Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: xanth@****.uky.edu (Terry Amburgey)
Subject: Which books count for by-the-book
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 09:30:01 -0500 (EST)
Sascha wrote:
[snip]
>Define: RULE: Something that is written down in a Sourcebook or rulebook
> published by FASA with the inted to use it in the SR-universe.
> No novels, no ED-stuff, no KaGe/Shadowland stuff, just the SR
> Rule- and Sourcebooks.

A question for by-the-book players & gm's [I know there are at least 2 of
you out there]. Despite what I consider some ominous trends, ED is a
separate game so IMO it's out as a source of rules for shadowrun.
Novels-as-rulebooks is a thread that has been vigorously discussed recently.
Because authors have a 'license' to bend/break the rules of the system in
pursuit of good fiction, novels are out as rule books, IMO.

What about KaGe [defunct] and Shadowland [new]? KaGe was sanctioned by FASA
if not published by them, it seem like most of my source books had a promo
for KaGe in the back. On the other hand, I have no idea what sort of freedom
contributors have to redefine or even ignore the published rules. What do
you think?

Along the same lines, what about adventure modules? They're FASA products.
On the other hand, there seem to be some big deviations from published
rules. For example the entire what-you-think-is-what-you-get-to-do school of
thought om magic is [apparently] based on part of 1 adventure module. What
do you think?
Terry

p.s. house-rulers and those fond of 'variants' are free to comment, but your
opinions will be discounted appropriately :)

p.p.s. Andrew, you are an active contributor to Shadowland. How much leeway
are you given for new equipment et cetera [fiction is a different story har
har]?

Terry L. Amburgey Office: 606-257-7726
Associate Professor Home: 606-224-0636
College of Business & Economics Fax: 606-257-3577
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40506
Message no. 2
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Which books count for by-the-book
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 11:52:12 +0100
Terry Amburgey said on 31 Oct 95...

> What about KaGe [defunct] and Shadowland [new]? KaGe was sanctioned by
> FASA if not published by them, it seem like most of my source books had
> a promo for KaGe in the back. On the other hand, I have no idea what
> sort of freedom contributors have to redefine or even ignore the
> published rules. What do you think?

>From what Andrew Ragland told me, it seems FASA looks over each piece
submitted and says whether it's suitable or not, and if suitable, what
needs to be changed to fit it into their view of the game... If this is
the case, I would say that makes things published in KaGe and Shadowland
official material.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Vrolijk lachend naar de kloten gaan
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U 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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 3
From: Brian McCallister <mccllstr@*****.bucknell.edu>
Subject: Re: Which books count for by-the-book
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:46:06 -0500 (EST)
> >From what Andrew Ragland told me, it seems FASA looks over each piece
> submitted and says whether it's suitable or not, and if suitable, what
> needs to be changed to fit it into their view of the game... If this is

I know that this is definately the case for the Earthdawn Journal, it
took FASA a good 5 months to decide whether an article I wrote was okay
or not :-) Kevin (editor of EDJ and Shadowland) fowarded the article to
em to make sure it fit into their vision. As such it is officially valid :-)

-Brian McCallister...
Message no. 4
From: Sascha Pabst <Sascha.Pabst@****.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de>
Subject: Re: Which books count for by-the-book
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 18:06:15 +0100 (MET)
Terry wrote:
> Sascha wrote:
> [snip]
> >Define: RULE: Something that is written down in a Sourcebook or rulebook
> > published by FASA with the inted to use it in the SR-universe.
> > No novels, no ED-stuff, no KaGe/Shadowland stuff, just the SR
> > Rule- and Sourcebooks.
>
> A question for by-the-book players & gm's [I know there are at least 2 of
> you out there]. Despite what I consider some ominous trends, ED is a
> separate game so IMO it's out as a source of rules for shadowrun.
> Novels-as-rulebooks is a thread that has been vigorously discussed recently.
> Because authors have a 'license' to bend/break the rules of the system in
> pursuit of good fiction, novels are out as rule books, IMO.
I know, I just wanted to make sure, SURE, _SURE_ !!! :-)

> What about KaGe [defunct] and Shadowland [new]? KaGe was sanctioned by FASA
> if not published by them, it seem like most of my source books had a promo
> for KaGe in the back. On the other hand, I have no idea what sort of freedom
> contributors have to redefine or even ignore the published rules. What do
> you think?
I took them out of the "Rules" section because it's real hard (to say the
least) to get the 'zines over here (Germany, that is, don't know about other
European Countries). I spent 40 US$ trying to get KaGe... without success :-(

> Along the same lines, what about adventure modules? They're FASA products.
> On the other hand, there seem to be some big deviations from published
> rules. For example the entire what-you-think-is-what-you-get-to-do school of
> thought om magic is [apparently] based on part of 1 adventure module. What
> do you think?
Hm. If sourcebooks are valid, so are the NAN1 & 2 Sourcebooks. Both contain
an adventure. If these are valid, I think the rest of the modules is, too.

> p.s. house-rulers and those fond of 'variants' are free to comment, but your
> opinions will be discounted appropriately :)
:-)

Sascha
--
+---___---------+-----------------------------------------+------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst | The one does not |
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de |learn from history|
| \___ __/ | or | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| Westerstr. 20 / 26121 Oldenburg | through it again.|
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| *Wearing hats is just a way of live* | |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------+------------------+
Message no. 5
From: "Sgt. Pepper" <GRBENNET@*****.CIS.ECU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Which books count for by-the-book
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 95 14:09:02 EST
On Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:06:35 -0500 Sascha Pabst said:

>Hm. If sourcebooks are valid, so are the NAN1 & 2 Sourcebooks. Both contain
>an adventure. If these are valid, I think the rest of the modules is, too.
>
Except that the adventure is obviously separated from the rules part. I see it
as more they didnt quite have the material for a whole book so they threw in
the adventure type thing. I dont think adventures should be considered as
by-the-book rules, Imago is a good example of why not. (Thats the one about
the elf digitized his personality, so as to cheat death so to speak)

Sgt. Pepper

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Which books count for by-the-book, 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!