Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu (S.F. Eley)
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 15:47:04 -0500 (EST)
Nathan Saunders writes:

> Ok I no this will sound kinda weird but can you smartlink/gun
> a Ranger X-Bow? If not why not.

I don't have the Street Samurai Catalog, and when it came up in my group
(the new girl wanted to play an Elven Decker with a Celtic fixation) I said
no to smartlinked bows, out of a vague sense of logic. She does, however,
have a smartlinked crossbow, with which she is quite deadly. I saw much
fewer differences between crossbows and guns than between bows and guns.


Blessings,

_TNX._

--
Stephen F. Eley (-) gt6877c@*****.gatech.edu )-( Student Pagan Community
http://wc62.residence.gatech.edu|
my opinions are my opinions. | "She didn't take my breath away;
Please don't blame anyone else. | she put it back."
Message no. 2
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 11:14:30 +0200
According to HHackerH@***.com, at 3:17 on 23 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> > A smartlink does not allow for what you are implying. You'll need more
> > hardware. If you use Gurth's barcoding suggestion, the problem is solved.
>
> Except that even that isn't enough.

How so? It nicely (IMHO) solves the problem of knowing what arrow is on
the bow; sure, it has a drawback in that you can't make your own arrows
unless you also know what barcode would need to be applied to it, but it
should work well enough if you ask me.

> A lot of course, as Gurth indirectly pointed out, has to do with
> Hardware that is involved. "Barcoding" for arrow recognition to the
> smartlink system is nice, but is so incomplete.

Huh?

> It would also have to depend upon the style of item coding, as well as
> the connectivity issues involved with regards to how the hardware works
> overall.

How about, "It works like a smartlink"? Given the fact that there are
smartlinks in SR, I don't see why we'd have to find a reason for the whole
thing to work when we can simply say that it's a smartlink, and leave it
up to Ares R&D to figure out _how_ to make the thing do what it does...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

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. 3
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 11:14:30 +0200
According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 23:06 on 22 Apr 00, the word on the
street was...

> I'm sorry if you thought I was implying: I think it's not too much of a
> stretch to assume/decide/expect smartlinks to handle different types of
> arrowheads. At least, I don't see why it's a problem surmountable *only*
> by barcodes.

There are probably plenty of other ways in which to solve it, but
barcoding seems to be the quickest one to me.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

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. 4
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 02:24:53 -0700
Gurth wrote:
>
> According to Deirdre M. Brooks, at 23:06 on 22 Apr 00, the word on the
> street was...
>
> > I'm sorry if you thought I was implying: I think it's not too much of a
> > stretch to assume/decide/expect smartlinks to handle different types of
> > arrowheads. At least, I don't see why it's a problem surmountable *only*
> > by barcodes.
>
> There are probably plenty of other ways in which to solve it, but
> barcoding seems to be the quickest one to me.

No disagreement. :-)

Apologies if my previous posts on the thread were argumentative. :-/

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 5
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 02:27:14 -0700
Gurth wrote:
>
> How about, "It works like a smartlink"? Given the fact that there are
> smartlinks in SR, I don't see why we'd have to find a reason for the whole
> thing to work when we can simply say that it's a smartlink, and leave it
> up to Ares R&D to figure out _how_ to make the thing do what it does...

That's my perspective. One can toss in flavor-oriented technobabble, but
at the end of the day, it just works like another smartlink. :-)

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 6
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 08:11:22 -0500
From: Gurth
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2000 4:15 AM

> > It would also have to depend upon the style of item coding,
> > as well as the connectivity issues involved with regards to
> > how the hardware works overall.
>
> How about, "It works like a smartlink"? Given the fact that there
> are smartlinks in SR, I don't see why we'd have to find a reason
> for the whole thing to work when we can simply say that it's a
> smartlink, and leave it up to Ares R&D to figure out _how_ to make
> the thing do what it does...

Hear, hear!!

When I said I didn't like the idea of a smartlinked bow, it was just because
I thought the idea was kind of twinkie, not because I thought it was
insurmountable from the standpoint of SR tech. I don't give a rip *how* a
smartlink, either in a bow or in a firearm, works; unlike Ken and some of
the other resident gearheads, that sort of thing doesn't bother me. It's a
friggin' game, after all, one which I play in order to walk away from
reality for a bit.

The fact is, I don't care if a smartlinked bow would really work or not,
since it remains a fact in the game since the Street Sam Catalog that they
*do* work. Isn't this whole discussion kind of moot?

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 7
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:23:54 +0200
According to Patrick Goodman, at 8:11 on 23 Apr 00, the word on the street
was...

> I don't give a rip *how* a smartlink, either in a bow or in a firearm,
> works; unlike Ken and some of the other resident gearheads, that sort of
> thing doesn't bother me. It's a friggin' game, after all, one which I
> play in order to walk away from reality for a bit.

It's what I call the Trekkie mentality: trying to find a reason why
something works, even if RL says it shouldn't, or at the very least be
difficult or extremely impractical.

And I do know I sometimes fall victim to this mentality as well (like in
my initial post about barcoding arrows) but I try to stop before I take it
too far :)

> The fact is, I don't care if a smartlinked bow would really work or not,
> since it remains a fact in the game since the Street Sam Catalog that they
> *do* work. Isn't this whole discussion kind of moot?

IMHO, it's fairly moot, yes. The only reasons I can think of to include
unnecessary technobabble is to a) make something look cool; or b) as a GM,
explain to a player why something will or will not work in the game world.
For neither, you need to work the whole thing out too far, in my
experience -- usually somthing in the order of "Smartlinks work, so with a
bit of modification you can have a smartlink on a bow" should do just
fine...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"There are millions of people who've got nothing to say to each other,
and who do it on mobile phones" --Ian Hislop, on Have I Got News For You
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-

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. 8
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:34:24 -0700
Patrick Goodman wrote:
>
> When I said I didn't like the idea of a smartlinked bow, it was just because
> I thought the idea was kind of twinkie

So why do you think it's twinkish?

> The fact is, I don't care if a smartlinked bow would really work or not,
> since it remains a fact in the game since the Street Sam Catalog that they
> *do* work. Isn't this whole discussion kind of moot?

Agreed here.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 9
From: Chronos chronos@*********.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 16:08:34 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: shadowrn-admin@*********.com
[mailto:shadowrn-admin@*********.com]On Behalf Of Deirdre M. Brooks
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2000 3:34 PM
To: shadowrn@*********.com
Subject: Re: Smartlinked Bows




>Patrick Goodman wrote:
>>
>> When I said I didn't like the idea of a smartlinked bow, it was just
because
>> I thought the idea was kind of twinkie

>So why do you think it's twinkish?

>> The fact is, I don't care if a smartlinked bow would really work or not,
>> since it remains a fact in the game since the Street Sam Catalog that
they
>> *do* work. Isn't this whole discussion kind of moot?

Fasa DOES eratta things... especially things that don't quite make sense.

>Agreed here.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 10
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 16:15:32 -0500
From: Deirdre M. Brooks
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2000 3:34 PM

> > When I said I didn't like the idea of a smartlinked bow, it was
> > just because I thought the idea was kind of twinkie
>
> So why do you think it's twinkish?

I wish I had a good, solid, rational reason for you, Deird'Re. The sad fact
is, I don't. It's a prejudice of mine, based around a guy that I used to
game with down in Houston that was a complete and total twink who glommed
onto the idea with some substantial degree of vigor, completely out of
proportion to the usefulness of the gizmo, and that might have something to
do with it. Nothing rational, just my gut telling me, "That's just not
right."

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 11
From: Deirdre M. Brooks xenya@********.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 14:25:26 -0700
Patrick Goodman wrote:
>
> I wish I had a good, solid, rational reason for you, Deird'Re. The sad fact
> is, I don't. It's a prejudice of mine, based around a guy that I used to
> game with down in Houston that was a complete and total twink who glommed
> onto the idea with some substantial degree of vigor, completely out of
> proportion to the usefulness of the gizmo, and that might have something to
> do with it. Nothing rational, just my gut telling me, "That's just not
> right."

Ah, this is similar to my reaction to Bastet in Werewolf (after someone
abused the hell out of Bastet).

Even so... I've had smartlinked bows in my game and they work out fine,
'swhy I was wondering.

--
Deird'Re M. Brooks | xenya@********.com | cam#9309026
Listowner: Aberrants_Worldwide, Fading_Suns_Games, TrinityRPG
"If you loved me, you'd all kill yourselves today."
-- Spider Jerusalem | http://www.teleport.com/~xenya
Message no. 12
From: Alfredo B Alves dghost@****.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 01:35:05 -0500
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 16:15:32 -0500 "Patrick Goodman" <remo@***.net>
writes:
<SNIP>
> I wish I had a good, solid, rational reason for you, Deird'Re. The
> sad fact
> is, I don't. It's a prejudice of mine, based around a guy that I
> used to
> game with down in Houston that was a complete and total twink who
> glommed
> onto the idea with some substantial degree of vigor, completely out
> of
> proportion to the usefulness of the gizmo, and that might have
> something to
> do with it. Nothing rational, just my gut telling me, "That's just
> not
> right."

