Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: 00DNA mcmanus@******.albany.edu
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 10:21:26 -0400
Hey,
Anyone know the scoop on Man & Machine. I just checked the ol' website and
now it says that M&M is coming out in November...???
Corporate Punishment still says October...is that now going to be coming
out before M&M or did they just not change this release date as well...
*sigh*...that's going to be even later now to expect the CC...


--00DNA
"...user connection terminated."
Message no. 2
From: Dvixen dvixen@****.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 12:19:38 -0700
At 10:21 AM 06/10/99 , 00DNA annoyed me by writing:
>Hey,
>Anyone know the scoop on Man & Machine. I just checked the ol' website
>and now it says that M&M is coming out in November...???
>Corporate Punishment still says October...is that now going to be coming
>out before M&M or did they just not change this release date as well...
>*sigh*...that's going to be even later now to expect the CC...

M&M will be out first, CP is still in the works. Afaik, M&M should be to
the printers in a week or two, then two weeks after that for going the
distib to store route.

No tentative date has been told to anyone (that I know of) for CP....

--
Dvixen - dvixen@****.com =-=-= Gallery - http://members.home.com/dvixen
Herkimer's Lair - http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair
"What's your sign?" - "Trespassers will be shot."
Comments/Questions accepted, flames dropped into the abyss.
Message no. 3
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:23:54 -0400
>
> M&M will be out first, CP is still in the works. Afaik, M&M
> should be to
> the printers in a week or two, then two weeks after that for
> going the
> distib to store route.
>
> No tentative date has been told to anyone (that I know of) for CP....
>

So once again FASA is having problems, with two core books that should have
been out right after 3rd ed. My gurps conversion is sounding better and
better.
(Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons are, and after I
just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
Shutdown....ick)
Message no. 4
From: Paolo Marcucci pmarcucci@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 12:40:14 -0700
>So once again FASA is having problems, with two core books that should have
>been out right after 3rd ed. My gurps conversion is sounding better and
>better.


Should have? Why? Did FASA ever said this?

M&M was scheduled for a GenCon release. After the known issues (Decipher et
al.), they decided to move the date to late October. Today is oct 6, plus
two weeks will be oct 20, plus two weeks will be nov 3. I'd say that's a
pretty near miss. Of course FASA could rush their products, cutting on
editing, art, etc... but with lower quality products they wouldn't be in the
position they are now...

And M&M is the only core book delayed that I know of. Cannon Companion (I
think you're referring to this as the second core book) didn't have a strict
release date. It will probably be out by December.

CP is definitely *not* a core book.

>(Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons are, and after I
>just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
>Shutdown....ick)


Well, if I ever found out that they are going to make a supplement to
Renraku Shutdown, I would be bitter too <g>

-Paolo
Message no. 5
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:34:54 -0400
> (Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons are, and after I
> just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
> Shutdown....ick)
>
WHAT! Are you actually serious?
Message no. 6
From: Richard Tomasso rtomasso@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 15:44:17 -0400 (EDT)
Dvixen wrote:
> M&M will be out first, CP is still in the works. Afaik, M&M should be to
> the printers in a week or two, then two weeks after that for going the
> distib to store route.
>
> No tentative date has been told to anyone (that I know of) for CP....

The last date given for it was November.
Message no. 7
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:02:47 -0400
> Should have? Why? Did FASA ever said this?
>
> M&M was scheduled for a GenCon release. After the known
> issues (Decipher et
> al.), they decided to move the date to late October. Today is
> oct 6, plus
> two weeks will be oct 20, plus two weeks will be nov 3. I'd
> say that's a
> pretty near miss. Of course FASA could rush their products, cutting on
> editing, art, etc... but with lower quality products they
> wouldn't be in the
> position they are now...
>

I like the quality of the projects, and I understand the near miss date now.
My grip is this. 3rd Ed came out last year.
MITS was playtested and took forever to appear after that. (Although the
quality is great).
Over a year later, they finally release another core book! Bioware hasn't
been updated since 1st ed, and alot of stuff
it out of print and not available. You shouldn't wait a year to release a
core, necessary book.

> And M&M is the only core book delayed that I know of. Cannon
> Companion (I
> think you're referring to this as the second core book)
> didn't have a strict
> release date. It will probably be out by December.
>
> CP is definitely *not* a core book.
>
By whose definition? Alot of the gun stuff is out of print. This updates and
clarifies all of it. To me (and to several of my players) its a core book.
If it updates to 3rd ed, its core. If it adds new optional stuff, its not
core.
>
> Well, if I ever found out that they are going to make a supplement to
> Renraku Shutdown, I would be bitter too <g>
>
I made the mistake of reading Adam's Gencon transcripts. :)
Perhaps I'm just spoiled since I've been dealing with gurps lately, and they
have a beautiful web site etc, and
a ton of stuff out.
Message no. 8
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:10:24 -0400
>
> > (Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons
> are, and after I
> > just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
> > Shutdown....ick)
> >
> WHAT! Are you actually serious?
>

