Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:05:12 +1000
A captatio benevolentiae first:
I´ve been off for couple weeks, so please pardon me for repeating any
comments that may have been made on this topic before.


Okay, okay.
We´ve been waiting for a real loooong time for the Rigger Black Book
2 to appear. Then, great FASA gave it to us.
Question: What does it have the old RBB does not?
Some more vehicles, some redesigned rules, and -- veeeeery important,
that -- rules for rigging. Gee. I needed them. Really, couldn´t stand
playing SR without 'em.
But we are all educated people, or so they tell us, and so we say,
well, it's a sourcebook, y'know, there's gotta be some stuff in it
that's not *that* interesting for everyone. And we accept it, as
always.

Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every
(not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
Like, six-wheeled autos with steam engines (just for fun), or a blip that =
works on
higher-powered variable-bypass jets? No? Or, is it possible to design
powered roller-skaters? Or ceramic-engine (aka Multifuel) hydrofoils?
Or amphibic vehicles powered by props and/or diesel engines? Or coal?
Or wood? Or is it possible to create muscle-powered urban vehicles?

The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos. Don´t get me wrong:
they have high-quality stuff there; the FASA sourcebooks belong to
the best I know. It´d be naive to believe FASA´s in the business to
*not* make money. But both RBB lack the quality I expect to find (and
have found) in (other) SR sourcebooks.

Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
not.

These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. I´m tr=
uly
impressed.

Any comments?

:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 2
From: William Gallas <wgallas@*****.FR>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:21:16 +0100
>Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
>presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
>classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
>not.

I dont't agree. VR2 gives fine rules which make matrix runs faster than
before. The system is totally changed. Sure, they give program stats that
existed before but sourcebooks are not written for YOU, they are written
for someone who doesn't have the 1st ed book.


Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "You are who you know"
Message no. 3
From: "Blair A. Monroe" <bmonroe@******.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 08:58:00 -0500
At 02:05 PM 12/12/97 +1000, you wrote:
>A captatio benevolentiae first:
>I´ve been off for couple weeks, so please pardon me for repeating any
>comments that may have been made on this topic before.
>
>The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos. Don´t get me wrong:
>they have high-quality stuff there; the FASA sourcebooks belong to
>the best I know. It´d be naive to believe FASA´s in the business to
>*not* make money. But both RBB lack the quality I expect to find (and
>have found) in (other) SR sourcebooks.
>
>Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
>presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
>classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
>not.
>
>These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
>Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
>the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
>virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
>maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. I´m=
truly
>impressed.
>
>Any comments?

IMHO:
If you like the sourcebooks from other games...USE THEM! I admit I do
disagree with you on the quality issue...sure, the books did not have
everything one could possibly want to see in them, but they are still very
useful and well put together books. I do agree that the Cyberpunk2020
netrunning rules and GURPS Vehicles are also very nice resources, and the
ability of a GM to pull from any and all resources he or she has available
to make a kick-ass game is one of the most important characteristics of a
great GM. Personally, I do not actually make much use of the netrunning
rules for Cyberpunk because I do not have any players doing the Decker
thing. As for vehicles, the RBB2 construction rules are quite nice for
quickly building many various mainstream vehicles. If I want more detail,
or want to build something exotic, I'll definitely turn to something like
GURPS Vehicles or vehicle/weapon design book from Traveller:New Era. Those
books were CREATED for their design systems...RBB2 was not.

-- Blair
------
Blair A. Monroe Phone: (850) 644-8114
Web Systems Administrator / Sr. Web Developer Fax: (850) 644-6253
School of Information Studies E-mail:=
bmonroe@******.fsu.edu
Florida State University
101 Louis Shores Bldg.
Tallahassee, FL. 32306 http://www.fsu.edu/~lis
Message no. 4
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:03:28 -0500
BulletShower[SMTP:nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE] wrote:
> A captatio benevolentiae first:
> I´ve been off for couple weeks, so please pardon me for repeating =
any
> comments that may have been made on this topic before.
>
>
> Okay, okay.
> We´ve been waiting for a real loooong time for the Rigger Black Book
> 2 to appear. Then, great FASA gave it to us.
> Question: What does it have the old RBB does not?
> Some more vehicles, some redesigned rules, and -- veeeeery important,
> that -- rules for rigging. Gee. I needed them. Really, couldn´t =
stand
> playing SR without 'em.

If you're not interested in Riggers or Rigging, why on earth did
you buy "Rigger 2"?

> But we are all educated people, or so they tell us, and so we say,
> well, it's a sourcebook, y'know, there's gotta be some stuff in it
> that's not *that* interesting for everyone. And we accept it, as
> always.

There are three kinds of sourcebook. There's the Place book,
which describes a place or a setting for a GM to hold a campaign
or adventure, the Current Events book (like PoaD:DS) which
give information on what's happening in the world and the Archetype
book (like Grimmy, FoF, VR2, and R2). If you're not interested
in a) that place, b) those events or c) that archetype, why buy
that book?

> Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
> design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every

I am. I even wrote a program to do the math for me. :-)

> (not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
> Like, six-wheeled autos with steam engines (just for fun), or a blip =
that
works on
> higher-powered variable-bypass jets? No? Or, is it possible to design
> powered roller-skaters? Or ceramic-engine (aka Multifuel) hydrofoils?
> Or amphibic vehicles powered by props and/or diesel engines? Or coal?
> Or wood? Or is it possible to create muscle-powered urban vehicles?

OK, let's get one thing straight. This is Shadowrun. No self
respecting Rigger would drive a coal-powered car. No self
respecting corp would build one. Thus, no problem. "Hey! But
I wanted to build an AT-AT so I could really kick butt!". Yeah,
right.

Corps will only build what they can sell. FASA only produces
rules for things that are likely to pop up. A coal-powered
vehicle is unlikely, but the *system* is flexible enough that
you could just invent your own powerplant. Did FASA make
rules in VR2 for accessing the Matrix with a typewriter? I don't
think so.

> The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos. Don´t get me =
wrong:
> they have high-quality stuff there; the FASA sourcebooks belong to
> the best I know. It´d be naive to believe FASA´s in the business =
to
> *not* make money. But both RBB lack the quality I expect to find (and
> have found) in (other) SR sourcebooks.

There are several mistakes in various examples, and there are
some unclear points in the vehicle construction rules (which
Jon Szeto has cleared up quite nicely). All in all, I like R2.

> Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
> presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
> classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
> not.

Haven't read VR2.

> These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
> Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
> the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
> virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
> maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. =
I´m truly
> impressed.

But do those vehicles fit in with the SR universe? If not, what's
the point? Sure, Gundam-class mecha are cool toys, but in SR?
'Taint bloody likely. :-)

James Ojaste

<plug mode=on-topic>
You can find The Shop, my vehicle creation program for R2 at:
http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~jojaste/SRII/
</plug>
Message no. 5
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:50:13 -0500
On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 02:05:12PM +1000, BulletShower wrote:
> A captatio benevolentiae first:
> I´ve been off for couple weeks, so please pardon me for repeating any
> comments that may have been made on this topic before.
>
>
> Okay, okay.
> We´ve been waiting for a real loooong time for the Rigger Black Book
> 2 to appear. Then, great FASA gave it to us.
> Question: What does it have the old RBB does not?
> Some more vehicles, some redesigned rules, and -- veeeeery important,
> that -- rules for rigging. Gee. I needed them. Really, couldn´t stand
> playing SR without 'em.
> But we are all educated people, or so they tell us, and so we say,
> well, it's a sourcebook, y'know, there's gotta be some stuff in it
> that's not *that* interesting for everyone. And we accept it, as
> always.
>
> Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
> design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every
> (not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
> Like, six-wheeled autos with steam engines (just for fun), or a blip that works on
> higher-powered variable-bypass jets? No? Or, is it possible to design
> powered roller-skaters? Or ceramic-engine (aka Multifuel) hydrofoils?
> Or amphibic vehicles powered by props and/or diesel engines? Or coal?
> Or wood? Or is it possible to create muscle-powered urban vehicles?
>
> The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos. Don´t get me wrong:
> they have high-quality stuff there; the FASA sourcebooks belong to
> the best I know. It´d be naive to believe FASA´s in the business to
> *not* make money. But both RBB lack the quality I expect to find (and
> have found) in (other) SR sourcebooks.
>
> Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
> presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
> classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
> not.
>
> These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
> Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
> the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
> virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
> maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. I´m truly
> impressed.
>
I don't know if happy is the correct word. It didn't list everything
I wanted, but seemed to be a major improvement over R1.
They also have to keep it vagualy abstract etc. I spoke with FASAMike
at one point, and as usual printing costs, etc limit the size of
the books.
VR2 was similiar, both were rules books. They took something
that wasn't playable (at least not without the GM making up his
own, which is what most of us were doing), and made them at
least workable.
I will admit the editing was lacking particulary in R2.
Anyway just my .02.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Time is the best teacher. Unfortunately it kills all of its students.
Message no. 6
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 08:04:32 -0700
BulletShower wrote:
/
/ Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
/ design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every
/ (not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
/ Like, six-wheeled autos with steam engines (just for fun), or a blip that =
/ works on
/ higher-powered variable-bypass jets? No? Or, is it possible to design
/ powered roller-skaters? Or ceramic-engine (aka Multifuel) hydrofoils?
/ Or amphibic vehicles powered by props and/or diesel engines? Or coal?
/ Or wood? Or is it possible to create muscle-powered urban vehicles?

Here's my feelings on this. The vehicle design rules are for the
players. And they're designed to maintain game balance.

If a player wants to make something out of the ordinary (like a
six-wheeled steam-powered auto) then he should sit down with the GM
and make up the numbers. The GM should make sure that everything is
balanced for *his* campaign.

If a GM needs something that the vehicle design rules can't provide,
then he should toss the design rules and start scribbling down
numbers and a description that matches what he needs.

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 7
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:42:19 +0000
> But we are all educated people, or so they tell us, and so we say,
> well, it's a sourcebook, y'know, there's gotta be some stuff in it
> that's not *that* interesting for everyone. And we accept it, as
> always.

<snip>

> Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
> design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every
> (not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
> Like, six-wheeled autos with steam engines (just for fun), or a blip that works on
> higher-powered variable-bypass jets? No? Or, is it possible to design
> powered roller-skaters? Or ceramic-engine (aka Multifuel) hydrofoils?
> Or amphibic vehicles powered by props and/or diesel engines? Or coal?
> Or wood? Or is it possible to create muscle-powered urban vehicles?

So let me get this straight....you are dis-satisfied with R2 because,
even though it did finally provide rules for riggers, it won't let
you make a six-wheeled auto with steam engine?

Grow up...people on this don't all blindly accept new products.
Typically, we shred them, then state whether it was overall worth it.
For most of us that care about vehicles at all, r2 was worth it.

And if you think everyone loves new sourcebooks, ask MC23 about his
opinion of the Companion.

(He's nomail right now, but he'll still receive personal mail)

-=SwiftOne=-
(who has no need for a steam-powered sixwheeled car, but does have a
need for rigging rules)




>
> The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos. Don't get me wrong:
> they have high-quality stuff there; the FASA sourcebooks belong to
> the best I know. It'd be naive to believe FASA's in the business to
> *not* make money. But both RBB lack the quality I expect to find (and
> have found) in (other) SR sourcebooks.
>
> Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
> presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
> classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
> not.
>
> These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
> Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
> the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you'll find
> virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
> maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. I'm truly
> impressed.
>
> Any comments?
>
> :)
> BulletShower
>
_______________________________________________________________________________________
> For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AMBER, dial
> http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
> OR try
> http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
>
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 8
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 11:50:00 +0100
BulletShower said on 14:05/12 Dec 97...

> Okay, okay.
> We´ve been waiting for a real loooong time for the Rigger Black Book
> 2 to appear. Then, great FASA gave it to us.
> Question: What does it have the old RBB does not?
> Some more vehicles, some redesigned rules, and -- veeeeery important,
> that -- rules for rigging. Gee. I needed them. Really, couldn´t stand
> playing SR without 'em.

Weren't you the diceless-SR fanatic? That does explain some things ;)

> Another question: Are we really, I mean, *really* satisfied with the
> design/construction rules FASA gives us? Can we design really every
> (not necessarily) sensible vehicle we dream of? Without problems?
[snip examples]
> The answer is no. Or, at least, a great many nos.

I have to agree there, the design rules work, in a way, but they are very
inflexible, and not all possible combinations (which would have hidden the=

inflexibility somewhate) can be made -- a good example being the creation
of a gasoline-powered APC. Why isn't there a suitable engine for this?
OTOH, many of the examples you mention just won't be around for the simple=

reason that nobody would bother with them. Steam-powered cars are rather
impractical, not to mention quite unnecessary if you have internal
combustion engines, so nobody will use them -- that's reason enough for
the system not to cater for them, I say.

> Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
> presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
> classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
> not.

The problem with creating systems that allows ou to truly build things
like programs or vehicles from the ground up, with the things _you_
(meaning "you" in a general sense) want from them, is that they get very
complex very fast. I haven't seen GURPS Vehicles (though I might buy it
one day), but I do own 3G3. That one takes some time before you know what
you're doing with it, but once you've got it down, it's pretty fast.
However, SR isn't as detailed or realistic as 3G3, so the two don't mesh
very well, or are even really comparable.

On the whole, I think the design system works if you want nothing too
outlandish. However, like many of SR's rules, it breaks down when you get
to its extremes. This is most likely because the rules were added in after=

the game was designed, rather than that FASA came up with a design
system when they were creating the basics of SR.

