Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:30:27 EDT
I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...

Ok, its like this:
I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed, and
wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back saying
"You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it has
an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher than
6."

Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during Charecter
Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I assumed
it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.

Granted he won the argument (since HE is going to be the GM) but I'd like to
know who was right if I ever decide to run a game myself.
Message no. 2
From: Steadfast <laughingman@*******.DE>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 22:39:08 +0200
And so it came to happen that David Foster wrote:
----------

> Ok, its like this:
> I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed,
and
> wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back
saying
> "You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it
has
> an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher
than
> 6."
>
> Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during
Charecter
> Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I
assumed
> it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.
<snip>

In SR 3rd. it is clearly stated:
"...no piece of gear purchased at character creation can have a _Rating_
higher than 6 or an _Availability_ higher than 8."
(SR 3rd., page 30, first column, middle)
But as you pointed it snippled out, the GM has the final saying about that.

--->Steadfast
to be "human" is not a state of living
I want to achieve.
Message no. 3
From: Steadfast <laughingman@*******.DE>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 22:40:37 +0200
Sorry, Michael Feeney of course wrote, NOT David Foster.
Sorry, bit to quick.
;o)

--->Steadfast
to be "human" is not a state of living
I want to achieve.
Message no. 4
From: Lehlan Decker <DeckerL@******.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:51:15 -0400
<SNIP Availibility>
In general the rules for availbility apply at all times.
The difference is whether you have to roll to find the gear,
negotiate the price, and pay the street index markup. These
usually don't apply during chargen. (sorry I don't have the pages
handy to back this up). However I would never let a starting
player have a vindicator either, unless it was a special
circumstance. Besides the GM has the authority to move
the street index/availibility around as needed for game balance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker, Unix Admin (704)331-1149
deckerl@******.com Fax 378-1939
Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Pager 1-888-608-9633
Message no. 5
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 22:41:31 +0100
And verily, did Micheal Feeney hastily scribble thusly...
|
|I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...
|
|Ok, its like this:
|I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed, and
|wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back saying
|"You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it has
|an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher than
|6."

Yup, that was introduced at the same time as Availability itself in
Shadowtech, and it's obviously been incorporated into the main book now.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 6
From: Steve Eley <sfeley@***.NET>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 17:42:45 -0400
Micheal Feeney wrote:
>
> I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...

Wouldn't help. Your opponent has Gamemaster Armor on, and that's hardened
against all forms of logical ammunition. >8->


> Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during Charecter
> Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I assumed
> it meant the rating of the gear itself.

It is if he says so. I had exactly that same house rule in my last
campaign, and I was glad I did. (In my upcoming campaign it doesn't
matter.. The PC's are all starting as legal citizens, so they won't have
anything you couldn't buy in a store...)


Have Fun,
- Steve Eley
sfeley@***.net
Message no. 7
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 18:15:35 EDT
In a message dated 98-09-16 17:46:04 EDT, you write:

<< It is if he says so. I had exactly that same house rule in my last
campaign, and I was glad I did. (In my upcoming campaign it doesn't
matter.. The PC's are all starting as legal citizens, so they won't have
anything you couldn't buy in a store...) >>

I dunno if that is such a disadvantage. A lot of that sort of stuff could be
found in gun stores and military surplus outlets. The only stuff I wouldnt
expect them to be able to find is stuff like Automatic weapons, plastique
(although someone with Chemestry skill could MAKE the stuff) etc. Might put a
crimp on someone who wanted to play a rigger, or someone who wanted a lot of
cyber, though.
Message no. 8
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:20:03 +0200
According to Micheal Feeney, at 16:30 on 16 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during Charecter
> Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I assumed
> it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.
>
> Granted he won the argument (since HE is going to be the GM) but I'd like to
> know who was right if I ever decide to run a game myself.

He is right. In 3rd ed. they added a rule that says no Availability higher
than 8 at character generation, in addition to the "no higher rating than
6" rule that already existed since forever. It's on page60, at the very
end of the first paragraph (not counting the header, that is).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Yeah, I left with nothing but the thought you'd be there too.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 9
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 07:50:37 -0400
On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Steadfast wrote:

->And so it came to happen that David Foster wrote:
->> Ok, its like this:
->> I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed,
->and
->> wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back
->saying
->> "You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it
->has
->> an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher
->than
->> 6."
->>
->> Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during
->Charecter
->> Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I
->assumed
->> it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.
-><snip>
->
->In SR 3rd. it is clearly stated:
->"...no piece of gear purchased at character creation can have a _Rating_
->higher than 6 or an _Availability_ higher than 8."
->(SR 3rd., page 30, first column, middle)
->But as you pointed it snippled out, the GM has the final saying about that.

Hmmm.... I don't remember saying the aforemention piece. Sure you
quoted right?

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 10
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:09:54 -0400
On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Micheal Feeney wrote:

->I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...
->
->Ok, its like this:
->I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed, and
->wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back saying
->"You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it has
->an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher than
->6."
->
->Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during Charecter
->Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I assumed
->it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.
->
->Granted he won the argument (since HE is going to be the GM) but I'd like to
->know who was right if I ever decide to run a game myself.

He was right, but I'd like to bring one sample character sheet to
everyone's attention that ignores, in part, this rule on one count. The
Ork Combat Decker has a cyberdeck with an MPCP Rating of 7, which is a
piece of gear with a rating higher than 6.
Also, who here would qualify a cyberdeck program as gear? I
figured since the program ratings cannot exceed the MPCP, that was the
limitation in and of itself.
Another cyberdeck question: If you buy a Rating 8 program, and
you have an MPCP of 6, can you downgrade the program's rating to 6 like
you would the Force of a spell or is it stuck at 8?

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 11
From: Rick J Federle <rfederle@****.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:37:23 -0400
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:09:54 -0400 David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
writes:
>On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Micheal Feeney wrote:
>
>->I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...
>->
>->Ok, its like this:
>->I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got
>3rd Ed, and
>->wants to use it.
Umm..... Just got? Try just got a month or two ago.

> Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it
>back saying
>->"You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun)
>because it has
>->an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing
>higher than
>->6."
>->
3rd edition, page 60, first column, first paragraph, last sentence.

>->Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during
>Charecter
>->Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I
>assumed
>->it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7,
>etc.
>->
>->Granted he won the argument (since HE is going to be the GM) but I'd
>like to
>->know who was right if I ever decide to run a game myself.
>
It mainly depends on the edition you use. I'm currently running a 3rd
edition game(off line and trying to start an online game, probably via
email or ICQ), playing a 2nd edition game with 3rd edition initiative
rules, and a 2nd edition game with edited 3rd edition rules.

> He was right, but I'd like to bring one sample character sheet
>to
>everyone's attention that ignores, in part, this rule on one count.
>The
>Ork Combat Decker has a cyberdeck with an MPCP Rating of 7, which is a
>piece of gear with a rating higher than 6.
> Also, who here would qualify a cyberdeck program as gear? I
>figured since the program ratings cannot exceed the MPCP, that was the
>limitation in and of itself.
MPCP isn't usually counted that way. You should probably ignore MPCP
and count the persona attributes.
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 12
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:12:02 -0400
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Rick J Federle wrote:

->> He was right, but I'd like to bring one sample character sheet
->>to
->>everyone's attention that ignores, in part, this rule on one count.
->>The
->>Ork Combat Decker has a cyberdeck with an MPCP Rating of 7, which is a
->>piece of gear with a rating higher than 6.
->> Also, who here would qualify a cyberdeck program as gear? I
->>figured since the program ratings cannot exceed the MPCP, that was the
->>limitation in and of itself.
-> MPCP isn't usually counted that way. You should probably ignore MPCP
->and count the persona attributes.

So, you wouldn't be allowed to start with a persona program higher
than 6? Drat, I wanted an 8 Masking. You still didnt answer my question
about the cyberdeck programs, maximum initial rating of 6 or MPCP?

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 13
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:37:32 EDT
In a message dated 9/17/1998 7:01:22 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US writes:

> Another cyberdeck question: If you buy a Rating 8 program, and
> you have an MPCP of 6, can you downgrade the program's rating to 6 like
> you would the Force of a spell or is it stuck at 8?

As the 3rd ed books say to use the VR2 rules, unless otherwise stated, the
programs are NOT flexible in their usage ratings, the way that a Spell is.
IMO, it's the *one* area where deckers are shafted.

-K
Message no. 14
From: Shaun Gilroy <shaung@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:59:29 -0400
At 04:37 PM 9/17/98 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 9/17/1998 7:01:22 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US writes:
>
>> Another cyberdeck question: If you buy a Rating 8 program, and
>> you have an MPCP of 6, can you downgrade the program's rating to 6 like
>> you would the Force of a spell or is it stuck at 8?
>
>As the 3rd ed books say to use the VR2 rules, unless otherwise stated, the
>programs are NOT flexible in their usage ratings, the way that a Spell is.
>IMO, it's the *one* area where deckers are shafted.
>
>-K

Actually, I don't have a page reference (I'm at work now), IIRC from VR2,
you can't use a program at all if its rated 8 on a deck of MPCP(6); not
enough processing power (Try running win98 on a 286- neh?).

Aside from that why would you want to run a program at a reduced rating?
It would still use the same active memory because of its rating.



Shaun Gilroy [shaung@**********.net]
Online Technologies Corporation
Message no. 15
From: Tim Flowers <tflowers@****.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 18:32:05 +0800
Micheal Feeney wrote:

> I was hoping you all might give me some ammunition on...
>
> Ok, its like this:
> I am getting together with a friend for some gaming. He just got 3rd Ed, and
> wants to use it. Well, I make my charecter, and then he sends it back saying
> "You cant have this piece of equipment (a vindicator Minigun) because it has
> an availability of 8, and you cant have anything with a rateing higher than
> 6."
>
> Now, As I understood it, Availability was not used in any way during Charecter
> Generation. I did see the rule about no rating higher than 6, but I assumed
> it meant the rating of the gear itself. Like Tranq-4, or Attack-7, etc.
>
> Granted he won the argument (since HE is going to be the GM) but I'd like to
> know who was right if I ever decide to run a game myself.

HE is in the right on this one...anyone crazy enough to want a Vindicator
minigun for a starting character doesn't desevre to play...I GM SR2 on a semi reg
basis...and It REALLY bugs me when people want big guns over anything
else...Including well thought
out characters with history...In fact...to makes starting characters less
munchkin...NOTHING is allowed over 6(attributes...excluding
metas,skills...INCLUDING concentrations/specializations or gear avail...as for
cyberware
It depends on the character's background on what I'll let them put in(what's
that?You're playing a Troll Ganger who has Move-by-Wire 3?I don't think so! In
finishing I'd like to say...I'm not having a go at you in particular...just the
whole munchkin thing.

If you don't know what a munchkin is...Think along these lines.

When buying weapons, do you think Why use a light pistol?It ONLY does 6L...get a
heavy pistol instead...It does 9M...If the answer is YES...then you might be a
munchkin
Or if you spend more Nuyen On ammo and gun parts than you do on clothes or
food...You're a munchkin:)

Well that's my two nuyen's worth...Asta Cabrones!
Message no. 16
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 14:28:50 EDT
In a message dated 98-09-18 06:31:12 EDT, you write:

<< When buying weapons, do you think Why use a light pistol?It ONLY does
6L...get a
heavy pistol instead...It does 9M...If the answer is YES...then you might be
a
munchkin
Or if you spend more Nuyen On ammo and gun parts than you do on clothes or
food...You're a munchkin:) >>

Oh dear... I seem to be becoming a munchkin. Ah well.

Oh, and that vindicator wasnt ment to be a personal weapon... it was ment to
go on a concealed firmpoint on his vehicle. not even *I* am so stupid as to
want to be carrying something like that around on a run!!!!!
Message no. 17
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 13:36:40 +0200
According to Tim Flowers, at 18:32 on 18 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> When buying weapons, do you think Why use a light pistol?It ONLY does 6L...get a
> heavy pistol instead...It does 9M...

Hell, my group uses 6M as the damage for most heavy pistols, and 6L for
lights, and still I have one player who constantly bitches about how
little damage they cause -- he fails to understand that with two more
successes, the light will cause the same kinds of wounds as the heavy :/

> If the answer is YES...then you might be a munchkin

I don't agree with that, but it seems there are more definitions of
"munchkin" than there are roleplayers.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 18
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 09:29:09 -0700
> From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>

> > When buying weapons, do you think Why use a light pistol?It ONLY does
6L...get a
> > heavy pistol instead...It does 9M...
>
> Hell, my group uses 6M as the damage for most heavy pistols, and 6L for
> lights, and still I have one player who constantly bitches about how
> little damage they cause -- he fails to understand that with two more
> successes, the light will cause the same kinds of wounds as the heavy :/

You never told me that at Gencon Gurth. I'm so happy I think I might cry.
;)

> > If the answer is YES...then you might be a munchkin
>
> I don't agree with that, but it seems there are more definitions of
> "munchkin" than there are roleplayers.

Hmmmm...good point. Taking a heavy pistol was just always good business, I
mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis then
an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who only
wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually use
machine pistols from time to time.


Caric
Message no. 19
From: Slipspeed <atreloar@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 03:35:36 +1000
Caric said:
>Hmmmm...good point. Taking a heavy pistol was just always good business, I
>mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis then
>an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who only
>wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually use
>machine pistols from time to time.


We solved the heavy pistols problem in one foul swoop with our group... We
paid attention to the concealment rules. (Though we may have fooled with
the numbers - I forget)

Anyway, according to our group, light pistols were compact, easily
concealable weapons. Most, if not all heavy pistols aren't nearly so
concealable. And cops these days tend to pay attention to bulges under
clothing, and a heavy pistol makes a noticeable bulge. Imagine what they're
like in the 2050s and 60s... The mere hint of a concealed weapon in some
areas of Seattle and elsewhere would cause them to stop the person and ask
questions.

So, after that was decided, our group started packing lighter weapons (and
lighter armour - that's bulky and noticeable at high levels too), thinking
that it's generally good for Lone Star etc to ignore you on the way to a
run...

The side effect of the lighter armour and weapons was good, too. When
you're wearing a MAXIMUM of 5 ballistic/3 impact armour, shotguns, assault
rifles etc are more than a threat, they're literally life threatening. No
more runners shrugging and saying "So he's got a shotgun... Big deal... I
lob a grenade around the corner."

Slipspeed

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
"Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology. So
there."
Adam Treloar aka Guardian, Slipspeed
atreloar@*********.com
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1900/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Message no. 20
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 19:44:08 +0200
According to Caric, at 9:29 on 19 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> > Hell, my group uses 6M as the damage for most heavy pistols, and 6L for
> > lights, and still I have one player who constantly bitches about how
> > little damage they cause -- he fails to understand that with two more
> > successes, the light will cause the same kinds of wounds as the heavy :/
>
> You never told me that at Gencon Gurth. I'm so happy I think I might cry.
> ;)

What part of this discussion am I missing here?

> Taking a heavy pistol was just always good business, I
> mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis then
> an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who only
> wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually use
> machine pistols from time to time.

Exactly. My main reason for downing them to 6M (or 7M for weapons that are
rated at 10M by FASA) is because IMHO they fire the same kind of ammo as
SMGs -- no, I don't see heavy pistols as .50AE and up -- so they should do
similar damage; it's also much easier to downgrade heavy pistols than to
adjust a lot of other weapons up to make the relative values slightly more
realistic.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 21
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 11:13:19 -0700
> From: Slipspeed <atreloar@*********.COM>

> Caric said:
> >Hmmmm...good point. Taking a heavy pistol was just always good
business, I
> >mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis
then
> >an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who
only
> >wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually
use
> >machine pistols from time to time.
>
>
> We solved the heavy pistols problem in one foul swoop with our group...
We
> paid attention to the concealment rules. (Though we may have fooled with
> the numbers - I forget)

I would imagine so, according to vanilla rules there really isn't much if
any concealability advantage to light pistols. Never made sense to us
either, but we never got around to changing them.

> The side effect of the lighter armour and weapons was good, too. When
> you're wearing a MAXIMUM of 5 ballistic/3 impact armour, shotguns,
assault
> rifles etc are more than a threat, they're literally life threatening.
No
> more runners shrugging and saying "So he's got a shotgun... Big deal...
I
> lob a grenade around the corner."

Sounds like your group was going for the same feel as u s. I've always
enjoyed the "any punk with a gun is a threat" mentality of SR. It takes
some adjusting on the groups part in my opinion to make it a reality
however.

Plus I still don't buy the fact that a heavy pistol penetrates armor better
than an assault rifle.

Caric
Message no. 22
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 11:17:04 -0700
> From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>

> > > Hell, my group uses 6M as the damage for most heavy pistols, and 6L
for
> > > lights, and still I have one player who constantly bitches about how
> > > little damage they cause -- he fails to understand that with two more
> > > successes, the light will cause the same kinds of wounds as the heavy
:/
> >
> > You never told me that at Gencon Gurth. I'm so happy I think I might
cry.
> > ;)
>
> What part of this discussion am I missing here?

None really. K and I discussed this point, but I don't think you and I
ever did. I figured that I was the only person in the world who thought
that it made zero sense for heavy pistols to do 9M damage.

> > Taking a heavy pistol was just always good business, I
> > mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis
then
> > an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who
only
> > wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually
use
> > machine pistols from time to time.
>
> Exactly. My main reason for downing them to 6M (or 7M for weapons that
are
> rated at 10M by FASA) is because IMHO they fire the same kind of ammo as
> SMGs -- no, I don't see heavy pistols as .50AE and up -- so they should
do
> similar damage; it's also much easier to downgrade heavy pistols than to
> adjust a lot of other weapons up to make the relative values slightly
more
> realistic.

If you did adjust all the power ratings up to make it make sense then you
would seriously have to look at the armor rules as well. Mush easier to
just lower HP's.

We did the same thing with the power as you. Basically subtract three from
the FASA listed power of and heavy pistol.

Caric
Message no. 23
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 14:15:45 -0500
On Sat, 19 Sep 1998 19:44:08 +0200 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>According to Caric, at 9:29 on 19 Sep 98, the word on the street
>was...

>> Taking a heavy pistol was just always good business, I
>> mean hell they had better penetration power on a round per round basis
then
>> an assault rifle. We waxed them down to 6m also and now the cops who
only
>> wear secure jackets actually have some protection, and people actually
use
>> machine pistols from time to time.

>Exactly. My main reason for downing them to 6M (or 7M for weapons that
are
>rated at 10M by FASA) is because IMHO they fire the same kind of ammo as
>SMGs -- no, I don't see heavy pistols as .50AE and up -- so they should
do
>similar damage; it's also much easier to downgrade heavy pistols than to
>adjust a lot of other weapons up to make the relative values slightly
more
>realistic.

Hmmmm... I might use this in my home games ...
However, I to disagree on the rationalle ...
Machine Pistols are going to be firing the same ammo as SMGs (Being
based, I believe on the Beretta Model 93R)
Light Pistols probably use the same ammo as well. This is, most likely,
the 9mm ammo.
Heavy Pistols are getting their extra punch from the longer barrel
lengths (compared to the Light Pistols) as well as heavier ammo. (Like
the .45 ...)

After comparing the Heavy Pistols in SR to excisting pistols, however, it
seems that they indeed fire 9mm ... D'OH! So what if a certain gun is
chambered for something like a .45? Is that 7M Heavy Pistols?

I'd guess, btw, that Hold-Outs have barrel Lengths of around 70mm, Light
of around 100-125mm, and Heavy of around 150+mm. Does that make sense?

