From:	Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: Magic or Tech...
Date:	Wed, 5 Apr 1995 19:40:45 GMT

Bob wrote-
> > Finally, someone who knows how to balance a game <G>

And Jani replied -
> Well that does it, I am fed up with this all mage-players are munchkins
> holier than thou attitude!
We said several times that mages were *easier* to munchkin: I pointed out
that I've had magical characters of my own come and retire. Bob was talking
about *balance*. I've seen samurai that would curl your hair - second-hand,
beta grade wired-II, for instance, on a starting character? We were offering a
countervailing view to someone whose posts seemed to imply all samurai are
alike and all are musclebound bozos :-)

> I and other listmembers have given you every curtesy and tried to make it
> clear that no one here has any bias toward street samurai.

Agreed, fine. There seems to be a slight bias against? (Ducks a hail of
laser-guided carp fillets).

> And yet you insist on flaming everyone that does not share your hate of mages
> and making impossible remarks about things you obviously know nothing about.

Jani, pop a Valium and sit down for a while, all right? I didn't see Bob
flame anyone. He's been polite, informed and said a great deal that he, I
and others agree on. There are *several* Mohicans out here :-) I've played
and GM'd Shadowrun since 1989, so I maybe know a *little* about it, and
Bob hasn't made any howlers. A few differences of opinion, sure, but isn't
that the point of lists like this?

> This list has always supported a very conservative attitude as far as
> magic is concerned, we have always tried to enforce the "disadvantages" of
> magic in order to make it more playable and not such a pain in the butt
> of the other players. But Mr. Join-The-List-And-Flame-Em Knowitall here
> always knows better.....

I haven't seen the list support any one attitude: if it did, it wouldn't be
as interesting. But to be told "your character is basically a pro footballer
with wired reflexes and big guns" is something of a sweeping generalisation
and I felt pressed to respond. Bob feels the same as I in many ways.

And if the game is so perfectly balanced, why is it necessary to "make it
more playable and not such a pain in the butt for other players" whenever
the magicians appear? :-)

One point I remember when I briefly tried AD&D: I chose a fighter because
I felt comfortable with the notion of being the big guy with the sword who
solved his problems by hitting them with something sharp. Nice and simple,
not too many rules and rolls while you're feeling out a system. So inexperienced
players may well drift into the "wires-and-guns" category, and roleplay in
the manner of novices: pick a movie stereotype and run with it.

So often you run into a street samurai who's a caricature from Hollywood. So
what? You have a novice player finding his or her feet in the game, hopefully
enjoying themselves, and learning the ropes. My first RPG character was the SR1
mercenary archetype, who I called Turner but everyone came to nickname "Bozo".
Bozo was fun to play, but my inexperience showed: he was a triggerhappy psycho
with no background or depth, and by the time I realised this was not conducive
to character survival it was too late to credibly change him.

So for two fun months Bozo danced the edge until his itchy trigger
finger finally got him into too much trouble to get away from. Lynch learned
from his mistakes: but Bozo did fit the description of street samurai that
Bob, I and others disagree with. He was the exception rather than the rule,
though, just as the munchkinous magical monstrosities some players foisted
on our game were rare compared to the well-rounded and well-played magicians.

(Stares intently around, nostrils twitching for the first warning whiff of the
incoming attack. Will it be searing napalm, or squelching carp?....)

--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better or
for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk