Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject:	Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 09:02:51 +1100

Message no. 1 Our group is probably going to try the following drastic alteration
to the initiative rules in SR:

1) An initiative roll of 18 gives you two actions.
2) A roll of 30+ gives you three actions (v. rare!).
3) Spacing out the actions... well, we'll either set them 12
apart, or divide the time by the number of actions. (This doesn't
seem very significant a point, and hasn't been discussed, frankly.)
3) The Essence cost of Wired Reflexes is halved.

This is on top of our house rule for the spell Increase Reaction +N:
it only gives the recipient Reaction +N/2 and N/2 extra dice for initiative.
(The purpose of this was to make sammies who'd wired themselves to
the max, faster than mages who had simply quickened the +4 spell.)

The reasons for the new rules:

1) We've noticed in other game systems, that when some characters
get 4 actions to another's 1, it seems to confuse and slow things
down - as well as being less fun for the slower characters.
We finally realised that this was also true in SR.
2) The fast characters will still get to act first, but because there
will be fewer actions per `round', it should speed up the playing-out
of combats (even though they'll take longer in the game reality).
3) `Who goes first' in a combat is super-important in SR; possibly
more important than having extra actions. This advantage is still
there for `boosted' characters.
4) The Essence halving is to try to be fair to characters that have
spent enormous amounts on reaction-boosting cyberware - it should
mean that they also have some room for `advancement' by adding
some more varied pieces of cyberware, if they wish.
(Basically, we've devalued the `currency' of Initiative.)

It will also mean that a large-scale combat will last longer than 15
seconds, which doesn't seem unreasonable. They may take as long as
40 seconds, with these rules!

Anyway, we're all interested to see what people on the mailing list
think; we're actually still discussing the adoption of these rules.

So, what do you think? Is the starting point of 18 before you get two
actions too low? Too high? Should we reduce the Magic cost of
Physical Adept's Increased Reaction?

luke

From:	Nightfox <DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sun, 11 Dec 1994 19:50:36 -0700

Message no. 2 >to the initiative rules in SR:
>
> 1) An initiative roll of 18 gives you two actions.
> 2) A roll of 30+ gives you three actions (v. rare!).
> 3) Spacing out the actions... well, we'll either set them 12
> apart, or divide the time by the number of actions. (This doesn't
> seem very significant a point, and hasn't been discussed, frankly.)
> 3) The Essence cost of Wired Reflexes is halved.
>

>This is on top of our house rule for the spell Increase Reaction +N:
>it only gives the recipient Reaction +N/2 and N/2 extra dice for initiative.
>(The purpose of this was to make sammies who'd wired themselves to
>the max, faster than mages who had simply quickened the +4 spell.)

Why does it give reaction N/2 and init N/2 ?
Increase reaction spell give +N to REACTION - thats all
Increase reflexes gives +N initiative dice - max of +3

So - for a drain code of (F/2)D and (F/2)D you can get
+4 reaction, +3d6 init and +4 TN

gee - its not that overpowered. Of course you could spell lock both of them
for 2 karma and the 90k Y it takes to buy 2 spell locks.
And then another mage will just ground through them :) or better yet a spirit

A sam can get +6 reaction, +3d6 initiative - and you can't ground through it.

>The reasons for the new rules:
> 1) We've noticed in other game systems, that when some characters
> get 4 actions to another's 1, it seems to confuse and slow things
> down - as well as being less fun for the slower characters.
> We finally realised that this was also true in SR.

thats the whole point - those who are fast are deadly, if you surprise someone
they are dead. BUT - if they are waiting for you or have a delayed action like
"I'm going to wait for him to stick his head around the corner, then I'm going
to blow it off!!! - Uh - his head, not the corner."

Gee Mister "walking Death" sami with initiative of 36 turns corner and
promptly gets a bullets in his skull. THATS THE WAY YOU DO IT!!!