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` I traded my Flesh for a Fantasy and now my truck broke down, my wife
left me, and my dog died o/` -- Billy Idol, Jr. Rock Country Singer

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 24
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 14:06:29 -0700
> From: D. Ghost <dghost@****.COM>

> >similar damage; it's also much easier to downgrade heavy pistols than to
> >adjust a lot of other weapons up to make the relative values slightly
> more
> >realistic.
>
> Hmmmm... I might use this in my home games ...
> However, I to disagree on the rationalle ...
> Machine Pistols are going to be firing the same ammo as SMGs (Being
> based, I believe on the Beretta Model 93R)
> Light Pistols probably use the same ammo as well. This is, most likely,
> the 9mm ammo.
> Heavy Pistols are getting their extra punch from the longer barrel
> lengths (compared to the Light Pistols) as well as heavier ammo. (Like
> the .45 ...)

Heavy pistols still do moderate damage as opposed to light damage from
light pistols.

> After comparing the Heavy Pistols in SR to excisting pistols, however, it
> seems that they indeed fire 9mm ... D'OH! So what if a certain gun is
> chambered for something like a .45? Is that 7M Heavy Pistols?

You could definitely lok at it that way, the problem with that type of
thinking however is similar to the problem with megapulses. SR firearm
calibres are not listed anywhere so comparing them to present day firearms
is never going to be perfect, because that's not what they based damage on
for the game.

> I'd guess, btw, that Hold-Outs have barrel Lengths of around 70mm, Light
> of around 100-125mm, and Heavy of around 150+mm. Does that make sense?

Sure it does, but it's still just rationalizing a game mechanic. I'm not
saying that I disagree with anything that you have said, in fact I don't,
but we didn't get that deep into it when we decided to switch, it just made
sense to us so we did it.

Caric
Message no. 25
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:56:20 EDT
In a message dated 98-09-19 14:23:47 EDT, you write:

<<
Plus I still don't buy the fact that a heavy pistol penetrates armor better
than an assault rifle.

Caric >>

There is a reason for this. Believe it or not, most assault rifles use a
SMALLER round than a heavy pistol does. The M-16, and its follow on M-22
use a 5.56 MM round. The AK 47 uses 7.5 mm round. A heavy pistol uses at
least a 9mm round or larger.

For those of you now shaking your head and going huh?? there was a reason for
this. They went with the smaller rounds for two reasons. First was the
lighter shell allows for more rounds in a smaller clip. Second, the recoil is
much more controlable. Third the ammunition is cheaper to produce, and
fourth, a wound can actually be better than a kill in terms of warfare. A
wounded solger exerts what is called a "rear-ward pull", in and off it can
take 3-4 men off the line of battle to care for a wounded man and get him back
to the aid station for treatment. A dead man exerts no such rearward force.

Hmm... I just came up with four entries for two reasons... Gawd I love new
math.
Message no. 26
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:18:28 -0700
:There is a reason for this. Believe it or not, most assault rifles use a
:SMALLER round than a heavy pistol does. The M-16, and its follow on
M-22
:use a 5.56 MM round. The AK 47 uses 7.5 mm round. A heavy pistol uses
at
:least a 9mm round or larger.

Which is EXACTLY why the SHOULD go through armor BETTER- smaller cross
section = less resitance. Note that they also have MUCH more charge, and
perhaps twice the speed- that also helps penetration.
The situation gets silly when folks pull out rugar warhawks they carry
ONLY for use against vehicles, for example. Because of their high base
power, they are a good bet to punch through hard armor, but an assault
rifle would ("realistically") be better.

Mongoose
Message no. 27
From: John E Pederson <pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 22:42:39 -0500
Micheal Feeney wrote:
>
> In a message dated 98-09-19 14:23:47 EDT, you write:
>
> <<
> Plus I still don't buy the fact that a heavy pistol penetrates armor better
> than an assault rifle.
>
> Caric >>
>
> There is a reason for this. Believe it or not, most assault rifles use a
> SMALLER round than a heavy pistol does. The M-16, and its follow on M-22
> use a 5.56 MM round. The AK 47 uses 7.5 mm round. A heavy pistol uses at
> least a 9mm round or larger.
>
> For those of you now shaking your head and going huh?? there was a reason for
> this. They went with the smaller rounds for two reasons. First was the
> lighter shell allows for more rounds in a smaller clip. Second, the recoil is
> much more controlable. Third the ammunition is cheaper to produce, and
> fourth, a wound can actually be better than a kill in terms of warfare. A
> wounded solger exerts what is called a "rear-ward pull", in and off it can
> take 3-4 men off the line of battle to care for a wounded man and get him back
> to the aid station for treatment. A dead man exerts no such rearward force.
>
> Hmm... I just came up with four entries for two reasons... Gawd I love new
> math.

Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an
assault rifle of any caliber. The 1947 Kalishnikov(sp?) automatic
assault rifle (aka: AK-47) and its knock-offs (most well-known of
these is the Chinese version which is nearly identical, though I
understand that it is supposed to be a more reliable gun in wet/muddy
conditions), use 7.62mm rounds, and if you've ever actually *looked*
at the cartridge (as opposed to the slug) of such a weapon, you'll
notice that assault rifle rounds, like a lot of high-power *rifle*
rounds use bullets with a low diameter relative to the length of the
slug, which is concave on the rearward end so that the manufacturer
can stuff *more* powder behind the slug and into the cartridge, which
already broadens out into a cola-bottle-like shape. The rounds used by
the AK-47 are like this, and the 5.56 NATO and Russian rounds used by
the M-16 and AK-74 (respectively) do the same. I don't think I've
heard of the M-22, but if it, too, uses 5.56mm NATO ammunition, the
rounds will do the same thing. What all of this boils down to is that
the bullet has a lower cross-sectional area, but a higher velocity,
while mass doesn't get lowered too much (IIRC). Lower cross-sectional
area => lower resistance => less kinetic energy lost + higher starting
kinetic energy (KE=mv^2) => higher penetration.

--
John Pederson otherwise known as Lyle Canthros, shapeshifter-mage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes
convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe -- a
spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we
with our modest powers must feel humble."
--Albert Einstein
lobo1@****.com canthros1@***.com pedersje@******.rose-hulman.edu
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/4864 ICQ UIN 3190186
"I'm not fifty!" "SPOONMAN!!!" Number Two -- with a bullet!
Message no. 28
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 21:50:11 -0700
> From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>

> <<
> Plus I still don't buy the fact that a heavy pistol penetrates armor
better
> than an assault rifle.


> There is a reason for this. Believe it or not, most assault rifles use a
> SMALLER round than a heavy pistol does. The M-16, and its follow on
M-22
> use a 5.56 MM round. The AK 47 uses 7.5 mm round. A heavy pistol uses
at
> least a 9mm round or larger.