BTW, does anyone else think the prices for winches are outrageous? I have
one player who bought a Land Rover 2046 and wanted to put a winch on it,
but when we looked up the price for the highest possible rating it was
15,000Y! I'm thinking of lowering the cost, but I'm not sure what a RL
winch costs.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
My mind is numb but my mouth's okay.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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. 9
From: James Lindsay <jlindsay@******.CA>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 01:38:43 GMT
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997 11:50:00 +0100, Gurth wrote:

> The problem with creating systems that allows ou to truly build things
> like programs or vehicles from the ground up, with the things _you_
> (meaning "you" in a general sense) want from them, is that they get very
> complex very fast. I haven't seen GURPS Vehicles (though I might buy it
> one day), but I do own 3G3. That one takes some time before you know what
> you're doing with it, but once you've got it down, it's pretty fast.
> However, SR isn't as detailed or realistic as 3G3, so the two don't mesh
> very well, or are even really comparable.

In case you're interested, Greg Porter's "Vehicle Design System" (or
"VDS")
is now available in Adobe Acrobat format (only) through the BTRC website.
It is also available from HyperBooks Online" (http://www.hyperbooks.com/).

> On the whole, I think the design system works if you want nothing too
> outlandish. However, like many of SR's rules, it breaks down when you get
> to its extremes. This is most likely because the rules were added in after
> the game was designed, rather than that FASA came up with a design
> system when they were creating the basics of SR.

They also weren't catering to what have become known as "Gearheads" on the
Traveller Mailing List-- with the GDW and IG versions of "Fire, Fusion &
Steel-- Technical Architecture" books.

> BTW, does anyone else think the prices for winches are outrageous? I have
> one player who bought a Land Rover 2046 and wanted to put a winch on it,
> but when we looked up the price for the highest possible rating it was
> 15,000Y! I'm thinking of lowering the cost, but I'm not sure what a RL
> winch costs.

The price is a bit high, but perhaps FASA thought that the highest rated
winch was equivalent to the expensive setup used on many towtrucks?



James W. Lindsay Vancouver, British Columbia
"http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero";

Money talks... it usually says "bend over"...
Message no. 10
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 13:40:20 +0100
James Lindsay said on 1:38/14 Dec 97...

> In case you're interested, Greg Porter's "Vehicle Design System" (or
"VDS")
> is now available in Adobe Acrobat format (only) through the BTRC website.
> It is also available from HyperBooks Online" (http://www.hyperbooks.com/).

Thanks, I'll check that out later this afternoon...

> They also weren't catering to what have become known as "Gearheads" on
> the Traveller Mailing List-- with the GDW and IG versions of "Fire,
> Fusion & Steel-- Technical Architecture" books.

You're right about that, the R2 system works if you just want an everyday
car and don't want to spend ages designing it, or want to add some mods to
an existing vehicle.

BTW, what's the URL for your vehicle shop page? I lost it somewhere and I
need a program like that to update the various vehicles in PW net.books.
I'm sure as hell not going to do that without computer assistance... :)

> > BTW, does anyone else think the prices for winches are outrageous?
>
> The price is a bit high, but perhaps FASA thought that the highest rated
> winch was equivalent to the expensive setup used on many towtrucks?

That's just the biggest possible winch for a Body 4 vehicle. Take an APC
and mount a winch on that, see what it costs. For the APC from FoF it was
something like 2.25 million nuyen...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
My mind is numb but my mouth's okay.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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. 11
From: James Lindsay <jlindsay@******.CA>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 22:44:21 GMT
On Sun, 14 Dec 1997 13:40:20 +0100, Gurth wrote:

> BTW, what's the URL for your vehicle shop page? I lost it somewhere and I
> need a program like that to update the various vehicles in PW net.books.
> I'm sure as hell not going to do that without computer assistance... :)

Err... wrong "James". That would probably be James Ojaste's website.

quote...

<plug mode=on-topic>
You can find The Shop, my vehicle creation program for R2 at:
http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~jojaste/SRII/
</plug>

> > > BTW, does anyone else think the prices for winches are outrageous?
> >
> > The price is a bit high, but perhaps FASA thought that the highest rated
> > winch was equivalent to the expensive setup used on many towtrucks?
>
> That's just the biggest possible winch for a Body 4 vehicle. Take an APC
> and mount a winch on that, see what it costs. For the APC from FoF it was
> something like 2.25 million nuyen...

I guess I gotta really *look* at those rules one of these days :)



James W. Lindsay Vancouver, British Columbia
"http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero";

Money talks... it usually says "bend over"...
Message no. 12
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:43:57 +1000
Hello to everyone who felt inclined to answer me.

On Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:03:28 -0500, "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.=
GC.CA>
wrote:

> If you're not interested in Riggers or Rigging, why on earth did
> you buy "Rigger 2"?

He he he, nice try, James. I *did not* buy this book, a friend of
mine did.

> If you're not interested
> in a) that place, b) those events or c) that archetype, why buy
> that book?

Once again: i didn´t buy it. Hope this has become clear now.
All I wanted to say is that FASA has published books before that were
way better than this VR- or RB thing. Of course, this is MO (there
indeed seem to be people on the list that *have* to read this "IMHO",
or they feel personally attacked).

> I am. I even wrote a program to do the math for me. :-)

This is fine for you. But for this price, I´d expect a little bit
more than just a redesign of old stuff.

> OK, let's get one thing straight. This is Shadowrun. No self
> respecting Rigger would drive a coal-powered car.

Man, you hit a nerve there. Let me get this straight:
you are NOT to judge what a "self-respecting rigger" would drive or
not. Who are you to say what character could/would do what things?
Do you want to create the "typical rigger", the "typical sam", the
"typical decker". Hey! Get a-life! Roleplaying means diversity, not
flat characterization.

> "Hey! But
> I wanted to build an AT-AT so I could really kick butt!". Yeah,
> right.

IMHO it´s a sign of poor discussion skill to use ridiculous examples.
Sorry, boy.

> Corps will only build what they can sell. FASA only produces
> rules for things that are likely to pop up. A coal-powered
> vehicle is unlikely

Riggers are not only people who tune their cars up. Riggers, (IMHO),
are people who sometimes are inclined to build theor own vehicles.
And this is where the FASA rules suck.


>, but the *system* is flexible enough that
> you could just invent your own powerplant.

Really [chuckles]. Without any problems? [chuckles] Show me.

> Did FASA make
> rules in VR2 for accessing the Matrix with a typewriter? I don't
> think so.

A counter-question: *can* you acces the net with a typwriter? NO.
Again, using this kind of ridicule is not a very constructive
criticism, right.

> > These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
> > Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
> > the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
> > virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes and
> > maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. I´=
m truly
> > impressed.
>
> But do those vehicles fit in with the SR universe? If not, what's
> the point? Sure, Gundam-class mecha are cool toys, but in SR?
> 'Taint bloody likely. :-)

James, I *never* saif that I´d like gundam-style in SR.
What I wanted to say is that the Rigger Design rules are poor, not
suitable to everyone´s wishes (unlike, for instance, the GURPS
Vehicles).
What I wanted to say was that we as roleplayers don´t terribly need
new rules in a very rules-heavy system, and rigging rules at that.
Next we see is rules for digestion, eh?


:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 13
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:45:29 +1000
David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG> wrote:

> If a GM needs something that the vehicle design rules can't provide,
> then he should toss the design rules and start scribbling down
> numbers and a description that matches what he needs.

So what is a vehicle design system for, then?

:)
BulletShower
_______________________________________________________________________________________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AMBER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 14
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:51:44 +1000
Gurth <creator@******!.nl> wrote:

> Weren't you the diceless-SR fanatic? That does explain some things ;)

Hm, maybe you got a point there. ;)


> I have to agree there, the design rules work, in a way, but they are ver=
y
> inflexible, and not all possible combinations (which would have hidden t=
he
> inflexibility somewhate) can be made -- a good example being the creatio=
n
> of a gasoline-powered APC. Why isn't there a suitable engine for this?

Thanks Gurth. :)

> OTOH, many of the examples you mention just won't be around for the simp=
le
> reason that nobody would bother with them. Steam-powered cars are rather
> impractical, not to mention quite unnecessary if you have internal
> combustion engines, so nobody will use them -- that's reason enough for
> the system not to cater for them, I say.

Hm. But what if there are players that are into that sort of thing?
One of my players is a chiphead, member of a Post-Doomsday-Posing
Gang. All of his friends drive steam-powered cars. Why not?
Shadowrunners can be blunt, simple-minded morons, too. Question is,
how long will they survive in the world of SR. But that´s surely not
the point.

> The problem with creating systems that allows ou to truly build things
> like programs or vehicles from the ground up, with the things _you_
> (meaning "you" in a general sense) want from them, is that they get very
> complex very fast. I haven't seen GURPS Vehicles (though I might buy it
> one day), but I do own 3G3. That one takes some time before you know wha=
t
> you're doing with it, but once you've got it down, it's pretty fast.

I´m also proud owner of 3G3; compared to GURPS vehicles, 3G3 is
really complicated, and you admittedly need some time to understand
the rules machanics. Not so with GURPS Vehicles. It´s fast, easy (not
simple) and detailed. Well worth trying (gee, they should give me
money for this campaign).



:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 15
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 12:58:54 +0100
James Lindsay said on 22:44/14 Dec 97...

> Err... wrong "James". That would probably be James Ojaste's website.

Erm, yes, <beavis>sorry 'bout that</beavis>. *trying to find an
excuse* *decides to blame it on the other person -- hey, it works
for politicians* That's what you get for having such a common name!

:)

> quote...
>
> <plug mode=on-topic>
> You can find The Shop, my vehicle creation program for R2 at:
> http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~jojaste/SRII/
> </plug>

Thanks :)

> > That's just the biggest possible winch for a Body 4 vehicle. Take an APC
> > and mount a winch on that, see what it costs. For the APC from FoF it was
> > something like 2.25 million nuyen...
>
> I guess I gotta really *look* at those rules one of these days :)

Many design systems look really great when you read through them, but only
when you start to apply them to something do the oddities appear.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
My mind is numb but my mouth's okay.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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. 16
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 07:05:39 -0700
BulletShower wrote:
/
/ David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG> wrote:
/
/ > If a GM needs something that the vehicle design rules can't provide,
/ > then he should toss the design rules and start scribbling down
/ > numbers and a description that matches what he needs.
/
/ So what is a vehicle design system for, then?
/
/ :)
/ BulletShower

:) Okay, ya got me there. In hindsight my humble opinion is that
it's an all or nothing proposition. Vehicle design rules for any
system should be able to accomodate just about anything.

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 17
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:20:32 -0500
BulletShower[SMTP:nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE] wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:03:28 -0500, "Ojaste,James [NCR]"
<James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
> wrote:

To begin with, I should probably apologize for my reply being
so testy...

> > If you're not interested in Riggers or Rigging, why on earth did
> > you buy "Rigger 2"?
>
> He he he, nice try, James. I *did not* buy this book, a friend of
> mine did.

Then I don't really see why you're complaining - you got your
money's worth, after all! :-)

> > If you're not interested
> > in a) that place, b) those events or c) that archetype, why buy
> > that book?
>
> Once again: i didn´t buy it. Hope this has become clear now.
> All I wanted to say is that FASA has published books before that were
> way better than this VR- or RB thing. Of course, this is MO (there
> indeed seem to be people on the list that *have* to read this "IMHO",
> or they feel personally attacked).

I don't know about that. VR and RB have covered new ground - there
were no (adequate) rules for the stuff that they do. I think
that a new sourcebook to provide those rules (and background on
rigging in general) was worth it.

> > I am. I even wrote a program to do the math for me. :-)
>
> This is fine for you. But for this price, I´d expect a little bit
> more than just a redesign of old stuff.

*blink* I've never seen shadowrun rules for Riggers contesting
over control of drones before. Or what's required to obtain
control of a CCSS rig. Sure, we may have known that some of
this stuff was possible, and we *did* have rules for vehicle
creation and combat driving, but even those have improved.

Rigger 2 provides lots of new stuff.

> > OK, let's get one thing straight. This is Shadowrun. No self
> > respecting Rigger would drive a coal-powered car.
>
> Man, you hit a nerve there. Let me get this straight:
> you are NOT to judge what a "self-respecting rigger" would drive or
> not. Who are you to say what character could/would do what things?

Sorry, personal prejudice, I admit. However, I don't think that
coal-powered vehicles fit in with the shadowrun universe. Ergo,
a rigger would have a difficult time obtaining one. Also, *most*
riggers (at least those portrayed by FASA) seem to be obsessed
with either high speeds or military vehicles (or drones or CCSS).

IMHO, of course. :-)

> Do you want to create the "typical rigger", the "typical sam",
the
> "typical decker". Hey! Get a-life! Roleplaying means diversity, not
> flat characterization.

Well, I guess the image in my mind is akin to a high-paid
shadowrun assassin using a blunderbuss. Sure, you'll be impressed,
and you'll remember, and his career probably won't last too long.

> > "Hey! But
> > I wanted to build an AT-AT so I could really kick butt!". Yeah,
> > right.
>
> IMHO it´s a sign of poor discussion skill to use ridiculous =
examples.
> Sorry, boy.

I see having an AT-AT as being much more likely in Shadowrun than
a coal-powered car. Coal-powered cars are slow, noisy, awkward,
large, smelly and probably quite expensive at the least. An AT-AT
is just an extension of the Walker chassis (make it extra large).

> > Corps will only build what they can sell. FASA only produces
> > rules for things that are likely to pop up. A coal-powered
> > vehicle is unlikely
>
> Riggers are not only people who tune their cars up. Riggers, (IMHO),
> are people who sometimes are inclined to build theor own vehicles.
> And this is where the FASA rules suck.

Well, as far as I can recall from the Riggers portrayed by FASA,
riggers generally prefer driving to building (or tuning). They
can afford to pay a mechanic for that.

> >, but the *system* is flexible enough that
> > you could just invent your own powerplant.
>
> Really [chuckles]. Without any problems? [chuckles] Show me.

Sure. Let's base it off the Sedan Gasoline engine...
Load 60/300
Speed 100/160
Accel 8/14
Fuel 60
Economy 8/14

We'll reduce the load (not as much power, and we need to carry
coal and water), the speed, the accel, increase the fuel and
decrease the economy:
Load 60/120
Speed 50/70
Accel 4/7
Fuel 90
Economy 2/3

How's that? It's just guesswork, of course, but you could try
and base these in reality if you like. Just look up the relevant
info...

> > Did FASA make
> > rules in VR2 for accessing the Matrix with a typewriter? I don't
> > think so.
>
> A counter-question: *can* you acces the net with a typwriter? NO.
> Again, using this kind of ridicule is not a very constructive
> criticism, right.

Sorry. I was just referring to the fact that strange technologies
are just that - strange. If it's that old, it's terribly obsolete.
If it's just alien, the GM should be creating the vehicle and
will therefore give it whatever stats suits his purpose.

It is *very* difficult to build a creation system for anything
that will be reasonable through all possible variations and at
each extreme.

> > > These are the reasons why I use the decking/designing rules for
> > > Cyberpunk2020 and (TATAH)
> > > the *GURPS Vehicles* Book. In it, you´ll find
> > > virtually everything for designing vehicles, not just cars, bikes =
and
> > > maybe jet fighters. Really, this book is definitely worth buying. =
I´m
truly
> > > impressed.
> >
> > But do those vehicles fit in with the SR universe? If not, what's
> > the point? Sure, Gundam-class mecha are cool toys, but in SR?
> > 'Taint bloody likely. :-)
>
> James, I *never* saif that I´d like gundam-style in SR.

Again, just an example of strange tech that isn't included in R2.

> What I wanted to say is that the Rigger Design rules are poor, not
> suitable to everyone´s wishes (unlike, for instance, the GURPS
> Vehicles).

I haven't seen GURPS:V. I'll see if I can borrow a copy off of
somebody (I'd probably buy it, but I just found a store here whose
supplier went out of business, so I picked up a bunch of SRII
stuff for $7 CDN - everything from Aztlan to Sprawl Sites :-) ).

> What I wanted to say was that we as roleplayers don´t terribly need
> new rules in a very rules-heavy system, and rigging rules at that.
> Next we see is rules for digestion, eh?

I disagree. Not everybody will use the rules, and those who do
will probably only use a subset, but having the rules at least
gives the GM a concrete idea of how hard it is to accomplish a
given task.

I don't think that SRII is terribly rules-heavy, either. I see
that you like Amber (I've been playing in an Amber campaign for
the past couple of years as well). It's an excellent system
for that universe (multiverse?), but it just doesn't work in SR.

I think that's about it...

James Ojaste
Message no. 18
From: "Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 19:17:29 +0000
On 15 Dec 97, BulletShower disseminated foul capitalist propaganda by
writing:

<snip>

> I´m also proud owner of 3G3; compared to GURPS vehicles, 3G3 is
> really complicated, and you admittedly need some time to understand
> the rules machanics. Not so with GURPS Vehicles. It´s fast, easy
> (not simple) and detailed. Well worth trying (gee, they should give
> me money for this campaign).

One question: What is the size of GURPS Vehicles vehicle design
system when compared to Artoo's vehicle design system? And how much
of GURPS V contains rules for rigging, drones, CCSS et al.?

;P


Leszek Karlik, aka Mike - trrkt@*****.onet.pl; http://www.wlkp.top.pl/~bea=
r/mike;
Star Wars fan and Amber junkie; FIAWOL; WTF TKD TOO;
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, (SS) (PC) (ISM) {IWATS-IIC} JH(Sith)=
/House Scholae Palatinae
It is a proud and lonely thing to be a prince of Amber, incapable of tru=
st. - Corwin
Message no. 19
From: The Bookworm <Thomas.M.Price@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 12:24:18 -0600
On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Ojaste,James [NCR] wrote:

> BulletShower[SMTP:nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE] wrote:
> > > OK, let's get one thing straight. This is Shadowrun. No self
> > > respecting Rigger would drive a coal-powered car.
> > Man, you hit a nerve there. Let me get this straight:
> > you are NOT to judge what a "self-respecting rigger" would drive or
> > not. Who are you to say what character could/would do what things?
> Sorry, personal prejudice, I admit. However, I don't think that
> coal-powered vehicles fit in with the shadowrun universe. Ergo,
> a rigger would have a difficult time obtaining one. Also, *most*
> riggers (at least those portrayed by FASA) seem to be obsessed
> with either high speeds or military vehicles (or drones or CCSS).
> IMHO, of course. :-)

And i would agree with you. and how much does that coal cost? and is it
even legal to use to power somehting with out a TON of polution controll
devices? Got to keep the Elves happy:) Most coal is lousy energy source
and throws out polution like crazy.

> > Do you want to create the "typical rigger", the "typical
sam", the
> > "typical decker". Hey! Get a-life! Roleplaying means diversity, not
> > flat characterization.
> Well, I guess the image in my mind is akin to a high-paid
> shadowrun assassin using a blunderbuss. Sure, you'll be impressed,
> and you'll remember, and his career probably won't last too long.

LOL what an image.


> > >, but the *system* is flexible enough that
> > > you could just invent your own powerplant.
> > Really [chuckles]. Without any problems? [chuckles] Show me.
> Sure. Let's base it off the Sedan Gasoline engine...
> Load 60/300
> Speed 100/160
> Accel 8/14
> Fuel 60
> Economy 8/14

> We'll reduce the load (not as much power, and we need to carry
> coal and water), the speed, the accel, increase the fuel and
> decrease the economy:
> Load 60/120
> Speed 50/70
> Accel 4/7
> Fuel 90
> Economy 2/3
> How's that? It's just guesswork, of course, but you could try
> and base these in reality if you like. Just look up the relevant
> info...

Hmm not bad but i would rule that this is a modern all ceramic engine
burning powdered coal automaticaly feed into the engine and a condenser on
the steam output after the pistons. Now if you wanted a good old fasion
steam engine with original materials i would make it even worse. Like
requireing someone to constantly feed in lumps of coal, water stops every
few miles, an obsenely low power, and I dont want to even think about the
signature from all the steam and smoke

> > > Did FASA make rules in VR2 for accessing the Matrix with a
> > > typewriter? I don't think so.
> > A counter-question: *can* you acces the net with a typwriter? NO.
> > Again, using this kind of ridicule is not a very constructive
> > criticism, right.
> Sorry. I was just referring to the fact that strange technologies
> are just that - strange. If it's that old, it's terribly obsolete.
> If it's just alien, the GM should be creating the vehicle and
> will therefore give it whatever stats suits his purpose.
> It is *very* difficult to build a creation system for anything
> that will be reasonable through all possible variations and at
> each extreme.

You can please all the people some of the time or some of the people all
the time, You can't please all the people all the time. And how often are
those extreemes likly to come up in games anyway. You try to satisfy most
of the people most of the time and let the GM wing it when he has to:)

> > > But do those vehicles fit in with the SR universe? If not, what's
> > > the point? Sure, Gundam-class mecha are cool toys, but in SR?
> > > 'Taint bloody likely. :-)
> > James, I *never* saif that I´d like gundam-style in SR.
> Again, just an example of strange tech that isn't included in R2.

