Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: TopCat <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Hand razors
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 1995 18:46:02 -0500
In response to Marc Renouf's comment about hand razors being assumed as
installed in both hands...

[pg. 249 SRII. Under the heading "Cyberlimbs"] "Cyberlimbs may have spurs
or hand razors at no additional cost to the user's system."

Now, after seeing this, would you still say that? If so... why would it be
free to have left-hand razors if I had a right-cyberarm?

I think the point is clear.

-- TopCat
Message no. 2
From: Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Hand razors
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 01:19:46 GMT
> In response to Marc Renouf's comment about hand razors being assumed as
> installed in both hands...
> [pg. 249 SRII. Under the heading "Cyberlimbs"] "Cyberlimbs may have
spurs
> or hand razors at no additional cost to the user's system."
> Now, after seeing this, would you still say that? If so... why would it be
> free to have left-hand razors if I had a right-cyberarm?

Okay... now what are the rules for razors in both hands? :-)

Not in Fields of Fire, from the main rulebook... Gets tricky, no?

It's one of many logical holes in the argument. I figured that spurs or
razors meant a set in each arm: a cyberlimb only gives you one. On the other
hand the cyberlimb can be designed to mount the blades, rather than have
them shoehorned in as an afterthought: better mountings, longer blades,
et cetera. That was the "fix" we used to keep it sensible...


--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 3
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hand razors
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 15:33:07 -0400
On Fri, 30 Jun 1995, TopCat wrote:

> In response to Marc Renouf's comment about hand razors being assumed as
> installed in both hands...
>
> [pg. 249 SRII. Under the heading "Cyberlimbs"] "Cyberlimbs may have
spurs
> or hand razors at no additional cost to the user's system."
>
> Now, after seeing this, would you still say that? If so... why would it be
> free to have left-hand razors if I had a right-cyberarm?
>
> I think the point is clear.

You are absolutely correct. But I still don't care. You have
hit upon one of the few house rules I have. In my game, hand razors are
not free in only one cyberlimb. You need both to get hand razors for
free. Sorry for the confusion.

Marc
Message no. 4
From: Alexander HJ Ruis <mtg@******.nl>
Subject: Handrazors
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:14:29 +0200 (MET DST)
What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
Where do I find this information? (tried the SSC, SRII and FOF. Did I miss
something?)

Alexander Ruis

Internet: mtg@******.nl
101460.3523@**********.com
Compuserve: 101460,3523

"Kill the human race, the world would be a better place" (De Heideroosjes)
Message no. 5
From: "Mark Steedman" <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 12:21:19 GMT
Alexander HJ Ruis writes

> What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
(str)L i think conceal i'm not sure.

> Where do I find this information? (tried the SSC, SRII and FOF. Did I miss
> something?)
>
Try SR2 gear descriptions, quite a few things are not listed on the
kit charts so if something is main book many important notes may only
show up in those full descriptions. eg the rule on harpoints on
bikes/car is there for the ones that are not explicitly listed.

Mark
Message no. 6
From: Niels Broberg <nilbabo@********.dk>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 22:10:05 +0200
At 12:14 26-07-96 +0200, Alexander Ruis wrote:
>What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
>Where do I find this information? (tried the SSC, SRII and FOF. Did I miss
>something?)

Well, a little maybe - try looking under "Melee Weapons - Other" on page ..
101 in the SR2 sourcebook(softcover) - concealability 10 for the razors in
the retractable version - NA if non-retractable. Damage is (Str)L and the
improved hand razor from SSC is (Str+2)L (SR2 p. 278)

Niels
------------------------------------------------------
Niels Broberg - nilbabo@********.dk, ncb@***.ku.dk
------------------------------------------------------
"Whose motorcycle is this ?"
"It's a Chopper, baby"
"Whose Chopper is this ?"
"Zed's"
"Who's Zed ?"
"Zed's dead baby... Zed's dead"

-Pulp Fiction-
Message no. 7
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 11:09:20 +0100
Alexander HJ Ruis said on 12:14/26 Jul 96...

> What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
> Where do I find this information? (tried the SSC, SRII and FOF. Did I miss
> something?)

Most definitely you missed something. SRII page 101, in the table it says
hand razors do (str)L damage, spurs do (str)M.

The concealability is infinite when the spurs/razors are retracted, and 9
for spurs, or 10 for razors if they are extended. That does seem a bit
very high to me, especially if you see the pictures of Wolverine-
impersonators with their spurs...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Look at my cat... Why can't I live like that?
-> 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. 8
From: Niels Broberg <nilbabo@********.dk>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 1996 21:15:22 +0200
At 11:09 27-07-96 +0100, Gurth wrote:
>Alexander HJ Ruis said on 12:14/26 Jul 96...
>
>> What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
>> Where do I find this information? (tried the SSC, SRII and FOF. Did I miss
>> something?)
>
>Most definitely you missed something. SRII page 101, in the table it says
>hand razors do (str)L damage, spurs do (str)M.
>
>The concealability is infinite when the spurs/razors are retracted, and 9
>for spurs, or 10 for razors if they are extended. That does seem a bit
>very high to me, especially if you see the pictures of Wolverine-
>impersonators with their spurs...

I think that the concealability for razors is 10 when they are retracted and
NA(=) 0 when extended, the same for the spurs - the logic behind this, is
that it's still possible to notice (although difficult) the razors even when
they're retracted because of the synthetic nail replacement and _maybe_ some
of the mini-motors. The spurs are a little easier to spot because it/they
retract along the bone of the forearm and there should also be some exit
hole(s) in the back of the hand. Also if you look in Street Sam catalog (SR1
version) on page 110 it says : conc. NA/10* and NA/9* for razors and spurs,
the comment then says: *Non-retractable/retractable, which could also
suggest that Non-retract are NA and Retractable are 10 or 9.

Finally I would think that it's quite difficult to hide 2.5 cm long
fingernails made of chromed steel or Carbon fiber, even more so a long -
10-15-20 cm ? blade coming out from your hand.

Make more sense IMHO.

Niels


------------------------------------------------------
Niels Broberg - nilbabo@********.dk, ncb@***.ku.dk
------------------------------------------------------
"Whose motorcycle is this ?"
"It's a Chopper, baby"
"Whose Chopper is this ?"
"Zed's"
"Who's Zed ?"
"Zed's dead, baby... Zed's dead"

-Pulp Fiction-
Message no. 9
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 96 19:38:56 +1100
>The concealability is infinite when the spurs/razors are retracted, and 9
>for spurs, or 10 for razors if they are extended. That does seem a bit
>very high to me, especially if you see the pictures of Wolverine-
>impersonators with their spurs...

Razors extended barely clear the tips of the false fingernails that cover
the slots. It's a RAZOR, not a sword... :)
Spurs, when retracted, slide into the bone cavities, and are fairly hard
to spot... the most visible part would be the covering of the holes, I'd
imagine. Of course, spurs, when extended, have a concealability of "Yeah,
Right".


--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ \
| "As soon as we started programming, we found to our surprise that it |
| wasn't as easy to get programs right as we had thought. Debugging |
| had to be discovered. I can remember the exact instant when I |
| realized that a large part of my life from then on was going to be |
| spent in finding mistakes in my own programs." -- Maurice Wilkes |
| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
\_______________________________________________________________________/
Message no. 10
From: Niels Broberg <nilbabo@********.dk>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 22:11:29 +0200
At 19:38 28-07-96 +1100, Robert Watkins wrote:

>Razors extended barely clear the tips of the false fingernails that cover
>the slots. It's a RAZOR, not a sword... :)

Don't you think that 2.5 cm of chromed steel or carbon fiber "blades"
extended from a guys fingers are a little... conspicuous ? Granted they
might not be "yeah Right" in concealability, maybe something like 2-3
depending on the circumstances. Try looking at the picture on page 249 in
the SR2 book, there's a picture of lady(?) with hand razors, although it
doesn't look like the kind that can be retracted, _I'd_ say that
Non-retractable hand razors have the same concealability as
_extended_retractable hand razors (phew).

>Spurs, when retracted, slide into the bone cavities, and are fairly hard
>to spot... the most visible part would be the covering of the holes, I'd
>imagine. Of course, spurs, when extended, have a concealability of "Yeah,
>Right".

Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin'
about bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you
took a part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?
Would the arm "die", become unresponsive or what ?(Is there a doctor in the
house ? :) ) I see them being retracted _along_ the bone which might make
some funny "lumps" along the arm unless the persons is quite muscular or
wearing something with long sleeves.

Again this is just my 0.02 $

Niels
------------------------------------------------------
Niels Broberg - nilbabo@********.dk, ncb@***.ku.dk
------------------------------------------------------
"Whose motorcycle is this ?"
"It's a Chopper, baby"
"Whose Chopper is this ?"
"Zed's"
"Who's Zed ?"
"Zed's dead, baby... Zed's dead"

-Pulp Fiction-
Message no. 11
From: sinless@**.netcom.com (Ross Hammer)
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 14:11:46 -0700
Niels wrote:
>
>At 19:38 28-07-96 +1100, Robert Watkins wrote:
>
>>Spurs, when retracted, slide into the bone cavities, and are fairly hard
>>to spot... the most visible part would be the covering of the holes, I'd
>>imagine. Of course, spurs, when extended, have a concealability of "Yeah,
>>Right".
>
>Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin'
>about bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you
>took a part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?
>Would the arm "die", become unresponsive or what ?(Is there a doctor in the
>house ? :) ) I see them being retracted _along_ the bone which might make
>some funny "lumps" along the arm unless the persons is quite muscular or
>wearing something with long sleeves.
>

If you examine the picture of a sammi in the SRI sourcebook, he has some rather
large lumps on the back of his hand where the spurs slide out. Unless your
wearing large, thick gloves or your sleeves cover your hands, it should be quite
noticable.

-SINless
Message no. 12
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 96 07:50:07 +1100
>The concealability is infinite when the spurs/razors are retracted, and 9
>for spurs, or 10 for razors if they are extended. That does seem a bit
>very high to me, especially if you see the pictures of Wolverine-
>impersonators with their spurs...

Razors extended barely clear the tips of the false fingernails that cover
the slots. It's a RAZOR, not a sword... :)
Spurs, when retracted, slide into the bone cavities, and are fairly hard
to spot... the most visible part would be the covering of the holes, I'd
imagine. Of course, spurs, when extended, have a concealability of "Yeah,
Right".


--
*************************************************************************
* .--_ # "My opinions may have changed, but not the fact *
* _-0(#)) # that I'm right." -- Old Fortune Saying *
* @__ )/ # *
* )=(===__==,= # Robert Watkins <---> robertdw@*******.com.au *
* {}== \--==--`= # *
* ,_) \ # "A friend is someone who watches the same *
* L_===__)=, # TV programs as you" *
*************************************************************************
Message no. 13
From: The Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 09:09:24 +1000 (EST)
> Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin'
> about bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you
> took a part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?
> Would the arm "die", become unresponsive or what ?(Is there a doctor in the
> house ? :) ) I see them being retracted _along_ the bone which might make
> some funny "lumps" along the arm unless the persons is quite muscular or
> wearing something with long sleeves.

Well, recalling my Human PHysiology classes from last semester (which I
actually PASSED this time), the bone marrow produces blood cells. So,
unless you have LARGE bones, anything removing a substantial portion of
the bone marrow from your body is going to cause problems:

1. Runners tend to lose lots of blood. :) If you'd like your body to
produce some more within a reasonable time frame (so that you don't keep
going woozy and fainting on your clients - looks unprofessional), then
cherish that marrow

2. White blood cells are vital to protect you from infection. After
having spurs put in, be sure you are ALWAYS treated at top clinics and
hospitals - none of this street doc stuff.

Then again, would the marrow removed to allow room for the spurs
constitute a "substantial portion" of the total body marrow?

The main problem *I* can see is that the body uses the bones to regulate
calcium levels in the blood. Excessive calcium levels in the blood
stimulate osteoblasts in the bone, to store calcium in the bone, and lack
of calcium causes osteoclasts to release calcium back into the blood.

Calcium is a vital component in the activation of muscular contraction.
Let me think further about what screwed-up calcium regulation would do to
your body...

(At first guess, I'd say lots of muscle spasms and twitches, from the
muscles over-activating, and worsened reaction, from the muscles lacking
calcium when sorely needed.)

Just my 0.02 nuyen, I may be totally on the wrong track here... anyone
with better knowledge than me, feel free to shrink my ego some more. :)


Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
Heisenberg may have slept here.
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503
------------------------------------------------------
I don't have enemies, it's just that my best friends
are trying to kill me.
------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 14
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 96 18:26:37 +1100
>>Razors extended barely clear the tips of the false fingernails that cover
>>the slots. It's a RAZOR, not a sword... :)
>
>Don't you think that 2.5 cm of chromed steel or carbon fiber "blades"
>extended from a guys fingers are a little... conspicuous ? Granted they
>might not be "yeah Right" in concealability, maybe something like 2-3
>depending on the circumstances. Try looking at the picture on page 249 in
>the SR2 book, there's a picture of lady(?) with hand razors, although it
>doesn't look like the kind that can be retracted, _I'd_ say that
>Non-retractable hand razors have the same concealability as
>_extended_retractable hand razors (phew).

First: The artwork is usually overdone. Razors are described as being
just clearing the fingernails. Sure, it's 2.5 cm of chromed steel, but
most of that is in the finger.
Second: They do. 10.

>Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin'
>about bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you
>took a part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?

I wouldn't know, but I imagine there's something they could do. And even
if they retracted into slots ALONG the bone, that wouldn't necessarily be
obvious. (The spur that goes into the elbow is actually specified as
sliding into the major bone in the forearm.)



--
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. 15
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.com>
Subject: Re: Handrazors -Reply
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 13:10:37 -0500
>Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin' about
>bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you took a
>part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?
>Would the arm "die", become unresponsive or what ?(Is there a doctor in the
> house ? :) ) I see them being retracted _along_ the bone which might make
>some funny "lumps" along the arm unless the persons is quite muscular or
>wearing something with long sleeves.

I'm not a doctor (and I don't even play one on TV) but the amount of marrow loss
from putting in a spur would not be a problem. The marrow is used to produce
blood, so the arm would not die or go unresponsive. Even if you didn't want to
lose any more marrow (maybe you have 2 cyberlegs so you've lost as much as
you can afford to already) you could embed the spurs in a titanium (or some high
tech material) sheath inside the bone itself. The hole plus sheath could end up
being just as strong as the bone without the hole.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 16
From: sinless@**.netcom.com (Ross Hammer)
Subject: Re: Handrazors -Reply
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 19:49:19 -0700
Double-Domed Mike wrote:
>
>>Do you think that spur(s) get retracted _into_ a bone ? I don't know notin' about
>>bones and such (except that they can break) what would happen if you took a
>>part of the bone and removed the marrow and put a spur in instead ?
>>Would the arm "die", become unresponsive or what ?(Is there a doctor in
the
>> house ? :) ) I see them being retracted _along_ the bone which might make
>>some funny "lumps" along the arm unless the persons is quite muscular or
>>wearing something with long sleeves.
>
>I'm not a doctor (and I don't even play one on TV) but the amount of marrow loss
>from putting in a spur would not be a problem. The marrow is used to produce
>blood, so the arm would not die or go unresponsive. Even if you didn't want to
>lose any more marrow (maybe you have 2 cyberlegs so you've lost as much as
>you can afford to already) you could embed the spurs in a titanium (or some high
>tech material) sheath inside the bone itself. The hole plus sheath could end up
>being just as strong as the bone without the hole.
>

I think we're forgetting something here... As far as I can tell, when you get spurs,
you get *THREE* blades attached to your fore-arm. If you intened to retract these,
there is just no way to retract ALL THREE into the bone... there must be some kind
of a sheeth implanted for retractable spurs. If you have naturaly large arms, most
likely the sheeths themselves would not be noticable (just take out excess matter in
the way), but as afore mentioned, where the spurs exit the skin, there is going to
be, at the least, small callused lumps and a small amount of plastic and plas-skin
to prevent the exits from being sealed by your own skin.
Another note: If the person in question has a cyberarm, then there is obviously no
problem what-so-ever in incorporating the (retractable) spurs without anything more
than tiny slits in the covering pseudoflesh.

-SINless
Message no. 17
From: Niels Broberg <nilbabo@********.dk>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 23:04:26 +0200
At 18:26 29-07-96 +1100, Robert Watkins wrote:
>>>Razors extended barely clear the tips of the false fingernails that cover
>>>the slots. It's a RAZOR, not a sword... :)
>>
>>Don't you think that 2.5 cm of chromed steel or carbon fiber "blades"
>>extended from a guys fingers are a little... conspicuous ? Granted they
>>might not be "yeah Right" in concealability, maybe something like 2-3
>>depending on the circumstances. Try looking at the picture on page 249 in
>>the SR2 book, there's a picture of lady(?) with hand razors, although it
>>doesn't look like the kind that can be retracted, _I'd_ say that
>>Non-retractable hand razors have the same concealability as
>>_extended_retractable hand razors (phew).
>
>First: The artwork is usually overdone.

Agreed, especially the color drawings on page 49-64 (yrddk, IMHO)

>Razors are described as being just clearing the fingernails.

Where ?? I've looked in the Black Book, SSC and Cybertech, none of these
says this as far as I could see.

>Sure, it's 2.5 cm of chromed steel, but most of that is in the finger.

How about the picture in SSC p. 89 ? There you've got about half "inside"
and the other half "outside" that gives you fingernails which are approx.
1-1.5 cm long (outside your finger) right ? I'd call that conspicuous.

[Extended retractable vs non-retractable]
>Second: They do. 10.

By your logic extended spurs would then have 9 ?
I find this a wee bit wild, _I'd_ say that Retracted razors are 10,
retracted spurs are 9, Extended razors are 0 (maybe 2 or 3 if dark/other)
and extended spurs are (almost) always 0

[Snip retract spur _into_ bone]
>I wouldn't know, but I imagine there's something they could do.

Probably, since they can lob off and replace arms and such without any
hindrances :-)

>And even if they retracted into slots ALONG the bone, that wouldn't
>necessarily be obvious.

You're probably right - I did write "_might_ make lumps" :-)

>(The spur that goes into the elbow is actually specified as sliding into
the major >bone in the forearm.)

What elbow-spur ? The one "Hatchetman" tells about in Cybertech ?

All this handrazors ranting is of course all IMHO.

Niels
------------------------------------------------------
Niels Broberg - nilbabo@********.dk, ncb@***.ku.dk
------------------------------------------------------
"Whose motorcycle is this ?"
"It's a Chopper, baby"
"Whose Chopper is this ?"
"Zed's"
"Who's Zed ?"
"Zed's dead, baby... Zed's dead"

-Pulp Fiction-
Message no. 18
From: Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 17:17:18 -0500
At 11:04 PM 7/30/96 +0200, you wrote:
>>Razors are described as being just clearing the fingernails.
>
>Where ?? I've looked in the Black Book, SSC and Cybertech, none of these
>says this as far as I could see.

SR2 Black Book, p 249. Under the description "Hand Razors". Measure 2.5 cm
from the lowest part of the cuticle. They replace the fingernails or
retract under synthetic nails.


-Thomas Deeny
Art Director, K&L Advertising
Cartoonist at Large

"Oh happy day! I've discovered a surprise Ding Dong in my pants!"
-Robin Joynes' brother-in-law "Dave".
Message no. 19
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:46:18 +0100
Niels Broberg said on 23:04/30 Jul 96...

> >Razors are described as being just clearing the fingernails.
>
> Where ?? I've looked in the Black Book, SSC and Cybertech, none of these
> says this as far as I could see.

Anyone wanting a good picture of hand razors, try the first-edition SR
rules, page 129. That page also shows a smartlink, fingertip compartment,
and dermal plating. The razor picture shows something that looks like a
needle, sliding out from under the fingernail. The blade is about as long
as the nail, so that'd be maybe 1.5 cm.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Media pollution is a very bad solution.
-> 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. 20
From: dion.scher@*******.co.za (DION SCHER)
Subject: Handrazors
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 96 17:02:00 +0200
> What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?

I have the module Dragonhunt and they seem to feel about 5 TN to detect
if I remember correctly.
---
* SPEED 2.00 [NR] * It's more than a reader. It's a message base manager!
Message no. 21
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Handrazors
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 11:48:52 +0100
DION SCHER said on 17:02/ 7 Aug 96...

> > What's the concealability rating of handrazors? What's their damage code?
>
> I have the module Dragonhunt and they seem to feel about 5 TN to detect
> if I remember correctly.

Wasn't that for that automatic detection system? It looks like whoever
writes an adventure thinks up their own ideas for cyberware detection
systems...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Negative expectations yield negative results.
Positive expectations yield negative results.
-> 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------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Handrazors, 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!