Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: HB Monsters
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 10:48:49 +0200
[on HB's monsters]

>Well if they don't they are history, but 1 monster vs 4 or 5 PC's
>should soon even up the odds. I have read this one and there is
>really little else you can do about it but someone should have one of
>the swords (you can get 2 by the time you have to defeat this
>beastie) and then it is plenty killable all on 1 and you should not
>take any damage a treat spell cannot fix in the process.

Well, it wasn't that easy. If nobody has Armed Combat skill, the swords are
a bit difficult to use. Those pesky creatures have +3 Reach, so they hit at
a 2, even if you're using a sword. OTOH, someone using Unarmed Combat to
wield a sword gets a TN of 10 (4 base, +4 for the skill web, +3 enemy's
reach, -1 own reach) Who do you think will kill the other? The critter with
5 dice (+ threat rating) and 9S damage or the runner with 6 dice (+ pool)
and 12M damage?


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Tijd voor een andere tekst...
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 2
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 11:13:26 GMT
Gurth writes

> [on HB's monsters]
>
> >Well if they don't they are history, but 1 monster vs 4 or 5 PC's
> >should soon even up the odds. I have read this one and there is
> >really little else you can do about it but someone should have one of
> >the swords (you can get 2 by the time you have to defeat this
> >beastie) and then it is plenty killable all on 1 and you should not
> >take any damage a treat spell cannot fix in the process.
>
> Well, it wasn't that easy. If nobody has Armed Combat skill, the swords are
> a bit difficult to use. Those pesky creatures have +3 Reach, so they hit at
> a 2, even if you're using a sword. OTOH, someone using Unarmed Combat to
> wield a sword gets a TN of 10 (4 base, +4 for the skill web, +3 enemy's
> reach, -1 own reach) Who do you think will kill the other? The critter with
> 5 dice (+ threat rating) and 9S damage or the runner with 6 dice (+ pool)
> and 12M damage?
>
>
Very true 1 runner is monster food alright but a group become another
problem.
5 runners: 4 base, +4 default +2 reach of 3 - 1 = 10 then minus 4 for
four friends in combat = 6's.
while the monter is 4 - 3 reach + 1 swords reach + 4 extra enemies in
combat = 6's. Ok its got threat rating but you have karma, not much i
know but, note if defaulting you may not use dice pools except karma.
If just one pc has armed combat its another game
base 4, + 2 overreached - 4 for friends = 2's can we say monster
burgers, if the party does not have a single soul with armed well i
admit they got problems just hope they are ready to use some of that
pool and as it'll burn just as well for autos several points should
at a nasty cost sort out a nasty pc capability oversight.

Anyway what about spell the critter? i cannot remember off hand what
magic you get allowed for this bit but i think its intact, ok said
critter has a big willpower but a couple of decent manacolts should
rather even the score even so.

> Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl -
> http://www.xs4all.nl/%gurth/index.html
>

Mark
Message no. 3
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 01:29:27 +1000
Mark Steedman writes:

> note if defaulting you may not use dice pools except karma.

You sure about this? Under the Combat Pool section it says:

"The maximum number of Combat Pool dice that a character can add to any
offensive Success Test is equal to his rating in the skill for which he is
making the test."

Could it not be interpreted that "I'm making the test using my Gunnery
skill, so therefore the maximum number of dice I can put in is equal to my
Gunnery skill"? Irrelevent of whether Gunenry is the skill he is supposed to
be using for the test or not. Gunnery is "the skill for which he is making
the test", is it not?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 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+
Message no. 4
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 14:31:20 +0200
>Could it not be interpreted that "I'm making the test using my Gunnery
>skill, so therefore the maximum number of dice I can put in is equal to my
>Gunnery skill"? Irrelevent of whether Gunenry is the skill he is supposed to
>be using for the test or not. Gunnery is "the skill for which he is making
>the test", is it not?

This is the way I always interpreted that rule; I also add cyberware
modifiers to the skill rating to find the maximum number of Combat Pool dice
you can roll.


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Beware of unfamiliar chickens
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 5
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 00:31:38 +3400
Gurth writes:

> This is the way I always interpreted that rule; I also add cyberware
> modifiers to the skill rating to find the maximum number of Combat Pool dice
> you can roll.

I assume you mean bioware modifiers, what cyberware is there that modifes
the users skill ratings? Some cyberware (noteably skillwires) _replaces_ the
users skill Ratings, but none that I can think of augment it.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 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+
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 11:43:55 +0200
>> This is the way I always interpreted that rule; I also add cyberware
>> modifiers to the skill rating to find the maximum number of Combat Pool dice
>
>I assume you mean bioware modifiers, what cyberware is there that modifes
>the users skill ratings? Some cyberware (noteably skillwires) _replaces_ the
>users skill Ratings, but none that I can think of augment it.

Yes, bioware modifiers :) The only cyberware I can think of at the moment
that adds dice to skills is an encephalon, and then only in the form of a
Task Pool. But now I've got a small question: what if you've got bioware
that gives extra skill dice, and you're using the skill from a chip? Like,
my character with cultured tailored pheromones level 2 using a rating 3
Negotiation chip: will he roll 3 dice or 7? (Not counting the halving of the
pheromones' level for talking to someone of another race.)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Too many problems... Why am I here?
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 7
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 00:47:29 +1000
Gurth writes:

> But now I've got a small question: what if you've got bioware that gives
> extra skill dice, and you're using the skill from a chip? Like, my character
> with cultured tailored pheromones level 2 using a rating 3 Negotiation chip:
> will he roll 3 dice or 7?

In the case of cultured tailored pheromones, I'd say that you would get the
bonus (after all, you can't exactly turn them on or off and they're still
going to be affecting people around you regardless of what you are doing, or
how you're doing it in this case). In the case of a reflex recorder I'd say
no. Skillwires replace the users nervous system with their own (and take
over the neccessary bits), so the reflex recorder would never get used. As
for enhanced articulation, I'd say yes, since it is irrelevent how you got
the skill for this bit of bioware (it affects the joints, not your own
personal ability). I can't think of any other bioware that adds to skills.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 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+
Message no. 8
From: Jonas Gabrielson <m94jga@*******.TDB.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 18:11:21 +0200
On Tue, 2 May 1995, Damion Milliken wrote:

> Gurth writes:
>
> > (On Bioware and Skillwires)
>
> In the case of a reflex recorder I'd say
> no. Skillwires replace the users nervous system with their own (and take
> over the neccessary bits), so the reflex recorder would never get used.

This makes no sense to me. I mean, I'm no cyberware designer, but
the easiest way to make a Skillwire system must be to use the existing
nervous system for signal transmitting, not building a whole secondary
nervous system with electric wires. This means the wires from the system
intercepts normal neurons somewhere in the spinal or basal ganglia, and
reflex recorders come later, so they *would* add to the system's rating.

-Jonas
Message no. 9
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 00:03:52 +1000
Jonas Gabrielson writes:

> This makes no sense to me. I mean, I'm no cyberware designer, but
> the easiest way to make a Skillwire system must be to use the existing
> nervous system for signal transmitting, not building a whole secondary
> nervous system with electric wires. This means the wires from the system
> intercepts normal neurons somewhere in the spinal or basal ganglia, and
> reflex recorders come later, so they *would* add to the system's rating.

Ya, you are right. Skilwires (and skillwires plus) will highjack the users
existing nervous system. It is skill hardwires which have their own set of
"nerves". Although, on your reasoning, I can't see just why, but the diagram
(in SSC) certainly indicates this is so.

--
Damion Milliken Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 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+
Message no. 10
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 12:04:07 +0200
>Ya, you are right. Skilwires (and skillwires plus) will highjack the users
>existing nervous system. It is skill hardwires which have their own set of
>"nerves". Although, on your reasoning, I can't see just why, but the diagram
>(in SSC) certainly indicates this is so.

I don't quite see the point of skill hardwires, really. Maybe the reduced
Essence cost, but apart from that I'd say it's much better to get Skillwires
Plus and a softlink-2; or if you want "hardwired" skills some headware
memory with the skills installed in that instead...


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
What's next?
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 11
From: Andy Butcher <Fiend@*********.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 13:07:19 +0100
Jonas Gabrielson wrote:

>> This makes no sense to me. I mean, I'm no cyberware designer, but
>> the easiest way to make a Skillwire system must be to use the existing
>> nervous system for signal transmitting, not building a whole secondary
>> nervous system with electric wires. This means the wires from the system
>> intercepts normal neurons somewhere in the spinal or basal ganglia, and
>> reflex recorders come later, so they *would* add to the system's rating.

And Damion wrote:

>Ya, you are right. Skilwires (and skillwires plus) will highjack the users
>existing nervous system. It is skill hardwires which have their own set of
>"nerves". Although, on your reasoning, I can't see just why, but the diagram
>(in SSC) certainly indicates this is so.

Let's face it, very little of the cyberware in Shadowrun makes sense in
terms of essence cost and invasiveness. Why does a Decker need nothing more
than a datajack to use a deck, but a Rigger need a massively invasive system
to achieve much the same levels of input/output and control? Okay, you could
say that Riggers have the equivalent of a cranial deck, but what's to stop
one just having a datajack and putting all the electronics in a 'rigging deck'?

The Shadowrun cyberware system is one of the most poorly thought out and
inconsistent areas of the game - it's fairly obvious that the designers just
thought 'this would be cool, and this would be great, oh, and let's have
that as well' without any real thought about how it all related. It's a
shame, considering they then spent a long time trying to justify magic in a
coherent and logical fashion. Okay, it doesn't quite work and there are some
problems, but Shadowrun is still the only game system I've ever played that
sets out 'ground rules' for magic that let the players understand roughly
how things work. This has always been one of the system's strong points for me.

For ages I've been toying with the idea of creating an alternate cyberware
system based on the technical explanations in the Shadowlore book and
systems like Cyberpunk and Cyberspace, both of which have much more
'modular' cyberware systems (especially the later). Unfortunately it's
always ended up being too much work, plus my players would hate to have to
read new lists of essence costs, etc. If anyone's interested, though, I
could resurrect some of my doomed attempts for all to see (and flame
mercilessly, no doubt... ;)

Andy Butcher | "Whether you think you will succeed
PC Gamer Magazine | or not, you are right."
Fiend@*********.co.uk | Henry Ford
Message no. 12
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: HB Monsters
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 01:23:16 +0930
Andy Butcher wrote:
> Let's face it, very little of the cyberware in Shadowrun makes sense in
> terms of essence cost and invasiveness. Why does a Decker need nothing more
> than a datajack to use a deck, but a Rigger need a massively invasive system
> to achieve much the same levels of input/output and control? Okay, you could
> say that Riggers have the equivalent of a cranial deck, but what's to stop
> one just having a datajack and putting all the electronics in a 'rigging deck'?

The generally accepted excuse is that Riggers need the equivalent of Wired
Reflexes to get the speed advantage. I mean, there are advantages for
cybernetic control that anyone with a datajack can get, but for the real
juicy stuff, you need internal hardware. There's still some physical
control, ya know.

Also, remember that, typically, programs aren't run on a deck. You've got
your MPCP, but just about everything else would run in the system where
your persona is... which is why it adds to system load. Nobody could cram
enough gear into a deck for it to be able to handle EVERYTHING that's
involved in decking. A rigger system, however, is totally self-contained.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.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.
*** Finger me for my geek code ***

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about HB Monsters, 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!