Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 13:55:01 2002
In my group we've been running into problems with combat taking too long so we decided to
make a mandate along the lines of, on a players initiative pass they are allowed 10
seconds to announce their action for that phase, this includes asking questions, thinking
about different options and guessing TNs. This time can be extended by the GM at the GMs
discretion. We do this to prevent a 2 minute fight lasting 2 hours and to simulate the
fact that your character has very little time to think but knows a little more about the
situation than you.

-George Waksman
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Wildside)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 14:40:01 2002
--- George S Waksman <waksman@***.EDU> wrote:
>
> In my group we've been running into problems with combat taking too long
> so we decided to make a mandate along the lines of, on a players
> initiative pass they are allowed 10 seconds....<snip>
> -George Waksman
>
10 SECONDS!! That is an eternity. I give experienced players 3 seconds and
beginners 5 seconds! The only extension to this time occurs if a player
wants to do something and no one can remember the rule (in this case I
generally decide the rule and we check the "right way to do it" after the
game). This does a couple of things. It speeds things up immensely, and it
makes the players pay attention during the declaration step.


Colin

______________________________________________________________________
Web-hosting solutions for home and business! http://website.yahoo.ca
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 15:45:03 2002
Wildside wrote:

>--- George S Waksman <waksman@***.EDU> wrote:
>>
>> In my group we've been running into problems with combat taking too long
>> so we decided to make a mandate along the lines of, on a players
>> initiative pass they are allowed 10 seconds....<snip>
>> -George Waksman
>>
>10 SECONDS!! That is an eternity. I give experienced players 3 seconds and
>beginners 5 seconds! The only extension to this time occurs if a player
>wants to do something and no one can remember the rule (in this case I
>generally decide the rule and we check the "right way to do it" after the
>game). This does a couple of things. It speeds things up immensely, and it
>makes the players pay attention during the declaration step.
>
>
>Colin
>

Yeah but those 10 seconds are meant to include any situational questions like "How
much cover does FOO have?" or anything else the character might know about the
situation which the GM knows and the player does not; it's more fair that way.

-George Waksman
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 15:55:06 2002
At 01:52 PM 2/8/2002 -0500, George S Waksman wrote:

>In my group we've been running into problems with combat taking too long
>so we decided to make a mandate along the lines of, on a players
>initiative pass they are allowed 10 seconds to announce their action for
>that phase, this includes asking questions, thinking about different
>options and guessing TNs. This time can be extended by the GM at the GMs
>discretion. We do this to prevent a 2 minute fight lasting 2 hours and to
>simulate the fact that your character has very little time to think but
>knows a little more about the situation than you.

Here's how I handle situations like this:

If they start asking questions it means that their character is using an
action to look around. They burn an action making a perception test.

If they take, what I estimate, to be to long to think of an action, I
declare that their character is using their action to think about what to
do next and move on to the next person.

After this happens a few times the players start paying attention and start
thinking quickly :)

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 16:15:03 2002
At 2/8/02 02:57 PM, you wrote:
>If they start asking questions it means that their character is using an
>action to look around. They burn an action making a perception test.

I disagree. There's a lot of information that a person will notice quickly
without needing to percieve anything. I'll probably notice that there are 4
CorpSec goons around me and each is holding an SMG and wearing what looks
to be pretty heavy armor. I'll be able to tell what my line of sight to
each of them is, where everyone else is in relation to myself, how much
ammo I have left, a multitude of things that may take a number of questions
to learn, but isn't anything you wouldn't notice in less than a second. Now
if I want to tell what kind of SMG it is, what all the writing on his armor
says, take a good long look at how the form-fitting armor clings to that
cute female guard before I buy it... that'd be perception. At least, that's
how I see it.

>If they take, what I estimate, to be to long to think of an action, I
>declare that their character is using their action to think about what to
>do next and move on to the next person.

Again I disagree. I often think about a variety of things that my character
would likely know before I do something. I check my current ammo, see
exactly what my guns do and at about what range, maybe I mentally go over a
few rules in my head to see how real-life actions convert into game terms.
In-game my character notes his ammo count in his display linked smartgun
and aims at Goon the Second. He doesn't have to think about how much of a
TN decrease you get a long vs medium range with a heavy pistol and compare
the effect this will likely have on his firearms skill. He knows about how
well he can hit something with it out to around a certain range and that's
all that matters.

I feel that a lot of it comes down to trying to describe something as
opposed to experiencing it. It may take a page of text to describe a scene
(or a chapter or so if Dickens is writing) whereas it only takes a second
or two to feel it when you're there.

Belgand


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jane VR)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 18:30:07 2002
>From: "Mark M. Smith" <belgand@**************.com>

>I disagree. There's a lot of information that a person will notice quickly
>without needing to percieve anything. I'll probably notice that there are 4
>CorpSec goons around me and each is holding an SMG and wearing what looks
>to be pretty heavy armor. I'll be able to tell what my line of sight to
>each of them is, where everyone else is in relation to myself, how much
>ammo I have left, a multitude of things that may take a number of questions
>to learn, but isn't anything you wouldn't notice in less than a second.

But if the player was paying attention, they would know all that stuff
already. Especially when you just told the person before them.


>Again I disagree. I often think about a variety of things that my character
>would likely know before I do something. I check my current ammo, see
>exactly what my guns do and at about what range,

you could check that while someone elese is having their turn.

>I feel that a lot of it comes down to trying to describe something as
>opposed to experiencing it. It may take a page of text to describe a scene
>(or a chapter or so if Dickens is writing) whereas it only takes a second
>or two to feel it when you're there.

A second or two is almost a whole Combat Turn.

Players use the time that the GM takes to describe, to assess and plan. And
if they want their actions to be maximally effective they will ask for a
description of what they can see in their quick look around. They don't
necessarily mean to do this but they conflate 20 seconds of thinking time
with half a second of looking around time.

Jane


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Fri Feb 8 19:20:01 2002
At 2/8/02 05:32 PM, you wrote:
>But if the player was paying attention, they would know all that stuff
>already. Especially when you just told the person before them.

If you're busy looking things up and such then you won't have that time,
plus what if the GM doesn't mention something that you'd want or need to
know that would be appropriate to know without a test?

>>Again I disagree. I often think about a variety of things that my character
>>would likely know before I do something. I check my current ammo, see
>>exactly what my guns do and at about what range,
>
>you could check that while someone elese is having their turn.
I usually try to, but you don't always get that chance. Besides, some of it
is personal, I prefer to have longer combat rather than a few minutes of
rolling dice. It adds to the game and makes it more real, yes it can slow
things down, but not significantly enough in my opinion based on what it
adds. A game where you only have 5 seconds to state your action is about as
much fun as a CRPG where you just click like mad to kill stuff.

I guess in the end it just comes down to what sort of play style you like
best. I only force players to make snap decisions when it serves the game
dramatically, otherwise they have a reasonable ammount of time to plan
actions and such and if they can't figure out something to do I suggest
they delay action on the turn thinking.

Belgand
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Sat Feb 9 07:10:24 2002
According to Wildside, on Fri, 08 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> 10 SECONDS!! That is an eternity. I give experienced players 3 seconds
> and beginners 5 seconds!

I give players as long as I like, which generally means that if they can't
tell me what they're actually going to be doing within a few seconds I give
them about a second more to bing talking, or else I assume they delay and
start counting down combat phases. Speeds 'em up pretty well :)

> The only extension to this time occurs if a
> player wants to do something and no one can remember the rule (in this
> case I generally decide the rule and we check the "right way to do it"
> after the game).

This doesn't get in the way of speedy player decisions, IMHO. First let
them declare what they're doing, and only then look it up -- and enforce
that they can't go back if they discover it's not a smart move after all.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That's the way that I can't win.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gak The Great)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Sun Feb 10 11:50:01 2002
<snip discussion on how much time players should be given in combat>

how do you measure the amount of time passed? Do you guess, count in your
mind ("one, two,..er, what are you doing again"), use a watch?

-- GAK THE GREAT

"Ein Ring, sie zu knechten, sie alle zu finden,
Ins Dunkel zu treiben und ewig zu binden,
Im Lande Mordor, wo die Schatten drohn."
Sauron aus "Herr der Ringe von J.R.R. Tolkien
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 09:35:01 2002
>From: "Gak The Great" <andypfister@***.net>

><snip discussion on how much time players should be given in combat>

>how do you measure the amount of time passed? Do you guess, count in >your
>mind ("one, two,..er, what are you doing again"), use a watch?


Free Action: Observe
--e.g. "How much cover does so and so have?"

