one. It makes armor a bit more usefull (whithout going in the direction of SR5, where armor was way too important and poorly balanced), but it also makes quick ambush takedowns a realistic option again, at least against weaker targets. Taking more than one Attack is the difference between some doofus guard or office drone calling for backup or not.

And yes, it´s scary and deadly when players can get one-shot by a skilled sniper, but that´s just gritty realism and mostly a psychological option for GMs - as long as you don´t seriously hate up your PCs, you don´t snuff them out like this (or at least not without giving a proper hint to avoid the trap).

As a side note: Is this stupid 2 Edge Limit actually confirmed? And if yes, is it for a single Action or for a single Initiative Pass or for the whole combat round? Because man, would that be idiotic, especially the last option: "Oh, you already got your 2 Edge for this round? Well, now cover and armor really doesn´t mean a thing anymore  "

[Banshee]

We already ran math on Action Economy before, showing it's very subjective as to how 'borked' it is. Asides from 'let's throw 40+ iniative around' people, it's not as badly twisted as claimed, and the Minor/Major system actually lets the augmented pick between an extra attack and more tactical options. All in all it's subjective as to how good/bad the new system is. Meanwhile, Edge Economy is indeed up but the benefits per point are smaller, making it less of a '7 Edge player can easily outdo the 2 Edge player whenever it matters the most', but none of y'all mention that.

I see a lot of soak, armor and damage complaints combined, which ignore the fact these are a combination that sum up to, as already discussed before, less 'either you're massively armored or the big toys oneshot you', making combat more tactical and less shock-and-awe. They're pointed out as single negative points, but the bigger picture and the math run to show it's not as bad is simply tossed aside. Frag, the second thing I did with SRM was save up for a Barrett 122, so I could try to one-shot the heavy opponents, so they couldn't one-shot me. I wiped out an entire squad of PR6 mooks in a single attack in Dragon Song 1, while my brother one-shot a lot of heavy encounters simply by overcasting and spellshaping an AoE spell. If you throw that at a player group, they'd also get butchered. So I for one welcome our new less-deviation damage overlords.

Y'all talk about the 'core playerbase not liking stuff' and risk of gatekeeping, yet at the same time by treating the 'core playerbase' as a monolith you're basically saying 'all those that disagree with me are obviously not core players'. To add to that, y'all are actually questioning the identity of a lurker who's been around longer than half of y'all, all because they dare to disagree with you and stopped lurking to combat the negativity spiral. (If postcount matters so much, what makes me then?) Heck, y'all can't even agree if SR6 is too Pink Mohawk or too Black Trenchcoat, so what is this about one opinion?

On top of that, y'all are so eager to claim playtesters were ignored and demand a player survey, but ignore the well-known fact that it was playtesters that went 'hey, how about you merge the combat advantage system with the edge system', playtesters went 'hey, how about you add status effects to make those things more explicit', and that obviously there also were plenty of playtesters that love the new mechanics otherwise CGL wouldn't have gone with it. This is not 'we toss it down and that's it', this is 'we try things, evolve things, and eventually we make decisions that obviously not everybody agrees with'.

Speaking of the writing process: First there were attacks on the writers for 'not knowing what makes shadowrun shadowrun' and none of y'all disagreed with that, then suddenly people go 'writers are cool, let's blame catalyst', a 180 so sudden it gave me whiplash and dumpshock.

There's complaint after complaint about the 'lack of quality control', meanwhile the errata team literally got the book weeks ago so they can go through it and provide fresh insight into what might have slipped during the changes during development, so that this time around CGL can be on top of things with the errata process. Frag, I'm actually jealous of the errata team because whenever I check Who's Online, I see constant activity of "Nothing, or nothing you can see", aka they're actually doing something meaningful while I'm stuck speculating. All I was able to do was provide some feedback to the Beginner Box.

And on top of all of that, we had several topics discussing positive feedback and reviews from those that played the game. Heck, y'all participated in those. Yet when I dare reference those, multiple people thought it was necessary to pretend I'm making it up. Let me reiterate: y'all participated in those topics, but me referencing them suddenly means I'm full of it.

Given how CGL isn't paying me for this, I don't see any reason why I'd respond to your Beginner Box data demands while at the same time y'all's default mode is 'MC is full of it'. I already received a (well-deserved) official warning here and I don't intend to get a second one. So for now I'm just going to try to survive a false heatwave, prepare a Beginner Box session, and work on some ideas I have for SR6. If anyone wants Beginner Box info, just PM me some requests and I'll see what I'm comfortable sharing (can't just copy the entire thing or JM Hardy will extract me for re-education).

See you in the shadows, chummers

+1

[Marcus]

We already ran math on Action Economy before, showing it's very subjective as to how 'borked' it is. Asides from 'let's throw 40+ iniative around' people, it's not as badly twisted as claimed, and the Minor/Major system actually lets the augmented pick between an extra attack and more tactical options. All in all it's subjective as to how good/bad the new system is. Meanwhile, Edge Economy is indeed up but the benefits per point are smaller, making it less of a '7 Edge player can easily outdo the 2 Edge player whenever it matters the most', but none of y'all mention that.

I see a lot of soak, armor and damage complaints combined, which ignore the fact these are a combination that sum up to, as already discussed before, less 'either you're massively armored or the big toys oneshot you', making combat more tactical and less shock-and-awe. They're pointed out as single negative points, but the bigger picture and the math run to show it's not as bad is simply tossed aside. Frag, the second thing I did with SRM was save up for a Barrett 122, so I could try to one-shot the heavy opponents, so they couldn't one-shot me. I wiped out an entire squad of PR6 mooks in a single attack in Dragon Song 1, while my brother one-shot a lot of heavy encounters simply by overcasting and spellshaping an AoE spell. If you throw that at a player group, they'd also get butchered. So I for one welcome our new less-deviation damage overlords.

Y'all talk about the 'core playerbase not liking stuff' and risk of gatekeeping, yet at the same time by treating the 'core playerbase' as a monolith you're basically saying 'all those that disagree with me are obviously not core players'. To add to that, y'all are actually questioning the identity of a lurker who's been around longer than half of y'all, all because they dare to disagree with you and stopped lurking to combat the negativity spiral. (If postcount matters so much, what makes me then?) Heck, y'all can't even agree if SR6 is too Pink Mohawk or too Black Trenchcoat, so what is this about one opinion?

On top of that, y'all are so eager to claim playtesters were ignored and demand a player survey, but ignore the well-known fact that it was playtesters that went 'hey, how about you merge the combat advantage system with the edge system', playtesters went 'hey, how about you add status effects to make those things more explicit', and that obviously there also were plenty of playtesters that love the new mechanics otherwise CGL wouldn't have gone with it. This is not 'we toss it down and that's it', this is 'we try things, evolve things, and eventually we make decisions that obviously not everybody agrees with'.

Speaking of the writing process: First there were attacks on the writers for 'not knowing what makes shadowrun shadowrun' and none of y'all disagreed with that, then suddenly people go 'writers are cool, let's blame catalyst', a 180 so sudden it gave me whiplash and dumpshock.

There's complaint after complaint about the 'lack of quality control', meanwhile the errata team literally got the book weeks ago so they can go through it and provide fresh insight into what might have slipped during the changes during development, so that this time around CGL can be on top of things with the errata process. Frag, I'm actually jealous of the errata team because whenever I check Who's Online, I see constant activity of "Nothing, or nothing you can see", aka they're actually doing something meaningful while I'm stuck speculating. All I was able to do was provide some feedback to the Beginner Box.

And on top of all of that, we had several topics discussing positive feedback and reviews from those that played the game. Heck, y'all participated in those. Yet when I dare reference those, multiple people thought it was necessary to pretend I'm making it up. Let me reiterate: y'all participated in those topics, but me referencing them suddenly means I'm full of it.

Given how CGL isn't paying me for this, I don't see any reason why I'd respond to your Beginner Box data demands while at the same time y'all's default mode is 'MC is full of it'. I already received a (well-deserved) official warning here and I don't intend to get a second one. So for now I'm just going to try to survive a false heatwave, prepare a Beginner Box session, and work on some ideas I have for SR6. If anyone wants Beginner Box info, just PM me some requests and I'll see what I'm comfortable sharing (can't just copy the entire thing or JM Hardy will extract me for re-education).

See you in the shadows, chummers

+1

Well that makes things pretty clear doesn’t it lol.

[adzling]

Again I will put forth that the system at its core could work with a few changes.
1. Get rid of the +2 edge limit, it is one of the major issues with this edition.
2. Add some more intuitive edge expenditures to the list.
a) Spend 1-2 edge to add Armor rating to soak/ or cover barrier rating/ higher (3-4 edge) if #3 is used
b) Spend 1-2 edge to add Armor rating to dodge/ or cover barrier rating/ higher (3-4 edge) if #3 is used
3. AV vs DV grants +1 edge per multiple of 4
4. If you are going to punish players for having low essence on healing then allow them to use some form of mechanical skill to heal, since the point of this has always been they are more machine then man. This has been issues to me in all versions of the game.
5. Have some form of coup de gra from the edge system 4-5?
All this can be done from just adding a few lines to the edge chart and removing the edge limit.

And before anyone brings up, well just house rule it. I don't support games where I have to make them work at their core rules.

These are excellent ideas. Plus, stuff like additional edge expenditures can also be "patched on" in a supplement, without having to eviscerate the core rules to "fix" them.

I also like the idea of adding Armor to the Soak roll while also increasing the additional Damage per Net by one. It makes armor a bit more usefull (whithout going in the direction of SR5, where armor was way too important and poorly balanced), but it also makes quick ambush takedowns a realistic option again, at least against weaker targets. Taking more than one Attack is the difference between some doofus guard or office drone calling for backup or not.

And yes, it´s scary and deadly when players can get one-shot by a skilled sniper, but that´s just gritty realism and mostly a psychological option for GMs - as long as you don´t seriously hate up your PCs, you don´t snuff them out like this (or at least not without giving a proper hint to avoid the trap).

As a side note: Is this stupid 2 Edge Limit actually confirmed? And if yes, is it for a single Action or for a single Initiative Pass or for the whole combat round? Because man, would that be idiotic, especially the last option: "Oh, you already got your 2 Edge for this round? Well, now cover and armor really doesn´t mean a thing anymore  "

entire combat turn I believe

[Marcus]

(Addiction cigarettes Level 3)
Addiction Character- cannot earn or spend Edge in any form while suffering withdrawal and takes a –2 dice pool penalty to all
tests, increasing by 1 per addiction period passed. (Level 1: 1 week)


Apparently not getting your of smokes is really hard on you in 6e.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Part of the edge problem is if your entire system is based around it and players don’t buy in like they have edge 1 they are cut off from the mechanic that theoretically makes the game work. You can’t both have a core mechanic that makes a system worn and have it optional.

...I didn't like the introduction of it in 4E as essentially, it is a fixed "luck attribute".  At least with Karma Pool in previous editions (which was more limited) it started small and grew as the character did.

Yeah I never liked the edge system but the game itself wasn’t balanced around it.  The karma system I preferred but broke on high karma characters.

[PiXeL01]

The old Karma Pool system punishes metahumans severely as they only gained a dice per 20 good karma earned, while humans got one every 10. The sky was the limit, so a upper limit was needed. 
Yet, I still prefer that form of progression to what happened with 4Es where you could start maxed out.

[adzling]

There's complaint after complaint about the 'lack of quality control', meanwhile the errata team literally got the book weeks ago so they can go through it and provide fresh insight into what might have slipped during the changes during development, so that this time around CGL can be on top of things with the errata process. Frag, I'm actually jealous of the errata team because whenever I check Who's Online, I see constant activity of "Nothing, or nothing you can see", aka they're actually doing something meaningful while I'm stuck speculating. All I was able to do was provide some feedback to the Beginner Box.

Don't be jealous of the errata process, time to rip the bandaid off.

I've been on the errata team since it's inception and worked as diligently as possible (along with other talented and motivated team members) to provide fixes and minor adjustments to 5e to make it more playable.
Looking back our heyday was when Patrick was running the show, we got some small attention from Jason (the line developer), enough that he would look at our work occasionally. I think that had more to do with Patrick than Jason however because as soon as Patrick left Jason stopped responding as far as I can tell.
We have tons of 5e errata that's been proposed but never reviewed.
So much that eventually, a few months before 6e was announced I threatened to quit if Jason didn't do something about his lack of engagement. A few other errata team members did as well.
Thankfully that got Jason's attention and he put the excellent Jayde Moon in charge.
As the errata team got excited and started working hard again 6e was announced, taking all of us by surprise.
Then a few of us got invited to the hot fix team for 6e.
Unfortunately it was already at the printers, so whatever work we did would not make it into the first printing.

I can't talk about the content of 6e or what we saw due to NDAs so don't ask.
For complete transparency I was removed from the 6e hotfix team due to an offhand comment I made confirming a demo play detail. I'm ok with that, it's within Catalyst's right to have whomever they want on their errata team.

However it's clear to me that errata was an afterthought for 6e as it was (or worse actually) for 5e errata.

So your comment above is totally offbase Chandra, as usual you take the Catalyst apologist line, which at least makes you consistent.

I think 6e started with good intentions that were needed (simplification) but ended up going down a rabbit-hole of inanity (the edge mechanic) that has divorced the rules from any relation to reality.

Time will tell if this is borne out by player experiences, you should all weigh comments here against what you want out of Shadowrun and your first play tests at your own table.

However I know that ours, with our focus on realistic outcomes, detail and authenticity will stick with 5e.

gluck!

[Moonshine Fox]

The old Karma Pool system punishes metahumans severely as they only gained a dice per 20 good karma earned, while humans got one every 10. The sky was the limit, so a upper limit was needed. 
Yet, I still prefer that form of progression to what happened with 4Es where you could start maxed out.

And with 4th and 5th it tended to get horded for a “just in case” moment since it had such a slow recharge time. Having it refresh a lot more often may help with people not leaving it sitting useless.

Granted it was fun in 3rd having 20 karma pool to just throw around at everything.

[Marcus]

There's complaint after complaint about the 'lack of quality control', meanwhile the errata team literally got the book weeks ago so they can go through it and provide fresh insight into what might have slipped during the changes during development, so that this time around CGL can be on top of things with the errata process. Frag, I'm actually jealous of the errata team because whenever I check Who's Online, I see constant activity of "Nothing, or nothing you can see", aka they're actually doing something meaningful while I'm stuck speculating. All I was able to do was provide some feedback to the Beginner Box.

Don't be jealous of the errata process, time to rip the bandaid off.

I've been on the errata team since it's inception and worked as diligently as possible (along with other talented and motivated team members) to provide fixes and minor adjustments to 5e to make it more playable.
Looking back our heyday was when Patrick was running the show, we got some small attention from Jason (the line developer), enough that he would look at our work occasionally. I think that had more to do with Patrick than Jason however because as soon as Patrick left Jason stopped responding as far as I can tell.
We have tons of 5e errata that's been proposed but never reviewed.
So much that eventually, a few months before 6e was announced I threatened to quit if Jason didn't do something about his lack of engagement. A few other errata team members did as well.
Thankfully that got Jason's attention and he put the excellent Jayde Moon in charge.
As the errata team got excited and started working hard again 6e was announced, taking all of us by surprise.
Then a few of us got invited to the hot fix team for 6e.
Unfortunately it was already at the printers, so whatever work we did would not make it into the first printing.

I can't talk about the content of 6e or what we saw due to NDAs so don't ask.
For complete transparency I was removed from the 6e hotfix team due to an offhand comment I made confirming a demo play detail. I'm ok with that, it's within Catalyst's right to have whomever they want on their errata team.

However it's clear to me that errata was an afterthought for 6e as it was (or worse actually) for 5e errata.

So your comment above is totally offbase Chandra, as usual you take the Catalyst apologist line, which at least makes you consistent.

I think 6e started with good intentions that were needed (simplification) but ended up going down a rabbit-hole of inanity (the edge mechanic) that has divorced the rules from any relation to reality.

Time will tell if this is borne out by player experiences, you should all weigh comments here against what you want out of Shadowrun and your first play tests at your own table.

However I know that ours, with our focus on realistic outcomes, detail and authenticity will stick with 5e.

gluck!

Ouch.