Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Hahns Shin Hahns_Shin@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 02:13:39 -0500
I'm curious to know what "power gaming" (especially in the SR context) means
to most people on this list. Mostly, I'm concerned with "benchmarks". What
are telltale signs of different "power levels" of SR gaming in your group?
I've had the fortune of playing (and not-as-much-fortunate task of GMing) in
various SR groups over the years, and we've run the gamut from street-level
campaigns to power games that involved the very fate of the Sixth World.
I've separated some of them into distinct categories, but I'm curious as to
what you guys/gals think:
1) Weeflerunners - Believe it or not, we ran a mini-campaign of wannabe
shadowrunners who were all fired from their snug corporate jobs in the
Renraku Arcology and became sort-of "Mallrats" shadowrunners (the
"Mallrats"
name wasn't my idea, but it came up eventually, and it stuck). A light
pistol was standard fare. SMGs were a deadly force. The only cyberdeck was a
Fuchi Cyber-4 which was borrowed for one run from an old friend.
2) Street Level - Imagine runs that only paid a thousand nuyen per person,
and you get the picture. Our rigger drove a modified Honda ZM-Turbo and had
a VCR level 1. Our muscle had a Smartlink and Boosted Ref. II. Oh, and hand
razors. We had a Rat shamanic adept (before aspected mages) for magical
support. Two teammates were killed by a single Force 5 Fire Elemental in
one run. Trolls and Orks rocked, simply because they didn't die as much.
The detective archetype actually kicks ass.
3) SR 2050 - SR as it was meant to be played back in 1st Ed. We call this
"old school" playing... the Predator was the gun you carried, the Fuchi was
the deck you banged, and everyone wore a lined coat or armor jacket simply
for their ballistic value (not for the camo/ruthenium/hardened gel pack
monstrosities of later sourcebooks). Wired II or Boosted III is standard,
and the mage had most spells at Force 4 or 5. People actually attempted to
play adepts (and suffered from mediocrity, because they couldn't buy power
points or initiate, like in SR3). The detective archetype starts to suck.
The most powerful guy you know is your Fixer. Basically, low tech curve
(compared to 10 years later).
4) SR 2055 - Fields of Fire. All I have to say about that. :-) The
occasional piece of Bioware, some Alpha grade cyber, Initiate grade 1 or 2,
perhaps. Multiple magically-active characters. Shadowtech was pretty spiffy.
By now, you threaten your players with the detective archetype if they don't
make viable, fleshed-out characters. The most powerful guy you know is one
of many Johnsons that call on you regularly for creative corporate work.
5) SR 2060 - More magic than you can shake a knobby staff at. Adepts
actually kick a little ass. Sammies are more machine than man (Dermal
Plating out, Dermal Sheathing in). Riggers have more drones than fingers.
Ruthenium Polymers are standard for stealth excursions. You've met a
powerful underling of Lofwyr/Mafia Don/Damien Knight/<insert plot character
here>. Players are more concerned with Karma than the payment for the run.
You get the picture (in your cybereye/cam/laser/gun).
6) Power gaming - Taking on an Insect Spirit or two is no problem for your
Physical Mage. The magically-actives have formed their own group and are all
initiate grade 4 or above. The decker can take on most sammies in hand to
hand combat. Fairlights are out-of-date/style. You've met
Harlequin/Lofwyr/<insert plot character here> and lived to not talk about
it. You've fired a Panther Cannon out of a vehicle once (and never thought
that a Panther Cannon can be a personal infantry weapon).
7) Munchkins - Your rigger owns a combat panzer. Your sammie owns a
customized, Smartlinked II Panther cannon, which he Ambidextrously fires
with his zero-recoil Vindicator (also customized). Your Physical Mage has
taken on an Insect Hive and won. The detective archetype is redundant,
because your decker, with his skillwires, is much better at all of those
skills than the detective ever will be. The GM walks off in disgust...
thankfully, I've never played or GMed a Munchkin campaign.

This is a long post (sorry), but mostly I want to know about your personal
benchmarking system.
Hahns
Message no. 2
From: Aristotle antithesis@**********.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 03:51:31 -0400
<<Hahns wrote>>
" I'm curious to know what "power gaming" (especially in the SR context)
means to most people on this list. Mostly, I'm concerned with "benchmarks".
What are telltale signs of different "power levels" of SR gaming in your
group? I've had the fortune of playing (and not-as-much-fortunate task of
GMing) in various SR groups over the years, and we've run the gamut from
street-level campaigns to power games that involved the very fate of the
Sixth World. I've separated some of them into distinct categories, but I'm
curious as to what you guys/gals think"
<<end quote>>

I think that the 'level' of gaming really depends on the GM. If the GM
plans to run something on a street level then anyone who takes an SMG will
be considered powerful. If the GM is running a 'prime' campaign then
someone playing a simple ganger wont have a great deal of fun. The GM is
final arbitrator. I explain the level of my campaign and give thorough
guidelines for characters. I don't care if a player spends a month tweaking
a character, if it doesn't fit in my game it won't see play.

To give you an idea of how my own campaign is going. I am running most of
the book adventures. The players just took their second contract and are
somewhere between your second and third examples of game power. I have no
munchkins and all of the players enjoy discussing and planning the runs
they are going on. (I couldn't have asked for a better group) It is
presently 2054 in my game. I have a campaign 'theme' for each year
(currently up to 2060). When this is all said and done, if the current
characters actually make it that long, I suspect the power level of my game
should be very high. In fact one of my players is currently 'in contact'
with a Horror and one of the others is being groomed to be a 'light bearer'
(I think that is what they are called). Neither player is aware of the
situation, nor was any of that 'special attention' requested... Now I just
have to buy some Earthdawn books so I know what it all means..


Regards,
-- Travis "Aristotle" Heldibridle
Message no. 3
From: Yiannakos yiannako@*******.edu
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 11:47:06 -0400
Hahns Shin wrote:

<SNIP Benchmarks>

Hey, I play a detective very similar to the archetype in SR3, and he
rocks. No decker can do what he does.

:-)

---Dave ('s not here man)
Message no. 4
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 20:11:57 +0200
Yiannakos wrote:
>
> Hahns Shin wrote:
>
> <SNIP Benchmarks>
>
> Hey, I play a detective very similar to the archetype in SR3, and he
> rocks. No decker can do what he does.
>
Sure can a decker that. Must a decker use his deck all the time?
nope, so the decker would be no different from the detective.

--
Barbie - Prayers are like junkmail for Jesus

"There are few sights as unnerving as a diehard Microsoftie in full jihad
mode."

barbie@********.de http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 5
From: Yiannakos yiannako@*******.edu
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 14:21:55 -0400
Barbie LeVile wrote:

> > Hey, I play a detective very similar to the archetype in SR3, and he
> > rocks. No decker can do what he does.
> >
> Sure can a decker that. Must a decker use his deck all the time?
> nope, so the decker would be no different from the detective.

Most detectives, maybe, but not Albert P. Donnybrook. A decker
presumably has to buy a deck and programs at character creation. When I
made Donnybrook, I gave priority A to resources, and spent 910,000 nuyen
of it on contacts. He has over fifty contacts of various levels. You
need info? He's yer man.

Aside from which, he's not a shadowrunner (yet). Not only does he use
his real given name and SIN, he has a registered, fully legal pistol
permit. This is gonna be fun...

:-)

---Dave ('s not here man)
*who knows that he just gave Phantom all the power in the world to shaft
me...*
Message no. 6
From: S O'Neill callahan421@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 15:37:10 EDT
>I'm curious to know what "power gaming" (especially in the SR context)
>means to most people on this list.

<snippity-snip-snip-snickersnackwhipcrack levels outline, ranging from
Weeflerunners to Munchkins>

To me, at least, powergaming ain't about relative competence of a runner
team, rather it starts to occur when players get the idea that they need
bigger guns/faster decks/more chrome for the sake of same. Whether it's a
decker whacking in an encephalon "just because" or a street sam that get
obsessed with carrying a SPAS-22 when the typical weapon is a pistol, when
players start to substitute firepower for brainpower, you're powergaming.

Powergaming/munchkinism, IMHO, is when you get walking tanks of characters
with a 2-sentence background and the '20 questions' answered in single,
monosyllabic words. I have no problem with powerful characters, so long as
they are appropriately challenged and are roleplayed suitably.