> 3) `Who goes first' in a combat is super-important in SR; possibly
> more important than having extra actions. This advantage is still
> there for `boosted' characters.

not all the time, many times you don't take the people out in one shot. Then
who is going to be in trouble?

> 4) The Essence halving is to try to be fair to characters that have
> spent enormous amounts on reaction-boosting cyberware - it should
> mean that they also have some room for `advancement' by adding
> some more varied pieces of cyberware, if they wish.
> (Basically, we've devalued the `currency' of Initiative.)

THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ADVANCEMENT. Neuro cyberware is NOT upgradable.
Only cyberware that is easy to replace can be up graded like eyes, ears,
headware and limbs. Any of the reflex enchancments are ONE TIME ONLY, not
upgrades, they place a layer over the nervous system, it is not possible to take
that layer off.

>It will also mean that a large-scale combat will last longer than 15
>seconds, which doesn't seem unreasonable. They may take as long as
>40 seconds, with these rules!

The shoot-out at the OK-corral took 12 seconds between about 8 people, and
about 50 some bullets were fired. Combats go fast - they are not drag out
battles unless all the people are using cover and such.

>Anyway, we're all interested to see what people on the mailing list
>think; we're actually still discussing the adoption of these rules.

>So, what do you think? Is the starting point of 18 before you get two
>actions too low? Too high? Should we reduce the Magic cost of
>Physical Adept's Increased Reaction?

18 is MUCH TO HIGH!!!! with a 10 - an above normal person whow rolls high can
get two actions - this is realistic.

yes - phys ad things should be reduced.

Nightfox

From:	"J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sun, 11 Dec 1994 22:21:46 -0500

Message no. 3 [regarding the changed initiative rules & easier wired reflexes]

I've found that while it can take hours to _play_ combat
(especially with our more powerful mage being relatively new to the game,
though she's gotten the hang of it by now), it is worth remembering that,
at least in our campaign, it is rare for combat to take a total of more
than two rounds: SIX SECONDS.
Yes, that's right, one round is three seconds.

-------------========== J.D. Falk <jdfalk@****.com> =========-------------
| "Information is the currency of democracy." -Thomas Jefferson |
--------========== http://www.cais.com/jdfalk/home.html ==========--------

From:	"Thomas W. Craig" <Craigtw1@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sun, 11 Dec 1994 23:02:34 -0500

Message no. 4 Hold it, folks. The initiative rule in SRII is (page 79 SRII Sourcebook)
for a character with, say, a 40 Initiative total; that character gets 4
actions, count them 4 actions. One action at 40, one a 30, one at 20, and
one at 10. A character with a 25 Initiative total gets 3 actions, as in the
other example subtract 10 from the total for each action.
In SRI the same character with the 40 Initiative would get, theoretically;
although the rules state no more than 4 actions per combat phase, 6 Actions.
One at 40, one at 33, one at 26, one at 19, one at 12, and one at 5.
Did this clear up this mess?
Tom Craig

From:	Shadowdancer <BRIDDLE@*****.VINU.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sun, 11 Dec 1994 23:12:36 EST

Message no. 5 Mr. Falk writes:

> [regarding the changed initiative rules & easier wired reflexes]
>
> I've found that while it can take hours to _play_ combat
> (especially with our more powerful mage being relatively new to the
game,
> though she's gotten the hang of it by now), it is worth remembering
that,
> at least in our campaign, it is rare for combat to take a total of more
> than two rounds: SIX SECONDS.
> Yes, that's right, one round is three seconds.

I read somewhere that one combat round could be 5 seconds. Do not
remember where. But most of our combats take about 4 action
phases, not even one round! Once in a while the combat will extent
into round two(like when fighting a greater spider spirit), but usually
they hose the bad-guys VERY quickly.

To Phil, I do not remember the issue number right off hand, but I think
it was 29.

Mr Falk, will I be able to post the physad powers on Nerps?

Many people fear Death, saying it is the bitter end.
I say Death is just lonely, crying out for a friend.

