Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:33:25 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12:22 PM 4/28/98 +0100, Gurth wrote:
>At any rate, the encephalon isn't quite as worked-out as it should
be,
>IMHO. There are lots of things you could do with what's basically a
CPU
>and some associated chips inside your head, but Shadowtech leaves
most of
>them up to the imagination of the players instead of giving some
>guidelines for it :(

One good source for ideas on what to do with your enecephalon is the
MIT Media Lab's Wearable Computing Homepage:


http://lcs.www.media.mit.edu/projects/wearables/

The articles can get a bit technical in places, but it's a very good
page for sparking the imagination. (after all, if this is what they're
doing with portable 486 based linux boxes, imagine what 205X-6X tech
must be like)

Now, much of the stuff on the wearable computer page could also apply
to SR's portable computers, however it wouldn't be nearly as seemless
to integrate into daily lifestyle as an enecephelon would be.

In particular, one application of wearable computers, that of being a
'rememberance agent' I would say would be partly responsible for the
Intelegence bonuses that the encephelon provides.

Of course, to really use some of the cool computer tricks on MIT's
page, the encephelon would have to be somewhat integrated into the
user's senses of sight and hearing, sampling and filtering input from
the outside world, but that would also explain why more powerful
encephelons take more essence: they have more invasive, higher
bandwidth connections to the visual and audio cortexes.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUXons2C0fERRVM5AQFsvQP/WoDCWAapuKrF6UmjTFT3Ygl6DOcXzB0j
nG/JHBjjCKYhU7We0shEmMXN9orN6aNrBKDBm3ZvDMyFLp5D6XtvqSRhJZsSUSA5
KqbDNa8UDxVO970XrtcgxwKm/VX4n8ONoDuEBsrmBgxZrG7T8XeaW7zzFdQ+tQ7/
fbsSLivwtaE=
=RfzD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 2
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:39:01 -0500
> Of course, to really use some of the cool computer tricks on MIT's
> page, the encephelon would have to be somewhat integrated into the
> user's senses of sight and hearing, sampling and filtering input from
> the outside world, but that would also explain why more powerful
> encephelons take more essence: they have more invasive, higher
> bandwidth connections to the visual and audio cortexes.
>
This sounds more like a tactical computer (tied into all your senses), then
an encephalon. Considering all the house rules for both these devices, I
do hope FASA clarifys them in the SR3.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Uh-Oh Toto, it doesn't look like we're gods anymore."
Message no. 3
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 16:47:08 +0100
And verily, did Paul Gettle hastily scribble thusly...
|Of course, to really use some of the cool computer tricks on MIT's
|page, the encephelon would have to be somewhat integrated into the
|user's senses of sight and hearing, sampling and filtering input from
|the outside world, but that would also explain why more powerful
|encephelons take more essence: they have more invasive, higher
|bandwidth connections to the visual and audio cortexes.

Why tap directly into the visual cortex when you can get all the info direct
from the cybereye? (Or build in a mike in the ear for that. No dangerous
essence draining brain surgery there.... Tapping into the cybereye should
only cost about .1 essence, for the extra wiring, similar for the mike.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 4
From: Katt Freyson <katt@******.NET>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 12:30:10 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Spike
Sent: April 28, 1998 11:47 AM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and

Why tap directly into the visual cortex when you can get all the info direct
from the cybereye? (Or build in a mike in the ear for that. No dangerous
essence draining brain surgery there.... Tapping into the cybereye should
only cost about .1 essence, for the extra wiring, similar for the mike.

[My response]

Except that here you make the totally unfounded assumption that all would
have cybernetic eyes. In order to save on essence draining, you would not
get a cybernetic eye, ergo you'd have to tap into the visual cortex. For
those who have a cybernetic eye, your point is valid.

Katt Freyson
ICQ UIN 3337155
Montreal, Canada
http://www.dsuper.net/~katt
Message no. 5
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 14:22:23 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 10:39 AM 4/28/98 -0500, Lehlan Decker wrote:
<<sniped my own stuff about encephalons having input from the user's
senses>>

>This sounds more like a tactical computer (tied into all your
senses), then
>an encephalon. Considering all the house rules for both these
devices, I
>do hope FASA clarifys them in the SR3.

