Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mercenary X <kdye@*****.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some thoughts
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 16:59:14 -0700
On Thu, 7 Jul 1994, Robert A. Hayden wrote:

> Alright....
>
> Based on the fact that this list has been dead for the last four months
> except for the automated postings and my askings 'is this list dead', I
> think it's time to re-evaluate what's happening.
>
> 1st: NERPS Foundations
> It should be out by the end of the month. I have it all on the
> mac and ran it though the spell checker (missed most of the stuff, but
> caught many). The only thing left for me to do is to set up the
> multi-font stuff, sort the entries, add archetype identifiers to the
> characters that don't have them, and write up the TOC, Title, copyright,
> and other informational sections. I anticipate a length of about 95
> pages. It will be distributed in postscript and RTF format on cerebus and
> vorlon.
>
> 2. The atlas and power players things are dead. It's been almost six
> months and only seven people have signed up to do anything, and nothing
> has been seen (and I'm no angel here, either).
>
> 3. The bulk of the people are interested in another Shadowlore-type book,
> where there are many smaller submissions instead of a handful of large
> ones. At least that is the impression I get based on the fact that there
> are some 65+ people on this list and only seven that are submitting.
>
> 4. Someone (I forget who, sorry) proposed making a book specifically
> talking about character creation alternatives and he/she stated that they
> had quite a bit of material already. I don't know if there is enough for
> a seperate publication or if it needs to be part of another book.
> Remember that on Shadowlore I, 500k of material turned into only about
> eighty pages.
>
> -------------------------
>
> Here's my thought:
>
> Cancel NERPS Atlas and NERPS Power Players. If people still want those
> things to be written, they can be included in other publications.
>
> Start NERPS ShadowLore II. Submissions will last until perhaps December
> to give those away for the summer the chance to be part of this.
>
> If there are enough materials for a character creation book (NERPS
> Genesis?), we can run that concurrently, otherwise make it part of
> ShadowLore II.
>
> The mailing list WILL be reset. (ie, everyone is deleted)
> The author-IDs will be reset (ie, you need to get a new one)
> You won't get an ID without promissing something to submit.
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> What do you think?
>
> ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@******.mankato.msus.edu
> \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
> \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> I do not necessarily speak for the
> \/ Finger for PGP Public Key <=> City of Mankato or Blue Earth County
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
> n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
>

Sounds good. You should include the PPlayers and atlas submissions in
lore II. As for CERPS, I have about 75-100k of stuffand currently
working on a few ideas. Id love to see more from you guys,
Message no. 2
From: Marc Melin <mme@****.RWTH-AACHEN.DE>
Subject: Some thoughts
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 00:42:57 +0100
Hi there.

1. The social pool is a not very good idea. One should use roleplaying to modify the
target number. So you get a lower target number for good roleplaying.

2. Mages: Mages aren't too powerful, but a street samurai must be able to cut
him down. So in my group mages aren't allowed to carry a spell lock with
a increase reaction spell. If you have that, you don't need muscle anymore.

3. A question: What kind of nature spirit do you get, if you summon one in an
old abandoned church?

Count Zero
Message no. 3
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Some thoughts
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 10:55:36 +1100
Marc Melin wrote:

> 1. The social pool [...] lower target number for good roleplaying.

I agree, if you use the social pool idea. And a faux pas should raise
the TN!.

> 2. Mages: [...] in my group mages aren't allowed to carry a spell lock with
> a increase reaction spell. If you have that, you don't need muscle
> anymore.

Our group halved the spell: so Reaction +4 gives Initiative +2 +2d6. This
works fine.

And you always need muscle. Mages are lousy against auto-weapons and
hardened armour barriers, etc. etc. A good mix is a must.

> 3. A question: What kind of nature spirit do you get, if you summon one in an
> old abandoned church?

A tired old Hearth spirit. Or possibly a relieved old Hearth spirit.

luke
Message no. 4
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Some thoughts
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 19:24:47 -0500
>>>>> "Marc" == Marc Melin <mme@****.RWTH-AACHEN.DE>
writes:

Marc> 1. The social pool is a not very good idea. One should use
Marc> roleplaying to modify the target number. So you get a lower target
Marc> number for good roleplaying.

Thank you.

Marc> 2. Mages: Mages aren't too powerful, but a street samurai must be
Marc> able to cut him down. So in my group mages aren't allowed to carry a
Marc> spell lock with a increase reaction spell. If you have that, you
Marc> don't need muscle anymore.

Magic = power; it's a given. If you want to beat a mage, you have to use
your brain.

Marc> 3. A question: What kind of nature spirit do you get, if you summon
Marc> one in an old abandoned church?

Hearth.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> |If Happy Fun Ball begins to smoke, get away
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox|immediately. Seek shelter and cover head.
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |
Message no. 5
From: John H Stawarz <jstawarz@****.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some thoughts
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 19:44:45 -0500
>
> Hi there.
>
> 1. The social pool is a not very good idea. One should use roleplaying to modify
the target number. So you get a lower target number for good roleplaying.

Good idea. In fact, that's what I already do. It helps our local
Bull-Drek artist out ALOT! He's taken the special skill (bullshitting)
as his centering skill... :) If Anyone's read Robert Myth series, the
example he was shooting for was when Skeeve auditioned for the position
of Court Magician of Possiltum. Sorry that I can't remember exactly
which book it was in... :P That kind of idea. Stage Magician mumbo
jumbo and general bullshit your audience type schtick.

> 2. Mages: Mages aren't too powerful, but a street samurai must be able to cut
> him down. So in my group mages aren't allowed to carry a spell lock with
> a increase reaction spell. If you have that, you don't need muscle anymore.

Yeah, ya do. This has been said before, but I'll say it again. How is
the mage gonna get through wards/barriers/etc. w/o giving his entry
away? Said sam could do that (provided of course that his friendly
neighbourhood wage mage didn't lock a spell on 'im.... :)

> 3. A question: What kind of nature spirit do you get, if you summon one in an
> old abandoned church?

A question to answer a question. Does anyone live there? If yes, then
a hearth spirit. If no, then a city spirit.

> Count Zero

--
*****************************************************************
* John Stawarz aka Chaos Manager *
* jstawarz@******.gmu.edu jstawarz@***.edu *
*****************************************************************
* Proudly attending Groucho Marx University since 1992. *
*****************************************************************

Geek Code (1.0.1) GCS/O -d+ p c++(c---) l u+ e+ m+(*) s+/++ n---(!n) h--
f? g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
Message no. 6
From: wadycki andrew m <wadycki@***.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Some thoughts
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 21:24:59 -0600
On Wed, 23 Nov 1994, Marc Melin wrote:

>
> 3. A question: What kind of nature spirit do you get, if you summon one in an
> old abandoned church?
>
> Count Zero
>

Well, it should be a hearth spirit. In Mercurial, if a shaman summoned a
nature spirit in Underwolrd 93(a night club) you got a hippie rock fan.
So, it would just be a spirit with more personality. Remember magic is
what the place believes in. So it could be an angel or something.

-Andrew
Message no. 7
From: Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Some thoughts
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 1994 00:47:28 +1100
Luke Kendall writes:

> > 1. The social pool [...] lower target number for good roleplaying.
>
> I agree, if you use the social pool idea. And a faux pas should raise
> the TN!.

I insert here a previous posting which I have taken rather a liking to.
Credits go to Terry.

==========
A recent post about realism in gaming [might as well play pencil & paperwork]
has stimulate me to do something I'm sure I'll regret -- defend roll-playing
as opposed to role-playing. In a nutshell, roll-playing allows the
dramatically impaired, such as me, to have fun playing rpg's such as
shadowrun. Players differ in their approach to gaming, but a large number of
the people I've played with end up in the same position as me, their
characters are better than they are. My characters are usually smarter,
stronger, quicker, and more charismatic than I am. The same is usually true
for skills; they can fight, shoot, drive, swim, and cast mana bolts better
than I.

Another recent post described finding a street-doc, the character had to
describe who he/she talked to, what was said etc. [if I'm distorting the
situation I apologize]. While this procedure can make for fun, a little can
go a long way. If my character has a street ettiquette of 6 and I-the-player
have a street ettiquette of 0 [you find a streetdoc by looking under S in
the yellow pages] which score do you use in the game?

Most of the emphasis on role-playing seems to occur in the context of social
skills/social interaction and since this is not a strong area for me I find
it particularly troublesome. I would note that none of the referee's I've
known ever took players to a shooting range to determine their success with
firearms but on occaision they would determine my success in 'fast talking'
by having me actually 'fast talk'.

Although roll-playing seems to suffer universal scorn I think it is crucial
for those of us without social skills. If outcomes in the game are largely
determined by my abilities & skills rather than those of my character(s) then
I might as well play 'pencil-and-paperwork'.

Terry
==========

I thougth that very appropriate just here.

> And you always need muscle. Mages are lousy against auto-weapons and
> hardened armour barriers, etc. etc. A good mix is a must.

So is anybody. I don't see too many sammies out performing mages in those
situations neither. In fact, my players mage severely out does the sammies
in combat. But that'll change when the Tac computer comes on line...

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

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+)('') !tv(--)@ b++ D+
B? e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Some thoughts, 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.