Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject:	FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 1997 08:30:23 +0000

Message no. 1 Okay boys and girls, here is my latest set of answers from FASAMike
(or more specifically, his clarifications on an earlier set of
answers.). Topics include Etiquette concentrations, The Sub-adept
system, and others.

-=SwiftOne=-

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From: FASAMike@***.com
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 15:58:38 -0500 (EST)
To: bxb121@***.edu
Subject: Re: Shadowrun Questions

<SNIP original question/answer)

>Let me clarify: Using the Build points (as opposed to Priority)
>system, I can get a Body of 6 for 12 points. OR I can get a body of
>1 for 2, then get 5 Bonus attribute Points for 5 more, for a total of
>6 points. Body 6 in both cases, one costs 6 the other 12. There is
>the hole.
>
>I told my runners that Bonus Force Points, Bonus skill Points, and
>Bonus attribute Point were only available if the character was taking
>Edges and Flaws to a Priority created character. If using only
>Points, they weren't available (which is what I took as your intent).
> Is this correct? Or can any Point-built character save 6 points on
>the Attribute section?

Well, I am a person who writes, designs and creates things based on the
spirit of the game...which obviosuly raping the rules to get a numerical
advantage doesn't sit to well with me. As a GM I wouldn't allow what your
players are trying to do - I would require the base to zero to be in effect -
Edges and Flaws equal zero. So 5 points of addtional attribute points would
mean 5 points in Flaws.

>> >V) According to the MetaHuman Albinoism section (COMPANION), albinos
>> >receive a +1 Willpower. Does this apply to the Racial maximum as
>> >well, or only to the attribute with the racial maximum the same?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you are asking here. But that does count toward
>> racial maximum. You are better than the best Troll, just different.
>
>I was asking if I could get the maximum Willpower for my race, then
>up it by 1, or if I still had the same maximum, I just got a "free"
>point. You answered the question, thanks.
>
>Also: Does this apply to human Albinos? (are you using Metahuman to
>mean the 5(+) subspecies or to refer to all non-"normal" humans?)

Metahumanity actully includes humans...so the answer is yes the rules above
apply to humans.

>> >XIII) In SRII, you say "the Etiquette skill is a special skill that
>> >requires a Concentration". Does this mean the character gets a +1
>> >to the skill during creation, or only that there are multiple
>> >Etiquette Skills? If it really is a Concentration, how do you set
>> >up defaults when the character begins the game with multiple
>> >Concentrations?
>>
>> No, you do not get +1. Etiquette skills are unique and don't
>> function like the regular ones. While each is in fact a
>> Concentration they all act like the main skill for defaulting
>> purposes.
>
>I'm not sure I understand....
>1) I don't get a +1 at creation....that part I get.
>2) I pay ?Concentration? costs to raise/purchase with Karma?
>3) They all act like the main skill for defaulting....what if:
>-A) I have Etiquette:Corp 4 and use it instead of Street?
>-B) I have Etiquette:Corp 5 and E:Tribal 5 and need Street?
>-C) I have no skill, does the fact that I need a Concentration affect
>defaulting from other skills? I'm guessing no, from your comment.
>4) Do I purchase multiple Etiquettes (at creation and later) as if
>they had no connection to each other?

You do pay Concentration costs for raiseing or purchasing an Etiquette skill.
You use the base skill to raise or lower it.

A and B) You default to Charisma (+4) on the Target number
C) You default to Charisma (+4)
D) Yes

These rules will be fixed in Shadowrun 3rd edition.

>> >XIV) Would Centering skills such as Mystic Gestures (Kuji-kiri) and
>> >Arcane Mutterings be Special skills that counted as Specializations,
>> >Concentrations, or a General skill? What is the overall tendancy
>> >for Centering skills?
>>
>> Special skills, again do not follow the normal rules of skill. They
>> are neither Concentration or Specializations they exist separetly. A
>> character would only ever take a single centering skill for
>> something very specific. They don't default or anything. The
>> Centering Skill operates outside the normal rules and exist
>> sptrictly as a Special skill as per SR2 p. 74.
>
>Unless I'm wrong (always possible, but I looked fairly hard) that
>doesn't say which category to treat the skill as for purposes of
>Raising/purchasing/getting at creation.

You would only get a Centering Skill once you have the centering metamagic
intiate power. So you would not get one at character creation - at least I
wouldn't allow it.I would treat them as Concentrations for improvement
(although the first one should be treated as a regular skill 2x).

