Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Robert Hayden <rahayden@*****.WEEG.UIOWA.EDU>
Subject: Re: SRII raising attributes
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 18:16:40 CET
uh, I suppose that FASA is thinking of GM's with a mind of their own who
tend to ignore most of the official rules anyways :)

Face it, who follows every single rule to the letter? If you do, raise
your hand so we can weed the fools out of the gene pool.

*cocks Predator II*

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Robert Hayden | Black holes result | My views do not
rahayden@*****.WEEG.UIOWA.EDU | from God dividing the | reflect the views
AQ650@*********.FREENET.EDU | universe by zero | of my employer.



On Thu, 1 Oct 1992, Smiling Wolf wrote:

>
> Okay, so here's the point of my confusion.
>
> In the beginning of the section on raising attributes (somewhere in the
> karma section) it says that you can raise any attribute _one_ point by paying
> a number of karma points equal to the new rating. Soon after, it says that
> GM's might consider allowing players to raise attributes above the racial
> max by paying twice the normal cost. Finally, it goes on to say that GM's
> should probably think twice before allowing players to raise attributes higher
> than 1.5 x the racial max.
>
> So my question is this. Barring cyberware and magic, when is that last instan
> ever going to be a problem? For example, if I start off with a strength of 6,
> and my GM lets me raise it to 7, I shouldn't be able to raise it again. So
> why the rule about 1.5 x the maximum?
>
> Your humble servant,
> Smiling Wolf
>
> sleibowitz@****.hampshire.edu
> "Um... I've never fired a Panther before"
> "It's very simple. There's the trigger.
> There's where the round comes out. Now
> go get 'em."

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.