Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	shadowrn@*********.com (Achille Autran)
Subject:	NPCs, game feeling, SR & ED (was: Re: Drakes)
Date:	Mon Oct 15 00:55:03 2001

Message no. 1 > From: TalonMail@***.com
> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 20:58:18 EDT
>
> (sigh) It's a pity I never got to write that one. I was really looking
> forward to it. The Denairastas were just so much fun to write about in Secret
> Societies of Barsaive and I had a lot of other ideas. Still, t'will be
> interesting to see what the folks at Living Room Games will do with them...

A pity for the players as well... I mean, my current ED character is one
of those nice fellows from Iopos, infiltrating the Eye of Throal and
culturing close if dangerous relationships with Icewing's drakes - I
think I caught well the feeling of these people. ;) A sourcebook
detailling a family that's rather monolithic and faceless as things
stands now would have been extremely cool and useful. Anyway, as the
campaign progresses (standard published adventures), I can see an insane
number of tiny puzzle pieces assemble, and start to form a great
meanigful pattern. It's just flabbergasting, how thorough was the
thought behind all the infinitesimal clues littering all the
sourcebooks. That's just great. Which brings me to the next (OT) point:
it's a feeling I would so like to be able to give to my players in SR...
Unfortunatley the plots are much less extensive and far-fetching. I
don't know how things will evolve, though... It looks like Rob Boyle has
plans and plots for a lot of things in the future.

Another point that is extremely useful in ED sourcebooks: they are
totally centered on NPCs, their actions and interactions. Throal, the
Serpent River or Blood Wood all feature litteraly /hundreds/ of directly
usable (and interesting !) NPCs. OTOH, I've always found SR sourcebooks
severly lacking in theis field. It gets better and better in the recent
sourcebooks, but any setting still demands a considerable NPC creation
job on the part of the GM. Of course, the scope is not the same as ED
books, much more remote and generalizing in SR, with faceless,
anonimized corporations and governements. Yet I would really like to see
more NPCs, even if they are acting behind the scenes. I don't really see
some satisfying middle-ground between SR and ED in that regard, but more
NPCs would greatly help with the usability of the books.

Well, opinions on these points? Do you find SR books directly usable, or
lacking in some fields? Some problems with implementing the field? Do
you like the short-term focus of the game so far; or do you prefer
far-fetching conspirations spread over numerous books?

Molloy

From:	shadowrn@*********.com (Wallace Blade)
Subject:	NPCs, game feeling, SR & ED (was: Re: Drakes)
Date:	Tue Oct 16 17:45:01 2001

Message no. 2 Molloy said:
>Well, opinions on these points? Do you find SR books directly usable, or
>lacking in some fields? Some problems with implementing the field? Do
>you like the short-term focus of the game so far; or do you prefer
>far-fetching conspirations spread over numerous books?

I find SR books directably usable, though some of them lack some info
(specially Underworld Sourcebook, I guess it was already too long, but I
would have liked some info on the special magic of the Triads and on the
ninjas, that are just mentioned).
I like far-stretching plots, but, since I don't own any official run (except
DNA/DOA) I don't know if they do it or not. There are some far-stretching
oplots anyway, like dunks will (four years, more or less).

Wallace Blade
Sepherim (Dagger in sperethiel)
"The Matrix was made to serve,
but only obeys those of us that love her."
Nodo 666: http://www16.brinkster.com/sepherim

_________________________________________________________________
Descargue GRATUITAMENTE MSN Explorer en http://explorer.msn.es/intl.asp

From:	shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject:	NPCs, game feeling, SR & ED (was: Re: Drakes)
Date:	Thu Oct 18 05:10:02 2001

Message no. 3 Achille Autran writes:

> Well, opinions on these points? Do you find SR books directly usable, or
> lacking in some fields? Some problems with implementing the field? Do
> you like the short-term focus of the game so far; or do you prefer
> far-fetching conspirations spread over numerous books?

I think SR represents a good comprimise of "cool world" and "GM/player
customisable game". I'll explain what I mean here.

Take D&D. It's a rather "generic" RPG. The rules are there, they're usable,
and there are fairly big lists of goodies, monsters, and such. But the game
worlds are, well, two-dimensional at the best. Pretty much they suck, have
no originality, no real "character", and certainly very little style. But,
on the upside, a GM can completely create and customise an entire world in
which the PCs can be big fish.

ED, on the other end of the spectrum, has an exsquisitely detailed world,
with a multitude of characters, plots, interconnected stories, and a wholely
developed and rich background. OTOH, incorporating PCs into this massive
array of cool plotlines is a little difficult, simply because they are so
interconnected, far reaching, and are liable to be exposed in a whole new
light when the next suppliment comes along.

SR, I think, lies somewhere in between. It's got a way cool backdrop with
interesting and fairly original characters and stories. But it's not so
detailed and intricate that the world overwhelms the importance of the PCs
in the game.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer