Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 03:57:50 +0000
OK, pretty much a final word from me. I've just received and read a
post from D. Thompson on the list that makes a lot of sense, and yet
still contains points that can be argued from a different point of view,
and using the core rules of the game system.

However.

As he so rightly states in the post, The argument is pointless, even
though I personally found it interesting.

It's one of those things where there is no way we are going to agree.

In my opinion, Mages are extremely rare. Most people will not ever meet
one, and only know of them through the media. Not my opinion, but that
of the creators of Shadowrun.

The argument is gravitating towards a "no you don't/yes you do" series
of posts, which is self defeating, very shortly they'll reduce to
contradictions and insults. Which is not the way I want to see this
thread go.

As David so rightly states. My opinion in no way matches his or
Jeremiah's. However, it has been interesting arguing with them, and
maybe some people here agree with me, and some disagree with me. Maybe
- as I hope, this thread has brought to the attention of others some of
the contradictions and problems with magic in Shadowrun. Not the
existence of magic in itself, but the over-riding quantity of magic in
the game.

I can quote chapter and verse from the sourcebooks to my heart's
content, and I'm sure that with dilligent searching, other paragraphs
can be found to argue those I use, making the thread a Monty Python
sketch.

In my own humble opinion (OK, maybe it's not as humble as I might think)
<g> This thread has come to an end for me. I _cannot_ agree with the
definitions that Jeremiah and David use concerning Magicians in
Shadowrun. Whether it be their integration into Society, or their
physical numbers.

I will, honourably admit that I can entertain that my view is not the
view of everyone. I'm not that arrogant. Not yet anyway. However, I
still stand by the arguments posted into this thread, and can only offer
the sourcebooks themselves as vindication for my arguments.

That is not to say that David, Jeremiah, or others are wrong in their
interpretation. Because in the end that's what it's all about isn't it?
Interpretation.

I interpret the rules in the Shadowrun system differently to the way
some others do. That's the fun of this list. Discussing things with
people who have a different view. And that is also part of the reason
why I'm now leaving this thread. Not because I have lost an argument.
I haven't. You can't _lose_ a theoretical argument based upon
interpretation of rules in a book. The same as you can't "win" such an
argument, so neither do I claim victory.

It would be nice to continue the discussion, but in all honesty, I have
the horrid feeling it is likely to end up as a destructive rather than
constructive argument.

Hopefully some of my ideas concerning the rules, and magic in general
have given some people workable ideas. I know I've gained a few from
this thread.

One day, I'll probably have much the same argument again, but hopefully
not before the end of _next_ year... <grin>

"I" only want one long drawn out discussion once a year, the rest can be
nice casual posts. <snigger>

However. If there are people who want to continue this discussion, and
promise _not_ to start flaming or become abusive to each other, we can
either take it to another list, where it won't bore the tears out of
people (I know one that is suitable for this sort of "theoretical"
argument) or to private mail.

I want to take a moment to apologise to Darkblade. I may have been a
teeny bit more short with my post to him than I intended. Sorry, no
offence was meant... (Assuming he didn't follow my advice, and can
actually read this post.) :)


Anyway. Thanks everybody, for an interesting and energetic discussion.
However, it's 4 am here, and I'm off to do something else with my life
for a while.

It's been fun, it's been entertaining, it's been interesting. but, I'm
gonna pull out of it now. And I still disagree <grin>

Bye guys (and gals).

Catch you all later.


Oh yeah, and never forget...

The government can be trusted. The government is your friend. Trust in
the government. The government knows what is best for you.

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims - Alternative UK Sourcebook (U/C)
Message no. 2
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 00:55:14 -0500
At 03:57 AM 11/17/97 +0000, you wrote:
>OK, pretty much a final word from me. I've just received and read a
>post from D. Thompson on the list that makes a lot of sense, and yet
>still contains points that can be argued from a different point of view,
>and using the core rules of the game system.
>
>However.
>
>As he so rightly states in the post, The argument is pointless, even
>though I personally found it interesting.
>
>It's one of those things where there is no way we are going to agree.
>
>In my opinion, Mages are extremely rare. Most people will not ever meet
>one, and only know of them through the media. Not my opinion, but that
>of the creators of Shadowrun.

Cool, I have totally seen your and Paul's point, I think. I would agree
with your conclusions, if I shared your premises. I also realize that your
premise has a lot of support in the source books, but that doesn't mean I
have to think treat SR that way, and I don't want to.

I consider this thread quite successful. It got a little nasty, but I
think we've been remarkably decent about it overall (if can be allowed to
pat all of us on the back).

See ya next year, which is about when I expect to be posting so much also.

--DT
Message no. 3
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 06:06:49 +0000
In article <3.0.32.19971118005514.00752f44@********.mail.yale.edu>,
David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU> waffled & burbled about Bye.
Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.

>>It's one of those things where there is no way we are going to agree.
>>
>>In my opinion, Mages are extremely rare. Most people will not ever meet
>>one, and only know of them through the media. Not my opinion, but that
>>of the creators of Shadowrun.
>
>Cool, I have totally seen your and Paul's point, I think.

After some of the posts it would be strange if you hadn't seen our
point, even if you didn't agree with it. :)

>I would agree
>with your conclusions, if I shared your premises. I also realize that your
>premise has a lot of support in the source books, but that doesn't mean I
>have to think treat SR that way, and I don't want to.

Nobody says you have to. But I am afraid that I was arguing from the
mistaken impression that you actually believed magic was more prevelant
than it is. So, please ignore the other post on this subject which went
out a tad earlier, where I list a pile of sourcebooks, and shout a
little bit :)

>I consider this thread quite successful.

Successful? I don't know. I don't see that the debate was to achieve
much of anything. I guess it depends on how you determine success.

Interesting it has been. And it forced me to go and dig through my pile
of books for a change. :)

>It got a little nasty, but I
>think we've been remarkably decent about it overall (if can be allowed to
>pat all of us on the back).

>See ya next year, which is about when I expect to be posting so much also.

<grin>

Nah, you'll do it again soon. Once it's started, it doesn't stop that
Quickly. :) There'll be something else to talk about.

It's been fun chatting to you DT. It's kinda refreshing to argue a
point from two such diverse views, rather than reading about whether or
not such and such a rule should have such and such a number of dice and
result.


--
__ \ | \ __
| | _` | __| | / _ \ \ / _ \ __ \ _` | _ \ __|
| | ( | | < ___ \ \ / __/ | | ( | __/ |
____/ \__,_|_| _|\_\ _/ _\ \_/ \___|_| _|\__, |\___|_|
A Dark Shadow in a Dark World |___/
http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk - Shadowtk Newbies Guide & Edgerunners Datastore
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims - Alternative UK Sourcebook (U/C)
Message no. 4
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:01:21 -0500
At 06:06 AM 11/19/97 +0000, you wrote:
>In article <3.0.32.19971118005514.00752f44@********.mail.yale.edu>,
>David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU> waffled & burbled about Bye.
>Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
>
>>>It's one of those things where there is no way we are going to agree.
>>>
>>>In my opinion, Mages are extremely rare. Most people will not ever meet
>>>one, and only know of them through the media. Not my opinion, but that
>>>of the creators of Shadowrun.
>>
>>Cool, I have totally seen your and Paul's point, I think.
>
>After some of the posts it would be strange if you hadn't seen our
>point, even if you didn't agree with it. :)
>
>>I would agree
>>with your conclusions, if I shared your premises. I also realize that your
>>premise has a lot of support in the source books, but that doesn't mean I
>>have to think treat SR that way, and I don't want to.
>
>Nobody says you have to. But I am afraid that I was arguing from the
>mistaken impression that you actually believed magic was more prevelant
>than it is. So, please ignore the other post on this subject which went
>out a tad earlier, where I list a pile of sourcebooks, and shout a
>little bit :)

Well, I do think it is more common that you do. And I already responded,
oh well.

>
>>I consider this thread quite successful.
>
>Successful? I don't know. I don't see that the debate was to achieve
>much of anything. I guess it depends on how you determine success.

Successful is interesting, without too much flaming.

>Nah, you'll do it again soon. Once it's started, it doesn't stop that
>Quickly. :) There'll be something else to talk about.

I've been around for a while, I'm usually not nearly this talkative, must
be because I have too much work I don't want to do.
>
>It's been fun chatting to you DT. It's kinda refreshing to argue a
>point from two such diverse views, rather than reading about whether or
>not such and such a rule should have such and such a number of dice and
>result.

I agree. Dice are boring.

--DT
Message no. 5
From: Jeremiah Stevens <jeremiah@********.EDU>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:15:41 -0500
> >It's been fun chatting to you DT. It's kinda refreshing to argue a
> >point from two such diverse views, rather than reading about whether or
> >not such and such a rule should have such and such a number of dice and
> >result.
>
> I agree. Dice are boring.
I've rather enjoyed the thread. I think the whole magic and society/law
issue is an important one that really serves to flesh out our perceptions
of the Shadow Run universe. Granted, game mechanics threads like the
layering armor and team Karma ones are usefull, but it is threads like
these that really require a good deal of thought, and not just an
encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
Message no. 6
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 00:40:57 +0000
In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.971120161149.27687D-100000@*****>, Jeremiah
Stevens <jeremiah@********.EDU> waffled & burbled about Bye. Was RE:
Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
>> >It's been fun chatting to you DT. It's kinda refreshing to argue a
>> >point from two such diverse views, rather than reading about whether or
>> >not such and such a rule should have such and such a number of dice and
>> >result.
>>
>> I agree. Dice are boring.
>I've rather enjoyed the thread. I think the whole magic and society/law
>issue is an important one that really serves to flesh out our perceptions
>of the Shadow Run universe. Granted, game mechanics threads like the
>layering armor and team Karma ones are usefull, but it is threads like
>these that really require a good deal of thought, and not just an
>encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.

Fairly said. :)

You know, I can't help admiring people like Gurth and Sascha, and a
couple of the others who are almost (seemingly at will) able to call in
and quote chapter, page and verse on a rule... BUt, I can't help
wondering if they ever get fed up with it all. Once you know the rules,
and that's all, what's left?

Nah, theoretical arguments are, in my opinion far more interesting,
usually involve a few aspects of the game world that hadn't been
considered before, and as you say, help to flesh out a perspective.

Rules threads are always going to happen, and can be useful. But...

Well, hell, a guy just has to blow off sometimes. :)

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims - Alternative UK Sourcebook (U/C)
Message no. 7
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:18:36 +0100
Avenger said on 0:40/21 Nov 97...

> You know, I can't help admiring people like Gurth and Sascha, and a
> couple of the others who are almost (seemingly at will) able to call in
> and quote chapter, page and verse on a rule...

I've just got a good memory for things that interest me, and for which
part of a book I read something in, so when someone has a question I can
usually grab the right book, leaf through it, and find the relevant page
and quote the answer from there.

> BUt, I can't help wondering if they ever get fed up with it all. Once
> you know the rules, and that's all, what's left?

Being able to answer rules questions isn't the same as not having any
interest in anything else than the game rules... However, the reason I
don't tend to get involved in threads like the "Magic and society" one is
because the messages are way too long, and rehash the same info over and
over again. I tend to lose interest in what I'm reading halfway through
the message, and go on to read shorter threads.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The future. Available tomorrow.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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. 8
From: Sascha Pabst <Sascha.Pabst@**********.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law.
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 16:27:17 +0000
On 21 Nov 97 at 11:18, Gurth wrote:
> Avenger said on 0:40/21 Nov 97...
> > You know, I can't help admiring people like Gurth and Sascha, and a
> > couple of the others who are almost (seemingly at will) able to call in
> > and quote chapter, page and verse on a rule...
> I've just got a good memory for things that interest me, and for which
> part of a book I read something in, so when someone has a question I can
> usually grab the right book, leaf through it, and find the relevant page
> and quote the answer from there.
Thanks, Avenger. With mails like this one it's hard to meet the "low
radiation user guidlines" as I really beamed at my screen :-)

And things are about the same here as with Gurth: I have my books
within arm-reach, and usually remember where to find what (unless it
comes to grounding: Quotes relevant there are etched nto my genes by
now, I think :-)

> > BUt, I can't help wondering if they ever get fed up with it all. Once
> > you know the rules, and that's all, what's left?
> Being able to answer rules questions isn't the same as not having any
> interest in anything else than the game rules...
Avenger, knowing those rules has just goal: To be a more efficient GM
then I would be if I had to check books regulary. When one happens to
know all the rules (hah! Haven't met that criterium yet!) FASA surely
brings a new book to us (I really should hurry getting through R2, as
Cyberpirates is coming...), and sometimes I even can enjoy a GAME!

It's always the _game_ that's there. Before, after, and among the
rules.

Sascha
--
+---___---------+------------------------------------+------------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |Things that try to look |
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@ | like things often do |
| \___ __/ | Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.de | look more like things |
|==== \_/ ======|*Wearing hats is just a way of life*| than things. Well known|
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | fact. - E.Weatherwax |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary ---(T.Pratchett)-+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Bye. Was RE: Magic in society & Magic and the Law., 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.