I think so. Go to adam's transcript of gencon.
http://shadowrun.html.com/tss/gc-sos.html

Halfway down it mentions a Harliquin style module, but dealing with the
Renraku Shutdown, slated for next year.
Considering how tentative these things are, I'll take it with a grain of
salt...but....it still bothers me.
Tentative title...Brainscan.
Message no. 9
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:29:04 -0400
> > > (Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons
> > are, and after I
> > > just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
> > > Shutdown....ick)
> > >
> > WHAT! Are you actually serious?
> >
>
> I think so. Go to adam's transcript of gencon.
> http://shadowrun.html.com/tss/gc-sos.html
>
> Halfway down it mentions a Harliquin style module, but dealing with the
> Renraku Shutdown, slated for next year.
> Considering how tentative these things are, I'll take it with a grain of
> salt...but....it still bothers me.
> Tentative title...Brainscan.
>
Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which was
a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
[IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."

RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really mean
that, with a very few exceptions.]
Message no. 10
From: dbuehrer@****.org dbuehrer@****.org
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 14:48:34 -0600
Lee Decker wrote:
\ >
\ > M&M was scheduled for a GenCon release. After the known

[snip]

\ I like the quality of the projects, and I understand the near miss date now.
\ My grip is this. 3rd Ed came out last year.
\ MITS was playtested and took forever to appear after that. (Although the
\ quality is great).

That's cuz we playtested the hell out of it. Mike and Steve had sheaves of
playtest reports to go through. I'm suprised the publishing date wasn't
pushed back further :)

\ Over a year later, they finally release another core book! Bioware hasn't
\ been updated since 1st ed, and alot of stuff
\ it out of print and not available. You shouldn't wait a year to release a
\ core, necessary book.

I think this is where opinions diverge. IMO M&M is not a core book. IMO
the only core book is the BBB3. Everything else is a supplement. Also
IMO, it isn't a necessary book. Ditto for any other source book.

I honestly don't care when M&M (or any other source book) comes out,
because I have the BBB3 and can play Shadowrun to my heart's content with
it and it alone.

However, I understand that you don't feel that way. I hope you will
understand that other people have different opinions and views :)

\ Perhaps I'm just spoiled since I've been dealing with gurps lately, and they
\ have a beautiful web site etc, and
\ a ton of stuff out.

No doubt. I'm a Pyramid subscriber, and love sjgames website, and
fervently wish FASA would do something similar. But FASA has a different
philosophy <shrug>. I've learned (well, am still learning ;) to be content
with FASA's wonderful products.

BTW, I highly recommend subscribing to Pyramid (www.sjgames.com). It's a
great resource even if you don't play GURPS (IMO Dork Tower alone is worth
the $15 subscription fee :)

-Graht
--
"The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know
and the more I want to learn."
-Einstein
Message no. 11
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:55:38 -0400
> \ Over a year later, they finally release another core book! Bioware
hasn't
> \ been updated since 1st ed, and alot of stuff
> \ it out of print and not available. You shouldn't wait a year to release
a
> \ core, necessary book.
>
> I think this is where opinions diverge. IMO M&M is not a core book. IMO
> the only core book is the BBB3. Everything else is a supplement. Also
> IMO, it isn't a necessary book. Ditto for any other source book.
>
> I honestly don't care when M&M (or any other source book) comes out,
> because I have the BBB3 and can play Shadowrun to my heart's content with
> it and it alone.

I could play SR without ShadowTech, but it wouldn't be nearly as good. And,
well, playing SR without Denver, London, Germany, both Tirs, CyberTech,
FoF...well, let's just say I'd be bored senseless. I need depth, not just
rules. I can live with lousy rules. I can't live with no depth. That's why I
was thrilled every time they released a new book, but not thrilled when they
released a new mainbook.

> However, I understand that you don't feel that way. I hope you will
> understand that other people have different opinions and views :)

Of course. But I don't have to like it. :)
Message no. 12
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:05:36 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 2:27:25 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
deckerl@******.com writes:

> (Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons are, and after I
> just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
> Shutdown....ick)

They are??? What supplement is this?

-K (who is rereading his Freelancers' Update *just* in case he misread
something)
Message no. 13
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:10:52 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 3:14:00 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
deckerl@******.com writes:

>
> I think so. Go to adam's transcript of gencon.
> http://shadowrun.html.com/tss/gc-sos.html
>
> Halfway down it mentions a Harliquin style module, but dealing with the
> Renraku Shutdown, slated for next year.
> Considering how tentative these things are, I'll take it with a grain of
> salt...but....it still bothers me.
> Tentative title...Brainscan.

That's an Adventure Book, not a Supplement.

-K
Message no. 14
From: Zebulin Magby zebulingod@*****.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:15:02 -0700 (PDT)
Abortion_Engine wrote:

"Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which was
a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
[IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."

RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really mean
that, with a very few exceptions.]"


I would like to know why you feel this way (perhaps offlist if no one else wants to
know your reasons). I, for one, don't like a couple of the adventures, for various
reasons, but how about you?

Zebulin
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Message no. 15
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:20:26 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 3:42:18 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
abortion_engine@*******.com writes:

> Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
> garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which was
> a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."
>
> RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really mean
> that, with a very few exceptions.]

While I agree with your opinion of Bug City completely, I don't agree with
RA:S. Do I think it was done correctly? Don't know actually, as that would
be a hard thing to do. Introducing something so dramatic a change into a
dynamic storyline like SR is always difficult and always creates critics
(such as yourself).

I do think however that "Bug City" was a wash out of a follow through.

-K
Message no. 16
From: Paolo Marcucci pmarcucci@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:30:56 -0700
>Abortion_Engine wrote:
>
>"Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
>garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which was
>a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
>[IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."


>I would like to know why you feel this way (perhaps offlist if no one else
wants to
>know your reasons). I, for one, don't like a couple of the adventures, for
various
>reasons, but how about you?


Well, I would agree with ae. RA:S is definitely munchie stuff. Nanotech
shouldn't be allowed in the Shadowrun world, and any attempt to regulate it
from the game balance pov is doomed to fail. This tech is not like cyberware
or a weapon. It's more like software, once you have the design (the source
code) you can have how many copies you want.

Can you say Smart-chemical/biological warfare?

Too powerful. Too easily abusable(sp?) by munchkins.

But, after all, this is all IMO

-Paolo
Message no. 17
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:24:06 -0400
>
> That's cuz we playtested the hell out of it. Mike and Steve
> had sheaves of
> playtest reports to go through. I'm suprised the publishing
> date wasn't
> pushed back further :)
>
This is true. We did play test the heck out of it, and I didn't grip too
much about MITS. (Since I had
a playtest copy. :))

>
> I think this is where opinions diverge. IMO M&M is not a
> core book. IMO
> the only core book is the BBB3. Everything else is a
> supplement. Also
> IMO, it isn't a necessary book. Ditto for any other source book.
>
> I honestly don't care when M&M (or any other source book) comes out,
> because I have the BBB3 and can play Shadowrun to my heart's
> content with
> it and it alone.
>
This is true, some GM's may not even allow some books. But if FASA says it
is a core book, then I will usually
let players use it. Also if they say its a core book, they will reference it
in many other places.


> However, I understand that you don't feel that way. I hope you will
> understand that other people have different opinions and views :)
>
Most definently. I just get annoyed that a game I like very much, is so far
behind in some ways.


>
> No doubt. I'm a Pyramid subscriber, and love sjgames website, and
> fervently wish FASA would do something similar. But FASA has
> a different
> philosophy <shrug>. I've learned (well, am still learning ;)
> to be content
> with FASA's wonderful products.
>
> BTW, I highly recommend subscribing to Pyramid
> (www.sjgames.com). It's a
> great resource even if you don't play GURPS (IMO Dork Tower
> alone is worth
> the $15 subscription fee :)
>
This is true. Particulary since Kenson has written some good stuff for them
in the past.
Very few RPG's can compare with Steve jackson for an offical net identity,
IMHO.
Didn't mean to start arguments (and I'll still buy the book and commend on
it, when/if it appears), I'm
slightly impatient by nature, and fustrated that FASA keeps promising and
taking forever to deliver.
Message no. 18
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:25:32 -0400
> >
> Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a
> munchie load of
> garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug
> City, which was
> a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."
>
> RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I
> really mean
> that, with a very few exceptions.]
>

Amen. (sorry folks, but I know quite a few folks (particulary my players)
who will feed me to wolves if I try to run
that module)
Message no. 19
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 17:28:56 -0400
>
> They are??? What supplement is this?
>
> -K (who is rereading his Freelancers' Update *just* in case
> he misread
> something)

Check out Adam's website (TSS), under Gencon notes he mentions a module
similiar to Harliquin, that deals
with Renraku Shutdown. If mike mentioned it at Gencon, I would think that it
makes it semi-legit.
Message no. 20
From: Tamino tamino@**********.wow.aust.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 07:55:07 +1000
At 05:05 PM 6/10/99 EDT, Ereskanti@***.com wrote:
>In a message dated 10/6/1999 2:27:25 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
>deckerl@******.com writes:
>
>> (Sorry I'm a bit bitter, no matter how good the reasons are, and after I
>> just found out they are going to make a supplement to Renraku
>> Shutdown....ick)
>
>They are??? What supplement is this?
>
>-K (who is rereading his Freelancers' Update *just* in case he misread
>something)

Um K, I think he's referring to Brainscan



-Tamino ...All too easy

"ISTI MIRANT STELLA" - Bayeux Tapestry
tamino@**********.wow.aust.com
Message no. 21
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 18:38:18 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 4:37:30 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
deckerl@******.com writes:

> > -K (who is rereading his Freelancers' Update *just* in case
> > he misread
> > something)
>
> Check out Adam's website (TSS), under Gencon notes he mentions a module
> similiar to Harliquin, that deals
> with Renraku Shutdown. If mike mentioned it at Gencon, I would think that
it
> makes it semi-legit.

