Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 13:51:26 -0600
New idea... prob been done before, but I felt it should be mentioned.

1) Change from 6-sided dice to 10-sided dice.
2) Make the average TN a 6 instead of 4.
a) In ranged combat, short would be 6, medium 7, long 8, extreme 11.
Maybe in the interest of fun add a point-blank with a 4.
b) Raise drain mods by 2.
3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).
4) Set 3 as the "average" stat.
a) What this does is allows characters to get more points in their
statistics, while setting a semi-realistic average stat. Someone's
strength can grow far higher than the average but can only go so far down.
(e.g. If the average person can bench say 60kg decently, then the weakest
person around might only lift 1kg or less. The strongest will lift around
300+.)
b) PLUS! No more "above racial max" stats. The absolute max becomes 10.
Unless you're a phys ad with powers that go over or a samurai with cyberware
or whatever. There would be no natural way to go over a 10 stat.

Some of the effects that this brings about are very interesting and
playable. For example, much combat finds itself with a target number of 2
when firing. More often than not, it's due to a -2 modifier. In the new
system that 2 becomes a 4, going from an 83% chance to a 70% chance. Also,
those attacks with higher modifiers are now easier to achieve (tho not by much).

One of the problems here is that of armor. Getting 4's on a six-sider isn't
easy, but you'll get 1 per 2 dice rolled on average. With the new system
you'd get 7 to 10. That works out to a 20% increase for the "average" roll
(heavy pistol vs. armor jacket).

In my opinion, this isn't a bad thing, armor now can handle heavy pistol
shots fairly well. By then it should handle them much more efficiently.
But that can be a drawback in some's views and it will mean longer combats.

Anyways, tell me what ya think of the system... expose the problems and
praise the merits. I need to know what the rest of the world thinks on this.

-- TopCat
Message no. 2
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 13:16:01 -0700 (MST)
TopCat wrote:
|
|New idea... prob been done before, but I felt it should be mentioned.

It comes pretty close to the Vampire rules, except that they combine
stats+skills for the number of dice you role for a test.

I periodically think about using the Vampire system for ShadowRun, but then
I think of the amount of work involved and that I would be replacing a
system that works pretty good to begin with.

| b) PLUS! No more "above racial max" stats. The absolute max becomes 10.
|Unless you're a phys ad with powers that go over or a samurai with cyberware
|or whatever. There would be no natural way to go over a 10 stat.

That kinda hoses Trolls doesn't it?

Except for the maximum stat of 10 for everyone, it sounds like it should
work.

-David

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Buehrer The UnCover Company
dbuehrer@****.org info: uncover@****.org
www.geopages.com/TimesSquare/1068 access: database.carl.org
www.carl.org/uncover/unchome.html
Customer Support: 1-800-787-7979
FAX: (303) 758-5946
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 3
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 13:19:46 -0700 (MST)
TopCat wrote:
|
|3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).

Arrrgh - In a previous reply I posted the comment that a max stat of 10
with this system would hose trolls. I didn't read close enough. Please
disregard what I said.

-David

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Buehrer The UnCover Company
dbuehrer@****.org info: uncover@****.org
www.geopages.com/TimesSquare/1068 access: database.carl.org
www.carl.org/uncover/unchome.html
Customer Support: 1-800-787-7979
FAX: (303) 758-5946
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 4
From: sedahdro@*****.com (Victor Rodriguez, Jr)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 95 04:58 EST
>New idea... prob been done before, but I felt it should be mentioned.
>
>1) Change from 6-sided dice to 10-sided dice.
One problem this can get rather expensive. 10-siders are more expensive
than six-siders. I don't know about you, but when I play I have at least 36
dice in front of me divided amongst different pools.

>2) Make the average TN a 6 instead of 4.
> a) In ranged combat, short would be 6, medium 7, long 8, extreme 11.
>Maybe in the interest of fun add a point-blank with a 4.
> b) Raise drain mods by 2.
>3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).

Why change the attribute range?

>4) Set 3 as the "average" stat.

In Shadowrun 3 is the average stat already (at least for humans).

> a) What this does is allows characters to get more points in their
>statistics, while setting a semi-realistic average stat. Someone's
>strength can grow far higher than the average but can only go so far down.
>(e.g. If the average person can bench say 60kg decently, then the weakest
>person around might only lift 1kg or less. The strongest will lift around
>300+.)

How do they get more points? A human gets no bonuses. If he wants a
strength of five he has to spend five points for it. Explain your logic.

> b) PLUS! No more "above racial max" stats. The absolute max becomes 10.
>Unless you're a phys ad with powers that go over or a samurai with cyberware
>or whatever. There would be no natural way to go over a 10 stat.

Does this include metahuman bonuses. Afterall they are "magical" in nature.

---Sedah Drol
--
ATTN: Due to lack of interest, tomorrow has been canceled.
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 C++++>$ U--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? K? w+>w++++ O--- M-- V
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ X++ R++>+++$ tv++ b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 5
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 12:12:24 +0100
TopCat said on 22 Dec 95...

> 1) Change from 6-sided dice to 10-sided dice.
> 2) Make the average TN a 6 instead of 4.
> a) In ranged combat, short would be 6, medium 7, long 8, extreme 11.

Point 2 should be needed if you adopt point 1, yes... Else everything gets
too easy... Maybe you could do it slightly different, and keep the TNs at
what they are but use D4s instead of D6s? Nah... :)

> Maybe in the interest of fun add a point-blank with a 4.

I have this problem sometimes with players walking up to a target and
shooting him or her in the face from a meter or so range, which I say is a
TN of 4, followed by shouts of "But I have my gun almost pressed to his
nose!" Point-blank range could solve that problem, but leads to people
getting killed even easier than they are now...

> 3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).
> 4) Set 3 as the "average" stat.
> a) What this does is allows characters to get more points in their
> statistics, while setting a semi-realistic average stat. Someone's
> strength can grow far higher than the average but can only go so far down.
> (e.g. If the average person can bench say 60kg decently, then the weakest
> person around might only lift 1kg or less. The strongest will lift around
> 300+.)
> b) PLUS! No more "above racial max" stats. The absolute max becomes
10.
> Unless you're a phys ad with powers that go over or a samurai with cyberware
> or whatever. There would be no natural way to go over a 10 stat.

I don't see the point of this. In effect the stats reain the same as they
were before, seeing that you still make 3 the human average. You can get a
Strength of 9 now as well, granted this is 1 point below what you propose
as an absolute maximum, but I don't really see the difference this rule
will make.

> Anyways, tell me what ya think of the system...

I think you've been looking at White Wolf stuff :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
That looked just like a negative reality inversion...
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(--) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 6
From: Quicksilver <jhurley1@******.stevens-tech.edu>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 22:25:01 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 22 Dec 1995, TopCat wrote:

> New idea... prob been done before, but I felt it should be mentioned.
>
> 1) Change from 6-sided dice to 10-sided dice.
> 2) Make the average TN a 6 instead of 4.
> a) In ranged combat, short would be 6, medium 7, long 8, extreme 11.
> Maybe in the interest of fun add a point-blank with a 4.
> b) Raise drain mods by 2.
> 3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).
> 4) Set 3 as the "average" stat.
> a) What this does is allows characters to get more points in their
> statistics, while setting a semi-realistic average stat. Someone's
> strength can grow far higher than the average but can only go so far down.
> (e.g. If the average person can bench say 60kg decently, then the weakest
> person around might only lift 1kg or less. The strongest will lift around
> 300+.)
> b) PLUS! No more "above racial max" stats. The absolute max becomes
10.
> Unless you're a phys ad with powers that go over or a samurai with cyberware
> or whatever. There would be no natural way to go over a 10 stat.

Urrgrh! Nice theory, but makes the game a LOT different. Changes the
rule of 1, the rule of 10 (6), and every damn target number in the game.
And if you don't change every T#, you are hustling the statistics.

>
> Some of the effects that this brings about are very interesting and
> playable. For example, much combat finds itself with a target number of 2
> when firing. More often than not, it's due to a -2 modifier. In the new
> system that 2 becomes a 4, going from an 83% chance to a 70% chance. Also,
> those attacks with higher modifiers are now easier to achieve (tho not by much).

If you want to be fair, the -2 modifier should be (uhhh......) -3.333333

>
> One of the problems here is that of armor. Getting 4's on a six-sider isn't
> easy, but you'll get 1 per 2 dice rolled on average. With the new system
> you'd get 7 to 10. That works out to a 20% increase for the "average" roll
> (heavy pistol vs. armor jacket).
>
> In my opinion, this isn't a bad thing, armor now can handle heavy pistol
> shots fairly well. By then it should handle them much more efficiently.
> But that can be a drawback in some's views and it will mean longer combats.

In the battle between armour and warhead, the warhead wins. Its very
short time periods where armour is ahead of warhead.

>
> Anyways, tell me what ya think of the system... expose the problems and
> praise the merits. I need to know what the rest of the world thinks on this.
>
> -- TopCat
>

Nice theory, but changes so much of the system as to make it unwieldy
Message no. 7
From: crashman@*******.akron.oh.us (Sean Getz)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 2:39:04 EST
>
> TopCat wrote:
> |
> |3) Make stats range from 1-10 + (racial mods).
>
> Arrrgh - In a previous reply I posted the comment that a max stat of 10
> with this system would hose trolls. I didn't read close enough. Please
> disregard what I said.

Well, it does hose trolls minorly. Their racial mods are smaller
compared to the new racial max. Just a minor detail probably not worth
mentioning. :)

> -David
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> David Buehrer The UnCover Company
> dbuehrer@****.org info: uncover@****.org
> www.geopages.com/TimesSquare/1068 access: database.carl.org
> www.carl.org/uncover/unchome.html
> Customer Support: 1-800-787-7979
> FAX: (303) 758-5946
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>


--
Message no. 8
From: crashman@*******.akron.oh.us (Sean Getz)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 2:44:48 EST
TopCat:
> [snip -- shadowrun rules using 10 siders]

I considered doing this myself but never tried to implement it. I felt
that many questions would come up. For example, people can now carry
around a lot more bioware, is this ok? Plus a lot more unseen
questions. Plus for acheiving those high TN, it becomes even harder.
I don't think, IMHO, it's worth makeing the change. Too many headaches
and conversions.

U-Gene << is practically buried in a snow storm >>
Message no. 9
From: cath@*******.ior.com (Auvil (Cath,Ty or Jahmai))
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 18:59 PST
>> Anyways, tell me what ya think of the system...
>
>I think you've been looking at White Wolf stuff :)

What is white wolf I've never heared of it (well maybe but not sure)

Things and stuff.

E-mail cath@*******.ior.com (Mom's account).
Home Page Anyday now.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GU dpu(-) s: a15 C++++ U--- P? L !E W+++(+) N+++ o? K+ w++(+++++) O- M@
V! PS+++ PE-- Y@ PGP-- t+ 5-- X(+) r-- tv++ b+ DI+ D+ G++ e>+++++ h !r y+
-------End GEEK CODE BLOCK-------
Message no. 10
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:01:35 +0100
Auvil (Cath,Ty or Jahmai said on 28 Dec 95...

> >I think you've been looking at White Wolf stuff :)
>
> What is white wolf I've never heared of it (well maybe but not sure)

White Wolf Game Studio, the company that publishes Vampire, Mage,
Werewolf, and other "Storyteller" games. Their dice system is similar to
SR's, except you roll D10s and not D6s; you also don't roll again on a 10,
and every 1 you roll cancels a success.
Which is why I though Top Cat had been looking at then when he suggested
changing SR to using D10s...

BTW, it appears (i.e. I was told) White Wolf Magazine has ceased to exist.
Does anyone know if this is true or not?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
You can never ever leave without leaving a piece of youth.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(--) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 11
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:03:40 +0000 (GMT)
|
|
|>> Anyways, tell me what ya think of the system...
|>
|>I think you've been looking at White Wolf stuff :)
|
|What is white wolf I've never heared of it (well maybe but not sure)

White Wolf... The creators of the Vampire/Werewolf/Wraith World of Darkness
games.
Ring a bell?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crackin |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant bolder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal in:- |to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 12:32:17 +0000 (GMT)
|BTW, it appears (i.e. I was told) White Wolf Magazine has ceased to exist.
|Does anyone know if this is true or not?
|
White Wolf magazine went out of print a few months ago. It had been changing
it's format and trying to become more popular by reviwing film/video and
stuff like that. That's when it started to lose readers.

Then, in thier infinite wisdom, they changed the name to something like

INPHOBIA

(or something, can't remember) and reformatted it AGAIN to be 'popular'
covering more forms of popular culture.

Of course, this totally crapped on thier readership and it was cancelled
soon after.

I think I got the details right. Correct me if I'm wrong!

--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crackin |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant bolder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal in:- |to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 13
From: sedahdro@*****.com (Victor Rodriguez, Jr)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 95 12:47 EST
>
>What is white wolf I've never heared of it (well maybe but not sure)
Ever Here of games called "Vampire" or "Werewolf". White Wolf is the
publishing company that puts the games out. Anyway's the game system is
based on d10s.
---Sedah Drol
--
ATTN: Due to lack of interest, tomorrow has been canceled.
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 C++++>$ U--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? K? w+>w++++ O--- M-- V
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ X++ R++>+++$ tv++ b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 14
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 23:51:54 +1100 (EST)
On Fri, 29 Dec 1995, Gurth wrote:

> SR's, except you roll D10s and not D6s; you also don't roll again on a 10,

Actually it is possible to reroll 10's, but it doesn't come up
often. You can only do it if it involves a specialty, and you can only
get specialties with a rating of 4 or more in an attribute or ability
(usually out of 5 - old vampires can raise them above the 5 limit).

> BTW, it appears (i.e. I was told) White Wolf Magazine has ceased to exist.
> Does anyone know if this is true or not?

Yes it is.

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 15
From: shadow@**.kensco.net (The Shadowdancer)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 09:25:47 GMT
>From out of the Shadows, Victor Rodriguez, Jr wispered:

>>
>>What is white wolf I've never heared of it (well maybe but not sure)
>Ever Here of games called "Vampire" or "Werewolf". White Wolf is
the
>publishing company that puts the games out. Anyway's the game system is
>based on d10s.

Speaking of WW games, I tried to implement a similar venture with the
dice, by using the "1's cancel successes" rule. If all successes were
canceled, it was a failure, and if there were more 1's, then a botch
occured. But my players complained that since d10's rolled 1's less
often then d6's, it would be unfair, so I never tested it. Anyone
else try this or are willing to try it? If so, I could use any
results.

----------------------------------------------------
Many people fear Death, saying it is the bitter end.
I say Death is just lonely, crying out for friend.
-The Shadowdancer (shadow@**.kensco.net)
Message no. 16
From: Dave Stone <dstone@******.dreamscape.com>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 03:43:04 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 31 Dec 1995, The Shadowdancer wrote:
> Speaking of WW games, I tried to implement a similar venture with the
> dice, by using the "1's cancel successes" rule. If all successes were
> canceled, it was a failure, and if there were more 1's, then a botch
> occured. But my players complained that since d10's rolled 1's less
> often then d6's, it would be unfair, so I never tested it. Anyone
> else try this or are willing to try it? If so, I could use any
> results.

*shakes head* The botch rule in WW is flawed anyway. The more
skill you have, the more chance you have of botching...weird rule.
Shadowrun's is much better.

Dave

| David Stone -- dstone@******.dreamscape.com |
| "Five ride forth, and four return. Above the watchers shall he |
| proclaim himself, bannered across the sky in fire..." |
Message no. 17
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 11:45:42 +0100
The Shadowdancer said on 31 Dec 95...

> Speaking of WW games, I tried to implement a similar venture with the
> dice, by using the "1's cancel successes" rule. If all successes were
> canceled, it was a failure, and if there were more 1's, then a botch
> occured. But my players complained that since d10's rolled 1's less
> often then d6's, it would be unfair, so I never tested it. Anyone
> else try this or are willing to try it? If so, I could use any
> results.

It depends on the TN, doesn't it? If you roll a number of D10s against a
TN of 6, you'll roll just as many successes as if you roll the same number
of D6s against a TN of 4. I think/hope/wish.
You could always give it a try, perhaps in a one-off adventure, so your
players won't get upset if their favorite characters get wasted because
they rolled too many 1s :)

I might try this some time...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Let's get nautical, ladies!
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(--) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 18
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 22:32:54 +1100 (EST)
On Sun, 31 Dec 1995, Dave Stone wrote:

> *shakes head* The botch rule in WW is flawed anyway. The more
> skill you have, the more chance you have of botching...weird rule.

That only happens at difficulties of 9 and 10. Somebody actually
figured out the probabilites - yeah they had WAY too much time on their
hands.

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 19
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 08:59:37 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "JL" == John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au> writes:

JL> That only happens at difficulties of 9 and 10. Somebody actually
JL> figured out the probabilites - yeah they had WAY too much time on
JL> their hands.

Actually, it happens for any difficulty equal or greater than "average"
(in the WoD games that's 6). You have to do the probabilities out to 5
or 6 places to see it at a difficulty 6, but the flaw is still there.
It becomes more dramatically pronounced at 7-8, and glaringly obvious at
9-10.

Shadowrun's "botch" mechanic is infinitely superior to Storyteller's.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQCVAwUBMOaXQ56VRH7BJMxHAQFHQAQAiwK45Eo2mMjFKVe1FYy2BEGzus++PihY
uHrwgyLYEkI5nL8uXzO+ZYwo66/j3D735epqdj2OfuEqOPepxhfXq1mKtR161IqY
k2iTczXaAgsZwwdvg+FHGNbADGKoxkLg0a/cZomt04qrENwiC7tsAu/fm2u68P4e
0g8elikBv5c=
=SZMU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Do not use Happy Fun Ball on concrete.
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \
Message no. 20
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 21:22:48 +1100 (EST)
On Sun, 31 Dec 1995, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> It becomes more dramatically pronounced at 7-8, and glaringly obvious at
> 9-10.

Well there ya go, in the one I saw it only went to 4 decimal
places. But still the probability for botching went down, with a greater
dice pool, until it reached diff. 9.

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 21
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 08:48:47 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "JL" == John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au> writes:

JL> On Sun, 31 Dec 1995, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
>> It becomes more dramatically pronounced at 7-8, and glaringly obvious
>> at 9-10.

JL> Well there ya go, in the one I saw it only went to 4 decimal
JL> places. But still the probability for botching went down, with a
JL> greater dice pool, until it reached diff. 9.

Didn't I just get through saying that this is NOT the case? When you
work out the probabilities to 6 or 8 decimal places you will find that,
for *all* difficulties higher than 5 your chance of botching is
*directly* proportional to the number of dice rolled and the difficulty
of the task. You are *MORE* likely to score a "critical failure"
rolling 10 dice than 5 for *ANY* task with a difficulty higher than 5.

Whoever cobbled together that table you saw either knows nothing of
statistical analysis or did the math wrong.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQCVAwUBMOfmOZ6VRH7BJMxHAQGjSgP+NPrudBsd1WsjIeJ4O37IFDWNJoFYXqmE
r+AFHsvxs7GkNjyzs75IUM8k1mDvJClF4vhntiy6JM02FKfLToj4KfVFI2BNU6cH
Z4q6asOSnfwCL2937YWKKnaHbYtBzviR7dZw7d9sfIkjWZKiT8rqdhC/D9OeisFR
4nWM+fs5QgM=
=WeT9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ of skin.
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \
Message no. 22
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 01:35:49 +1100 (EST)
On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> Didn't I just get through saying that this is NOT the case? When you

Have you considered doing something about that temper of yours?

> of the task. You are *MORE* likely to score a "critical failure"
> rolling 10 dice than 5 for *ANY* task with a difficulty higher than 5.

Well *I* can only comment on what I've seen (and remember), and I
haven't seen that. If you would care to send me this table of yours,
privately, maybe I'll believe you.

> Whoever cobbled together that table you saw either knows nothing of
> statistical analysis or did the math wrong.

Have you considered you may have done it wrong? And I can't help
mentioning that they do say there are three types of lies - lies, damn
lies and statistics! :)

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 23
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 19:02:28 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "JL" == John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au> writes:

>> Whoever cobbled together that table you saw either knows nothing of
>> statistical analysis or did the math wrong.

JL> Have you considered you may have done it wrong?

No, because I personally didn't do the cooking. The person who did
makes a living writing statistical simulations, so I doubt he messed up
something that, for him, is a trivial task.

