Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: rencheple@*******.net (Tim Martin)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 10:38:33 -0400
This came up in a discussion with one my my fellow gamers the other day,
and seems to be a problem that afflicts multiple games systems. The SR4
FAQ, Part Three, Question 4 says, "Skills and attributes range from 1 to
6, with 3 being average."

The question I have is this: Who's average? Is the the average of the
Shadowrunner, or the aver Joe or Judy ont he street? If this is a
RACIAL average, then shouldn't shadowrunner be expected to have
consistently above average ratings?

Tim
Message no. 2
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
--- Tim Martin <rencheple@*******.net> wrote:

> This came up in a discussion with one my my fellow gamers the other
> day,
> and seems to be a problem that afflicts multiple games systems.
> The SR4
> FAQ, Part Three, Question 4 says, "Skills and attributes range from
> 1 to
> 6, with 3 being average."
>
> The question I have is this: Who's average? Is the the average of
> the
> Shadowrunner, or the aver Joe or Judy ont he street? If this is a
> RACIAL average, then shouldn't shadowrunner be expected to have
> consistently above average ratings?
>
> Tim

That phrasing is not unique to SR4, and has been around as long as
the game has. I have always interpreted that phrase to mean that
adult humans average attributes in the 3-4 range. Meaning I expect
human shadowrunners to usually have at least half their attributes at
4 (top end of average) or better. YMMV.

======Korishinzo
--this time I'm putting my foot down, no new editions *grin*

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 3
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 11:11:13 -0400
On 8/25/05, Tim Martin <rencheple@*******.net> wrote:
>
> The question I have is this: Who's average? Is the the average of the
> Shadowrunner, or the aver Joe or Judy ont he street? If this is a
> RACIAL average, then shouldn't shadowrunner be expected to have
> consistently above average ratings?

I don't have SR4, but from what I've been able to tell from discussion
about it, the major implication of this is that the SR4 designers have
worked hard to keep characters from "sixing out" on everything. Maxed
attributes and skills cost too much, and you're explicitly prevented
from having more than one 6 in skills at chargen. This is a radical
departure from previous editions, where if you didn't have 6s in all
your core skills it meant you weren't taking your character seriously.

In practice every player is going to look at any 3 in a stat as
sucking, and will bend over backwards to prevent a lower score than
that in any attribute. That's just the way players think. If they
can't get more than a 4 or a 5 on a secondary stat, they'll strain for
4s and 5s. So 3 surely won't be the "average" for PCs, regardless of
how it's promoted in the text.

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 4
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 11:25:16 -0400
At 10:38 AM 8/25/2005, Tim Martin wrote:
>This came up in a discussion with one my my fellow gamers the other day,
>and seems to be a problem that afflicts multiple games systems. The SR4
>FAQ, Part Three, Question 4 says, "Skills and attributes range from 1 to
>6, with 3 being average."
>
>The question I have is this: Who's average? Is the the average of the
>Shadowrunner, or the aver Joe or Judy ont he street? If this is a RACIAL
>average, then shouldn't shadowrunner be expected to have consistently
>above average ratings?

In the case of Shadowrun, you have a compression problem. With the human
range shoe-horned into only 6 values, you don't have much room to establish
different "averages" for different classes of characters.

In another game I play, there are ten stats, each ranging from 1 to 10.
Mister Joe Average, Man on the Street, has 3s across the board. Player
characters start with a higher average of 3-1/2. Serious threat NPCs start
with an average of 4-1/2.

Getting back to the compression issue, under this game's system no
character starts with higher than 6, but there is still 7 and 8 to reach
for. 9 and 10 are generally reserved for the truly extraordinary, and give
the GM headroom to play with.

--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 5
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 11:31:01 -0400
At 11:25 AM 8/25/2005, Timothy J. Lanza wrote:

And the rest of that e-mail...

>Getting back to the compression issue, under this game's system no
>character starts with higher than 6, but there is still 7 and 8 to reach
>for. 9 and 10 are generally reserved for the truly extraordinary, and give
>the GM headroom to play with.

In Shadowrun, you only have 6-point spread regardless of race. With the
"average" placed at 3, you're denying the players and the GM any room for
advancement. When you start with a 5, there's only one step up, and beyond
that is nothing.

In my SR campaigns, I have always set the Man on the Street average at 2
rather than three. I carefully explain to my players that three is the
average runner; this reduces the number of people that insist on starting
with sixes.


--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 6
From: kelvaris@***********.us (Jeff Haskell)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:51:42 -0800
At 11:25 AM 8/25/2005, Timothy J. Lanza wrote:

And the rest of that e-mail...

>Getting back to the compression issue, under this game's system no
>character starts with higher than 6, but there is still 7 and 8 to reach
>for. 9 and 10 are generally reserved for the truly extraordinary, and give
>the GM headroom to play with.

In Shadowrun, you only have 6-point spread regardless of race. With the
"average" placed at 3, you're denying the players and the GM any room for
advancement. When you start with a 5, there's only one step up, and beyond
that is nothing.

In my SR campaigns, I have always set the Man on the Street average at 2
rather than three. I carefully explain to my players that three is the
average runner; this reduces the number of people that insist on starting
with sixes.


--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman


On top of that, in character creation you are only allowed one 6, and 2
fours. Or 2 fives and a 4. but you cant have a 6 and a 5 in your stats. I
figure each character has a life span of about 6 months before they have 6's
in everything they want to have 6's in. Get bored and make a new one.

Something tells me the days of 100 karma characters are over.
Message no. 7
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:08:17 -0400
On 8/25/05, Timothy J. Lanza <tjlanza@************.com> wrote:
>
> Getting back to the compression issue, under this game's system no
> character starts with higher than 6, but there is still 7 and 8 to reach
> for. 9 and 10 are generally reserved for the truly extraordinary, and give
> the GM headroom to play with.

But you can do that in Shadowrun too. 6 is just the *starting*
maximum. The absolute maximum for karma-raising is 9 (plus racial
mods) and then you've still got cyberware, bioware and spells to play
with. Lots and lots of headroom for making NPCs that will challenge
the players.


> In my SR campaigns, I have always set the Man on the Street average at 2
> rather than three. I carefully explain to my players that three is the
> average runner; this reduces the number of people that insist on starting
> with sixes.

Do you also reduce the number of attribute points available at
chargen? Otherwise, what you just said connotes that the average
runner takes Priority E on attributes (thus indicating retardation
even before INT points are assigned) and the Man on the Street takes,
I dunno, Priority G or something.

Anyway, my experience is that nobody really cares what the "average"
shadowrunner can do. They care about making *their* character the
best he/she can be at whatever they decide is important. And that's a
proper perspective. The PCs are the protagonists of the story. They
are, in a narrative sense, the most important people in the world.
The stats of the average person matter because they'll interact with
them, but why should they limit what a PC can do?

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 8
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:14:00 -0400
On 8/25/05, Stephen Eley <sfeley@*****.com> wrote:
>
> But you can do that in Shadowrun too. 6 is just the *starting*
> maximum. The absolute maximum for karma-raising is 9 (plus racial
> mods) and then you've still got cyberware, bioware and spells to play
> with. Lots and lots of headroom for making NPCs that will challenge
> the players.

By the way, it should be clear that throughout this entire message I
was talking about SR3, since that's what I'm most familiar with.
Since Mr. Lanza was also talking about prior and current editions ("I
have always set...") that seemed to be the natural context.

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 9
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:09:17 +0200
According to Tim Martin, on 25-8-05 16:38 the word on the street was...

> The question I have is this: Who's average? Is the the average of the
> Shadowrunner, or the aver Joe or Judy ont he street?

The average Joe/Judy is who's meant, AFAIK. Typical human office
workers, for example, have 3 in all stats except probably Charisma,
skill level 3 for the skills they need to do their job (Computer,
Corporate Etiquette, etc.), and probably 3 in one or two hobby skills.

> If this is a
> RACIAL average, then shouldn't shadowrunner be expected to have
> consistently above average ratings?

They do. Take a look at the sample characters posted on srrpg.com --
they have attributes that tend to average above 3, and skills that do
much the same. Not by much, I admit, but this is in part due to SR4
trying to reduce the overall power level of characters compared to SR3
(you can only buy a very limited number of level 5 and 6 skills under
the new system), and also by these characters having lots of skills
compared to typical people you'll meet on the street. Unlike the Weapons
Specialist, a corporate office worker won't have 14 skills, for example.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:12:45 +0200
According to Stephen Eley, on 25-8-05 17:11 the word on the street was...

> Maxed
> attributes and skills cost too much

Yep. In SR3, you could have all your attributes at 5 and still have
plenty points (priorities) left over to buy skills, gear, etc. to the
same level. In SR4, just buying all your attributes to 5 swallows up
_all_ your building points. And then there's the skill cap you mention.

> In practice every player is going to look at any 3 in a stat as
> sucking, and will bend over backwards to prevent a lower score than
> that in any attribute. That's just the way players think.

Very true. My group initially felt that their characters weren't as
"good" as their SR3 ones, but they overlooked the fact that SR4 is an
attribute+skill system, instead of an attribute-OR-skill system like
SR1/2/3. Once you start rolling dice, you're still throwing more or less
the same number about as you were under the previous editions (not
counting pool dice, anyway). It's just that where you get those dice is
a bit different.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 11
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:18:11 +0200
According to Stephen Eley, on 25-8-05 18:08 the word on the street was...

> But you can do that in Shadowrun too. 6 is just the *starting*
> maximum. The absolute maximum for karma-raising is 9 (plus racial
> mods) and then you've still got cyberware, bioware and spells to play
> with.

Not any longer. 6 plus racial mods is now the actual maximum for
unaugmented attribute ratings, with the absolute maximum, including
cyberware, magic, etc. being 1.5 times that.

> Anyway, my experience is that nobody really cares what the "average"
> shadowrunner can do. They care about making *their* character the
> best he/she can be at whatever they decide is important. And that's a
> proper perspective. The PCs are the protagonists of the story. They
> are, in a narrative sense, the most important people in the world.

One problem with that is that, under SR3 certainly, it's a bit easy to
get carried away and have characters with, oh, 12+ Charisma running
around. Which means they should be more famous than [insert name of
saviour of choice here], yet for some strange reason they're managing to
maintain a low profile while running the shadows...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 12
From: rencheple@*******.net (Tim Martin)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:32:39 -0400
Gurth wrote:

> The average Joe/Judy is who's meant, AFAIK. Typical human office
> workers, for example, have 3 in all stats except probably Charisma...

Hey now! Don't go dissin' us office workers! >:-)

Gurth wrote:

> Very true. My group initially felt that their characters weren't as
> "good" as their SR3 ones, but they overlooked the fact that SR4 is an
> attribute+skill system, instead of an attribute-OR-skill system like
> SR1/2/3.

Is it safe to assume, then, that you were play testing SR4 or perhaps
GMing at GenCon, or is there a quick start guide out that I simply
haven't stumbled across?

Tim
Message no. 13
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:58:58 -0600
On 8/25/05, Tim Martin <rencheple@*******.net> wrote:
> Gurth wrote:
>
> > The average Joe/Judy is who's meant, AFAIK. Typical human office
> > workers, for example, have 3 in all stats except probably Charisma...
>
> Hey now! Don't go dissin' us office workers! >:-)
>
> Gurth wrote:
>
> > Very true. My group initially felt that their characters weren't as
> > "good" as their SR3 ones, but they overlooked the fact that SR4 is an
> > attribute+skill system, instead of an attribute-OR-skill system like
> > SR1/2/3.
>
> Is it safe to assume, then, that you were play testing SR4 or perhaps
> GMing at GenCon, or is there a quick start guide out that I simply
> haven't stumbled across?

Gurth was a playtester :)

For SR4 dice rolled (in general) = Attribute + Skill. In other words,
players still get to roll big handfulls of dice. And if they have
cyberware and advantageous dice modifiers they get to roll double
handfulls of dice ;) Course, if they are completely screwed they
might only get to roll one pidely little dice... while the GM cackles
madly of course <egmg>.

The fluctuating number of dice really is my favorite thing about SR4.
In SR3 (and before) a big handfull of dice didn't necessarily mean
success. There were several times when I as the GM rolled a huge
handfull of dice but the players didn't care because they knew what
the TN was. In SR4 it's completely different. When the GM starts
loading up on dice the players start shaking. Likewise, when the
players have to pick up a lot of dice they smile pretty big. And when
a player is reduced to a few dice they piss and moan ;) Being able to
instantly guage the difficulty of a task by the number of dice in hand
made it *much* easier for inexperienced players to make decisions (and
the experienced players made decisions blindingly fast).

--
-Graht
Message no. 14
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
[snip]
> (and the experienced players made decisions blindingly fast).
>
> --
> -Graht

The decision, for example, to stick with SR3, and avoid SR4 like the
plague. Took me less than a split second. Hardly even used up a
free action...




...but, I do have these sweet level 4 wired prejudices, and a knee
jerk accelerator as well. Add in my cultured progress dampers and
that delta-grade curmudgeon processor, and I can sometimes calculate
your 1st edition dodge pool before you can even finish thinking the
phrase "Ess-Ar-For".

======Korishinzo
--keepin' it middle school yo :p



____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Message no. 15
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:33:56 -0600
On 8/25/05, Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > (and the experienced players made decisions blindingly fast).
> >
> > --
> > -Graht
>
> The decision, for example, to stick with SR3, and avoid SR4 like the
> plague. Took me less than a split second. Hardly even used up a
> free action...
>
>
>
>
> ...but, I do have these sweet level 4 wired prejudices, and a knee
> jerk accelerator as well. Add in my cultured progress dampers and
> that delta-grade curmudgeon processor, and I can sometimes calculate
> your 1st edition dodge pool before you can even finish thinking the
> phrase "Ess-Ar-For".

ROTFLOL!

Heh, yeah, if you love SR3 (or SR2 or SR1), don't switch :) My gripes
with SR3 are minor. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't game with
hardcore gamers anymore I wouldn't even consider switching to SR4, but
no the group has players like the wife of a player who likes to
roleplay but doesn't want to read the rules or get confused by the
rules ;)

Me, I'm getting ready to GM Victory Games James Bond RPG where you
have to roll... d100! ;) (Seriously, James Bond RPG has one of the
sweetest systems I have ever used. I have *no* house rules for it.)

--
-Graht
Message no. 16
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:35:43 -0600
On 8/25/05, Graht <graht1@*****.com> wrote:
>
> Heh, yeah, if you love SR3 (or SR2 or SR1), don't switch :) My gripes
> with SR3 are minor. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't game with
> hardcore gamers anymore I wouldn't even consider switching to SR4, but
> no the group has players like the wife of a player who likes to
> roleplay but doesn't want to read the rules or get confused by the
> rules ;)

Hm.. that might have come out wrong. All else being said, SR4 is
good. I would recommend it to anyone, well except Ice Heart, MC23,
and TopCat and all you SR1 facists ;)

--
-Graht
Message no. 17
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Sanger)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 17:37:58 -0400
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:09:17PM +0200, Gurth wrote:
> much the same. Not by much, I admit, but this is in part due to SR4
> trying to reduce the overall power level of characters compared to SR3

I can't read the minds of the designers, and I wasn't fortunate enough
to be a playtester (*shakes fist in FanPro's direction*) but the
experiments with SR4 that I and my group have done since GenCon agree
with all of this. Characters are less powerful with regards to to
theoretical max, perform roughly equivilantly, and concepts can be more
flexible.

The main difference is the TN 6 breakpoint. In SR3, once the TN hit 6,
the difficulty increased greatly, and (anecdotaly), the number of dice
you had to toss to get a decent result made a similar jump vs the raise
from TN 4 to TN 5, for example. Many times a skill of 10 (including
pool) was enough to get just 1 success. TN 12 was questionable even with
obscenely high dice pools.

Now getting hits is far easier. A pool of 3 will statistically do it,
and a pool of 4 can be quite comfortable. Raising the threshold for
difficult tasks does not experience the same leaps in difficulty.

The result is that there are still surprise failures and surprisingly
large successes, but that the progression is more comfortable. So
Characters with a 3 attribute and 3 skill can achieve success where an
SR3 character with skill 3 couldn't reliably do more than a TN 4.

So now characters can be more than a one-trick pony and can still be
viable characters. As I tend to play in small groups where we don't
have a mage, hacker, face, muscle, etc all filled, that's very
comforting. And those characters that do hyper-specialize can still
pull off some amazing things that "average" characters (be they average
people or average runners) don't have a real chance to.

While we haven't had enough time to do character growth yet, it looks
like there will be much more character improvement and development,
stat-wise.
--
SwiftOne / Brett Sanger
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 18
From: anders@**********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:56:37 -0700
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > (and the experienced players made decisions blindingly fast).
> >
> > --
> > -Graht
>
> The decision, for example, to stick with SR3, and avoid SR4 like the
> plague. Took me less than a split second. Hardly even used up a
> free action...
>
I haven't played SR seriously for about a year, and I look forward to the new
system. I hope I don't find too much cognative dissonance working with one GM
who seems not ready to embrace the future...
<smiles> 8>]
--Anders
Message no. 19
From: run@***********.com (run@***********.com)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 20:30:27 -0400
Count me in the exception list. I will be there with Kage working on backwards
compatibility and sr3r rules.

At 05:35 PM 8/25/2005, you wrote:
>On 8/25/05, Graht <graht1@*****.com> wrote:
> >
> > Heh, yeah, if you love SR3 (or SR2 or SR1), don't switch :) My gripes
> > with SR3 are minor. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't game with
> > hardcore gamers anymore I wouldn't even consider switching to SR4, but
> > no the group has players like the wife of a player who likes to
> > roleplay but doesn't want to read the rules or get confused by the
> > rules ;)
>
>Hm.. that might have come out wrong. All else being said, SR4 is
>good. I would recommend it to anyone, well except Ice Heart, MC23,
>and TopCat and all you SR1 facists ;)
>
>--
>-Graht
>---
>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
Message no. 20
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:45:35 -0400
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:08:17, Stephen Eley wrote:

>On 8/25/05, Timothy J. Lanza <tjlanza@************.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Getting back to the compression issue, under this game's system no
>>> character starts with higher than 6, but there is still 7 and 8 to reach
>>> for. 9 and 10 are generally reserved for the truly extraordinary, and give
>
>>> the GM headroom to play with.
>
>
>But you can do that in Shadowrun too. 6 is just the *starting*
>maximum. The absolute maximum for karma-raising is 9 (plus racial
>mods) and then you've still got cyberware, bioware and spells to play
>with. Lots and lots of headroom for making NPCs that will challenge
>the players.


Yes, you can raise a stat up to the racial limit with karma points but i would suggest
that this option shouldn't be taken lightly. I am having no problems with extremely
competent PC but i have reserves about nobel-prize winners and olympic athletes. Can
sombody explain to me why someone with a Intelligence of 9 is doing running the shadows?
Up to that point, it is mostly ridiculous that anybody with such a gift is still out
risking his life without a very good reason. Those persons are unique characters and need
to be used sparcely.

During a long time in my game, the higher "Karma-boosted" stat was the team's
fixer, a humman with a Willpower of 8. Many times the story showed the players how a
"Hard-A$$" he was. Up to now, he's still got that rep with the PC. This is the
main idea; when used with moderation, high stats enhance the game. If they became common,
it would be as amazing as owning a Ares Pred.

As far as the "Average Joe" goes, i put him between 2 and 4 in stats. comparing
them to Shadowrunners is like comparing us to astronauts, olympic athletes and Navy SEALs;
we will never be a match in their fields.
Message no. 21
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:54:38 -0400
On 8/25/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
>
> Yes, you can raise a stat up to the racial limit with karma points but i would
suggest that this option shouldn't be taken lightly. I am having no problems with
extremely competent PC but i have reserves about nobel-prize winners and olympic athletes.
Can sombody explain to me why someone with a Intelligence of 9 is doing running the
shadows?

First name "Lex." Last name "Luthor." >8->

I have no problem with it; again, the PCs are the heroes of the story.
If they put all their effort and Karma into being the absolute best
in some narrow area, why not let them have it? Of course there'll be
ramifications -- the problem with being the fastest gun in the West is
that the fifty *next* fastest guns won't ever let you get any sleep.
But if that's what the player wants most, give it to them and build a
story out of it.


--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 22
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:50:38 -0400
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:54:38, Steve Eley wrote:


>On 8/25/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Yes, you can raise a stat up to the racial limit with karma points but i >
>would suggest that this option shouldn't be taken lightly. I am having no p>roblems
with extremely competent PC but i have reserves about nobel-prize w>inners and olympic
athletes. Can sombody explain to me why someone with a I>ntelligence of 9 is doing
running the shadows?
>
>First name "Lex." Last name "Luthor." >8->


Okay, i will rephrase: "Why a non-megalomaniac and totaly sane NPC with an intel of 9
is doing running in the shadows?"
Happy? :)


>I have no problem with it; again, the PCs are the heroes of the story.
> If they put all their effort and Karma into being the absolute best
>in some narrow area, why not let them have it? Of course there'll be
>ramifications -- the problem with being the fastest gun in the West is
>that the fifty *next* fastest guns won't ever let you get any sleep.
>But if that's what the player wants most, give it to them and build a
>story out of it.


My problem is not about giving it to the players, it's about keeping the "Amazement
Factor" present in the game. If the players receive the Mill-Spec equipment and the
high stats at the begining of the game, how can i motivate them of becoming better? If
they reached the big stat from a lower level, not only it will give them a sense of
achivement but it will give them also a legent that will tag them along. Once again, all
is in the roleplaying ang a long-lasting game.
Message no. 23
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Sanger)
Subject: Average?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:52:53 -0400
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 03:50:38PM -0400, Toubrouk wrote:
> Okay, i will rephrase: "Why a non-megalomaniac and totaly sane NPC with an
> intel of 9 is doing running in the shadows?"

You have sane, non-megalomaniac (N)PCs?

--
SwiftOne / Brett Sanger
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 24
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average?
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:31:06 -0600
On 8/26/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:54:38, Steve Eley wrote:
>
>
> >On 8/25/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
> >
> >>>=20
> >>> Yes, you can raise a stat up to the racial limit with karma points but i
=
> >
> >would suggest that this option shouldn't be taken lightly. I am having no p=
> >roblems with extremely competent PC but i have reserves about nobel-prize w=
> >inners and olympic athletes. Can sombody explain to me why someone with a I=
> >ntelligence of 9 is doing running the shadows?=20
> >
> >First name "Lex." Last name "Luthor." >8->
>
>
> Okay, i will rephrase: "Why a non-megalomaniac and totaly sane NPC with an intel
of 9 is doing running in the shadows?"
> Happy? :)

Because they were chased there by the jealously insane megalomaniac VP
Head of Research NPC who only has an intel of 8 ;)

--
-Graht
Message no. 25
From: u.alberton@*****.com (Bira)
Subject: Average?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:42:34 +0000
On 8/26/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 22:54:38, Steve Eley wrote:
>
> My problem is not about giving it to the players, it's about keeping the
"Amazement
> Factor" present in the game. If the players receive the Mill-Spec equipment and
the high
>stats at the begining of the game, how can i motivate them of
becoming better? If they
>reached the big stat from a lower level, not only it will give them a
sense of achivement but
> it will give them also a legent that will tag them along. Once again, all is in the
roleplaying
>ang a long-lasting game.


Not all games have to play the same, tough. In my experience, no one
in a start-from-the-bottom game will ever see any mil-spec gear unless
the group has the time and patience to keep the same campaign up for
ten years.

But what about mercenary games, where the whole point is having
mil-spec gear and going to war from session one? Or an "epic" game
where that actually tries to place the future of the world in the
hands of the PCs, rather than delegating it to some NPC in some novel?

Games where characters start from the bottom of the heap and climb up
can be fun, but so games in which they start as ultra-elites and go on
to hobnob with immortals and show them they're not _that_ immortal...

--
Bira
http://compexplicita.blogspot.com
http://sinfoniaferida.blogspot.com
Message no. 26
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 19:41:48 -0400
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 15:52:53, Brett Sanger wrote:

>On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 03:50:38PM -0400, Toubrouk wrote:
>
>>> Okay, i will rephrase: "Why a non-megalomaniac and totaly sane NPC with
an
>>> intel of 9 is doing running in the shadows?"
>
>
>You have sane, non-megalomaniac (N)PCs?

Yes. Many of my PC and NPC are quite sane. I got some cases of post
traumatic stress disorders, a transsexual and the chemical warfare guy
is totally loco but that's all about it. On the other side, my campaign
is based on a covert war between Tamanous and "Concerned Citizens". So
yeah, i have a truckload of psychopaths on demand. :)
Message no. 27
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 22:12:14 -0400
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:31:06, Graht wrote:

> On 8/26/05, Toubrouk <Toubrouk@*********.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Okay, i will rephrase: "Why a non-megalomaniac and totaly sane NPC with
an intel of 9 is doing running in the shadows?"
>
>>> Happy?
>
>
>Because they were chased there by the jealously insane megalomaniac VP
>Head of Research NPC who only has an intel of 8

Ah the sad, corporative "Dog Eat Dog" world... ;)
Message no. 28
From: Toubrouk@*********.ca (Toubrouk)
Subject: Average?
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:15:27 -0400
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:42:34, Bira wrote:

>
>Not all games have to play the same, tough. In my experience, no one
>in a start-from-the-bottom game will ever see any mil-spec gear unless
>the group has the time and patience to keep the same campaign up for
>ten years.
>
>But what about mercenary games, where the whole point is having
>mil-spec gear and going to war from session one? Or an "epic" game
>where that actually tries to place the future of the world in the
>hands of the PCs, rather than delegating it to some NPC in some novel?
>
>
I was a part of that type of mercenary game. The five person team
received 12 millions NuYen to buy material, cyber and vehicles. It was a
fun game. Suddently, an assault rifle became a sidearm.

Shadowrun got some real interesting possibilities if you're ready to
think out of the box. The trick is to not turn the PC into super-heroes
too fast. A good opposition is always needed.
Message no. 29
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:22:24 +0200
According to Tim Martin, on 25-8-05 21:32 the word on the street was...

Sorry for the late reply (in this thread and elsewhere), but I was away
for the weekend :)

> Is it safe to assume, then, that you were play testing SR4 or perhaps
> GMing at GenCon, or is there a quick start guide out that I simply
> haven't stumbled across?

I helped playtest the new edition, so you probably haven't overlooked
anything :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 30
From: weberm@*******.net (Ubiquitous)
Subject: Average?
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:51:55 -0400
At 03:35 PM 8/25/2005 -0600, you wrote:
>On 8/25/05, Graht <graht1@*****.com> wrote:

>> Heh, yeah, if you love SR3 (or SR2 or SR1), don't switch :) My gripes
>> with SR3 are minor. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't game with
>> hardcore gamers anymore I wouldn't even consider switching to SR4, but
>> no the group has players like the wife of a player who likes to
>> roleplay but doesn't want to read the rules or get confused by the
>> rules ;)
>
>Hm.. that might have come out wrong. All else being said, SR4 is
>good. I would recommend it to anyone, well except Ice Heart, MC23,
>and _TopCat_ and all you SR1 facists ;)

Heh. That name brings back memories! Whatever happened to that idiot,
anyway?
--
"Ted, sweetheart...somebody's left a wicker basket with a little baby in it
on our front doorstep."
"Just leave it out there on the stoop, honey. The cats'll get it."
- Red Meat http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/
Message no. 31
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 11:00:59 +0200
According to Ubiquitous, on 15-9-05 02:51 the word on the street was...

> Heh. That name brings back memories! Whatever happened to that idiot,
> anyway?

He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
thought it would be ...

I wouldn't say he's an idiot, though -- he was a cool listmember, IMHO,
until he made the mistake of posting the Manifesto :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 32
From: sfeley@*****.com (Stephen Eley)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:23:34 -0400
On 9/15/05, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>
> He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
> because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
> thought it would be ...

This got me curious, so I tried Googling, and was surprised to find a
few references but no pointers to the Manifesto itself. Anyone have a
copy they'd care to post for historical value and/or amusement?

--
Have Fun,
Steve Eley (sfeley@*****.com)
ESCAPE POD - the SF podcast magazine
http://escape.extraneous.org
Message no. 33
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:35:27 -0600
On 9/15/05, Stephen Eley <sfeley@*****.com> wrote:
> On 9/15/05, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> >
> > He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
> > because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
> > thought it would be ...
>
> This got me curious, so I tried Googling, and was surprised to find a
> few references but no pointers to the Manifesto itself. Anyone have a
> copy they'd care to post for historical value and/or amusement?

I wish. I was using ELM at the time and wasn't able to save a copy :(

--
-Graht
Message no. 34
From: weberm@*******.net (Michael Weber)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:53:06 -0400
Stephen Eley <sfeley@*****.com> wrote:
>On 9/15/05, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

>> He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
>> because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
>> thought it would be ...
>
>This got me curious, so I tried Googling, and was surprised to find a
>few references but no pointers to the Manifesto itself. Anyone have a
>copy they'd care to post for historical value and/or amusement?

I probably have a copy SOMEWHERE (I am something of a packrat) but I'll
have to look...
Message no. 35
From: wilson.reis@*****.com (Wilson Reis)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:28:44 -0300
> >
> >This got me curious, so I tried Googling, and was surprised to find a
> >few references but no pointers to the Manifesto itself. Anyone have a
> >copy they'd care to post for historical value and/or amusement?
>
> I probably have a copy SOMEWHERE (I am something of a packrat) but I'll
> have to look...
>

(Delurk)

That´s something i would like to see :-)

Will
Message no. 36
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 19:20:03 +0200
According to Stephen Eley, on 15-9-05 16:23 the word on the street was...

> This got me curious, so I tried Googling, and was surprised to find a
> few references but no pointers to the Manifesto itself. Anyone have a
> copy they'd care to post for historical value and/or amusement?

Here's a copy I dug up from an old ShadowRN mail folder that I managed
to salvage off a hard drive that crashed on me in the summer of 1996 or
so. This accounts for the gap in the middle, as that was one of the bits
that was damaged, and also the odd spaces at the beginning of the lines
-- I recall I had to print it to an ASCII file in order to save the mail
folder at all :(

Received: from ns.cencom.net (ns.cencom.net [198.69.20.2]) by
relay.mika.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA28510 for
<shadowrn@********.itribe.net>; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:14:17 -0400
Received: from superman.cencom.net by ns.cencom.net (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
id AA01487; Sun, 19 May 1996 01:14:54 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:14:53 -0500
Message-Id: <9605190614.AA01487@**.cencom.net>
X-Length: 00002c34
Status: N
X-Sender: topcat@******.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: ShadowRN <shadowrn@********.itribe.net>
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: TopCat's Manifesto
Sender: owner-shadowrn@********.itribe.net
Reply-To: shadowrn@********.itribe.net
Errors-To: jdfalk@************.org

The TopCat Manifesto
or "What I like to rant about and why"

Hi there. You may've seen me yelling and screaming on the ShadowRN
mailing
list about various subjects. My name is Bob Ooton and my email name
is
TopCat. TopCat was my first ever Shadowrun character and my favorite,
but
that isn't what this is about. I am writing this so that everyone who
seeks
my opinion on a subject can get it easily. So...on with the ranting.

Credentials: In case you were wondering "Who the hell is this guy and
why
should I care about what he says?" I feel I should at least tell a bit
about
myself. I'm 23 years old, live in Springfield, IL (US, of course),
and am a
writer-wannabe. I have spent the greater part of my life playing
various
roleplaying games, but have only been playing SR seriously for a
little over
a year now. Why should my opinion on SR matter if I'm such a newbie
to the
game? Because I am a number-cruncher/rules-lawyer of sickening
proportions.
I master games within a month, often less, then learn to tone down
from
there, eventually creating balance and happiness all around. I have
also
done a bit of acting and have been a serious roleplayer for years.
I've
crunched SR down to it's most basic level and found it wanting in some
areas. It is these areas that I often rant about and shall describe
in this
posting.

1. Magic vs. Cyberware: Which is "better"?
Well, for overall effectiveness magic whales all over tech. Even
Cybertechnology or shadowtech level tech. For the average combat
scene,
magic and tech are about equal, with tech having a slight edge due to
better
average speed. If you crunch the numbers you'll find certain things
to be
true and they will confirm that magic is indeed more effective than
cyberware.

The first of these is essence. Cyberware costs essence which can
_never_ be
regained, spells cost no essence. The next is karma, which spells
cost and
cyberware doesn't, but the cost is so small as to hardly be worth
mentioning. The next is nuyen. Cyberware eats nuyen like trolls eat
twinkies. Spells are VERY cheap comparatively. Next, the time it
takes to
learn a spell is nowhere near as long as it takes to heal from surgery
for
new cyberware. Next, spells aren't illegal or detectable (unless in
use and
they can still be masked). Much cyberware is illegal and is always
detectable. Cyberware can break. Spells can't. You will die if you
get
too much cyberware. Too many spells never killed a magician. With
magic
you can always achieve an equal, better, and/or safer effect than you
can
with cy, better, and/or safer effect than you can
with cy

[I think this is one of the places where the file was corrupt -- Gurth]

is when someone dares to say
that magic is better because it can be roleplayed. I'll get into this
later, but I'll end this with saying that neither is better when it
comes to
roleplaying and many people are confused as to what roleplaying
actually is.

2. Roleplaying
Ok, I couldn't wait to rant about it, so here goes. Roleplaying is
some
things and isn't some things, I'll babble for a while on the subject
and
it'll be up to you to figure out what I mean.

Roleplaying is the responsibility of the player. If the player
doesn't
actually play a role, then he's just rolling dice. Roleplaying is not
automatic for certain types of characters. Just because a character
is a
magician, he isn't necessarily roleplayed. Just because he's got a
cool
background doesn't mean he's roleplayed. Just because a character is
a mage
doesn't mean he's being roleplayed. Magic is not roleplaying.
Cyberware is
not roleplaying. Guns are not roleplaying. Combat is not, in itself,
roleplaying, but it can contain elements thereof. Die rolls are not,
in
themselves, roleplaying, but can help it along. Roleplaying's most
deadly
enemy is the stereotype, which many players are willing to paste all
over
another while blatantly adhering to one themselves (I'll hit on this
next).

So what the hell is roleplaying if it isn't all that stuff? It is
playing a
role, go figure. Roleplaying is acting, though not necessarily on the
same
scale. Roleplaying is actually making a person out of the sheet of
numbers
in front of you. Whether that sheet holds the numbers of a street
samurai,
mercenary, decker, mage, shaman, physad, or whatever doesn't matter IN
THE
SLIGHTEST BIT to the actual roleplaying of that character. Good
numbers
does not a character make. It makes for a high power level and lots
of dice
rolling instead of actual thought (I'll get into this sometime after
the
stereotype rant). Bad numbers don't make a character either. They
just
make for lower power and less dice when called for. If the character
only
represents numbers to the player, then he isn't roleplayed. If the
character represents something just that side of real, with emotions
and
opinions and talents and personality and those are all used in some
way
throughout the course of a game, then that player is ROLEPLAYING!
(waits
for the "Amens" from the crowd, before resuming rant)

Hopefully that got a point across.

3. Stereotypes
I HATE 'EM! If I ever hear anything like "All samurai are
bloodthirsty
mountains of machinery with bad attitudes" again, I'll scream again.
And I
know I'll hear it again because a shitload of people still haven't
figured
it out yet, so I know I'll scream again. Anyways, the stereotyping of
characters is what leads to mediocre roleplaying. Some players force
stereotypes on themselves. The "I shall not kill" players are just as
guilty of settling into a stereotype as the "kill everything" players
are.
Is either a better roleplayer for it? Nope. They just grabbed a
tired old
convention of the genre and decided to beat the dead horse again in
the name
of roleplaying.

Now, in all fairness, almost all roles have been done in one way or
another
so it isn't all that easy to actually come up with something fresh and
new
without seeming insane, which has
been

[And here is an obvious big gap that, in my file as I have it now,
consists of nothing but ....... for a couple dozen lines :( -- Gurth]

d in the game because
your mind will actually be working instead of your hand just grabbing
and
rolling more dice at every situation. If the character needs is in a
social
situation and has an etiquette skill of 4, don't make him roll every
time he
reaches for a fork at dinner or meets an executive in the corp, just
let him
coast through those rolls. Talk to him about it, play out the
situation,
but don't roll dice unless absolutely necessary. Likewise if the
player
lacks the appropriate etiquette skill, then mention to him that he
feels
awkward and others are noticing. If the player has a firearms BR of
4, I
think he'd know how to clean a pistol, don't make him roll, it's a
waste of
time. If a character has a skill at around 10 but the player knows
nothing
about it, you may want to get them a book of some sort so they can at
least
know the basics, it's worth the effort all around.

Minimizing die rolls and maximizing actual interaction will aid
roleplay and
be more fun to all involved. Only use them when needed.

Well, this is the current status of the TopCat Manifesto. I'll be
adding to
it regularly as I remember some of my favorite topics in greater
detail. In
case you were wondering how you'd know if the TCM was updated or not,
don't
worry, I plan on posting it every couple months for everyone's viewing
pleasure. If viewing it doesn't please you, then set up a kill-file
or just
remember to delete any whopping huge post with the subject of
"TopCat's
Manifesto". We'll all be happier.

This isn't a post made to be debated, this is my view on things.
Whether
you think I'm wrong or not is your concern, not mine, and I encourage
you to
write your own to express your views on these and similar subjects.
In
doing so I think we can lessen the amount of repeat mail on the list
and
increase our understanding of how others play Shadowrun. I hope to
add a
section on realistic gaming versus unrealistic gaming (and the
benefits/detriments of each) in the near future.

Thanks for reading. See ya on the list.

-------------------------------------
"I was thinking of the immortal words
of Socrates, who said: I drank what?"
-- Real Genius
-------------------------------------
TopCat at the bottom...

.----------------------
TopCat at the bottom...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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: asher.nonymous@*****.com (Asher)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 11:24:29 -0700
On 9/15/05, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> According to Ubiquitous, on 15-9-05 02:51 the word on the street was...
>
> > Heh. That name brings back memories! Whatever happened to that idiot,
> > anyway?
>
> He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
> because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
> thought it would be ...
>
> I wouldn't say he's an idiot, though -- he was a cool listmember, IMHO,
> until he made the mistake of posting the Manifesto :)

As I remember it, it wasn't the Manifesto itself that was the problem,
it was the way he refused to accept any criticism of the Manifesto. He
actually made some good points but he didn't seem prepared to let
anybody else make points.

I know that Tony Glinka (Porthos) recently mentioned he has a copy of
the original Manifesto post. I don't have the original , but I have at
least a dozen of the replies saved that I thought made good points at
the time.
If there is anybody on the list that wants these reposted, I can ask
Tony for his copy and post the saved replies.
I must warn anybody that asks, though, that the last time this was
posted we had about 300 emails on this subject, few of which were
constructive or civil in tone.
Message no. 38
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 20:32:51 +0200
According to Asher, on 15-9-05 20:24 the word on the street was...

> As I remember it, it wasn't the Manifesto itself that was the problem,
> it was the way he refused to accept any criticism of the Manifesto. He
> actually made some good points but he didn't seem prepared to let
> anybody else make points.

Precisely. If he hadn't posted the Manifesto, nothing would have happened :)

> If there is anybody on the list that wants these reposted, I can ask
> Tony for his copy and post the saved replies.

Please do :) All I've had for the past 9 years is the damaged copy I
posted earlier tonight.

> I must warn anybody that asks, though, that the last time this was
> posted we had about 300 emails on this subject, few of which were
> constructive or civil in tone.

The difference is that now, TopCat isn't on the list (to the best of my
knowledge), so he won't defend his writings.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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: wolfjack@********.org (WolfJack)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:44:31 -0400
Gurth wrote:

>
> Hi there. You may've seen me yelling and screaming on the ShadowRN
> mailing
> list about various subjects. My name is Bob Ooton and my email name
> is

Funny thing, I knew Bob. Used to game with him on a regular basis.
Infact, he and were both on the MidWest White Wolf Demo team for awhile.

Bob was good people when I knew him, and I can't think he'd have changed
that much since then.

-Wolf
Message no. 40
From: lists@*******.com (Wordman)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 20:11:57 -0400
For your sanity here is a reformatted version, courtesy of a few
milliseconds under TextMate's "reformat" function:

The TopCat Manifesto or "What I like to rant about and why"

Hi there. You may've seen me yelling and screaming on the ShadowRN
mailing list about various subjects. My name is Bob
Ooton and my email name is TopCat. TopCat was my first ever Shadowrun
character and my favorite, but that isn't what
this is about. I am writing this so that everyone who seeks my
opinion on a subject can get it easily. So...on with the
ranting.

Credentials: In case you were wondering "Who the hell is this guy and
why should I care about what he says?" I feel I
should at least tell a bit about myself. I'm 23 years old, live in
Springfield, IL (US, of course), and am a
writer-wannabe. I have spent the greater part of my life playing
various roleplaying games, but have only been playing
SR seriously for a little over a year now. Why should my opinion on
SR matter if I'm such a newbie to the game? Because
I am a number-cruncher/rules-lawyer of sickening proportions. I
master games within a month, often less, then learn to
tone down from there, eventually creating balance and happiness all
around. I have also done a bit of acting and have
been a serious roleplayer for years. I've crunched SR down to it's
most basic level and found it wanting in some areas.
It is these areas that I often rant about and shall describe in this
posting.

1. Magic vs. Cyberware: Which is "better"? Well, for overall
effectiveness magic whales all over tech. Even
Cybertechnology or shadowtech level tech. For the average combat
scene, magic and tech are about equal, with tech having
a slight edge due to better average speed. If you crunch the numbers
you'll find certain things to be true and they will
confirm that magic is indeed more effective than cyberware.

The first of these is essence. Cyberware costs essence which can
_never_ be regained, spells cost no essence. The next
is karma, which spells cost and cyberware doesn't, but the cost is so
small as to hardly be worth mentioning. The next
is nuyen. Cyberware eats nuyen like trolls eat twinkies. Spells are
VERY cheap comparatively. Next, the time it takes to
learn a spell is nowhere near as long as it takes to heal from
surgery for new cyberware. Next, spells aren't illegal or
detectable (unless in use and they can still be masked). Much
cyberware is illegal and is always detectable. Cyberware
can break. Spells can't. You will die if you get too much cyberware.
Too many spells never killed a magician. With magic
you can always achieve an equal, better, and/or safer effect than you
can with cy, better, and/or safer effect than you
can with cy

[I think this is one of the places where the file was corrupt -- Gurth]

is when someone dares to say that magic is better because it can be
roleplayed. I'll get into this later, but I'll end
this with saying that neither is better when it comes to roleplaying
and many people are confused as to what roleplaying
actually is.

2. Roleplaying Ok, I couldn't wait to rant about it, so here goes.
Roleplaying is some things and isn't some things,
I'll babble for a while on the subject and it'll be up to you to
figure out what I mean.

Roleplaying is the responsibility of the player. If the player
doesn't actually play a role, then he's just rolling
dice. Roleplaying is not automatic for certain types of characters.
Just because a character is a magician, he isn't
necessarily roleplayed. Just because he's got a cool background
doesn't mean he's roleplayed. Just because a character
is a mage doesn't mean he's being roleplayed. Magic is not
roleplaying. Cyberware is not roleplaying. Guns are not
roleplaying. Combat is not, in itself, roleplaying, but it can
contain elements thereof. Die rolls are not, in
themselves, roleplaying, but can help it along. Roleplaying's most
deadly enemy is the stereotype, which many players
are willing to paste all over another while blatantly adhering to one
themselves (I'll hit on this next).

So what the hell is roleplaying if it isn't all that stuff? It is
playing a role, go figure. Roleplaying is acting,
though not necessarily on the same scale. Roleplaying is actually
making a person out of the sheet of numbers in front
of you. Whether that sheet holds the numbers of a street samurai,
mercenary, decker, mage, shaman, physad, or whatever
doesn't matter IN THE SLIGHTEST BIT to the actual roleplaying of that
character. Good numbers does not a character make.
It makes for a high power level and lots of dice rolling instead of
actual thought (I'll get into this sometime after
the stereotype rant). Bad numbers don't make a character either. They
just make for lower power and less dice when
called for. If the character only represents numbers to the player,
then he isn't roleplayed. If the character
represents something just that side of real, with emotions and
opinions and talents and personality and those are all
used in some way throughout the course of a game, then that player is
ROLEPLAYING! (waits for the "Amens" from the
crowd, before resuming rant)

Hopefully that got a point across.

3. Stereotypes I HATE 'EM! If I ever hear anything like "All samurai
are bloodthirsty mountains of machinery with bad
attitudes" again, I'll scream again. And I know I'll hear it again
because a shitload of people still haven't figured it
out yet, so I know I'll scream again. Anyways, the stereotyping of
characters is what leads to mediocre roleplaying.
Some players force stereotypes on themselves. The "I shall not kill"
players are just as guilty of settling into a
stereotype as the "kill everything" players are. Is either a better
roleplayer for it? Nope. They just grabbed a tired
old convention of the genre and decided to beat the dead horse again
in the name of roleplaying.

Now, in all fairness, almost all roles have been done in one way or
another so it isn't all that easy to actually come
up with something fresh and new without seeming insane, which has been

[And here is an obvious big gap that, in my file as I have it now,
consists of nothing but ....... for a couple dozen
lines :( -- Gurth]

d in the game because your mind will actually be working instead of
your hand just grabbing and rolling more dice at
every situation. If the character needs is in a social situation and
has an etiquette skill of 4, don't make him roll
every time he reaches for a fork at dinner or meets an executive in
the corp, just let him coast through those rolls.
Talk to him about it, play out the situation, but don't roll dice
unless absolutely necessary. Likewise if the player
lacks the appropriate etiquette skill, then mention to him that he
feels awkward and others are noticing. If the player
has a firearms BR of 4, I think he'd know how to clean a pistol,
don't make him roll, it's a waste of time. If a
character has a skill at around 10 but the player knows nothing about
it, you may want to get them a book of some sort
so they can at least know the basics, it's worth the effort all around.

Minimizing die rolls and maximizing actual interaction will aid
roleplay and be more fun to all involved. Only use them
when needed.

Well, this is the current status of the TopCat Manifesto. I'll be
adding to it regularly as I remember some of my
favorite topics in greater detail. In case you were wondering how
you'd know if the TCM was updated or not, don't worry,
I plan on posting it every couple months for everyone's viewing
pleasure. If viewing it doesn't please you, then set up
a kill-file or just remember to delete any whopping huge post with
the subject of "TopCat's Manifesto". We'll all be
happier.

This isn't a post made to be debated, this is my view on things.
Whether you think I'm wrong or not is your concern,
not mine, and I encourage you to write your own to express your views
on these and similar subjects. In doing so I think
we can lessen the amount of repeat mail on the list and increase our
understanding of how others play Shadowrun. I hope
to add a section on realistic gaming versus unrealistic gaming (and
the benefits/detriments of each) in the near future.

Thanks for reading. See ya on the list.
Message no. 41
From: weberm@*******.net (Ubiquitous)
Subject: Average?
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:04:41 -0400
At 11:24 AM 9/15/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>On 9/15/05, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>> According to Ubiquitous, on 15-9-05 02:51 the word on the street was...
>>
>> > Heh. That name brings back memories! Whatever happened to that idiot,
>> > anyway?
>>
>> He left the list soon after posting his Manifesto, as I recall. Mostly
>> because said Manifesto wasn't exactly as well-received as he perhaps
>> thought it would be ...
>>
>> I wouldn't say he's an idiot, though -- he was a cool listmember, IMHO,
>> until he made the mistake of posting the Manifesto :)
>
>As I remember it, it wasn't the Manifesto itself that was the problem,
>it was the way he refused to accept any criticism of the Manifesto. He
>actually made some good points but he didn't seem prepared to let
>anybody else make points.

In reposting what archival copy, I also am reminded that he was a know-it-all.





--
"Ted, sweetheart...somebody's left a wicker basket with a little baby in it
on our front doorstep."
"Just leave it out there on the stoop, honey. The cats'll get it."
- Red Meat http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/
Message no. 42
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Average?
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:58:42 +0200
According to WolfJack, on 15-9-05 21:44 the word on the street was...

> Bob was good people when I knew him, and I can't think he'd have changed
> that much since then.

I guess part of the problem was that this was an e-mail message, and not
a face-to-face conversation about this topic. I've lost track of the
number of times over the years that people got angry with me because
they misunderstood a message I posted, and those were usually just over
trivial things instead of a "This is how I see the world"-type post...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
de limme
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Average?, 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!