Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 11:31:15 -0400
It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?

Marc (peeved, as usual)
Message no. 2
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 12:15:19 -0400
>>>>> "Marc" == Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
writes:

Marc> It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
Marc> Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?

No. I can't spell Grimoire without it there in front of me. And even then
I've got problems with it.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | Anything not nailed down is mine.
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | Anything I can pry up is not nailed down.
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 3
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 11:23:25 +0100
On Thu, 21 Jul 1994, Marc A Renouf wrote:

> It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
> Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?

Tough toodles. It's a Grimthingy to me.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> I do not necessarily speak for the
\/ Finger for PGP Public Key <=> City of Mankato or anyone else, dammit
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 2.1) GJ/CM d- H-- s-:++>s-:+ g+ p? au+ a- w++ v* C++(++++) UL++++$
P+>++ L++$ 3- E---- N+++ K+++ W M+ V-- -po+(---)>$ Y++ t+ 5+++
j R+++$ G- tv+ b+ D+ B--- e+>++(*) u** h* f r-->+++ !n y++**
Message no. 4
From: Robyn King-Nitschke <rking@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 09:24:48 PDT
=>
=> It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
=> Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?
=>
=> Marc (peeved, as usual)
=>


This is my first post, so be gentle, okay? :)

All this talk about the Grimoire (Grimthingy, Grimy, whatever),
in addition to reading all the notes in the past few
days about Initiation, prompt me to ask: is there anyone
else out there who thinks that the Grimoire (especially
the Initiation concept) has made mages *too* powerful for
game balance?

Some background: the campaign I play in consists of a mage
(me), a modified samurai-type, an Elven assassin, and a
big nasty troll. We all enjoy a high-roleplaying, high-character-
development, low-lethality game. We're much more interested
in developing our characters than we are at throwing around
major firepower, and the game is structured accordingly (i.e.,
the GM isn't out to kill us--he makes it quite challenging
and we've come close many times, but that's not his aim). To
this end, he doesn't allow Initiation or any of the stuff
from ShadowTech that lets you use Body instead of Essence.
While I would love the chance for my mage to Initiate, I can
see his point--if we keep getting nastier and harder to
kill, he'll have to throw tougher and nastier opponents at
us until it's either them or us. And Initiation seems (to us
at least...please correct me if we're wrong) to be a way to
make mages so powerful that there really isn't much they
can't do, thus turning the game into "the mage and everybody
else."

So anyway, my questions are:

1. Does anyone else consider Initiation to be unbalancing?
2. Does anyone have an alternative to Initiation that would
allow a mage to advance beyond the masses of magedom without
making him/her too powerful?
3. Are we reading this totally wrong and Initiation isn't
really as bad as it looks?

Thanks in advance,
--Rat (who's obviously gonna have to get a new nickname on this
list, as my usual one seems to be taken... :-) )
Message no. 5
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 12:54:24 -0400
X-Attribution: Rat
X-Geek-2: GAT$ d--@ H++ s !g(+) p0 au- a- w+ v+(++) C+(++) US++++$ P++ L 3
E+++ N+++ K++++ W--- M- V(-) -po+ Y+(++) t- 5+ j R(+) G- tv b+++ D++
B-- e+(*) u+(-)* h! f r n---(+)(----) y+

>>>>> "Robyn" == Robyn King-Nitschke <rking@******.COM>
writes:

Robyn> This is my first post, so be gentle, okay? :)

Robyn> All this talk about the Grimoire (Grimthingy, Grimy, whatever),
Robyn> in addition to reading all the notes in the past few
Robyn> days about Initiation, prompt me to ask: is there anyone
Robyn> else out there who thinks that the Grimoire (especially
Robyn> the Initiation concept) has made mages *too* powerful for
Robyn> game balance?

Balanced? Shadowrun? Magic? Surely you jest!

That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
"game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:

SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!

Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | I don't care; I want the Green Ranger's
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | flute!
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 6
From: Robyn King-Nitschke <rking@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 10:19:39 PDT
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> says:

=>
=> Balanced? Shadowrun? Magic? Surely you jest!
=>
=> That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
=> "game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:
=>
=> SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
=> BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
=> JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!
=>
=> Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.
=>

Okay...

So I guess my next question would be: if magic is so powerful and
unbalanced and totally neat-o, then why would anyone in their right
mind (assuming they don't want to get their butts kicked or aren't
*totally* into it for the roleplaying aspects) want to play anything
but a mage/shaman? Why don't Shadowrun groups consists of mages and shamans
stomping all over those poor unfortunate mundanes? Where's the fun
of making up a kick-ass street samurai, only to have her toasted by
the first second-rate mage who comes along? Yeah, okay, it might be
real life, but it doesn't sound like much of a fun gaming experience
unless the mage's player is a munchkin or the non-mages' players are
masochists.

BTW, this is all from the point of view of someone who *plays* a mage
and who *likes* playing mages. It just doesn't seem to me like it would
be too much fun to be that much more powerful than all your fellow
players in an ongoing campaign.

My two nuyen,
--(the other) Rat
Message no. 7
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 13:50:29 -0400
>>>>> "Robyn" == Robyn King-Nitschke <rking@******.COM>
writes:

Robyn> So I guess my next question would be: if magic is so powerful and
Robyn> unbalanced and totally neat-o, then why would anyone in their right
Robyn> mind (assuming they don't want to get their butts kicked or aren't
Robyn> *totally* into it for the roleplaying aspects) want to play anything
Robyn> but a mage/shaman?

Because not everyone is interested in playing a walking artillery piece
with a bullseye painted on him. How many times have you heard the
battlecry, "Geek the mage!" and how many times have you been the target of
that cry? :)

Having power does not mean that you are capable of doing everything. No way
a mage is going to provide the Matrix or technical support of a decker, nor
the heavy duty firepower and mobility of a rigger with armored drones. And
in an in-your-face slugfest my money's on the wired-to-the-gills samurai.
For covert ops you want samurai or physads trained for it.

Of course if you're a hack'n'slasher, then you play a 6th or 8th level
initiate combat spell-chucker all the time, just like everyone else in your
group, and blow up anything that gets in your way.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | Guns cause crime and cars cause vehicular
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | homicide.
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 8
From: Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 11:18:55 -0700
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> says:=>
=> That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
=> "game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:
=>
=> SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
=> BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
=> JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!
=>
=> Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.
=

Uh-huh. Magic. Just like real life. Damn, I sure know what you mean. Geeze,
I know *I* can't walk down the street to the store anymore without getting
fireballed by those hotshot Cthulhu U. kids...

It's a game. It's isn't real life. Shit, if the magic system in SRII was
"realistic", then the first time a shaman toasted a cop with a manaball
then the Threefold Law would see that shaman flat on his butt within a
short space of time.

That said, I'm willing to admit that magic in SRII is not balanced and is
not meant to be balanced. To some people, that's cool. To some, those of
us who *enjoy* playing characters that "suck the big mundane banana", ie
riggers, sams, deckers, etc, it does get kinda lame watching the mages
run the world and stop occasionaly to piss on your parade. I'm only just
coming to terms with the fact that SRII really is "Fantasy that just happens
to be set in the near future", instead of, as I thought when I began playing,
"Cyberpunk with magic thrown in". I *like* having some magic in there, I
think it gives a neat spice to a cyber-game. I do think it takes over a
bit, though. But then, depends on your game. We play in a very magic-thick
game. If I ran my own SRII game, I'd probably de-emphasize magic somewhat.
It's a trade-off. Cyberpunk is traditionally grim, gritty, and
somewhat fatalistic. Magic makes miracles, does the impossible, with awe
and wonder and pretty colors. In SR, the "wonder" of magic tends to
increase, by comparison, the "grimness" of slowly turning a body into a
machine. The mundanes fill their bodies with metal and live brief, violent,
angst-filled lives, while the mages work miracles, talk to the gods, and
turn into eternal spirit-things when they die. Unless you're really into
nihilism, playing a mundane in this kind of world does indeed get you
down a bit.
It would help if it was easier to fight magic with tech, but
there's no way to do this, none at all; so you're basically stuck with
"You suck, and there's nothing you can do about it, nyeah nyeah nyeah."

I'm still working on getting ahold of a tac nuke or two to drop on
Tir Tarnagire (or whatever Oregon is these days). Fraggin' elf magic
bastards. If you can't join them or beat them, nuke them.

:)

-E
Message no. 9
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 14:23:45 -0400
>>>>> "Eve" == Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
writes:

Eve> Uh-huh. Magic. Just like real life. Damn, I sure know what you mean.
Eve> Geeze, I know *I* can't walk down the street to the store anymore
Eve> without getting fireballed by those hotshot Cthulhu U. kids...

What I meant was that /life/ is unbalanced, not that magic is real.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | "What do you want to do tonight,
Brain?"
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | "The same thing we do every night, Pinky,
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! | try to take over the world!"
Message no. 10
From: Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 11:32:26 -0700
Rat says:


Having power does not mean that you are capable of doing everything. No way
a mage is going to provide the Matrix or technical support of a decker, nor
the heavy duty firepower and mobility of a rigger with armored drones. And
in an in-your-face slugfest my money's on the wired-to-the-gills samurai.
For covert ops you want samurai or physads trained for it.


__________________________________________________

Well, with the exception of decking, I have indeed seen mages do everything.
I have seen a mage with a big nasty power-focus sword out-move and
out-fight our best sam. A few quickened spells and he's as fast, as armored,
and does as much damage. We've done astral quests and been moved halfway
round the globe in the twinkling of an eye, with the rigger just sitting
and watching the scenery. At range, I've seen a mage call down a special
spell he wrote up that slags *everything* in a certain area, faster and
more effectively than a minigun. I've seen a mage turn himself utterly
unseen to slip into anywhere he wants, or do the aforementioned astral
bop and be in and out like the wind.

And, I'd just like to mention... This was all *the same mage.*

The ability to write up custom spells is one that is all too often
overlooked. If you take the time and money to write up the spell,
there's no reason why you can't do *anything*. You just write up a
spell that does it. Try that with a mundane; try making a custom
piece of cyberware that lets you walk through walls or call fire
from the skies. See how far you get.
Magic works miracles. Miracles are unbalancing. Sure, that's the system,
that's the rules. *shrug* And if you're a mundane, that's the breaks.

Me though, I still like my rigger.
Message no. 11
From: Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 11:35:59 -0700
Rat says:
>What I meant was that /life/ is unbalanced, not that magic is real.

I know, I know. Just yankin' yer chain, chummer... :) Ya gotta let us
mundanes have *some* fun, heck..
Message no. 12
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 14:49:05 -0400
>>>>> "Eve" == Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
writes:

Eve> Rat says:
> Having power does not mean that you are capable of doing everything. [...]

Eve> Well, with the exception of decking, I have indeed seen mages do
Eve> everything. I have seen a mage with a big nasty power-focus sword
Eve> out-move and out-fight our best sam. A few quickened spells and he's
Eve> as fast, as armored, and does as much damage.

And is three times as vulnerable to the sammi's backup mage in astral.
Smart sammi /always/ has magical backup.

Eve> We've done astral quests and been moved halfway round the globe in the
Eve> twinkling of an eye, with the rigger just sitting and watching the
Eve> scenery.

Then you're playing with a much higher power level than I'm used to.

Eve> At range, I've seen a mage call down a special spell he wrote up that
Eve> slags *everything* in a certain area, faster and more effectively than
Eve> a minigun.

I take that back. You're playing at a SIGNIFICANTLY higher power level than
I'm used to. "Slay Everything" spells, yeesh! I do /not/ want to see the
drain code for that sucker.

Eve> I've seen a mage turn himself utterly unseen to slip into anywhere he
Eve> wants, or do the aforementioned astral bop and be in and out like the
Eve> wind.

Eve> And, I'd just like to mention... This was all *the same mage.*

'For my next trick, watch me pull Cthulhu out of my hat!'

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | "I'd rather be a pig than a
fascist."
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | --Porco Rosso (The Crimson Pig)
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 13
From: "C. Paul Douglas" <granite@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 15:11:35 -0400
On Thu, 21 Jul 1994, Marc A Renouf wrote:

> It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
> Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?
>
> Marc (peeved, as usual)
>
Live with it...
-----------------------------GRANITE
Message no. 14
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 14:29:29 -0700
RE: 3 questions about initiation.

Bluntly, Initiation is no big thing. It is a Good Karma sink, and the
benefits really aren't enough to make up for the costs. (So why is
Firebug initiated to 11? Shielding, Astral work, Spell locks to hide and
she's a pure mage so it makes sense for her.)

The only way to really play SRII is completely By The Book.

Ivy
Message no. 15
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 14:39:08 -0700
Hi Robyn,


On Thu, 21 Jul 1994, Robyn King-Nitschke wrote:

> Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> says:
> =>
> => Balanced? Shadowrun? Magic? Surely you jest!
> =>
> => That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
> => "game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:
> =>
> => SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
> => BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
> => JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!
> =>
> => Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.
> =>
>
> Okay...
>
> So I guess my next question would be: if magic is so powerful and
> unbalanced and totally neat-o, then why would anyone in their right
> mind (assuming they don't want to get their butts kicked or aren't
> *totally* into it for the roleplaying aspects) want to play anything
> but a mage/shaman? Why don't Shadowrun groups consists of mages and shamans
> stomping all over those poor unfortunate mundanes? Where's the fun
> of making up a kick-ass street samurai, only to have her toasted by
> the first second-rate mage who comes along? Yeah, okay, it might be
> real life, but it doesn't sound like much of a fun gaming experience
> unless the mage's player is a munchkin or the non-mages' players are
> masochists.

Well, I play a Street Razor myself (don't ever call her a "samurai"
that's a dirty word for her) so I'll try to give you some outlook.
1) Mages absolutely suckout when the fighting gets in their faces.

2) When you have a Willpower of 6 and a Body to match magic isn't
guaranteed. And cover helps too.

3) When you return the mages manabolt with a hand grenade, the mage loses.

4) Most mages can't do anything but magey stuff. Di'mon's can drive,
fly a plane, pick a lock, etc, etc, etc.

5) Playin a Street Monster is a challange all to itself.

> BTW, this is all from the point of view of someone who *plays* a mage
> and who *likes* playing mages. It just doesn't seem to me like it would
> be too much fun to be that much more powerful than all your fellow
> players in an ongoing campaign.
>
> My two nuyen,
> --(the other) Rat

Ivy
Message no. 16
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 16:14:40 -0700
Actually, the "Slay Everything" spell was a sustained
manipulation spell called "Firestorm", with a drain code of around
(Force/2)+9 D.

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 17
From: Tim Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 19:34:54 -0500
> It's "Grimoire" okay?! Not Grimthingy. Not Grimy. Not
> Grimwhowhatchamadoobob. Grimoire! Got it?

What about Grimikabobber.

Anyway, don't worry about abbreviations...do YOU always
write out "Shadowrun -- Second Edition", or do you write "SRII"?

-------------Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@********.uni.uiuc.edu-------------
"He's NOT a gibbering idiot - he's cured of gibbering, he's just an
idiot now." -- Jane, "Waiting for God"
Message no. 18
From: Tim Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 19:49:17 -0500
> I have seen a mage with a big nasty power-focus sword out-move and
> out-fight our best sam. A few quickened spells and he's as fast, as
> armored,

And then he gets geeked from long distance. That bullet barrier isn't
going to last forever...

