Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: l-hansen@*****.tele.dk (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 15:03:48 +0200
From: "Bira" <u.alberton@*****.com>
> After seeing the third FAQ, all I have to say is: w00t! I'm now pretty
> sure I'll buy the corebook when it comes out. I've tought of using
> rules similar to these myself, the next time I ran the game.
>
>>How do you handle easyer tasks? In Fusion you are granted automatic
>>successes in addition to the ones you roll on your test.
>
> I suspect it will have something to do with the number of successes
> you need. Easier tasks require less successes than harder ones.

That would assume that a single success won't be enough for a basic task.

I on the other hand assumed that a basic task would be something like this:
Shooting your average guy at short range, no special modifiers:
SR3:
Skill: Pistols + Combat Pool
T#: 4

SR4:
Dice Pool: Quickness + Pistols
T#: 5

Now in SR3 you could have:
Target standing still: -1 T#, Lasersight: -1 T#, Aiming -1 T#, etc.

I was asking/wondering how that would be handled in the new system. The
other system I know give automatic successes, but you still need a minimum
of one succes on your die rolls.

> Either
> that, or they give bonuses/penalties to your basic die pool.

Could be.

But that would mean that a Laser sight becomes +1 die, Aiming +1 die,
Smartlink +2 dice, attacker running -4 dice (-6 if difficult ground), or
something similar. I'm not to sure I like that idea.

Lars
Message no. 2
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 15:47:27 +0200
According to Lars Wagner Hansen, on 05-04-2005 15:03 the word on the
street was...

> That would assume that a single success won't be enough for a basic task.

From http://www.shadowrunrpg.com :
"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."

I think your answer is right there: the more difficult the task, the
more hits (note the term :) you'll need, but basic tasks would succeed
with only one.

This does put some tasks out of reach of characters with too few dice,
but then again, that's the case in SR3 as well -- cast Invisibility with
7+ successes, and only very exceptional people will be able to see
through it.

> I was asking/wondering how that would be handled in the new system.

The answer to that is also on the page: "Dice pools consist of skill +
attribute, +/- any modifiers." So if you're shooting someone in poor
lighting conditions, you'd lose dice. If you have very good tools when
trying to rebuild an engine, you might gain dice for your roll, etc.

> The
> other system I know give automatic successes, but you still need a
> minimum of one succes on your die rolls.

That is at least better than SR1 rules with their automatic successes,
but not something I'd like to see return to SR.

> But that would mean that a Laser sight becomes +1 die, Aiming +1 die,
> Smartlink +2 dice, attacker running -4 dice (-6 if difficult ground), or
> something similar. I'm not to sure I like that idea.

It will make things more obvious to the players, and quicker to resolve,
if they know their smartlink always gives them two extra dice, rather
than having the GM apply the modifier without telling them.

--
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
Message no. 3
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:01:04 +0200
At 15:47 05.04.2005, Gurth wrote:

> From http://www.shadowrunrpg.com :
> "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."
>
>I think your answer is right there: the more difficult the task, the more
>hits (note the term :) you'll need, but basic tasks would succeed with
>only one.
>
>This does put some tasks out of reach of characters with too few dice, but
>then again, that's the case in SR3 as well -- cast Invisibility with 7+
>successes, and only very exceptional people will be able to see through it.

I really don't like this. Everybody will go after high attributes and high
skills then, and IMO there are enough dicemonsters out there now anyway...
before, you could have a nice effective character with skills only at about
4, and push it with smart play and tactics. Begone, things of good...

>>I was asking/wondering how that would be handled in the new system.
>
>The answer to that is also on the page: "Dice pools consist of skill +
>attribute, +/- any modifiers." So if you're shooting someone in poor
>lighting conditions, you'd lose dice. If you have very good tools when
>trying to rebuild an engine, you might gain dice for your roll, etc.

Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...



--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 4
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:17:02 +0200
According to Arclight, on 05-04-2005 20:01 the word on the street was...

> I really don't like this. Everybody will go after high attributes and
> high skills then, and IMO there are enough dicemonsters out there now
> anyway...

Let's say I trust FanPro will take care of this :)

> Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
> you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...

It would be simple enough to put in a rule that says something like "You
can't drop below one die" -- kind of the reverse of the current rule,
really: now, the TN cannot drop below 2, so no matter how good you are,
under some circumstances things simply will not get any easier. If SR4
introduces a bottom limit, then you have a situation where things will
never get any more difficult after a certain point.

--
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
Message no. 5
From: carltondavis@*******.net (Carlton Davis)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 13:24:51 -0500
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:01:04 +0200, Arclight <arclight@*********.de> wrote:

> At 15:47 05.04.2005, Gurth wrote:
>
>> From http://www.shadowrunrpg.com :

>>> I was asking/wondering how that would be handled in the new system.
>>
>> The answer to that is also on the page: "Dice pools consist of skill +
>> attribute, +/- any modifiers." So if you're shooting someone in poor
>> lighting conditions, you'd lose dice. If you have very good tools when
>> trying to rebuild an engine, you might gain dice for your roll, etc.
>
> Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
> you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...
>

It sounds exactly like the White Wolf system. In that system if you only
have 1 die to roll it's a luck die. If you get a 1 on that it's a botch.
I guess it'll be easier to teach new people the system, since you just
have to tell them that it's "Just like White Wolf, but with a D6 instead
of a D10." I'm really looking forward to the new system, but hearing
about the change to the dice mechanics is a bit of a let down. I like
the fact that Shadowrun has a unique (to my knowledge) dice mechanic.
The idea of losing that disappoints me.
Message no. 6
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:29:46 +0200
According to Carlton Davis, on 05-04-2005 20:24 the word on the street
was...

> It sounds exactly like the White Wolf system. In that system if you only
> have 1 die to roll it's a luck die. If you get a 1 on that it's a botch.

How does that differ from the way SR has always been? If you only have
one die to roll, you have a 1-in-6 chance of rolling a 1, and having the
second part of the Rule of One come up (the bit that can be paraphrased
as "FUBAR").

> I guess it'll be easier to teach new people the system, since you just
> have to tell them that it's "Just like White Wolf, but with a D6 instead
> of a D10."

Kind of ironic, seeing as how the Storyteller game system is essentially
a rip-off of SR's but with D10s :) (In the afterword of the original
V:TM, Mark R*H mentioned SR as one of his inspirations. Of course,
seeing as how the current edition doesn't even acknowledge its _own_
previous incarnations, I don't think many current WW players will even
know this.)

--
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
Message no. 7
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:30:48 +0200
At 20:17 05.04.2005, Gurth wrote:

>>I really don't like this. Everybody will go after high attributes and
>>high skills then, and IMO there are enough dicemonsters out there now anyway...
>
>Let's say I trust FanPro will take care of this :)

Says you with that NDA ;)

>>Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
>>you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...
>
>It would be simple enough to put in a rule that says something like "You
>can't drop below one die" -- kind of the reverse of the current rule,
>really: now, the TN cannot drop below 2, so no matter how good you are,
>under some circumstances things simply will not get any easier. If SR4
>introduces a bottom limit, then you have a situation where things will
>never get any more difficult after a certain point.

I still prefer modified TNs and low amounts of dice to a fixed TN and loads
of dice... with "the old model", you are quite good at low TN, ok with
medium TN and have a slim chance with high TNs - with the new model, your
chances simply rise with the number of dice you can throw at that flimsy TN
of 5 ;)


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 8
From: carltondavis@*******.net (Carlton Davis)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 13:43:58 -0500
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:29:46 +0200, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

> According to Carlton Davis, on 05-04-2005 20:24 the word on the street
> was...
>
>> It sounds exactly like the White Wolf system. In that system if you
>> only
>> have 1 die to roll it's a luck die. If you get a 1 on that it's a
>> botch.
>
> How does that differ from the way SR has always been? If you only have
> one die to roll, you have a 1-in-6 chance of rolling a 1, and having the
> second part of the Rule of One come up (the bit that can be paraphrased
> as "FUBAR").
>

With White Wolf, it isn't a botch unless you're rolling a single Luck Die.
Rolling snake eyes isn't a botch in the system.

>> I guess it'll be easier to teach new people the system, since you just
>> have to tell them that it's "Just like White Wolf, but with a D6 instead
>> of a D10."
>
> Kind of ironic, seeing as how the Storyteller game system is essentially
> a rip-off of SR's but with D10s :) (In the afterword of the original
> V:TM, Mark R*H mentioned SR as one of his inspirations. Of course,
> seeing as how the current edition doesn't even acknowledge its _own_
> previous incarnations, I don't think many current WW players will even
> know this.)
>

Interesting. I'm not familiar with the lineage of the different systems.
I guess the big change would be going to Attribute + Skill instead of
having a fluctuating number of dice pulled from a pool of dice. I'm more
than willing to wait until the rules are published to decide how I like it,
and I'll probably switch to the new system. I just think that a lot of the
flavor in different role playing games comes from the differing mechanics.
If Shadowrun and White Wolf end up with nearly identical systems I would
see
it as a loss. Hopefully there will be enough of a difference between the
two systems that they will convey a different feel.
Message no. 9
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:53:55 +0200
According to Carlton Davis, on 05-04-2005 20:43 the word on the street
was...

