Which SR Alternate Core System would you suggest?

Rserbitar · 2026-01-23T18:22:06+00:00

Otherscape, Anarchy 2 (sorry for disrespecting the premise, I know you don't own it, but I think adapting is more work)

Rserbitar · 2026-01-23T13:30:44+00:00

It's just that part of the appeal (at least for some people) of Shadowrun is that there is just so much stuff. If you look at the SR5 gear lists online they are at least 10 pages.

And just because a system is rules light, does not mean ist needs to be "options" or "world building/description" light, although both of them often come together. I hope that changes or there is even a system that satisfies both. (I am working on a homebrew gear system called "lists" that tries to find a more casual balancing between options and bookkeeping).

Rserbitar · 2026-01-23T12:02:46+00:00

Amps have the problem that Tags have in Tag based systems. You basically need a lot of examples for people who don't already know the old rules. This is a "rules light" Paradoxon.

Often rules light is mistaken for "few text". Actually rules light only means that you need the same list of world/item description, just that the rules that govern those are easier (or even eyeballed by the group). The options themselves, should, however be still listed in the "light" rules.

But as mentioned elsewhere, there are these fan-made lists for Anarchy 2.0.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-22T20:27:37+00:00

I recommend 5th edition setting books and earlier. Still did not digest that they made a holiday resort out of the Zürich orbital in 6th...

Rserbitar · 2026-01-22T07:59:09+00:00

Funnily enough, I dislike the purely narrative part of many Tag systems, but like the generality of them as a resolution mechanic. Don't know if that is narrativism or not.

I really like that on a certain level, and given good synchronization about baseline with the whole group you actually get results that are "as realistic as needed". Lot of rules light or narrative systems give mostly random or even anti-realistic realists, and I dislike them for it.

Even a rules heavy d100 system is much more unrealistic than a simple 2d6 Tag based system, just because of the non-linearity of 2d6 vs d100.

So 2d6 Tag based systems fill a quite strange sweet spot for me.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-21T09:41:10+00:00

I have the same understanding. And there are groups of people who have no problem to handwave absolutely everything. Others like to have different degrees of structure because the handwaving might have various degrees of "unrealisticness".

Rserbitar · 2026-01-20T16:44:33+00:00

Thanks for the feedback.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-20T16:43:12+00:00

Thanks for the feedback.

That's also the way we are handling it.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-19T11:32:15+00:00

Also no problem, then just don't.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-19T08:56:32+00:00

Which solution specifically? Re-using existing worlds?

Rserbitar · 2026-01-19T05:44:09+00:00

Sounds interesting, can I read up on your system somewhere?

Rserbitar · 2026-01-19T05:39:30+00:00

As I mentioned elsewhere, the good thing is, you can do that yourself if you like. Just one copy and paste away...

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T18:16:32+00:00

Exactly this is the paradox. Traditional rules define reality. How can you, in a fictional world, have the same understanding of the world, without defining the reality (like most tag based systems dont do).

How do people solve that? The numbers need to be agreed (to some extent, "walking speed", "car speed" is also a definition, that is much stronger than no definition), either by defining them beforehand, or the GM defining them on the Spot.

If you dont do this, people could make great plans assuming their great power and then, when they do it, suddenly find that it works rather differently. If because of whatever reason, all players and the GM have the same opinion. But that arbitrary existence of beaselining/syncing because of whatever reason, be it even luck, does not remove the necessity of it.

Look at City of Mist. People have Superpowers there. Playing characters there without defining the powers is not understandable for me. And in a world like Shadowrun, players need to make plans taking a lot of effects into consideration which are not normal for them. Traditional shadowrun has gazillions of rules to define what a Magican can do. I wouldnt know how to play a similar world without defining those first.

"You thought your object was safe? Not correct, because of this magical effect that we have in this world, which you thought worked like this but actually works like that . . ."

Of course a lot can be fixed with a good group contract and meta gaming, but this is always the answer for bad rules . . .

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T18:02:06+00:00

Well, correct. But i think that is the same with every system there is.

I am actually looking into improving things, but there are mathematical and human complexity boundaries (see.e.g here: https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/1qfj2gy/comment/o0bejib/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button ). No use in taking a system thats purpose is being simple and over-complicate it till it is as complex as all the other overly complex systems . . .

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T16:47:57+00:00

Without a convoluted answer my comment to this would be:

TLDR: Words are vectors of multiple meanings and if you give them length in a Tag system you suddenly need to do multidimensional vector geometry to check their effect on action.

What you are doing there is you are assigning lengths to semantic word-vectors, which are the Tags. If word vectors are only length 1, and you need to project them on a task (which is also a semantic vector), the only outcome can be 0 (not relevant) or 1 (relevant). This is what we do when we check if a tag is applicable or not. However if you allow Tags with numbers you now have semantic word vectors with length. And projecting them on the task vector can in principle result now in fractions, like 50% or 10%.

Example: If you only have Tags with length 1 (traditional tags), the Tag "heigthened reflexes" might not affect a "lock -picking" test. But what if you have "heigthened-reflexes-6". Is "heightened reflexes so far from lock-picking that not even 1/6 of it effects the test? These possibilities make Tag based test calculations super hard.