>> >XVII) Using the Companion, can Physical Adepts take the Magical
>> >Talent of Astral Sight? Doesn't that render the 2 point Astral
>> >Perception Power too expensive for anyone to take?
>>
>> Well, here's the philosphical distinction between number crunching
>> and character creation. Sure it's "cheaper" to go the Magical Talent
>> way, but you get a Flaw. You can alos spend the Physad points to get
>
>This sounds as if you are assuming Flaw pointsíge points. This
>isn't true for Point Built characters. (Or did I miss a rule?!?)
>
>> it and have no Flaw and make it part f the characaters growth. If
>> you are doing it to "break the bank" then I have aproblem with it,
>> but if you are doing it for character development then I have no
>> problem with it. This is a spirit of the game question and I always
>> will rule in favor of the spirit of the game versus the rapeing the
>> rules "to win".
>
>Naturally role-playing is great....but my players are using Point
>Only Built Characters....so the flaw question never comes up....and
>my players want to know what is "official". (so do I)
>
>Also, Steve Kenson explained how he intended for all the Magical
>Talent Edges to represent a sort of Sub-Adept, which contrasts with
>the line in the companion stating that only characters WITH a Magic
>Attribute could take them (Steve said he meant for the characters
>with the Edge to have an effective Magic attribute, much as the
>spirit watchers (Spokenkeirken?) from the Germany Sourcebook.) Is
>this an official correction (he said only you could declare that) or
>is the printed version to stand? (BTW, Steve's version makes a LOT
>more sense, both in use and balance)

No it's not an offical answer. What Steve wanted (and we still go around and
around on this) was "mundanes" to kind of have a magical spark...I have no
problem with this except that every "mundane" would take Hellblast of
PowerBolt and you would have no check and balance on the Street Sam with a
magical ablity. He hadn't thought of that and so our compromise was what you
read. I stand by it because it allows magical characters to do things they
normally wouldn't. So in this case the Companion and me are right, Steve's
intentions are not. I also think the Germany stuff is way too abuseable. I
would never have let that be printed. Finally, to answer your begining
questions...Yes at character creation the Edge Astral Magical Talent of
Astral Sight can be taken by the physical adept. Yes that means that the
chracter can "cheat the system" and not take the adept power that does the
same thing. But remember not everyone uses that Edge and Flaw system - plus
Edges and Flaws can only be taken at character creation, but adpet powers can
be bought at any time.

>> >XIX) Using the Companion, does use of the Magical Talent Edge of
>> >Innate Spell Ability require the user to have a sorcery skill? Can
>> >characters with normal spell casting abilities take this edge to
>> >have one innate spell?
>> I assume by "normal" you mean mundane (non-magical). If that is the
>> case then no they cannot take this Edge.
>
>ACtually, I meant a shaman character taking an Innate spell, so that
>the Force of that particular spell was tied to his magic rating. If
>we go with Steve's version of the Sub-Adept, this becomes moot.
>
>Does A character with the Innate Spell ability need Sorcery? Or can
>he cast without a Magic Pool?

He needs Sorcery...

>> >XX) The Detect Individual Spell (SRII): How much needs to be known
>> >about the target to cast it? A case rose up recently where the
>> >caster had seen the target, but did not know her name. In another
>> >case, the opposite was true. What about only knowing the street
>> name?
>>
>> I think you need to re-read the spell. You must name the individual
>> that you want detected. Therofre only havein a picture and not the
>> name would not work.
>> In the second case...the street name, what if more than one person
>> has the
>> same street name. It would go off all the time. What you want is to
>> narrow it down to a specific use.
>Hmm..But it would work with just a street name? (Images of the John
>Smith convention running through my head). I guess I just needed to
>know what "defined" the name. Does the target need to use it
>himself? (herself?) What if they are tracking someone known to the
>enemy, but that is not what the person calls himself.

The parameters make it that the character must know, the character...my
suggustion is that the character needs to have actully seen the person "live"
in order for the spell to work.

>> >XXIII) Anchors and Spell Links (GRIMOIRE II): How specific can we
>> >get with the Activation link? Can we specify a Command phrase?
>> >Command condition? (a man with a red shirt and one foot waves the
>> >anchor in a specific method?)
>>
>> As specific as the mage want it to be. Obviously the more specific
>> the less chance of it activating by accident.
>
>But we could indeed (despite the obvious problems, this is just an
>example) make an arrowhead/bullet anchor that would activate once it
>entered a body with a single activation link?

Nope.

>> >XXVI) In SRII, I understand why someone would take cybereyes, as
>> >they can put in up to .5 worth of enhancements without further
>> >essence loss. However, why would a character take cyberears?
>> >(barring loss of the natural ones) They can't really save anything
>> >essence-wise. Is there need for cyberears if the character is
>> >taking multiple aural enhancements?
>>
>> Each ear gets .2 enhancements free...I don't understand why that's
>> not good.
>
>Can you take enhancements WITHOUT getting the replacement though? If
>so, the replacement isn't worth it. If not, you better put that in
>the description of the gear somewhere, because it isn't there now.

I'm sorry I misunderstood...no you need the ears to take the enhancements.

Have Fun!
Play Games!

