Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Dave Mowbray dave_mowbray@*****.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 09:30:40 -0500
Strago wrote<snip>
>
> It couldn't have been that close, could it? I didn't have a
> condition monitor.
> All the information you gave me was "that hurt quite a bit"
> and "you fall
> unconscious" and "you hurt all over". Not as effective as "you
> lose 5 HP" or "you
> have 1 HP left". But anyway, thanks.
> <SNIP>
> --
> --Strago

Actually, you were very close to death... getting punched repeatedly in the
face with a mail gauntlet will do that to you (especially when you're a mage
in D&D).

That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?
My theory here is that you have no condition monitor IRL and players often
stay until they only have one box of damage left (or sometimes two). The
idea with giving players no condition monitor is twofold:
1) Make them even more paranoid about death (since the no longer know
exactly how close they are).
2)Force them to role-play rather than roll-play. After all a serious wound
is just that: serious. I find players sometimes saying things like, "I only
have a moderate wound" or "I'm at a serious right now... but I can still
take three more boxes of damage."

I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it for SR.
Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?

-Dave
Message no. 2
From: Grzegorz Ruminski gburus@***.univ.szczecin.pl
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 15:45:53 +0100 (MET)
Konbanwachiwa (sp?), chummer-san ;],

[big cut]

> That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
> players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
> really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?
> My theory here is that you have no condition monitor IRL and players often
> stay until they only have one box of damage left (or sometimes two). The
> idea with giving players no condition monitor is twofold:
> 1) Make them even more paranoid about death (since the no longer know
> exactly how close they are).
Hehe, I like it. Gotta use it during next run.

> 2)Force them to role-play rather than roll-play. After all a serious wound
> is just that: serious. I find players sometimes saying things like, "I only
> have a moderate wound" or "I'm at a serious right now... but I can still
> take three more boxes of damage."
It is common problem not just in SR, but everywhere, afaik

> I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it for SR.
> Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?

Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove difficult. How will
you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition?

> -Dave

--
Guru

This site is about Shadowrun RPG
http://www.stuco.uni-oldenburg.de/~james

ArMCode 1.2 5+ R- H- SG-- G Y1 C--- F-- P D+++ Imm-- Ex++ Ma +++ Q+ Cd
Message no. 3
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 10:41:56 -0500
Grzegorz Ruminski wrote:

> <SNIP>
> > I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it for SR.
> > Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?
>
> Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove difficult. How will
> you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition?
>

For one thing, I always make it an open test, telling my players here "roll your
[Insert skill here] and reroll all sixes." Then I ask for their highest roll,
mutter some, the next highest, mutter more, and then for the highest number with
more than one die, and that number and finally the number in between. (ie. from
our last game session " my highest roll, 15, next highest, 8, and I rolled 3 5's,
nothing in between"). Then I compare with the TN I've come up with and the action
resolves itself.
Of course, they can also tell what kind of damage I've done to them, since I
serious wound for me means you lose a limb. And that brings up another question,
do you GMs out there use fantastic descriptions of damage for your PCs, or just
your NPCs? Does the "Blood messily splatters on the wall behind him" happen just
when your PC fires a three round burst to the head? Or would it also happen with
an NPC?

>
> > -Dave
>
> --
> Guru
>
> This site is about Shadowrun RPG
> http://www.stuco.uni-oldenburg.de/~james
>
> ArMCode 1.2 5+ R- H- SG-- G Y1 C--- F-- P D+++ Imm-- Ex++ Ma +++ Q+ Cd

--
--Strago

In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder,
bloodshed - they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In
Switzerland they had brotherly
love, five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did they produce? The
cuckoo clock!
-Orson Welles

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2+ SR3++ h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN+ SRFF W+ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+)
gm+ M P
Message no. 4
From: Yiannakos Yiannako@*******.edu
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 12:38:20 -0500
From: "Dave Mowbray" <dave_mowbray@*****.com>

> That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
> players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
> really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?
> My theory here is that you have no condition monitor IRL and players often
> stay until they only have one box of damage left (or sometimes two). The
> idea with giving players no condition monitor is twofold:
> 1) Make them even more paranoid about death (since the no longer know
> exactly how close they are).
> 2)Force them to role-play rather than roll-play. After all a serious
wound
> is just that: serious. I find players sometimes saying things like, "I
only
> have a moderate wound" or "I'm at a serious right now... but I can still
> take three more boxes of damage."
>
> I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it for SR.
> Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?
>
> -Dave

I have been trying out Unknown Armies, and this is in the rules for that
game. I (the GM) know that Player X just took 35 points of damage, but all
Player X knows is that a bullet slammed into his shoulder hard enough to
spin him around, he can't seem to move his arm on that side, and his vision
is blurry. So far it has worked quite well, and personally, I love the idea,
for exactly the reasons you described above.