I'll try to get a copy of his numbers, but as he now lives on the
opposite side of the country from me that might be a bit of a problem.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQCVAwUBMOh2Dp6VRH7BJMxHAQHBMQP8DsRC1dMfu5f0txGBtjj2PtH9opAqnyey
BtP39ftXTWVLE1M6tDS1nxSzu1CMv0tuZzYJ/dxvYNmIZ5Fz0jDghezJSTMqWkQK
tSjG0cEui65uVAOWX4BZFa2Jupbofh0CTshxbPXMaqIgPmWuD0F6uqLUGfYjqvJo
4ZpaobZlXAk=
=vOyU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox/ \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
Message no. 24
From: Sgt Pepper <GRBENNET@*****.CIS.ECU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 96 22:58:43 EST
On Mon, 1 Jan 1996 19:01:29 -0500 Stainless Steel Rat said:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>>>>>> "JL" == John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
writes:
>
>>> Whoever cobbled together that table you saw either knows nothing of
>>> statistical analysis or did the math wrong.
>
>JL> Have you considered you may have done it wrong?
>
>No, because I personally didn't do the cooking. The person who did
>makes a living writing statistical simulations, so I doubt he messed up
>something that, for him, is a trivial task.
>
>I'll try to get a copy of his numbers, but as he now lives on the
>opposite side of the country from me that might be a bit of a problem.
>
I havent really been following this thread, but I think it has something
to do with botching dicing rolls and probabilities. If you need some
numbers run, being a graduate mathematics student, if you will refresh my
memory of what the discussion exactly was, i be glad to try and do the
calculations.

Sgt. Pepper
Message no. 25
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 22:46:44 +1100 (EST)
On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Sgt Pepper wrote:

> I havent really been following this thread, but I think it has something
> to do with botching dicing rolls and probabilities. If you need some
> numbers run, being a graduate mathematics student, if you will refresh my
> memory of what the discussion exactly was, i be glad to try and do the
> calculations.

Certainly. The problem is to figure out the probability of
botching a die roll (d10) for various dice pools (varying from 1 - 10) and
for varying difficulties (ranging from 2 - 10). Where a botch results if
more 1's than successes are rolled. The results are to go to the 6th
(wasn't it?) decimal place.

Any more information you need?

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 26
From: John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 22:51:34 +1100 (EST)
On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:

> makes a living writing statistical simulations, so I doubt he messed up
> something that, for him, is a trivial task.

Yeah it is doubtful, but still possible. It's also possible that
it requires 6 or more decimal places in order to see the flaw.

> I'll try to get a copy of his numbers, but as he now lives on the
> opposite side of the country from me that might be a bit of a problem.

Or you could see if somebody on this list could do it?

John.

vidar@******.edu.au
Message no. 27
From: westec@******.COM
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 02:49:09 -0600
>
>I have this problem sometimes with players walking up to a target and
>shooting him or her in the face from a meter or so range, which I say is a
>TN of 4, followed by shouts of "But I have my gun almost pressed to his
>nose!" Point-blank range could solve that problem, but leads to people
>getting killed even easier than they are now...

>Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html



are they complaining that the target doesn't wanna stand still to get
shot?????


...it can be a lot harder to hit something/someone very close up where their
movement
certainly effects a larger hand movement to compensate, or even step
inside the
aim. if a physical adept (or any str HTH for that matter) is that close,
something
is wrong with their shooting up to that point anywayz...



---------construction in progress-------------------
westec@******.com
TIP #1323
IPPA #A-0117
Lively #F188
---------construction in progress-------------------
Message no. 28
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 12:39:31 +0100
westec@******.COM said on 3 Jan 96...

> >I have this problem sometimes with players walking up to a target and
> >shooting him or her in the face from a meter or so range, which I say is a
> >TN of 4,
>
> are they complaining that the target doesn't wanna stand still to get
> shot?????

Basically, yes. So that's what I said too... The target doesn't stand
still when it's not his action. Next time I might just use that
interception rule and have the target punch the PC in the guts before he
can shoot :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
How does it feel to be like you?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(--) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 29
From: t_little@**********.utas.edu.au (Timothy Little)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style)
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 08:35:54 +1100
>>>>>> "JL" == John Lambert <vidar@******.edu.au>
writes:
>
>JL> On Sun, 31 Dec 1995, Stainless Steel Rat wrote:
>>> It becomes more dramatically pronounced at 7-8, and glaringly obvious
>>> at 9-10.
>
>JL> Well there ya go, in the one I saw it only went to 4 decimal
>JL> places. But still the probability for botching went down, with a
>JL> greater dice pool, until it reached diff. 9.
>
>Didn't I just get through saying that this is NOT the case? When you
>work out the probabilities to 6 or 8 decimal places you will find that,
>for *all* difficulties higher than 5 your chance of botching is
>*directly* proportional to the number of dice rolled and the difficulty
>of the task. You are *MORE* likely to score a "critical failure"
>rolling 10 dice than 5 for *ANY* task with a difficulty higher than 5.
>
>Whoever cobbled together that table you saw either knows nothing of
>statistical analysis or did the math wrong.

>From my analysis, it appears that you're both wrong in some repsects.
The chance does not always go down with increasing dice for difficulties
less than 9, nor does it always go up for all difficulties above 5.

My table for inverse probability of a botch looks like this:
(Results from this table should be read as "1 in x":

Difficulty
Dice 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
2 100 33.333 20 14.286 11.111 9.0909 7.6923 6.6667 5.8824
3 35.714 32.258 25 18.182 13.158 9.7087 7.3529 5.7143 4.5455
4 270.27 69.93 38.314 24.096 15.898 10.787 7.5019 5.3447 3.8986
5 116.82 90.009 53.879 31.736 19.32 12.149 7.8518 5.1999 3.5241
6 787.4 163.64 78.235 41.801 23.511 13.756 8.3135 5.1624 3.283
7 366.57 233.96 111.46 54.924 28.603 15.609 8.8533 5.1835 3.1163
8 2316.7 391.8 159.37 72.016 34.766 17.724 9.4567 5.2397 2.9946
9 1122.4 585.25 226.55 94.232 42.209 20.126 10.118 5.3189 2.9021
10 6807.2 941.16 321.68 123.07 51.183 22.846 10.835 5.4143 2.8294
11 3381.7 1431.9 455.51 160.44 61.991 25.921 11.608 5.5216 2.7707
12 19928 2254.8 643.94 208.84 74.994 29.392 12.438 5.6382 2.7221
13 10072 3454.9 908.64 271.45 90.628 33.306 13.327 5.7626 2.6812
14 58107 5378.7 1280.3 352.38 109.41 37.719 14.278 5.8935 2.6461
15 29740 8258.9 1801.3 456.88 131.96 42.689 15.294 6.0303 2.6157

>From this table, you can see that the chance of botching is quite erratic
for difficulty 2 (alternating up-and-down with number of dice but generally
becoming less likely). For difficulty range 3 to 6 the chance of botching
goes steadily down with increasing skill. At difficulty 7 the chance of
botching is maximised at 2 dice, for 8 it maxes out with 3 dice, and for
difficulty 9 it maxes with 6 dice. For difficulty 10 it steadily approaches
1 in 2.

Using a this sort of modified "Rule of Ones" in Shadowrun would be
disastrous! Apart from the nearly double chance of rolling a 1 per die,
many target numbers in SR are greater than 6 and suffer far worse from the
"10 effect" than the worst Vampire tests.

To use the example of TN# 13 posted previously, the table looks like this:

Dice 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Botch 16.67% 29.63% 39.85% 48.03% 54.66% 60.12% 64.66% 68.48% 71.74%


Maths behind the numbers:

For those who are interested, the table was worked out by finding the
probabilities on a single die for: success, failure, a '1' given that it
failed, and 'not 1' given that it failed. Eg. for Difficulty 7 the numbers
are 0.4, 0.6, 0.166+, and 0.833+.

I generated a table of probabilities for "exactly X successes from Y dice",
and "exactly X 1's from Y dice that failed". From the 2nd table I partially
summed to get a 3rd table "X or more 1's from Y dice that failed". I then
generated a 4th table, "botch on Y dice with exactly X successes" by
multiplying "X successes on Y dice" by "(X+1) or more 1's on (Y-X) dice
that
failed". Summing the 4th table by X gave the result column "probability of
botch on Y dice" (with any number of successes). I then inverted the
results to give more significant figures for small probabilities. (eg. 1
in 29740 instead of 3E-05)

For each column in the final table, I entered the difficulty and copied out
the results.

I included this section to allow anyone else to try to find fault with my
procedure.

--
Tim Little

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Shadowrun 2.1 (TopCat style), 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.