You mean Brainscan then, and I wouldn't call it a supplemental to go with
Renraku Arcology: Shutdown. I *might* be willing to call a continuation of a
nightmare. Don't get me wrong, personally I think the idea is great, just
the ability of other people/GM's and/or players out there to implement it
fully and have it work well in a given campaign is just lacking, if not
impossible in many cases.

"THE MATRIX" is the next real "Rule Book" after Cannon Companion.

-K
Message no. 22
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 00:44:33 +0200
And finally, Lee Decker expressed himself by writing:

> So once again FASA is having problems, with two core books that should
have
> been out right after 3rd ed. My gurps conversion is sounding better and
> better.

While I never played the SR conversion, I did (rather than "do")
play the Cyberpunk conversion for gurps. Most disappointing thing I
ever saw, because when you play a generalized system, there's no real
difference besides the techlevel.

arclight

All of the above IMVHO, no intent to start a "XXX rpg is better
than XXX" thread, so flame me privately (just to be sure)
my addy is arclight@*********.de
Message no. 23
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 20:42:33 -0400
>
> I think so. Go to adam's transcript of gencon.
> http://shadowrun.html.com/tss/gc-sos.html
>
> Halfway down it mentions a Harliquin style module, but dealing with the
> Renraku Shutdown, slated for next year.
> Considering how tentative these things are, I'll take it with a grain of
> salt...but....it still bothers me.
> Tentative title...Brainscan.
>That's an Adventure Book, not a Supplement.

I won't argue that. But if it continues to propogate that ugly
sourcebook. Ugh.
Message no. 24
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 20:44:42 -0400
>You mean Brainscan then, and I wouldn't call it a supplemental to >go with
>Renraku Arcology: Shutdown. I *might* be willing to call a >continuation
of a
>nightmare. Don't get me wrong, personally I think the idea is >great, just

>the ability of other people/GM's and/or players out there to >implement it
>fully and have it work well in a given campaign is just lacking, >if not
>impossible in many cases.

>"THE MATRIX" is the next real "Rule Book" after Cannon Companion.

Now that is a different argument. The concept of the arcology shutdown is
interesting. The implementation bites.
I won't start that thread online, but if you can't see how munchie and
unrealistic that modules is......
Message no. 25
From: Graht Graht@**********.worldnet.att.net
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:18:44 -0500
Lee Decker wrote:
/
/Didn't mean to start arguments (and I'll still buy the book and commend on
/it, when/if it appears), I'm
/slightly impatient by nature, and fustrated that FASA keeps promising and
/taking forever to deliver.

We're not argueing, we're debating :)

And might I suggest thinking of FASA as that lazy relative (spouse,
brother/sister, son/daughter, etc) who does a good and thorough job, when
they finally get around to it :) Be honest, how many times have you said,
"I'll do it tomorrow, I promise."? ;)

And yes, you think a company would know better than to repeatedly set
deadlines that they can't meet. But that's the way FASA is, for better or
for worse. Which brings me to the next point: playing an RPG is like being
married, you gotta take the bad with the good.

-Graht
--
ShadowRN GridSec
The ShadowRN FAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3
Geek Code: GCS d-( ) s++:->+ a@ C++>$ US P L >++ E? W++>+++ !N o-- K-
w+ o? M- VMS? PS+(++) PE+(++) Y+ !PGP t+(++) 5+(++) X++(+++) R+>$ tv+b++ DI++++
D+(++) G e+>+++ h--->---- r+++ y+++
http://home.att.net/~Graht
"The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know
and the more I want to learn."
-Einstein
Message no. 26
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 23:25:39 -0400
At 04:48 PM 10/6/99 , dbuehrer@****.org wrote:
>No doubt. I'm a Pyramid subscriber, and love sjgames website, and
>fervently wish FASA would do something similar. But FASA has a different
>philosophy <shrug>. I've learned (well, am still learning ;) to be content
>with FASA's wonderful products.

I'm hoping that if the Decipher thing goes through, we might see more of
that...

>BTW, I highly recommend subscribing to Pyramid (www.sjgames.com). It's a
>great resource even if you don't play GURPS (IMO Dork Tower alone is worth
>the $15 subscription fee :)

I'll second that. I get a nice amount of source material to translate into
SR. There are also general articles that are fun to read. The "Suppressed
Transmission" has never given me anything I would think of using in a game.
And that level of paranoia has never failed to make me laugh out loud at
least once per article.

I'm also working on getting more Shadowrun stuff published there. :)

>-Graht
>--
>"The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know
> and the more I want to learn."
>-Einstein


Sommers
Insert witty quote here.
Message no. 27
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 01:35:18 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 7:45:40 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
deckerl@******.com writes:

> > Tentative title...Brainscan.
> >That's an Adventure Book, not a Supplement.
>
> I won't argue that. But if it continues to propogate that ugly
> sourcebook. Ugh.

