D20 Urban Arcana vs. GURPS for "Shadowrun"

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I
have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
steaming pile of shite. Opinions?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
103 answers Last reply
More about urban arcana gurps shadowrun
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    Modern,
    > Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers
    are
    > incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel
    "right" for
    > this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    > Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the
    changes I
    > have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and,
    quite
    > frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a

    > steaming pile of shite. Opinions?

    First question is why didn't you just use Shadowrun? are you opposed
    to it? I mean, I know it's a daunting system at first, but it's very
    nice once you know it.

    Other than that. Cuberpunk i still a good system and GURPS will do a
    good job with any setting (that's what it does). Though i'm wondering
    how tough the gangers were to put down and why. it's not lke you don't
    know this system really well. If you want them to go down easier then
    lower level, lower stats, etc. And if hte party should be putting them
    down without breaking a sweat then maybe they're just not advanced
    enough for the flavor of game?
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    Modern,
    > Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers
    are
    > incredibly hard to put down.

    The gangers shouldn't be statted at a high level if you want them to be
    quickly put down.

    Or, alternatively, you can use my patented Cheapie Mook Rule for D20
    games: Mooks, no matter their level, never gain hit points past first
    level.

    (1) For mooks you want to be completely ineffectual against skilled
    characters, simply use 1st level characters.

    (2) For mooks you want to be a minor threat while basically functioning
    as cannon fodder, stat them out at 2 levels below the PCs.

    (3) For mooks who have a pretty good chance of hitting the PCs but
    still drop quickly, stat them up at the same level as the PCs.

    For example, if I ever run a D20 Star Wars game (which would, in no
    way, involve the STAR WARS game published by WotC) stormtroopers will
    be statted up as approximately level 5 mooks with 4-6 hp each.

    --
    Justin Bacon
    triad3204@aol.com
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:19:32 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
    >Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
    >incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
    >this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    >Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I
    >have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
    >frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
    >steaming pile of shite. Opinions?

    Well, there are some obvious remedies for the gangers being hard to
    put down. You can lower their level, or you can lower the critical
    damage threshold, or you can institute a "mook" rule where unnamed
    characters just naturally go down in a hurry. Not that using GURPS
    won't work, of course.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:

    > We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    > Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    > that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.

    Interesting. How were you statting them up?

    > Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for this style of setting.
    > I recall GURPS doing pretty well with Cyberpunk-style games (and I
    > imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I have heard of, like
    > ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite frankly, *any*
    > future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a steaming pile
    > of shite. Opinions?

    I always thought GURPS' first, best destiny was providing a system to
    play Shadowrun with, so that's probably what I'd recommend. More
    "power" advantages in the corebook, too, for whipping up cyberware.

    --
    Matt Pillsbury
    pillsy[at]mac[dot]com
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Matt Pillsbury" <mtp@seesig.com> wrote in message
    news:m2oedmxbma.fsf@seesig.com...
    > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:
    >
    >> We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    >> Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    >> that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    >
    > Interesting. How were you statting them up?

    I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough heroes. It seems
    that most challenges you are likely to encounter randomly in a bad
    neighborhood are going to be somewhere around there.

    >> Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for this style of setting.
    >> I recall GURPS doing pretty well with Cyberpunk-style games (and I
    >> imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I have heard of, like
    >> ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite frankly, *any*
    >> future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a steaming pile
    >> of shite. Opinions?
    >
    > I always thought GURPS' first, best destiny was providing a system to
    > play Shadowrun with, so that's probably what I'd recommend.

    I may be able to get the GM to convert over, eventually. However, I would
    first have to run a *different* campaign with a similar setting, until he
    became more comfortable with GURPS (he has played before, but has never GMed
    *anything* before this Urban Arcana game).

    > More "power" advantages in the corebook, too, for whipping up cyberware.

    Indeed. Additionally, there is David Pulver at the helm for most of their
    futuristic books, so they are well thought out. Fortunately, I have about
    80 GURPS 3E books to play with. I think I am going to hit up the FLGS for
    the 4E core stuff, Fantasy, and Magic.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > "Matt Pillsbury" <mtp@seesig.com> wrote in message
    > news:m2oedmxbma.fsf@seesig.com...
    > > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:
    > >
    > >> We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    > >> Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    > >> that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    > >
    > > Interesting. How were you statting them up?
    >
    > I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough heroes. It
    seems
    > that most challenges you are likely to encounter randomly in a bad
    > neighborhood are going to be somewhere around there.

    Why so high? What do you need that sort of level for? Just how many
    major
    life and death challenges is your DM assuming for growing up/living in
    a
    bad neighborhood? Most people manage it without dieing young.

    Skills certainly DON'T require such high levels in any other D20 system
    game, is d20 future that much worse?

    DougL
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "DougL" <doug.lampert@tdytsi.com> wrote in message
    news:1110836145.016756.306790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >> "Matt Pillsbury" <mtp@seesig.com> wrote in message
    >> news:m2oedmxbma.fsf@seesig.com...
    >> > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:
    >> >
    >> >> We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    >> >> Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    >> >> that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    >> >
    >> > Interesting. How were you statting them up?
    >>
    >> I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough heroes. It
    > seems
    >> that most challenges you are likely to encounter randomly in a bad
    >> neighborhood are going to be somewhere around there.
    >
    > Why so high?

    I do not know. I believe he got it from suggested random encounters in the
    book.

    > What do you need that sort of level for?

    I will have to ask.

    > Just how many major life and death challenges is your DM assuming for
    > growing up/living in
    > a bad neighborhood? Most people manage it without dieing young.

    With that many hit points, I am not surprised ;-)

    > Skills certainly DON'T require such high levels in any other D20 system
    > game, is d20 future that much worse?

    In order to be a credible threat, they need to be able to hit. These guys
    were even having trouble.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > "DougL" <doug.lampert@tdytsi.com> wrote in message
    > news:1110836145.016756.306790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

    > > Why so high?
    >
    > I do not know. I believe he got it from suggested random encounters
    in the
    > book.

    Not knowing your characters or the rules in use I may have reached the
    limit of my useful knowledge. However:
    [SNIP]

    > > Skills certainly DON'T require such high levels in any other D20
    system
    > > game, is d20 future that much worse?
    >
    > In order to be a credible threat, they need to be able to hit. These
    guys
    > were even having trouble.

    Should they be a threat? Cyberpunk genre frequently includes
    unaugmented
    people being more or less helpless in a straight fight with augmented
    humans, and in a slum virtually everyone should be unaugmented.

    I personally hate warping the setting in the name of challenge or of
    making something a credible threat, some things really ARE cakewalks.

    DougL
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    DougL wrote:
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > > "Matt Pillsbury" <mtp@seesig.com> wrote in message
    > > news:m2oedmxbma.fsf@seesig.com...
    > > > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:
    > > >
    > > >> We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    > > >> Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    > > >> that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    > > >
    > > > Interesting. How were you statting them up?
    > >
    > > I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough heroes.
    It
    > seems
    > > that most challenges you are likely to encounter randomly in a bad
    > > neighborhood are going to be somewhere around there.
    >
    > Why so high? What do you need that sort of level for? Just how many
    > major
    > life and death challenges is your DM assuming for growing up/living
    in
    > a
    > bad neighborhood? Most people manage it without dieing young.
    >

    In 1st. ed. AD&D, a 5th level NPC would be the leader of a hundred
    0-level cannon-fodder types, with maybe a couple of 1st-3rd level
    characters thrown in.

    Does d20 even *have* 0-level types anymore?
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:19:32 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> scribed into the ether:

    >We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
    >Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
    >incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
    >this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    >Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I
    >have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
    >frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
    >steaming pile of shite. Opinions?

    Cyberpunk 2020...it was d10 before d20 was a mote in TSR's eye. Great
    system, lots of material.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Matt Frisch" <matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
    news:1tsb311ddv600gje4v8b9frn11ju31mrqd@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:19:32 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    > <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> scribed into the ether:
    >
    >>We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
    >>Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
    >>incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
    >>this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    >>Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes
    >>I
    >>have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
    >>frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
    >>steaming pile of shite. Opinions?
    >
    > Cyberpunk 2020...it was d10 before d20 was a mote in TSR's eye. Great
    > system, lots of material.

    I have it, but I do not wish to cobble together a magic & fantasy race
    system from scratch.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:

    > I have it, but I do not wish to cobble together a magic & fantasy race
    > system from scratch.

    Technically speaking, if you can track down a copy of Mekton Zeta and
    Mekton Zeta Plus you've got almost everything you need for a magic
    system and nonhuman races in an Interlock game, and Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0.
    is also Interlock.

    But Mekton Zeta Plus is hard to find. Which is a damn shame, because
    aside from being a resource for magic in Cyberpunk, it's also the best
    mecha creation and skirmish ruleset I've ever effin' seen. So this
    isn't very helpful.

    Um.

    ....

    As regards to your original question, I can't really comment on d20
    Urban Arcana Future, 'cause I haven't seen d20 Future, and I can't
    really comment on GURPS either, because I just have 3e, Discworld, and
    GURPS Mage: The Ascension... but have you considered taking a look at Ex
    Machina? It's Guardians of Order's relatively new cyberpunk system,
    based on their Tri-Stat system (aka Big Eyes, Small Mouth). Big Eyes,
    Small Mouth has magic and other races out the wazoo, and Ex Machina is
    supposed to be a solid product.

    This post ended up a lot more useless than I'd originally intended it to
    be. Sorry.
    --
    Stephenls
    Geek
    "You do your arguments no favor by insulting those you ought persuade."
    -Greg Stolze, Rites of the Dragon
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    <chaos_israel@antisocial.com> wrote in message
    news:1110859881.243509.91630@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > DougL wrote:
    >> Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >> > "Matt Pillsbury" <mtp@seesig.com> wrote in message
    >> > news:m2oedmxbma.fsf@seesig.com...
    >> > > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:
    >> > >
    >> > >> We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20
    >> > >> Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was
    >> > >> that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    >> > >
    >> > > Interesting. How were you statting them up?
    >> >
    >> > I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough heroes.
    > It
    >> seems
    >> > that most challenges you are likely to encounter randomly in a bad
    >> > neighborhood are going to be somewhere around there.
    >>
    >> Why so high? What do you need that sort of level for? Just how many
    >> major
    >> life and death challenges is your DM assuming for growing up/living
    > in
    >> a
    >> bad neighborhood? Most people manage it without dieing young.
    >>
    >
    > In 1st. ed. AD&D, a 5th level NPC would be the leader of a hundred
    > 0-level cannon-fodder types, with maybe a couple of 1st-3rd level
    > characters thrown in.
    >
    > Does d20 even *have* 0-level types anymore?

    Nope, but a Level 1 Commoner is pretty much the same thing.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Nikolas Landauer" <dacileva.flea@hotmail.com.tick> wrote in message
    news:smic31h564ku1sk07jobf9ojm4t0c2kig8@4ax.com...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >> Matt Pillsbury wrote:
    >> > Malachias Invictus writes:
    >> > >
    >> > > We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using
    >> > > D20 Modern, Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I
    >> > > noticed was that gangers are incredibly hard to put down.
    >> >
    >> > Interesting. How were you statting them up?
    >>
    >> I talked to the GM, and they were 5th level Strong/Tough
    >> heroes. It seems that most challenges you are likely to
    >> encounter randomly in a bad neighborhood are going to be
    >> somewhere around there.
    >
    > Remember: Urban Arcana is not intended to model Shadowrun-style
    > settings. It's high fantasy with a very thin modern/cyberpunk veneer.

    I am discovering that.

    > (Abbreviations used below: StrO = Strong Ordinary; DedO = Dedicated
    > Ordinary; ChaO = Charismatic Ordinary)
    >
    > Second, Hero classes should be reserved for major villains, not for
    > the mooks you meet on the street; that's what Ordinaries are for. I
    > would do low-level gangers as StrongO 1/ToughO 1 (most gangers you'd
    > meet on the street), mid-level as StrongO 3/ToughO 3 (gang bosses),
    > and high-level as StrongO 5/ToughO 5 (absolute elite gang bosses, or
    > 'oyabun'-style ganger bosses). Never higher than these, and I'd only
    > use hero classes for the intended villain of the adventure.

    I just found out they were ordinaries.

    > For instance, I've got a Dark-Matter game I'm running soon. (Warning:
    > the following example and information is *really* long, and probably
    > tedious, heh.)

    <snip>

    > So, anyway. After all that babbling, I hope I've conveyed at least
    > some idea of how I think d20 Modern adversaries should be designed.

    I will point him at your post and see what he thinks. He *is* a first-time
    GM, and can use the advice.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <IoCdnQajvqOp7qjfRVn-ow@comcast.com>, capt_malachias@hotmail.com
    wrote:

    >We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
    >Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
    >incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
    >this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    >Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I
    >have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
    >frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
    >steaming pile of shite. Opinions?

    Why not just play the real game?
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >
    > They were tough to put down because they had 42 or so hit
    > points. That means they could be shot about five times
    > each with a sawed-off shotgun at point blank range before
    > falling unconscious (without armor).
    and
    > The "heroic damage reduction" hit point mechanic just
    > feels "off" when applied to this genre.

    If you're discovering that no one goes down until below 0 hp, just
    adjust the Massive Damage Threshhold downward for everyone. "Con-2",
    "Con-4", "Con/2", etc., and use the most common d20 Modern house rule
    I know of: Saves vs. Massive Damage are adjusted by damage dealt (the
    one I use in my Dark-Matter/d20 Modern game is Save DC = 5 + damage
    dealt, with the MDT = Con, which comes up moderately often). IMO, in
    most d20 Modern and d20 Future games, only low-hp mooks should be
    going down because of hit point loss. Others should go down due to
    crits and failing MDT saves.

    That, and cover is (or should be) the paramount factor in firefights.

    --
    Nik
    - remove vermin from email address to reply.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    About Cyberpunk 2020.
    I have the original Mekton and I confirm the mecha design rules are
    beautiful; as an alternative, smaller powered armour is covered in
    Maximum Metal (reprinted and easily available).
    Vampires, werewolves and other fancy stuff, including an adaptation of
    Mekton Z psionics, are featured prominently in the impressive
    supplements from Ianus Games (esp. Children of the Night).
    In a minimalistic system like Interlock, a race can be defined as a
    bunch of stat adjustments and skill bonuses; it should be an easy task
    (on the other hand GURPS has a richer model).
    For magic you can add to the psionic system from Mekton Z or Children
    of the Night (disciplines are very expensive skills, different effects
    of a discipline have varying difficulty levels) and/or transplant the
    GURPS system (every spell is a rather cheap skill, less specific than
    D&D spells).
    The main advantage of the Interlock system over D20, apart from elegant
    simplicity and sensible rules in general, is how it deals with hit
    points: everybody has the same number of hit points because they are
    all humans (cyborgs have more...) and damage received causes serious
    penalties.
    Physical toughness corresponds in D20 terms to moderate damage
    reduction and also helps in saving throws (similar to AD&D system shock
    rolls) against poison, passing out, death etc.; dexterity helps
    dodging; armour provides a lot of damage reduction but impairs dodging
    and fighting.
    None of the above improves with experience: intrinsic combat
    survivability can only be increased with technological (or in our case
    magical) improvements of stats and by raising attack and defense combat
    skills.
    No hit points out of thin air applied to falling, drowning, explosions
    etc., no exchanges of hits without dramatic effects until one party
    drops dead, no huge superiority of high level characters.

    Lorenzo Gatti
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:58:45 -0500, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>
    wrote:

    >In article <IoCdnQajvqOp7qjfRVn-ow@comcast.com>, capt_malachias@hotmail.com
    >wrote:
    >
    >>We had our first "Shadowrun"-type game this weekend, using D20 Modern,
    >>Future, and Urban Arcana. The first thing I noticed was that gangers are
    >>incredibly hard to put down. Quite frankly, this did not feel "right" for
    >>this style of setting. I recall GURPS doing pretty well with
    >>Cyberpunk-style games (and I imagine 4E is a bit better, given the changes I
    >>have heard of, like ACC reduction and the elimination of PD), and, quite
    >>frankly, *any* future treatment is better than D20 Future, which is a
    >>steaming pile of shite. Opinions?
    >
    >Why not just play the real game?

    Shadowrun? I hated Shadowrun's mechanics. Reeealy, reeeealy hated
    them.
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    chaos_israel@antisocial.com writes:
    [...]
    > In 1st. ed. AD&D, a 5th level NPC would be the leader of a hundred
    > 0-level cannon-fodder types, with maybe a couple of 1st-3rd level
    > characters thrown in.

    > Does d20 even *have* 0-level types anymore?

    In D&D 3rd edition, the equivalent would either be a 1st level Warrior
    (for combatants) or a 1st level Commoner (for non-combatants). They
    would have one hit die that isn't maxed, and an "ordinary" stat array.

    In d20 Modern, the equivalent would be a 3rd level Ordinary, who would
    take levels in basic classes without the attendant feats and talents;
    they have three hit dice, but the first isn't maxxed, and they have
    the "ordinary" stat array, just like their D&D counterparts.

    --
    Matt Pillsbury
    pillsy[at]mac[dot]com
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Robert Singers wrote:
    > Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Anivair said
    >
    > >> ...until you start looking at the fact that extremely difficult
    tasks
    > >> make your skill level irrelevant.
    > >
    > > there are plenty of similar complaints to make against the d20
    system,
    > > though, esspecially regarding how irrelevant skill is for most
    average
    > > tasks.
    >
    > Can you remind me; are you one of the 2e players that keeps
    commenting when
    > 3e is assumed to be the ruleset being used in comparision?

    No, i detest the 2ed rules, but there is still plenty of ammunition
    against the 3E skill system, not all of it bad. Though I agree that
    it's leaps and bounds and a couple extra feet better than 2ed.
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Johnston wrote:

    > Any such problems with d20 pale to insignificance by comparison with
    > Shadowrun. (And actually with the current rules set, skill matters a
    > lot for average tasks.)

    I agree, but hte point has been raised a thousand times that for most
    easy to average tasks skill is less important than your d20 roll, and
    in fact the right roll for most skills (read anyhting under about a 22
    if you have a decent attribute score) is all important. The point made
    seems to be that the 1-20 variation is very large in comparison to the
    DC's (that most often range from 10-20 for most tasks) and I don't
    totally disagree, though I also don't care much. I'm just clarrifying
    that d20 is not the best model of a really well thought out skill
    system. There are plenty of games that have a better skill system.
    They are just not appropriate for D&D. (most of them anyway)
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote in news:1110897278.246682.113400
    @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > David Johnston wrote:
    >
    >> Any such problems with d20 pale to insignificance by comparison with
    >> Shadowrun. (And actually with the current rules set, skill matters a
    >> lot for average tasks.)
    >
    > I agree, but hte point has been raised a thousand times that for most
    > easy to average tasks skill is less important than your d20 roll, and
    > in fact the right roll for most skills (read anyhting under about a 22
    > if you have a decent attribute score) is all important. The point made
    > seems to be that the 1-20 variation is very large in comparison to the
    > DC's (that most often range from 10-20 for most tasks) and I don't
    > totally disagree, though I also don't care much. I'm just clarrifying
    > that d20 is not the best model of a really well thought out skill
    > system. There are plenty of games that have a better skill system.
    > They are just not appropriate for D&D. (most of them anyway)


    I think that focusing too much on the variance of the d20 roll is
    overlooking the importance of Take 10 and Take 20 to the 3e system. For
    almost all skills, it is PURELY your skill and ability that determines
    whether you can perform the task at all, purely your skill and ability
    that determines if you can perform the task reliably by taking 10. The
    die roll only comes up when it matters how quickly you perform a
    difficult task under pressure.

    d20 actually made an ingenious logical step from most rpgs in what a
    skill roll represents. In most games, the skill roll determines if you
    CAN do something. In d20, the roll is how QUICKLY you can do something.

    Take picking locks as an example. In 2e, you have a, say, 50% chance to
    unlock any particular door. If you fail, you can't do it until you go up
    a level, but the identical door down the hall may be no bar. GURPS, if I
    recall, works basically the same, although the number you're rolling for
    makes more sense. In 3e, you either can or can not pick the lock on the
    door. There's no die roll to determine this. If you're in no hurry, you
    take 20 and automatically succeed if it's at all in your ability. If
    there's a beholder chasing you, then you start rolling to see how QUICKLY
    you get the door open.
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 14 Mar 2005 10:34:24 -0800, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote:

    >
    >Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >
    >> > I mean, I know it's a daunting system at first,
    >>
    >> No, it really isn't.
    >
    >I think it is. or at least the combat system is (esspecially once you
    >factor in all the stupid weapon and damage rules).
    >
    >> > but it's very nice once you know it.
    >>
    >> ...until you start looking at the fact that extremely difficult tasks
    >make
    >> your skill level irrelevant.
    >
    >there are plenty of similar complaints to make against the d20 system,
    >though, esspecially regarding how irrelevant skill is for most average
    >tasks.

    Any such problems with d20 pale to insignificance by comparison with
    Shadowrun. (And actually with the current rules set, skill matters a
    lot for average tasks.)
  24. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:47:08 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

    > Indeed. Additionally, there is David Pulver at the helm for most of their
    > futuristic books, so they are well thought out. Fortunately, I have about
    > 80 GURPS 3E books to play with. I think I am going to hit up the FLGS for
    > the 4E core stuff, Fantasy, and Magic.

    IMO the core stuff is really good. The one flaw is that the authors
    and editors weren't as rigorous in their langauge as D&D is, so
    there's some slight confusion in terminology. It's not bad, but D&D is
    better here.

    The new Magic is Magic + Grimoire, with some fixes (but not all spells
    are 'fixed' - Earth to Stone when used to create iron from earth makes
    iron at a cost that can be defined in "pounds per cent"), so you don't
    really need it, but it looks nice beside the core rules, and is
    cleaner than the 3e versions.

    Fantasy I don't have yet (thanks to the effing useless distributors
    the FLGS uses), but flipping through my friend's copy it looks really
    useful. Discussions of magic levels and their effects on game worlds,
    discussions of religions, and so on.

    Apparently Infinite Worlds is good if you're into that stuff, and
    Kenneth Hite wrote it, which is all good.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Anivair said

    >> ...until you start looking at the fact that extremely difficult tasks
    >> make your skill level irrelevant.
    >
    > there are plenty of similar complaints to make against the d20 system,
    > though, esspecially regarding how irrelevant skill is for most average
    > tasks.

    Can you remind me; are you one of the 2e players that keeps commenting when
    3e is assumed to be the ruleset being used in comparision?

    --
    Rob Singers
    "All your Ron are belong to us"
    Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Anivair said

    >> Can you remind me; are you one of the 2e players that keeps commenting
    >> when 3e is assumed to be the ruleset being used in comparision?
    >
    > No, i detest the 2ed rules, but there is still plenty of ammunition
    > against the 3E skill system, not all of it bad. Though I agree that
    > it's leaps and bounds and a couple extra feet better than 2ed.

    How can you have things "against" something and it not be bad? Perhaps
    you're scored low in my score file because of the way you mangle english.

    --
    Rob Singers
    "All your Ron are belong to us"
    Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:1110808430.208167.70290@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

    <Re: Mooks>
    >>And if hte party should be putting them down without breaking a sweat then
    >>maybe they're just not advanced enough for the flavor of game?
    >
    > Breaking a sweat is not the issue. The "heroic damage reduction" hit point
    > mechanic just feels "off" when applied to this genre.

    My old Troll had heaps of it back in my Shadowrun days, soaked damn
    near everything, and liked it just fine TYVM. The parties Orc ended up
    with plenty too, what with all the cyberware.
    OK, I killed most everything in one hit with my sword, but that was
    down to being the equivilent of a power attacking moron; I'd imagine a
    24 Str Large swordsman in d20 modern could PA past everyones massive
    damage threshold pretty easily.

    Not killing mooks fast enough? Get bigger guns.

    --
    tussock

    Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
  28. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Chipacabra <chipb@efn.org> writes:

    >Take picking locks as an example. In 2e, you have a, say, 50% chance to
    >unlock any particular door. If you fail, you can't do it until you go up
    >a level, but the identical door down the hall may be no bar. GURPS, if I
    >recall, works basically the same, although the number you're rolling for
    >makes more sense.

    In GURPS you can try again as many times as you want, unless of course
    someone's chasing you or there's an alarm or your picks break or whatever.
    Since each attempt takes a certain amount of time, your skill does sort of
    determine how long it takes -- if, on average, you get it once in every
    two tries it probably takes you 2x to do it, while if you get it once
    every six tries it will instead take more like 6x (where "x" is "a minute"
    or whatever). Well, actually those probabilities are off, but you get
    the point.


    --
    Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
    Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
    Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
    www.stanford.edu/~jmbay/ got my mojo properly adjusted
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "David Johnston" <rgorman@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
    news:42366240.3129798@news.telusplanet.net...
    > On 14 Mar 2005 10:34:24 -0800, "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >>
    >>> > I mean, I know it's a daunting system at first,
    >>>
    >>> No, it really isn't.
    >>
    >>I think it is. or at least the combat system is (esspecially once you
    >>factor in all the stupid weapon and damage rules).
    >>
    >>> > but it's very nice once you know it.
    >>>
    >>> ...until you start looking at the fact that extremely difficult tasks
    >>make
    >>> your skill level irrelevant.
    >>
    >>there are plenty of similar complaints to make against the d20 system,
    >>though, esspecially regarding how irrelevant skill is for most average
    >>tasks.
    >
    > Any such problems with d20 pale to insignificance by comparison with
    > Shadowrun. (And actually with the current rules set, skill matters a
    > lot for average tasks.)
    >

    Feeling a need to rescue my preferred gaming genre. SR has ways of reducing
    'impossible' difficulty tests on, like burning Good Karma to garner
    automatic successes or reduce the test or by a lot of gaming to increase
    your stats/skills so as to build up better dice pools.
    Stupid damage rules? I though SRs rules were pretty clear-cut: every two
    additional successes beyond the first scale the damage rating up one
    level(L->M->S->D). Reduction worked the same way, for every two successes
    you scale the damage back down one level(D->S->M->L->none). Number before
    the damage rating reflect the target's diffulty in resisting said damage ...
    .... ... (Deep Breath, Chesko) Okay calming down...
    As such, yes I even concede that SR can be a little clumsy and no, I don't
    recommend being a sniper right off, not unless you dump practically all your
    skill points into becoming highly proficient with your rifle of choice
    during char gen.

    -==-
    Jerry Chesko
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Jerry Chesko" <res7g0hd@verizon.net> wrote in message
    news:SXNZd.6361$mq2.4812@trnddc08...

    > Feeling a need to rescue my preferred gaming genre. SR has ways of
    > reducing 'impossible' difficulty tests on, like burning Good Karma to
    > garner automatic successes or reduce the test or by a lot of gaming to
    > increase your stats/skills so as to build up better dice pools.

    If you need a 10 to succeed, and a 1 cancels out a 10, the amount of dice
    you roll is largely irrelvant.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Robert Singers wrote:

    > How can you have things "against" something and it not be bad?
    Perhaps
    > you're scored low in my score file because of the way you mangle
    english.

    No, i think that the skill system isn't perfect, which leaves room for
    amunition against it. there are plenty of arguments against the
    system. That doesn't mean I don't use it and that I don't like it. it
    just means it's imperfect and I see the other point of view as well.
  32. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:SN6dnR4yCIEZKKrfRVn-jg@comcast.com...
    >
    > "Jerry Chesko" <res7g0hd@verizon.net> wrote in message
    > news:SXNZd.6361$mq2.4812@trnddc08...
    >
    >> Feeling a need to rescue my preferred gaming genre. SR has ways of
    >> reducing 'impossible' difficulty tests on, like burning Good Karma to
    >> garner automatic successes or reduce the test or by a lot of gaming to
    >> increase your stats/skills so as to build up better dice pools.
    >
    > If you need a 10 to succeed, and a 1 cancels out a 10, the amount of dice
    > you roll is largely irrelvant.

    Total Failure was only achieved in the case of rolling all ones, A DR of 10
    means that you'd have to roll a six on one die and then roll four or better
    on the same die. Roll of one in any other case just lowered your overall
    success rate, by not allowing you to gett he job done as quickly..
  33. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "tussock" <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:4236d899@clear.net.nz...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >> "Anivair" <anivair@gmail.com> wrote in message
    >> news:1110808430.208167.70290@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > <Re: Mooks>
    >>>And if hte party should be putting them down without breaking a sweat
    >>>then maybe they're just not advanced enough for the flavor of game?
    >>
    >> Breaking a sweat is not the issue. The "heroic damage reduction" hit
    >> point mechanic just feels "off" when applied to this genre.
    >
    > My old Troll had heaps of it back in my Shadowrun days, soaked damn
    > near everything, and liked it just fine TYVM. The parties Orc ended up
    > with plenty too, what with all the cyberware.
    > OK, I killed most everything in one hit with my sword, but that was
    > down to being the equivilent of a power attacking moron; I'd imagine a 24
    > Str Large swordsman in d20 modern could PA past everyones massive damage
    > threshold pretty easily.
    >
    > Not killing mooks fast enough? Get bigger guns.
    >
    YESSSssss!!!
    Say it with the Panther Assault Cannon(18D SR), just how much you love
    go-gangers tear-assing through your yard at 0330 in the morning....
    -==-
    Jerry Chesko
  34. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

    <SNIP>

    >Yeh - I guess in order to remember the wackiness, I will have to crack the
    >books again (getting old, here). I *do* remember that the highest level of
    >Wired Reflexes made you so powerful compared to others that its use was
    >damned near mandatory...

    As in many combat systems, he who goes first wins. Particularly
    when "going first" also meant "going more often" as well.

    Being the speed freak was a good strategy in Shadowrun, but
    it did seem reasonable that the guy who can shoot 3 times before
    anyone else can even move is probably going to win a lot of
    fights. The soak monster was arguably just as good- it matters
    a lot less if you shoot someone 3 times and the bullets might
    as well be cream pies for all the damage they do.

    ~P.
    who played both
  35. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:58:21 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

    > Yeh - I guess in order to remember the wackiness, I will have to crack the
    > books again (getting old, here). I *do* remember that the highest level of
    > Wired Reflexes made you so powerful compared to others that its use was
    > damned near mandatory...

    Yep. Physical Adept with the ability being the magical equivalent was
    just as bad. I had a character with that, a really high pistol skill,
    and a big gun. I got to aim and shoot once, sometimes twice before
    anyone else got to do stuff, and by then it was often too late for
    them.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  36. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
    >On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:58:21 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    ><capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

    >> Yeh - I guess in order to remember the wackiness, I will have to crack the
    >> books again (getting old, here). I *do* remember that the highest level of
    >> Wired Reflexes made you so powerful compared to others that its use was
    >> damned near mandatory...

    >Yep. Physical Adept with the ability being the magical equivalent was
    >just as bad. I had a character with that, a really high pistol skill,
    >and a big gun. I got to aim and shoot once, sometimes twice before
    >anyone else got to do stuff, and by then it was often too late for
    >them.

    Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    for me.

    Pete
  37. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu...

    > Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    > rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    > is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    > who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    > bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    > the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    > "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    > for me.

    Well, it has been decided. We are switching to GURPS. Of course, what you
    describe *is* possible in that system.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  38. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu>,
    Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:
    >Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >"You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >for me.

    It's been a long time since I looked at original Shadowrun, but aren't there
    negative consequences to being heavily cybered? Loss of humanity or some
    such? I seem to recall discussions where some people disliked those rules and
    didn't use them, which would mean even less of a reason to avoid cybernetic
    mods.
    --
    "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
  39. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "David Alex Lamb" <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote in message
    news:d1ch0c$4t5$1@knot.queensu.ca...
    > In article <d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu>,
    > Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:
    >>Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >>rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >>is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >>who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >>bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >>the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >>"You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >>for me.
    >
    > It's been a long time since I looked at original Shadowrun, but aren't
    > there
    > negative consequences to being heavily cybered?

    You lost Essence or somesuch, which really only mattered to magic-types. Of
    course, a Vampire would tear you up something fierce, since they have
    Essence-draining attacks.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  40. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    >news:d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu...

    >> Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >> rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >> is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >> who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >> bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >> the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >> "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >> for me.

    >Well, it has been decided. We are switching to GURPS. Of course, what you
    >describe *is* possible in that system.

    Absolutely. The opposite is even more possible, though - heavily
    cybered or magicked folks being taken out by a mook with an
    Uzi. Which is a feature rather than a bug for a lot of genres,
    of course. And GURPS can do cinematic action pretty darn well
    if you use the right rules and adopt the right frame of mind.

    Pete
  41. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d1ci9o$jli$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >>"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
    >>news:d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu...
    >
    >>> Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >>> rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >>> is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >>> who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >>> bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >>> the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >>> "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >>> for me.
    >
    >>Well, it has been decided. We are switching to GURPS. Of course, what
    >>you
    >>describe *is* possible in that system.
    >
    > Absolutely. The opposite is even more possible, though - heavily
    > cybered or magicked folks being taken out by a mook with an
    > Uzi.

    That'd be pretty difficult against either, unless said Uzi had enhanced
    ammunition (Explosive Depleted Necronium, to kill two birds with one stone).

    > Which is a feature rather than a bug for a lot of genres,
    > of course. And GURPS can do cinematic action pretty darn well
    > if you use the right rules and adopt the right frame of mind.

    Command of the rules is even more mandatory than in other systems.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  42. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:
    >In article <d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu>,
    >Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:
    >>Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >>rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >>is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >>who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >>bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >>the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >>"You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >>for me.

    >It's been a long time since I looked at original Shadowrun, but aren't there
    >negative consequences to being heavily cybered? Loss of humanity or some
    >such? I seem to recall discussions where some people disliked those rules and
    >didn't use them, which would mean even less of a reason to avoid cybernetic
    >mods.

    Were there ever actual character-affecting rules about the humanity
    loss? It got mentioned a lot, and it made for some cool stories
    in the fictional parts of the gear books, but I don't remember if
    it had any real game effect on characters. Most of the characters
    I remember who avoided total cyberfication did so for roleplaying
    reasons. I played a street sammie who refused to get any eye
    enhancements because he didn't want anyone with a scalpel anywhere
    near his eyes. The same guy never got wired for the Smartgun
    bonuses because he already knew how to shoot straight, thank
    you very much.

    Pete
  43. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

    "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:8q7c31higih57em6cqme9jgd0g3ff3jvl0@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:47:08 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    > <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    >> Indeed. Additionally, there is David Pulver at the helm for most of
    >> their
    >> futuristic books, so they are well thought out. Fortunately, I have
    >> about
    >> 80 GURPS 3E books to play with. I think I am going to hit up the FLGS
    >> for
    >> the 4E core stuff, Fantasy, and Magic.
    >
    > IMO the core stuff is really good.

    I just picked it up. So far, it looks pretty awesome; most of my previous
    complaints (overwhelming ACC bonuses for guns, the way stats were priced,
    etc.) were dealt with. I note that Unaging is still 15 points, though. Oh
    well. Personally, I think it is only worth 1.

    > The one flaw is that the authors
    > and editors weren't as rigorous in their langauge as D&D is, so
    > there's some slight confusion in terminology. It's not bad, but D&D is
    > better here.

    Hmm. I did not notice this so far. Then again, I am not learning the
    system afresh.

    > The new Magic is Magic + Grimoire, with some fixes (but not all spells
    > are 'fixed' - Earth to Stone when used to create iron from earth makes
    > iron at a cost that can be defined in "pounds per cent"), so you don't
    > really need it, but it looks nice beside the core rules, and is
    > cleaner than the 3e versions.

    Cool. I picked it up, but have not had a chance to crack it.

    > Fantasy I don't have yet (thanks to the effing useless distributors
    > the FLGS uses), but flipping through my friend's copy it looks really
    > useful. Discussions of magic levels and their effects on game worlds,
    > discussions of religions, and so on.

    It looks very good, albeit light on the fantasy races (Fantasy Folk TBA?).

    > Apparently Infinite Worlds is good if you're into that stuff,

    Not really, although I gave it a glance.

    > and Kenneth Hite wrote it, which is all good.

    Hite is nothing short of awe-inspiring. I love his Pyramid articles.

    We have not only decided to switch the "Shadowrun" game over to GURPS (it
    has only gone one session, with only two characters showing, so it will not
    be too painful), but I have also decided to resurrect my Voodoo: The Shadow
    War/World of Darkness-esque Cyberpunk/Cthulhupunk game. It should be fairly
    interesting.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  44. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 17 Mar 2005 14:32:17 GMT, Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:

    >Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
    >>On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:58:21 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    >><capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    >>> Yeh - I guess in order to remember the wackiness, I will have to crack the
    >>> books again (getting old, here). I *do* remember that the highest level of
    >>> Wired Reflexes made you so powerful compared to others that its use was
    >>> damned near mandatory...
    >
    >>Yep. Physical Adept with the ability being the magical equivalent was
    >>just as bad. I had a character with that, a really high pistol skill,
    >>and a big gun. I got to aim and shoot once, sometimes twice before
    >>anyone else got to do stuff, and by then it was often too late for
    >>them.
    >
    >Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >is at least possible.

    Really there's no reason why wired reflexes would let you have
    multiple actions. Your nerves may be wired but your brain is still
    organic and you can't move faster than you think.
  45. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "David Johnston" <rgorman@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
    news:42397bbd.4584429@news.telusplanet.net...
    > On 17 Mar 2005 14:32:17 GMT, Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:
    >
    >>Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
    >>>On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:58:21 -0800, "Malachias Invictus"
    >>><capt_malachias@hotmail.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:
    >>
    >>>> Yeh - I guess in order to remember the wackiness, I will have to crack
    >>>> the
    >>>> books again (getting old, here). I *do* remember that the highest
    >>>> level of
    >>>> Wired Reflexes made you so powerful compared to others that its use was
    >>>> damned near mandatory...
    >>
    >>>Yep. Physical Adept with the ability being the magical equivalent was
    >>>just as bad. I had a character with that, a really high pistol skill,
    >>>and a big gun. I got to aim and shoot once, sometimes twice before
    >>>anyone else got to do stuff, and by then it was often too late for
    >>>them.
    >>
    >>Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >>rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >>is at least possible.
    >
    > Really there's no reason why wired reflexes would let you have
    > multiple actions. Your nerves may be wired but your brain is still
    > organic and you can't move faster than you think.

    I cannot move nearly as fast as I can think. I suspect the same is true of
    pretty much everyone. Moving faster and having more actions than others is
    perfectly reasonable in this context.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  46. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On 17 Mar 2005 18:07:08 GMT, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb)
    wrote:

    >In article <d1c4dh$2k4$3@news3.bu.edu>,
    >Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote:
    >>Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >>rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >>is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >>who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >>bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >>the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >>"You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >>for me.
    >
    >It's been a long time since I looked at original Shadowrun, but aren't there
    >negative consequences to being heavily cybered?

    No, not really. Not unless you want to sling magic. You may be
    confusing it with another game that had cyber-psychosis rules, like
    Cyberpunk or Bubblegum Crisis.
  47. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> writes:

    >Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

    >>Yep. Physical Adept with the ability being the magical equivalent was
    >>just as bad. I had a character with that, a really high pistol skill,
    >>and a big gun. I got to aim and shoot once, sometimes twice before
    >>anyone else got to do stuff, and by then it was often too late for
    >>them.

    >Yeah. That's one of the things I don't like about some cyberpunk
    >rules. I want a setting where being unaugmented and surviving
    >is at least possible. It'd be an uphill battle, because folks
    >who're stronger and faster than you and have all sorts of other
    >bells and whistles just plain have an advantage, but "naked in
    >the shadows" should at least be possible. Games that have a
    >"You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked To Play" rule don't do it
    >for me.


    Well, they're really more like "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked
    To Engage In A Standup Fight", which is substantially different.
    Consider how many cyberpunk stories involve people not "playing
    fair" in life-or-death situations. That would pretty much be all
    of them, I think, practically by definition.


    --
    Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
    Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
    Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
    www.stanford.edu/~jmbay/ got my mojo properly adjusted
  48. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Joseph Michael Bay" <jmbay@Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
    news:d1dbj5$t6c$1@news.Stanford.EDU...

    > Well, they're really more like "You Must Be This Cybered/Magicked
    > To Engage In A Standup Fight", which is substantially different.
    > Consider how many cyberpunk stories involve people not "playing
    > fair" in life-or-death situations. That would pretty much be all
    > of them, I think, practically by definition.

    Indeed. Even Sally Shears cheated to beat the ninja.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  49. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> writes:

    >David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:

    >>It's been a long time since I looked at original Shadowrun, but aren't there
    >>negative consequences to being heavily cybered? Loss of humanity or some
    >>such? I seem to recall discussions where some people disliked those rules and
    >>didn't use them, which would mean even less of a reason to avoid cybernetic
    >>mods.

    >Were there ever actual character-affecting rules about the humanity
    >loss? It got mentioned a lot, and it made for some cool stories
    >in the fictional parts of the gear books, but I don't remember if
    >it had any real game effect on characters. Most of the characters
    >I remember who avoided total cyberfication did so for roleplaying
    >reasons. I played a street sammie who refused to get any eye
    >enhancements because he didn't want anyone with a scalpel anywhere
    >near his eyes. The same guy never got wired for the Smartgun
    >bonuses because he already knew how to shoot straight, thank
    >you very much.


    Yeah, that'd be CP2020, with its Humanity stat. Really, ShadowRun
    only said that people with 0 (or < 1, I forget) Essence were sorta
    "on the edge" in terms of being human and having empathy, for
    whatever reason, but not that there was a difference between someone
    with Essence 2 and someone with Essence 6. On the other hand, I
    think having a low Essence made it harder for magical healing to
    work on you, which was something to consider.

    Course depending on how you'd "spent" that Essence, it could mean
    that it was less likely that you would *need* magical healing.


    --
    Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
    Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
    Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
    www.stanford.edu/~jmbay/ got my mojo properly adjusted
Ask a new question

Read More

Style Games Video Games