Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Steadfast laughingman@*******.de
Subject: Distinctive Style Flaw
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:35:06 +0100
And so it came to happen that Manx wrote:

> I was just wondering what examples of the
> 'Distinctive Style' flaw you have all come
> across in your previous game sessions.

We here ruled that that Flaw mostly is a kind of how you express yourself in
the world. And it is most of the time used with the clothing, hairstyle,
accesories one runner is wearing.
For example I have a PC that almost always wears Armytrousers (in different
colours, he even has one made out of cord) in any length and a black sweater
with a collar (hope that is the word) regardless of area he is in. Of course
the worn out duster that is SEEN to be used comes with it for personal
taste.
Another PC who had a very good looking and has always worn abdomen free
clothes so to see her perfect body (not usefull while in a firefight).

> Personally I think that if played correctly
> it can be quite dangerous for a runner
> and certainly not worth the one build point
> that one gains from it. Thankfully that is
> no longer a problem in SR3.

Yup it is dangerous to have distincitve style as the other side will more
easily remember your PC. And the point cost can be judged as to low but than
there are many edges/flaws in the Companion that are to be reconsidered, but
that depends on personal taste and game.
Ah, but why you say that it is no longer a problem in SR3? As far as I
remeber correctly other rulebooks are not overriden by the SR3rd. other than
noted in the backsection of the new mainrulebook?
;o)
--
__________________________________________
---> Steadfast
Selfproclaimed protector of Gerber
BABY's
Mmwahahahahaar...
"I have 'grosse bumm' in my Pocket!
Yes, a real 'GROSSE BUUMM'!"
German translation for Savalette Guardian.
__________________________________________

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.