Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: honken101@********.net (Fredrik Holmqvist)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:28:04 +0200
At 21:21 2004-06-18, you wrote:
>According to Fredrik Holmqvist, on Friday 18 June 2004 14:03 the word on
>the street was...
>
> > Both first and second editions says that the Etiquette skill is
> > different, and that you HAVE to specialize in it, and that each
> > specialization is counted as a different skill. Now the 3rd edition
> > doesn't state that anywhere. Or did i just miss that statement?
>
>In SR3, the required specialization was dropped -- you can have just basic
>Etiquette skill if you want.

You all seems to agree on that. That is good, i didn't miss it somewhere.
So my second question to you all is how much weight do you put on the
Etiquette roll (or role play if you rather do that)?

/Honken
Message no. 2
From: Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu (Hunted by the Aphids)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 00:22:32 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fredrik Holmqvist" <honken101@********.net>
To: "Shadowrun Discussion" <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 8:28 PM
Subject: Another Etiquette question...

> You all seems to agree on that. That is good, i didn't miss it somewhere.
> So my second question to you all is how much weight do you put on the
> Etiquette roll (or role play if you rather do that)?

It varies, depending on the experience levels of the players. Generally, if
people want to say "My character tells the Renraku executive x" or "I call
my fixer and ask if he can get me the new Ares Kill O Matic", I let it go
with an Etiquette roll to express how well they managed to get their point
across, especially if the player in question hasn't had much experience with
Shadowrun or cyberpunk in general. On the other hand, if they roleplay out
the interaction or come up with something else creative (like calling in a
favor from someone who might have a lead on the new Ares toy or researching
the proper setting for their clandestine meeting with the corporator), I
give them substantial enough bonuses to the roll that roleplay becomes worth
it.

Not completely realistic, but it both allows people who are new to the
setting to play without their characters ending up on somebody's frag list
and encourages people to move more and more into roleplaying things out as
they become comfortable.

My $.02, YMMV as always.

Jeff D.
Message no. 3
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 11:12:56 +0200
According to Fredrik Holmqvist, on Saturday 19 June 2004 02:28 the word on
the street was...

> You all seems to agree on that. That is good, i didn't miss it
> somewhere. So my second question to you all is how much weight do you
> put on the Etiquette roll (or role play if you rather do that)?

I usually have players roll their Etiquette after a bit of role-playing the
conversation between the PC and whoever they're talking to. If the player
made no effort whatsoever, I modify the result downward, while if the
role-playing went well, I give them a bit of a bonus. I don't have any
hard numbers to put on this, though, as I tend to wing these things by
looking at the dice roll -- if the roll looks good, the players get what
they're after; if the roll looks crap, they don't.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
... in real life, which was styled after the film.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 4
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:55:24 +0100
At 01:28 AM 6/19/2004, /Honken wrote:
>You all seems to agree on that. That is good, i didn't miss it somewhere.
>So my second question to you all is how much weight do you put on the
>Etiquette roll (or role play if you rather do that)?

We roll for basic legwork (in the fashion of the older adventures)
generally TN4 lots of successes required for the really useful stuff.

For getting hold of stuff and primary legwork we tend to roleplay it, using
the skill level as an indication of how well the character can do (one of
our players didn't buy ettiquette for a while, they thought they could
roleplay the situations and therefore wouldn't need the skill, they got
away with it for a long while because they let the team face do the
talking... then they decided to go off on a solo... needless to say they
now have ettiquette (still the lowest in the team at 3 but better than
nothing.))


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 5
From: l-hansen@*****.tele.dk (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 12:51:57 +0200
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
> According to Fredrik Holmqvist, on Saturday 19 June 2004 02:28 the word on
> the street was...
>
> > You all seems to agree on that. That is good, i didn't miss it
> > somewhere. So my second question to you all is how much weight do you
> > put on the Etiquette roll (or role play if you rather do that)?
>
> I usually have players roll their Etiquette after a bit of role-playing
the
> conversation between the PC and whoever they're talking to. If the player
> made no effort whatsoever, I modify the result downward, while if the
> role-playing went well, I give them a bit of a bonus. I don't have any
> hard numbers to put on this, though, as I tend to wing these things by
> looking at the dice roll -- if the roll looks good, the players get what
> they're after; if the roll looks crap, they don't.

That's just like I do. I've had players complain that it's unfair, but
mostly just until thei get used to it. I hate player saying things like
"I'll ask him for information about XXX", well then ask him...

Lars
Message no. 6
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:13:37 +0200
According to Lars Wagner Hansen, on Saturday 19 June 2004 12:51 the word on
the street was...

> That's just like I do. I've had players complain that it's unfair, but
> mostly just until thei get used to it.

Part of the problem, perhaps is that they don't actually see hard-and-fast
results. If you were to tell them "You roleplayed well, you get a -2 TN
modifier, so with that roll you have five successes instead of two" they'd
probably get the point much quicker than if you adjust the TN and give
them the information for five successes without letting them know this.

> I hate player saying things like
> "I'll ask him for information about XXX", well then ask him...

Same here -- usually new players learn fast enough that my handwaving when
they go "I tell the gangers to keep an eye on my car in exchange for fifty
nuyen" is not sufficient for me :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
... in real life, which was styled after the film.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 7
From: adela@******.com (Carol Courtney)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 07:41:51 -0400
We still use specialized etiquette skills in our game. So... if my decker
has street etiquette she can talk with the corporate executive types but
receives a target modifier (or you can take away a die or two) because she
is not familiar with the corporate environment and protocols. Elecktra
Twofeather
Message no. 8
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:20:42 +0200
According to me, on Saturday 19 June 2004 13:13 the word on the street
was...

> Same here -- usually new players learn fast enough that my handwaving
> when they go "I tell the gangers to keep an eye on my car in exchange
> for fifty nuyen" is not sufficient for me :)

I should really re-read more carefully before posting... The words "means
their roleplaying" will have to be inserted between "nuyen" and
"is" in
the sentence above :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
... in real life, which was styled after the film.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:25:17 +0200
According to Carol Courtney, on Saturday 19 June 2004 13:41 the word on the
street was...

> We still use specialized etiquette skills in our game. So... if my
> decker has street etiquette she can talk with the corporate executive
> types but receives a target modifier (or you can take away a die or two)
> because she is not familiar with the corporate environment and
> protocols.

I used to keep that rule in my group, too. Then, quite probably several
years after I'd dropped it without really mentioning that to the other
players, someone else took over as GM. Within a few weeks he discovered I
hadn't taken an Etiquette specialization for my character, and was telling
me about how I always required that of everybody else's characters, so I
had to pick a specialization right now, etc. etc. etc.

In recent years I had just let the PCs take basic Etiquette skill without
mentioning specializations, which I thought was enough of a hint, but
apparently, it wasn't...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
... in real life, which was styled after the film.
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 10
From: psycho@*********.co.nz (Keith Duthie)
Subject: Another Etiquette question...
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:14:47 +1200 (NZST)
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Gurth wrote:

> I used to keep that rule in my group, too. Then, quite probably several
> years after I'd dropped it without really mentioning that to the other
> players, someone else took over as GM. Within a few weeks he discovered I
> hadn't taken an Etiquette specialization for my character, and was telling
> me about how I always required that of everybody else's characters, so I
> had to pick a specialization right now, etc. etc. etc.

I'd allow a non-specialized etiquette, but I'd apply target number
penalties if the character didn't have a relevant knowledge skill for the
situation. (Come to that, I'd apply the same penalties to a specialized
etiquette to...)
--
Just because it isn't nice doesn't make it any less a miracle.
http://users.albatross.co.nz/~psycho/ O- -><-

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Another Etiquette 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!