Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 18:54:28 +1000
Gurth writes:

> Or how does anyone know that he's only got 6 rounds left in his gun? Or how
> actually do you decide to fire 8 rounds, no more and no less?

Well, for the first you look at the little readout on the sight of the gun -
many SR guns claim to have such things, or you look at the smartlink reading
if you've got one. For the second, you count, or you have burst limiters or
somesuch things. My friend in the army claims to be able to reasonably
accurately spit out x rounds from the minimi machine gun. And it doesn't
have any three round burst limiters or things like that which would make it
even easier. And if it's smartlinked, then I couldn't see a problem about
choosing exactly, to the bullet, how many rounds you're going to fire.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 2
From: Ioannis Pantelidis <jpante@******.COMPULINK.GR>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 23:12:48 +0300
On Sun, 6 Aug 1995, Damion Milliken wrote:

>
> > Or how does anyone know that he's only got 6 rounds left in his gun? Or how
> > actually do you decide to fire 8 rounds, no more and no less?
if you have smartlink it is replied in books but for non smartlinked
weapons it is more spophisticate. in the sr books it writes that the
rouns left on the weapon it is written through an lcd monitor (a little
one) on the weapon. Also if you have at your skill 6 firearms it means
that your mother instead of (the thing you suck-not mean it in bad meaning-)
it putte you a bullet. this means that you know very much about firearms
so you clould calculate how many bullets you fire
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 11:46:31 +0200
>if you have smartlink it is replied in books but for non smartlinked
>weapons it is more spophisticate. in the sr books it writes that the
>rouns left on the weapon it is written through an lcd monitor (a little
>one) on the weapon.

I know all that, but I still find it strange that you can say "I'm going to
fire 5 rounds," especially on a superMG like in those FOF... Ah well, let's
just call it cinematic, shall we?


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 4
From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 11:48:00 PDT
> the
>rouns left on the weapon it is written through an lcd monitor (a little
>one) on the weapon.

Just a note: Ever seen those fancy LCD displays on the _side_ of a weapon in
some illustrations and fiction art? Yea, they look neat, and fill up some
space when the artist doesn't know what a gun really looks like from the
side. (I'm talking from experience here :-) But real guns (in SR, of course)
should have their display somewhere where you can see it while firing,
right? Like below the (iron) sights, somewhere on the back side of the gun.
(sorry I'm no good at gun anatomy in english :-)

Just my 2 ... you know.


MxM
Message no. 5
From: Eve Forward <lutra@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 05:26:58 -0700
>>>> the
>rouns left on the weapon it is written through an lcd monitor (a little
>one) on the weapon.
<<<<

Just a side amusing note... One time we had a character who was a "tech",
repair guy. He "fixed" the team sammie's favorite pistol, so that when
the Sammie was smartlinked in, he not only saw a running tally of his
remaining ammo in the top right corner of his vision, but it also
automatically tallied "scores" for various targets, and had a little video
Docwagon guy that would pop into view occasionally, and shooting that would
subtract points. I think it also did time and range.
Drove the sam nuts.

-E
Message no. 6
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 13:35:15 BST
> Just a side amusing note... One time we had a character who was a "tech",
> repair guy. He "fixed" the team sammie's favorite pistol, so that when
> the Sammie was smartlinked in, he not only saw a running tally of his
> remaining ammo in the top right corner of his vision, but it also
> automatically tallied "scores" for various targets, and had a little video
> Docwagon guy that would pop into view occasionally, and shooting that would
> subtract points. I think it also did time and range.
Drove the sam nuts.

I think ammo counters and barrel temp is standard to Smart-links, but
I'm not sure...

I do like the idea of a pints counter though, and the Doc-wagon guy, ROFL
I'm not suprised shooting the guy subtracts points... did the tech fix the
smart-link so it registered the doc-wagon as a 'friendly', so the gun
won't go off, or did the sammy have a wild round going down-range to punch
through walls and take out bystanders too?

Heh, double penalty points for a doc-wagon icon and a bystander :-)


Man, I have to go and do this to one of the player's sammys, they're
all to cocky anyway... scuse me :-)

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 7
From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 14:59:00 PDT
>did the tech fix the
>smart-link so it registered the doc-wagon as a 'friendly', so the gun
>won't go off,

In my campaign, smartlinks used to work like that (sort of like a streak SRM
in Battletech, for those of you who know what I mean). Unless you got a
lock-on-foe condition the gun didn't go off. I think it works like that in
some novels.

Anyway, I dropped that function when I saw how much precious APDS ammo my
players saved on it, and how ultimately un-cool it is... It's better when
showers of lead fly everywhere, don't you think? More action-movie-like.

Also, a graphic-based (as opposed to radio-signal based) IFF system
incorporated in the smartlink would require a hughe (?) expert-system that
impossibly fits within 0.5 essence, IMHO. It would also cost a LOT more than
2,500Y.


MxM
Message no. 8
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 14:05:52 BST
Agreed, a vison-based IFF would be very mp intensive, no to mention the
processing time...... I prefer the cheapo cyber-punk version where all
your buddies get to wears small IFF badges (I think they;re passive,
but show up on radar, which is how CP smart works), then if the gun finds
a badge in the LOF, it won't fire (can be a bit akward that one :-)).

Now, the tac-comp definitely can Id friendlys and mark them as a non-
target, but in the midst of a busy firefight.... well, would you rather
ensure you don't hit a friend, or use one of your 'paint-slots' to make
sure you do hit an enemy....

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 9
From: Stephanos Piperoglou <sneakabout@**********.HOL.GR>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 17:57:54 +0300
On Mon, 7 Aug 1995, Lindblom Fredrik, Training wrote:

> In my campaign, smartlinks used to work like that (sort of like a streak SRM
> in Battletech, for those of you who know what I mean). Unless you got a
> lock-on-foe condition the gun didn't go off. I think it works like that in
> some novels.
>
> Anyway, I dropped that function when I saw how much precious APDS ammo my
> players saved on it, and how ultimately un-cool it is... It's better when
> showers of lead fly everywhere, don't you think? More action-movie-like.

Yeah, it's munchkinous. If you want to do it like that, you just push
down on the trigger and wait until theguy walks into your sights, and the
gun fires off then...
_________________________ ______________________________
______/ Stephanos J. Piperoglou \____/ sneakabout@**********.hol.gr \______
Aspiring Linux hacker, computer nut, RP gamemaster, sci-fi fan, High School
student, amateur writer, forensics champion, A-level candidate, math adept,
science geek, rave fan, people person, pleasantly plump, or in other words:
GCS/S/M/L/PA d- s++:++ a16 C++++ UL++>++++ P+ L+++>++++ E- W++ N+ K w--- O-
M+ !V PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP++ t+ 5++ X+ R+++ tv b++ DI? D+ G++ e->++++ h! r y?

...QED
Message no. 10
From: Eve Forward <lutra@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 08:51:35 -0700
>>
I do like the idea of a pints counter though, and the Doc-wagon guy, ROFL
I'm not suprised shooting the guy subtracts points... did the tech fix the
smart-link so it registered the doc-wagon as a 'friendly', so the gun
won't go off, or did the sammy have a wild round going down-range to punch
through walls and take out bystanders too?<<<

Well, see, he couldn't tell the difference between the computer-simulated
Docwagon guy and something "real", so I think it still fired. I'm not sure.
Originally, when you hit the Docwagon guy, the gun would quit firing for
a few rounds as a penalty... but the Sammy made him fix that.
The gun also tallied misses and wasted shots and figured those in too.
We joked that if he could ever loop the score (make it run out of tally
numbers) that it would play a little "You Win!" kinda video.

Alas, the sammy, the gun, and the tech who created it all fell victim
to Adam's vicious sense of humor, and a close-range rocket-launcher
explosion.

-E
Message no. 11
From: Eve Forward <lutra@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 08:56:39 -0700
"Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE writes:

>>It's better when showers of lead fly everywhere, don't you think?<<

Oh, I think so. I also think this would be a great .sig quote. :)

-E
Message no. 12
From: "S.F. Eley" <gt6877c@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 15:11:48 -0400
Eve Forward writes:

> "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE writes:
> >>It's better when showers of lead fly everywhere, don't you think?<<
>
> Oh, I think so. I also think this would be a great .sig quote. :)


I agree. >8->


Blessings,

_TNX._

--
Stephen F. Eley (-) gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu )-( Student Pagan Community
http://wc62.residence.gatech.edu| "It's better when showers of lead fly
My opinions are my opinions. | everywhere, don't you think?"
Please don't blame anyone else. | -- Frederik Lindblom
Message no. 13
From: Duke Diener <DukeDragon@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 16:08:04 -0400
MxM wrote:
>Also, a graphic-based (as opposed to radio-signal based) IFF system
>incorporated in the smartlink would require a hughe (?) expert-system that
>impossibly fits within 0.5 essence, IMHO. It would also cost a LOT more than
>2,500Y.

I had an idea once, I had everyone in the party paint a unique symbol on the
front and back of their Armored Jackets with infared reflective paint. Most
of the party had thermo vision anyway and could easily see the design (some
debate over wether or not it appeared hotter or colder than the rest of the
jacket but I digress). So in a firefight if the person in your sights had
the design on him/her don't shoot. Never did get the chance to test this
theory out (haven't played a sammie in a while).

Duke
Message no. 14
From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 09:01:00 PDT
>> >>It's better when showers of lead fly everywhere, don't you think?<<
>>
>> Oh, I think so. I also think this would be a great .sig quote. :)
>
>I agree. >8->

<bows to the audience>
"Thank you, thank you, autographs later, everyone." ;-) ;-) ;-)


MxM
Message no. 15
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 09:39:08 +0200
>Just a note: Ever seen those fancy LCD displays on the _side_ of a weapon in
>some illustrations and fiction art?

Like on the AK-97 in the first-ed rulebook you mean? Yeah, I noticed that too :)

>But real guns (in SR, of course)
>should have their display somewhere where you can see it while firing,
>right? Like below the (iron) sights, somewhere on the back side of the gun.
>(sorry I'm no good at gun anatomy in english :-)

At the rear end of the receiver you mean? Still, you'd have to make it a
HUD-like device, I think. Project the ammo left in the gun onto the same
transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
remaining in your gun :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 16
From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 10:17:00 PDT
>At the rear end of the receiver you mean? Still, you'd have to make it a
>HUD-like device, I think. Project the ammo left in the gun onto the same
>transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
>you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
>remaining in your gun :)

Yeah. Or, of course, if you have a (digital or otherwise) imaging scope you
can project it on its display. But with old-style iron sights it gets a bit
difficult. Maybe below the frontmost sight (still lousy at english
gun-anatomy) (I'm thinking about assault rifles, here) then you wouldn't
have to move the eye all that much? I'm assuming we are shooting from the
shoulder, of course. Hip-shots are only good for those with smartguns or
those with targets within ten meters, anyway.

BTW what part of the gun is called 'reciever' ? :)


MxM
Message no. 17
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 11:32:46 +0200
>Agreed, a vison-based IFF would be very mp intensive, no to mention the
>processing time...... I prefer the cheapo cyber-punk version where all
>your buddies get to wears small IFF badges (I think they;re passive,
>but show up on radar, which is how CP smart works), then if the gun finds
>a badge in the LOF, it won't fire (can be a bit akward that one :-)).
>
>Now, the tac-comp definitely can Id friendlys and mark them as a non-
>target, but in the midst of a busy firefight.... well, would you rather
>ensure you don't hit a friend, or use one of your 'paint-slots' to make
>sure you do hit an enemy....

With a smartlink, you don't make stray shots -- walk your fire from one
target to the next, and even if there's a friendly between them, you don't
hit him/her. (Or is that an SR1 rule?)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 18
From: Richard Gilchrist 0131 343 4685 <richard.gilchrist@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 11:31:25 +0000
>With a smartlink, you don't make stray shots -- walk your fire from one
>target to the next, and even if there's a friendly between them, you don't
>hit him/her. (Or is that an SR1 rule?)

I think the point is that during a fast/dark gunfight its kind of difficult to
tell who are the good guys (well the people you don't want to shot), and the
smart gun link isn't going to tell you which one you want to hit, thats up to
you, i.e. you have to know that its is a stray shot and if you can only see an
outline then how can you tell

rick
Message no. 19
From: "Lindblom Fredrik, Training" <fredrik.lindblom@*******.TELIA.SE>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 13:49:00 -0700
>With a smartlink, you don't make stray shots -- walk your fire from one
>target to the next, and even if there's a friendly between them, you don't
>hit him/her. (Or is that an SR1 rule?)

I think in "Never deal with a dragon" Ghost (or his tribe-mate) points his
gun at a guy having a "human shield" or something, and Verner (or whoever)
comments that the "shield" won't help the guy 'coz the smartlink won't let
the indians gun fire unless it's pointed at the target, not the hostage.
Sorry, got only weak memories of this.

As for walking fire and smartguns, I think it's a SR1 rule. I never saw
anything about it in the 2ed rules. And I never read 1st ed.

Now how about an "Expert Smartlink"...say 1.0 essence cost...all benefits of
SmartlinkII...plus some functions like a (very) scaled-down tac-comp
including target recognition, and an ammo-saving function for walking
fire... Hmmm...just maybe...


MxM
Message no. 20
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 12:51:30 BST
> With a smartlink, you don't make stray shots -- walk your fire from one
> target to the next, and even if there's a friendly between them, you don't
> hit him/her. (Or is that an SR1 rule?)

Yeah, that's what I mean, how does the bugger do it?

Put it like this, I figure that the samrtgun has a gyro or whatever, so it
knows exaclty where the gun is pointing, and then puts a dot in your field
of vision.... now, how does it know the difference between a piece of wall,m
your best buddy, a cardboard cut-out of your best buddy, and somebody you
want to turn into a greasy stain?

If it recieves signals from your brain that Id's targets, then how does a
smartgun cut-out targets in the midst of a firefight on thermo, or in
limited light conditions when you can;t tell who's who?

It's a fiddle,

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 21
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 13:03:08 BST
> I think in "Never deal with a dragon" Ghost (or his tribe-mate) points his
> gun at a guy having a "human shield" or something, and Verner (or whoever)
> comments that the "shield" won't help the guy 'coz the smartlink won't let
> the indians gun fire unless it's pointed at the target, not the hostage.

Sounds accurate... but if you really wanna take that shot and fire through
the hostage, then you oughta to be able to mentally shut down the target
recog facility... after all, you can turn the safety off, why not the
image-recog?

Walking fire... I thought it was still in 2ed, maybe FASA noticed the problem
and sorted it out then :-)


> Now how about an "Expert Smartlink"...say 1.0 essence cost...all benefits
of
> SmartlinkII...plus some functions like a (very) scaled-down tac-comp
> including target recognition, and an ammo-saving function for walking
> fire... Hmmm...just maybe...

Of course you could simulate the same thing with some of the non-official
cyberware that's been cooing around... such as a Vision SPU, connected to
a (good) image-recog database that has pictures of all your chummers in
full light, reduced light, and a good idea of their thermal signatures...

Walking fire... easy, you just shut down the gun when the X-hair is not pointed
at anything vaguely human shaped, or you haven't _actively_ designated as a
target.. such as that armoured car, etc.

course, I like walking fire... but there's not much need for it anymore when
it says you can split the auto-fire burst between targets, rather than walk
the gun across a few...something like
"Autofire:- the gun fires between three and ten rounds in any
combination of bursts as long as each burst is at least three
rounds."
So you don;t have to walk between targets (unless you like collateral damage
:-) )

Phil
Message no. 22
From: "Victor Rodriguez, Jr" <sedahdro@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 03:05:00 EST
Gurth wrote:
>At the rear end of the receiver you mean? Still, you'd have to make it a
>HUD-like device, I think. Project the ammo left in the gun onto the same
>transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
>you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
>remaining in your gun :)
So would looking back and forth be a free, simple, or complex action?
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 23
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 01:11:49 +1000
Lindblom Fredrik, Training writes:

> As for walking fire and smartguns, I think it's a SR1 rule. I never saw
> anything about it in the 2ed rules. And I never read 1st ed.

Try page 93 SRII, under the heading "Multiple Targets".

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 24
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 01:08:27 +1000
P Ward writes:

> If it recieves signals from your brain that Id's targets, then how does a
> smartgun cut-out targets in the midst of a firefight on thermo, or in
> limited light conditions when you can;t tell who's who?

I'd have said that it doesn't. If the firer can't ID friend from foe, then
neither can the smartgun. Hmm, might toss a few smoke grenades at my runners
next fight, see just how much damage they can do to each other.

> Sounds accurate... but if you really wanna take that shot and fire through
> the hostage, then you oughta to be able to mentally shut down the target
> recog facility... after all, you can turn the safety off, why not the
> image-recog?

Again, I woulda thought this was pretty obvious. Otherwise smartlinks would
be kinda useless. Or if they actually _are_ made like that, I very much
doubt that the ones runners get have that particular option still intact.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 25
From: Ian Smith <KildTheCat@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 19:21:54 -0400
>If [ a smartgun ] recieves signals from your brain that Id's >targets, then
how does a
>smartgun cut-out targets in the midst of a firefight on >thermo, or in
>limited light conditions when you can;t tell who's who?
>
>It's a fiddle,

I don't think it does. The smartlinked gun will not shoot at anyone you
don't want it to shoot at ( or anything for that matter ) - in the case of
conditions where you can;t tell who's who the wired guy has the same choice
as the unwired - do you WANT to shoot at the form. The smartgun acts once the
decision is made, the decision is made difficult by the conditions. . . <GM
evil grin>
Message no. 26
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 17:16:56 GMT
Gurth wrote: <replying to someone else>

> >But real guns (in SR, of course)
> >should have their display somewhere where you can see it while firing,
> >right? Like below the (iron) sights, somewhere on the back side of the gun.
> >(sorry I'm no good at gun anatomy in english :-)
>
> At the rear end of the receiver you mean? Still, you'd have to make it a
> HUD-like device, I think. Project the ammo left in the gun onto the same
> transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
> you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
> remaining in your gun :)

Easy enough to do: at the moment I'm wondering whether to put a red-dot
sight on my pistol. Projects a red dot into the scope: put the dot on
the target and fire. Better than a laser by a long shot. Not hard at all
to put an ammo indicator into there: the rounds-left counter is the hard
part. You could do it today.

I use these scopes (Aimpoint and Pro-Point are two of the brand names)
in SR instead of lasers in most cases. It's interesting that none of the
Practical Pistol shooters I know use lasers, but everyone not using iron
sights uses red-dot scopes.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 27
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 01:22:48 GMT
Damon wrote (answering Renegade):
> > P Ward writes:
> > If it recieves signals from your brain that Id's targets, then how does a
> > smartgun cut-out targets in the midst of a firefight on thermo, or in
> > limited light conditions when you can;t tell who's who?
>
> I'd have said that it doesn't. If the firer can't ID friend from foe, then
> neither can the smartgun. Hmm, might toss a few smoke grenades at my runners
> next fight, see just how much damage they can do to each other.

I always saw it as "You are about to put a round into Target X. Do you
want the gun to cut out?" If the answer is other than "yes",
"no," or (if
I feel merciful and the character has been paying attention) "who was X
again?" the smartgun fires a shot into that person.

No sophisticated image recognition, no IFF, just a "WHOA!" signal to
the weapon. If you don't send it...

> > Sounds accurate... but if you really wanna take that shot and fire through
> > the hostage, then you oughta to be able to mentally shut down the target
> > recog facility... after all, you can turn the safety off, why not the
> > image-recog?
>
> Again, I woulda thought this was pretty obvious. Otherwise smartlinks would
> be kinda useless. Or if they actually _are_ made like that, I very much
> doubt that the ones runners get have that particular option still intact.

Oh, you can override the "too close to a friendly" signal all right :)

Again, I only saw this as similar to WW1 aircraft interruptor gear: you
*can* tell the weapon not to fire. If you don't, it'll rock and roll all
over the target. But it is fail-active, not fail-safe.... If the trigger is
pulled and it is recieving no "INHIBIT!" signal from the smartlink, the
gun goes "BLAM!" into whatever it might be pointed at.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 28
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:46:43 +1000
Victor Rodriguez, Jr writes:

> So would looking back and forth be a free, simple, or complex action?

Myself I'd rate it sa a free. One can observe, but not make a perception
test by using a free action. That sounds about right to me.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 29
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 10:30:30 +0200
>Yeah. Or, of course, if you have a (digital or otherwise) imaging scope you
>can project it on its display. But with old-style iron sights it gets a bit
>difficult. Maybe below the frontmost sight (still lousy at english
>gun-anatomy) (I'm thinking about assault rifles, here) then you wouldn't
>have to move the eye all that much?

It's not moving the eye, it's focusing it that's the problem. Try this
trick: look out of the window and focus on a house or tree or whatever in
the distance. Then put your fingers in your line of sight. Your fingers will
be out of focus, and when you take a closer look at the finger, you're
hardly able to see the house as any more than a blur. There's the same
problem with aiming a weapon while you're looking at the ammo counter, I
think...
IMHO the only workable solution is to make it HUD-like, so that it appears
the text is at an infinite distance from the weapon. An LCD would be very
hard for this, I think.

>BTW what part of the gun is called 'reciever' ? :)

The main body, to which the rest of the gun's parts are attached (I think...
someone's bound to correct me on the exact definition).


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 30
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 12:41:32 +0200
[smartguns not hitting unwanted targets]
>Yeah, that's what I mean, how does the bugger do it?

I've been wondering too...

>Put it like this, I figure that the samrtgun has a gyro or whatever, so it
>knows exaclty where the gun is pointing, and then puts a dot in your field
>of vision.... now, how does it know the difference between a piece of wall,m
>your best buddy, a cardboard cut-out of your best buddy, and somebody you
>want to turn into a greasy stain?

I believe just found a major difference between smarthuns in SR1 and SR2.
Page 68, SR1: "A character using autofire may sweep from one target to
another, thereby performing an action called "walking the fire." Each meter
of distance between the targets requires one burst [one bullet] of sweeping
fire. A smartgun can walk autofire past a friendly character without hitting
him." It then gives an example with a diagram of someone doing just that.
Now, page 93, SR2: " When engaging multiple targets in full-auto mode, the
attacker must "walk" the fire from one target to the next. What this means
is that one round is "wasted" for every meter of distance between the two
targets. Smartguns never waste rounds."

They seem similar enough, apart from the four words at the end of the second
bit -- in SR1, the gun does not fire if you want it to, in SR2 the gun fires
_only_ when you want it to.

I think this settles that debate. The way I read all this, the gun fires at
anyone you want to shoot at, and not at anyone you don't want to shoot at.
It doesn't cut out any specific target because it IDs them as "friendly."


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 31
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 12:41:47 +0200
>>At the rear end of the receiver you mean? Still, you'd have to make it a
>>HUD-like device, I think. Project the ammo left in the gun onto the same
>>transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
>>you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
>>remaining in your gun :)
>So would looking back and forth be a free, simple, or complex action?

Don't really know, I'd make it Simple I think, just like changing gun modes.
With a smartgun, I say you know it instinctively, though maybe I'd make it a
Free Action (we never use many of those anyway).


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wicked mental dope
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 32
From: P Ward <P.Ward@**.CF.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 14:26:12 BST
> Again, I only saw this as similar to WW1 aircraft interruptor gear: you
> *can* tell the weapon not to fire. If you don't, it'll rock and roll all
> over the target. But it is fail-active, not fail-safe.... If the trigger is
> pulled and it is recieving no "INHIBIT!" signal from the smartlink, the
> gun goes "BLAM!" into whatever it might be pointed at.

Are you talking about the things that stopped the gun from firing when
it'd cut right through your propellors?


Another thing I found the inbhibitor useful for was enforcing the
need for a team karma pool. None of my players wanted to relinquish their
direct control over their karma, so I told that them that the smartgun
would not _definitely_ cut out when it tracked over a person in their
team that they didn't trust enough to share karma with... you had to
specifically designate them as a friendly at the start of a fight, and
that took time.....

Phil (Renegade)
Message no. 33
From: Ian Smith <KildTheCat@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 14:25:01 -0400
>:-> So would looking back and forth be a free, simple, or >:->complex
action?

>Myself I'd rate it sa a free. One can observe, but not make a >perception
>test by using a free action. That sounds about right to me.

I wouldn't even rate it as an action. Remember a character only gets one
free action a combat phase. So would you say that a character can't glance
at his readout and drop prone in the same combat phase? I wouldn't think
looking at something is the same as 'observing' it. . .
Message no. 34
From: Allen Versfeld <aversfel@****.CS.UNP.AC.ZA>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 08:54:50 +0200
On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, Victor Rodriguez, Jr wrote:

> >
[schnip]

> >transparent plate that holds your aiming dots or something. If you don't,
> >you have to keep looking back and forth between the target and the ammo
> >remaining in your gun :)
> So would looking back and forth be a free, simple, or complex action?
> ---Sedah Drol
>

Obviously, the ammo-counter would be designed to be as easy to read as
possible, so that a glance would be enough to read it. Therefore, a free
action
---------------------------
The guy with no .sig

aversfel@****.cs.unp.ac.za
homepage opening soon
Message no. 35
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:10:01 GMT
> >Yeah. Or, of course, if you have a (digital or otherwise) imaging scope you
> >can project it on its display. But with old-style iron sights it gets a bit
> >difficult. Maybe below the frontmost sight (still lousy at english
> >gun-anatomy) (I'm thinking about assault rifles, here) then you wouldn't
> >have to move the eye all that much?
>
> It's not moving the eye, it's focusing it that's the problem. Try this
> trick: look out of the window and focus on a house or tree or whatever in
> the distance. Then put your fingers in your line of sight. Your fingers will
> be out of focus, and when you take a closer look at the finger, you're
> hardly able to see the house as any more than a blur. There's the same
> problem with aiming a weapon while you're looking at the ammo counter, I
> think...

Actually, you focus on the sights and let the target blur, at least the
way I was taught. Works well, too. Concentrate on the target and you
shoot without aligning the sights properly - in other words, miss.

So even on iron sights you'd be focussed on them, and could read a simple
counter or gauge.

> IMHO the only workable solution is to make it HUD-like, so that it appears
> the text is at an infinite distance from the weapon. An LCD would be very
> hard for this, I think.

LEDs in the display of an Aimpoint, no problem.

> >BTW what part of the gun is called 'reciever' ? :)
>
> The main body, to which the rest of the gun's parts are attached (I think...
> someone's bound to correct me on the exact definition).

<Snigger>

Actually, Gurth's about right. The receiver is basically the part of the
weapon which the bolt rides in and recoils into. Revolvers don't have
recievers, for instance, and neither do most automatic pistols. In terms
of "which bit of the weapon" his explanation's more helpful, though.

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 36
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Character Knowledge
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:31:02 GMT
In message <9508091326.AA10245@********.cm.cf.ac.uk> SHADOWRN@***.surfnet.nl
writes:
> > Again, I only saw this as similar to WW1 aircraft interruptor gear:
>
> Are you talking about the things that stopped the gun from firing when
> it'd cut right through your propellors?

Yep, Anthony Fokker's little invention.

> Another thing I found the inbhibitor useful for was enforcing the
> need for a team karma pool....

Now that's sneaky!


--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 37
From: "Mr. Me" <jlr6@****.ucc.nau.edu>
Subject: character knowledge
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 10:54:02 -0700 (MST)
More thoughts on how much the players should know about the game and the
rules....Since I know that I don't know everything about all the games I
play and run I hope that the other players have a good deal of knowledge
about the game systems...I even enjoy running games with rules lawyers
since that way I don't have to memorize everything...

As for knowledge of the background stuff in the game...I want the players
to know as much as possible in the hopes that they intergrate that
knowledge into character backgrounds, and thus provide me with some more
story ideas...

And how do you keep the players from finding out stuff if they want to?
I guess if you want to keep the players totally in the dark you have to
trust them...Otherwise they can just go to the store and read or buy the
books and find out the info...

ugghh..don't know how badly written this is...mind isn't working, need
caffeine...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hey you! Silly sniper persons! You can't kill the Tick with mere
bullets!!"
-The Tick

"Oh dear! I think I ran over a ninja back there!"
"Well, keep driving we're late as it is! I mean it's not like we hit a
collie or anything."
-From _the Tick_
_______________________________________________________________________
jlr6@****.ucc.nau.edu
Mr.Me High Arch Priest of Tod<gorf gorf gorf> God of Small Frogs

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Character Knowledge, 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!