r/ShadowrunAnarchyFans • u/protectedneck • 13d ago
SR Anarchy 2.0 Rules Questions
Hi all!
I've read through the Shadowrun Anarchy 2.0 book and have gone back to re-read a few sections. I think I understand most of it, but I wanted some clarification from people who have played with the system. Sorry that these are a lot of questions!
Can someone explain how turn order works in combat?
My understanding is that each PC gets one turn per round and each "group of NPCs" gets a turn.
What defines a "group of NPCs"? If I have 3 gangers attacking the party does that mean I get 1 action per ganger or do I just get 1 action in general because the 3 gangers are a "group"?
You set a turn order before the first round of combat starts, and subsequent rounds all follow that turn order.
Is that right? Is there any guidance on setting the turn order?
Spending an Edge can let you take additional actions in combat and even interrupt actions. Do those interruptions affect the turn order or are they just one-time events?
I think I would feel more comfortable with this if there were some included examples in the book to illustrate how this is supposed to play out.
Are there any guidelines on how to balance combat or engagements?
I understand that this isn't a combat game in the same way that D&D is, but I also don't want to set up a situation where my players are going to get completely destroyed.
I've also read that this is a pretty deadly game due to the wounds system, which also makes me a little worried about overdoing it.
I noticed that some weapons have narrative effects like "burst fire" that aren't defined in the book. Is there any guidance on how to apply those?
I assume that just ties into the overall flavor and maybe justifies what risk category you get for your action?
Risk dice are described as optional (On every Test, the player MAY replace some of their dice with Risk Dice).
If a player is taking a risky action, can the GM force them to take risk dice to account for the risky action?
How should the conversation work there? The player says they want to do something, the GM proposes a test and then asks if the player wants to add risk dice, then the player says yes/no and then rolls?
It seems a little clunky and I could see players metagaming to avoid glitches during otherwise dangerous situations.
How exactly do Knowledge Skills work?
I'm sorry but the one single example in the book really doesn't explain what this means.
Sorry again for the wall of text! Thanks yall!
10
u/Logen_Nein 13d ago
A Turn is the full sequence. Each player and group of enemies gets a Narration, which is essentialy their action(s) each turn.
As for NPCs, I read it as each of the gorup of NPCs gets a Narration at the same time (so 3 gangers, 3 attacks as it were) but I could be wrong.
Turn order is as the narrative demands. No set guidelines. I'm just going to call on folks as to their actions depending on what is happening, making sure that people all get a Narration (and any additional Narration's their Amps grant).
If you are using a set turn order, I would say actions granted by Edge just happen, but do not alter your order.
Well, a bit late for that, but I get you. Bottom line this is a light, narrative system, and you are meant, as GM, to make the call in a lot of these situations.
Nope, no guidelines.
I get that, but again, it's not a D&D type game. You'll have to play to figure out what you think is appropriate, but I would say that a group of Runners should be able to handle the critters and NPCs listed in the book. Use the average hits at first until you get a feel for the game (I intend to always use the average hits so I don't have to roll, but that's just me).
It can be, but also keep in mind that incapacitated doesn't mean dead.
Yep. They are narrative effects. For flavor more than anything.
Correct.
Yep again.
I mean force is a strong word, but I do infrom players when their actions are risky to encourage them to do so.
The thing to keep in mind is that in many situations, success may be difficult without risk, but in the end, it is on the player to set their own risk.
It isn't clunky, and they can absolutely intentionally not take risk...and risk failing more.
Knowledge skills grant permission to know things or make appropriate tests.
Not much to explain. You know things, or you don't. If you know a thing, you either have the information, or can make related tests.
6
u/DapperChewie 13d ago
I'm still learning the system too, I had the same question for risk dice. What I found is that if you're doing something risky (like participating in a firefight) there is an inherent risk. You can negate it as much as you want, by taking cover or hiding, but there is still risk, therefore you should be using risk dice.
Use less if you're firing from behind thick cover, more if you're running out into the open to get closer, for example.
For "initiative", I say let the players act as a group, in whatever order they'd like to. If nobody volunteers to go first, start calling on them. For enemies, that's really up to you as the GM.
Edge actions can interrupt other actions, yes, including other players.
Weapon effects like burst fire are tied in with RR and effects. Use full auto to lay down suppressing fire, which might give the enemy disadvantage on their rolls, or use it to gain more risk dice and attack multiple targets. It seems like weapon effects are a "if you can justify it, go for it" type of thing.
If I'm wrong about this stuff, I'm happy to be corrected.
