Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: tjlanza@************.com (Timothy J. Lanza)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 01:01:33 -0500
At 12:55 AM 1/6/2004, Damion Brooks wrote:
>Hi all i had a question that i hope you all can help
>with, If you have cyber eyes with vision mag 3, and a
>smartlink do their modifires stack ,
>Example
>since every thing counts as being short range with
>vision mag 3 that nocks your taget down to 4 doese
>that mean that the smartlink nocks it down to 2?
>and can you tell me where the rules for this are?
>thanks for your help

Unless there's an errata I don't know about, there's nothing saying they
don't stack.

In my campaigns, we house rule it and say that it doesn't. You can have the
benefits of a Smartlink or magnification, but not both. Depending on your
particular smartlink (I or II) and your level of magnification, which item
gives you the most benefit can vary.

--
Timothy J. Lanza
"When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
Message no. 2
From: Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu (Hunted by the Aphids)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:35:07 -0000
I haven't found any ruling on this either, and I play it the opposite way-
you can use both smartlink and magnification, since it didn't make sense to
me that zooming in would deprive you of those little crosshairs in your
vision. So yeah, base TN 2.

On the other hand, zooming in does take a Simple Action, and the TN will be
higher if the target is doing anything other than standing still on a clear
day across from you, who is also standing still with a clear field of view.
Once the PCs move off the shooting range, things get a little more
interesting. *evil_grin*

Jeff Dougherty
Research Peon 2nd Class, Biology
Williams College

"There is a thin line between genius and insanity"
-Anonymous

"I walk the line."
-Johnny Cash
----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy J. Lanza" <tjlanza@************.com>
To: "Shadowrun Discussion" <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers


> At 12:55 AM 1/6/2004, Damion Brooks wrote:
> >Hi all i had a question that i hope you all can help
> >with, If you have cyber eyes with vision mag 3, and a
> >smartlink do their modifires stack ,
> >Example
> >since every thing counts as being short range with
> >vision mag 3 that nocks your taget down to 4 doese
> >that mean that the smartlink nocks it down to 2?
> >and can you tell me where the rules for this are?
> >thanks for your help
>
> Unless there's an errata I don't know about, there's nothing saying they
> don't stack.
>
> In my campaigns, we house rule it and say that it doesn't. You can have
the
> benefits of a Smartlink or magnification, but not both. Depending on your
> particular smartlink (I or II) and your level of magnification, which item
> gives you the most benefit can vary.
>
> --
> Timothy J. Lanza
> "When we can't dream any longer, we die." - Emma Goldman
>
>
>
Message no. 3
From: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:28:36 +1100
Damion Brooks writes:

> Hi all I had a question that I hope you all can help
> with, If you have cyber eyes with vision mag 3, and a
> smartlink do their modifiers stack ,
> and can you tell me where the rules for this are?

Check page 280 of SR3 under the "Imaging Scopes" section. The modifier don't
stack.

--
Damion Milliken E-Mail: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
ICQ: 177734389 | MSN: DamionMilliken@*****.com.au | AIM/Y!: DamionMilliken
---------------+----------------------------------+-----------------------
Message no. 4
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:27:38 +0100
According to Damion Milliken, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 07:28 the word on
the street was...

> Check page 280 of SR3 under the "Imaging Scopes" section. The modifier
> don't stack.

Which, when you think about it, is strange. For a weapon with a regular
scope and a smartlink, it is perfectly understandable: the smartlink can't
know you're looking through the scope, so it can't place the crosshairs to
account for it.

But if you have a cyberware telescopic sight, then the smartlink can know
the parameters of the scope, its current magnification, etc., and
compensate for it.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 5
From: zebulingod@*******.net (zebulingod)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 02:39:06 -0800
"Gurth" <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

According to Damion Milliken, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 07:28 the word on
the street was...

> Check page 280 of SR3 under the "Imaging Scopes" section. The modifier
> don't stack.

Which, when you think about it, is strange. For a weapon with a regular
scope and a smartlink, it is perfectly understandable: the smartlink can't
know you're looking through the scope, so it can't place the crosshairs to
account for it.

But if you have a cyberware telescopic sight, then the smartlink can know
the parameters of the scope, its current magnification, etc., and
compensate for it.

--

And I just had an argument with two players for nearly twenty minutes saying
that the modifiers should stack. Then, another one saying that using
optical/electronic magnification in your cybereyes should be a free action
(not simple) because it makes sense if a person can eject a clip in a smart
gun as a free action, they should be able to change focus in a cybereye just
as quickly.

I can understand not using smartlink with scopes. You can't combine it with
laser sights, for much the same reason, I suspect. With cybereyes
magnification, though... it won't fly with my group.

[:

S'okay, I'm teaching them the Ways of the Wraith, Shedim and Vampire. *egmg*

Zebulin
Message no. 6
From: davidb@****.imcprint.com (Graht)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 08:41:35 -0700
At 11:12 PM 1/5/2005, Hunted by the Aphids wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Timothy J. Lanza" <tjlanza@************.com>
>
> > At 12:55 AM 1/6/2004, Damion Brooks wrote:
> > >Hi all i had a question that i hope you all can help
> > >with, If you have cyber eyes with vision mag 3, and a
> > >smartlink do their modifires stack ,
> > >Example
> > >since every thing counts as being short range with
> > >vision mag 3 that nocks your taget down to 4 doese
> > >that mean that the smartlink nocks it down to 2?
> > >and can you tell me where the rules for this are?
> > >thanks for your help
> >
> > Unless there's an errata I don't know about, there's nothing saying they
> > don't stack.
> >
> > In my campaigns, we house rule it and say that it doesn't. You can have
>the
> > benefits of a Smartlink or magnification, but not both. Depending on your
> > particular smartlink (I or II) and your level of magnification, which item
> > gives you the most benefit can vary.
>
>I haven't found any ruling on this either, and I play it the opposite way-
>you can use both smartlink and magnification, since it didn't make sense to
>me that zooming in would deprive you of those little crosshairs in your
>vision. So yeah, base TN 2.
>
>On the other hand, zooming in does take a Simple Action, and the TN will be
>higher if the target is doing anything other than standing still on a clear
>day across from you, who is also standing still with a clear field of view.
>Once the PCs move off the shooting range, things get a little more
>interesting. *evil_grin*

<admin> Jeff, please place your replies below/after quoted text. Thank you
:) </admin>

Consider this: Get a scope/telescope and a laser pointer. While looking
through the scope at an object, try to paint it with the laser (simulating
trying to bring a smart-linked weapon on target while viewing the target
through a cybereyes with image magnification). If you don't have access to
these items, just try to imagine it. It's a bitch. And if whatever you're
looking at through the scope is moving, it's even harder.

The problem is that you can't see the laser dot out of the corner of your
eye to bring it in on the target. It has to enter the field of the scope
before you can bring it on target.

If nothing else I would make the character spend an action "aiming" to gain
the benefits of the smartgun link.


--
To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
http://www.graht.com
Message no. 7
From: Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu (Jeffrey T Dougherty)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 11:52:43 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Graht wrote:

> At 11:12 PM 1/5/2005, Hunted by the Aphids wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Timothy J. Lanza" <tjlanza@************.com>
> >
> > > At 12:55 AM 1/6/2004, Damion Brooks wrote:
> > > >Hi all i had a question that i hope you all can help
> > > >with, If you have cyber eyes with vision mag 3, and a
> > > >smartlink do their modifires stack ,
> > > >Example
> > > >since every thing counts as being short range with
> > > >vision mag 3 that nocks your taget down to 4 doese
> > > >that mean that the smartlink nocks it down to 2?
> > > >and can you tell me where the rules for this are?
> > > >thanks for your help
> > >
> > > Unless there's an errata I don't know about, there's nothing saying they
> > > don't stack.
> > >
> > > In my campaigns, we house rule it and say that it doesn't. You can have
> >the
> > > benefits of a Smartlink or magnification, but not both. Depending on your
> > > particular smartlink (I or II) and your level of magnification, which item
> > > gives you the most benefit can vary.
> >
> >I haven't found any ruling on this either, and I play it the opposite way-
> >you can use both smartlink and magnification, since it didn't make sense to
> >me that zooming in would deprive you of those little crosshairs in your
> >vision. So yeah, base TN 2.
> >
> >On the other hand, zooming in does take a Simple Action, and the TN will be
> >higher if the target is doing anything other than standing still on a clear
> >day across from you, who is also standing still with a clear field of view.
> >Once the PCs move off the shooting range, things get a little more
> >interesting. *evil_grin*
>
> <admin> Jeff, please place your replies below/after quoted text. Thank you
> :) </admin>
>
> Consider this: Get a scope/telescope and a laser pointer. While looking
> through the scope at an object, try to paint it with the laser (simulating
> trying to bring a smart-linked weapon on target while viewing the target
> through a cybereyes with image magnification). If you don't have access to
> these items, just try to imagine it. It's a bitch. And if whatever you're
> looking at through the scope is moving, it's even harder.
>
> The problem is that you can't see the laser dot out of the corner of your
> eye to bring it in on the target. It has to enter the field of the scope
> before you can bring it on target.
>
> If nothing else I would make the character spend an action "aiming" to gain
> the benefits of the smartgun link.

<admin-reply> Gack, teach me to switch email programs. </admin-reply>

The problem with that analogy, at least considering the way I usually
employ smartlinks, is that the "crosshairs" generated by the smartlink
system is always in your field of view, and so peripheral vision is not
needed to bring it on target.

On the other hand, I can see the argument for making them spend a Simple
Action to aim, which is what I usually do- the changing perspective from
the zoom is enough of a change that I can see that being justifiable.

Jeff D.
Message no. 8
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:57:44 +0100
According to Graht, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 16:41 the word on the street
was...

> Consider this: Get a scope/telescope and a laser pointer. While looking
> through the scope at an object, try to paint it with the laser
> (simulating trying to bring a smart-linked weapon on target while
> viewing the target through a cybereyes with image magnification). If
> you don't have access to these items, just try to imagine it. It's a
> bitch. And if whatever you're looking at through the scope is moving,
> it's even harder.

I might have to try that with my binoculars, but I don't exactly feel like
using them from my window now that it's dark outside ;)

> The problem is that you can't see the laser dot out of the corner of
> your eye to bring it in on the target. It has to enter the field of the
> scope before you can bring it on target.

On a firearm both the laser pointer and scope would be mounted rigidly --
both moving exactly the same way when you move the weapon. The scope can
be adjusted for elevation and windage, and if you're smart you'd make sure
the laser sight also compensates for those at the range at which you're
likely to use it. Which means, I think, that the dot will always visible
in the same part of the telescope (assuming the target isn't so close that
the laser dot is outside the cone that forms the scope's field of view)
because both look along the same axis.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 9
From: davidb@****.imcprint.com (Graht)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 11:23:46 -0700
At 09:57 AM 1/6/2004, Gurth wrote:
>According to Graht, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 16:41 the word on the street
>was...
>
> > Consider this: Get a scope/telescope and a laser pointer. While looking
> > through the scope at an object, try to paint it with the laser
> > (simulating trying to bring a smart-linked weapon on target while
> > viewing the target through a cybereyes with image magnification). If
> > you don't have access to these items, just try to imagine it. It's a
> > bitch. And if whatever you're looking at through the scope is moving,
> > it's even harder.
>
>I might have to try that with my binoculars, but I don't exactly feel like
>using them from my window now that it's dark outside ;)

You mean you don't own a pair of night vision goggles? ;)

> > The problem is that you can't see the laser dot out of the corner of
> > your eye to bring it in on the target. It has to enter the field of the
> > scope before you can bring it on target.
>
>On a firearm both the laser pointer and scope would be mounted rigidly --
>both moving exactly the same way when you move the weapon. The scope can
>be adjusted for elevation and windage, and if you're smart you'd make sure
>the laser sight also compensates for those at the range at which you're
>likely to use it. Which means, I think, that the dot will always visible
>in the same part of the telescope (assuming the target isn't so close that
>the laser dot is outside the cone that forms the scope's field of view)
>because both look along the same axis.

But we're talking about cybereyes with image magnification and a
smartlinked gun. They are seperate. Although at this point I could easily
imagine a creative player coming up with the idea of a cybereye that could
be removed and used remotely and mounted on a pistol... "I spy with my
little eye... something that is about to die." Cybereyes on reelable lines
would also be interesting, if a little disconcerting.

--
To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
http://www.graht.com
Message no. 10
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 19:42:46 +0100
According to Graht, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 19:23 the word on the street
was...

> >I might have to try that with my binoculars, but I don't exactly feel
> > like using them from my window now that it's dark outside ;)
>
> You mean you don't own a pair of night vision goggles? ;)

Not yet... The only times I've seen any were when I didn't have the money
to buy them. Of course, now that money isn't the issue, coming across NVGs
for sale is :)

> But we're talking about cybereyes with image magnification and a
> smartlinked gun. They are seperate.

As happens far too often, I got lost explaining one thing that was supposed
to lead into something else, so that I forgot to actually add the other
thing :(

> Although at this point I could
> easily imagine a creative player coming up with the idea of a cybereye
> that could be removed and used remotely and mounted on a pistol... "I
> spy with my little eye... something that is about to die." Cybereyes on
> reelable lines would also be interesting, if a little disconcerting.

As I said earlier, I don't see the (technical) problem with eye-mounted
vision magnification: the smartlink should be able to compensate for the
magnification easily enough. A weapon-mounted scope would be different,
though.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 11
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:48:15 +0100
At 19:42 06.01.2004 +0100, Gurth wrote:

<snip>

> > You mean you don't own a pair of night vision goggles? ;)
>
>Not yet... The only times I've seen any were when I didn't have the money
>to buy them. Of course, now that money isn't the issue, coming across NVGs
>for sale is :)

Well, as far as you're not thinking about a Gen1 russian NVG - did you win
in the lottery? ;) Good ones are at $3000+ ... Oh, and good ones cannot
easily be shipped from it's manufacturer or seller (probably in the US) to
you or me ;)


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 12
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:04:54 +0000
In article <6.0.1.1.2.20040106083647.02892a00@***.0.0.1>, Graht
<davidb@****.imcprint.com> writes
>Consider this: Get a scope/telescope and a laser pointer. While
>looking through the scope at an object, try to paint it with the laser
>(simulating trying to bring a smart-linked weapon on target while
>viewing the target through a cybereyes with image magnification).

More like, look through a magnifying scope and try to aim the weapon at
the target. The problem is "where is the target?" not "how do I work out
where this weapon is pointing?" The smartlink just replaces the
crosshairs with an aiming mark.

> If you don't have access to these items, just try to imagine it. It's
>a bitch. And if whatever you're looking at through the scope is
>moving, it's even harder.

I've used red-dot sights, I've used x4 SUSATs and other magifiying
sights; I'm down the road from folk working on similar kit for
larger-calibre weaponry. I'm comfortable with the concept.

A laser sight or red-dot scope on your weapon won't work with a
magnifying scope; but a smartlink will work with image magnification (or
with a magnifying scope, with the right software patch and more hassles)

Now, the trouble with being zoomed in on a distant target is that you
have lost your peripheral vision; to the point that we Brits hammer in
the "every few rounds, move and look around" because while the SUSAT is
a great tool for scoring hits at long range it's bad for your
situational awareness.

>The problem is that you can't see the laser dot out of the corner of
>your eye to bring it in on the target. It has to enter the field of
>the scope before you can bring it on target.

But a smartlink is implanted and can give you a clear "This Way,
Stupid!" indicator on the edge of your vision, even if the aiming mark
is outside your field of view. And it's easier to track the target while
getting your weapon pointed, than to track the weapon while looking for
your target.

>If nothing else I would make the character spend an action "aiming" to
>gain the benefits of the smartgun link.

I'd just occasionally have Bad Guys smart enough to have a distraction
force fighting at long range, while the main attack hits the flank or
rear as the Good Guys stare into the wild blue yonder through their
scopes. Having a few folk reloading magazines while looking around pays
off, but if everyone goes to "full zoom, kill kill KILL!" mode they
deserve what they get.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 13
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:53:57 +0100
According to Arclight, on Tuesday 06 January 2004 22:48 the word on the
street was...

> Well, as far as you're not thinking about a Gen1 russian NVG - did you
> win in the lottery? ;)

Actually, I was thinking along those kinds of lines :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 14
From: silvercat@***********.org (Jonathan Hurley)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:54:29 -0500
Just as a sort of semi-real world note - Mechwarrior 4 (and MW4 mercenaries)
has a magnification system in it. It also highlights where the enemy is. If
the enemy is off-screen there is a pointer that shows you where off-screen
(or out of the cone of magnification) the target is. I find it effectively
impossible to acquire a new target (or an old target that has moved out of
my magnification cone) without dropping magnification, reacquiring, and
re-zooming. While this is a slightly different problem (I'm trying to get my
crosshairs onto the target while being able to see the crosshairs, and not
the target), it has caused me to require a user of cybernetic magnification
to expend a simple "aim" action to acquire a new target, or reacquire an old
target that has moved radically in the previous action. (Technically, 2 free
actions: one deactivate cyberware, one activate cyberware).
Message no. 15
From: valeuj@*****.navy.mil (Valeu, John W. EM3 (AS40 R-3))
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:36:48 +1000
> > > You mean you don't own a pair of night vision goggles? ;)
> >
> >Not yet... The only times I've seen any were when I didn't
> have the money
> >to buy them. Of course, now that money isn't the issue,
> coming across NVGs
> >for sale is :)
>
> Well, as far as you're not thinking about a Gen1 russian NVG
> - did you win
> in the lottery? ;) Good ones are at $3000+ ... Oh, and good
> ones cannot
> easily be shipped from it's manufacturer or seller (probably
> in the US) to
> you or me ;)


What happened? You finally start collecting rent from all those people
under your stairs? ;) The only bad thing about NVGs is that it's hard to
make out printed words.
Message no. 16
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:20:36 +0100
According to Valeu, John W. EM3 (AS40 R-3), on Sunday 11 January 2004 06:36
the word on the street was...

> What happened? You finally start collecting rent from all those people
> under your stairs? ;)

They all seem to have moved out without telling me, leaving an awful mess
for me to clean up... :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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. 17
From: silvercat@***********.org (Jonathan Hurley)
Subject: Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:10:43 -0500
-----Original Message-----

According to Valeu, John W. EM3 (AS40 R-3), on Sunday 11 January 2004 06:36
the word on the street was...

> What happened? You finally start collecting rent from all those people
> under your stairs? ;)

They all seem to have moved out without telling me, leaving an awful mess
for me to clean up... :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You've been touched by the doubt of man
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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

-----Reply Message-----

I was wondering why I had enough room to do a full-body stretch the other
day.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Cyberware question to do with gun modifiers, 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!