Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 16:31:00 -0400 (EDT)
I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's
unfortunate you are so limiting. I usually run high powered thinking games.
If the runner's are smart then they can get throught it without any combat.
If not then their problably gonna be pretty hurt afterwards. As a result the
characters are, inder some standards, munchkinous. They need to be able to
survive, so they need high everything as soon as possible, and it doesn't
always mean no fun either. Corps can have PACs and LMGs too. And they can
carry them all over their land. I had a PC try that once. Star got him,
convicted him and jailed him. He lost his PAC and the rest of his gear,
evidence don't ya know, had most of his cyber disabled and a tracking
implant placed by Star. He got lucky that the cyber-doc caught the tracer
and was able to disable it, but he still lost a lot of time and money. Why,
cause he thought he could walk through seattle with a PAC over his shoulder.
Translation: He was stupid. Some of you seem to have very black and white
ideas about what is good and bad, or munchie or not, or thinking vs high
powered. Nothing personal, but open your minds and stop being so judgemental.

Sasquatch

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 2
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 18:59:22 -0500
>Translation: He was stupid. Some of you seem to have very black and white
>ideas about what is good and bad, or munchie or not, or thinking vs high
>powered. Nothing personal, but open your minds and stop being so judgemental.

If you ever assumed me to be in this crowd, I have simply to say that you
are wrong. I also don't see how anyone on the list (even those who have
argued against me) has produced any statement that would be regarded like
this. I think you've missed a great deal of what is going on here.

-------------------------------------
"I was thinking of the immortal words
of Socrates, who said: I drank what?"
-- Real Genius
-------------------------------------
TopCat at the bottom...
Message no. 3
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 20:23:43 -0400 (EDT)
At 18:59 5/13/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>Translation: He was stupid. Some of you seem to have very black and white
>>ideas about what is good and bad, or munchie or not, or thinking vs high
>>powered. Nothing personal, but open your minds and stop being so judgemental.
>
>If you ever assumed me to be in this crowd, I have simply to say that you
>are wrong. I also don't see how anyone on the list (even those who have
>argued against me) has produced any statement that would be regarded like
>this. I think you've missed a great deal of what is going on here.
>
>

1. Did I name you or anyone else? No.

2. Reread the posts. I see a lot of I'm right because... you're wrong
because.... All I'm saying is everyone's game is going to be different
because everyone is different. Some will like mages some will like sammies.
If we could remeber that everyone has a slightly different view on the game
and how it is to be run then maybe these silly threads will not be continued
for days on end with no resolution. Everyone has a right to their opinion,
and has a right to state it. Do so. Don't restate it to people who don't get
it or don't want to get it and this shit won't happen anymore. As you've
been saying: some people won't get it. Accept that, and if you don't get it
and don't want to we need to accept that too. I'm just sick of this running
in circle arguments.

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 4
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 20:40:40 -0500
>I'm just sick of this running
>in circle arguments.
>
>Sasquatch

Two words: Kill File

-------------------------------------
"I was thinking of the immortal words
of Socrates, who said: I drank what?"
-- Real Genius
-------------------------------------
TopCat at the bottom...
Message no. 5
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 22:13:40 -0400 (EDT)
At 20:40 5/13/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>I'm just sick of this running
>>in circle arguments.
>>
>>Sasquatch
>
>Two words: Kill File

Which does?

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 6
From: Ken <kwhorner@*******.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 20:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
On Mon, 13 May 1996, Hairy Smurf wrote:

> I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
> thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
> are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's

The problem is the people stuck on high-power. I came up to school and
found a campaign. Low and behold they were stacking magic and cyber
reaction dice. Yeow! We had a PC who was a dragon, on was some sort of
vampire that could run around in the sun and hordes of demons were
chasing us around. Got really stupid after a while, because you had to
be a supermunchin to survive. My character was supposed to be a
'sniper', so the GM gave him a -8 modifier with rifles or something. I
was firing blind and hiting these 'demons' right between the eyes(the
only way to kill them of course). As you can guess, that campaign didn't
last very long.

Nutcracker
Message no. 7
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 23:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
> > I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
> > thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
> > are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker.

((Not necessarily. Lately, my favorite 'runs (with my more powerful
char) have been the ones where I don't even fire my fraggin' gun... I'm
as much of a thinker as anyone else, and my chars don't start out
powerful... when they get powerful, their player is still thinking things
through, and not just throwing power at the problem...))

---Tom---


>
> The problem is the people stuck on high-power. I came up to school and
> found a campaign. Low and behold they were stacking magic and cyber
> reaction dice. Yeow! We had a PC who was a dragon, on was some sort of
> vampire that could run around in the sun and hordes of demons were
> chasing us around. Got really stupid after a while, because you had to
> be a supermunchin to survive. My character was supposed to be a
> 'sniper', so the GM gave him a -8 modifier with rifles or something. I
> was firing blind and hiting these 'demons' right between the eyes(the
> only way to kill them of course). As you can guess, that campaign didn't
> last very long.
>
> Nutcracker
>
Message no. 8
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 96 17:46:53 +1030
>I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
>thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
>are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's
>unfortunate you are so limiting. I usually run high powered thinking games.

No, no, no... High powered games encourage combat, not thinking, 'because
the players ARE high powered. Go for the easiest solution, and all that.
And, IMHO, if you stack the opposition high to counter that, you're going
unrealistic, and you might as well have played the low-power game,
anyway. :)

It's all relative. If you play a game with no cyber, for example, you
have hard fights with gangers and low level guards. If you play a game
with some cyber, you have hard fights with corps. If you play a game with
10th level initiates and MBW4, then you need to take on hordes of cyber
zombies & dragons to make it challenging... why not just go for the low
level stuff?

The only true advantage high-level stuff has over low-level stuff is that
you can turn thousands of corp & gang types into pulp whenever you
want... and THAT is just shoot-em-ups.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 9
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 11:09:15 +0100
Hairy Smurf said on 22:13/13 May 96...

> >>I'm just sick of this running
> >>in circle arguments.
> >>
> >>Sasquatch
> >
> >Two words: Kill File
>
> Which does?

My guess is that you can use it to remove all messages with a certain
subject line or something, on TopCat's mailer anyway. In mine it could be
done by opening the Filters window, and adding a new rule to Delete
certain messages...

Not that it'd be helpful if anyone starts changing the subject, though...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Just kidding. Maybe...
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.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. 10
From: mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 07:57:04 -0500
>>I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
>>thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
>>are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's
>>unfortunate you are so limiting. I usually run high powered thinking games.
>
[snipped "high powered gamers aren't role players"]
>
>
>--
> Robert Watkins

You are a limited player Robert. If you think that the only way to play a
high powered character is to kill everyone, then you need to work at it.
There is more to playing SR than kill or be killed scenarios. High powered
games are the ones where, admitately, you can have movie like combat with
high ROF and magic from hell. They are also the ones where the players can
play things to control the fate of the world. Initiate grade 10 and MBW4
aren't jack if you try to go toe to toe vs. a mega corp. But, that grade 10
is going to be able to get in touch with the magic movers and shackers of
the world to get a big ritual going. And the guy with MBW4 is going to show
the locals that he's a great fighter, and that they should follow him. And
if they talk to the people the right way, and play things the way they
should be, then the locals will follow the sam into battle, and the mage
will get his ritual going, and when things sync up, the
mega-corp/gov't/whatever is going to find barbarians at the gate, and an
earthquake at their back door. It's all how good a role player you are. A
player should limit themself only if they think they are weak in an area.
And if they want to be good role players, they should work on it.

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"You only need to things in this world. WD40 to make things go, and duct
tape to make them stop."
Message no. 11
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:14:54 -0400 (EDT)
At 20:32 5/13/96 -0700, you wrote:
>On Mon, 13 May 1996, Hairy Smurf wrote:
>
>> I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
>> thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
>> are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's
>
>The problem is the people stuck on high-power. I came up to school and
>found a campaign. Low and behold they were stacking magic and cyber
>reaction dice. Yeow! We had a PC who was a dragon, on was some sort of
>vampire that could run around in the sun and hordes of demons were
>chasing us around. Got really stupid after a while, because you had to
>be a supermunchin to survive. My character was supposed to be a
>'sniper', so the GM gave him a -8 modifier with rifles or something. I
>was firing blind and hiting these 'demons' right between the eyes(the
>only way to kill them of course). As you can guess, that campaign didn't
>last very long.
>
>Nutcracker
>

In my book that's Munchkin-powered, and worse it unrealistic to expect it to
last.

