Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Shawn C. Carroll" <carrsha@****.ACC.IIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Enigma CD
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 13:08:13 -0600
>
> The new Enigma CD is out!
>
> *boingee boingee boingee*
>
> ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
> \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
> \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
> \/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
> n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
>

The New Enigma CD has been out since right Before christmas. Well, at least thsat is if
you are overseas. :)
Message no. 2
From: Joe Bay <bay@*******.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Enigma CD
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 22:00:58 EST
Not to seem like some sort of self-appointed net-cop or anything like that,
but don't you think John Candy and Enigma are more the subject matter of
something *other* than "Discussion of the Fantasy Game ShadowRun"?

I'm sorry to sound bitchy or something, but I seem to be getting 20 messages
concerning net access, depleted uranium, dead fat guys, and techno monks for
every one message about the "subject" of this mailing list. Argh. And most
of those messages are about how great it would be to install your deck in
your arm, in order to get the benefit of a C^2 without the essence cost (can
you say "munchkin"?) or some equally non-fun, non-roleplaying concept.

Now, I don't want to offer criticism without any creativity, so I'd like to
start up a thread (forgive me if you've "been there, done it"). I allowed
one of my players to start off play as a werefox. Sandy is a fox shaman
(thanks, whoever wrote up that one), and has been playing exceptionally in
that role, being manipulative and deceitful. I set up character creation as
"metahuman", not using the More Meta rule, and adding 1 to quickness and
intelligence (in retrospect, I think that *no* attribute bonuses should have
been allocated). The only major problem is that regeneration thing, but
Sandy has not been involved in any combat so far (after ~6 hours of play),
and is not really a combat type, so I think this might work. So, tell us
about your experiences running/allowing "critters" as characters. Any
guidelines? Problems? It's an interesting concept, but it requires some
hefty tweaking (and good players).

Thanks for putting up with my crap.
Joe Bay
GS
Message no. 3
From: Necromancer <shilberg@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Enigma CD
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 22:22:53 -0600
Best idea, about the werefox, is to modify in some way the abilities like
regeneration in order to keep game balance. However, if they never really
come into play, well, don't fix what ain't broke. I think using critters like
that wouldn't be a half-bad idea, after all, Striper <and the two stories
written about her exploits> show how such a character would work.

-------------
Steve Hilberg <shilberg@********.uni.uiuc.edu>
aka Jarred Wellsley <Necromancer>
aka Phaeros Lostchilde <Archlich of the Dark Order, High Necromancer
of Zalanthas>
Play Armageddon <studsys.mscs.mu.edu 4444>!
Message no. 4
From: Joe Bay <bay@*******.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Enigma CD
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 23:45:35 EST
How would you suggest modifying the regeneration rules?

Joe Bay
GS

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about New Enigma CD, 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!