I played a lot with 2nd edition in the ‘90s. What a great game! It has a scent what the 6nd edition is unable to deliver. The arts were mindblowingly awesome in 2nd ed. ‘til the 3rd edition.
Completely agree about the art in Second (and first) editions, and although I love the rules in 3rd edition, I really didn't like the game because the artwork let it down.
The "Goat Head" was the reason that they've drop it the Dragon Skull on the logo. Nobody got it and some people though that Shadowrun was "a little bit satanic" because of it. I love that classic logo by the way.
The original logo was far better, I forget that even Shadowrun was effected by the Satanic panic which still existed back then. Weird to think how much (and how little) has changed.
The thing I remember most about the 2nd edition is the increased danger. Damage is harder to resist than in first edition as you pointed out, and also healing got greatly reduced in effectiveness, so an unlucky round in combat could leave you struggling through the entire rest of the 'run. I wasn't really aware of it at the time (the internet wasn't as big at the time and it wasn't a game I followed closely) but apparently Shadowrun player culture changed quite a bit across the lifetime of the second edition. The "punk" aesthetic of going loud and proud and sticking it to The Man changed, to become all about being slick criminal operators, doing the job quietly and professionally. A game of heists instead of a game of dungeon crawls, basically. The change was probably driven partially by the rules being far more punishing of reckless violence (as well as a shift in tone in some of the in-character flavour text, especially in the Fields of Fire sourcebook). It's interesting because I can't think of edition changes prompting playstyle changes to that extent in any other RPGs.
As I've been doing this series I've been noticing the changes that editions force upon games, especially D&D and Shadowrun, where the various editions change the tone quite massively. Feels odd, but the changes in editions totally change the games so that while they share a gameworld, the tone is completely different (5e Shadowrun is barely anything like 1e, and D&D is the same)
The term "shadowrun" pretty much implies stealth and covertness, not being loud and braggish. Not only do you not want to be caught, you don't want many people knowing about you unless you want them to, especially the government. Blowing open the doors of a mega corporation and screaming "Fuck the man!!" isn't really what a Shadowrunner is. They aren't just basic terrorists, they're mercenaries.
@@DeadlyDanDaMan That sounds a lot like the concept of combat as a failure state, which has been part of the discussion over original D&D during the old-school renaissance. That is, OD&D is (or is meant to be) a game of strategic plundering of a dungeon with risk/reward calculation, not systematically killing all the monsters then looting the corpses. OD&D achieves this by making combat fast and deadly, and by making the XP based far more on gold than combat. Shadowrun has a reward structure similarly not based on combat. Second edition makes combat, I don't know if it's exactly deadly, but it can be punishing in consequences (leaving the group wounded enough that calling off the 'run is the only smart option because most of the 'runners are crippled with wound penalties even afterhealing). The thing that's missing is combat being fast. Combat has never been fast in any edition of Shadowrun I've played. Combat gets its own chapter with dedicated subsystems a lot like decking and magic do, which I think implies that these are core activities of the game. I think combat is even more of a core activity because it's something that all the players can take part in, unlike magic or decking. To my way of thinking, if combat is meant to be avoided, it shouldn't reward the players with the deepest game-mechanical interactions the system has to offer unless your PC is Awakened or uses a cyberdeck. So I think it's a legitimate criticism of second edition to say that combat is too punishing, because the rules system doesn't otherwise treat it like it's something to be avoided as much as possible, so it seems like incoherent design to me. I suppose there are groups who find combat too detailed and complex and want to avoid it because of that, but then punishing the players by dragging them through mechanics that take such a long time to resolve doesn't make for a good time!
*The "punk" aesthetic of going loud and proud and sticking it to The Man changed, to become all about being slick criminal operators, doing the job quietly and professionally.* That's very good. Try to do it loud and pround and you will end up in prison or six feet under. Shadowname, nick or code name now have sense. Real spies are not like 007. And people who do wet job are also not the onces you would suspect, or see on the front page on each news paper. The worst thing about ever cyberpunk game for me was when author(s) put emphasis on loud and proud. With style, or other bullshit like that. And one of the fanniest things is when you see Shadowruners doing gig with their faces clearly visible. xD No one wears any type of mask, not mentioning tactical masks.
@@Dasharr *Shadowrun has a reward structure similarly not based on combat.* It's not the mechanics but GM who makes the call. *XP for gold? What's that?* ;) I started my experience as a Warhammer 1st edition GM. You may earn more xp with roleplaying, or by simply chosing to not kill a certain npc/enemy, but befriend him. Which also can result in new carriers options, access to new resources, people and so on. This is rpg. WFRP and its xp system, as I always seen it puted emphasis on 'obstacles' and ways to hadle them. You earn most xp for inventing/finding out best possible way to solve certain problem, and good amount of it by roleplaying. If you look at OD&D it never was very rpg to begin with. Playing dungeon crawls with XP for gold, isn't as much rpg as puzzle solving game. A board game where players have big impact on how the game runs. If we now try to look at Shadowrun with OD&D and WFRP experience under our belt, it's like you wrote. There is a great emphasis put on shootouts, but... It's always worst case scenario. The cleanest Shadowrun is when you enter, do your thing and get out unnoticed. I will comment it this way. A good point would be to have a basic combat system, with a more complex layer on top of it. For all those heavy rulesets weirdos. To each his own as they say. But rpgs wouldn't be rpgs if you wouldn't be able to house rule them, right?
Loved this RPG - played it loads when I was at college with a bunch of 6 great friends. Really miss those days. I have a bag squirrelled safely away with this main rulebook along with all my other source books - great nostalgia...need to dig them out and have another read. Might even have a 3e sourcebook somewhere, though only really played 2e to death. Thanks for the reminder / blast from the past! 👍
Over the years I've played every version of Shadowrun up until 5e, and 1st and 2nd were the versions which hold special memories as we had such great fun in them.
Yeah, that's been one of the main comments that people have made to me, that the 3e rules were great, but the artwork let the whole game down. I love all of the editions in different ways, 3e was streamlined and well thought out, 2e was dangerous and deadly, and 1e was janky but a whole load of fun.
We were a whole week into actually swapping over to 5e, when 6e was announced, so we weren't in a rush to buy all new books. And from what I've heard, that's a good thing.
I mostly played 3rd, but did my first char in 2nd; ex-Lone Star Detective turned private dick, had lots of fake warrant and a marked car too- minus most of the bells &whistles
I am curious about your ending comments that 2e wasn't as good as 1e. Everywhere I've read people seem to agree 2e is 1e but better. You even mentioned in the video things like autofire got fixed in 2e, but other than the artwork, you didn't mention anything that was outright worse than 1e.
It's difficult to put my finger on exactly what it was. Perhaps the increased danger in combat (1st game session of 2e, the entire party were crippled by a sniper, with the lowered effectiveness of healing magic, the party were carrying wounds for the rest of the adventure, making it far more difficult). It changed the tone of the game quite heavily, taking the players from being Rambo like heroes, down to mere mortals. Which might make some players far more happy, as it's a lot more realistic, but the game world always treats Shadowrunners as almost mythical level warriors ("You're not just messing with a street thug, you're messing with a Shadowrunner"), but 2nd edition doesn't really let them act like it. There's a comment below from my good friend Dashar, who points out that the play style changed over the life of 2e, where players were far more tactical in their play, which is no bad thing, but just doesn't seem as much fun to me. Or perhaps it's just the packed nature of the book, where they've crammed in all the additions from Street Samurai Catalog, Riggers Black Book and the Grimoire, so it all just feels a little packed in. For example, equipment in first edition was more detailed and the descriptions more evocative which expanded the world a little more.