HEY NOW!!! I *LIKE* the cover of that book!!! It was exactly the kind of
twisted mentality I expected to come out of a place like the Arcology!!! ;-P

-K

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/intro.htm]
Message no. 28
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 01:36:58 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/1999 7:47:56 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
deckerl@******.com writes:

> Now that is a different argument. The concept of the arcology shutdown is
> interesting. The implementation bites.
> I won't start that thread online, but if you can't see how munchie and
> unrealistic that modules is......

I'll reply to this in the following manner....

Consider how the material was developed and what happened afterwards if you
will. I won't say it's unrealistic, I will say it is however unbalancing and
lacked significant foresight IMO.

-K

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/intro.htm]
Message no. 29
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 11:18:34 +0200
According to abortion_engine, at 16:29 on 6 Oct 99, the word on
the street was...

> Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
> garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which was
> a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."

A rather lame way of ending the plotline, certainly.

> RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really mean
> that, with a very few exceptions.]

Have you played, or at least read, every adventure published? If not, then
I feel you cannot make blanket statements like that...

Anyway, RA:S is not an adventure, IMnsHO; it's a very short sourcebook
that has a few adventure ideas in the back. The majority of its chapters
are in-character, he whole thing is written as a sourcebook, and it looks
like a sourcebook. I say that makes it a sourcebook despite the 7300-
series number on the cover.


According to Lee Decker, at 17:25 on 6 Oct 99, the word on
the street was...

> Amen. (sorry folks, but I know quite a few folks (particulary my
> players) who will feed me to wolves if I try to run
> that module)

How can you run it if it's not an adventure...?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I would have it all if I'd only have this much
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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. 30
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:19:51 -0400
> Amen. (sorry folks, but I know quite a few folks (particulary my
> players) who will feed me to wolves if I try to run
> that module)
>How can you run it if it's not an adventure...?

How about if I make any references to it happening, they get a bit
upset. I play a fairly realistic and gritty (as realistic as shadowrun can
be) game. My players felt that this "book" was
munchie, didn't add anything to the plotline, and broke the realism
somewhat horrible. (Is the US government going to let an AI sit
on nuclear reactors and such?)
Message no. 31
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:21:06 -0400
>I'll reply to this in the following manner....
>Consider how the material was developed and what happened >afterwards if
you
>will. I won't say it's unrealistic, I will say it is however >unbalancing
and
>lacked significant foresight IMO.

Damn, I almost agree with that. :)
Personally I liked the IE plotlines better....:)
Message no. 32
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:24:05 -0400
>We're not argueing, we're debating :)

hey, this is the most interesting thread I've seen for awhile.
No arguments there.

>And might I suggest thinking of FASA as that lazy relative >>(spouse,
>brother/sister, son/daughter, etc) who does a good and thorough >job, when
>they finally get around to it :) Be honest, how many times have >you said,
>"I'll do it tomorrow, I promise."? ;)

All the time, but I can't get away with that at work very easily.


>And yes, you think a company would know better than to repeatedly >set
deadlines that they can't meet. But that's the way FASA is, >for better or
>for worse. Which brings me to the next point: playing an RPG is >like
being
>married, you gotta take the bad with the good.

Amen to that. (What is that quote, the last thing you as a man ever
had the right answer to is..."I do")
My complain isn't the deadlines, mine is release 3rd Ed, and then
take over a year to release a core (in my mind) supplement.
No matter the quality, you piss folks off when you do that.
Message no. 33
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:42:35 -0400
> > Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
> > garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which
was
> > a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> > [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."
>
> A rather lame way of ending the plotline, certainly.
>
> > RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really
mean
> > that, with a very few exceptions.]
>
> Have you played, or at least read, every adventure published? If not, then
> I feel you cannot make blanket statements like that...

Well, since 1990, I have read all but 5 of the published adventures. I think
that allows me a little leeway in making blanket statements.

> Anyway, RA:S is not an adventure, IMnsHO; it's a very short sourcebook
> that has a few adventure ideas in the back. The majority of its chapters
> are in-character, he whole thing is written as a sourcebook, and it looks
> like a sourcebook. I say that makes it a sourcebook despite the 7300-
> series number on the cover.
>

Yeah, it's a sourcebook in the same way Bug City was; it just wasn't a) big,
or b) good. But you're right; it's not an adventure. It is more like what
would be called a campaign setting, if we were all playing some awful game
that still used those words. :)
Message no. 34
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:47:03 -0400
> >"Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
> >garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which
was
> >a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> >[IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."
>
>
> >I would like to know why you feel this way (perhaps offlist if no one
else
> wants to
> >know your reasons). I, for one, don't like a couple of the adventures,
for
> various
> >reasons, but how about you?
>
>
> Well, I would agree with ae. RA:S is definitely munchie stuff. Nanotech
> shouldn't be allowed in the Shadowrun world, and any attempt to regulate
it
> from the game balance pov is doomed to fail. This tech is not like
cyberware
> or a weapon. It's more like software, once you have the design (the source
> code) you can have how many copies you want.

Yeah. Nanotech biological drones. Let's hear it for the tech curve. Rules
for making AIs [sort of]. Great. And, well, with the exception of the
[colorful!] fight featuring Dodger, Captain Chaos, FastJack, etc., vs. Deus'
Chosen, it's really not written very well. Well, no, that's not true; the
quality of writing is pretty decent, it's just the outrageous ideas that
drive me bonkers.

And people thought Tir Tairngire was munchie...

And all the pseudo-religious images...well, let's say it just gets a little
too campy for me.
Message no. 35
From: Martin Steffens (Berlitz) v-marts@*********.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 05:57:55 -0700
From: abortion_engine [mailto:abortion_engine@*******.com]

> Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie
> load of garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to
> Bug City, which was a million times better; they just said, as a
> sideline in Target: UCAS [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb.
> All over. Go home. Thanks."

Hmmm it does indeed look like they wanted to play down the whole
insect spirit thing rather quickly, which is a shame because Chicago
offered a really interesting break from the normal type of runs we
got into. The way it was done just doesn't feel right, it should
at least have been a Harlequin-like adventure module offering the
players a part in it. But better would have been to leave it the
way it is. I suspect that FASA got too much flak from their fellow
Chicago people (Chicagoans??) and they were getting tired of people
dropping boxes of dead cockroaches on their doorstep :)

> RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I
> really mean that, with a very few exceptions.]

I read through RA:S in the shop luckily so I avoided actually buying
it. Too much like Paranoia, and very unlike Shadowrun, IMHO.
Personally I would only buy "adventures" if they are in the style
of BitB or MW, but that's just because of my style of running them.

Finally about the extension of the release date (unrelated to your
comments A-engine); working for MS I don't think I'm in a position
to make any comments about that in the first place :).
But I prefer to wait a little longer if the quality improves. It
doesn't work both ways alas, so it's either quality or speed. And
if you think about it, it is going to be a long time before you
can get expect an update for M&M after they release this; much
longer than the few months you're waiting now.


Martin Steffens
e-mail: v-marts@*********.com
phone: 70 666 44
Message no. 36
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:11:43 -0400
> > "Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie load of
> > garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to Bug City, which
was
> > a million times better; they just said, as a sideline in Target: UCAS
> > [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb. All over. Go home. Thanks."
> >
> > RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I really
mean
> > that, with a very few exceptions.]"
> >
>
> I would like to know why you feel this way (perhaps offlist if no one else
wants to
> know your reasons). I, for one, don't like a couple of the adventures, for
various
> reasons, but how about you?
>
Well, I think, with a very, very few exceptions, the published Shadowrun
adventures are juvenile, simple, two-dimensional and not horribly
well-thought-out. I use them as starting points; I once used a sort of
bottled demon, but by the time I was done writing up the adventure, it bore
no resemblence to the original, in form or effect. Eventually, the idea got
boiled down so far that even the players who had read BD didn't recognize
it, even when I told them what the inspiration was.

The adventures are for children. They remind me of something I would have
done when I was 14. And they possess to depth, no thrill. There are seldom
any moral dillemmas, and never any real difficulty. Once you've played a few
of them, you know what's about the happen, what to do and what not to. Even
playing in character, with no special knowledge, any half-wit can see right
through these paper-thin plot lines. And where are the invitations to
character decision and development?

We did a run once, GMed by one of the players, where four guys are driving
through the desert in one of the gentlemens' automobiles. There's a
footlocker in the trunk. We've got to get to Milwaukee with it. That's it.
The backstory was given to us in remembrances, alleviating the new GM from
the responsibility of making sure we took the job and didn't learn too much
[clever guy]. We didn't know what was in the box. Well, one of us did. And
in the backstory flashbacks, the GM mentioned it to him. But our characters
weren't around, just our players [manipulative, clever guy]. And the GM only
mentioned that the character knew what was in the box; he still didn't tell
the other players what it was.

So here we are; four players, who know one character knows what's in the
box. But none of the players know what it is, not even the one playing the
character who knows. Three of the characters don't know what's in it, and
none of them know that one of them knows, except the one who knows he knows,
and knows the others don't.

Oh, and did I mention that one of the guys didn't shower...ever?

So, aside from the usual stresses of travelling a thousand miles with
fellows you don't know, you've got three guys worried about what might be in
the box, and one guy who knows what's in the box, and is thus a hell of a
lot MORE worried than everyone else. Between border crossings, running out
of gas, carrying the box by hand when the car broke down, getting chased by
the cops, etc., we had a lot of paranoid guys. And the one guy who knew what
was going on just couldn't resist gloating, just a little, and just enough
to tip everyone off that he knew.

So when the other four finally got up to courage to defy their sense of
self-preservation, to defy their Johnson, and open the box, what they found
changed everything. Everything.

It was fun. It didn't have a whole lot of depth, but it sure as hell had
more than Celtic Double-Cross. And it sure as hell required a lot more
ROLEplaying than any of the published adventures, with moral and ethical
dilemmas, engineered character/player knowledge traps, and lots of time
spent fighting over who got to change the radio station.

