Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: SR3 & Valid Topics
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 08:19:52 -0400
Matb once dared to write,

>On a completely non-related issue -- First Ed was Big Blue; Second Ed
>was Big Black -- what color will Third Ed be? (Big Brown?)

Now that would be ugly. Black has the best impact for the cover.

>I could possibly see a boxed set with one basic rules booklet and one
>equipment booklet (as well as magic booklet and matrix booklet) <==
>crappy idea. Scrap it.

Thank you.

>I *would* like to see better descriptions of the Basic Tech (especially
>Wired Reflexes!) offered, something along the lines of the Shadowtech
>descriptions. Revise the Body Index rules, and perhaps inject some
>crossover items (Bone Lacing, in my mind, should have both a BI rating
>and cost Essence).

Not that much of a description. Don't forget that Cybertechnology
does pick up some of the slack.

>On a nearly-related thread, one way to end the problem of characters
>starting out with the magnatech items is simply not to have any items in
>the Basic Bxxx with an Availability over 6....

I have problems with that fast rule. I can't agree with it. Maybe
some other way perhaps.

>I'd drop the optional metatypes altogether, revamp the Flaws so as to
>eliminate the hosers (Lightning Reflexes, Magic Invulnerability...)

Since those are options from the Companion, that's where they should
stay. This is about the CORE RULES, not what to do to the entire system
or how to make the book over a thousand pages. Please let's keep ideas
relavant to what's in the main rule book already and anything else that
HAS to be in there. If it's in another book, then you should ask yourself
if there is something wrong with an existing rule where it is at.
Optional and additional rules are fine where they are at. Anything that
need to cover or CORRECT the main book should be there. Rules for
handling Stealth and the expanded Threat ratings are two examples of what
should be in the book. Metavarients and Edges & Flaws are fine where they
are at.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 2
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: SR3 & Valid Topics
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 17:20:34 -0700
> >I'd drop the optional metatypes altogether, revamp the Flaws so as to
> >eliminate the hosers (Lightning Reflexes, Magic Invulnerability...)

> Since those are options from the Companion, that's where they should
> stay. This is about the CORE RULES, not what to do to the entire system
> or how to make the book over a thousand pages. Please let's keep ideas
> relavant to what's in the main rule book already and anything else that
> HAS to be in there. If it's in another book, then you should ask yourself
> if there is something wrong with an existing rule where it is at.
> Optional and additional rules are fine where they are at. Anything that
> need to cover or CORRECT the main book should be there. Rules for
> handling Stealth and the expanded Threat ratings are two examples of what
> should be in the book. Metavarients and Edges & Flaws are fine where they
> are at.

That was sent in reply to (?) Bull's comment, who included metatypes and
flaws/edges in consideration. Personally, if any rules got added to
Basic Third, I'd think those rules would be it. It's /not/ going to
bulk the book up at all; it is relevant to the various methods of
character creation. Most people I know use them to a limited degree (in
that some of the Edges are deliberately broken - sigh.)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SR3 & Valid Topics, 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.