Mike Mulvihill
Shadowrun Line Developer
FASA
www.fasa.com
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie

From:	William Gallas <wgallas@*****.FR>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 1997 15:17:24 +0100

Message no. 2 >Well, I am a person who writes, designs and creates things based on the
>spirit of the game...which obviosuly raping the rules to get a numerical
>advantage doesn't sit to well with me. As a GM I wouldn't allow what your
>players are trying to do - I would require the base to zero to be in effect -
>Edges and Flaws equal zero. So 5 points of addtional attribute points would
>mean 5 points in Flaws.

I use another method : Additionnal attribute cost can only affect one
attribute, has a cost of 5 per point and increases racial max (up to racial
max * 1.5, i.e. 9 for a human)

>You would only get a Centering Skill once you have the centering metamagic
>intiate power. So you would not get one at character creation - at least I
>wouldn't allow it.I would treat them as Concentrations for improvement
>(although the first one should be treated as a regular skill 2x).

First, there is an option rule allowing you to become initiate at character
creation by spending spell points at rate of 1 per point of karma. Second,
I treat them as normal skills because they are used as usually as other
skills and do have powerful effect.

>>> it and have no Flaw and make it part f the characaters growth. If
>>> you are doing it to "break the bank" then I have aproblem with it,
>>> but if you are doing it for character development then I have no
>>> problem with it. This is a spirit of the game question and I always
>>> will rule in favor of the spirit of the game versus the rapeing the
>>> rules "to win".

It isn't impossible to make rules adapted to roleplaying ...

>The parameters make it that the character must know, the character...my
>suggustion is that the character needs to have actully seen the person
"live"
>in order for the spell to work.

Here is the rule I use : To cast detect individual spell, you need to know
the character you're searching for. This means you saw his aura and got
sufficient successes (4+). In the case of a spellcaster adept, he must know
the character so he could only use it on contacts or the like. If the mage
has sufficient data on the character, he can try to imagine his aura (some
days of work) and will be able to cast the spell with a +2 TN modifier.

Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "You are who you know"

From:	Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 1997 09:41:31 +0000

Message no. 3 > >players are trying to do - I would require the base to zero to be in effect -
> >Edges and Flaws equal zero. So 5 points of addtional attribute points would
> >mean 5 points in Flaws.
>
> I use another method : Additionnal attribute cost can only affect one
> attribute, has a cost of 5 per point and increases racial max (up to racial
> max * 1.5, i.e. 9 for a human)

As I said in the email FASAMike was replying to, I simply disallow
Bonus Attribute, Bonus Force Point, and Bonus skill Point, as they
really are intended for characters using the priority system. Using
a point system they have no basis.

Isn't what you describe really the other Edge that increases Racial
Maximum?

> First, there is an option rule allowing you to become initiate at character
> creation by spending spell points at rate of 1 per point of karma. Second,

An option that is rarely used because of the power involved.

> I treat them as normal skills because they are used as usually as other
> skills and do have powerful effect.

I disagree. In my games (fairly low Karma...) the players would
never save enough to get a normal skill above a 4....and considering
that getting it that high means they are neglecting other areas, and
the 4 dice isn't very helpful for Centering, no one would ever use
Centering.

An even better argument is to think of the concept. Examples include
using musical instruments. Concentrations or specializations there.
Personally I treat them as Concentrations, and allow specializations
with restrictions. (example, he can only use a model 55 Hammeril
Synthesizer.) Centering is awfully useful, but not all that
powerful, particularly if you have a low skill.

> >>> it and have no Flaw and make it part f the characaters growth. If
> >>> you are doing it to "break the bank" then I have aproblem with
it,
> >>> but if you are doing it for character development then I have no
> >>> problem with it. This is a spirit of the game question and I always
> >>> will rule in favor of the spirit of the game versus the rapeing the
> >>> rules "to win".
>
> It isn't impossible to make rules adapted to roleplaying ...

I was taking the middle ground....I looked at the rules, guessed at
what the "spirit" intended was, and was asking him to confirm.

> Here is the rule I use : To cast detect individual spell, you need to know
> the character you're searching for. This means you saw his aura and got
> sufficient successes (4+). In the case of a spellcaster adept, he must know
> the character so he could only use it on contacts or the like. If the mage
> has sufficient data on the character, he can try to imagine his aura (some
> days of work) and will be able to cast the spell with a +2 TN modifier.

Jeez, why not just use a watcher? (Adepts aside)

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie

From:	William Gallas <wgallas@*****.FR>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 1997 16:18:34 +0100

Message no. 4 >> First, there is an option rule allowing you to become initiate at character
>> creation by spending spell points at rate of 1 per point of karma. Second,
>
>An option that is rarely used because of the power involved.

Just a point of view. It costs 18 karma points and IMO doesn't give so much.