@@RPGGamer *the entire party were crippled by a sniper* Seems realitics to me, which is good. *the party were carrying wounds for the rest of the adventure, making it far more difficult* Again realistic, which is good. *taking the players from being Rambo like heroes, down to mere mortals* More realistic = good. *but the game world always treats Shadowrunners as almost mythical level warriors. You're not just messing with a street thug, you're messing with a Shadowrunner* Shadowrunner. Who's still a mortal. And do his deeds in the shadows. Not seen, not heard. Firefight, or any fight at all is least wanted thing. *where players were far more tactical in their play, which is no bad thing, but just doesn't seem as much fun to me* Tactical firefights = greater chances for survival. Realistic again. Gooood. Goooooooooooood. Realistics but fast and light rules are best thing to happen. A team of Shadowrunners shouldn't work like a team of individuals. If one part of mechanism breaks, everything can go to hell. Gooood. Gooooooooooooood. Be well prepared. Anyone should know his area od expertise. Everyone backs others back.
@@hadeseye2297 Lol. I totally get every point you make, and did indicate in my original comment that some people would like it that way. But your final comment shows where S2 was flawed. Because after everyone else was on the deck with Deadly wounds, my Sorcerer adept shrugged off the next bullet because he had a spell locked Armour Spell, and spell locked Enhanced Body. He then went first in the non surprise round, because he had a Spell Locked enhanced initiative spell. He then roasted the Sniper with a Mana Blast, shrugging off the drain with his spell locked Enhanced Willpower, then levitated everyone away over the sea at tremendous speed, using his spell locked Levitate spell, casting heal spells on them which generally reduced them to serious or moderate wounds. All while looking like an unarmed man in a suit. He then proceeded to stroll through the rest of the adventure because Mundanes apparently are pretty much totally vulnerable to magic. And while that felt pretty good, it didn't feel as fun. As it wasn't action packed gunfights and action scenes, it was me knowing how to abuse the rules to make an awesomely powerful character. That time I transformed half the party into Housecats, and because the way the rules worked we had stats higher than the Insect spirits we were slaughtering, also felt like abusing the rules, rather than being heroic.
@@RPGGamer "it was me knowing how to abuse the rules to make an awesomely powerful character" Pure rules flaws. Nothing more. But funny thing is that magic is magic because it's magic. If game designers didn't put any boundries on magic system then you can say *It's not a bug. It's a feature.* It worked as intended. Besides... You did what any good decker would do. You hacked the system and used it to your own adventage. A side note. All of these *cyberpunk* systems can't tackle IT and hacking right. Designers fetish with sticking to 3d avatars and brain burning via software is ludicrous to me. Such flawed hardware/software solution and people would still use it? Or a hacker who buys hacking software. I don't know how you can call one a decker or netrunner when he is nothing more than script kiddy. Gibson's Count Zero has a very good example of such character. A no one when it comes to hacking, who use ice breaker from black market. That's just silly. And his moronic attacks at the data fortress. No true experience. xD Take a look at Cyberpunk RED. Nothing has changed. Attack rules are a little bit different, but tables and tables of hacking software. xD Hilarious. If you need good cyberpunk game, you need to make your own set of good rules for it. For any system that is out there in the wild.
@@hadeseye2297 point pool was added in the Shadowrun Companion for 3e. My favorite was actually a 3rd party creator for 3rd edition called BeCKs, where basically everything was given a Karma score, so it was basically identical to character advancement. There's still a digital creator out there somewhere that gives you 4 options(Priority, Sum to 10, Points, and BeCKs).
I played a lot with 2nd edition in the ‘90s. What a great game! It has a scent what the 6nd edition is unable to deliver. The arts were mindblowingly awesome in 2nd ed. ‘til the 3rd edition.
Completely agree about the art in Second (and first) editions, and although I love the rules in 3rd edition, I really didn't like the game because the artwork let it down.
The "Goat Head" was the reason that they've drop it the Dragon Skull on the logo. Nobody got it and some people though that Shadowrun was "a little bit satanic" because of it. I love that classic logo by the way.
The original logo was far better, I forget that even Shadowrun was effected by the Satanic panic which still existed back then. Weird to think how much (and how little) has changed.
@@RPGGamer That Tom Hanks movie(Mazes and Monsters) sure helped.
The thing I remember most about the 2nd edition is the increased danger. Damage is harder to resist than in first edition as you pointed out, and also healing got greatly reduced in effectiveness, so an unlucky round in combat could leave you struggling through the entire rest of the 'run.
I wasn't really aware of it at the time (the internet wasn't as big at the time and it wasn't a game I followed closely) but apparently Shadowrun player culture changed quite a bit across the lifetime of the second edition. The "punk" aesthetic of going loud and proud and sticking it to The Man changed, to become all about being slick criminal operators, doing the job quietly and professionally. A game of heists instead of a game of dungeon crawls, basically. The change was probably driven partially by the rules being far more punishing of reckless violence (as well as a shift in tone in some of the in-character flavour text, especially in the Fields of Fire sourcebook). It's interesting because I can't think of edition changes prompting playstyle changes to that extent in any other RPGs.
As I've been doing this series I've been noticing the changes that editions force upon games, especially D&D and Shadowrun, where the various editions change the tone quite massively.
Feels odd, but the changes in editions totally change the games so that while they share a gameworld, the tone is completely different (5e Shadowrun is barely anything like 1e, and D&D is the same)
The term "shadowrun" pretty much implies stealth and covertness, not being loud and braggish. Not only do you not want to be caught, you don't want many people knowing about you unless you want them to, especially the government. Blowing open the doors of a mega corporation and screaming "Fuck the man!!" isn't really what a Shadowrunner is. They aren't just basic terrorists, they're mercenaries.
@@DeadlyDanDaMan That sounds a lot like the concept of combat as a failure state, which has been part of the discussion over original D&D during the old-school renaissance. That is, OD&D is (or is meant to be) a game of strategic plundering of a dungeon with risk/reward calculation, not systematically killing all the monsters then looting the corpses. OD&D achieves this by making combat fast and deadly, and by making the XP based far more on gold than combat.
Shadowrun has a reward structure similarly not based on combat. Second edition makes combat, I don't know if it's exactly deadly, but it can be punishing in consequences (leaving the group wounded enough that calling off the 'run is the only smart option because most of the 'runners are crippled with wound penalties even afterhealing).
The thing that's missing is combat being fast. Combat has never been fast in any edition of Shadowrun I've played. Combat gets its own chapter with dedicated subsystems a lot like decking and magic do, which I think implies that these are core activities of the game. I think combat is even more of a core activity because it's something that all the players can take part in, unlike magic or decking. To my way of thinking, if combat is meant to be avoided, it shouldn't reward the players with the deepest game-mechanical interactions the system has to offer unless your PC is Awakened or uses a cyberdeck.
So I think it's a legitimate criticism of second edition to say that combat is too punishing, because the rules system doesn't otherwise treat it like it's something to be avoided as much as possible, so it seems like incoherent design to me. I suppose there are groups who find combat too detailed and complex and want to avoid it because of that, but then punishing the players by dragging them through mechanics that take such a long time to resolve doesn't make for a good time!
*The "punk" aesthetic of going loud and proud and sticking it to The Man changed, to become all about being slick criminal operators, doing the job quietly and professionally.*
That's very good. Try to do it loud and pround and you will end up in prison or six feet under. Shadowname, nick or code name now have sense. Real spies are not like 007. And people who do wet job are also not the onces you would suspect, or see on the front page on each news paper. The worst thing about ever cyberpunk game for me was when author(s) put emphasis on loud and proud. With style, or other bullshit like that.
And one of the fanniest things is when you see Shadowruners doing gig with their faces clearly visible. xD No one wears any type of mask, not mentioning tactical masks.
