Shadowrun Sixth World(6e[a][b][c]) game mechanics: what we know so far
...and many commenters & suggesters!
Thank you for your contributions!
So far, these notes are based on:
Important disclaimer: this document is my interpretation and summary of what I’ve listened to/watched in the links above, and I may have made errors or misrepresented things. I’ll try and call out where I’m reading between the lines. |
I am keeping up to date with people adding comments and suggestions, but I haven’t had much chance to go through at make large changes myself yet -- an unexpectedly busy weekend means I haven’t had a chance to listen to the backlog of podcasts and AMAs. As I make larger changes I’ll note them here.
Date | Notes |
2019/05/04 | Start of me tracking version history; lots of edits before here, mostly from commenters |
2019/05/05 | Added “Core Mechanics” section and moved Wild Die description there. |
2019/05/05 |
(All above are thanks to Dynath Kajira.) Also:
|
2019/05/07 |
|
2019/05/09 | Finally had a chance to go through the doc properly (while waiting for my SR group to show up…) Cleared out lots of comments and suggestions, made lots of small edits for flow and style, fixed some formatting, started moving source links to footnotes so they’re more discreet.
Below updates from R. B.:
|
2019/07/01 | Rejected some typo comments; accepted a couple of small additions; cleaned up a little formatting. |
No Future will be the first dual-stat book -- the print edition will contain 5e and 6e statblocks, and the PDF will be updated.
More bits and pieces, taken from the official forum:
Mostly unchanged from 5e: Dice Pools are usually Attribute + Skill; tests/opposed tests/extended tests are the same; and so on.
One new addition is Wild Dice: These are special d6. If you roll a hit, it counts as 3 hits. If you roll a one, any 5s rolled are no longer hits. This die is granted on some rolls by special qualities.[d][e][f][2]
The new Edge system is a major overhaul that touches lots of parts of the game:
Bug spirits will play a part in the lore at the beginning of 6th edition.
These are gone -- instead, to simulate the same effect of having an advantage over your opponent because of your gear or tactical planning then you or your opponent gain Edge, which you spend for buffs.
Headline: there is only one initiative pass per turn and characters only roll initiative once per combat situation. Significantly reduced book-keeping.
Unclear what happens to interrupt actions like Full Defence[t][u].
Weapon ranges are harmonised across weapons: Medium is always Medium now, whatever gun you have in your hand.
However:
Rules for conglomerating grunts into groups and rolling once for a set of goons, with some sort of bonus for the size of the group.
Alice shoots Bob with her Ares Predator. Steps to resolve:
Forces for spells are gone as limits are gone.
Spells are designed to fit into a modular system, a future splatbook will have the ability for players to create custom spells by picking parts from a system.[bj]
Spirits updates, via Kevin Hagel[bk] (thanks!): Mr. Johnson has been talking a bit about Spirits on the Shadowcasters Discord.
Lastly, you can have multiple spirits summoned, up to three times your Magic Rating in total Force.[bl][bm][bn]
Further streamlined over 5e.
* Master/slave networks have been removed.[cg][ch]
Technomancers work mostly the same except for the modification to the base matrix actions and removal of limits
Can increase access to admin straight away but it gets higher defense.
Rigging has been changed but not necesarily streamlined.
Vehicles overhauled:
Jumping in (rigging) tests are now intuition instead of reaction when determining dice pools.
Still priority based. Compact with less skills to choose from speeds up the generation.
Far fewer skills. Basically Skills in 6e are similar to Skill Groups in 5e. This means Firearms is back as a single skill, for example. Another example given was that Counterspelling is gone, a magician just uses the dice pool from their Spellcasting skill instead.
Being a metatype is no longer tied to allocating a high priority letter; you can be any race at any priority, but they unlock the ability to spend points on some sort of other track. “They feel very similar at chargen but develop differently over time,” apparently. No further details in the Arcology podcast.
Philosophy of starting characters being able to get almost anything, including heavy weapons like missile launchers and assault cannons. “Opening up the toybox,” is the idea.