>> I treat them as normal skills because they are used as usually as other
>> skills and do have powerful effect.
>
>I disagree. In my games (fairly low Karma...) the players would
>never save enough to get a normal skill above a 4....and considering
>that getting it that high means they are neglecting other areas, and
>the 4 dice isn't very helpful for Centering, no one would ever use
>Centering.

My players have centering skills of 3-4 and use them quite usually. One
more time, if they neglect other areas it's their choice. No one ever
forced them to buy centering skill. And mages often neglect non magical
areas (but not always).

>An even better argument is to think of the concept. Examples include
>using musical instruments. Concentrations or specializations there.
>Personally I treat them as Concentrations, and allow specializations
>with restrictions. (example, he can only use a model 55 Hammeril
>Synthesizer.) Centering is awfully useful, but not all that
>powerful, particularly if you have a low skill.

I use a multiplier of *1 for special skills like singing and the like. I
just consider centering much more useful than just singing. The cost
augmentation is due to the augmentation of effect.
Effect isn't as low as you think. First, you can use centering with sorcery
but with conjuring too (perhaps it's a house rule ...). If you need 2
successes to gain one success for spell effect, it's not the same to reduce
TN modifiers. Let's say you have +2 to TN, you roll 4 dices and get 1
success, your TN will be reduced by 1 which has a big effect on your
spellcasting.

>I was taking the middle ground....I looked at the rules, guessed at
>what the "spirit" intended was, and was asking him to confirm.

I just wanted to say that if you think it's important that your character
has astral sight at the beginning of the game, it's a roleplaying
motivation. When you have choice between 2 rules, why would you take the
one that costs you more ?
That doesn't apply to my game because edges and flaws are quite difficult
to buy. The player needs to give good arguments to get the edge or the flaw.

>> Here is the rule I use : To cast detect individual spell, you need to know
>> the character you're searching for. This means you saw his aura and got
>> sufficient successes (4+). In the case of a spellcaster adept, he must know
>> the character so he could only use it on contacts or the like. If the mage
>> has sufficient data on the character, he can try to imagine his aura (some
>> days of work) and will be able to cast the spell with a +2 TN modifier.
>
>Jeez, why not just use a watcher? (Adepts aside)

I really don't like the rule about watchers searching for an individual.
IMO it's too easy and too quick to find someone. And I apply the same
modifiers to the use of watchers.

Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "You are who you know"

From:	John Wicker <saxon@***.NET>
Subject:	FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:46:25 -0600

Message no. 5 In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
ill-disciplined.

The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.

When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.

Just my two nuyen. Thoughts, opinions or flames?

John Wicker

From:	"David R. Lowe" <dlowe@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:01:31 -0800

Message no. 6 At 1:46 PM 11/20/97, John Wicker wrote:
>In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
>shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
>ill-disciplined.
>
>The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
>confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.
>
>When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
>even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
>Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
>the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
>just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.
>
>Just my two nuyen. Thoughts, opinions or flames?
>
>John Wicker

The world takes on FASAMike?

D.

ps, cage match or ladder match?

David R. Lowe (dlowe@****.com)
Photography/Graphic Design

"HTML, the most fun you can have without a vowel."

Hey, there's a URL in my sig file now!
Check it out at www.lowephoto.com.

-
GC3.1 GCA$ d- s: a- C++++ U P L E? W+ N++ o K w-- O- M++$ V--
PS++ PE Y+ PGP- t 5 X+ R+++$ tv- b++ DI++ D--- G++ e++ h--- r++ y+
-

From:	Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:42:38 -0500

Message no. 7 At 01:46 PM 11/20/97 -0600, John Wicker wrote these timeless words:
>In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
>shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
>ill-disciplined.
>
>The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
>confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.
>
>When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
>even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
>Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
>the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
>just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.
>
>Just my two nuyen. Thoughts, opinions or flames?
>
Having met Mike M personally, and having had more than my share of one on
one conversations, I think that he definatley has a tendancy to come off a
bit too terse. that, and the fact that he isn;t a writer, or even an
editor, he's a developer. His job is to come up with the concepts,
coordinate the storylines, and make sure that everything fits together.
That means that his writing, especially the off the cuff stuff, leaves a
lot to be desired. It took me and Adan several days to work out all the
typos and missing words from The Interview I did with him.

Plus, keep in mind, that he's not only a VERY busy man on the Game end of
it, trying to plan, organize and develop at least three products at any one
time, but het gets a HELL of a lot of personal e-mail, and has to answer
all the Shadowrun related e-mail that's sent to FASA. Between all that,
it's no wonder that his replies are a bit terse...

Just my observations, but I think Mike has done a hell of a job with SR.
From listening to him at the Seminars at Gen Con, and from talking to him
personally, he has definate passion for the SR world, and wants to make the
game better, and is always looking for more for the game.