@@Dasharr
*Shadowrun has a reward structure similarly not based on combat.*
It's not the mechanics but GM who makes the call. *XP for gold? What's that?* ;) I started my experience as a Warhammer 1st edition GM. You may earn more xp with roleplaying, or by simply chosing to not kill a certain npc/enemy, but befriend him. Which also can result in new carriers options, access to new resources, people and so on. This is rpg. WFRP and its xp system, as I always seen it puted emphasis on 'obstacles' and ways to hadle them. You earn most xp for inventing/finding out best possible way to solve certain problem, and good amount of it by roleplaying.
If you look at OD&D it never was very rpg to begin with. Playing dungeon crawls with XP for gold, isn't as much rpg as puzzle solving game. A board game where players have big impact on how the game runs.
If we now try to look at Shadowrun with OD&D and WFRP experience under our belt, it's like you wrote. There is a great emphasis put on shootouts, but... It's always worst case scenario. The cleanest Shadowrun is when you enter, do your thing and get out unnoticed.
I will comment it this way. A good point would be to have a basic combat system, with a more complex layer on top of it. For all those heavy rulesets weirdos. To each his own as they say. But rpgs wouldn't be rpgs if you wouldn't be able to house rule them, right?
Loved this RPG - played it loads when I was at college with a bunch of 6 great friends. Really miss those days. I have a bag squirrelled safely away with this main rulebook along with all my other source books - great nostalgia...need to dig them out and have another read. Might even have a 3e sourcebook somewhere, though only really played 2e to death. Thanks for the reminder / blast from the past! 👍
Over the years I've played every version of Shadowrun up until 5e, and 1st and 2nd were the versions which hold special memories as we had such great fun in them.
2nd was great, the art was on point. We still play 3rd. The rules are cleaner.
Yeah, that's been one of the main comments that people have made to me, that the 3e rules were great, but the artwork let the whole game down. I love all of the editions in different ways, 3e was streamlined and well thought out, 2e was dangerous and deadly, and 1e was janky but a whole load of fun.
Picked up a copy on ebay today! Look forward to diving in once it arrives!
Cool, enjoy, it's a great edition.
Superb! The colour really makes the art pop when it's used.
Although I've got a soft spot for first edition, I have to admit that second looked a lot cooler.
I flipped through my 2e book with you haha.
"Read along with Freddy" has become a thing in these videos which I really didn't expect :D, hope you enjoyed it.
I played all till 5 and really like 5. Havent looked into 6 yet, but havent heard a lot of good of it.
We were a whole week into actually swapping over to 5e, when 6e was announced, so we weren't in a rush to buy all new books. And from what I've heard, that's a good thing.
I bought literally last 5 rulebook in my country. 6 looks like a junk to me.
I mostly played 3rd, but did my first char in 2nd; ex-Lone Star Detective turned private dick, had lots of fake warrant and a marked car too- minus most of the bells &whistles
I've played quite a lot of most of the editions (I think 3e is the one I played least), but my first true love is the 1st Edition.
I have to get this 😢
This is the version I probably played more than any other, but I still have a soft spot in my heart for the 1st Edition.
I am curious about your ending comments that 2e wasn't as good as 1e. Everywhere I've read people seem to agree 2e is 1e but better. You even mentioned in the video things like autofire got fixed in 2e, but other than the artwork, you didn't mention anything that was outright worse than 1e.
It's difficult to put my finger on exactly what it was.
Perhaps the increased danger in combat (1st game session of 2e, the entire party were crippled by a sniper, with the lowered effectiveness of healing magic, the party were carrying wounds for the rest of the adventure, making it far more difficult). It changed the tone of the game quite heavily, taking the players from being Rambo like heroes, down to mere mortals.
Which might make some players far more happy, as it's a lot more realistic, but the game world always treats Shadowrunners as almost mythical level warriors ("You're not just messing with a street thug, you're messing with a Shadowrunner"), but 2nd edition doesn't really let them act like it.
There's a comment below from my good friend Dashar, who points out that the play style changed over the life of 2e, where players were far more tactical in their play, which is no bad thing, but just doesn't seem as much fun to me.
Or perhaps it's just the packed nature of the book, where they've crammed in all the additions from Street Samurai Catalog, Riggers Black Book and the Grimoire, so it all just feels a little packed in. For example, equipment in first edition was more detailed and the descriptions more evocative which expanded the world a little more.
@@RPGGamer That all makes sense. Thanks got the info!
@@RPGGamer
*the entire party were crippled by a sniper* Seems realitics to me, which is good.
*the party were carrying wounds for the rest of the adventure, making it far more difficult* Again realistic, which is good.
*taking the players from being Rambo like heroes, down to mere mortals*
More realistic = good.
*but the game world always treats Shadowrunners as almost mythical level warriors. You're not just messing with a street thug, you're messing with a Shadowrunner*
Shadowrunner. Who's still a mortal. And do his deeds in the shadows. Not seen, not heard. Firefight, or any fight at all is least wanted thing.
*where players were far more tactical in their play, which is no bad thing, but just doesn't seem as much fun to me* Tactical firefights = greater chances for survival. Realistic again. Gooood. Goooooooooooood.
Realistics but fast and light rules are best thing to happen. A team of Shadowrunners shouldn't work like a team of individuals. If one part of mechanism breaks, everything can go to hell. Gooood. Gooooooooooooood.
Be well prepared. Anyone should know his area od expertise. Everyone backs others back.
@@hadeseye2297 Lol. I totally get every point you make, and did indicate in my original comment that some people would like it that way. But your final comment shows where S2 was flawed.
Because after everyone else was on the deck with Deadly wounds, my Sorcerer adept shrugged off the next bullet because he had a spell locked Armour Spell, and spell locked Enhanced Body. He then went first in the non surprise round, because he had a Spell Locked enhanced initiative spell. He then roasted the Sniper with a Mana Blast, shrugging off the drain with his spell locked Enhanced Willpower, then levitated everyone away over the sea at tremendous speed, using his spell locked Levitate spell, casting heal spells on them which generally reduced them to serious or moderate wounds. All while looking like an unarmed man in a suit.
He then proceeded to stroll through the rest of the adventure because Mundanes apparently are pretty much totally vulnerable to magic.
And while that felt pretty good, it didn't feel as fun. As it wasn't action packed gunfights and action scenes, it was me knowing how to abuse the rules to make an awesomely powerful character.
That time I transformed half the party into Housecats, and because the way the rules worked we had stats higher than the Insect spirits we were slaughtering, also felt like abusing the rules, rather than being heroic.
@@RPGGamer
"it was me knowing how to abuse the rules to make an awesomely powerful character"
Pure rules flaws. Nothing more. But funny thing is that magic is magic because it's magic. If game designers didn't put any boundries on magic system then you can say *It's not a bug. It's a feature.* It worked as intended.
Besides... You did what any good decker would do. You hacked the system and used it to your own adventage.
A side note.
All of these *cyberpunk* systems can't tackle IT and hacking right. Designers fetish with sticking to 3d avatars and brain burning via software is ludicrous to me. Such flawed hardware/software solution and people would still use it? Or a hacker who buys hacking software. I don't know how you can call one a decker or netrunner when he is nothing more than script kiddy.
Gibson's Count Zero has a very good example of such character. A no one when it comes to hacking, who use ice breaker from black market. That's just silly. And his moronic attacks at the data fortress. No true experience. xD
Take a look at Cyberpunk RED. Nothing has changed. Attack rules are a little bit different, but tables and tables of hacking software. xD Hilarious. If you need good cyberpunk game, you need to make your own set of good rules for it. For any system that is out there in the wild.
Do Lancer: and Rocket Age: please
Also, I never liked 4th.
I think it has great character creation system. I like point pools.
@@hadeseye2297 point pool was added in the Shadowrun Companion for 3e. My favorite was actually a 3rd party creator for 3rd edition called BeCKs, where basically everything was given a Karma score, so it was basically identical to character advancement. There's still a digital creator out there somewhere that gives you 4 options(Priority, Sum to 10, Points, and BeCKs).