Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Wafflemeisters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Wed, 20 May 1998 16:44:37 -0500

Message no. 1 > Summer Time (Ereskanti , Tue 1:30)
>
> yes folks, I think it's finally official. Either that, or the email programs
> of the world have come to a grinding halt on many fronts. The list traffic
> has dropped back down to levels similar to "Holiday" and "Summer"
that I have
> seen before...
>
> So, what nice little topics should we come up for the hard core members???
>
> -K

Well, since its summer, an Mr. Kenson yelled at me for bringing it up
in another forum, and advised it should be discussed here, I'l throw
this out: Pools.

Dice pools, of course, not swimming pools. Sorry, Wyrmy.

For sake of this argument, I'll assume pools represent your "focus and
concentration" on the task you are doing", and that current pool values
are good and useful for the given areas.

Given that, does anybody else find it odd that having multiple pools
essentially makes it BETTER to divide you attention among multiple task
types? The most common case is the mage who uses his magic pool for
magical offense (and maybe defense) while still getting his whole combat
pool for damage resistance. Why does he get to use ALL of BOTH pools,
when clearly, his attention is divided? If a samurai is using ONLY
combat pool, why does he effectively get fewer pool dice?
(Note that this is less aproblem with other pool combos, but still
noticable).
Having multiple pools should NOT mean you can acsess them all freely, as
that would require you attention to be spilt more than using only one
pool, which should not give a bonus.

Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
concept", I think.

A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do not
exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
EITHER, both are gone.

Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs fixing?
The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
need fixing.

-Mongoose X

From:	Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Wed, 20 May 1998 17:21:00 -0500

Message no. 2 <Snip: Using one pool should reduce them all>

You are correct. One of those factoids I learned studying cognitive
science is that the more skilled you are in a task, the less concentration
it takes.

Wafflemeister's proposed rule is a good compromise between playability
and accuracy, although there are two features I don't like about it.
Joe Mage (Magic Pool 8, Combat Pool 3):
Spends his full attention dodging lead (spends 3 CP), but can still cast
spells with 5MP.
or
Spends almost no attention on a spell (1MP) and looses a full 1/3 of his
combat pool. (this one isn't so bad, spliting ones attention is hard).

I can't think of a playable counter-proposal, however. If you don't mind
doing some math during character creation you could change pools into
"Cost Per Die". Everyone gets 120 points per action (I chose 120
because most numbers we will deal with go into it evenly. One could
use 100 if you prefered), people with a pool of 1 hace a Cost Per Die
(CPD) of 120. 2`, 3@, 40, 5= 24, 6 , 7 (rounding up) 8
and 9.

Joe Mage then gets written up as
Magic CPD, Combat CPD@.
Now, spending 120 points of combat gets him 3 dice, but he can't spend
anything on magic then.
If he dodges just a little (40pts, enough for 1 die), he has 80 points left
and can spend 5 dice on magic.

If you are good at adding and subtracting in your head, this scheme
works ok. If you need a calculator to figure out how many times 15
goes into 80, then, well, forget it.

As I said, I don't have a _playable_ alternate proposal.

Double-Domed Mike
--MIT&M, We Bring Good Things to Life!

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Wed, 20 May 1998 17:53:12 -0400

Message no. 3 At 04:44 PM 5/20/98 -0500, you wrote:

> Dice pools, of course, not swimming pools. Sorry, Wyrmy.

Hey, it's spring which does mean that swimming pools are beginning to be on
people's minds...

> For sake of this argument, I'll assume pools represent your "focus
and
>concentration" on the task you are doing", and that current pool values
>are good and useful for the given areas.

Reasonable assumption but nobody, including the DLOH, seems to know why we
have dice pools. It's an important game mechanic, but no one seems to have
the concrete answer as to why it even exists.

<snipped>

> Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs fixing?
>The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
>thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
>need fixing.

Actually, I don't really think it needs fixing. BUT if I were to have to
come up with a solution to the problem you posit, I wouldn't use your
answer. It isn't an original idea, but I think it would be better then to
use a single pool for everything.

Call it a "Shadow Pool" or something, a group of dice that can be used by
shadowrunners. Not sure of what it would be, but if you accept that pools
are a byproduct of focus and concentration, you could make this pool
INT+WILL/2 or something.

Other thoughts?

Erik J.

"Ladies & Gentleman, the newest member of the band, the one and only Spice
Boy, GRUMPY SPICE!!!" <and the crowd goes wild!!!>

From:	Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Wed, 20 May 1998 19:04:39 -0500

Message no. 4 On Wed, 20 May 1998 17:53:12 -0400 Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM> writes:
>At 04:44 PM 5/20/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> Dice pools, of course, not swimming pools. Sorry, Wyrmy.

