Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Mike Mulvihill on STATE OF THE ART
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 11:49:11 +0200
According to Wagemage, on Thu, 26 Oct 2000 the word on the street was...

> I agree. Shadowtalk was my favorite part of the old sourcebooks and part
> of what locked me in as a long time SR player. Now, as a GM, I would love to
> see some more shadowtalk in the gear sections. I mean in the old Samurai
> catalog there were several guns which had very few differences, but the
> shadowtalk made points about reliability and undocumented problems. I
> suppose this was confusing to some people, but to me it gave the equipment
> more life. I don't need rules to assign I higher chance of jamming to a
> particular weapon, but hearing about how it broke down on Hatchetman (RIP)
> in the middle of a run gave the indication that it wasn't top notch without
> forcing it into the rules and ensuring that no one would ever buy it. Maybe
> he got a bad run, maybe it was the ammo or maybe the gun is crap, but *I*
> want to decide that as GM.
> The shadowtalk gave me that option, and I liked it.

But that was exactly the problem for FASA, as I understand it. They'd get
lots of questions from unimaginitive players who wanted to know exactly
how the unreliable gun was unreliable, and what would happen if something
went wrong to it (not to mention when that something _would_ go wrong).

FASA's solution appears to be to cut these comments altogether, instead of
the other option, namely giving rules that support the shadowcomments. And
I know the objection against that solution: it limits the players'
imagination. Still, OTOH at least it would mean the items would still have
that extra bit of color.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Shhh....I know it's only in my head.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

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.