Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott W)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Sat Feb 24 10:40:01 2001
--- Lee Decker <leedecker@******.com> wrote:

> Count me in that camp as well. I haven't played much since 3rd ed
hit the streets. I wasn't happy with the direction it was taking then
and in general I haven't seen things improve. It lost alot of its
uniqueness around that time.

That's too bad... although you're lucky, I guess, that you still
enjoy 2nd Ed. and so can enjoy playing SR at all.
Me, I'm thoroughly impressed by 3rd Ed. I like the rules changes
(barring the new Initiative rule which I'm undecided on and the
omission of any Critters from the main book which really chafes) and
I like the storylines. One of the great things about SR that lots of
people take advantage of is that you can tailor the universe to your
tastes. If you didn't like the whole Arcology thing, change it to
suit your campaign.
I'm not sure about the emphasis on tech that people talk about.
Yes, the rules books we've seen (MitS excepted) focus on tech... M&M,
CC, Matrix, R3. But so did the Street Sam book, so did STech, so did
CyberTech and FoF. Magic books have always been in the minority (it
makes sense to me, magicians are in the minority :) And as for
non-rule books, we've already gotten Brainscan, a huge adventure set
that closes a chapter a lot of people didn't like, CorpPun; two of
the adventures in there have magic as a focus, and Target: Matrix,
which I haven't seen, but I bet doesn't focus on magic by necessity
(it's the Matrix). And now we've got two new books slated for 'soon'
by Wizkids, Year of the Comet and T: Awakened Lands. Try telling me
they're not going to be magic-heavy :)
Also, I can't see any reason to say that 3rd Ed. killed the
possibility of plotlines involving Horrors and IEs. Maybe there
won't be any more _official_ plotlines, but nobody's stopping you
from creating your own world-threatening (or individual-threatening)
storylines. Everbody always says they hate the published
adventures... you'd think making up your own stuff wouldn't be a
problem :) I know Rat, at least, writes excellent fiction that's way
out of whack with what the SR rules say. She's got non-canonical
Horrors bothering non-canonical Great Dragons and it's great! That's
just one example.
So if you don't like it, accomodate. At least you'll still be able
to enjoy the game :)

====-Boondocker (whose views are his own, and not necessarily the views
of anyone else on the planet.... there's absolutely no intention to
offend here!)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (MC23)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Sat Feb 24 11:00:02 2001
Once upon a time, Scott W wrote;

> That's too bad... although you're lucky, I guess, that you still
>enjoy 2nd Ed. and so can enjoy playing SR at all.

You missed the point. It's not the rules, it's the focus of the
background direction.

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

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. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Michael Yacht)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Sat Feb 24 11:55:01 2001
> > That's too bad... although you're lucky, I guess, that you still
> >enjoy 2nd Ed. and so can enjoy playing SR at all.
>
> You missed the point. It's not the rules, it's the focus of the
> background direction.

I believe you missed the point, MC. Scott was merely pointing out that you
don't have to be a slave to the background material. The background
material shows you the world evolving. Look at our modern world today.
There has been lots of talk about the new space station, evolving economic
models, bringing eastern Europe more fully into the global society,
terrorism, and the like. All of that is happening right now, in our real
lives. It is the focus of the world and the media. Does that mean any of
it matters one whit to a gang member living in Compton?

You have to keep things in perspective. Shadowrun used to be exclusively
street. The problem is that characters outgrow the street fast if they have
any modicum of success. FASA has given a fleshed out complete world to play
in. The new source material represents the lack of material they neglected
to give for years. This started with things as simple as Corporate
Shadowfiles.

Now, if you're complaining that the published adventures aren't fitting into
your desired worldview niche, I can't disagree with that, that is a
stylistic choice. I'm running a KE SIU team, and NOTHING out there fits my
game, so I empathize.

Shadowrun is as gritty or high-level as you, the GM, let it be. It is your
game. SR is just a rules-set with an optional bevy of background info.
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott W)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Sat Feb 24 16:25:01 2001
> Not to say the 3rd edition rules are bad. But the setting has lost
touch with the streets (Optional campaigns for gangers doesn't cut
it).

I'm not sure what you mean here, MC23. Maybe you could give me
some examples. What does 'the street' mean for runners, anyway?

> Also there seems to be a stronger push for noble Idealist natures
or runners, which lacks the gray moral ambiguity of a mature game it
had. That is a shame as its easy enough for individual games to
find their own moral playground in this game.

Gotta disagree here. You can give me examples of this too if you
want (because I can't really think of anything in SR that's been
pushing me to play an idealistic character), but shadowrunners are
criminals. The whole game is geared towards being criminals. That
by itself is pretty morally bankrupt, but then there's plenty of
possibility to go further one way or another. I'm in a couple PBEMs
now; in one we play the 'bad guys,' corporate goons sent in to do the
dirty work, in another we're playing runners sent after a kidnapped
girl. Plenty of difference between the two, but the rules and game
world stay the same. It's all how you decide to do it, how you
decide to play the game. I can't agree that SR is limiting my
options by pursuing its current direction. I don't think it limited
me by going in the Horrors/Lots O' Magic direction either.

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Wavy Davy)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Mon Feb 26 08:55:02 2001
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, Scott W wrote:

> > Also there seems to be a stronger push for noble Idealist natures
> >or runners, which lacks the gray moral ambiguity of a mature game it
> >had. That is a shame as its easy enough for individual games to
> >find their own moral playground in this game.
>
> Gotta disagree here. You can give me examples of this too if you
> want (because I can't really think of anything in SR that's been
> pushing me to play an idealistic character), but shadowrunners are
> criminals. The whole game is geared towards being criminals. That
> by itself is pretty morally bankrupt,

I guess that depends on whether the law is morally justified or not :)
I've always had the impression that mainstream SR society was largley
decadent and corrupt, or at least ignorant. Which implies that
shadowrunners could be 'rebels', rejecting societies amoral,
hypocritcal standards, and doing what they must.

> but then there's plenty of
> possibility to go further one way or another.

Of course, they could just be out there for the money, booze and sex.
Either way, there is room for any kind of character - the SR world
gives scope for both extremes.

Basically, I agree. FASA have left things very free and open, IMHO.
Pick and mix.

--
Wavy Davy (who shares wins)
...I think there probably should be a rule that if you're talking about how
many loaves of bread a bullet will go through, it's understood that you mean
lengthwise loaves. Otherwise, it makes no sense.
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (abortion_engine)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Thu Mar 1 21:45:01 2001
From: "MC23" <mc23@**********.com>
> Once upon a time, Scott W wrote;
> > That's too bad... although you're lucky, I guess, that you still
> >enjoy 2nd Ed. and so can enjoy playing SR at all.
>
> You missed the point. It's not the rules, it's the focus of the
> background direction.

Precisely; what good are rules, whether good ones or bad, if the storyline,
the metaplot, that backs up the rules isn't enjoyable?

And yes, I know we've all heard it before:

> "So write your own metaplot."
"Sorry, but that's what I pay FASA for."
> "Then don't pay them. Boycott them; losing your $15 will make them
reconsider."
"Yeah, right. Ooh. $15."
> "Or try writing some material yourself."
"Yeah, sure, because I have plenty of time to do that; if I was going to
write up a bunch of material, what the devil did I need FASA for in the
first place?"
> "Hey, if you haven't written anything for FASA, no one cares what you
think anyway."

Okay, okay, so I'm [mostly] tongue-in-cheek. But you get the point. It all
boils down to: hey, whatever you like is whatever you like. Enjoy your
opinion; FASA's closed anyway.
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (MC23)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Thu Mar 1 23:00:01 2001
Once upon a time, abortion_engine wrote;

>Precisely; what good are rules, whether good ones or bad, if the storyline,
>the metaplot, that backs up the rules isn't enjoyable?

Great, we agreed on something.

"I have a very bad feeling about this."

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

"Someone set us up
the bomb."
-Zero Wing

I am MC23
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Jason Mulligan)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Fri Mar 2 00:20:00 2001
On 2/26/01 at 1:52 PM Wavy Davy wrote:

> Basically, I agree. FASA have left things very free and open, IMHO.
> Pick and mix.

I guess. It all depends on how much work you're willing to put in. But if you're the type
of person who
doesnt have much more time than is neccesary to prepare the publihsed adventures it's very
difficult.

Plus, dumping some metaplot details are more problematic than others. Like say, a GM
decided the
whole Dunkelzahn being killed thing didnt happen in his game. Now trying to deal with that
would be
quite a pain, and quite a bit of work.

In my case, I didnt like the whole Renraku:Arcology Shutdown / Otaku thing (from what I've
read - I dont
actually own shutdown, just subsequent material). So, I have two options
either filter out that stuff or set my game in earlier time periods. And I think I might
take that later
route (and set it in 2050).

Reminds me when I was using Forgotten Realms...I waited for ages to see a sourcebook on a
particular
region (Zhentil Keep) and when it does finally appear its part of the big metaplot thing
wheer Zhentil
Keep is essentially razed. Not terribly useful if you wanted to ignore that particualr
event, but wanted
detail on the location.
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Stefan G)
Subject: The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR)
Date: Fri Mar 2 07:20:01 2001
I have liked moreover the Idea of whatsthatthingycalled
Hárnworld (to set a world, at a given point in time, provide whys-what info,
but never exeed that point in time.) REally Useful.
StG
>>>>
In my case, I didnt like the whole Renraku:Arcology Shutdown / Otaku thing
(from what I've read - I dont
actually own shutdown, just subsequent material). So, I have two options
either filter out that stuff or set my game in earlier time periods. And I
think I might take that later
route (and set it in 2050).

Reminds me when I was using Forgotten Realms...I waited for ages to see a
sourcebook on a particular
region (Zhentil Keep) and when it does finally appear its part of the big
metaplot thing wheer Zhentil
Keep is essentially razed. Not terribly useful if you wanted to ignore that
particualr event, but wanted
detail on the location.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about The ol' 3rd Ed. is bad/good debate (was: Returning to SR), 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!