Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Sempai Arishu <radowshun@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:32:52 PDT
>Well, I think that you are GM, and GM = God of your world. If you are
hey what kind of player are you anyway a GM IS GOD OF ALL SHE/HE/THEY
SURVEY AND THOU SHALT BE SMOTE UPON SUCH BLASPHEMOUS THOUGHTS
UNBELIEVER.
of course you could be right about the guns, it doesnt matter if the GM
doesnt agree.
Sempai

Question?
Questioningly questioning a question being questioned, is the answer
questioned or the question answered?


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 2
From: Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@********.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:54:14 +1300
>Believe it or not, drawing a weapon and firing it is not as instinctual
>as you might think. Any PC with a skill of 4 or less would probably not
>think to automatically shoot at something that just appears out of
>nowhere. Nor do I think that anyone with half a brain would train their
>reflexes (wired or not) to respond with gunfire when even just a
>perceived threat exists. Any PC with a skill of 5 or higher would have
>a good handle on the concept of "Check your target before firing" and
>would probably not automatically respond with gunfire. It is much more
>likely that he/she would respond to a perceived threat with a
>hand-to-hand maneuver (especially if schooled in martial arts) if the
>target was close, or a dodge/movement to avoid possible incoming fire if
>the target is far away.

I was under the impression that this sort of thing happened in real life in
combat situations with highly trained individuals. (and this is with
uncybered soldiers and police, I would imagine it would be much worse if
they were wired).


>
>"...aims and shoots without even thinking,..." Alright, aiming a weapon
>is a cognitive action that is far from reflex. Again, anyone with any
>considerable level of firearms skill will have to adjust for target
>distance, movement, and possible obstacles in the line of fire. IMHO,
>shooting is just not an instinctive action, no matter how you look at
>it. Martial Arts, on the other hand, to be really effective, must be
>instinctive.

If you can train your martial arts to be instinctive why can't you do the
same with firing a gun? I know that when I am doing Taekwondo I adjust a
kick for target distance. movement, etc and it is all basicaly instinctive.
I would hope that if I trained in using a gun in combat situations for as
long as I trained in Taekwondo I would want to be as "quick" and
instinctive.


>Well, I think that you are GM, and GM = God of your world. If you are
>looking for things to screw with your sammy players, by all means, use
>those rules, although I think the rules for wired characters in CT
>better handle this kind of situation.

I shall look these rules in CT up.

For the record book I don't set out to screw up ~any~ of my players (and
infact there are no sammys currently in teh group I run). I am just looking
for a fair way to highlight what I percieve as a possible weakness in wired
reflexes.


>Just a thought.....there have been several threads on all the millions
>of drawbacks to having wired reflexes and how bad this kinda of
>cyberware is to have and the plethora of ways to screw over a sammy with
>'ware.........anyone have a clue why GM's tend to have it in for the
>sammy PCs?

Again it's probibly just GM's looking for a way to portray mucking around
with biological functions with the use of cyberware.


Justin.
Message no. 3
From: Rook <rook@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 21:26:52 -0700
Justin Elliott wrote:
>
> >Believe it or not, drawing a weapon and firing it is not as instinctual
> >as you might think. Any PC with a skill of 4 or less would probably not
> >think to automatically shoot at something that just appears out of

> >perceived threat exists. Any PC with a skill of 5 or higher would have
> >a good handle on the concept of "Check your target before firing" and

> I was under the impression that this sort of thing happened in real life in
> combat situations with highly trained individuals. (and this is with
> uncybered soldiers and police, I would imagine it would be much worse if
> they were wired).

It does happen. But not with seasoned fighters so often as with
'green's. It's called a panic attack. You see something and don't have
the speed of thought or the training to comprehend it so you get scared
and just fire.

> If you can train your martial arts to be instinctive why can't you do the
> same with firing a gun? I know that when I am doing Taekwondo I adjust a

Aiming a gun requires taking a moment to analyse. Snap shooting could
be made instinctive though. However contrary to westerns; few people in
the Real World (tm) are all that good at it. Of course in the Hollowood
Reality (tm) anybody can become a gunslinger if their origin's tragic
enough or if their drunk enough. :)

> I would hope that if I trained in using a gun in combat situations for as
> long as I trained in Taekwondo I would want to be as "quick" and
> instinctive.

Being 'quick on the draw' often goes along with being good at missing
your target. For every 1 unit of quick you learn, it takes 2 units of
skill to compensate for not stopping to aim.

--
Rook ¿Õ ¿ë ±â WebRPG TownHall Magistrate
townhall.webrpg.com <0){{{{><
__ Super WebRing http://orion.supersoldiers.com/heroes/webring.html
/.)\ Nothing vast enters the life of mortals without a curse.
\(@/ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/ Super Hero RPG Site
Message no. 4
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:03:52 -0400
Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@********.OTAGO.AC.NZ> wrote:
>If you can train your martial arts to be instinctive why can't you do the
>same with firing a gun? I know that when I am doing Taekwondo I adjust a
>kick for target distance. movement, etc and it is all basicaly instinctive.
>I would hope that if I trained in using a gun in combat situations for as
>long as I trained in Taekwondo I would want to be as "quick" and
>instinctive.

Actually, I just saw something on TV about the training of Navy Seals and
one of the BUDS instructors was saying that they train so that pretty much
everything is instinctual _except_ the decision to actually fire. They
were stressing (especially in close quarters combat) that friendly fire and
shooting innocents are a huge danger and that the trainees need to think
about their target and where the muzzle is pointing before they fire. (I'm
sure the rest after the decision to fire is extremely fast and instinctual).

Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.

--DT
Message no. 5
From: Jason 'Ding' Dowd <jdowd@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 22:21:45 -0700
At 01:03 AM 10/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@********.OTAGO.AC.NZ> wrote:
>Actually, I just saw something on TV about the training of Navy Seals and
>one of the BUDS instructors was saying that they train so that pretty much
>everything is instinctual _except_ the decision to actually fire. They
>were stressing (especially in close quarters combat) that friendly fire and
>shooting innocents are a huge danger and that the trainees need to think
>about their target and where the muzzle is pointing before they fire. (I'm
>sure the rest after the decision to fire is extremely fast and instinctual).
>
>Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
>prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
>prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
>the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
>the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.

In SR2, there was nothing that said a smartlink prevented friendly fire.
The way it was stated in the book was that when you are firing on autofire
and walking fire between targets, when you have a smartlink you don't waste
shots walking the fire, so you won't hit an unintended target. If you
didn't have a smartlink and you had to walk the fire past someone, you had
a chance of hitting them with a stray round. (SR2, p93)
So if you're in a situation where you're not sure who's friend and who's
foe, the smartlink won't prevent you from shooting one of your teammates.

There was a device in a Kage magazine a few years back called "friendly
fire". It was composed of a set of badges and a device you put on your gun.
You gave the badges to your companions and the device on the gun would lock
it so it wouldn't shoot when it was pointed at someone wearing the badge. I
don't recall exactly how it worked, but I think it had to do with a radio
signal. Anyway, that's the only time I've ever seen anything in Shadowrun
designed to eliminate friendly fire. Assumedly special ops teams around the
world in 205x/2060 would have some device similar to that to keep them from
shooting teammates in a CQB situation.


Jason "Ding" Dowd
http://home.san.rr.com/jdowd
"There is no problem in this world that cannot be solved by the
judicious application of high explosives."
Message no. 6
From: Rook <rook@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 23:00:08 -0700
> Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
> prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
> prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
> the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
> the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.

Your teammates wear something, such as a small chip in a lapel that a
signal in the smart system gets a read from, or that broadcasts a signal
to the smartsystem. They would be coded with passwords to prevent the
opposition from wearing them and shutting off your guns.

Unless they are taken in mid firefight. :)

--
Rook ¿Õ ¿ë ±â WebRPG TownHall Magistrate
townhall.webrpg.com <0){{{{><
__ Super WebRing http://orion.supersoldiers.com/heroes/webring.html
/.)\ Nothing vast enters the life of mortals without a curse.
\(@/ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/ Super Hero RPG Site
Message no. 7
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:39:30 +0200
According to David Thompson, at 1:03 on 20 Oct 98, the word on the street was...

> Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
> prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
> prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
> the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
> the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.

AAARGH!

You've been on the list long enough to have seen that thread at least
once, if not multiple times -- it's almost as bad as grounding through
quickenings used to be...

And for those who'll listen, I'll state that IMO a smatlink can prevent
friendly fire because the _shooter_ identifies the friendly, not the
system. The smartlink senses that the shooter doesn't want to fire at the
target the gun is currently pointed at, and thus prevents the gun from
discharging. This is the simple way of making such a system, and one that
doesn't cause all kinds of trouble ruleswise and interpretation-wise.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
A grizzle scene on my electron beam told a story about human rights.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 8
From: Steadfast <laughingman@*******.DE>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:49:47 +0200
I allways considered mundane Characters more fun to play as I dislike magicusers on
a subconscience level. From this premise I decided to make a Street Sammy with all
the goodies he can get (aka a bit munchkinised), Wired 2, Biomuscleaugment 2,
Suprahydroid and stuff like that. And I wanted to make sure he is a bit of a dark
character by giving him a slight BTL addiction. OK. First Run with that GM.
I meat the other PC's, one Player has 2 Chars (one Newbee like mine and one Top
Notch IE that is big friend with Big D./Harlequin/Ghost/Dodger/D.Montgomery etc.,
dont ask) and that IE just told me that having this addiction is bad. Having a
Chrisma of about 15 or so I decided that this words does have some impact on my Char
(Well to say so, if that IE has comanded my Char to jump of the top of the
Spaceneedle I would have asked wehter I am allowed to smile while I fall down or
not). OK. So I decided to loose that BTL addiction (I did not realy liked it to do,
but beeing a roleplayer you sometimes have to do such things if its the decent thing
to do for your character like killing innocents even if you personally really dont
think thats an option). GM told me that it is no prob and I am out of this in about
1 week, no sideeffects, no loss of anything including money. Hmmm. Allright, I could
live with that and still do as most of the play there is unlike any other
roleplaying group I know.
Next thing is that I wanted to make sure that I AM a slight unnormal beeing with
that Cyber intus and having wired reflexes without reflextrigger seemed to be
perfect. I once in a while jumped up from the couch where we play and drawed a
fictional weapon, pointing against some targets as to get a lock (someone tapped me
from behind, someone got shot in an alleyway three blocks away, some motor misfired
while drove by, a Techno Song involved heavy Machinegunfire etc.). GM told me not to
behave that way as my Character knows that those Triggereffects weren't hostile, so
my Char did not have to take actions. I have NEVER EVER made a test for the wired
reflexes in this group for shooting friends and the like.

Ok, the whole point of this is that Wired Reflexes SHOULD give the player the creeps
if a loud "BANG" occurs outside, but as this is a whole fictional affair and it
is a
Game it should only have an impact when the GM finds it apropriate. So if the GM
tells you that you have the urge to shoot you can try to quench this bloodthirst
with the rules from CT or every other method the GM deems apropriate. If the GM
tells you that you do not have that primal urge, then leave it to it. Of course you
can allways opt to shoot/hit/attack anyway as it is still your Char. But if the GM
tells you something then react like that, maybe argue once in while but leave it
than. And after the session or a day later talk to the GM about your concerns and
try to find a way to go in the future. Thats an advice from a Player and a GM it
smoothes Gameplay a lot, even if you consider yourself mistreated.
A bit long after all but this whole thread (like many I read already) seems to get a
bit too realistic as to how Wired work (we had this one already more than once on
the list) and how they can affect the Gameworld of SR. But allways keep in mind this
is not real (although some may find that fact realy sad if I remember the SR and
real life thread correctly;o)) and it is all about fun in behaving like someone
else. And if one starts toargument abou RL examples and SR in comparison I allways
say that you please please don't take it too serious and too realistic as you
probably can't lob a fireball at someone IRL, nor can you connect nerveclusters
functioning to technological devices nor has anyone more than thoughts about the
outcome of this.
And to conclude, I think if you ask three SR-Players about how Wired or other
cybergear really works you get 10 answers with about 5 of them sound reasonable and
say 2 sound realistic or doable. I found that out after watching and arguing in some
of those threads on the list.
But, of course that will not stop me from giving my knowledge of how it realy works
to the list ;o)

--->Steadfast
to be "human" is not a state of living
I want to achieve.
Message no. 9
From: Starjammer <starjammer@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 06:38:34 -0400
At 01:03 AM 10-20-98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
>prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
>prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
>the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
>the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.
>
> --DT

Not friendly fire, but stray/wasted rounds during autofire. The way I see
it working is this: Part of the smartlink hardware/firmware can determine
which objects in the firer's field of view he considers to be valid
targets, and maybe even how many rounds he wants to fire at them. (I don't
know how it would do this, just that it apparently does. Part of the
neural interface, I guess. Or an eye-tracking/expert system firmware combo
in smartgoggles.) If the gun isn't pointed at a valid target when the
trigger's depressed, then the link overrides the firing mechanism. If the
gun is pointed at a valid target, the gun fires. However, the system isn't
perfect and can't measure/compensate for certain factors (i.e. the target
uses combat pool dice to dodge or stage down the damage). IMHO, however,
the "no stray rounds" rule does mean that if a firer fails their Firearms
roll and wouldn't hit the target at all, the smartgun detects that it's not
on-target and doesn't fire.

Although it doesn't say so, the smartlink system theoretically gives a
sammy a MUCH wider field of fire with his autofire weapon. After all, if
his weapon doesn't fire stray rounds when walking fire then he can sweep
the barrel across as many targets as he's got rounds in a burst. He also
gets to put all his rounds on target no matter how much they're separated,
which results in doing more damage to each target. If you want to get
really extreme, a smartlinked long rifle could sit there with the trigger
pulled and wait for a target to wander through his line of fire. (How's
that for an advantage for the poor, abused widdle sammies, with all the
world out to get them? :) )

Cyber's caustic, but there's a reason you put it in anyway...
Starjammer | Una salus victus nullam sperare salutem.
starjammer@**********.com | "The one hope of the doomed is not to hope
Marietta, GA | for safety." --Virgil, The Aeneid
Message no. 10
From: Number Ten Ox <number_10_ox@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 07:10:25 -0700
-A man whose attribution I lost wrote:

> Back to SR, It was true in SR2, (I'm not sure about SR3) that a smartlink
> prevented friendly fire. It seems like if this is the case and the system
> prevents shooting teammates that in game that is an explanation that ends
> the whole argument. Realistic or not, I'm not so sure, afterall, how does
> the system know a friend from foe any easier than the shooter.

The system *doesn't*. Let me explain to you what it actually does in my
games.

I, IRL, am not a trained shooter: a good shot, but not a trained shooter.
I tend to like video games like Virtual Cop and Operation Wolf and things
like
that, and I can tell you that it's pretty common for me to experience the
following situation:

Near end of level, adrenaline jacked, beating hostiles to the draw by a
fraction of a second, anticipation jacked, something moving in the corner
of the screen, BLAM!
Oh, shit, that was a hostage.

In that sort of situation, as far as I can tell, the firing reflex kicks in
faster than the image-recognition reflex in my brain. Therefore, in my
games a smartlink is designed to eliminate that by delaying the gun fire
by a few microseconds until the user's brain has identified the shape as a
'valid target'.

Now mind you, friendly fire injuries will still occur: mistakes happen,
and the fog of war is a potent thing. But they'll be rarer.

===
--Number 10, aka Aneirin Two-Tails.

"What's the blast radius of a mouse?"






>
> Your teammates wear something, such as a small chip in a lapel
that a
> signal in the smart system gets a read from, or that broadcasts a signal
> to the smartsystem. They would be coded with passwords to prevent the
> opposition from wearing them and shutting off your guns.
>
> Unless they are taken in mid firefight. :)
>
> --
> Rook ¿Õ ¿ë ±â WebRPG TownHall Magistrate
townhall.webrpg.com <0){{{{><
> __ Super WebRing http://orion.supersoldiers.com/heroes/webring.html
> /.)\ Nothing vast enters the life of mortals without a curse.
> \(@/ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/ Super Hero RPG Site
>

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 11
From: David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 14:29:52 -0400
At 10:39 AM 10/20/98 +0200, Gurth wrote:

>
>AAARGH!
>
>You've been on the list long enough to have seen that thread at least
>once, if not multiple times -- it's almost as bad as grounding through
>quickenings used to be...
>
I have been here a while, but I really don't remember such a thread. I've
never really thought about the issue before.

>And for those who'll listen, I'll state that IMO a smatlink can prevent
>friendly fire because the _shooter_ identifies the friendly, not the
>system. The smartlink senses that the shooter doesn't want to fire at the
>target the gun is currently pointed at, and thus prevents the gun from
>discharging. This is the simple way of making such a system, and one that
>doesn't cause all kinds of trouble ruleswise and interpretation-wise.

This works fine but of course, this system doesn't prevent mis-identifying
your friends and blasting them, which is the whole problem.

--DT
Message no. 12
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:55:39 +0200
According to David Thompson, at 14:29 on 20 Oct 98, the word on the street was...

> I have been here a while, but I really don't remember such a thread.

Hmm. I could have sworn you were around last time this thread was
perpetrated.

> This works fine but of course, this system doesn't prevent mis-identifying
> your friends and blasting them, which is the whole problem.

No, it doesn't. But the real problem, in my experience, is that people
want to try and _make_ it do those things, for which it would most likely
need HUGE amounts of memory and processing power, which IMO a smartlink
simply doesn't have.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
A grizzle scene on my electron beam told a story about human rights.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Picking on the Sammy (was Re: Wired reflexes and friendly, 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!