Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject:	Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 15:35:21 -0400

Message no. 1 Here's the newest installment of my Optional Metatypes: the Sasquatch.

Sasquatch characters are limited due to their lack of comprehensible
speech, but they can use sign language to communicate, and can imitate
sounds with a high degree of skill.

Despite being recognized as a sentient species in 2042, they are still
considered little more than animals by most of (meta)humanity, and at best,
are considered to be smart pets. Few pople treat them like equals, making
thier lives harsh when they choose to live among pople. most offten,
Sasquatch live in the woods, solitary or with others of their kind.

As with all Optional Metatypes, great care should be used in allowing
players to play this race, as there is more roleplaying potential, as well
as the potential for abuse.

A high percentage of Sasquatch are magically active, with Shamans being the
majority of the magically active. Most often Sasquatch follow forest
totems, though city dwelling Sasquatch will sometimes follow city totems as
well.

Sasquatch are capable of getting cyberware, though any sort of vocal or
throat cyberware will damage their mimicing abilities. Also, even
cyberware designed to restore speach will not enable a Sasquatch to speak.
They simply cannot connect words with comprehensible speech patterns.

Bonuses: Mimicking Capabilities, +2 Body, +1 Strength, +1 reach

Penalties: Lack of speech capability, -1 Willpower, -1 Charisma

Well kids, have fun.

Bull-the-creating-the-metatypes-Ork-Decker
--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"Gen Con, here I come!"
-- Me

From:	Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 13:17:16 -0800

Message no. 2 At 15:35 7/10/97 -0400, Bull wrote:
>Sasquatch characters are limited due to their lack of comprehensible
>speech, but they can use sign language to communicate, and can imitate
>sounds with a high degree of skill.

Here's a piece of gear I came up with a while ago, using some existing
pieces of Shadowrun technology:

* It's easy to get a heads-up display in a pair of goggles.
* Speech recognition is good enough for drones to take spoken commands.
* Sound filtering is very good (as in the Select Sound Filter).
* The problems of defining language programmatically have been solved
well enough to create linguasofts.

The gear is basically a set of glasses or goggles, Sasquatch-sized, with
microphones mounted on the temples. The microphones feed in to a computer
which recognizes separate voices and determines their location. (There
may be an ultrasound device or some other mapping function to help the
computer figure out where people are.) The computer then interprets the
speech, parses it, and does its best to create a translation into
Perkins-Athapascan. It then displays ghostly hands moving in Perkins-
Athapascan sign language, hovering in front of any person who's speaking.

The device will probably be confused by crowds, people with similar vocal
timbres, and bad acoustic environments, but it should make it possible for
the Sasquatch to pick up on what people are saying to a limited degree.

Similarly, if the Sasquatch is wearing datagloves (which could easily be
a fine mesh that lets the Sasquatch's fur through), the computer can take
Perkins-Athapascan input and attempt to produce English output.

--
%% Max Rible %% slothman@*****.com %% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "So, an Arisian, a Vorlon, and a knnn go into a tavern..." %%

From:	Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 17:24:33 -0400

Message no. 3 At 01:17 PM 7/10/97 -0800, Max Rible wrote these timeless words:

>Similarly, if the Sasquatch is wearing datagloves (which could easily be
>a fine mesh that lets the Sasquatch's fur through), the computer can take
>Perkins-Athapascan input and attempt to produce English output.
>
Actually, as far as I can tell, Sasquatch CAN understand the spoken
languange. they just can't speak a language.

That's just always been my impression, at least...;]

Bull

--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"Gen Con, here I come!"
-- Me

From:	Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 13:36:27 -0800

Message no. 4 At 17:24 7/10/97 -0400, Bull wrote:
>Actually, as far as I can tell, Sasquatch CAN understand the spoken
>languange. they just can't speak a language.
>
>That's just always been my impression, at least...;]

My impression is that they are unable to assimilate spoken language; the
idea just doesn't work for them.

--
%% Max Rible %% slothman@*****.com %% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "So, an Arisian, a Vorlon, and a knnn go into a tavern..." %%

From:	Black Death <ddmaster@**.NET>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 18:50:51 -0500

Message no. 5 I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords' make
up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.

Take a look at dogs they can be taught single syllable words and their
meaning. Yet they cannot speak our language.

Am I to assume that now I'm wrong on this??

--
Heaven or Hell it does not matter for I am the soul taker and you are
next on my list.
Black Death

From:	Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 1997 16:02:00 -0800

Message no. 6 At 18:50 7/10/97 -0500, Black Death wrote:
>I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords' make
>up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.

Actually, the Sasquatch Entertainer Contact in Sprawl Sites gives
a prerecorded speech, IIRC. I figure that Sasquatches can speak
just fine, but they just know that "Hoi, more beer here, chummer" is
a sound that makes the bartender pour you a drink, and it might as well
be some kind of complicated whistle-code. (If they can do "divebombing
starfighter with overloaded fusion pack", they should be able to do
human speech.)

>Take a look at dogs they can be taught single syllable words and their
>meaning. Yet they cannot speak our language.

>Am I to assume that now I'm wrong on this??

About dogs? No. About Sasquatches? Depends on your campaign.

--
%% Max Rible %% slothman@*****.com %% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "So, an Arisian, a Vorlon, and a knnn go into a tavern..." %%

From:	John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 1997 00:03:00 EDT

Message no. 7 On Thu, 10 Jul 1997 18:50:51 -0500 Black Death <ddmaster@**.NET> writes:
>I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords'
>make
>up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.
>
>Take a look at dogs they can be taught single syllable words and their
>meaning. Yet they cannot speak our language.
>
>Am I to assume that now I'm wrong on this??

Well, it's just not that simple. IIRC (let me check my book:) the
description on the Sasquatch Entertainer Contact indicates an
unbelievable ability to mimic sounds. Why should this not, then, include
human speech patterns? The only reason I can think of that they might not
learn language (as we know it) is that they do not want to. They are
sophisticated enough to handle language through the means of gestures,
sign language, why not through speech? I'm quite sure that they must use
some form of vocal communication in the wild, so to speak, as very few
creatures do not. Therefore, why do they not attempt to learn human
speech? What if they simply don't want to (GM's, get to work:)?

--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 1997 12:04:17 +0100

Message no. 8 Black Death said on 18:50/10 Jul 97...

> I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords' make
> up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.

Yet they can reproduce sounds of cars, dog,s aircraft, horses, etc.
without any problem? This has always appeared a bit strange to me...

> Take a look at dogs they can be taught single syllable words and their
> meaning. Yet they cannot speak our language.

They can only be taught them because you have to say the same word over
and over again, and reward them if they do what you want. Once they know
that if you say "sit" they have to sit, they'll do it. However, all
they're doing is responding to the specific sound of the word "sit," not
to its meaning. That's the difference between understanding a language and
knowing command words.

Sasquatches are supposed to have a language of their own, but it hasn't
been interpreted by (meta)humans yet, and the P-A sign language only
allows limited communication; however, both these indicate sasquatches
understand the meaning of words rather than responding to commands they've
been taught (as they should, if they're a sentient species).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Forget about the ones who "have it all."
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	"J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 11:38:01 -0400

Message no. 9 In a message dated 97-07-11 02:20:14 EDT, ddmaster@**.NET (Black Death)
writes:

> I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords' make
> up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.
>
> Take a look at dogs they can be taught single syllable words and their
> meaning. Yet they cannot speak our language.
>
> Am I to assume that now I'm wrong on this??
>
I don't think you're wrong, I just think they (FASA writers) are playing
games with us. And on the note of Sasquoi, what about that assistant to
Lofwyr? Her unmasked form that S. Verner saw was tall and furry, but I
couldn't tell from the descriptions if she was a Sasquoi or a Wendigo (and
yeah Lofwyr could work with Wendigo, he gives to the Ordo Maximus).
-K

From:	"J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 11:42:33 -0400

Message no. 10 In a message dated 97-07-11 02:51:29 EDT, slothman@*********.ORG (Max Rible)
writes:

>
> Actually, the Sasquatch Entertainer Contact in Sprawl Sites gives
> a prerecorded speech, IIRC. I figure that Sasquatches can speak
> just fine, but they just know that "Hoi, more beer here, chummer" is
> a sound that makes the bartender pour you a drink, and it might as well
> be some kind of complicated whistle-code. (If they can do "divebombing
> starfighter with overloaded fusion pack", they should be able to do
> human speech.)
>
>
Actually, that part is being said by an Interpreter/Translator I thought...
-K

From:	"J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 12:26:58 -0400

Message no. 11 In a message dated 97-07-11 09:18:34 EDT, gurth@******.NL (Gurth) writes:

>
> > I agree with Bull. I have always thought due to their vocal cords' make
> > up that they were not able to speak any complicated languages.
>
> Yet they can reproduce sounds of cars, dog,s aircraft, horses, etc.
> without any problem? This has always appeared a bit strange to me...
>
>
Part of my curiosity got enhanced by the topic of Language vs. Vocal Range.
Parrots for example have a FAR wider range than humans, yet can't
communicate in a way short of "stock mimicry" than ourselves. Dolphins (and
Cetaceans in general) have even wider yet, and show signs of communication
(very good signs, awesome to listen to when you're alone, in the dark).

Anyway, perhaps it's part of the mental framework of the Sasquoi, they can
communicate and use language, but they consider "vocal language" to be a
mimicry and not -REAL- communication, which comes from other sources. The
difference between "chatter" and "true comprehension."

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sun, 13 Jul 1997 12:32:24 +0100

Message no. 12 J. Keith Henry said on 12:26/12 Jul 97...

> Anyway, perhaps it's part of the mental framework of the Sasquoi, they can
> communicate and use language, but they consider "vocal language" to be a
> mimicry and not -REAL- communication, which comes from other sources. The
> difference between "chatter" and "true comprehension."

That could be a possibility, but it appears strange to me that they'd
rather learn sign language than simply mimic humans when there is a need
to communicate between a sasquatch and a human. IMHO they'd likely also
have a superiority complex when it comes to humans, and that in turn would
make it unlikely sasquatches would go and be employed in the entertainment
industry.

Also, if this is the case then it reeks of Star Trek where everyone of a
certain race/species has the same habits and customs... There'd _have_to
be some sasquatches who don't feel it beneath themselves to use their
voices when talking with humans.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Forget about the ones who "have it all."
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	"J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sun, 13 Jul 1997 12:32:43 -0400

Message no. 13 In a message dated 97-07-13 10:05:44 EDT, gurth@******.NL (Gurth) writes:

>
> That could be a possibility, but it appears strange to me that they'd
> rather learn sign language than simply mimic humans when there is a need
> to communicate between a sasquatch and a human. IMHO they'd likely also
> have a superiority complex when it comes to humans, and that in turn would
> make it unlikely sasquatches would go and be employed in the entertainment
> industry.

Unless...(see below)

> > Also, if this is the case then it reeks of Star Trek where everyone of
a
> certain race/species has the same habits and customs... There'd _have_to
> be some sasquatches who don't feel it beneath themselves to use their
> voices when talking with humans.

... there are -always- exceptions to any rule. I don't know really why
Sasquoi are non-vocal speach types, but they are. I agree, it seems kind of
stupid at times, but that stupid is what I like to analyze and find the
intelligence that once stood behind it.

-Keith

From:	Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sun, 13 Jul 1997 20:08:16 EDT

Message no. 14 On Thu, 10 Jul 1997 13:36:27 -0800 Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
writes:
>At 17:24 7/10/97 -0400, Bull wrote:
>>Actually, as far as I can tell, Sasquatch CAN understand the spoken
>>languange. they just can't speak a language.
>>
>>That's just always been my impression, at least...;]
>
>My impression is that they are unable to assimilate spoken language; the
>idea just doesn't work for them.

Well, medically that same condition can arise in humans... that is a
person can hear and understand spoken speach perfectly fine, but are
almost completely unable to speak coherently. themselves. It had to do
with the connections between the parts of the brain for speech and
comprehension/cognitive activity (or something... the "Mind, Brain, and
Behavior" class that I took was two quarters ago.)

~Tim

From:	Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 1997 21:02:23 -0700

Message no. 15 > Well, medically that same condition can arise in humans... that is a
> person can hear and understand spoken speach perfectly fine, but are
> almost completely unable to speak coherently. themselves. It had to do
> with the connections between the parts of the brain for speech and
> comprehension/cognitive activity (or something... the "Mind, Brain, and
> Behavior" class that I took was two quarters ago.)

Aphasia (of which there are two kinds, both of which I forget the names
to. One allows you to understand speech but not produce words sensibly,
and the other is more or less vice versa.) Not exactly an evolutionary
advantage for a species to develop, is it?

From:	Dvixen <dvixen@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Optional Metatypes, part 3: Sasquatch
Date:	Mon, 14 Jul 1997 01:07:50 -0700

Message no. 16 People wrote:

> >My impression is that they are unable to assimilate spoken language;
> the
> >idea just doesn't work for them.
>
> Well, medically that same condition can arise in humans... that is a
> person can hear and understand spoken speach perfectly fine, but are
> almost completely unable to speak coherently. themselves. It had to
> do
> with the connections between the parts of the brain for speech and
> comprehension/cognitive activity (or something... the "Mind, Brain,
> and
> Behavior" class that I took was two quarters ago.)

Aphasia. The neurolinguistical term used to refer to any acquired (as
opposed to developmental) language disorder that follows a focal
(localised) brain lesion caused by a stroke, tumour, gunshot wound, or
an infection. (The main ones are: Broca's, Wernicke's, and a combination
of the two, Global Aphasia.) (And yep, I snuck it from one of my old
texts. The dust on it was something to be feared.)

Going on with that in mind, an Aphasia born to Sasquatch? Possible. This
would mean that there was some malformation in the Sasquatch's brain
that affected their ability to produce language. (And this means (in the
case of Sasquatch born Sasquatch) that the problem is no longer a case
of Aphasia.)

For all we know, Sasquatch speak the language from the Tower of Babel,
and therefore can understand us, but since we lost the ability to speak
it... (Snowcrash, anyone?) (Hey, wouldn't the old geezer's (Dragons,
IE...) be able to understand Sasquatches then? )

--

Dvixen Code-word : Weevil-chuck. dvixen@********.com
"And I thought First Ones were rare." - Ivanova - Babylon 5
First High Priest of the Church of the Squooshy Ball.
Vodka corrupts. Abolut Vodka corrupts absolutely.

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer