Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:31:01 +0200
Nitewing@********.de





From meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:56:26 +1000
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:56:26 +1000
From: Jeremy Baker meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au
Subject: Necronomicon

>> I have always been under the impression that the *real* Necronomicon was
>> Lovecraft's invention in the first place. Abort.Eng. - you are stating
>> that this is not so?
>>
>Well, my *real* assertion was that there is no *real* Necronomicon.
>Lovecraft made one up to show people how neat he was for having thought of
>Cthulu, and how closely he got everything in his books to this "Book of the
>Dead." But no, there is no *real* Necronomicon.
>
>Sorry I wasn't more clear.
>
Aha! Your just saying that because you know the "REAL" *real* truth,
aren't you AE. Trying to lay false trails just like H.P. Lovecraft did. But
it won't work on me because I KNOW 'THE TRUTH' (TM), just as I also KNOW
that Elvis was abducted by aliens.





From gurth@******.nl Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:37:49 +0200
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:37:49 +0200
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Gues what
Message no. 2
From: Da Twink Daddy datwinkdaddy@*******.com
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:00:26 -0500 (CDT)
Don't tell us, 00DNA. Tell Mike Mulvihill. From where I sit, you're
preaching to the choir (I happen to agree with you on this one). Drop
FASAMike@***.com a note and let him know what you think.

Patrick





From mcmanus@******.albany.edu Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:20:15 -0400
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 11:20:15 -0400
From: 00DNA mcmanus@******.albany.edu
Subject: simsense rules from M&M?

At 10:04 AM 10/29/99 -0500, Patrick Goodman wrote:
>Don't tell us, 00DNA.
Message no. 3
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:33:13 EDT
> Maybe instead of a rant, we should actually make some kind of constructive
> list of requests and submit them to Mike M. But instead of sending it one
> or two at a time, we should have some kind of listing of what the requests
> are and how many people have signed up that agree with them. There would
be
> much more of an effect if it was signed by 30 people than 1, let alone if
> everyone on this list signed off on it.

Good idea.

> To start:
>
> 1: A while ago FASA said that they would post material that got cut out of
> sourcebooks due to space on their website. Simsense rules would be a
great
Message no. 4
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 20:20:14 +0100
As with all media, assuming it survives intact, the problem is reading the
data off of it properly and then decoding it. With more fragile media, you
run the risk of destroying it or the data if it is read improperly.

For computer data or other digital media, this can be a big problem. Sure,
a text file is fairly simple to read, assuming your computer/editor knows
ASCII (or EBCIDIC for mainframes or Unicode for new java stuff). If it
doesn't, then it's just bits.

Given that the Crash of '29 wiped out vast swaths of information and that
computer systems built afterward didn't use the same formats to avoid
contamination, pre-crash
Message no. 5
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 02:52:09 EDT
Your system you put forth previously for example. You asked me to give some
feedback, well here it comes.

The system shows dynamics for "games" that do not exist within Shadowrun.
They also are very advanced in many aspects, and the indications given by the
incomplete list/table, means that if anything, the rules you are coming up
with are only going to gain in detail, which translates to more information
needed to be kept "on call" by the players/GM's of the games.

I'm not saying the idea is bad. On the contrary, it shows attention to
detail and a desire on the part of the creator to come up with something
*better*. However, you are simply skipping the larger portion of the gaming
community. I personally wouldn't want to use the system, as it will most
assuredly slow down the actual "game time" usable for stuff other than combat
situations. This happens enough now, what you are creating actually
increases this time, not diminishing it.

Wanna develop something better? Try streamlining the rules that exist now
more so than they have been. Make sure to accomodate for players age 12 to
75 (I've only ever heard rumors of people that old playing games like this),
and for educational levels ranging from late-elementary (American) to
Doctorial. And finally, if you really want to impress me and everyone else.
Make it something that will work for individuals of maturity (define this one
yourself, I leave it open ended) ranging from temper-tantrum throwing
cry-babies (I've seen enough of these lately) to nigh-divinely patient
players who can and *WANT* to help everyone within their potential.

This ultimately comes down to compromise IMO. What you have created, and
most others as well, will probably work "FOR WHAT YOU WANT IT TO DO". But,
the systems I am seeing do NOT take everyone into account. They merely take
into account a need for more power, more speed, more "I'm better than you
are" mentality.

And given what I've been reading lately (not you granted...to make certain
you understand that), I simply just do not want to see it anymore.

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
ICQ#-51511837




From ahrain_drigar@*******.com Sat, 30 Oct 1999 02:54:22 EDT
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 02:54:22 EDT
From: Ahrain Drigar ahrain_drigar@*******.com
Subject: Phys-Ad advancement question

My wife asked me to post this question.

Page 168 of the BBB (3rd), says that, and I quote, "During game play, adepts
may purchase additional Power Points at a cost of 20 Good Karma Points per
Power Point." OK, self explanitory.

Now her question is, "If the new power you are wanting to buy for your
Phys-Ad only costs .25 or .5, do you have to purchase a full Power Point or
can you purchase the .25 or .5, spending 5 or 10 Good Karma respectively,
for the specific power you want.


Ahrain

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com




From Nitewing@********.de Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:01:59 +0200
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:01:59 +0200
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion ]

Well, first of all, we did no changes that were as dramatic as changing back
Message no. 6
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion ]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:01:59 +0200
character with 4 actions | o o o o |
character with 3 actions | o o o |
character with 2 actions | o o |
character with 1 actions | o |

The circles indicate the actions.The bars indicate the timeline.So we
thought it would be more logical if the actions tend to take place in the
right order of the timeline.(Is there really anybody out there who thinks
itīs realistc that, multi thousand nuyen hardware boosts (for practical
purposes Iīll ignore the magic for now) the triggering reflex and then
*WAITS* for that normalo??? By now I hope you get my point. The only problem
is to determine who acts first if thereīs a tie.(Circles on the same
horizontal position indicate that.) In that situation we use the last cipher
of our initiative roll. So a sammie wwith 31 would use 1, a person with a
total of 6 would use, yeah, right, 6. The higher goes first. As I said
before matters only if thereīs a tie and the order of actions can not
clearly be determined by the number of actions, what happens all the time.
If theres
still a tie we use the higher reaction. So if we got a sammie with 25 an a
normalo with 7, whatīs fairly standard, the sammie goes first, as ever, and
then, surprise, because of the second cipher, the normalo comes, aka in this
case no change at all. Had the normalo a 4 the sammie had his second action
before the first of the normalo. (always remember my diagram on top!) There
is a 50% chance that a normal person will loose one action (with this rule
in comparison to SR3) to the samurai. last example. 5 actors: Sammie1 Ini
31, Sammie2 Ini 23, 3 Guards Ini 17, 5, 9

Sammie1 4 actions, Sammie2 3 actions, Guard1 2 actions, Guard2 1action like
Guard3

First is Sammie1 (look at the upper diagramm!), then Sammie2, Guard1,
Sammie1, Guard3, Guard2, Sammie2, Sammie1,Guard1,Sammie2, Sammi1. (You
should always draw the pyramide and I know itīs sounds confusing, but as I
said before, its no big deal if youīre used to it).
If the Initiative is modified (e.g. injuries) subtract normaly, and have a
look if a action is lost. (If our Sammie with 31 takes a moderate wound
before his second action, his Initiative would fall to 29 so he just loses
his next action (for shock or other crap) and the second cipher becomes a 9,
so maybe he gets something good out of this.Yes, this mean that his formerly
third action that was circle tie with Guard 1, is now on a 9, so he acts
first!

I know it sounds very confusing and complicated, but itīs not. If you got
questions, ask, critics, fine, weīre always open for your opinion but if you
say its not more acurate or realistic in some ways than the original rules,
you better prove it! We like it and weīre no munchkins!

If you look at the whole package, itīs not that drastic than going back to
SR2 (I didnīt like that system too well either!), but itīs not SR3 either.
(The rules of SR2 were far from being realistic but clear, in SR3 they
twisted the rules to favor slower characters whats essentially not a bad
thing to do, but, BTW, if I hear ever, ever that "Hey itīs not fair! Iīm a
mage (or whatever archetype you want), why are you Sammies so unfair, to be
that faster than me" crap again, then 1st I will say Iīm so sorry that you
can do sorcery, conjure, run the matrix, or go nuts with vehicles, my
condolences, poor chumer iīm really sorry, that you donīt like what you are.
(To those players outside, that you donīt like what you *WANTED* to play)
and 2nd, Iīll stick up my middle finger to you (no offense!!);)and will say
live fast, die young.

BTW, Thanks, Barbie youīre right.


The First, The Last, The Only

N.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> thereīs a law in the Nite, either itīs respect or blood <<<<
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Nitewing@********.de






From angelkiller404@**********.com Sat, 30 Oct 1999 02:58:34 -0400
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 02:58:34 -0400
From: Angelkiller 404 angelkiller404@**********.com
Subject: Phys-Ad advancement question

>Page 168 of the BBB (3rd), says that, and I quote, "During game play,
adepts
>may purchase additional Power Points at a cost of 20 Good Karma
Points per
>Power Point." OK, self explanitory.
>
>Now her question is, "If the new power you are wanting to buy for
your
>Phys-Ad only costs .25 or .5, do you have to purchase a full Power
Point or
>can you purchase the .25 or .5, spending 5 or 10 Good Karma
respectively,
>for the specific power you want.


Nope, you have to spend the full 20 karma to get a full point. Adepts
cannot have Power Points in decimal values.

At least I don't think so.


AK404
http://freespeech.org/ak404/





From cmaxfiel@****.org.au Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:18:28 +1000
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:18:28 +1000
From: Chris Maxfield cmaxfiel@****.org.au
Subject: Magical Thesis

At 13:07 30/10/99 +1000, Raije wrote:
>Would it be possible for me to make a javelin or something l
Message no. 7
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:37:20 +0200
And please, if someone argues about realism, or whatever topic he or she
likes or dislikes about roleplaying, donīt tell us what roleplaying is for
or is intended to be for. Everybody should play his or her way. The personal
fun way.

Roleplaying is not ignorance of The Real




The First, The Last, The Only

N.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> thereīs a law in the Nite, either itīs respect or blood <<<<
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Nitewing@********.de





From m0ng005e@*********.com Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:18:59 -0500
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:18:59 -0500
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Phys-Ad advancement question

:Page 168 of the BBB (3rd), says that, and I quote, "During game play,
adepts
:may purchase additional Power Points at a cost of 20 Good Karma Points per
:Power Point." OK, self explanitory.
:
:Now her question is, "If the new power you are wanting to buy for your
:Phys-Ad only costs .25 or .5, do you have to purchase a full Power Point or
:can you purchase the .25 or .5, spending 5 or 10 Good Karma respectively,
:for the specific power you want.

I'm pretty sure the intention was for full point purchase. Techniclly,
t would seem you can only purchase full points (though not spending a
portion of the PP would not "waste" it- ypou could spend it later), but
there no reason I can see not to allow purchaing .25, .5, or .75 PP.
It doesn't really make sense that an adept would learn more than 1 (or
multiple levels of just one) power at a time (as natural development,
outside initiation), so just buying the one
Message no. 8
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion ]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:38:52 -0500
In a message dated 10/30/1999 2:11:30 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
angelkiller404@**********.com writes:

> >Now her question is, "If the new power you are wanting to buy for
> your
> >Phys-Ad only costs .25 or .5, do you have to purchase a full Power
> Point or
> >can you purchase the .25 or .5, spending 5 or 10 Good Karma
> respectively,
> >for the specific power you want.
>
> Nope, you have to spend the full 20 karma to get a full point. Adepts
> cannot have Power Points in decimal values.

As a House Rule, I see personally no problems with it, as long as the
character doesn't suddenly "develop" these powers in the middle of a game
without some kind of practice/training, etc....

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
ICQ#-51511837




From m0ng005e@*********.com Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:49:53 -0500
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:49:53 -0500
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Su
Message no. 9
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion ]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 03:49:53 -0500
Mongoose





From LXR@***.net Sat, 30 Oct 1999 10:06:06 +0200
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 10:06:06 +0200
From: LXR LXR@***.net
Subject: Spirits vs. Drones

First of all thx for your replies.
However I just di
Message no. 10
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3[comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 11:10:36 +0200
According to Scott Harrison, at 9:58 on 29 Oct 99, the word on
the street was...

> Assuming technology progresses like it does today, I should think
> there would be no problem with running emulators of older systems. We
> already have emulators today for a lot of the fun older machines like
> the C-64. The problems I have seen with emulators is that they tend to
> run the old software too quickly and that causes games to be much
> harder because of deifferent timing delays being way off.

True, but the thing is that the best way to write an emulator is to have
access to an original machine, or at least the code that made up its ROM
and/or operating system. Without that, it will be very hard to write a
usable emulator.

> Back to SR. Assuming we still have access to code that was written
> decades ago, we should be able to easily create emualtors for the
> ancient style of software.

IMHO, that is exactly the problem. The Crash of '29 would
Message no. 11
From: Xyron II markus.meisen@****.uni-muenchen.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3[comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 13:41:31 +0200
LXR [mailto:LXR@***.net] asked:
>
>I've already asked this question sometimes ago but it wasn't
>answered to my
>satisfaction. So I ask again.
>
>How do you handle a situation where the rules require a specific
>specialisation but the charakter only has the base skill. This
>is especially
>important with the rigger rules or still the etiquette test.

I always used (fi. for etiquette tests) the rules similar to defaulting from
skill to specialization (SR3 p.85).
Base skill knowledge would include some general guidelines to resolve
specialized task within the base skill. But if specific specialization
knowledge is required you would lack the detailed, "nerd-like"
guidelines/info to accomplish it. Thus relying on general
knowledge/experiences it would be harder to accomplish the specific
specialization.

>For example, a rigger can use the non-matrix programming
>specialisation for
>improving the test to give commands
Message no. 12
From: Nitewing Nitewing@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3[comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:22:11 +0100
Nitewing@********.de






From iridios@*****.com Sun, 31 Oct 1999 08:39:23 -0500
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 08:39:23 -0500
From: Iridios iridios@*****.com
Subject: Year of the Comet

Arcaist wrote:
>
> The Cover of "Year of the Comet" seems to be ready:
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1555603904/qid”1373794/sr=1-2
> /002-5496012-4960267

Did you see the price? $0.20 plus a special surcharge of $19.80!
What is that about?

--
Iridios
"Accept what you cannot avoid,
Avoid what you cannot accept."




From arcaist@*****.de Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:44:08 +0100
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:44:08 +0100
From: Arcaist arcaist@*****.de
Subject: Year of the Comet

> Did you see the price? $0.20 plus a special surcharge of $19.80!
> What is that about?

Perhaps FASA didn't tell them a price, so they just made one up ;-)

(That way, they could also tell you about a "special offer" if it's
cheaper in the end...)

--
(>) Arcaist
WHO'S NEXT ?!

BABGY #101 ::: MMLX ::: www.s-s-r.de





From vocenoctum@****.com Sun, 31 Oct 1999 09:15:21 -0500
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 09:15:21 -0500
From: vocenoctum@****.com vocenoctum@****.com
Subj
Message no. 13
From: Barbie Levile barbie@********.de
Subject: Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion]
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:15:34 +0100
Ereskanti@***.com wrote:
>

> Barbie, I know you'll take this wrong, but coming from someone who plays with
> "only house rules", this has little meaning to me or a great many others.

Umm, K, it is a fact, but do you realy think it is only a valid fact when
playing with the printed rules?
I surely hope not.
>
> By this I mean that if you focus upon "the unfairness" given or appointedly
> noticed towards a given "type" of individual, you immediately forfeit the
> aspects of other facets of the mechanics overall.

Umm, a realistic system IS unfair, someone will have ALWAYS the advantage.
And thats one of my main complains about sr3, its tries to be ultimately
fair, make every one equal to the level it gets painfull.

>
> The system shows dynamics for "games" that do not exist within Shadowrun.
> They also are very advanced in many aspects, and the indications given by the
> incomplete list/table, means that if anything, the rules you are coming up
> with are only going to gain in detail, which translates to more information
> needed to be kept "on call" by the players/GM's of the games.

Its as I stated in the rules a work in progress.
I work different in writing rules then most people.
I start with the complicated, highly detailed version and simplify them,
instead of taking a default ultra simple take and add stuff to it.
When you have to add stuff to a rules work after the initial ruless, you are
creating a more complicated version then when you go my way of taking a
highly complicated version and simplify it, because you have everything you
need and know what you have to take in account when writing the rules. It
results in a more harmonical ruleset, which is a big factor in a simple
ruleset.
>
> I'm not saying the idea is bad. On the contrary, it shows attention to
> detail and a desire on the part of the creator to come up with something
> *better*. However, you are simply skipping the larger portion of the gaming
> community. I personally wouldn't want to use the system, as it will most
> assuredly slow down the actual "game time" usable for stuff other than
combat
> situations. This happens enough now, what you are creating actually
> increases this time, not diminishing it.

Ok, lets see, first I wrote the system for me, or for those peoples which
want more detail.
Second, ANY initiative system has only one purpose, to control the flow of
combat.
A simple init system makes combat fast to carry out, leading to more combat
situtaion because its simple. A slower init system, but with more detail,
makes for a more realistic combat sequence, leads to fewer combat
situations, because its slower, the greater level of detail, especialy for
tactical choices, makes it more interesting because noe it depens on what
kind of action you take, not only speed or luck.
therefor overall leading to a more roleplaying experiance, at least for me.
BUT, as I said sometime ago as i showed the ruless, its still in progress,
its not said its the final version, its possible that i scrap it alltogether
and write something simpler.
Which i prolly will, when i find a way to make it simpler without loosing
the detail I want.
>

> This ultimately comes down to compromise IMO. What you have created, and
> most others as well, will probably work "FOR WHAT YOU WANT IT TO DO". But,
> the systems I am seeing do NOT take everyone into account.

Ummm, thats a point of a houserule, they has to work in the first place for
the group of the one who wrote it, their game, its possible that it works
for other groups too.
BUT its intented in the first place not for a larger audiance.

They merely take
> into account a need for more power, more speed, more "I'm better than you
> are" mentality.

Umm, again wrong, read the init system again, by its very build up, more
speed is not everything, the faster you are in it, the more demishing the
benefits are, after a certain point it just gets irrelevant how fast you
are, because the time differnces are so small it does matters anymore, and
the added tactical possibilities are a big help for slower people because
the action the chose weights a great deal in the combat resolution.
>
hmm, this machine doesn't has my signature file, how annoying ...

Barbie

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Initiative in SR3 [comments and rule conversion], 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!