Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Sean McCrohan <mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:24:29 -0400
Quoting AlSeyMer (AdSM@******.BE):
> My point here is that a natural injury can be healed, and once healed the body
> template will be returned to its pristine state. When cyberware is implanted,
> the body template is damaged (well, the body is damaged...), and when the body
> is healed, the body template stays damaged, because the implanted cyberware
> replaces part of the body, allowing a whole new range of expression that were
> not "allowed" by the original body.
> The bioware thing is completely different, as it is alive. It has its own body
> template, so there is no Essence loss. (Well, maybe it should, when bioware
> implantation is so massive that it overwhelms the body in which it is
> implanted...)

Okay - the main crux of your point seems to be that bioware is alive,
and therefore has its own astral (or rather, aural) presence, so it doesn't
disrupt the patient's aura as much, and shouldn't affect Essence. However...
the bioware, as you said, has its own 'astral template', and it DOESN'T
MATCH that of the patient. I can see an argument that an 'alien' aura within
your own would be even more disruptive than a hole would be. So, I don't think
this tact will resolve the debate decisively.
Hey, does anyone know about rules for losing Essence for things OTHER
than cyberware implantation? SR3 says that long-time addicts and other
people who abuse their bodies lose Essence, but it doesn't have details.
Can you lose Essence from a deadly wound? What about losing a body part and
not replacing it? CyberPirates assigns an Essence cost for peg-legs and
hook-hands, which seems pretty silly to me for things that are basically
strap-ons.

--Sean
--
Sean McCrohan (mccrohan@**.gatech.edu) | "He uses his folly as a stalking
Grad Student, Human-Computer Interaction | horse, and under the presentation
Georgia Institute of Technology | of that he shoots his wit."
http://www.lcc.gatech.edu/~smccrohan | _As You Like It_, Act 5 Sc 4
Message no. 2
From: AlSeyMer <AdSM@******.BE>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 00:55:46 +0200
Sean McCrohan wrote:
(snip)
> Okay - the main crux of your point seems to be that bioware is alive,
> and therefore has its own astral (or rather, aural) presence, so it doesn't
> disrupt the patient's aura as much, and shouldn't affect Essence. However...
> the bioware, as you said, has its own 'astral template', and it DOESN'T
> MATCH that of the patient. I can see an argument that an 'alien' aura within
> your own would be even more disruptive than a hole would be. So, I don't think
> this tact will resolve the debate decisively.

This is widely open to discussion, but i don't think an alien aura would damage
a character's Essence, but it would certainly damage its Magic.
IMHO, bioware doesn't damage the essence because the body template is preserved,
even if some parts are added or augmented. There is no lasting "lack of body
parts".
However, the aura is altered, so there is a magic loss.

> Hey, does anyone know about rules for losing Essence for things OTHER
> than cyberware implantation? SR3 says that long-time addicts and other
> people who abuse their bodies lose Essence, but it doesn't have details.
> Can you lose Essence from a deadly wound? What about losing a body part and
> not replacing it?

No Essence is lost when a body part is lost, however a mage can loose temporary
magic when he replaces a body part with one cloned from somebody else DNA. (SR3
p.129)

> CyberPirates assigns an Essence cost for peg-legs and
> hook-hands, which seems pretty silly to me for things that are basically
> strap-ons.

Yup, it's pretty silly, however it can be argued that by not getting a cloned
replacement, the character is modifying its body, and doing so it looses some
essence. If the said character was to replace its peg/hook by a cybernetic part,
i would say that the essence cost of the said part should be diminished by the
essence cost of the peg/hook.

AlSeyMer
Message no. 3
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:02:55 -0400
AlSeMeyer and Ron, you're both missing the point of what I had been proposing.

Just because a magician doesn't lose Essence or Magic, that doesn't mean
they aren't penalized. I am more than aware of the theories of Essence
loss as presented in Tir na nOg and other books. I am well aware of the
munchkin possibilities.

That's why I built in drawbacks not only for everyone, but for the
magically active also. Adepts lose Power Points, but not Essence.
Magicians find it harder to channel magic, hence the increased Drain Target
Numbers. Perhaps they should also suffer equivalent losses to their Spell
Pool also.

The thought process behind this is that bioware doesn't disrupt a mundances
aura anywhere near as much as the magically active. A mundane doesn't lose
Essence from bioware; why should the magically active then? It doesn't
make sense to me. Bioware modifications don't alter the body as much from
it's aural template as much as a chunk of chrome and servos serving as an
arm would.

But bioware does create differences. In the mundane, those differences
would be slight. In the magically active, those same slight differences
can have a significant impact on how they handle their magic. But I still
don't see why they'd lose Magic or Essence, I see instead that their
abilities or their control over the mana would be degraded. Having an
extra +2 or +3 or more to the Drain Target number almost always makes it
assured the magician will at least take some drain...and on any serious
spell casting, it's practically guaranteed, even with foci and centering.

So call off the Munchkin Police, if you read my proposal you'd realize that
the penalties actually outweigh the benefits.

Erik J.




http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 4
From: "Ratinac, Rand (NSW)" <RRatinac@*****.REDCROSS.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing (
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:05:13 +1000
Blah blah blah blah...

Okay, I'm not replying directly to what anyone has said previously, but
now that I've had a chance to think about the issue, I have two points
to make.

First, I don't think bioware should cost essence. If you check
definitions, cyberware is described as invasive and bioware as
non-invasive. Cyberware replaces parts of your body, which really screws
with the aural template. If you check bioware (which I didn't have the
time to do last night, as this occurred to me while I was lying in bed),
I don't think there's a single piece that totally replaces a part of
your body. Bioware just augments body parts. I see the issue of
replacement/non-replacement as a key part of essence loss. Mundanes
aren't 'in tune' with the magical world enough for the slight alteration
to their aura to have any appreciable effect on their essence. Magically
active characters, on the other hand, suffer from any change whatsoever.
That's why bioware costs essence for magickers, but not for mundanes
under the old rules. I think that's still valid - the essence of bioware
hasn't changed (forgive the unintentional pun) - unless they change it,
of course. :)

Secondly, regarding the issue of augmented reflexes, 'twitchiness' and
social penalties. I think that wired reflexes that are 'on', probably
boosted reflexes and definitely move-by-wire systems should all cause
social penalties - but NOT synaptic accelerators. Why? Because of how
they work. Well, with move-by-wire, they're always on, you look
unnatural when you move and you twitch a lot when you don't. That'd be
enough to alienate anyone - ESPECIALLY if they're knowledgeable enough
to realise that you ARE carrying move-by-wire.

Wired and boosted reflexes augment your reaction time, by improving your
REFLEXES. Get that? Reflexes. So what actually happens is that your
senses absorb the information and that info. is processed by your
subconscious (SUBconscious, mind), which then reacts in what it believes
to be an appropriate fashion. No time for conscious thought - they
aren't designed that way. So what happens? Well, you know the
fight/flight reflex? That's what you're dealing with, mostly. Most
things that set off wired reflexes (etc.) are things that your
subconscious deems as threats. If you're an average shmoe, you probably
run (fastest 100m ever and all that). If you're a highly trained killer,
however, you go for your guns. Loud noise behind you, bang! (Sorry about
the leg, fella.) Someone tapping you on the shoulder, bang! (Sorry about
the hand, fella.) Waking up beside your wife in the morning, bang! (I
know I should apologise, but, well, you know how it is.) :) And when
you're a paranoid runner living in the Sixth World, almost anything can
be deemed a threat. So you're constantly jumping around, drawing or
nearly drawing your guns, looking around to make sure nothing surprises
you and sets you off - THAT'S the kind of thing that makes people treat
you in a funny fashion, not because you can move faster than they can.
Fair enough?

