Annoying Game Questions You Want Answered

[DrPraetor]

I don't see why one couldn't go full on retrofuture with a hypothetical SR 6e. I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with the concept of playing out the adventures of Snake Plissken or John Connor in the grim future hellscape of 1997. Moreover, considering Blade Runner 2049, Stranger Things, etc., the 80s are currently back and are scheduled to remain so for the next three-ish years, at which point the 90s may take their place.

What you absolutely cannot do (is what they did).

Eh, maybe.

It's a very different game when it's about an alternate past that both has magic and has technology that modern readers will immediately recognize as implausible: I'm not saying such games can't be good (for example, I'm quite enjoying Ancient History's mashup with space rangers and wands). But, it's hard to take "gritty" steampunk seriously - if the technology is fundamentally whimsical, the tone clashes when the otherwise period-appropriate urchins get rickets.

In any case, such a feat would've required an advance in editorial vim and vision, not a retreat, and of course not the collapse we actually got.

When it came out, Shadowrun performed a neat hat trick of having the most plausible magic on the market married to a credible near-future history. If you want to resurrect that, and if you want the trenchant critique of present society that you can draw from cyberpunk - the technology has shifted, but the cyberpunk genre is very much still alive! - you can do it, but you have to start the setting over from scratch.

[Iduno]

When it came out, Shadowrun performed a neat hat trick of having the most plausible magic on the market married to a credible near-future history. If you want to resurrect that, and if you want the trenchant critique of present society that you can draw from cyberpunk - the technology has shifted, but the cyberpunk genre is very much still alive! - you can do it, but you have to start the setting over from scratch.

Yeah, Shadowrun needs a reboot, but it's a game that trades on 25 years of history.

SR4 tried to do that somewhat with wireless, and it bombed. Partly because the new matrix rules were, as they always are, ass. But also partly because a lot of the customer base wants the future of the 1980's.

Changing the cops from Lonestar (violent, racist Keystone Kops) to Knight Errant (special forces) wasn't bad because it made the major antagonists more successful or less humorous (directly). It was bad because you aren't supposed to stand up to them anymore, and wasn't a dark reflection of our own society. A competent company could make a good cyberpunk game without people carrying around fax machines, by making a new reflection of the bad parts of our society. But you'll still get assholes who would prefer fax machines to a good game.

[OgreBattle]

So were Shadowrun orcs an expie for black Americans specifically

[Whipstitch]

SR4 tried to do that somewhat with wireless, and it bombed. Partly because the new matrix rules were, as they always are, ass. But also partly because a lot of the customer base wants the future of the 1980's.
.

I'm not convinced that it outright bombed since I've never encountered anyone who had a problem with wireless outside of a handful of dumpshockers. Drones were wireless in previous editions and drop out via closed circuit was always an explicit option. There really wasn't anything stopping the MC from still making you do a dungeon crawl to find the right port to plug into. So while there was certainly a bit of kvetching about being called hackers instead of deckers my impression was always that it was kind of a big ol' nothing burger and that the current state of affairs has less to do with public outcry and more to do with the fact that Shadowrun is a dinky ass insular franchise and the obscurantists are in charge one way or the other.

So were Shadowrun orcs an expie for black Americans specifically

They're kind of a mish-mash. After all, the point of fantastic racism is so that you can cast a wide net and broach whatever topic you want without having to drop real world slurs on people or argue about the merits of Irishmen specifically. So while there's mention of "orksploitation films" and various allusions to black power groups there's also other references in there such as metahumans being untouchables in Japan. "Goblinization" also doesn't map particularly well to anyone specific race given that the whole point of it is so that random people get smacked with racism regardless of what diaspora caused their parents to make it to future Seattle. Further complicating matters is that ethnicity and language didn't just cease to be notable, either, and so you can still have oppressed communities of orks who also happen to be majority Latino or whatever.

[OgreBattle]

Did anyone ever write orcs with a 'hick white supremacist' bent then? Like they're in the countryside banging their siblings, have too many guns, are the majority in their area but still whine about being oppressed by everyone else.

[Username17]

I don't really have any evidence that SR4 bombed. Fanpro fell apart due to arguments over license ownership and a falling out between the English and German teams. As far as I know, the funding stream was still fine. The failure to pay freelancers wasn't because Shadowrun stopped having revenue, it was because Loren Coleman embezzled money. There was still resources to go forward with SR4A and then SR5.

As far as I can tell, the switch to wireless tech was pretty much accepted by the fanbase, with only a few vocal idiots complaining much during or after the switch. Certainly in my area SR4 revitalized Shadowrun and made it a major game from the moribund state ot had been in prior. Dumpshock post volume seems to coincide with that.

I can't say I have seen more than a dead cat bounce from SR5. But SR5 was also fucking awful and I haven't been looking carefully.

Which is somewhat secondary to the issue that at this point Shadowrun needs a hard reboot. SR5 should be nearly in 2080 at this point and I honstly cannot tell you a single event that was supposed to happen after 2073. Shadowrun's future history can't be extended because it has been in limbo for nearly a decade.

Which goes to the heart of the mater: if you have to reboot Shadowrun anyway, should you do that? Or should you make a new setting and try to learn from Shadowrun's successes and failures? At this point, I favor the latter option. Cyberpunk with fantasy elements is still cool, but you'd want to make something new instead of trying to fix something old.

-Username17

[Ignimortis]

Well the issue here is that Shadowrun has been badly in need of a rethink of how much cyberware costs since first edition. The fact that Muscle Replacement needs to be recosted has been generally understood for nearly thirty years.

The history there is that in first edition the concept was that an Essence point was worth an attribute point. That in a platonic ideal you'd spend one Essence and get one Quickness or some shit. And to obfuscate that, they let you buy conditional stat points for half a point of Essence each.

Now that's fucking awful. It was aful when there were less stats and mages could do less things. It's just factually true that a point of Strength just isn't very impressive or good and spending one sixth of your soul to get one is laughably terrible. Which you'd think would sink the entire Street Samurai concept right at the beginning - and it almost did. If that had been all Cyberware did,the cyborg warrior would have been completely unplayable. Fortuitously, the first edition also simultaneously undervalued bonus senses and super speed that let you take extra actions. Those pieces of cyberware were way better than the official standard of what cyberwarewas supposed to get you. And the error in design and the error in evaluation kind of balanced out. Players with a bit of system experience rapidly figured out that all the shit likeMuscle Replacement was basically worthless and thesuper senses and super speed were the bomb diggity. And thus the Street Samurai archetype ended up having an actual place on the team - the guy with super vision and super speed.

That's not because any of the original designers actually figured out what they had done. This was an emergent fact from actual play. The players of Shadowrun adopted the assumption that all Street Samurai were supposed to have cyber eyes,smart gun links, and wired reflexes, but that's because all theother layouts that people tried were fucking terrible. The reality that most of the cyberware the designers envisioned peopleusing were actually fucking useless sank in pretty fast, and the very first book introduced various schemes to improve some basic cyberware or make cyberware cost less essence.

Throughout the following three fucking decades, what should have happened is just to have someone go back and do a big rethink about what they actually intended cyborgs to do with their lives and thus what kinds of price incentives should exist. That never happened. Instead, people built various epicycles into the system to make new grades of cyberware to bring essence cost down, new layers of bioware, alternate and improved versions of existing ware and so on and so forth. It's been a fucking mess.

And since 5th edition is the most inexcusably terrible of the editions, obviously whatcould have been a time for a great rethink of cyberware costs and functions was instead used to fiddle around with costs in a totally fucking random fashion and make them make even less sense.

-Username17

Just to finish this off...
I spent about two days in total (so 20-24 hours) compiling data and re-pricing every piece of cyberware/bioware in SR5e. It wasn't anything revolutionary, since I did have to adhere to some basic guidelines within the game, but I did change a lot, because the things listed below just pissed me off at some points.

Here are some high (low) points:

Two things that do the same fucking thing can have radically different costs, which are illogical as well as mathematically unsound.
For instance, metatype visual change doesn't hit your Essence at all, while permanently recoloring your skin to white-and-red polka dots or whatever you want takes 0.1 Essence away. Biosculpting within your metatype is punished more severely than trying to become an ork from an elf. Cosmetic surgery somehow still hits you over the head with Essence loss, and that doesn't happen in 2018, much less in 2075.

On the math side, you can get +3 armor for 1.5 essence and 9k nuyen...and spending the same amount of Essence and 21k more will net you double the armor plus some unarmed attack features which make your fists stronger than razor claws.

Most items are severely overpriced (mostly by Essence, but sometimes nuyen too), aside from a few outliers (Pain Editor and Adrenaline Pump come to mind). Who in their right fucking mind would want to pay 1.2 Essence (that's 1/5 of your soul, buddy, irretrievable too) to have +6 dice against Toxins? Or Suprathyroid Gland, which gives you +4 stats total and makes you pay +25% Lifestyle costs, but it costs more than it would take to get those stats individually from other sources.

Many items that don't have any mechanical basis, like glowy hair or a dream recording machine, still have hefty Essence costs. If I was the GM, I'd basically say "all this shit doesn't cost Essence", because, well, there isn't any single use for those things outside of "I look cool" or "that's what my character would totally get".

Suffice to say, all of that got either toned down severely or thrown out.

[Emerald]

I'm looking for two old posts from this forum (and the surrounding discussions) and the search function isn't helping.

1) A post about addressing the social skills issue by giving people explicit social abilities in the vein of 4e powers. The example scenario was along the lines of the party walking into a tavern and running into some people they wanted to extort/threaten/etc., so the rogue used Good First Impression to get them to not attack immediately, the bard used Get a Hunch to figure out what the best approach to take to persuade them would be, and so forth.

2) A post about abstracting domain management resources where they were arranged in a wheel and each one affected adjacent resources. I want to say the resources were along the lines of Army, Judicial, Magic, Diplomacy, and such, and when you e.g. increased your Army resource you also affected your Judicial and Navy (or whatever) because those were the resources on either side.

Anyone remember either of those things and hopefully have them bookmarked or something?

[jadagul]

Is this what you were looking for for number 1?

What it really needs is special "not related to combat" abilities. Maybe a separate track so you don't have to choose between "Face Stabbing" and "Facial Expressions" or whatever. That way, when you're trying to talk your way past the guards, this happens:

Rogue: I use Double-Talk, throwing in plenty of lingo that I just made up then and acting like only an idiot wouldn't understand me, causing the Confused status effect.

Party Face: Meanwhile, I try to talk him over to our point of view by activating Voice of Reason and using Quid Pro Quo.

Bullysaurus: I'll use my multiclassed power Sidle to end up behind him and then activate Loom. Now he's Worried. In fact, because I'm sharing his square, the feat "Dragon Cock? I Walk!" applies and he gets a Nervousness penalty.

Tieflock: I show him my boobs, using the Great Cleavage feet. Now he's Fascinated.

---

Jokes aside, doesn't that sound cool?

[Emerald]

Yep, that's the one. Thanks!

[Prak]

This is a long shot, but I remember there being an indie tabletop war game back in the early 2000s that used action figures for combat. The figures were given stats according to their appearance/equipment based on guidelines and mutual agreement.

It's not Toy War, there was another one that was at least a slightly more robust book. Does anyone have a better memory of this random indie thing?

[virgil]

Cast ethereal jaunt, wield a bow, attack all enemies in the Material plane with impunity.

Does this work? If not, why?

[Pedantic]

Cast ethereal jaunt, wield a bow, attack all enemies in the Material plane with impunity.

Does this work? If not, why?

Is "[a]n ethereal creature can’t attack material creatures" unclear in some way?

[virgil]

Cast ethereal jaunt, wield a bow, attack all enemies in the Material plane with impunity.

Does this work? If not, why?

Is "[a]n ethereal creature can’t attack material creatures" unclear in some way?

Flask rogues.

[deaddmwalking]

Cast ethereal jaunt, wield a bow, attack all enemies in the Material plane with impunity.

Does this work? If not, why?

Is "[a]n ethereal creature can’t attack material creatures" unclear in some way?

Flask rogues.

That's a non-sequitor.

Flask rogues are throwing a physical object.

Ethereal is in the SRD. It quite explicitly says that some effects originating from the material can affect ethereal creatures, but that same effect originating from the ethereal has no impact on material creatures (see magic missile and other force effects.

When you're ethereal, you can't affect the Material Plane at all. Because it says so. Explicitly.

So bow-wielding ethereal jaunted creatures are dangerous to other creatures on the ethereal plane and no one else.

[virgil]

Arrows are physical objects as well. It's not a non-sequitur when flask rogues are expected to get a Ring of Blinking.

[deaddmwalking]

Yes it is.

Ethereal Jaunt is not Blink.

SRD Blink

Likewise, your own attacks have a 20% miss chance, since you sometimes go ethereal just as you are about to strike.

If you are ethereal and you attempt to attack someone on the material plane, you miss.

When you're blinking, you're trying to initiate your attack while you're on the material plane. Since you are aware of when you are material versus ethereal, you only screw up 20% of the time - someone trying to target you as you materialize has a 50% miss chance.

But it is fair to say that if you are ethereal, you have a 100% miss chance against material opponents. The fact that blink lets you spend only half of your time ethereal makes a pretty big difference.

[virgil]

The reason attacks from the ethereal don't work against material targets isn't because your arm comes up with a 404 error when you swing sword, but because ethereal objects don't interact with the material plane.

You suffer zero miss chance with flasks while blinking, because they 100% become material when released from your grasp. What makes blink work differently from ethereal jaunt in regards to objects completely returning to the material plane when no longer attended by you?

[deaddmwalking]

You suffer zero miss chance with flasks while blinking, because they 100% become material when released from your grasp.

And that's based on...?

What makes blink work differently from ethereal jaunt in regards to objects completely returning to the material plane when no longer attended by you?

Even if missile/ranged weapons work using blink (which requires evidence you have not yet provided), ethereal jaunt indicates that your equipment becomes ethereal, too. There's nothing in the spell description to indicate that your equipment ceases to be ethereal if you drop it or otherwise lose contact.

If your argument for something working is a half-remembered interpretation of a rule, your argument is dumb. If your argument is based on something else, you should lay it out clearly so people can respond to the substance of it. From reading blink, ethereal jaunt and the description of being ethereal, I don't see anything to support using arrows from the ethereal plane. If you think there is evidence, you should cite it.

[Username17]

The issue with ranged weapons and Blink is that Blink is a personal continuous effect that stops affecting things you let go of. If you throw a flask or release an arrow it stops blinking and reverts to the physical world. You can't use Blink to make ranged attacks against ethereal foes and your ranged attacks do not have a miss chance when directed at material foes.

As written, Ethereal Jaunt probably works the same way. When the spell expires, you return to the material. And since it's personal, any object that you let go of has the spell expire for it. So if you drop a gold coin, it's no longer covered by the spell and it materializes. If you shoot an arrow, it should also stop being ethereal because the spell ends for the arrow as soon as it stops being an attended object.

So there's no reason that wouldn't work. But I've also never seen it done, because it's a 7th level spell that runs out after less than 3 minutes, so it's not a really long period of invulnerable arrow shooting.

-Username17

[deaddmwalking]

The issue with ranged weapons and Blink is that Blink is a personal continuous effect that stops affecting things you let go of. If you throw a flask or release an arrow it stops blinking and reverts to the physical world. You can't use Blink to make ranged attacks against ethereal foes and your ranged attacks do not have a miss chance when directed at material foes.

This appears to be an extrapolation and appears entirely unsupported by the rules. It may be a reasonable adjudication, but it is not correct.

Specific trumps general. The description of blink indicates you have a 20% miss chance when attacking, full stop. You would have us believe that they meant melee attacks and simply forgot to specify. Similarly, when describing being ethereal, "they can affect each other normally" they neglect to mention 'except when making ranged attacks'.

Further, your extrapolation necessitates that momentum is maintained from the ethereal plane to the material. While again, that appears reasonable, it does not appear to be directly substantiated. There is something 'funny' about moving between the material and ethereal plane that is inconsistent with normal physics. Ethereal creatures don't fall (confirmed by both the blink description and the explanation of the ethereal special quality), but blink indicates that you take half damage from falling (because you only fall when you're on the material plane). If an object is momentarily 'free' while on the plane before 'dropping' into the material, it would have to choose it's direction. It is entirely possible that it couldn't 'choose' a direction of travel and would just stop...

The idea that objects that are dropped cease to be the subject of a 'personal spell' appears to be an extrapolation from invisibility - that's the only example that appears to indicate that the items 'loses' the benefit of the spell. Of course, for most 'personal' spells, the idea of worn items benefiting at all is bizarre. Divine Favor or Bull's Strength don't do anything to your equipment, so dropped items don't lose a benefit - they never had a benefit to begin with.

I'm not 100% certain I'm right, but I don't see anything 'general' that indicates dropped items automatically lose the benefit of 'personal spells' (if they even gained the benefit), nor do I see anything indicating that if such a rule exists, it would trump the text of blink. This looks like an 'everyone KNOWS' it works this way, but it looks like mind caulk. If there is such a rule and it clearly applies, someone should be able to cite it.

[virgil]

invisibility - that's the only example that appears to indicate that the items 'loses' the benefit of the spell.

Enlarge/Reduce Person

[deaddmwalking]

invisibility - that's the only example that appears to indicate that the items 'loses' the benefit of the spell.

Enlarge/Reduce Person

That's an interesting example, because it also says that weapons deal the increased damage as if they were one size larger if they're projectile weapons (ie - damage is determined by the object firing them, rather than the object hitting them). That's...odd...from a physics point of view, but ultimately it simply reinforces my point.

Blink specifically says that you have a 20% miss chance when making attacks. It is awfully relevant if ranged attacks are excepted, but it doesn't say that they are.

If the examples where it would be relevant specifically address the issue of ranged attacks (like enlarge person), it's hardly reasonable to assert that blink simply forgot to do so, especially when doing so requires adding a provision that directly contradicts the written text.

Allowing a flask rogue to avoid a miss-chance is a house rule - it's not supported by the text of the relevant spell.

[Username17]

DDMW, you realize that there actually was a big "how does this stuff work" article and it completely held up the interpretation that only you are having a problem with. Personal spells do not affect unattended objects. They just don't. Never have. Never will.

Ranged weapons don't benefit from your Fire Shield because the ammunition is not on fire once they leave your possession.

The fact that having Blink or Ethereal Jaunt turn off for items you shoot or throw is an edge case, and taking advantage of that is clever. But it's ultimately minor and getting your underwear bunched up over it is inane. No one uses the Ethereal Jaunt trick. Not because they can't, but because no one plays 13th level Cleric Archers, and those are the only characters that could meaningfully benefit from it.

-Username17

[deaddmwalking]

No. I don't realize that. A reference would be worthwhile.

Creating consistent fantasy physics is worthwhile and sensible (see Spelljammmer review). Applying a consistent interpretation of those fantasy physics is also worthwhile and sensible but if your sensible interpretation conflicts with the rules as written you have to choose which one you use. Choosing house rules isn't wrong, but you can't positively assert RAW is wrong just because you don't play that way.

Official errata would be a very clear indication that blink was incorrect. An 'official' article of the metaphysics might help - it'd at least clarify a plausible reason to widely adopt better and more consistent house rules.

Edit - And of course I know that D&D has a long history of 'secret rules', like the 'real spell descriptions' in the 1st edition DMG that modify the rules presented in the Player's Handbook. Like, it wouldn't SURPRISE me that secret rules exist, but if they do, someone should be able to cite an authoritative source.