Jump to content

Alderaan Crumbs

Members
  • Content Count

    477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alderaan Crumbs

  1. Transportation should be largely “fast traveling” (especially with how ubiquitous and required auto-driving is). If you’re the type of group who does “shadowruns” you probably don’t own vehicles, instead acquiring them as needed (be it renting or theft), then discarding them when done. Professional criminals don’t take their personal hoppers to do jobs! A bounty hunter or P.I. would probably take public or temporary paid transportation (cabs, etc.), even with a bounty in tow. There needs to be a big shift in a group’s perception towards owning a vehicle in such a massively populated city and it makes sense for New Angeles to promote public transportation. Many heavily populated cities today are trending towards personal vehicles being less common due to the massive congestion they cause, making them more expensive to own and operate. As far as being part of a group where it makes sense you would have a vehicle, I hope that’s not a tough discussion for groups to have. Police need police cars, corporations likely grant a corporate ride (very likely an android-piloted hopper that picks them up when needed and takes them where they need to go), etc. These aren’t in danger of being credit fodder as a cop who sells his car won’t be a cop much longer! This can even be part of a ristie’s life, if it makes sense. As GeneSys can’t and shouldn’t cover every angle, groups need to make decisions about “company gear”, which includes vehicles. The Favor economy is perfect for uncommon but viable situations (“Captain, I can assure you I need a Bennet MK V anti-vehicular cannon from the armory. You gotta’ trust me. Besides, you owe me...”). If there’s one sticking point I can see it’s risties not having access to a more expected level of money, but that too falls within both a group’s prerogative and what background the character has. Oh, the “Sound Investments” Talent from the SWRPG is perfect for such a thing.
  2. An A.I.-created/controlled nano-swarm that infests a being (this makes bioroids vulnerable) and eventually turns them into a “tech-zombie” of sorts. The brain is turned into a hive-like cortex (a cluster of nanites restructured to puppet the body) and any extreme trauma has a good chance of distupting it and rendering the zombie inert (Shoot ‘em in the head!”), save the possibility of residual nanites being viable (bodily fluids). The bodily fluids (be they organic or otherwise) of the infested take on a silvery sheen, making infested organics easy to recognize. Just adding to our Beanstalk zombie apocalypse!
  3. That’s assuming a sysop is present, but I can see your point. I’ve only read the running rules (and very much enjoy them) and actual use will assuredly answer a lot.
  4. Agreed. I have the addition thought of wondering if a sysop should be able to reactivate downed ICE that a runner spends a Triumph to shut off for the encounter? My assumption is that ICE either reactivates on its own, as it does after standard defeat (or an extended time from Advantage), or is shut off until a sysop reactivates it. Thoughts?
  5. Yep. It’s a really slick dynamic they’ve made.
  6. I see sysops activating/deactivating/reactivating ICE to react to various runner tactics. Perhaps a program isn’t stopping the runner(s) so the sysops pulls out a different gun, so-to-speak. Basically, a digital Pokémon battle. As far as reactivating ICE, might that be for ICE a runner disabled for the whole run? The runner defeated the ICE but the sysops reboots it? If reactivation is automatic and disabling it is the result of a dynamic between the runner and a program, then it should stand to reason a third player (the sysops) can reactivate the disabled ICE (I assume the ICE isn’t completely destroyed). The ICE being disabled for a run, to me, assumes a sysops isn’t getting involved. What’s interesting is the constant battle of melting ICE that’s continually popping back up, the runner having to make the call to keep it at bay, disable it, stymie a trace or find juicy data, etc. I picture it like trying to swordfight while searching a book for some secret. Not easy but oh-so awesome.
  7. Perhaps. It’s a compliment to enjoying FFG’s take on it. As much as I have loved several other cyberpunk RPGs, their running has left me cold. It’s often too clunky/complicated/difficult-to-pair-with-meat-space and goes largely unused by players. The way this one works is enjoyable to me and meshes well with non-runners. As with everything GeneSys, it’s crunchy enough to chew on the rules without going so deep it loses speed and narrative flair. The Narrative Dice System is a great fit.
  8. I just wanted to say how impressed I am after reading the running rules in GeneSys/SotB. It flows so nicely. Carry on.
  9. I meant no pleasure clones as far as those listed here. I haven’t heard of a “Pris” model or such. And it very much does wander uncomfortably close to very hot button issues, so it’s not surprising they aren’t detailed (assuming they aren’t). There’s a lot of really uncomfortable topics around clones that can, depending on the group, be explored but I wouldn’t expect FFG to approach them.
  10. Interesting there are no pleasure clones, given the bioroid pleasure models.
  11. Excellent point! I knew I was missing something obvious. Reading comprehension is a vital skill, eh? 😊 Thank you.
  12. Is it me, or are clones a poor choice when compared to naturals? Lower XP, wound and strain. I may be underestimating “Underestimated”, but even so, clones don’t seem worth it.
  13. I don’t have the book but am I right in the assumption that the listed “Useful Talents” each offer career skills already available to the attached carrier? That is odd.
  14. Perhaps it should’ve been named “OrgCrime Contacts” then. 😉
  15. Oh, great point on the shorting out and such. I actually see the social stuff as logical as you’re less able to relate as you were and have less “emotional reserves”.
  16. I like that. Losing Strain has an odd dynamic to me.
  17. Sadly, I didn’t find a way to delete my admittedly emotional first post as it was largely venting. I’m not in any way expecting anyone to boycott the game and hope they don’t as I agree that it hurts other writers. At worst, his involvement might nudge me away from an undecided purchase.
  18. By all means, bring objective politics into it, I’ll still vote with my wallet and steer very clear of anything he touches. He’s not irresponsible, he’s a dishonest scumbag who has continually lied to backers and blamed others for hos failures. He deserves absolutely no quarter. But please, continue to lecture me and others as to how we choose not to spend our money on things we were on the fence about anyway.
  19. He burned and continues to burn many people. He is an absolute turd of a person who deserves to be less than a footnote in RPG history. This isn’t a case of separating the art from the artist. His extremely poor behavoir is directly tied to the art, which is the problem. I’m quite sick of the outrage mob ruining lives over personal lives; this isn’t that. This is about the hobby and his atrocious behavior in it. He may have been paid already but every sale potentially keeps him working and paid. With any luck and justice, he will become persona non grata and be the cautionary tale he deserves to be.
  20. I probably won’t get it regardless as I have a ton of other games to play, but I am very hard-pressed to support a game that supports scum. As far as boycotting, that’s a toughie and ultimately up to an individual. If a person wants to boycott the game, there’s nothing wrong with that; spend your money as you wish.
  21. Oh, I was lamenting Gareth Michael Skarka’s involvement with L5R5.
  22. No need to be negative no matter how irritated I am.
  23. So, waiting for a second printing with fixes might be the way to go.
×
×
  • Create New...