TheRPGSite

Pen & Paper Roleplaying Central => Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion => Topic started by: Marchand on October 10, 2020, 08:37:10 AM

Title: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Marchand on October 10, 2020, 08:37:10 AM
In case anyone is interested and missed it, R Tal put out some more info on Cyberpunk Red.

Link: https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/ (https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/)

Scheduled release 14th Nov pdf, 19 Nov physical. So the physical book is due out the same day as the CP2077 videogame (surprise...). USD60/30 for the book/pdf. 456 pages.

I'll almost certainly buy the pdf, but the page count is sounding a bit bloated. There will be 3 pieces of fiction and a lot of art. To be fair, the samples available so far look pretty good.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Spike on October 11, 2020, 02:26:24 AM
I will buy this because I hate money.  8)

I got the starter kit in PDF when it came out and I cannot believe how little value it actually had, and I am a serious fan of CP2020. V3 physically hurt me. I still have nightmares about dolls...

I want to say deep and meaningful things about Mad Mike and where he is going wrong and why, but honestly...  honestly I think the problem is me and my nostalgia for 2020.  Think Ima get my group to play a game or two when I get back. Unless they've taken a yen to Invisible War...
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: lordmalachdrim on October 11, 2020, 07:19:36 AM
I got the starter kit in PDF when it came out and I cannot believe how little value it actually had, and I am a serious fan of CP2020.

I want to say deep and meaningful things about Mad Mike and where he is going wrong and why, but honestly...  honestly I think the problem is me and my nostalgia for 2020.

I agree with all the above or at least I had thought I did. After the starter set came out I found it...lets just say it's in the basement with a much larger then I want to admit collection of books I'm slowly donating to the local library. I went and picked up a new copy of 2020 (My old one was lost in a move years ago) and after rereading the book and running a couple of sessions I realized I just don't like it nearly as much as I thought I had.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Marchand on October 11, 2020, 08:24:11 AM
In terms of what CP-RED brings as a game, based on the jumpstart, I think for me it's probably just the new netrunning rules, which do seem like a decent way to integrate netrunning into a game without leaving the rest of the party twiddling their thumbs. But I haven't actually had a chance to playtest it myself.

I was surprised that R Tal seem to think people are interested in loads of setting material about the Fourth Corporate War and so on, as well as the plots around Johnny Silverhand and co. Maybe it's just to have the tie-in with the videogame's backstory.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Svenhelgrim on October 11, 2020, 10:11:36 AM
I don’t give money to people who hate me.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Nerzenjäger on October 11, 2020, 12:22:15 PM
I don’t give money to people who hate me.

You don't pay taxes? Just joking.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: RandyB on October 11, 2020, 01:49:43 PM
I don’t give money to people who hate me.

Who hates you, and why?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 11, 2020, 03:36:37 PM
I'm leaning towards sticking with 2020, but I'll give Red a chance.
Just waiting for the damn thing to actually come out. R. Tal's release track record has been terrible after Mike went galavanting around.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: soundchaser on October 11, 2020, 04:16:22 PM
Hoping the release dates are firm.

I will buy the core. Anyone have thoughts for a newb with regard to 2020 stuff that might port over well?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Marchand on October 11, 2020, 07:52:20 PM
Hoping the release dates are firm.

I think it would be a major fail not to synch release with the video game. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some contractual obligation to do so. The video game is orders of magnitude more important than the pen and paper RPG, commercially.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: soundchaser on October 11, 2020, 09:07:15 PM
The reveal posts show interesting details:

https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: VisionStorm on October 11, 2020, 10:33:04 PM
I got the starter kit in PDF when it came out and I cannot believe how little value it actually had, and I am a serious fan of CP2020.

I want to say deep and meaningful things about Mad Mike and where he is going wrong and why, but honestly...  honestly I think the problem is me and my nostalgia for 2020.

I agree with all the above or at least I had thought I did. After the starter set came out I found it...lets just say it's in the basement with a much larger then I want to admit collection of books I'm slowly donating to the local library. I went and picked up a new copy of 2020 (My old one was lost in a move years ago) and after rereading the book and running a couple of sessions I realized I just don't like it nearly as much as I thought I had.

I always loved the way that Cyberpunk 2020/Interlock handled task resolution and “classes” (which are more like starting templates with one special ability, rather than straightjackets), but I always felt it had way too many attributes and a few more skills than were necessary. I mean, the game has THREE freaking social attributes (one of which doubles as willpower), two intelligence attributes (one for actual thinking, a separate one for tech) a movement rate attribute and a luck attribute. None of that crap is necessary.

Attributes should just be one attribute per core function. ONE interaction attribute is enough (charisma-type attributes are already weak enough without splitting them into three) and you don’t need a specialized attribute to deal with tech—that’s just an intellectual task. Movement rate does NOT need a stat. Everyone should just get the same base movement rate and higher movement rates should just be an Advantage/Feat/Talent type of thing (which don’t exist in Cyberpunk 2020, but should) and/or handled as cybernetic enhancements. And I’m not sure Luck should exist as an attribute and I always thought it was barely useful compared to basically every other attribute—even the split up social ones. That’s just too much crap to spread your stat points over.

Then the game suffers from the same issue as most skill-based systems, which is specificity. Every tiny, uber specialized task is its own separate skill, which you have to level independently of every other skill that’s essentially the same thing, but a different specialty. Like half a dozen piloting skills to cover what’s essentially driving vehicles, so that if you max one but don’t spread every single skill point you have available learning the rest you turn into a complete retard whenever you hop into anything but your chosen vehicle.

I love skill-based systems and consider them superior to class-based systems, but implementation like this is crap. As I heard someone say before, uber specific skill-based systems like these turn more into being about what you don’t know than about what you do. There’s just too much interrelated crap that’s really just variants of each other to spread your points around. They should just be general skills with specialties as a bonus thing to cover the specific stuff.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: hedgehobbit on October 12, 2020, 08:13:34 AM
https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
456 pages

I don't see why they need to overdo the background material so much when anyone that plays this RPG will have already played the video game and will know more about the world from playing it than they would from reading any book.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on October 12, 2020, 11:02:43 AM
https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
456 pages

I don't see why they need to overdo the background material so much when anyone that plays this RPG will have already played the video game and will know more about the world from playing it than they would from reading any book.
I wouldn't make that assumption. There are still people that prefer reading books to playing video games.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: soundchaser on October 12, 2020, 03:42:49 PM
https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
456 pages

I don't see why they need to overdo the background material so much when anyone that plays this RPG will have already played the video game and will know more about the world from playing it than they would from reading any book.
I wouldn't make that assumption. There are still people that prefer reading books to playing video games.
Yes, I will never play the video game.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: VisionStorm on October 12, 2020, 04:05:41 PM
https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
456 pages

I don't see why they need to overdo the background material so much when anyone that plays this RPG will have already played the video game and will know more about the world from playing it than they would from reading any book.
I wouldn't make that assumption. There are still people that prefer reading books to playing video games.

Perhaps, but I doubt that they are in the majority. And IMO excessively large game tomes are more a liability than an asset when it comes to actually getting a group together, prepping a game and actually playing the game. Most people, particularly casual gamers, are not heavy readers. And even when they might read the occasional novel, most people (other than uber nerds, and even then only some) don’t associate games with reading massive textbooks. That’s homework, not a game. Large books scare noobs away.

Large books are an obstacle to gaming. Having to read a 400+, almost 500 freaking page book just to get started becomes an immediate barrier of entry. That’s too much material to start playing right away, and IMO, that should be the primary goal of any RPG book—to get people to play as quickly as possible without delay. But 450+ pages means that we’re gonna have to sit this one out and wait till the GM gets around reading all text before we even discuss playing, much less start prepping a campaign.

IMO, all RPG books should be short and to the point. If there’s too much material to cover in 250 pages or so tops, the material should be split up into separate supplements, with the core book focusing on rules and a world overview.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on October 12, 2020, 04:44:15 PM
https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/10/09/cyberpunk-red-alert/
456 pages

I don't see why they need to overdo the background material so much when anyone that plays this RPG will have already played the video game and will know more about the world from playing it than they would from reading any book.
I wouldn't make that assumption. There are still people that prefer reading books to playing video games.

Perhaps, but I doubt that they are in the majority. And IMO excessively large game tomes are more a liability than an asset when it comes to actually getting a group together, prepping a game and actually playing the game. Most people, particularly casual gamers, are not heavy readers. And even when they might read the occasional novel, most people (other than uber nerds, and even then only some) don’t associate games with reading massive textbooks. That’s homework, not a game. Large books scare noobs away.

Large books are an obstacle to gaming. Having to read a 400+, almost 500 freaking page book just to get started becomes an immediate barrier of entry. That’s too much material to start playing right away, and IMO, that should be the primary goal of any RPG book—to get people to play as quickly as possible without delay. But 450+ pages means that we’re gonna have to sit this one out and wait till the GM gets around reading all text before we even discuss playing, much less start prepping a campaign.

IMO, all RPG books should be short and to the point. If there’s too much material to cover in 250 pages or so tops, the material should be split up into separate supplements, with the core book focusing on rules and a world overview.
I would imagine that not too many new players are going to be all that interested in the tabletop game at all. The tabletop game is aimed at those that already enjoy CP2020. Sure, some new blood might take a bite, but I don't think that's the real target audience here. The target audience is those that will eat up 400+ pages and ask for more. The non-readers still have their video game.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 14, 2020, 01:32:58 PM
For those that might be interested, Cyberpunk RED is available now on DTRPG.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Jaeger on November 14, 2020, 04:17:02 PM

I love skill-based systems and consider them superior to class-based systems, but implementation like this is crap. As I heard someone say before, uber specific skill-based systems like these turn more into being about what you don%u2019t know than about what you do. There%u2019s just too much interrelated crap that%u2019s really just variants of each other to spread your points around. They should just be general skills with specialties as a bonus thing to cover the specific stuff.

This.

It seems that CP2020 was done by 1989 design standards.

I get it - there is a subset of people that like their big skill lists.

But stuff like that is not the way to a larger audience.

How hard is it to make a game more accessible and less complicated than the latest edition of Shadowrun?

Honestly...


Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: lordmalachdrim on November 14, 2020, 04:59:06 PM
It seems that CP2020 was done by 1989 design standards.

Considering Cyberpunk 2020 was 1990 that is as expected.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Wicked Woodpecker of West on November 14, 2020, 05:18:23 PM
Quote
I mean, the game has THREE freaking social attributes (one of which doubles as willpower), two intelligence attributes (one for actual thinking, a separate one for tech) a movement rate attribute and a luck attribute. None of that crap is necessary.

On contraty. Games without at least 15 attributes are crap :P

I mean Leadership, Charm and Resolves for Interaction are minimum for me, so yeah 3 attributes :P
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Alderaan Crumbs on November 15, 2020, 01:41:08 AM
So, how “woke” (or whatever you want to call it) is CP Red? I have seen rumbling of BLM and other nonsense and was curious if any face-palming political crap made it in. Also, is the system still a goofy mess as far as armor and melee are concerned?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Spinachcat on November 15, 2020, 02:05:22 AM
I don’t give money to people who hate me.

Smart choice.

Pondsmith and his clown company proudly supported Burn Loot Murder terrorists, so those scum can be their new customer base. 
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Alderaan Crumbs on November 15, 2020, 02:11:22 AM
I don’t give money to people who hate me.

Smart choice.

Pondsmith and his clown company proudly supported Burn Loot Murder terrorists, so those scum can be their new customer base.

Did they? I wasn’t aware of that. The “white boys” comment when detailed the Voodoo Boys was a turn-off for me and that’s one reason I was curious how much bullshit made it into Red. If they keep that shit out of the game I’ll be fine with that, provided the rules aren’t ass.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 15, 2020, 04:08:53 AM
456 pages.

Why, though?

Oh well, here's some cyberpunk music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DheyUKJ-K_k
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 15, 2020, 10:10:06 AM
456 pages.

Why, though?

Oh well, here's some cyberpunk music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DheyUKJ-K_k
There's nothing inherently wrong with a high page count. I'd suggest reading it over and seeing if the quality of the content is there through all of the pages before lamenting the length. Unless you're too short on time or find reading to be somehow unpleasant, in which case, perhaps this isn't for you.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Dimitrios on November 15, 2020, 11:05:44 AM
2 questions:

Has the combat system changed much from CP2020? I recall Friday Night Firefight as being the most fun system for firearms combat in a ttrpg.

I remember CP2020 as being similar to other games of that era in that dexterity or the equivalent was the "one stat to rule them all", and regardless of what sort of character you were making, you would be a a distinct disadvantage if you didn't put a lot of points into it. Has that changed?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: myleftnut on November 15, 2020, 01:44:03 PM
Any word on the physical book?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: soundchaser on November 15, 2020, 07:37:12 PM
Any word on the physical book?
Release is supposed to be 11/19
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Thornhammer on November 15, 2020, 07:59:14 PM
Oh well, here's some cyberpunk music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DheyUKJ-K_k

That is some good shit right there.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 15, 2020, 09:54:07 PM
There's nothing inherently wrong with a high page count.
I've been gaming since 1983. I've yet to see a game that couldn't have been written in 48 digest-sized pages instead.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: SHARK on November 15, 2020, 11:32:58 PM
Greetings!

I hope that they go broke. It is good that their audience of customers dwindle to nothing, and their entire company goes bankrupt. They all need to be standing in the Unemployment line, and begging.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Torque2100 on November 16, 2020, 07:39:32 AM
Cyberpunk 2020 is one of my all time favorite RPGs. I've already pre-ordered the physical copy through my FLGS and I will be buying a copy of the PDF through DTRPG.

I am a huge fan of Interlock and I am looking forward to this game.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Panzerkraken on November 16, 2020, 10:23:36 AM
I bought the .pdf within seconds of its release.

Overall, I like it. There is some page bloat, mostly centered around the idea of having quick lists in the chargen section that have the information necessary to create the character, get them their skills and gear etc, but then repeating all the information later in the book in the gear section.

They've done pretty extensive changes to the Interlock system in it, a lot of which can be seen in the Witcher (HP for example), although they've changed the crit system so it's not quite the exercise it was in The Witcher.

In answer to the FNFF question, it's close to the same, pretty much all the basic stuff is there, but there's some callback to the range-and-DN tables from CP2013. There's no more hit locations, every shot is assumed to hit the body unless you aim for the head (at a -8). Hit location granularity comes up in the new crit system, where when you roll damage, if you roll 2 or more 6's you create a critical hit, which deals an extra 5 points of damage and causes an effect, both of which bypass armor.

Roles are even more classlike, which I guess makes sense with the massive popularity of D&D-descended games in the US Market. The role skills have been seriously expanded with new options and fiddly bits that you can play around with, or just leave aside most of the time if you like. Combat Awareness, for instance, lets you shift the points around into different combat-related abilities such as Awareness Rolls, To-Hit rolls, Damage, etc. So it reduces the numbers it grants by spreading it around other areas. Nomads have been merged with Runners (Riggers), adding their Moto skill to Drive, but the family aspect is still there, as you have clan rank and family motor pool as other aspects of the skill.

Executives (Corporates) and Lawmen (Cops) have neat spreads where they can call for backup (Lawmen) to bring in some combat mooks, or have detailed personal employees (Exec) who might be personal assistant by day, and legbreaker by night. Execs also have a lot of their needs taken care of by their employer, but that has its own set of strings.

Medtechs and Techs have a slew of abilities, and each point in their Role skill provides them with two points to spread into the various aspects of those abilities, things like upgrading gear or inventing new gear complement the old Jury Rig aspect of the Techie, while the Medtech has Surgery (advanced MedTech), Pharmaceuticals (really nice boosts from drugs that don't addict the user), and Cryotank operations.

I felt like for all the size of the document, it still felt like they might have planned on 2 books, then just pasted them together in order to get the game out the door. It works for me, but I wind up making heavy use of the bookmarks on the .pdf and the CTRL+F function to get around. There's also a general lack of the brand-minded specific gear items that sort of became the hallmark of CP2020. One of my players from my old CP2020 game already commented wondering how he was supposed to tell the difference between a Sternmeyer Type 35 and a Mustang Arms 10mm now. Mechanically, they're pretty much the same.  I can see how I'd deal with it in game, but I feel like the video-gameification that Mike brought back when he went to work on Crimson Skies, and sloppily tried to implement in V3.0 hasn't completely gone away. I can see WHY they do it, and I've heard his explanation for it, but it's just one of those things I always felt was a differentiator between Cyberpunk and Shadowrun (where as a concept, the generic pistol has been a thing since 2e).

Production wise, I like the rest of the book. Nice art, layout is readable with a minimum of silly fonts, etc.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Alderaan Crumbs on November 16, 2020, 01:08:07 PM
Greetings!

I hope that they go broke. It is good that their audience of customers dwindle to nothing, and their entire company goes bankrupt. They all need to be standing in the Unemployment line, and begging.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

What did they do?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: VisionStorm on November 16, 2020, 04:24:47 PM
There's nothing inherently wrong with a high page count.
I've been gaming since 1983. I've yet to see a game that couldn't have been written in 48 digest-sized pages instead.

I don't know about that. 48 pages seems kinda limited for some games (specially if you include spell entries, skill descriptions, "Feats" or similar Advantages/Disadvantages, etc.), but I do question the actual size of the audience that supposedly wants 400+ books left and right.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Jaeger on November 16, 2020, 06:38:24 PM
It seems that CP2020 was done by 1989 design standards.

Considering Cyberpunk 2020 was 1990 that is as expected.

But Cyberpunk Red is actually being released in the Year 2020... And still has big skill lists....

Its like when the PF2 developers said that they never played or so much as took one look at 5e when they were developing PF2.

IMHO, simply no excuse for not making the system more accessible.

The overwhelming majority of the OSR does not use THAC0.

Long skill lists need to die in the same dumpster fire.

Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 16, 2020, 07:05:41 PM
It seems that CP2020 was done by 1989 design standards.

Considering Cyberpunk 2020 was 1990 that is as expected.

But Cyberpunk Red is actually being released in the Year 2020... And still has big skill lists....

Its like when the PF2 developers said that they never played or so much as took one look at 5e when they were developing PF2.

IMHO, simply no excuse for not making the system more accessible.

The overwhelming majority of the OSR does not use THAC0.

Long skill lists need to die in the same dumpster fire.
I think I already mentioned that I don't see CPR as making any effort to pull in new gamers. Instead it's a nostalgia bomb for old CP players. Those are the ones that will often pay big money for a big, pretty book.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Spike on November 16, 2020, 07:35:18 PM

Considering Cyberpunk 2020 was 1990 that is as expected.

But Cyberpunk Red is actually being released in the Year 2020... And still has big skill lists....

Its like when the PF2 developers said that they never played or so much as took one look at 5e when they were developing PF2.

IMHO, simply no excuse for not making the system more accessible.

The overwhelming majority of the OSR does not use THAC0.

Long skill lists need to die in the same dumpster fire.
[/quote]

Dafuq? Are skill lists like collars now? You can tell what decade that book was released by how big their collars are, man. That's so seventies!

Did I miss something and Gaming is now 'trendy'? We do it because it makes us cool?   So, if Pondsmith just waited until big skill lists were back in fashion you'd be all over this motherfucker?

Its a fucking game for fucks sake. Some people still play GURPS you know? I mean, they released fourth Edition GURPS in, what, the last ten years or so and its skill list makes Cyberpunks look like Vanilla Ice.

And what's this shit about OSR and 5e and, I assume Pathfinder?  You won't like CP:Red until its made by Hasbro and Solo is just a skin for Fighters?   If you are complaining that not all games are 5e (which, honestly, it sorta seems like you are doing), I got news for you, bro. Not everyone wants to play 5e when they sit down with their pathfinder buddies, or when they pull out a Cyberpunk Game, or god forbid... GURPS (I hear their skill list is now OVER 9000!!!!... skills. Run, don't walk. )





EDIT: Meh. Bad Copy-pasta skills.  sorry.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: rytrasmi on November 16, 2020, 07:42:52 PM
I've been gaming since 1983. I've yet to see a game that couldn't have been written in 48 digest-sized pages instead.
Dungeon Crawl Classics accepts your challenge, though its mostly pages and pages of random spell effects.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: lordmalachdrim on November 16, 2020, 10:15:02 PM
It seems that CP2020 was done by 1989 design standards.

Considering Cyberpunk 2020 was 1990 that is as expected.

But Cyberpunk Red is actually being released in the Year 2020... And still has big skill lists....

Its like when the PF2 developers said that they never played or so much as took one look at 5e when they were developing PF2.

IMHO, simply no excuse for not making the system more accessible.

The overwhelming majority of the OSR does not use THAC0.

Long skill lists need to die in the same dumpster fire.

Oh, I see the problem here. You are one of those mental midgets that infest the hobby today. It must really impair your ability to accomplish anything not being able to count past 20 or to follow Attack score - AC = Target Number
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Abraxus on November 16, 2020, 11:33:08 PM
I don't necessary hate or dislike long skill lists. Too short and then it seems like every new book has a new skill to make up for the lack of skills. Too many and it can sometimes feel like a chore making a character and sometimes redundant skills. As long as the rules are clear and concise short or long skill lists won't kill my interest in a game. Though I prefer the middle option skill lists that are neither too short or too long.

Either way I will probably skip on Cyberpunk Red simply because I am more of a fan of Shadowrun and because of Mike Pondsmith suddenly jumping on the SJW kool-aid drinking bandwagon.

As for the PF2 DEvs saying the never looked at 5E to develop PF2. Yeah they are full of bullshit. They claimed that their was never a need for PF2 and suddenly once 5E was announced out of the blue a product called Pathfinder Unchained appeared on the release list totally by sheer coincidence I am sure. Which included many elements that went first in Starfinder than PF2. Other than that yeah I am sure the PF2 devs "never" looked at 5e. Just as Im sure the 5E devs "never" looked at PF 1E while making their new edition. After all why look at an rpg that was taking away sales and market share for inspiration or anything.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: VisionStorm on November 17, 2020, 06:12:03 AM
This side discussion about skills sprung out of a post I made in the first page, but the direction it seems to be heading it looks like its missing some context, so I'm gonna self quote just in case. Jaeger may have his own reasons for not liking long skill lists, but this is the full post he initially quoted when he touched on this topic (last two paragraphs, specifically)...

I got the starter kit in PDF when it came out and I cannot believe how little value it actually had, and I am a serious fan of CP2020.

I want to say deep and meaningful things about Mad Mike and where he is going wrong and why, but honestly...  honestly I think the problem is me and my nostalgia for 2020.

I agree with all the above or at least I had thought I did. After the starter set came out I found it...lets just say it's in the basement with a much larger then I want to admit collection of books I'm slowly donating to the local library. I went and picked up a new copy of 2020 (My old one was lost in a move years ago) and after rereading the book and running a couple of sessions I realized I just don't like it nearly as much as I thought I had.

I always loved the way that Cyberpunk 2020/Interlock handled task resolution and “classes” (which are more like starting templates with one special ability, rather than straightjackets), but I always felt it had way too many attributes and a few more skills than were necessary. I mean, the game has THREE freaking social attributes (one of which doubles as willpower), two intelligence attributes (one for actual thinking, a separate one for tech) a movement rate attribute and a luck attribute. None of that crap is necessary.

Attributes should just be one attribute per core function. ONE interaction attribute is enough (charisma-type attributes are already weak enough without splitting them into three) and you don’t need a specialized attribute to deal with tech—that’s just an intellectual task. Movement rate does NOT need a stat. Everyone should just get the same base movement rate and higher movement rates should just be an Advantage/Feat/Talent type of thing (which don’t exist in Cyberpunk 2020, but should) and/or handled as cybernetic enhancements. And I’m not sure Luck should exist as an attribute and I always thought it was barely useful compared to basically every other attribute—even the split up social ones. That’s just too much crap to spread your stat points over.

Then the game suffers from the same issue as most skill-based systems, which is specificity. Every tiny, uber specialized task is its own separate skill, which you have to level independently of every other skill that’s essentially the same thing, but a different specialty. Like half a dozen piloting skills to cover what’s essentially driving vehicles, so that if you max one but don’t spread every single skill point you have available learning the rest you turn into a complete retard whenever you hop into anything but your chosen vehicle.

I love skill-based systems and consider them superior to class-based systems, but implementation like this is crap. As I heard someone say before, uber specific skill-based systems like these turn more into being about what you don’t know than about what you do. There’s just too much interrelated crap that’s really just variants of each other to spread your points around. They should just be general skills with specialties as a bonus thing to cover the specific stuff.

The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.

This sort of system is overly punishing and inefficient, and does not reflect reality. This isn't even a dig against long skill lists (in the sense of defining specific functions), specifically, but about implementation. Specific functions ideally should still exist, but they should NOT be treated as separate unrelated skills, but as specialties of general skills dealing with core, universal functions, like melee combat, ranged combat, technology, academic knowledge or piloting. That way you have general competency in one core function, but may still define things you've specifically mastered within those areas of activity, rather than spread Every. Single. Point. you've got into a dozen variations of the same thing, that might not even come up during play, just to have mild competency in those areas.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 17, 2020, 07:06:09 AM
The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.
GURPS (and Dungeon Fantasy) called. They appreciate your support!
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: rytrasmi on November 17, 2020, 09:43:00 AM
The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.

This sort of system is overly punishing and inefficient, and does not reflect reality. This isn't even a dig against long skill lists (in the sense of defining specific functions), specifically, but about implementation. Specific functions ideally should still exist, but they should NOT be treated as separate unrelated skills, but as specialties of general skills dealing with core, universal functions, like melee combat, ranged combat, technology, academic knowledge or piloting. That way you have general competency in one core function, but may still define things you've specifically mastered within those areas of activity, rather than spread Every. Single. Point. you've got into a dozen variations of the same thing, that might not even come up during play, just to have mild competency in those areas.

I respectfully disagree for two reasons. 1) Swords and axes are used very differently; they have different striking motions, muscle groups, and tactics. Granted this is a quibble over one example, and I agree that in real life being skilled in combat in general affects different weapon skills. 2) That said, in a game your solution would get lost in the mushiness of rolling dice. Say my sword skill is 60% and my axe skill is 10%. Your argument seems to be that some sword skill overflows into axe, so axe should really be what 30%? Thing is, I'm mostly going to use sword anyway and the few times I use axe, the difference between 10% and 30% is not going to register as statistically significant. If I use axe to the extent that 30% vs 10% does become statistically significant, then axe should still artificially suck for sake of narrative. If multiple weapons skills are all close in level and training in one means training in another, then what's the point in specializing? Without forcing specialization, choices become gray and characters become samey. I might as well throw points into bladed weapons because it benefits sword and axe. Soon all characters are all pretty good at both. IMO, it's better to have the sword guy and the axe guy, even if a little unrealistic.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Marchand on November 17, 2020, 10:08:05 AM
The problem with long skill lists is that they define what a character can't do, rather than what they can.

Either that, or you end up with characters with huge numbers of skills, so that chargen is a chore. Plus if the design goal is to have broadly competent characters, why not boil it down to a smaller list anyway.

How long is long is going to vary by taste of course.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 17, 2020, 10:10:54 AM
The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.

This sort of system is overly punishing and inefficient, and does not reflect reality. This isn't even a dig against long skill lists (in the sense of defining specific functions), specifically, but about implementation. Specific functions ideally should still exist, but they should NOT be treated as separate unrelated skills, but as specialties of general skills dealing with core, universal functions, like melee combat, ranged combat, technology, academic knowledge or piloting. That way you have general competency in one core function, but may still define things you've specifically mastered within those areas of activity, rather than spread Every. Single. Point. you've got into a dozen variations of the same thing, that might not even come up during play, just to have mild competency in those areas.

I respectfully disagree for two reasons. 1) Swords and axes are used very differently; they have different striking motions, muscle groups, and tactics. Granted this is a quibble over one example, and I agree that in real life being skilled in combat in general affects different weapon skills. 2) That said, in a game your solution would get lost in the mushiness of rolling dice. Say my sword skill is 60% and my axe skill is 10%. Your argument seems to be that some sword skill overflows into axe, so axe should really be what 30%? Thing is, I'm mostly going to use sword anyway and the few times I use axe, the difference between 10% and 30% is not going to register as statistically significant. If I use axe to the extent that 30% vs 10% does become statistically significant, then axe should still artificially suck for sake of narrative. If multiple weapons skills are all close in level and training in one means training in another, then what's the point in specializing? Without forcing specialization, choices become gray and characters become samey. I might as well throw points into bladed weapons because it benefits sword and axe. Soon all characters are all pretty good at both. IMO, it's better to have the sword guy and the axe guy, even if a little unrealistic.
I liked the old Cortex (not Cortex+) method where skills start as broad groups up to a moderate level, but higher levels are in specific aspects of that broader group (and you have to take the basic levels of the broad group before the specializations open up).
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: VisionStorm on November 17, 2020, 10:50:18 AM
The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.

This sort of system is overly punishing and inefficient, and does not reflect reality. This isn't even a dig against long skill lists (in the sense of defining specific functions), specifically, but about implementation. Specific functions ideally should still exist, but they should NOT be treated as separate unrelated skills, but as specialties of general skills dealing with core, universal functions, like melee combat, ranged combat, technology, academic knowledge or piloting. That way you have general competency in one core function, but may still define things you've specifically mastered within those areas of activity, rather than spread Every. Single. Point. you've got into a dozen variations of the same thing, that might not even come up during play, just to have mild competency in those areas.

I respectfully disagree for two reasons. 1) Swords and axes are used very differently; they have different striking motions, muscle groups, and tactics. Granted this is a quibble over one example, and I agree that in real life being skilled in combat in general affects different weapon skills. 2) That said, in a game your solution would get lost in the mushiness of rolling dice. Say my sword skill is 60% and my axe skill is 10%. Your argument seems to be that some sword skill overflows into axe, so axe should really be what 30%? Thing is, I'm mostly going to use sword anyway and the few times I use axe, the difference between 10% and 30% is not going to register as statistically significant. If I use axe to the extent that 30% vs 10% does become statistically significant, then axe should still artificially suck for sake of narrative. If multiple weapons skills are all close in level and training in one means training in another, then what's the point in specializing? Without forcing specialization, choices become gray and characters become samey. I might as well throw points into bladed weapons because it benefits sword and axe. Soon all characters are all pretty good at both. IMO, it's better to have the sword guy and the axe guy, even if a little unrealistic.

1) Striking motions for most melee weapons are almost identical and share practically the same muscle groups. I know cuz weapon training is my go-to physical exercise these days, and I train primarily with swords and staves, but have also messed around with knives, hammers, walking canes and sticks, and they all tend to translate (stick fighting in particular is identical with swords, and canes have much in common with sticks--and therefore swords--and staves). Even seemingly disparate weapons like swords vs poles involve similar maneuvers that work basically the same muscles. You just need to compensate for different weight distribution and dimensions, and occasionally for special features, like hooks (if you're fighting with a walking cane or using the axe head as a hooking implement). But such features don't require drastically different techniques than what you'd normally use when striking or tripping opponents, and once you become experienced with fighting techniques, it becomes almost second nature to figure out how to use those features (hooking with a cane is very similar to tripping with a stave, only easier, cuz the hook gives you an edge).

Edit: Even when you need specific training to properly handle a weapon, that training is more in terms of "becoming used to the weapon", than learning radically different techniques. And once you master a weapon you pretty much can fight at the same level as you would with any other weapon. In old D&D or 3e terms, is more like gaining "proficiency", rather than leaning an entirely new skill.

2) What I'm proposing is making general skills the ONLY "skills" in terms of level development and specializations basically a one time bonus (like maybe +2 or so, depending on the system) on top of your skill level. Depending on how granular you want it to be, specialties could gain multiple ranks for increased bonuses, but I wouldn't recommend making it more than two or three ranks tops (Expert, Master, Grandmaster?). Also, the idea that you would only use a sword is very meta. Sometimes all you have is a stick you found in the ground. Granted, in game play that relies on the GM paying attention to stuff like disarming, or potentially losing your weapon if you fall, etc.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Charon's Little Helper on November 17, 2020, 11:01:59 AM
The problem with long skill lists isn't just accessibility, but that even from the PoV of what they try to embody they make NO sense. They're invariably endless variations of the same type of action treated as separate abilities, so that if you master one skill, but not another that's basically THE SAME FUCKING THING (but a different vehicle or type of melee weapon), you're inexplicability completely and utterly incompetent in that other skill despite both being essentially specialties of the same core function. Which is NOT how skills work in reality. People who know how to fight with swords do not suddenly forget how to fight because they pick up an axe.

This sort of system is overly punishing and inefficient, and does not reflect reality. This isn't even a dig against long skill lists (in the sense of defining specific functions), specifically, but about implementation. Specific functions ideally should still exist, but they should NOT be treated as separate unrelated skills, but as specialties of general skills dealing with core, universal functions, like melee combat, ranged combat, technology, academic knowledge or piloting. That way you have general competency in one core function, but may still define things you've specifically mastered within those areas of activity, rather than spread Every. Single. Point. you've got into a dozen variations of the same thing, that might not even come up during play, just to have mild competency in those areas.

I respectfully disagree for two reasons. 1) Swords and axes are used very differently; they have different striking motions, muscle groups, and tactics. Granted this is a quibble over one example, and I agree that in real life being skilled in combat in general affects different weapon skills. 2) That said, in a game your solution would get lost in the mushiness of rolling dice. Say my sword skill is 60% and my axe skill is 10%. Your argument seems to be that some sword skill overflows into axe, so axe should really be what 30%? Thing is, I'm mostly going to use sword anyway and the few times I use axe, the difference between 10% and 30% is not going to register as statistically significant. If I use axe to the extent that 30% vs 10% does become statistically significant, then axe should still artificially suck for sake of narrative. If multiple weapons skills are all close in level and training in one means training in another, then what's the point in specializing? Without forcing specialization, choices become gray and characters become samey. I might as well throw points into bladed weapons because it benefits sword and axe. Soon all characters are all pretty good at both. IMO, it's better to have the sword guy and the axe guy, even if a little unrealistic.

1) Striking motions for most melee weapons are almost identical and share practically the same muscle groups. I know cuz weapon training is my go-to physical exercise these days, and I train primarily with swords and staves, but have also messed around with knives, hammers, walking canes and sticks, and they all tend to translate (stick fighting in particular is identical with swords, and canes have much in common with sticks--and therefore swords--and staves). Even seemingly disparate weapons like swords vs poles involve similar maneuvers that work basically the same muscles. You just need to compensate for different weight distribution and dimensions, and occasionally for special features, like hooks (if you're fighting with a walking cane or using the axe head as a hooking implement). But such features don't require drastically different techniques than what you'd normally use when striking or tripping opponents, and once you become experienced with fighting techniques, it becomes almost second nature to figure out how to use those features (hooking with a cane is very similar to tripping with a stave, only easier, cuz the hook gives you an edge).

Edit: Even when you need specific training to properly handle a weapon, that training is more in terms of "becoming used to the weapon", than learning radically different techniques. And once you master a weapon you pretty much can fight at the same level as you would with any other weapon. In old D&D or 3e terms, is more like gaining "proficiency", rather than leaning an entirely new skill.

2) What I'm proposing is making general skills the ONLY "skills" in terms of level development and specializations basically a one time bonus (like maybe +2 or so, depending on the system) on top of your skill level. Depending on how granular you want it to be, specialties could gain multiple ranks for increased bonuses, but I wouldn't recommend making it more than two or three ranks tops (Expert, Master, Grandmaster?). Also, the idea that you would only use a sword is very meta. Sometimes all you have is a stick you found in the ground. Granted, in game play that relies on the GM paying attention to stuff like disarming, or potentially losing your weapon if you fall, etc.

Yeah - while not a skill-based system, that was one thing that I felt 3.x did pretty well. You can focus on a particular weapon for a slight boost (Weapon Focus), but for the most part it's just based upon your BAB & attributes.

I know that when I recently replayed a piece of Baldur's Gate, the 2e specializations kinda grated. I had a character fully specialized in longswords (probably the most common magic sword in the game), but then I happened to pick up an awesome katana, and it was basically just dead weight to him. A katana is practically the same thing!
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: rytrasmi on November 17, 2020, 11:36:19 AM
1) Striking motions for most melee weapons are almost identical and share practically the same muscle groups. I know cuz weapon training is my go-to physical exercise these days, and I train primarily with swords and staves, but have also messed around with knives, hammers, walking canes and sticks, and they all tend to translate (stick fighting in particular is identical with swords, and canes have much in common with sticks--and therefore swords--and staves). Even seemingly disparate weapons like swords vs poles involve similar maneuvers that work basically the same muscles. You just need to compensate for different weight distribution and dimensions, and occasionally for special features, like hooks (if you're fighting with a walking cane or using the axe head as a hooking implement). But such features don't require drastically different techniques than what you'd normally use when striking or tripping opponents, and once you become experienced with fighting techniques, it becomes almost second nature to figure out how to use those features (hooking with a cane is very similar to tripping with a stave, only easier, cuz the hook gives you an edge).

Edit: Even when you need specific training to properly handle a weapon, that training is more in terms of "becoming used to the weapon", than learning radically different techniques. And once you master a weapon you pretty much can fight at the same level as you would with any other weapon. In old D&D or 3e terms, is more like gaining "proficiency", rather than leaning an entirely new skill.

2) What I'm proposing is making general skills the ONLY "skills" in terms of level development and specializations basically a one time bonus (like maybe +2 or so, depending on the system) on top of your skill level. Depending on how granular you want it to be, specialties could gain multiple ranks for increased bonuses, but I wouldn't recommend making it more than two or three ranks tops (Expert, Master, Grandmaster?). Also, the idea that you would only use a sword is very meta. Sometimes all you have is a stick you found in the ground. Granted, in game play that relies on the GM paying attention to stuff like disarming, or potentially losing your weapon if you fall, etc.

I have no basis to challenge your actual experience, aside from chopping wood, messing around with a bokken, and fencing classes long ago. However, in my reading these things were used very differently in combat. Axes chop and many types of sword, especially things like the Roman gladius, poke. Often (it seems) swords were used to find cracks in armor or gaps between shields and then thrust in. You cannot do that with an axe. Rather, you'd probably be striking the armor/shield directly trying to rend it. You also have a guard on swords that is not found on axes, making parrying a sane choice.

I think that weapon specialization was very much a thing in the middle ages (maybe not in the systems you play). Give a pikeman a sword and yeah he could probably kill someone with it. But give your unit of 80 pikemen swords and you're gonna lose the battle. If you've trained with swords your whole life and suddenly you need to improvise with a stick, yeah of course, you will be better at it than the milkmaid. But these kinds of situations are unusual in play and, I'd argue, should run against the sword-less swordsman for sake of narrative. It makes it more exiting when he does actually succeed with the stick, as opposed to being all around pretty good with everything. Losing the sword has to matter and the difference between weapon choice of a +2 does not matter in the typical combat.


Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 17, 2020, 11:41:04 AM
I don't necessary hate or dislike long skill lists. Too short and then it seems like every new book has a new skill to make up for the lack of skills. Too many and it can sometimes feel like a chore making a character and sometimes redundant skills. As long as the rules are clear and concise short or long skill lists won't kill my interest in a game. Though I prefer the middle option skill lists that are neither too short or too long.

Either way I will probably skip on Cyberpunk Red simply because I am more of a fan of Shadowrun and because of Mike Pondsmith suddenly jumping on the SJW kool-aid drinking bandwagon.

As for the PF2 DEvs saying the never looked at 5E to develop PF2. Yeah they are full of bullshit. They claimed that their was never a need for PF2 and suddenly once 5E was announced out of the blue a product called Pathfinder Unchained appeared on the release list totally by sheer coincidence I am sure. Which included many elements that went first in Starfinder than PF2. Other than that yeah I am sure the PF2 devs "never" looked at 5e. Just as Im sure the 5E devs "never" looked at PF 1E while making their new edition. After all why look at an rpg that was taking away sales and market share for inspiration or anything.
Well... maybe. Although I suspect said books were driven more by Paizo's incompetence at playtesting and balance than by a need to compete with 5E, at least initially.

Yeah, I'm still disgusted it took Unchained to unfuck the PF monk class, and it's still not great.

Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Alderaan Crumbs on November 17, 2020, 02:31:55 PM
Seriously, what the hell did Pondsmith say/do that’s so egregious?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on November 17, 2020, 02:38:58 PM
Seriously, what the hell did Pondsmith say/do that’s so egregious?
I believe that he made a pro-BLM statement online somewhere. For some, this is apparently enough that he should be destroyed.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Charon's Little Helper on November 17, 2020, 02:51:03 PM
I don't necessary hate or dislike long skill lists. Too short and then it seems like every new book has a new skill to make up for the lack of skills. Too many and it can sometimes feel like a chore making a character and sometimes redundant skills. As long as the rules are clear and concise short or long skill lists won't kill my interest in a game. Though I prefer the middle option skill lists that are neither too short or too long.

Either way I will probably skip on Cyberpunk Red simply because I am more of a fan of Shadowrun and because of Mike Pondsmith suddenly jumping on the SJW kool-aid drinking bandwagon.

As for the PF2 DEvs saying the never looked at 5E to develop PF2. Yeah they are full of bullshit. They claimed that their was never a need for PF2 and suddenly once 5E was announced out of the blue a product called Pathfinder Unchained appeared on the release list totally by sheer coincidence I am sure. Which included many elements that went first in Starfinder than PF2. Other than that yeah I am sure the PF2 devs "never" looked at 5e. Just as Im sure the 5E devs "never" looked at PF 1E while making their new edition. After all why look at an rpg that was taking away sales and market share for inspiration or anything.
Well... maybe. Although I suspect said books were driven more by Paizo's incompetence at playtesting and balance than by a need to compete with 5E, at least initially.

Yeah, I'm still disgusted it took Unchained to unfuck the PF monk class, and it's still not great.

The PF monk was solid before Unchained if you used the Qinggong archetype (which was basically a stealth buff), especially if you stacked it with 1-2 other archetypes. My favorite PF monk is still my dwarf Drunken Master who would take a swig of hooch every round of combat as a swift action for more ki (the feat required an 18+ CON). I even considered stacking it with the Sensei archetype (getting 3 total archetypes) in order to be able to use infinite ki powers for the whole group - doing things like giving the whole group Barkskin perpetually as well as giving True Strike every round along with Inspire Courage.

Now - the base PF monk was pretty bad - only a bit better than the 3.5 version. But if you used the Qinggong archetype and stacked 1-2 more, they could be very solid well before the Unchained version - which is a better beatstick, but lost some of the utility of the previous version.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 17, 2020, 03:03:05 PM

The PF monk was solid before Unchained if you used the Qinggong archetype (which was basically a stealth buff), especially if you stacked it with 1-2 other archetypes. My favorite PF monk is still my dwarf Drunken Master who would take a swig of hooch every round of combat as a swift action for more ki (the feat required an 18+ CON). I even considered stacking it with the Sensei archetype (getting 3 total archetypes) in order to be able to use infinite ki powers for the whole group - doing things like giving the whole group Barkskin perpetually as well as giving True Strike every round along with Inspire Courage.

Now - the base PF monk was pretty bad - only a bit better than the 3.5 version. But if you used the Qinggong archetype and stacked 1-2 more, they could be very solid well before the Unchained version - which is a better beatstick, but lost some of the utility of the previous version.
It's not a good sign when to be viable, the class needs an archetype from a later splat.

I grant that Qinggong is very effective, and Unchained is basically an extension of Qinggong.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Nephil on November 17, 2020, 05:11:19 PM
So, to get this thead back on track, exactly how many skills does the new Cyberpunk have? Did they at least pare down the number of skills from the 2020 version?
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Jaeger on November 17, 2020, 06:05:15 PM

... Some people still play GURPS you know?

And what's this shit about OSR and 5e and, I assume Pathfinder?  ...  If you are complaining that not all games are 5e ...

Oh hell no. I think we are talking past each other.

Currently playing in a 5e game - if I was to give my opinion on the system, I would be accused of D&D hate.

It always strikes me that whenever some of these older games are brought out again in a "new" edition - It never seems to occur to the designers that there are other ways of doing skills that would give the PC's the same ability to differentiate their characters while streamlining the system.

It's like they don't play any other RPG's between editions.

And not only do people play Grups, they willingly play Hero as well... *shudder*



Oh, I see the problem here. You are one of those mental midgets that infest the hobby today. It must really impair your ability to accomplish anything not being able to count past 20 or to follow Attack score - AC = Target Number

Look everyone, a personal attack:  The cornerstone of all well articulated arguments.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Eirikrautha on November 17, 2020, 08:59:20 PM
Seriously, what the hell did Pondsmith say/do that’s so egregious?
I believe that he made a pro-BLM statement online somewhere. For some, this is apparently enough that he should be destroyed.
Just holding him to the same standard as BLM holds others.  Once a white man owned a black man.   For some, this is apparently enough that all white men should be destroyed.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Eirikrautha on November 17, 2020, 09:06:31 PM
The problem with long skill lists is that they define what a character can't do, rather than what they can.

Either that, or you end up with characters with huge numbers of skills, so that chargen is a chore. Plus if the design goal is to have broadly competent characters, why not boil it down to a smaller list anyway.

How long is long is going to vary by taste of course.
Exactly.   All of the posts about swords and axes miss the point.  If I have a +200 to drive a BMW but no bonus for driving a Mercedes,  then your skill system is too granular.   Large skill lists just artificially separate actions that share the same bases.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Marchand on November 17, 2020, 09:44:35 PM
So, to get this thead back on track, exactly how many skills does the new Cyberpunk have? Did they at least pare down the number of skills from the 2020 version?

66 by my count off the character sheet, plus 10 role abilities. That's not counting specialisations for Language, Science or Play Instrument.

How long is too long? My view is, games get into trouble when they start trying to model what people might actually know, rather than what might come up in a game. Cyberpunk's systems primarily support combat (physical and social), and netrunning, with a generic task system for everything else. If the game is skills-driven, why provide a load of skills that aren't supported by the game's system?

The old BRP Ringworld went way off the other direction - characters could be centuries old and training was relatively easy (in VR), so it was expected you would reach your "root maximum" in say Physics fairly early on, and then have to split off into Cosmology, Crystallography etc. etc. But that sort of worked as well, because it was supported with an "experimentation" minigame.
 
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Dropbear on November 17, 2020, 10:55:34 PM
I’m finding the game to my liking so far. Still reading on the PDF, with the book on the way at some point.

I feel like the usefulness of a lot of the skills is going to depend largely on the players who take those skills, and the GM recognizing that those players took those skills because they found them interesting and implementing their possible use into their game, really.

I’m a fan of netrunning no longer being let’s check what’s on [insert TV channel or video game interest here] time, or hey let’s go out and pick up some pizza time.

Kind of miss the gear porn of 2.0.2.0, but that will be forthcoming, I’m sure.

Super glad that the Midnight Lady and the Mr. Studd implants are still there. Always struck me wrong that Shadowrun was so happy to talk about such augmentations existing but never really pricing them or talking about availability. Because, let’s be honest here, once it’s something that’s commonly available, people will be getting that kind of thing in droves, guaranteed.

I just don’t even want to think about selling out for cyber, and having to wonder if that’s where the Corpos stuck their hidden micro-bombs...

Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Panzerkraken on November 18, 2020, 05:37:42 AM
I just don’t even want to think about selling out for cyber, and having to wonder if that’s where the Corpos stuck their hidden micro-bombs...

Well, they should keep in mind that at the end of the day, who's actually paying their Entourage's paychecks? That "security specialist" doubling as your secretary will probably rat you out in a second, and your "driver" and "batman" will gun you down if HR says to.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Dropbear on November 18, 2020, 07:13:09 AM
Well, they should keep in mind that at the end of the day, who's actually paying their Entourage's paychecks? That "security specialist" doubling as your secretary will probably rat you out in a second, and your "driver" and "batman" will gun you down if HR says to.

I’m not even sure yet if these Neo corps have an HR department. Just triggers for their cortex bombs implanted in their thumbs, I suspect.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Spike on November 18, 2020, 12:59:54 PM
Y'know? The last few comments about Corps in Cyberpunk 2020/Red have got me thunk. 

Robocop, despite its desperate, deliberate silliness, is a respected serious movie in its own way, and a good chunk of that I feel can be chalked up to how it shows the way evil sort of just happens in big corporations... the result of human decisions up and down the chain that collectively result in cruelty and evil, rather than a deliberate faceless choice to 'do evil'.

Conversely, despite having one hell of a corporate themed swan song adventure (still, in my opinion, a gold standard for this sort of thing), the 'Sell Your Soul' to the corps concept, as presented in CP2020 originally, is the exact opposite.  Its the taking of a genre trope and running with it without understanding it, and presenting it in the bland light of 'Do Evil' as a sort of creedo for the Corps.

Now, a lot could be said for having the GM build all that human element back INTO the concept of 'Selling your soul to the Corps', but the game provides no advise, no support, no reason the GM... or the players... should ever do more than take the money in return for giving the GM leverage to force adventures down the player's throats like we're all just monkeys pulling levers and hoping for a food pellet.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Thornhammer on November 19, 2020, 12:18:07 AM
If anyone is interested, Humble Bundle put up shitload of old Cyberpunk sourcebooks for fifteen American currency units.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: yabaziou on November 19, 2020, 07:58:40 AM
If anyone is interested, Humble Bundle put up shitload of old Cyberpunk sourcebooks for fifteen American currency units.

Ever better, you can buy  those pdfs without giving Talsorian Games (legally) one dime since you can elect to direct the sale process entirely to the sponsored charity. This is a 100 % win-win situation !
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 19, 2020, 02:21:44 PM
If the FLGS has a copy in, I plan to pick it up today. Will post my thoughts if I get a chance to check it out.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on December 01, 2020, 08:17:50 PM
I just got my hard copy in from CoolStuffInc (which is also my FLGS) and it looks great. If you're looking to pick up a copy, they're out there.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Batjon on December 02, 2020, 03:52:46 AM
I got mine at my local FLGS around 4 days or so ago.  I am loving it.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Godsmonkey on December 02, 2020, 10:16:01 AM
I recently received my physical copy of the book.

The design layout appears pretty good. easy to find information and a decently logical layout of the rules.

However, the first thing I noticed, and am not happy about is the paper stock its printed on. at over 400 pages, its a pretty thin book. Comparing it to my original CP2020 book circa 1990, I dont think CP red will last under regular use.

Personally, I think I'll use the PDF if I get a campaign going.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 10, 2020, 07:22:50 PM
Got my copy today and flipped through it.

I'm not hot on the layout. It's very complex and "busy". The art is mostly great, with a few cheapass CG illustrations that are Ads for fictional products, so I'm not going to knock it.
I beelined for the combat rules, because that's what I was most interested in.
Armor ablation is similar to CP 2020, and I'd use my house rule that any hit causes armor ablation, not just hits that cause damage.
Armor pen now does 2 ablation points instead of CP 2020 halving SP. I think I'd house rule that back as well.
At this point, I'm considering why switching to Red when I'm putting 2020 rules back in.
Hate how the autofire rule is a 10 round burst. Again, I'd go back to 2020 single shot, 3 round burst, and full auto.
And I'm totally dissapointed that the guns are generic. I like flipping through the gear lists and seeing an FN-RAL or Sternmeyer. Most of the gear in Red is generic like that. I love the Chromebooks, and all the little details that make Cyberpunk feel lived in.

Mostly it looks like 2020 with a few rules tweaks and updated setting. Which is fine with me. I'll give the book a more thorough read over the next few days and have more to post about.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Thornhammer on December 10, 2020, 10:24:00 PM
And I'm totally dissapointed that the guns are generic. I like flipping through the gear lists and seeing an FN-RAL or Sternmeyer. Most of the gear in Red is generic like that. I love the Chromebooks, and all the little details that make Cyberpunk feel lived in.

Yeah...yeah. Wholeheartedly agree there. If megacorporations are a big deal, I want product names. Chromebooks, the Street Samurai Catalog from Shadowrun, all that. DETAILS, baby.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 10, 2020, 11:58:32 PM
Holy shitballs. I'm digging the setting.
the 4th Corporate War turned the world into something resembling Rifts without the magic. Pockets of civilization and high technology can be literally next door to a bombed out city block. Caches of pre-war technology and secrets hidden in the rubble. Lots of room for tiny kingdoms taking advantage of the power vaccum. I've got a ton of adventure ideas ping-ponging around in my head now.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Batjon on December 11, 2020, 03:55:11 AM
I liked the layout.  I enjoyed the tables and the use of space.  Al the test was VERY easy to read and clear.  It is well written.  The red text against a white background makes it very visible.  The organization is one of the best I've seen in a long time.  It is hella easy to find what you are looking for in the book and it is all logically laid out.  Bravo!

I loved the combat rules and loved the Autofire.  In fact, it is my favorite version of Autofire in any RPG.  It is fast and easy to adjudicate.  In a lot of games, GMs and players avoid Autofire because it is a pain in the ass to adjudicate.  Not in this game.  I am very ok with having generic categories of weapons but would like to have an add-on product in the near future that adds individual branded weapons and then just rates what weapon category it is for damage, range, etc. and adds any special properties it might have.

Cyberpunk RED has become my cyberpunk game of choice now.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: soundchaser on December 11, 2020, 11:35:37 AM
My only beef, with my beloved mode of hard copy, is that Rtal seems to not rely much on section "signals" like "paper edge" sorts of features, to help me quickly find things.

But, I will add some 3M tabs, so it's an easy fix.

Agree on the setting, as it's very cool with lots of possibilities... It's like the serious "Gamma World" (though not as disastrous, in terms of 95% population loss, as we'd tend to envision GW).
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: RandyB on December 11, 2020, 11:54:34 AM
I liked the layout.  I enjoyed the tables and the use of space.  Al the test was VERY easy to read and clear.  It is well written.  The red text against a white background makes it very visible.  The organization is one of the best I've seen in a long time.  It is hella easy to find what you are looking for in the book and it is all logically laid out.  Bravo!

I loved the combat rules and loved the Autofire.  Inm fact, it is my favorite version of Autofire in any RPG.  It is fast and easy to adjudicate.  In a lot of games, GMs and players avoid Autofire because it is a pain in the ass to adjudicate.  Not in this game.  I am very ok with having generic categories of weapons but would like to have an add-on product in the near future that adds individual branded weapons and then just rates what weapon category it is for damage, range, etc. and adds any special properties it might have.

Cyberpunk RED has become my cyberpunk game of choice now.

R. Talsorian has you covered:

https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/11/14/cyberpunk-red-digital-goes-live/

Link from there to a free PDF with conversion guidelines to convert 2020 weapons into RED.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on December 11, 2020, 01:02:52 PM
I liked the layout.  I enjoyed the tables and the use of space.  Al the test was VERY easy to read and clear.  It is well written.  The red text against a white background makes it very visible.  The organization is one of the best I've seen in a long time.  It is hella easy to find what you are looking for in the book and it is all logically laid out.  Bravo!

I loved the combat rules and loved the Autofire.  Inm fact, it is my favorite version of Autofire in any RPG.  It is fast and easy to adjudicate.  In a lot of games, GMs and players avoid Autofire because it is a pain in the ass to adjudicate.  Not in this game.  I am very ok with having generic categories of weapons but would like to have an add-on product in the near future that adds individual branded weapons and then just rates what weapon category it is for damage, range, etc. and adds any special properties it might have.

Cyberpunk RED has become my cyberpunk game of choice now.

R. Talsorian has you covered:

https://rtalsoriangames.com/2020/11/14/cyberpunk-red-digital-goes-live/

Link from there to a free PDF with conversion guidelines to convert 2020 weapons into RED.
Well, that's...something...I guess.

Unfortunately, most of the steps there are "disregard" or "flatten" the previous (CP2020) values so they all neatly fit into CPR's narrowed range of slots. This is not what those that want brand differentiation in their gear are likely looking for, and it all but eliminates truly exceptional pieces.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 11, 2020, 02:05:08 PM
Upon further reading, I think I'm going to tweak what I said about armor and SP. I'm thinking now that every 6 rolled for damage gives an additional point of armor ablation, and armor piercing rounds would reduce the SP by 2 before applying damage.
I'd still want to put 3 round bursts back in.

Going to give the Netrunning rules a read next. That's supposedly one of the big fixes in Red over 2020 Netrunning.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: HappyDaze on December 11, 2020, 05:22:37 PM
Going to give the Netrunning rules a read next. That's supposedly one of the big fixes in Red over 2020 Netrunning.
I'm curious to hear back on this. In the CP games I was in (as a player, I only ran it once for a short 3-game arc as cops), netrunning was exclusively something you hired NPCs to do for you.
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 12, 2020, 03:53:50 AM
Going to give the Netrunning rules a read next. That's supposedly one of the big fixes in Red over 2020 Netrunning.
I'm curious to hear back on this. In the CP games I was in (as a player, I only ran it once for a short 3-game arc as cops), netrunning was exclusively something you hired NPCs to do for you.

Let's do this.

Netrunning as I understand it.

According to the rules, the netrunner has to be and stay within 6 meters of a realspace (I refuse to use the term Meatspace) access point. A netrunner either uses their net actions or their realspace actions that turn. They can still move. (To get into cover or out of the way, whatever.)
They enter a simplified grid, made up of "floors". So instead of a complex map to navigate, it's simply a series of floors to get to whatever you're after. Floor 1, Black ICE protection. Floor 2, encryted files, Floor 3, control node for the room's laser turrets, etc down to the bottom floor (Net architectures can have various numbers of floors, depending on how complex they are) the runner has to reach the bottom floor to make any fundamental changes, like plant a virus.
A netrunner can move one floor per action, and fuckit if they want to encounter each countermeasure. So a runner in a hurry can zip to the bottom floor, but has to encounter all the ICE at once. The ICE "follows" the runner, in an encounter queue until evaded or derezzed. Probably a bad idea.

Otherwise the rules are pretty similar to 2020, just with a simplified, linear, grid map. You have a cyberdeck, you load programs, you run programs and use them to attack the ICE and access hardware attached to the system, etc.

Now, when I heard the netrunning rules in Red were going to feature Augmented Reality, I was pretty jazzed. I've worked on AR hardware and apps in a QA role, and am pretty familiar with the concepts.
Cyberpunk Red does next to nothing with the idea. And it's terribly dissapointing.

A netrunner must still stay in one location and diddle around in the net while the rest of the team does realspace stuff.

Bah. I'm gonna use what I expected the system to be:

Ratman's tweaks to the netrunning in Cyberpunk Red.

AR interfaces are 'attached' to the physical devices. A netrunner with an AR headset can 'see' them, and interact with them. There is no single dedicated access point. Each device is connected via WIFI to a networked system throughout a location. A netrunner who wants to hack a laser turret does it by getting within 6 meters of the device, and rolling their access and hack tests.

ICE systems exist in the augmented reality, linked to a realspace location. A team entering a room may see nothing, while the netrunner sees a Black ICE program standing there.

So, take the existing system, but the "floors" are re-defined as the realspace rooms of a building.

Once a netrunner gets to a proper terminal, (a work PC or a server) they can use it to get at files and plant viruses and whatnot.

Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 14, 2020, 10:18:25 PM
I find it amusing that the autofire rules have been simplified, but there are 8 range bands, plus a different category of range bands when using autofire.

I only need  4 range bands, and can tweak from there for specifics.

Point Blank, about 5 feet. Shooting someone who is up in your grill.
Inside, about 20 feet. Shooting someone in the same room.
Outside, about 100 feet. Shooting someone across a parking lot.
Long range, 250 feet plus. Shooting someone far away. Sniping.

Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 19, 2020, 03:44:45 AM
The real 2020.

Everyone is sitting alone wearing the latest polymer fashion in a grubby box apartment paid for with their UBI, VR headseat and plastic genitals on, moaning in orgasmic empty loneliness - because it's CovidSafe. As they wipe up there’s a knock at the door, a less than minimum wage semi-literate migrant has brought them their dinner. They tap their smartwatch and he’s paid, along with taxable tip, and he runs off down the stairs in the rain to his next delivery - to a late-night sitting of Parliament where they’re debating a law obliging diversity in pornography, they want to disable search algorithms, because choice oppresses diversity.

This is the progressive cyberpunk future we've got. Mike Pondsmith lied to us!
Title: Re: Cyberpunk RED
Post by: Shawn Driscoll on December 19, 2020, 05:09:31 PM
This is the progressive cyberpunk future we've got. Mike Pondsmith lied to us!

Cyberpunk is not the future. It's alternate timeline. It's too bad SJWs were producing the video game. Mike Pondsmith wasted so much of his time with them.