Simple Action: Observe in Detail
--e.g. "Is he wearing gang colors under that long coat?"
--a.k.a. anything which would require a perception test to know

This pretty well covers giving the players more info than was contained in
the original description. If they don't know what their gun is set at, how
to aim, or which skill is required to knit during a gunfight; it comes down
to two possible problems. Either the players have never played in my game
before, or they are not paying attention. Both have remedies quite outside
of how long I let combat take. They involve (not familiar with my game):
reading one of the 9 SR2 main books I regularly loan out, reading the rules
summaries I hand out each game, or asking more questions in the first few
combat sessions. They might also involve: (players not paying attention):
character death, or some other drastic measure. Nothing kills a TT RPG like
4 hour (IRL) 9 second combats. Nothing creates such 4 hour debacles like
having to repeat oneself 30 times about what is going on. I have a 2 meter
by 1 meter dry erase board that I put combat maps on. I tell people
approximate scale when I describe the scenario. (unless the guy with the
rangefinder gets snooty, then I give them exact scale and take his first
round away :> ) I describe what has changed while everyone rolls
initiative and decides movement. [As a side note, I let tactics be rolled
and applied at this time, rather than eating up phases.] Bottom line, I
hate repeating myself. If I call out an action phase number and no one says
anything, I call out the next number. If they do/say ANYTHING (except ask
me if I need another Coke), actions are being spent. The only time I am
lenient is during the trial "dream sequence" combat I start every campaign
with. This may sound draconian, but it works. People pay attention, keep
the strategizing while fighting to a minimum, and are ready to act on their
phase. I ran a 4 minute run and gun battle between 4 PCs and 70 ghouls/4
dzoo-noo-qua (sp)/3 bogies/1 nosferatu. It took 1.5 hours of real time.
The rigger had 4 vehicles in the fight, and two of the PCs were averaging 3
action phases a turn. It was hectic and lethal. The combat map was redrawn
12 times. 3 years ago, that battle would have taken 8 hours and I would
have been homocidal. Put the some of the burden on the players, they can
take it. :)
Korishinzo

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 14:10:12 2002
According to Gak The Great, on Sun, 10 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> how do you measure the amount of time passed? Do you guess, count in your
> mind ("one, two,..er, what are you doing again"), use a watch?

If you want to do it accurately, I think you should invest in an hourglass
that runs out in, say, 5 seconds. But the way I do it is simply take a stab
at it -- not something I can easily explain.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That's the way that I can't win.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 14:10:17 2002
According to Ice Heart, on Mon, 11 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> Simple Action: Observe in Detail
> --e.g. "Is he wearing gang colors under that long coat?"
> --a.k.a. anything which would require a perception test to know

I've changed this to a Complex Action, to make things a bit more
challenging for the players. As it is, you can come running around a
corner, be told there are three people there, use a Simple Action to
identify the bad guy(s), and then shoot them all in the same combat phase.
By changing Observe In Detail to a Complex Action, you have to choose
between attacking immediately (risking that you shoot someone you
shouldn't), and positively IDing targets (risking that they shoot at you
first).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That's the way that I can't win.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 17:20:03 2002
At 2/11/02 12:53 PM, you wrote:
>According to Ice Heart, on Mon, 11 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...
>
> > Simple Action: Observe in Detail
> > --e.g. "Is he wearing gang colors under that long coat?"
> > --a.k.a. anything which would require a perception test to know
>
>I've changed this to a Complex Action, to make things a bit more
>challenging for the players. As it is, you can come running around a
>corner, be told there are three people there, use a Simple Action to
>identify the bad guy(s), and then shoot them all in the same combat phase.
>By changing Observe In Detail to a Complex Action, you have to choose
>between attacking immediately (risking that you shoot someone you
>shouldn't), and positively IDing targets (risking that they shoot at you
>first).

Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex action.
If the main problem is to prevent the situation described I'd think that my
system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the observe action until
the end of the turn. It works because they would technically be
simultaneous (or rather close to it).

Belgand


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 17:35:01 2002
> Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex
action.
> If the main problem is to prevent the situation described I'd think
that
> my
> system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the observe action
until
> the end of the turn. It works because they would technically be
> simultaneous (or rather close to it).
>
> Belgand

We saw the reason for needing this explicitly Friday night at the
game....everyone wanted to take their time, looking their sheets over
till they felt they were ready to make a judged decision on what they
should do. We had ONE combat scene take all of 2 hours plus in reality
when the actual fight would have been all of about 1 minute 30 seconds
at the very most. The longest anyone got was a minute to
decide....there's no reason that someone should have as long to decide
what they're going to do as what the actual combat took. I've gotta
agree with these guys in that there's gotta be a limit on how long
you've got to declare what you're doing, or at least work on it....if
you're asking me whether or not something would work that's fine but
sitting there going hmm....should I do this or do this or do this or do
this? That's gotta be sped up
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 21:05:01 2002
"Mark M. Smith" wrote:

>At 2/11/02 12:53 PM, you wrote:
>>According to Ice Heart, on Mon, 11 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...
>>
>> > Simple Action: Observe in Detail
>> > --e.g. "Is he wearing gang colors under that long coat?"
>> > --a.k.a. anything which would require a perception test to know
>>
>>I've changed this to a Complex Action, to make things a bit more
>>challenging for the players. As it is, you can come running around a
>>corner, be told there are three people there, use a Simple Action to
>>identify the bad guy(s), and then shoot them all in the same combat phase.
>>By changing Observe In Detail to a Complex Action, you have to choose
>>between attacking immediately (risking that you shoot someone you
>>shouldn't), and positively IDing targets (risking that they shoot at you
>>first).
>
>Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex action.
>If the main problem is to prevent the situation described I'd think that my
>system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the observe action until
>the end of the turn. It works because they would technically be
>simultaneous (or rather close to it).
>
>Belgand
>

That or you could use the rules for high initiative characters; you know the ones that say
the GM rolls some dice and depending on how high the characters initiative is, the player
must perform the most likely action (ie you pop around the corner and there are two guys
there, you shoot them). I can't quote the rules offhand but I know they exist. I'm pretty
sure the rules are in the SR3 basebook, but if they aren't then they're in M&M.

-George Waksman
Message no. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 21:55:04 2002
> That or you could use the rules for high initiative characters; you
know
> the ones that say the GM rolls some dice and depending on how high the
> characters initiative is, the player must perform the most likely
action
> (ie you pop around the corner and there are two guys there, you shoot
> them). I can't quote the rules offhand but I know they exist. I'm
pretty
> sure the rules are in the SR3 basebook, but if they aren't then
they're in
> M&M.
>
> -George Waksman
wait a sec.....you're talking about taking the right to choose what your
character does there.....If I as the GM tell the sammie of the group
what he's doing on his initiatives cause they're so high (on average
above a 55) that's BS, the reason he's so fast and deadly is because
he's trained and tweaked and is by his own choices the faster and more
deadly, he could also very well be the most non lethal of the group if
he didn't use weapons and instead used something like a tranq patch or
things of that nature

The point is that it seems to me like you're going for a "rules lawyer"
game and not a fun one, I'm sorry but that's my opinion, if you're not
willing to let things go to the players then there's no point in playing
cause they won't enjoy it nearly as much and when players are in high
demand and short supply you can't afford to not have the players enjoy
the games.
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 22:15:01 2002
"Derek Hyde" wrote:

>> That or you could use the rules for high initiative characters; you
>know
>> the ones that say the GM rolls some dice and depending on how high the
>> characters initiative is, the player must perform the most likely
>action
>> (ie you pop around the corner and there are two guys there, you shoot
>> them). I can't quote the rules offhand but I know they exist. I'm
>pretty
>> sure the rules are in the SR3 basebook, but if they aren't then
>they're in
>> M&M.
>>
>> -George Waksman
>wait a sec.....you're talking about taking the right to choose what your
>character does there.....If I as the GM tell the sammie of the group
>what he's doing on his initiatives cause they're so high (on average
>above a 55) that's BS, the reason he's so fast and deadly is because
>he's trained and tweaked and is by his own choices the faster and more
>deadly, he could also very well be the most non lethal of the group if
>he didn't use weapons and instead used something like a tranq patch or
>things of that nature
>
>The point is that it seems to me like you're going for a "rules lawyer"
>game and not a fun one, I'm sorry but that's my opinion, if you're not
>willing to let things go to the players then there's no point in playing
>cause they won't enjoy it nearly as much and when players are in high
>demand and short supply you can't afford to not have the players enjoy
>the games.
>
>

That's not my point at all. It's for when the character is surprised/startled. The
initiative determines target number/dice rolled (I think) and if they fail they can make a
willpower test to overcome their reaction; if they fail they must perform the action most
appropriate to the character in that situation (shoot, hide, etc.). It's kind of like
"Combat Monster" or certain shaman totem flaws. If the player is a good player
and capable of understanding the idea of "you hear a loud noise and see a bright
flash to your left", some dice are rolled, "you are startled, react".
Depending on the character the reaction could range from diving for cover to shooting at
the disturbance. It's not a forcing the player to do something thing, it's meant to
penalize a player with excessive initiative. Read the rules (I'd give a reference if I
wasn't so lazy).

-George Waksman
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 22:20:01 2002
> That's not my point at all. It's for when the character is
> surprised/startled. The initiative determines target number/dice
rolled (I
> think) and if they fail they can make a willpower test to overcome
their
> reaction; if they fail they must perform the action most appropriate
to
> the character in that situation (shoot, hide, etc.). It's kind of like
> "Combat Monster" or certain shaman totem flaws. If the player is a
good
> player and capable of understanding the idea of "you hear a loud noise
and
> see a bright flash to your left", some dice are rolled, "you are
startled,
> react". Depending on the character the reaction could range from
diving
> for cover to shooting at the disturbance. It's not a forcing the
player to
> do something thing, it's meant to penalize a player with excessive
> initiative. Read the rules (I'd give a reference if I wasn't so lazy).

Actually what you're talking about is the impulsive flaw (you tend to
react before you think which tends to get you in more trouble than you
can handle)

It's NOT a rule that applies to everyone, it's a mental flaw just like
in reality, there are people who can't THINK before they react and then
there are people that think out at least 3 possibilities before they
react and they've chosen the best one
Message no. 19
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 22:40:01 2002
"Derek Hyde" wrote:

>> That's not my point at all. It's for when the character is
>> surprised/startled. The initiative determines target number/dice
>rolled (I
>> think) and if they fail they can make a willpower test to overcome
>their
>> reaction; if they fail they must perform the action most appropriate
>to
>> the character in that situation (shoot, hide, etc.). It's kind of like
>> "Combat Monster" or certain shaman totem flaws. If the player is a
>good
>> player and capable of understanding the idea of "you hear a loud noise
>and
>> see a bright flash to your left", some dice are rolled, "you are
>startled,
>> react". Depending on the character the reaction could range from
>diving
>> for cover to shooting at the disturbance. It's not a forcing the
>player to
>> do something thing, it's meant to penalize a player with excessive
>> initiative. Read the rules (I'd give a reference if I wasn't so lazy).
>
>Actually what you're talking about is the impulsive flaw (you tend to
>react before you think which tends to get you in more trouble than you
can handle)
>
>It's NOT a rule that applies to everyone, it's a mental flaw just like
>in reality, there are people who can't THINK before they react and then
>there are people that think out at least 3 possibilities before they
>react and they've chosen the best one
>
>

Now you've gone and done it. You've contradicted me long enough to get me to bother
looking up the rule. p.45 Man & Machine "Effects Of Increased Reflexes". I
won't quote the rule because it's three paragraphs long and I neither feel like writing it
all out or feel like being told not to write so much from a book. Suffice it to say it's
not the impulsive flaw, it's simply something bad that happens when you're wired.

-George Waksman
Message no. 20
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Mon Feb 11 23:15:01 2002
> Now you've gone and done it. You've contradicted me long enough to get
me
> to bother looking up the rule. p.45 Man & Machine "Effects Of
Increased
> Reflexes". I won't quote the rule because it's three paragraphs long
and I
> neither feel like writing it all out or feel like being told not to
write
> so much from a book. Suffice it to say it's not the impulsive flaw,
it's
> simply something bad that happens when you're wired.
>
> -George Waksman

now now.....is this listed as an OPTIONAL rule? I would assume so since
ALL rules are essentially optional....anyway the point is I wouldn't put
that into play unless the character had JUST gotten the cyberware or
whatever to boost his speed and hadn't had the time to adapt to it and
get used to the new speeds he was capable
Message no. 21
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 00:20:01 2002
> That or you could use the rules for high initiative characters; you know
the ones that say the GM rolls some dice and >depending on how high the
characters initiative is, the player must perform the most likely action (ie
you pop around the >corner and there are two guys there, you shoot them). I
can't quote the rules offhand but I know they exist. I'm pretty sure >the
rules are in the SR3 basebook, but if they aren't then they're in M&M.


There in M&M. Its under role-playing characters with cyberware that
boosts reflexes! I agree, I believe that works really well as a balance!
In all the fiction it point to similiar reactions so I was glad to see the
rule added!

meph
Message no. 22
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 00:25:01 2002
> The point is that it seems to me like you're going for a "rules lawyer"
> game and not a fun one, I'm sorry but that's my opinion, if you're not
> willing to let things go to the players then there's no point in playing
> cause they won't enjoy it nearly as much and when players are in high
> demand and short supply you can't afford to not have the players enjoy
> the games.


The point it makes in M&M is that characters have their reactions
tweaked SO high that there is going to be a REaction, before a controlled
action. And especially if your characters are tweaked to get a 55 plus
initiate?!?! Then I would TOTALLY use this rule! It is an EXCELLENT game
balance tool! I personally don't think this is "rule lawyering" at all, IMO
it is Min/Maxing to get characters with 55 plus initiative scores! ;> So
don't come down on someone for a difference of opinion, we all play
different ways! Welcome to the spice of life.

Meph
Message no. 23
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 00:35:01 2002
> Actually what you're talking about is the impulsive flaw (you tend to
> react before you think which tends to get you in more trouble than you
> can handle)


No, he's not. Correct me if I'm wrong George...but on page 45 in
M&M...it explains rules for Effect fo Increased Reflexes...

..."At the gamemaster's discretion, such a character tends to react
reflextively in situations where a perceived threat exists, regardless of
whether that threat is real."

It says tp role percp, with a +1 for every +1d6 the char has. If he fails
they react reflextively and not normally! Check out the rule, I really like
it as a game balancer! And even it says don't use it all the time, just as
a occasional reminder that wiring yourself up sucks! ;>

Meph
Message no. 24
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 00:35:05 2002
> Now you've gone and done it. You've contradicted me long enough to get me
to bother looking up the rule. p.45 Man & >Machine "Effects Of Increased
Reflexes". I won't quote the rule because it's three paragraphs long and I
neither feel like >writing it all out or feel like being told not to write
so much from a book. Suffice it to say it's not the impulsive flaw, it's
simply >something bad that happens when you're wired.


I'm there with ya George! :)

Meph
You can come and run my game! hehehe
Message no. 25
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 00:40:01 2002
> now now.....is this listed as an OPTIONAL rule? I would assume so since
> ALL rules are essentially optional....anyway the point is I wouldn't put
> that into play unless the character had JUST gotten the cyberware or
> whatever to boost his speed and hadn't had the time to adapt to it and
> get used to the new speeds he was capable


No, it's listed a new rules for cyberware. And not for NEW
cyberware...for any cyberware.

Have any of you read the fiction? I can thin of one example in Headhunters
where the main character is CONSTANTLY talking about his adrenaline surge
and having to literally hold himself back whenever he felt the surge.
Cyberware is not something that works perfectly with the body. It's
throwing your body in states that it is not used to be in. This rule is NOT
an every time thing...but simply a reminder that cyber is not GOOD! In
fact, it sucks! It eats away your "soul" for lack of a better way to put
it. It fights tooth and nail against your body to make it work the way the
'ware decides it should work.

Meph
Message no. 26
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 01:05:01 2002
> The point it makes in M&M is that characters have their
reactions
> tweaked SO high that there is going to be a REaction, before a
controlled
> action. And especially if your characters are tweaked to get a 55
plus
> initiate?!?! Then I would TOTALLY use this rule! It is an EXCELLENT
game
> balance tool! I personally don't think this is "rule lawyering" at
all,
> IMO
> it is Min/Maxing to get characters with 55 plus initiative scores! ;>
So
> don't come down on someone for a difference of opinion, we all play
> different ways! Welcome to the spice of life.

Umm....55 as a reaction? How in the heck would you accomplish that
within the rules....I said an initiative of 55...I've had a character
WITHOUT any kind of boost get that once in a great while with lucky
rolls
Message no. 27
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 01:10:01 2002
> Have any of you read the fiction? I can thin of one example in
> Headhunters
> where the main character is CONSTANTLY talking about his adrenaline
surge
> and having to literally hold himself back whenever he felt the surge.
> Cyberware is not something that works perfectly with the body. It's
> throwing your body in states that it is not used to be in. This rule
is
> NOT
> an every time thing...but simply a reminder that cyber is not GOOD!
In
> fact, it sucks! It eats away your "soul" for lack of a better way to
put
> it. It fights tooth and nail against your body to make it work the
way
> the
> 'ware decides it should work.


Umm....not necessarily.....go read Tails you Lose for the fiction, they
don't talk about this chick that's got delta grade move by wire having
ANY trouble with moving before she thinks, in fact she finds it
impossible to comprehend how people would survive without it in some
situations. Like I said....it takes time for you to adapt to anything.
(trust me I know this subject a little too intimately than you care to
argue since I'm on my second shoulder reconstruction, it's hard to be
able to get used to having the muscles do what they're supposed to again
let alone what it would be like if you made things faster) All in all I
would say that you should implement a roll to see how well adapted to
the cyberware the character's body will be before you go sticking them
with that rule, I'd use it for plot advancement before I'd use it for a
normal thing. ANY of the advanced grade cyberware is designed to work
increasingly better with your body and inherently less intrusively for
the same results which is why I argue that it's a crock for you to put a
blanket rule down stating that the faster someone is the more impulsive
they become. (for example Move By Wire 4 gives you +4 to Quickness, +8
to reaction, +4D6 Init, and +4 Dice for all athletics and STEALTH tests,
now if this adds dice to stealth cause you're more graceful with it why
would it make you more jumpy? If the cyberware systems had been damaged
perhaps but not normally)
Message no. 28
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 02:05:04 2002
Derek Hyde writes:

> Umm....55 as a reaction? How in the heck would you accomplish that
> within the rules....

Beats me, but with one exception* I'd say that it's about as likely as the
following:

> I said an initiative of 55...I've had a character WITHOUT any kind of
> boost get that once in a great while with lucky rolls

* The single exception is the Edge Adrenaline Surge, which allow use of the
rule of 6 for Initiative. How on earth did an _"unboosted"_ character roll
anything more than about a 15?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 29
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 02:20:00 2002
Derek Hyde writes:

> I argue that it's a crock for you to put a blanket rule down stating that
> the faster someone is the more impulsive they become.

I don't think you're quite following the argument, though, Derek. The more
wired a person gets, the more _REACTIVE_ they get (check which Attribute
tends to get modified by such enhancements ;-)). Think, for a second, about
what the word "reactive" actually means. An example is what happens when you
lean on a hot plate. Your arm pulls up automatically before your brain even
has time to realise that you've just leaned on something that was 400 oC.
Then you notice, and then you feel the pain. Another example are highly
trained martial artists. If you surprise such a person (for example, leap
out of a doorway near them), then you'll likely wind up very quickly in a
heap on the ground. The person will then actually see who and what you are
(and if they're your friend, hopefully say sorry for decking you ;-)). These
sorts of things a "reaction".

What you seem to be arguing is that enhanced relfexes should solely grant
better conscious control of your _actions_. These aren't the same as your
_reactions_. For what it's worth, such reflex enhancers do improve conscious
action, but they also improve unconscious reaction. The point of that little
rule is to reflect this situation. In my mind, it actually isn't a potent
enough rule. Most initative and reflex enhancers are _reaction_ improvers,
and thus, in my mind, should be much more likely to jack up reactions rather
than conscious actions. As it is, however, they significantly increase
conscious actions, and only very minorly crank up reactions.

Being impulsive is not quite the same as reacting. An impulsive person may
not think things through, but the are still consciously acting, not merely
reacting.

Anyway, if you cared to check the rule out yourself, rather than whinging
about it cluelessly, you'd actually find that the odds of it occuring (even
if used in the rare instance, as suggested) are actually quite low. Nearly
every character with such cyberware is going to make that test, not fail it,
so they will not end up reacting, but will be able to act normally.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 30
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 06:00:05 2002
According to Mark M. Smith, on Mon, 11 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex
> action. If the main problem is to prevent the situation described I'd
> think that my system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the
> observe action until the end of the turn. It works because they would
> technically be simultaneous (or rather close to it).

But if you do that, you get characters who'll observe first but only be told
what's there _after_ taking their other action...? I suppose this is fine if
you have a character who fires an APDS round followed by an explosive round
from his gun, but you resolve the explosive first anyway :)

My house isn't intended to allow characters to be shot at in the Combat
Phase in which they themselves have an action (as I think you read it) but
rather to force them to wait, and thereby give the opposition a chance to
act _after_ a character storms into a new situation -- and immediately
removes any possible threat in the same Combat Phase.

(I know the opposition could delay their actions and be ready, but it's just
not believable that, whatever the situation, the PCs opponents have ready
actions. IMHO, it _is_ realistic to assume a character needs a few seconds to
take in the situation, and be open to counterattacks while doing that.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That's the way that I can't win.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 31
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 06:00:25 2002
According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> wait a sec.....you're talking about taking the right to choose what your
> character does there.....

George is talking about the rules that make character with high initiative
boosts act on impulse, rather than rationally. The intention behind them is
that if something unexpected happens that _appears_ to be threatening, the
wired sam might just try and do something about it before consciously
realizing it. For example, you're sitting at a bar, somebody walks past
behind you, and you hear a click-like sound (from, say, a loose shoelace
hitting the floor). Being the good paranoid shadowrunner with wired
reflexes-2, you'll probably punch the assassin, get ready to follow through
if necessary -- and then realize that you just broke your girlfriend's nose
because she didn't tie her shoelaces...

The rules explicitly mention (at least, they did in Cybertechnology) that
this should be used sparingly. Just enough to make players see that
reflex triggers may be a good investment would be best, I think :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 32
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 06:10:00 2002
<snipt!(TM)>
> (I know the opposition could delay their actions and
be ready, but it's just not believable that, whatever
the situation, the PCs opponents have ready actions.
IMHO, it _is_ realistic to assume a character needs a
few seconds to take in the situation, and be open to
counterattacks while doing that.)
> Gurth@******.nl -

So, Gurth, do your NPCs ever observe before opening
fire, or is it only your PCs who run this risk?

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 33
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 09:35:01 2002
> * The single exception is the Edge Adrenaline Surge, which allow use
of
> the
> rule of 6 for Initiative. How on earth did an _"unboosted"_ character
roll
> anything more than about a 15?

Because every single GM I've ever played with has used the rule of 6 for
the whole game as I do because it's absolutely stupid to try and teach
players to roll one way and then to change it for ONE thing in the game
Message no. 34
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 09:40:01 2002
> Anyway, if you cared to check the rule out yourself, rather than
whinging
> about it cluelessly, you'd actually find that the odds of it occuring
> (even
> if used in the rare instance, as suggested) are actually quite low.
Nearly
> every character with such cyberware is going to make that test, not
fail
> it,
> so they will not end up reacting, but will be able to act normally.
I've read the rule....my take on the original argument was that the
other guy was implying that you should use it all the time to help speed
up combat (as is the title for this thread) that was my argument that it
should be an absolutely RARE occurance and the only time I'd use it
continuously is if it was like I said, the character that'd JUST gotten
it put in or someone with a mental flaw like impulsive
Message no. 35
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 09:45:22 2002
> > Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex
> > action. If the main problem is to prevent the situation described
I'd
> > think that my system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the
> > observe action until the end of the turn. It works because they
would
> > technically be simultaneous (or rather close to it).

Hmm....ok.....we'll go with that one in our game ok? I think it'll go
something like this....
Sam: What's going on around me?
GM: is that a question your asking me?
Sam: yeah I need to know what's going on so I can figure out what I can
do
GM: ok works for me, sit back and listen to everyone else's initiatives,
look at the mini's on the table in front of you, and then start planning
your actions for your next initative, let me know what you're doing
after we roll the next init.
Sam: but I just wanted a quick idea of what's going on
GM: 2 seconds is a quick idea in combat..
END

As you can see just that little argument there because you're not going
to get to observe and then do ANYTHING else and if you're looking for
something detailed it's going to take you a while.
Message no. 36
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 09:50:01 2002
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> > * The single exception is the Edge Adrenaline Surge, which allow use
> > of the rule of 6 for Initiative. How on earth did an _"unboosted"_
> > character roll anything more than about a 15?
>
> Because every single GM I've ever played with has used the rule of 6 for
> the whole game as I do because it's absolutely stupid to try and teach
> players to roll one way and then to change it for ONE thing in the game

It would be so much easier if people told when they use house rules, instead of
tacking it on afterwards.

Otherwise I know a Street Samurai that can shoot and kill 5 people in the same
action with a Streetline Special!

Oh... did I forget to tell that all guns do 9M damage, and can use FA, since
it's to confusing to have different damage codes and firing modes for different
firearms!

:-)

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 37
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 09:55:01 2002
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> We had ONE combat scene take all of 2 hours plus in reality
> when the actual fight would have been all of about 1 minute 30 seconds
> at the very most.

What game do you play?

1 minute and 30 seconds, thats 30 combat rounds?!?

All our fights are usually over within 5 combat rounds, at the most 10 combat
rounds.

But they still often takes around 1 hour to play out :-(

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 38
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:10:00 2002
> Umm....55 as a reaction? How in the heck would you accomplish that
> within the rules....I said an initiative of 55...I've had a character
> WITHOUT any kind of boost get that once in a great while with lucky
> rolls


It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky rolls
when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?

Meph
Message no. 39
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:15:02 2002
> Umm....not necessarily.....go read Tails you Lose for the fiction, they
> don't talk about this chick that's got delta grade move by wire having
> ANY trouble with moving before she thinks, in fact she finds it
> impossible to comprehend how people would survive without it in some
> situations. Like I said....it takes time for you to adapt to anything.
> (trust me I know this subject a little too intimately than you care to
> argue since I'm on my second shoulder reconstruction, it's hard to be
> able to get used to having the muscles do what they're supposed to again
> let alone what it would be like if you made things faster) All in all I
> would say that you should implement a roll to see how well adapted to
> the cyberware the character's body will be before you go sticking them
> with that rule, I'd use it for plot advancement before I'd use it for a
> normal thing. ANY of the advanced grade cyberware is designed to work
> increasingly better with your body and inherently less intrusively for
> the same results which is why I argue that it's a crock for you to put a
> blanket rule down stating that the faster someone is the more impulsive
> they become. (for example Move By Wire 4 gives you +4 to Quickness, +8
> to reaction, +4D6 Init, and +4 Dice for all athletics and STEALTH tests,
> now if this adds dice to stealth cause you're more graceful with it why
> would it make you more jumpy? If the cyberware systems had been damaged
> perhaps but not normally)


And that example is with dealta ware...the HIGHEST grade 'ware
available! Of course she's going to have a better time with it. (And as to
personaly experience, I'm right there with you having to have reconsturctive
surgery on my face, including the muscles of my cheek and eye). It comes
down to a disagreement in world views. IMO sure, cyberware is help for the
'runner, but it adding cold steel to your body. And in the end, you'll be a
cyberzombie if you don't watch out!

Meph
Message no. 40
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:20:01 2002
> I don't think you're quite following the argument, though, Derek. The more
> wired a person gets, the more _REACTIVE_ they get (check which Attribute
> tends to get modified by such enhancements ;-)). Think, for a second,
about
> what the word "reactive" actually means. An example is what happens when
you
> lean on a hot plate. Your arm pulls up automatically before your brain
even
> has time to realise that you've just leaned on something that was 400 oC.
> Then you notice, and then you feel the pain. Another example are highly
> trained martial artists. If you surprise such a person (for example, leap
> out of a doorway near them), then you'll likely wind up very quickly in a
> heap on the ground. The person will then actually see who and what you are
> (and if they're your friend, hopefully say sorry for decking you ;-)).
These
> sorts of things a "reaction".
> Anyway, if you cared to check the rule out yourself, rather than whinging
> about it cluelessly, you'd actually find that the odds of it occuring
(even
> if used in the rare instance, as suggested) are actually quite low. Nearly
> every character with such cyberware is going to make that test, not fail
it,
> so they will not end up reacting, but will be able to act normally.


Thank you. Very well said. That is exactly the point.

Meph
Message no. 41
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:25:02 2002
> Because every single GM I've ever played with has used the rule of 6 for
> the whole game as I do because it's absolutely stupid to try and teach
> players to roll one way and then to change it for ONE thing in the game


I don't believe it's "stupid." It set that way for game balance, so
you don't have 55 plus initiatives....

Meph
Message no. 42
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:30:02 2002
> Oh... did I forget to tell that all guns do 9M damage, and can use FA,
> since
> it's to confusing to have different damage codes and firing modes for
> different
> firearms!

Ok I get your punch at me but when you're trying to teach people that
have never gamed before how for one and only one roll you get to add
them all together and you don't re-roll 6's but for the rest of the game
each die is an individual test? If you just leave the rule of 6 for the
initiative then things may get sped up but they'll be increased for the
whole pack, NPC's included so it's not that bad...(trust me with the one
of my newbies in the group it would be next to impossible, we tried to
play D&D with her and she couldn't figure out how to read half of the
dice and then to top it off she's reading the BOTTOM SIDE of the 4
sider....not the bottom edge but the bottom side. This is what I'm
dealing with....too many conflicting rules for the players becomes a
problem and as I said somewhere else, gamers are in high demand and
short supply so you take what you can get.
Message no. 43
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:30:06 2002
> What game do you play?
>
> 1 minute and 30 seconds, thats 30 combat rounds?!?
>
> All our fights are usually over within 5 combat rounds, at the most 10
> combat
> rounds.
>
> But they still often takes around 1 hour to play out :-(
note I said AT VERY MOST if I recall correctly the whole fight was about
5 rounds long or something like that (with exaggeration on how soon demo
goes off and such for speed of the scene)
Message no. 44
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 10:45:01 2002
> Ok I get your punch at me but when you're trying to teach people that
> have never gamed before how for one and only one roll you get to add
> them all together and you don't re-roll 6's but for the rest of the game
> each die is an individual test? If you just leave the rule of 6 for the
> initiative then things may get sped up but they'll be increased for the
> whole pack, NPC's included so it's not that bad...(trust me with the one
> of my newbies in the group it would be next to impossible, we tried to
> play D&D with her and she couldn't figure out how to read half of the
> dice and then to top it off she's reading the BOTTOM SIDE of the 4
> sider....not the bottom edge but the bottom side. This is what I'm
> dealing with....too many conflicting rules for the players becomes a
> problem and as I said somewhere else, gamers are in high demand and
> short supply so you take what you can get.


I'm dealing with 6 players. All are couples. Two of the females
have NEVR gamed AT ALL before. Also, one of my players has only role-played
but a couple of times before. And even my tried and true players are having
some difficulty with SR3 because it is a complex system (compared to White
Wolf, Deadlands, at the like). Hell, even I have problems with remembering
the rules. But I still use them, because most of them are there for a
reason. Sure, for now it's slightly slower but in a few games it'll be
better. So when my players go play somewhere else, they've got the rules
and don't have to worry about it.

By the way, when i first started gaming AD&D, I was taught to read the
bottom side of the 4 sider! That's just the way at our group (and several
others around) did it!

meph
Message no. 45
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:10:05 2002
At 2/12/02 04:30 AM, you wrote:
> Being the good paranoid shadowrunner with wired
>reflexes-2, you'll probably punch the assassin, get ready to follow through
>if necessary -- and then realize that you just broke your girlfriend's nose
>because she didn't tie her shoelaces...

This definately explains why more heavily wired sams tend not to get much.
Can you imagine the results of wired 2, adrenal boost and strength augs in
bed if you accidentally react without thinking...? *Shudder*

Belgand


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 46
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:15:02 2002
> I'm dealing with 6 players. All are couples. Two of the
females
> have NEVR gamed AT ALL before. Also, one of my players has only role-
> played
> but a couple of times before. And even my tried and true players are
> having
> some difficulty with SR3 because it is a complex system (compared to
White
> Wolf, Deadlands, at the like). Hell, even I have problems with
> remembering
> the rules. But I still use them, because most of them are there for a
> reason. Sure, for now it's slightly slower but in a few games it'll
be
> better. So when my players go play somewhere else, they've got the
rules
> and don't have to worry about it.
>
> By the way, when i first started gaming AD&D, I was taught to read
the
> bottom side of the 4 sider! That's just the way at our group (and
several
> others around) did it!

No no....not the bottom edge where the number is....I mean
literally...the bottom face of the die....unless there was a time when
there was only one number on each side of the die you couldn't have done
what she does....
Message no. 47
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:20:02 2002
At 2/12/02 08:26 AM, you wrote:
> > > Personally I don't see why it would be need to make this a complex
> > > action. If the main problem is to prevent the situation described
>I'd
> > > think that my system would work quite well. Just don't resolve the
> > > observe action until the end of the turn. It works because they
>would
> > > technically be simultaneous (or rather close to it).
>
>Hmm....ok.....we'll go with that one in our game ok? I think it'll go
>something like this....
>Sam: What's going on around me?
>GM: is that a question your asking me?
>Sam: yeah I need to know what's going on so I can figure out what I can
>do
>GM: ok works for me, sit back and listen to everyone else's initiatives,
>look at the mini's on the table in front of you, and then start planning
>your actions for your next initative, let me know what you're doing
>after we roll the next init.
>Sam: but I just wanted a quick idea of what's going on
>GM: 2 seconds is a quick idea in combat..
>END
>
>As you can see just that little argument there because you're not going
>to get to observe and then do ANYTHING else and if you're looking for
>something detailed it's going to take you a while.

I think you misunderstand. Mainly because I meant Observe in Detail, not
just the normal ability to see and hear. Also I'm intending that you do
this along with other actions and make it obvious that it would resolved as
such.

Belgand


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 48
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:25:01 2002
At 2/12/02 09:12 AM, you wrote:

> > Umm....55 as a reaction? How in the heck would you accomplish that
> > within the rules....I said an initiative of 55...I've had a character
> > WITHOUT any kind of boost get that once in a great while with lucky
> > rolls
>
> It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky rolls
>when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?

Was this something new added to 3rd edition? I'lll admit that I'm still in
the process of making the transition to 3rd from 2nd and still awaiting a
copy of the main rules atm, but according to what I'm familiar with in 2nd
it was never specifically stated that the rule of six doesn't apply to
initiative. I can understand why this would be implemented, but wasn't
personally aware of it.

Belgand


-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 49
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:25:06 2002
At 2/12/02 09:08 AM, you wrote:
> when you're trying to teach people that
>have never gamed before how for one and only one roll you get to add
>them all together and you don't re-roll 6's but for the rest of the game
>each die is an individual test?

Well, I can understand that people might have trouble picking up on some
things, but this doesn't seem particularly chalenging. It's only one roll
made under particular circumstances and doesn't even come close to the
complexity of a lot of other games. I could understand if it was a more
variable rule that would affect a number of other things, but all you need
to do is tell someone that for intitiave you just don't use it. Simple.

Belgand

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 50
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:35:02 2002
"Derek Hyde" wrote:

>
>Umm....not necessarily.....go read Tails you Lose for the fiction, they
>don't talk about this chick that's got delta grade move by wire having
>ANY trouble with moving before she thinks, in fact she finds it
>impossible to comprehend how people would survive without it in some
>situations. Like I said....it takes time for you to adapt to anything.
>(trust me I know this subject a little too intimately than you care to
>argue since I'm on my second shoulder reconstruction, it's hard to be
>able to get used to having the muscles do what they're supposed to again
>let alone what it would be like if you made things faster) All in all I
>would say that you should implement a roll to see how well adapted to
>the cyberware the character's body will be before you go sticking them
>with that rule, I'd use it for plot advancement before I'd use it for a
>normal thing. ANY of the advanced grade cyberware is designed to work
>increasingly better with your body and inherently less intrusively for
>the same results which is why I argue that it's a crock for you to put a
>blanket rule down stating that the faster someone is the more impulsive
>they become. (for example Move By Wire 4 gives you +4 to Quickness, +8
>to reaction, +4D6 Init, and +4 Dice for all athletics and STEALTH tests,
>now if this adds dice to stealth cause you're more graceful with it why
>would it make you more jumpy? If the cyberware systems had been damaged
>perhaps but not normally)
>
>

This is not a case of the cyberware not working properly in taandem with the bosy, it's a
case of the cyberware doing what it's supposed to. Initiative/reaction boosters are meant
to make you jumpy and more reactive.

Let's take a simple example; you accidentally touch something hot and your reactions force
your hand to withdraw quickly. This works exactly the same for a wired character, just a
heck of a lot faster. It works exactly the same when you're startled by something.

What's being overlooked is the willpower to resist the reaction, this is important too
because it represents your ability to override your reactions. Going back to the previous
example; if you try to force yourself you can touch the hot object but occasionally you
will withdraw your hand anyway because you don't catch your reaction in time. This too
works exactly the same for a wires character, just a heck of a lot faster.

-George Waksman
Message no. 51
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:50:13 2002
Damion Milliken wrote:

>Derek Hyde writes:
>
>> Umm....55 as a reaction? How in the heck would you accomplish that
>> within the rules....
>
>Beats me, but with one exception* I'd say that it's about as likely as the
>following:
>
>> I said an initiative of 55...I've had a character WITHOUT any kind of
>> boost get that once in a great while with lucky rolls
>
>* The single exception is the Edge Adrenaline Surge, which allow use of the
>rule of 6 for Initiative. How on earth did an _"unboosted"_ character roll
>anything more than about a 15?
>

Bah, I've gotten initiatives as high as 7d6 + 24 on starting characters without too much
effort. However, I don't see it as very possible on an unboosted character (considering
magic to be boosting).

-George Waksman
Message no. 52
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 11:55:03 2002
Damion Milliken wrote:

>what the word "reactive" actually means. An example is what happens when you
>lean on a hot plate. Your arm pulls up automatically before your brain even
>has time to realise that you've just leaned on something that was 400 oC.
>Then you notice, and then you feel the pain. Another example are highly

Same exaple I used.

-George Waksman
Message no. 53
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 12:30:13 2002
"Derek Hyde" wrote:

>> * The single exception is the Edge Adrenaline Surge, which allow use
>of
>> the
>> rule of 6 for Initiative. How on earth did an _"unboosted"_ character
>roll
>> anything more than about a 15?
>
>Because every single GM I've ever played with has used the rule of 6 for
>the whole game as I do because it's absolutely stupid to try and teach
>players to roll one way and then to change it for ONE thing in the game
>
>

Yeah but initiative is also the only time in the game where you sum up the results.

-George Waksman
Message no. 54
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Marc Renouf)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 12:45:07 2002
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Mark M. Smith wrote:

> > It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky rolls
> >when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?
>
> Was this something new added to 3rd edition? I'lll admit that I'm still in
> the process of making the transition to 3rd from 2nd and still awaiting a
> copy of the main rules atm, but according to what I'm familiar with in 2nd
> it was never specifically stated that the rule of six doesn't apply to
> initiative.

The Rule of Six has *never* applied to initiative rolls in any
edition of Shadowrun. There are a number of house rules concerning this,
but as far as vanilla rules go, Ro6 is not used for initiative.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@*********.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@******.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://hlair.dumpshock.com/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 55
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 12:55:08 2002
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
>
> Ok I get your punch at me

I wasn't to get personal, but I've just had the same experience at
rec.games.frp.cyber wether Mind probe was to powerfull, and half way through the
discussion, where several people have refered to SR3 rules, some schmuck turns
around and says: "well I use SR2, and this is another reason why I won't change
to SR3".

> and as I said somewhere else, gamers are in high demand and
> short supply so you take what you can get.

Aren't they everwhere?

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 56
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 13:05:00 2002
At 2/12/02 11:49 AM, you wrote:


>On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Mark M. Smith wrote:
>
> > > It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky
> rolls
> > >when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?
> >
> > Was this something new added to 3rd edition? I'lll admit that I'm still in
> > the process of making the transition to 3rd from 2nd and still awaiting a
> > copy of the main rules atm, but according to what I'm familiar with in 2nd
> > it was never specifically stated that the rule of six doesn't apply to
> > initiative.
>
> The Rule of Six has *never* applied to initiative rolls in any
>edition of Shadowrun. There are a number of house rules concerning this,
>but as far as vanilla rules go, Ro6 is not used for initiative.

Hmm... ah yes, you only use the rule of six for tests. Simple confusion on
my part then, I always assumed that it being such a standard part of
shadowrun that it was used for initiative rolls as well as all others and
it never said anything about not using the rule of six in intiative...


Mark "Belgand" Smith
belgand@**************.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 57
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 13:10:02 2002
> Yeah but initiative is also the only time in the game where you sum up
the
> results.
>
> -George Waksman
oh yeah I know....it's hard enough keeping them from trying to do that
all the time...LOL
Message no. 58
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 13:25:06 2002
> I wasn't to get personal, but I've just had the same experience at
> rec.games.frp.cyber wether Mind probe was to powerfull, and half way
> through the
> discussion, where several people have refered to SR3 rules, some
schmuck
> turns
> around and says: "well I use SR2, and this is another reason why I
won't
> change
> to SR3".

Ahh...thanks....LOL

>
> Aren't they everwhere?
>

one would think so.....but if they are they're in hiding and don't wish
to be found....that or they play those *shudder* warhammer games and
Magic and all of those hideous creations....no more good old 2nd edition
AD&D and no more shadowrun around here
Message no. 59
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:15:01 2002
According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> As you can see just that little argument there because you're not going
> to get to observe and then do ANYTHING else and if you're looking for
> something detailed it's going to take you a while.

Which is exactly why I changed Observe In Detail to be a Complex Action
instead of a Simple one in my game.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 60
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:15:05 2002
According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> we tried to
> play D&D with her and she couldn't figure out how to read half of the
> dice and then to top it off she's reading the BOTTOM SIDE of the 4
> sider....not the bottom edge but the bottom side. This is what I'm
> dealing with....

That, actually, is my group's "initiation ritual" for new players: throw a
D4 on the table and ask the newbie what number was rolled. If they don't
get it, we say "It's at the bottom" and laugh as they pick up the die to
look at the bottom. We've never had anyone read a D4 wrong after their
first game session :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 61
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:15:13 2002
According to Rand Ratinac, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> So, Gurth, do your NPCs ever observe before opening
> fire, or is it only your PCs who run this risk?

It's generally the PCs who get into situations where they don't know who's
who, not the NPCs :) But yes, if a hostile NPC in my game were to storm
into a room containing both his buddies and some PC, I'd make him observe
first -- and run the risk of getting shot by one of the PCs before being
able to do anything about it.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 62
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:20:14 2002
> That, actually, is my group's "initiation ritual" for new players:
throw a
> D4 on the table and ask the newbie what number was rolled. If they
don't
> get it, we say "It's at the bottom" and laugh as they pick up the die
to
> look at the bottom. We've never had anyone read a D4 wrong after their
> first game session :)

see it's funny the first time but if it keeps happening cause they're
not quite catching on then it's a problem
Message no. 63
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:35:01 2002
At 2/12/02 12:50 PM, you wrote:
>According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...
>
> > As you can see just that little argument there because you're not going
> > to get to observe and then do ANYTHING else and if you're looking for
> > something detailed it's going to take you a while.
>
>Which is exactly why I changed Observe In Detail to be a Complex Action
>instead of a Simple one in my game.

Possibly just shift up Observe and Observe in Detail and change them over a
bit. Observe is the standard perception checked observation and observe in
detail would be for very detailed observations.. say Perception +2 to the
TN. Thus:

Normal: You see a man with a revolver
Observe: You see a man with a Ruger Super Warhawk
Observe in Detail: You see a man with a Ruger Super Warhawk. From what you
can make out of the cylinder from your vantage it appears to only have two
rounds left. The man's socks do not match and his wife no longer loves him
having gone on to a younger man whom she is having an affair with at this
very moment...

You get the idea.


--
Mark "Belgand" Smith
belgand@**************.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 64
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 14:35:05 2002
At 2/12/02 12:53 PM, you wrote:
>According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...
>
> > we tried to
> > play D&D with her and she couldn't figure out how to read half of the
> > dice and then to top it off she's reading the BOTTOM SIDE of the 4
> > sider....not the bottom edge but the bottom side. This is what I'm
> > dealing with....
>
>That, actually, is my group's "initiation ritual" for new players: throw a
>D4 on the table and ask the newbie what number was rolled. If they don't
>get it, we say "It's at the bottom" and laugh as they pick up the die to
>look at the bottom. We've never had anyone read a D4 wrong after their
>first game session :)

Weird... I always found d4s rather intuitive...


--
Mark "Belgand" Smith
belgand@**************.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 65
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 15:55:01 2002
From: "Mark M. Smith" <belgand@**************.com>
> At 2/12/02 09:12 AM, you wrote:
>
> > It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky rolls
> >when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?
>
> Was this something new added to 3rd edition? I'lll admit that I'm still in
> the process of making the transition to 3rd from 2nd and still awaiting a
> copy of the main rules atm, but according to what I'm familiar with in 2nd
> it was never specifically stated that the rule of six doesn't apply to
> initiative. I can understand why this would be implemented, but wasn't
> personally aware of it.

SR1: Nope not mentioned anywhere.

SR2, page 32, column 1, at the end of "Rule of Six": The Rule of Six does not
apply to Initaitive (see p. 79)
This one is actually only in my 1st printing hardcover, because I added it from
the official SR2 erratta. The erratta was published in KA*GE #8, and on the FASA
homepage, but it was never added to any of the printings, and does not appear in
my 11th printing softcover SR2 book

SR3, page 38, column 2, last line: The Rule of Six does not apply to Initiative
Tests.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 66
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Christian Casavant)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 16:10:01 2002
> ...wife no
> longer loves him having gone on to a younger man whom she is having an
> affair with at this very moment...


What would the TN to spot that be?

Xian
Message no. 67
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Mark M. Smith)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 18:10:01 2002
At 2/12/02 02:57 PM, you wrote:
>From: "Mark M. Smith" <belgand@**************.com>
> > At 2/12/02 09:12 AM, you wrote:
> >
> > > It was meant to be initiative. How do you get 55 with lucky
> rolls
> > >when the rule of six does NOT apply for initiative?
> >
> > Was this something new added to 3rd edition? I'lll admit that I'm still in
> > the process of making the transition to 3rd from 2nd and still awaiting a
> > copy of the main rules atm, but according to what I'm familiar with in 2nd
> > it was never specifically stated that the rule of six doesn't apply to
> > initiative. I can understand why this would be implemented, but wasn't
> > personally aware of it.
>
>SR1: Nope not mentioned anywhere.
>
>SR2, page 32, column 1, at the end of "Rule of Six": The Rule of Six does
not
>apply to Initaitive (see p. 79)
>This one is actually only in my 1st printing hardcover, because I added it
>from
>the official SR2 erratta. The erratta was published in KA*GE #8, and on
>the FASA
>homepage, but it was never added to any of the printings, and does not
>appear in
>my 11th printing softcover SR2 book

Ah, that'd be why. I have the third printing softcover SR2. SR3 is on order
and ought to be here shortly. Damn... to think I've been doing it wrong all
this time.


>SR3, page 38, column 2, last line: The Rule of Six does not apply to
>Initiative
>Tests.

--
Mark "Belgand" Smith
belgand@**************.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GS/CS/AT d- s-: a-- C++++ UL++>++++ US P+>++ L++>+++ E@ W++(+++) N+++@ o+
K++ w---() O- M-- !V PS+@ PE++(+++)@ Y+@ PGP- t+ 5 X++@ R++ tv++ b+++
DI++++ D+++ G++ e>++++$ h(!) r++ y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 68
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 18:30:01 2002
At 05:10 PM 2/12/2002 -0600, Mark M. Smith wrote:

>>SR2, page 32, column 1, at the end of "Rule of Six": The Rule of Six
does not
>>apply to Initaitive (see p. 79)
>>This one is actually only in my 1st printing hardcover, because I added
>>it from
>>the official SR2 erratta. The erratta was published in KA*GE #8, and on
>>the FASA
>>homepage, but it was never added to any of the printings, and does not
>>appear in
>>my 11th printing softcover SR2 book
>
>Ah, that'd be why. I have the third printing softcover SR2. SR3 is on
>order and ought to be here shortly. Damn... to think I've been doing it
>wrong all this time.

Fwiw, many of us apply the Rule of Six to the first initiative dice. If a
character only has 1d6 for initiative, then the rule of six applies to that
dice. If a character has multiple dice for initiative, then use a
different color for *one* of the dice and apply the rule of six to that dice.

We've found that this adds a certain edge to combat. The players really
enjoy it when it comes up in their favor, but they're also a little more
cautious knowing that an NPC might get lucky.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 69
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Meph)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 21:45:01 2002
> No no....not the bottom edge where the number is....I mean
> literally...the bottom face of the die....unless there was a time when
> there was only one number on each side of the die you couldn't have done
> what she does....


No, i understand stand. We used to pick up the die and look which
number was missing from the bottom! (Don't ask me why...) And that was the
way we did it! I can't explain why!!!! :>

Meph
feeling ssoooooooo embarrassed!
Message no. 70
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Rand Ratinac)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Tue Feb 12 22:10:01 2002
> > So, Gurth, do your NPCs ever observe before
opening fire, or is it only your PCs who run this
risk?
>
> It's generally the PCs who get into situations where
they don't know who's who, not the NPCs :) But yes, if
a hostile NPC in my game were to storm into a room
containing both his buddies and some PC, I'd make him
observe first -- and run the risk of getting shot by
one of the PCs before being able to do anything about
it.
> Gurth@******.nl -

Well, you're consistent at least, I'll give you that.
As Kori just said, though, I still think making it a
complex action to be able at the very least to figure
"friend/foe/innocent bystander" is too harsh. But
whatever works.

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

If you SMELL what the DOC' is COOKING!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Message no. 71
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 05:40:02 2002
From: "Gurth" <Gurth@******.nl>

> That, actually, is my group's "initiation ritual" for new players: throw a
> D4 on the table and ask the newbie what number was rolled. If they don't
> get it, we say "It's at the bottom" and laugh as they pick up the die to
> look at the bottom. We've never had anyone read a D4 wrong after their
> first game session :)

But that dosn't work with all D4s. I have D4s where the result is actually
printed at the top of the die, right at the corner, instead of at the botm edge.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 72
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 09:15:01 2002
This thread has raised some very valid points, and I am taking another look
at wired reflexes, boosted reflexes, and reflex recorders. However, I have
seen move-by-wire lumped into this category numerous times now, and it is
not the same critter at all. Move-by-wire has NOTHING to do with reflexive
reactions being sped up. This frightening piece of chrome places you in a
constant state of seizure, and then directs your movement. You will NOT
accidently shoot anyone because they said "Boo!" when you did not expect it.
You will move,like your are flowing. Literally. A controlled, or rather,
a directed seizure would look positively alien and smooth. But it would not
cause you to react before you can think. As the rules stand, it is not
possible to get more than about a 40 initiative result with wired reflexes 3
and reaction enhancers. That is four actions in 3 seconds. Speaking as a
trained martial artist, that is not unreasonable for unarmed combat. I
cannot vouch for gunfights. I have never been in one. :) Furthermore, you
can do a fair amount of "observing" while you are in combat. Let me give
you an example from my martial arts experience. I was working a grueling
kumite (sparring) drill with a fellow student when another person stumbled
into our workout area. I was halfway through a spinning counter technique
to their kick, when this 12-year old kid appears almost between us. He had
backpeddled out of his ring and into ours. We were both utterly committed
to our techniques. We both stopped short of the interloper. No thought, no
hesitation. We were functioning on instinct and reflex, but still had time
for OTHER reflexes. Like the reflex to NOT hit. Most martial artists train
for control, and can choose to stop a strike anywhere between release and
impact. I think a trained gunfighter can choose to terminate their firing
action right up until the hammer drops, wired or not. Think about the last
time you played one of those arcade games with the attached guns. (Time
Crisis, Police Trainer, etc.) You get very good at shooting on reflex, and
checking that reflex when an non-target jumps up. You are adrenalized and
in the act of wasting virtual bad guys when some virtual bystander pops out.
Wires do not remove your ability to see and hear, and even to notice
detail. They shorten the time between neurons firing and fingers getting
the message. That would include the message to stop pulling the trigger,
just the same as the message to pull it in the first place.
Here is a thought for the whole debate. How come there is no suggestion
that physads suffer a penalty to observation when running under enhanced
reflexes? Or mages with spells boosting their initiative? The entry on
cybereyes states that they are NOT treated as mechanical devices because you
paid essence to integrate them into your body. The soul suffered, yes, but
not the flesh. It accepted the eyes, and uses them. Someone (Meph, I
believe) talked about how cyber is invasive and that is why there should be
penalties. Unless you got you chrome in a very second rate clinic, you did
not walk out the door until the cyber was in AND your body had accepted it.
Implicit in this is the fact that you would be acclimating to the new body
part during recovery. Cybereys, limbs, and reflexes all fall into this.
In summation:
IMO, players should decide how much to play the negative aspects of having
chrome. In mechanical terms, they paid good essence for the cybergear.
More rules that penalize them are really not necessary. A good roleplayer
will have read the flavor text about the chrome they have. Maybe they will
have read some of the novels as well. They will apply their own penalties
to their characters. And the problem of deus ex machina won't exist. I
think Derek's original problem with this rule stemmed from the lack of
player control. I agree. Good roleplayers don't need more rules, they need
less.

Korishinzo


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 73
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 09:40:01 2002
>The Rule of Six has *never* applied to initiative rolls in any
>edition of Shadowrun. There are a number of house rules concerning >this,
>but as far as vanilla rules go, Ro6 is not used for initiative.

>Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Shadowrun Companion (SR2) page (I don't know)
Edge 2 points
Adrenaline Surge
This edge allows you to use the "rule of 6" on initiative rolls.

The preceding has been exceedingly paraphrased for my protection...or
something.
I don't know how you'd categorize this. Somewhere between plain vanilla
rules and house rules? Anyhow, just my 2 cents worth of contrariness. :)

Kori


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
Message no. 74
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jonathan)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 09:50:01 2002
> The preceding has been exceedingly paraphrased for my protection...or
> something.
> I don't know how you'd categorize this. Somewhere between plain vanilla
> rules and house rules? Anyhow, just my 2 cents worth of contrariness. :)
>

I think it counts as an optional rule since you don't need edges or flaws
;o)
Message no. 75
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 10:35:01 2002
"Ice Heart" <korishinzo@*******.com said:
>This thread has raised some very valid points...You will NOT accidently
>shoot anyone because they said "Boo!" when you did not expect it.

The rule in (I think) "Man and Machine: Cyberware" is there for game balance
predominantly and does take into account the fact that not every 'runner is
going to immediately go for the cyberspurs. Something to think about though
(it's certainly true for M.B.W. systems but I haven't got my SR3 handy to
check whether it carries to Wired reflexes) is the essence cost of the
systems, this cost is not based on how much superconductive wiring you have
running through your body, high rating isn't going to have a significant
amount more than low rating (you still have cable running to every muscle
which drives your primary motor functions) the reason for the vast (7 for
rating 4) essence cost is the control system, you basically have a semi
autonamous knowbot between you (your essential self) and your meat body, you
no longer control your actions. The control system of a Move By Wire system
learns what your reactions to certain types of stimuli are going to be and
sets your body in motion before your brain has finished proccessing the
information. I think the system is similar with wired reflexes but I'm not
sure.
Yes you can stop the action as quickly as you started it but your body has a
good head start and is quite likely to have squeezed the trigger three times
before your brain catches up.
My point is that if you always react to any form of "surprise" stimulus by
popping spurs and whaling away then your system gets used to that reaction
and triggers it when you need it (and when you don't) so when you have wires
installed you really ought to expect to rip pieces out of your doss between
your bad dream waking you up and your mind realising you're awake and it was
all a dream.
I'm sure that even able as you are to stop yourself impacting on a
pinwheeling 12 yr old you've still woken up to find your leg in a full
extension sidekick toward the ceiling...

Apologies for the hugely long sentences b.t.w. :-)



_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Message no. 76
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Marc Renouf)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 12:50:01 2002
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Ice Heart wrote:

> This thread has raised some very valid points, and I am taking another look
> at wired reflexes, boosted reflexes, and reflex recorders. However, I have
> seen move-by-wire lumped into this category numerous times now, and it is
> not the same critter at all. Move-by-wire has NOTHING to do with reflexive
> reactions being sped up.

Actually, it does. The controlled-seizure motion is *in addition
to* ordinary reflex enhancement (at least in my interpretation). But even
if you rule that it's not, it's still a piece of cyberware that makes your
body react to external stimuli faster. At some level this means acting
physically before your brain can fully process all of the pertinent
details.
That's what so well done about the "Jumping the Gun" rule: it
involves a Perception check (which inherently involves the Intelligence
attribute). It's basically a way of determining if your brain can discern
enough information to be able to send that "WAIT!" command to your body
before the gut instinctual reaction from your deeply wired lizard brain
kicks in. When the 12-year-old wandered into your sparring, you made your
Perception check. Congratulations.

> Good roleplayers don't need more rules, they need less.

Roleplaying has nothing to do with rules. Rules are there to give
a mechanic for conflict resolution, and to provide a framework in which
roleplaying can take place. They exist to provide verisimilitude to the
game world. A key idea behind verisimilitude is that actions have logical
consequences, and the rules should reflect that. Hence, there's a
downside to being wired as all get out.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@*********.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <graht@******.net> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://hlair.dumpshock.com/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 77
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 13:25:20 2002
According to Lars Wagner Hansen, on Wed, 13 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> But that dosn't work with all D4s. I have D4s where the result is
> actually printed at the top of the die, right at the corner, instead of
> at the botm edge.

None of the D4s in my group do, and anyway, if you have some printed like that,
then all you need to do is take one that has the numbers at the bottom :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 78
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 15:10:01 2002
>From: "Lone Eagle"

><snip>The control system of a Move By Wire system learns what your
> >reactions to certain types of stimuli are going to be and sets your >body
>in motion before your brain has finished proccessing the
>information. I think the system is similar with wired reflexes but I'm >not
>sure.

Ummm, IIRC your body is always in motion under MBW and it is your thoughts
that drive the computer that coordinates that random seizing into useful
movement.
Wired reflexes just cut down on the delay time between thought and muscle
response. The movement still has to "get up to speed", while MBW has you
"up to speed" already and just needs a direction.

>Yes you can stop the action as quickly as you started it but your body >has
>a good head start and is quite likely to have squeezed the trigger >three
>times before your brain catches up.

This is where training comes in. In our dojo, like most, we stress control
over power; precision over speed. Power and speed come as products of
repetition, coupled with stength training. The tricky part is controlling
the weapon. (hand, foot, bo, sai, tanto, escrima, etc.) This applies to
guns as well. Police officers. SWAT members, and SEALS are trained to check
their fire on instinct, at least as hard as they are trained to shoot at
anything that moves. This means that no matter how far these guys get
wired, they will still have a faster reflexes for checking fire than pulling
triggers. No matter how wired my nervous system got, I would not suddenly
forget how to choose between touching the tip of someone's nose with my fist
or shattering it. Trained combatants observe SIMULTANEOUSLY with all other
actions, and train to "pull their punch" whenever necessary. This
simultaneous observation kept the 12 year old in my previous example from
getting brained. It also causes a SWAT operative to jerk his gun up to the
ceiling if a teammate crosses his field of fire, even in a tense situation.
Trust me, I've watched them train. Simultaneous observation is best
represented by allowing perception tests to be made with only a simple
action. You can say you are _aiming_ and observing, only to pull the
trigger suddenly, if that makes it sound more tense.
If a player actually spends a complex action to observe, they should get a
WHOLE lot of info. They are stopping all the other little things a fighter
does for up to half a second or more. Just to focus on their conscious
senses. Trained combatants do NOT do this in a hostile situation. In a
different thread, I mentioned my sensei saying that one blink equals three
free punches you do not see. He was serious. That is how long it takes.
Tiny fractions of a second.

So:
Pay attention to surroundings...always
Try and process extra info from surroundings...free action
Rerun above two processes to be sure...simple action.


>I'm sure that even able as you are to stop yourself impacting on a
>pinwheeling 12 yr old you've still woken up to find your leg in a full
>extension sidekick toward the ceiling...

No, but I once woke up with hand around a throat and my fist in motion.
Then my sleep fogged brain registered the other person kneeling over me was
a sibling with a pillow. My fist stopped a good inch from their face. Of
course, I had that reflex trigger put in... :P

>Apologies for the hugely long sentences b.t.w. :-)

np...I reflexively added puncuation as needed, while reading no less. :)

Kori

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 79
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 15:40:01 2002
"Ice Heart" wrote:

>impact. I think a trained gunfighter can choose to terminate their firing
>action right up until the hammer drops, wired or not. Think about the last
>time you played one of those arcade games with the attached guns. (Time
>Crisis, Police Trainer, etc.) You get very good at shooting on reflex, and
>checking that reflex when an non-target jumps up. You are adrenalized and
>in the act of wasting virtual bad guys when some virtual bystander pops out.

Firstly, you do get a willpower roll to abort the reflexive action and secondly, the only
reason you're not shooting the hostages is because you are succeeding in the necessary
perception tests or willpower rolls.

-George Waksman
Message no. 80
From: shadowrn@*********.com (George S Waksman)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Wed Feb 13 15:45:01 2002
"Ice Heart" wrote:

>Shadowrun Companion (SR2) page (I don't know)
>Edge 2 points
>Adrenaline Surge
>This edge allows you to use the "rule of 6" on initiative rolls.
>
>The preceding has been exceedingly paraphrased for my protection...or
>something.
>I don't know how you'd categorize this. Somewhere between plain vanilla
>rules and house rules? Anyhow, just my 2 cents worth of contrariness. :)
>
>Kori
>

I'd probably categorize it as a specifically noted exception.

-George Waksman
Message no. 81
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Thu Feb 14 11:05:01 2002
>Actually, it does. The controlled-seizure motion is *in addition
>to* ordinary reflex enhancement (at least in my interpretation). But even
>if you rule that it's not, it's still a piece of cyberware that makes your
>body react to external stimuli faster. At some level this means acting
>physically before your brain can fully process all of the pertinent
>details.
> That's what so well done about the "Jumping the Gun" rule: it
>involves a Perception check (which inherently involves the Intelligence
>attribute). It's basically a way of determining if your brain can discern
>enough information to be able to send that "WAIT!" command to your body
>before the gut instinctual reaction from your deeply wired lizard brain
>kicks in. When the 12-year-old wandered into your sparring, you made your
>Perception check. Congratulations.

All very well said Marc, but I never argued that Perception checks were
needed. I argued that the checks should not be more than a simple action
unless you planned on analyzing their sock color in Freudian context. (To
paraphrase a rather humorous example from earlier in the thread) And I
further argued that in a given phase, since both actions are nearly
simultaneous, the player should be able to choose the order, not the GM. If
they do not declare any Observation, have them shoot Grandma. That is a
valid price to exact for wires. But forcing them to act in a shoot first,
observe second order is wrong, IMO. If they can spend a simple action
aiming before pulling the trigger (an option under SR2 at least) they should
be able to spend a simple action observing before pulling the trigger. If
that perception test reveals that their intent to shoot was ill conceived,
they should be able to abort it. IIRC, they take a +2 TN mod for changing
their actions.

> > Good roleplayers don't need more rules, they need less.

>Roleplaying has nothing to do with rules. Rules are there to give
>a mechanic for conflict resolution, and to provide a framework in which
>roleplaying can take place. They exist to provide verisimilitude to the
>game world. A key idea behind verisimilitude is that actions have logical
>consequences, and the rules should reflect that. Hence, there's a
>downside to being wired as all get out.
>Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Have you ever played Amber? Very few mechanics. But the game works. It
has all the verisimilitude you can ask for. Game mechanics exist to
simulate a physical framework to build a game on. The better a group of
gamers are at living in the world, the more they can take the framework for
granted. Rules can move to the back of their mind. That is what I meant by
less rules. I did not say it well. You and I have a background in martial
arts. We do not need dice or mechanics to simulate defending our lives with
our bare hands. Many people would. They have never tried it. They have no
framework to understand the physics or mentality involved. I have never
changed into a werewolf, or had a computer built into my brain, or been a
Vulcan, or entered into a Matrix-style lobby gunfight. I need dice and
mechanics to simulate the framework for understanding that I lack. However,
as I immerse myself in these fantasy-scapes, the framework becomes less and
less necessary. I "learn" to shapechange, deck, shoot guns while doing
gymnastics, and tell people they are illogical. The mechanics become my
tempory set of physical/biological/mental laws, and the dice exist only to
maintain randomness. To the point that in some games the dice become
pointless as well. If your fantasy world become real enough, you know what
is plausible in its confines and adhere to that knowledge. I have played WW
games where full combat scenes were resolved without dice. We all knew the
odds and we all knew what was plausible. We accepted and dealt injuries,
used magick, and licked our wounds without referring to any book or dice
pool. Occasionally, we would roll one die because we thought something had
a significant marginal chance of success/failure, otherwise we played it as
logic dictated things would fall. The storyteller had literally NOTHING to
do except think for the NPCs and generate plots. To me, that is the
quintessential goal in roleplaying. And that is what I meant when I said
good roleplayers need less rules. Although badly worded, my point was that
they can take more rules for granted and roll with the story as it unfolds.

Korishinzo

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 82
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: Here's an idea that will speed up combat
Date: Sat Feb 16 17:25:01 2002
From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
<Snip>
> Fwiw, many of us apply the Rule of Six to the first initiative dice. If a
> character only has 1d6 for initiative, then the rule of six applies to that
> dice. If a character has multiple dice for initiative, then use a
> different color for *one* of the dice and apply the rule of six to that dice.

I only apply the rule of six, if _all_ of your dice comes up 6.

That means that poeple with lover initiative dice get bonus dice more often, but
on the averag they still won't catch up with the sped freeks, and it also means
the people with high dice, seldom get very high results.

> We've found that this adds a certain edge to combat. The players really
> enjoy it when it comes up in their favor, but they're also a little more
> cautious knowing that an NPC might get lucky.

My players are even more cautious, because normal people actually get an extra
D6 ever 6th round, where as they (the players) usualy only get the extra D6
every 36th round (those with 2D6) or every 216th round (those with 3D6). Once it
has actually meant that one player refused to get his initiative increased, as
he thought the higher chance of the bonus would be more fun.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Here's an idea that will speed up combat, 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!