Absolutely true, but in my personal though limited experience, and
everything that I have ever read/seen/been told the smaller rounds of
assault rifles penetrate far better due to a *much* higher velocity.
The best RL example I can give that I was part of would be a 1911 A1 .45
pistol and a 7.62 AR15 fired at the same range at an old washing machine.
None of the pistol rounds went through the front and back of the machine,
but nearly every single AR round went through both sides.

> Hmm... I just came up with four entries for two reasons... Gawd I love
new
> math.

:)

Caric
Message no. 29
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 01:03:57 EDT
In a message dated 9/19/1998 1:25:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
caric@********.COM writes:

>
> We did the same thing with the power as you. Basically subtract three from
> the FASA listed power of and heavy pistol.

Interesting, in simpler terms that would make the pistols *nearly* the
equivalent to what they would have been in SR1, which IIRC, a Predator II was
6M3, and according to the rules for converting from SR1 to SR2, everything
went to a flat staging of "2", and the original staging number was simply
added to the power. Here's a thought to this one then.

Instead of adding a flat number, subtract the previous staging from "2" (which
is what all staging in SR2 and SR3 would be). That value, be it positive or
negative, is then "added" to the Power Value of the weapon in question.

I remember considering this option once several years ago (back when Rob
Nesius was actually playing in my games), but decided against it in lue of the
idea of having to repeat or supply this "House Rule" to all those players all
those times it would have come up.

-K
Message no. 30
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 00:09:25 -0500
On Sat, 19 Sep 1998 21:50:11 -0700 Caric <caric@********.COM> writes:
>The best RL example I can give that I was part of would be a 1911 A1 .45
>pistol and a 7.62 AR15 fired at the same range at an old washing
machine.
>None of the pistol rounds went through the front and back of the
machine,
>but nearly every single AR round went through both sides.

Uhm... wouldn't this support the Heavy Pistols' damage codes by
attributing them to massive trauma? (IOW, isn't it better for the target
if the bullet goes clean through?)

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` I traded my Flesh for a Fantasy and now my truck broke down, my wife
left me, and my dog died o/` -- Billy Idol, Jr. Rock Country Singer

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 31
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 00:16:56 -0500
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Date: Sunday, September 20, 1998 12:04 AM

>Interesting, in simpler terms that would make the pistols *nearly* the
>equivalent to what they would have been in SR1, which IIRC, a Predator II
was
>6M3, and according to the rules for converting from SR1 to SR2, everything
>went to a flat staging of "2", and the original staging number was simply
>added to the power. Here's a thought to this one then.

Close. According to SSC, the Predator II was a 6M2 weapon, not 6M3. The
rest of your observations seem right on to me.

Upon hearing those arguments, I think I'm going to implement that into my
own current campaign (dropping heavy pistols down to 6M or 7M).

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 32
From: Machine-gun Kelly <mgkelly@****.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 01:30:11 -0500
D. Ghost wrote:
(IOW, isn't it better for the target
> if the bullet goes clean through?)
>
> --
> D. Ghost

That depends. On a lower velocity round, it usually does. High-vee
rounds like the 5.56mm carry a tremendous amount of kinetic energy,
which produces an entrance would the size of a dime, but an exit would
the size of a softball. If you've ever seen x-rays of a torso being hit
by a 5.56mm round, you can actually see the shock wave cone which has
been left in the body and has displaced organs (to say nothing of the
hydrostatic shock high-velocity rounds produce. It tend to travel
through the blood vessels, bursting them, as well as blowing cardio
valves, depending where the bullet hit).

Mgkelly

--
"The next time we go to the Tir, I'm bringing a nuke...."
Message no. 33
From: Josh Munn <barnack@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 03:09:05 EDT
>>>Hmmmm...good point. Taking a heavy pistol was just always
>>>goodbusiness, I mean hell they had better penetration power on a
>>>round per round basisthen an assault rifle. We waxed them down to
>>>6m also and now the cops whoonly wear secure jackets actually have
>>>some protection, and people actuallyuse machine pistols from time
>>>to time.
>> We solved the heavy pistols problem in one foul swoop with our
>>group...We paid attention to the concealment rules. (Though we may
>>have fooled with the numbers - I forget)
>I would imagine so, according to vanilla rules there really isn't >much
if any concealability advantage to light pistols. Never made >sense to
us either, but we never got around to changing them.
Since it takes only one success to notice to "bulge" of a weapon in a
perseption test, the diference between a 7 and a 9 in concealalbility is
quiet significant. It is much harder to role a 6 then rerole and get a
three or higher than to role a 6 and then a 1 or higher. For this
reason I always make it a policy to get a light pistol during character
creation.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 34
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:28:31 +0200
According to D. Ghost, at 0:09 on 20 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> Uhm... wouldn't this support the Heavy Pistols' damage codes by
> attributing them to massive trauma? (IOW, isn't it better for the target
> if the bullet goes clean through?)

What matters is the amount of energy left behind by the bullet. A .22 LR
that leaves all of its 200 J behind will do less damage than a 5.56 mm
(which has about the same bullet diameter as the .22) which leaves half
its 1800 J behind and then flies out the other side of the target. Of
course, if that 5.56 mm were to stay in the target, its effects would be
even worse.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 35
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:28:29 +0200
According to D. Ghost, at 14:15 on 19 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> Hmmmm... I might use this in my home games ...
> However, I to disagree on the rationalle ...
> Machine Pistols are going to be firing the same ammo as SMGs (Being
> based, I believe on the Beretta Model 93R)

Not really, because machine pistols are equivalent to light pistols in SR.

> Light Pistols probably use the same ammo as well. This is, most likely,
> the 9mm ammo.
> Heavy Pistols are getting their extra punch from the longer barrel
> lengths (compared to the Light Pistols) as well as heavier ammo. (Like
> the .45 ...)

I'm not getting into this. An SR caliber discussion is like a thread about
the intricacies of the magic system -- we could argue for a decade and
still have no answer everyone is happy with.

> After comparing the Heavy Pistols in SR to excisting pistols, however, it
> seems that they indeed fire 9mm ... D'OH! So what if a certain gun is
> chambered for something like a .45? Is that 7M Heavy Pistols?

If you want them to be, yes.

> I'd guess, btw, that Hold-Outs have barrel Lengths of around 70mm, Light
> of around 100-125mm, and Heavy of around 150+mm. Does that make sense?

Yes and no. Trying to put actual stats on SR guns is very hard (if you own
3G3, take a look at the conversions on my page, and pay particular
attention to the tricks I had to use to make it fit).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 36
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:28:30 +0200
According to Micheal Feeney, at 22:56 on 19 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> > Plus I still don't buy the fact that a heavy pistol penetrates armor better
> > than an assault rifle.
>
> There is a reason for this. Believe it or not, most assault rifles use a
> SMALLER round than a heavy pistol does. The M-16, and its follow on M-22
> use a 5.56 MM round. The AK 47 uses 7.5 mm round. A heavy pistol uses at
> least a 9mm round or larger.

Michael, you need to do the math for armor penetration. Smaller caliber =
higher penetation for a given energy, because there is less surface area
for that energy to be applied to.

If you take a 9 mm round (area about 64 mm^2) and a 5.56 mm round (area
about 24 mm^2), you'll see that if both have the same energy, the 5.56 mm
has approximately 2 2/3rds more energy per square millimeter. (This is not
an entirely valid comparison because the shape and material of the bullet
will also contribute to penetration, but it works on a global level.)

To make it worse, pistol rounds have a much lower velocity than rifle
rounds, reducing the energy available to them (compare a 10 g bullet at
300 m/s to a 4 g bullet at 1,000 m/s: 450 J vs. 2000 J -- about the
difference between a 9x19 mm and a 5.56x45 mm round at the weapon's
muzzle).

The conclusion is that assault rifles have higher penetration than
pistols, yet in SR it's the other way around.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 37
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:28:30 +0200
According to K in the Shadows, at 1:03 on 20 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> Interesting, in simpler terms that would make the pistols *nearly* the
> equivalent to what they would have been in SR1, which IIRC, a Predator II was
> 6M3

6M2, and that was mainly due to the FirePower ammo they added in the SSC
to make heavy pistols a useful thing in SR1 (light pistols were 3M2,
heavies 4M2).

> and according to the rules for converting from SR1 to SR2, everything
> went to a flat staging of "2", and the original staging number was simply
> added to the power.

I don't think they did that for all weapons; only a number of them fit
this rule (hold-outs, assault rifles, SMGs almost, etc.).

> Here's a thought to this one then.
>
> Instead of adding a flat number, subtract the previous staging from "2"
(which
> is what all staging in SR2 and SR3 would be). That value, be it positive or
> negative, is then "added" to the Power Value of the weapon in question.

So in case of heavy pistols, they'd stay at 9M, but assault rifles would
also go to 9M, as they went from 5M3 to 8M? Not sure how well this rule
would work...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 38
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:28:29 +0200
According to Caric, at 11:17 on 19 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> > What part of this discussion am I missing here?
>
> None really. K and I discussed this point, but I don't think you and I
> ever did. I figured that I was the only person in the world who thought
> that it made zero sense for heavy pistols to do 9M damage.

Ah, that would explain a lot, yes :)

> If you did adjust all the power ratings up to make it make sense then you
> would seriously have to look at the armor rules as well. Mush easier to
> just lower HP's.
>
> We did the same thing with the power as you. Basically subtract three from
> the FASA listed power of and heavy pistol.

Of course, we've also added variable staging back into the game, so our
heavy pistols do 6M2 against 6M3 for SMGs, 6L2 for light pistols, and so
on.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 39
From: Michael vanHulst <Schizi@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 22:11:33 EDT
In a message dated 9/19/98 8:40:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU writes:

> Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
> notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an
> assault rifle of any caliber.
<snip the rest>
The error here is in combining the idea of penetrating and damage. A heavy
pistol may do more damage but a rifle round will penetrate more through armor
or thick flesh (trolls?)
To reflect I allow a sorta partial APDS. -1/4 armor (personal armor or
firing through), but I also wanted pistols to be more dangerous to unarmored
peoples (especially by-standers) so they gain a +1 staging vs. unarmored.
(except hold-outs, which receive a +4 to the wound target # for healing)
Also, the new AK round is a 5.45 MM, for the record. :-)
Message no. 40
From: John E Pederson <pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 23:44:46 -0500
Michael vanHulst wrote:
>
> In a message dated 9/19/98 8:40:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU writes:
>
> > Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
> > notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an
> > assault rifle of any caliber.
> <snip the rest>
> The error here is in combining the idea of penetrating and damage. A heavy
> pistol may do more damage but a rifle round will penetrate more through armor
> or thick flesh (trolls?)

I thought we were only arguing about penetration, though? The Power
Level is generally the best gauge of armor penetration in this game,
right?

> To reflect I allow a sorta partial APDS. -1/4 armor (personal armor or
> firing through), but I also wanted pistols to be more dangerous to unarmored
> peoples (especially by-standers) so they gain a +1 staging vs. unarmored.
> (except hold-outs, which receive a +4 to the wound target # for healing)

Hmmm... Not a bad idea, if that's the way you to do it. Definitely an
interesting twist on things, at any rate.

> Also, the new AK round is a 5.45 MM, for the record. :-)

D'oh! Well, there goes any illusion I may have managed as a firearms
buff (which I'm not, so I don't feel *too* bad about this:)

--
John Pederson otherwise known as Lyle Canthros, shapeshifter-mage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes
convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe -- a
spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we
with our modest powers must feel humble."
--Albert Einstein
lobo1@****.com canthros1@***.com pedersje@******.rose-hulman.edu
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/4864 ICQ UIN 3190186
"I'm not fifty!" "SPOONMAN!!!" Number Two -- with a bullet!
Message no. 41
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 11:19:12 -0700
D. Ghost wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Sep 1998 21:50:11 -0700 Caric <caric@********.COM> writes:
> >The best RL example I can give that I was part of would be a 1911 A1 .45
> >pistol and a 7.62 AR15 fired at the same range at an old washing
> machine.
> >None of the pistol rounds went through the front and back of the
> machine,
> >but nearly every single AR round went through both sides.
>
> Uhm... wouldn't this support the Heavy Pistols' damage codes by
> attributing them to massive trauma? (IOW, isn't it better for the target
> if the bullet goes clean through?)

Not really. Heavy Pistols and Assault Rifles in SR do the same damage -
Moderate. The power is reallt once you think about it a measure of the
penetration power of the weapon. Yes the HP rounds would bounce around
inside the washing machine, but if your armor is as effective as (this
sounds silly I know) two layers of washing machine :) ,which I can't see as
being that difficult, then which round is more deadly?

Caric
Message no. 42
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 11:25:03 -0700
John E Pederson wrote:

> > > Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
> > > notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an
> > > assault rifle of any caliber.
> > <snip the rest>
> > The error here is in combining the idea of penetrating and damage. A heavy
> > pistol may do more damage but a rifle round will penetrate more through armor
> > or thick flesh (trolls?)
>
> I thought we were only arguing about penetration, though? The Power
> Level is generally the best gauge of armor penetration in this game,
> right?

We were. I wouldn't really classify it as argueing though since for the most part
we tend to agree. :) Power level is really the *only* gauge of armor
penetration in the game.

> > To reflect I allow a sorta partial APDS. -1/4 armor (personal armor or
> > firing through), but I also wanted pistols to be more dangerous to unarmored
> > peoples (especially by-standers) so they gain a +1 staging vs. unarmored.
> > (except hold-outs, which receive a +4 to the wound target # for healing)
>
> Hmmm... Not a bad idea, if that's the way you to do it. Definitely an
> interesting twist on things, at any rate.
>
> > Also, the new AK round is a 5.45 MM, for the record. :-)
>
> D'oh! Well, there goes any illusion I may have managed as a firearms
> buff (which I'm not, so I don't feel *too* bad about this:)

It's alright John we can console one another. My world is crumbling down!!!

:)

Caric
Message no. 43
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 14:27:36 -0400
John E Pederson wrote:
> > > Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
> > > notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an
> > > assault rifle of any caliber.
> > <snip the rest>
> > The error here is in combining the idea of penetrating and damage. A
> heavy
> > pistol may do more damage but a rifle round will penetrate more through
> armor
> > or thick flesh (trolls?)
>
> I thought we were only arguing about penetration, though? The Power
> Level is generally the best gauge of armor penetration in this game,
> right?
>
In Shadowrun, damage codes are made up of a Power and a Damage Level.
Thus, I don't understand what you meant. The Power is what represents
armour penetration, while the Level represents how much damage is done.
Roughly. So I could see an AR doing "just" 8L while a heavy pistol does
6M - the AR would have a higher penetration, but do less damage per
round (of course the AR can go full-auto...). A lot depends on how
weapons have changed in the 60 years leading up to SR.

James Ojaste
Message no. 44
From: John E Pederson <pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 16:54:26 -0500
Caric wrote:
>
> John E Pederson wrote:
> > I thought we were only arguing about penetration, though? The Power
> > Level is generally the best gauge of armor penetration in this game,
> > right?
>
> We were. I wouldn't really classify it as argueing though since for the most part
> we tend to agree. :) Power level is really the *only* gauge of armor
> penetration in the game.

Well, actually I was using 'we' in a more general sense, but as long
as I agree with someone:)

> > D'oh! Well, there goes any illusion I may have managed as a firearms
> > buff (which I'm not, so I don't feel *too* bad about this:)
>
> It's alright John we can console one another. My world is crumbling down!!!
>
> :)

Hmmm... Perhaps you should consider investing in better construction?

--
John Pederson otherwise known as Lyle Canthros, shapeshifter-mage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes
convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe -- a
spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we
with our modest powers must feel humble."
--Albert Einstein
lobo1@****.com canthros1@***.com pedersje@******.rose-hulman.edu
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/4864 ICQ UIN 3190186
"I'm not fifty!" "SPOONMAN!!!" Number Two -- with a bullet!
Sergeant-at-Arms and Greatest Swordsman of the Frinch Army
Message no. 45
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 19:30:49 EDT
In a message dated 9/20/1998 5:41:04 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
gurth@******.NL writes:

>
> > Instead of adding a flat number, subtract the previous staging from
"2" (
> which
> > is what all staging in SR2 and SR3 would be). That value, be it positive
> or
> > negative, is then "added" to the Power Value of the weapon in
question.
>
> So in case of heavy pistols, they'd stay at 9M, but assault rifles would
> also go to 9M, as they went from 5M3 to 8M? Not sure how well this rule
> would work...

That's because you schized in the following of the rule. For instance, a
"6M3" weapon would become a 7M weapon. The "3" is subtracted from the
"2",
given a "+1", which would be added to the power (of a "6") making it a
2.

Please note, this converting rule option is for going form SR1 to SR2 or SR3.

-K
Message no. 46
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 21:38:09 -0700
> From: John E Pederson <pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>

> > John E Pederson wrote:
> > > I thought we were only arguing about penetration, though? The Power
> > > Level is generally the best gauge of armor penetration in this game,
> > > right?
> >
> > We were. I wouldn't really classify it as argueing though since for
the most part
> > we tend to agree. :) Power level is really the *only* gauge of armor
> > penetration in the game.
>
> Well, actually I was using 'we' in a more general sense, but as long
> as I agree with someone:)

So was I. :) I was just pointing out that with the exception of like one
post I haven't heard any outspoken "What the hell are you talking about?"
posts.

> > > D'oh! Well, there goes any illusion I may have managed as a firearms
> > > buff (which I'm not, so I don't feel *too* bad about this:)
> >
> > It's alright John we can console one another. My world is crumbling
down!!!
> >
> > :)
>
> Hmmm... Perhaps you should consider investing in better construction?

Damn framers.

Caric
Message no. 47
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 00:41:59 -0700
>Better go checking your answers: a RL 'heavy' pistol (with a few
>notable exceptions, *maybe*) does *not* penetrate better than an

Didn't we just have this discussion?

Wounds are usually based on kinetic energy deposition and volume of tissue
destroyed (aka Wound Channel). There are physiological effects such as
shock that have a highly variable effect depending upon the individual --
some people get shot in the vitals and carry on without too much problem
(especially if they're on drugs), others can get shot in the foot and die
from shock.

Hydrostatic shock is mostly transitory, causing little permanent tissue
damage (the body is amazingly elastic) unless confined by bones, such as
the skull.

>slug, which is concave on the rearward end so that the manufacturer
>can stuff *more* powder behind the slug and into the cartridge, which

Er ... bullets are concave to improve their aerodynamic properties. Sharp
corners will cause them to tumble even more than they already do ... which
is at the drop of a hat.

You don't want to compress powder grains too much as that inhibits
combustion (which depends on surface area). It's much simpler to elongate
the case slightly ...

>the bullet has a lower cross-sectional area, but a higher velocity,
>while mass doesn't get lowered too much (IIRC). Lower cross-sectional
>area => lower resistance => less kinetic energy lost + higher starting
>kinetic energy (KE=mv^2) => higher penetration.

If you want to penetrate armor using kinetic energy you want high sectional
density. So you pick a dense material such as tungsten or depleted uranium
to construct your kinetic energy penetrator. (Tungsten also has nice
hardness properties which helps shove aside pesky armor but DU has charming
pyrophoric properties with Iron.) The more momentum a bullet has the less
energy it will lose due to friction ... try throwing a wad of crumpled
paper and then a bean bag of the same size and shape and you'll see what I
mean. This is why most bullets are made of lead, not steel. This is also
why (non-toxic) steel buckshot doesn't perform as well as lead, even though
both possess roughly the same muzzle energy.

If you want to damage a target you maximize the wound channel volume. Hence
the use of frangible ammunition such as the Glaser safety shot or Cor-Bon
jacketed hollowpoints. A 115 grain 9mm Cor-Bon JHP will stop a Black bear
in its tracks. A 130 grain FMJ military ball will annoy it a little before
it mauls you to death.

Of course, if you're one of those tourists that feeds them after all the
"Do NOT Feed the Bears" signs, warnings, and exhortations from the Park
rangers then you deserve it.

>John Pederson otherwise known as Lyle Canthros, shapeshifter-mage

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 48
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 12:31:41 +0200
According to K in the Shadows, at 19:30 on 21 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> > So in case of heavy pistols, they'd stay at 9M, but assault rifles would
> > also go to 9M, as they went from 5M3 to 8M? Not sure how well this rule
> > would work...
>
> That's because you schized in the following of the rule. For instance, a
> "6M3" weapon would become a 7M weapon. The "3" is subtracted
from the "2",
> given a "+1", which would be added to the power (of a "6") making
it a 2.

You're only confusing me more with that "explanation," you know...

But I think I get it. You mean to add the difference between SR1's Staging
and 2 to the SR_1_ Power Level -- that would keep a 6M2 heavy pistol at
6M, but turn a 5M3 assault rifle into 6M as well, or a 6S4 taser into 8S.
Do I have it right now?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 49
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 14:19:02 EDT
In a message dated 9/22/1998 5:30:40 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
gurth@******.NL writes:

>
> But I think I get it. You mean to add the difference between SR1's Staging
> and 2 to the SR_1_ Power Level -- that would keep a 6M2 heavy pistol at
> 6M, but turn a 5M3 assault rifle into 6M as well, or a 6S4 taser into 8S.
> Do I have it right now?

Using the suggestion, yes, that is correct. Wow, an 8S tazer!?!?! Do I get
to have one in a colorful, Tres'Chic bracer???

-K (who is simply commenting now, because he's in a story-block mode)
Message no. 50
From: Michael vanHulst <Schizi@***.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 21:31:19 EDT
In a message dated 9/22/98 12:40:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> This is why most bullets are made of lead, not steel. This is also
> why (non-toxic) steel buckshot doesn't perform as well as lead, even th=
ough
> both possess roughly the same muzzle energy.

Actually since Lead is so soft, steel penetrates better.

> If you want to damage a target you maximize the wound channel volume. H=
ence
> the use of frangible ammunition such as the Glaser safety shot or Cor-B=
on
> jacketed hollowpoints. A 115 grain 9mm Cor-Bon JHP will stop a Black be=
ar
> in its tracks. A 130 grain FMJ military ball will annoy it a little bef=
ore
> it mauls you to death.
Cor-bon hollow points are not "frangible" they are expanding bullets, they=
do
make a frangible slug called Bee-safe (a copy of Mag-safe) which is very
effective against unarmored targets, but does not penetrate as well. Such =
a
round would probably flatten againt any form of armor and do less than any
other round.
And a Bear (or other "heavy target") would be angered more by the hollow=
-
point (they're just too stupid to know it is supposed to hurt) some people
carry .357 but most are 10 MM or 44 Mag the higher velocity and bullet wei=
ght
is better. (event eh .357's are usually heavy high-velocity loads)
Just my .02¥
Message no. 51
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 12:13:27 +0200
According to K in the Shadows, at 14:19 on 22 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> > But I think I get it. You mean to add the difference between SR1's Staging
> > and 2 to the SR_1_ Power Level -- that would keep a 6M2 heavy pistol at
> > 6M, but turn a 5M3 assault rifle into 6M as well, or a 6S4 taser into 8S.
> > Do I have it right now?
>
> Using the suggestion, yes, that is correct.

In which case it needs some serious tweaking... Okay, it puts heavy
pistols at a lower Power Level, but it also reduces assault rifles's Power
tremendously. IMHO, on the whole it's not much different than the current
rules, except taken in a slightly different direction.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Unconsciousness is no excuse.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 52
From: System Administrator <Wells@*************.COM>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 10:16:37 -0500
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------ =_NextPart_001_01BDE705.28BB760E
Content-Type: text/plain


<snip>

>Oh, and that vindicator wasnt ment to be a personal weapon...
it was ment to
>go on a concealed firmpoint on his vehicle. not even *I* am so
stupid as to
>want to be carrying something like that around on a run!!!!!

All the other cool runners do it....haven't you ever seen
"D-team" on the trideo?!?

------ =_NextPart_001_01BDE705.28BB760E
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; =
charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.1960.3">
<TITLE>RE: An Interesting question.....</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<UL>
<P><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2
FACE="Arial">&lt;snip&gt;</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2
FACE="Arial">&gt;</FONT><FONT =
COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Oh, and that
vindicator wasnt =
ment to be a personal weapon...&nbsp; it was ment to</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2
FACE="Arial">&gt;</FONT><FONT =
COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">go on a
concealed firmpoint =
on his vehicle.&nbsp; not even *I* am so stupid as to</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2
FACE="Arial">&gt;</FONT><FONT =
COLOR="#000000" SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">want to be
carrying something =
like that around on a run!!!!!</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR="#0000FF" SIZE=2
FACE="Arial">All the other cool =
runners do it....haven't you ever seen &quot;D-team&quot; on the =
trideo?!?</FONT>
</P>
</UL>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------ =_NextPart_001_01BDE705.28BB760E--
Message no. 53
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: An Interesting question.....
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 09:46:15 -0700
>Cor-bon hollow points are not "frangible" they are expanding bullets, they =
do

You're wrong ...

Dictionary Definition:

frangible \Fran"gi*ble\, a. [Cf. F. frangible.] Capable of being broken;
brittle; fragile; easily broken.

In the 1994 Spring edition of Gun Tests they do a review of 9mm ammunition,
including Mag-safes, Glaser safety slugs, and Cor-Bon 115 grain rounds.

Looking at the test results in ballistic gelatin, the Cor-Bon both has a
larger wound cavity, and there are clearly several wound channels from
various peices of the round. A visual inspection of the Cor-Bon round shows
several panels over a prefragmented hollow nose. Cor-Bon itself stands for
Core-Bonded. Again, softer, frangible parts are soldered to a core.

This is also the source for the comment that Cor-Bons would stop a Black
Bear. Given as how the editorial staff of this particular publication has
over a hundred years of hunting and shooting experience amongst them,
you'll pardon me if I take their word over yours.

> Just my .02¥

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about An Interesting question....., you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

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

Thwap!