Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Sean McCrohan <mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Computers vs Electronics vs B/R
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 15:08:32 -0400
Okay. I'm having some trouble figuring out how to fit Computers,
Electronics, and their respective B/R versions together in a semi-consistant
fashion. The problem may well lie in my own mind rather than in the system -
we'll see :)

To design a new electronic device, you use Electronic Theory aka
Electronics Background aka Electrical Engineering - the names change,
but it's all basically the same. This is a Knowledge skill. (SR3, p85 -
to build something new, you need theoretical knowledge). Or maybe, you
use Electronics, which claims to cover both use and 'general understanding'?

To /build/ the device, you use Electronics Build/Repair. Presumably,
Electronics B/R has the same specialities as Electronics.

To /use/ the device, you use Electronics. This includes all of
the fun rigger tricks, like jamming signals, boosting gain, etc.

To defeat a Maglock, you use...? I'd say Electronics if you're
using another device to override it, Electronics B/R if you take the
cover off and start crossing wires. The Build/Repair example, in fact,
(SR3 p95) looks like it invloves a maglock.


That was the easy part.


Computers has, as specialities, 'Hardware' and 'Software' (yes, and
others). So.

To design a new piece of computer hardware, you use...
Computers(Hardware)? Computer Theory

To build a new piece of computer hardware, you use...
Computers(Hardware)? Computers(Hardware) B/R? Electronics B/R? (After all,
what makes assembling a computer different from assembling any other
electronic device?)

To design a new program, you use...Computers(Software)? Computer
Theory?

To code a new program, you use...Computers(Software)?
Computers(Software) Build/Repair?


Hmm. I feel like the logical way to arrange things would be to
change Computers(Hardware) into Electronics(Computers), use Computers(Software)
as the skill for /using/ software, and Computers Build/Repair (or
Computers(Software) Build/Repair) for programming. Knowing how to use a
computer and knowing how to program one are at least as different as knowing
how to drive a car and knowing how to repair one. They default to each other,
maybe, but they're separate skills. But I'm also pretty sure that's nowhere
close to what the rules say.
Thoughts?

--Sean
Message no. 2
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Computers vs Electronics vs B/R
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 13:08:38 +1000
> To defeat a Maglock, you use...? I'd say Electronics if you're
>using another device to override it, Electronics B/R if you take the
>cover off and start crossing wires. The Build/Repair example, in fact,
>(SR3 p95) looks like it invloves a maglock.

Maglocks is a specific concentration of Electronics. Or is it
specialisation (Can't remember the SR3 rules)? Whatever, it's there. :)

> To design a new piece of computer hardware, you use...
>Computers(Hardware)? Computer Theory
> To build a new piece of computer hardware, you use...
>Computers(Hardware)? Computers(Hardware) B/R? Electronics B/R? (After all,
>what makes assembling a computer different from assembling any other
>electronic device?)

I'd say you use Comp Theory to design the new hardware, Computers B/R to
*make* the new hardware, and Electronics B/R to install it in the rest of
the computer.

> To code a new program, you use...Computers(Software)?
>Computers(Software) Build/Repair?

Software only, not B/R.

Lady Jestyr

- Eagles may soar, but turkeys don't get sucked into jet engines. -
jestyr@*******.com.au URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Computers vs Electronics vs B/R, 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!