Shadowrun: Anarchy Sounds Terrible

pragma · Post by **pragma** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 7:38 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0leMiXgtYU

It turns out that it's possible to screw up the koan-like exercise of not writing rules for a narrative game. Unsurprisingly, CGL is up to the task. The above video features some yahoo discussing prototype rules for Shadowrun: Anarchy and highlights include:

* Only one person is allowed to talk at any given time unless the GM bypasses the rules or a player spends metagame currency
* Each player is free to narrate _anything they want_ happening unless it said act a chance of failure. Who decides whether there's a chance of failure is not specified.
* There's a GM even though characters adjudicate all interactions.
* In spite of this, the game promises a batshit long list of gear and modifiers which fiddle with your dice pools.

RelentlessImp · Post by **RelentlessImp** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:45 pm

Considering Shadowrun 5E is already a garbage bag that's been lit on fire and continues to be on fire through some arcane ritual spewing toxic fumes into the playspace, of course any new iteration of the rules, even an alternate way to play the game, is going to be little more than the aforementioned toxic fire.

Mask_De_H · Post by **Mask_De_H** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:00 pm

Adam Koebel has a very punchable face, apropos of nothing. As expected of one of the Dungeon World designers.

From other sources talking about Anarchy, Adam flubs a couple of points here: mainly the "do anything as long as it doesn't have a chance of failure," and "only one person can talk" bits.

Only the player whose turn it is can narrate what they're doing (since their narration is basically fluff justifying a dice roll, Leverage/Assymetric Threat style), but you can still say shit out of turn. The "do anything narration" is just marketing patter for stunting.

To me, it sounds like AT without the alternate minigames and "narrative" mechanics shoved in sideways.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:42 pm

I'll be frank (not Trollman, just honest): they shoulda paid me to write it.

I'm in their freelancer pool, and I'm like the only one in there with any notable game design skills.

But of course they had their LAYOUT GUY design it instead?

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:55 pm

That sounds more like a mother may i MTP set in the shadowrun universe to me . .
Justifying rolls with fluff? Wrong way around.
Roll. Describe Result on basis of what you rolled.

Mask_De_H · Post by **Mask_De_H** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:19 pm

Who gives a shit what you think, Stahl? You unironically play the dumpster fire that is SR3, which is the same thing, but with obfuscating rules cruft that was a bad idea in the 90s.

It's a hacked down Shadowrun written by hacks. Simple as that.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:44 pm

I wouldn't call SR3 a trash fire. SR5 is a trash fire. RIFTS is a trash fire and a half.

SR3 was mostly serviceable with a broken Matrix and broken vehicles, like most editions of Shadowrun. I prefer SR4, but that's not perfect either.

Blade · Post by **Blade** » Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:24 pm

Looks like it's not all bad, but I'm still keeping my lean-but-complete home system. It also has automatic success when there's no chance of failure, but there are actual rules to know if there's a chance of failure or not.

I also think that you cannot really pretend to speed up the game if you keep having variable dice pools with more than 7 dice.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 7:55 am

Well I sure wish I'd kept my big fucking stupid mouth shut.

Rawbeard · Post by **Rawbeard** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:49 am

Jesus fucking Christ, what is this? Can I kill it with fire? The game sounds terrible, too. *badum tsk*
But seriously, what is up with CGL?

JonSetanta · Post by **JonSetanta** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:57 am

Schwarzkopf wrote:Well I sure wish I'd kept my big fucking stupid mouth shut.

It's for the best you're not working with them if they treat you like that.

And I hope they see this message.

Fuck you guys. You lost some good talent.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 12:13 pm

Schwarzkopf wrote:Well I sure wish I'd kept my big fucking stupid mouth shut.

My condolences.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:12 pm

Thanks guys. I appreciate it.

But it was a learning experience for me. I need to be way more subtle in the future.

Talk less, make more.

pragma · Post by **pragma** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:16 pm

I'm sorry, man. I didn't have any intention of setting this thread up as a lightning rod for anything but an ill-considered mix of narrative and non-narrative rules. I'm sending sympathy.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Aug 26, 2016 8:27 pm

Not your fault at all, pragma, don't feel bad.

Thanks for the good vibes, I feel 'em.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Aug 28, 2016 6:35 am

Blade wrote:I also think that you cannot really pretend to speed up the game if you keep having variable dice pools with more than 7 dice.

As long as you're counting which dice are hits and not doing something stupid like summing dice that fit certain criteria or trying to make straights and pairs and shit with your dice, dicepool systems run at an acceptable speed even with 24 dice. Obviously they move faster when you roll less dice - and thus anyone who tells me that resolution speed is a priority who doesn't move from TN 5 to TN 4 or 3 gets the immediate hairy eyeball from me - but the difference is marginal compared to the difference between arranging rolls more times and rolling fewer times. Shadowrun has six complete rolls of different dicepools everytime a player opts to shoot bullets at a couple of dudes during an action. That's obscene and far outweighs any possible benefit you might achieve by reducing expected dicepools from 15 dice to 7.

Shadowrun with more fluid narration and less fiddly die rolls is certainly a noble goal. I have that goal myself.

But I see no evidence that the people behind Anarchy understand any part of what slows down Shadowrun or how to effectively speed it up. The "no rolls for things with no chance of failure" is one of those ideas that should be on the table during the design brainstorms - not left alone as an actual rule. Shadowrun already had the "take 4" rule, which was a pretty effective rule for skipping pointless die rolls. If rolling one hit per four dice (average was one per 3) was sufficient, you could skip the roll. That's already a clearer and more effective rule than anything the Anarchy guys came up with.

-Username17

Blade · Post by **Blade** » Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:03 am

Sure, rolling less helps a lot, but I still think that having to count the dice you need to roll slows down the game as well. When it's about 7 dice, most people will be able to quickly get the right number of dice, but when it's 24 dice, you need to count them individually (unless you arrange your dice in stacks).

Personally I've solved the problem by having the rolling happen when there's time and using another mechanism during the action.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:42 pm

Blade wrote:Sure, rolling less helps a lot, but I still think that having to count the dice you need to roll slows down the game as well. When it's about 7 dice, most people will be able to quickly get the right number of dice, but when it's 24 dice, you need to count them individually (unless you arrange your dice in stacks).

Gosh... if only cubes stacked well?

This 104 page actual book should explain how to do it.

If we were talking about rolling a pile of d20s or even d8s, this would be a potentially big deal. But we really are talking about d6s. They stack super well.

Rolling big piles of d6s isn't the slow part of fucking Warhammer 40k. And that's a game where you seriously roll 40 d6s at a time. It's just not that hard. It's nowhere near as time consuming as like rolling on charts or measuring base to base distances and shit. You can shave time off resolution times for dicepool based RPGs by shrinking the dicepools, but not a significant amount of time unless the dicepools have gotten to "more dice than you have on hand and you have to roll twice," because that shit is bullshit.

-Username17

Smirnoffico · Post by **Smirnoffico** » Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:41 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:Rolling big piles of d6s isn't the slow part of fucking Warhammer 40k. And that's a game where you seriously roll 40 d6s at a time. It's just not that hard. It's nowhere near as time consuming as like rolling on charts or measuring base to base distances and shit. You can shave time off resolution times for dicepool based RPGs by shrinking the dicepools, but not a significant amount of time unless the dicepools have gotten to "more dice than you have on hand and you have to roll twice," because that shit is bullshit.

-Username17

So much that. When I got into Shadowrun, I just took my wh40k dice and dice cup and never looked back. But even warhammer has you make only two rolls (and one for opponent) per attack

rasmuswagner · Post by **rasmuswagner** » Tue Aug 30, 2016 4:56 am

The benefit of huge dice pools is that you can have an even more expensive tactical smartscope give another +1 die without completely fucking the RNG, and that means you can print it in a book at the end of the development cycle and still sell it.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Tue Aug 30, 2016 4:38 pm

Rolling big piles of dice is awesome. Shit, even storygames have figured this out.

e: the ones that let you roll dice at all.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Tue Aug 30, 2016 8:20 pm

Hadanelith · Post by **Hadanelith** » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:37 am

Rhetorical answer: 40k Apocalypse. I have actually done this. Note: rolling more or less ANYTHING for the Green Tide formation (100+ ork boyz) kinda NEEDS 3 pounds of dice. It only gets sillier when they manage to get into close combat with 5 different enemy squads SIMULTANEOUSLY. Shit gets stupid.

/pointless digression

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:41 am

Hadanelith wrote:Rhetorical answer: 40k Apocalypse. I have actually done this. Note: rolling more or less ANYTHING for the Green Tide formation (100+ ork boyz) kinda NEEDS 3 pounds of dice. It only gets sillier when they manage to get into close combat with 5 different enemy squads SIMULTANEOUSLY. Shit gets stupid.

/pointless digression

How long did it take to move, roll attack/defense, remove casualties for that green tide? I've only played in 1500ish at most

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:52 am

There's a formation that requires a minimum of 100 Necron Warriors (all forming one blob), and even though they won't be charging into melee, their shooting is good enough that everyone else will want to charge them, ideally with several units at once. So no matter how you do it, there will be lots of dice.