D&D 4E OT: Shadowrun 4E announced

[Felon]

Well, all. Once you start removing a part from the game and put something else back in, it will most probably not fit as good as the original part. It might, sure, but the chances are rather slim that it will.

See, I was hoping you wouldn't opt for the path of least resistance by being vague like that.

Where did I say, that I do this?

It was just one example for a game, which was not meant to be d20, much like Shadowrun.

There are good conversions, too. Most importantly Star Wars d20 (altho I also liked the d6 system). The d20 system lends itself fairly well to the kind of gaming required for Star Wars (heroic).

If you admit there are good conversions, you either acknowledge the possibility that a d20 SR could be good as well, or you should try to explain why you place the premise of d20 SR in the same camp with the bad ones. It is possible to actually support a position like that with reasonable arguements. The question is, do you have this thought out rationally or do you just have vague, ineffable feelings on the topic?

Yes, without the willingness to spend much, much work on it, there will quite surely not be a decent result.

As has been stated previously, much of the infrastructure for a D20 SR is already out there or is forthcoming. Cybernetics, cyberspace, high-tech firearms, power armor, races, vehicles--it's out there, if somewhat scattered. D20 SR would have a framework in place that Deadlands could not benefit from.

 

[Felon]

Oof. Bad sales pitch to give to people who already like SR the way it is. You see, you aren't really marketing to an untapped player pool, to them. To them, you're attempting to steal away potential players (and thus support) for the real SR. Splitting the potential pool of players for a small game probably leads to two smaller games that can't compete in the market, and they both die. But I digress...

See, Thanee, this is what I'm talking about. This a pretty rational observation.

It does force me to admit that I'm not trying to sell this to guys like Jurgen or Geron. I'm simply trying to counter the assertion that d20 SR would be a universal failure and completely pointless waste of time.

The basic reason why it won't appeal to a significant number of gamers is that it (like most games not made by WotC or WW) won't even be seen by a significant number of gamers, much less bought, read, and adopted. Unless you get a really big publisher behind it, you simply aren't likely to get enough market visibility to win appeal. Very few games make that climb. In a market where small publishers are having troubles getting their books on the shelves, much less off them, a retread of a borderline game is not going to win points with the retailers. All in all, since there's nothing really new in your game, there's very little reason to think it will be any more appealing than the original. So, we again come to askign why we should bother.

Well, now you're playing voodoo marketing here. You can't say with absolute assurance what the marketing plan would be like or what will strike a cord with consumers, now and certainly not a year or two from now. And what you speculate so cynically here can be applied to darn near any gaming product to come out, since most gaming products are derivative of what's already out there.

And even above and beyond that, I can't say I agree with the notion that "newness" even has all that much appeal. Traditionally, gamers are a lot like any group of consumers. They tend to like things that are familiar, with only a slight twist.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Oooo...nobody's mentioned this yet in this thread. Yay for me!!!!

http://www.shadowrunrpg.com/wordpress/?p=10

Apparently SR4 is going to be different enough that the crunch bits of previous books are now completely obsolete. Veddy interesting, I think.

Brad

 

[Umbran]

And what you speculate so cynically here can be applied to darn near any gaming product to come out, since most gaming products are derivative of what's already out there.

I think that what I say so cynically is borne out in evidence of all sorts of gaming products, not just the retreads. If you haven't noticed, very few gaming products sell well. In general, the chances are against any product put out by a small publisher, period. And if a big publisher isn't going to take on SR, why would they take on a d20 SR?

Which brings us to another real big reason why your conversion would not, as things now stand, reach many people. SR is not OGL. You cannot legally use their setting elements without permission. And for them to split their audience between two different system for the same world would be very silly.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Alright, alright, I've got to ask a serious question.

Who else has skimmed through a few posts and read "d20 Spell Resistance" over and over?

 

[Felon]

Which brings us to another real big reason why your conversion would not, as things now stand, reach many people. SR is not OGL. You cannot legally use their setting elements without permission. And for them to split their audience between two different system for the same world would be very silly.

But appealing to a new audience of consumers would be very smart. And that's the purpose of offering a d20 version.

Oooo...nobody's mentioned this yet in this thread. Yay for me!!!!

http://www.shadowrunrpg.com/wordpress/?p=10

Apparently SR4 is going to be different enough that the crunch bits of previous books are now completely obsolete. Veddy interesting, I think.