So what did this twinky Houstonian do?

--
D. Ghost
Profanity is the one language all programmers know best
- Troutman's 6th programming postulate.

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 13
From: HHackerH@***.com HHackerH@***.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:27:16 EDT
In a message dated 4/24/00 1:23:48 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dghost@****.com writes:

> > > It may need an expansion on it's specifically stated functionality
> > > but,
> > > "there is no additional equipment to buy". In order to mentally
> > > choose
> > > which arrow is being fired, you need:
> > > 1) a display link;
>
> > Only if the fact that Display Link is included in the Smartlink
> > Currently at
> > a rudimentary level.
>
> Hunh?

As per the Smartlink-II accessories/breakdown list on M&M (page 32-33), the
"Eye Display" is a rudimentary display link and could probably work towards
fulfilling this function.

> > > 2) a transducer (I think);
>
> > I don't see why this would be required at all. It's not a matter of
> > requiring any kind of mental communication between the person and
> > the
> > bow/arrow beyond the Smartlink system.
>
> The transducer is required for selecting the arrow type from a menu as
> Deidre suggested.

Again, not necessarily. It may be, but it may not. I draw my example from
the concept that the a smartlink system can select between "modes" on a gun
made for such (SS, SS, BF, FS, etc...) as well as some auto-ejection
functions such as with a clip ... or even as per Cannon Companion's
suggestion (unless this got removed from notes somewhere along the line and
I'm confusing it), it also allows for a user to select between clips/ammo
holds for those weapons that possess such.

Perhaps keeping that in mind, it would be easier to remember that a
Smartlink-II (which is what is likely to be needed, due to the indirect fire
requirements that may be involved with Projectile Weapons skill) is an
interface to another processing unit. That unit (the gun in most cases, but
it can be other items) merely needs to be full considered. In this case, the
Bow's casing houses the other processor device and helps control the rest of
the functions that would be required.

Furthermore, unless you are going to have an additional cyberlimb (wow, what
a neat idea for that Articulated Arm thing ... an additional arm to select
and adjust gear at your discretion), the Smartbow system is NOT going to be
what chooses and select the arrow. That is going to be the job of the archer
individually. All the recognition system would need to do is insert the
information about "X" arrow and adjust the FoF information in the processor
accordingly.

> > > 5) router links between the above and the smartlink;
>
> > Actually, no... the Datajack has enough "router ports" open to do
> > this on
> > it's own, should this be required.
>
> Uhm ... Smartlink, Display Link, Transducer, and Memory (database) that's
> 4 (1 more than the datajack has available). So you need a router.

Nope, the Smartlink and the Display Link are likely covered already in one
unit already. And, as I pointed out above, the Transduecer may not even be
necessary due to the current capabilities of Smartlink-II systems as they
stand now. So, either way, we're down to three or less ports utilized.

> > > What does that add up to? too much Essence and money! :P~
>
> > Less than 1.0 I think actually. MP/Memory would be the big question
> > to this
> > one. Money would have to be figured out, and as I still have
> > company and am
> > just taking a break from the evening ... don't really feel like
> > looking it
> > all up.
>
> Item Essence Cost

Snipped items where required.

> Smartlink I 0.5 2,500¥
> Memory (Database) ? ?
> Datajack 0.2 1,000¥
> Router 0.05 1,000¥
> 3 Links 0.03 600¥

BTW, what the HELL!!!??!!! is this 3 routers thing? The datajack as they
exist already HAVE the three routers included and do NOT require additional
routers to be purchased. As such, it isn't even required.

> ----------------------------------
> Total 0.98 8,100¥

Adjusted to 0.7 3,500 prior to Memory Database, if required.
Again, it would be easy to just use what is in the books as it stands now,
read the rules fully, and just put things into their appropriate level of
detail.

> (Plus the cost of the database! That's nearly double the essence of a
> firearm smartgun and over three times the price.)

Actually, as I'm looking at the book now for this kind of thing, I notice the
"Standard Processor" and "Smartlink-2 Processor" are listed in there.

Perhaps these particular items are what would merely need to be
upgraded/altered in the "Smartbow Link System"? The processor might require
slightly more programming, or better yet, lets give the thing more ... along
the lines of "Autosoft Input Ability" and go from there (I select that term,
merely because we don't have anything else currently). Sadly, we'll probably
have to wait for The Matrix book before we realize the full potential here.

As I see it, the processor subsystem might be changable here, and the rest is
built directly into the bow.

> Like I said, too much Essence and money! Now, if we go with Gurth's
> suggestion, we don't have this problem. :P~

Ah, but we'd still require alterations to the bow as well as to arrows.
Personally, I'd go with flashchip recognition instead of "barcodes", as it is
a far more reliable system in that it doesn't have to worry about "visual
recognition blurring" or similar problems that arise from barcode-like
systems.

Also, if you *REALLY* take a look at the current bows that exist today, you
will notice that in the case of compound bows, the entire central housing of
the bow is immobile/non-flexing. That leaves a LOT of potential room,
especially given the additional considerations of material
processing/synthesis that exists. And, to help with the flash/smartchip
recognition, I would like to draw your attention to the bowstring itself and
the que' that is positioned accordingly thereon.

The que' could easily be the point of a recognition item, with the string
being threaded bilinearly (go both directions along the string) allowing for
the "arrow recognition" to afforded at that end, and leave the "scanning
device" as not even being in the main grip itself, but along a flexibly
placed coil along the devices.

As for "Bow Mount Accessories", a lot of this would come into play elsewhere
and quite frankly I was insulted at FASA's inexperience with the entire
concept. There are now, in current bows, not one but three primary mount
locations along the bow's structure.

The forward aiming counterweight is also aptly placed to allow for additional
equipment and gear, along the lines of designator equipment (laser or
microwave perhaps).

The side-grip "rangefinder" location, which most individuals are familiar
with in regards to the bow itself (usually have 3-4 multicolor-tipped pegs
for various range alignments). This also has options. For one, I've always
thought it would be a very select place to position a video rangefinding
device, which has a selected screen for the viewer (ignoring the concept of
cybernetics in this case). This might also be a nice place for
ruthenium-level screening equipment to work hand-in-hand with FDDM type
arrangements on a bow.

And lastly, the quiver-mount.

This one is perhaps the one I see the most certifiably abusable. It does not
interfere with the location of the rangefinder or the counterweight, nor does
it impede the actions of the user, excuse me, a trained user. As long as the
proper rules of engagement for weight and position were kept in mind, this
position could mount damn near anything on the tactical level ... from
BattleTAC hardware to rigger mount devices to sensor equipment to accessory
logging personal computer to .... well I think you might get the point.

And yes, I WAS a VERY big archery fiend in my days, both with the
university's official stuff as well as personal time on the outside. And
were it now for a significant, life-changing, chain of events I would still
possess my set, which included all of the current world versions of such
listed including silencers, fletchings, guards, camo, side-quiver, 4-point
rf, counterweight (three of them actually, depending upon position and type
of action I was taking) AND a maintenance kit for the pulleys and additional
strings.

It was, admittedly a massive setup, 70 pound pull weight range, and overall
length of my Bear was probably 4' (I think the actualy length was 41",
rounded up from axis to axis). But for the SINCERE Shadowrun-level Archer, I
would see it being merely the beginning of the iceberg.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-K
-"Just a Bastard"
-Hoosier Hacker House
"Children of the Kernel"
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
Message no. 14
From: Alfredo B Alves dghost@****.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:23:30 -0500
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:27:16 EDT HHackerH@***.com writes:
> In a message dated 4/24/00 1:23:48 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> dghost@****.com writes:
<SNIP>
> As per the Smartlink-II accessories/breakdown list on M&M (page
> 32-33), the
> "Eye Display" is a rudimentary display link and could probably work
> towards
> fulfilling this function.

I disagree.

<SNIP>
> > The transducer is required for selecting the arrow type from a
> > menu as
> > Deidre suggested.

<SNIP>

(You assume that a programmer designed smartlnks and not an engineer,
didn't you? ;) )

> Perhaps keeping that in mind, it would be easier to remember that a
> Smartlink-II (which is what is likely to be needed, due to the
> indirect fire
> requirements that may be involved with Projectile Weapons skill) is
> an
> interface to another processing unit. That unit (the gun in most
> cases, but
> it can be other items) merely needs to be full considered. In this
> case, the
> Bow's casing houses the other processor device and helps control the
> rest of
> the functions that would be required.

1) As I said, the bow can not internally mount a smartlink. It would too
greatly unermine the bow's structural integrity and/or strain fragile
electronic components.

> Furthermore, unless you are going to have an additional cyberlimb
> (wow, what
> a neat idea for that Articulated Arm thing ... an additional arm to
> select
> and adjust gear at your discretion), the Smartbow system is NOT
> going to be
> what chooses and select the arrow. That is going to be the job of
> the archer
> individually. All the recognition system would need to do is insert
> the
> information about "X" arrow and adjust the FoF information in the
> processor
> accordingly.

And how does the "smartbow" know what arrow you are firing? "Select it
from a list". I ammo not suggesting that smartbow system magically picks
the arrow out of the quiver and knocks it.

<SNIP>
> >
> > Uhm ... Smartlink, Display Link, Transducer, and Memory
> > (database) that's
> > 4 (1 more than the datajack has available). So you need a router.
>
> Nope, the Smartlink and the Display Link are likely covered already
> in one
> unit already.

I disagree.

> And, as I pointed out above, the Transduecer may not
> even be
> necessary due to the current capabilities of Smartlink-II systems as
> they
> stand now.

Again, I disagree.

> So, either way, we're down to three or less ports
> utilized.

Yet again, I disagree.

<SNIP>
> > Item Essence Cost

> Snipped items where required.

Do I really need to say it again?

> > Smartlink I 0.5 2,500¥
> > Memory (Database) ? ?
> > Datajack 0.2 1,000¥
> > Router 0.05 1,000¥
> > 3 Links 0.03 600¥

> BTW, what the HELL!!!??!!! is this 3 routers thing? The datajack as
> they
> exist already HAVE the three routers included and do NOT require
> additional
> routers to be purchased. As such, it isn't even required.

Nope. actually, it may be only 2 links.
The datajack connects to the smartlink, memory, and display link; the
router connects to the datajack, and the transducer.

> > ----------------------------------
> > Total 0.98 8,100¥

> Adjusted to 0.7 3,500 prior to Memory Database, if
> required.

Corrected to 0.97 and 7,900¥ plus database.

> Again, it would be easy to just use what is in the books as it
> stands now,
> read the rules fully, and just put things into their appropriate
> level of
> detail.

Which you can do if use Gurth's suggestion (How many times do I have to
say this?) instead of this one?

<SNIP>
> > Like I said, too much Essence and money! Now, if we go with
> > Gurth's
> > suggestion, we don't have this problem. :P~

> Ah, but we'd still require alterations to the bow as well as to
> arrows.

The modifications to the arrows is trivial. The modifications "to the
bow" would be part of the external smartgun (smartbow?) link on the bow's
external mount.

> Personally, I'd go with flashchip recognition instead of "barcodes",
> as it is
> a far more reliable system in that it doesn't have to worry about
> "visual
> recognition blurring" or similar problems that arise from
> barcode-like
> systems.

Same thing in principle...

> Also, if you *REALLY* take a look at the current bows that exist
> today, you
> will notice that in the case of compound bows, the entire central
> housing of
> the bow is immobile/non-flexing. That leaves a LOT of potential
> room,
> especially given the additional considerations of material
> processing/synthesis that exists.
<SNIP>

You are going to market a bow accessory that can only be mounted on
specialized bows? Additionally, I can not picture a bow with 150+ pound
pull and a hollow handle. (What's magical about 150 lb pull? English
longbows, I'm told, had 150 lb pulls.)

--
D. Ghost
Profanity is the one language all programmers know best
- Troutman's 6th programming postulate.

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 15
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 07:10:47 -0500
From: Alfredo B Alves
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 1:35 AM

> > It's a prejudice of mine, based around a guy that I used to
> > game with down in Houston that was a complete and total twink
> > who glommed onto the idea with some substantial degree of vigor,
> > completely out of proportion to the usefulness of the gizmo,
> > and that might have something to do with it. Nothing rational,
> > just my gut telling me, "That's just not right."
>
> So what did this twinky Houstonian do?

It's been almost 8 years, Alfredo; I've managed to mostly forget this guy (a
feat made easier since I didn't have to GM the guy, just play in the same
game). The only thing besides making the bow smart (and thus ignoring all
combat mods because the smartlink overcame them) that still stands out are
the things he did and the lengths he went to in order to ignore
compatibilities (example: stacking muscle replacement 4 and muscle
augmentation 4, in spite of the printed statements that they didn't work
together, and adding toxin filters to create an uber-dwarf with some really
annoying stats and distressing social habits...and yeah, sadly, the GM liked
the idea and let him get away with it).

Geez, what a sentence that made.

Anyway, the guy was a twink that I'd like to continue forgetting, and made a
game that I didn't play in for very long a hellish experience.

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 16
From: Alfredo B Alves dghost@****.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 09:41:22 -0500
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 07:10:47 -0500 "Patrick Goodman" <remo@***.net>
writes:
> From: Alfredo B Alves
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 1:35 AM
<SNIP>
> > So what did this twinky Houstonian do?

<SNIP>

So, basically it's not about what a "smartbow" can do, but rather what it
shouldn't do but your GM let the munchkin (dwarf metatype ;) ) do?

--
D. Ghost
Profanity is the one language all programmers know best
- Troutman's 6th programming postulate.

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 17
From: HHackerH@***.com HHackerH@***.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 01:17:41 EDT
Be warned, I'm honest here.

In a message dated 4/24/2000 3:06:15 AM , dghost@****.com writes:

> On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:27:16 EDT HHackerH@***.com writes:
> > In a message dated 4/24/00 1:23:48 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> > dghost@****.com writes:
> <SNIP>
> > As per the Smartlink-II accessories/breakdown list on M&M (page
> > 32-33), the
> > "Eye Display" is a rudimentary display link and could probably work
> > towards
> > fulfilling this function.
>
> I disagree.

That's nice, but it is completely in the book now.

> > > The transducer is required for selecting the arrow type from a
> > > menu as
> > > Deidre suggested.
>
> <SNIP>
>
> (You assume that a programmer designed smartlnks and not an engineer,
> didn't you? ;) )

No, I presume a game-player designed this.

> > Perhaps keeping that in mind, it would be easier to remember that a
> > Smartlink-II (which is what is likely to be needed, due to the
> > indirect fire
> > requirements that may be involved with Projectile Weapons skill) is
> > an
> > interface to another processing unit. That unit (the gun in most
> > cases, but
> > it can be other items) merely needs to be full considered. In this
> > case, the
> > Bow's casing houses the other processor device and helps control the
> > rest of
> > the functions that would be required.
>
> 1) As I said, the bow can not internally mount a smartlink. It would too
> greatly unermine the bow's structural integrity and/or strain fragile
> electronic components.

And this is PURE BS!!!! I knew someone who had a device built into the
handle-frame of a bow. It won't damage the structural integrity for squat.

> > Furthermore, unless you are going to have an additional cyberlimb
> > (wow, what
> > a neat idea for that Articulated Arm thing ... an additional arm to
> > select
> > and adjust gear at your discretion), the Smartbow system is NOT
> > going to be
> > what chooses and select the arrow. That is going to be the job of
> > the archer
> > individually. All the recognition system would need to do is insert
> > the
> > information about "X" arrow and adjust the FoF information in the
> > processor
> > accordingly.
>
> And how does the "smartbow" know what arrow you are firing? "Select
it
> from a list". I ammo not suggesting that smartbow system magically picks
> the arrow out of the quiver and knocks it.

Ah, but you that is the direction you have been going up until this point.
Try this for a thought. The arrow's "notch" has the recptical for the
smartchip recognition. Upon notching the arrow, instantly the que-responder
transmits the information along the line and to the integrated processing
system of the bow itself. Within the information the processor itself
possesses lies the information for the type of arrow. The user selects
NOTHING. Hell, doing it by your methodology, you are actually slowing the
bow-user completely down.

> Do I really need to say it again?

That you disagree or that you are going beyond the boundaries of
pigheadedness??? It's fairly obvious to me that you, for whatever reason,
have completely side-placed the normal allowance for "the possible" here
Alfredo that you possess. Again, you are basing so much on the here and now
and your own personal opinions that you are not going out into the world and
seeing what is already possible.

> > > Smartlink I 0.5 2,500¥
> > > Memory (Database) ? ?
> > > Datajack 0.2 1,000¥
> > > Router 0.05 1,000¥
> > > 3 Links 0.03 600¥
>
> > BTW, what the HELL!!!??!!! is this 3 routers thing? The datajack as
> > they
> > exist already HAVE the three routers included and do NOT require
> > additional
> > routers to be purchased. As such, it isn't even required.
>
> Nope. actually, it may be only 2 links.
> The datajack connects to the smartlink, memory, and display link; the
> router connects to the datajack, and the transducer.

No, it has 5 links/ports. 2 of them are used by the datajack itself. Reread
the book.

> > > Total 0.98 8,100¥
>
> > Adjusted to 0.7 3,500 prior to Memory Database, if
> > required.
>
> Corrected to 0.97 and 7,900¥ plus database.

Not corrected at all. REREAD THE BOOK!!!!

> > Again, it would be easy to just use what is in the books as it
> > stands now,
> > read the rules fully, and just put things into their appropriate
> > level of
> > detail.
>
> Which you can do if use Gurth's suggestion (How many times do I have to
> say this?) instead of this one?
>
> <SNIP>
> > > Like I said, too much Essence and money! Now, if we go with
> > > Gurth's
> > > suggestion, we don't have this problem. :P~
>
> > Ah, but we'd still require alterations to the bow as well as to
> > arrows.
>
> The modifications to the arrows is trivial. The modifications "to the
> bow" would be part of the external smartgun (smartbow?) link on the bow's
> external mount.
>
> > Personally, I'd go with flashchip recognition instead of "barcodes",
> > as it is
> > a far more reliable system in that it doesn't have to worry about
> > "visual
> > recognition blurring" or similar problems that arise from
> > barcode-like
> > systems.
>
> Same thing in principle...

Perhaps, but not in practice or implementation or potential.

> > Also, if you *REALLY* take a look at the current bows that exist
> > today, you
> > will notice that in the case of compound bows, the entire central
> > housing of
> > the bow is immobile/non-flexing. That leaves a LOT of potential
> > room,
> > especially given the additional considerations of material
> > processing/synthesis that exists.
> <SNIP>
>
> You are going to market a bow accessory that can only be mounted on
> specialized bows? Additionally, I can not picture a bow with 150+ pound
> pull and a hollow handle. (What's magical about 150 lb pull? English
> longbows, I'm told, had 150 lb pulls.)

Tell you all they want, I am NOT dealing in recurve bows here Alfredo which
apparently you are (English Longbows are Recurve ... Bows as outlined in the
books currently are NOT recurve, they are Compound style....massive
engineering difference).

-K

>
> --
Message no. 18
From: Alfredo B Alves dghost@****.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 02:18:17 -0500
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 01:17:41 EDT HHackerH@***.com writes:
> Be warned, I'm honest here.

Be warned, so am I.

<SNIP>
> > I disagree.

> That's nice, but it is completely in the book now.

No it isn't. Where does it say that the rudimentary display link used in
a smartgunlink can be used for these purposes?

<SNIP>
> > (You assume that a programmer designed smartlnks and not an
> > engineer,
> > didn't you? ;) )

> No, I presume a game-player designed this.

It was a joke. An engineer designs something effeciently and cheaply and
a computer programmer designs something for maximum
upgradablity/compatability. (or at least, that's how the joke goes)

<SNIP>
> > 1) As I said, the bow can not internally mount a smartlink. It
> > would too
> > greatly unermine the bow's structural integrity and/or strain
> > fragile
> > electronic components.

> And this is PURE BS!!!! I knew someone who had a device built into
> the
> handle-frame of a bow. It won't damage the structural integrity for
> squat.

In order to maximize the pull of the bow, you can't have anything built
into the handle.

<SNIP>
> > And how does the "smartbow" know what arrow you are firing?
> > "Select it
> > from a list". I ammo not suggesting that smartbow system
> > magically picks
> > the arrow out of the quiver and knocks it.

> Ah, but you that is the direction you have been going up until this
> point.

NO I WASN'T! For I don't know how many posts, I've been trying to hammer
why this direction won't work.
<SNIP>

> > Do I really need to say it again?

> That you disagree or that you are going beyond the boundaries of
> pigheadedness??? It's fairly obvious to me that you, for whatever
> reason,
> have completely side-placed the normal allowance for "the possible"
> here
> Alfredo that you possess. Again, you are basing so much on the here
> and now
> and your own personal opinions that you are not going out into the
> world and
> seeing what is already possible.

(To audience) "He don't know me very well."

Part of this perception is your misunderstanding of my point in this
conversation and even misunderstanding what I am saying.

<SNIP>
> > Nope. actually, it may be only 2 links.
> > The datajack connects to the smartlink, memory, and display link;
> > the
> > router connects to the datajack, and the transducer.

> No, it has 5 links/ports. 2 of them are used by the datajack
> itself. Reread
> the book.

Reread my POST. I'm saying that only 2 router links would be need by the
router. I know how many links a datajack has.

<SNIP>
> > Corrected to 0.97 and 7,900¥ plus database.

> Not corrected at all. REREAD THE BOOK!!!!

I stand by my statement.

<SNIP>
> Tell you all they want, I am NOT dealing in recurve bows here
> Alfredo which
> apparently you are (English Longbows are Recurve ... Bows as
> outlined in the
> books currently are NOT recurve, they are Compound style....massive
> engineering difference).

I'm pretty sure English longbows are not recurve. I'll have to check. I
believe Turkish bows (IIRC, about the size of a short bow) are recurve
and out shoot English Longbows. It's been a while and I really don't have
a source to look it up in anymore ...

--
D. Ghost
Profanity is the one language all programmers know best
- Troutman's 6th programming postulate.

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Message no. 19
From: HHackerH@***.com HHackerH@***.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 03:24:14 EDT
In a message dated 4/25/2000 2:01:46 AM , dghost@****.com writes:

> <SNIP>
> > Tell you all they want, I am NOT dealing in recurve bows here
> > Alfredo which
> > apparently you are (English Longbows are Recurve ... Bows as
> > outlined in the
> > books currently are NOT recurve, they are Compound style....massive
> > engineering difference).
>
> I'm pretty sure English longbows are not recurve. I'll have to check. I
> believe Turkish bows (IIRC, about the size of a short bow) are recurve
> and out shoot English Longbows. It's been a while and I really don't have
> a source to look it up in anymore ...

One last thing, and then the whole topic goes into the Kill File for me here.

Compound bows (pulleys and wheels and axles) are a recent invention ... ALL
BOWS prior to them are basically recurve, included in this is the English
Longbow. Remember, Recurve are single piece items and putting something into
*THEIR* handle would alter their structural integrity, as the all portions of
that design are part of the flexation power involved. Compound Bows (such as
those used in SR at this point) have a multi-jointed structure in which the
central hand grip does NOT flexate at all.

Hence, they can be used to ... oh forget it... I'm getting Out Mike's Camera
now... we'll take pictures, I'll SHOW you what the HELL I mean....

-K
Message no. 20
From: Simon Fuller sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:08:47 +1000
-----Original Message-----
From: HHackerH@***.com <HHackerH@***.com>
To: shadowrn@*********.com <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: Smartlinked Bows



>Ah, but you that is the direction you have been going up until this point.
>Try this for a thought. The arrow's "notch" has the recptical for the
>smartchip recognition. Upon notching the arrow, instantly the
que-responder
>transmits the information along the line and to the integrated processing
>system of the bow itself. Within the information the processor itself
>possesses lies the information for the type of arrow. The user selects
>NOTHING. Hell, doing it by your methodology, you are actually slowing the
>bow-user completely down.

This is entering a minefield as the argument is clearly nearing meltdown,
but I rush in where angels fear to tread.
By putting a chip into an arrow nock you are raising the price of the most
expended part of the system. You are unlikely to get many of your arrows
back in combat. The second most expended part, the string, would also be
made more expensive. Not to mention the fact that the more complicated a
system, the higher the likelihood of failure. This list's favorite, the
barcode on the arrow, if it circled the shaft, doubled further down the
shaft as a failsafe, and a scanner built into where the arrow is drawn
across the bow, would feed the data to the smartlink as you draw. This way
the only extra cost on the arrow would be the printing of wraparound bar
codes. Simple, no extra actions needed, nearly failsafe, and cheap for the
home fletcher.
Message no. 21
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 07:18:46 -0500
From: Alfredo B Alves
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 9:41 AM

> So, basically it's not about what a "smartbow" can do, but rather what
> it shouldn't do but your GM let the munchkin (dwarf metatype ;) ) do?

Yeah, basically. It's been long enough, I might actually let someone try it
in my game now to see how badly I react....

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 22
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Smartlinked Bows
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:39:57 -0400
From: <HHackerH@***.com>
> Compound bows (pulleys and wheels and axles) are a recent invention ...
ALL
> BOWS prior to them are basically recurve, included in this is the English
> Longbow. Remember, Recurve are single piece items and putting something
into
> *THEIR* handle would alter their structural integrity, as the all portions
of
> that design are part of the flexation power involved. Compound Bows (such
as
> those used in SR at this point) have a multi-jointed structure in which
the
> central hand grip does NOT flexate at all.

While you're right about the Compound Bow's unbending central section [and
definitely right about being able to alter that structure!] there is one
little correction I should make clear.

It is not true that all longbows are recurve; in fact, British longbows [the
medieval sort we're speaking of here] aren't recurved. They are, in essence,
today's compound bows without any pulleys [in shape].

Originally, nearly all bows were this straight form, except certain small
"horse bows" which, because of their small size, needed a way to generate
additional punch without having a draw so long that the arrows needed to be
six feet long and the tips of the bow touch! :) The solution was to slightly
curve the tips back toward the front, which also solved certain bowstring
problems; whee!

When the same need was found for longbows, at first, all they did was
recurve the tips just like the horsebow; well, that didn't make much sense
or difference. Eventually, the recurves were moved midway down each arm, and
made more extreme; thus was born the "modern" recurve bow.

Obviously, the application of the pulley to archery made all of this
outdated, but some people still prefer the more even draw of the older
recurved longbows.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Smartlinked Bows, 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!