Jump to content

Janus

Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Janus


  1. I was a huge fan of the original relaease of Fireborn, and had run some fantastic games with it.  With the released of pdfs of the original game, is it possible we'll see a new edition of the game on the horizon?  Alternatively, since the IP is being used for fiction publishing now, will we see new game properties based on it?

     

    I personally would love to see an LCG fitted to the property, or perhaps an intrigue based board game.


  2. Lets not speak in absolutes.  Here's the way I see it:

    Reasons to buy 2+ Core Sets:  You want to have multiple decks built without resorting and rebuilding according to a deck list, you don't want to trade away cards to get the ones that have less than 3 copies of

    Reasons to buy 1 Core Set:  You have a limited gaming budget (or you have a diverse list of games to buy), you have an active group to do trading with, you are comfortable sticking with only 1 or 2 factions on each side of the game

    In the end, it's your choice how you want to spend your money.


  3. It's a big grand collection of influences.  Cyberpunk 2020 RPG was the influence on the original Netrunner CCG, with Shadowrun originally coming onto the scene just after that game originally published.  Both games borrowed ideas and concepts from Gibson, and Gibson was one of the more popular writers in the Cyberpunk genre that started in the late 70s to early 80s.  Cyberpunk writing was an attempt to try new concepts in sci-fi and modern literature, with Philip K. **** having been cited as an influence on many of those original writers.  All of these in turn inspired works by Masamune Shiro, who brought the cyberpunk and transhumanism themes to Japanese manga literature.

    And as tech changed in attempts to fulfill or improve on the predictions of many of these writers, the writers in turn adjusted and rethought new ideas to explore, diverging away from their original inspirations or borrowing some influences from new venues.  Today's "cyberpunk" is a much much different vision than the predictions of "Fax Jockies" or urban assault pizza delivery drivers, delving into some areas those original writers never thought to examine.  We're always going to see echoes of what's come before, especially when we're talking about material written into a game.

     


  4. Anarchosyn said:

     

    They are against the system because it is corrupt, like actually and unambiguously corrupt. They are against society not just because it is there, but because the society they exist within supports that corrupt regime. It's not that they're against any and all regimes. 

     

     

     

    Knew I should have double-checked the rules text… ah well, I stand corrected.


  5. I could totally see an Android RPG working, though I think with the current RPG market like it is that something with a heavy storytelling mechanic might be the best route.  It would harken back to some of what FFG was doing with the board game, help set it apart from the stats heavy cyberpunk material, and even offer an alternative to the Warhammer 40K material they also publish.


  6. Looking at the board game material again, I stopped for a moment to think about the labor union faction listed there.  They were a source of street level activity in the Android game, but they certainly weren't the sort of group that fits as a hacker organization.  So if they were introduced into the game, could they give a new look and feel to "Corp" faction play?  Or should they be the basis for a sort of "Activist" hacker faction?

    (Not looking to make this an advocacy for an immediate release for a new faction, but more theorizing on what a group like that might be like)


  7.  

     

     

    TheRealLeo said:

     

    $180 for a whole year is hardly a big deal. And I'm not suggesting doing that for the whole year; just the first three or four months, especially October and hopefully early November to make the Championship tourney a little more interesting.

    Also, it wouldn't be $30 if there was even distribution amongst the factions. If you ran the typical 60 cards for the corp expansion, 4 new cards per faction (including generic) x 3 each = 60, while 4 new cards per runner faction (again including generic) x 3 each = 48. So unless FFG decides to get greedy, the runner expansion would realistically need to be a little less, maybe $12. So the total would be $27. It's only a difference of $3, but it's still something.

    Surely a distribution model like that for only a few months would not be a deal-breaker, or even a game-breaker.

     

     

     

    The problem would be logistics more than play balance.  You need there to be time for FFG to properly vet the cards, get the manufacturing rolling, submit the ordering info, get quantities from retailers, and then ship on a timetable.  If you don't give the retailers enough time to gauge support for the game and understand what kind of product stocking numbers they need to keep, then this will all collapse in on itself.

