Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Barbie <barbie@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Hello Everyone!
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 04:54:28 -0500
At 15-Aug-97 wrote GLENNROBB:

>Hi,

>Hi, Everyone. I have just recently signed on. So what are we doing
>now?

Hi Elton !!

BULL!! here is another twisted mind for you to greet.

We will teach you the way of Shadowrun:)
And I can`t wait to see more of your mindfallout, you know
what I mean, do you.

BTW: please clear your reply-to field in our mailer,
some of us are to lasy to check the reply addy.

--
Barbie-who-knows-Elton-from-more-than-one-source-:)


One lived hour is still living.
Message no. 2
From: Chris <chris_hayes@*******.COM>
Subject: Hello Everyone!
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 09:03:04 -0700
Good Morning to Everyone (Morning at least on the US West Coast),

Used to subscribe to this list, but when the list had to be reformatted
a while back (or whatever they did) I didn't have the time to resubscribe.
But then low and behold, Shadowrun 3 came out, and I knew that I just had to
get back on the list and hear what everyone is saying about it. Already
picked it up, and it was like a breath of fresh air to the Shadowrun world.
It explained so many things that before we just had to guess about. (How
long has it been out anyway?) So, just want to tell everyone that I'm back
home where I belong. Used to be just a lurker, but now I'm gonna tell
everyone my opinions on everything (that may be a good thing or a bad
thing). I'm sure I'll be talking to yall real soon!


Christopher Hayes
"Who put their hoo-hoo dilly in your cha-cha?" - Cartman
Message no. 3
From: Y.T. shadowrun y..t@********.com
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 12:27:47 +0100 (WET DST)
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--=_NextPart_Caramail_020612928404923_ID
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello I am a newcomer on this list and I'm just asking what
mean the code that some of you use like signature???
I am player and master on Shadowrun for several year now
and I've make a program to calculate the deck
Price and programs under the VRII rules, if some-one is
interesting in the stuff let me know and I post it on this
list.
YT



______________________________________________________
Boîte aux lettres - Caramail - http://www.caramail.com


--=_NextPart_Caramail_020612928404923_ID--
Message no. 4
From: A Halliwell u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 13:25:36 +0100 (BST)
And verily, didst Y.T. shadowrun hastily scribble thusly...
|Hello I am a newcomer on this list and I'm just asking what
|mean the code that some of you use like signature???

That? Oh, it's just the geek code.
(Invented by the founder of this mailing list about 6 or so years ago.)

You can find out more by going to http://www.geekcode.com/

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 5
From: Simon simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:02:42 +0200 (WesteuropÀische_Sommerzeit)
I´ve been lurking on this list a some time ago, and remembered something
along the line of my question.

In our group we are thinking of reintroducing the old Damage Codes
from SR1. We are unsure wether to go all the way, or not.
The problem lies in the way armour was treated, as it gave automatic
successes against the damage, which means it is as good for the low-body
mage as for the Troll. Or keep the system introduced in second Ed
where Armour just lowers the Power of the weapon, thereby being more
effective the higher your own Body is.

How should burst and automatic weapons be treated. Raising the Power of
the weapon, would mean using the second Ed (or 3d Ed) system. As I can't
figure out the way it was handled in 1st Ed. I´m at loss.

What about spells ? Any ideas how to convert them ?


Thanks

Simon
Message no. 6
From: Kenneth Vinson kennethv@****.wisc.edu
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:38:44 -0500
Simon wrote:
>
> I´ve been lurking on this list a some time ago, and remembered something
> along the line of my question.
>
> In our group we are thinking of reintroducing the old Damage Codes
> from SR1. We are unsure wether to go all the way, or not.
> The problem lies in the way armour was treated, as it gave automatic
> successes against the damage, which means it is as good for the low-body
> mage as for the Troll. Or keep the system introduced in second Ed
> where Armour just lowers the Power of the weapon, thereby being more
> effective the higher your own Body is.
>
> How should burst and automatic weapons be treated. Raising the Power of
> the weapon, would mean using the second Ed (or 3d Ed) system. As I can't
> figure out the way it was handled in 1st Ed. I´m at loss.
>
> What about spells ? Any ideas how to convert them ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Simon

The main difference that you're talking about, though you didn't
actually say it, is that 1st edition used "staging". 2nd and 3rd
editions use staging too but they don't have to call it that because
it's always 2. If you wanted to reintroduce variable staging to your
game while using the rest of 3rd edition you're in for some headaches.
As you alluded to in your post, the balance with the armor is completely
different after 1st edition. If you let weapons have stagings of 3 and
4 again without changing the way armor works your characters are going
to get trashed. For instance, a 1st ed assault rifle doing 5M3: let's
say attacker fires a burst and gets 3 net successes(final damage code:
8D3), the defender(with an armor jacket) will have to get *12* successes
at TN#3 in order to stage it down completely. With 1st ed. armor the
defender would have had 5 automatic successes and with at least one or
two successes on Body+Combat Pool they could get away with a moderate
wound. The automatic successes on the armor compensate for needing the
larger number of successes. I guess I might be exaggerating a little
here but I think you'd have to change the armor back to first edition as
well.

As far as the burst fire rules, 1st edition had you make a separate
to-hit roll with each bullet, adding +1 to the Power and adding the
recoil penalty for the entire burst to every bullets TN. The burst and
autofire rules as they exist in 2nd and 3rd ed premiered near the back
of the first Rigger Black Book. I remember our group was using them
with the 1st ed rules before 2nd ed without major problems. So your
major sticking point, IMHO, will be to reinstate the 1st ed. armor rules
and then see how it goes.

As for spells, you'd be messing with their whole design system since 2nd
ed. You should look in the 1st edition Grimoire at the spell design
rules there. That should help you put things back into balance with the
firearms from 1st ed. I would advise that you keep all other changes
made to magicians in 3rd edition, however. I assume that you have the
1st edition books; if you don't, you can email me privately and I'll
give you a summary of the 1st edition Grimoire spell design rules.


Cheers,

Ken Vinson
Message no. 7
From: Simon simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:51:18 +0200 (WesteuropÀische_Sommerzeit)
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Kenneth Vinson wrote:
>
> The main difference that you're talking about, though you didn't
> actually say it, is that 1st edition used "staging". 2nd and 3rd
> editions use staging too but they don't have to call it that because
> it's always 2. If you wanted to reintroduce variable staging to your
> game while using the rest of 3rd edition you're in for some headaches.
> As you alluded to in your post, the balance with the armor is completely
> different after 1st edition. If you let weapons have stagings of 3 and
> 4 again without changing the way armor works your characters are going
> to get trashed. For instance, a 1st ed assault rifle doing 5M3: let's
> say attacker fires a burst and gets 3 net successes(final damage code:
> 8D3), the defender(with an armor jacket) will have to get *12* successes
> at TN#3 in order to stage it down completely. With 1st ed. armor the

The main problem here is that you still get to use burst fire as in 2nd
Ed. This seems overly powerfull to me (and as I understand you ). I
thought of maybe raising the number of rounds you had to fire before the
Wound Level rises and dispensing with the Power rise altogether.

OTOH making the weapons that deadly, would maybe make players more afraid
of guns :)

> defender would have had 5 automatic successes and with at least one or
> two successes on Body+Combat Pool they could get away with a moderate
> wound. The automatic successes on the armor compensate for needing the
> larger number of successes. I guess I might be exaggerating a little
> here but I think you'd have to change the armor back to first edition as
> well.

Me too, but then the rise in Weapon power due to burst fire would have to
be adressed.

>
> As far as the burst fire rules, 1st edition had you make a separate
> to-hit roll with each bullet, adding +1 to the Power and adding the
> recoil penalty for the entire burst to every bullets TN. The burst and

Ack ! And felt nowadays combat took too long

> autofire rules as they exist in 2nd and 3rd ed premiered near the back
> of the first Rigger Black Book. I remember our group was using them
> with the 1st ed rules before 2nd ed without major problems. So your
> major sticking point, IMHO, will be to reinstate the 1st ed. armor rules
> and then see how it goes.
>

Sounds easy enough, as converting the weapons is no problem.

> As for spells, you'd be messing with their whole design system since 2nd
> ed. You should look in the 1st edition Grimoire at the spell design
> rules there.

Did that
That should help you put things back into balance with the
> firearms from 1st ed. I would advise that you keep all other changes
> made to magicians in 3rd edition, however. I assume that you have the
> 1st edition books; if you don't, you can email me privately and I'll
> give you a summary of the 1st edition Grimoire spell design rules.
>
Thanks, but got all the books´n stuff :)
Main problem is until now wether to use Force as Drainpower or F/2 as in
the later Editions. But I´ll have to do some more comparing before then

Simon
Message no. 8
From: Kenneth Vinson kennethv@****.wisc.edu
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:06:35 -0500
Simon wrote:
<snip>
> The main problem here is that you still get to use burst fire as in 2nd
> Ed. This seems overly powerfull to me (and as I understand you ). I
> thought of maybe raising the number of rounds you had to fire before the
> Wound Level rises and dispensing with the Power rise altogether.
>
> OTOH making the weapons that deadly, would maybe make players more afraid
> of guns :)

As I mentioned, my group used the 2nd and 3rd edition burst fire rules
in tandem with 1st edition staging and armor and we found that we liked
it just fine. I think that firearms *should* be deadly and feared and
that subtly adjusting the threat level of the opposition in your runs
will be easier than tinkering with the burst fire rules.

> Thanks, but got all the books´n stuff :)
> Main problem is until now wether to use Force as Drainpower or F/2 as in
> the later Editions. But I´ll have to do some more comparing before then
>
> Simon

As long as your using the 3rd edition rules for Spell Pool, and
resistance target # being the force, you should be okay leaving the
drain at F/2. The 1st edition rule of the magicians Sorcery skill being
the Spell Resistance TN was incredibly unbalancing and if you were going
to use that then I'd advise making the drain TN as Force.

Cheers,

Ken Vinson
Message no. 9
From: Simon simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 17:30:49 +0200 (WesteuropÀische_Sommerzeit)
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Kenneth Vinson wrote:

> Simon wrote:
> <snip>
> <snap>
> As I mentioned, my group used the 2nd and 3rd edition burst fire rules
> in tandem with 1st edition staging and armor and we found that we liked
> it just fine. I think that firearms *should* be deadly and feared and
> that subtly adjusting the threat level of the opposition in your runs
> will be easier than tinkering with the burst fire rules.

Yes, I agree. But if there are too many one shot = one dead weapons around
it will become difficult to just wound the players, or for them just to
wound someone else. This could amended with a certain amount of fudging
and GM leeway, but that would be sort of counterproductive.
A 6 round burst out of an SMG (base 4M3, AFAIK) would be 10T3 add in
explosive ammo and you´ve got 10T4 , before staging up. And the 6 points
of recoil can be easily compensated to something reasonable. This is just
a little bit scary right now. Feels a little bit on the deadly side. With
SR3 this would translate 5M4 with armour jacket and under SR1 it would be
10S4 with three more successes needed. Maybe adding only half the number
of shots fired would be more appropriate (7S4 on a 6 round burst and 5S4
on a standard one.

Not sure which system I prefer. Armour stil seems comparably weak. Maybe a
mixed system. Reduce Power by Ballistic Level and add Impact to Body. That
would need Power Levels along the lines of SR3 though.

>
> As long as your using the 3rd edition rules for Spell Pool, and
> resistance target # being the force, you should be okay leaving the
> drain at F/2. The 1st edition rule of the magicians Sorcery skill being
> the Spell Resistance TN was incredibly unbalancing and if you were going
> to use that then I'd advise making the drain TN as Force.

No. I´ll mostly keep spell effects as in SR3, will have to see about the
modifications needed to combine staging and Power mods. Though making the
number of dice rolled again dependant on Force is enticing. Magic Pool
something like Sorcery+Magic+Willpower /3 could work. still refreshes only
once per turn. I´ll have to see :)

Simon
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ken Vinson
>
>
Message no. 10
From: Adam J adamj@*********.com
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:16:17 -0600
At 16:02 29/08/2000 +0200, Simon wrote:
>
>I´ve been lurking on this list a some time ago, and remembered something
>along the line of my question.
>
>In our group we are thinking of reintroducing the old Damage Codes
>from SR1.

Issue #8 of The Shadowrun Supplemental at http://tss.dumpshock.com/tss.html
has an article about reintroducing damage codes done up by Gurth, done back
for 2nd edition. I'm not sure if he has made any changes to it for 3rd
edition at all, but I can't think of anything off the top of my head that
would need to be changed.

(BTW, please try to use a more descriptive subject line in future
messages.. if every message was titled something like "Hi everyone" and
"Hey folks" and "Yo Amigos!" we would all be tearing our hair out ;) )

Adam
--
< adamj@*********.com | ICQ# 2350330 | TSS Productions >
< The Shadowrun Supplemental: http://tss.dumpshock.com >
< ShadowFAQ: http://shadowfaq.dumpshock.com >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader: http://lists.dumpshock.com >
Message no. 11
From: Augustus shadowrun@********.net
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 10:45:45 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: Simon <simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de>

>How should burst and automatic weapons be treated. Raising the Power of
>the weapon, would mean using the second Ed (or 3d Ed) system. As I can't
>figure out the way it was handled in 1st Ed. I´m at loss.

In SR1... you rolled each bullet seperately... so if you fired a burst at a
target with an Uzi III (4M3 weapon) you rolled for a 4M3 attack 3 times
against the target.

Differences in SR1 were... Armour were automatic successes against each shot
(ie: if you had a 5/3 armour jacket on, you always got 5 automatic successes
against the attack) and there was also The Dodge Pool... (equal to your
quickness rating) that would also count as automatic successes that you
would allocate to each attack roll. And T# penalties added up each time...

Of note, there was no 'Combat Pool' per se... you rolled only your skill in
firearms for ranged attacks (there was a combat pool for melee combat tho)

So if you had no recoil compensation and a smartlink... your first shot
would have T#2 at short range, T#3 on second shot and T#4 on 3rd shot...

So then the defender in his 5/3 jacket would have 5 successes plus any dodge
pool for the first shot, 5 plus any more dodge pool for the second shot and
5 plus any remaining dodge pool for 3rd shot.

Then along came Rigger Black Book with its revised burst/autofire rules...
they did the same as they do in SR2/3... each 3 shots is +3 power and +1
damage level... this was to speed up combat (I had an SR1 battle where the
PCs were all firing Full Auto and the NPCs were doing the same... 7 PCs in
5/3 armour jackets and 12 NPCs in 8/6 Full Suits for armour... the battle
took about 5 and a half hours to resolve with all that continual dice
rolling per bullet)

SR1 made for more weapons... do you go for one with a higher staging (harder
for you to stage up, harder for them to stage down) or do you go for
something else? Now, in SR3 its really a choice between "Do you want gas
vent or silencer" and after that you vary t he price by gun price and clip
size (in most campaigns money isn't tight enough where PCs have to worry
about saving $200 here or $500 there in their primary weapon choice)

But with SR1 you could see somethings like where that +1 quickness of elves
really was handy (translated right to +1 for dodge pool, in SR2 it was
almost irrelevant, in SR3 with the skill linking its important once again)

In SR1, flechette ammo was actually kinda handy... it increased power by 1,
even tho it doubled armour costs, in a weapon doing 8S4 damage it became 9s
you had to resist... and explosive ammo was +2 to staging (so an 8S4 HMG
became 8S6... very hard to stage that down) and APDS halved armour (remember
it was autosuccesses... so an 8S4 APDS against a 5/3 armour would give the
defender 2 successes so far... they'd need 2 more on a bod roll (no combat
pool) T#8 to stage the damage down to Moderate.

So SR1 was alot more lethal in some regards if you had all the 'goodies' for
your guns and armour like Partial Suits and Full Suits weren't common.

But, the catch was... it almost always took 2 shots to down somebody in
SR1... if you hit a guy in 5/3 armour with a panther assault cannon
(10D4)... even if you rolled 4 successes... you'd only shave off a point of
armour on his balistic rating... so it'd be 4/2 armour after that shot... 4
autosuccesses... enough to stage it down to serious, so you can live for one
more shot.

Anyhow, hopefully that might help,

Augustus`
Message no. 12
From: Simon simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 16:51:14 +0200 (WesteuropÀische_Sommerzeit)
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Adam J wrote:

First up: Sorry for the delay. I did´nt make it inbto university these
last couple of days.

> Issue #8 of The Shadowrun Supplemental at http://tss.dumpshock.com/tss.html
> has an article about reintroducing damage codes done up by Gurth, done back
> for 2nd edition. I'm not sure if he has made any changes to it for 3rd
> edition at all, but I can't think of anything off the top of my head that
> would need to be changed.

Thanks for the pointer. Looks like the sort of thing I´ve been looking
for. Though i sort of liked the idea of autosuccesses against damage.
Helps those Body 3 characters in the campaign.


>
> (BTW, please try to use a more descriptive subject line in future
> messages.. if every message was titled something like "Hi everyone" and
> "Hey folks" and "Yo Amigos!" we would all be tearing our hair out
;) )

Sorry. I inteneded to change it after the first post but forgot.
<thwaps himself>

Simon
Message no. 13
From: Simon simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de
Subject: Hello everyone
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 17:22:47 +0200 (WesteuropÀische_Sommerzeit)
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Augustus wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Simon <simonbio@*****.fu-berlin.de>
>
> >How should burst and automatic weapons be treated. Raising the Power of
> >the weapon, would mean using the second Ed (or 3d Ed) system. As I can't
> >figure out the way it was handled in 1st Ed. I´m at loss.
>
> In SR1... you rolled each bullet seperately... so if you fired a burst at a
> target with an Uzi III (4M3 weapon) you rolled for a 4M3 attack 3 times
> against the target.
>
> Differences in SR1 were... Armour were automatic successes against each shot
> (ie: if you had a 5/3 armour jacket on, you always got 5 automatic successes
> against the attack) and there was also The Dodge Pool... (equal to your
> quickness rating) that would also count as automatic successes that you
> would allocate to each attack roll. And T# penalties added up each time...
>
> Of note, there was no 'Combat Pool' per se... you rolled only your skill in
> firearms for ranged attacks (there was a combat pool for melee combat tho)
>
> So if you had no recoil compensation and a smartlink... your first shot
> would have T#2 at short range, T#3 on second shot and T#4 on 3rd shot...
>
> So then the defender in his 5/3 jacket would have 5 successes plus any dodge
> pool for the first shot, 5 plus any more dodge pool for the second shot and
> 5 plus any remaining dodge pool for 3rd shot.
>
Thank you very much. That´s the part I did´nt understand.


> Then along came Rigger Black Book with its revised burst/autofire rules...
> they did the same as they do in SR2/3... each 3 shots is +3 power and +1
> damage level... this was to speed up combat (I had an SR1 battle where the
> PCs were all firing Full Auto and the NPCs were doing the same... 7 PCs in
> 5/3 armour jackets and 12 NPCs in 8/6 Full Suits for armour... the battle
> took about 5 and a half hours to resolve with all that continual dice
> rolling per bullet)

Ouch ! but I can remember those times.... Though playing an shapechanging
dragon sorcerer hunting go gangers started shortening things a little ;)
Yes, I was hopelessly munchkin back then. I did change though. At least a
little.

<Snip damage examples>

>
>
> So SR1 was alot more lethal in some regards if you had all the 'goodies' for
> your guns and armour like Partial Suits and Full Suits weren't common.
>
they still are´nt. At least IMC.

> But, the catch was... it almost always took 2 shots to down somebody in
> SR1... if you hit a guy in 5/3 armour with a panther assault cannon
> (10D4)... even if you rolled 4 successes... you'd only shave off a point of
> armour on his balistic rating... so it'd be 4/2 armour after that shot... 4
> autosuccesses... enough to stage it down to serious, so you can live for one
> more shot.
>

But you could add overdamage rules. So staging up beyond deadly becomes
possible. In that case there still woud be a chance of one shot takedowns.


> Anyhow, hopefully that might help,
>
Yes it did. Thanks again


Simon
>
>
>
>
>
>

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Hello everyone, 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!