Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Fisher, Victor" <Victor-Fisher@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:59:54 -0400
Simon T.Sailor wrote:
<snip>
>Said decker- a real good
>one- takes his 12 dice plus hacking pool- another 10 or so... so he
>rolls that truckload of dice... no success.
>Decker: 'may I retry?'
>GM (me): 'Ok, you may retry once'
>Decker taking his twelve skill dice, this time plus task pool plus
>karma pool- another 18 dice or so...
>No success again...
>So one of our street samurais thinks: it can't be that hard... pushes
>said Master Decker/god archetype aside, takes the fairlight and
>starts typing... samurai slots in his computer 3 chip-
>rolls three dice, results: 6,4,6, rerolled: 6,2 rererolled: 4
>
>So the samurai did what the decker couldn't do...
>HOW THE HELL CAN THIS BE EXPLAINED IN THE GAME?
>The deckers rep would be permanently exringuished.. (if it weren't
>already)

It sounds like you're using SR 1's rules of matrix tasks with a
Decking Pool like that.
Well, right off the top of my head, the Samurai using the
Fairlight would be suffering a +2 target number penalty, because the
deck has to be calibrated to it's user's specific brainwaves for maximum
efficiency, & the least misinterpretation of command functions, and the
Decker's EEG is already burned into the chips.
Message no. 2
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 21:25:39 +0100
> It sounds like you're using SR 1's rules of matrix tasks with a
>Decking Pool like that.

Nope- thats one shocking thing- a decker with a hacking pool that
high has to be a godlike matrix-master... and thats exactly what our
decker is. So something like that should NOT happen to him.

> Well, right off the top of my head, the Samurai using the
>Fairlight would be suffering a +2 target number penalty, because the
>deck has to be calibrated to it's user's specific brainwaves for
>maximum efficiency, & the least misinterpretation of command
>functions, and the Decker's EEG is already burned into the chips.

Yea, I want you to say something nice and you tell me I used the
wrong rules...
;=)

ss
Message no. 3
From: "Fisher, Victor" <Victor-Fisher@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 15:39:11 -0400
>Simon T. Sailor(man) <toot toot> said:
><snip>
>Nope- thats one shocking thing- a decker with a hacking pool that
>high has to be a godlike matrix-master... and thats exactly what our
>decker is. So something like that should NOT happen to him.
>
>> Well, right off the top of my head, the Samurai using the
>>Fairlight would be suffering a +2 target number penalty, because the
>>deck has to be calibrated to it's user's specific brainwaves for
>>maximum efficiency, & the least misinterpretation of command
>>functions, and the Decker's EEG is already burned into the chips.
>
>Yea, I want you to say something nice and you tell me I used the
>wrong rules...
>;=)

Sorry, didn't mean for it to come out that way. Ultimately, there
are no wrong rules [weeeeeeell, there are a few :-], but if it works for
your group, then go with it.
As for the TN penalty, it makes sense to me something that delicate
as hardware and software to translate mental impulses into command code
with as little error as possible [a problem similiar but greater than
when voice recognition computer controlling software came into use].
Anyone can still use the tortoise functions of a deck, but becasue
the deck isn't on the same wavelength as the user, he'd have
difficulties using any direct neural interfacing commands.
I think everone else's posts on this subject pretty much cover,
that sometimes, s**t just happens.

Victor
Message no. 4
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 16:04:11 EDT
On Wed, 28 May 1997 13:59:54 -0400 "Fisher, Victor"
<Victor-Fisher@******.COM> writes:

> Well, right off the top of my head, the Samurai using the
>Fairlight would be suffering a +2 target number penalty, because the
>deck has to be calibrated to it's user's specific brainwaves for
>maximum
>efficiency, & the least misinterpretation of command functions, and
>the
>Decker's EEG is already burned into the chips.


Where is this listed? I don't know of any where that anything says
this...


--
-Canthros
And ye shall know the truth, and lobo1@****.com
the truth shall set you free. canthros1@***.com
--John 8:32, KJV
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 5
From: "Fisher, Victor" <Victor-Fisher@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 16:15:03 -0400
L Canthros asks:
>> Well, right off the top of my head, the Samurai using the
>>Fairlight would be suffering a +2 target number penalty, because the
>>deck has to be calibrated to it's user's specific brainwaves for
>>maximum
>>efficiency, & the least misinterpretation of command functions, and
>>the
>>Decker's EEG is already burned into the chips.
>
>
>Where is this listed? I don't know of any where that anything says
>this...

I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere; maybe in Virtual Realities
1.0. Or, I'm just suffering from delusions, again. Still, it makes sense
to me, and I'm using it in my games.
I've got it! My mind possed a question to the universe and I was
granted a burst of divine inspiration! [either that, or my shorts are
too tight.]

Victor
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:40:11 +0100
Fisher, Victor said on 16:15/28 May 97...

[sam using decker's Fairlight has +2 TN]
> >Where is this listed? I don't know of any where that anything says
> >this...
>
> I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere; maybe in Virtual Realities
> 1.0. Or, I'm just suffering from delusions, again. Still, it makes sense
> to me, and I'm using it in my games.
> I've got it! My mind possed a question to the universe and I was
> granted a burst of divine inspiration! [either that, or my shorts are
> too tight.]

It's in VR 1.0, the very last paragraph on page 26: "The MPCP chips are
custom-aligned to a specific decker's brainwave patterns. Using someone
else's MPCP chips results not only in a headache, but a +4 Target Number
modifier across the board."

So in short, this is another case of a VR 1.0 rule that didn't make it
into VR 2.0. It makes sense to me, so I guess that if I ever have a decker
PC I'll apply this modifier even though it's not in VR 2.0.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Wat u bent, dat is niets anders dan de herinnering aan uzelf.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 19:11:27 +0100
> Sorry, didn't mean for it to come out that way. Ultimately, there
> are no wrong rules [weeeeeeell, there are a few :-], but if it works for
> your group, then go with it.
> As for the TN penalty, it makes sense to me something that delicate
> as hardware and software to translate mental impulses into command code
> with as little error as possible [a problem similiar but greater than
> when voice recognition computer controlling software came into use].
>
> Victor

You're right- makes sense. I'll use the +4 Gurth mentioned in the
future (for the unlikely case that the Decker allows anyone to touch
his Fairlight)

ss
Message no. 8
From: "Arno R. Lehmann" <arlehma@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Decker's Run of Bad Luck
Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 01:49:14 +0200
On Wed, 28 May 1997 21:25:39 +0100, Simon T. Sailer wrote:

>a decker with a hacking pool that
>high has to be a godlike matrix-master... and thats exactly what our
>decker is. So something like that should NOT happen to him.

Then, if you as GM feel that it should not happen to him why did you
let it happen? Or, if you thought that it could happen and so let him
roll his dice, why do you have a problem with his bad luck?
After all, the GM decides when a dice roll is adequate, and when
someone with a high knowledge anything just knows what to do. There's
no reason to argue against luck IMO.


--
Arno
*********************************************************************
Be careful when replying to this mail - check the address !!!
(And send me a note when you notice that
the reply-to-address points to the list!)
*********************************************************************

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Decker's Run of Bad Luck, 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!