 Centering |
  |
 Dec 24 2003, 03:50 PM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Immortal Elf  Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670  |
where are you buying SR sourcebooks on CD?
|
 |
 
|
|
Dec 24 2003, 03:55 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 606 Joined: 17-December 03 Member No.: 5,909 |
I bought em from a friend who got tired of SR i dunno where he got em i assumed that were either bought from a store or paid for online. They may have been pirated I dunno ill ask him when I see him
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 24 2003, 04:31 PM
Post
#53
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 21-October 03 From: Yorkshire Toxic Zone Member No.: 5,752 |
Fair enough. There are some edges which lower the target number. But its not something an existing character could 'get'. But if you have those, why on earth do you want to lower the numbers even more with Centering? Tradition modifiers, the only other things I could think of which could possibly lower the TN also fit into the 'unavailable to obtain in game' category, so I would say that there's no way to lower the TN in game without resorting to special metamagics and house rules. If its an existing character who doesn't have the appropriate edges or tradition modifiers if indeed such things exist, then you can't lower the conjouring TN. If you're talking about making a character who is a world beating conjourer from scratch, then build it carefully, and like anything else you can probably twink it out quite a long way if you were that way inclined. And I would say your CD files are most definately pirated. FASA always said they were never going to do it and I know it definately hasn't been done for retail since 3rd ed. Personally, I own almost all the core books and most of the sourcebooks that've been printed except the neo guide and tir na nog, but I could really use an on disk resource. Trouble is they'll probably be in pdf, so you couldn't search the data. So I wouldn't bother with it myself. In any case, I wouldn't shout about it too much, even if you bought it in good faith. *dreams of an official release, hyperlinked, searchable html set of core books with demonically powerful uncrackable encryption, and sighs* |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 24 2003, 04:38 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 606 Joined: 17-December 03 Member No.: 5,909 |
Yea a search function would be EXTREMELY useful. Someone should start a petition to have them made.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 24 2003, 05:02 PM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 611 Joined: 21-October 03 From: Yorkshire Toxic Zone Member No.: 5,752 |
No, because the level of encryption needed to stop people pirating it just doesn't exist in a commerically friendly way. And I wouldnt' want them to bring something out that would cost them so much money in the long run in lost sales just to get something convenient for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 24 2003, 06:29 PM
Post
#56
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,028 Joined: 9-November 02 From: The Republic of Vermont Member No.: 3,581 |
That's not the problem. Nigh-unbreakable encryption is readily available, for free. I routinely use free source encryption software to encrypt my network traffic at levels that, barring major advances in decryption techniques, will not be cracked before the heat death of the universe. (This isn't paranoia.... well, it isn't just paranoia. I've got wireless Ethernet here, and the standard hardware encryption/authentication on that is so weak as to be practically useless. So I run software encryption and authentication and fairly rigorous firewalling on top of it to keep anyone within a block of me from being able to leech off my Internet connection. And I figure if I'm doing that anyway, I might as well do it right. It's not like the K7 I use for a router doesn't have CPU cycles to burn.) Anyway, the problem is that it doesn't matter how strongly encrypted the data is. The end user has to be able to decrypt it, or it's useless. If you can't decrypt it, you can't read it, and there's no point in buying sourcebooks that you can't read. And, digital media being what it is, if the end user can decrypt it, he can make a perfect copy of the unencrypted data, or simply make copies of the encrypted data and hand out the info necessary to decrypt it along with them. Microsoft et al. are trying to solve this problem by building copy protection into the OS and the hardware such that the computer itself will refuse to allow the end user to make unauthorized copies of such things. There are a number of issues involved with that approach, however, not the least being the degree of control over what can be done with the computer that it requires the end user to give up to the OS manufacturer and content providers. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 24 2003, 06:41 PM
Post
#57
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
That's what he meant by "doesn't exist in a commercially friendly way". :P |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 24 2003, 06:59 PM
Post
#58
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,028 Joined: 9-November 02 From: The Republic of Vermont Member No.: 3,581 |
It's not a matter of commercial friendliness, or anything else to do with encryption, though. The encryption exists, and fills its part of the deal quite effectively. It's just not the right tool with which to solve the fundamental problem. Encryption is great for protecting communications between two friendly endpoints from interception by hostile third parties. It doesn't do jack when the hostile party is actually the intended recipient of the communication, which is the problem faced with piracy. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 24 2003, 07:05 PM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
Right, it doesn't exist in a commercially friendly way. Just like a chainsaw doesn't exist in a sexually friendly way. It's probably not the right tool, as you said.
Anyway, I just wanted to nitpick because it seemed like you were jumping on spotlite for saying pretty much the same thing. It's not really important. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th July 2025 - 03:59 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.