Shadowrun 5E coming soon

[Derren]

One of my problems with SR4 was that many - maybe most - of the cool metaplot and setting stuff - such as Saito, the Arcology, the Bugs and so on - were already resoplved, and the newer metaplot was less evocative. Most of the cool metaplot stuff was already resolved. I actually think that the 2050's were cooler, in terms of look, feel and metaplot, than the 2070's.

Also, guidelines to what could be hacked and when would be very welcome. SR4 had the feeling that "everything could be hacked", right down to your foe's smartgun, and hacked by wi-fi, no less. Clearer rules and guidelines about what hackers could do (with examples) would be very useful indeed.

Actually hacking the smartgun was used several times as an example in the books.
Generally everything which can receive wi-fi signals (has an open port so to speak) can be hacked provided you are close enough depending on the signal strength.

They are currently reprinting all the 2050 stuff as PDFs so if you want to play that just get them (if you don't want to take your books with you).
I can't comment on the metaplot as this is a matter of taste. But with StormFront a lot of the 4E meta got resolved and there are several new plots on the Horizon.
The Bugs are back, so are AIs (It is hinted that Deus is still somewhere) and Aztechnology had some serious victories. Also the HMVV infection is getting worse.
Matrix rules will be overhauled. They will still be wireless, but a bit more compartmentalized.

 

[karolusb]

Full disclosure, I haven't looked at much shadowrun since the 90's, So I'll ask... Are new Shadowrun Editions minor upgrades and improvements like Chaosiums Call of Cthulhu / AD&D 1E to 2E or are they whole rebuilds of the game like AD&D2e to D&D3E / D&D3.5 to D&D4E.

1 was a good idea, and all but unplayable. 2 was a major overhaul, 3 seemed major at the time (as a fan of 2) but really the two are nearly interchangeable. 4 was unrelated in tone or mechanics to anything that had ever been called ShadowRun before. 5 is going to be related to 4, which is a shame.

 

[DnD_Dad]

I still have all my 1st and 2nd edition book, which are all the core and source books. I also have DMZ and about 60 minis to boot. I haven't needed to change my game for a long time. When 3rd came out it made it easier for anyone to play and I didn't like that. I spent a good long time making a matrix deck and a custom character generator in BASIC to have it all slated as obsolete because FASA closed down and someone else couldn't just reprint and add to the world that was already established. I applaud Jordan for getting his stuff back and giving it some love, and I play MWO, MWT and I plan on buying whatever Shadowrun PC game comes out, but I already have all my books on my shelf I plan on buying... unless I find a Universal Brotherhood for a good price.

 

[Piratecat]

When 3rd came out it made it easier for anyone to play and I didn't like that.

It's really weird for me to read that. Why is it a bad thing for a game to be more accessible? That means there's more players, and that's a win for everyone.

 

[DnD_Dad]

Because it took me and my group a long time to understand and run the matrix and foci correctly, and after years of playing and finally understanding the rules they threw them out the window. I had a lot invested in the system and it made sense at that point. Everyone that I played with were in the same boat too. No one in my area changed from 2nd to 3rd, and a lot of hardcore Shadowrun players at the time felt the same way. Only new players bought 3rd. It created a big divide. We had a pretty big FASA supporter in our area at Challenge Games, Forest Brown was a developer for a lot of FASA products and even had a hand in making Axis and Allies. I enjoyed the fact that people were playing Shadowrun 3rd, but they wouldn't play second because of the mechanical differences. I don't think a game has to be made easier for it to be accessible.

 

[dnoonan]

Wait, shouldn't they call it "Shadowrun Next"?

Seriously, though, this is great news, and I can't wait to get my hands on it.

--Dave.
nnnooner.blogspot.com

 

[Piratecat]

But if the rules are so crappy (read "complex and hard to understand" there) that it takes your group a long time to master them, isn't it a fantastic thing that they were later streamlined? The newer rules don't remove the joy you guys got from your 1st & 2nd ed Shadowun games, of course, and I get that having your system mastery of the old rules no longer apply would be annoying. But accessible rules that are also fun help bring in new players, and new players keep a game alive.

A good example for me is the old "higher ACs should be negative ACs" discussion when 3rd ed D&D launched. Having AC -10 was quirky, but it was also confusing and positive ACs are flat-out better game design because they're so much more intuitive. A lot of folks bridled about the change regardless. I get that change is scary and can suck, but that was one of those arguments that just didn't seem to make sense.

Anyways, thank you for explaining. I only played 2e Shadowrun once, largely because the rules seemed impenetrable, so I may be biased.

 

[DnD_Dad]

My point exactly!

 

[Jhaelen]

Because it took me and my group a long time to understand and run the matrix and foci correctly, and after years of playing and finally understanding the rules they threw them out the window.

Yes. The Matrix Rules created a game within the game. I only ever played one-shots, but the only character profession I was really ever interested in was the Decker. Unfortunately, I never met a Shadowrun GM who felt the same way ;-)
I ended up creating an Adept/Decker character so could at least contribute in _some_ way.

Without the specific, elaborate Matrix rules, playing a Decker definitely lost it's 'magic'.

Back in the days I even started creating my own RPG system around the Matrix rules - a game where every pc was a Decker! I never got to finish or test it, though.

At least there were some good computer games featuring the Matrix, e.g. Neuromancer or System Shock.

 

[Derren]

Yes. The Matrix Rules created a game within the game. I only ever played one-shots, but the only character profession I was really ever interested in was the Decker. Unfortunately, I never met a Shadowrun GM who felt the same way ;-)
I ended up creating an Adept/Decker character so could at least contribute in _some_ way.

Without the specific, elaborate Matrix rules, playing a Decker definitely lost it's 'magic'.

Back in the days I even started creating my own RPG system around the Matrix rules - a game where every pc was a Decker! I never got to finish or test it, though.

At least there were some good computer games featuring the Matrix, e.g. Neuromancer or System Shock.

One goal of the 5E is to unify all the sub systems in Shadowrun. That especially means making the matrix similar to the "normal" game when it comes to how many checks are made and how the dice pool is assembled.
So if you want a special matrix system 5E won't be your game unless you houserule.

And speaking of matrix PC games, there is a free Decker game out there using the Shadowrun 2E? matrix rules.
http://www10.caro.net/dsi/decker/

Another thing, the quickstart rules for 5E will be ready on the Free RPG day
http://www.catalystgamelabs.com/2013/03/12/catalyst-game-labs-and-free-rpg-day-2013/