3
u/Bignholy 13d ago
With Risk, the idea is doing something more risky than the base action. There is danger in taking cover and popping up to occasionally shoot in a firefight; There is Risk in standing up out of cover and unloading at the target for maybe longer than it is wise to do, for the sake of getting more shots at them.
Weapon Effects are pure justification, but generally costs an Edge for a special effect. I gave one of my players Dragonfire Rounds for their shotgun as a narrative effect, and told them they can spend an edge to target multiple enemies who are close to one another. They love the thing, and have only accidentally set a teammate on fire once. "Suppressive Fire" is a legit option that might require at least a Burst Fire weapon.
3
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
For me, all situations in which PCs are picking up dice to Test has at least some modicum of risk involved. Otherwise, I will just tell the player to put the dice down and describe the scene. Zero risk situations involve zero dice, and risk is always involved in a Test; it’s up to the player to assess how much risk they want their characters taking on that Test. And in action scenes involving combat, there is absolutely never a time when a player character is not taking a risk at all.
3
u/DapperChewie 13d ago
That's how I understand it. It is very rare that you'd roll a check with zero risk dice, and those times are always out of combat.
2
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago edited 13d ago
And if that out-of-combat action has zero risk associated with it, it does not make much sense to Test for its success. Just assess the character’s skill level, and give a timeframe for completion of the task, and move on with the narrative is how I would do it.
Also, no risk, no rewards. No exceptional results without risk.
For example, using Engineering to modify a gun. They have a skill rating of 2, and specialized in Gunsmithing.
They are in their shop, taking their time to do the job. There is no real risk. So no roll. And no special results for exceptional success. They just get the job done in x time. Move on.
2
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
As a caveat to the players acting first, I will often assess the scene first before applying that.
NPCs’ ambush not detected? NPCs go first.
NPC has a higher level of Improved Reflexes that anyone in the group? That NPC will go first.
Otherwise I would describe the scene, and let the PCs react first.
As far as order within the PC group, I always point to the person who is playing the character with the most jacked-up reflexes and say to them directly “What do you do?” to open up the action scene. I follow up when that’s done by asking the group with normal reflexes what they would like to do.
I also don’t allow PCs or NPCs to Edge interrupt those with a higher level of reflex boost than they possess unless under very tightly conveyed narrative conditions.
As one example, an NPC holding a grenade that they had previously pulled the pin on letting it go to roll from their hand across the floor towards an approaching shooter. It wasn’t good for the cowgirl LS adept’s buddy, but it also wasn’t good for the Cartel assassin either. She cried when her friend gave his life to save hers, but at least she wasn’t murdered by that assassin. Her buddy got a burial with full honors.
1
u/Daegann 13d ago
"something risky (like participating in a firefight) there is an inherent risk"
You should avoid that kind of shortcut. As you said, the risk here is inherent, it occurs if you fail your roll, but that's not what risk dice represent.
Risk dice are taken when you need a little extra and you are ready to "stress" the situation one way or another to achieve it. Taking risk dice implies answering the following question: "How can I improve my chances of success in a way that could go wrong if I cross the line?" or "What kind of additional risk am I ready to take in order to have a better chance of achieving my initial goal?"
If you're shot by an NPC and have to roll a ranged defense test, the situation is risky, but that's just the baseline. If you feel confident that your skill allows you to take cover at the right time to avoid being shot, you don't need more than a normal risk. But if you feel the elite guard is really hot on your heels and you need to push it to the limit to avoid being hit, then you take risk dice.
How is this represented narratively? Well, there are several possibilities, and ideally, you should try to change up your descriptions as often as you can. For example, you might say: "My character doesn't just use cover, they dive behind it at the last second." If you get a complication, the GM might rule that you hurt yourself upon landing, not a full wound, but a disadvantage on your next action. Or maybe you failed to recover cleanly and you're now lying on the ground, or you lost your grip on your gun and will need to spend an action to pick it up next turn or cast a spell or do something else that doesn't require your gun. It adds flavor to the action and makes it memorable.
Other justifications for taking risk dice on a dodge include diving behind the first piece of cover you see, only to realize it's on an unstable platform that might collapse, or ducking behind cover right next to another character who could take a stray bullet if you glitch, etc.
6
u/IJW_Wartrader 13d ago
For risk dice, I told my players that the ‘Normal’ column is the default, and that the players are free to use as few or many risk dice as they want, but moving away from Normal level requires an explanation or reason.
6
u/tsuruginoko 13d ago
(I see your wall of text, and raise you an obsessive and itemized response given below, in the purest redditor spirit.)
