Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Erik Jameson <WildSmashr@***.COM>
Subject: My thoughts on the matter
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 19:54:38 EDT
Well. I think this is a first; I think NERPS is outdoing TK for volume of
posts at the moment.

NERPS: Players could potentially include not only NPCs but also Corporations
and Gangers. It all depends on the presentation. But they might also be done
seperately. I'm game either way.

I am currently in favor of not giving gaming stats for any NPC at this moment.
Give a name, some good solid background and history and a guide to their
personality, and a paragraph giving guidelines about how powerful they should
be in relation to the rest of the game. This matches very closely with FASA's
current attitude; look at the stats for their NPCs in recent
adventures...oops, they don't give any...

In addition, to be specific, I would like to NOT see PCs in any NERPS: Players
book. Pure NPCs. Contacts. Fixers, Mr. Johnsons, Mechanics, Gun Runners,
LAV Riggers, Mob Hitmen and Yak Thugs. Run the gamut of the sorts of NPCs
that will be used. Most experienced GMs should be have some of this on-hand
already.

I know I've been recycling some of the same contacts for years; Johnny Rotten
(from Edge Runners) has been the primary Fixer of nearly every PC I've created
and most of the PC's I've GMed. New contacts is something any GM can find
useful.

Gangs? Myself, not quite so sure, I've simply never run that way. But it
could be done easily enough, if done similar to the Players guidelines above.

Corporations? I did an entire Shadowlands article on this. It can be done
and it can be quite interesting and useful; you just have to resist the
tempation to make megas and to make arms manufacturers (and I even I wasn't
totally able to resist that second one). What about agricorps? What about
accounting corps? And you know that all the megas have all sorts of subsids
and the like.

So I support any of the above concepts and will provide submissions to any of
the above ideas except the gangs, simply because I have little *personal*
interest in that.

And as for SR2 vs. SR3 (BTW, BABY is strictly for the GenCon special editions
of SR3), I strongly recommend we go with SR3. It's honestly not *that* much
of a difference and it seems to be easier to convert SR3 to the SR2 format
than the other way around.

Of course, this is all heavily dependent on the rest of the list and of course
Gurth.

As an additional aside, I would offer my services to the list for any NERPS
book for editing purposes; editing is part of my daily job and it's something
I'm not too bad at. I'd rather it go through an extra step of editing (i.e.,
me, a professional) so it has an extra level of sheen and polish to it.

Enough rambling for now; I'm still recovering from the Comicon. But of that,
we won't speak.

Erik J.
Message no. 2
From: Geoff Skellams <geoff.skellams@*********.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: My thoughts on the matter
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 10:49:01 +1000
On Net Enhancements for Roleplaying Shadowrun, Erik
Jameson[SMTP:WildSmashr@***.COM] wrote:
> NERPS: Players could potentially include not only NPCs but also
Corporations
> and Gangers. It all depends on the presentation. But they might also
be done
> seperately. I'm game either way.
>
I guess the problem with including one in the other will
probably mean the watering down of both. My personal take is to keep
things reasonably separate to make sure that we keep the focus on the
topic. If we make the topic to broad, people tend to lose interest. The
tighter the focus, the more likelihood there is of actually getting
something finished.

> I am currently in favor of not giving gaming stats for any NPC at this
moment.
> Give a name, some good solid background and history and a guide to
their
> personality, and a paragraph giving guidelines about how powerful they
should
> be in relation to the rest of the game. This matches very closely
with FASA's
> current attitude; look at the stats for their NPCs in recent
> adventures...oops, they don't give any...
>
I'm with you Erik. Quite often people seem to see characters as
simply a collection of stats and skills and ignore the REALLY important
stuff like a background which includes plot hooks for the GM. I've had
so many players do this to me. I'm training them out of it though.
When we actually get around to this one, it might be a good idea
to include some things like unfinished business the character has, or
stains on the character that a GM could use as an adventure hook.

> In addition, to be specific, I would like to NOT see PCs in any NERPS:
Players
> book. Pure NPCs. Contacts. Fixers, Mr. Johnsons, Mechanics, Gun
Runners,
> LAV Riggers, Mob Hitmen and Yak Thugs. Run the gamut of the sorts of
NPCs
> that will be used. Most experienced GMs should be have some of this
on-hand
> already.
> I know I've been recycling some of the same contacts for years; Johnny
Rotten
> (from Edge Runners) has been the primary Fixer of nearly every PC I've
created
> and most of the PC's I've GMed. New contacts is something any GM can
find
> useful.
>
Amen to that, brother. I would much prefer to see things that
could be useful to both GMs and players. A whole list of current or
ex-characters really doesn't work that well. With the new edition of SR
now out, it's possible that there will be a whole pile of NEW SR GMs
starting out there. This sort of thing could save them an immense amount
of time and effort.

> Gangs? Myself, not quite so sure, I've simply never run that way.
But it
> could be done easily enough, if done similar to the Players guidelines
above.
>
But then again, if there was something in there that caught your
imagination, then a gang MIGHT be useful to you.

> Corporations? I did an entire Shadowlands article on this. It can be
done
> and it can be quite interesting and useful; you just have to resist
the
> tempation to make megas and to make arms manufacturers (and I even I
wasn't
> totally able to resist that second one). What about agricorps? What
about
> accounting corps? And you know that all the megas have all sorts of
subsids
> and the like.
>
This was the sort of thing I was aiming for when I proposed the
topic. I think we should aim for all of the little corps that find a
niche for themselves and dig themselves in. Lots and lots of little
corps, all with different foci would be really cool and would provide a
rich source of ideas for GMs.

> So I support any of the above concepts and will provide submissions to
any of
> the above ideas except the gangs, simply because I have little
*personal*
> interest in that.
>
What if the gangs book covered things wider than just street
gangs, like organised crime groups or smuggling rings? Would that change
your mind?

> As an additional aside, I would offer my services to the list for any
NERPS
> book for editing purposes; editing is part of my daily job and it's
something
> I'm not too bad at. I'd rather it go through an extra step of editing
(i.e.,
> me, a professional) so it has an extra level of sheen and polish to
it.
>
Sounds like a good idea to me. I'm all for fan material looking
professional. Shows that you really do care about what you're putting
your name to, rather than just churning out any old crap.

> Enough rambling for now; I'm still recovering from the Comicon. But
of that,
> we won't speak.

Sounds like you had a REALLY good time ;)

cheers
G

--
Geoff Skellams R&D - Tower Software
Email Address: geoff.skellams@*********.com.au
Homepage: http://www.towersoft.com.au/staff/geoff/
ICQ Number: 2815165

"That rates about a 9.5 on my weird-shit-o-meter"
- Will Smith in "Men in Black"
Message no. 3
From: Adam J <adamj@*********.HTML.COM>
Subject: Re: My thoughts on the matter
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 20:10:39 -0600
At 19:54 8/18/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Well. I think this is a first; I think NERPS is outdoing TK for volume of
>posts at the moment.

Wow.. :') (It's not within a mile of RN, though.)

>I am currently in favor of not giving gaming stats for any NPC at this
moment.
>Give a name, some good solid background and history and a guide to their
>personality, and a paragraph giving guidelines about how powerful they should
>be in relation to the rest of the game. This matches very closely with
FASA's
>current attitude; look at the stats for their NPCs in recent
>adventures...oops, they don't give any...

Right. They use the "Bob is Superior to any of your characters, make stats
yourself, you lazy sonofabitch". I like that -- that means I have a real
good excuse not to bother making stats, because I wouldn't want to in the
first place.

>In addition, to be specific, I would like to NOT see PCs in any NERPS:
Players
>book. Pure NPCs. Contacts. Fixers, Mr. Johnsons, Mechanics, Gun Runners,
>LAV Riggers, Mob Hitmen and Yak Thugs. Run the gamut of the sorts of NPCs
>that will be used. Most experienced GMs should be have some of this on-hand
>already.

The only difference between a PC and a NPC is who plays it. They should be
able to be completely interchangeable.

>Gangs? Myself, not quite so sure, I've simply never run that way. But it
>could be done easily enough, if done similar to the Players guidelines above.

Gangs in my game come into my play much more often than corps, which come
into play nearly never in any large capacity.

>So I support any of the above concepts and will provide submissions to any of
>the above ideas except the gangs, simply because I have little *personal*
>interest in that.

More than either Gangs or Corps, I would like to see *other* organizations,
I listed a pile of ideas in my post yesterday.

I don't think either Corps or Gangs would ever get finished on their own.
We need something that is general enough for everyone to contribute too.

>And as for SR2 vs. SR3 (BTW, BABY is strictly for the GenCon special editions
>of SR3), I strongly recommend we go with SR3. It's honestly not *that* much
>of a difference and it seems to be easier to convert SR3 to the SR2 format
>than the other way around.

Aye. No use designing for the non-SOTA, unless one of those is Gurth.. ;-)

>As an additional aside, I would offer my services to the list for any NERPS
>book for editing purposes; editing is part of my daily job and it's something
>I'm not too bad at. I'd rather it go through an extra step of editing (i.e.,
>me, a professional) so it has an extra level of sheen and polish to it.

I think we need to go back to some sort of system for approving and
re-editing all the articles in the book, similar to what Hayden did with
NERPS Shadowlore. Since I don't know if Gurth wants to do that, I'll talk
to him and I may end up organizing it.

-Adam J
-
< http://www.interware.it/users/adamj / ICQ# 2350330 / fro@***.ab.ca >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / TSS Productions >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< "I'm your friend, and friends don't let heads drive drunk." -Al Snow>
Message no. 4
From: "Arno R. Lehmann" <arlehma@***.NET>
Subject: Re: My thoughts on the matter
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 09:43:51 +0200
Ok, after listening to the discussion of new NERPS projects I will
reveal my ideas...

I'm taking Erik's mail as a starting-point.

On Tue, 18 Aug 1998 19:54:38 EDT, Erik Jameson wrote:
<snip>
>NERPS: Players could potentially include not only NPCs but also Corporations
>and Gangers. It all depends on the presentation. But they might also be done
>seperately. I'm game either way.

I think it should be dependant on what a number of submissions we could
expect. I'd say let's first ask who waould be willing to write
something, perhaps with a deadline, and then see if we will have enough
for People, Corps and Gangs separately or if it will hardly fill one
publication.

Later, we could still change this if more or less submissions than
expected come in.

Than, I don't know if the idea of making a collection of Everything and
Everybody in a building or a building block is still alive... I liked
that one.

Sure, we must be extremely careful not to make a block where half of
the people are fixers, runner or decker but keep in mind that ~99.5%
will be ordinary people; the same with companies -- only a fery small
percentage will do anything semi-legal, most will just do their
business in a straightforward and legal way.

But I personally would really love to have such a thing and to help
create it. Part of the reasons is that, after all, Shadowrun is a US
product and much of it takes place in what today is the US. Differences
between the US and other part's of the world do exist, naturally. I, as
a European, simply have difficulties imagining how an office or a flat
or whatever building in the US really looks like. How do they build
houses in Seattle 2055?

I don't know. I invent what I need, but I'm quite sure that it would
add some extra flavour to my adventures if I could use all the US
people out there as a source of information. (Sprawl Sites, I believe,
is not a good source -- I always think of this appartement with about
500 corners. Nobody could design a house filled with that kind of
flats!)

In turn I think we could make similar collections for other parts of
the world. For example, the South African Townships might be a
(not-so)nice template for the barrens in Seattle...

A publication like this would not require that much effort: As stated
above, most of the things described would not be very exciting. Giving
some detail for "ordinary" people or small corps can be very easy, I
think. To make sure that the ratio of "ordinary" to "shadowy" things
remains ok I would suggest that everybody submitting things must not
give more than 1/10th shadowy things -- one fixer thus would require at
least nine legal inhabitants.

Hmm, I think I will continue my ideas in a separate post... this is
getting a little longish. I will call this City Life.

>I am currently in favor of not giving gaming stats for any NPC at this moment.
>Give a name, some good solid background and history and a guide to their
>personality, and a paragraph giving guidelines about how powerful they should
>be in relation to the rest of the game. This matches very closely with FASA's
>current attitude; look at the stats for their NPCs in recent
>adventures...oops, they don't give any...

Sorry, I don't know any recent FASA adventures... Anyway it's what I
prefer, too. After all (1) different gaming groups have different power
levels which makes fixed stats useless to most of them and (2)
inventing stats is easy for a GM; inventing background usually is not,
so background is more important in a publication.

>In addition, to be specific, I would like to NOT see PCs in any NERPS: Players
>book. Pure NPCs. <snip>

Sorry, I don't agree. I'd say that any character could be a PC or a
NPC. It depends only if the GM or a player actually plays her. It
shouldn't matter.

For a publication like we plan it it will not be important, since (1)
someone elses PC might be the contact of other PCs, so he should be
available as such, and (2) who will know if I give a descreption of a
PC or an NPC in my campaign? Ideally only people from my gaming group
should know.

This, of course, implies that NPCs get as good a background as any PC.
I hope they do.

<snip> New contacts is something any GM can find useful.

Very true.

Or, in other words

<AOL>
Me too!
</AOL>

<snip>

>And as for SR2 vs. SR3 (BTW, BABY is strictly for the GenCon special editions
>of SR3), I strongly recommend we go with SR3. It's honestly not *that* much
>of a difference and it seems to be easier to convert SR3 to the SR2 format
>than the other way around.

Well, here are my questions.

1. Where are the differences between SR2 and SR3? I heven't seen SR3
yet and will probably not for a while and also am NOMAIL on ShadowRN,
so please, someone, give me an idea! At least, what has changed in
character stats, since this is what we will need to know, and in
character generation?

2. What does BABY mean?

>As an additional aside, I would offer my services to the list for any NERPS
>book for editing purposes; editing is part of my daily job and it's something
>I'm not too bad at. I'd rather it go through an extra step of editing (i.e.,
>me, a professional) so it has an extra level of sheen and polish to it.

That sounds like a good idea. But just one suggestion: I'd really like
to see a product that is not produced as a winword file primarily. You
see, there are people without Micro$oftware around and we should really
give them access to what we think is worth reading it... thinka about
it as a kind of marketing.

The least we could do is, since no WinWord most often might mean Unix,
offer something to print as a Postscript file. That's huge, I know, but
can be compressed and, most important, could be produced easily by
anybody who owns WinWord: Just print it with generic Postscript printer
driver to a file and upload that file.

Of course in fact I don't know how many people without WinWord there
are -- at least one there is. Me.

>Enough rambling for now; I'm still recovering from the Comicon. But of that,
>we won't speak.

Hmm, you could speak, we would listen.


--
Arno
*********************************************************************
Be careful when replying to this mail - check the address !!!
(And send me a note when you notice that
the reply-to-address points to the list!)
*********************************************************************
Message no. 5
From: "Steven A. Tinner" <bluewizard@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: My thoughts on the matter
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 06:18:18 -0400
>>I am currently in favor of not giving gaming stats for any NPC at this
>moment.
>>Give a name, some good solid background and history and a guide to their
>>personality, and a paragraph giving guidelines about how powerful they
should
>>be in relation to the rest of the game. This matches very closely with
>FASA's
>>current attitude; look at the stats for their NPCs in recent
>>adventures...oops, they don't give any...
>
>Right. They use the "Bob is Superior to any of your characters, make stats
>yourself, you lazy sonofabitch". I like that -- that means I have a real
>good excuse not to bother making stats, because I wouldn't want to in the
>first place.

This is one of the current FASA trends that I really do hate.
Talk about lazy sonofabitch ... make the damn stats already! Give me a
guidline as to what you think this guys numbers should be, then if I need to
I can modify them!

Also, if we want to make Players acessible to new GM's - a line I hear
bandied about a lot, ten we DO need stats made up for at least SOME of the
NPCs in the book!
I know when I started out GMing umpteen years ago, having all the numbers in
the book helped out a LOT!

What's wrong with writing these NPC's up the way the contacts are handled?
Minimal stats provide a guidline, and then follow that with an expanded
personality and background section.

Steven A. Tinner
bluewizard@*****.com
http://listen.to/Tinner
"Legless Dogs!" - Jargon Al, The Sifl & Olly Show

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about My thoughts on the matter, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!