Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Cover Mods (Moving Towards Karma Pools)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 01:16:57 +1000
> > > ... or, you have to throw the PCs up against such drastic opposition
> > > that they'll be fine until their Karma pool gets used up and then they
> > > die right quick. Either way, as Marty says, not a good option. (And
> > > let's not even get INTO the Karma Pool debate. There MUST be a good
> > > Karma Pool solution out there somewhere. I just wish I could find it.
> > > *sigh*)
> > >
> >
> > Best one I can think of; Use Threat as Karma pool, and re-introduce
> > combat pools for all NPC's
> Actually, I meant the PCs' Karma Pools. Once they get to a certain level
> PCs become unkillable (look at Rex) without ridiculous opposition. There
> has to be a better way of managing PCs Karma Pools, but I haven't worked
> out what it is yet.

Well...... If you've got a major bad-dude with 6-10 Threat, what's to
stop him from buying auto-successes to stay alive, or (God forbid) to
hurt his enemies (the players). If Rex has 18 Karma pool, he's going to
naturally drek all over anyone with a threat of 2, but if you've got a
guy with 10 Threat (100 Karma equiv), then he's at least going to piss
Rex off before he dies.

And let's face it, as the GM you don't really care if the bad guy does
eventually die, as long as he provides a _challenge_ for the players.
(Unless you make the mistake of using an ex-PC *grin*)

For those that don't play our campaign (the vast majority *grin*), Rex
is/was a mage with a reputation for unkillability and extreme deadliness,
all because of his obscene Karma Pool.

A related topic is of course the problems associated with differences in
Karma Pools among the players (Newbies vs. Veterans)


Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Cover Mods (Moving Towards Karma Pools), you may also be interested in:


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.