Thanks for the tip! Let's take a quick peak. Some of it might have a vaguely familiar ring to it...

Q. What does this mean for my old books?
A. SR4 is a new rules set — simpler, streamlined, and more accessible, but new rules nonetheless. That means SR1, SR2, and SR3 rules will be obsolete in the new system. Source material, however — meaning background, plot, and world info — will still be relevant. We are advancing the timeline a slight bit in order to account for some new technology, but not so far as to completely sever ourselves from ongoing plots.

So … this means that core rulebooks like SR3, Magic in the Shadows, Cannon Companion, Man & Machine, Rigger 3, etc. will no longer be useful, unless you want to keep playing SR3. Any books that are primarily source material will still be useful.

So they're coming with a new the rules set for players to learn, and preserving the source material. The new rules will even be sufficiently different that players won't even be able to use their SR3 rulebooks.

Hmm. Y'know, it's almost as if they're converting over to a new system (i.e. "rules set"), but keeping the setting (a.k.a. "source material"). Of course, numerous folks in this thread have already asserted that the two were inextricably linked and utterly inseparable, so we now can only sit back and wait for the realization to sink into the heads of those poor deluded fools designing this unpallatable product.

Yes, I am very amused and self-content at this moment.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Hmm. Y'know, it's almost as if they're converting over to a new system (i.e. "rules set"), but keeping the setting (a.k.a. "source material"). Of course, numerous folks in this thread have already asserted that the two were inextricably linked and utterly inseparable, so we now can only sit back and wait for the realization to sink into the heads of those poor deluded fools designing this unpallatable product.

Yes, I am very amused and self-content at this moment.

It did prove my point (though I'm sure they're overstating the "uselessness" of the old Crunch. It's just an excuse to come out with all new products that are the same as what came before.), but it doesn't really amuse me, given it's just one more sign of FanPro's mutilation of Shadowrun into something unrecognizable to the game I loved.

Hackers, that's got to be the worst name I could think to apply to Deckers. I wonder if Riggers are still riggers, or if they're officially just called chauffeur now?

It looks like SR4 won't just screw up the system, but further mangle the setting.

 

[Felon]

Hackers, that's got to be the worst name I could think to apply to Deckers. I wonder if Riggers are still riggers, or if they're officially just called chauffeur now?

Yeah, "hacker" is a very generic label that applies to a lot of folks that aren't in a decker's league. The decker was sort of the pinnacle.

 

[Ottergame]

So they're coming with a new the rules set for players to learn, and preserving the source material. The new rules will even be sufficiently different that players won't even be able to use their SR3 rulebooks.

Hmm. Y'know, it's almost as if they're converting over to a new system (i.e. "rules set"), but keeping the setting (a.k.a. "source material"). Of course, numerous folks in this thread have already asserted that the two were inextricably linked and utterly inseparable, so we now can only sit back and wait for the realization to sink into the heads of those poor deluded fools designing this unpallatable product.

Yes, I am very amused and self-content at this moment.

This doesn't mean what we are saying was wrong. I still think SR is tied to it's ruleset. This is going to make a lot of fans nervous. But if they can pull off the update as well as WOTC did with 3E, it will put fan fears to rest. But I get the feeling it's going to split the player base if changes are to big.

If the changes are a sweeping as it seems, it's not going to be the same Shadowrun. Of course, they admited as much. At least if it's not any good, there's enough material to continue playing 3rd edition, and ignore the new storyline and changes.

I think it's possible to simplify the clunk parts of the rule system without changing the feel of the game, maybe this will be the equivilent to saying 2e suppliments to D&D aren't useful in 3e. It's not that the game plays a lot differently, it's just that the little things changed enough, so that the material that focused on the little things no longer applies.

 

[Ottergame]

Yeah, "hacker" is a very generic label that applies to a lot of folks that aren't in a decker's league. The decker was sort of the pinnacle.

I aggree. Besides, there's nothing in the real world that makes people drop established names for things, in spite of them not longer accurate. There's 15 years of established story calling them deckers, and I perfer it over the generic hacker label.

Hacking itself has changed a lot in 20 years. Very few "hackers" nowadays have the gritty skills of a hacker of 20 years ago. They use programs to do the dirty work for them. A lot like programers or web designers.