Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Sascha Pabst <Sascha.Pabst@**********.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 1997 20:50:19 +0000

From:	Mike Goldberg <michael.goldberg@*******.COM>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 1997 23:23:59 MST

Message no. 2 Hey... you misedited your post.

Thought I would point it out.... In particular, if the posts to
Death and Midnight were to be separate, you failed to end the post to
Death.

Also, I'm going to have to print out your note to be able to respond
to it, which means that I won't get to it until Monday (at the
earliest).

It seems to me, that it is more likely that I misinterpreted your
post. What it said to me, is that you are labeling Abraham and others
who may not have normal views that society (SIN-based) fear as Morally
Challenged. Therefore, I had both Death and Midnight (in their own
ways) feel that it was implied to a much larger audience than just
Abraham. You have to be really careful when you make those
statements. Most countries' citizens consider all Shadowrunners to be
nutcases. After all, why would anyone want to have to live their
whole life being in true, easy to see, danger of being snuffed out.
Better to live in a shell and be decently safe.

----
*gets on weak soapbox*

There is a trend on shadowtk that I particularly dislike. Sentinel,
the Wanderer, Legion, and Nightmare (among others) were created
specifically because they don't fit the trend I am seeing. I don't
know why it is, but there seem to be a LOT of heroes on shadowtk that
tackle any noble cause that comes their way. Even the assassins (for
instance the whole horse episode). Most of the characters are
enlightened about the whole race issue and treat just as if it was a
skin color or sex preference matter (in other words, that it just
doesn't matter what their race is).

But wait a second.... most runners aren't that highly educated, and
don't come from rich, enlightened backgrounds. Most runners grew up
near or on the streets. That kind of life doesn't tend to give people
a pleasant view on people that are different (in any way).
Considering the amount of 1980s and 1990s references and the general
attitudes, I think shadowtk is one of the most skewed representations
of what shadowrunners are like. There is a reason that Johnsons
normally screw runners and that is because most runners deserve it.
Most runners are sleazes that don't deserve an ounce of respect, let
alone be treated fairly by normal society. A lot of runners stand out
like sore-thumbs to normal society because they flaunt their
differences instead of trying to blend in. They bargain (as was
pointed out in a Shadowrun source book (Fields of Fire)) by
intimidating the Johnson. That doesn't do anything for respect.

It has been a long time since I have seen a true representation of
what runners are like. The Wanderer is probably the closest example
in my characters. Ratspeak is another good example of it.

The only way that I understand the trend here is that players are
supposed to be the shining stars of the Shadows, and that the rest of
the shadows are an extremely unprofessional lot, as likely to help
each other as to sell them out.

Which leads me to something I alluded to earlier this week. I was
under the impression that Shadowtk was NOT Shadowland (back when I
joined which was almost 4 years ago), and thus we can say it is as
hard or easy to get to as the general consensus on plot-d likes. I
think it is time to make it harder to get to. Make it so that only
decent deckers (and their friends) can get to Shadowtk. At least in
that way, it would fit the type of characters that tend to post here.
Most of the characters are enlightened people who are generally a cut
above the typical shadowrunner. I think it is time that the
difficulty of getting to shadowtk reflected that.

*gets off soapbox as it collapses from the rot that set in 2 years ago*

Mike

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re: Info wanted...
Author: Shadowrun Interactive Fiction <SHADOWTK@********.ITRIBE.NET> at SMTP-PO
Date: 3/28/97 6:31 PM

>>>>>[Well, "Death" I sort of agree with you, and sort of don't.
As
for when in time... Well, some of us on the streets have morals, there
are things we simply will not do. Killing women and children, killing
innocents, killing in general for the sake of it, and other such things.

From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sat, 29 Mar 1997 14:52:42 +0000

Message no. 3 In message <9702288596.AA859617700@*********.comm.twcable.com>, Mike
Goldberg <michael.goldberg@*******.COM> writes
> There is a trend on shadowtk that I particularly dislike. Sentinel,
> the Wanderer, Legion, and Nightmare (among others) were created
> specifically because they don't fit the trend I am seeing. I don't
> know why it is, but there seem to be a LOT of heroes on shadowtk that
> tackle any noble cause that comes their way. Even the assassins (for
> instance the whole horse episode). Most of the characters are
> enlightened about the whole race issue and treat just as if it was a
> skin color or sex preference matter (in other words, that it just
> doesn't matter what their race is).

Part of it's that many people are uncomfortable playing bad guys. One
reason I brought Easy in is to see reaction to a homicidal psychopath
(albeit a fairly stable one) in the shadows.

> But wait a second.... most runners aren't that highly educated, and
> don't come from rich, enlightened backgrounds. Most runners grew up
> near or on the streets. That kind of life doesn't tend to give people
> a pleasant view on people that are different (in any way).

I don't know that you'd find many _overtly_ racist runners, though. If
you walk off a job because, when the team's assembled, your rigger is a
Dwarf, then you don't do your rep any good: so you'd tend to keep your
opinions to yourself in order to get work. Having it be known that "this
guy can't work with metas" means he won't even be considered for many
jobs.

I liked Snake and Easy's minor clash, just before Snake was set up for
the hostage incident: pity there wasn't a chance to explore it further.

> Which leads me to something I alluded to earlier this week. I was
> under the impression that Shadowtk was NOT Shadowland (back when I
> joined which was almost 4 years ago), and thus we can say it is as
> hard or easy to get to as the general consensus on plot-d likes. I
> think it is time to make it harder to get to. Make it so that only
> decent deckers (and their friends) can get to Shadowtk. At least in
> that way, it would fit the type of characters that tend to post here.
> Most of the characters are enlightened people who are generally a cut
> above the typical shadowrunner. I think it is time that the
> difficulty of getting to shadowtk reflected that.

I'd tend to agree with Mike here. While I wouldn't want it set too high,
else we'd only have deckers in there, it should become harder than it
has been seen to be to get in.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sat, 29 Mar 1997 15:44:05 +0000

Message no. 4 In article <9702288596.AA859617700@*********.comm.twcable.com>, Mike
Goldberg <michael.goldberg@*******.COM> writes
> Hey... you misedited your post.

Oopsy, sorry Mike. I was having so much fun nattering away at your
comments... Should have paid better attention, again - sorry. :)

(In this post, some remarks are made and characters used as an example,
this is not intended as a challenge to those characters or the players,
merely an example to highlight an observation)... <g>

> Thought I would point it out.... In particular, if the posts to
> Death and Midnight were to be separate, you failed to end the post to
> Death.

They were supposed to be seperated, for simplicities sake, though they
were answered together.

> Also, I'm going to have to print out your note to be able to respond
> to it, which means that I won't get to it until Monday (at the
> earliest).

That's ok, no rush... I've not got anywhere important to be, so anytime.
:)

> It seems to me, that it is more likely that I misinterpreted your
> post. What it said to me, is that you are labeling Abraham and others
> who may not have normal views that society (SIN-based) fear as Morally
> Challenged.

No, the label was intended as a "joke", The Centre for the Morally
Challenged is a rip off from Robocop, it's a polite name for a criminal
institution. Marathon was not intentionally labelling anyone as morally
challenged, the comment was made more in reflection of Abraham's
apparent support of the Thunda episode, something I feel Marathon would
feel strongly about. My other characters just treat the episode as
another part of life, and don't care too much, life goes on so to speak.
:) Marathon, however, is a sometimes belligerent, and always
opinionated sob.

>Therefore, I had both Death and Midnight (in their own
> ways) feel that it was implied to a much larger audience than just
> Abraham.

S'okay, no complaints from me :) The comments were interesting, and I
felt they deserved an answer, if the whole conversation blows into a
moralistic debate, fair enough, if it fades into obscurity with both
parties realising their mistakes, well, I guess that's OK too. It's
possible that if the debate gets deeper, a couple of other characters
may get involved in it, both from the point of amoral survivability,
more in keeping with what appear to be deaths views, and one from the
high moral, good guy standpoint.

>You have to be really careful when you make those
> statements.

Oh. Why? If I'm too careful with my characters comments, they won't
live up to their profile, and little debates like this won't start up :)
I quite enjoyed arguing the good tir/bad tir thing with Paul when
Urbanus and Easy started on each other, and would indulge a little more
in this sort of debating if there were other things around that I feel
my characters would respond too. I appreciate that Shadowtk, is for
playing out plots designed privately and on PlotD, but as it is a
reflection of a Shadowland(ish) node, then I also feel that the
deckers/characters would get more involved in debating with each other,
in much the same way that mailing lists/newsgroups invite debate. After
all, everybody is an individual, with their own thoughts, ideas and
beliefs. In the time of Shadowrun, the people who inhabit the Shadows
may be more strongly opinionated about things they believe strongly
about, in much the same way that a bunch of "good ol' boys" in a bar
will be opinionated about everything. Frankly, with the number and
types of people that post here, I'm surprised this sort of debate
doesn't erupt more often. <g>

>Most countries' citizens consider all Shadowrunners to be
> nutcases. After all, why would anyone want to have to live their
> whole life being in true, easy to see, danger of being snuffed out.
> Better to live in a shell and be decently safe.

Agreed, wholeheartedly. :) I can't see the mob mind changing that much
from now to then, people are still going to work in crap jobs for
companies who don't care, just because it's a job and it offers some
security. It allows them to exist as "respectable" people, rather than
on welfare. I still don't see, even in today's economic times, that
people on welfare have any more respect or sympathy than they did in
previous years. Many people still consider them scroungers of the
state. Sad, but there you go. That situation may increase to deeper
contempt in the future, who knows.

As for Shadowrunners, Shadowrun itself is contradictory on this point,
in the blurb covering the game FASA state that the Shadowrunners are the
last knights of humanity, the last hope against the corruption of the
mega corporations, yet in the same breath, state that it is the
Shadowrunners who do the dirty work for the corps, "when the corps want
a job done, and don't want to get their hands dirty...they turn to the
Shadowrunners." In the character development area, with their rather
strange series 20 questions, there's the contradictory "What's the
Character's moral code: Does he kill? Why? When did he decide he could?
etc. A shadowrunner kills, pure and simple, it's the difference
between making a profit, and pushing up daisies. When the security
teams, guarding the isntallation a runner is cracking open fire, he
doesn't stop and negotiate... I suspect the moral code was introduced
by FASA, with the undertone of Shadowrunners as good guys, to appeal to
the lighter side of humanity. People find a game that concentrates on
the dark side of humanity, with no respite from the grime and filth of
life as a hired assassin/thief/hacker then there is a chance that there
will be some complaint about that concept.

My own personal outlook on it is that the runners are there to do what
they do best, they are an exception to the norm, skilled
warriors/deckers who don't follow the normal laws and rules of society,
and don't very much care for the ways of normal life. Maybe they are
all crazy, maybe not. That's not a debate I'd want to get into, but all
Shadowrunners are mercenary, they work for the highest bidder and do
whatever the corps ask. Some may refuse certain jobs, my players won't
do wet work, they had one job based around it, and decided it was not
for them, there was no "honour" in merely killing a target, but a paid
extraction/recovery/datasteal where the sec guards were well, if not
equally trained, fired back, it made it seem more fair to them, even
though they were still killing "family" men/women.

> *gets on weak soapbox*

(grin)

> There is a trend on shadowtk that I particularly dislike. Sentinel,
> the Wanderer, Legion, and Nightmare (among others) were created
> specifically because they don't fit the trend I am seeing. I don't
> know why it is, but there seem to be a LOT of heroes on shadowtk that
> tackle any noble cause that comes their way. Even the assassins (for
> instance the whole horse episode). Most of the characters are
> enlightened about the whole race issue and treat just as if it was a
> skin color or sex preference matter (in other words, that it just
> doesn't matter what their race is).

Again, I have no argument with you here. I actually agree. The primary
reflection of this list seems to cover what I would lable as Crusaders
(hence Marathons comments) There are a unfounded number of good guys
here. Thunda was created by a friend of mine, because he was bored
reading the "I'm a supreme good guy, and can achieve anything I want"
style posts. Unfortunately, as I'm sure many will agree, Thunda was
seriously over the top. The same person is working on a slightly less
"loud/obnoxious" character, but one who is essentially street scum.
Somebody who doesn't care who he works for, and what the job is,
provided the money is at the end of it. But as he said the other day,
how does someone like that integrate into an environment which contains
so many shining examples of "The John Wayne syndrome".

I have a couple of characters operating on tk at the moment who have
strong moral beliefs, however, those beliefs are secondary to survival.
One of them is at this time associated with Pauls ambitious "nasty
person" Emma, and partly embroiled in his "Farmer" plot. But with Lynch
I find that the man is a tad over the top, in as much as he is an
epitomy of "good guy". I keep getting strange visions of him as a Tom
Berenger look alike (from Rustlers Rhapsody) <grin> (No offence meant
Paul)

> But wait a second.... most runners aren't that highly educated, and
> don't come from rich, enlightened backgrounds. Most runners grew up
> near or on the streets. That kind of life doesn't tend to give people
> a pleasant view on people that are different (in any way).

True, and again I agree with you. But then, not all Shadowrunners are
street born and bred, some are ex-corporates who are either
dissillusioned with the life they were leading, or are rich and seeking
thrills. Others are ordinary people who are forced into the lifestyle
because of a variety of incidents, others may be ex military/government
types who have been discharged or resigned from the services, and have
nothing else to offer society except the skills they learned in service,
the same goes for security services... I'm convinced that ex-security
agents/guards/specialists will be running the shadows. Not all of them
will be low life scum from the gutters, bred and weened on the
corruption and filth the lives there. Also, some may have come from
orphanages, where high morals are taught by an old priest or somesuch,
and have entered street life with a vision of cleaning the corruption
from the system, these will be the most disillusioned and possibly
bitter of the runners out there.

> Considering the amount of 1980s and 1990s references and the general
> attitudes, I think shadowtk is one of the most skewed representations
> of what shadowrunners are like.

Agreed. (I really must stop that). There is some debate as to whether
80/90's slang would be in use. I would say yes, "foul" language has
existed for centuries, the fact that FASA chose to introduce frag and
drek, is merely a reflection of family values, it sounds better to have
kids sitting around a table using this kind of terminology, than
swearing a blue stream... <g> That new slang and expletives would be
introduced is of no doubt, new words are brought into modern speech,
every year. So...

As regards the commentary on preferences for old aircraft/weapons/music.
Well, there's not much one can do about that. If Lynch wants to fly an
old Phantom, use ancient weapons and listen to 80's rock, that is merely
part of his character, the same as people today prefer centuries old
classic music, and classic tales. I don't think it would be a
reflection of society in 2058, just a personal preference. Also, as
heavy metal seems to be an undercurrent theme in Shadowrun/Cyberpunk,
the fascination for 80's rock isn't that strange, it may have gone
through a revival phase, as most music styles tend to do, Techno and
similar styles would also be prevelent in that time.

>There is a reason that Johnsons
> normally screw runners and that is because most runners deserve it.
> Most runners are sleazes that don't deserve an ounce of respect, let
> alone be treated fairly by normal society.

Ah, at last, something I don't totally agree with. <g>
The above statement is a little ambiguous, Johnson's will screw with
runners for a variety of reasons, not just because the runner deserves
it. If I may take a moment to quote something from Cyberpunk

It's taken from Edgerunners Inc. (sourcebook) and reflects something I
feel would be true to Shadowrun as well. (This paragraph concerns the
formation of the company known as Edgerunners Inc.)

<quote>
.... was familiar with street culture, and the freelance operatives the
media were calling Edgerunners. he also knew there was no centralised
way to get hold of them; Corps usually worked with a single set of
'Runners that they had come to trust, or tried to get in touch with a
team or operative through a fixer. This was tricky, as you might not
get what you needed or wanted.

What was needed, Michael reasoned, was a temp agency for Edgerunners, a
way to match up teams and operatives with jobs that suited not only
their skills, but their temperament. Such an agency would have to be
Net base, of course, so it couldn't be tied back to him...
</quote>

The first paragraph reflects something that I think would hold true for
Shadowrun, that corps work with a team/operative that they have come to
trust, because of the difficulty of contacting the Runners. It's not
really as simplistic as Shadowrun implies. A Johnson can't just walk
into a bar and hire a team of runners, finding a Johnson/Fixer isn't as
simple as walking into The Fixer Bar & Grill. When a corp finds a team
that works, they will use them until they are either dead, burned out,
or compromised.

Imagine if you will, Fuchi want a run against a small electronics firm
who have discovered a new processor that doubles the power of a
cyberdeck, Fuchi want the chip, and don't want the company to release
it, as it will cut into Fuchi profits. How do they get a team to
contract the run? Advertise on Shadowland, (which isn't really very
sensible for Shadowrunners), walk into a "known" Shadowrunner bar (give
me a break... that same bar also contains undercover operatives for the
security agencies) So how do they do it? At some time, at some point
in their history they will have made a few dodgy contacts, they may have
"acquired" a team or two, and it is this regular contact that they will
use. I can't believe that they will risk everything by employing any
old Tom/Dick or Harry. Cyberpunks' use of a "shadow" board "Edgeruners
Inc." is something that I feel should exist in Shadowrun, that role is
not filled by Shadowland. Nowhere in the sourcebooks does it mention
that Shadowland is a source for work. Also, open advertising on a board
like that means the corps have access to Shadowland, if one does, others
do, maybe even the one you are contracting against. So, an independant
"clearing house" makes sense.

That's also part of the reason a Johnson won't frag over a Runner team,
not because he's scared of reprisals, I doubt the Johnson could care
less, but because he/she may need that team again, especially if they
follow orders well, and are effficient. If the team make a mess of the
run, make a lot of noise and draw attention to the operation, or just
basically screw up, then yes, there will be "deductions" made, even to
the point of refusing payment totally. But the runners are likely to
learn from this. I don't accept that all Runners are morons who are
going to get rolled over every job. Runners are the exception to street
life, they have skills the normal person does not possess. For example,
Paul plays about with the TA's occassionally, both he and I are
shooters, he's probably better than I am, as a result of more training
and more opportunity. On the flip side, I'm better trained than he is
regarding computers and networks, though these skills are far from
unique, they seperate us from the majority of people in our
neighbourhoods. Nobody else in my street knows dick about computers, so
they come and talk to me when they want something or need advice on an
upgrade. Paul works for a defence firm, designing and producing
materials for the military, again, not something for the average person.

OK, this example isn't representative of street people, but how do you
explain the presence of skilled personnel in the Shadows. The decker is
a person who is fascinated by computers and the matrix, a superior
reflection of the modern day hacker. Hackers today are primarily
interested in the sharing and transferring "knowledge/information",
Deckers in Shadowrun also trade in information. The street sam is a
combat specialist, with a fascination for weapons/gear that enhance his
abilities. These are not normal street people. I can't see a standard
tramp (bum) being able to co-ordinate a run against a guarded facility.

>A lot of runners stand out
> like sore-thumbs to normal society because they flaunt their
> differences instead of trying to blend in.

True (ish). Shadowrunners are intrinsically arrogant. They are
confident in their skills and abilities and rely on these to gain profit
and survive in a competitive and hostile environment. However, I don't
believe they stand out like a sore thumb. Shadowrunners, by their
chosen way of life are the walking epitomy of "illegal" They are hated
by "respectable" society, hunted by the law enforcment agencies,
persecuted by the media, and labelled as murderers, thieves and "not
nice"... To make yourself "known" as A Shadowrunner, and to advertise
that fact by ignoring society and making yourself obvioius, is inviting
your demise at the hands of security and law enforcement, in much the
same way as modern criminals are hunted by modern law enforcement, and
when they are found, or make themselves public, what is the reaction...
Read the newspapers, it happens every day. I would suggest that
Shadowrunners, except for the highly cybered ones (and that's another
complaint of mine) will blend quite well into the streets and society.
By their very nature, they _must_ in order to survive.

Cyberware is one of my pet hates. A street sam with increased reflexes,
cybereyes and all manner of enhancements is going to move in a massively
different way to other people, he's going to alienate himself from
society because of that difference, he has become a combat monster, and
as such is unpredictable and deadly, making him a "risk" to casually
associate with. I always see this type of character as the shadow in
the corner, hiding from prying eyes, desperate not to be noticed, and
terminated by law enforcement. The cybered character is the ultimate in
social outcasts, by the very presence of vast quantities of cyberware,
that character is no longer a part of street culture, they draw
attention, and make people notice you. This is a bad thing, and one of
the reasons I have such a problem with heavily cybered characters. None
of my characters (except one) have any significant cyber enhancements,
they have cyberware, but not to the point that most characters in SR
games seem to pack it, just the essentials to assist in their chosen
walk of life. A couple of them don't have any, relying purely on their
skills, training and experience to help them. That is a standard in my
Game world, anyone heavily cybered is a Police magnet, and must
therefore hide in a darkened area during the day, and avoid public areas
at night.

>They bargain (as was
> pointed out in a Shadowrun source book (Fields of Fire)) by
> intimidating the Johnson. That doesn't do anything for respect.

But isn't the Johnson also employing intimidation to employ them. Work
for me and get paid, refuse and you'll look like idiots, when your
acquaintances pull this off without a hitch and celebrate their easy
earnings. Peer pressure is as much intimidation as is threatening to
cack a Johnson, and bullying him/her for more money. Fields of Fire is
primarily based on Mercenaries, Mercs are more likely to use
intimidation to gain better financial reward because of the very nature
of their assumed role in society. They fight wars for people, they
assist rebel/government forces during a coup. They are employed to
fight other trained armed forces. Mercs are not Shadowrunners, they are
mercenaries, the fact that some choose to run the shadows is not a
reflection of that caste.

> It has been a long time since I have seen a true representation of
> what runners are like. The Wanderer is probably the closest example
> in my characters. Ratspeak is another good example of it.

I can't comment much here, as I don't know the Wanderer and Ratspeak too
well, Their precis on the Character list is short and lacks the
information I need to be able to judge that.

> The only way that I understand the trend here is that players are
> supposed to be the shining stars of the Shadows, and that the rest of
> the shadows are an extremely unprofessional lot, as likely to help
> each other as to sell them out.

That does unfortunately appear to be a general thing on the list, but
then maybe the people here like to play the hero, rather than a
character who is darker and less "good guy". Again something I call the
"John Wayne Syndrome". It's kinda fun sometimes to play a hero, someone
who comes through against the odds, with his/her morals intact and a
deep personal code unviolated. I am guilty of possessing exactly such a
character, though the plots he's involved in are contrary to those
personal codes - he just doesn't know it yet.. <g>

> Which leads me to something I alluded to earlier this week. I was
> under the impression that Shadowtk was NOT Shadowland (back when I
> joined which was almost 4 years ago), and thus we can say it is as
> hard or easy to get to as the general consensus on plot-d likes.

Don't know. When I signed onto this list two years ago, it was
difficult to decide exactly what it was. I signed off in confusion.
Then rejoined again last year, and slowly have still not arrived at a
conclusion. The general concept seems to be that though Shadowtk is
_not_ Shadowland, it is a reflection of a Shadowland node, maybe a
server tied into the path leading to Shadowland, who knows. To some
characters, it would be Shadowland, or at least as close as they can
get, to others they may believe wholheartedly that they have found one
of the fabled Shadowland nodes, and would treat this area as exactly
that... As you so rightly state, not eveyrone has the skills to access
Shadowland itself (though by FASA rulings now, anyone can have it as a
contact - go figure.. mummble, mutter, grumble) But the presence of
shadowrunners in this node, may say to the less skilled or less able,
that they have in fact found the place. It's down to interpretation in
the end. :)

>I
> think it is time to make it harder to get to. Make it so that only
> decent deckers (and their friends) can get to Shadowtk. At least in
> that way, it would fit the type of characters that tend to post here.
> Most of the characters are enlightened people who are generally a cut
> above the typical shadowrunner. I think it is time that the
> difficulty of getting to shadowtk reflected that.

Well, there are two problems here. Though you are right, and Shadowtk
should be changed to reflect the primarily corporate and incredibly
highly skilled/classed/quality characters that post here, it would
result in a situation where the majority of plots would collapse from
this restriction, with people not being able to post comments/storylines
as a result of their characters not being able to access it. Certainly
all of my characters bar one, would not be able to access a board with
those restrictions. None of them can apparently compete with the likes
of Serenity and Flux, the Two Jakes and other "high class" deckers. The
other basic characters I have wouldn't be able to utilise this node for
transfering data, and the plots I have ongoing would stop, as would
other people's.

I did suggest to Mark last year, whether the creation of a second node
would be worthwhile, Mark wasn't at that time interested in setting up
another list, and as he is still extremely busy now, I shouldn't think
that situation has changed any.

In order to fullfill your suggestion, it would be necessary to create an
area where the less "high skilled" characters can gain access. My major
complaint with things at the moment, although up to a point I agree with
you, is the massive presence of publicly recognised corporate affiliates
and commanders. SIGA, a DC associated Security agency, with Lynch, who
although he claims to run the shadows, is such a public figure, he's
almost disqualified. Serenity Deckers, another public corporation, and
many other characters and companies who are what I would describe as
"public", not a part of what is intrinsicaly Shadowrun. However, I've
enjoyed many of the posts that Paul has produced with Lynch, and over
conversations on private mail, we are more than aware of our own
opinions, ideas and attitudes regarding both our plots and characters.
I don't know enough about Mark and Brians companies to comment on them
really, but it doesn't feel that the spirit of Shadowrun is alive here,
it's more "Corporaterun" <g>

A very long post detailing a conversation between Dragoneyes and
someone, left me confused and scrabbling through Marks archives to find
out what it was all about, I still haven't quite figured that one out
yet :) I was firmly convinced that the character was going to die, and
a series of events would occur as a result of that death, I felt
somewhat cheated and more than a little puzzled when his death speech
turned into a "never mind I'm getting better now" sort of thing, though
I'm still curious to see how that's going to develop.

Again, although I may not agree with the presence of SIGA, the FBI and
others on this list, I'm involved in Pauls plot, from two angles and am
enjoying his little twists and plot developments. The same applies to
other posts here. I may not agree with such a high corporate presence
here, but it does make for interesting reading sometimes.

> *gets off soapbox as it collapses from the rot that set in 2 years ago*

Stay on the soapbox a while longer Mike, you have some valid points,
much of which I agree with. It might take the observations of an older
list member to get points over, as a newbie like myself is more likely
to be ignored <grin>

Although I agree with the majority of what you say, I don't agree with
changing the list to reflect the professionalism and superiority of some
of the characters here. That would be counterproductive. However, it
would be nice to see more characters that are in keeping with the
Shadowrun/Cyberpunk genre and less in keeping with the "miniature god"
that "John Wayne Syndrome" produces.

I recall also, last year, a disagreement over the number of "encrypted"
posts as opposed to public posts that were made to the list. Although
much of the "Private" conversation that occurs is encrypted for very
good reasons, and integral to the plots it is used in, it doesn't help
to create debate and character interaction, which I feel should be more
prevelant here.

I really don't want to get into that debate again, so I'll leave it at
that. Maybe as more people get bored with being a superhero, more
"realistic" and earthy characters will slowly appear. <grin>

Anyway, I've just realised how much I've rambled her, so I'll do
everyone a favour, and shutup for a while.

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sun, 30 Mar 1997 02:11:08 +0000

Message no. 5 In message <tmzFlFAFjTPzEwae@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>But with Lynch
>I find that the man is a tad over the top, in as much as he is an
>epitomy of "good guy". I keep getting strange visions of him as a Tom
>Berenger look alike (from Rustlers Rhapsody) <grin> (No offence meant
>Paul)

None taken. Mind you, I see Lynch more as John Clark from Tom Clancy's
novels: and especially from the movie "Clear And Present Danger".

He's not exactly a shadowrunner. And he's not exactly a good guy. But he
does his best.

>As regards the commentary on preferences for old aircraft/weapons/music.
>Well, there's not much one can do about that. If Lynch wants to fly an
>old Phantom, use ancient weapons and listen to 80's rock, that is merely
>part of his character, the same as people today prefer centuries old
>classic music, and classic tales. I don't think it would be a
>reflection of society in 2058, just a personal preference.

It's meant to be an anachronism, not a reflection of the superiority of
this period :) Just the way the character developed since 1989, not a
heavy statement.

>That's also part of the reason a Johnson won't frag over a Runner team,
>not because he's scared of reprisals, I doubt the Johnson could care
>less,

Some runner teams could make a Johnson's life short, painful and
interesting, though. The success rate need not be high for that to be a
deterrent: having to involve Security and other agencies to shut down an
"unsanctioned" operation could be penalty enough for many shadowruns
(since not all involve the approval of, or are in the best interests of,
Johnson's employers).

>Runners are the exception to street
>life, they have skills the normal person does not possess. For example,
>Paul plays about with the TA's occassionally, both he and I are
>shooters, he's probably better than I am, as a result of more training
>and more opportunity. On the flip side, I'm better trained than he is
>regarding computers and networks, though these skills are far from
>unique, they seperate us from the majority of people in our
>neighbourhoods. Nobody else in my street knows dick about computers, so
>they come and talk to me when they want something or need advice on an
>upgrade. Paul works for a defence firm, designing and producing
>materials for the military, again, not something for the average person.

Yep. If you gave us more budget and training, Pete's "decker who can
take care of himself" and I'm the merc that Fields of Fire was written
for :)

Pete's right, though. Compare the Archetypes offered as starting PCs to
the Contacts in SR2, or (if you have Sprawl Sites) to the Contacts in
there. Your typical Shadowrun PC is considerably more capable than the
average citizen.

>These are not normal street people. I can't see a standard
>tramp (bum) being able to co-ordinate a run against a guarded facility.

I work in a "guarded facility" where the guards don't have truncheons,
let alone guns, and it would be pretty hard to pull off a raid on it
unless you were willing to accept a double-figure body count.

As for hitting RNAD Frater (where our products are stored and
maintained)... forget it. Even visiting contractors meet gun-toting
security, and this in the UK where armed police are confined to airports
and weapons stored in locked cases in patrol cars. That site would need
a pretty exceptional team to crack.

>Cyberware is one of my pet hates. A street sam with increased reflexes,
>cybereyes and all manner of enhancements is going to move in a massively
>different way to other people, he's going to alienate himself from
>society because of that difference, he has become a combat monster, and
>as such is unpredictable and deadly, making him a "risk" to casually
>associate with. I always see this type of character as the shadow in
>the corner, hiding from prying eyes, desperate not to be noticed, and
>terminated by law enforcement.

