Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "P. Steele" <P.C.Steele@*********.AC.UK>
Subject: Srun II
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 21:41:02 BST
Hi all you sprawl junkies out there.

Just wrestled with the listserver for the last 20 mins and eventually managed
to get subscribed (You can tell I don't play a decker).

So a question, I have no idea if it's been asked before, so I'm sorry if I'm
being a bore.

When does Srun II hit the streets in the UK ?

Well So ka for now, hope to hear real soon.
Message no. 2
From: MacGyver <macgyver@***.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Subject: Srun II
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 92 16:44:31 -0400
> When does Srun II hit the streets in the UK ?

in about a month is my guess...
Message no. 3
From: Seth Scott <seth@***.UOREGON.EDU>
Subject: SRUN II
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 15:20:45 -0700
>>>>>[Hoi, all. Quick question: judgement call, actually--
how're
people agreeing on the concept of making metahuman priority C instead of A?
I've been stewing over this one, myself; I'm inclined to think C, since my
campaigns have been rather homogenous.]<<<<<
----- Woodsy (10-7-92/23:17)
Message no. 4
From: Robert Hayden <rahayden@*****.WEEG.UIOWA.EDU>
Subject: Re: SRUN II
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 01:28:48 CET
On Wed, 7 Oct 1992, Seth Scott wrote:

>
>
> >>>>>[Hoi, all. Quick question: judgement call, actually--
how're
> people agreeing on the concept of making metahuman priority C instead of A?
> I've been stewing over this one, myself; I'm inclined to think C, since my
> campaigns have been rather homogenous.]<<<<<
> ----- Woodsy (10-7-92/23:17)
>

Well, i don't have SRII in front of me, but in SR1 we all pretty much
agreed on a system of the following for races:

0 Human
1 Elf
2 Dwarf
3 Orc
4 Troll

It seemed to work in that characters created were in the same ration as
the population ratios os seatle (or roughly close).

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SRUN II, 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!