[I Hate All Life]

Hi guys. I have a Shadowrun page (4th Ed). I've put a good bit of work into it, both content and format/presentation, and feedback would be appreciated. I don't expect you guys to read all of it and then write me a thesis or anything; I realize there's a lot there.   But feel free read over at what seems interesting to you, and if you want to comment on it that would be great. And this includes negative feedback; especially negative feedback. While I tried really hard to balance things, there might be wonky or straight-up broken rules, or lack of clarity. That's what your feedback is for. I want to present stuff that's useful and fun, not things that will break your game.

What does my page have on it? Why should you devote valuable time to come look at it? Well, Upgrades has a brief list of house rules that might prove useful (especially for you old school runners). Menagerie presents new metahuman variants and sapients. My Mysticism page has new magic rules, traditions, spells and adept powers. And finally, Dark Ops Tech gives SR4 rules for Perfect Dark weapons (yes, the old N64 game).

While I edit my page meticulously, I'm sure I've missed stuff: typos, grammar errors, subject number disagreements, etc. Feel free to point those out too, it's always nice to come across as literate. I'll go ahead and tell you my web design/HTML skills aren't all that great. The site isn't flashy; it's simple and stark. My intent is to present game content, and if my page does that then I'm happy. When I presented my page on DumpShock, it was ripped on people that focused more on my (lack of) web design skills than the pages' actual content. While such feedback is valid, I'd rather you guys comment on the substance of my site; I already know my web design is lacking, so criticism along those lines is of limited use. Hopefully I can get around to learning CSS or something one of these days.

I plan to expand on my SR page, and I have a significant expansion in the works right now. And I'm open to suggestions and collaborations, or hosting your work on my page if it's quality stuff (with credits due to you of course).

[FastJack]

Looks pretty good to me. I haven't a chance to go into detail on the content yet, but I looked over some of the stuff and, on first glance, it looked pretty solid. I'm not so sure on the exploding dice rule (it's a bit convoluted since you're adding the result together instead of counting hits), but the variants in the Menagerie section seem pretty good.

When I get a chance, I'll go through in a bit more detail.

As for style, I think it looks good too. Don't listen to the DS guys, as long as you can read it and it's not pushing the limits of taste, it's fine. If you want to go for a look a little more reminiscent of the old sourcebooks, two common fonts that come close to the sourcebooks are Franklin Gothic (articles) and Century Gothic (Shadowland comments).

[Angelone]

Looking good. It seems easier to read than before.

[I Hate All Life]

Thanks for looking at it, FastJack. The exploding dice isn't for everyone. It's a flavor and nostalgia thing. The only other way I could re-introduce exploding dice was change the way hits work, and I don't want to do that. I like how hits work and didn't want to add former editions' complexity to the system. The method I offered seemed simple and workable enough. But could you suggest a better method for exploding dice in 4E, were you to try to do it? If you come up with something better I'll put it on my page and give you credit for it. 

And I'm glad it's easier to read, Angelone.

[Doc Chaos]

Have to agree, pretty nice design. I like On topic of the content, I haven't read everything, but what I read, I liked. Sure, it really isn't for everyone, but it looks like you really poured some thought into it.

[FastJack]

Heh... The problem is that I like the system as it is in 4E, with exploding hits only when you use Edge. The only other method I could think of that would keep it relatively balanced would be to allow only one re-roll of sixes, but then it's not really exploding.

[KarmaInferno]

Heh. Shadowrun is one of the few subjects where it's still appropriate to have that 90's "white text on black page" web design.




-k

[Prime Mover]

Nice site.
Was following your links and got a good chuckle out of Parakeet corner and the cyber Parakeet art.  Greet stuff.

[Angelone]

After rereading your site, I gotta say I really like the banter between the shadowtalkers. The Metavariants are interesting, the image I have in my head for the Yumboes is kinda freaky. I smiled to myself over the thought of an Orca shifter.

Freecasting I think is interesting an pretty well thought out. I haven't read the traditions or the spells yet.

For Dark Ops Tech. I like how you didn't screw up the tables. Most sites I've been on have. One thing I noticed is in the text for the Cyclone it mentions it has built in recoil comp., however it's not listed on the table.

[tbrminsanity]

I think it is important that you know the content on your site is great and I think you have done a great job at it, keep up the good work.  As for your site itself, I would update the layout to a more modern format as it does appear to be dated (following a standard for websites in the 90's and early 2000's).  I would look at other formats out there to get ideas on how to spice up the presentation of your site so you can attract more people to your site.  Again I think you are doing some great work, I would just polish the presentation of the material.

[FastJack]

Okay, being in the web business, I feel I have to chime in on tbrminsanity's post. If the purpose of your site is to try and attract loads and load of people to visit the site to get information and get your name out there then, yes, you might want to update the format of the site and look at different ways to present the information. For instance, if you are trying to break into web design for work, and want to include this on your portfolio, then I agree totally with him and think you should go out to different "design sites" to get some ideas on how to update the site.

If I'm right, though, and you're doing this just as a place to share your ideas with a finite group of people and don't give two shakes of a binary code where your site is listed on Google; I'd say update the presentation only if you want to go for a certain 'look and feel'. If you're happy with the presentation as it is, and people aren't complaining that their retinas are forever scarred by staring at your page, then you've succeeded in what you've accomplished.

Web design is a fickle and constantly changing environment, even worse that fashion. What was considered hot and new today is boring tomorrow. Certain design principles almost always incorporated into websites, but even these are requirements (unless you're producing a site meant to catch the attention advertisement/sales opportunities).

[Liber Hazen]

I need to read more of your site, but I really liked what I saw. I liked it so much I added it as a link for my players on my site (http://www.3waters.org/consulting/sr4/Links/tabid/495/Default.aspx).

The thing that really caught my attention is that the material is new (to me). For some reason when I search for Shadowrun on Google, I seem to find the same sites over and over. Thanks for doing the work I hope it is rewarding. We will definitely be looking at the website more in the future.

[voydangel]

I really really like your idea for freecasting. I personally will make a few changes to the specific mechanics when I use it, to make it more balanced (IMHO), but kudos and thanks for the idea.

Decent page too btw, keep it up =)

[I Hate All Life]

Wow, a lot of feedback! Thanks. I appreciate it. My stuff was received more positively than i thought it might be and I'm happy about that.

Let me respond to the main points; sorry if I missed anything.

On the formatting/presentation: I wish my page looked better, I really do. I hope to make improvements to it. But what you see is the extent of my HTML skills right now, so sorry.
----------

Have to agree, pretty nice design. I like On topic of the content, I haven't read everything, but what I read, I liked. Sure, it really isn't for everyone, but it looks like you really poured some thought into it.

All two of them! I try not to have more thoughts than that in a day, I get nosebleeds if I do.
----------

Nice site.Was following your links and got a good chuckle out of Parakeet corner and the cyber Parakeet art.  Greet stuff.

No problem. I love the little things. I was thinking about making some parakeet-based metacritters, statting up Terrorkeet in SR4 stats and posting it on my page. Heheh.
----------

After rereading your site, I gotta say I really like the banter between the shadowtalkers. The Metavariants are interesting, the image I have in my head for the Yumboes is kinda freaky. I smiled to myself over the thought of an Orca shifter.

Yeah, the yumboes of folklore were kinda weird. I tried my best to make them metavariant-viable. But yeah, they are strange-looking. And I had a lot of fun working on the banter.

Freecasting I think is interesting an pretty well thought out. I haven't read the traditions or the spells yet.

For Dark Ops Tech. I like how you didn't screw up the tables. Most sites I've been on have. One thing I noticed is in the text for the Cyclone it mentions it has built in recoil comp., however it's not listed on the table.

I will fix that, thank you. And I worked a whole lot on the tables to get them presentable, I'm glad my efforts paid off.
----------

I need to read more of your site, but I really liked what I saw. I liked it so much I added it as a link for my players on my site (http://www.3waters.org/consulting/sr4/Links/tabid/495/Default.aspx).

The thing that really caught my attention is that the material is new (to me). For some reason when I search for Shadowrun on Google, I seem to find the same sites over and over. Thanks for doing the work I hope it is rewarding. We will definitely be looking at the website more in the future.

Wow, I'm flattered. Thanks. I hope you guys find it useful. And I do have more stuff bouncing around inside my head, I'll try to put it up sometime soon.
---------

I really really like your idea for freecasting. I personally will make a few changes to the specific mechanics when I use it, to make it more balanced (IMHO), but kudos and thanks for the idea.

Decent page too btw, keep it up =)

Thanks Voy. If you'd tell me what doesn't seem balanced about freecasting, and what your proposed tweaks are, if it sounds better than my own version maybe I can incorporate those ideas into my own version; I'd even give you credit for helping develop the house rule. I'm always open to feedback.

[voydangel]

Personally, these are the following tweaks I would make:

• Limit the force of freecast spells to the casters Magic attribute or their Spellcasting skill (whichever is lower) + Initiation Grade. This seems to work with the spirit of the existing magic system much better.
• Every freecast spell is considered "overcasting" for the purposes of drain. i.e.: freecast spell drain is always physical. this makes sense from a "focusing and shaping raw magic in a not-fully-controlled-or-understood" point of view... fluff wise.
• Every freecast spell is considered a glitch. I don't dig this idea. It could be interesting, but I just don't think it jives with the spirit of the glitch rules. Glitches are generally negative, and I think there's enough penalties for freecasting without making every attempt into a bad thing. I do like the idea of making every freecast have some sort of entertaining and interesting side effect, but not necessarily a bad one.
• Optionally: Considering that many groups already have a house rule of "don't divide drain by 2 when calculating drain codes". Drain for freecast spells could be "(Calculate drain as normal) x2". This will generally lead to slightly higher drain (but not tons higher), which makes sense, as there will never be overcasting when freecasting, so drain values would tend to be lower than normal anyway. Doing this ensures that its actually a draw back.

These tweaks are of course more based on my opinion of the power level of Mages, the scaling power of magic, and my personal experiences of the game, so your mileage may vary. =)
Just my 2 cents. Any counter-thoughts? I, like you, am always open to discussion.