From: | shadowrn@*********.com (Hahns Shin) |
---|---|
Subject: | YotC: SURGE, the soft drink *Spoiler* |
Date: | Sun Aug 5 14:50:01 2001 |
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
A
N
D
S
T
U
F
F
Okay, after reading the Year of the Comet thoroughly and also reading
some of the less intelligent comments on the Dumpshock forums, I was
amazed at the latent negative reaction to SURGE. People who play
Shadowrun choose to suspend their disbelief with the idea that Magic
returns to the world in 2011, yet somehow a massive change occurs in
the population of the game world, and they decry it as unneccessary
and even un-SR (if that is such a term). I like SURGE, but not because
I believe that I can turn my campaign into a Neoanime setting or turn
my characters into Striper/Quicksilver wannabes. I like it because it
introduces a wild card element... just when you think you know
everything, everything turns upside down. It allows characters to
roleplay Goblinization Day all over again, fast forwarded 50 years
into the future, with people making the same mistakes of history. It
makes the Humanis Policlub a powerful, dangerous force again. It can
make racism very real for the human characters in a group. It has such
wonderful possibilities for great role playing, and it saddens me to
see people reject an idea without giving it a chance. I know many
people who love Cyberpunk but won't play Shadowrun because "it has
elves" or love fantasy RPGs, but won't play Shadowrun because
"Cyberpunk sucks". Now I see the same thing happening with SURGE and
YotC.
I respect the wishes of GMs to make their campaign timeline
SURGE-less, or play out an alternate timeline from SR canon... in
fact, I love it when my GMs play alternate timelines with any RPG. But
I'm just wondering if I'm the only SR fan that likes SURGE...
Hahns Shin, MS II
Budding cybersurgeon
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already
know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be
killed."
-G. K. Chesterton