A few weeks back there was a big discussion about "Is Intelegence
really IQ or is it Perception". I'm not looking to start that topic up
again, but one particular point that was raised is that the
Intelegence stat is the one most GMs call for for perception tests.

I figure that since an encephalon boosts the Intelegence stat, it must
have some hand in making the user more perceptive, by filtering and
augmenting the information coming down the user's sensory pipeline.

I figure a TacComp would have to similarly be wired into its user's
senses, but to a much greater extent. It would also have to be wired
into more obscure senses such as balance/kinesthetic/body position
sense (A Tactical Computer would have to know its user's orientation
to be able to properly track targets), where as an encephalon would
probably only plug into sight and hearing.

This would tend to explain why a Level 1 TacComp takes twice as much
essence as a Level 4 Encephalon. Tactical Computers require a much
higher bandwidth of sensory input than even the most elaborate
encephalons, and so they are wired much more extensively into the
user's sensory nerves.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUYeVM2C0fERRVM5AQFCGQP/RtuoZV+0jZcThYcC0Cldm6orTmZG0SqL
VRo4rp8HkH2ChCUMY/vYczzWtlRDkEfIbK/OBY3x6kAXmG7+UW+FI3nKmQT+T5v+
ocoxi9ijYzeYR7neYE0kHdwX5oWB6NhGjQjzoOT+8x94RpAzO3//sigUDGrv0F2R
DZ2uoxMUlug=
=uutV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 6
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:22:56 -0500
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> At 10:39 AM 4/28/98 -0500, Lehlan Decker wrote:
> <<sniped my own stuff about encephalons having input from the user's
> senses>>
>
> >This sounds more like a tactical computer (tied into all your
> senses), then
> >an encephalon. Considering all the house rules for both these
> devices, I
> >do hope FASA clarifys them in the SR3.
>
> A few weeks back there was a big discussion about "Is Intelegence
> really IQ or is it Perception". I'm not looking to start that topic up
> again, but one particular point that was raised is that the
> Intelegence stat is the one most GMs call for for perception tests.
>
This is very true and goes along with the whole abstract gaming
system I suppose.

<SNIP Part of argument>

> I figure a TacComp would have to similarly be wired into its user's
> senses, but to a much greater extent. It would also have to be wired
> into more obscure senses such as balance/kinesthetic/body position
> sense (A Tactical Computer would have to know its user's orientation
> to be able to properly track targets), where as an encephalon would
> probably only plug into sight and hearing.
>
> This would tend to explain why a Level 1 TacComp takes twice as much
> essence as a Level 4 Encephalon. Tactical Computers require a much
> higher bandwidth of sensory input than even the most elaborate
> encephalons, and so they are wired much more extensively into the
> user's sensory nerves.
>
Excellent argument, and this is how I sorta see them as well.
Unfortunately FASA gave both an "ambigous" sort of description (IMHO),
more useful for writing novels, or for NPCs, then for PC's.
An encephalon would be able to let you juggle, while chewing gum,
and tap dancing (if you were agile enough). A Tcomputer, would
get track the balls path through the orientation system, distance
via the cybereyes, and aim your arm via the smartlink. :)
I actually had an ex-merc once with low level T-computer, tactics skill,
and encephalon. (Along with a bunch of other cryto headgear etc).
No matter how you interpret the rules, he was fast as hell.
(He was also worth a small fortune but hey he was an NPC :))

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Uh-Oh Toto, it doesn't look like we're gods anymore."
Message no. 7
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 15:30:28 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 04:47 PM 4/28/98 +0100, Spike wrote:
>Why tap directly into the visual cortex when you can get all the info
direct
>from the cybereye? (Or build in a mike in the ear for that. No
dangerous
>essence draining brain surgery there.... Tapping into the cybereye
should
>only cost about .1 essence, for the extra wiring, similar for the
mike.

And if the user doesn't have cybereyes?

I could see giving a small discount to someone who has both an
encephalon and cybersenses, as a house rule. I don't know if FASA
would ever put it into the real rules. I still remember the chaos over
the essence cost for cyberguns ("Merry Christmas").

Not all of the essence cost of an encephalon is from the sensory
wiring though. Another large portion of it would be dedicated to
wiring the box into the 'Thought Process' areas of the brain, allowing
the user to seemlessly integrate instantanious, computer-fed data into
their own methods of thinking.

Given that, prehaps a simple .05 discount to a Level 1-2 encephelon if
you have cybereyes or cyberears installed, and a .1 discount if you
have both. For Level 3-4, a .1 discount for either or, and a .2
discount for both?

In previous posts on this topic, I've drawn a paralell between the
essence costs of Encephalons and Tactical Computers, and the amount of
sensory bandwidth they'd require. If you give an essence discount to
one for having a direct cybersense feed, then the other should get one
too. However, TacComps already get a more powerful bonus for being
wired into cybersenses, in that the effective level of the TacComp
increases.

I suppose the two pieces of ware are fundamentally different enough to
warant different rules in this case. A TacComp adds dice to skill
tests and boosts inititave results, and is probably tied into a lot
more than just sensory nerves. A flat .1 or .2 discount per
cybersense, prehaps?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUYuNs2C0fERRVM5AQEQIQP+KZgaxOy+jegWOf07H/f6omHEKsbKcSZj
Be12mp9J4HP9P772vDg/OzqrCWXKwzzYq7b+SupIjmXEO5YJ05RJ/YcyBzPTjLs1
NASx728W6oGF+7MGqskJDVWWHTQjNYliJdMc4eJuCeeo8wvRTFar4yKt6xgJWT3v
oGpcEk53Sj8=
=DJMN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 8
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 22:53:31 +0100
And verily, did Katt Freyson hastily scribble thusly...
|[My response]
|
| Except that here you make the totally unfounded assumption that all would
|have cybernetic eyes. In order to save on essence draining, you would not
|get a cybernetic eye, ergo you'd have to tap into the visual cortex. For
|those who have a cybernetic eye, your point is valid.

Possibly, but I think it might be simpler to ger the info from the
retina/optic nerve anyway.

If they can plug in a cybereye, then they already know about the interfacing
techniques for the optic nerve....

Alternatively, have two flavours, one costing X essence, and one costing a
lot less.

If you think about it, a lot of people would weigh up the costs and realise
that getting a cybereye would actually be cheaper than the other
alternative...

(In fact, you could even have the extra wiring as part of the "Freebie"
package that can go with cybereyes....)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 9
From: Katt Freyson <katt@******.NET>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 11:07:12 -0400
-----Original Message-----
From: Spike
Sent: April 28, 1998 5:54 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and

[Spike]
Possibly, but I think it might be simpler to ger the info from the
retina/optic nerve anyway.

[My response]
Perhaps this is true in Shadowrun rules, but in real life I'd say no.
Because the signals from the optic nerves are raw, while in the visual
cortex it's been converted into a visual image. Ergo, lets make use of the
brain's natural ability to convert the signals from the eyes.

However, once again, if one already has a cyber-eye, then yes, you might
as well get the input from the eye.

[Spike]
If you think about it, a lot of people would weigh up the costs and realise
that getting a cybereye would actually be cheaper than the other
alternative...

[My response]
While this may be true, we don't have the data to show this yet. How much
essence would it take to put an interface in the visual cortex? Hey, wait,
we do no, deckers have that now. The cyber deck is such an interface, how
much essence does it cost one to be able to use a cyber deck?

Katt Freyson
ICQ UIN 3337155
Montreal, Canada
http://www.dsuper.net/~katt
Message no. 10
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 16:18:32 +0100
And verily, did Katt Freyson hastily scribble thusly...
|[My response]
| While this may be true, we don't have the data to show this yet. How much
|essence would it take to put an interface in the visual cortex? Hey, wait,
|we do no, deckers have that now. The cyber deck is such an interface, how
|much essence does it cost one to be able to use a cyber deck?

None. Just the ability to plug it into a datajack.
But we're talking full headware, which would mean a cranial cyberdeck, and I
can't remember how much that costs.

P.S. Please take Gridsecs advice.... PLEASE?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about What do do with an Encephalon [was: Re: smartgun links and, 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.