From:	Les Ward <lward@*******.COM>
Subject:	Re: My Least Favorite Sourcebook
Date:	Mon, 15 Dec 1997 18:42:19 -0500

> This is probably going to throw alot of people into na uproar,
> but
> I didn't like the Seattle Sourcebook. Presentation was mediocre 5,
> photographs and pictures were a 5, relavent information was a two (I
> pulled more from the Shadowrun 2nd edition and a good travel guide
> of the area, and a bit of imagination}, and interesting places was a
> 1. Sorry. Seattle just doesn't do it for me, so maybe I prejudiced.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. The Seattle Sourcebook is one of
the best role-playing supplements ever written. The criticisms above are
valid, but the source book had more adventure seeds than anything else I've
ever seen. I'm not talking about huge epic runs, but "here's what's
happening in your neighborhood" style runs that always seem to make the
best Shadoruns, at least for the people I played with.

The best part, both as a GM and a player, is that _all_ the information in
the SS is considered to be public. No special GM section. This lets every
player have a copy. As a GM it is immensely satisfying to create several
weeks of gaming around a single sentence in the book, and then -- months
later -- have the players randomly discover that sentence, and suddenly
realize how screwed they were during those sessions. If I relied solely on
stuff I wrote, that could have never happened, because what I wrote would
not have been long enough to sufficiently hide the sentence for that long.

So, a warning to FASA about Seattle II: Don't screw it up. Oh, and give it
a friggin index. I'm not going to save your ass this time by publishing my
own for the net.

Wordman