    I'm in support of a slow drip of material for the first year, small packs once every other month with a large pack just before they start organized play would be optimal in my mind for business.


  8.  It's a fantastic setting, I love a number of the mechanics ideas, and I ran some wonderful sessions of the game.  But it did need some refining.  However, considering the recent attention Fireborn has gotten for FFG's fiction line, I still hold on to hope that a new edition may be in the works.


  9.  Your mistake is seeing the "Central Servers" as a singular entity for card effects.  The card you are referencing says "ice protecting this server" for the target of effect.

    "The Corporation has three central servers: Headquarters, Research and Development, and Archives. Each central server also has a root."  (pg. 6, Netrunner Rules)

    If you install him in the root of your HQ server, he affects HQ.  If you install him in the root of a remote server, he affects that server.  "Central Servers" just help define what you get when the game starts, the three components are not protected and affected as one.  Get rid of the idea that there is a single "CS" and a single "RS".  There are three Central Servers when the game begins and you will build 1 or more Remote Servers as you play.  Each Remote Server will house a single Asset or Agenda, have as many root upgrades as you want to affect that single server, and will each have their own defensive line of ICE.


  10.  You can have as many Remote Servers as you want.  Remote Server is not a single item in the play area, a Remote Server is anything that is not one of the Central Servers you start the game with (R&D, HQ, Archives).

    Mikko Leho is right, Page 7 is a good diagram to understand this.


  11.  Right; in that particular diagram, you are seeing a single Remote Server that has a defensive row of ice, and Agenda, and an Upgrade.  When the Runner gets through the ICE, both the Agenda and the Upgrade are accessed.  That would be an illegal server if there was more than 1 Agenda, more than 1 Asset, or an agenda and an asset "co-existing".

    All of this, of course, assumes that there is not a card text in play that would create an exception to the standing rules in the book.


  12.  OK, I see where the terminology problem is happening.  Let me try a breakdown like this, just to make sure we're all on the same page:

    Central Servers:  A plural term that identifies the 3 servers the Corp begins the game with - R&D (Draw Pile), HQ (ID & Hand), and Archives (Discard Pile)

    Remote Servers: A catchall term for any and all Servers that are built after initial setup.  These are defined as the placement of a facedown card (That may be either an Agenda or an Asset) and/or the establishment of an ICE defensive line.  Remote Servers exist as long as one of these two elements is present.

    Server:  A term given to represent any and all "locations" in the Corp Player's play area that may have a Run activated on.  All Servers are either Remote Servers or Central Servers, based on how they are established during game play.  Any card that targets a "Server" is valid against either of these game elements.

     

    Therefore, you are not establishing "Sub-servers" in a singular Remote Server.  Rather, you are building multiple Remote Servers, with each one holding/maintaining an Asset or an Agenda.

    Make sense?


  13.  Think of Agendas as the collected efforts towards a goal, while Assets are the collected resources designed to make something work.  The ICE is the security dedicated to that particular aspect of the corporation.

    What helps is that the Agenda is taken out of the Remote Host once complete, leaving space fresh for a new Agenda or Asset.  Once you complete the goal, it sustains without needing the security.


  14.  Beyblade and .hack were financial fiascos that were horrible in design and play.  The Star Treck CCG underwent so many changes and revisions during it's life, hardly any fans remained towards the end, and most that I knew bought it did so out of either a loyalty to the source franchise or so the could dominate in what organized play remained (and the latter only bought the product when it got discounted so a brick and mortar store could at least get back some of the product cost).

    The Fight Klub game that they have been promising since 2007 is an ill-conceived attempt to cash in on multiple film franchises, many of which are old and stale by now.  It's a display of how they cannot create anything that stands well on it's own.

    I feel bad that so much was stolen from the company, likely promoting them to abandon more creative work back then.  But really…  the company may like gaming, but that doesn't mean they make good games anymore.

×
×
  • Create New...