Okay, now synaptic accelerators - the way they work is to increase the
speed at which sensations/information/etc. are absorbed and processed,
by increasing the speed at which your nervous system work. Likewise,
they let you react faster, because your brain can send messages to your
body faster. In other words, you have a bigger bandwidth. :) I see this
as conscious direction, because of the simple fact that they
'accelerate' your synapses. So you receive the stimulus, say, oh, it's
just Joe, and don't blow his head off.

Let me give you an example. A while back I was standing in a computer
store looking at a game. An employee standing beside me was restocking
the shelves and accidentally knocked one of the games off. I caught a
glimpse of this out of the corner of my eye, but before I even KNEW what
was going on, my hand just shot out and caught it. That's how wired
reflexes work. If a normal mundane (who wasn't overly protective of
computer games like me :) ) was doing that, he probably would have
caught a glimpse, followed it down and watch it hit the ground and then
thought, oh, computer game - maybe I should have caught that. That's how
I normally work. Someone with synaptic acceleration on the other hand
would see it, think, hmmm, computer game, better catch that, and then
would have caught it (or on the other hand would have thought, hmmm,
computer game, I don't like that one, and then let it hit the ground).
Whatever the response, though, synaptic acceleration gives you conscious
direction of your body at higher speeds than usual - that lets you
CONTROL what you do, so you aren't forever twitching and going off at
the slightest stimulus. And so people don't react badly to you, because
you don't act like a freak.

Hmmm...'nother thought. I'd actually give someone with hearing
amplification and activated wired reflexes and even bigger penalty than
usual. Think about it - what are people going to think when you keep
reacting (badly!) to things happening a mile away? Just imagine a street
sammie with wired reflexes and hearing amplification who's sitting in a
bar having a quietly nervous drink with a Johnson. Then a car backfires
out in the street. If he ever survived to tell that story I think it
would go something like this... "After I ceased firing, the
survivors..."

*Doc' suffers no social penalties from his wired reflexes because he's a
twitchy bastard already.*

Doc'

.sig Sauer
Message no. 5
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:52:51 -0500
>So call off the Munchkin Police, if you read my proposal you'd realize that
>the penalties actually outweigh the benefits.
>


...... As the red and white flashing lights flicker within the smog filled
haze of Seattle..........

"Pull over. Pu-ell ov-er. Munchkin Police!
Those shoes don't go with those pants, Shorty! Do you have a permit for
that Ares?"
;)

Erik,

I don't mean to dog the idea, that is the least of my intentions, but
wouldn't even a 25% penalty cost for bioware for adepts still give an adept
more points to spend? Lets say an adept gets bioware that would reduce his
magic rating to 4. By the book he could get 8 levels of pain resistance
(cost .5), and with the 25% penalty the adept could get 9 (cost .625) and
atleast one aditional power like body control, an attribute boost, or even
an improved sense.

Ron
#include disclamer.h
Message no. 6
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:31:10 -0500
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 7:18 PM

>I don't mean to dog the idea, that is the least of my intentions, but
>wouldn't even a 25% penalty cost for bioware for adepts still give an
>adept more points to spend?

Well, no, that's why it's a penalty.

>Lets say an adept gets bioware that would reduce his
>magic rating to 4. By the book he could get 8 levels of pain resistance
>(cost .5), and with the 25% penalty the adept could get 9 (cost .625) and
>atleast one aditional power like body control, an attribute boost, or even
>an improved sense.

Where'd you learn to do math? Four points can get you 8 levels of pain
resistance at a cost of .5 per point, but if each point cost .625, you can
only get 6 (with some change left over). Where'd you get nine?

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 7
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:37:11 -0500
A
>
>Where'd you learn to do math? Four points can get you 8 levels of pain
>resistance at a cost of .5 per point, but if each point cost .625, you can
>only get 6 (with some change left over). Where'd you get nine?

I got the extra points since you wouldn't subtract from the magic rating,
the character would have 6 points to play with instead of 4. It doesn't
make sence to give the 25% penalty AND a reduced magic rating.

Ron
#include disclamer.h
Message no. 8
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:31:19 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 06:24 PM 10/6/98 -0400, Sean wrote:
> Hey, does anyone know about rules for losing Essence for
things OTHER
>than cyberware implantation?

Leonization from Shadowtech causes Essence loss, and it's a gene
therapy.

>CyberPirates assigns an Essence cost for peg-legs and
>hook-hands, which seems pretty silly to me for things that are
basically
>strap-ons.

As I understood it, the peg-legs and hook-hands in CyberPirates
weren't just "basically strap-ons" but instead screwed into a piece of
hardware that's permanently mounted on your flesh. I also understood
that the esesnce cost for those items was minimal, and in the same
ballpark as the essence cost for a non-retractable spur (0.1 E), which
is merely a sharp pointy piece of metal securely fastened to some part
of your body. (I don't have a CyberPirates handy though to confirm
this)

Sick tangent thought: an NPC with so many non-retractable spurs
mounted on him that he needs to undergo cybermancy.

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

iQCVAwUBNhrSX6PbvUVI86rNAQGpGQQAmgCIxUz/c6HZ4B64y3vRHFLBYljAp5ye
ZK9gsuLl629ktDtnu9q5Jzgvv+caTyjI8Mdl9dKR4i/1vHX/gD/KRMr6k8GpIk4W
G+njhxoZYcOzXoTqEvg7TsmPF3qHz02arMH/fUohigkgtA/4mGtxAnyH6Q1OBil9
Pn5D05lzFgQ=
=IADd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 9
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 22:36:18 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12:55 AM 10/7/98 +0200, AlSeyMer wrote:
>Yup, it's pretty silly, however it can be argued that by not getting
a cloned
>replacement, the character is modifying its body, and doing so it
looses some
>essence. If the said character was to replace its peg/hook by a
cybernetic
>part,
>i would say that the essence cost of the said part should be
diminished by the
>essence cost of the peg/hook.

Congrats. You've just re-discovered the "Upgrading Cyberware" rules.
:)
Essentially, if you get a piece of cyber removed (even a cyber
pegleg), you get an empty essence slot that the new ware can be
implanted into. (The actual rules have one or two more details, but
I'm sure everyone has the relevant books...)

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

iQCVAwUBNhrTm6PbvUVI86rNAQFhMwP/VBOUg+06354CcHG6t5XDzy/8FtffJacK
ZStT9T8UBOOzrmXhfBXODW8dJ1T128BmhpUUQRSOj2viEpDHOSgZqtRHcMQRMJmG
fDH7Mu+2nVhOUk8M7/Ic3bayJ3xIZgQojtZo4Cc2s4mUqv/5AkHunU9W+x6NJK12
UG1azChZATM=
=ew3n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 10
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:22:56 +1000
>Sick tangent thought: an NPC with so many non-retractable spurs
>mounted on him that he needs to undergo cybermancy.

Wheee! My next evil mad villain - "The Hedgehog". ;)

Lady Jestyr

- Eagles may soar, but turkeys don't get sucked into jet engines. -
jestyr@*******.com.au URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr
Message no. 11
From: Fixer <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 06:44:29 -0400
On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Ron Clark wrote:

->Erik,
->
-> I don't mean to dog the idea, that is the least of my intentions, but
->wouldn't even a 25% penalty cost for bioware for adepts still give an adept
->more points to spend? Lets say an adept gets bioware that would reduce his
->magic rating to 4. By the book he could get 8 levels of pain resistance
->(cost .5), and with the 25% penalty the adept could get 9 (cost .625) and
->atleast one aditional power like body control, an attribute boost, or even
->an improved sense.

The same could be said for cybereyes-ears. If you get the whole
and complete package, the cyber costs less than it's equivalent in magic.
Does this make it a bad thing? No, because if you're worried about
'points' you're min-maxing. A human physad with no artifical enhancements
can get an initiative of 13 + 4d6 easy (5 for inc. reflexes, 1 for
attribute Boost (2) Quickness). A human Street Samurai with no magic or
bio or alpha grade can get an initiative of 16 + 4d6 easily, and even get
a reflex trigger (wired 3, reflex enhancements 3, reflex trigger). Just
because some things are easier to get with bio/cyber doesn't mean the
system won't work.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 12
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:00:50 -0500
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Date: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 7:36 PM

>>Where'd you learn to do math? Four points can get you 8 levels of pain
>>resistance at a cost of .5 per point, but if each point cost .625, you can
>>only get 6 (with some change left over). Where'd you get nine?
>
>I got the extra points since you wouldn't subtract from the magic rating,
>the character would have 6 points to play with instead of 4.

My bad; I'd been up for 30-odd hours at that point and my reasoning skills
aren't all they could be at that point.

>It doesn't
>make sence to give the 25% penalty AND a reduced magic rating.

Good point.

Yes, the adept in question is getting more than he would under the old
system, but he's getting less than he would with no penalty. And with 2 BI
in bioware, his penalty would probably be something greater than 25% (we're
still trying to decide how to handle that). It's a trade-off and not
everything is going to work out without some hammering on the system.

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 13
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:27:11 -0400
At 06:52 PM 10/6/98 -0500, you wrote:

>"Pull over. Pu-ell ov-er. Munchkin Police!
>Those shoes don't go with those pants, Shorty! Do you have a permit for
>that Ares?"

I think that would actually be the fashion police...and unlike many gamers
I've known in my life, I've never committed any crime for which the fashion
police would have cause to pull me over...
;-)

> I don't mean to dog the idea, that is the least of my intentions, but
>wouldn't even a 25% penalty cost for bioware for adepts still give an adept
>more points to spend?

I don't follow; how would they have more to spend if they are still being
penalized?

Lets say an adept gets bioware that would reduce his
>magic rating to 4. By the book he could get 8 levels of pain resistance
>(cost .5), and with the 25% penalty the adept could get 9 (cost .625) and
>atleast one aditional power like body control, an attribute boost, or even
>an improved sense.

Uh, what? How could it work out that when the powers cost more, the adept
gets more powers? If the pain resistance would now cost .625, how does
that times 9 equal 4?

I'll admit I'm math-phobic and while I did complete high school trig and
even started calculus (meaning I'm not stupid) I'm not so hot when it comes
to math, but what you are saying doesn't make any sense to me.

Or maybe we're both simply missing each other's point.

Erik J.


http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 14
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Subject: Re: Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:47:50 -0500
>I don't follow; how would they have more to spend if they are still being
>penalized?

They would have more points due to the difference in initial points.
Assuming the character has 2 points of bio, by the book, he would have 4
points to spend on abilities. Now with the 25% penalty, he would have 6
points to spend. It wouldn't make sence to reduce the magic points and
give a % penalty. So, its one or the other.... With that out of the way
we continue with what I said earlier...

... >Lets say an adept gets bioware that would reduce his
>>magic rating to 4. By the book he could get 8 levels of pain resistance
>>(cost .5), and with the 25% penalty the adept could get 9 (cost .625) and
>>atleast one aditional power like body control, an attribute boost, or even
>>an improved sense.
>
>Uh, what? How could it work out that when the powers cost more, the adept
>gets more powers? If the pain resistance would now cost .625, how does
>that times 9 equal 4?

It doesn't. It equals 6, the initial magic points able to be spent. That
is unless you really want to double whammy the adept.


I think either way accomplishes the same goal, to penalize the magical for
having bioware/cyberware. Other than for conceptual reasons, why change
something that does, for the most part, what you want done to begin with.
I assume we all don't really want an adept or a mage to have the best of
both worlds.

Ron

#include disclamer.h

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Why i think that bioware as per Shadowtech was a Good Thing, 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.