From:	"S.F. Eley" <sfeley@******.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:	NO! Dead zones are a GOOD thing!!
Date:	Thu, 24 Jun 1993 00:32:00 -0400

> I must agree with Crossfire and Scotty, to whit-'Ye kinna change the laws
> of Physics'. These 'dead zones are IM-not-so-HO a very bad idea and I
> think that they detract from an otherwise exemplary 'sourcebook' (NAGEE).
> This is and the speculations on the 'barrier' are definitely things I do
> not like.
> If Silver Cianide is reading, please restrict your magazine articles to
> extrapolations from given data (New weapons, spells, city layouts,
> comments on existing products' info, and fiction). Plese do not include
> things that radically change the game and which are not based on anthing
> published or which can be reasonably extrapolated from real world examples
> (New ammo, vehicles, surveillence equip., etc.)


Urrrrrrrrgh. First off, Silver Cianide: ignore that drek!! You do have
readers who value new ideas, and who are interested in original gaming
directions. If Doc X doesn't like it, he doesn't have to use those rules.
Good for him. That's no excuse for limiting information.

Second: The dead zones. C'mon, folks, cut a little slack, will ya? I
don't think it's nice to kill players off for standing in the wrong spot
either, but there are ways around that. Let's say it shuts down cyberware
(bioware I can't judge) and that's lethal, but NOT split-second lethal.
System failure causes damage at a steady rate -- depending on GM's discretion
and the amount of chroming -- and the unlucky punk has a few minutes to get
the <Hades> outta there (or his buddies getting him out, if he's unconscious
or too disabled) before a hemorrhage occurs somewhere. Once you're out of
the zone, of course, everything comes back online. (Perhaps it needs to be
rebooted with Skill, if the GM is feeling cruel.)

Rule #1 of role-playing: THE GAME MASTER CAN GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING.
He just has to rationalize it sufficiently.

_TNX._