((Man, does that ever sound like a bad PR piece for Mike and FASA...:] ))

Bull (Who's not getting paid for this stuff:))

--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka Chaos, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Cuddly Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
---- in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher
a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight effectively, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects."
-- Robert Heinlein, "The Notebooks of Lazurus Long"

From:	David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:49:02 -0700

Message no. 8 John Wicker wrote:
/
/ In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
/ shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
/ ill-disciplined.

He's a line developer, not a fanatical gamer :)

And, he's a real person. Just because he's the line developer
doesn't make him an expert. His job is to publish products that will
make money for Shadowrun. Our hopes are that new products will
remain consistent with the rules and add significantly to the game.

/ When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
/ even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
/ Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
/ the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
/ just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.
/
/ Just my two nuyen. Thoughts, opinions or flames?

<thought>

What you've just said, IMHO, is that Mike is doing a good job of
putting out good products, but that he isn't so hot on the specifics
of Shadowrun. So what? Maybe your expectations of his abilities to
answer rules questions are to high. As experience has taught you
Mike isn't the end all of rules debates. IMO you shouldn't ask him
questions anymore and instead send them to the list where Steve,
Gurth and others will probably do a much better job of helping you
resolve problems.

</thought>

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm

From:	Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:07:25 EST

Message no. 9 > >In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
> >shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
> >ill-disciplined.
> >
> >The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
> >confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.

Uh-oh, I've been implicated.

> >Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
> >the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
> >just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.

I'll agree with the "not thought out" part. I'll also agree with the
quality. I think the reasoning is that:

1) He doesn't play (not enough to matter anymore), thus weird things
like many of his rulings

2) He has a good concept of the universe, and lets other people make
the rules for him, and interferes only when they disturb the concept.
This is a good trait in a line developer.

All in all, I'd say FASAMike is great as a line developer...but he
should let others answer questions :)

(I'm really hoping to sway him on the sub-adept issue, but I won't
hold my breath)

-=SwiftOne=-
(Who is also hoping to someday write for FASA, not to mention getting
a tagline in one of the books, and so doesn't want to get on
FASAMike's bad side)

From:	Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 18:31:10 -0700

Message no. 10 At 15:42 11/20/97 -0500, you wrote:

>Having met Mike M personally, and having had more than my share of one on
>one conversations, I think that he definatley has a tendancy to come off a
>bit too terse. that, and the fact that he isn;t a writer, or even an
>editor, he's a developer. His job is to come up with the concepts,
>coordinate the storylines, and make sure that everything fits together.
>That means that his writing, especially the off the cuff stuff, leaves a
>lot to be desired. It took me and Adan several days to work out all the
>typos and missing words from The Interview I did with him.

Typos? Who's 'Adan', Stvee? ;)

Mike isn't much of a typer, and even less of a computer person, from what
I've seen. The time I spent with him on the telephone impressed me far
more than anything I had seen him write.

Of course, we mainly talked about Target: UCAS and why I hate the new
Meta's...

>Plus, keep in mind, that he's not only a VERY busy man on the Game end of
>it, trying to plan, organize and develop at least three products at any one
>time, but het gets a HELL of a lot of personal e-mail, and has to answer
>all the Shadowrun related e-mail that's sent to FASA. Between all that,
>it's no wonder that his replies are a bit terse...

Yup.. he's almost always behind on his mail, which is one thing he would
like to have more time to do, but frankly, it doesn't earn FASA money. Not
directly..

>Just my observations, but I think Mike has done a hell of a job with SR.
>From listening to him at the Seminars at Gen Con, and from talking to him
>personally, he has definate passion for the SR world, and wants to make the
>game better, and is always looking for more for the game.

Agreed with this.. he sounds fanatical, in a good way :)

>Bull (Who's not getting paid for this stuff:))

-Adam (Who only wants to be;)

-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ AdamJ@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
The Shadowrun Archive Co-Maintainer: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 02:08:15 +0000

Message no. 11 In article <3.0.16.19971120161612.2dbf2b0a@*****.com>, Bull
<chaos@*****.COM> waffled & burbled about FASAMike takes on the world

>((Man, does that ever sound like a bad PR piece for Mike and FASA...:] ))
>
>Bull (Who's not getting paid for this stuff:))

Really? Then why is it you "sound" like a Tairngire apologist. <grin>

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims - Alternative UK Sourcebook (U/C)

From:	Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:25:56 -0500

Message no. 12 At 02:08 AM 11/21/97 +0000, Avenger wrote these timeless words:
>In article <3.0.16.19971120161612.2dbf2b0a@*****.com>, Bull
><chaos@*****.COM> waffled & burbled about FASAMike takes on the world
>
I don;t Waffle OR burble... I *DO* babble incessantly, though...;]

>>((Man, does that ever sound like a bad PR piece for Mike and FASA...:] ))
>>
>>Bull (Who's not getting paid for this stuff:))
>
>Really? Then why is it you "sound" like a Tairngire apologist.
<grin>
>
Egads! Is that what I sound like??

