Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 22:14:07 +1000
Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.

The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits may
not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
good stuff either. *grin*

I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
reason! <g>)

Lady Jestyr
~ Hell hath no fury like a geek with a whippersnipper ~

* jestyr@*****.com | URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr *
Message no. 2
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 08:23:08 EST
In a message dated 12/2/99 7:19:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jestyr@*********.html.com writes:

> Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
> confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.
>
> The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits may
> not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
> good stuff either. *grin*
>
> I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
> slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
> reason! <g>)
>
> Lady Jestyr


Fear not, fair Jestyr, for I have abandoned all hope of M&M from FASA and am
going to pick it up at my local store momentarily. I'll try and work up
plenty of nanotech criticisms....I mean opinions. I said opinions, right?






-Twist

"We've never backed away from evil incarnate before, Peter, why this?"
"Evil incarnate can't sue, Frank."
Message no. 3
From: Brent Smith Lucius@****.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:40:28 -0600
>Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
>Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
>confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.


I personally liked it. I love the Oxy-Rush, Lots of cool ideas came to mind
hehehe. Its something thats needed adressed for quite some time. I really
wish there were more types listed. Oh and they removed stylers..haven't
heard quite why. Overall the chapter is "A" grade work. (not "A+"
because
they need more types IMHO)
Brent
Message no. 4
From: Dvixen dvixen@****.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 08:13:54 -0800
At 10:14 PM 02/12/99 , Lady Jestyr annoyed me by writing:

>Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
>Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
>confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.
>
>The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits may
>not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
>good stuff either. *grin*
>
>I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
>slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
>reason! <g>)

Nanotech?!? Theres *Nanotech* in Man and Machine?!?

No way!


*grin* buhbye!
--
Dvixen - dvixen@****.com =-=-= Gallery - http://members.home.com/dvixen
Herkimer's Lair - http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair
"What's your sign?" - "Trespassers will be shot."
Comments/Questions accepted, flames dropped into the abyss.
Message no. 5
From: Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 11:47:01 -0500 (EST)
Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*********.html.com> writes:
> Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
> confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.

I'm very happy with M&M as a whole, so any parts I hadn't been
talking about are the ones that worked well enough that I didn't have
to seek clarification.

The most important factor in SR Nanotech is that it's not
self-replicating, as far as I can see. It's produced in smallish
factories, though I don't know if there's a way to mass produce the
factories. (the self-replicating feature is one of the biggies for
traditional SF nanotech) I am a bit curious what is in the dietary
supplements you'd need if you get a factory implated though... :)
This lets SR avoid the usual ramifications of self replicating
hardware wandering around the world, which is a very good thing(tm)
because the level of technology in SR is lower then many other game
worlds, to the point where self-replicating nanotech would force many
things to change.

As a result, the most useful nanotech in my mind are the ones
I would classify as the one-shot contingency devices. They just sit
there until a trigger, and then are released to deal with a specific
problem. (cyberware damage would be the most likely choice for a
typical character of mine, though I am a little doubtful that a
nanomachine can repair cyberware damage. IMHO, it's a short step from
there to very cheap automated cyberware construction in a confined
space.)

My only real complaint is that the section reads like a
teaser. It provides just enough information to let your mind wander
off and design nanotech, while I felt that a few more pieces would be
nice to help people brainstorm. It's really too bad that the 200 page
M&M couldn't have been released instead. I know I would have shelled
out extra money. On second thought, bioware would feel like this as
well if it weren't for Shadowtech to provide more background text.
Chemistry seemed to get enough space devoted to it to feel more
complete.

The nanotech section comes across the best if you just read it
as the basic rules, kind of how I treated cyberware in the SR3 BBB.

Mark
Message no. 6
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 11:51:16 -0500
Twist0059@***.com wrote:

> In a message dated 12/2/99 7:19:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> jestyr@*********.html.com writes:
>
> > Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> > Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
> > confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.

I'm not going to give it, because my comment would be the inane "it's good"
comment which could either mean I liked it or I'm being polite :). No offense.

> ><SNIP>
> > I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
> > slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
> > reason! <g>)
> >

I don't have a comment, just a question: for the cyber-fixing nanites, do you
have to get different ones for each piece of cyber, or for all? For example: do I
have to buy 5 sets of nanites for my Wired II, left Cyberarm, my cybereyes and my
Kid Stealth Cyberlegs? Or could I just by one? And what about a hive? Does it
cover just one type of nanites or all? Just a few random questions...

>
> > Lady Jestyr
>
> Fear not, fair Jestyr, for I have abandoned all hope of M&M from FASA and am
> going to pick it up at my local store momentarily. I'll try and work up
> plenty of nanotech criticisms....I mean opinions. I said opinions, right?
>
> -Twist
>
> "We've never backed away from evil incarnate before, Peter, why this?"
> "Evil incarnate can't sue, Frank."
Message no. 7
From: Drew Curtis dcurtis@***.net
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:33:24 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Lady Jestyr wrote:

>
> Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
> confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.
>
> The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits may
> not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
> good stuff either. *grin*
>
> I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
> slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
> reason! <g>)
>
No problem!

In general the nanites seemed primitive. This makes sense because the
tech is fairly new, the background section states that most of the
advances in nanotechnology came recently a la Deus.

I agree that I would have liked more types. In general however it was
excellent!

Drew Curtis, President, Digital Crescent, Incorporated
http://www.dcr.net (502) 226 3376 Internet services.
Frankfort Lawrenceburg Shelbyville Owenton Louisville
http://www.fark.com: If it's not news, it's fark.
Message no. 8
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:02:25 EST
> > Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> > Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
> > confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of
it.
> >
> > The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits
may
> > not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
> > good stuff either. *grin*
> >
> > I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're not
> > slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
> > reason! <g>)
> >


Believe it or not, I find nanites to be the best part of M&M. Exceedingly
cool.

(This might be because nanites are the only true new product in M&M. While
there are plenty of great new wares and rules, it's all new ideas with an old
concept. I'm glad to see something new and exciting has stepped, to help us
believe that SOTA isn't just a way to rob players of nuyen. :-)


Mind you, I'm not sure how much I like the image of samurai walking around
infested with robotic termites (as part of my view of the game world). It
conjures imagines of the Borg.....



-Twist
"We've never backed away from evil incarnate before, Peter, why this?"
"Evil incarnate can't sue, Frank."
Message no. 9
From: Wordman wordman@*******.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:44:29 -0500
> In general the nanites seemed primitive. This makes sense because the
> tech is fairly new.

Yes. Definite thumbs up from me on getting the tech level correct. This
went a long way towards addressing the social concerns I voiced several
months ago. Nice job, Lady Jestyr (BTW, now that M&M is out, go read the
Diamond Age immediately).

Wordman
Message no. 10
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 08:38:56 -0400
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Lady Jestyr."
]
] Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
] Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I will
] confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of it.
]
] The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits may
] not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
] good stuff either. *grin*

Well, I liked it. At first, the techno-babble at the beginning
reminded me of Shadowtech...I got a bit discouraged. But then I
actually read it, and it wasn't that bad, quite informative, really :)
The organization was a bit iffy, as you had to really jump back and
forth to fully understand everything, but that's not a problem unless
you're skimming, as I did at first.
Incidentally, I thought the constant references to Deus and the
Arcology situation in the past tense were interesting...it was made to
seem resolved, but the section never stated how (of course). Clever :)

Also, it says, on page something or other, that nanites cannot be
used to boil someone's blood (for example). Is this rewriting history
as it pertains to the Arcology?

-Boondocker
Message no. 11
From: dghost@****.com dghost@****.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:21:57 -0800
On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 22:14:07 +1000 Lady Jestyr
<jestyr@*********.html.com> writes:
>
> Well, there's been surprisingly little conversation about the
> Nanotechnology presented in M&M. As the co-author of that section, I
will
> confess that I'm more than a little curious as to peoples' opinions of
it.
>
> The section was enthusiastically edited, of course, so any cruddy bits
may
> not be my fault. Equally, I probably can't take the credit for half the
> good stuff either. *grin*
>
> I have a thick skin, btw - all comments appreciated, even IF they're
not
> slavish adoration. (But if they're not, you'd better have a damn good
> reason! <g>)

Cool beans, Lady J. :) My fave piece is probably the nano-tattoos. :)

Question: Dod Nanite Facilitators have a minimum Essence cost? (I assume
having a rating 7+ blood filtration implant won't reduce the Essence cost
below 0. ;)

--
D. Ghost
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-Groucho Marx

___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Message no. 12
From: dghost@****.com dghost@****.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:15:04 -0800
On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 08:38:56 -0400 Scott W <iscottw@*****.nb.ca> writes:
> "And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Lady Jestyr."
<SNIP>
> Also, it says, on page something or other, that nanites cannot be
> used to boil someone's blood (for example). Is this rewriting history
> as it pertains to the Arcology?

Refences:
Bubblebee drone: pg 37 of RA:S
Nano-limitations: pg 85-86 of M&M (above reference is in the seconf
paragraph that starts on on page 86)

My interpretation was that the limitations are how the corps are limited.
Deus was operating at a higher technological level. Another
interpretation is that the Nanites in the bumble bee didn't work exactly
as the description implied. Perhaps Deus actually used Carerand-Plus to
administer a substance that did the boiling. It seems unlikely that the
resistance could concoct an antidote otherwise.

(Could you put thermite in Carcand-Plus and have the nanites ugnite small
quantities of the stuff in some bloke's bloodstream?)

--
D. Ghost
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-Groucho Marx

___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Message no. 13
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 10:42:45 -0400
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to dghost@****.com."
] Cool beans, Lady J. :) My fave piece is probably the nano-tattoos. :)

Yup, very nifty.

] Question: Dod Nanite Facilitators have a minimum Essence cost? (I assume
] having a rating 7+ blood filtration implant won't reduce the Essence cost
] below 0. ;)

Read the example in Italics on p. 99. "Manx already has a topflight
blood filtration system (see p.300, SR3), so it doesn't cost him any
extra Essence, just money." Cool, eh? It's the first complete freebie
I've ever, ever seen in an SR product.
Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?

-Boondocker
Message no. 14
From: Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1999 12:17:20 +1000
> Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?
>
>-Boondocker

Yep.

Lady Jestyr
~ Hell hath no fury like a geek with a whippersnipper ~

* jestyr@*****.com | URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr *
Message no. 15
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 23:51:57 -0400
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Lady Jestyr."
] > Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?
] >
] >-Boondocker
]
] Yep.

<sigh>

I long for the day when I get mentioned in a book. Presumably, it
will be somthing akin to "...a large, rusty hatchet studded with
fishhooks. Boondocker's in quite a lot of pain now, and has to make a
Willpower(10) Test to avoid wetting himself and blubbering like a
child. He rolls two dice..."

Either that, or:

(>) Huh?
(>) Boondocker




-Boondocker
Message no. 16
From: Manx timburke@*******.com.au
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 14:30:26 +1000
> > Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?
> >
> >-Boondocker
>
> Yep.
>
> Lady Jestyr

Geez Elle, you're just too good to me :)
Thanks Heaps !!!

All I've got to do is actually find a copy now.
It's just my luck to be out bush for work when
M+M came out :(

*********************************
Manx // timburke@*******.com.au // #950
"It's always funny until someone get's hurt
and then it's just hilarious"
- Faith No More
*********************************
Message no. 17
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 22:35:29 -0600
From: Scott W
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 9:52 PM

> ] > Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?
> ]
> ] Yep.
>
> <sigh>

Cheer up, little buckaroo....

> I long for the day when I get mentioned in a book.

It's interesting, I gotta tell you. Especially the funny looks you get when
you have to play yourself as an NPC.

Patrick Goodman
Founder & CEO, Cavalier Arms Ltd.
Message no. 18
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:19:05 -0500
From: "Scott W" <iscottw@*****.nb.ca>
> "And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Lady Jestyr."
> ] > Oh, and I assume the Manx in the example the Manx on the list?
> ] >
> ] >-Boondocker
> ]
> ] Yep.
>
> <sigh>
>
> I long for the day when I get mentioned in a book.
> <snip>

Yeah, well, at least "Boondocker" *could* get mentioned in a book. I think
it may be a cold day in Hell before my name appears in an SR sourcebook. <g>

--abortion_engine
___________________________________
I told you this morality of mine would kill us all.
Message no. 19
From: Scott W iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 22:51:02 -0400
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to abortion_engine."
] > I long for the day when I get mentioned in a book.
] > <snip>
]
] Yeah, well, at least "Boondocker" *could* get mentioned in a book. I think
] it may be a cold day in Hell before my name appears in an SR sourcebook. <g>

AE could make it...but I think it's more than just a somwhat nifty
nick'...you gotta know people. Grease the right palms, sing the right
psalms, etc. The first time it happened (IIRC) was when Mike M. asked
a question on the list, and anyone who answered got put in a book (I
wasn't here, which book was that, anyhow?). Now it's become almost as
much a status symbol as owning a BABY :)
Wish I may, wish I might...

-Boondocker
Message no. 20
From: Adam J adamj@*********.html.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 19:54:25 -0700
At 22:51 12/6/99 -0400, Scott W wrote:

> AE could make it...but I think it's more than just a somwhat nifty
>nick'...you gotta know people. Grease the right palms, sing the right
>psalms, etc. The first time it happened (IIRC) was when Mike M. asked
>a question on the list, and anyone who answered got put in a book (I
>wasn't here, which book was that, anyhow?).

Target: UCAS

Bull, Spike, Granite, CCCampbell (No longer subscribed), and myself made it
in. :-)

Adam

--
< adamj@*********.html.com / http://shadowrun.html.com/tss >
< ICQ# 2350330 / ShadowFAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / Shadowrun Creative Resources >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
Message no. 21
From: dghost@****.com dghost@****.com
Subject: M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious.
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:20:52 -0800
On Mon, 06 Dec 1999 22:51:02 -0400 Scott W <iscottw@*****.nb.ca> writes:
> AE could make it...but I think it's more than just a somwhat nifty
> nick'...you gotta know people. Grease the right palms, sing the right
> psalms, etc. The first time it happened (IIRC) was when Mike M. asked
> a question on the list, and anyone who answered got put in a book (I
> wasn't here, which book was that, anyhow?). Now it's become almost as
> much a status symbol as owning a BABY :)
> Wish I may, wish I might...

I think it is a matter of luck. I made it into Corporate Download (Page
68) and have no idea how. :)

--
D. Ghost
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-Groucho Marx

___________________________________________________________________
Why pay more to get Web access?
Try Juno for FREE -- then it's just $9.95/month if you act NOW!
Get your free software today: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about M+M - Nanotech? I'm curious., 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!