---Dave ('s not here man)
Message no. 5
From: Yiannakos Yiannako@*******.edu
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 12:45:44 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Strago" <strago@***.com>
> Of course, they can also tell what kind of damage I've done to them, since
I
> serious wound for me means you lose a limb. And that brings up another
question,
> do you GMs out there use fantastic descriptions of damage for your PCs, or
just
> your NPCs? Does the "Blood messily splatters on the wall behind him"
happen just
> when your PC fires a three round burst to the head? Or would it also
happen with
> an NPC?

I use graphic damage descriptions for PCs as well as NPCs. I haven't had a
problem with people determining what their damage is from the description.
The difference is, that I use this tactic when I run Unknown Armies, which
is where I learned it from, and UA has a much wider range of damage levels
than Shadowrun does, so it might be easier to guess in SR.

YMMV, of course.

---Dave ('s not here man)
Message no. 6
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:22:17 +0100
According to Dave Mowbray, at 9:30 on 22 Mar 00, the word on the street
was...

> That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
> players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
> really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?

It'll probably work really well, provided the GM can keep track of it all.
I, for instance, have an unfortunate habit of forgetting about almost
everything except the situation at hand -- including stuff like how far
wounded a PC is... It helps a lot to be able to say, "You'd taken a...?"
and hear back, "Moderate wound." That's just me, though, so it's bound to
work for others.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
What a pretty life you have...
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 7
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 13:38:26 -0500
Gurth wrote:

> According to Dave Mowbray, at 9:30 on 22 Mar 00, the word on the street
> was...
>
> > That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
> > players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
> > really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?
>
> It'll probably work really well, provided the GM can keep track of it all.
> I, for instance, have an unfortunate habit of forgetting about almost
> everything except the situation at hand -- including stuff like how far
> wounded a PC is... It helps a lot to be able to say, "You'd taken a...?"
> and hear back, "Moderate wound." That's just me, though, so it's bound to
> work for others.
>

Well, that's what the notepad is for. When I GM, I've always got a notebook
where I write notes like "Tom Greenjeans, 1143 N. State Rd Apt. 47" or
"just
ticked off Yakuza" or "daughter of Mafia Capo is 3rd level initiated mage"
or
stuff like that while planning a run the night before we play. And I keep notes
of damage. From the last game, here's a good example: (I use the first letter of
the player's name, and N denotes an NPC, X denotes 10 boxes of damage, so dead)

R 3 N 0 D 7M N3 X N6 9
S 9 M 1 N1 X N4 X
C 5 A 2P/4M N2 X N5 9

At which point the two survivors ran away. Since I write in pencil on the run,
I'm constantly erasing and rewriting. It takes a little bit more work, but it's
OK.
<SNIP>
Message no. 8
From: Dave Mowbray dave_mowbray@*****.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 14:04:27 -0500
Guru wrote:
<snip>
> Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove
> difficult. How will
> you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition?
>
> --
> Guru

Actually, I don't reveal a target number either, so TN modifiers don't
really matter (in that I have to keep track of those too). I just say,
"Roll your <insert appropriate action here> and tell me your highest
number."
I will admit that this can be difficult when players claim they know the
base target number and try to figure things out from there (as Strago has
seen)... but overall, this works pretty well...
-Dave
Message no. 9
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 14:17:09 -0500
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 12:38:20 -0500 "Yiannakos" <Yiannako@*******.edu>
writes:
> From: "Dave Mowbray" <dave_mowbray@*****.com>
> > I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it
> for SR.
> > Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?
> >
>
> I have been trying out Unknown Armies, and this is in the rules for
> that
> game. I (the GM) know that Player X just took 35 points of damage,
> but all
> Player X knows is that a bullet slammed into his shoulder hard
> enough to
> spin him around, he can't seem to move his arm on that side, and his
> vision
> is blurry. So far it has worked quite well, and personally, I love
> the idea,
> for exactly the reasons you described above.

