Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: weberm@*******.net (Ubiquitous)
Subject: SR4 comments
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:41:12 -0400
At 08:53 PM 4/5/2005 +0200, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:


>It would be in SR, true.
>
>(The old rule from FoF about fumbling if you rolled a number of 1's
>equal to your skill rating made this even worse -- in SRII, I had a
>player whose character had Firearms 1, and who insisted on rolling a
>Combat Pool die with it almost every time because he felt it increased
>his chances of hitting...)

As I remember it, only the dice rolled for your skill (not anything added)
were counted.


--
"Ted, sweetheart...somebody's left a wicker basket with a little baby in it
on our front doorstep."
"Just leave it out there on the stoop, honey. The cats'll get it."
- Red Meat http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/
Message no. 2
From: james@****.uow.edu.au (James Niall Zealey)
Subject: SR4 comments
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 08:44:32 +1000
> Re: SR4 comments
>
> "Paul J. Adam" <ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk>
>
> We had one magician who bought a Light Fire automatic (no ammunition,
> never loaded it, so she wouldn't have any accidents: no skill, either)
> because pointing your fingers at someone and saying "Freeze!" didn't
> have the desired effect...
>

A real magician does that, and then the opponent literally freezes...
Message no. 3
From: zebulingod@*******.net (Zebulin)
Subject: SR4 comments
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 17:33:21 -0700
Max Noel wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2005, at 02:03, Zebulin wrote:
>
> > *seems to recall a story about a mage screaming "I am
> DEATH!" and his
> > player running with it*
>
> That one was a CLUE file, wasn't it?
>

And that player's inspiration. [:

Zebulin

>From The Top 100 Things I'd Do
If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord

15. I will never employ any device with a digital countdown. If I find that
such a device is absolutely unavoidable, I will set it to activate when the
counter reaches 117 and the hero is just putting his plan into operation.
Message no. 4
From: weberm@*******.net (Ubiquitous)
Subject: SR4 comments
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 20:53:21 -0400
At 09:36 AM 4/5/2005 +0200, Lars wrote:
>From: "Graht" <graht1@*****.com>


>> Q. What is the basic mechanic?
>> A. Basic success tests are made rolling your dice pool against a fixed
>> target number of 5. The target number never changes. So each 5 or 6 that
>> you roll equals a "hit." Success is determined by the number of hits
>> rolled. More difficult tests require a higher number of hits to succeed.
>
>Oh no. I have this Danish RPG called Fusion (http://www.fusion-net.dk/) that
>uses that exact mechanism (except that you have to roll 6 to succede).

I have a very bad feeling about this change...

>> Q. Are you killing the SR3 stories?
>> A. Some. Many of the major plotlines we have had ongoing for years will
>> reach a climax or even an end in the upcoming System Failure book. A few
>> others may be relegated to obscurity in the jump to 2070. But others will
>> continue forward, mutating into new post-2070 plotlines in SR4.
>
>No surprise there. But I do hope that you also cater for those of us that
>perfer the Fantasy aspect of SR. Lately I think SR has moved a bit to far in
>the SF direction. I prefer a more mixed enviroment. Before SR I used to play
>fantasy/horror games, SR showed me a new world, but be carefull or I might
>turn back... Don't worry I'll just add my own bit of Fantasy, and things
>will be fine for me, but I do think you could attract players from the D&D
>crowd if you concentrated on some plotlines dealing with fantasy themes.

Dammit, I liked those overlaying plotlines.

>> Q. Are deckers called hackers in SR4?
>> A. Yes. We're eliminating the clunky old cyberdeck in SR4, and with no
>> 'deck, it doesn't make much sense to call them deckers. So we're back to
>> calling them hackers, since that's what they do. (And, yes, we are aware
>> that some hackers out there don't like having the term associated with
>> illegal activities - and SR hackers will primarily be criminals, like
>> other runners. Realistically, however, "hacking" is the term used for
>> exploring, learning, and exploiting, whether it's legal or not, so it
>> fits.)
>
>Why? Even though you scrap the deck, and mix the Decker/Rigger I see no
>reason to change the name.

Indeed. We still use outdated terms, such as "records" for music.


--
"Ted, sweetheart...somebody's left a wicker basket with a little baby in it
on our front doorstep."
"Just leave it out there on the stoop, honey. The cats'll get it."
- Red Meat http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/
Message no. 5
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 11:28:52 +0200
According to Ubiquitous, on 18-04-2005 02:53 the word on the street was...

> Indeed. We still use outdated terms, such as "records" for music.

But ask yourself why that would be outdated? "Record" implies a
recording, regardless of whether it's on a bakelite disc, a CD or an OGG
file :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- 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

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SR4 comments, 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!