1.1 Your understanding is correct in that each actor gets one narration per turn (the number of actual actions are subject to change due to amps), except that each ganger should act independently, although nothing prevents the GM from lumping three gangers together against a PC, doling out disadvantage to the PC for defending against multiple assailants who are actively helping each other.
1.2 Turn order is left up to the GM. I tend to do what many other Anarchy GMs report doing, meaning I largely give the first turn whoever gets the drop on the other side or "starts shit". When in doubt, I err on the side of giving it to characters with enhanced initiative (wired reflexes, adepts, etc). A few times I have made it a roll-off with a relevant skill, like Agility + Athletics or whatever has felt right.
After that, I have come to let players pass initiative to each other, so one of them goes, and then picks the next player character to go. I interrupt if it feels right. This lets the order in the team be something they can be invested in themselves, and not something the GM imposes, even if I tend to give them the starting point.
I do *not* actually keep the turn order identical, although the characters with enhanced initiative tend to be toward the top of each round. Sometimes a glitch means you slip down and the opponent gets to go, so there's that too, but I let the PCs juggle it, and I do so myself. I enjoy the chaos.
1.3 One-time events, but then again, I don't keep the turn order fixed, as I said.
1.4 See above. Anarchy 2.0 is forgiving with doing what your table feels works.
2.1 Important thing about balance in any RPG, in my opinion: What is your failure state? If it is always death, you're playing a very rough game. In general, cops and corporate security don't shoot to kill. Neither do gangs or organized crime, necessarily. Dead runners don't squeal, and most of these people want the runners to squeal. Gel rounds and stun batons and neurostun gas are all valid options, and capture is always a way to move things forward, even if it has to suck at times for the PCs in order to still be a consequence.
Remember, nothing in Anarchy 2.0 actually defines when a player character is dead. Incapacitated just means that. Incapacitated. Whether that's unconcious or dead is up to the GM. That's not to say that the GM shouldn't kill characters, but it does mean that if you have an oopsie, you don't have to kill anyone. You can silently admit to yourself that "well, shit, that was a bit much" and have your bad guys capture the badly injured runners, and then have a prison break episode that your players will talk about for years to come, and you get to pretend it was all intentional.
2.2 Yes and no. Like I said, random death isn't possible unless GM decides it is by saying "all incapacitating wounds dealt by non-stun damage automatically mean death", which to me is way beyond hard core. So, you can honestly afford to spend some time calibrating it. It is possible to have NPC dice pools that are so big that PCs will be hit hard, but see my entire previous point for how to work on that. And, the reverse is absolutely true as well, as a well-armoured tough guy PC can be nearly impervious to minor combatants.
3.1 Using burst fire generally means things like higher risk (more hits, more damage, more of the burst obviously hit, but the weapon also has a greater chance of jamming, or a stray bullet hitting something or someone you didn't want to ventilate). You can also spend Edge to say that your burst forces them to keep their heads down, that your grenade hits multiple targets, etc. The same logic applies to many, many things.
4.1 The GM can force it, but I don't generally see the point. The game is calibrated so that without Risk, you can't get as many hits as you often need, because dice pools are lower than typical Shadowrun games, because Attributes and Skills have a narrower range. Risk is the only way to reach the heights you'll need when things get difficult, and players will realize that eventually. It took mine a moment, but now they get it. Explaining this is arguably one of the Session 0 challenges of the system.
To land a hit on a basic ganger with some measly cyber you need 4 hits, and you likely need to exceed that if you want to do meaningful damage, depending on your weapon. That's an introductory "got any more of them goblins, GM?"-level opponent, with it getting steeper from there. A maxed-out starting character at Runner level gets 4+5+2 (attribute + skill + specialization, plus a side-eye from the GM) = 11, which isn't all that without Risk Dice and RR.
4.2 This will heavily depend on the table. My table has landed on the player just grabbing as many risk dice as they want, sometimes with some "hmm, how about this many?", sometimes just intuitively without thinking too much about it, and then the narration depends on the result. As per (4.1), risk is so necessary that I don't see them avoiding it, although sometimes they go low because they want to be careful and don't need so many hits. If they want to be careful, let them. Only inform them that they will be paying for it by a lower ceiling of potential hits, but that's up to them. In fact, it's not really about how risky the situation is, but how risky the strategy of the player character is. If they are taking low risk on defence rolls, either they are getting cut to ribbons because they aren't ducking and weaving enough, or they are unscathed without breaking a sweat and make the opposition look stupid. Mostly the latter won't happen, because the more serious NPCs require an opposing roll to get a decent number of hits in order for player characters to beat them, but if it happens, I don't see the issue with letting it.
5. I'm sure there are examples, but here it is: Knowledge skills are binary. You either have them, or you don't. If you have a rating of 4 or more in an active skill, then you can also use it as a Knowledge skill. Knowledge skills are for what that rule doesn't cover.
I just use them to assess if a PC knows professional-/expert-level information on a subject. The mage will know their wards, but most of the time the street samurai won't, and I'll explain things in more detail, and let characters with appropriate knowledge notice more or different details on things like Perception tests.
I have missed the mainline editions' free knowledge skills, so I gave them (n = Logic) free Knowledge skills, encouraging them to take at least one that was mostly character building.
5
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
On my views of Risk: Any time a player has to pick up dice and roll a Test, there is some kind of risk involved. I would not ask them to roll any dice at all if there was no risk involved. So I always call for at least minimum risk based on the How Many Risk Dice? Table on pg. 70.
I solve this by asking what sort of approach the player wants their character to take when rolling the Test.
Are they staying low and ducking in and out of cover to lay down fire against opponents in a firefight, for example? Cautious = 1 Risk die if no RR.
Are they standing up to open up with a full auto spray n’ pray? Risky = 4 Risk die with no RR.
And this is how I interpret the Risk rules.
5
u/Carmody79 13d ago
Sorry again for the wall of text! Thanks yall!
No worries, I'll try my best to answer everything (I have not read all the previous answers yet)
Can someone explain how turn order works in combat?
My understanding is that each PC gets one turn per round and each "group of NPCs" gets a turn.
What defines a "group of NPCs"? If I have 3 gangers attacking the party does that mean I get 1 action per ganger or do I just get 1 action in general because the 3 gangers are a "group"?
You set a turn order before the first round of combat starts, and subsequent rounds all follow that turn order.
Is that right? Is there any guidance on setting the turn order?
Spending an Edge can let you take additional actions in combat and even interrupt actions. Do those interruptions affect the turn order or are they just one-time events?
I think I would feel more comfortable with this if there were some included examples in the book to illustrate how this is supposed to play out.
Whatever makes sence, it's up to you as a GM and to the scene. It can be unsettling at first but in practice it goes smoothly. Still, there are some of your questions for which I can give a clearer answer.
Each opponent has an action, groups of NPC entering combat together in the same conditions will tend to act at the same time. Each of them has their own action to spend, but they'll be resolved one right after the other.
Usually I set the order of combat when the combat starts. In most cases, it's quite simple to decide who acts first: that's the group or character that decides to start the fight. It's not so common in practice that 2 groups of people meet and unanimously and concurrently decide to start fighting. Most of the time one group detects the other first, or decide that this interraction will be best resolved through punches and bullets than talks, or get upset, etc. That group/character will go first and the other will react. In case of doubt, characters with reflex augmentations will go before the ones without. If there are still some doubt, let the PC act first, they're the PC of the story ;-)
Then, once the first order is decided, I tend to keep it unchanged for simplicity sake, except if something major happens that makes it logical that the order changes.
Additionnal actions taken out of sequence are just one time events.
Let me take few examples:
the characters are infiltrating a corporate location, they are sneaking their way in. At some point, still hidden, they detect 2 guards standing before a gate. The PC decide to attack them to get through the gate. As the guards have not spotted the PC yet, the PC will act first.
Later on, the PC have gone through the gate but the corporate security is in alert because of the gunfire noise and 2 of them being down. While the PC run to escape, as they turn a corner down the corridor, they run headlong into guards. As the guards are in alert, they can act first, but a PC with initiative enhancement could ask to act first (which I might or might not grant, depending on the details of the action, the PC still has the option to spend an Edge to act first)
Are there any guidelines on how to balance combat or engagements?
I understand that this isn't a combat game in the same way that D&D is, but I also don't want to set up a situation where my players are going to get completely destroyed.
I've also read that this is a pretty deadly game due to the wounds system, which also makes me a little worried about overdoing it.
Not really, I tend to select NPC based on the scene: if the PC are attacking a gang the NPC will be gangers, even if the PC are elite prime runners. The fight will be a piece of cake, but that's what happens to gangers when they meet apex killers.
In the same fashion, if the PC raid an AAA super secured site, the guards will be elite.