This is why Cybertechnology's "reflex trigger" is such a sought-after
item.

I made the point in character, it's true everywhere: most characters
would yearn to be able to turn off those short-circuited reflexes for a
few hours, to react like normal humans for a while.

Again, the IC reference on S-TK was Tim Zahn's "Cobra", but it's a
superb description of what it is to be a wired combat machine. To kill
without thought, because your short-circuited reflexes evaluated the
target as a threat, is not a nice thing to have happen to a PC.
Cybertechnology's introduction does a superb job of describing the
problems of many cyber enhancements.

>That does unfortunately appear to be a general thing on the list, but
>then maybe the people here like to play the hero, rather than a
>character who is darker and less "good guy". Again something I call the
>"John Wayne Syndrome". It's kinda fun sometimes to play a hero, someone
>who comes through against the odds, with his/her morals intact and a
>deep personal code unviolated. I am guilty of possessing exactly such a
>character, though the plots he's involved in are contrary to those
>personal codes - he just doesn't know it yet.. <g>

I've got a character coming in who's pretty dark. He probably won't last
long, though....

>Well, there are two problems here. Though you are right, and Shadowtk
>should be changed to reflect the primarily corporate and incredibly
>highly skilled/classed/quality characters that post here, it would
>result in a situation where the majority of plots would collapse from
>this restriction, with people not being able to post comments/storylines
>as a result of their characters not being able to access it. Certainly
>all of my characters bar one, would not be able to access a board with
>those restrictions. None of them can apparently compete with the likes
>of Serenity and Flux, the Two Jakes and other "high class" deckers. The
>other basic characters I have wouldn't be able to utilise this node for
>transfering data, and the plots I have ongoing would stop, as would
>other people's.

Well, some characters ride on the back of those deckers (Lynch and
Lilith get access via Karlsbruhn, and more recently Flux). Quinn gets
access via a PhD student at Seattle U. I'm less certain how Easy and
Marlowe get access, and if I bring Harley in more often I don't know how
she'd claim to be getting access (she's a hardcore biker: any machine
with less than two, or three or more, wheels is beneath her notice).

It does, though, irritate when children are able to post "help me, help
me" messages so easily.

>Again, although I may not agree with the presence of SIGA, the FBI and
>others on this list, I'm involved in Pauls plot, from two angles and am
>enjoying his little twists and plot developments. The same applies to
>other posts here. I may not agree with such a high corporate presence
>here, but it does make for interesting reading sometimes.

A dissenting opinion. A board like this _would_ be monitored. What
shadowrunners can create, corporations and national intelligence
organisaions can read. If it's available to competent runners with
decker contacts, then for sure Fuchi, Renraku, Ares, Aztlan, the UCAS et
al can read it. If Fuchi can't access it, neither can most of the
characters currently posting.

IMHO most of the contributors recognise this: and the demands of writing
interesting and entertaining plotlines override total realism. I'd like
to see fewer PRIVATE: headers, but that's going to take a culture change
on S-Tk.

NOT TO: is a good workaround for plot purposes, but Thunda ignoring it
crippled that particular device. While it's unrealistic, it has a lot of
value for this list.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sun, 30 Mar 1997 05:58:51 +0100

Message no. 6 In article <tquSRgA8ucPzEwKG@********.demon.co.uk>, "Paul J. Adam"
<shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>In message <tmzFlFAFjTPzEwae@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
><Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes

>>Berenger look alike (from Rustlers Rhapsody) <grin> (No offence meant
>>Paul)
>
>None taken. Mind

Oh good. :)

>you, I see Lynch more as John Clark from Tom Clancy's
>novels: and especially from the movie "Clear And Present Danger".

You're more familiar with your character, and obviously had a concept
from which to create him, I merely know him from the conversations we've
had prior to playing a game, the list, and private mail. So my
"picture" would be different. I can see the Clark connection though.

>>classic music, and classic tales. I don't think it would be a
>>reflection of society in 2058, just a personal preference.
>
>It's meant to be an anachronism, not a reflection of the superiority of
>this period :) Just the way the character developed since 1989, not a
>heavy statement.

Didn't figure it for a heavy statement, I always looked at it in the
same way as antiques collectors now, they like the period, and therefore
collect items from that period. I always stuck Lynch as that sort of
collector. :)

>Some runner teams could make a Johnson's life short, painful and
>interesting, though. The success rate need not be high for that to be a
>deterrent: having to involve Security and other agencies to shut down an
>"unsanctioned" operation could be penalty enough for many shadowruns
>(since not all involve the approval of, or are in the best interests of,
>Johnson's employers).

Agreed, I'll not repeat myself here, as my comments are in the previous
post. The flip side to that, is that although yes, some runners could
have that effect, Johnson has a very good defence, he works for, is
employed by or contracted to a corp, to hire Runners for a job, if a
team or individual kills a Johnson, that news is likely to get around,
meaning that other Johnsons are likely to be more nervous about dealing
with this person/team, resulting in less employment. A vicious circle
where both parties have a certain unwritten code to operate by.
Shadowrunners don't cack a Johnson without justification, and Johnsons
don't rip Runners without justification. The Thieves Code, if you will.

>>upgrade. Paul works for a defence firm, designing and producing
>>materials for the military, again, not something for the average person.
>
>Yep. If you gave us more budget and training, Pete's "decker who can
>take care of himself" and I'm the merc that Fields of Fire was written
>for :)

I like the "gave us more budget" bit.. Anyone offering???? <grin>

>Pete's right, though. Compare the Archetypes offered as starting PCs to
>the Contacts in SR2, or (if you have Sprawl Sites) to the Contacts in
>there. Your typical Shadowrun PC is considerably more capable than the
>average citizen.

Thanks, that was a better example, one that slipped passed my overeager
fingers.

>I work in a "guarded facility" where the guards don't have truncheons,
>let alone guns, and it would be pretty hard to pull off a raid on it
>unless you were willing to accept a double-figure body count.
>
>As for hitting RNAD Frater (where our products are stored and
>maintained)... forget it. Even visiting contractors meet gun-toting
>security, and this in the UK where armed police are confined to airports
>and weapons stored in locked cases in patrol cars. That site would need
>a pretty exceptional team to crack.

Something that is not covered accurately in SR. Listening to the
majority of players posting in Shadowrun and Cyberpunk, and the
simplistic way that such opposition is overcome here on tk, Sec Guards
and Lone Star/Cops are merely "Star Trek Red Shirts", untrained dopes
who are simply targets for the runners. Incapable morons whose biggest
ambition in life is to get to the next donut stop. The Sec Guards and
police in my particular little world, as Paul knows, are far more
professional, and more of a threat to the runners. It's difficult,
without making a real effort at writing, to get across the skill
required to quietly bypass even a poor sec team. Something that is not
reflected well in the list, or in many players minds. A comment is made
in one of the Sourcebooks, that Lone Star require that a candidate knows
which way a gun points and can hit a barn... Bollocks. If we ran our
present law enforcement agencies like that, then the US and other parts
of the world would have the same restrictions Britain now has... No
guns. No automatics, no large calibre (above .22) handguns, etc, etc.
but we'll let the criminals have them, because they know what they're
doing with them, and won't kill innocent people. And the fatality rate
for bystanders would be far higher than it is. I can't believe that the
entire contingent of Lone Star, FBI, etc. are unskilled bozos waiting
for a runner to shoot them. They are trained individuals who pose a
real threat to the Runners.

(Sorry, I ran off at the fingers again, and lost the point I was trying
to make. Paul knows what I'm like and is probably grinning right now.)

>>associate with. I always see this type of character as the shadow in
>>the corner, hiding from prying eyes, desperate not to be noticed, and
>>terminated by law enforcement.
>
>This is why Cybertechnology's "reflex trigger" is such a sought-after
>item.

Sought after, yes, available, hardly. Agreed though.

<snippy bit>
>target as a threat, is not a nice thing to have happen to a PC.
>Cybertechnology's introduction does a superb job of describing the
>problems of many cyber enhancements.

Agreed. It gives over the very clear impression of how it is to have
cyberware installed, the detachment that cybereyes offer, the supreme
almost uncontrollable strength of replaced/enhanced musculature, the
loss of tactile sensation with replacement limbs and the disassociation
with reality from overindulgence. Excellent piece of work, that more
players should read, but unfortunately don't bother with. I notice the
"can you combine Replacement with Augmentation debate is about to start
on Shadowrn again... <sigh>

>I've got a character coming in who's pretty dark. He probably won't last
>long, though....

None of the really dark ones do, unfortunate? I think so.

>>other basic characters I have wouldn't be able to utilise this node for
>>transfering data, and the plots I have ongoing would stop, as would
>>other people's.
>
>Well, some characters ride on the back of those deckers (Lynch and
>Lilith get access via Karlsbruhn, and more recently Flux).

<snippy bit>

Agreed again. Marathon is a decker, Paraquat gains access through
Cathy, Urbanus gains access through an associate, though he is able to
tortoise in. Avenger and the rest gain access through Gates. Gates is
the only character I have, with sufficient skill to find Shadowland and
play with the big boys, privately, as Paul knows, Gates is an supremely
efficient decker, here on Shadowtk, he's a small fry, in a big ocean,
and not up to the standard of the more experienced and older Flux, or
the Jakes. BUt having a decker post sections of content of actions
taken wouldn't achieve much of anything if that content was merely a
picture. I'm trying to justify the posts from Red Shift, by utilising
an archive, run in SA by a chap called Stonewall, someone all the Merc
teams know about, and who keeps datastores to assist them in their
work... obviously for financial reward. Otherwise, much of the Red
Shift plot would be invisible and senseless. As regards the rest of my
characters, if the list was jacked up to reflect the skills of the long
term characters, they and many other characters would effectively be cut
out from making any posts, and I don't want to play "supremely skilled,
all powerful" characters, I like the earthiness of low power. the
knowledge that at any time I can kill a character without having to
think, well, now how much damage is he likely to do? Later on, when the
Urbanus plot starts to liven up, I will need more experienced and
powerful deckers to achieve certain things, but I don't feel at the
moment, that the current character content would accept that work, they
already have company affiliations that preclude their involvement in
something as dodgy as that would produce, increasing the "level" of this
list, would deny access to those types of characters.

>It does, though, irritate when children are able to post "help me, help
>me" messages so easily.

Agreed. Having said that, one or two kids would be capable. There is a
12 year old in the States, called Nic, he is what I would describe as a
wizkid. He writes programmes in four languages, he's got a pretty good
website, and is already associated with a couple of the larger "hacker"
rings. Not bad for a "kid". And it's not often that a kid posts to
the list, just when someone wants to have an irritating squirt around
for a moment. Like Dashira and whoever Tinners kid was during Thunda.

>A dissenting opinion. A board like this _would_ be monitored. What
>shadowrunners can create, corporations and national intelligence
>organisaions can read.

Not dissenting. I agree a board like this would be monitored, but
really, would SIGA, FBI, Lone Star, Serenity really use this board for
their conversations? I think not. Too many good deckers would live
here that may intercept that information, or get curious about the busy
datastream between the FBI and SIGA, or Serenity and someone. OK, it's
essential to certain areas of the plots to have their posts available
for S-tk to read, but is not really something I think would happen. The
FBI, though they undoubtedly monitor Seattles Shadowland boards, are
highly unlikely to make their presence known. And certainly wouldn't
use it for traffic. :) (Though for the moment they will continue to do
so <g>)

>If it's available to competent runners with
>decker contacts, then for sure Fuchi, Renraku, Ares, Aztlan, the UCAS et
>al can read it. If Fuchi can't access it, neither can most of the
>characters currently posting.

But increasing the intrinsic power level of this list, would also reduce
and prevent characters posting. Look at it another way. Although as
you know Gates is very skilled in my game, and provides the team with
valuable information in exchange for payment, if he had arrived on this
board with those skills and attitude, I would have been (deservedly)
flamed out of existence, because I rearranged his stats and skills, and
equipment, and brought him to a "newcomer" entrance level, nobody has
complained about his presence. The same for Marathon, his skills
privately are a lot higher than here in the list. Over time, I will be
able to increase his abilities, as the list becomes more familiar with
him, and he grows in here. But to have a net god suddenly arrive would
be ridiculous, and uninteresting. Something I feel would happen, if the
level of this list was increased. I know quite a few people who post
here, who don't want to play with "Superhero" characters. Just slightly
more than ordinary joes, who want to make a living.

>IMHO most of the contributors recognise this: and the demands of writing
>interesting and entertaining plotlines override total realism.

Up to a point I agree with you, and as I said, although I disagree with
the strength and primarily corporate/company presence here, there have
been some well written and entertaining posts. But many of the
characters here are old and well established, for instance some of the
characters present have been here since the lists creation, and have
gained their power and respect over those four years, in order to
compete with them, on a stricter regime for this list, I would have to
introduce new characters of an equal power level, something I don't find
interesting, and would initially cause trouble with the listmembers, If
Mark has been using Flux four several years, the last thing he needs is
some upstart twerp bringing in a character who is equal in skill, it is
also, mostly unbelievable. That there is no reason I can't have one of
that skill and strength is not an issue, I would rather see the power
level in here drop, than climb a few notches. More runners, less
company affiliates. More interaction, less "supreme runner". Everyone
has a favoured character. In my case it's Avenger and Gates, my wife
favours Shado, Vael, although he would like to change it a bit, has his
own, and that applies to everyone. The difficulty arises when low power
characters like mine meet more skilled people similar to the one's on
this list. Avengers stats, skills and experience, put him beyond the
reach of even someone like Lynch, who is two years his senior on this
list, but he can't fly, he doesn't have acces to a strong company like
SIGA, and doesn't have a passion for antiques, this reduces his skill
level to reflect Lynch's longer presence, and the fact that it would be
silly for me to play a high power, superhero. I'm not comfortable with
that style of play. Although it might be cool to have him destroy
everything in sight without the slightest problem, it's ludicrous and
unbelievable, and I would expect to get shouted at for the effort.
However, some of the things Lynch does, that I wouldn't dream of doing,
are acceptable, because of his longer presence on the list. The other
listmembers are familiar with the character, they have associated with
him longer, and can accept some of the things he does without question.
(This isn't a moan, honest) Ultimately deciding that only highly
skilled characters could gain access to this list, wouldn't prevent
Lynch or Dragoneyes or similar from posting, but it would prevent many
others from doing so.

For instance, if say, Brain A was to introduce a powerful character for
a few months as part of his plotline, and also introduce a lower skilled
new character, nobody would comment, because eveyrone is familiar with
his style, and would expect something interesting from both characters.
If someone else, like for instance, erm... Gweedo, was to introduce a
character of equal skill to Mark I's Flux, there would be some outcry.
If the level of this list is increased to reflect the skills off Lynch
and Flux, the introduction of a powerful first timer would be essential,
how else could he have accessed this board, something that would invite
problems, trouble, arguments and encourage munchkinism. And everybody
here who knows me, knows well my opinions of munchkins. <grin> But it
would be a deserved label.

I know I'm starting to repeat myself, but increasing the level of this
list to reflect the greater skills of the posters would not assist the
list, if anything it would be likely to close it even more to newcomers
than it ever has before. Dropping the strength and power of the
characters accessing this list, would perhaps be a better way of dealing
with the problem.

