Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marcel Emami <rab@****.INFORMATIK.UNI-MANNHEIM.DE>
Subject: Re: powered armor
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 13:30:08 MEZ
from RAB RAB@***.INFORMATIK.UNI-MANNHEIM.DE

I had the same idea half a year ago. I agree with you (just forgot your name
in the most parts and just want to ad one thing or two).
It has to be a rigger in it otherwise it would be a exosceletton wich has
not as much boni as the powered armor (pa).
The pa has vehicle armor 'cause it isn't just an armor it is metall and steel
around your body. It enhance your body -attributes (S&Q&B) maybe even your
reflexes. For moving you have an pa-skill even if you just want to walk
on pavement. If you punch or kick someone you do physical damage not stun.
Aggainst vehicles this damage is not halved, but reduced due to armor.
For development one pa can take out a hole bunch of hightrained and equiped
infantrist, cause he combines the firepower of a tank with the speed
of a jet/sammie and the mobility of a man. He can also rip tank, of the same
causes as above. So i think the army will deevelop it and the security corps
will take it and someone will pit it on the streets sometime so the PC can get
the hands on it. Until now they just have pa's as opponents. And they are
tough.
RAB
GM/GO -d+(---) -P+(---) c+(+++) l u e+ m+ s /- n+ h+ f+ g++ w+ t-- r++ y++

RAB@***.INFORMATIK.UNI-MANNHEIM.DE
Message no. 2
From: Nathan Viles <viles@*****.ASTRO.NWU.EDU>
Subject: Powered Armor
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 15:59:59 -0500
I know robotics is an area not seen much in SR.
>
But what about powered armor?

Something that is interfaced with a datajack. Its armor, its a wepons platform
but it could also store skill chips. It the armor would simulate grafted
muscle and wired reflexes.

This of course would be a villian thing, too powerful for PCs.
It could also have a BTL effect that turns user into a malable soldier.
It would also prevent PCS from trying to us it.

Ideas?

Nathan
>
Message no. 3
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 13:30:10 +1000
Nathan writes:

> I know robotics is an area not seen much in SR.
> But what about powered armor?
>
> Something that is interfaced with a datajack. Its armor, its a wepons platform
> but it could also store skill chips. It the armor would simulate grafted
> muscle and wired reflexes.
>
> This of course would be a villian thing, too powerful for PCs.
> It could also have a BTL effect that turns user into a malable soldier.
> It would also prevent PCS from trying to us it.

J.D did a write up on power armour sometime back. And what you are
describing sounds like coupling his power armour with the skillchips from
Dream Chipper. If you accept his power armour in the SR world (which isn't
too hard, its is very similar to what is hinted at in FoF), then you could
add in skill chips, even make the skill chips nasty ones like in Dream
Chipper.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 4
From: Chaos Manager <jstawarz@******.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 17:15:56 -0400
> J.D did a write up on power armour sometime back. And what you are
> describing sounds like coupling his power armour with the skillchips from
> Dream Chipper. If you accept his power armour in the SR world (which isn't
> too hard, its is very similar to what is hinted at in FoF), then you could
> add in skill chips, even make the skill chips nasty ones like in Dream
> Chipper.

J.D,
Could you post the stats for your powered armour (if you still have
'em) or let me know where I could get my grubby little paws on 'em?

Tan(x) <-- dontcha just LOVE Calculus? 8P
--
*****************************************************************
* John Stawarz aka Chaos Manager *
* jstawarz@******.gmu.edu jstawarz@***.edu *
*****************************************************************
* Proudly attending Groucho Marx University since 1992. *
*****************************************************************

Geek Code (1.0.1) GCS/O -d+ p c++(c---) l u+ e+ m+(*) s+/++ n---(!n) h--
f? g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
Message no. 5
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 00:46:04 -0400
On Sat, 10 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager quoted somebody saying:

> > J.D did a write up on power armour sometime back.

Nope, 'twasn't me, though I took part in the discussion about the
(IMHO) implausibility of seeing Power Armor in most situations.
Message no. 6
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 23:56:05 +1000
Chaos Manager writes:

> J.D,
> Could you post the stats for your powered armour (if you still have
> 'em) or let me know where I could get my grubby little paws on 'em?

Well, I picked 'em up from the ftp site ftp.umd.umich.edu in the /pub/frp
directory. Called powered.armor, and the one I was referring to (see below)
is called combat.computer.

> Tan(x) <-- dontcha just LOVE Calculus? 8P

Ain't that Trig?

JD writes:

> On Sat, 10 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager quoted somebody saying:
>
>> > J.D did a write up on power armour sometime back.

Er, yeah, that was me :-)

> Nope, 'twasn't me, though I took part in the discussion about the
> (IMHO) implausibility of seeing Power Armor in most situations.

Er, yeah, sorry, I was thinking of the SR stats you wrote up for the power
armour featured in the file combat.computer.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 7
From: Chaos Manager <jstawarz@******.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 15:57:53 -0400
>
> Well, I picked 'em up from the ftp site ftp.umd.umich.edu in the /pub/frp
> directory. Called powered.armor, and the one I was referring to (see below)
> is called combat.computer.

Thanks, Damion.

> > Tan(x) <-- dontcha just LOVE Calculus? 8P
>
> Ain't that Trig?

Oh, yeah, I forgot something there...
It should read:

Tan(x)dx (now that's calculus, unfortunately... 8P)

> Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

--
*****************************************************************
* John Stawarz aka Chaos Manager *
* jstawarz@******.gmu.edu jstawarz@***.edu *
*****************************************************************
* Proudly attending Groucho Marx University since 1992. *
*****************************************************************
Message no. 8
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 00:24:29 -0600
On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager wrote:

> Tan(x)dx (now that's calculus, unfortunately... 8P)

That's easy. ln(sec(x)) + C.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 9
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 18:51:29 +1000
John IV writes:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager wrote:
> > Tan(x)dx (now that's calculus, unfortunately... 8P)
>
> That's easy. ln(sec(x)) + C.

Well, he didn't put the little integration sign on the front, so no, it's
not the answer. There is no answer, it is a mathematical expression, like
A+B is. BTW, how would you do a little integration sign in ASCII?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 10
From: Micah Levy <M.Levy@**.UCL.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 12:31:56 +0100
For those who seem to be of a mathematical bent, I would like to share with
you a small limerick that I heard a while ago.
Apologies if you've heard it before:

Integral d-squared dt
From 1 to the cubed root of 3
Times the Cosine
Of 3 Pi over 9
Equals Ln the Cubed Root of e.

This looks much better when you actually write it out as a formula.

Micah Levy
Message no. 11
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 01:09:57 -0600
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> > On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager wrote:
> > > Tan(x)dx (now that's calculus, unfortunately... 8P)
> >
> > That's easy. ln(sec(x)) + C.
>
> Well, he didn't put the little integration sign on the front, so no, it's
> not the answer. There is no answer, it is a mathematical expression, like
> A+B is. BTW, how would you do a little integration sign in ASCII?

Ok, fine, it's d(ln(sec(x))); d being the differential operator. This
_is_ equivalent.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 12
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:42:33 -0400
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, John Moeller wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Chaos Manager wrote:
> > > > Tan(x)dx (now that's calculus, unfortunately... 8P)
> > >
> > > That's easy. ln(sec(x)) + C.
> >
> > Well, he didn't put the little integration sign on the front, so no, it's
> > not the answer. There is no answer, it is a mathematical expression, like
> > A+B is. BTW, how would you do a little integration sign in ASCII?
>
> Ok, fine, it's d(ln(sec(x))); d being the differential operator. This
> _is_ equivalent.

What does this have to do with powered armor? I'm sorry but I am lost,
could any of you please direct me to the Shadowrun list?

Nigel
(Who hates math more then brussle sprouts)
Message no. 13
From: Jeremy Smith <jsmith@*****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 11:56:30 -0500
Yeah, Nigel, I feel about the same way....
I'm sure there's a math usergroup around here somewhere...
Now can we please get back to SR?

Jeremy
Message no. 14
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 00:05:17 -0600
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, Chris Lubrecht wrote:

> What does this have to do with powered armor? I'm sorry but I am lost,
> could any of you please direct me to the Shadowrun list?
>
> Nigel
> (Who hates math more then brussle sprouts)

Sure. About five messages back, and one sub-thread over.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 15
From: John Dukes <dukes@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 12:32:43 -0600
>Hmmm. I've been kicking around some justifications of powered armor in the
>SR universe. Currently in my game, the 'first flight' powered suit have
>come, unimpressed the military powers that be, and gone. (Much of the trial
>run was issued to the Seattle Metroplex Guard, who warehoused it, allowing
>some of the ubiquitous criminal element (my players) to steal some, but
>that's another story...) (Why issue them to the Metroplex Guard? Why would
>the UCAS Army want *effective* weapons in the hands of people who show
>every sign of wanting to secede in the near future? They do make halfway
>decent riot-control units - at least for the kind of riots the Governor
>calls out the Guard to quell.)
>
>Anyway, this brought me to thinking about the 'current' State of the Art in
>external amplified musculature frames (powered exoskeletons). In my view,
>things similar to the powered load-lifter of Aliens fame do exist. They
>aren't as common as a forklift, but in areas where maneuvering space is at
>a premium, or in rough-ground conditions, they are more useful. The UCAS
>Army Corps of Engineers has a fair number of 'Hardsuits', and they are
>armored against at least heavy small-arms fire (up to HMG at least, and
>probably stand a good chance of stopping an assault cannon shell. Call it
>17 or so Ballistic rating. This isn't too excessive for a powered suit,
>when an unpowered suit runs to 14). The amplified musculature allows the
>engineer to do more with his 'bare' hands, and the armor allows him to
>survive under fire a little longer. (For those of you familiar with the
>Legions of Steel tabletop game, I'm thinking of the Pioneer PBA suit)
>
>A conversion of the engineer exoskeleton might be produced for airmobile or
>light infantry forces. Strip off the specialist engineering attachments,
>give it a 'rifle' whose size is limited by the strength of the exoskeleton
>(anyone for a 50 mm burst-fire rifle? Or a larger, non-burst capable weapon
>that can penentrate tank armor? (Not the front glacis, I suppose, but side
>or top armor?) They could operate in areas that 'conventional' armor, or
>even LAVs, would find difficult (Heavy woods, mountains, etc. I do have
>doubts about them being terribly effective against infantry in urban areas,
>I'll admit.) Not too many units would carry these on their TO&E, but some
>might.


There are rules in Cyberpirates for the JIM deep dive suits you might want
to have a look at. They have an armor rating, although I dont know if I
would call them armor or not. Anyway, the JIM suit has an inherant strength
of 7 and may be boosted to 10 (for enough cash). There are of course some
penalties for maneuverability and such (which a rigger can circumvent). I
would think that if the tech exists to boost the strength on a diving
exoskeleton the tech would exist to do the same for a suit of heavy
military armor. Anyway, the JIM suit might give you some ideas. Have a look
at it. :)

Hrm... of course there might be problems inherant with converting JIM suit
underwater tech to surface suits. The GM ought to be able to have fun with
that. ;)

-John
Message no. 16
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Powered Armor
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 15:32:05 -0500
On Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 12:32:43PM -0600, John Dukes wrote:
<SNIP>

>
> There are rules in Cyberpirates for the JIM deep dive suits you might want
> to have a look at. They have an armor rating, although I dont know if I
> would call them armor or not. Anyway, the JIM suit has an inherant strength
> of 7 and may be boosted to 10 (for enough cash). There are of course some
> penalties for maneuverability and such (which a rigger can circumvent). I
> would think that if the tech exists to boost the strength on a diving
> exoskeleton the tech would exist to do the same for a suit of heavy
> military armor. Anyway, the JIM suit might give you some ideas. Have a look
> at it. :)
>
> Hrm... of course there might be problems inherant with converting JIM suit
> underwater tech to surface suits. The GM ought to be able to have fun with
> that. ;)
>
Hmm..the other problem is, its far easier to move stuff around underwater.
(Archimeded Principal and such). Not sure if this was taken into
account when the suit was designed or not. It may account for
the high strength.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Powered Armor, 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!