That said, I generally prefer to play closer-to-the-bone games especially
for short-haul campaigns, simply because they tend to allow a more gritty,
in-your-face feel, as opposed to more melodramatic, high-flying games. But
it's all about personal preference, IMHO. In cases where a long-running game
can track the saga of some runners progressing from weeflers to lords of the
underworld over the course of several years . . . well that's kinda why I
like roleplaying and character development. In the classic 'player types'
breakdown, i tend to identify with the 'REAL ROLEPLAYER' designation.

'Vanilla' Shadowrun suggests that you can only get Avail.6 items in chargen.
Try reducing this even further, or simply prohibiting Priority-A Resources
or skills above 4 in chargen, and you'll have a substantial impact on the
starting level of the game.

Just my $0.01 (2 cents $CDN, with exchange)...

Callahan


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 7
From: Josh Harrison mataxes@****.net
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:06:19 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: Aristotle <antithesis@**********.com>
> In fact one of my players is currently 'in contact'
> with a Horror and one of the others is being groomed to be a 'light
bearer'
> (I think that is what they are called). Neither player is aware of the
> situation, nor was any of that 'special attention' requested... Now I just
> have to buy some Earthdawn books so I know what it all means..

Or you could just ask me. I don't bite. *grin*

But seriously, there wasn't much information released on the Lightbearers.
They only appear in two sources, the Barsaive boxed set (long out of print
and unavailable except through used book dealers), and the Earthdawn
Companion (where a list of their granted abilities can be found).

In brief, they are a secret society dedicated to eradicating the world of
the Horrors forever. If you want info on them to convert to SR, the
Companion is the place to look.

-- Josh
Message no. 8
From: Dennis Steinmeijer dv8@********.nl
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 11:28:12 +0200
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aristotle" <antithesis@**********.com>
> I think that the 'level' of gaming really depends on the GM. If the GM
> plans to run something on a street level then anyone who takes an SMG will
> be considered powerful. If the GM is running a 'prime' campaign then
> someone playing a simple ganger wont have a great deal of fun. The GM is
> final arbitrator. I explain the level of my campaign and give thorough
> guidelines for characters. I don't care if a player spends a month
tweaking
> a character, if it doesn't fit in my game it won't see play.

I must say I disagree with you here. It is not only the player that has to
make adjustments, it is also the GM that has to adjust to what the players
would like to see. You will have to find a comprimise in order to keep it
enjoyable for everyone. Maybe in your neighborhood there is a wide range of
people you can pick to play in your games, but where I am from I currently
have 3 players and I don't see that changing any time soon. In order for
them to continue playing it has to be fun, it has to appeal to them.

DV8

"Abashed the Devil stood, and felt how awful Goodness is,..."
- John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 9
From: Aristotle antithesis@**********.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 05:36:54 -0400
Aristotle wrote:
"The GM is final arbitrator. I explain the level of my campaign and give
thorough guidelines for characters. I don't care if a player spends a month
tweaking a character, if it doesn't fit in my game it won't see play."

DV8 replied:
"I must say I disagree with you here. It is not only the player that has to
make adjustments, it is also the GM that has to adjust to what the players
would like to see. You will have to find a comprimise in order to keep it
enjoyable for everyone. Maybe in your neighborhood there is a wide range of
people you can pick to play in your games, but where I am from I currently
have 3 players and I don't see that changing any time soon. In order for
them to continue playing it has to be fun, it has to appeal to them."


Oh I agree with you. The example given (about a player tweaking a character
for months) was a fairly isolated incident, and further friction in the
group forced me to ask that particular player to leave the table. One of
the strongest points of my game is probably that I know my players very
well and know what will keep each player's interest. I make sure that the
'guidelines' I give for character generation are not so strict as to cut
off the creativity of my players. Comrpomise is definately very important.

Thanks,
-- Travis "Aristotle" Heldibridle
Message no. 10
From: Phil Smith phil_urbanhell@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:20:04 GMT
>From: "Hahns Shin" <Hahns_Shin@*******.com>

My group actually show this divide quite well as we have pretty much one
player for each school of thought, I know that at least one of them reads
this list so I will cut out most of the cursing;

1/ Phil gaming; physical stats are rarely above fours, same for skills, each
character has at least one 300 page novel written about them as background
before they can come in. Reglar breaks to dicuss what the character is
like, the characters get slaughtered by force 2 watchers on a regular basis.
"Good" means has negotiation at 4 or more.

2/ Lewis gaming; all characters are all armed with pistols, some kind of
plating or pretty finish is mandatory. Stats and skills are low, a degree
is chemistry is required to work out most of the plot devices as is the
viewing of as much Quenitin Tarantino stuff as possible. "Good" means says
the most witty comments and fires a pistol in each hand.

3/ Bale gaming; guns guns guns. Character concepts consist of "has a lot of
cyberware", intelligence is not a requirement to live through the runs just
more armor than the human mind can comfortably concieve. "Good" means can
empty an average SMG clip in one combat turn and has a body of at least 6.

4/ Darren gaming; stats are normally at sixes unless the character has a
damn good reason why not, an intelligence attribute of six is mandatory.
The word "Killing" should be used at least once in every sentence.
Millitary grade armor is prefered. "Good" means rolling anything more than
fifty dice in melee.

Okay, I exaggerated a lot here; we all have fun and we all mock each other's
styles of playing. I like playing weedy characters with very complete
personalities and Darren likes working out how to be the best, nether is
better, as I say; we all have fun.

Phil

These are my principles; if you don't like them I have some others.
-Groucho Marx

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 11
From: Phil Smith phil_urbanhell@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 12:30:47 GMT
>From: Aristotle <antithesis@**********.com>
<snip>
>(I couldn't have asked for a better group)

Dammit Aristotle are you trying to make me jealous? ;)>

>In fact one of my players is currently 'in contact'
>with a Horror and one of the others is being groomed to be a 'light bearer'
>(I think that is what they are called). Neither player is aware of the
>situation, nor was any of that 'special attention' requested... Now I just
>have to buy some Earthdawn books so I know what it all means..

Speaking of which, I have yet to find a reference to Light Bearers in ED,
which is one of reasons I bought it, what to they do? I was thinking of a
Companion esque basis for an alternative campaign. In SR they would be
hunting Wraiths and doing nasty stuff in Atzlan (acording to the shadowtalk
in Atzlan one of the folks in charge is a horror right?)

Phil

These are my principles; if you don't like them I have some others.
-Groucho Marx

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 12
From: Josh Harrison mataxes@****.net
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 14:10:40 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Smith <phil_urbanhell@*******.com>
> Speaking of which, I have yet to find a reference to Light Bearers in ED,
> which is one of reasons I bought it, what to they do? I was thinking of a
> Companion esque basis for an alternative campaign. In SR they would be
> hunting Wraiths and doing nasty stuff in Atzlan (acording to the
shadowtalk
> in Atzlan one of the folks in charge is a horror right?)

The Lightbearers can be found in the following sources:

Earthdawn Companion (FASA 6200), pgs. 107-113
Barsaive boxed set (FASA 6100), GM book, pgs. 44-45

The Lightbearers are a secret society dedicated to ridding the world of the
Horrors forever.

Hope this helps

-- Josh Harrison -- mataxes@****.net
"When Fate taps you on the shoulder, you'd best pay attention.
Unfortunately, she has the blasted habit of tapping you on the
opposite shoulder, so that when you turn around she's actually
on your other side, giggling like a schoolgirl. I hate that."
Message no. 13
From: Hahns Shin Hahns_Shin@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 22:18:18 -0500
>My group actually show this divide quite well as we have pretty much one
>player for each school of thought, I know that at least one of them reads
>this list so I will cut out most of the cursing;
<Laughs> The players in my group(s) tend to work in the same way. One
of the running gags is that one player keeps playing the same
character... oh, sure, one of them MAY be an adept and another MAY
have cyberware, but basically the same walking killing machine on legs that
walks and err... (he is notorious for repetitive redundancies, too). It
went
so far that his most recent character (and most memorable) was an adept
named Generic. :-) Another player tends to model characters after a pop
or rock music star (not so much the rocker aspect as the general
personality and character). Another is a person that is AWESOME at
playing deckers, but fails in all other archetypes. You get all kinds.