>Hey, it's spring which does mean that swimming pools are beginning to
>be on
>people's minds...

>> For sake of this argument, I'll assume pools represent your
"focus
>>and concentration" on the task you are doing", and that current pool
values
>>are good and useful for the given areas.

>Reasonable assumption but nobody, including the DLOH, seems to know why
we
>have dice pools. It's an important game mechanic, but no one seems to
have
>the concrete answer as to why it even exists.

Actually, It was my understanding that Dice Pools represent Natural
Ability in certain areas... The Combat, Atheltic, and Social Pools (the
last two are optional pools from SRCo) represents the character's natural
Aptitude (Ahnold Shwahtzeneagger should easily be able to kick the snot
out of Pee Wee Herman ...) while the Magic, and Hacking Pools represent
the characters supperior knowledge (and in the case of the Hacking Pool,
supperior resources/natural ability). The Control Pool represents the
character's supperior reaction time and awareness while rigged as well as
a few other factors ... All IMO :)

><snipped>
>> Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs
fixing?
>>The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
>>thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
>>need fixing.

>Actually, I don't really think it needs fixing. BUT if I were to have
to
>come up with a solution to the problem you posit, I wouldn't use your
>answer. It isn't an original idea, but I think it would be better then
to
>use a single pool for everything.
>
>Call it a "Shadow Pool" or something, a group of dice that can be used
by
>shadowrunners. Not sure of what it would be, but if you accept that
pools
>are a byproduct of focus and concentration, you could make this pool
>INT+WILL/2 or something.
>
>Other thoughts?
>
>Erik J.
<SNIP Sig>

I don't think it needs fixing either ... IMO, the dice pools represent
very little extra effort ... However, If *I* were to "fix" em, I'd make
the Dice Pools smaller and make them available in full for every skill
roll ... but this would get out of hand ... I think they work well enough
as is :)

D.Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum)
"What are you supposed to be? the Spice Boys?"

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 10:36:52 +0100

Message no. 5 Wafflemeisters said on 16:44/20 May 98...

> Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
> same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
> around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
> concept", I think.

It makes for a lot of bookkeeping -- remembering how many dice have been
used and from which pool, so the others can go down accordingly -- but in
theory this would be the best solution to keep characters from using all
the dice from all their pools.

> A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do not
> exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
> is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
> combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
> down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
> EITHER, both are gone.

IMHO it would be better here to simply make all pools go down by the same
amount, which can take them to 0 but not below. This reduces bookkeeping
again, because you don't have to remember which pools to reduce -- they
all do. The pool actually in use would determine how many dice are
available, of course.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
En ik zal het heen twee keer zehhen.
-> 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/ <-

-----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:	"Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 09:34:05 -0400

Message no. 6 Mongoose wrote:
> Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
>same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
>around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
>concept", I think.

Agreed.

> A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do
>not
>exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
>is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
>combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
>down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
>EITHER, both are gone.

Hmm. I'd probably take dice away from the top, so to speak. With
8 CP and 5 MP, using 3 MP leaves you with 5 CP and 2 MP. Using 4 CP
drops you to 1 CP and 1 MP. "If the pool that you are using dice
from has more dice than any other pool, treat the final level of that
pool as a maximum limit for the other pools."

Actually, I guess that works out to a "floating pool". Just take your
largest pool (8 CP in this case), and get that many dice. You can't
use more than 5 of them as MP.

> Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs fixing?
>The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
>thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
>need fixing.

Well, apart from the fact that mages tend to get geeked a lot easier
than sams (relatively low bodies, no cyber, etc)...

It depends, as you implied above, on how you define a pool. If it is
indeed "concentration and focus", then limiting the pool used/available
is a good thing. If instead it represents something different (or
perhaps several different things), then it might fall apart. MP doesn't
seem related to concentration, but is limited by skill (and to an
extent, inherent magical ability). CP is determined by attributes.
This would seem to indicate that there are at least two different kinds
of pools.

James Ojaste

From:	David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 08:10:09 -0600

Message no. 7 Erik Jameson wrote:
/
/ At 04:44 PM 5/20/98 -0500, you wrote:
/
/ >For sake of this argument, I'll assume pools represent your "focus and
/ >concentration" on the task you are doing", and that current pool values
/ >are good and useful for the given areas.
/
/ Reasonable assumption but nobody, including the DLOH, seems to know why we
/ have dice pools. It's an important game mechanic, but no one seems to have
/ the concrete answer as to why it even exists.

IMO pools are a game mechanic only. Whenever anyone has tried to equate
them with a "real" world function (concentration, focus, luck, etc) the
reason for their existence break down.

I think I know why dice pools exist.

An effect of dice pools (whether intentional or not) is that they add
a level of unpredictability to combat and require the players to plan
their moves. For example, on any given action pool dice could be
spent on offense or saved for defense. I as the GM don't know which
way the ball is going to bounce when it comes to PCs' pools. And the
player has to weigh his decision on how to use his pools, forcing him
to think his way through combat. IMHO dice pools make combat more
interesting for all involved.

Anyway, that's what dice pools represent to me: a level of
unpredictability that requires planning when it comes to combat.

/ >Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs fixing?
/ >The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
/ >thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
/ >need fixing.

I don't think there is a problem that needs fixing. As I've GMed and
played Shadowrun over the years dice pools have never really caused a
problem. Karma pools on the other hand... <don't get started Dave ;>

/ Actually, I don't really think it needs fixing. BUT if I were to have to
/ come up with a solution to the problem you posit, I wouldn't use your
/ answer. It isn't an original idea, but I think it would be better then to
/ use a single pool for everything.
/
/ Call it a "Shadow Pool" or something, a group of dice that can be used by
/ shadowrunners. Not sure of what it would be, but if you accept that pools
/ are a byproduct of focus and concentration, you could make this pool
/ INT+WILL/2 or something.

I agree in that one pool would probably work better. However, that
depends on the effect you want to achieve :) I'd go with a single
Combat Pool, derived from (Body + Quickness + Intelligence +
Willpower)/3 (round down), that can be applied towards any attack or
resistence test in combat. As per the rules you couldn't use more pool
dice than the rating of the skill or attribute required for the test.
And note that I defined it as a *Combat* pool. This resolves and issue
that I've had in that Magic Pools can be used outside of combat in a
rather munchkinous manner. If you call it a Combat Pool, then it can
only be used during combat. If a character needs some luck outside of
combat then they can use their Karma Pool, IMHO.

As rule mechanic only, I chose those four attributes because to me they
represent the offensive (quickness and intelligence) and defensive
(body and willpower) attributes.

-David
--
"If I told you, then I'd have to pull a Shadowrun against you. Sorry."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm

From:	MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 10:48:55 -0400

Message no. 8 Once upon a time, David Buehrer wrote;

>IMO pools are a game mechanic only. Whenever anyone has tried to equate
>them with a "real" world function (concentration, focus, luck, etc) the
>reason for their existence break down.

Hey I equate it to Game world functions. B>]#

>I think I know why dice pools exist.

I think most of their uses simulate a lot of offensive/defensive
maneuverings in their most simplistic manner. And it does it better than
any other systems rules to boot.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 14:21:07 -0400

Message no. 9 At 08:10 AM 5/21/98 -0600, you wrote:

>I think I know why dice pools exist.
>
>An effect of dice pools (whether intentional or not) is that they add
>a level of unpredictability to combat and require the players to plan
>their moves. For example, on any given action pool dice could be
>spent on offense or saved for defense. I as the GM don't know which
>way the ball is going to bounce when it comes to PCs' pools. And the
>player has to weigh his decision on how to use his pools, forcing him
>to think his way through combat. IMHO dice pools make combat more
>interesting for all involved.
>
>Anyway, that's what dice pools represent to me: a level of
>unpredictability that requires planning when it comes to combat.

That's possibly the best explanation that I've heard. Instead of bothering
with offensive/defensive stances and target locations and all those
complexities that are sometimes added, a raw, abstract and simple mechanic
was instituted instead.

Works for me.

Erik J.

From:	losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Thu, 21 May 1998 20:33:08 -0400

Message no. 10 At 05:53 PM 5/20/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Hey, it's spring which does mean that swimming pools are beginning to be on
>people's minds...

Swimming? Ewww. :p

Anyway, on with the show...

>Reasonable assumption but nobody, including the DLOH, seems to know why we
>have dice pools. It's an important game mechanic, but no one seems to have
>the concrete answer as to why it even exists.

In first edition they existed largely for butt-saving. They were there to
give characters some dice with which to defend against attacks. Magic pool
is different, since it is fairly integral to sorcery, but I believe someone
suggested that the magic system was done later than the other game
mechanics (and so dice pools were prolly already in the mechanics when
magic was being written, and available, and so used to make sorcery work
the way it does).

