Message no. 1

From:	"Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject:	Re: Strong/Weak characters (was Re: Why is everyone so happy wit
Date:	Thu, 18 Dec 1997 08:34:46 +0100

> A weak character doesn't nessesarily mean the role-player is good.. but if
> they role-play a weak character well, then yes, they are good.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear... what I wanted to express was that
good or bad roleplaying has nothing got to do with the relative
strengh of the character... he may be weak, yes, but he may as well
be strong. Maybe I should have said it the other way round: NOT
everybody with a strong character is a bad roleplayer, since this was
what Mr. bulletshower seemed to imply...

> Why? Not all characters are born to 'run the shadows', nor do all of them
> want to. Some are caught up in circumstances they don't really understand
> at first (Sam Verner..), others aren't really competent, but want the
> thrill, etc.

I get the point- I never created characters from that point of view,
I always tried to make shadowrunners that were competent at least in
one way... (ie. computer, mechanic, doctor, rigger,...)

> And if they have little money? They can't really lose essence without
> implanting cyber, which costs money..

Hm... true again, if you play that way... I as a gamemaster reward my
players with either money or karma if they played nicely... Its only
fair...
So they got to have something to spend sooner or later.

> The little bar of stats has Nothing to do with a good and bad character,
> and I will argue this until I am blue in my face. If the character is
> matched correctly with the level of opposition, everything is usually just
> fine.
>
> -Adam J

I agree. The only statement that bugs me is that strong characters
are made by bad roleplayers.

ss