Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Bob Ooton <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Magic/Tech bias...
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 16:48:54 -0500
OK, after watching this thread thoroughly enough...I believe I have seen
what I wanted to. I've learned that many of the people here do play mages
(and are biased in ways towards them, what player wouldn't be biased towards
his char, except me, of course...forced to play a phys ad, but enjoying the
roleplaying if not the game usability. Yep, we're on the first run of this
new team so he isn't all that well brought up yet.) BUT!!!!

For the most part, you (as a group) also enforce the rules a lot more
frequently than I thought was the case.

Yep, I'm admitting I was wrong...

OK, now for what I felt was accomplished.

While watching these I saw many things come across that truly made my day.
Posts about samurai who weren't psyco-clones like "all samurai are, right?"
Mainly, I made the point (and so did many others) that roleplaying is in the
player, not the archetype. Just seeing that posted (over and over and
over...) and agreed upon was truly great. Now I think we all know (if we
didn't before) that samurai can be something other than the stereotype (I
don't like calling it that, because in most cases, a stereotype got to be
that way because it was at least in part true). And people like me realize
that not every mage is a munchkin at heart.

Aside from that, a neat little sidetrack involving strictly combat measures
occurred (the post about sam A and phys ad B, etc...and it's replies). And
that goes along with my "anyone can make a munchkin with a calculator, a
rulebook, and an hour or so free time." And of course there were the "burn
the heretic" posts that I was expecting, most lately Jani's. (I apologize
for implying that he (someone who I can't remember right now...sorry about
that) was the ONLY one who knew how to balance a game...I was merely
impressed by the way he kept everything equalized and based on roleplay more
than "spell A or spell B?" or "Assault Cannon or Silenced Pistols?"
And
should've just thrown some kudos at him, instead.) What else was there to
be learned...that JD sends out an awful lot of FAQ's (heheheheh...) for
whatever reason (innocent look).

Since this does in fact seem to be degenrating into a "my char is
better"/"my rules are better" argument, I'd kinda like it to end if
possible.

I hope that we all learned something from this, I know I did...

-- Bob Ooton <topcat@******.net>
"He who realizes there's a lot more Mohicans...errr...Samurai than he thought"
Message no. 2
From: David Hinkley <dhinkley@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Magic/Tech bias...
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 02:41:32 -0700
Needless to say these three aspects are all interrelated.
It is, after all, difficult to create a good character that is
consistent with a game without some knowledge of the game rules and
setting. Not in terms of creating a super character but in terms of
translating the players character concept to the attributes, skills
and equipment used in a particular game system in a manner that you
get a playable character consistent with the original concept. The
greater the understanding of the game setting the better the
character fits into it.

Generally speaking a individual playing a Street Samurai has
fewer rules to learn and understand then someone who is playing a
Mage. In this sense it is "easier" to roleplay a Samurai well then it
is to roleplay a Mage well.

As to the question which is more "powerful" a Samurai or a Mage,
a particular players imagination ability to innovate and his technical
mastery of the rules pertaining to his respective character type is
more important in determing relative power then any real or perceived
bias in the rules set. I have noticed that in many long running
games (in Shadow Run and other systems) Magic users seem to be the most
powerful character type. But upon further examination it is the
player that has created this imbalance by studying the rules and
correctly identified the strengths and weaknesses of his character type
and by courses of action that play to its strengths and avoids its
weaknesses. Often this imbalance is enhanced by a lack of similar
efforts on the part of the other players and sometimes even the
gamemaster. The other common thread I have seen is that the type of
individual willing to learn a complex magic system is also extremely
likely to make the kind of effort learning the ins and outs of the
rules that can unbalance the game.

The other factor that I have noted is that the perception of the
players as to the relative strengths of character types may be more
important then the reality. In one game system the first individual
to try a magic user was not willing to learn the rules as a result the
rest of the players came to believe that magic users were unimportant
and not worth the effort to play. So for the most part the game was
played without magic.

As it is the case with most game matters it is the players
that make the big difference.


David G. Hinkley
(dhinkley@***.org)
Message no. 3
From: Bob Ooton <topcat@**.CENCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Magic/Tech bias...
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:34:39 -0500
David G. Hinkley writes:

> Generally speaking a individual playing a Street Samurai has
> fewer rules to learn and understand then someone who is playing a
> Mage. In this sense it is "easier" to roleplay a Samurai well then it
> is to roleplay a Mage well.

NO! Not roleplay...ROLLplay. Big difference.

> As to the question which is more "powerful" a Samurai or a Mage,
> a particular players imagination ability to innovate and his technical
> mastery of the rules pertaining to his respective character type is
> more important in determing relative power then any real or perceived
> bias in the rules set. I have noticed that in many long running
> games (in Shadow Run and other systems) Magic users seem to be the most
> powerful character type. But upon further examination it is the
> player that has created this imbalance by studying the rules and
> correctly identified the strengths and weaknesses of his character type
> and by courses of action that play to its strengths and avoids its
> weaknesses. Often this imbalance is enhanced by a lack of similar
> efforts on the part of the other players and sometimes even the
> gamemaster. The other common thread I have seen is that the type of
> individual willing to learn a complex magic system is also extremely
> likely to make the kind of effort learning the ins and outs of the
> rules that can unbalance the game.

Munchkinism defined!

> As it is the case with most game matters it is the players
> that make the big difference.

Yep, well said.


-- Bob Ooton <topcat@******.net>

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Magic/Tech bias..., 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!