Not much detail here:
[2] 01:21:30 and 01:23:55 https://www.twitch.tv/videos/419828769
[3] “Source for that is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjZEerwJ2TY The GM says it some time in the fight against the rats (~1:50 I think, too lazy to check rn).”
[4] Not sure what the exact wording of the attack was, source again is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjZEerwJ2TY during the rat fight, where Rooster Fullautos all of the rats
[5] Jason Hardy Interview, 10:11:09
[6] Interview with Jason Hardy 18.31, 32:02, 42:03
[7] Source: Beginner Box unboxing (with some freeze-framing)
[10] Interview with jason hardy, 26:15
[11] 01:38:35 vehicle stats https://www.twitch.tv/videos/419828769
[12] Interview with Jason Hardy, 1:15:12
[13] Jason Hardy Interview, 8:28:15
[14] Jason Hardy Interview 14:32
[15] Interview with Jason Hardy, 14:53
[a]for what it's worth a lot of people are shorthanding this to 6E but the official name is "Sixth World"
[b]True. I just changed it to be more compact, but I'll note that back.
[c]I was sort of hoping the full name would have been Shadowrun: Sixth World Edition. Though SR SWE probably doesn't work well.
[d]I have to admitt, I like the idea from a storytelling perspective. Using a wild die is the gaming equivalent of that moment where the bomb squad just picks a cable at random and prays for the best.
[e]Hah, yes! Nice comparison :)
[f]The only wrinkle I can think of in this pretty fun mechanic is that since the benefit is flat and the penalty is die pool dependent (more dice means ore potential 5's) this the potential gain for large die pools diminishes proportionately and the potential penalty goes up linearly.
Some hose rules like "double hits" or "double 6's" might work, but I wouldn't implement it w/o play testing.
[g]So many things go from being worth little to being worth even less.
[h]This section reads like there will be ways to guarantee those 2 bonus Edge every turn. While this may make things move faster, it also means that tactical/strategic planning has a very high threshold before it has real impact. PCs and NPCs are in an arms race to get their irrevocable 2 Edge and nothing after that matters. There won't be a reason to "take cover" if you know the other guy already has 2 Bonus Edge from other sources (which you can assume because of the implicit ways to get irrevocable or semi-irrevocable Bonus Edge).
[i]Sounds like a bad idea, badly executed.
[j]Simple GM handwave, "everyone gets 2 edge per turn" then no one ever checks their strategic locations or gear load out ever again. Seems terribly broken frankly.
[k]Summarizes my fears about this very well. The general idea isn´t that bad, but why do they have to make EVERYTHING, even something simple as Armor, about it?!
[l]I´d say it´s a good idea that´s badly executed. The result is the same, though...
[m]Does this mean you can extend a combat by "cautiously" staying behind cover and take the occasional shot at the enemy to fill up your edge again and just heal up all your damage? It would be up to the GM to forbid this, but the rules basically say yes.
[n]Yes but with edge generating at 2 points max per turn you end up hiding a lot to heal your damage.
[o]AresAssist: Play music "At Last" by Etta James.
[p]:D :D :D
[q]Does anyone have parameters and requirements for this?
A lot of us have been home brewing stuff for ages, and Sturgeon's Law notwithstanding a few runs, NPC's, and so on can add a lot of color to a game.
[r]Is it though? In 5e, reasonably statted fighters usually had about 2 passes (with max. 1 Attack each) without Augmentations, while wired Sammies could get up to 3 or rarely 4 passes. When it comes to Attacks only, the ratio goes from 3/2 to 2/1.
[s]Reasonably statted fighters without wires or magic had either 1 or 2 passes, and if they got 2, they usually tended to use Full Defense to not get shot immediately by the wired/magically quick. Meanwhile, wired people could get 3 or 4 passes and didn't always need to Full Defense (due to armor/dodge), thus it's more like 3/1 in 5e. 5e already nerfed the combat specialists though - 4e had them at straight 4/1 due to fixed passes, which was a good idea and it should've stayed.
[t]The first episode of the Actual Play mentioned them briefly, but not in depth. Seems to use up an action from your next turn (major/minor depending on the interrupt)
[u]Specifically, spends a minor action from your turn to add your Athletics skill score to your Dodge test.
[v]I like that. If it´s done right, it might turn out more simple AND more realistic than the previous range systems, where the bigger guns usually don´t even get any modifiers outside of high-range battlezones, simply because their first range band is so high. As if a longer barrel is all it takes.
[w]TBH, another viable option would just have been individual range bands for every single weapon. Seriously, If you already have to note Damage, Armor Pen, Clip Size and whatnot on your char sheet, noting a couple of Range Bands won´t be the straw that breaks the camel´s back...
[x]Dumb Rule for Clubs, Hammers etc., but it DOES make some sense for other weapons like Knifes: In reality, some lanky methhead with a shiv can be a really deadly assailant if he gets the jump on you. In SR5 however, you just go "What, base Damage of 4? Don´t tickle me, Scrub". I´ll wait how this turns out in the full ruleset. Maybe some "heavy hitters" weapons will still scale with strength, or require a minimum strength value?
[y]Specifically, unarmed attacks deal 1/2 STR, rounded up.
[z]So assuming that the Spellcasting example below is also the template for other kind of attacks: You compare the Attack rating and Defense Ratings before you determine if the target got hit? That sucks. It´s
a. Illogical and unintuitive
b. Triggers Edge gain more often (and thus, the 2 Edge per turn (or is it per round? Probably the one that sucks most as welll...)
c. More complicated, as you have to make the comparison everytime and not just when the attack hits.
Let´s hope that there will be a section for optional combat rules like in Run&Gun that offer an alternative to this mess. There are so many promosing things about the new Edition, but this is just so unfathomably stupid...
[aa]This is interesting to me: under 5e, if it's dark and both characters have low-light, you need to modify both rolls. Now the two things cancel out and nothing changes. This feels like nice streamlining.
[ab]This could work out if done well.
[ac]Yeah, I'm cautiously optimistic about this.
[ad]What about the max 2 Edge? If I have Lowlight and armor, doesn't my elevated position behind cover do anything?
[ae]I have done a reddit post about that very issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/Shadowrun/comments/blq8k9/hypothesis_or_houserule_about_6es_max_2_edge_per/
[af]Mr. Johnson has added some addition info about damage for guns. "Light Pistols are normally 2P, heavy pistols and SMGs 3, Assault Rifles and Shotguns 4, bigger rifles and MG 5, Panther Cannon is king at 7."
[ag]_Marked as resolved_
[ah]_Re-opened_
[ai]So it'll take 3 shots with a high powered handgun to incapacitate an average human. Amazing.
[aj]It's a handgun - 2 good shots to incapacitate feels about right, and if you're getting 2-3 net hits when you shoot, you'll put them down with 2.
[ak]Remember that net hits still adds to damage, as well. Also, we don't know if the calculation for the stun/physical track are the same as they were.
[al]True, Armor could give you more Boxes before getting negative modifiers as far as we know
[am]So the role of armour is greatly reduced; far fewer shots will end up being soaked up by armour. But it does play into the Edge determination process.
It makes combat deadlier and move faster as there's less to calculate eg. armour penetration vs armour values aren't re-computed for each shot.
[an]Well, this effectively ends anything but trolls (and maybe cybered orks) as combat characters. good thing they'll force the decker to participate in combat, isn't it?
[ao]Sounds bad. With the limit on amount of edge earned per round, better armour does nothing against smaller arms.
[ap]There *must* be more to the soak rules than this. Maybe they're letting excess edge go toward soak? Or have a separate gear stat to help soak?
[aq]Doesn't seem like it. And with the hard cap on situational Edge, that brave new mechanic can't save the day either, and trolls become practically invincible (even if their body bonus is seriously curbed). 20 fully armored, deltaware cybered red samurai with monokatana, beaten to death by mongo, a naked troll with a piece of rebar. They failed to do any damage to Mongo.
[ar]It's pretty clear in their discussions armor is useless except for generating edge. Instead of soaking with high armor you'll get into stupid Edge fights where whoever can generate edge faster each round inevitably wins.
[as]They also mention cyberware providing other boosts to soak.
So it wouldn't surprise me if particularly fancy armour had a tag that added a die or two.
Mostly I don't mind because I very rarely find PCs/NPCs with turbo armour very interesting.
[at]So SR6 will be the trolls in jumpers edition.
[au]So far? Troll summoner in Jumpers edition.
[av]If it is + Edge per turn, I think it can add up. Especially if weapon damage has been scaled down. Also, didn't they say hardened armor is direct auto-soak? So there is still that, no?
[aw]If you can wear a spirit or a tank, this will be very helpful.
[ax]The Armor/Edge interaction is seriously overstraining the scope of the new mechanic. I really hope that CGL is only testing the waters with the current information and the beginner´s rules and are prepared to make a rollback in the full ruleset...
[ay]I don´t like rants about something that we only have limited information on, but in this case, I think CGL should continue to receive flak, just in case that
a. Armor/Edge really is supposed to work this way
b. Something can be done about it until the final release.
[az]_Marked as resolved_
[ba]_Re-opened_
[bb]This sounds oversimplified, at least unless they take great care to maintain some variety. But how do they want to differ between dermal plating, dermal sheathing and bone lacing? Honestly, this seems a lot like "generic damage resistance cyberware, write your own fluff".
[bc]Its been clarified that Bone Lacing adds to BOD score, and does not provide automatic soak.
[bd]I'm betting bone lacing adds body for soak, dermal plating/orthoskin adds armor.
[be]So only Bone Lacing remains viable.
[bf]orthoskin was always viable. It was more armor for cheap
[bg]Armor itself is basically worthless in SR6.
[bh]You had me at "status effects". I hope they keyword the shit out of the new editon...
[bi]this is incorrect too ... may be a QSR thing again
[bj]Good, more of that. I hope we get the same for homebrew Drones, Guns etc.
[bk]:D
[bl]Sure that this is the right number (and not Magix/3)? That would be a maximum of 18(!) Spirits for a Summoner with Magic 6. How can you even get there, let alone handle that many actors properly in Combat? What´s the point of a Limitation that is so high?
[bm]I think it means "up to Magic Rating * 3 in total Force across all spirits." So one Force 18, three Force 6, 18 Force 1s.
Would you rather fight one Force 18 spirit or 18 Force 1 spirits...
[bn]Ouh, I think you are right. That would be pretty strong, but at least not batshit insane :P
[bo]So hardened armor adds to soak in general? Or does that apply ONLY to spirits?
[bp]Probably applies to hardened Armor in general, but it´s very likely that only spirits will have access to it :P
[bq]It was just stated that Immunity to Natural Weapons adds its rating as auto soak and that it was equivalent to hardened armor. They didn't say if Hardened Armor was still in the game otherwise.
[br]Ah, so we do not even have confirmation there is hardened armour except for
spirits. Thanks for the clarification.
[bs]"Rating" as in "Force"? WTF is up with Catalyst and Spirits?
[bt]That's the same as in previous editions, really: Immunity to Normal Weapons saying 'rating <something with Essence> hardened armor' and Hardened Armor going 'Rating does Y'
[bu]I know, but with the decreased Weapon damage and the changes to Armor this would be even more OP than in the previous Editions. Force/2 as autosoak would be at least somewhat plausible, but the full force of the spirit? Jeez, did they learn anything? Why make everything deadlier, except for the one type of asset that was already considered broken?
[bv]Mr. Johnson has been talking a bit about Spirits on the Shadowcasters Discord. Binding has been removed. Spirits stick around for one sunrise AND one sunset, so 12 hours longer then previously. Spirits roll to resist Summoning with F*2 now, so lower force spirits should be more common. Lastly, you can have multiple spirits summoned, up to your magic rating*3 in force.
[bw]Hmm. That seems positive to me?
[bx]I think it's positive from gaming standpoint (spirits are ridiculously OP, especially when a mage has multiple). However, as far as flavour goes, bound spirits or spirit allies sure add some spice, so it's sad to see them go. Hell, a few iconics have powerful allied spirits.
[by]Multiple summoned spirits which ignore basically all weapon damage (BOD scaling with Force, probably, and Autosoak = Force means even anti-tank weapons don't do jack to them). Troll Shamans, here we go.
[bz]I ran the numbers and a wired street sam with a pistol can take out a Force 4 spirit in a couple of rounds. Force 5 is tough without help, and force 6 isn't going to happen. An AK-97 makes it a lot easier.
[ca]Great. So spirits are even more powerful now, as if 5e wasn't already bad enough about that.
[cb]They're also more difficult to summon, since they resist summoning with twice their force. It's unlikely, but possible to die trying to summon a F6 spirit. A F4 seems to sit at the sweet spot for summoning reliably.
[cc]ASDF is also used in some dice pools as well
[cd]Cyberjacks are defense, Cyberdecks are attack. ASDF is removed as it is a limits, and is replaced by edge mechanics.
https://arcologypodcast.shadowcasters.network/2019/04/30/special-episode-shadowrun-sixth-world-edition/
and
http://neo-anarchist.com/sixth-edition-box-set-special/
[ce]Time stamps would be nice.
[cf]01:04:00 - 01:05:00
https://arcologypodcast.shadowcasters.network/2019/04/30/special-episode-shadowrun-sixth-world-edition/
[cg]correct in general, you still have PAN's and Host networks etc, but you no longer need to worry about keeping track of what is slaved to what. All you need to do is gain access to the network or device if it is independent with a single hack roll for access then your free to operate on any part of the network once you are in. There are also some actions you can perform as an 'outsider' .. which means you don't need to hack for access first.
[ch]Great, more ways to fuck cybered characters up without adequate defense. Just what was needed to make them even more unappealing than in 5E.
[ci]they are set up the same way as spells
[cj]should be noted that this automatically alerts the device/host but not necessarily the owner. The owner would have to either be actively monitoring or be alerted once the host is able to send a message to them.
[ck]Such an incredibly annoying mechanism. Would work wonderful in a digital game, but man do I hate GOD scores with pen & paper...
[cl]Did this really happen? I never experienced this problem, only small vehicle vs large vehicle collusion I had GMed involved called shot ramming to take out guns or tires, etc.
[cm]IIRC, they had the calculations backwards, where the occupants took damage based of THEIR vehicle's hardness/body. IE: a tank crashing into a moped would have the tank crew using the TANK'S hardness for the crash damage value they needed to soak while the moped rider just took 4-6 damage...
Instead of errataing a fix, they let it ride...
[cn]Wow, I never noticed that. They mentioned they hired their Errata team half way through 5th and this time they are starting with their Errata team in place so here is hoping that happens less in this edition.
[co]Of course, there hasn't been ANY official Errata since early/middle 5th Edition except for Missions...so not sure how much to believe it is going to get better
[cp]This significantly increases the chances that I'll be investing in 6E. I'm not fond of huge skill lists.
[cq]Seems like a lot of depth lost for something dumbed-down, though. Much like Anarchy. At least it doesn't seem to want to lock you down at a maximum of 4 out of 20 skills, so there may be some room for characters to progress meaningfully left.
[cr]Reducing the number of skills isn't dumbing anything down. For example, in combat, you don't actually get anything for having, say, Pistols, Shotguns, and Rifles keying off of different skill ratings.
[cs]You get something during character creation and character progress. Besides, you get either hyperspecialized builds (if skills are expensive during chargen) or jacks-of-all-trades (if they aren't). It makes characters across the board flattetr and more sameish, and competence very binary. Either you are a master of all arms, or you aren't certain which part of any firearm (sword, polearm, axe) goes towards the enemy, there's little middle ground to be had. You get D&D, where there'S exactly one viable type of fighter/mage/paladin and they're basically all c&p.
[ct]This can work if done well. WoD (mortals) have only a few skills, but you can add depth through specialisations. Careful reduction of skills is good. Reducing too much is bad.
[cu]Less a simplification and more a rebrand pretending it is new.
[cv]Indeed, though the simplification is just buying skill groups rather than individual skills. You can get away with just buying one thing rather than individually investing in 3.
[cw]you *can't* just be competent with pistols anymore, though, you somehow also learn the basics of lasers, RPGs and artillery. Hence, it's indeed not a rebrand, but a downgrade. Not by much, but it does take away options without adding anything meaningful.
[cx]Firstly I don't disagree that this simplification has taken away options. That's what simplifying usually does. However, you are over reacting about what is added to your skill. the Firearms skill group has been said to be the same as the 5e skill group, so lasers, RPGs, and artillery are not part of it. If you take the 6e Firearms skill you are equally good with pistols, rifles, shotguns, and automatic weapons nothing more. this is a limit on "just being competent" yes but it's not the crazy game breaking situation you imply.
[cy]With expertise and specializations, it's not even a simplification, just a change of term (not a meaningful simplification, just a marketing lie). However, since you are forced to take the entire group first, the mechanism takes away an option you had before (be only good at one specialization) without adding anything substantial (like an actual simplification of anything with that skill group).
And Heavy Weapons is still its own skill (group?) then, I assume. So you still need two skill (groups) to fire a light or a medium machine gun, but one of them somehow also covers pistols, long rifles, shotguns and various iterations of automatic small arms. This is not how a simplification is supposed to work.
[cz]You are mistaking Option Simplification for Mechanical Simplification. Option simplification is just that, there are less options or the process of selecting said options are simplified. That's what this is. We have less skill options, that's all. Mechanically there are just as many things you can do with the skills and just as many rules associated with those things we can do. I believe the intent behind simplifying the skill options was to speed up character generation. Now a new player chooses 1 or 2 Skills (formerly skill groups) and it gives them a wider selection of things they can do with their character. The alternative is older editions' selection of more granular skill options. Yes it gives a player more choice in what their character can do but it takes longer to do and requires a better understanding of what you want out of your character for it to be done well.
As far as I can tell Yes, Heavy Weapons is likely a 6e Skill (5e skill group). I'm not sure what weapons fall into what 6e Skill but firearms seems to cover the same things as 5e Firearms Skill group. If heavy weapons covers heavy machine guns that actually does make since. I'm not sure where Light MGs and Medium MGs fall and frankly I don't care. Firearms Skill Group in 5e has some good justification around it being mostly simple operation weapons IE point and shoot, or Point, Brace, and Shoot. Heavy weapons, including most machine guns of all types generally require a much higher skill to operate effectively, particularly to avoid jams. Even if heavy weapons includes some or all machine guns I would be indifferent to the distinction even if it removes options from character builds.
Never the less, the wording of the entry is accurate. They have simplified the skills system by removing options from the skill list. Regardless of how realistic that is or what it does to character build options CGL has done it.
[da]The politburo has decided, shut up and do what you're told. Best point made, ever. ;)
[db]Yeah that's basically what has happened. CGL has unilaterally decided what 6e has and doesn't have. I think it will be hard to find anyone who actually play tested this stuff seriously before release. Even the SCN members posting these videos admit they play tested a tiny bit and then they got cut out of the process (some imply it was willing others seem a bit upset about it). I'm personally hoping that at some point you can just individually buy specializations, either in a "Run Faster" sort of book or by using a quality that changes skill purchasing like an intuitive skill mastery or something. I understand all the limits you've very rightly pointed out. There is sadly just no way to change the train wreck after the whole train is off the track.
[dc]Hardy is supposed to have said that "playtesting is too hard". Doesn't raise my hopes the quality of SR6 will be higher than SR5'S already very mediocre rules.
[dd]Ouuuh, so there will finally be Sammies that are RAW good at intimidating people? :D
( Maybe, just maybe, this is where strenght might come in play for some melee weapons?)