This was actually mentioned in old AD&D products (or, at least in Dragon
magazine so long ago) While it may be more realisitic and give a better
"fear" for death, I never used it just because it was easier to have the
players know. I still kept track of their hitpoints and such anyway. It
would make it easier for a GM to manipulate the behind the scene's stuff
for his own ends, (whether thats good or bad...)
I played a sorta one-shot UA game (didn't like it, but thats another
story :-) and it made no difference to me one way or the other.
(sure, I had to heal myself, so I needed more charges, so I pulled out my
revolver and started playing russian roulette to heal me :-)
(oh, and I got a little greedy, and shot myself on the 4th try, then had
to try twice more to heal the damage from shooting myself, and that was
the most fun I had in that game :-)


Vocenoctum
<http://members.xoom.com/vocenoctum>;

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 10
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 14:26:43 -0500
Dave Mowbray wrote:

> Guru wrote:
> <snip>
> > Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove
> > difficult. How will
> > you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition?
> >
> > --
> > Guru
>
> Actually, I don't reveal a target number either, so TN modifiers don't
> really matter (in that I have to keep track of those too). I just say,
> "Roll your <insert appropriate action here> and tell me your highest
> number."
> I will admit that this can be difficult when players claim they know the
> base target number and try to figure things out from there (as Strago has
> seen)... but overall, this works pretty well...
> -Dave

Though it's not just with damage. Remember that crazy Tim adventure two years
ago with you driving, shooting blindly over your shoulder at the roof of the
van while the guy who'd been up there had moved to the back and you were
rolling 37s? And Tim's saying your missing and we're all like "WHAT? HE
ROLLED A 37! YOU CAN'T MISS ON A 37!" And then we tried to figure out all the
modifiers. While the guy wasn't even there. So it's not just then. But I know
what you're saying. And yes, I've seen it, I've even done it, and as a GM,
sometimes for plain vanilla stuff it works well to have players who know the
rules backwards and forwards enough to say,
"Short Range, base 4. Smartlink 2, -2, so that's 2. Called Shot, +2, so 4
again. Partial cover, +2, so 6. And smoky, +2, so 8. TN 8, roll my 6 skill
dice, add 6 combat pool, *shake shake shake* reroll three sixes, so two
successes on 9S because called shot."
That's time when I can be rolling a dodge test or damage resistance test, or
even rolling my guys' attacks to speed up combat.
Message no. 11
From: Richard Gaywood r.gaywood@**********.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:42:24 -0000
Just a quick intro: I used to be on this list, ooh, two-and-a-half years
ago. Unfortunately, I haven't played SR for nearly 18 months now due to lack
of players, but that's another story.

Anyway, I came across the ShadowRN FAQ a coupla nights ago, and was shocked
to find that Gurth's response my first ever post on ShadowRN (about Physads
& Street Sams - D'oh!) is immortalised in the FAQ! I'm famous! Yay!

(In case you're interested, it's at
http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/showfic.php3?code=tlc&chapter=4&of=9)

Anyway, to those people who are still on the list from back then: Hi. I'm
back. On with the post.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Grzegorz Ruminski" <gburus@***.univ.szczecin.pl>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 2:45 PM
> Konbanwachiwa (sp?), chummer-san ;],
Konnichiwa?

> > [ descriptive damage ]
> Hehe, I like it. Gotta use it during next run.

I started to use this toward the end of my last campaign. Works well,
although requires a bit more attention & imagination from the DM. And
recordkeeping, of course...

> Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove difficult. How will
> you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition?

Depends on how rules-tight you are. Most conversations in my SR games go
like this:
Player: Take a shot at the ork on the right
Me: Roll against target number... uhhh... <stick tongue out>... 9.

The player's never sees the calculation, so don't realise I make it up most
of the time ;o) Certainly, sticking an extra +1 or +2 on is easy, assuming I
don't forget altogether. Inititive mods are harder, especially because I
nominate a player as initiave manager (sorry, this is SR, Initiative
Manager) who tracks the countdown for me. I tend to just forget injury mods
to initiative - they're not terribly significant, anyway.

Also, hiding the damage like this can help insulate players from really
unlucky rolls - you can silently amend damage levels. And vice versa if the
player's annoying you, of course...

--
-=R=-
http://www.clmconsulting.co.uk
ICQ: 66545073
UT ngStats: RichBeard
Message no. 12
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:05:46 -0500
Richard Gaywood wrote:

> Just a quick intro: I used to be on this list, ooh, two-and-a-half years
> ago. Unfortunately, I haven't played SR for nearly 18 months now due to lack
> of players, but that's another story.
>
> Anyway, I came across the ShadowRN FAQ a coupla nights ago, and was shocked
> to find that Gurth's response my first ever post on ShadowRN (about Physads
> & Street Sams - D'oh!) is immortalised in the FAQ! I'm famous! Yay!
>
> (In case you're interested, it's at
> http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/showfic.php3?code=tlc&chapter=4&of=9)

Wow! Did you ever save that post? Or the resulting chaos that ensued? Because,
sweet jesus (breaking the second commandment going straight to hell now), I've
always wondered just how that one got started...

> <SNIP>
> Player: Take a shot at the ork on the right
> Me: Roll against target number... uhhh... <stick tongue out>... 9.
>
> The players never see the calculation, so don't realise I make it up most
> of the time ;o) Certainly, sticking an extra +1 or +2 on is easy, assuming I
> don't forget altogether.

<SNIP>
Well, as Dave Mowbray already said, sometimes that just don't work. Sometimes
the players know the rules just as well as you do, and they don't even need that
nifty little screen to help :^P. And so you say "9" and they go, "NO!"
and then
they rattle off a whole string of modifiers and you just go "well..." And then
they beat you down and say "BAD GM" while doing that. OK, maybe not that far,
but I think I know of one person and one GM who that might happen with...

*coughcoughChoiniereandRoncoughcough*

-Strago
Message no. 13
From: Dave Mowbray dave_mowbray@*****.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 17:06:32 -0500
Strago wrote:
<SNIP>
> Well, as Dave Mowbray already said, sometimes that just don't
> work. Sometimes
> the players know the rules just as well as you do, and they
> don't even need that
> nifty little screen to help :^P. And so you say "9" and they
> go, "NO!" and then
> they rattle off a whole string of modifiers and you just go
> "well..." And then
> they beat you down and say "BAD GM" while doing that. OK,
> maybe not that far,
> but I think I know of one person and one GM who that might
> happen with...
>
> *coughcoughChoiniereandRoncoughcough*
>
> -Strago

Arrrrgh!!! Bad memories!!! Bad Memories!!! Devil's out!!! Devil's out!!

Yeah, sometimes being the evil dominant GM is required: "Why do you have a
target number of 9? Because I said so!! And if you don't like it too f**king
bad!!!!"
If the player persists in being a pain in the ass severe beatings in the
form of loss of KARMA are required (and recommended btw).
-Dave
Message no. 14
From: GuayII@***.com GuayII@***.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 17:17:53 EST
In a message dated 3/22/00 6:44:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
gburus@***.univ.szczecin.pl writes:

<< Konbanwachiwa (sp?), chummer-san ;],

[big cut]

> That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about keeping the
> players condition monitors secret and just telling them things like, "That
> really hurt." or "You feel the bullet penetrate your sternum."?
> My theory here is that you have no condition monitor IRL and players often
> stay until they only have one box of damage left (or sometimes two). The
> idea with giving players no condition monitor is twofold:
> 1) Make them even more paranoid about death (since the no longer know
> exactly how close they are).
Hehe, I like it. Gotta use it during next run.

> 2)Force them to role-play rather than roll-play. After all a serious wound
> is just that: serious. I find players sometimes saying things like, "I
only
> have a moderate wound" or "I'm at a serious right now... but I can still
> take three more boxes of damage."
It is common problem not just in SR, but everywhere, afaik

> I do do this in AD&D campaigns, but have not yet implemented it for SR.
> Does anyone else do this? or what do y'all think of this idea?

Well, idea is great, but implementing it would prove difficult. How will
you handle TN modifiers, not revealing players' condition? >>

Let them know the TN#'s. That way, if you say that they have a +3, does that
person have a Serious, S+1, S+2, or S+3? They have no way of knowing....

Cash
Message no. 15
From: Richard Gaywood r.gaywood@**********.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:08:58 -0000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Strago" <strago@***.com>
> Wow! Did you ever save that post? Or the resulting chaos that ensued?
Because,
> sweet jesus (breaking the second commandment going straight to hell now),
I've
> always wondered just how that one got started...

I thought I had it somewhere, but can't seem to find it. I've just come over
all teary-eyed and now I wanna read it again. I came across a posting log
for the forum last night, but can't seem to find it now and I don't think it
went that far back anyway... Listmaster?

Oh, and can I just thank Gurth for the truly excellent thwap he gave me.

I can, however, tell you how it got started: me, being a green internet
newbie in those days, sending nuclear topic msterial to a mailing list I'd
only joined a few hours earlier. Sigh. Certainly one way to learn
netiquette...

And can I also clear up: I do *not* have an Oxford accent as I am Welsh. I
did, however, have an Oxford email address, which is where Gurth got it from
(nice touch, BTW).

> <SNIP>
> Well, as Dave Mowbray already said, sometimes that just don't work.
Sometimes
> the players know the rules just as well as you do, and they don't even
need that
> nifty little screen to help :^P. And so you say "9" and they go,
"NO!" and
then
> they rattle off a whole string of modifiers and you just go "well..." And
then
> they beat you down and say "BAD GM" while doing that. OK, maybe not that
far,
> but I think I know of one person and one GM who that might happen with...

Ah. Most of the members of most of my groups have had the dubious priviledge
of being newbies, and in my games, you're too busy running for cover and
dodging bullets to learn the rules...

Plus, players who contradict my target numbers tend to suffer "unfortunate
accidents". Notice I said "players" and not "characters" ;o)


-=R=-
http://www.clmconsulting.co.uk
ICQ: 66545073
UT ngStats: RichBeard
Message no. 16
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:37:23 -0600
From: Strago
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 9:42 AM

> And that brings up another question,
> do you GMs out there use fantastic descriptions of damage for
> your PCs, or just your NPCs? Does the "Blood messily splatters
> on the wall behind him" happen just when your PC fires a three
> round burst to the head? Or would it also happen with an NPC?

If a PC gets nailed by an NPC, it gets described just the same way as if the
PC nails an NPC. Usually with special effects supplied by yours truly.

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 17
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:37:20 -0600
From: Dave Mowbray
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 8:31 AM

> That however raises a question: How does everyone feel about
> keeping the players condition monitors secret and just telling
> them things like, "That really hurt." or "You feel the bullet
> penetrate your sternum."?

I hate the idea. While I can generally keep track of things like that, to
keep the players honest, the fact is that I've got too much to do as it is
when I GM. The notion of adding even more to that load, with a group of
(counts on fingers...James and Myron and Melynda and Steve and sometimes
Alan) four or five PCs and sometimes a couple of dozen NPCs (I get cinematic
sometimes), is to me just plain crazy. I know some guys who can GM that
way, but I'm not one of them.

> My theory here is that you have no condition monitor IRL and players
> often stay until they only have one box of damage left (or sometimes
> two).

If you have players who do this regularly, then I posit that you have
quality control problems. It's not been a problem for me with my regular
players (some of the flakes that have passed through are something else
again), and the local campaign has been going on for a year and a half (and
I've been roleplaying for twenty-mumble years, and it's not been *that* big
a problem).

> The idea with giving players no condition monitor is twofold:
>
> 1) Make them even more paranoid about death (since the no longer know
> exactly how close they are).

Mine are paranoid enough, thanks. The cinematic style I favor doesn't lend
itself to much more fear about death than is already present.

Your mileage, of course, may vary significantly, but for me, this idea isn't
worth the extra bookkeeping that would be required on my part.

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 18
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:00:02 +0100
According to Strago, at 13:38 on 22 Mar 00, the word on the street was...

> Well, that's what the notepad is for. When I GM, I've always got a notebook
> where I write notes like "Tom Greenjeans, 1143 N. State Rd Apt. 47" or
"just
> ticked off Yakuza" or "daughter of Mafia Capo is 3rd level initiated
mage" or
> stuff like that while planning a run the night before we play.

That's the sort of stuff I can remember fairly well, so I don't tend to
write much of it down. Maybe I should, though, as it'd help in maintaining
consistency...

> And I keep notes of damage.

I've got this handy sheet of paper with about 10 NPC records printed on
each side, that I laminated and use a white-board marker on. It works
great for keeping track of NPC damage, but not so good for PCs. (Mainly
because, if left unwiped for too long, the sheet is hard to clean...)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
What a pretty life you have...
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 19
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:00:02 +0100
According to Richard Gaywood, at 20:42 on 22 Mar 00, the word on the
street was...

> Just a quick intro: I used to be on this list, ooh, two-and-a-half years
> ago. Unfortunately, I haven't played SR for nearly 18 months now due to lack
> of players, but that's another story.

Welcome back :)

> Anyway, I came across the ShadowRN FAQ a coupla nights ago, and was shocked
> to find that Gurth's response my first ever post on ShadowRN (about Physads
> & Street Sams - D'oh!) is immortalised in the FAQ! I'm famous! Yay!

Is that the one in the bar with the Elastica song playing? Or am I
thinking of someone else I thwapped back then? :)

> The player's never sees the calculation, so don't realise I make it up most
> of the time ;o) Certainly, sticking an extra +1 or +2 on is easy, assuming I
> don't forget altogether. Inititive mods are harder, especially because I
> nominate a player as initiave manager (sorry, this is SR, Initiative
> Manager) who tracks the countdown for me. I tend to just forget injury mods
> to initiative - they're not terribly significant, anyway.

One way to keep track of damage effects on initiative is to not anounce in
which Combat Phase the NPCs act. Instead of counting down, you just say
who is next and (if you feel like it) give an indication of whether there
is a long or a short time between the last action and the current one.

The players still know their own initiative result, but they don't know
the wound modifiers to it, and they don't know the NPCs' initiatives, so
in the end, all they really know is in which order the PCs will act.

> Also, hiding the damage like this can help insulate players from really
> unlucky rolls - you can silently amend damage levels. And vice versa if the
> player's annoying you, of course...

The only rolls I tend to make in secret, apart from all those made by
NPCs, are Perception tests and similar rolls made to see if a PC notices
something. This really does work much better than asking the players to
roll the dice, because they won't know that something is worth paying
attention to. Like that pickpocket in the club the PCs wen to :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
What a pretty life you have...
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 20
From: Richard Gaywood r.gaywood@**********.com
Subject: Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:02 -0000
> > Just a quick intro: I used to be on this list, ooh, two-and-a-half years
> > ago. Unfortunately, I haven't played SR for nearly 18 months now due to
lack
> > of players, but that's another story.
>
> Welcome back :)

Thanks!

> Is that the one in the bar with the Elastica song playing? Or am I
> thinking of someone else I thwapped back then? :)

That's the one. IIRC, <ducking> you were a bit handy with the thwaps,
perhaps explaining your inability to remember ;o)

> One way to keep track of damage effects on initiative is to not anounce in
> which Combat Phase the NPCs act. Instead of counting down, you just say
> who is next and (if you feel like it) give an indication of whether there
> is a long or a short time between the last action and the current one.

In Feng Shui (great game, BTW) I made the players sit in decreasing
initiative order, threw away initiative rolls, and went around the circle.
Worked well.

> The only rolls I tend to make in secret, apart from all those made by
> NPCs, are Perception tests and similar rolls made to see if a PC notices
> something. This really does work much better than asking the players to
> roll the dice, because they won't know that something is worth paying
> attention to. Like that pickpocket in the club the PCs wen to :)

I roll dice in secret because it hides that fact I make it up half the time
:o)

Boy, sure hope none of my old players read this...


-=R=-
http://www.clmconsulting.co.uk
ICQ: 66545073
UT ngStats: RichBeard

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Condition Monitoring (was Re: Ironic), 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!