I don;t even LIKE elves!!!

<grin>

Bull-the-"I'm-Not-an-Elf"-Ork-Decker
--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka Chaos, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Cuddly Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
---- in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher
a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight effectively, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects."
-- Robert Heinlein, "The Notebooks of Lazurus Long"

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:18:36 +0100

Message no. 13 Brett Borger said on 16:07/20 Nov 97...

> 1) He doesn't play (not enough to matter anymore), thus weird things
> like many of his rulings

Definitely. It would probably be best for everyone if FASAMike weren't
approached for "official" answers to rules questions, IMHO... too many
times he's given rules that most of us immediately discarded as wrong when
asked for a clarification.

> 2) He has a good concept of the universe, and lets other people make
> the rules for him, and interferes only when they disturb the concept.
> This is a good trait in a line developer.

Not so sure about that one... Mike does seem to have an idea for where the
game universe is going, but I don't particularly care for the way he's
going about it. I guess my main gripe is with the theme years we've been
having -- I don't like a "Year of Crime," a "Year of the Corps," or
whatever, I'd like it to be a more "random" order: a corp book now, a
crime book in three months, a location sourcebook in five months, and so
on. Furthermore I don't think tying a bundle of short adventures to each
major sourcebook is such a good move, as I prefer longer adventures like
the ones that used to be published by FASA...

Hmm, this almost turned into a rant :)

> All in all, I'd say FASAMike is great as a line developer...but he
> should let others answer questions :)

Seconded :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The future. Available tomorrow.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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------

From:	Fredrik Lindblom <fredrik.lindblom@******.KALMAR.SE>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 14:12:42 +0100

Message no. 14 At 11:18 1997-11-21 +0100, you wrote:
> Furthermore I don't think tying a bundle of short adventures to each
>major sourcebook is such a good move, as I prefer longer adventures like
>the ones that used to be published by FASA...

Personally, I too miss the "real" adventure modules (i.e. Mercurial, Eye
Witness, etc). Background material is great for all who have time to sit
down and write their own campaign. Others (like me) still enjoy a good game
of SR, but prefer to spend their scarce spare time _playing_ rather than
preparing sessions. So why don't you guys at FASA give us busy (or lazy)
people a break, huh? :-)

/FL

From:	Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 09:50:03 +0000

Message no. 15 > Definitely. It would probably be best for everyone if FASAMike weren't
> approached for "official" answers to rules questions, IMHO... too many
> times he's given rules that most of us immediately discarded as wrong when
> asked for a clarification.

Agreed....except that we have nowhere else to go :( This leads to
another complaint of mine:
<rant on>
The Shadowrun Web page. They've started to utilize it a bit more,
but just do a quick comparison between it and the battletech web
page. BT has errata and FAQs. BT has universe details and even one
or two minor rules supplements. SR has....well, I like the
occasional story (Post Mortem), but....

No FAQs (other than for the card game)
_NO_Errata (but then FASA books don't need them...:)

Sigh.

<rant off>

> Not so sure about that one... Mike does seem to have an idea for where the
> game universe is going, but I don't particularly care for the way he's
> going about it. I guess my main gripe is with the theme years we've been

Well, yeah, I have a few complaints about that too, but that is a
value difference rather than he being a bad line developer. I guess
that'd be the distinction between a "bad" line developer and a
"wrong" line developer. [Trent was an evil king, not a bad king]

> having -- I don't like a "Year of Crime," a "Year of the Corps,"
or
> whatever, I'd like it to be a more "random" order: a corp book now, a
> crime book in three months, a location sourcebook in five months, and so
> on. Furthermore I don't think tying a bundle of short adventures to each
> major sourcebook is such a good move, as I prefer longer adventures like
> the ones that used to be published by FASA...

Agreed. What am I going to do with 6 themed adventures? My runners
WILL catch on. But then, I never tend to use modules, so that is
another thing I hate....having to by the adventures to keep up on
what universe changes are going on. I mean, I could handle
Harlequin, UB, and HB....but now I need to by all the Dragon
adventures to get the election happenings....all the Mob adventures
to get the underworld happenings...all the Missions to get the secret
of the pictures, etc.

> Hmm, this almost turned into a rant :)

I finished it for you :)

> > All in all, I'd say FASAMike is great as a line developer...but he
> > should let others answer questions :)
>
> Seconded :)

Heck, I like it so much, I'll third it myself!