In second edition, they became a more central game mechanic, since they
could add to offensive tests (basically, combat pool functions like Magic
Pool now, instead of like the purely defensive Dodge and Defense Pools of
first edition).

>Actually, I don't really think it needs fixing. BUT if I were to have to
>come up with a solution to the problem you posit, I wouldn't use your
>answer. It isn't an original idea, but I think it would be better then to
>use a single pool for everything.

>Call it a "Shadow Pool" or something, a group of dice that can be used by
>shadowrunners. Not sure of what it would be, but if you accept that pools
>are a byproduct of focus and concentration, you could make this pool
>INT+WILL/2 or something.

Shadow Pool? Only useable by runners? I'll pass. Hmm... I'd say, you
can use one dice pool before it is your turn again to act (i.e. before you
get another Simple or Complex Action). That way, you don't get to defend
against incoming spells -and- dodge that maniac with the knife with equal
ease. You choose, either you're paying attention to that knife when it
comes at you, or you're wrapped up in taking apart that spell that's trying
to eat you, but not both...

Or, perhaps only allow one dice pool to refresh on each action? You start
out the fight able to defend on both the magical and physical side of
things, but after that you gradually use up your ability to do both, and
have to concentrate on one or the other?

losthalo@********.comwhileyouarelisteningyourwillingattentionismakingyoumore
andmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome.

"Some things are true whether you believe in them or not."

From:	DisnyShamn <DisnyShamn@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Sat, 23 May 1998 10:53:37 EDT

Message no. 11 From David:

> I think I know why dice pools exist.
> An effect of dice pools (whether intentional or not) is that they add
> a level of unpredictability to combat and require the players to plan
> their moves.
[snippage]
> Anyway, that's what dice pools represent to me: a level of
> unpredictability that requires planning when it comes to combat.

True in part, but the very nature of dice provides unpredictability. What it
looks more like to me is a "patch" of sorts (though anything that's so
thoroughly ingrained throughout 2, soon 3 editions cannot really be called a
patch, I suppose...), a way of working in things that don't figure into
mechanics otherwise but should.

Here's MY view on each type of "pool":

Combat: your innate combat-value, independent of actuall know-how; an amalgam
of your reaction time (Int & Qui), good sense (Int) and plain determination to
win (Wil). (The last being the least quantifiable).

Control Pool: Like combat, 'cept it's through a machine and therefore less
personal, so your determination isn't as important.

Magic: Without which. what the hell else is Sorcery skill good for, 'cept
fighting spirits? Seems to me a person with a decent Sorcery skill should get
SOME magical benefit. So it's not concentration, it's just your magical
superiority.

Karma Pool: We all know this one has nothing to do with concentration, or
skill, or ought like that. Your credit account with the universe.

Along these lines, I've created the Psi Pool for my space opera "ShadowZone"
campaign, equals (Will + Int) / 3). Represents your general mental prowess.
Tada.

There is the element of unpredictability, too; but this isn't really to
beequated with randomness, more with strategy. The combat, pool, for example,
provides (and does a better-than-usual job of, I think) the option of
"aggressive" and "defensive" attack modes found in other RPG systems;
Except
you have as many options as you have combat pool dice.

Me, I generally prefer to use pools for NPCs rather than threat dice. It's not
really THAT much more paperwork for me. I use threat dice only when using a
higher-level version of an archetype, instead of skills and attributes and
whatnot.

Then again, little do my players know, they're really plauying a diceless
game, I just allow them the *illusion* of control! :)

- Disney Shaman

- Disney Shaman

From:	Wafflemeisters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Fri, 22 May 1998 21:50:41 -0500

Message no. 12 >
> Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time) (Gurth , Thu 4:36)

> > A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do not
> > exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
> > is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
> > combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
> > down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
> > EITHER, both are gone.
>
> IMHO it would be better here to simply make all pools go down by the same
> amount, which can take them to 0 but not below. This reduces bookkeeping
> again, because you don't have to remember which pools to reduce -- they
> all do. The pool actually in use would determine how many dice are
> available, of course.
>

Funny, thats what several folks thought I intended...

No, I don't (persoanlly)likethat- in theabove eaxmple, if you did this,
using 5 combat pool would mean you could use NO magic, only the 3
remaining combat pool. I don't see why you'd have to do magic first,
THEN combat, if you want to use magic pool.
It would be easier to remeber, but just doesn't make "sense".

-Mongoose X

From:	Wafflemeisters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Fri, 22 May 1998 21:51:07 -0500

Message no. 13 > Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time) ("Ojaste,James [NCR]" , Thu 8:34)
>
> Mongoose wrote:
> > Ideally, If you used two or more pools, each would be reduced by the
> >same fraction as the other, as you only have so much attention to spread
> >around, IMO. This is not at all practical, but is a good "base
> >concept", I think.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > A simpler mechanic would be that any dice used in one pool that do
> >not
> >exceed those in another pool come out of both pools. Sound complex, but
> >is actually simple; If you have 8 combat and 5 magic, and use 3 magic,
> >combat goes down by 3. If you then use 3 combat, magic does not go
> >down, as combat is 5, magic 2- both go to 2. If you then use 2 from
> >EITHER, both are gone.
>
> Hmm. I'd probably take dice away from the top, so to speak. With
> 8 CP and 5 MP, using 3 MP leaves you with 5 CP and 2 MP. Using 4 CP
> drops you to 1 CP and 1 MP. "If the pool that you are using dice
> from has more dice than any other pool, treat the final level of that
> pool as a maximum limit for the other pools."
>
> Actually, I guess that works out to a "floating pool". Just take your
> largest pool (8 CP in this case), and get that many dice. You can't
> use more than 5 of them as MP.

Thats exactly the effect I proposed, if you read the wording and
example carefully. It was awkwardly put- I said using a small pool
impacts larger pools, you say using large pools doesn't affect small
ones- same thing, potAEto, potAHto...
Great minds, huh?
>
> > Does this seem reasonable? Is it a"problem" that even needs
fixing?
> >The example of mages using combat pool for damage resistance only (and
> >thus having more availible there than samuria) indicates to me it DOES
> >need fixing.
>
> Well, apart from the fact that mages tend to get geeked a lot easier
> than sams (relatively low bodies, no cyber, etc)...

Hardly. Cast an armor spell ritually (unlimited pool use) with an
earth elemental or 4 to help and maybe fetish foci, and pop it in a
lock. (OK, locks can cause problems, but now BULLETS won't). Also,
invisibility and and such means they simply get attacked less, many
times. No reason mages MUST have much lower bodies, and magic can make
up for cyber, often.
But hey, thats just my feeling. I admit, the above example is not
always a HUGE balance problem, which is why I asked if it specifically
needs fixing.

> It depends, as you implied above, on how you define a pool. If it is
> indeed "concentration and focus", then limiting the pool used/available
> is a good thing. If instead it represents something different (or
> perhaps several different things), then it might fall apart. MP doesn't
> seem related to concentration, but is limited by skill (and to an
> extent, inherent magical ability). CP is determined by attributes.
> This would seem to indicate that there are at least two different kinds
> of pools.
>

I don't think that the difference is that big, since skill in sorcery
is you sbility to focus you "gift", and Hacking is easier and less
distracting on a better computer. Even if the METHOD of concentration
is very diffrent, the effectis similar.

-Mongoose X

From:	Wafflemeisters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Fri, 22 May 1998 21:52:15 -0500

Message no. 14 > Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time) (losthalo , Thu 19:33)

> Or, perhaps only allow one dice pool to refresh on each action? You start
> out the fight able to defend on both the magical and physical side of
> things, but after that you gradually use up your ability to do both, and
> have to concentrate on one or the other?
>

4 variourS R3asonz, i won't yet discusse changez to how poolz refresh.

-Mongoose X

From:	rabiola <rabiola@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:	Re: Pool Use (was; Summer Time)
Date:	Mon, 25 May 1998 11:00:18 -0500

Message no. 15 > Given that, does anybody else find it odd that having multiple
pools
>essentially makes it BETTER to divide you attention among multiple task
>types? The most common case is the mage who uses his magic pool for
>magical offense (and maybe defense) while still getting his whole
combat
>pool for damage resistance. Why does he get to use ALL of BOTH pools,
>when clearly, his attention is divided? If a samurai is using ONLY
>combat pool, why does he effectively get fewer pool dice?
>(Note that this is less aproblem with other pool combos, but still
>noticable).
>Having multiple pools should NOT mean you can acsess them all freely,
as
>that would require you attention to be spilt more than using only one
>pool, which should not give a bonus.
>

What about applying a +2 modifier if trying to use two pools at once?
Much simpler to implement, and similar to other situations when a
character is trying to do another thing while already busy with the
first.

Tony Rabiola rabiola@**.netcom.com
Fourth and Sixth World Adept
Still working on the Fifth...

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer