| From: | TopCat <topcat@***.NET> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [SR3] Combat Spells |
| Date: | Wed, 16 Jul 1997 17:07:14 -0500 |
>At 14:25 7/16/97 -0500, TopCat wrote:
>>How many of your group's magicians lack sorcery 6 and willpower 6, Caric?
>>If "not all" refers to a troll mage who can't have a Willpower of 6,
then
>>I'm still on the plus side here as his base stat is doubtlessly a 6 before
>>racial mods. If "not all" refers to someone who took Willpower 3 as (as
you
>>say) a "roleplaying device", then maybe you should rethink the
power-levels
>>of your campaign.
>Why should he rethink the power levels in his because you don't like them?
>I haven't even bothered to read the rest of the post.. this just strikes me
>as incredibly pathetic..
It seems pathetic to me that a character with an average Willpower is
considered to have a weak Willpower in his campaign and having a "weak"
Willpower is considered a roleplaying device in his campaign. If said
character is in serious danger simply because he isn't maxed out in all his
spell-targeted stats, then the power level of the game is way askew.
Also, having a weak, average, or high stat has nothing to do with how well a
character is roleplayed.
It isn't so much that I don't like the campaign power level (though
admittedly, I do not), it's that if someone isn't maxxed out they're as good
as dead in his campaign. Requiring a maximum stat to survive a game is
pathetic to me. Basing the average Shadowrun campaign on such a power level
disgusts me and it's something he's been doing since the start of this thread.
As I say in an earlier posting, not everyone plays "Monty Haul". I'd hope
that very few people do, but with some of the things I've seen posted to
this list there could well be many "Monty's" out there...
For the sake of Shadowrun as a playable game and not some overpowered AD&D
or Rifts piece of munchkin crap, I've argued against the proposed
modification to combat spells. He argues that they should be changed based
on what I (and Shadowrun) would call an overpowered campaign. I argue that
combat spells should not be changed at all based on a starting campaign, the
logical progression of power levels from there, the theory behind combat
spells, and game-balance.
Perhaps you wouldn't call Caric's gaming pathetic, but I do. It reeks of a
"give the players the world and smile as they kill everything and get the
treasure and karma, yay!" game to me. Yes, I do have a great deal of
sentiment against such gaming as it kills a game (see AD&D or Rifts). If
they have fun doing that, then that's fine. Just don't bring that "Monty
Haul" crap anywhere near the base rules of a game, there'll be enough of
those campaigns anyway and adjusting the rules to accomodate it can only
turn a game munchy. Some of us like a game that has an actual realistic
spectrum of abilities in characters that can be challenged by realistic
levels of opposition. I like to not *have* to have a 6 Willpower or Body to
survive and normal Shadowrun doesn't require this. That's why I like it as
it is.
Now what's more pathetic, Adam: having fun playing a realistic campaign of
SR or having fun playing a powergamer/munchkin campaign?
--
Bob Ooton
topcat@***.net