-Shadowdancer- <briddle@*****.vinu.edu>

From:	Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 16:19:12 +1100

Message no. 6 Nightfox wrote:

luke>This is on top of our house rule for the spell Increase Reaction +N:
luke>it only gives the recipient Reaction +N/2 and N/2 extra dice for
luke> initiative.

> Why does it give reaction N/2 and init N/2 ?
> Increase reaction spell give +N to REACTION - thats all
> Increase reflexes gives +N initiative dice - max of +3

We thought the spell gave +N and +Nd6 - maybe we've been wrong all this
time. Doesn't matter, it's the +4d6 that's significant.
We halved the spell's power to give sammies a chance of being faster.

> So - for a drain code of (F/2)D and (F/2)D you can get
> +4 reaction, +3d6 init and +4 TN

(Actually, we play SR I Force-based drain, not the lighter SR II drain
codes.)
But anyway, why only +3d6?

> gee - its not that overpowered. Of course you could spell lock both of them

Ah well. We do consider it overpowered. Not important.

A sam can get +6 reaction, +3d6 initiative - and you can't ground through it.

> thats the whole point - those who are fast are deadly, if you surprise
> someone they are dead. BUT - if they are waiting for you or have a delayed
> action like "I'm going to wait for him to [...]

What you say (above) is perfectly true.

But I guess I wasn't clear - I meant that the confusion and slowness happens
to the players, not to the characters. We're trying to reduce the time it
takes to play out a combat (among other things).

luke> 3) `Who goes first' in a combat is super-important in SR;[...]

> not all the time, many times you don't take the people out in one shot.

No, but you often wound them; and that's enough.

luke> 4) The Essence halving is to try to be fair to characters that have
luke> spent enormous amounts on reaction-boosting cyberware - it should
luke> mean that they also have some room for `advancement' by adding
luke> some more varied pieces of cyberware, if they wish.
luke> (Basically, we've devalued the `currency' of Initiative.)

> THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ADVANCEMENT. Neuro cyberware is NOT
> upgradable. Only cyberware that is easy to replace can be
> up graded like eyes, ears, headware and limbs. Any of the
> reflex enchancments are ONE TIME ONLY, not upgrades,
> they place a layer over the nervous system, it is not
> possible to take that layer off.

Another misunderstanding. These changes are happening to the rules,
outside the game. Characters in the game haven't found some sort of
omega-ware. We're trying to reduce the number of actions that happen
in a round, in the belief that this will speed up play.

And we're trying not to penalise players who have invested lots of
Essence in reaction, because it's so important in the standard rules.
Do you see what I mean?

> The shoot-out at the OK-corral took 12 seconds between about 8 people,

Interesting. I'd expect that to happen in SR, too, if none of the
combatants were wearing any armour.

> 18 is MUCH TO HIGH!!!! with a 10 - an above normal person whow rolls high
> can get two actions - this is realistic.

Are you sure? The idea is that normal people _never_ get 2 actions.
Wired people _sometimes_ get 2 actions.
Wired people _almost always_ go first though.

So - do you still think 18 is too high? Remember, the whole idea is
that we've made extra actions less likely - so one extra action under
these rules is sort of `worth' 2 actions under the standard rules.

Think of it like this one round's actions are spread out over 2 rounds,
now. Sort of.

> yes - phys ad things should be reduced.

J.D.Falk:

> I've found that while it can take hours to _play_ combat
> [...] it is rare for combat to take a total of more than two rounds:
> SIX SECONDS.

Exactly. In our campaign, the long combats _almost_ stay exciting. But
they do have this sort of background frustration running through them,
because it takes so long till your next action. Recently, we had one
combat (a complex situation, admittedly), require 2 game sessions (I
guess about 8 hours) to play out. This wasn't because we had to keep
referring to the rules or anything, by the way.

Thomas W. Craig writes:

> In SRI the same character with the 40 Initiative would get, theoretically;
> although the rules state no more than 4 actions per combat phase, 6 Actions.

No, 4 actions has always been the limit - so we aren't trying it for that
reason.

Shadowdancer writes:

> But most of our combats take about 4 action phases, not
> even one round! Once in a while the combat will extent into
> round two(like when fighting a greater spider spirit)

Our big ones sometimes go as long as 10; the 2-session one I mentioned
went for almost 15, I think! Part of this is due to the fact that at
the moment, we have eight players (yes, eight!), and the opposition
(obviously) is designed to be a serious danger. (I thought our chance
of survival in the 2-session thing was about 50%. In retrospect, it
may have been lower. Some nights, everyone plays well. Other nights,
someone drops a flare grenade amongst the characters about to leave
your van. :-( ["How dumb?" "Ten. That's ten dumb."] )

Anyway, thanks for the comments!

luke

From:	Nightfox <DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sun, 11 Dec 1994 23:25:06 -0700

Message no. 7 >> Why does it give reaction N/2 and init N/2 ?
>> Increase reaction spell give +N to REACTION - thats all
>> Increase reflexes gives +N initiative dice - max of +3
>
>We thought the spell gave +N and +Nd6 - maybe we've been wrong all this
>time. Doesn't matter, it's the +4d6 that's significant.
>We halved the spell's power to give sammies a chance of being faster.

The +N and +Nd6 is a SRI thing

>> So - for a drain code of (F/2)D and (F/2)D you can get
>> +4 reaction, +3d6 init and +4 TN
>
>(Actually, we play SR I Force-based drain, not the lighter SR II drain
>codes.)
>But anyway, why only +3d6?

so that they don't exceed what a sami does. thats about the only reason

>But I guess I wasn't clear - I meant that the confusion and slowness happens
>to the players, not to the characters. We're trying to reduce the time it
>takes to play out a combat (among other things).

yes - but if you increase the time to refresh - the combat isn't taking any less
time really - something that takes you 4 action phases is still going to take 4
action phases.

to speed up play - try counting from 40 or 30 (depending on how fast people are)

>No, but you often wound them; and that's enough.

not really - depending on what their on or how they are fighting.

on drugs "I feal NO pain!!!"

using suppresion fire - # number bullets vs TN 4 is still TN 4
don't matter if they have a moderate wound (could be wrong on this)

>> THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ADVANCEMENT. Neuro cyberware is NOT
>> upgradable. Only cyberware that is easy to replace can be
>> up graded like eyes, ears, headware and limbs. Any of the
>> reflex enchancments are ONE TIME ONLY, not upgrades,
>> they place a layer over the nervous system, it is not
>> possible to take that layer off.

>Another misunderstanding. These changes are happening to the rules,
>outside the game. Characters in the game haven't found some sort of
>omega-ware. We're trying to reduce the number of actions that happen
>in a round, in the belief that this will speed up play.

HUH? I don't get the "outside the game" part

>And we're trying not to penalise players who have invested lots of
>Essence in reaction, because it's so important in the standard rules.
>Do you see what I mean?

but you are, if you raise the refresh to 18 - that means that they only refresh
half as often - they don't get the 2 actions they used to.
And remember - you may have lowered the Essence - bu the money is still the
same - and thats a big limiting factor.

>Interesting. I'd expect that to happen in SR, too, if none of the
>combatants were wearing any armour.

it still happens, bullets in the midwest weren't as powerful - they were
about 6M. You are right though - armor has gotten better, and it does slow
down the game to some extent - if this is the case - us the deadlier combat
rules.

>> 18 is MUCH TO HIGH!!!! with a 10 - an above normal person whow rolls high
>> can get two actions - this is realistic.
>
>Are you sure? The idea is that normal people _never_ get 2 actions.
>Wired people _sometimes_ get 2 actions.
>Wired people _almost always_ go first though.

An above normal person can get 2 actions (one needs a reaction of 5+ and
to roll a 6 (or 5) ). This means that a Special Forces will beat a normal
person, but will still loose to the wired person.

with wired 1 the average person will become reaction 5 and +2d6 init averaging
a 12 on init rolls. This beats the un modified Special forces - like it should
and makes them twice as quick - but they will normally get their second action
AFTER the other person has had their first.

