[Csjarrat]

As an avid player of 4/5e's I got pissed off with quality issues and bowed out of 6e due to all the reported issues at launch.
Given that was some time ago now, how are we looking? Are we fixed and having fun or are the problems still there?

[Redwulfe]

Personally I am having fun. i have played every edition of the game and I am actually having fun in this edition.

That being said I am not one to care about the major issues people had with the game namely Armor and such.

YMMV though depending on what you didn't like.

[Michael Chandra]

As an avid player of 4/5e's I got pissed off with quality issues and bowed out of 6e due to all the reported issues at launch.
Given that was some time ago now, how are we looking? Are we fixed and having fun or are the problems still there?

Depends on what the problems are. Quality-wise, a lot is fixed by the Augustus and January errata. New-mechanic-wise, nothing new. And if your grade-level is 'how many problems are reported with a new crunch-book', we don't have Firing Squad yet so cannot say.

[Csjarrat]

Cool, will keep hanging fire and have a look at quality of the expansion books when they arrive then

[MercilessMing]

Having fun with 6th, but it's still Shadowrun so it's not a great system.  However, it's Shadowrun so it's a fun time in spite of that.  6th has only had two errata in the 9 months since its release, and probably needs at least two more. 

[wraith]

As an avid player of 4/5e's I got pissed off with quality issues and bowed out of 6e due to all the reported issues at launch.
Given that was some time ago now, how are we looking? Are we fixed and having fun or are the problems still there?

Still bad, IMHO.  Nothing has been published that really materially changes the major problems of 6e Core.

20A is still a better take on the modern setting, and I'm still running in the 2050's instead because the writing is better.   

[topcat]

Having fun with 6th, but it's still Shadowrun so it's not a great system.  However, it's Shadowrun so it's a fun time in spite of that.  6th has only had two errata in the 9 months since its release, and probably needs at least two more.

This is pretty much where I'm at. Some thoughts after four sessions...

• Lower DVs put a big emphasis on margin of success and actions with +DV modifiers.
• The Adept Power Combat Sense is extremely effective (limits margin of success).
• Spirits are extremely effective.
• Haven't used them yet, but explosive are completely unbalanced.
• I love Reputation, Heat, and this edition's interpretation of Professional Rating.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Personally I'm walking away.  I had issues from the get go but ran about 20 games in it to see if it worked for us overall.  I mean its die pool v die pool so it functions, but I find the actions slower than previous editions,(though a combat round is quicker) the magic system is just a full on train wreck 2/3rds of it just doesn't work by the math.  And overall the game revolves around the edge mechanic that I find slow, fiddly and too gamist. As an aside to the edge thing I think edge actions are a terrible idea, and for the most part they are something that should have been folded into the action mechanic. The speed thing may be something that will get fixed by experience but for us there is a lot more decision paralysis due to the edge system. The errata cleared up basic errors, but it isn't tackling what we see as core issues.

[Shadowjack]

For the time being I am not playing, not sure if I'll try it again. I really wish they would have reinvented the game instead of sticking to things like the priority table, ammo tracking, etc. Speaking of ammo, standard ammo seems to be the best, which makes no sense. We went from APDS rounds being amazing to being mediocre. PC's start with way too many contacts, it's a total headache for the GM. Group of 6 players? You might have to make over 20 contacts, totally ridiculous.

The edge system is fun but also weird at the same time, having played a decent bit I feel like I'm not a fan of it overall. Stacking dodge dice is strictly superior to tanking. I can say though that tank characters have been effective for my group. Another thing, using acrobatics to dodge is insanely broken, most of the enemies in the CRB struggle to land attacks on someone with 6 acrobatics, which is easily attained. The guidelines for karma distribution are really bad imo, it's like they're built for campaigns to go on for years when that is definitely not the norm. It takes far too many sessions to raise high-rank attributes and skills, not a lot of fun imo.

The worst thing of all, which is not unique to 6E, is the brutally boring process of character creation. The biggest offender being spending starting nuyen on crap like flashlights, clips, ammo, etc, it's WAY TOO SLOW. Character creation takes too long, isn't fun due to nuyen expenditures and the priority table, etc. On a positive note, I do think the matrix and magic rules are a lot easier to learn and much more clear than previous editions. That does hold a ton of value for me but unfortunately, it's just not enough.

I hate to sound so negative but I guess it's just been a rough go over the decades of Shadowrun I've played, I keep hoping the next editions will solve my issues with the game but in the end, they never do. I have gone back to Anarchy and it's been more balanced and fun but I do miss aspects of the core rules, which is unfortunate. Also, Anarchy does not get very many books and the ones it does are packed with shadowruns I'll never use.

[Michael Chandra]

If you're running a short campaign and want rewards to flow like water to quickly get a buff, then what's stopping you? It's a guideline, not a law, just like how the training times are guidelines. I know I ran a double-exp campaign in D&D 4e, but that wasn't a flaw in the normal rewards, simply me giving more because it fit my goals better. On the other hand my 52-session campaign ended with a player at 10 Magic, Saeletra forbid I had given them double rewards.

As for contacts, I guess that's a difference in GM-style. Way I see it, low-connection low-loyalty contacts don't need more than a location and a single line of text. Plus players can make those, just needs a quick review. Plus making your non-social street sam have 3 lowlife contacts is more fun for gameplay than the classic 'I get one high-connection fixer for my gear'.

[Shadowjack]

I haven't had much fun with starting contacts, always preferred meeting them during the game. If I play again I won't use any starting contacts A single line of text and a location seems like pretty scant info for a contact, I find I am not happy unless they are fleshed out a bit. I usually give them a decent bit of info. As for the karma rules, I get what you're say and I do that myself but I really think it is a major flaw that the book does not give broader guidelines, it feels off to me to give extra karma, I really prefer running things by the book. This was also a huge complaint I heard in 5E, I'm surprised they didn't try to smooth it out more.

[Michael Chandra]

It's easier to give more than give less. The base guidelines were perfectly balanced for my home game last edition.

[Shadowjack]

I just think that it would have been much better if these sections were written differently. 4 or 5 karma a run would take a group many years to get an extremely powerful runner in 5E, yet most groups won't come close to that. Not saying that the game should be setup so every campaign all the runners become so powerful but have guidelines for shorter campaigns would have been nice. For example, if you play a 10 session campaign and get 45 karma, that's barely enough to scratch initiation and magic costs even at the lower levels.

[Michael Chandra]

Initiation is much cheaper though. 45 can get you almost a fourth. In SR5 it couldn't get you a third. Even with 1 karma extra per session in SR5 it basically means 3 Initiations and 1 Specialization in both editions.

[Shadowjack]

That is true but you'd need a ton of extra karma to raise your magic. I just wish the section was more robust.