Hahns
Message no. 14
From: Phil Smith phil_urbanhell@*******.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:45:01 GMT
>From: "Hahns Shin" <Hahns_Shin@*******.com>
><Laughs> The players in my group(s) tend to work in the same way. One
>of the running gags is that one player keeps playing the same
>character... oh, sure, one of them MAY be an adept and another MAY
>have cyberware, but basically the same walking killing machine on legs that
>walks and err... (he is notorious for repetitive redundancies, too). It
>went
>so far that his most recent character (and most memorable) was an adept
>named Generic. :-) Another player tends to model characters after a pop
>or rock music star (not so much the rocker aspect as the general
>personality and character). Another is a person that is AWESOME at
>playing deckers, but fails in all other archetypes. You get all kinds.

*Makes sure Hahns' Manhunter is holstered*

I was discussing this with my group yesterday and we recon that people tend
to play characters who do a lot of what they like; for example, folks who
play deckers go on computers a lot, I play a writer in one campaign - which
is what I want to do when I leave school. If someone is a loner in real
life they will play one, and so on. Just think about the people in your
group and you will find it bizarrely true.

Phil

These are my principles; if you don't like them I have some others.
-Groucho Marx

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 15
From: Aewyn labsyn@*********.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:19:00 -0500
At 05:45 -0500 25/06/2000, Phil Smith enlightened us on the topic of Re:
Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long):

>I was discussing this with my group yesterday and we recon that people tend
>to play characters who do a lot of what they like; for example, folks who
>play deckers go on computers a lot, I play a writer in one campaign - which
>is what I want to do when I leave school. If someone is a loner in real
>life they will play one, and so on. Just think about the people in your
>group and you will find it bizarrely true.

I,ve noticed that, too. One of my player *always* play magic users, no
matter which game we're playing. The guy dabbled a bit with wicca and
shamanism...
The campaign's decker is also played by a omputer freak.
Can't say anything aobut the sammy and the adept, however...

Farewell,
Aewyn
Message no. 16
From: caelric@****.com caelric@****.com
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 10:47:34 -0700
At 10:45 AM 6/25/00 GMT, you wrote:
>
>I was discussing this with my group yesterday and we recon that people tend
>to play characters who do a lot of what they like; for example, folks who
>play deckers go on computers a lot, I play a writer in one campaign - which
>is what I want to do when I leave school. If someone is a loner in real
>life they will play one, and so on. Just think about the people in your
>group and you will find it bizarrely true.


Nope. For example, I play ALOT of magic using types in whatever game I
play. Not always, but more often than not. However, when the list gets
into the debates on whether magic in real life is real and exists or not, I
am FIRMLY on the side of no magic exists. Being a physicist, I believe
there are laws and theorys that explain everything, and that magic has no
part of it. (I am not trying to start a debate; those are just my views,
and help make a counterpoint to your point)

In addition, I am a big, strong person, maybe slightly clumsy, but not very
much. I often play rogue/theifly types, small and quick.

On the other hand, I do see your point, and it does happen alot in gaming.

Dave
Message no. 17
From: Paul Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 21:34:05 +0100
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shadowrn-admin@*********.com
> [mailto:shadowrn-admin@*********.com]On Behalf Of Phil Smith
> Sent: 25 June 2000 11:45
> To: shadowrn@*********.com
> Subject: Re: Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long)
>
>
<Snip>
>
> *Makes sure Hahns' Manhunter is holstered*
>
> I was discussing this with my group yesterday and we recon that
> people tend
> to play characters who do a lot of what they like; for example, folks who
> play deckers go on computers a lot, I play a writer in one
> campaign - which
> is what I want to do when I leave school. If someone is a loner in real
> life they will play one, and so on. Just think about the people in your
> group and you will find it bizarrely true.
>
> Phil
>
> These are my principles; if you don't like them I have some others.
> -Groucho Marx
>

Nope - not me, anyway! I wanted to play a decker, but couldn't get my head
round the rules. Since I'm a programmer in real life, I kept coming up
against real-life glitches in the system. So I decided on mages. Go
figure.

SA.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Power Gaming and Benchmarking (Long), 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!