From:	Robyn King-Nitschke <rking@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Metamagic/gaming philosophies
Date:	Wed, 8 May 1996 14:34:05 -0700

Tom writes:

>
> Yay! Its nice to see other people with similar ideas as mine. In our
> current campaign (just starting), we had to justify everything. We had
> to write up a history of the char, family etc... we had to answer the
> "Twenty questions" in the SRII. Our contacts were to be defined people
> with names and personalities, not just stats on a page. Our eq had to be
> justified if it wasn't in the std SRII book. Sure, at first I didn't
> like it, but now that I think about it, it works really well. Sorry,
> I've been rambling... I guess I'm more of a role-player than anything
> else... heh heh heh...
>

Count me in on this camp, too.

Both our games (the one I'm playing in and the one I GM) emphasize
roleplaying over all else. Our power levels are low (no book initiation,
no bioware, only a little bit of the latest cyberware) but our characters
are *extremely* well-developed. I can't stand the "stats-on-a-page"
school of gaming--it might work for others, but I just get bored. If I
don't know all the relevant details about my character (or have a chance
to come up with 'em) then I don't have fun playing him. We've had
long stretches of sessions where we did nothing but *gasp* talk, and it
was great! The personality differences between the characters make
interactions very interesting... :)

--o'Rat
(check out my Shadowrun page:
http://www.best.com/~shadorat/shadorun.htm)