> out-fight our best sam. A few quickened spells and he's as fast, as
> armored, and does as much damage. We've done astral quests and been
> moved halfway

And also VERY vulnerable to any other mages that happen to be around,
and he's wasted karma...not to mention that he can't get into any place that's
warded...

> and does as much damage. We've done astral quests and been moved
> halfway round the globe in the twinkling of an eye, with the rigger
> just sitting

Oops! You lost that one. Too bad...

> and watching the scenery. At range, I've seen a mage call down a
> special spell he wrote up that slags *everything* in a certain
> area, faster and more effectively than a minigun. I've seen a mage
> turn himself utterly

Sure, it's possible. Drain [(F/2)+6]D for that Hellblast. It works
if you want it to...but the mage generally goes down, too, and if they survive
it...that's one DEAD mage.

> more effectively than a minigun. I've seen a mage turn himself
> utterly unseen to slip into anywhere he wants, or do the
> aforementioned astral bop and be in and out like the wind.

Once again, a little astral security and that mage is done for.

You get a big gun, the opposition is going to get a bigger one.

Mages can be versatile, sure, but they're also vulnerable to the
same forces they're using.

> overlooked. If you take the time and money to write up the spell,
> there's no reason why you can't do *anything*. You just write up a

Yes there is. Special modifiers.

Sure, you can get that area effect "Fire from the Sky" thing, but
if the drain is [(F/2)+11]D I'm not going to cast it too often.

-------------Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@********.uni.uiuc.edu-------------
"He's NOT a gibbering idiot - he's cured of gibbering, he's just an
idiot now." -- Jane, "Waiting for God"
Message no. 19
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 11:39:58 +1000
Ivy writes:

> Bluntly, Initiation is no big thing. It is a Good Karma sink, and the
> benefits really aren't enough to make up for the costs.

The main advantages of initiation are Sheilding and Quickening, in my view.
Once sheilding gets into play, a sheilding initiate on each side of a
contest cancells out the use of magic until one of them goes down. Magic no
longer becomes a problem, as neither side can use it effectively. Also makes
mages a better target than they usually are, normally mages are targeted as
they can frag a lot of enemies real quick, with sheilding in play, whoever
geeks the other sides mage first has a real advantage. Quickening is maybe a
tad too powerful, but it has its own problems, such as wards and astral
attacks etc. Also the metaplanes open up a whole new roleplaying arena for
the game, they can be quite fun.

> The only way to really play SRII is completely By The Book.

Like your game eh Ivy? :-) even you have your own modifications. True, they
are limited compared to some of the modifications I've seen around the
place, but you aren't exactly playing a "by the book" game yourself. It
seems funny sometimes with everybody else saying "its your game - play it
how you like", and Ivy going "play it by the book". Not knocking anybody,
it
just seems odd, theres 10 messages saying "your game, if you dont like it,
change it..." then one going "try the real rules, it'll be a new, fresh,
experience for you".

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE d@ H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v C+ U P? !L !3 E? N K- W+ M
!V po@ Y t(+) !5 !j r+(++) G(+) !tv(--) b++ D+ B? e+ u@ h+(*)
f+@ !r n--(----)@ !y+
Message no. 20
From: Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 19:45:19 -0700
Adam writes:

> Actually, the "Slay Everything" spell was a sustained
>manipulation spell called "Firestorm", with a drain code of around
>(Force/2)+9 D.

Yeah, Adam, BUT, remember what he did with it? He KILLED a party of
highly-trained and experienced Shadowrunners...

i.e., US.

"We're kinda like a big Voltron, you know?"
"Heh, yeah!"
WHOOOOOOSH!
"AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHHGH!!!"

-E
Message no. 21
From: Hamish Laws <h_laws@**********.UTAS.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 12:56:07 +1000
>Balanced? Shadowrun? Magic? Surely you jest!
>
>That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
>"game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:
>
> SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
> BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
> JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!
>
>Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.

Um.... I think you'll find that very few mages can go one on one
with a street samurai. Or ride the net like a decker, drive Panzer's as a
rigger can.... .The characters all have their own areas of strength and
they cannot do the job alone. Also how many other archetypes take damage
(almost) every time they use their abilities ot the max or can kill
themselves while succeeding in their action?
>
>--
>Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | I don't care; I want the Green Ranger's
>http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | flute!
>PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |


*************************************************
There has to be an optimist around here somewhere
*************************************************

Hamish Laws
Message no. 22
From: Hamish Laws <h_laws@**********.UTAS.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 14:27:37 +1000
Eve Said
>
>Well, with the exception of decking, I have indeed seen mages do everything.
>I have seen a mage with a big nasty power-focus sword out-move and
>out-fight our best sam. A few quickened spells and he's as fast, as armored,
>and does as much damage. We've done astral quests and been moved halfway
>round the globe in the twinkling of an eye, with the rigger just sitting
>and watching the scenery. At range, I've seen a mage call down a special
>spell he wrote up that slags *everything* in a certain area, faster and
>more effectively than a minigun. I've seen a mage turn himself utterly
>unseen to slip into anywhere he wants, or do the aforementioned astral
>bop and be in and out like the wind.
>

I'm not an experienced Shadowrun player but there seem to be a few
hassles with the above. Can't spells be cast from astral space onto the
power-focus sword? How effective are you when in astral space against
non-astral targets? What's the drain on the spell, can he afford to cast it
more than once? Isn't there a modifier to target numbers when maintaining
multiple spells?


>And, I'd just like to mention... This was all *the same mage.*
>
>The ability to write up custom spells is one that is all too often
>overlooked. If you take the time and money to write up the spell,
>there's no reason why you can't do *anything*. You just write up a
>spell that does it. Try that with a mundane; try making a custom
>piece of cyberware that lets you walk through walls or call fire
>from the skies. See how far you get.

Correction, you can attempt to write up a spell which does
anything. The GM's decision as to the working of the spell should be final
and it probably should not be more effective than the 'official' spells
listed. Blaming the system for allowing an unbalancing spell to be
developed is like blaming the system if the GM allows a new cyberdeck with
ratings in the fiftys, or a new gun with 100D damage.

>Magic works miracles. Miracles are unbalancing. Sure, that's the system,
>that's the rules. *shrug* And if you're a mundane, that's the breaks.
>
>Me though, I still like my rigger.


*************************************************
There has to be an optimist around here somewhere
*************************************************

Hamish Laws
Message no. 23
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 20:37:54 +1000
Adam writes:

> Actually, the "Slay Everything" spell was a sustained
> manipulation spell called "Firestorm", with a drain code of around
> (Force/2)+9 D.

And someone _actually_ cast that, and survived the drain so that they could
sustain it?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE d@ H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v C+ U P? !L !3 E? N K- W+ M
!V po@ Y t(+) !5 !j r+(++) G(+) !tv(--) b++ D+ B? e+ u@ h+(*)
f+@ !r n--(----)@ !y+
Message no. 24
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 10:50:07 -0400
Someone (who also doesn't put her name at the end of her posts) writes:
[Help! Mages walk all over everything and are ultrapowerful.]

We have had this discussion before, but since you're new to the list,
I'll save you the trouble of digging through the old logs (yuck!).

1. I have to agree with sir Ratinox. Magic = power. Period. If you
have it and the other guys don't, they're up the creek with exactly zero
manual locomotion. There are, however, ways around this.

2. Wards, barriers etc. An astral ward, Magical barrier, or mana
barrier will all keep out those pesky unwanted quickenend spells. If the
mage tries to go through the ward, his quickened spells will be forced to
enter astral "hand-to-hand" with the ward, and there ain't squat he can
do to help them (you can't allocate spell defense or shielding because
there are no spells being cast.) So, as the mage attempts to pass
through that cleverly hidden ward that he missed when scouting astrally,
bye-bye to the weaker quickenings, and maybe some of the stronger ones as
well. Ooops.

3. The only good mage is a dead mage. I have maintained this view from
the beginning. The best way to keep a mage from casting a
spell/summoning a spirit is to put a bullet in his head. Or even many
bullets. Heh. An example was done previously about a sniper setting up,
taking aim, etc. and let me tell you, the end result was not pretty. All
you need to do is analyze the weaknesses in the mage's defense and
exploit them. That's what the bad guys would and should be doing.
Granted it may take them a while, but maybe they'll catch on. (Hmm, sir,
our bullets seem to be having little effect on yonder glowing mage
dripping with power. Perhaps we should try twelve kilograms of C-12
strapped to a sneaky-snooper drone. Methinks the personal anti-bullet
barrier will be ineffectual...) You get the idea.

Hope this helps.

Marc
Message no. 25
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 09:11:32 -0700
Um, Sorry Eve, but Rat's correct.

On Thu, 21 Jul 1994, Eve Forward wrote:

> Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> says:=>
> => That's what I hate about claiming to do something with magic in the name of
> => "game balance." Now read carefully, everyone:
> =>
> => SHADOWRUN MAGIC NEVER WAS BALANCED, ISN'T
> => BALANCED, AND NEVER WILL BE BALANCED.
> => JUST LIKE REAL LIFE!
> =>
> => Magic in the Sixth World is power--accept it.
> =
>
> Uh-huh. Magic. Just like real life. Damn, I sure know what you mean. Geeze,
> I know *I* can't walk down the street to the store anymore without getting
> fireballed by those hotshot Cthulhu U. kids...

Wait 20 years, and you may be worrying about just that.

> It's a game. It's isn't real life. Shit, if the magic system in SRII was
> "realistic", then the first time a shaman toasted a cop with a manaball
> then the Threefold Law would see that shaman flat on his butt within a
> short space of time.

Sorry Eve, the "threefold law" is the unrealistic part. In fact, the
"threefold Law" is a piece of malarky that pagans came up with to try to
protect themselves from the xtians.

> That said, I'm willing to admit that magic in SRII is not balanced and is
> not meant to be balanced. To some people, that's cool. To some, those of
> us who *enjoy* playing characters that "suck the big mundane banana", ie
> riggers, sams, deckers, etc, it does get kinda lame watching the mages
> run the world and stop occasionaly to piss on your parade.

Mages *aren't* all powerful. Mages *are* harder for the GM to control.
(I have the experience to know) I played a St. Razor / Rigger / Decker
and her Decker / St. Razor / Rigger buddy for close to 4 years and had a
lot of fun with them. And this is 'with' having a "super-mage" along
played by another person. My pair made sure they shot first, hardest,
and they used cover (super-mage didn't) so they generally got off with
less wounds. Mundanes are a challange, so I find them more fun.

I'm only just
> coming to terms with the fact that SRII really is "Fantasy that just happens
> to be set in the near future", instead of, as I thought when I began playing,
> "Cyberpunk with magic thrown in". I *like* having some magic in there, I
> think it gives a neat spice to a cyber-game. I do think it takes over a
> bit, though. But then, depends on your game. We play in a very magic-thick
> game. If I ran my own SRII game, I'd probably de-emphasize magic somewhat.

Your choice, but I like the SRII rules just as they are.

> It's a trade-off. Cyberpunk is traditionally grim, gritty, and
> somewhat fatalistic. Magic makes miracles, does the impossible, with awe
> and wonder and pretty colors. In SR, the "wonder" of magic tends to
> increase, by comparison, the "grimness" of slowly turning a body into a
> machine. The mundanes fill their bodies with metal and live brief, violent,
> angst-filled lives, while the mages work miracles, talk to the gods, and
> turn into eternal spirit-things when they die. Unless you're really into
> nihilism, playing a mundane in this kind of world does indeed get you
> down a bit.

Adam might want to take another look at his game then. Mages aren't
'supposed' to be *that* powerful. There are really a lot of controls on
mages that seem to be being ignored.

> It would help if it was easier to fight magic with tech, but
> there's no way to do this, none at all; so you're basically stuck with
> "You suck, and there's nothing you can do about it, nyeah nyeah nyeah."

There are a lot of ways to fight magic with tech. Heavily armored normal
looking vehicles with pop=up turrets mounting Vanquishers is just one of
them. Use the highest tech, most processed armor you can get (Cobham)
which moves their TN up to about 10+, put it bio-layers to keep them from
looking inside your vehicle and homestead, Use remote weaponry and drones
a lot. Use as much cover as possible. Build up your Willpower. Things
like that.

> I'm still working on getting ahold of a tac nuke or two to drop on
> Tir Tarnagire (or whatever Oregon is these days). Fraggin' elf magic
> bastards. If you can't join them or beat them, nuke them.

Di'mon's thought of that too... Decided not to though (couldn't find any
Tac Nukes that weren't nailed down AND guarded actually) so we went to
max sec anytime we even 'thought' there might be mages against us instead.

The only thing I can add is that the entire magic rule section was
written by a hermetic mage. It is very accurate. That is the way magic
really would work if it worked at all. And there are a lot of ways to
make a mage's life difficult. But the GM has to use them all. And the
"mundanes" have to learn a bit about magic so they can protect themselves
from it.

Ivy
Message no. 26
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 09:55:58 -0700
On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> Ivy writes:
>
> > Bluntly, Initiation is no big thing. It is a Good Karma sink, and the
>
> The main advantages of initiation are Sheilding and Quickening, in my view.
> Once sheilding gets into play, a sheilding initiate on each side of a

Shielding is still limited by the number of dice the mage puts into the
shielding. And those dice have to be split between the people being
shielded. No big deal from where I (as a GM) stand. The most it will do
is let some get wounded instead of dea. Once.

>
> > The only way to really play SRII is completely By The Book.
>
> Like your game eh Ivy? :-) even you have your own modifications. True, they
> are limited compared to some of the modifications I've seen around the
> place, but you aren't exactly playing a "by the book" game yourself. It

Dumped the only two house rules I had. No more doubled weapon ranges.
No more faster vehicles. It was too hard to explain to the players.

> seems funny sometimes with everybody else saying "its your game - play it
> how you like", and Ivy going "play it by the book". Not knocking
anybody, it
> just seems odd, theres 10 messages saying "your game, if you dont like it,
> change it..." then one going "try the real rules, it'll be a new, fresh,
> experience for you".

The BTB rules work better than any idea I've seen on the BBS to date.
And they will be a "new, fresh" idea too. What I am trying to say is
that this game works. But only up until some GM(?) starts messing with
the rules. Every "improvement" that has come up on this BBS, or any
other I've read, has inevitably made things worse for the players, and
generally messed up the fraggin' game. Leave it alone and play it.

Every "weak spot" that has been mentioned really does have an answer in
the rulebook(s). Sometimes the GM has to work for the answer, and some
things need more explanation for the educationally challanged on here,
but the answers are there. No new "rules" are needed at all.

Sure, you can change it all you want. Just do me the favor of not
calling it SRII anymore. Because it isn't SRII, it's <fill in your
name>'s Fantasy Cyberpunkish Game from then on. I don't care what it is
from that point onwards.

Ivy
Message no. 27
From: Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 10:09:35 -0700
Ivy says:

>
Um, Sorry Eve, but Rat's correct.

Well, if you look carefully at our posts, you'll see that Rat basically
says: Magic is powerful.

And I basically say: Magic is powerful.

The only difference is, he likes it, I don't. *shrug*

I don't see that Rat, or anyone, can tell me what's "correct" about what
I feel.

I used to be a Hermetic myself, Ivy. (Albeit a beginner, and I gave it
up just because I developed other interests.) Did a lot of reading, a
lot of research. One thing I do remember is getting the impression that
in many ways, magic(k) is like religion; everyone has their own way of
doing it. I have a very experienced Wiccan friend who deeply belives in
the Threefold Law, and not, I think, just to hide from Xtians.
I know, from talking to her, that there are Wiccans who have certain
sets of belief, and others who have similar, but by no means identical,
beliefs. I am sure, too, that they are both "right", in their own way;
just as a Jew, a Xtian, and a Catholic are all "right" in their own way.
I am sure that, whatever path you follow, you are "right" as well. If
it works for you, then it's true for you. No prob.
I've seen the Threefold Law work as often as I've seen the other
"laws" of magic (at least the ones I know about) work. (and yes, at least
once.) Considering that the majority of the population feels that *all*
occultism etc is "malarky"...
I'm not trying to fight or flame you here; actually I think we
agree on a hell of a lot of points re: magic/tech, and we both seem to
like tech a lot. I'm just defending myself from a couple rather, well,
patronising statements, and I just wanted to explain that I do have some
reason behind the things I say. I'm just speaking from -my- experiences;
you may have had very different ones, so may the guy at FASA.
The Shadowrun magic system is, indeed, the most "realistic" I've
seen. It was eerie, reading it for the first time, because it was indeed
so close to a lot of the hermetic stuff I used to do. But, in the end,
it's a game. I play it for fun. I'm not going to fret about disrupting
the fabric of the universe if I play it or change it or whatever, any
more than I would worry about summoning demons by playing AD&D.(ObUgh.)
Everyone's different, everyone has their own opinions and
way of doing things. We all have rights to do our own thing, (within
reason) and I think that's a good thing.
This is a very interesting discussion for me, but I think
we may be getting a bit speculative (haven't mentioned Force points
or anything...) so can we keep talking about this, but over email?
Adam has mentioned you're a cool person and I'd like to keep chatting
with you.

(PS. Of course, if you don't belive in the Threefold Law, then it's not
going to affect you. Isn't that nifty? :) )

-E
Message no. 28
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 13:40:17 -0400
>>>>> "Eve" == Eve Forward <ez019741@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
writes:

>Um, Sorry Eve, but Rat's correct.

Eve> Well, if you look carefully at our posts, you'll see that Rat
Eve> basically says: Magic is powerful.
Eve> And I basically say: Magic is powerful.
Eve> The only difference is, he likes it, I don't. *shrug*

No problem with that.

Eve> I don't see that Rat, or anyone, can tell me what's "correct" about
Eve> what I feel.

Now that I've got a problem with. If I came across as "you're wrong" then I
apologise. I'm usually pretty laid back about that kind of thing. But I can
get pretty sarcastic some times, and it can get difficult to understand
what I mean. Again, I do apologise for the misinterpretation.

[...]

Eve> (PS. Of course, if you don't belive in the Threefold Law, then it's
Eve> not going to affect you. Isn't that nifty? :) )

Does that mean that if I stop beliving in Eris (Goddess forbid!), then I'll
become immune to entropy? :)

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | "Oh, did I mention that they're Howling,
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | Flying, Righteous, Fire-breathing Berserk
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! | Mammoths?" --Dixie
Message no. 29
From: Loki <jek5313@*******.TAMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 12:26:35 -0500
Ivy:
--> > I'm still working on getting a hold of a tac nuke or two to drop on
--> > Tir Tarngire (or whatever Oregon is these days). Fraggin' elf magic
--> > bastards. If you can't join them or beat them, nuke them.

I don't know about FASA's idea of that, but I DO know that any GM worth
his/her (NO P.C.!! NO P.C.!!) will have thought of that and taken steps
against it.
And if you don't think that's realistic (by FASA terms) read the Tir
sourcebook section regarding the activity at Crater Lake.

That having been said, know that the "bigger ain't always better" rule is
very much in effect when it comes to getting around magic. But, when it
comes right down to it, no group without magic can hope to succeed in a fair
fight against a group with magic. SO. . . . (everyone but Rat pay
attention here) don't make it a fair fight. The "bad-guys" never do.
Why feel as if you have to be nice to them? You're trying to
steal/evade/kill them, not missionary work!

(Gee, is my bias showing?)

--> The only thing I can add is that the entire magic rule section was
--> written by a hermetic mage. It is very accurate. That is the way magic
--> really would work if it worked at all. And there are a lot of ways to
--> make a mage's life difficult. But the GM has to use them all. And the
--> "mundanes" have to learn a bit about magic so they can protect themselves
--> from it.

The GM doesn't "have" to use every trick of the trade to make a mage's
life difficult, (s)he just has to be _prepared_ to do so, at a moment's
notice. The mundos have to learn not to be seen, unless seeing them
can't change the outcome.



--

Dark Thought Publications & Doom Technologies, Inc.
>>> Working on solutions best left in the dark.
Message no. 30
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 12:10:42 -0700
On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> Adam writes:
>
> > Actually, the "Slay Everything" spell was a sustained
> > manipulation spell called "Firestorm", with a drain code of around
> > (Force/2)+9 D.
>
> And someone _actually_ cast that, and survived the drain so that they could
> sustain it?

Well, actually, you don't do the Drain Resistance Test till after the
sustaining period is over. SRII, pg. 132, left column, under the bolded
Drain Resistance, first sentance, starting with; Lastly, the Spellcaster...

Ivy
Message no. 31
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 13:12:38 -0700
On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Eve Forward wrote:

> Ivy says:
>
> >
> Um, Sorry Eve, but Rat's correct.
>
> Well, if you look carefully at our posts, you'll see that Rat basically
> says: Magic is powerful.
>
> And I basically say: Magic is powerful.
>
> The only difference is, he likes it, I don't. *shrug*
>
> I don't see that Rat, or anyone, can tell me what's "correct" about what
> I feel.

Wasn't talking about how you feel, Eve. I was talking about your comment
that "If the magic in the game was real, the threefold law...." I knew
how you feel, cause I nearly gave up on the game (due to the super-mages)
until I got a grip on myself. And, I play the techies.

> I used to be a Hermetic myself, Ivy. (Albeit a beginner, and I gave it
> up just because I developed other interests.) Did a lot of reading, a
> lot of research. One thing I do remember is getting the impression that
> in many ways, magic(k) is like religion; everyone has their own way of
> doing it. I have a very experienced Wiccan friend who deeply belives in
> the Threefold Law, and not, I think, just to hide from Xtians.

I know wiccans who believe in it too. Which doesn't change how it came
into existance. Heck, I know xtians too, who believe. And magic could
be considered a religion to some of us, and a science to the others. My
own approach is more intuitive than reasoned so I fit into the Shamanic
mold better than into the hermetic mold. But there are certain laws, and
attributes are one of them. The laws don't change, or they aren't laws.

> I know, from talking to her, that there are Wiccans who have certain
> sets of belief, and others who have similar, but by no means identical,
> beliefs. I am sure, too, that they are both "right", in their own way;
> just as a Jew, a Xtian, and a Catholic are all "right" in their own way.
> I am sure that, whatever path you follow, you are "right" as well. If
> it works for you, then it's true for you. No prob.

Funny, because of my religion I do believe in an absolute Right and an
equally absolute Wrong.

> I've seen the Threefold Law work as often as I've seen the other
> "laws" of magic (at least the ones I know about) work. (and yes, at least
> once.) Considering that the majority of the population feels that *all*
> occultism etc is "malarky"...

I look on the "Threefold Law" as a geasa, not a law, but that's because
it doesn't hold true for everyone. I also consider it more than a bit
suicidal too. Bars self-defense, bad for future health. And, while I
believe in magic, I don't believe it works reliably right now. I do hope
the mayans, and my religion too, are correct though.

> I'm not trying to fight or flame you here; actually I think we
> agree on a hell of a lot of points re: magic/tech, and we both seem to
> like tech a lot. I'm just defending myself from a couple rather, well,
> patronising statements, and I just wanted to explain that I do have some
> reason behind the things I say.

I am sorry, I was not trying to be patronizing. I have to aim my
comments at the non-awakened and so I probably seem to have been so. I
am told that I am more than a bit blunt at times too. Sorry.

I'm just speaking from -my- experiences;
> you may have had very different ones, so may the guy at FASA.
> The Shadowrun magic system is, indeed, the most "realistic" I've
> seen. It was eerie, reading it for the first time, because it was indeed
> so close to a lot of the hermetic stuff I used to do. But, in the end,
> it's a game. I play it for fun. I'm not going to fret about disrupting
> the fabric of the universe if I play it or change it or whatever, any
> more than I would worry about summoning demons by playing AD&D.(ObUgh.)

My dislike of people changing, altering and modifying the game doesn't
stem from some idea of universal retribution <grin>, it comes from my
experience at writing games, playing games, and GMing games for some 30
years. Miniature Wargaming is a field in which all the permutations have
been worked out over the years, and I did that exclusivily till 1970.
Then I was introduced to H.G.Welles' Little Wars (miniature rules for
individual characters). The first RPG, and it took a lot of tinkering.
Early D&D did too. But the games have constantly improved. By the AD&D
period most, if not all, rules jigering was making the games worse, not
better.

> Everyone's different, everyone has their own opinions and
> way of doing things. We all have rights to do our own thing, (within
> reason) and I think that's a good thing.

Do their own thing? Certainly! But before their "own thing" is done to
a very good ruleset I have been advising that the surgeon learns the
rules, all the rules, first. There is a control in the rules for every
problem. A good example is the, thankfully optional, "Instant KIll" rule
in FOF. It is a poorly written modification to the rule on SRII, pg. 111
for Overflowing the Damage Table. The original rule is more than
sufficient for instantly killing a target, the new one is unnecessary, as
well as overcomplicated.

> This is a very interesting discussion for me, but I think
> we may be getting a bit speculative (haven't mentioned Force points
> or anything...) so can we keep talking about this, but over email?
> Adam has mentioned you're a cool person and I'd like to keep chatting
> with you.

Certainly, E-mail is fine with me. See you there, and i'm looking
forward to it. I have respected your views since your first post; on the
subject of how Rigging actually works.

> (PS. Of course, if you don't belive in the Threefold Law, then it's not
> going to affect you. Isn't that nifty? :) )

Funny, I think I mentioned this up a ways. Geasa, not Law.

Ivy
Message no. 32
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 13:28:30 -0700
Hold IT!!! I didn't

On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Loki wrote:

> Ivy:
> --> > I'm still working on getting a hold of a tac nuke or two to drop on
> --> > Tir Tarngire (or whatever Oregon is these days). Fraggin' elf magic
> --> > bastards. If you can't join them or beat them, nuke them.

write this!! Eve wrote that part. Yes, Di'mon's *did* think of it, but
dropped the idea for two reasons. One; There are NO loose tac-nukes in
the SRII universe, and, two; A whole lot of innocent people woulda been
killed, and she couldn't handle that. (Whatta ya think she is? The US
Air Force? NO WAY!!!)

> I don't know about FASA's idea of that, but I DO know that any GM worth
> his/her (NO P.C.!! NO P.C.!!) will have thought of that and taken steps
> against it.
> And if you don't think that's realistic (by FASA terms) read the Tir
> sourcebook section regarding the activity at Crater Lake.

Yeah, in fact I GM the Tir at times. Simply won't work. No way to
deliver the bomb.

> That having been said, know that the "bigger ain't always better" rule is
> very much in effect when it comes to getting around magic. But, when it
> comes right down to it, no group without magic can hope to succeed in a fair
> fight against a group with magic. SO. . . . (everyone but Rat pay
> attention here) don't make it a fair fight. The "bad-guys" never do.
> Why feel as if you have to be nice to them? You're trying to
> steal/evade/kill them, not missionary work!
>
> (Gee, is my bias showing?)

My contention is that it is up to the GM, playing inside the rules, to
make the players understand this simple fact Loki states so simply. If
the gM stays inside the rules the players will like the game more, and
have more fun.

> --> The only thing I can add is that the entire magic rule section was
> --> written by a hermetic mage. It is very accurate. That is the way magic
> --> really would work if it worked at all. And there are a lot of ways to
> --> make a mage's life difficult. But the GM has to use them all. And the
> --> "mundanes" have to learn a bit about magic so they can protect
themselves
> --> from it.
>
> The GM doesn't "have" to use every trick of the trade to make a mage's
> life difficult, (s)he just has to be _prepared_ to do so, at a moment's
> notice. The mundos have to learn not to be seen, unless seeing them
> can't change the outcome.

Yep, and she should use then nasty tricks every so often just so's the
players know it can happen.

>
> Dark Thought Publications & Doom Technologies, Inc.
> >>> Working on solutions best left in the dark.
>
Whatta ya do, work at Doc. Doom's think tank? <grin>

Ivy
Message no. 33
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 18:47:56 -0400
On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, the Ivy Ryan wrote:

> The BTB rules work better than any idea I've seen on the BBS to date.
>
. . .
> Sure, you can change it all you want. Just do me the favor of not
> calling it SRII anymore. Because it isn't SRII, it's <fill in your
> name>'s Fantasy Cyberpunkish Game from then on. I don't care what it is
> from that point onwards.
>
Um, Ivy? Tell ya what. If you stop calling this BITNET mailing
list a BBS (which it is most emphatically _not_ -- I'll send you the
appropriate FAQ if you want), I won't tell you how asinine and stuck-up
the above comment is.
I don't usually harp on terminology so long as everybody
understands what you're taking about. If you had confused USENET or
BITNET with the Internet, that'd be fine -- no big deal. I'd even let
the term 'bboard' get by, because that was the name of the first-ever
mailing list, back when there were less than ten systems on the 'net.
But BBS? No way. That is just simply wrong.

==============================================<jdfalk@****.com>============
|| "Welcome to my nightmare ||
|| Its the one in which I always press the button." ||
|| -Roy Harper ||
==========================================================================
(Geek Code 2.1) GO/T/AT$ -d+(-) H++ s+:+ !g p1>+ au>++ a20 w@ v++(-)
C++(+++) UB(++)>++++ P+ L 3 E---- N++ K(++) W M@ V--
-po+(--) Y+ t+(++) 5- j>x R+(+++) G++(') $tv+ b+>++
D(-) B- e+ u*+(-) h!(*) f+ r(++)>++ n-(----) y+
Message no. 34
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 1994 17:24:56 +1000
Ivy writes:

> Well, actually, you don't do the Drain Resistance Test till after the
> sustaining period is over. SRII, pg. 132, left column, under the bolded
> Drain Resistance, first sentance, starting with; Lastly, the Spellcaster...

I've never interpreted it that way. I always had a mage casting a sustained
spell make the drain test at the time of casting. Its only the permanent
spells which had to be maintained over a period of time that I had the drain
test made after the spell was cast. Hmmm, it doesnt really make it all that
clear on sustatined spells does it? I, and my players, had never interpreted
the rule that way. Many sustained spells cast in novels seem to effect the
caster when they cast 'em, dont they? Hey, it would mean that if you spell
locked or quickened a sustained spell then you would never have to make a
drain test. Untill your spell lock or quikening was removed that is. That
could be quite bad when an enemy mage dumps a powerball thru your spell
lock, damages you, and you then have to cop the drain resistance for that +4
body spell you had on. Ouch.

While we're on the subject of sustained spells, it says the mage has a
"universal target modifier...this target modifier affects all other tests"
Does this include the drain resistance test? Or the damage resistance test?
Or the combat pool dice allocated to evade damage?

The reason I asak is that I always thought these three tests had _no_
modifiers on them at all, none. I got this idea from page 112, where it say,
under the injury modifier "...universal modifier...applies to nearly all
success tests...except those involving attempts to resist damage or avoid
damage." But the other day I saw, under ritual sorcery, that if the team
sustains a spell, then they get +2 to their drain test target number. This
makes little sense, unless they actually take drain at the time of casting,
as otherwise, as you all would have me beleive, if they took drain after
dropping the spell, then they would no longer have the +2 for sustaining a
spell. Also, come to think of it, would not normal sustained spells have a
+2 to their drain tests if the ritual sorcery does?

Or is the bit on page 112 only for the injury mods? If this is the case, then
efects such as those of a chaos spell would effect resistance tests (meaning
like damage resistance tests) of their target. Nasty.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE d@ H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v C+ U P? !L !3 E? N K- W+ M
!V po@ Y t(+) !5 !j r+(++) G(+) !tv(--) b++ D+ B? e+ u@ h+(*)
f+@ !r n--(----)@ !y+
Message no. 35
From: Loki <jek5313@*******.TAMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 1994 10:56:45 -0500
Ivy:


Apologies for the mis-attribution.


--> Whatta ya do, work at Doc. Doom's think tank? <grin>

Hah! I RUN Doom's think tank. :) Check the .sig.


--

Dark Thought Publications & Doom Technologies, Inc.
>>> Working on solutions best left in the dark.
Message no. 36
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 1994 12:59:49 -0700
Ivy writes:

> Well, actually, you don't do the Drain Resistance Test till after the
> sustaining period is over. SRII, pg. 132, left column, under the bolded
> Drain Resistance, first sentance, starting with; Lastly, the Spellcaster...

Wrong! Notice the steps of spell casting are as follows. (SRII page 129)

A) Determine Spell
B) Determine Target
C) Apply Situation Modifiers
D) Make Spell Success Test
E) Mkae Spell Resistance Test
F) Determine Results
G) Make Drain Resistance Test

Notice that Drain Resistance is he last step. That's why it sayes "Lastly".
The last step to spell casting is Drain Resistance. Nowhere does it say you
make your Drain Resistance Test at the end of spell sustating.

As I side note, I found the answer as to how sustained spells affect astral
bodies. They don't since (SRII page 128), "Magicians man maintain spells while
astrally perceiving, but not while astrally projecting." Naturally FASA didn't
consider what would happen if another magician casted a sustained spell on
an astral magician, but the rules have always been less than flawless.

And Damion asked:

>While we're on the subject of sustained spells, it says the mage has a
>"universal target modifier...this target modifier affects all other tests"
>Does this include the drain resistance test? Or the damage resistance test?
>Or the combat pool dice allocated to evade damage?

No. The books says "No target modifiers apply to this test." (SRII page 132).
Injury modifiers do not affect the Damage Resistance Test, and that includes
combat pool dice allowcated tothe DRT. Interestily, the Injury Modifier is
also a "univeral modifier" like the one for sustaining spells. However the
rules do not say that no target modifiers apply to the DRT. I wonder if this
was an oversight?

>The reason I asak is that I always thought these three tests had _no_
>modifiers on them at all, none. I got this idea from page 112, where it say,
>under the injury modifier "...universal modifier...applies to nearly all
>success tests...except those involving attempts to resist damage or avoid
>damage."

The exact reading of the sentence says that the Injury Modifier does not apply
to test to resist damage, however combined with the sustained spell modifier
you an easily infer that Universal Modifiers do not apply do test to resist
damage.

> But the other day I saw, under ritual sorcery, that if the team
>sustains a spell, then they get +2 to their drain test target number. This
>makes little sense, unless they actually take drain at the time of casting,
>as otherwise, as you all would have me beleive, if they took drain after
>dropping the spell, then they would no longer have the +2 for sustaining a
>spell. Also, come to think of it, would not normal sustained spells have a
>+2 to their drain tests if the ritual sorcery does?

I would call this a screw up on FASA's part. Gee, the rules aren't perfect
afterall.

*******************************************************************************
* See Ya in Shadows * * "Trust No One." *
* Jason J Carter * Carter@***.EDU * The late Deep Throat *
* The Nightstalker * * The X-Files *
*******************************************************************************
Message no. 37
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 1994 02:45:54 -0700
On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Ivy Ryan wrote:

> Well, actually, you don't do the Drain Resistance Test till after the
> sustaining period is over. SRII, pg. 132, left column, under the bolded
> Drain Resistance, first sentance, starting with; Lastly, the Spellcaster...

<Evil grin> You caught that one fair and square, Ivy; the mage didn't
really bother saving any dice for drain due to this and the fact that he
knew he was going to be dead long before the sustaining period was over.

> Ivy


+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 38
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 1994 08:42:56 -0700
J.D.Falk's gripe about my calling the Internet (all bow) a "BBS".

Sorry JD, I fail to see the difference.

I'm sure you've heard the old saying; "If it looks like a..."

This is just the biggest BBS in the world, as far as I can see.

Ivy
Message no. 39
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 1994 10:02:28 -0700
On Sun, 24 Jul 1994, Adam Getchell wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Ivy Ryan wrote:
>
> > Well, actually, you don't do the Drain Resistance Test till after the
> > sustaining period is over. SRII, pg. 132, left column, under the bolded
>
> <Evil grin> You caught that one fair and square, Ivy; the mage didn't
> really bother saving any dice for drain due to this and the fact that he
> knew he was going to be dead long before the sustaining period was over.
>

I get it. The old "If I'm gonna die, you're ALL going with me <Mwaa, ha,
ha, ha>!" tactic. Ouch! <cubed> Definitely no sense of humor, none,
nada, zip, gone. Wouldn't wanna piss him off (If he was still around
that is) at all.

Ivy
Message no. 40
From: Paolo Marcucci <marcucci@***.TS.ASTRO.IT>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 08:48:32 METDST
[snip]
> Granted it may take them a while, but maybe they'll catch on. (Hmm, sir,
> our bullets seem to be having little effect on yonder glowing mage
> dripping with power. Perhaps we should try twelve kilograms of C-12
> strapped to a sneaky-snooper drone. Methinks the personal anti-bullet
> barrier will be ineffectual...) You get the idea.
[snip]
>
> Marc
>

Eheheh... I've actually tried this. Well, a building now is somehow
lower than it was before. But maybe twelve kg are too much for the deal.
W've try to calculate something like that: how much of a road will go
to a reasonable height with the appropriate use of 10kg of C-12 carefully
inserted below it?

Our best response was that 100mt of the road were blown away in pieces.
Any opinions?

Bye, Paolo

--
______________________________________________________________________
Paolo Marcucci Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste - Italy
marcucci@***.ts.astro.it http://www.oat.ts.astro.it/marcucci.html
Message no. 41
From: Dylan Northrup <northrup@*****.CAS.USF.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 10:07:17 -0400
On Sun, 24 Jul 1994, Ivy Ryan wrote:

> J.D.Falk's gripe about my calling the Internet (all bow) a "BBS".
>
> Sorry JD, I fail to see the difference.
>
> I'm sure you've heard the old saying; "If it looks like a..."
>
> This is just the biggest BBS in the world, as far as I can see.

So a mortar is a big gun, eh? And a icbm is just a bottle rocket on a
larger scale? And a SR-71 is just a really advanced hangglider with an
engine?

Doc "Please don't start another guns/planes discussion" X
*****************************************************************************
* Dylan Northrup <northrup@*****.cas.usf.edu> * PGP and Geek Code available *
*********************************************** via WWW and upon request *
* Will code HTML for food * KIBO #7 * <http://www.cas.usf.edu/dylan.html>; *
*****************************************************************************
-----------------------
Random Babylon 5 Quote:
-----------------------
"Savor the mystery, Stephen. We don't get nearly enough of them."
-- Vance Hendricks (to Dr. Franklin), "Infection"
Message no. 42
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 11:37:55 -0400
>>>>> "Ivy" == Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG> writes:

Ivy> I'm sure you've heard the old saying; "If it looks like a..."
Ivy> This is just the biggest BBS in the world, as far as I can see.

It looks like a mailing list to me, and nothing like a BBS.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> | "Good, bad... I'm the guy with the
gun."
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox | --Ashe, "Army of Darkness"
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 43
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 16:11:10 -0400
On Sun, 24 Jul 1994, Ivy Ryan wrote:

> J.D.Falk's gripe about my calling the Internet (all bow) a "BBS".
>
> Sorry JD, I fail to see the difference.
>
> I'm sure you've heard the old saying; "If it looks like a..."
>
> This is just the biggest BBS in the world, as far as I can see.
>
Like I said, Ivy, I'll send you the appropriate FAQ(s) if you'd
like. I merely get annoyed with various attitudes, and that message was
the worst of 'em all that day.

"I may be as bad as the worst /-----------------\
but, thank God, | J.D. Falk |
I am as good as the best." | jdfalk@****.com |
-Walt Whitman \-----------------/
Message no. 44
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Grimoire (fwd)
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 15:27:39 -0700
On Mon, 25 Jul 1994, Dylan Northrup wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Jul 1994, Ivy Ryan wrote:
>
> > J.D.Falk's gripe about my calling the Internet (all bow) a "BBS".
>
> So a mortar is a big gun, eh?
Yep

And a icbm is just a bottle rocket on a larger scale?

Yep

And a SR-71 is just a really advanced hangglider with an engine?

Yep.

So, what's your problem? The principles are the same. I spent 20 years
working on a real communications system for Uncle Sam. I even worked on
what became the Internet after Uncle Army gave it to the colleges to
use. The difference is scale, nothing else.

Ivy
Message no. 45
From: toby <t_strube@**********.UTAS.EDU.AU>
Subject: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 12:17:43 +1000
G'day, I just bought the Grimoire the other day and it's excellent.
However I was wondering, (after reading about Magical Circles), whether
phsical adepts can be in the same magical circle as magicians or shamans,
or do they need to be in a physical adept only circle, like the Thorns.

Tobias Strube
University of Tasmania.
Message no. 46
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 15:12:13 +1000
toby wrote:

> However I was wondering, (after reading about Magical Circles), whether
> phsical adepts can be in the same magical circle as magicians or shamans,
> or do they need to be in a physical adept only circle, like the Thorns.

I think that these Circles are just organisations of people with
something in common, for the purpose of Initiating and promoting
those common goals.

So I think a physical adept could join. They of course couldn't help
in ritual magic, but they could provide support for operations in other
ways. And the group can help them Initiate.

In my opinion.

luke
Message no. 47
From: Jesper Soderlund <erax3@*******.ERICSSON.SE>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 09:08:44 +0200
Toby wrote:

>G'day, I just bought the Grimoire the other day and it's excellent.
>However I was wondering, (after reading about Magical Circles), whether>
>phsical adepts can be in the same magical circle as magicians or shamans,
>or do they need to be in a physical adept only circle, like the Thorns.

>Tobias Strube
>University of Tasmania.

I'd say that they could, but the practicality of a joint mage/shaman - Physical
adept should tend to keep these ventures to a minimum.

Mages need hermetical libraries to do research, Shamans (and Shawomans) need
herbs, tribal painting material, medicin lodge material etc. The physical
adept needs meditation grounds (a zen garden perhaps?), workout gear, people
to spare with (I doubt that a mage'll want to spare against a PA :->) and
probably big training grounds as well.

So, you see. If it's a democratic group the different groups have so little
in common (mages and shamans should have a difficult enough time to get along)
that they're bound to have big arguments over what to buy next:

"Too heal the sickness of the city, I need a powerful place where I
I can practise and make my medicin strong. You cannot be aginst mother
nature herself?"

"I think that we should build a dojo, you guys look like you can could
need some workout! By the way that way I can become better in the
physical field and so better protect you so that you can perform your
weed-eating rituals"
"I only need 64k for a new computer library..and I need a new computer"

in unison from the first two speakers "NOOOO!"

Could be a fun roleplaying challange to have so different characters though.
But the groups tha manage to stay together inspite of their very different
view on life, the universe and everything should indeed be rare.

/Jeppe

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesper Soderlund "Ours is not to reason why,
Computer Science Major Ours is but to do and die"
c89jesso@***.ida.liu.se - Tennyson's "Charge of the light brigade"
Linkoping Institute of technology
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 48
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@******.UOW.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 18:43:14 +0000
Tobias writes:

> G'day, I just bought the Grimoire the other day and it's excellent.
> However I was wondering, (after reading about Magical Circles), whether
> phsical adepts can be in the same magical circle as magicians or shamans,
> or do they need to be in a physical adept only circle, like the Thorns.

I assume you mean magical groups by this. Phys adepts cannot use magic
circles, neither can shamans for that matter.
I would say yes, but perhaps apply the +2 mod like they have for admitting both
mages and shamans. This would mean that there would be very few magical groups
who would be able to admit phys adepts as no bunch of mages/shamans wants to
have a +2 mod to get an astral conenction. Then again, maybe it might work
without the mod.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-Mail: u9467882@******.uow.edu.au

(Geek Code 2.1) GE d@ H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v C+ U P? !L !3 E? N K- W+ M
!V po@ Y t(+) !5 !j r+(++) G(+) !tv(--) b++ D+ B? e+ u@ h+(*)
f+@ !r n--(----)@ !y+
Message no. 49
From: Darth Vader <j07c@***.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Grimoire
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 12:24:28 +0100
> >G'day, I just bought the Grimoire the other day and it's excellent.
> >However I was wondering, (after reading about Magical Circles), whether>
> >phsical adepts can be in the same magical circle as magicians or shamans,
> >or do they need to be in a physical adept only circle, like the Thorns.

> So, you see. If it's a democratic group the different groups have so little
> in common (mages and shamans should have a difficult enough time to get along)
> that they're bound to have big arguments over what to buy next:
[MUNCH] [COOL EXAMPLE] [MUNCH]

I say yes, the rules allow it and it sure is fun. I used to play an
elven hermetic mage from the Tir and my best friend in the party (we were all
pretty good chums) was a coyote shaman. We had all that typical stoned shaman
vs bookworm mage arguments, but deep down we were the best of friends. I
saved his life a couple of times and he saved mine. He even helped me (through
his tribal contacts) get all that virgin materials I needed to enchant that
munchinous power focus I wanted to have. We had great fun kicking mundane ass
together.... oh those were the days. Aheem, after a couple of runs we had
enough karma to become initiates, but decided that it was pointless to go
through this process alone (and pay double karma) when we could help each
other out, so we decided to found this group. We invited two other magicians
(one mage one shaman) that were followers of our street samie :) and the
four of us founded the 'Circle of Power' magical group. Boy did we kick ass :)
Anyway about the resources, resources were never a problem, take a look in
the Grimoire and you'll find a paragraph talking about group resources. To
make a long story shoer we used (abused) this rule to get Luxury lifestyle
for our group, even one paid his share 100K/4%K and we were all quite happy.
We even had our own villa in some remote location, complete with guardens
a mega library, lodges gymrooms ... the works.


--
Strong am I with the Force... but not that strong!
Twilight is upon me and soon night must fall.
That is the way of things ... the way of the Force.

GCS d>d- H s+: !g p? !au a- w+ v-(?) C+++ UAVSL++>UAVSL+++ P--(aren't we all?)
L+>L+++ 3 E--- N++ K W(+)(---) M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ !5 !j- R+++(--)
!G tv(++) b+++ D++ B- e+ u++(-) h*(+) f+ r- n!(----) y?

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Grimoire, 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!