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:30:18 -0400 (EDT)
At 17:46 5/14/96 +1030, you wrote:
>>I've been reading most of these wonderfully civil and useful posts. :) One
>>thing I've noticed is that the standing opinion is that high-powered games
>>are just shoot-em-ups and low pwoered games are for the thinker. It's
>>unfortunate you are so limiting. I usually run high powered thinking games.
>
>No, no, no... High powered games encourage combat, not thinking, 'because
>the players ARE high powered. Go for the easiest solution, and all that.
>And, IMHO, if you stack the opposition high to counter that, you're going
>unrealistic, and you might as well have played the low-power game,
>anyway. :)
>
>It's all relative. If you play a game with no cyber, for example, you
>have hard fights with gangers and low level guards. If you play a game
>with some cyber, you have hard fights with corps. If you play a game with
>10th level initiates and MBW4, then you need to take on hordes of cyber
>zombies & dragons to make it challenging... why not just go for the low
>level stuff?
>
>The only true advantage high-level stuff has over low-level stuff is that
>you can turn thousands of corp & gang types into pulp whenever you
>want... and THAT is just shoot-em-ups.
>
>

You forget... 1. roleplaying and thinking things through gets ya more karma.
My group knows that. They like karma. 2. Worst thing to do in the shadows is
have a shoot-em-up. You then become a target. My group also knows that. Some
still lay flowers on the old character's graves. They all know one thing.
"Life is harsh. Play smart." High powered is not always what you said it is.
Like I said earlier open your minds.

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 13
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Wed, 15 May 96 00:05:09 +1030
>You are a limited player Robert. If you think that the only way to play a
>high powered character is to kill everyone, then you need to work at it.

No, no, no... What I say is that the solution of "We'll go in and kill
everyone in sight" is tempting, especially for high-power characters. You
can have meaningful campaigns, sure, but what's the motivating force?

>There is more to playing SR than kill or be killed scenarios. High powered
>games are the ones where, admitately, you can have movie like combat with
>high ROF and magic from hell. They are also the ones where the players can
>play things to control the fate of the world.

Gee... That describes a munchkin campaign to me. Kinda like playing **&*
with the compulsory quest to the planes and becoming demi-gods. Or
playing the Methsulahs in "Vampire". Hob-knobbing with Ehran and Knight
and the boys seems to be the SR version.

> Initiate grade 10 and MBW4
>aren't jack if you try to go toe to toe vs. a mega corp. But, that grade 10
>is going to be able to get in touch with the magic movers and shackers of
>the world to get a big ritual going. And the guy with MBW4 is going to show
>the locals that he's a great fighter, and that they should follow him. And
>if they talk to the people the right way, and play things the way they
>should be, then the locals will follow the sam into battle, and the mage
>will get his ritual going, and when things sync up, the
>mega-corp/gov't/whatever is going to find barbarians at the gate, and an
>earthquake at their back door.

Except the magic movers and shakers are too concerned maintaining their
illusion of secrecy to care about you, so with the exception of a handful
of individuals (who wouldn't help you like that, anyway), they'd just as
soon kill you as look at you. Especially if they thought you knew that
much about them. And the big bad corp just tracks down the supplier of
your MBW4 and sets off the "safeguards" they would have put in. And when
the barbarians show up at the gate, the HMGs on the walls open up.

The thing is you can do all those kind of things you mentioned WITHOUT
that level of power. So what's the attraction? The idea of shaking the
world? That is what always has meant munchkin to me... power for the sake
of it. You want a roleplaying challenge? Try and figure out how to do
these things without the illusion of god-like power.

> It's all how good a role player you are. A
>player should limit themself only if they think they are weak in an area.
>And if they want to be good role players, they should work on it.

So? Anyone can play a high-power campaign. But a thinking campaign can be
set for ANY level of power, but high-power ones require the GM to come up
with more and more convulted ideas, and (IMHO) you usually end up with an
inconsistent, unrealistic, and impossible to believe campaign.


--
* *
/_\ "A friend is someone who likes the same TV programs you do" /_\
{~._.~} "Eternal nothingness is fine if you happen {~._.~}
( Y ) to be dressed for it." -- Woody Allen ( Y )
()~*~() Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au ()~*~()
(_)-(_) (_)-(_)
Message no. 14
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:42:49 -0400 (EDT)
At 11:09 5/14/96 +0100, you wrote:
>Hairy Smurf said on 22:13/13 May 96...
>
>> >>I'm just sick of this running
>> >>in circle arguments.
>> >>
>> >>Sasquatch
>> >
>> >Two words: Kill File
>>
>> Which does?
>
>My guess is that you can use it to remove all messages with a certain
>subject line or something, on TopCat's mailer anyway. In mine it could be
>done by opening the Filters window, and adding a new rule to Delete
>certain messages...
>
>Not that it'd be helpful if anyone starts changing the subject, though...
>

Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 15
From: mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:44:20 -0500
>Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
>of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
>buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)
>
>Sasquatch

The shareware versions don't have filters. That's only in the registered
vrs. Of course, I could be wrong, but thats the only time I've ever seen them.

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"You only need to things in this world. WD40 to make things go, and duct
tape to make them stop."
Message no. 16
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 11:54:40 -0400 (EDT)
At 10:44 5/14/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
>>of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
>>buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)
>>
>>Sasquatch
>
>The shareware versions don't have filters. That's only in the registered
>vrs. Of course, I could be wrong, but thats the only time I've ever seen them.
>
>Mike Broadwater

Oh well, I think mailer need a version of IRC's ignore command. That way we
could filter the mails without even needing to see them.

Sasquatch

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Psychiatrists say that one out of four people are mentally ill. |
| Check three friends. If their OK, you're it. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 17
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:25:50 -0600 (MDT)
Robert Watkins wrote:
|
|>There is more to playing SR than kill or be killed scenarios. High powered
|>games are the ones where, admitately, you can have movie like combat with
|>high ROF and magic from hell. They are also the ones where the players can
|>play things to control the fate of the world.
|
|Gee... That describes a munchkin campaign to me. Kinda like playing **&*
|with the compulsory quest to the planes and becoming demi-gods. Or
|playing the Methsulahs in "Vampire". Hob-knobbing with Ehran and Knight
|and the boys seems to be the SR version.
|
[snip]
|
|The thing is you can do all those kind of things you mentioned WITHOUT
|that level of power. So what's the attraction? The idea of shaking the
|world? That is what always has meant munchkin to me... power for the sake
|of it. You want a roleplaying challenge? Try and figure out how to do
|these things without the illusion of god-like power.

Here's what I do. The PCs in my game are not high powered. They do standard
(but fun) runs. But I have major events happening in the background which
will decide the fate of my world. Every now and then the PCs happen to
wander into one of these events, either into the middle or on the
periphery. And despite their low level of power they are in a position to
decide future events (through roleplaying).

The PCs never know when this is going to happen. And sometimes they aren't
even aware of it after it's happened.

To date they've made two serious enemies, both dragons. One PC lost all
of his contacts to one dragon (a warning to back off, which the PC is
taking seriously). And the other dragon is just keeping an eye on them,
due to the coincidental nature in which they interfered with her plans
(she's positive that someone is backing the PCs).

My players enjoy it. Once they realize that a simple run has gotten them
enmeshed in someone's grand scheme the mental tapdancing is fun to watch.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~
Message no. 18
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 21:43:15 +0200
At 15:35 Uhr 14.05.96, Robert Watkins wrote:
>>You are a limited player Robert. If you think that the only way to play a
>>high powered character is to kill everyone, then you need to work at it.
>
>No, no, no... What I say is that the solution of "We'll go in and kill
>everyone in sight" is tempting, especially for high-power characters. You
>can have meaningful campaigns, sure, but what's the motivating force?
Only if the opposition is weaker... when YOU carry HMGs and Cannons, and your
enemy, too, you'd better rethink the 'go in and shoot'em all' approach.
High-powered does -at least IM(maybe)HO- NOT mean 'you are strong, enemies
are weak'. It means -could mean -should mean-- EVERYBODY uses bigger guns'n'
spells'stuff then in a 'low powered' game. Heck, when everyone runs around
in Security Armor, and PACs, you'd better, too (and you are better not
surprised unequipped!), while even a pistol can be dangerous when the
'standard armor' is Armored Clothing with a ballistic rating of 3...

You gotta be careful. STOP.

Sascha

--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |The one who does not|
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de| learn from history |
| \___ __/ | | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | through it again. |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 19
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 21:43:20 +0200
At 16:42 Uhr 14.05.96, Hairy Smurf wrote:
>Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
>of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
>buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)

I think not at all. Filters are with the 'Pro' Version only AFAIK, and the
shareware version doesn't have 'em. My Mac-Version talks about
Version 1.5.4, and I thought it was the newest...
Sascha

--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |The one who does not|
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de| learn from history |
| \___ __/ | | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | through it again. |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 20
From: Ken <kwhorner@*******.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 13:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
On Tue, 14 May 1996, Hairy Smurf wrote:

> At 20:32 5/13/96 -0700, you wrote:
> >only way to kill them of course). As you can guess, that campaign didn't
> >last very long.
> >
> >Nutcracker
> >
>
> In my book that's Munchkin-powered, and worse it unrealistic to expect it to
> last.
>
Well, actually, _I_ didn't last, I left and have been berift of SR since,
but I'd rather not play than play in a game like that again, I have no
idea if their still playing their campaign, becuase they're all to munchy
for me.

Nutcracker
Message no. 21
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 15:27:05 -0500
>Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
>of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
>buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)
>
>Sasquatch

Eudora 2.0 is not shareware (unfortunately). I got my copy through a
college for free though! :)

Anyways, Pegasus is also capable of creating kill files through filters
(like Eudora). Check http://www.shareware.com/ to get a copy.

-------------------------------------
"I was thinking of the immortal words
of Socrates, who said: I drank what?"
-- Real Genius
-------------------------------------
TopCat at the bottom...
Message no. 22
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 13:51:18 -0700 (PDT)
> No, no, no... What I say is that the solution of "We'll go in and kill
> everyone in sight" is tempting, especially for high-power characters. You
> can have meaningful campaigns, sure, but what's the motivating force?

((In our current campaign, we all have powerful characters. As it stands
now, my char is 'retired', that is, he's getting away from the shadows.
He's doing things now that he WANTS to do, no things he HAS to do... Max
is now engaged to his girlfriend of 7 years (he refused to marry her
until he got out of the shadow), he had some of his cyber taken out and
he underwent surgery and therapy to repair the damage... he's going after
old nemeses, he has time to help out old friends... I still play him as often
as possible, and I'm having as much fun as I ever have with him.))

> >There is more to playing SR than kill or be killed scenarios. High powered
> >games are the ones where, admitately, you can have movie like combat with
> >high ROF and magic from hell. They are also the ones where the players can
> >play things to control the fate of the world.

((The start of our old campaign was like that. Our group was used as
pawns in a power struggle between seven ancient (400 yr+) vampires... as
we grew in power, and investigated more of what was going on, we began to
turn the tables on them... through subtle and not-so-sublte manipulation,
we gained control over what was happening... we helped decide the fate of
alot of people with that...))

> You want a roleplaying challenge? Try and figure out how to do
> these things without the illusion of god-like power.

((I get difficult challenges all the time... high powered or no...))




---Tom--
Message no. 23
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 11:27:35 +0100
Hairy Smurf said on 10:42/14 May 96...

> Speaking of which you wouldn't happen to know where I could download a copy
> of eudora 2.0 would you. 1.5.2 doesn't have filters, and I can't afford to
> buy software. Hell I can't afford to buy lunch. :)

No, but I do know that Pegasus is totally free and downloadable at various
sites (I don't remember where I got my copy, though...)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That's what being a man is all about, Steve: making mistakes and not caring!
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.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. 24
From: Jonas Gabrielson <m94jga@*******.tdb.uu.se>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 14:14:19 +0200 (MET DST)
On Tue, 14 May 1996, David Buehrer wrote:

> Here's what I do. The PCs in my game are not high powered. They do standard
> (but fun) runs. But I have major events happening in the background which
> will decide the fate of my world. Every now and then the PCs happen to
> wander into one of these events, either into the middle or on the
> periphery. And despite their low level of power they are in a position to
> decide future events (through roleplaying).
>
> The PCs never know when this is going to happen. And sometimes they aren't
> even aware of it after it's happened.
>
> My players enjoy it. Once they realize that a simple run has gotten them
> enmeshed in someone's grand scheme the mental tapdancing is fun to watch.

I like the idea, but my usual approach is to build the entire
campaign around an epic/grand-scale concept (so, I like epic - do you
blame me?). Then I have the players mooch around a bit at the low end of
things, doing introductory runs and getting to know the circuit. Some of
these runs are ordered (through a looong chain of command) by the movers
and shakers of the campaign, and slowly but inexorably the PCs become
pawns. Then they put things together, realize what is happening, start
acting on themselves, and finally try to do something about it. By this
time they are mid- to high-level.
Perhaps a bit standard, but I think it's nicer than the direct
approach ("A Mr Johnson walks over to you and hires you to save the
world"). When I think about it, it's the Babylon 5 approach! Maybe
*that's* why I love that show so... :)

-Jonas Gabrielson, member of the Kosh Fan Club
Message no. 25
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 13:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 14 May 1996, David Buehrer wrote:

> Here's what I do. The PCs in my game are not high powered. They do standard
> (but fun) runs. But I have major events happening in the background which
> will decide the fate of my world. Every now and then the PCs happen to
> wander into one of these events, either into the middle or on the
> periphery. And despite their low level of power they are in a position to
> decide future events (through roleplaying).
> The PCs never know when this is going to happen. And sometimes they aren't
> even aware of it after it's happened.

I too run things in a similar matter, in both campaigns that I
run. I also have a number of large, sweeping, dynamic changes in the
world going on that are totally unrelated to the players, and may only
affect them in small ways. Watch CNN. *Our* world changes every day.
Why should a realistic, well-thought-out fictitious world be any different.
Indeed, this gives the players a sense of accomplishment when
they actually *do* manage to somehow alter world events, even in small
ways.

> My players enjoy it. Once they realize that a simple run has gotten them
> enmeshed in someone's grand scheme the mental tapdancing is fun to watch.

Agreed. When they discover that they are somehow involved in a
larger game, where the major players and their ultimate motivations are
unknown, things get entertaining. Some players can actually manage to
use such ambiguous situations to their benefit. All in all, it makes for
a far more entertaining game.

Marc
Message no. 26
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: games
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 14:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
<snip>
> > And despite their low level of power they are in a position to
> > decide future events (through roleplaying).

> > The PCs never know when this is going to happen. And sometimes they aren't
> > even aware of it after it's happened.

> > My players enjoy it. Once they realize that a simple run has gotten them
> > enmeshed in someone's grand scheme the mental tapdancing is fun to watch.

> I like the idea, but my usual approach is to build the entire
> campaign around an epic/grand-scale concept (so, I like epic - do you
> blame me?). Then I have the players mooch around a bit at the low end of
> things, doing introductory runs and getting to know the circuit. Some of
> these runs are ordered (through a looong chain of command) by the movers
> and shakers of the campaign, and slowly but inexorably the PCs become
> pawns. Then they put things together, realize what is happening, start
> acting on themselves, and finally try to do something about it. By this
> time they are mid- to high-level.

I love that kind of concept. We had a very lllllonnnggg campaign that
was centered aound the PCs being used as pawns in a world-wide power
struggle between 400+ yr old vampire mages/shamans/physads... (grade
16+)... we never fought them of course.. but everything developed kind of
like described above. All in all, the 'epic-scale' campaigns are a
helluvalotta fun... if they are done right...


---Tom---

---The ex-double parenthesis guy---

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about games, 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!