Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 22:01:22 +0100
Here's the forwarded version of the Manifesto:

-------- Originele bericht --------
Onderwerp: Topcat's Manifesto
Datum: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:02:18 -0400
Van: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Antwoord-naar: Shadowrun Discussion <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Aan: Shadowrun Discussion <shadowrn@*****.dumpshock.com>
Referenties: <1fb4df0509150723685eb66@****.gmail.com>
<f525734005082513581f06dbd1@****.gmail.com>
<20050825212609.19325.qmail@********.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
<f5257340050825143313c5c83b@****.gmail.com>
<3.0.3.32.20050914205155.01704294@****.polaris.net>
<4329384B.5060509@******.nl> <1fb4df0509150723685eb66@****.gmail.com>

The TopCat Manifesto
or "What I like to rant about and why"

Hi there. You may've seen me yelling and screaming on the ShadowRN mailing
list about various subjects. My name is Bob Ooton and my email name is
TopCat. TopCat was my first ever Shadowrun character and my favorite, but
that isn't what this is about. I am writing this so that everyone who seeks
my opinion on a subject can get it easily. So...on with the ranting.

Credentials: In case you were wondering "Who the hell is this guy and why
should I care about what he says?" I feel I should at least tell a bit about
myself. I'm 23 years old, live in Springfield, IL (US, of course), and am a
writer-wannabe. I have spent the greater part of my life playing various
roleplaying games, but have only been playing SR seriously for a little over
a year now. Why should my opinion on SR matter if I'm such a newbie to the
game? Because I am a number-cruncher/rules-lawyer of sickening proportions.
I master games within a month, often less, then learn to tone down from
there, eventually creating balance and happiness all around. I have also
done a bit of acting and have been a serious roleplayer for years. I've
crunched SR down to it's most basic level and found it wanting in some
areas. It is these areas that I often rant about and shall describe in this
posting.

1. Magic vs. Cyberware: Which is "better"?
Well, for overall effectiveness magic whales all over tech. Even
Cybertechnology or shadowtech level tech. For the average combat scene,
magic and tech are about equal, with tech having a slight edge due to better
average speed. If you crunch the numbers you'll find certain things to be
true and they will confirm that magic is indeed more effective than
cyberware.

The first of these is essence. Cyberware costs essence which can _never_ be
regained, spells cost no essence. The next is karma, which spells cost and
cyberware doesn't, but the cost is so small as to hardly be worth
mentioning. The next is nuyen. Cyberware eats nuyen like trolls eat
twinkies. Spells are VERY cheap comparatively. Next, the time it takes to
learn a spell is nowhere near as long as it takes to heal from surgery for
new cyberware. Next, spells aren't illegal or detectable (unless in use and
they can still be masked). Much cyberware is illegal and is always
detectable. Cyberware can break. Spells can't. You will die if you get
too much cyberware. Too many spells never killed a magician. With magic
you can always achieve an equal, better, and/or safer effect than you can
with cyberware.

Now, where I REALLY get ranting on this subject is when someone dares to say
that magic is better because it can be roleplayed. I'll get into this
later, but I'll end this with saying that neither is better when it comes to
roleplaying and many people are confused as to what roleplaying actually is.

2. Roleplaying
Ok, I couldn't wait to rant about it, so here goes. Roleplaying is some
things and isn't some things, I'll babble for a while on the subject and
it'll be up to you to figure out what I mean.

Roleplaying is the responsibility of the player. If the player doesn't
actually play a role, then he's just rolling dice. Roleplaying is not
automatic for certain types of characters. Just because a character is a
magician, he isn't necessarily roleplayed. Just because he's got a cool
background doesn't mean he's roleplayed. Just because a character is a mage
doesn't mean he's being roleplayed. Magic is not roleplaying. Cyberware is
not roleplaying. Guns are not roleplaying. Combat is not, in itself,
roleplaying, but it can contain elements thereof. Die rolls are not, in
themselves, roleplaying, but can help it along. Roleplaying's most deadly
enemy is the stereotype, which many players are willing to paste all over
another while blatantly adhering to one themselves (I'll hit on this subject
next).

So what the hell is roleplaying if it isn't all that stuff? It is playing a
role, go figure. Roleplaying is acting, though not necessarily on the same
scale. Roleplaying is actually making a person out of the sheet of numbers
in front of you. Whether that sheet holds the numbers of a street samurai,
mercenary, decker, mage, shaman, physad, or whatever doesn't matter IN THE
SLIGHTEST BIT to the actual roleplaying of that character. Good numbers
does not a character make. It makes for a high power level and lots of dice
rolling instead of actual thought (I'll get into this sometime after the
stereotype rant). Bad numbers don't make a character either. They just
make for lower power and less dice when called for. If the character only
represents numbers to the player, then he isn't roleplayed. If the
character represents something just that side of real, with emotions and
opinions and talents and personality and those are all used in some way
throughout the course of a game, then that player is ROLEPLAYING! (waits
for the "Amens" from the crowd, before resuming rant)

Hopefully that got a point across.

3. Stereotypes
I HATE 'EM! If I ever hear anything like "All samurai are bloodthirsty
mountains of machinery with bad attitudes" again, I'll scream again. And I
know I'll hear it again because a shitload of people still haven't figured
it out yet, so I know I'll scream again. Anyways, the stereotyping of
characters is what leads to mediocre roleplaying. Some players force
stereotypes on themselves. The "I shall not kill" players are just as
guilty of settling into a stereotype as the "kill everything" players are.
Is either a better roleplayer for it? Nope. They just grabbed a tired old
convention of the genre and decided to beat the dead horse again in the name
of roleplaying.

Now, in all fairness, almost all roles have been done in one way or another
so it isn't all that easy to actually come up with something fresh and new
without seeming insane, which has been done as well. But all that's really
being touched upon here is a small part of the role. If the only character
concept is "I don't like to kill" or "I like to kill very much" then
you've
got a one-dimensional character, which isn't enough for roleplaying. It
makes it for die rolling, but like I said I'll get to that later. It takes
dozens of dimensions to flesh out a character to the point where he is
actually fully roleplayed. This shouldn't be expected of anyone, but any
effort in this direction is better than no effort at all. Should a player
actually roleplay himself to the fullest, then sit back and enjoy watching
him, maybe even ask what he's doing and try it yourself.

So I guess what I was saying there is there are hundreds of questions you
can ask yourself about situations pertaining to your character, he may
answer some one way and others another. Find the answers to questions from
the character's point of view and just keep asking more. Sooner or later
you'll find a roleplayable character in there with a complete personality.
Often the character will end up a shade off of your own personality which is
fine, because it is easiest to play something you're familiar with and you
know you'll get it right more often than not.

4. DICE
I hate them too. Now, they do have their place (character has a
cybertechnology skill of 8, but player wouldn't know shit about it) and can
speed up a lot of nasty situations, but if at all possible try not to use
them and play things out. You'll get more interested in the game because
your mind will actually be working instead of your hand just grabbing and
rolling more dice at every situation. If the character needs is in a social
situation and has an etiquette skill of 4, don't make him roll every time he
reaches for a fork at dinner or meets an executive in the corp, just let him
coast through those rolls. Talk to him about it, play out the situation,
but don't roll dice unless absolutely necessary. Likewise if the player
lacks the appropriate etiquette skill, then mention to him that he feels
awkward and others are noticing. If the player has a firearms BR of 4, I
think he'd know how to clean a pistol, don't make him roll, it's a waste of
time. If a character has a skill at around 10 but the player knows nothing
about it, you may want to get them a book of some sort so they can at least
know the basics, it's worth the effort all around.

Minimizing die rolls and maximizing actual interaction will aid roleplay and
be more fun to all involved. Only use them when needed.

Well, this is the current status of the TopCat Manifesto. I'll be adding to
it regularly as I remember some of my favorite topics in greater detail. In
case you were wondering how you'd know if the TCM was updated or not, don't
worry, I plan on posting it every couple months for everyone's viewing
pleasure. If viewing it doesn't please you, then set up a kill-file or just
remember to delete any whopping huge post with the subject of "TopCat's
Manifesto". We'll all be happier.

This isn't a post made to be debated, this is my view on things. Whether
you think I'm wrong or not is your concern, not mine, and I encourage you to
write your own to express your views on these and similar subjects. In
doing so I think we can lessen the amount of repeat mail on the list and
increase our understanding of how others play Shadowrun. I hope to add a
section on realistic gaming versus unrealistic gaming (and the
benefits/detriments of each) in the near future.

Thanks for reading. See ya on the list.

-------------------------------------
"I was thinking of the immortal words
of Socrates, who said: I drank what?"
-- Real Genius
-------------------------------------

--
"Ted, sweetheart...somebody's left a wicker basket with a little baby in it
on our front doorstep."
"Just leave it out there on the stoop, honey. The cats'll get it."
- Red Meat http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/



--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Van e-mail bakt men cyberbrood.
-> Former NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 2
From: anders@**********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:07:50 -0800
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 22:01:22 +0100
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
[snip]

There, I saved it to my personal data crystal, so I can come up with it, too.
--Anders
Message no. 3
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:08:12 -0800
Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's nothing wrong
or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto there. Just not exactly
what I expected.

TopCat was an over-the-top character, larger than life. Hang something on
his name and I expect it to blow up like the character did. But I guess I
never really followed his posts to shadowrn, maybe he's got a totally
different persona on the list.
Message no. 4
From: asher.nonymous@*****.com (Asher)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 21:22:10 -0700
On 12/6/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
> Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's nothing wrong
> or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto there. Just not exactly
> what I expected.

The manifesto isn't (in)famous for the contents of the post, it is
what happened afterwards when people started discussing some of his
points that we all remember.

See the line that says "This isn't a post made to be debated, this is
my view on things."? Topcat really meant it when he said it, and when
people commented, he really seemed to get defensive. Then, others who
either agreed or disagreed started getting worked up about things too.

I seem to remember about 300 posts within a week, some of which were
nothing more than name calling.

-Asher
Just don't ask about Woodchucks
Message no. 5
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 20:49:14 -0800
On 12/6/06, Asher <asher.nonymous@*****.com> wrote:
>
>
> I seem to remember about 300 posts within a week, some of which were
> nothing more than name calling.



Hahaha ok well now that seems more like Bob. I might even remember him
complaining about that, now that I think about it. I remember him
complaining about the list for some reason, people arguing with him or
something. I didn't link the two though.

It's funny when you consider how over the top the game we were playing in
was. It was seriously comic-book cartoony over-the-top munchkin fare. TopCat
hired a bunch of deckers and set them to work forging IDs. The team stole a
Banshee and started up a smuggling business, running CalHots from SF to
Seattle. Too much money, too much karma, not enough thinking through the
details. Five years later I was running pithy vignettes that I would be
proud to recount, playing characters with deep, involved stories of personal
tragedy and loss. But in those games, I was living the munchkin dream,
miniguns and manaballs.

It was fun, don't get me wrong. We had a lot of good times, funny jokes --
TopCat became TopDog when he got caught sneaking into the Tir, and the
Banshee was the Family Truckster -- but I would have a hard time calling
what we did roleplaying, exactly.
Message no. 6
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 11:11:44 +0100
According to Geoff Gerrietts, on 7-12-06 05:08 the word on the street was...

> Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's nothing
> wrong or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto there. Just
> not exactly what I expected.

It caused quite a stir on the list at the time, though. Maybe ten years
on, we see things in a somewhat different light?

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Van e-mail bakt men cyberbrood.
-> Former NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 7
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 07:22:41 -0800 (PST)
> > Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's
> > nothing wrong or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto
> > there. Just not exactly what I expected.

> It caused quite a stir on the list at the time, though. Maybe ten
> years on, we see things in a somewhat different light?

Well, after the venom-slinging that surrounded the debates regarding
SR4, TopCat's Manifesto seems rather mild. Honestly, if he hadn't
closed with (and meant) "this is not intended for debate", I doubt
there would have been much of an issue. I have posted far more
pedantic and vociferous diatribes on this list, covering many of the
same topics.

Maybe if I changed my sig line to "this is not open for debate"...

*wicked grin*

======Korishinzo
--"Everything is open for debate." <- I am not /even/ going to argue
about this! ;)



____________________________________________________________________________________
Have a burning question?
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
Message no. 8
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 09:51:22 -0800
On 12/7/06, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>
> It caused quite a stir on the list at the time, though. Maybe ten years
> on, we see things in a somewhat different light?


I can't say for sure. At the time, I remember it was a huge advantage to
have an AOL account because ... Mike Mulvihill, was it? ... was answering
rules questions posed in the FASA forums there, and I remember my impression
of this list being "the place you go to start a flame war about whether
magic or cyber is better" and I remember countless threads of the
approximate form "cyber is better because if you take a sammy with X, Y, Z
and stack him up against a mage with L, M, N, the sammy will win almost
every time"

I think the only thing I remember from that era, that has still stuck with
me, is Gurth's plastic warriors. I was very impressed by the idea of using
Legos to model combat, and I'll use little Lego dudes with a battlemat for
Shadowrun now (but I use the D&D miniatures on the battlemat when I play
D&D.) It's not quite as entertaining as the full-scale Lego models, but it's
also not as time consuming. :)
Message no. 9
From: swiftone@********.org (Brett Ritter)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 13:10:39 -0500
On 12/7/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
> have an AOL account because ... Mike Mulvihill, was it? ... was answering
> rules questions posed in the FASA forums there, and I remember my impression

Wow, Mike answer rules questions...that sounds like a disaster in the making.

Mr. Mulvihill was many things, but well-versed in the rules, or
particularly good at thinking out rules-call implications were not
among them.
--
Brett Ritter / SwiftOne
swiftone@********.org
Message no. 10
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 10:19:53 -0800
On 12/7/06, Brett Ritter <swiftone@********.org> wrote:
>
> On 12/7/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
> > have an AOL account because ... Mike Mulvihill, was it? ... was
> answering
> > rules questions posed in the FASA forums there, and I remember my
> impression
>
> Wow, Mike answer rules questions...that sounds like a disaster in the
> making.
>
> Mr. Mulvihill was many things, but well-versed in the rules, or
> particularly good at thinking out rules-call implications were not
> among them.


I sometimes found that to be true myself. At the time, Tom Dowd was the SR
line developer, and Mike would routinely carry the more challenging
questions to Tom (and possibly others in the same camp) and then come back
the next day to give us answers.

Honestly, I'm not sure how much the answers mattered anyway. Pick a
solution, as long as everyone agrees. :)
Message no. 11
From: weberm@*******.net (Michael Weber)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 13:42:07 -0500
Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> wrote:

>Well, after the venom-slinging that surrounded the debates regarding
>SR4, TopCat's Manifesto seems rather mild. Honestly, if he hadn't
>closed with (and meant) "this is not intended for debate", I doubt
>there would have been much of an issue.

That certainly was part of it, but the guy was an asshole was a bigger part of it.
Message no. 12
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 13:13:33 -0700
On 12/6/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
> Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's nothing wrong
> or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto there. Just not exactly
> what I expected.

You mean other than the fact that cyber is better than magic?

;)

--
-Graht
Message no. 13
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 12:24:05 -0800
On 12/7/06, Michael Weber <weberm@*******.net> wrote:
>
> Ice Heart <korishinzo@*****.com> wrote:
>
> >Well, after the venom-slinging that surrounded the debates regarding
> >SR4, TopCat's Manifesto seems rather mild. Honestly, if he hadn't
> >closed with (and meant) "this is not intended for debate", I doubt
> >there would have been much of an issue.
>
> That certainly was part of it, but the guy was an asshole was a bigger
> part of it.
>


I keep almost responding, then not. We're here in this public forum, where
my words may or may not come back to haunt me. Bob was a decent guy. He and
I spent a lot of time together, but when I went away to grad school in Aug
2006, we largely stopped talking. It wasn't that we had a falling out, per
se, but neither of us kept up -- we had as many significant disagreements as
we did common grounds. I went on to get very involved in Shadowrun on first
the Seattle MUSH, then in founding the Detroit MUX. He went on to join the
White Wolf demo team. We had a lot of fun together, and I think he's a
pretty likable guy.

On the other hand, I can believe perfectly that what you say is true. He had
an absolute certainty that he was right, even when he was wrong. He had a
high opinion of his number-crunching abilities. He was turning a corner in
his experience with games where he was starting to realize a few of the
fundamental truths -- that an involving story matters more than a
perfectly-constructed character sheet; that the most exhilirating moments
are not when you deploy overwhelming force to conquer a threat, but when
your weaknesses are exploited and you still manage to find strength to
triumph. I think that at this point on the list, these are truths that most
of us have encountered, or we wouldn't still be playing Shadowrun. I mean
let's face it, Shadowrun isn't as trendy now as it was in the early and
middle 90's.

Anyway, combine an almost bullish arrogance with the dawning revelation that
story matters more than numbers and you get something like the TopCat
Manifesto. And, in some ways, the enduring legacy of the flame-fest that
followed stands as a profound testament to the force of his will, if nothing
else. A pig-headed, stubborn will that could not see how absurd it was to
post an opinion to a discussion group and insist that it was not valid to
discuss it, that's true. But a pig-headed, stubborn will that people still
talk about. Is it any surprise he went to law school? Hahaha!
Message no. 14
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 12:34:53 -0800
On 12/7/06, Graht <graht1@*****.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/6/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
> > Hm. I was expecting something more outrageous. I mean, there's nothing
> wrong
> > or even anything to disagree with in the manifesto there. Just not
> exactly
> > what I expected.
>
> You mean other than the fact that cyber is better than magic?
>
> ;)



That would have been apropos to the list at the time, but it's not really
what I was imagining. I think in my mind, the TopCat Manifesto was a grander
piece of work, at once more amusing, more insightful, and more
tongue-in-cheek than the actuality. The actual document is just a refraction
of a rant I've seen dozens of times in dozens of forums, usually from a guy
or gal who's just turning the corner from the numbers game to a real
roleplaying focus.

I'm going to spend some time thinking about the TopCat Manifesto I would
have written. I'm not sure what to call it though.

As to the argument of ages, I can argue either side reasonably well but in
the end I think it comes down to two questions: how long will your campaign
run, and what's the ratio of cash to karma awarded? Short campaigns favor
cyberware, because of the high priority cost of magic. Obviously, lots of
cash favors a samurai over a magician.
Message no. 15
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 13:23:54 -0800
On 12/7/06, Geoff Gerrietts <ggerrietts@*****.com> wrote:
>
> I'm going to spend some time thinking about the TopCat Manifesto I would
> have written. I'm not sure what to call it though.
>


Okay, so this is what I came with. Keep in mind that this is along the
lines of what I had imagined, and I was hoping that reality exceeded
rather than fell short of my imagination. Also keep in mind, it's been
a while since I was playing SR regularly, and even longer since some
of this stuff happened. I'm sure there are errors now that were not
present then (and equally sure there were errors then, that remain
today.)

TopCat's Manifesto
(as opposed to The TopCat Manifesto)
(though perhaps a relationship might be inferred)

My name is TopCat Chan, and I am 20 years old. I live in a cage along
the northern border of Tir Taingire. Literally, in a cage. The wires
that run through my muscles and my mind have been turned against me,
bent around to encase my will rather than serve it. I am a slave now,
a slavering guard dog for the elvish high court. You may wonder how it
is that at the tender age of 20 I feel emboldened to make these
pronouncements about running the shadows, but this cage is why.

I am arranging to have this chip smuggled out and uploaded to
Shadowland. I implore you to study its contents. This isn't a post to
be debated, it is simply offered for the insights it contains.

1. DECKERS. And the Matrix in general. It's useful, because a team of
good deckers can do almost anything. Almost any shadowrunner knows
this, and has a decker buddy or two to call on when he needs some
information, or some reservations forged, or some security
bypassed. You might think that getting a team of good deckers
together and having them forge credsticks would be a great way to
make some money. You would be right, but be sure you pay your
deckers very, very well. Do not give them reason to turn you in,
or to figure they don't need you.

2. RIGGERS. Getting from place to place can be a real challenge.
Riggers know how to meet that challenge, usually with considerable
flair. But beware of the "bigger is better" rigger mentality.
There are very few ways in which a GMC Banshee can be employed in
a subtle fashion. Having it painted up like a "family truckster"
is not one of those ways, regardless of the rigger's "good feeling
about this." In fact, consider asking riggers before hiring them
whether they have a strong preference for vectored thrust
vehicles. Consider not hiring them if they do.

3. SMUGGLING. Smuggling is a subtle activity. See above point for
caveats surrounding this. Further notes: (a) vectored thrust
vehicles are not street legal; (b) vectored thrust vehicles
employed on the street have strongly detrimental effect on other
vehicles using said street; (c) vectored thrust vehicles should
never be employed in the vicinity of pedestrians, particularly not
pedestrians in a funeral procession, and most particularly not
pedestrians in a Yakuza boss's funeral procession. All of the
above will bring undesirable attention to your smuggling
operation.

4. ELF PRINCES. If you had the fortune to be born an elf it may occur
to you that your services could be of use to your racial liege
lord. I strongly advise against this opinion. If the opinion
should take root, I strongly advise against breaking into his home
as a means of presenting your qualifications. If you should be so
inclined despite my warnings, I strongly recommend against
slotting the skillsoft they offer you. Should all these warnings
fail, don't eat the orange kibble, it will give you the runs.
Message no. 16
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:54:11 +0100
According to Geoff Gerrietts, on 7-12-06 18:51 the word on the street was...

> my impression
> of this list being "the place you go to start a flame war about whether
> magic or cyber is better"

So _that's_ why there was this rule in the FAQ about not starting
threads about that ... ;)

> I think the only thing I remember from that era, that has still stuck with
> me, is Gurth's plastic warriors.

Great, I've made an impression ;)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Van e-mail bakt men cyberbrood.
-> Former NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:54:54 +0100
According to Brett Ritter, on 7-12-06 19:10 the word on the street was...

> Mr. Mulvihill was many things, but well-versed in the rules, or
> particularly good at thinking out rules-call implications were not
> among them.

As evidenced by the time when he was asked about FAB ...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Van e-mail bakt men cyberbrood.
-> Former NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 18
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 09:24:45 -0800
On 12/8/06, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>
> According to Brett Ritter, on 7-12-06 19:10 the word on the street was...
>
> > Mr. Mulvihill was many things, but well-versed in the rules, or
> > particularly good at thinking out rules-call implications were not
> > among them.
>
> As evidenced by the time when he was asked about FAB ...


Oh now you can't leave it like that, what did he say?
Message no. 19
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 19:09:05 +0100
According to Geoff Gerrietts, on 8-12-06 18:24 the word on the street was...

>> As evidenced by the time when he was asked about FAB ...
>
> Oh now you can't leave it like that, what did he say?

I don't remember exactly, but IIRC he was asked what would happen if you
made a net filled with FAB and threw it over the astral form of a
magician who is standing on the earth. The dilemma here is that astral
forms could not pass through living things (the FAB and the earth),
instead being simply pushed aside by them, but there is nowhere to go
because the magician is surrounded by living things. (Remember that this
was in the SRII era, so before the rules for FAB and astral projection
were both revised for SR3.)

Any way, he ruled one way (either that the net would go "through" the
magician, or that it would be supported by the astral form, I don't
remember which) and got lots of protests from listmembers who had
thought the problem through more clearly, after which he basically
turned his ruling a hundred and eighty degrees around in light of the
better rules interpretations than his own :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Van e-mail bakt men cyberbrood.
-> Former NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UB+ P(+) L++ E W++(--) N o? K w-- O
M+ 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. 20
From: weberm@*******.net (Michael Weber)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:47:08 -0500
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

>I don't remember exactly, but IIRC he was asked what would happen if you
>made a net filled with FAB and threw it over the astral form of a
>magician who is standing on the earth. The dilemma here is that astral
>forms could not pass through living things (the FAB and the earth),
>instead being simply pushed aside by them, but there is nowhere to go
>because the magician is surrounded by living things. (Remember that this
>was in the SRII era, so before the rules for FAB and astral projection
>were both revised for SR3.)

How did they solve that, anyway?
Message no. 21
From: ggerrietts@*****.com (Geoff Gerrietts)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 12:12:58 -0800
On 12/8/06, Michael Weber <weberm@*******.net> wrote:
>
> Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>
> >I don't remember exactly, but IIRC he was asked what would happen if you
> >made a net filled with FAB and threw it over the astral form of a
> >magician who is standing on the earth. The dilemma here is that astral
> >forms could not pass through living things (the FAB and the earth),
> >instead being simply pushed aside by them, but there is nowhere to go
> >because the magician is surrounded by living things. (Remember that this
> >was in the SRII era, so before the rules for FAB and astral projection
> >were both revised for SR3.)
>
> How did they solve that, anyway?
>


FAB was (no pun intended) pretty cheesy anyway. "There's this bacteria
they're breeding that has ASTRAL PRESENCE." "Um, but doesn't everything
that's alive have astral presence?" "But this stuff is MORE ALIVE. Because
it's an ASTRAL SECURITY MEASURE. Therefore it COSTS A METRIC TON OF NUYEN!
Oh and it's hard to get." Yet another case where the magic rules were
incoherent.
Message no. 22
From: marc.renouf@******.com (Renouf, Marc A.)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:03:39 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 12:25 PM
>
> On 12/8/06, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> >
> > As evidenced by the time when he was asked about FAB ...
>
> Oh now you can't leave it like that, what did he say?

Dear gods, NO! I don't want a rehash of the infamous
"FAB-funnel" debate!

Marc
Message no. 23
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto]
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:20:09 -0700
On 12/11/06, Renouf, Marc A. <marc.renouf@******.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: shadowrn-bounces@*****.dumpshock.com
> > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 12:25 PM
> >
> > On 12/8/06, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > As evidenced by the time when he was asked about FAB ...
> >
> > Oh now you can't leave it like that, what did he say?
>
> Dear gods, NO! I don't want a rehash of the infamous
> "FAB-funnel" debate!

How about FAB funnel cake? ;)

--
-Graht

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [Fwd: Topcat's Manifesto], 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.