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie

From:	John Wicker <saxon@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 12:15:23 -0600

Message no. 16 David Buehrer wrote:
>/ When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
>/ even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
>/ Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
>/ the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
>/ just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.
>
><thought>
>What you've just said, IMHO, is that Mike is doing a good job of
>putting out good products, but that he isn't so hot on the specifics
>of Shadowrun. So what? Maybe your expectations of his abilities to
>answer rules questions are to high. As experience has taught you
>Mike isn't the end all of rules debates. IMO you shouldn't ask him
>questions anymore and instead send them to the list where Steve,
>Gurth and others will probably do a much better job of helping you
>resolve problems.
></thought>

That's exactly what I'm saying-- Mike's job responsibilities only
marginally concern answering the day-to-day questions of the people who
play the game (at least, that's my perception of them). He's the one who
maintains the grand visioin, ties all the products together, and makes sure
the package is balanced and wrapped up nicely.

What I'd like to see is an official response to some of our questions from
someone a little more in touch with the street-level game. While some
responses would need to be run past Mike (the sub-adept issue), general
stuff could be answered efficiently and concisely by someone more suited to
the task. That would free his time up a little more, giving him more time
for the game as a whole, and the really important questions in specific.

Frank Pelletier wrote:
>Hint: No damn Horrors! Or power armor. Or spaceships. (Very, very IMHO)

Horrors? No! Power armor? Don't care either way. Space? Oh, well, hang on
there...

I like the idea of a continually expanding universe (and yes, I support the
big bang theory, but that's another thread). Despite the losses incurred by
the crash of '29, I think there would be a legitimate call, and even a
need, for expansion into space.

What this does to the core magic rules is another issue, but I think
there've been several plausible theories about how magic can work in space.

The space book is one that Tom Dowd was talking about way-back-when, and
I'm personally looking forward to it.

Brett Borger said:

>> >The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
>> >confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.
>
>Uh-oh, I've been implicated.

You've been useful to the list, but I wouldn't call that an implication of
anything but... usefullness. :-}#

[snipped my own comments]
>
>All in all, I'd say FASAMike is great as a line developer...but he
>should let others answer questions :)

I completely agree. I suppose we're asking for a great deal, given that
most companies wouldn't even bother to address the questions at all, but it
sure would be nice if someone like Stephen Kenson or Jak Koke were put in
place as the offical "answer guy".

>(I'm really hoping to sway him on the sub-adept issue, but I won't
>hold my breath)

I'm completely with you here, too. I think the sub-adept issue adds a great
deal to the color and variety of the game, without causing too many
problems. Any rule has the possibility of creating a muchkinous
interpretation (cybermancy's not a problem, but the occasional Fireball or
Hellblast spell is?), but all in all I think the concept of someone with a
small and limited natural ability is pretty cool. If that 1% of mages out
there only include a few that are fully capable, a greater range of power
and ability would seem to be more fully supported with the addition of
sub-adepts.

Thanks for all the comments!

John Wicker,
saxon@***.net
_

From:	David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:52:33 -0700

Message no. 17 John Wicker wrote:
/
/ What I'd like to see is an official response to some of our questions from
/ someone a little more in touch with the street-level game. While some
/ responses would need to be run past Mike (the sub-adept issue), general
/ stuff could be answered efficiently and concisely by someone more suited to
/ the task. That would free his time up a little more, giving him more time
/ for the game as a whole, and the really important questions in specific.

I don't think that it's "officially" going to happen. Mike is the
guy in charge but he's not a "rules lawyer". But I don't see him
handing out the responsibility of "Official Shadowrun Rules Lawyer"
to anyone any time soon (I get the feeling that Mike likes to keep a
tight grip on things, I could be wrong though :). Keep posting
questions to the list, read the responses, and then make an
"official" decision for your game :)

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm

From:	Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Sat, 22 Nov 1997 02:29:12 +0000

Message no. 18 In article <3.0.1.32.19971121121523.007af2b0@***.net>, John Wicker
<saxon@***.NET> waffled & burbled about FASAMike takes on the world

<biggus snippus>
>I'm completely with you here, too. I think the sub-adept issue adds a great
>deal to the color and variety of the game, without causing too many
>problems. Any rule has the possibility of creating a muchkinous
>interpretation (cybermancy's not a problem, but the occasional Fireball or
>Hellblast spell is?),

To answer this, not many players will hand their characters over as a
complete cyborg... It only takes a failed roll, and that character is
now an NPC - with a motherfraggin' headache, and a bad temper. But
nobody thinks twice about fireballs or stuff from mages. What player
minds rolling drain dice?

Anyway, that's not the point.

>but all in all I think the concept of someone with a
>small and limited natural ability is pretty cool. If that 1% of mages out
>there only include a few that are fully capable, a greater range of power
>and ability would seem to be more fully supported with the addition of
>sub-adepts.

Although I do have a problem with the attitude of "magic everywhere",
this suggestions regarding sub-adepts seems a reasonable one.

It does state that magic is extremely versatile, and manifests itself in
many different ways in different people.

A fireball spell cast by one magician, is different (although still
fireball) when cast by a different mage. Each magicians interpretation
of how magic works and is manipulated is different. Now, if that's the
case, then it is a logical assumption that there will be different ways
of interpreting how you "manage" that power. So, sub-adepts aren't
really so unbelievable. They're simply a way that a person has
interpreted their "power" (for want of a better word)

Of course the concept is open to abuse. But name one part of Shadowrun
that isn't?

In all honesty, disregarding my low power campaing concepts, I would not
have a problem with allowing sub-adepts. As you say it allows a greater
range of power and ability. This is true of all walks of life in RL,
soooo - why not SR?

<Provided they all register and give DNA - grin>

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims - Alternative UK Sourcebook (U/C)

From:	Tobias Berghoff <Zixx@*****.TEUTO.DE>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Sun, 23 Nov 1997 15:26:00 GMT

Message no. 19 on 20.11.97 saxon@***.NET wrote:
s> In all my dealings with FASAMike, his answers have seemed to be
s> shot-from-the-hip, overly emotional in basis, or just plain...
s> ill-disciplined.
s>
s> The recent series of forwards sent by Brett Borger seem to completely
s> confirm the spirit and tone of my one-on-one dealings with him.
s>
s> When I compare FASAMike's stuff with that of Stephen Kenson, Jak Koke, or
s> even Gurth, I wonder if we couldn't have a better direct representative or
s> Line Developer in place. And yet, the quality of the materials publshed in
s> the Shadowrun universe hasn't gone done (IMNSHO), so I wonder if Mike's
s> just got a way about him that seems terse, or whatever.

Well, I always viewed the LD as the person, who says what happens in the
gameworld and who tells the authors what books to write and how to write
them. He's *not* the Ocracle Of Delphi for rules-questions or something
like that. If I had a question about magic, I'd ask Steve K., about
rigging it would be Jon Szeto and so on. Mike's not the ultimate number-
crunsher and most of his ruleings seem to be designed for the perfect
group (i.e. completely munchkin-free). He's no god and if he makes
mistakes while trying to help, that's O.K. with me. If've seen to many
people never answering when customers asked something.

Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx a.k.a. Charon, your friendly werepanther physad.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+(+++) o? K?(-)
w---() O- M-- V- PS+ PE- Y+>++ PGP-
t+(++) 5+ X++ R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++
e>+++++(*) h! r-- z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 1997 12:08:20 +0100

Message no. 20 Tobias Berghoff said on 15:26/23 Nov 97...

> Well, I always viewed the LD as the person, who says what happens in the
> gameworld and who tells the authors what books to write and how to write
> them. He's *not* the Ocracle Of Delphi for rules-questions or something
> like that. If I had a question about magic, I'd ask Steve K., about
> rigging it would be Jon Szeto and so on.

Unfortunately, you need to either run into them regularly IRL or know
their email addresses in order to do that. _We_'ve got "access" to Steve
Kenson and Jon Szeto as well as to Mike Mulvihill, but someone who isn't
aware of the list but does have internet access will only find Mike's
address in some of the older books, and use that to ask questions.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The future. Available tomorrow.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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------

From:	Fredrik Lindblom <fredrik.lindblom@******.KALMAR.SE>
Subject:	Re: FASAMike takes on the world
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:14:06 +0100

Message no. 21 >From: rabiola@**.netcom.com
>Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 09:07:47 -0600 (CST)
>To: fredrik.lindblom@******.KALMAR.SE
>Subject: Re: FASAMike takes on the world
>X-Mailer: NETCOMplete v3.27, from NETCOM On-Line Communications, Inc.

This ended up in my private mail.
Dunno if it was intended for the list or not.
/F

On 11/21/97 14:12:42 you wrote:
>
>At 11:18 1997-11-21 +0100, you wrote:
>> Furthermore I don't think tying a bundle of short adventures to each
>>major sourcebook is such a good move, as I prefer longer adventures like
>>the ones that used to be published by FASA...
>
>Personally, I too miss the "real" adventure modules (i.e. Mercurial, Eye
>Witness, etc). Background material is great for all who have time to sit
>down and write their own campaign. Others (like me) still enjoy a good game
>of SR, but prefer to spend their scarce spare time _playing_ rather than
>preparing sessions. So why don't you guys at FASA give us busy (or lazy)
>people a break, huh? :-)
>

I have made use of them all, adventure modules, the Harlequin campaigns,
and developed ideas from
seeds in Sprawl Sites. They all work to some degree or another, depending
on quality of adventure
and my groups mood, but we REALLY had a blast when I taunted them with
Laughing Man.

Argent

Rabiola@**.netcom.com
Argent - Elven Fixer Extrodinaire
It was hot, the night we burned Chrome...

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer