| From: | The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Wake the Dead!!! |
| Date: | Wed, 23 Jun 1993 13:54:35 -0500 |
themselves quite a bit. In fact, they followed up with a second article to
better define the first, and backed away from the "no tech, period"
approach. But I still think they're a good idea.
To me, Dead Zones should be hard to define, leaving a good deal of
discretion for the GM to decide which laws work. For instance, there
may be one area where nothing but Gravity can be taken for granted, where
inertia doesn't exist, greatly modifying armed and unarmed combat. Maybe you
just need to touch that giant and he'll disintegrate. Other areas might allow
for light gravity, heat going down instead of up. Call this the "Alice in
Wonderland" approach.
One could argue that since Essence was paid for cyberware, it will still
function. But your smartlink won't do you a lot of good if your gun won't
work. Bioware, since it's living, should be viable. Just because high tech
was required to install it doesn't mean it'll stop working; it's there, it's
in place, it'll keep functioning.
I believe that when people think of cyberware, they think of wired first, and
that's ahere we get hung up on whether or not cyber works. The call for it not to
not to is to take away the speed advantage. People say sams will die if it doesn't
work period because it's your nervous system. But you can have it work and
still take away the speed advantage by declaring a slow zone, -2d to init (min
1). Or you can argue that the real nervous system is in place and only the
signal accelerators cease to function, and the sam can still function at
normal speed.
So much of what we're talking about is hypothetical that I'm sure there's
more than one way to define these zones and their effects logically. Whatever
approach you use, however, be sure to carry through all of its implications.
J Roberson
