Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Shaun Sides <arch@****.ABTS.NET>
Subject: House Rules - and why we do it.
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 07:53:18 -0500
Date: 5 May 97 Time: 14:09
Subject: Re: Number of Houser Rules

TO: David Buehrer

> Okay, in your basic melee combat each side roles their skill vs a
> target number of 4. The one that gets the most success hits the
> other one. Everyone agrees that if you used the opposing skill
> ratings as the TNs then the combat would be way overbalanced in
> favor of the guy with the highest skill (more dice vs a lower target
> number).

Um.

Isn't that the point? The person with better skill *should* win more
times than not. Sounds to me like a really good reason to actually
let a character be aware of his limitations and not get in a fight
with a person more skilled than himself. Also, the fact that a PC
generally can reroll unsuccessful dice by using karma pool goes a
long way toward giving him a chance. But then, I've noticed that a
lot of folks seem to not like letting people use their karma pool. I
don't really understand that, since it eliminates the need, IMO, for
many of the other house rules I've read, and also runs out if the
character is put into too many situations that he shouldn't be able
to handle. In short, I see all the interlinking of the above factors
as a good way of everything safeguarding itself. All the rest of it
seems like needless complication.

My 2 nuyen worth, I guess. :)

Hey, on topic as it gets.

a chaoidh teabadaich,

Shaun Sides
arch@****.net
http://www.abts.net/~arch

Callin' me sir's like putting an elevator in an outhouse;
it don't fit.
-- Emmett, from Roadhouse
Message no. 2
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: House Rules - and why we do it.
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 08:17:45 -0600
Shaun Sides wrote:
|
| TO: David Buehrer
|
| > Okay, in your basic melee combat each side roles their skill vs a
| > target number of 4. The one that gets the most success hits the
| > other one. Everyone agrees that if you used the opposing skill
| > ratings as the TNs then the combat would be way overbalanced in
| > favor of the guy with the highest skill (more dice vs a lower target
| > number).
|
| Um.
|
| Isn't that the point? The person with better skill *should* win more
| times than not. Sounds to me like a really good reason to actually
| let a character be aware of his limitations and not get in a fight
| with a person more skilled than himself.

<friendly smile> If you want to treat melee combat as a resisted
test in your game it's fine with me. This started out as a request
for house rules. My rule for resisted tests is just that, a house
rule. I use the house rule because I want my game to have a certain
style that isn't accomodated by the core rules.

| Also, the fact that a PC
| generally can reroll unsuccessful dice by using karma pool goes a
| long way toward giving him a chance. But then, I've noticed that a
| lot of folks seem to not like letting people use their karma pool.

Some might think my house rule for karma pool is more than fair.

| I
| don't really understand that, since it eliminates the need, IMO, for
| many of the other house rules I've read, and also runs out if the
| character is put into too many situations that he shouldn't be able
| to handle. In short, I see all the interlinking of the above factors
| as a good way of everything safeguarding itself. All the rest of it
| seems like needless complication.

<gripe> Shadowrun has rules for resisted tests (Rating(opposing
Rating) vs Rating(opposing Rating)). And rules for standard tests
(Rating(4)). But for melee combat it's Skill(4) vs Skill(4). So now
there's three rules. They have one set of rules for regular combat,
another set of rules for vehicle combat, and another set of rules for
matrix combat. And then there's the rules for magic.</grip>

My resisted test rule makes things easier. The player doesn't have
to ask me what his target number is. I don't have to ask the
player. I just rattle off the modifiers and leave the rest up to
him/her. He/she tells me how many successes they got and I tell them
what the outcome is.

Shadowrun's rules aren't perfect. And they never will be. The fact
that so many people use house rules is testimant to that. What
everyone needs to remember is that the rules do not make the game.
Shadowrun is Shadowrun because of it's history, it's culture, and
it's people. The dice rule's are there to decide the outcome of
events. If you started using the dice rules from Gurps it wouldn't
change the world of Shadowrun at all.

I tweek the rules because I think there's a better way to decide
outcomes. I tweek the rules because I want a desired effect (my
players to rely on their brains, and not their weapons). But I am in
no way advocating changing the world of Shadowrun.

:)

-David
--
/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances
like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 3
From: Shaun Sides <arch@****.ABTS.NET>
Subject: Re: House Rules - and why we do it.
Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 19:24:33 -0500
Date: 6 May 97 Time: 8:17
Subject: Re: House Rules - and why we do it.

TO: David Buehrer

> <friendly smile> If you want to treat melee combat as a resisted
> test in your game it's fine with me. This started out as a request
> for house rules. My rule for resisted tests is just that, a house
> rule. I use the house rule because I want my game to have a certain
> style that isn't accomodated by the core rules.

Well, I understand that, and I'm not trying to get you to change.
More than anything, I guess I'm trying to expand my facility with the
SR system by learning why all of you do the things that you do, stuff
like that.

> My resisted test rule makes things easier. The player doesn't have
> to ask me what his target number is. I don't have to ask the
> player. I just rattle off the modifiers and leave the rest up to
> him/her. He/she tells me how many successes they got and I tell
> them what the outcome is.

The GM's I've gamed with were more partial to having the players make
a roll, then figuring out how many successes were achieved
themselves. :) Different styles, as you say.

> Shadowrun's rules aren't perfect. And they never will be. The fact
> that so many people use house rules is testimant to that. What
> everyone needs to remember is that the rules do not make the game.

Again, I do understand, however I will say that I like SR's system
better than any other. It's the main reason why I like the game so
much.

> I tweek the rules because I think there's a better way to decide
> outcomes. I tweek the rules because I want a desired effect (my
> players to rely on their brains, and not their weapons). But I am
> in no way advocating changing the world of Shadowrun.

I guess my point is that, from my perspective, an exhaustible pool
and the knowledge that one can have his ass thoroughly trounced by a
person of higher skill should make for some very careful, unimpulsive
runners. It seems that having all tn's at 4 would encourage the
characters to engage in combat with a superior foe, rather than
trying to find an alternate way of dealing with the situation. And,
please, note that this is all stated only as my own opinion.

a chaoidh teabadaich,

Shaun Sides
arch@****.net
http://www.abts.net/~arch

No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force
of arms forever. There is no greater power in the Universe than the
need for freedom. Against that power, governments and tyrants and
armies cannot stand. The Centauri learned this lesson once; we will
teach it to them again. Though it take a thousand years, we will be
free.
-- G'Kar, Babylon 5: The Long, Twilight Struggle

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about House Rules - and why we do it., 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!