>I'd like
>to see fewer PRIVATE: headers, but that's going to take a culture change
>on S-Tk.

Not a culture change, I don't think, but a conscious decision on the
style of posts. Much of what happens between D'Arlan and SIGA, is not
going to be done on an open channel, same between Red Shift and Emma,
they are likely to want to keep their conversations pretty quiet, a NOT
TO: wouldn't achieve that. OK, It would look better with a TO: header,
than the PRIVATE, but, doesn't reflect the secrecy behind the posts.
Also, my problem with NOT TO: was used to effect during Thunda. People
posting "NOT TO: Thunda" doesn't preclude his associates. Offering a
25K reward for his death, must be readable by others he is associated
with, on the off chance that one of them may want to claim that reward.
I don't feel that NOT TO: is reflective of any encryption, and shouldn't
preclude a teams access to that post, just the addressed person. For a
lot of posts, that style of encryption is probably just fine, but it is
self defeating in its purpose.

For example, if Marathon really cheeses someone off, and they offer
2,500K to kick his butt in a NOT TO post. There is a good possibility
that an associate will remark on that in the bar he frequents.

"Oh hey, Marathon, what the hell did you do to get that price on your
head?"

"What price?"

"The 2.5K to kick your ass, from >so-and-so<"

>NOT TO: is a good workaround for plot purposes, but Thunda ignoring it
>crippled that particular device. While it's unrealistic, it has a lot of
>value for this list.

It has it's uses, if total agreement is reached on it's encryption
value, but it isn't logical.

NOT TO: Lynch, would not prevent Easy, Lillith, Quint or SIGA from
reading that post, unless you agreed to that, and it would not be a
logical decision, neither would it be logical to decide that none of
Lynch's many contacts would see it either.

I agree, and would like to see fewer PRIVATE headers, even though I am
guilty of using them a hell of a lot. I don't see an easy work around
to be honest, and also remember the endless posts on this subject last
year :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	"Mark L. Neidengard" <mneideng@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sun, 30 Mar 1997 10:29:55 -0800

Message no. 7 According to Avenger:
>According to Paul Adam:
>>I've got a character coming in who's pretty dark. He probably won't last
>>long, though....
>
>None of the really dark ones do, unfortunate? I think so.

Goes with the territory, I guess.

>>It does, though, irritate when children are able to post "help me, help
>>me" messages so easily.
>
>Agreed. Having said that, one or two kids would be capable. There is a
>12 year old in the States, called Nic, he is what I would describe as a
>wizkid. He writes programmes in four languages, he's got a pretty good
>website, and is already associated with a couple of the larger "hacker"
>rings. Not bad for a "kid". And it's not often that a kid posts to
>the list, just when someone wants to have an irritating squirt around
>for a moment. Like Dashira and whoever Tinners kid was during Thunda.

I won't rule out the possibility, but getting young kids onto the net takes
a certain amount of resources (especially the capital to have the right
computers on hand, and to have had the opportunity to learn how to use them
from someone). I'm especially unfond of the "Otaku", which look like nothing
to me so much as a FASA concession to bad SciFi (and to Gibson-style
Japanese mangling). As for this Nic, I'll say that just having a website
is something that public schools in my area are looking at firing up in the
primary educational system, and that it's not that hard to get in touch with
some of the major "hacker rings" if you're lucky enough to have the right BBSs
in your area (I did it while I was in high school, then scrapped it when I
finally had the chance to get into real engineering and academic computing).
The programming in four languages is more promising...OTOH, my third-grade
teacher made everyone in my class learn BASIC and Logo, and I'm sure I could
have picked up C and Java if they had been as popular at the time as they
are now....again, not to belittle Nic, but when I think of computer prodigies
I think of people like Dan Farmer or RTM.

I guess the point is that with the rise of the Information Age there's a lot
of room for the average kid's computer proficiency to rise without making them
especially "talented" in the sense that a top-rated decker must be talented.
In 2058, I'm sure that kids can be educated in as many computer languages as
they (or their parents) choose to be. =)

>>A dissenting opinion. A board like this _would_ be monitored. What
>>shadowrunners can create, corporations and national intelligence
>>organisaions can read.
>
>Not dissenting. I agree a board like this would be monitored, but
>really, would SIGA, FBI, Lone Star, Serenity really use this board for
>their conversations? I think not. Too many good deckers would live
>here that may intercept that information, or get curious about the busy
>datastream between the FBI and SIGA, or Serenity and someone. OK, it's
>essential to certain areas of the plots to have their posts available
>for S-tk to read, but is not really something I think would happen. The
>FBI, though they undoubtedly monitor Seattles Shadowland boards, are
>highly unlikely to make their presence known. And certainly wouldn't
>use it for traffic. :) (Though for the moment they will continue to do
>so <g>)

This was one of the reasons for the INTERNAL tag. =) On the third hand
though, I could see an organization that has to share network substrate with
sister governmental organizations routing some traffic (probably with extra
encryption) through Shadowland simply to avoid the prying eyes of their own
MIS staff. Part of why Shadowland occupies the place it does in the world
model is that it offers a very valuable service: reasonably secure, reasonably
private, reasonably reliable communications.

>But increasing the intrinsic power level of this list, would also reduce
>and prevent characters posting. Look at it another way. Although as
>you know Gates is very skilled in my game, and provides the team with
>valuable information in exchange for payment, if he had arrived on this
>board with those skills and attitude, I would have been (deservedly)
>flamed out of existence, because I rearranged his stats and skills, and
>equipment, and brought him to a "newcomer" entrance level, nobody has
>complained about his presence. The same for Marathon, his skills
>privately are a lot higher than here in the list. Over time, I will be
>able to increase his abilities, as the list becomes more familiar with
>him, and he grows in here. But to have a net god suddenly arrive would
>be ridiculous, and uninteresting. Something I feel would happen, if the
>level of this list was increased. I know quite a few people who post
>here, who don't want to play with "Superhero" characters. Just slightly
>more than ordinary joes, who want to make a living.

But what is a "net god"? Skill level 6? Higher? It varies from campaign to
campaign. I think part of what's _good_ about not insisting on mechanics for
everything is that the "depiction" of the character in words tends to
normalize for the different power levels from the campaigns the characters here
came from (to some extent at least =) To some extent, I think this is
actually a good forum for "high-powered" characters to be able to stretch
their legs, so long as their players can simulate their competence with good
writing. It's quite clear that _just_ having a higher Firearms skill or
Initiative score means little or nothing in the face of a well-prepared
opponent.
--
/!\/!ark /!\!eidengard, CS Major, VLSI. http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/~mneideng
"Fairy of sleep, controller of illusions" Operator/Jack-of-all-Trades, CACR
"Control the person for my own purpose." "Don't mess with the Dark
Elves!"
-Pirotess, _Record_of_Lodoss_War_ Shadowrunner and Anime Addict

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 1997 01:30:57 +0100

Message no. 8 In article <199703301829.KAA01173@*****.ugcs.caltech.edu>, "Mark L.
Neidengard" <mneideng@****.CALTECH.EDU> writes
>According to Avenger:

>>None of the really dark ones do, unfortunate? I think so.
>
>Goes with the territory, I guess.

Yeah, I suppose so, but sometimes it would be nice. Two of my favourite
bad guys were played by Alan Rickman, and I was rather put out when the
good guy won. I felt, especially in Robin Hood, that Costner should
have lost <grin> Good bad guys add colour, variety and dynamism to what
is otherwise a standard "good guy" plot, and although the "white hats"
are a prevelent thing with players, not just here on the list, they are
rather passe. <g> It would be nice to see a *decent* bad guy make it
through, and hang around longer than normal, or at least a few more less
than "soap powder" white good guys.

>>rings. Not bad for a "kid". And it's not often that a kid posts to
>>the list, just when someone wants to have an irritating squirt around
>>for a moment. Like Dashira and whoever Tinners kid was during Thunda.

<snippy>
>teacher made everyone in my class learn BASIC and Logo, and I'm sure I could
>have picked up C and Java if they had been as popular at the time as they
>are now....again, not to belittle Nic, but when I think of computer prodigies
>I think of people like Dan Farmer or RTM.

Agreed Mark, but in the example I was using with "Nic", he's not an
average kid, he really is good, I've seen some of the stuff he's written
and "spoken" to him, he's got a hell of a lot more savvy than most kids
his age. In respect to your comments, yes, there would need to be
certain resources available, a defined level of training, that would
explain his presence, though I dare say it is possible to stumble across
a board like Shadowland. In browsing around the net I've occassionally
found myself in an area that I would not normally have attempted to
reach. As far as Otaku are concerned, I'm afraid I can't stand the
nasty little critters, they rank up in my hate books with Imortal Elves,
and ED crossovers. The major problem I have with SR at the moment, is
FASA giving away Shadowland as a contact for any character prepared to
pay 1 DP to acquire it, _any_ character. Now, although for S-tk
purposes this is a good thing, as it means it is now easier to allow
pretty much any type of character to post to Shadowland, and you don't
need a cyberdeck to do it, but it is also detrimental to the game, in as
much as it has reduced a lot of the mystique and "fame" of the fabled
node to a simple BBS.

>I guess the point is that with the rise of the Information Age there's a lot
>of room for the average kid's computer proficiency to rise without making them
>especially "talented" in the sense that a top-rated decker must be talented.
>In 2058, I'm sure that kids can be educated in as many computer languages as
>they (or their parents) choose to be. =)

Again, agreed.

>>for S-tk to read, but is not really something I think would happen. The
>>FBI, though they undoubtedly monitor Seattles Shadowland boards, are
>>highly unlikely to make their presence known. And certainly wouldn't
>>use it for traffic. :) (Though for the moment they will continue to do
>>so <g>)
>
>This was one of the reasons for the INTERNAL tag. =)

Yes. And when applicable, both Paul and I use it, but for
communications between the two companies, it becomes a little more
difficult.

>On the third hand
>though, I could see an organization that has to share network substrate with
>sister governmental organizations routing some traffic (probably with extra
>encryption) through Shadowland simply to avoid the prying eyes of their own
>MIS staff. Part of why Shadowland occupies the place it does in the world
>model is that it offers a very valuable service: reasonably secure, reasonably
>private, reasonably reliable communications.

However, the observation was more in reflection of the amount of
"corporate" traffic on this list, rather than the fact that there is any
at all. I agree that some small amounts of communication would travel
through this style board, for the exact reasons you state, but looking
through the posts that are contained in the archives, there's a lot of
company/corporate traffic, far more than would normally be found on what
is primarily a "shadow" board, something that isn't a standard access
area for mail/contact between companies. The problem being that there
seems to be an inordinate amount of company affiliates present, and a
much smaller number of "standard" Shadowrunner types. Also, logically,
the presence of corporate/law enforcement/security/whatever means that
the runs advertised here, the conversations, video posts and other
things would mean that organisations would have a better and greater
chance to exact revenge on the characters present. For example, someone
hits Fuchi for a reasonable datasteal, pops in here to sell the results
of that steal, or brags about it... That datasteal has hurt Fuchi
profits and given some research technology to a rival company who are
now able to compete and market at the same time, cutting the profit
margin. Fuchi personnel know who was responsible because they read this
board... Oopsy.

Although the initial datasteal didn't hurt that much, the loss of market
share, profit and shareholder confidence is sufficient reason for Fuchi
to consider some form of reprisal against that character, depending on
the severity this could vary from a sound beating, to death. That's the
main reason I feel Shadowland would and should be more secret, with very
little or no corporate/company presence. Of course, some company stuff
is essential to the plots that occur here, I'm just, I suppose amused,
at the fact that people who already work for companies, would want to
relect a similar attitude and mind set in their characters <g>

>>him, and he grows in here. But to have a net god suddenly arrive would
>>be ridiculous, and uninteresting. Something I feel would happen, if the
>>level of this list was increased. I know quite a few people who post
>>here, who don't want to play with "Superhero" characters. Just slightly
>>more than ordinary joes, who want to make a living.
>
>But what is a "net god"? Skill level 6?

Skill levels are not something that can be easily assigned to a list
like this, where the judgement of characters' abilities is made through
the posts of the player. If I was to say that a skill level of 6 in my
games was average, in some places eyebrows would be raised. But in
others people would look at SL 6, and think, grief, that's not even
starting level...

>Higher?

OK, in a loose definition, in my opinion a net god is a decker who needs
not worry too much about other deckers, IC or matrix security, someone
who casually cuts through the Matrix like a hot knife through soft
butter. There are some, (what initially appear anyway) very powerful
deckers present on Shadowtk, deckers who are capable of achieving
wondrous things with little or no strife. An increase in the basic
rating of this list, would dynamically increase the number of characters
of this type of ability. How would you feel if I or someone else,
suddenly introduced a character of the skill of Mark I's Flux, and
started cutting through Corporate IC as if it wasn't there. I know I'd
get a bit cheesed about it. Facing the logic of the situation, Mark has
been playing Flux for some time, he's built the character in here,
AlexandriaN and other deckers also have existed in this list for a
while, I don't have a problem with that... My point is that Mike's
suggestion to increase the intrinsic difficulty to reach this list,
which would then require that new/introductory/starting characters would
rival characters like Flux, without having spent the time developing in
the list. They would just arrive, already at that "level". That is
what I have a problem with. <g>

>It varies from campaign to
>campaign. I think part of what's _good_ about not insisting on mechanics for
>everything is that the "depiction" of the character in words tends to
>normalize for the different power levels from the campaigns the characters here
>came from (to some extent at least =)

Yes... It can do, but from a "watcher" point of view, some pretty
amazing things are achieved here in a very casual way. For example the
recent transportation of a considerable mechanised brigade through
European soil to a german village (not sure what happened there, as I
was off the list for a while). Lynch's miraculous transferrals from one
location to another, and his apparent casualness in flaring a chopper in
to a pin point landing inside the CZ, with little or no consequence for
that action, flying the machine in weather that other pilots would frown
at... Little things, that look cool when written, but come over as a
little OTT.

I hate using examples like that, as it appears that I'm moaning about
the characters and players, I'm not, but you have to look at it from the
point of view of new players and lurkers. When they see posts from
Flux, with no T/D stamp, from Paul or myself, where the character is
doing something pretty phenomenal, the temptation is to think that is
the normal behaviour of this list, and act/write accordingly, to the
detriment of one's plot, and usually to the objection of people who have
spent some time working their characters to that level of acceptability.
I appreciate that Mike was making a point that seems to be an old gripe
of his, and I do tend to agree with a lot of what he said, but changing
the list to reflect the capabilities of those established characters
would not actually achieve anything, except to encourage others to
introduce characters like them.

At the moment, I'm slowly introducing characters to this list, and would
rather that everyone became aware of them over a period of time that
allowed for questions to be asked, problems cleared up, and so that
everyone slowly familiarises themselves with those characters as they
develop. I don't for one minute believe that a character I, or another
"newer" listmember introduced that displayed the same skills, contacts,
and corporate affiliates as an established character would be accepted
without some complaint and arguing. Rightly so I feel, but a fact
nonetheless. Increasing the level of this list to acknowledge people
like AlexandriaN, Lynch, Flux, Frypp, etc *must* propogate and provoke
exactly that situation, otherwise there is going to be some very fast
and slick explaining as to how a low power character gained access.