[In case you're curious, my character ended up shooting and killing every
other member of the group, taking the box for himself, and moving it to
Milwaukee. Where, of course, he was killed by the people who hired him in
the first place; why else would they have picked four such enormous losers,
other than to throw off suspicion, and so that no one cared when they died.]

And that was one of the simple, non-challenging, non-military adventures. I
had a hell of a lot more fun that I did playing Double Exposure, or whatever
it's called, much less Renraku Arcology: When Good Computers Go Bad.

[Also, in case anyone is wondering, this is not an anti-FASA post, and it's
not an anti-Fasa Writers post. I love FASA, I love SR, and I love almost
every sourcebook. I love Tom Dowd, I love Nigel Findley [God Rest his Soul],
and I even get warm feelings when I think about Mike Mulvill. I keep a
stuffed Dunky Doll under my pillow at night. I really don't dislike FASA, no
matter how much I gripe; I'm even willing to give them extra time to put out
sourcebooks, because I believe in holding out for quality. But I don't like
the adventures, and I probably never will.]
Message no. 37
From: dbuehrer@****.org dbuehrer@****.org
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 07:26:16 -0600
Lee Decker wrote:
\
\ >And yes, you think a company would know better than to repeatedly >set
\ deadlines that they can't meet. But that's the way FASA is, >for better or
\ >for worse. Which brings me to the next point: playing an RPG is >like
\ being
\ >married, you gotta take the bad with the good.
\
\ Amen to that. (What is that quote, the last thing you as a man ever
\ had the right answer to is..."I do")
\ My complain isn't the deadlines, mine is release 3rd Ed, and then
\ take over a year to release a core (in my mind) supplement.
\ No matter the quality, you piss folks off when you do that.

One last suggestion, then I think I'm done ;)

Email FASA with your complaint.

One the one hand companies don't like customers griping at them, on the
other hand an unhappy customer is better than no customer. And believe it
or not they listen to customers, especially those that calmly address an
issue (hint hint).

I recently emailed the local bus company because they weren't staying on
schedule and many of my employees were arriving late to work. In addition
to complaining about their lack of consistency, I praised them for past
performance and made it clear that their service was valued. In return I
received a very informative and pleasant response and know that the bus
company is aware of the problem and is taking steps to address the problem.

FASA may not be able to change their publication schedule (which is laid
out a year in advance) at this point, but maybe down the road they will
change their ways if they hear from enough loyal customers.

Okay, I'm done :)

-Graht
--
"The battles that count aren't the ones for gold medals.
The struggles within yourself; the invisible, inevitable
battles inside all of us; that's where it's at."
-Jesse Owens
Message no. 38
From: Quindrael d.n.m.vannederveen@********.warande.uu.nl
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 15:39:51 +0200
>[Also, in case anyone is wondering, this is not an anti-FASA post, and it's
>not an anti-Fasa Writers post. I love FASA, I love SR, and I love almost
>every sourcebook. I love Tom Dowd, I love Nigel Findley [God Rest his Soul],
>and I even get warm feelings when I think about Mike Mulvill. I keep a
>stuffed Dunky Doll under my pillow at night. I really don't dislike FASA, no
>matter how much I gripe; I'm even willing to give them extra time to put out
>sourcebooks, because I believe in holding out for quality. But I don't like
>the adventures, and I probably never will.]

But... but... please tell us! What's in the box? What's in the f#$*&^g box?

VrGr David

"We're but fools of our fate, on this earth I shall wait by the roots of my
soul."
(Fields of the Nephilim - "Sumerland (what dreams may come)")
Message no. 39
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:37:39 -0400
> > Yuk. Sorry, folks, but RA:S is just stupid, IMO. What a munchie
> > load of garbage. And a follow-up? They didn't do a follow-up to
> > Bug City, which was a million times better; they just said, as a
> > sideline in Target: UCAS [IIRC], "Uh, Ares fixed it. FAB bomb.
> > All over. Go home. Thanks."
>
> Hmmm it does indeed look like they wanted to play down the whole
> insect spirit thing rather quickly, which is a shame because Chicago
> offered a really interesting break from the normal type of runs we
> got into. The way it was done just doesn't feel right, it should
> at least have been a Harlequin-like adventure module offering the
> players a part in it. But better would have been to leave it the
> way it is. I suspect that FASA got too much flak from their fellow
> Chicago people (Chicagoans??) and they were getting tired of people
> dropping boxes of dead cockroaches on their doorstep :)

Yes, we're Chicagoans. [Which sounds almost as rediculous as what I was when
I was much younger; a Londoner.] I don't know why they shut it down, but
I'll tell you, here in my group, it's 2060 and the bugs are still going
strong.

> > RA:S was as stupid as every other published adventure. [And I
> > really mean that, with a very few exceptions.]
>
> I read through RA:S in the shop luckily so I avoided actually buying
> it. Too much like Paranoia, and very unlike Shadowrun, IMHO.
> Personally I would only buy "adventures" if they are in the style
> of BitB or MW, but that's just because of my style of running them.

I liked Paranoia better, in fact. But that's because I'm the master of the
fast-talk. "No, Friend Computer, I didn't mean to impugn your own intellect,
but simply to praise you for creating me with a mind as sharp as mine. You
have made me the happiest, smartest person I know, but by no means am I as
smart or happy as you, Friend Computer. Thank you."
Message no. 40
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:42:36 -0400
> One last suggestion, then I think I'm done ;)
>
> Email FASA with your complaint.
>

I've sent them a couple. Recieved one response from Mike way back when,
saying something similiar
about the change in direction of SR3 to attract new games, and the small
staff.
Didn't mean to turn this is to a gripe fest, but it is one of those things
my group semi discusses each
time we get together to play. (We're odd that way)
I'll let the thread go, but he it was interesting to know I wasn't the only
one out there with similiar sentiments.
Message no. 41
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:50:44 -0400
> >[Also, in case anyone is wondering, this is not an anti-FASA post, and
it's
> >not an anti-Fasa Writers post. I love FASA, I love SR, and I love almost
> >every sourcebook. I love Tom Dowd, I love Nigel Findley [God Rest his
Soul],
> >and I even get warm feelings when I think about Mike Mulvill. I keep a
> >stuffed Dunky Doll under my pillow at night. I really don't dislike FASA,
no
> >matter how much I gripe; I'm even willing to give them extra time to put
out
> >sourcebooks, because I believe in holding out for quality. But I don't
like
> >the adventures, and I probably never will.]
>
> But... but... please tell us! What's in the box? What's in the f#$*&^g
box?
>
Huh. You know what's funny? I don't even remember.

I'll have to ask my roommate. He serves as my memory, as I destroyed most of
mine at University.
Message no. 42
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 13:57:35 -0400
> > I'll reply to this in the following manner....
> > Consider how the material was developed and what happened
> > afterwards if you will. I won't say it's unrealistic, I will say it is
> > unbalancing and lacked significant foresight IMO.
>
> Damn, I almost agree with that. :)
> Personally I liked the IE plotlines better....:)
>
ME TOO. [And I'm really, really serious.]
Message no. 43
From: Penta cpenta@*****.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 17:09:35 -0400
Ereskanti@***.com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/6/1999 7:45:40 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
> deckerl@******.com writes:
>
> > > Tentative title...Brainscan.
> > >That's an Adventure Book, not a Supplement.
> >
> > I won't argue that. But if it continues to propogate that ugly
> > sourcebook. Ugh.
>
> HEY NOW!!! I *LIKE* the cover of that book!!! It was exactly the kind of
> twisted mentality I expected to come out of a place like the Arcology!!! ;-P
>
> -K

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssss. Very twisted. Gotta love the (Red Samurai?)
just sitting there, utterly calm, as people get SQUISHED right behind them.

John
Message no. 44
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:32:18 +0200
According to abortion_engine, at 8:42 on 7 Oct 99, the word on
the street was...

> Well, since 1990, I have read all but 5 of the published adventures. I think
> that allows me a little leeway in making blanket statements.

Good, just checking (if there's one thing I don't like, it's people who
know nothing about a subject making statements about it like the one you
posted; good to see you're not one of them :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I would have it all if I'd only have this much
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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. 45
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:32:18 +0200
According to Lee Decker, at 8:19 on 7 Oct 99, the word on
the street was...

> >How can you run it if it's not an adventure...?
>
> How about if I make any references to it happening, they get a bit
> upset.

Ah. That's different than running it, but I see what you mean.

> I play a fairly realistic and gritty (as realistic as shadowrun can be)
> game. My players felt that this "book" was munchie, didn't add anything
> to the plotline, and broke the realism somewhat horrible. (Is the US
> government going to let an AI sit on nuclear reactors and such?)

Well, the UCAS government and Renraku _are_ trying to get rid of the AI.
Although I probably won't use the actual game setting in my campaign (it's
in 2051 ATM, so the arcology shutdown is a LONG way away) I did sort of
like the idea behind it. Although it does seem to me that, probably for
the sake of the story, they made the arcology much too defensible.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I would have it all if I'd only have this much
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL 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. 46
From: Lee Decker deckerl@******.com
Subject: release date change on M&M?
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 08:45:48 -0400
<SNIP>
> Well, the UCAS government and Renraku _are_ trying to get rid
> of the AI.
> Although I probably won't use the actual game setting in my
> campaign (it's
> in 2051 ATM, so the arcology shutdown is a LONG way away) I
> did sort of
> like the idea behind it. Although it does seem to me that,
> probably for
> the sake of the story, they made the arcology much too defensible.
>

They might be trying to get rid of the AI. But no matter how
extraterritorial is, I don't
think the UCAS would take well to an unknown power having access to nuclear
resources
in the middle of seattle. They made it too defensible and unrealistic....
I didn't mind the concept, but the implemenation sucked.
But my new campaign is starting in 2052, so I have a long time to consider
how I will
fix that event in SR history. I'm just annoyed that they are even
referencing it elsewhere. :)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about release date change on M&M?, 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!