Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Martin Steffens <chimerae@***.IE>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:28:26 +0000
First, thanks Jon for the explaination, I'm looking forward to the
third edition.

Since the people who have problems with the rules being spread out
all over the place have been acused of being not worshipfull enough
of the Holy Rules, I thought of a way that might be a solution... or
at least a patch before they hit me with the Spanish Inquisition:

An Index of all the books.

If some one already did this, please let me know, so I save myself
the trouble. I'm thinking about a fairly general keyword index,
nothing as fancy as one where you can find all the pages where Ehran
made a comment, no more along the lines of
Vehicle Rules
- LAV Flight ceilings: p XX T:SH

Once the main work is done, it should be easier to keep it up to date
when a new book hits the shops. I'll need some help with the books I
don't (yet) have, but if enough people are interested I just start
with the ones I have.

Let me know what you think about it,


Martin Steffens
chimerae@***.ie
Message no. 2
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 12:02:53 +0100
Martin Steffens said on 9:28/28 Jun 98,...

> An Index of all the books.
>
> If some one already did this

Sascha has one, AFAIK. I don't know what is in it exactly, but he
used to use it to support rules quotes quite a lot.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Refusing to be classified.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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. 3
From: Robert Nesius <nesius@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 23:56:48 -0700
RE: Indexes of SR Rules
- I sort of have one. When I have time I go through the books and
transcribe mechanics into my own "reference" with the hope that over
time, I'll have been able to pull the various rules that are related,
but spread out over multiple books, into one place.

RE: Support of SR.
Mixed reactions here. I like the fact that FASA people and creaters
monitor this list, contribute to disscussion, and have generally
made themselves available. It's better than the "don't say anything
until we publish a book that fixes all the issues we know of." Unfortunately,
I don't think FASA does either very well. But for me part of the
issue is that I'm in an industry where companies have to support
their products, and when problems arrive, provide fixes in a timely
fashion. As a new GM, when I ask what I see as "newbie" questions,
and people who've been hardcore shadowrunners far longer than me
end up telling me "It's up to the GM. Here are the two sides to
the argument. FASA has never clarified this...." That annoys
me. My attitude is "They've had four years to
address this problem/issue and haven't?"

-Rob
Message no. 4
From: K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:45:55 EDT
In a message dated 6/29/98 2:58:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
nesius@******.COM writes:

> RE: Support of SR.
> Mixed reactions here. I like the fact that FASA people and creaters
> monitor this list, contribute to disscussion, and have generally
> made themselves available. It's better than the "don't say anything
> until we publish a book that fixes all the issues we know of."
> Unfortunately,
> I don't think FASA does either very well. But for me part of the
> issue is that I'm in an industry where companies have to support
> their products, and when problems arrive, provide fixes in a timely
> fashion. As a new GM, when I ask what I see as "newbie" questions,
> and people who've been hardcore shadowrunners far longer than me
> end up telling me "It's up to the GM. Here are the two sides to
> the argument. FASA has never clarified this...." That annoys
> me. My attitude is "They've had four years to
> address this problem/issue and haven't?"
>
> -Rob

Oh Rob, that is priceless. But how is this for a reply range?

There are two -particular- players in your games that I recall fairly well
(assuming they haven't left ya ;) that I could say the same thing of.
'They've had "x" years to fix their problem(s) and they haven't???" (In
game
mode to that, not RL)

Okay, that wasn't fair, but put it into a perspective of sorts. "Being up to
the GM" is the failsafe of all failsafes. It forces the means of
"decision"
upon a given, singular, individual. Something that many people in America at
least seem to have a hard time doing. Making a Final Decision.

IOW, it's FASA's way of passing on the responsibility of a decision for the
"minor, fill in the cracks, details" since they've made the "major, core
rules, decisions" themselves.

And besides, IAH, Humility Aside, it works better the way it is, with us, the
GM types, having the fun of making the make-or-break decision on whether or
not a given character has a chance to live, even if the rules are stacked
against them. Better drama that way... :)

-K
Message no. 5
From: Robert Nesius <nesius@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 21:43:27 -0700
>In a message dated 6/29/98 2:58:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>nesius@******.COM writes:
>
>> RE: Support of SR.
>> Mixed reactions here. I like the fact that FASA people and creaters
>> monitor this list, contribute to disscussion, and have generally
>> made themselves available. It's better than the "don't say anything
>> until we publish a book that fixes all the issues we know of."
>> Unfortunately,
>> I don't think FASA does either very well. But for me part of the
>> issue is that I'm in an industry where companies have to support
>> their products, and when problems arrive, provide fixes in a timely
>> fashion. As a new GM, when I ask what I see as "newbie" questions,
>> and people who've been hardcore shadowrunners far longer than me
>> end up telling me "It's up to the GM. Here are the two sides to
>> the argument. FASA has never clarified this...." That annoys
>> me. My attitude is "They've had four years to
>> address this problem/issue and haven't?"
>>
>> -Rob
>
>Oh Rob, that is priceless. But how is this for a reply range?
>
>There are two -particular- players in your games that I recall fairly well
>(assuming they haven't left ya ;) that I could say the same thing of.
>'They've had "x" years to fix their problem(s) and they haven't???" (In
game
>mode to that, not RL)

huh?

>
>Okay, that wasn't fair, but put it into a perspective of sorts. "Being up to
>the GM" is the failsafe of all failsafes. It forces the means of
"decision"
>upon a given, singular, individual. Something that many people in America at
>least seem to have a hard time doing. Making a Final Decision.

I don't mind making decisions. What bothers me is when FASA says 1+1=3, for
extremely large values of 1. Or, to put it more succinctly - "Link Rot."
Link Rot is when a web page doesn't maintain it's links, and the places
they point to dissappear from under them so that when someone clicks on
the link, they get a 404 error. An example of this is pools with chipped
skills and pools. FASA's original descriptions and examples regarding
this issue are murky, but there was one example given regarding chipped
computer skills and the hacking pool. Hmmm. Hacking Pool. Let's click
on that link. Oh..as of VR2.0, the computer skill has nothing to do
with the Hacking Pool. Link Rot. In fact, the only pool left that
is skill based is the magic pool (excluding IVIS, which is skill based,
but dynamic). That shows me that FASA is weaving
the "tapestry of shadowrun" one thread at a time, but no paying enough
attention to the over all design being created.

Also, in general, I have no problems making decisions when FASA addresses
an issues. But when they do address an issue, and I can't determine
their intentions because of ambiguity in the text, that also drives me nuts.

>And besides, IAH, Humility Aside, it works better the way it is, with us, the
>GM types, having the fun of making the make-or-break decision on whether or
>not a given character has a chance to live, even if the rules are stacked
>against them. Better drama that way... :)
>

No arguments there.

-Rob
p.s. You? Humble? ;)
Message no. 6
From: K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Damn Shadowrun, possible solution
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:12:34 EDT
In a message dated 6/29/98 11:38:51 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
nesius@******.COM writes:

> I don't mind making decisions. What bothers me is when FASA says 1+1=3, for
> extremely large values of 1. Or, to put it more succinctly - "Link Rot."
> Link Rot is when a web page doesn't maintain it's links, and the places
> they point to dissappear from under them so that when someone clicks on
> the link, they get a 404 error. An example of this is pools with chipped
> skills and pools. FASA's original descriptions and examples regarding
> this issue are murky, but there was one example given regarding chipped
> computer skills and the hacking pool. Hmmm. Hacking Pool. Let's click
> on that link. Oh..as of VR2.0, the computer skill has nothing to do
> with the Hacking Pool. Link Rot. In fact, the only pool left that
> is skill based is the magic pool (excluding IVIS, which is skill based,
> but dynamic). That shows me that FASA is weaving
> the "tapestry of shadowrun" one thread at a time, but no paying enough
> attention to the over all design being created.

I do understand the screwiness concerning "Link Rot" as you put it, but I
don't think I can find myself arguing with it. Personally, "Magic Pool" is a
term that always caused so much confusion to the gamers I've known in SR.
"Magic Pool = Sorcery Skill plus Foci, so when I cast a spell, I use Sorcery
plus Magic Pool dice that I allocate, right?" (THHWAP!)

Part of me is hoping that Magic Pool rules change in SR3 to an "attributive
average" of some type.

But in other circumstances, I -think- I can say with some amount of certainty
(don't ya just my vaguery?? :) that FASA is watching it's course in the
"Tapestry" it is weaving, it's just not letting very many people in on it's
little collection of ideas.

> Also, in general, I have no problems making decisions when FASA addresses
> an issues. But when they do address an issue, and I can't determine
> their intentions because of ambiguity in the text, that also drives me
nuts.

See above...

> >And besides, IAH, Humility Aside, it works better the way it is, with us,
> the
> >GM types, having the fun of making the make-or-break decision on whether
or
> >not a given character has a chance to live, even if the rules are stacked
> >against them. Better drama that way... :)
>
> No arguments there.
> -Rob
> p.s. You? Humble? ;)

hA hA HA!!!

-K (so, Rob, is it still Red Hair???? or is it all gone? :P) (hit and run,
hit and run)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Damn Shadowrun, possible solution, 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!