>To some extent, I think this is
>actually a good forum for "high-powered" characters to be able to stretch
>their legs, so long as their players can simulate their competence with good
>writing.

OK, at the risk of seeming belligerent, if I was to produce a "well
written" post that displayed a character with skills matching or higher
than an "older" listmembers character, with contacts and abilities
beyond the logic of acceptance, it would be acceptable? - I don't think
so. As I mentioned, one of the characters I use is an NPC in my game
world, his abilities are very well established, and he's been in that
game world for about four/five years. Introducing a character that
highly skilled here, and running him in the fashion suited to his "game"
stats, would, I feel be met with derision. I suspect that Ratspeak is
one of the stranger and more respected Deckers in this list, I don't
think Ratspeaks player would be overly impressed by a newbie character
displaying the same or better skills and abilities as his "long term"
character. A justified reaction, but one that is likely to occur much
more, if Mike's suggestion is accepted.

>It's quite clear that _just_ having a higher Firearms skill or
>Initiative score means little or nothing in the face of a well-prepared
>opponent.

Absolute agreement. But how often are the opponents well prepared. I
recall a post before Christmas, that I personally felt was over the top,
and carried off way too easily considering the characters involved, and
the opposition. I won't name the post, as I don't want to offend the
person who wrote it, a lot of their other stuff has been very
entertaining and interesting, but that one post displayed the "ST Red
Shirt" mentality I mentioned. The higher skilled and abled a character,
the more likely they are to overcome odds, but opposition here, isn't of
a class that often reflects the skills of the people protrayed.

As I'm sure you'll agree with Paul and myself, even a small company,
with a small security force is a hard nut to crack, but how many people
will accept that, rather than just happily wading through it guns
blazing with no recurse or consequence? I know I've had some arguments
over private mail with the IF crew over some of the things that occured
during the stuttering lifetime of that plot, and I've also had a few
arguments with the players involved in my own plots. A considerable
number of posts have travelled between Paul and myself, where things are
happening we object to, or have an opinion on, ultimately, we've come to
accept the way we both think, and accept that some things are different.
The power of characters here, would not be a fair thing to throw to new
people who want to join this list. To demand that they produce "high
power" characters to just access this list, would be self defeating, and
likely cause a lot more arguments and objections than have so far
occured here.

The other problem that arises, is in interacting with these higher class
characters. During the Thunda episode, I was _very_ surprised that so
many of the listmembers got embroiled in it, and even more surprised
when established characters became involved. It added a little something
to that plot, which only started as a "dare" ;) But I think everyone
here will agree, when I say that, even though Thunda was of a level to
compete with the characters on this list, he was so seriously over the
top, as to be laughable. It was quite a relief when it was finally
agreed how Thunda would die, the sequence of events leading to it, and
when Paul finally told me his posts for Lynch were prepared. It meant a
totally munchkin episode for me could end, and that was quite a relief.
But converse to that, I don't feel comfortable approaching or appealing
to one of the experienced characters using a new "lower power"
character, much of what he/she is doing is likely to be beneath the
notice of these superiors, and I am extremely unlikely to directly
approach something like Serenity or SIGA.

The other thing that seems a bit strange is the intrinsic public image
of many characters on the list, they don't really qualify as
Shadowrunners anymore, many of them are famous, more are involved with
very public companies, and although they may have started in the
shadows, they are too well known by the various government/law
enforcement agencies and populace to actively run in the shadows. They
are more like "government agents with a good PR". (A bad analogy
but...)

For example, two of Pauls main characters have featured in TriD reports
and heavily in film clips of events. Easy and Lynch. One of my
characters has also appeared on TriD reports, which means logically,
they are no longer part of the Shadows, and unlikely to be able to
operate successfully in that environment. (Sorry Paul, it looks like I'm
picking on you, I'm not...) Sascha's characters now have DNA samples
with the UCAS military, also pretty much precluding them from active
Shadowrunning.

I'm curious to know how the listmembers define Shadowrun, is it a
solo/team that is surviving against the odds and trying to make their
way in life, or is it a group of people who have formed their own
company and are trying to increase their share value and compete with
the big boys (which is more in keeping with much of what happens here)?

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	Brion Wauters <stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 1997 13:51:48 -0800

Message no. 9 I'm not going to bother quoting the quote of a quote, so please bear with me.

If memory serves, Dante was around for quite awhile, ditto for Nightmare (I'm
assuming Nightmare was a villian, that's the way his posts always read). So
we've had a few "reaccuring" baddies.

As for "super-runners", I'm not sure. I've been off-list for a year, so I
don't really know anything about the newer characters. But with the older
guys, it seemed to me that it was fairly spread out. We had folks who where
death on wheels (Daisho for example), we had characters like Irish and Caine,
who where experienced street vetrans and could do alot of fairly impressive
stuff, but got their hoops kicked a number of times, and we had some fairly
basic "starting-character" types.

When someone brings in a character, they'll proably try to make him fairly
strong. He's running with the big-guns now, and even if he isn't that
impressive himself, he's liable to get caught up in things aimed at the
nastier runners. Then he'll have to try to survive. A little forebearance
proabably couldn't hurt, regarding "power-level". And be carefull that you
don't jump to conclusions about how strong a new character is. Just because
a newbie's background sounds like that of an established character, doesn't
mean that their in the same league. Take Irish and Lynch for example. Their
backgrounds sound an awful lot alike, but if you take everything into account
(abilities, skills, cyber/bio, gear, contacts, buddies, etc) they're
proabably operating on two fairly different levels.

As for the "red-shirt" syndrome, its always going to be there. You just have
to try to keep it under control. Sure some sec-guards are going to be jokes,
you have that in real life. But alot will be as good as the runners, and
some will be better (see Brian A's. first "anti-Maxim" run for an example of
how Sec-guards can hoose runners good). It just takes practice to write up a
realistic and entertaining story.

Oh, and Avenger, I see Shadowrunning as just trying to survive using the
abilities you got. I'll leave the corporate-style stuff to the folks who
hire the characters.

My two cents.

Brion

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 00:06:53 +0100

Message no. 10 In article <334031F4.78C2@****.coco.cc.az.us>, Brion Wauters
<stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US> writes
>I'm not going to bother quoting the quote of a quote, so please bear with me.

Fair enough :)

>If memory serves, Dante was around for quite awhile, ditto for Nightmare (I'm
>assuming Nightmare was a villian, that's the way his posts always read). So
>we've had a few "reaccuring" baddies.

I've not noticed, but as I said to Mike G earlier, I'm ploughing through
a few years worth of plot logs in an effort to make sure my observations
weren't groundless. As for recurring bad guys, I have noticed one or
two, even though they aren't immediately recognisable as "bad", for
instance Frypp. his bio, puts him as a terrorist responsible for
several attrocities, yet he happily runs a security firm employing
runners... He was alledgedly executed in LA, yet I personally have had
a "conversation" with him on S-tk... But he's not greeted as a "bad"
guy, so it's kinda difficult to know what the heck he is, this seems to
apply to several characters, I'm not complaining as such, but there
aren't any easily definable characters of "dark" intent, they seem
mainly to be "John Wayners", this is, admittedly reflective of SR as a
whole, but in respect to Mike's remarks, it seems a shame. Even the bad
guys are good guys really.

>As for "super-runners", I'm not sure. I've been off-list for a year, so I
>don't really know anything about the newer characters.

Maybe I was a bit too generic with the term "superheroes". It was used
to generalise with characters that achieve soem pretty amazing feats
without any problems at all, whether it be hacking a system, flying an
aircraft in whether that grounds all others, shooting fifty sec guards
on a single magazine or two people taking out a twenty man sec team,
guarding a heavily armoured transport, and flying off into the sunset.
I was being general, and possibly used he wrong wording, but it seemed
the most suitable without dragging my post out into epic proportions.

>But with the older
>guys, it seemed to me that it was fairly spread out. We had folks who where
>death on wheels (Daisho for example), we had characters like Irish and Caine,
>who where experienced street vetrans and could do alot of fairly impressive
>stuff, but got their hoops kicked a number of times, and we had some fairly
>basic "starting-character" types.

Death on wheels characters still exists on the list, they're just not
doing a lot of killing at the moment.

>When someone brings in a character, they'll proably try to make him fairly
>strong. He's running with the big-guns now, and even if he isn't that
>impressive himself, he's liable to get caught up in things aimed at the
>nastier runners. Then he'll have to try to survive. A little forebearance
>proabably couldn't hurt, regarding "power-level".

That's part of the problem. In this case, I have several new
characters, all of them low powered bar one, a couple of which are
involved with some very heavy "old time" characters, this makes
interaction with them difficult at best. I don't personally feel
comfortable playing characters here that are the equal of people like
Lynch or Kor, or Flux, but it becomes very difficult, when a player
knows his character doesn't have a chance in hell of surviving the kind
of situations these people get into. Logically five of my characters
are going to have to be killed because of the scale of their
involvement, and the state of the plots they're involved in, not
something I would be overly happy about, but something that *logic*
dictates must occur.

>And be carefull that you
>don't jump to conclusions about how strong a new character is. Just because
>a newbie's background sounds like that of an established character, doesn't
>mean that their in the same league.

That's something I'm never guilty of, _I_ don't jump to any conclusions
about character power. My characters might, but I just assume they are
equal or superior, having said that, after reading posts concerning
those characters it is possible to get a good feeling of that
character's power level.

>Take Irish and Lynch for example. Their
>backgrounds sound an awful lot alike, but if you take everything into account
>(abilities, skills, cyber/bio, gear, contacts, buddies, etc) they're
>proabably operating on two fairly different levels.

I can't comment as I know nothing at all about Irish.

>As for the "red-shirt" syndrome, its always going to be there. You just
have
>to try to keep it under control.

Yeah, sure, no problem. When I use them I do try to give them some
credence. Excuse me while I laugh at other posts where sec guards/mob
members/police etc. are brainless "gallery" targets. :)

>Sure some sec-guards are going to be jokes,
>you have that in real life. But alot will be as good as the runners, and
>some will be better (see Brian A's. first "anti-Maxim" run for an example of
>how Sec-guards can hoose runners good). It just takes practice to write up a
>realistic and entertaining story.

When I find it, I will read it. The S-tk plot logs are pretty
extensive, though they are archived on Marks site, and I've now got
hold of the lot, they're not all well threaded, which makes following
plots difficult at best, and almost impossible at worst, especially as
they have to be followed in reverse.

>Oh, and Avenger, I see Shadowrunning as just trying to survive using the
>abilities you got. I'll leave the corporate-style stuff to the folks who
>hire the characters.

That's the sort of answer I expected, and one I personally agree with.
However, the trend doesn't give across that impression, or maybe I'm
just reading the list wrong. :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 01:33:24 +0100

Message no. 11 In message <CfuJ8ZANOEQzEw0e@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>Maybe I was a bit too generic with the term "superheroes". It was used
>to generalise with characters that achieve soem pretty amazing feats
>without any problems at all, whether it be hacking a system, flying an
>aircraft in whether that grounds all others,

No fair, the snow in Chicago wasn't too bad. Read Lynch's latest for
real nightmare flying.

What I find _really_ scary is that the US Navy consider that to be a
necessary qualification: _every_ carrier pilot can do that with less
effort and hassle than Lynch. That was a bloody poor landing, and the
LSO almost literally kicked Lynch's backside for it.

I just wanted to emphasise that he's good, but sometimes only just good
enough.

>Death on wheels characters still exists on the list, they're just not
>doing a lot of killing at the moment.

Easy _is_ death on wheels, as long as she's only fighting gang members
and the like, and you bet she knows that :)

>That's part of the problem. In this case, I have several new
>characters, all of them low powered bar one, a couple of which are
>involved with some very heavy "old time" characters, this makes
>interaction with them difficult at best. I don't personally feel
>comfortable playing characters here that are the equal of people like
>Lynch or Kor, or Flux, but it becomes very difficult, when a player
>knows his character doesn't have a chance in hell of surviving the kind
>of situations these people get into. Logically five of my characters
>are going to have to be killed because of the scale of their
>involvement, and the state of the plots they're involved in, not
>something I would be overly happy about, but something that *logic*
>dictates must occur.

Power level is relative and I don't have a problem with it. I don't
personally see Lynch as being one of the most dangerous characters on
the list: if you want to be picky, he's a mundane. Cybered and skilled,
but still a mundane. While he's very very good, he can still be beaten
by surprise or by stealth or by skill. Yes, he's excellent in a stand-up
fight, but since that's widely known that's the last method you should
choose by which to take him on.

On a list like this, if two listmembers' creations clash, negotiation
between players is typically the best option: the best example I can
think of is when Lynch challenged Ronin to a duel. Lynch could beat
Ronin easily with a knife, but I'm much less certain of the outcome if
Ronin went unarmed (as Jaimie said he would).

Would one of the seconds then be justified in shooting Ronin? Not sure.

Luckily it didn't come to that: Jaimie merely added unexpected emphasis
to a plot point I already hoped to make.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Brian Angliss <angliss@*****.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 1997 18:30:36 -0700

Message no. 12 On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Paul J. Adam wrote:

> Easy _is_ death on wheels, as long as she's only fighting gang members
> and the like, and you bet she knows that :)

Which part does she know? That she's death on wheels, or that she's only
death on wheels when facing gangers and the like? :)

Brian

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 03:50:40 +0100

Message no. 13 In article <Qz7NHRAUfFQzEwEX@********.demon.co.uk>, "Paul J. Adam"
<shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>In message <CfuJ8ZANOEQzEw0e@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
><Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>>without any problems at all, whether it be hacking a system, flying an
>>aircraft in whether that grounds all others,
>
>No fair, the snow in Chicago wasn't too bad. Read Lynch's latest for
>real nightmare flying.

It's amusing that you should pick up on that Paul. I was in fact
referring to something that had been discussed off-line with another
player, and that may still occur... And it involves slightly more than
a rough snow flurry in a hostile area. :) I did mention his amazing
chopper landing, but it wasn't a direct dig.

>What I find _really_ scary is that the US Navy consider that to be a
>necessary qualification: _every_ carrier pilot can do that with less
>effort and hassle than Lynch. That was a bloody poor landing, and the
>LSO almost literally kicked Lynch's backside for it.

Carrier pilots are a bit of an exception to the norm. They have a small
deck, occassionally that deck moves up and down by massive degrees, and
they have to land "on" it in preference to hitting it. Landing on terra
firma is a different ball game all together.

>I just wanted to emphasise that he's good, but sometimes only just good
>enough.

Unfortunately, where I've been so closely associated with Lynch and your
other characters of late, I've used them as examples to generalise, they
weren't personal digs at you. The reason being that I have so many
characters names bouncing around in my skull at the moment, it's easier
to pick a familiar one, than rumage around and make a bad connection
(something I'm famous for, and trying to avoid here) <g>

>>Death on wheels characters still exists on the list, they're just not
>>doing a lot of killing at the moment.
>
>Easy _is_ death on wheels, as long as she's only fighting gang members
>and the like, and you bet she knows that :)

And so do I. :) However she's not the only one.

>>involvement, and the state of the plots they're involved in, not
>>something I would be overly happy about, but something that *logic*
>>dictates must occur.
>
>Power level is relative and I don't have a problem with it. I don't
>personally see Lynch as being one of the most dangerous characters on
>the list:

No, there are other more dangerous characters, but still he is way
beyond the capabilities of many others, fair enough, he's been here
awhile and has been worked hard to achieve that level. However, that's
not really the point. Most of my ramblings have been in reflection of
the suggestion to increase the "relative" power level of this list to
better reflect the power of the characters posting to it. That's
something I feel would be detrimental and in the long term self
defeating. Encouraging more power play plots, and less "human" plots.

>fight, but since that's widely known that's the last method you should
>choose by which to take him on.

The strength of Lynch, or D'Arkan, or Bull, or Frypp is not an issue
Paul, I'm not saying that everyone should get a serious grip on reality
and stop being the "M" word, because that would be an unfair statement
and an unjustified accusation. Both Easy and Lynch have taken their
fair share of beatings, as have other characters, Mr. Frypp was even
executed, though he appears to have returned as a malevolent spirit,
this was all in a rather vociferous attempt to rationalise the logic
behind increasing the lists relative power (limiting character ability
to access) or keeping it low (allowing greater access for more
characters).

>think of is when Lynch challenged Ronin to a duel. Lynch could beat
>Ronin easily with a knife, but I'm much less certain of the outcome if
>Ronin went unarmed (as Jaimie said he would).

That's one of the more interesting problems here. If two people are
attached to characters, and have used them over a period of several
months or a couple of years, how likely is it that something untoward is
going to be allowed.

For instance, there are some people who are seriously peeved at Lynch,
AlexandriaN, and several other characters, yet there is no way they can
take direct action against a couple of them, and an unlikely case that
any attempt at retribution would be satisfactory. Attempting to
assassinate a character for something they've publicly acknowledged
being responsible for, and failing, is not (in my mind) a satisfactory
conclusion for the concerned parties, so they are likely to try again,
however.... You see the problem.

Example: Lynch wasted Thunda, and cost a certain company a great deal of
money, however Thunda was a "deniable asset", so no repurcussions,
however, other characters took out contacts, systems, teams set up
within other organisations and cost this company more than money, they
cost them a couple of years development to replace those lost assets, I
feel in that case there would be some form of decision at retribution.

However, I as a player would not like to make that point in the list.
In a game, I would not hesitate, but here, it would be incredibly
arrogant of me to ask AlexandriaN's player or Lefty, or Whomever to
allow their character to have an "accident" as a result of their
involvement. Also, I would not expect those players to allow their
characters to suffer this retribution. That's what I meant with the "no
recurse or consequence" comment, and what I was aiming at in relation to
"logic".

Thunda's little escapade is a poor example, but the first one that pops
to mind, and one I'm most familiar with. It is my fault that it was
allowed to develop to the point where it did. I'm not making any
statement of disatisfaction with the involvement of the characters
mentioned, it's just an example to highlight this situation, which has
occured before, I've noticed a couple things in the logs where
characters have done something, and there was no reaction to those
actions. I won't get specific as it would be tedious in the least, but
it's a problem I can see arising again later.

>Luckily it didn't come to that: Jaimie merely added unexpected emphasis
>to a plot point I already hoped to make.

That is the hoped for result of any interaction between characters, but
sometimes, the plots themselves demand some sort of logical conclusion
that is not always in agreement with the characters involved.

Another example. I very much doubt that D'Arkan will survive his
involvement in your plot with Emma and The Farmer. His position within
the FBI, and the fact that his actions must ultimately be explained or
justified to his superiors indicates a good chance that an opposition
character is going to discover his involvement, and in the event of him
getting too close to an answer will take steps to prevent that
occurrence, whether that would be an attempt on his life, or a campaign
to discredit him remains to be seen, but logically one of those events
must occur. Lynch has the fortune of working for a small company with
no corruption in its ranks, and a superior who feels strongly about such
issues. If anyone survives that plot, it will be Lynch, he has
sufficient backing to make that survivability logical and likely.

The same goes for the involvement of four other of my characters, three
of Vaels and one or two others with their connection to Emma, at any
time she can call on them to achieve certain things, or terminate their
involvement... You would by list protocol, need to ask me and inform me
of the reasoning behind that decision and where you would like to see it
go, but "logic" dictates that I must concur, of course I could argue
the point, and come up with reasons not to allow it, but I have a
preference for logic in these instances. If I can't justify it to
myself, then I am not comfortable with it, however I digress from the
original point. :) (as usual) It was my decision to involve them, and
they'll pay whatever the consequences may be for that involvement.

You should know pretty much the way I think from the "conversations"
we've had over mail and at home over a beer or coffee. Maybe I should
have been a politician, I'd probably be more comfortable with plausible
deniability then. :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	Justin Fang <justinf@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 1997 23:11:29 +6400

Message no. 14 Avenger wrote:

Something of a side note to your main argument:

>develop. I don't for one minute believe that a character I, or another
>"newer" listmember introduced that displayed the same skills, contacts,
>and corporate affiliates as an established character would be accepted
>without some complaint and arguing. Rightly so I feel, but a fact
>nonetheless. Increasing the level of this list to acknowledge people
>like AlexandriaN, Lynch, Flux, Frypp, etc

Interesting you should use those examples, since AFAIK, both AlexandriaN and
Lynch appeared on the list more-or-less at the same "level" they are now.
Futhermore, Paul introduced Lynch right after he joined the list. (Not to
pick on Paul or anything, it's just that Lynch seems to be the example-of-
the-week...)

I think presentation and plausibility are more important than actual power
level when introducing a new character. Obviously, coming on to the list
with Mr. Munchkin and proclaiming him KEWLER than anyone else isn't going to
get a very good reception. Conversely, when I signed on just a few weeks
after Paul did, I couldn't tell that Lynch was a "new" character or that
Paul wasn't a veteran listmember. This could just be my newbie ignorance
showing, I suppose. :)

Anyway, I'll agree that making Shadowland harder to access isn't a good
solution to the problems mentioned. My preference would be to allow the
posting of just about any form of electronic communication to the list, not
just stuff traveling over Shadowland or currently covered by the INTERNAL:
header, but that doesn't seem to be a very popular idea.

--
Justin Fang (justinf@****.caltech.edu)
This space intentionally left blank.

From:	Chuck McKenzie <kilroy@**.WISC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 02:30:05 -0600

Message no. 15 On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Justin Fang wrote:

> I think presentation and plausibility are more important than actual power
> level when introducing a new character. Obviously, coming on to the list
> with Mr. Munchkin and proclaiming him KEWLER than anyone else isn't going to
> get a very good reception. Conversely, when I signed on just a few weeks
> after Paul did, I couldn't tell that Lynch was a "new" character or that
> Paul wasn't a veteran listmember.

Actually, from what I remember, Lynch was talked about on ShadowRN for
quite a while before Paul joined TK, and there's a considerable amount of
crossover in readership between the two lists, so a lot of people were
already familiar with him. Compared to a super powered character like
Thunda appearing from nowhere on the list and causing a great deal of
outcry on the list, Lynch just slipped in like he had always been there.

> Anyway, I'll agree that making Shadowland harder to access isn't a good
> solution to the problems mentioned. My preference would be to allow the
> posting of just about any form of electronic communication to the list, not
> just stuff traveling over Shadowland or currently covered by the INTERNAL:
> header, but that doesn't seem to be a very popular idea.

I'm more in favor of this than most, and it seems to be the direction in
which the list is going. Shadowland (in the books) is much more of a
place where people just make short comments about things, rather than
posting videos of their recent exploits, but from recent discussion, it
seems like people agree that Shadowland and TK aren't quite the same
thing. Perhaps just thinking of TK as an overview of the seemier side of
the net in 206X, rather than an oldstyle BBS would help.

Chuck McKenzie kilroy@***.cs.wisc.edu
http://www.upl.cs.wisc.edu/~kilroy/ charlesm@**.wisc.edu
Something caught my eye and dragged it fifteen feet.

From:	"Mark L. Neidengard" <mneideng@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 10:55:36 -0800

Message no. 16 According to Avenger:
>>think of is when Lynch challenged Ronin to a duel. Lynch could beat
>>Ronin easily with a knife, but I'm much less certain of the outcome if
>>Ronin went unarmed (as Jaimie said he would).
>
>That's one of the more interesting problems here. If two people are
>attached to characters, and have used them over a period of several
>months or a couple of years, how likely is it that something untoward is
>going to be allowed.
>
>For instance, there are some people who are seriously peeved at Lynch,
>AlexandriaN, and several other characters, yet there is no way they can
>take direct action against a couple of them, and an unlikely case that
>any attempt at retribution would be satisfactory. Attempting to
>assassinate a character for something they've publicly acknowledged
>being responsible for, and failing, is not (in my mind) a satisfactory
>conclusion for the concerned parties, so they are likely to try again,
>however.... You see the problem.

Well, at least in Alex's case, all his involvement was basically in the
capacity of fixer and strategist for the real parties concerned. In point of
fact, I don't see any particular problem with people really being out to "get"
a particular character on the list, but I'd hope that there is some rational
reason for their grudge. At that point, it falls to the writers to see what
measures and countermeasures their characters are taking. The whole Luthien
incident strikes me as a good example of where a character on the list got
"sanctioned", but in a fashion agreeable to both parties and not without a
sizeable amount of forethought and planning on the assailant's part.

>Example: Lynch wasted Thunda, and cost a certain company a great deal of
>money, however Thunda was a "deniable asset", so no repurcussions,
>however, other characters took out contacts, systems, teams set up
>within other organisations and cost this company more than money, they
>cost them a couple of years development to replace those lost assets, I
>feel in that case there would be some form of decision at retribution.

Well, there is a certain amount of implicit protection afforded by the
organizations that "sponsored" the effort. In the case of the La Paz bombing,
for example, Maxim rather knew that they had some sort of retribution coming,
and while they might be able to ascertain eventually how specifically they
were bombed, doing anything about it in an efficient fashion would likely be
traceable to them and doing it in a subtle fashion that still gets the message
across to the shadow community would likely be too cost-inefficient. Plus,
it would risk further repercussions from Ares et. al. (Alex's employers on
that run) who probably don't want the reputation of corps who don't look after
their runners. OTOH, a deniable asset _is_ a deniable asset...

>However, I as a player would not like to make that point in the list.
>In a game, I would not hesitate, but here, it would be incredibly
>arrogant of me to ask AlexandriaN's player or Lefty, or Whomever to
>allow their character to have an "accident" as a result of their
>involvement. Also, I would not expect those players to allow their
>characters to suffer this retribution. That's what I meant with the "no
>recurse or consequence" comment, and what I was aiming at in relation to
>"logic".

Actually, I was collaborating with Robert Granat (now no longer on the list)
at the time of the La Paz raid with the specific goal of having at least one
of the characters fingered by Maxim and ending up very dead; Rob's loss of
interest in the list made that slightly fall by the wayside, though now that
I'm reminded of it it might be worth doing just for the sake of "completeness".
In any event, Alex himself, like any good fixer, is far less likely than his
runners to suffer the direct consequences of the operations he orchestrates,
as long as he's prudent; not that he'd throw V-12 and crew to the wolves or
anything though. =)

I will say that, at least in my view, the operations that Alex and his people
have participated in have, thusfar, been conducted in a manner that makes them
pretty hard to trace, making the apparent lack of reprisals somewhat more
plausible...
--
/!\/!ark /!\!eidengard, CS Major, VLSI. http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/~mneideng
"Fairy of sleep, controller of illusions" Operator/Jack-of-all-Trades, CACR
"Control the person for my own purpose." "Don't mess with the Dark
Elves!"
-Pirotess, _Record_of_Lodoss_War_ Shadowrunner and Anime Addict

From:	Jeffrey Mach <mach@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 15:18:11 -0800

Message no. 17 Well, now...I seem to have created an avalanche from the little snowball I
threw a few days ago, but it seems to be for the best. Time to toss
meself into the ring.

On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Avenger wrote:

> In article <334031F4.78C2@****.coco.cc.az.us>, Brion Wauters
> <stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US> writes
>
> >If memory serves, Dante was around for quite awhile, ditto for Nightmare (I'm
> >assuming Nightmare was a villian, that's the way his posts always read). So
> >we've had a few "reaccuring" baddies.

> I've not noticed, but as I said to Mike G earlier, I'm ploughing through
> a few years worth of plot logs in an effort to make sure my observations
> weren't groundless. As for recurring bad guys, I have noticed one or
> two, even though they aren't immediately recognisable as "bad", for
> instance Frypp. his bio, puts him as a terrorist responsible for
> several attrocities, yet he happily runs a security firm employing
> runners... He was alledgedly executed in LA, yet I personally have had
> a "conversation" with him on S-tk... But he's not greeted as a
"bad"
> guy, so it's kinda difficult to know what the heck he is, this seems to
> apply to several characters, I'm not complaining as such, but there
> aren't any easily definable characters of "dark" intent, they seem
> mainly to be "John Wayners", this is, admittedly reflective of SR as a
> whole, but in respect to Mike's remarks, it seems a shame. Even the bad
> guys are good guys really.

I was going to snip some of this, but it wouldn't make much sense if I cut
it up.

I'm not too sure why you'd have a problem with bad guys that weren't
dripping scum and villany like it was sweat. Those are the types (can
anyone say Thunda? I knew you could....) that generally find themselves
the subject of manhunts and get themselves fragged by their compatriots
because they end up being too dangerous to work with. I'm not sure why
you would refer to somone like Frypp as a "John Wayner," but if it means
someone who does acts that some would call evil for some purpose, then
hey, I'm for it. I frankly hate the usual straw-man badguys that do evil
things "because their bad, that's why" although I must take the blame for
coming up with a couple in the past. The villans who do things for a
reason are usually the more interesting, and tenatious of bad-guys, they
also tend to develop allies that think like they do. I guess my complaint
in terms of power escallation is the desire to have D&Dish "monsters:"
single bad-guys that are so bloody powerful that your average runner
couldn't take on alone. Well coordinated teams of bad-guys are always
far more dangerous than any one bad-guy (well maybe with the exception of
the Wraith (shiver) hell that dude was his own well coordinated team of
bad-guys).

> >When someone brings in a character, they'll proably try to make him fairly
> >strong. He's running with the big-guns now, and even if he isn't that
> >impressive himself, he's liable to get caught up in things aimed at the
> >nastier runners. Then he'll have to try to survive. A little forebearance
> >proabably couldn't hurt, regarding "power-level".

I will personally admit to some serious munchkinism (compared to Shadowrun
"starting" characters) in a couple of my characters. Part of the reason I
did so when I came up with them is that frankly, I could. With the pace
and scope of the usual campaigns I found myself in, I would have never had
a chance to play these kinds of characters. HOWEVER, I have generally
treated them in such a way that their munchkinism isn't an issue. For
example, as a design study, I came up with a design for an air-superiority
fighter (circa 2058), because frankly, from an Aerospace Engineering
major's perspective, the EFA variant is a total piece of crap, even by
today's standards. Once I had that, I decided to see what could be done
about the person flying it. And so, Arashi was born. On the other hand,
she is by no means a shadowrunner, and you will never see her on a typical
shadowrun. Why is she here? Entertainment value. In comming up with her
origin, we figured there had been a minor ammount of shadow work with her
friend Vernier to get them to where they are now, but at worst in their
futures they may do a bit of merc work, and not return to the shadows,
because they like what they are doing now. And as stories progressed and
things got talked about, a couple other characters, Hephaestus and
Stainless Steel Rat, popped up around them. But these are talking heads,
dispensing advice, data, etc. where I feel appropriate. They basically
stay in the background on the list, and rear their heads when something
interesting comes along that would be in their field of expertise.

On the other hand, (you have five more fingers), er my more shadowrunny
character, WhiteTyger is also by no means a starting character. I had an
idea of what I wanted him capable of doing, and a history, so that
entailed something beyond starting value. I thought he was actually too
powerful, until I got myself involved in a storyline a while back. In the
pre-post writing stage, another wrote a scene where WhiteTygers
single-handedly takes out a bad-guy with little effort. Wanting to grab a
little more lime-light for my character, since he didn't appear much in
the story, I asked to re-write the scene, and for the person who
envisioned the bad-guy to give me some game-term stats for the fellow, so
I could make the fight a bit more realistic. Relatively speaking,
(comparing the game-term stats I had for WhiteTyger) the bad-guy should
have been able to mash poor WhiteTyger to a bloody smear and pick his
teeth with WT's bones. So, I got creative. Technically it would really
screw up the story for our good guys to die, so I made the battle as
realistic as I could while still letting WhiteTyger win. Let him get away
with a few advantages to put them on a more even playing field, and he
walks away bruised, battered, and with a broken leg, but still breathing.

I guess the point I am getting at, is that one man's superstud, is another
man's weenie. It all depends on how you write it. Characters don't get
to be annoyingly powerful, unless you let them. And regarding the whole
"red shirt" sec-guard problem: I think it is usually the symptom of
hurried or unthoughtful writing. People invest a lot of time in their
characters, so they want to show them off. Who want's to give some
faceless security guy the spotlight? But I don't think that this should
be used as an excuse to have your "heroes" wade into battle taking out the
opposition like a Craftsman hi-wheel mower. I always try to give security
credit, hense WhiteTyger looking like me after three rounds with Holyfield
after going mano-y-mano with a Black Ops specialist. In fact, I would
have loved to have wrote up the whole Oxton scenario where the guards were
carefully taken out maximizing their weekness (no magical support and
small numbers) while taking advantage of the runners strenghts, but giving
them the "props" they were due, but when the whole thing fell through when
the other writer involved disappeared on me.

> That's part of the problem. In this case, I have several new
> characters, all of them low powered bar one, a couple of which are
> involved with some very heavy "old time" characters, this makes
> interaction with them difficult at best. I don't personally feel
> comfortable playing characters here that are the equal of people like
> Lynch or Kor, or Flux, but it becomes very difficult, when a player
> knows his character doesn't have a chance in hell of surviving the kind
> of situations these people get into. Logically five of my characters
> are going to have to be killed because of the scale of their
> involvement, and the state of the plots they're involved in, not
> something I would be overly happy about, but something that *logic*
> dictates must occur.

Well, logic can always be coaxed to dictate the solution you want, but it
takes work. Hense the need every once in a while for writer fiat, but
only to be used sparingly. Hating to beat a dead horse, for example with
WhiteTyger vs. the Black Op guy, in a fair fight, WT should have been
chunky salsa, but that wouldn't have been satisfying. So, decided he was
actually hidden (invisibility) and attacted the Black Op guy when it
turned out he was going to nail one of they good guys. Getting a surprise
attack in first and being invisible can really help in a scrap. However,
they bad guy had a hidden cybergun. Logically, this is enough of an edge
that our hero looks mostly doomed, since the fellow is otherwise well-nigh
invulnerable and a combat-monster to boot. In comes writer fiat. The
first attack makes the gun unusable. Fight progresses, WT wins, but gets
pretty hurt doing it. So, I get what I want, but don't look too munchkin
doing it. Walking into the training grounds of an Ares Black Op team with
a knife and a grimmace, yelling "Come get some!" is a good way of
demanding your character get whupped, therefore, I have made the conscious
decision that none of them will do so.

> >Oh, and Avenger, I see Shadowrunning as just trying to survive using the
> >abilities you got. I'll leave the corporate-style stuff to the folks who
> >hire the characters.
>
> That's the sort of answer I expected, and one I personally agree with.
> However, the trend doesn't give across that impression, or maybe I'm
> just reading the list wrong. :)

I personally will take some of the blame for corporate characters on
ShadowTk, however, like I made it clear earlier, they aren't actually
shadowrunners. What material that they produce that comes through the
list is designed for the entertainment and edification of the people
reading it. I assume I will phase them out as I come up with new
characters, or they are no longer useful, but until then I wish to have
fun. As for the problems it causes with characters, well, frankly, who's
to say corps don't pay shadow deckers to monitor the boards for any yahoo
that decides to brag that they broke into their facility. I would only
think it prudent. If Vernier, who despite her current "legitimate"
status, while still maintaining her more shady talents sees some boyo
shouting how he gutted some Ares people with glee, there's a good chance
she will pass that knowledge on. Caveat Evangelion or something like
that. On the other hand, as it says in the FAQ, To and Private exist as
writing tools to indicate the privacy of a message. When you use those
you are basically requiring anyone who wants to use that information but
wasn't in the loop, to a) ask you personally first, b) have a good reason
why their character would have gotten ahold of it. But the open board is
the open board, and it would be really difficult to deny access to the
information, even to a corporation.

The way I see ShadowTk is that it is for any and all electronic traffic
that writers see as relevant to show to the readers. Internal means it
probably never comes near a Shadowland node. Private, and To indicate it
goes to a specific mailbox or computer, maybe in the case of shadowrunners
in the Shadowland node, in the case of say, D'Arkan, not. Only if you
post without any header (or use the nebulous NotTo) are you sending to the
Bullitin Board for anybody that accesses the node to see if they want to
(minus the not-to people of course). If we were to only allow Shadowland
type traffic through here, then I thing this list would become a much more
boring place. First off, you'd have to ax Lynch (Shadowland would
actively exclude law enforcement personel, sorry to continue picking on
you Paul), and the whole SIGA internal threads which I find interesting as
a counterpoint to the more typical shadowrunning. With him, D'Arkan,
Drake and the whole FBI and Interpol groups. Then any and all corporate
traffic. I mean, now that we know Emma was behind the refurbishing of the
nukes, how much harder do we boo and hiss when she is having Dark Avenger
piece together the Twilight's Soul when we also know that she was at least
mildly in league with the Invae all along when it served her interests.
Wouldn't it be less satisfying to the reader, if suddenly DA gets himself
backstabbed for no appearent reason? If we wanted to be real Shadowland
purists, we'd have to nix all phone traffic, sat-uplinks, even video, and
just keep to little text bites where we get to dis each other or make
snippy little comments about things. As a wise man once said: "Where's
the fun in that?"

I think "beefing up" the net-security of the shadowland node would not
address any of the problems for which it has been suggested. All it
really should take is a conscious effort on the part of the people who
write here. If you hate having little kids post, "Dadys in truhbul, help
me." Then don't and don't respond when it comes up. The person who does
it may call everybody on the list heartless bastards on plotd, then we can
point out to them that it would take an ammount of skill and resources
impossible for a child to amass, and therefore we all assumed it was a
trap. Frankly I could care less if FASA declared everybody gets a
Shadowland account for free with three proofs of purchase of NERPS, most
characters lack the skills necessary to access, and more importantly
maintain access to Shadowland, IM(NS)HO. That's what decker contacts are
for, among other things. People simply have to decide if something passes
through ShadowTk, why is it there, and how did it get there and have solid
reasons for each. So, say you beef it up. Logically, you get a higher
class of runners? BZZZT. Logically, everyone who wants to write here
decides, hey my character is good enough and writes anyway, or if you have
someone honest enough to want to play low-powered characters (and who
generally write more interesting stories anyway) they decide to leave.
So, in all, I see a decline in story potential.

As for this place being littered by "John Wayne"s, I don't quite agree.
Besides, Wayne was a versitile enough actor that the reference is dubious
(I like the line: "You wouldn't shoot and unarmed man?" "Well then arm
yourself you sonovabitch!"). While I admit, the tendency here is to play
"good guys," is that so unusual? Most people, despite what kind of slime
you may think they are, usually think of themselves as decent, good, etc.
And given the choice, people play some characters that despite the
situation of being on the wrong side of the law some times, are generally
"good people." Should we ban them from the list? No. Should they think
more about the consequences of their actions? (Actually that's applicable
to just about everyone.) Should they avoid hipocracy (talking all high
and noble, then wasting some fellow out of convenience)? Sure. Being
"good" in the shadows is a rather difficult proposition. I see a lot of
characters that act good only when it is convenient. On the other side of
the coin, I would prefer to see more well thought out villains, even if
they are only seen in one story. (Realisticly, if a hero and a villain
repeatedly cross paths, it shows somebody is doing something seriously
wrong.) But even shadowrunners on the list who are desidedly dark or even
evil should be so for a reason, if anything, to give more color to the
character, whether or not the reason comes out.

Enough of this rambling.

--My two yen

Jeff

From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 1997 00:28:52 +0100

Message no. 18 In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.970331182747.9330B-100000@*****.Colorado.EDU>,
Brian Angliss <angliss@*****.COLORADO.EDU> writes
>On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Paul J. Adam wrote:
>
>> Easy _is_ death on wheels, as long as she's only fighting gang members
>> and the like, and you bet she knows that :)
>
>Which part does she know? That she's death on wheels, or that she's only
>death on wheels when facing gangers and the like? :)

Both. Thunda and then her visitor from the Tir were rude shocks: up
until then being superlatively fast and strong had been enough to carry
her through any situation. Now she's having to actually learn how to be
skilled as well, and it's harder than she thought.

It's beginning to teach her a little humility :)

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 1997 03:22:58 +0100

Message no. 19 In article <Pine.SGI.3.95.970401123656.5465A-
100000@****.ugcs.caltech.edu>, Jeffrey Mach <mach@****.CALTECH.EDU>
writes
>Well, now...I seem to have created an avalanche from the little snowball I
>threw a few days ago, but it seems to be for the best. Time to toss
>meself into the ring.

<grin>

>I was going to snip some of this, but it wouldn't make much sense if I cut
>it up.

In order to save space, and prevent repeating myself (plus everyone
interested will have read Jeff's post) I've snipped a lot of this.
Mainly because I agree with much of the comments made by Jeff. And
don't see any need to answer each paragraph with "Agreed".

>I'm not too sure why you'd have a problem with bad guys that weren't
>dripping scum and villany like it was sweat.

I don't Jeff, I don't have any problem with bad guys who aren't oozing
evil. Earlier I mentioned that my personal favourites in bad guys were
both played by Alan Rickman, The Sheriff of Nottingham, in Costners
Robin Hood, and "Wotsisname" from Die Hard. Neither of whom drip evil.

>you would refer to somone like Frypp as a "John Wayner,"

I guess I should explain this comment. The only information I have
concerning Freddy Frypp, is the bio that's available on the net. He is
a terrorist, responsible for several racial incidents, he's apparently
immortal, and has apparently been raised by and worked for a Tir council
member. Aside from being wanted for terrorist actions, murder etc in
the CFS, he runs a security agency in the CFS. ??? Sorry but this is
where I get confused, hence the John Wayne connection. Wayne played
mainly good guys, but in a couple of movies he played a really mean
sonofabitch. I forget the movies off hand, but one was mean nasty old
cattle baron... Frypps claims to terrorist activities, in my mind
preclude his involvement in providing security in an area where he has a
price on his head, and assisting others... If I've got it wrong, fair
enough, but this is information I have garnered together.

The other thing is the "Good Guy" image. An observation was made, by
someone far more articulate than me, that Shadowrunners would not be the
pictures of respectability and tolerance they are on this list. An
observation I tend to agree with strongly, although some will stick to a
high moral content, many others won't. Also, what kind of lunatic does
it take to decide that getting shot at, and living on the edge of
survivability is way to make a living. (rhetorical question) The other
side to that, is a person who lives on the edge like that for a length
of time, (and as an example I'll use Vietnam, and the consequences of
that action), is going to suffer from the pressure and constant demands
on their system. I have two "older" character on the list, both of whom
are slowly "losing it" as a result of this pressure, but it's not
something that is well portrayed in characters. Characters here have
been running for more years than many Vietnam vets were "in country",
but don't seem to show any result of that day in day out pressure.
Again that can be answered by "writers choice" but helps to highlight
the "recurse/consequence" comment I made earlier.

Now, to cover my ass quickly. I expect Lynch to be primarily a good
guy, as a result of his involvement with SIGA, DC and Pauls very clear
explanations to me of Coppinger and co. His other characters Emma and
Farmer, are far from squeeky clean, and Easy, though heading towards to
"white hat" status, is also "dodgy" Mike G, has filled me in on his
characters as no information is available on the list about them, but he
seems to portray the "darker side" of Shadowrunners better than most of
the characters here at the moment. I understand that it is mainly down
to the skill and determination of the writer to portray their characters
in certain ways. Brian A does nicely with his characters even if I am
confused about one of them. The same goes for Mike G.

But, on one occassion I encountered a character called Ratspeak, I know
nothing at all about that character, but after answering the post, it
was made clear that Ratspeak was "beyond touch" he was superior in all
respects to the present character and was given almost mystical status,
by other listmembers. In that instance, the characters reaction would
have been to taunt Ratspeak, but to what end? It would not have
achieved anything.

Now, in that situation, it's all well and good saying "go read the
logs". I am, and it's not an easy job. The plots aren't well threaded,
and there's a hell of a lot of them, mounting into megabytes. I know, I
downloaded the lot a few nights ago while trying to find some
information on Archangel and Goldeneyes... (since cleared up)

>but if it means
>someone who does acts that some would call evil for some purpose, then
>hey, I'm for it.

As regards Thunda, I am the first to admit that character was so
seriously over the top as be a joke, but he has served his purpose, and
has provided a background for a couple of other plots that are going on,
that surprisingly are not mine. :)

>I frankly hate the usual straw-man badguys that do evil
>things "because their bad, that's why" although I must take the blame for
>coming up with a couple in the past.

Agreed. (and I said I wouldn't do that...)

>the Wraith (shiver) hell that dude was his own well coordinated team of
>bad-guys).

Again, the Wraith is a complete mystery to me, but don't worry about it
Mike G is educating me nicely in this field :)

<snip admission of munchkinist behaviour and justification for
characters> <g>
>On the other hand, (you have five more fingers),

Actually four, and a thumb, but now I'm just being picky. :)

>realistic as I could while still letting WhiteTyger win. Let him get away
>with a few advantages to put them on a more even playing field, and he
>walks away bruised, battered, and with a broken leg, but still breathing.

Ah, now we come to the crux of the matter. That little believability
factor. Paul worked very hard to give me what I wanted with Lynch and
Easy when he took Thunda down, and ultimately I'm happy with it. I
guess, without trying to get into a new argument, I was using Paul as an
example more than anything as I'm more familiar with his characters than
any others. As regards my comments about getting away without injury
and "red shirt" guards, I should have aimed that more at previous IF
posts than the list in general, but that is something I've argued about
privately, and mostly they agree. However, OK, one doesn't want to give
the "red shirt" too much limelight in a character related post, but it
seems unfair not to make it fair and acknowledge that these people are
professionals as well.

>carefully taken out maximizing their weekness (no magical support and
>small numbers) while taking advantage of the runners strenghts, but giving
>them the "props" they were due, but when the whole thing fell through when
>the other writer involved disappeared on me.

I know that feeling, well. I've just had two drop out on me, one has
gone to play in the desert, and another is heavily involved in
transferring an entire manufacturing plant to another state... So I
can sympathise with that.

>doing it. Walking into the training grounds of an Ares Black Op team with
>a knife and a grimmace, yelling "Come get some!" is a good way of
>demanding your character get whupped, therefore, I have made the conscious
>decision that none of them will do so.

OK, although this in point has not occured in the list, a few posts of
similar nature have occured, and are available in the logs, again I'm
not going to name names or anything, as I'm not here to get into an
argument.

>I personally will take some of the blame for corporate characters on
>ShadowTk,

As will I, but not from a character sense, I am at this time controlling
an FBI department. (so who the hell am I to moan huh?) :)

>however, like I made it clear earlier, they aren't actually
>shadowrunners.

Corporate character is one thing, this sort of character will
occassionally turn up, in relation to a plot, or interacting with other
characters, however, entire companies and corporations are another
matter. Now, that's not to belittle SIGA, Serenity or the rest, but
they are in the majority here, and involved heavily in plots. Thinking
on a movie scale, in this sort of instance, the company is usually the
background noise of something, with one or two characters as the main
focus. Paul tends to leave SIGA very much as background noise, but as
far as I can see Serenity are a power unto themselves, and the company
itself is the focus. (Remember I'm not moaning here, so don't try to
justify their existence, please) That's what makes me a little nervous,
again there is another influx of new people to the net due in the next
few weeks, and again at around September. Some of them will find their
way here, and possibly arrive on Shadowtk, expecting something, finding
Corporatetk. And what are they likely to introduce? I'm very larey of
the kind of reaction that might occur. I recall a very minor incident
last year with Brian's Serenity, where a new poster made a mistake, one
that is easy to make given the "impression" here.

>why their character would have gotten ahold of it. But the open board is
>the open board, and it would be really difficult to deny access to the
>information, even to a corporation.

Or other characters/friends/associates etc.

>The way I see ShadowTk is that it is for any and all electronic traffic
>that writers see as relevant to show to the readers.

Yes. This is something that I do agree with wholeheartedly. The fact
that it _must_ come through in the form of a decker post is largely
irrelevant. But, in the same breath, if this *isn't* Shadowland, as the
list seems to agree, then the restriction on decker only involvement is
partially negated, and this becomes more like an information datanode,
where all manner of traffic passes through, something that would
certainly fit the present content of this list better, and would justify
not having the "power level" raised.

>(minus the not-to people of course). If we were to only allow Shadowland
>type traffic through here, then I thing this list would become a much more
>boring place. First off, you'd have to ax Lynch (Shadowland would
>actively exclude law enforcement personel, sorry to continue picking on
>you Paul), and the whole SIGA internal threads which I find interesting as
>a counterpoint to the more typical shadowrunning. With him, D'Arkan,
>Drake and the whole FBI and Interpol groups.

This is pretty much where I was aiming at going with my reasoning for
not increasing the difficulty to access this list, and keeps the variety
of posters and presences, without a necessity to justify it's existence.
I must admit I'm far more comfortable thinking of this as a data
transfer area than a Shadowland node, which is what it apparently is
supposed to be.

If that small section of the FAQ could be changed from Shadowland to
something more fitting, in what appears to be a general view of this
list (though some have not commented yet) that'd be great. (It would
also serve the dual purpose of shutting me up once and for all.) <g>

>I mean, now that we know Emma was behind the refurbishing of the
>nukes, how much harder do we boo and hiss when she is having Dark Avenger
>piece together the Twilight's Soul when we also know that she was at least
>mildly in league with the Invae all along when it served her interests.
>Wouldn't it be less satisfying to the reader, if suddenly DA gets himself
>backstabbed for no appearent reason?

That's something that has been bouncing around on private mail for a
while. I'm rather surprised at Pauls mentioning of Emma, and clearing
her involvement so early in this part of his plot, but I dare say he has
a reason.

Also, without getting into detail, The Soul has other uses, and huge
limitations, again something we're hammering out slowly over p-mail,
before actually using it.

As regards DA, well, his fate is far from sealed, and Emma may not get
the chance to stab him in the back. As South America is pretty much
unmapped, I virutally have carte blanc to do what I want down there...
within reason of course. Anything major will be cleared with PlotD
before I introduce it into a plot. But it's an exciting little area.
And others may yet cheat Emma of her satisfaction. :)

>If we wanted to be real Shadowland
>purists, we'd have to nix all phone traffic, sat-uplinks, even video, and
>just keep to little text bites where we get to dis each other or make
>snippy little comments about things. As a wise man once said: "Where's
>the fun in that?"

Too true. And the primary reason for me starting this whole rant.
Funny how other people get to say what I want to say, only better. :)

>trap. Frankly I could care less if FASA declared everybody gets a
>Shadowland account for free with three proofs of purchase of NERPS,

Single character development point allows unlimited access to the data
and information contained within Shadowland, no need for the skills of a
decker, a simple tortoise and a Matrix browser will do... (I'm not
happy about that either, but that's FASA for you.)

>class of runners? BZZZT. Logically, everyone who wants to write here
>decides, hey my character is good enough and writes anyway, or if you have
>someone honest enough to want to play low-powered characters (and who
>generally write more interesting stories anyway) they decide to leave.
>So, in all, I see a decline in story potential.

Not just in sotry potential, but involvement, in characters and in
general list content. Something that is self destructive in the long
run.

>As for this place being littered by "John Wayne"s, I don't quite agree.
>Besides, Wayne was a versitile enough actor that the reference is dubious
>(I like the line: "You wouldn't shoot and unarmed man?" "Well then
arm
>yourself you sonovabitch!").

Good guys, with a mean streak, but always with the white hat shining
through.

>While I admit, the tendency here is to play
>"good guys," is that so unusual?

Not unusual no, as I said in another post, that is the general trend in
Shadowrun, Mark made a comment about darker characters, and I mentioned
that FASA were contrdicting themselves in the sourcebook, yet the
general trend is for good guys. However, I've seen stronger character
traits in RL games, than in characters where writing is easier than
acting for most.

>Sure. Being
>"good" in the shadows is a rather difficult proposition.

OK, it's the good bad debate all over again really. What constitutes an
evil/bad character. There is no fine descriptor line that seperates the
two, some actions a character may make are likely to be amoral, while
others uphold the finer morals of "civilised" beliefs. However, there
is very distinct line between good characters, and not stable
characters/ OK, I agree that mental stability is difficult to portray
and effectively achieve in a written post, but consider the reaction
when someone acts out of context. ie, the whole "horse" thing. I never
did find out why the guy wanted the horse dead, but everybody was
strongly against killing an innocent animal. Why? Coppinger and Lynch,
yeah, maybe they'd object, D'Arkan certainly would have, but I'm not
going to use him to haunt every post in the list as I have other plans
for that character. Also it would soon get tiring having him quoting
rules and regulations every thirty seconds. :) Or the general reaction
to racist comments or other similar events, The list is united in
unanimously condeming such a thing, not something that is reflective of
modern life in general, let alone the anarchic 2058 the characters
inhabit. Why should anybody give a damn, maybe one or two, but so
many...

>the coin, I would prefer to see more well thought out villains, even if
>they are only seen in one story. (Realisticly, if a hero and a villain
>repeatedly cross paths, it shows somebody is doing something seriously
>wrong.)

Very much dependant on the story and plot. However, something that
drags over a long period, when both antagonists are more than well aware
of each other is difficult to justify unless there is something larger
behind them.

>But even shadowrunners on the list who are desidedly dark or even
>evil should be so for a reason, if anything, to give more color to the
>character, whether or not the reason comes out.

As they should also be exceptionally moral and lawful for a reason. The
majority of Shadowrunners are mercenary, selling their skills for
monetary gain, and reputation. Not the most moral of people, though
they may have their own limitations on the type of job they take,
however their very nature prevents them from being "fanatically" moral
or righteous. In that case, they should find a new line of work.
Death, corruption and betrayal are common fodder, and
insanity/instability walks hand in hand with every one of them.

>Enough of this rambling.

Yeah, I think I'll shut up for a while too. :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	Mike Goldberg <michael.goldberg@*******.COM>
Subject:	Re[2]: Info wanted...
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 1997 21:35:54 MST

Message no. 20 I'm sure the bomb didn't help her ego any either!

*grin*

Mike

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Info wanted...
Author: ShadowTk Plot and Administrative Discussion
<PLOTD@********.ITRIBE.NET> at SMTP-PO
Date: 4/1/97 6:35 PM

In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.970331182747.9330B-100000@*****.Colorado.EDU>,
Brian Angliss <angliss@*****.COLORADO.EDU> writes
>On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Paul J. Adam wrote:
>
>> Easy _is_ death on wheels, as long as she's only fighting gang members
>> and the like, and you bet she knows that :)
>
>Which part does she know? That she's death on wheels, or that she's only
>death on wheels when facing gangers and the like? :)

Both. Thunda and then her visitor from the Tir were rude shocks: up
until then being superlatively fast and strong had been enough to carry
her through any situation. Now she's having to actually learn how to be
skilled as well, and it's harder than she thought.

It's beginning to teach her a little humility :)

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Brion Wauters <stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Fri, 4 Apr 1997 12:02:00 -0800

Message no. 21 Avenger wrote:
>
> The other thing is the "Good Guy" image. An observation was made, by
> someone far more articulate than me, that Shadowrunners would not be the
> pictures of respectability and tolerance they are on this list. An
> observation I tend to agree with strongly, although some will stick to a
> high moral content, many others won't. Also, what kind of lunatic does
> it take to decide that getting shot at, and living on the edge of
> survivability is way to make a living. (rhetorical question) The other
> side to that, is a person who lives on the edge like that for a length
> of time, (and as an example I'll use Vietnam, and the consequences of
> that action), is going to suffer from the pressure and constant demands
> on their system. I have two "older" character on the list, both of whom
> are slowly "losing it" as a result of this pressure, but it's not
> something that is well portrayed in characters. Characters here have
> been running for more years than many Vietnam vets were "in country",
> but don't seem to show any result of that day in day out pressure.
> Again that can be answered by "writers choice" but helps to highlight
> the "recurse/consequence" comment I made earlier.
>

Just what are you talking about when you say "losing it"? This is just
personal intrest rather than flaming. One of my characters - Irish - has
been risking his hide (marines, merc, shadowrunner, Ares/MCT securit) for
twenty-odd years now. He has a few mental problems, but I was never sure
what else might resonably result from his extended stay in front of the
bull's-eye.

Just hoping for usefull (or entertaining) info.

Brion

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Sat, 5 Apr 1997 00:27:11 +0100

Message no. 22 In article <33455E38.2C00@****.coco.cc.az.us>, Brion Wauters
<stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US> writes
>
>Just what are you talking about when you say "losing it"? This is just
>personal intrest rather than flaming. One of my characters - Irish - has
>been risking his hide (marines, merc, shadowrunner, Ares/MCT securit) for
>twenty-odd years now. He has a few mental problems, but I was never sure
>what else might resonably result from his extended stay in front of the
>bull's-eye.
>
>Just hoping for usefull (or entertaining) info.

<grin>
Amusing maybe, useful... well, I'm not known for *useful* information,
but here goes.

Not having personally met any combat veterans as such, though two of my
friends were present during the Falklands incident (navy) I can only
really use programs like China Beach, Tour of Duty, and the statements
from vets in the various "books" on 'Nam, Korea, etc. and a huge amount
of movie references for character study. One that is mildly interesting
is the short character studies from the first Predator movie. If you
ignore the "super-being" Schwartzennegar, and watch the other
characters, they have some interesting quirks all of their own. If you
watch Predator, it is best to get hold of the uncut version, as there is
a bit more character interaction, unlike the video release which follows
the American format of more action-less story.

The way I see it, is in two ways. Aside from the obvious traits of mild
mental instability, and temperament, by "losing it" I mean an impairment
of judgement, the inability to make a clear decision regarding certain
situations, for instance, committing people to combat and accepting
losses, making clear judgement in combat situations that prevents
losses, standing in the line of fire rather than hitting the dirt,
little things that are reflections of a loss of their professionalism.
It is not unknown for people in long term combat situations to become
_extremely_ professional, appearing almost as legendary heroes, becoming
"luck" charms for the company or platoon, it is also not unknown for
similar people to go the opposite way.

If this was a simple war situation, then I might play the characters
differently, but as their enemies and opposition are not so easily
defined, and may be anyone anywhere, the paranoia of that situation is
likely to have a greater effect on the stability of those characters.
Although at this time, the instability of my characters isn't obvious, I
have used a couple of situations to portray a "two sidedness" to their
personalities.

This isn't, obviously, an easy thing to portray effectively using a
written medium, and even less so, in this sort of mail format, as the
lack of emphasis in the text, can be restricting, but I guess that just
makes it more of a challenge. I don't think that obvious ranting and
raving, making allegations of conspiracy and "looning" about is
relective of the pressures these people would be under, though they may
believe in a greater conspiracy, Shadowrunners, and in my case
Mercenaries, are still, mostly professional, they still believe in their
professionality, they'll just develop some strange quirks, and habits,
and gradually lose the ability to make clear judgements in certain
situations. The other side is the emotional feelings of these people
will be greatly enhanced, they'll feel the loss of their friends more,
as though it was a part of themselves, while becoming extremely casual
regarding the deaths of others, only loosely associated with them. They
may become careless of causing "colateral damage" as well, including a
complete lack of remorse for the injury of innocents, though that can
also go the other way.

There are so many possible variations on the theme, that it is difficult
to list them without indulging in one of my incredibly boring epic
posts. <grin>

I hope that all made some sense, and was helpful. :)

--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/

From:	Brion Wauters <stu502@****.COCO.CC.AZ.US>
Subject:	Re: Info wanted...
Date:	Mon, 7 Apr 1997 10:56:10 -0700

Message no. 23 Avenger wrote:
>
> One that is mildly interesting
> is the short character studies from the first Predator movie. If you
> ignore the "super-being" Schwartzennegar, and watch the other
> characters, they have some interesting quirks all of their own. If you
> watch Predator, it is best to get hold of the uncut version, as there is
> a bit more character interaction, unlike the video release which follows
> the American format of more action-less story.

I'm afraid I've only seen the video version.

>they still believe in their
> professionality, they'll just develop some strange quirks, and habits,
> and gradually lose the ability to make clear judgements in certain
> situations. The other side is the emotional feelings of these people
> will be greatly enhanced, they'll feel the loss of their friends more,
> as though it was a part of themselves, while becoming extremely casual
> regarding the deaths of others, only loosely associated with them. They
> may become careless of causing "colateral damage" as well, including a
> complete lack of remorse for the injury of innocents, though that can
> also go the other way.

That's pretty much what I'd already figuered. Little things like decideing
that the safety of the team takes precedence (spl?) over the success of the
mission, boughts of depression and survivors guilt, beserker reaction to the
death of a friend, etc. As for the "colateral damage", that's still rather
loose. He'll try to minimize any extraneous deaths, but if comes down to
killing the techie that they guy with the gun is hiding behind or losing a
teammate, the techie is a ghost.

Thanks for the info.

Brion

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer