Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 00:35:08 -0400
Okay, I have a (hopefully) simple question. You never can tell with this
list. ;)

If you have taken the Blindness Flaw from the Shadowrun Companion, it must
be some sort of neural damage, because replacing the eyes won't get rid of
the blindness. Okay, that makes sense. Now, I understand when a mage is
astrally perceiving, he can see on the astral plane regardless of his
blindness. One of the arguments for this is that astral perception isn't
directly tied to the eyes of the magician, but to some other sense, or some
collective of the senses, etc. Is that the same for Deckers? Can a Decker
view the matrix via an ASIST even if he is blind? Does it make a
difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?

Thanks! :)

Justin :)
Message no. 2
From: Mike Sapp <cynner29@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 01:53:48 -0400
At 12:35 AM 8/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
<snip>
> Does it make a
>difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?
>
>Thanks! :)
>
>Justin :)
>
>
It would depend on which nerve is damaged. If the damage was to the optic
nerve then yes. If the damage was located in the region of the brain where
sight is processed then no. It basically boils down to the GM's call.
Message no. 3
From: Greg Childress <greg@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 02:20:09 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
>Okay, I have a (hopefully) simple question. You never can tell with this
>list. ;)

The answers are always simple... it's consenus that's difficult.

>If you have taken the Blindness Flaw from the Shadowrun Companion, it must
>be some sort of neural damage, because replacing the eyes won't get rid of
>the blindness. Okay, that makes sense. Now, I understand when a mage is
>astrally perceiving, he can see on the astral plane regardless of his
>blindness. One of the arguments for this is that astral perception isn't
>directly tied to the eyes of the magician, but to some other sense, or some
>collective of the senses, etc. Is that the same for Deckers? Can a Decker
>view the matrix via an ASIST even if he is blind? Does it make a
>difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?

YES, there is quite a big difference between retinal and neurological
blindness. For a Decker neurological blindness would mean that the ASIST
has no visual cortex into which to feed information about the terrain of
cyberspace. The decker would be just as blind in the matrix as in the real
world. The caveat is that if the individual is neurologically blind the
probability is that he was since birth. If that is the case thne the
addition of the visual sensorium would not necessarily be a gift. Most
likely the effect it would have on the effectiveness of the decker would be
analogous to the effect it has on the decker's real-world life. The blind
decker could be just as competent as his sighted brothers he just would not
access the information in terms of visual input. This would mean that he
would be bad at things like rapid data perusal that require a visual
modality for scanning but skilled at sensor and detection type work.

On a related note, there is more to sight than just eyes and cortex-
training plays an important part also. The visual cortex of the human being
starts in a initial state that is not useful for much more than identyifing
motion in the visual field. in the first few months the visual system
trains itself through feedback mechanisms to "see" this means that if one
is going to help a person born with retinal blindness there is no point in
waiting until their older as if the visual cortex is not utilised in
development then those sections of the brain are commandeered by other
functional units. Giving a sixteen year old boy who was born retinally
blind cybereyes would be like installing a hard drive with out a controller
card. The device works perfectly but there is nothing to plug into.


<greg>

"I see", said the blind man
Message no. 4
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 03:03:33 -0400
In a message dated 97-08-10 00:38:27 EDT, vanyel@*******.NET writes:

> Okay, I have a (hopefully) simple question. You never can tell with this
> list. ;)

And after reading what is following, I am very glad you put in the last part
of the statement.

> If you have taken the Blindness Flaw from the Shadowrun Companion, it must
> be some sort of neural damage, because replacing the eyes won't get rid of
> the blindness. Okay, that makes sense. Now, I understand when a mage is
> astrally perceiving, he can see on the astral plane regardless of his
> blindness. One of the arguments for this is that astral perception isn't
> directly tied to the eyes of the magician, but to some other sense, or
some
> collective of the senses, etc. Is that the same for Deckers? Can a
Decker
> view the matrix via an ASIST even if he is blind? Does it make a
> difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?
>

VERY GOOD Question...I would have to rule, that if the blindness was
neurological, then the "visual" sensations might not work. The question
would ultimately fall to what part of the "visual cortex" is dealt with for
the Flaw's definition. Is it a failing in the Optic Nerve? Is it a problem
in the Visual Cortex itself? That would, IMHO, tell all.

-K
Message no. 5
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 03:24:02 -0400
After reading your helpful replies, I came up with an idea:

How about offering the Blindness Flaw with a value of 4 points for Deckers?
This way, you can rule that it's optical nerve damage, but the Decker can
still see just fine in the Matrix. However, unlike Magicians, the Decker
can't see at all in the meat world. However, this would require some way
of justifying nerve damage after birth, because it was pointed out that
those first few months of development are crucial to the brain ever being
able to process visual input. Of course, the 6 point Flaw would still be
an option to everyone who wasn't either magically active or a Decker.

Doable?

Justin :)
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 12:11:47 +0100
Justin Pinnow said on 0:35/10 Aug 97...

> If you have taken the Blindness Flaw from the Shadowrun Companion, it must
> be some sort of neural damage, because replacing the eyes won't get rid of
> the blindness. Okay, that makes sense. Now, I understand when a mage is
> astrally perceiving, he can see on the astral plane regardless of his
> blindness. One of the arguments for this is that astral perception isn't
> directly tied to the eyes of the magician, but to some other sense, or some
> collective of the senses, etc. Is that the same for Deckers? Can a Decker
> view the matrix via an ASIST even if he is blind? Does it make a
> difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?

The decker can't see the matrix, IMHO, because ASIST stimulates the brain
directly, and if it's the brain isn't functioning properly (as the
Blindness flaw implies), it won't know what to do with the ASIST data,
just as it doesn't know what to do with the data coming from the eyes.

However, if the damage is to the nerves connecting the eyes to the brain,
then the matrix would be completely and normally visible to the decker.
One thing to keep in mind there is the probalbe shock a decker will
receive if he/she's been blind since birth, and then plugs into the matrix
for the first time...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Pleasure is to be insane.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: "Wendy Wanders, Subject 117" <KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 09:05:01 -0500
You wrote:
> The decker can't see the matrix, IMHO, because ASIST stimulates the brain
> directly, and if it's the brain isn't functioning properly (as the
> Blindness flaw implies), it won't know what to do with the ASIST data,
> just as it doesn't know what to do with the data coming from the eyes.

> However, if the damage is to the nerves connecting the eyes to the brain,
> then the matrix would be completely and normally visible to the decker.
> One thing to keep in mind there is the probalbe shock a decker will
> receive if he/she's been blind since birth, and then plugs into the matrix
> for the first time...
All the character would need is a very specialized reality filter which made
very careful use of his existing senses, and he would be able to function just
fine as a decker... He still has four perfectly good senses, after all.

losthalo
Message no. 8
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 23:46:13 +1000
> The answers are always simple... it's consenus that's difficult.

Very true.

Actually, the answers are always simple. It's the explanations that get
messy. :)

> >blindness. One of the arguments for this is that astral perception isn't
> >directly tied to the eyes of the magician, but to some other sense, or some
> >collective of the senses, etc. Is that the same for Deckers? Can a Decker
> >view the matrix via an ASIST even if he is blind? Does it make a
> >difference if the blindness is neurological as compared to retinal?
>
> YES, there is quite a big difference between retinal and neurological
> blindness. For a Decker neurological blindness would mean that the ASIST
> has no visual cortex into which to feed information about the terrain of
> cyberspace. The decker would be just as blind in the matrix as in the real
> world. The caveat is that if the individual is neurologically blind the

Hmmm. Nice answer, but I'd like to disagree with you, please. From what
I remember of my Neuroscience classes, neurological blindness can be
caused by any impairment in the nerve transmission pathways after the
optic nerve. It doesn't necessarily mean there's no visual cortex at
all. I'd imagine that a specialized surgical technique could re-route
the pathways so that a decker with a functioning visual cortex but
impaired transmission to the cortex could still process visual ASIST
data. This is, of course, providing that the decker's vis. cortex still
works (ie that the neurological damage is relatively recent, rather than
congenital).

All IMHO, naturally. I'm a geneticist, not a neurologist, so feel free
to ignore me. :)

Lady Jestyr

-------------------------------------------------------------
Who says I'm crazy? I prefer the term 'sensibility deficient'
- Tamino
-------------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 9
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 23:47:06 +1000
> How about offering the Blindness Flaw with a value of 4 points for Deckers?
> This way, you can rule that it's optical nerve damage, but the Decker can
> still see just fine in the Matrix. However, unlike Magicians, the Decker

>
> Doable?

Yup yup! I'd certainly say so.

Lady Jestyr

-------------------------------------------------------------
Who says I'm crazy? I prefer the term 'sensibility deficient'
- Tamino
-------------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 10
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 23:50:20 +1000
> However, if the damage is to the nerves connecting the eyes to the brain,
> then the matrix would be completely and normally visible to the decker.
> One thing to keep in mind there is the probalbe shock a decker will
> receive if he/she's been blind since birth, and then plugs into the matrix
> for the first time...

A very good argument for a super-decker NPC. Imagine you're an
x-year-old child who's never seen the world. Somehow you get into the
Matrix - the joy of sight for the first time. It would be indescribable.
Such people would never leave the Matrix. Rather like the quadriplegics
and so forth described p22 in VR2.0... somewhat of an epiphany, I'd
imagine.

Lady Jestyr

-------------------------------------------------------------
Who says I'm crazy? I prefer the term 'sensibility deficient'
- Tamino
-------------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 11
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 12:29:39 -0400
In a message dated 97-08-10 03:27:15 EDT, vanyel@*******.NET writes:

> How about offering the Blindness Flaw with a value of 4 points for Deckers?
> This way, you can rule that it's optical nerve damage, but the Decker can
> still see just fine in the Matrix. However, unlike Magicians, the Decker
> can't see at all in the meat world. However, this would require some way
> of justifying nerve damage after birth, because it was pointed out that
> those first few months of development are crucial to the brain ever being
> able to process visual input. Of course, the 6 point Flaw would still be
> an option to everyone who wasn't either magically active or a Decker.
>
Almost actually. What about Virtual Sight Overlay. A character of mine has
a small collection of cybereyes (used those rules for pricing anyway) in an
object he wears on his head. They are connected, sort of like a Prism Switch
from Corporate Security, to one visual relay. The entire thing is then
datajackable so that he can connect to it. He uses it for visual stuff that
is occuring around him. It lets him change views without turning around.

My point is simple, with a Datajack and a pair of special glasses, you can
come up with a quick method around the "Blindness". Of course, a Magician
with a "Sight" spell can do the same thing.

-K
Message no. 12
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 12:38:02 -0400
In a message dated 97-08-10 09:51:08 EDT, jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU (Lady
Jestyr) writes:

> A very good argument for a super-decker NPC. Imagine you're an
> x-year-old child who's never seen the world. Somehow you get into the
> Matrix - the joy of sight for the first time. It would be indescribable.
> Such people would never leave the Matrix. Rather like the quadriplegics
> and so forth described p22 in VR2.0... somewhat of an epiphany, I'd
> imagine.
>
OOOH, the basis for a hellishly awesome Otaku. The resonance seeks people
out, and someone like this would be a perfect candidate, IMHO.
-K
Message no. 13
From: Greg Childress <greg@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 12:43:16 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
>However, if the damage is to the nerves connecting the eyes to the brain,
>then the matrix would be completely and normally visible to the decker.
>One thing to keep in mind there is the probalbe shock a decker will
>receive if he/she's been blind since birth, and then plugs into the matrix
>for the first time...

Not to harp, but "shock" is not exactly the word. Think 5 to 10 years of
trying to teach yourself to understand visual information during which you
have a constant and throbbing migraine, trouble sleeping due to the light
transmitted through the eyelids that sighted people have come to ignore, not
to mention the lack of sympathy from people who don't understand why you
don't just "see" now that you've been "fixed"; then at the end of that
you
still can't interpret more than broad outlines and movements and most of the
time you tend to ignore that and revert to "blind behavior" anyway. Not
pretty.

On the other hand, if the damage is to the optic nerve then I don't see any
reason why Shadowrun level tech couldn't just give you a new one. People
sometimes talk about how the initial levels of visual processing go on in
the optic nerve, but that processing really takes the form of the manner and
place that the nerve tracts connect; something that a level of tech that
allows conscious neurological triggering of technological implants should be
able to duplicate easily, and then there's bioware...


<greg>

blinded by the light...
Message no. 14
From: Greg Childress <greg@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 12:52:13 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
>Hmmm. Nice answer, but I'd like to disagree with you, please. From what
>I remember of my Neuroscience classes, neurological blindness can be
>caused by any impairment in the nerve transmission pathways after the
>optic nerve. It doesn't necessarily mean there's no visual cortex at
>all. I'd imagine that a specialized surgical technique could re-route
>the pathways so that a decker with a functioning visual cortex but
>impaired transmission to the cortex could still process visual ASIST
>data. This is, of course, providing that the decker's vis. cortex still
>works (ie that the neurological damage is relatively recent, rather than
>congenital).

All of which is correct and I agree with totally. Actually the advances
that would be needed to perform such a surgery would mostly be on the
technical surgical side rather than the theory, We actually have quite a
bit of really complete knowledge about the neurological functioning of the
visual system; it's the more metaphysical information processing side that
we're having problems with- thinking about the brain processing 2 and 1/2 D
information still makes my brain hurt and I passes Neural Correlates of
Visual Perception two semesters ago.

>All IMHO, naturally. I'm a geneticist, not a neurologist, so feel free
>to ignore me. :)

My girlfriend is a geneticist and my sister is on the path to be one... I've
learned the hard way never to ignore one. Neurologists on the other hand,
as a theoretical cognitive linguist, I can ignore with impunity...


<greg>

Are you lookin' at me!?
Message no. 15
From: "MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 11:58:50 +1000
> > However, if the damage is to the nerves connecting the eyes to the brain,
> > then the matrix would be completely and normally visible to the decker.
> > One thing to keep in mind there is the probalbe shock a decker will
> > receive if he/she's been blind since birth, and then plugs into the matrix
> > for the first time...
>
> A very good argument for a super-decker NPC. Imagine you're an
> x-year-old child who's never seen the world. Somehow you get into the
> Matrix - the joy of sight for the first time. It would be indescribable.
> Such people would never leave the Matrix. Rather like the quadriplegics
> and so forth described p22 in VR2.0... somewhat of an epiphany, I'd
> imagine.
>
That makes sense, but what happens when you allow this kind of thing to
occur on a more regular basis??

You can conceivably plug any kind of technological device through the
datajack and as someone else has mentioned, find a way around the flaw.

You'll probably end up with blind riggers and deckers galore.... Not to
mention the (stereo)typical blind physical adept/samurai. Essentially,
if you can do that why not get modified cybereyes???

Who says that the ASIST interface has to rely upon sight? It's got 4
other senses it can use, and in a blind person these senses are often
heightened to some extent. You could instead design a custom interface
which translates visual cues into the other senses..... Probably
equivalent to a reality filter for programming time, which would give
none of the normally associated bonuses.

Of course, if it's a reality filter then a decker is going to have a
damned hard time penetrating heavily sculpted systems. (Unless the GM
deems otherwise)

Marty
Message no. 16
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Blindness and Decking
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 07:55:59 -0400
> From: MARTIN E. GOTTHARD <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
> Date: Sunday, August 10, 1997 9:58 PM

> > A very good argument for a super-decker NPC. Imagine you're an
> > x-year-old child who's never seen the world. Somehow you get into the
> > Matrix - the joy of sight for the first time. It would be
indescribable.
> > Such people would never leave the Matrix. Rather like the quadriplegics
> > and so forth described p22 in VR2.0... somewhat of an epiphany, I'd
> > imagine.

> That makes sense, but what happens when you allow this kind of thing to
> occur on a more regular basis??

> You can conceivably plug any kind of technological device through the
> datajack and as someone else has mentioned, find a way around the flaw.

Right. I don't allow the characters ways around the flaws they take
without trading off for others of equal value...and it has to be realistic.
I would rule that the blindness is permanent on the physical, but they
could see via an ASIST in the matrix. They're still vulnerable in the
physical world, and that can be a threat when they get traced...

> You'll probably end up with blind riggers and deckers galore.... Not to
> mention the (stereo)typical blind physical adept/samurai. Essentially,
> if you can do that why not get modified cybereyes???

Right. Just don't let someone get cybermodification to see on the
physical. The only thing they could do is say jack into a computer and
walk around with a camera that they can see the world through. I would
still give them significant TN mods to see anything, however (via the
camera methond...they would see just fine in the matrix). But it's not
realistic to have someone walking around pointing a camera at everyone all
the time, unless they're part of the media. ;)

> Who says that the ASIST interface has to rely upon sight? It's got 4
> other senses it can use, and in a blind person these senses are often
> heightened to some extent. You could instead design a custom interface
> which translates visual cues into the other senses..... Probably
> equivalent to a reality filter for programming time, which would give
> none of the normally associated bonuses.

I have to make a point here. While an ASIST may very well work with only 4
senses, I doubt it would work AS well. Much of the Matrix is visual, after
all. Also, blind people do NOT develop heightened senses to make up for
their lack of eyesight. That is pure myth to make us individuals with
sight more comfortable. They rely heavily on their other senses, but that
does NOT give them enhanced hearing of any kind, for example.

> Of course, if it's a reality filter then a decker is going to have a
> damned hard time penetrating heavily sculpted systems. (Unless the GM
> deems otherwise)

Like I suggested before. Normal ASIST, normal reality filter, 4 point Flaw
for Deckers.

> Marty

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Blindness and Decking, 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!