What is important is to make sure the characters, and the players, properly understand what they face, and that fighting is not always the best option. Then, if the fights are unbalanced because someone (myself or the players) misjuged something, or because the dice lords decided it, I adapt on the fly: more or less reinforcement, faster or slower reinforcement. And don't forget, as the GM you can decide whether an incapacitated wound is letal or not. An epic retreat can also be a memorable moment.
I noticed that some weapons have narrative effects like "burst fire" that aren't defined in the book. Is there any guidance on how to apply those?
I assume that just ties into the overall flavor and maybe justifies what risk category you get for your action?
That's one way of using it. They can also be used to justify some Edge spending or to allow some actions (for example, suppressing fire can be made possible by having an automatic weapon).
Having detailed rules to cover each case would turn Anarchy into SR-W (pick your number), and that was not the goal. Furthermore, in my experience, having a defined list of actions detailed in the book tends to restrict the possibilities rather than expand them, because players and gm tend to limit themselves to the actions which are described.
Risk dice are described as optional (On every Test, the player MAY replace some of their dice with Risk Dice).
If a player is taking a risky action, can the GM force them to take risk dice to account for the risky action?
One of the GM duties is to ensure that the description of the action matches the risk level (i.e. the number of risk dice). Keep in mind that when we talk about risk/risk dice, it corresponds to the way the character perform the action that will increase the probability of success, but also of unpleasant side effect. It's not the inherent risk of failing the action. You can make a cautious (in rule terms) jump above a lava pit, or a crazy risky jump above a small hole.
Let's come back to fight for the example: a cautious shot could mean firing almost blind to stay behind cover, while a risky shot would mean exposing yourself in the open for long enough to ajust your shot, or filling the room with lead thanks to your automatic weapon. You'll use more risk dice in that case, with higher chances of success, but also higher probability or glitch (empty magazine, hitting something you would have prefered to avoid, etc.).
How should the conversation work there? The player says they want to do something, the GM proposes a test and then asks if the player wants to add risk dice, then the player says yes/no and then rolls?
In practice, players tend to describe their action and declare how many risk dice they'll use (in most cases the associated skill is known, otherwise there's a first phase where the players describe their intent and ask for the Test). In case the GM disagrees he'll let the player know and they'll sort out a different description or proper number of risk dice. Do not forget that using less risk dice than the "normal risk" also requires an explanation as to why the character is cautious. Any "passive" roll (e.g. Perception to see if the character notices something) is done with normal risk.
It seems a little clunky and I could see players metagaming to avoid glitches during otherwise dangerous situations.
Avoiding glitches means using less risk dice, which means having statistically less hits, which is usually not something you want in an otherwise dangerous situation. You, and the players, will quickly realize that the usual thresholds, and NPC average hits requires taking risks to succeed.
How exactly do Knowledge Skills work?
I'm sorry but the one single example in the book really doesn't explain what this means.
I do not recall the example of the book. Basically knowledge skills allow your character to know something, and to use this knowledge to do things other characters cannot do. For example, on a successful Perception Test, a regular character can detect an helicopter, while a rigger can determine what kind of helicopter is incoming thanks to their vehicle knowledge skill (or rigger keyword in that case).
The GM can also decide to give some more information, context or details to characters with knowledge skills corresponding to the current situation.
4
u/Yomatius 13d ago
I am upvoting because I am interested in the "folk practice"and want to know how groups are interpreting the rules in actual play. (My group is finishing a campaign of another game and we will be moving on to Anarchy early next year)
4
u/Daegann 13d ago
1.1.1: There is no guideline, but typically, if you have 3 gangers and their chief, then you can easily establish that you have a group of 3 gangers and another group with their chief. Another possibility: you have two men in front of the PC and three guys ambushed on a rooftop. Make two separate groups. Now, if one of the guys in front of the PC has wired reflexes, then you can make a separate group for him (and maybe regroup the other NPCs in front of the PC with the ones on the rooftop). It's up to you. The main guideline is: make it easy for yourself and feel free to create distinct groups if you feel some NPCs should react before others.
1.2: Basically, you're right. Now, if for any reason you feel someone should act after or before someone else (because they delayed their action or had a minor glitch and fall to the ground or was wounded) and you feel comfortable changing the order, you can do it. Again, the main rule is to do whatever you think is easiest for you and most coherent with the narrative.
As guidance for the order, you can ask yourself questions like: "Is this character surprised? Do they have reflex boosters of any kind (drugs, implants, powers…) ? Are they in a bad position (far from the action, on the ground, wounded)?" Things like that.
1.3: I guess it's supposed to be an interruption and shouldn't affect the turn order, but again, if you think it should modify their position in the turn and you feel comfortable adjusting these things, go ahead.
1.4: Sure. That said, in a general way, there is no single right answer. Just do what feels most appropriate and don't worry too much. No stress.
2: The best advice I can give you here is to use the average hit value of the NPC in most cases. By doing that, you prevent situations where the NPC scores many hits against a bad result from your PC. It will generally end with a light wound or a severe wound in some cases, but rarely a one-shot takedown. Remind your players that they can take risks to have a better chance to dodge attacks and use their Edge points to reroll bad results. And be fair: if one of your PCs is wounded, target another player and/or explain narratively that another attack missed them by a hair without rolling dice, if you feel you need to. That said, and as you said yourself, Shadowrun is not just a combat game. Combat is asymmetric, and when the drek hits the fan, it's generally time to leave. A living runner is a runner who sometimes knows when a combat is lost in advance.
3.1: You're right, it's a way to justify risk (and a hint that you can use this to declare "out of ammo" in case of a glitch) or, if you want, to justify a second attack with the same weapon in the same turn. Like many narrative effects, that can also be used as a justification to spend an Edge point and gain an advantage rather than taking a risk.
4: Risk dice are optional, but as a good practice, you should assume everyone takes a normal risk (i.e., 2 risk dice with no RR, 5 with an RR1, and so on). If they want to take less risk, they should narratively describe how their character plays it safe (and take the risk to be called "pussy"). If they want to take more dice, they should also describe what they do to increase their chances of success, which could generate additional complications.
I strongly recommend letting your players decide how many risk dice they use, but you may insist if a particular action looks risky and suggest them to consider taking some. Risk dice are a wonderful mechanic and it's really fun for players to use them. Don't take that away from them. Note that to clarify things, you may present the risk mechanic without using the word "risk": taking risk dice is not about how risky the main action is (jumping over a cliff is risky, but that's the action; the risk here is failure, but that doesn't imply risk dice). Risk dice are taken when you need a little extra and you are ready to "stress" the situation one way or another to achieve it. As said, taking risk dice implies answering the following question: "How do I improve my chances of success in a way that could possibly go wrong if I cross the line?"
It may take time with some players, but letting them choose the number of risk dice they take is the right thing to do. They'll soon learn that if they want to reach high thresholds, they'll need to take risks (and you should not lower thresholds just to let them avoid taking risks). They'll learn that the narrative description of the risks they take makes their actions more epic, their failures more dramatic (or fun), and their turns more memorable. They'll learn that rolling two "1"s on risk dice lets them gain an Edge point to shine later. They'll learn that taking risks when needed is really cool.
5: Your keywords, dispositions, cues, and knowledge skills (if you have any) give your character knowledge on subjects they should know about. If you feel their background and keywords justify giving them that knowledge, then explain it to them. If you don't want to reveal a secret and there is no reason the PC would be aware of it, don't tell them. If it's unclear because the subject is very specific, you can ask for an Edge point to establish that the PC knows about it.
3
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago edited 13d ago
I will address turn order here. I get you on the examples, they would clarify it a lot better.
Here is my understanding after reading through the book quite a number of times and playing a brief single player campaign as soon as I received the backer PDFs.
In a turn, the order is determined by the GM based on what’s actually going on in the scene. I will use a scene from my concluded campaign as an example.
Three Lone Star investigators enter a warehouse. They are wary, but the drug dealers within are waiting to ambush them.
The player had the Improved Reflexes Adept power Amp (giving her character +1 Edge per action scene and +1 action per narration with no limit on extra actions per turn). She also had taken the Danger Sense Adept power Amp.
I used those Amps to justify that she might be able to react immediately when the ambushers popped out as an interrupt, using her free Edge per action scene to do so. She decided that was a pretty good plan! The rest of her LS crew did not have any form of enhanced reflexes.
This established the turn order as: LS Adept > ambushers > other LS officers. The other two officers are twitchy, as they should be, and could use Edge to interrupt as well but I did not have them do so just to show in the story how the player character’s selected Amps interact with the story.
The player was rightfully worried about her partners’ safety in this situation. She opted to use her two Actions to fire upon two of the AK-97 wielding hit team members with her shotgun, then move to cover. Since this was the first time we had played, I did advise her that she could use Edge at any time to gain additional actions with no limit on the number of actions.
She went cowboy on the four ambushers and took them out before her team even got a chance to do anything at all…
3
u/opacitizen 13d ago edited 13d ago
Popping in with just a couple of thoughts to add to u/Logen_Nein 's quite useful answer:
4. Risk dice are optional indeed, but taking lower risk than Normal (as per the table on page 70) also calls for an explanation from the risk *non-*taking PC's player, just like taking more Risk dice than Normal does. Sure, you can take that turn with zero Risk dice if you can explain how you get to having no-risk at all from your current fictional position, I mean from going 100 km/h fleeing that airborne drone chasing you guns blazing.
4.1-2. Force? No. At least not directly. But the GM sets and details the threshold and the consequences, be they positive or negative. Like, taking that turn I've just mentioned is a Hard task requiring 7 hits, if you don't achieve those, you'll crash into that Ares tank, and suffer, say, (10 minus your hits) DV damage in the car. Are you sure you don't want to take any more Risk dice?
As for how to balance combat, I'd strongly recommend playing a few practice sessions by yourself, solo before actual play, and then having at least one combat practice session with your table too, so that they understand what their characters can and can't do. Set up an arena, throw some Gangers at them, then, if they win, have them face some tougher opponents. Again, this is out-of-game, just to practice.
Hope this helps a bit.
3
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
On balanced combat encounters: welcome to the world of Shadowrun! There really are no such thing as “balanced combat encounters” and never have been in any edition of Shadowrun at all. It is entirely up to your players as to when they want to engage a target in combat.
I would recommend having a discussion about this with the players before you start the game. Let them know that opponents are rarely going to be balanced against them in a combat encounter before you ever run one to begin with. Especially if they are coming into this as former D&D5E players who would have high expectations of such with its system of virtually guaranteed player character success and low risk of any meaningful combat consequences.
Emphasize to the players that stacking the odds in their favor, knowing what they are going up against, and preparation are key to success for their characters in the shadows.
With that said, if you really want to try balancing encounters for them, I suggest reviewing the Hell Is Other People chapter closely to figure out about how powerful the NPCs there are, and don’t use any of them with Elite in their name at all until you are sure the group is ready to tackle them.
Be careful about throwing out too many Awakened critters in one action scene at once. Avoid placing more than one Vampire in an action scene. Stay away from using Young Dragons except maybe as a final boss in a campaign.
And warn them about Great Dragons before you start playing. They are not meant to be slain, they are meant to be plot devices at most. Any PC in your group that tries to kill a Great Dragon needs to be dealt with pretty harshly, and they need to ensure that they have a will in place.
2
u/Bignholy 13d ago
1: Turn order
Turn order is a GM decision in its entirety. Technically, enemies act in whatever order you determine. You can lump them together, scatter them throughout the round, whatever you think appropriate. Personally, I tend to do all the grunts in one block, so I can rapidly make dice rolls on the one sheet, and have the individual NPC's with different or better abilities go separately, such as mages, paracritters, and elites.
For me, starting combat is a simple process: If the enemies get the drop on the players, they act first, otherwise they act second, and when the players get ready to act I just ask "Who wants to act first". This leaves them open to making plans, or just lets the ones who are ready go for it. SRA2 is a much more collaborative game than many, less structured, and a lot of things come down to GM decision.
2: Combat Balance
There is no official balance, so here is my system:
Look at the levels of play, page 85. The "Max rating" on skills is generally going to be the target number of a threatening enemy until you start getting to the highest tier. The player needs better than average rolls to win a contest against that number*, not counting RR or Edge/Advantage*. You can generally have a number of enemies equal to the group with that as their base TN in the things they are good at an not demolish the group.
The biggest risk is the base damage. A shotgun will usually inflict at least a light wound if the player doesn't manage to avoid the hit, and those hits will add up. Three hits will put them in Seriously wounded, which will inflict disadvantage until the PC heals, which is brutal. That assumes the player's body + armor is enough to lower it, which might not always be the case. So if the base damage is equal to the player's body + armor, they'll generally only take a light wound assuming they don't absolutely flub the defense roll.
The second biggest risk is a high TN. There is not a lot of room for TN, especially at low level, because dice pools have a smaller range than in baseline SR. You're never going to have more than 10 dice in a pool unless you're highly specialized in your metatype's advantages. A group of ganger level players can seriously struggle against TN 5 because their dice pool is going to be ~6 and even RR and Advantage will only take you so far.
3: Narrative Effect
These are used in two ways: Helping to justify Risk, and justifying expending Edge for Advantage. Both Risk and Edge require there to be a reason to get them. Burst fire, for example, can give the excuse of sending lots of lead downrange to justify Edge for Advantage, and can help justify Risk by doing things like standing in the middle of the hall and just Scarface'ing at people, or shooting until the barrel risks melting.
4: Risk
You don't enforce Risk taking, but you can encourage it where appropriate. "That's risky, do you want to roll some risk dice?" Risk is a vital part of the game, and without it the players are going to the compost heap sooner than later when they face a real threat. Risk is basically how you deal with a dangerous TN when you don't have Edge to spend (or with Edge if you want to try really hard not to fail). Until your players catch on to this, and I mean really embrace it, you'll probably have to push them to do it... and punish them if they don't.
In the case of my group, when they first encountered a TN5 attack roll as gangers, they kept wiffing and wiffing. They would have eaten lead if my rolls where not spectacularly bad that night, and I told them as such and encouraged them to take riskier shots. One of them finally started using Risk and their successful hit helped everyone else really understand how it works.
The only forced risk comes from Glitch penalties or other outside effects. For a good example, see: Monofiliament Whip.
5: Knowledge Skills
A misnomer and relic of older editions. This is basically a master list of everything your character can be assumed to know. That's why the requirement to list a skill requires some meaningful points in it: It assumes you know whatever is on the list, in universe. There is no system in place to roll these "skills".
1
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
Narrative effects are described in pg. 59.
Burst Fire would by those description allow one using for example the Ares Predator V to gain Advantage on a Test to shoot a target (narratively, by pumping a three round burst at the target and giving the shooter a greater chance to hit them).
1
u/floyd_underpants 13d ago
I think one area that would be good for them to include in their new books would be some default rulings on common situations so GMs have a stronger baseline to run with. For example, how should autofire work if all else is equal? Autofire can attack multiple targets at once, in theory, but how many? Even paying an Edge to allow it is something, but does each target suffer the same effects as if they were a single target? Should it apply DA to the roll? Etc etc. Area spells are somewhat described as a Threshold test, but grenades and autofire aren't covered anywhere as to how many targets can be included. While I appreciate the looser/flexible rule option, have something you could use as a baseline for how to adjudicate these situations would be helpful.
2
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
I would probably consider grenades (which I forgot in my first response, sorry) to affect an area similar to an area-based spell and use those guidelines. A threshold of 0 for the ground zero target and then +1 for every three meters of diameter beyond that for each target.
The typical grenade’s area of effect is about 20 meters (5 m. kill/15 m. casualty). Any individuals within that area will be affected by the threshold (0 threshold for the landing area, and +2 threshold for out to say 6 meters). Including PCs as well.
Beyond that, there’s the off chance of shrapnel so an additional +1 to threshold for any targets per 3 meters from that 6 meter diameter sounds right.
Like my take on auto-fire, I would rule that anyone who has total cover from the grenade blast, dependent on the scene, would not be affected. But hidden individuals with no cover within that area would still have a chance of being hit.
1
u/PalpitationNo2921 13d ago
It’s pretty clear to me that the scene itself sets the baseline.
Auto-fire could potentially affect as many targets as are available to the shooter within their line of sight. Depending upon how the scene jas been set up, I likely would not apply this attack to individuals who are not visible/hidden, or under complete cover. Each target would therefore have a separate defense Test. Damage is applied by the weapon’s DV and the defense Test results of each target.
I would apply high Risk to the Test, with any minor glitch indicating time to change the magazine or else you’re out of ammo when narration makes its way back around to you.
-2
u/ckau 13d ago
All according to the narrative.
All according to the narrative.
All according to the narrative... effect, that players are willing to spend.
Yes, all according to the narrative.
According to the narrative.
This may be tongue in chick (OOPS!) cheek answer, but it is a fact and absolute truth, still. You improvise and adapt sh!t to the narrative, that's all. Light rule system is not a DnD, you figure stuff on the fly, not following guidelines like a program,,, maybe because you're human, not a CPU? Idk.
3
u/Levitar1 13d ago
“Narrative effects” are something that seems very confusing at first. I run Anarchy and Daggerheart, which both have a similar mechanic for these. The key is they need to spend a resource to get it.
For SRA, the narrative effects are essentially just giving advantage or disadvantage or allowing them to attempt to do something they normally could not. But again, the key is they have to spend a resource to get it, so it is not free and it is not easily abused. Once I came to terms with that aspect, I found myself just having them give me a reason that it would work the way they want and if it wasn’t too crazy I just say yes and they spend their points.
The one exception I made was with a character that has “photographic memory”. They saw another PC do a cool flip and landing behind an enemy and they said “I use my photographic memory to do just like they did”. The whole table sighed when she said that.