> With White Wolf, it isn't a botch unless you're rolling a single Luck Die.

But with one die, that's the same as rolling a single die in SR, right?

> Rolling snake eyes isn't a botch in the system.

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...)

> Interesting. I'm not familiar with the lineage of the different systems.

"Lineage" may be a big word, but there was certainly mention of SR in V:TM.

> Hopefully there will be enough of a difference between the
> two systems that they will convey a different feel.

Well... WW uses differing TNs in their Storyteller system (at least,
they did back when I occasionally played it -- I have no idea about the
current edition), so that is already different from SR4; their
simplified rules system like that used in Trinity had a fixed TN, though.

--
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
Message no. 10
From: carltondavis@*******.net (Carlton Davis)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:15:21 -0500
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:53:55 +0200, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

>> Hopefully there will be enough of a difference between the
>> two systems that they will convey a different feel.
>
> Well... WW uses differing TNs in their Storyteller system (at least,
> they did back when I occasionally played it -- I have no idea about the
> current edition), so that is already different from SR4; their
> simplified rules system like that used in Trinity had a fixed TN, though.
>

I'm only familiar with the current White Wolf system. In it, the target
numbers are so fixed in stone that they sell special D10's for the game
with the successes printed in a different color. The rolls are open ended
in the sense that if you roll a 10 (or lower in some circumstances) you get
to roll that die again for additional successes. If you're reduced to 0
dice you roll a single Luck die, which opens up the chance of botching.

The similarity with the new SR system is that both determine your number of
dice in a test by summing a skill and related attribute, then apply
modifiers
to the number of dice rolled. A static target number would be another
similarity. Perhaps there will be enough other rules that the two won't
feel identical in actual use. I hope that will be the case, but I'm not
too
optimistic.

I love the idea of the Matrix being ubiquitous. I always like the idea of
including some sort of mediated reality beyond the simple targetting dot of
the smartlink system. Something along the lines of chips or programs
providing complementary dice for knowledge tests would be nice. The
current
skillwire system seems to be a bit over the top for that sort of purpose,
since it completely replaces the user's skill; a system that enhances
current
abilities would be better. Imagine a "social smart link" that can monitor
a metahuman's breathing, eye movements, and other autonomic responses to
provide
the user with up to date information on their mental state, providing 1 or
2
points of modifiers for certain social skills.
Message no. 11
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 13:30:19 -0600
On Apr 5, 2005 12:01 PM, Arclight <arclight@*********.de> wrote:
> At 15:47 05.04.2005, Gurth wrote:
>
> > From http://www.shadowrunrpg.com :
> > "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."
> >
> >I think your answer is right there: the more difficult the task, the more
> >hits (note the term :) you'll need, but basic tasks would succeed with
> >only one.
> >
> >This does put some tasks out of reach of characters with too few dice, but
> >then again, that's the case in SR3 as well -- cast Invisibility with 7+
> >successes, and only very exceptional people will be able to see through it.
>
> I really don't like this. Everybody will go after high attributes and high
> skills then, and IMO there are enough dicemonsters out there now anyway...

And they don't now? ;)

> >The answer to that is also on the page: "Dice pools consist of skill +
> >attribute, +/- any modifiers." So if you're shooting someone in poor
> >lighting conditions, you'd lose dice. If you have very good tools when
> >trying to rebuild an engine, you might gain dice for your roll, etc.
>
> Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
> you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...

What would your alternative be?

--
-Graht
Message no. 12
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 13:35:00 -0600
On Apr 5, 2005 12:24 PM, Carlton Davis <carltondavis@*******.net> wrote:
> I like
> the fact that Shadowrun has a unique (to my knowledge) dice mechanic.
> The idea of losing that disappoints me.

Unfortunately Shadowrun's dice mechanic is broken. TNs of 6 and 7 are
the same, and it breaks down vs high target numbers. There's a reason
that Shadowrun is the only major game, that I know of, that uses its
dice mechanic :/

--
-Graht
Message no. 13
From: davek@***.lonestar.org (David Kettler)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:04:14 +0000
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 01:35:00PM -0600, Graht wrote:
> On Apr 5, 2005 12:24 PM, Carlton Davis <carltondavis@*******.net> wrote:
> > I like
> > the fact that Shadowrun has a unique (to my knowledge) dice mechanic.
> > The idea of losing that disappoints me.
>
> Unfortunately Shadowrun's dice mechanic is broken. TNs of 6 and 7 are
> the same, and it breaks down vs high target numbers. There's a reason
> that Shadowrun is the only major game, that I know of, that uses its
> dice mechanic :/
>
> --
> -Graht

There are some issues with the SR system to be sure, but also a lot of good things. One
of my favorite aspects of it is how you can have arbitrarily large TNs can can at least
theoretically be made by somebody of any skill level, just with lower and lower
probability. I don't see how the new system will handle this.

It sounds to me like modifiers will just change the number of successes needed, or
something like that. I could see this potentially working only if the rule of 6 is kept
around. The way I see it, if you roll a 6 let that count as a success and you get a
chance to roll again. If the second roll is a 5 you get two successes on that one die and
if it's a 6 again you get two successes and a chance to roll a third time, etc.

Under a system like that, even if you're only rolling one die you can theoretically get
any number of successes, and thus you can scale the number of required successes up just
like you scale TNs in regular SR. But keep in mind that I am only speculating and have no
inside knowledge.

--
Dave Kettler
davek@***.lonestar.org
http://davek.freeshell.org/
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Message no. 14
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 22:15:24 +0200
At 21:30 05.04.2005, Graht wrote:

<snip>

> > I really don't like this. Everybody will go after high attributes and high
> > skills then, and IMO there are enough dicemonsters out there now anyway...
>
>And they don't now? ;)

In SR3, there was a quite nice table showing that a rating 8+ skill was
world class. I really liked that table, because you had some sort of
standard for how to create characters and NSCs. I suppose this was meant by
the developers to get some sort of sense into how high skills should be and
could be. But who cared?

I really hope they will find a better way this time ;)

> > Wow - what if you get below 1 die? If this means that you can't shoot if
> > you can only see sh1t, I don't like that even more...
>
>What would your alternative be?

Stick with the old system? Just revise the combat skills into groupings
that make sense and leave it that way.

I know that revised editions are meant to attract new gamers to the system,
but please keep an eye on those *already playing it*. Don't change all of
it. And certainly not, because there's this new edition being made and it's
simply possible atm...

--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 15
From: pentaj2@********.edu (John C. Penta)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:20:17 -0400
Something I noticed...With this new dice system, even old adventures become totally
unusable. That's...new for FASA/FanPro. Usually we've been able to run old adventures with
only minimal modification.

Was that intentional?
Message no. 16
From: Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu (Jeffrey T Dougherty)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:28:14 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Arclight wrote:

> At 20:17 05.04.2005, Gurth wrote:
>
> >It would be simple enough to put in a rule that says something like "You
> >can't drop below one die" -- kind of the reverse of the current rule,
> >really: now, the TN cannot drop below 2, so no matter how good you are,
> >under some circumstances things simply will not get any easier. If SR4
> >introduces a bottom limit, then you have a situation where things will
> >never get any more difficult after a certain point.
>
> I still prefer modified TNs and low amounts of dice to a fixed TN and loads
> of dice... with "the old model", you are quite good at low TN, ok with
> medium TN and have a slim chance with high TNs - with the new model, your
> chances simply rise with the number of dice you can throw at that flimsy TN
> of 5 ;)

That's not necessarily true. IIRC, there was a discussion either here or
on the Dumpshock forums on dice mechanics that discussed a number of
problems with the system. One of the biggest ones was that, under the SR3
rules, TNs of 5 and lower were relatively easy to get, so tasks with those
difficulties did not challenge many characters, but TNs above 6-7 became
increasingly difficult to the point where they were effectively
impossible, especially for tasks that didn't have their own pools. For an
infiltrator with an Electronics B/R of 7, for example, a Rating 6 maglock
wasn't much of a challenge- but increasing the TN to 8 made the task
almost impossible. Basically, people were finding it almost impossible to
find that "medium" TN where things are challenging but not nearly
impossible, which is where I'd say you'd want most of the tests in your
run to be.

There were a number of suggestions tossed around for dealing with this,
since there seemed to be a number of people who felt this was a problem.
The only one I remember offhand was to replace the D6s with D8s, thus
changing the probability curves. One thing that a number of people seemed
to agree on was that the SR3 dice system was flawed in that way.

Sorry for the lack of specifics. Anybody else remember this conversation?

-JTD
Message no. 17
From: failhelm@*****.com (Failhelm)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 13:48:54 -0700
> On Apr 5, 2005 1:28 PM, Jeffrey T Dougherty <Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu>
wrote:
> [snip]
> There were a number of suggestions tossed around for dealing with this,
> since there seemed to be a number of people who felt this was a problem.
> The only one I remember offhand was to replace the D6s with D8s, thus
> changing the probability curves. One thing that a number of people seemed
> to agree on was that the SR3 dice system was flawed in that way.
>
> Sorry for the lack of specifics. Anybody else remember this conversation?

I do, it was here, or at least there was one here a few mo back. In
fact I recall the SR4 dice system has one of the suggested fixes.

Having largely to do with probability and chance. It effectively
changes the chances of success vs. failure back into something that is
more balanced and fair.

Someone actually worked up the math. I was astonished at the
statistics on trying to hit high TN. So much so that I was compelled
to re-consider the core system.

New editions do attract new players, but they also try and "fix"
problems. Not a single one of us will agree with all of them. If you
don't like the big ones, you stuck in the edition you do like and
moding it.

Funny thing is, I know there are still SR1 people around whom would
have argued the same about SR2 & SR3. Which IMO, makes it kind of
ironic when higher edition players complain about new editions, when
clearly they have agreed with enough of the edition changes to play
higher than 1e.

I am encouraged at the attempt to bring more logic of math into the
system, while easing off the rules and @ least trying to slim the
rules down.

A for effort.
Message no. 18
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:50:20 -0600
On Apr 5, 2005 2:28 PM, Jeffrey T Dougherty
<Jeffrey.T.Dougherty@********.edu> wrote:
> Basically, people were finding it almost impossible to
> find that "medium" TN where things are challenging but not nearly
> impossible, which is where I'd say you'd want most of the tests in your
> run to be.
>
> There were a number of suggestions tossed around for dealing with this,
> since there seemed to be a number of people who felt this was a problem.
> The only one I remember offhand was to replace the D6s with D8s, thus
> changing the probability curves. One thing that a number of people seemed
> to agree on was that the SR3 dice system was flawed in that way.
>
> Sorry for the lack of specifics. Anybody else remember this conversation?

This?

http://tss.dumpshock.com/html/tss-13/art13-c.htm

It solved one issue, and helped alleviate another, but it wasn't a
complete solution :/

--
-Graht
Message no. 19
From: graht1@*****.com (Graht)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 15:05:36 -0600
On Apr 5, 2005 2:20 PM, John C. Penta <pentaj2@********.edu> wrote:
> Something I noticed...With this new dice system, even old adventures become totally
unusable. That's...new for FASA/FanPro. Usually we've been able to run old adventures with
only minimal modification.

You'll still be able to run old adventures. I don't think it will
require any more work than it took to convert SR1 adventures to SR2
and SR3.

--
-Graht
Message no. 20
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 11:08:55 +0200
According to Arclight, on 05-04-2005 22:15 the word on the street was...

> In SR3, there was a quite nice table showing that a rating 8+ skill was
> world class. I really liked that table, because you had some sort of
> standard for how to create characters and NSCs.

The problem here being, really, that the rules then allow starting
characters to put 6 points into a skill and add a specialization, so
they start with 7 dice -- making them almost world-class already.

--
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
Message no. 21
From: scott@**********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 12:37:21 +0200
On Apr 5, 2005, at 22:04, David Kettler wrote:

>
> There are some issues with the SR system to be sure, but also a lot of
> good things. One of my favorite aspects of it is how you can have
> arbitrarily large TNs can can at least theoretically be made by
> somebody of any skill level, just with lower and lower probability. I
> don't see how the new system will handle this.
>
>
Yes, this should be interesting. I really loved it when you say
something like the TN is 20 and the character gets a success at 32
(after rolling TONS of dice). The look on the player's face (as well
as other gamers) is part of the fun.

I guess my SRDiceRoller will not longer be needed in SR4. :-(

--
·𐑕𐑒𐑪𐑑
·𐑣𐑺𐑦𐑕𐑩𐑯 Scott
Harrison PGP Key ID: 0x0f0b5b86
Message no. 22
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:40:01 +0200
At 11:08 06.04.2005, Gurth wrote:

<snip>

>The problem here being, really, that the rules then allow starting
>characters to put 6 points into a skill and add a specialization, so they
>start with 7 dice -- making them almost world-class already.

Sure. But if Shadowrun IMO never really had "starting characters" anyway.
Otherwise, they could've taken the skill rating limit down to 4. Would make
no real difference anyway, because a skill of 4 is enough for most tasks
anyway. You only need high skill ratings for the "profession" or
"specialization" of the character to demonstrate were the focus of his work is.


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 23
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 18:34:46 +0200
On Apr 6, 2005, at 11:08, Gurth wrote:

> According to Arclight, on 05-04-2005 22:15 the word on the street
> was...
>
>> In SR3, there was a quite nice table showing that a rating 8+ skill
>> was world class. I really liked that table, because you had some sort
>> of standard for how to create characters and NSCs.
>
> The problem here being, really, that the rules then allow starting
> characters to put 6 points into a skill and add a specialization, so
> they start with 7 dice -- making them almost world-class already.

Not to mention Adepts. I had a player whose character could roll 18
dice on a Pistols test if he was using his custom gun. Scary.

"The heavy weapons guy from the Firewatch team steps out of the
Citymaster. You can hear the minigun attached to his gyrostabilizer
begin to spin up as he points it toward you-"
"Headshot."

-- Wild_Cat
maxnoel_fr at yahoo dot fr -- ICQ #85274019
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting
and sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"
Message no. 24
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:04:38 +0200
According to Scott Harrison, on 06-04-2005 12:37 the word on the street
was...

> Yes, this should be interesting. I really loved it when you say
> something like the TN is 20 and the character gets a success at 32
> (after rolling TONS of dice). The look on the player's face (as well as
> other gamers) is part of the fun.

Unfortunately, really high rolls usually happen when the TN is 2 or 4 or
so, not when it's very high already :)

--
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
Message no. 25
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:10:13 +0200
According to Arclight, on 06-04-2005 16:40 the word on the street was...

> Sure. But if Shadowrun IMO never really had "starting characters"

With "starting character" I mean a newly-made _character_, not a
character who is just starting out as a shadowrunner.

> Otherwise, they could've taken the skill rating limit down to 4.

That would be a good thing, IMHO. Far too many of my players go for
plenty of skills at 5 or 6, and using "leftover" skill points to buy a
few more at other ratings.

> Would make no real difference anyway, because a skill of 4 is enough for
> most tasks anyway. You only need high skill ratings for the "profession"
> or "specialization" of the character to demonstrate were the focus of
> his work is.

My idea exactly. I prefer to make characters with plenty of skills at
ratings 2-4, instead of with a few at ratings 5-6.

--
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
Message no. 26
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 11:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
--- Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> According to Arclight, on 05-04-2005 22:15 the word on the street
> was...
>
> > In SR3, there was a quite nice table showing that a rating 8+
> skill was
> > world class. I really liked that table, because you had some sort
> of
> > standard for how to create characters and NSCs.
>
> The problem here being, really, that the rules then allow starting
> characters to put 6 points into a skill and add a specialization,
> so
> they start with 7 dice -- making them almost world-class already.

I tend to restrict skill ratings to 4 at char gen. I also limit
Attributes to 60 BP. With a good story, I sometimes allow a base
skill rating of as high as 6. But only 1, and not often. Fixes
things like a charm. Besides, after playing in one of my games even
one session, people tend to go for broader skillsets. Some sort of
unarmed combat skill, stealth, and athletics all get at least a 3 or
4... no matter what the character. I don't think anyone would choose
a runner 'career' if they were not of at least average skill level in
these. That belief is easy to drive home to players. Unless players
routinely dump half their BP into skills, a 6 in something means some
other vital skill is neglected completely.

======Korishinzo
--just a thought





__________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest
Message no. 27
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:05:52 +0100
At 06:38 PM 4/6/2005, Korishinzo wrote:
>The
>new wheel is moving away from the initial design enough that in many
>ways, we are headed back to square one.

And to continue the wheel analogy to its logical conclusion - possibly _a_
square one...

I'm afraid I'm joining the ranks of the skeptics here.

I like decks, yes it's awkward to find jackpoints and put yourself into a
stupor for the sake of opening a door. but a cellphone link mitigates the
problem and an electronics toolkit and sequencer allows you to bypass it
after all. I like the way you have to be careful with them...

I like the differences between decking and rigging (don't like the essence
cost of the VCR but we took the CIVVCR and adjusted it until it would work
in our game and made use of the VCR0)...
The differences didn't stop me playing a decker who could also rig and had
multiple datajacks so that he could (by means of a cellular link and a
throwaway "pay as you go mobile") run Matrix overwatch as well as providing
the getaway (and occasional drone firepower).

I don't see the point in fixed TNs, I look at Vampire and the table under
Potence (IIRC) and think "OK, I can do that, does that mean I have..." and
"Assuming that I'm actually human and don't have excessive abilities I
could never do that - and yet...".

I'm not as skeptical of SR4 as I am of the proposed "new WFRP" yet
(especially not having seen certain information pertaining to The Enemy
Within campaign in White Dwarf that could not exist within the scope of the
campaign). Plus there's the fact that it's going to be made by a company
whose sole goal is to sell cheap miniatures to twelve year olds at stupidly
over inflated prices...


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ 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-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 28
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:47:56 +0200
At 19:10 06.04.2005, Gurth wrote:

>With "starting character" I mean a newly-made _character_, not a character
>who is just starting out as a shadowrunner.

Me too =)

>>Otherwise, they could've taken the skill rating limit down to 4.
>
>That would be a good thing, IMHO. Far too many of my players go for plenty
>of skills at 5 or 6, and using "leftover" skill points to buy a few more
>at other ratings.

Yep. Characters who can nothing but fight and sneak. Thank god that they
are also fast enough to catch the bus to the meet with J ^^

>>Would make no real difference anyway, because a skill of 4 is enough for
>>most tasks anyway. You only need high skill ratings for the "profession"

>>or "specialization" of the character to demonstrate were the focus of
his
>>work is.
>
>My idea exactly. I prefer to make characters with plenty of skills at
>ratings 2-4, instead of with a few at ratings 5-6.

x2


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 29
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:10:47 +0200
At 21:05 06.04.2005, Lone Eagle wrote:

<snip>

>I like decks, yes it's awkward to find jackpoints and put yourself into a
>stupor for the sake of opening a door. but a cellphone link mitigates the
>problem and an electronics toolkit and sequencer allows you to bypass it
>after all. I like the way you have to be careful with them...

Well, I can understand why they moved to wireless. Fiber networks leave the
decker isolated from the rest of the group for most of the time. With all
characters moving together, the decker (ok, hacker) automatically gets more
into the action.
Though I begin to wonder what the "in character" reason for this change
will be. After all, the fiber cables just don't care what protocolls are
used, so after the crash most parts of the old matrix could very well be
reused. Yes, WLAN is a big trend today, but fiber is getting stronger too.
And fiber offers way more bandwidth with far less problems in a working
environment than wireless networks.
In the german fanpro-newsletter, Christian Lonsing (the
sort-of-something-developer responsible for Shadowrun here) made a comment
that the new matrix and electronics would be may more sophisticated and
advanced after the 5-year break. With miniature storage chips offering "any
amount of storage necessary" and "realtime availability of any kind and
amount of information through the wireless matrix" (quotes are only
paraphrased). I am very interested how that is supposed to work. If they
care to explain, of course.

"Die Welt ist nun kabellos ("wireless"), die zunehmende Miniaturisierung
und Energieeffizienz hat dazu geführt, dass sich jede
Art von Elektronik problemlos in einer Armbanduhr oder einer Brille
unterbringen lässt, und die Speicherkapazität hat solche Ausmaße
erreicht, dass ein einzelner Chip eine quasi unbegrenzte Datenmenge
aufnehmen kann. Nicht dass es notwendig wäre, Daten noch
abzuspeichern, weil sie nämlich über die allgegenwärtige Matrix jederzeit
abgerufen werden können"

That's the exact wording.


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 30
From: failhelm@*****.com (Failhelm)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 21:32:50 -0700
On Apr 6, 2005 10:04 AM, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> According to Scott Harrison, on 06-04-2005 12:37 the word on the street
> was...
>
> > Yes, this should be interesting. I really loved it when you say
> > something like the TN is 20 and the character gets a success at 32
> > (after rolling TONS of dice). The look on the player's face (as well as
> > other gamers) is part of the fun.
>
> Unfortunately, really high rolls usually happen when the TN is 2 or 4 or
> so, not when it's very high already :)

Perhaps my group is the only one then, that pissed their pants at TN
higher 10 or higher?

Even when I power gamed the crap out of my characters 10 or higher was
a hold your breath moment, as I might get 1 success, and sometimes as
many as 4 with my really powerful characters (powerful meaning over
300 karma on a 130 point system with virtually unlimited funds).

Granted my GM pretended to control us by not allowing a lot of
technology, but we were still f'ing tanks.

Either way, I have only seen it once in over 4 years of gaming/running
SR. Ironically it didn't even matter the player just kept rolling to
see what would happen.
Message no. 31
From: scott@**********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:04:23 +0200
On Apr 7, 2005, at 06:32, Failhelm wrote:

> On Apr 6, 2005 10:04 AM, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
>> According to Scott Harrison, on 06-04-2005 12:37 the word on the
>> street
>> was...
>>
>>> Yes, this should be interesting. I really loved it when you say
>>> something like the TN is 20 and the character gets a success at 32
>>> (after rolling TONS of dice). The look on the player's face (as
>>> well as
>>> other gamers) is part of the fun.
>>
>> Unfortunately, really high rolls usually happen when the TN is 2 or 4
>> or
>> so, not when it's very high already :)
>
> Perhaps my group is the only one then, that pissed their pants at TN
> higher 10 or higher?
>
> Even when I power gamed the crap out of my characters 10 or higher was
> a hold your breath moment, as I might get 1 success, and sometimes as
> many as 4 with my really powerful characters (powerful meaning over
> 300 karma on a 130 point system with virtually unlimited funds).
>
> Granted my GM pretended to control us by not allowing a lot of
> technology, but we were still f'ing tanks.
>
> Either way, I have only seen it once in over 4 years of gaming/running
> SR. Ironically it didn't even matter the player just kept rolling to
> see what would happen.

Ahh, you don't have an Orc in your group that regularly rolls more
than 15 dice for either Pistols or Body. And has tons of karma to use
for those rerolls. The team he is in has 51 karma pool as they have
been gaming together for more than 10 years now. These characters are
rather powerful -- about 300 karma each. I use my dice program and get
proper bell curve results. However, when the player picks up a large
handful of dice TNs of 10 are not that hard it seems (remember 1
success with 15 dice is like 72%).

--
·𐑕𐑒𐑪𐑑
·𐑣𐑺𐑦𐑕𐑩𐑯 Scott
Harrison PGP Key ID: 0x0f0b5b86
Message no. 32
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:22:52 +0200
According to Ice Heart, on 06-04-2005 20:46 the word on the street was...

> Besides, after playing in one of my games even
> one session, people tend to go for broader skillsets. Some sort of
> unarmed combat skill, stealth, and athletics all get at least a 3 or
> 4... no matter what the character.

My players do the same, but they also tend to take a number of skills at
higher levels, and then not have any points left over for much more than
these essentials.

--
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
Message no. 33
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:35:05 +0200
According to Arclight, on 06-04-2005 21:47 the word on the street was...

> Yep. Characters who can nothing but fight and sneak. Thank god that they
> are also fast enough to catch the bus to the meet with J ^^

I'm further blessed with at least one player who does stuff like buy a
pistol from another PC when she needs one, because "I'm a magician, why
would I need a gun?" (But for some as-yet unexplained reason she did put
5 points into Pistols when making the character...)

--
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
Message no. 34
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:39:03 +0200
According to Scott Harrison, on 07-04-2005 11:04 the word on the street
was...

> Ahh, you don't have an Orc in your group that regularly rolls more
> than 15 dice for either Pistols or Body.

Can't say I have, but I do have a player with an elf with Charisma 14 or
so, and an almost-matching level in most social skills...

--
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
Message no. 35
From: The_Sarge@***.de (MatthÀus_Cebulla)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:30:50 +0200
> Translation for Mr. Penta:
>
> > Nicht dass es notwendig wäre, Daten noch
> > abzuspeichern, weil sie nämlich über die allgegenwärtige Matrix
> > jederzeit abgerufen werden können"
>
> "Not that it still would be necessary to save data, 'cause it will
> always be available through the omnipresent Matrix."
>
> HTH,
> Matthäus

(I just wanted to correct that stupid, evil, typo. *ashamed*)
Message no. 36
From: arclight@*********.de (Arclight)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:47:19 +0200
At 11:36 07.04.2005, Gurth wrote:

>According to Arclight, on 06-04-2005 22:10 the word on the street was...
>
>>Nicht dass es notwendig wäre, Daten noch
>>abzuspeichern, weil sie nämlich über die allgegenwärtige Matrix
jederzeit
>>abgerufen werden können"
>
>LOL! I guess that means deckers (hackers, whatever) are definitely out of
>a job ;)

Just remember what I told you via private mail ^^ And again - I'm pretty
much interested in the in-game explanation how that is supposed to work...


--
Arclight

Quitters never win, winners never quit,
but those who never quit and never win are idiots
Message no. 37
From: ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:52:41 +0100
In article <4254FEC9.5020302@******.nl>, Gurth <gurth@******.nl> writes
>I'm further blessed with at least one player who does stuff like buy a
>pistol from another PC when she needs one, because "I'm a magician, why
>would I need a gun?"

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...

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 38
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:13:59 +0200
According to Paul J. Adam, on 07-04-2005 17:52 the word on the street was...

> 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...

Very true, but in my case this magician was usually told by the other
players to carry a gun just in case she started suffering from drain
(which was fairly often). It helps to have a loaded weapon for those
situations.

--
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
Message no. 39
From: anders@**********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:23:16 -0700
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:19:17 +0200
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> According to John C. Penta, on 07-04-2005 15:23 the word on the street
> was...
>
> >>LOL! I guess that means deckers (hackers, whatever) are definitely out of
> a job ;)
> >
> > Translate, please?
>
> See Matthäus' post. If the Matrix is omnipresent and all data can be
> retrieved from it anywhere and anytime, who needs deckers? :)
>
Because only a decker could find the information in a reasonable amount of
time and prise it out from it's security wrappings. Especially if it's
distributed in pockets around the globe.
--Anders

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SR4 comments (Was: SR4 will time-traveling immortal, 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!