| From: | Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Power (Re: tattoo magic/cyber zombie) |
| Date: | Sun, 18 Jul 1999 12:25:06 EDT |
gurth@******.nl writes:
> she didn't make the character a combat monster or
> semi-Robocop (not even a single cyberlimb, for example) and focused more
> on the roleplaying possibilities of a cyberzombie (in this case, overly
> paranoid) than the powergaming possibilities.
>
> Under these circumstances, I have no problem with a cyberzombie. OTOH if a
> player wants a cyberzombie only to make the most powerful, archetypal
> street-sam-without-a-past possible, or if I were GMing a street level
> campaign, I'd say "no."
Gurth, I think you hit the nail pretty squarely on this one. For some
reason, whenever someone thinks/hears/reads the term "Cyberzombie" (or even
Cybermancy), they often times think "Combat Monster" or "Powergamer"
(or
worse ;). However, there are a LOT of cybernetic implants that could be done
which have absolutely NOTHING to do with direct, melee style, combat. Matrix
Interface technology can also become incredibly essence consuming. I also
seem to recall Tactical Computer being a monstrous bite-taker as well.
Vehicle Control Rig, while having multiple purposes, is also not directly
something of this nature.
I had always considered one of the *couple* cybermantically modified people
that Fuchi (now Novatech) ever kept around was actually a
super-decker/operator of sorts. One, maybe two sets of cranial-decks, or
even just cyberlimbs with cyberdeck internals and perhaps a built-in CCSS
system to co-parallel building security or something else with.
Sure, we all tend to think of "combat monster", but that is entirely on how
the terminology is viewed.
-K