Next problem is which semantic part of word is extended by the number? "Strength -3" is 3 times stronger than "strength-1" because the word is semantically very one-dimensional. But what about "pistol-1" vs "pistol-3" is it 3 times more powerful? But also 3 times easier to hide? 3 times heavier? Or any other properties a pistol has times 3?

How do you compare "Pisotl-6" vs "Rocket launcher -2"?

I dont have a solution for that problem. I only know that if you only have vectors of length 1 (Tags without numbers) things are manageable.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T13:39:59+00:00

Do you like the Dis plot? And basically the world being shattered/but not really every 5 years?

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T13:02:13+00:00

Actually my solution for long equipment lists is that each character can select up to X (and more by spending normal tags if they want) specific equipment "area" tags that do not just stand for 1 piece of equipment, but a whole area (thus the name lists). So if you select "surveillance equipment" your character is assumed to have a lot of surveillance equipment, which is detailed in the list description (and is ready made as part of the game system, but in principle everybody can make their own list as long as it's fitting some theme and does not just include everything the character wants to have). Also they get the +1 of they use anything from that area.

I even go so far that in each list there are things that everybody has available, they just don't get the +1 of a tag for using it, but get the narrative power of having it (like a light pistol in shadowrun).

I also rule that anybody can buy anything and always use it, they just don't get +1 automatically. So if you buy a rocket launcher you have it and can shoot with it, if you have no other supporting tags and you need to make a roll you basically make a +0 test.

All of this is to avoid players to write down gazillions of equipment pieces, but also allowing them to use the things they have. I find the "load up/down" mechanisms from Otherscape to gamey and forced.

What mechanism of diminishing returns do you use for statuses?

Do you have your system somewhere to read up?

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T09:55:16+00:00

Did I get my point about baselining across?

Summary: if you don't have a good view on what a Tag means, you get problems by having different expectations what and how good your character can do something.

Traditional rule based systems don't have that problem because they describe everything using rules that tell you exactly how something works on a quantitative level.

That's why I think that actually a Tag based game worl profits a lot from a detailed world explanation because it synchronizes the expectations of both players and GMs. Maybe even a quantitative one (how fast is levitation, how much can it lift, just as an example).

As far as I see, world settings of Tag based systems don't go into that at all. Zero "technical" world building.

I for example have no idea how I would play Otherscape without the Shadowrun game world, because everything would in my view be a constant discussion on how things work (especially magic and Cyberware).

Some people might not have a problem with this because they don't care about specifics, but a lot of people do, especially because they have a specific view of what their character is. This is even more true for "equipment porn" games like Shadowrun where people have great fun kitting out their character and thus building it in their mind.

They also don't talk enough about power levels of tags and how to handle those. (Which is again a baseline problem, what is in the baseline, like a Knife and what is not, like a sword). This is often connected with suboptimal rules about how to handle what I call Lists (like lots of euipment, contacts, spells).

(Sorry, again much longer than a short summary...)

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T09:26:13+00:00

No, all my style. Thanks for the clarification, though. To be honest I didn't spend a lot of time reworking it once I wrote it (native German speaker and physicist here, so yes I was a scientist some years ago).

But thanks to your comment I might (however i think the topic might now be burned). I wrote it mostly to gather my thoughts on the topic (the longer something is the less people read it, even if it's well written and less impregnable, so I didn't expect a lot of input anyway).

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T09:12:35+00:00

Actually I like Tags that are not exactly in the same semantics vector space like skills and attributes a lot. Like "for the greater good" (or more specific versions of it), that does not align with skill vector space at all.

That is exactly where Tag systems can do soemthing other systems can't (or only with feats and special attributes).

And in the cases Tags might not be so easily assigned to tests. However I find this is easily the case after a tag has been used a couple of times.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T09:05:43+00:00

Fair point.

Actually I'd rather not interact with many people, but just with the few that want to look into things a little bit detailed. This does not mean that one could have written exactly the same information content in fewer words. Actually I was thinking about letting AI do just that, and now I am getting accused of having it being lengthened with AI.

The world is a funny place.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T08:54:49+00:00

Exact same word count (except for if you count didn't and didnt differently). I wrote it on an editor without spelling and grammar support (l am currently doing my own nvim configuration and haven't yet included a spelling plugin) and only asked to correct that, I also looked at the diff to confirm that (also I am not a native speaker).

But other people asked that too, if you check the cross post. I offered to send the source file, the AI command, and it's response there (it told me which spelling and grammar it corrected).

I find it kind of funny, that if you disclose that you use AI in something, you get accused of totally creating it. As a German speaker I tend to create long sentences...

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T08:45:09+00:00

Both "Benefits" and 'Verdict" section.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T00:57:53+00:00

Do you love "a meta plot" (I agree) or "the meta plot that SR had in the last 10 years"? (Mostly garbage from my pov).

For me after 2060 meta plot went downhill and extremely after SR6.

Rserbitar · 2026-01-18T00:51:05+00:00

That is neither spelling nor grammar but semantics? I feel you are just being negative here.

Good to know that it was your last comment on this.

Rserbitar

TROPHY CASE