And gundam isnt as strange as Steam power. I mean we have the Walker and
anthropod chasis in R2:)

> > What I wanted to say was that we as roleplayers don´t terribly need
> > new rules in a very rules-heavy system, and rigging rules at that.
> > Next we see is rules for digestion, eh?
> I disagree. Not everybody will use the rules, and those who do
> will probably only use a subset, but having the rules at least
> gives the GM a concrete idea of how hard it is to accomplish a
> given task.

Depends if you have players like me that like to play riggers. With the
BBB and RBB1 there were very few rules on just WHAT i could do with my
drones or EW. if i bring along all 10 of my combat drones and set them to
guarding out backsides how fast do they detect someone, what action do
they fire on, howmany dice do they role? The rules for electronic warfare
look interesting and answere a lot of questions i had about what i could
do to subvert the security drones ect. And to go back to your designe
argument atleast now you have a decen chance of building something from
the ground up, before ALL you had were rules for modifying printed
vehicles. Better than nothing in my opinion.

Thomas Price
aka The Bookworm
thomas.m.price@*******.edu
tmprice@***********.com
Message no. 20
From: Mike Hartmann <Hartmann@***********.M.EUNET.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 14:29:47 +0100
> >Same goes for the Virtual Realities books. The FASA guys never
> >presented us a good "construction kit" for programs, only different
> >classes of programs, or some mixed ones. *Not* well done, definitely
> >not.
>
> I dont't agree. VR2 gives fine rules which make matrix runs faster than
> before. The system is totally changed. Sure, they give program stats that
> existed before but sourcebooks are not written for YOU, they are written
> for someone who doesn't have the 1st ed book.

but they forgot to give ANY hint on conversion of old matrix-systems
to the new rules. at least they could have given stats for
matrix-systems presented in adventures.

bye mike

---
Download SRCG now:

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/newreed/15/index.html
Message no. 21
From: Mike Hartmann <Hartmann@***********.M.EUNET.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 14:33:58 +0100
> I have to agree there, the design rules work, in a way, but they are very
> inflexible, and not all possible combinations (which would have hidden the
> inflexibility somewhate) can be made -- a good example being the creation
> of a gasoline-powered APC. Why isn't there a suitable engine for this?


did you notice that the load rating for the diesel-engine for APC is
only 3 to 6 ?

bye mike

---
Download SRCG now:

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/newreed/15/index.html
Message no. 22
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:19:43 +1000
Said "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>:

> To begin with, I should probably apologize for my reply being
> so testy...

Same goes for me, chummer. :)

> *blink* I've never seen shadowrun rules for Riggers contesting over
> control of drones before. Or what's required to obtain control of a
> CCSS rig. Sure, we may have known that some of this stuff was
> possible, and we *did* have rules for vehicle creation and combat
> driving, but even those have improved.

I see your point. Maybe the reason for my admittedly strong
resentments is that I´m into diceless roleplaying, and, ance again,
IMHO there´s nothing more unneccessary and superfluous than rules for
every (sorry) fart one can think off.


> Rigger 2 provides lots of new stuff.

Rules-wise, yeah. :)


> Also, *most*
> riggers (at least those portrayed by FASA) seem to be obsessed
> with either high speeds or military vehicles (or drones or CCSS).

FASA also says (sorry I don´t have the rulesbook with me, can´t quote
it word-by-word) use your own imagination to create characters that
have their own personality, and FASA encourages the players to create
characters that are different than all the "typical" ones: "create a
fat, square elf" etc.

> Well, I guess the image in my mind is akin to a high-paid
> shadowrun assassin using a blunderbuss. Sure, you'll be impressed,
> and you'll remember, and his career probably won't last too long.

This is entirely correct. But this is, IMHO, the essence of
roleplaying: impersonating and becoming someone you really want to be,
or like to play. Roleplaying, again IMHO, has nothing to do with
creating "effective" characters -- this belongs to the
munchkin-department.



> I see having an AT-AT as being much more likely in Shadowrun than a
> coal-powered car. Coal-powered cars are slow, noisy, awkward,
> large, smelly and probably quite expensive at the least. An AT-AT
> is just an extension of the Walker chassis (make it extra large).

No, not really. :))


> Well, as far as I can recall from the Riggers portrayed by FASA,
> riggers generally prefer driving to building (or tuning). They can
> afford to pay a mechanic for that.


Yes, but there are other riggers out there whom FASA hasn´t even heard
of, you know.


> > >, but the *system* is flexible enough that
> > > you could just invent your own powerplant.
> >
> > Really [chuckles]. Without any problems? [chuckles] Show me.
>
> Sure. Let's base it off the Sedan Gasoline engine...
> Load 60/300
> Speed 100/160
> Accel 8/14
> Fuel 60
> Economy 8/14

All you´ve done is that you derived new numbers using a
rule-of-thumb, or better: a rough guesstimate to arrive with this
example. What I was talking about was a design system that already
features all of these possibilities without bothering you with any
guesses or problems when you want to design a vehicle.

As you said:
> How's that? It's just guesswork, of course, but you could try
> and base these in reality if you like. Just look up the relevant
> info...

This is what I mean.
A good design system should be able to cover a great variety of
vehicles *without guesswork*.


> Sorry. I was just referring to the fact that strange technologies
> are just that - strange. If it's that old, it's terribly obsolete.

In our SR universe, there are peoples, poor peoples, like various
African tribes, that only have that: access to steam-powered engines.
Same goes for parts of the ex-USSR. SR hi-tech is not for everyone,
only for those who can pay (as always).


> If it's just alien, the GM should be creating the vehicle and
> will therefore give it whatever stats suits his purpose.

I don´t understand your style of discussing things. On the one hand,
you are glad FASA gives you new rules for (quote): "Riggers contesting
over control of drones before, or what´s required to obtain control of
a CCSS rig." Now, when it comes to being able to create even weird
stuff, rules are all of a sudden not important to you any more.


> I haven't seen GURPS:V. I'll see if I can borrow a copy off of
> somebody (I'd probably buy it, but I just found a store here whose
> supplier went out of business, so I picked up a bunch of SRII stuff
> for $7 CDN - everything from Aztlan to Sprawl Sites :-) ).

Wow!! Lucky soab, you!! :)
BTW: it´s called "GURPS Vehicles", NOT, please NOT
"GURPS: V", like all this colon-infected namedrek V:TM or M:TG.
Sorry, just my 0.02.



> I don't think that SRII is terribly rules-heavy, either. I see that
> you like Amber (I've been playing in an Amber campaign for the past
> couple of years as well). It's an excellent system for that
> universe (multiverse?), but it just doesn't work in SR.

No, no, no, no!!!!
This is just not true.
We´ve been roleplaying since 1984, and since 1990 diceless (starting
with Amber). We started playing SR 1st edition as soon as it was
available here in Germany. Since then, we´ve played diceless. And it
works *very* well. During the last couple of months some new players
have joined us, two of them being die-hard diceful roleplaying
fanatics. They wanted to "put me to the test", as they admitted. Now,
they´re playing diceless SR, too.
Listen, I don´t want to start this moot discussion diceless-diceful
over and over again. Let´s say you haven´t played diceless SR yet,
but you think it doesn´t work. OK. This is your point of view,
though I think one can only judge after one has actually tried it.


:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 23
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 09:26:13 +1000
"Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL> said the other day:

> One question: What is the size of GURPS Vehicles vehicle design
> system when compared to Artoo's vehicle design system? And how much
> of GURPS V contains rules for rigging, drones, CCSS et al.?

Okay [thumbs through the book] lemme see ...
actually, I´m sitting here at the university terminal, so I happen to
have the GURPS book not with me. Anyway, it´s a roughly 250+ pages
softback, witth ther first half or so covering the design system.
Then comes an example section and a vehicular combat section.
Being a generic system, it covers no rigging rules per se.
If you wait till Thursday, i´ll give you more information. Please be
patient.

:)
BulletShower

__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 24
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:45:37 +0100
Mike Hartmann said on 14:33/13 Dec 97...

> did you notice that the load rating for the diesel-engine for APC is
> only 3 to 6 ?

Yes, and I assume it must be 3000 and 6000. It just doesn't make sense to
be able to be able to haul a full 6 kg with an APC that weighs between 10
and 20 tons...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
My mind is numb but my mouth's okay.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----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. 25
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 08:36:27 +0100
> This is entirely correct. But this is, IMHO, the essence of
> roleplaying: impersonating and becoming someone you really want to be,
> or like to play. Roleplaying, again IMHO, has nothing to do with
> creating "effective" characters -- this belongs to the
> munchkin-department.
>
> :)
> BulletShower

Noooooo... Maybe its wrong to interfere here... maybe it will start a
useless discussion, but...
I can not let this be said...
You say that roleplaying has nothing to do with creating effective
characters... I am sick of all that players that believe they are
good roleplayers just because their characters are weak...
(no personal offense intended)
creating weak characters is VERY bad roleplaying, IMHO... Your
characters are humans, they want to survive, so they sacrifice all
they got (money, essence, humanity) in order to survive... They are
caught in a vicious circle, they have to improve or they will die...

Of course, creating a lively character with a personality is most
important, but there is no need for the character to be weak, and not
every character that is really strong (strong does not mean a combat
monster without other skills! a very diverse character is strong,
too) was created by a bad roleplayer/munchkin.

ss
Message no. 26
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 07:05:48 -0700
Simon T. Sailer wrote:
/
/ > This is entirely correct. But this is, IMHO, the essence of
/ > roleplaying: impersonating and becoming someone you really want to be,
/ > or like to play. Roleplaying, again IMHO, has nothing to do with
/ > creating "effective" characters -- this belongs to the
/ > munchkin-department.
/ >
/ > :)
/ > BulletShower
/
/ Noooooo... Maybe its wrong to interfere here... maybe it will start a
/ useless discussion, but...
/ I can not let this be said...
/ You say that roleplaying has nothing to do with creating effective
/ characters... I am sick of all that players that believe they are
/ good roleplayers just because their characters are weak...
/ (no personal offense intended)
/ creating weak characters is VERY bad roleplaying, IMHO... Your
/ characters are humans, they want to survive, so they sacrifice all
/ they got (money, essence, humanity) in order to survive... They are
/ caught in a vicious circle, they have to improve or they will die...
/
/ Of course, creating a lively character with a personality is most
/ important, but there is no need for the character to be weak, and not
/ every character that is really strong (strong does not mean a combat
/ monster without other skills! a very diverse character is strong,
/ too) was created by a bad roleplayer/munchkin.

Ditto that. The group I'm in also plays an AD$D Power Game. The
characters would be described as munchkinous by most standards. But
we roleplay the heck out of those characters and have a blast. It is
so much fun playing a character that can chain lighting opponents
into oblivion, but tries to talk her way out of every situation (much
to the consternation of the other characters that would rather she
chain lightninged the opposition :) "A Black Dragon, kill it."
"Wait a sec, it might be a nice dragon. Let's talk to it first."
"WHAT?!? Are you nuts?!" "Trust me. Yoohoo! Mr. Dragon!...."

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 27
From: Glenn Robb <GLENNROBB@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 17:50:43 -0700
Sorry, I'm using Jane's Rigger Registry. If you don't like the RBB2, check it
out!

— Elton Robb
Message no. 28
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 08:53:54 +1000
Also sprach "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>:
> > this is, IMHO, the essence of
> > roleplaying: impersonating and becoming someone you really want to be,
> > or like to play. Roleplaying, again IMHO, has nothing to do with
> > creating "effective" characters -- this belongs to the
> > munchkin-department.

> You say that roleplaying has nothing to do with creating effective
> characters... I am sick of all that players that believe they are
> good roleplayers just because their characters are weak...
> (no personal offense intended)
> creating weak characters is VERY bad roleplaying, IMHO...

I did not say playing weak characters was good roleplaying.
However, you´ll have to agree when I say that *generally*, playing
effective, ie., strong characters is easier than playing weak ones,
simply because the latter do not have raw power (be it money,
strength, or otherwise) to use in certain situations.

> Your
> characters are humans, they want to survive, so they sacrifice all
> they got (money, essence, humanity) in order to survive... They are
> caught in a vicious circle, they have to improve or they will die...

Not necessarily. Take a look at the SR universe: there are lots of,
lots of squatters, and many of them do indeed get old. Living is
about coping with situations, not necessarily overcoming them.

:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 29
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 09:31:56 +1000
Asked "Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>:

Okay, 'ere we go:
> One question: What is the size of GURPS Vehicles vehicle design
> system when compared to Artoo's vehicle design system?

Without weaponry: 93 pages
With weaponry: 131 (including rules for spotting and removing
landmines, and so on and so forth)


> And how much
> of GURPS V contains rules for rigging, drones, CCSS et al.?

I looked it up yesterday. As I said the day before, GURPS Vehicles is a
generic system. As a consequence, *this* book does not deal with
rigging. My guess is you get the *GURPS Cyberpunk* sourcebook to get
'em.
But just let me list what GURPS Vehicles offers you (skip this if you
want ;))

Ground/Air/Water Maneuvering
Air Craft maneuvers with stall speeds
Helicopters, Vertols and contragravity vehicles maneuvers
Ligther-than-air-flight
High-G maneuvers
Jumping (yes, you can build vehicles that have legs *and* jump)
Extreme environments and their effects on maneuvers
Fuel Tank/ammo Explosions
Detection rules for Visual Spotting/Electronic
Sensors/Hydrophone/IR/Thermograph/Radar/Magnetic Anomaly
Detectors/Geophones/Ladar/Multiscanners

... and this is just a small part of the vehicular combat section!


:)
BulletShower
_______________________________________________________________________________________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AMBER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 30
From: "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 10:48:03 +0100
> Also sprach "Simon T. Sailer" <Simon.Sailer@****.AC.AT>:

Richtig angenehm, hier ein paar Deutsche worte zu lesen... ;)

> > You say that roleplaying has nothing to do with creating effective
> > characters... I am sick of all that players that believe they are
> > good roleplayers just because their characters are weak...
> > (no personal offense intended)
> > creating weak characters is VERY bad roleplaying, IMHO...
>
> I did not say playing weak characters was good roleplaying.
> However, you'll have to agree when I say that *generally*, playing
> effective, ie., strong characters is easier than playing weak ones,
> simply because the latter do not have raw power (be it money,
> strength, or otherwise) to use in certain situations.

Ok, I agree. Sometimes it's easier. But some problems can not be
solved with good roleplaying alone... as I see it, developing the
character so that he has the right ware/skill/attribute rating/tool
at the right time is a essential part of shadowrun, and is fun, too.
I am not sure if it's the right way to force the players to solve
each situation without thing normally necessary to do so...
After all, the game's name is not 'McGyver' but shadowrun.
A certain level of power/combat is part of the game and part of the
'shadowrun-feeling'. (imho of course)

> Not necessarily. Take a look at the SR universe: there are lots of,
> lots of squatters, and many of them do indeed get old. Living is
> about coping with situations, not necessarily overcoming them.
>
> BulletShower

I didn't know you liked to play squatters... just kidding. Well,
squatters aren't that sort of a good example... they do not live,
they just -barely- survive. A shadowrunner, no matter how powerful or
weak, is something different...most shadowrunners aim at getting out
of the dirty business somehow, so they try to make a lot of money...
and they have something to offer, some special skill. They don't
start at the same level as a squatter... They have *something* ...
unless you use some special character generation method with all
priorities at level E... ;)

ss
Message no. 31
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 12:22:28 -0500
At 08:53 AM 12/18/97 +1000, you wrote:
>I did not say playing weak characters was good roleplaying.
>However, you´ll have to agree when I say that *generally*, playing
>effective, ie., strong characters is easier than playing weak ones,
>simply because the latter do not have raw power (be it money,
>strength, or otherwise) to use in certain situations.

Easier as in meeting goals, or roleplaying them. Roleplaying is the same
regardless, meeting goals obviously depends on the resources. And I've
played the 1st Circle Illusionist Elf in a group of 5th-6th Circle
adventurers in ED, and had fun with the roleplaying even if I was coming
close to death regularly, the character interaction made it worthwhile.

>> Your
>> characters are humans, they want to survive, so they sacrifice all
>> they got (money, essence, humanity) in order to survive... They are
>> caught in a vicious circle, they have to improve or they will die...
>
>Not necessarily. Take a look at the SR universe: there are lots of,
>lots of squatters, and many of them do indeed get old. Living is
>about coping with situations, not necessarily overcoming them.

You're talking about squatters making it through the day, he's talking
about runners. Apples, oranges anyone?

losthalo
Message no. 32
From: BulletShower <nmatausc@****.CIP.FAK14.UNI-MUENCHEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 08:15:31 +1000
SAid losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>:

> >> Your
> >> characters are humans, they want to survive, so they sacrifice all
> >> they got (money, essence, humanity) in order to survive... They are
> >> caught in a vicious circle, they have to improve or they will die...
> >
> >Not necessarily. Take a look at the SR universe: there are lots of,
> >lots of squatters, and many of them do indeed get old. Living is
> >about coping with situations, not necessarily overcoming them.
>
> You're talking about squatters making it through the day, he's talking
> about runners. Apples, oranges anyone?

He he, I like this. ;)
However, this maybe a problem of definition.
How do you define the term "runner"?
For me, it´s someone who´s forced to do paralegal things sometimes to
make ends meet. For me, a runner is not necessarily someone who
"runs" the shadowy business professionally.

:)
BulletShower
__________________________________________________________________________=
_____________
For more information on diceless roleplaying, netbooks, and, of course, AM=
BER, dial
http://www.cip.fak14.uni-muenchen.de/~nmatausc
OR try
http://141.84.137.159/~nmatausc/
Message no. 33
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 11:02:34 -0500
At 08:15 AM 12/19/97 +1000, you wrote:
>> You're talking about squatters making it through the day, he's talking
>> about runners. Apples, oranges anyone?
>
>He he, I like this. ;)
>However, this maybe a problem of definition.
>How do you define the term "runner"?

For me a runner is a serious professional in the field (even if
professionalism does vary a bit) someone whose primary income or
'profession' is running the shadows.

Thus, squatters lead a very different life from a runner. Squatters go day
to day finding something to eat, or some alcohol, or a place to sleep, and
that's about it. Surviving is a very real goal for them, as they have to
work at it or they will starve, they will dehydrate, they will die of
exposure. Runners aren't in that sort of situation, their lives require a
very different approach in order to survive, usually consisting of taking
action first.


losthalo@********.comGoFa6)7(Im6TJt)Fe(7P!ShMoB4/19.2Bk!cBkc8MBV6sM3ZG
oPuTeiClbMehC6a23=n4bSSH173g4L??96FmT1Ea4@*********************
4h7sM8zSsYnk6BSMmpFNN0393NRfmSLusOH1Whileyouarelisteningyourwillingat
tentionismakingyoumoreandmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome
Message no. 34
From: Zixx <t_berghoff@*********.NETSURF.DE>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 1997 03:56:40 +0000
On 19 Dec 97 at 8:15, BulletShower wrote:


> > >Not necessarily. Take a look at the SR universe: there are lots of,
> > >lots of squatters, and many of them do indeed get old. Living is
> > >about coping with situations, not necessarily overcoming them.
> >
> > You're talking about squatters making it through the day, he's talking
> > about runners. Apples, oranges anyone?
>
> He he, I like this. ;)
> However, this maybe a problem of definition.
> How do you define the term "runner"?
> For me, it s someone who s forced to do paralegal things sometimes to
> make ends meet. For me, a runner is not necessarily someone who
> "runs" the shadowy business professionally.

ACK. It's quite nice, as most people you find in the world do...well,
paralegal things at times. It help getting rid of the "Runners are
street-monsters"-POV.


Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx a.k.a. Charon, your friendly werepanther physad.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+(+++) o? K?(-)
w---() O- M-- V- PS+ PE- Y+>++ PGP-
t+(++) 5+ X++ R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++
e>+++++(*) h! r-- z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Message no. 35
From: Grahamdrew <grahamdrew@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 1997 20:59:07 -0500
> > If a GM needs something that the vehicle design rules can't provide,
> > then he should toss the design rules and start scribbling down
> > numbers and a description that matches what he needs.
>
> So what is a vehicle design system for, then?
>
> :)
> BulletShower
>

Personally, I agree. No set of rules is totally complete or apropriate
for every situation (keyword: GM's disgression), and if one of my
players comes up with something non-spec, I make it up.
--
Disclaimer: My mind is so fragmented by random excursions into a
wilderness of abstractions and incipient ideas that the
practical purposes of the moment are often submerged in my consciousness
and I don't know what I'm doing.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Why is everyone so happy with RBB2?, 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!