Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Sir Philos Nex <philos@****.NET>
Subject: Re: Karma & Characters(Was Skill Levels)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 13:47:19 -0400
George Metz wrote:
>
> In a message dated 97-07-29 03:45:35 EDT, you write:
>
> << Some of the characters in our game are as old as the first edition :-)
> Maincore around four to five years.
>
> pool 45 is the highst :] >>
>
> Heh. Never mess with a Troll who's got a karma pool in the 60's. Especially
> one who's married to a Salish Councillor/Eagle Shaman with an identical pool.
> Makes a great fixer though, let me tell you.
> What does anyone think of a proper "retirement level" based on Karma Pool?
> When does a runner say, "Enough is enough, let's get a SIN and move on with
> our lives"? Anyone?
>
> Wolfstar

I would think that's more character decision than anything. You could
have a character who decides to retire after making X bucks, or who
gives up after getting 10 karma pool. I think that everything should be
based on how fun it is to play with the character. I would think that
having a karma pool of 60 whould kinda make the game boring.. each
combat for it to be challenging you're need to be up against 10x the
normal numbers of bad guys just to make it challenging... ("Oh what's
that? 31D damage with 16 successes against me? Well I guess I'll just
make myself reroll until I stage it down to nothing.. soo much for that
nuclear blast":) I would have to say it's a player/GM decision that's
variable for the situation.
--
Andrew Dominas
AKA Sir Philos Nex
3rd Year Honours Business Administration U of Windsor
Jedi Knight

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GB/O d-@>++ s+:+> a-- C++++>$ U P L>- !E----? W+@>++ N++ o K-?
w---(-)>- O+++
!M- V? PS+ PE++>+++ Y-- !PGP- t !5 X R++* tv- b+
DI++++(+++++)>+++++ D++ G e++
h>+ r+++ y+++++(reset)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.