>So - do you still think 18 is too high? Remember, the whole idea is
>that we've made extra actions less likely - so one extra action under
>these rules is sort of `worth' 2 actions under the standard rules.

but the combat will still take as long or LONGER - you don't get those quick
kills with the samies blowing the not so ready guards away.

>Think of it like this one round's actions are spread out over 2 rounds,
>now. Sort of.

>Our big ones sometimes go as long as 10; the 2-session one I mentioned
>went for almost 15, I think! Part of this is due to the fact that at
>the moment, we have eight players (yes, eight!), and the opposition
>(obviously) is designed to be a serious danger. (I thought our chance
>of survival in the 2-session thing was about 50%. In retrospect, it
>may have been lower. Some nights, everyone plays well. Other nights,
>someone drops a flare grenade amongst the characters about to leave
>your van. :-( ["How dumb?" "Ten. That's ten dumb."] )

if guards see a large bunch of people - they will NOT try and shoot just one
person - they will act as a team and do suppression fire into the middle of the
runners - that way they will hit a few of them.

1 guard = 1 meter area that can be filled with 10 dice of lead for 10 phases.

if Twig the mage enters that area - roll 10 dice vs TN 4 ( say 6 succeses)
at 1 bullet for 2 successs = 3 bullets = +3 power + 1 wound level

The next person to enter the area takes 10 - 3 = 7 bullets. (say 3 success)
a 1 bullet for 2 succes = 1 bullet = +1 power

the next person to enter gets 10 - 4 = 6 bullets + 10 bullets from guard #2
who just started to blast the area.

See - it can get NASTY - then add in a defensive grenade or 3 and runners go
bye-bye.

Nightfox

BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!
Daniel Waisley + SCA - March of Ered Sul - Flagstaff AZ
DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU + Nau fencing club.
"Nightfox" + Brotherhood of the Cryptic Demesne -household
BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!
Geek code V2.1 GE d-? H++ s+:->++: g+ p? !au(-) a21! w++ v+* C++$(++++)
U(-) p? L !3 E? N K- W M+ V+ -po+(---) Y+ t+ 5+++! j-x R+(++) G' tv
b+(+++) D(+) B--- e+ u+*(++)(**) h(*) f+(*) r-->+++ !n- y+*>++

From:	Susan Sherman <SSHERMAN@****.STEVENS-TECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 04:47:28 -0500

Message no. 8 On saturday and sunday I was in a session that lasted from 1 in
the afternoon sat to 5:30 in the morn on Sun and I was playing a street
sam. For initiative I rolled from 11 at the lowest to 18 at the highest
including wound modifiers. Depending on what reflexive enhancements
a character has I don't think that anything under a 30 is gross. We've
got an NPC on our team for whom an 18 is low, with modifiers...

Just $0.02 from a newbie :).

Susan a.k.a. SilverFire
ssherman@****.stevens-tech.edu

From:	Andrew <wadycki@***.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 10:00:05 -0600

Message no. 9 There is another big problem with playing with iniative like you are.
All the dice pools are going to not refresh as quickly. Your players are
going to run out of combat pool to dodge the attacks of all the guys that
survive that are after them. What about the effects all this will have
with astral space and decking? It won't make as much sense when you
throw those two systems in too.

-Andrew

From:	"Thomas W. Craig" <Craigtw1@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 11:40:01 -0500

Message no. 10 Your character with an 18 Initiative would only get 2 actions in SRII,
whereas he would get 3 in SRI, capeche?
Tom

From:	"J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 1994 19:24:17 -0500

Message no. 11 On Sun, 11 Dec 1994, Shadowdancer wrote:

> I read somewhere that one combat round could be 5 seconds.

Just checked with the Shadowy Think Tank's resident G.M., who
tells me that it is between three and five seconds. He likes to think of
it as five seconds, since so much usually happens; we players like to joke
about it being three seconds, because it's more mind-boggling when we
think about exactly how much our fastest character does each round.

> Mr Falk, will I be able to post the physad powers on Nerps?

Yes, just follow the submission guidelines in the NERPS FAQ. And
remember, the current deadline for submission registration is December
24th -- x-mess eve.

-------------========== J.D. Falk <jdfalk@****.com> =========-------------
| "He who waits for the sword to fall upon his neck |
| will surely lose his head." -Stephen R. Donaldson |
--------========== http://www.cais.com/jdfalk/home.html ==========--------

From:	Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 14:32:52 +1100

Message no. 12 In answer to several people's responses ...

Nightfox writes:

luke>But anyway, why only +3d6?

> so that they don't exceed what a sami does. thats about the only reason

Good. Sounds like we're on the right wavelength, even if it has taken
us a lot longer than FASA to notice the problem.

luke>But I guess I wasn't clear - I meant that the confusion and slowness
luke> happens to the players, not to the characters.

> yes - but if you increase the time to refresh - the combat isn't taking any
> less time really - something that takes you 4 action phases is still going
> to take 4 action phases.
>
> to speed up play - try counting from 40 or 30 (depending on how fast
> people are)

I have to disagree. Even though it's weird and hard to believe.

The more actions you cram into a round, the longer it takes to
resolve the scene. Even when the total number of actions, over
the whole scene, is the same!

This sounds crazy, but it's something which we've observed in all the
game systems that commonly allowed more than two actions in a round.

Nightfox> >> THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ADVANCEMENT. Neuro cyberware is NOT
> >> upgradable. Only cyberware that is easy to replace can be
> >> up graded like eyes, ears, headware and limbs. Any of the
> >> reflex enchancments are ONE TIME ONLY, not upgrades,
> >> they place a layer over the nervous system, it is not
> >> possible to take that layer off.
>

> >Another misunderstanding. These changes are happening to the rules,
> >outside the game. Characters in the game haven't found some sort of
> >omega-ware. We're trying to reduce the number of actions that happen
> >in a round, in the belief that this will speed up play.
>

> HUH? I don't get the "outside the game" part

I mean, it's like we're going back and altering the way the world
works, so we have to go back and change history so that it matches.

luke>And we're trying not to penalise players who have invested lots of Ess

> but you are, if you raise the refresh to 18 - that means that they only
> refresh half as often - they don't get the 2 actions they used to.

Yes, but they're still faster, so they still go first; we've basically
said, faster reactions are not as significant as they used to be.

> And remember - you may have lowered the Essence - bu the
> money is still the same - and thats a big limiting factor.

Good point. Have to halve that, too.

>> 18 is MUCH TO HIGH!!!! with a 10 - an above normal person whow rolls high
>> can get two actions - this is realistic.
>
>Are you sure? The idea is that normal people _never_ get 2 actions.
>Wired people _sometimes_ get 2 actions.
>Wired people _almost always_ go first though.

The whole point is we're trying to make 2 actions the most you can
reasonably expect, assuming maximum wiring.

> but the combat will still take as long or LONGER - you don't get
> those quick kills with the samies blowing the not so ready guards
> away.

Hmm. I don't think we often go up against ordinary people (because
they'd be no real threat). This initiative experiment would obviously
make these people a serious threat once again.

Basically, we rarely have the luxury of having `not so ready guards'
to blow away.

> if guards see a large bunch of people - they will NOT try and
> shoot just one person - they will act as a team and do
> suppression fire into the middle

Sure, sure. But the circumstances don't always allow this to be
done. Anyway, thanks again for the comments.

---

Andrew wrote:

> There is another big problem with playing with iniative like you are.
> All the dice pools are going to not refresh as quickly. Your players are
> going to run out of combat pool to dodge the attacks of all the guys that
> survive that are after them.

Yep. And it will make things more dangerous for us, as well as speeding
up play. Both are good, in my opinion.

> What about the effects all this will have with astral space and decking?
> It won't make as much sense when you throw those two systems in too.

Astral combatants rarely have reactions of 12 + 4d6, so it's just
making physical combats more like Astral ones. With the result that
the two situtations are more similar. This seems to make more sense,
to me at least.

Decking? Well, we try to avoid playing that out, as it's usually
slow and involves only one player instead of the whole group. So it's
kind of different anyway.

---
And, Thomas W. Craig wrote:

> Your character with an 18 Initiative would only get 2 actions in SRII,
> whereas he would get 3 in SRI, capeche?

Right. So FASA decided that there was a problem in this area, too.
We're taking the same path that they did - we're just going further!

Again, thanks for all the helpful comments and arguments.

luke

From:	Gurth <gurth@***.NL>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 09:49:25 +0100

Message no. 13 > 1) An initiative roll of 18 gives you two actions.
> 2) A roll of 30+ gives you three actions (v. rare!).

Very rare indeed! With Wired-2 (I think the most common sam-grade reflex
boost), you'd ahve to get a Reaction of 12 to even hope getting 30! (and
even that is a 1-in-216 chance)

>The reasons for the new rules:
>
> 1) We've noticed in other game systems, that when some characters
> get 4 actions to another's 1, it seems to confuse and slow things
> down - as well as being less fun for the slower characters.
> We finally realised that this was also true in SR.

Yep. I remember a game where two characters had Wired-2 systems, and the
others had nothing. The first two characters were always first, and shot
just about anyone in a fight before the others' actions came up. They just
sat around yawning until it was their turn -- by which time they had nothing
to do so they could yawn a bit more :)

> 2) The fast characters will still get to act first, but because there
> will be fewer actions per `round', it should speed up the playing-out
> of combats (even though they'll take longer in the game reality).

That's not a bad thing: if a turn take between 3 and 5 seconds, your average
firefight takes maybe 6 to 10 seconds...! And that leaves you with five or
more dead NPCs... But like someone else said: the characters' pools aren't
refreshed as often, so you'll likely face a higher character mortality rate.
Double all pools, maybe?

>It will also mean that a large-scale combat will last longer than 15
>seconds, which doesn't seem unreasonable. They may take as long as
>40 seconds, with these rules!

Whooh!

Gurth@***.nl | GEEK CODE v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g P?(3) !au !a>?
Windows -- the | w+(+++)y v*(---) C+(++) U P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po)
largest virus | Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++) B? e+ u+@ h!
ever written | f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?

From:	Gurth <gurth@***.NL>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 09:49:29 +0100

Message no. 14 >not all the time, many times you don't take the people out in one shot. Then
>who is going to be in trouble?

Ever had someone fire at you with a full-auto shotgun? Seven rounds of 8S
against a Target Number of 2? I can guarantee you that one action = one dead
NPC in such situations... Even if the NPC is a dragon, as I found out :(

Gurth@***.nl | GEEK CODE v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g P?(3) !au !a>?
Windows -- the | w+(+++)y v*(---) C+(++) U P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po)
largest virus | Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++) B? e+ u+@ h!
ever written | f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?

From:	Gurth <gurth@***.NL>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 09:49:54 +0100

Message no. 15 > On saturday and sunday I was in a session that lasted from 1 in
>the afternoon sat to 5:30 in the morn on Sun and I was playing a street
>sam. For initiative I rolled from 11 at the lowest to 18 at the highest
>including wound modifiers. Depending on what reflexive enhancements
>a character has I don't think that anything under a 30 is gross. We've
>got an NPC on our team for whom an 18 is low, with modifiers...

And I thought the sam in our group rolls high initiatives... and he usually
sits between 14 and 29 (usually around 20), without modifiers.

> Just $0.02 from a newbie :).

You are what you think, I always say :)

Gurth@***.nl | GEEK CODE v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g P?(3) !au !a>?
Windows -- the | w+(+++)y v*(---) C+(++) U P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po)
largest virus | Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++) B? e+ u+@ h!
ever written | f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?

From:	Andrew <wadycki@***.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 13:46:18 -0600

Message no. 16 On Tue, 13 Dec 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> Andrew wrote:
>
> > There is another big problem with playing with iniative like you are.
> > All the dice pools are going to not refresh as quickly. Your players are
> > going to run out of combat pool to dodge the attacks of all the guys that
> > survive that are after them.
>
> Yep. And it will make things more dangerous for us, as well as speeding
> up play. Both are good, in my opinion.
>
> > What about the effects all this will have with astral space and decking?
> > It won't make as much sense when you throw those two systems in too.
>
> Astral combatants rarely have reactions of 12 + 4d6, so it's just
> making physical combats more like Astral ones. With the result that
> the two situtations are more similar. This seems to make more sense,
> to me at least.
>

Astral people should be the fastest and have the most actions, in astral
space you go the speed of thought. You don't have a body to slow you
down.

> Decking? Well, we try to avoid playing that out, as it's usually
> slow and involves only one player instead of the whole group. So it's
> kind of different anyway.
>

Decking also would be faster, but as you say it never comes into to play
in such a way to effect these alterations of yours. You might think of
rasing the number of actions for astral and matrix though.

-Andrew

From:	Andrew <wadycki@***.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 14:05:54 -0600

Message no. 17 Everyone keeps saying how their sammies kill everything and the other
players are bored. There is more to the game than combat. Sammies do
combat. That is usually all they can do. The other characters are
better at other things. The character I play can hold his own in combat,
but does a lot of social stuff, he is more of a watcher fo things and
thinker, but if it comes to combat he can do it, the sammies are faster,
but that is not his primary thing (he is a phys adept, he is an agent for
other powers, so is kinda always doing INTEL). If players are having
problems with being bored with combat, add some other types of scenes to
keep everyone happy.

-Andrew

From:	robert frazine <shade@*****.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 1994 16:45:08 -0500

Message no. 18 This deal about the sammies doing all the killing...I play a snake
shaman in a campaign and I do quite a bit of the killing--to the
remorse of the character...killing is not snake's way...this probably
due to the fact that we only have one sammie...with wired 2 where as
me and the other full shaman have +3d6 for init...locked...yes we are
mage bait...reason one of us is always percepting the alternate plane...
but moving away from combat is a good thing...send them to find someone...
or to find out the patterns of such and such companies trucks...all
can be interesting and include all of the party members...

From:	The GREAT Cornholio <mruane@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Wed, 14 Dec 1994 13:35:44 -0700

Message no. 19 On Tue, 13 Dec 1994, Gurth wrote:

> Ever had someone fire at you with a full-auto shotgun? Seven rounds of 8S
> against a Target Number of 2? I can guarantee you that one action = one dead
> NPC in such situations... Even if the NPC is a dragon, as I found out :(

Are you using the dragon's armor as hardened armor?It wouldn't do much
except flatten the flechette ammo against its hide.

Mike,TGC

fraggin' space bar....

From:	Gurth <gurth@***.NL>
Subject:	Re: Initiative experiment
Date:	Sat, 17 Dec 1994 19:10:58 +0100

Message no. 20 (So this was written on 14 Dec. 94...sue my ****ed-up mailer system :)

>> Ever had someone fire at you with a full-auto shotgun? Seven rounds of 8S
>> against a Target Number of 2? I can guarantee you that one action = one dead
>> NPC in such situations... Even if the NPC is a dragon, as I found out :(
>
>Are you using the dragon's armor as hardened armor?It wouldn't do much
>except flatten the flechette ammo against its hide.

The guy was firing regular rounds, and the weapon's base Power was greater
than the beast's armor :( It didn't bounce off...

Gurth@***.nl | GEEK CODE v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g P?(3) !au !a>?
Windows -- the | w+(+++)y v*(---) C+(++) U P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po)
largest virus | Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++) B? e+ u+@ h!
ever written | f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer