 New Update!, SR4 Sample Char: Weapon Specialist |
  |
 Aug 19 2005, 08:14 PM
Post
#276
|
|
|
Immortal Elf  Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890  |
All I have to say about this is: Why the frag didn't they use this type of art on the cover? Oy!
|
 |
 
|
|
Aug 19 2005, 08:14 PM
Post
#277
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
That's a darn fine question.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2005, 08:19 PM
Post
#278
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
but then it becomes just a advanced iron sight, no?
and i dont think the panther is a "over the shoulder" kinda weapon :P |
|
|
|
|
Aug 20 2005, 07:33 PM
Post
#279
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 117 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,094 |
See. It's at this point that I believe that your last line is the most telling; implying that any of the trite bullshit that has been spewing out of your brain, funneled down your fingers, and piped onto my screen, has been intelligent. Rather than, say, pretentious pseudo-elitism in some obscure form of forum penis-dangling. You constantly state the obvious, and then distort assumption and speculation into somesort of Doctrine of Sabosect. A doctrine that apparently involves needing to tamper with every small nuance of a system in some failing justification of your existance. And the backbreaking straw, then, is that you propose that a system is broken because in your twistedly useless style of GM'ing, an arbitrarily proposed sample character of some generic power curve will not survive? And that, somehow by a stretch of imagination I cannot fathom, the problem is with the system, and not with your inability to process rational thought? And the most ridiculous claim I've heard yet, is that the problem cannot be solved by adding more build points into the template? That the solution involves all sorts of tinkering, as you engineer out our perfect system for us? More pointedly, the solution could be acquired by your retirement as a GM, let alone a precious oxygen-consuming human being. You are pretentious, pompus, and childish. A small book could be filled with the ridiculous claims you've laid up and down all over these forms, bound in leather, and sold at most retailers for $19.95. Perhaps you could even hold a book release party, and sign a few of the covers: "To all of my fans, don't worry, I'll fix it someday, I promise! - Sabosect, pompus jackass." This has absolutely nothing to do with my dislike of the subject being discussed, kid. If anything, it is my -enjoyment- of the subject matter that prompts the complete scathing of your contribution to database bloat. For instance, if I wasn't interested in learning and discussing new little tidbits of information about our new shadowrun core system, I wouldn't be here to begin with. The frusteration mounts then, when it's not just a good idea, but nigh a requirement, to consistently filter out everything you say by the sheer volume of uselessness contained therein. So, in closing, it is not merely that you a complete tool, nor a mere box of tools. While an Ace Hardware store -FILLED TO THE BRIM- with tools would be closer to the mark, I believe we need to hit the entire solar system composed of screwdrivers, and bald hammers before we're close to pinning you down. That said, I'm glad to be doing my part to make sure complete rejects such as yourself are not left unchecked on our forums, filling reply, after reply with utter garbage while you masturbate to the quality of your own cesspool of ignorant text. -RM "I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely." |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 20 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#280
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
If nothing else, I suppose this is a decent test of the extent to which these forums are moderated.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 20 2005, 07:41 PM
Post
#281
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
I'm trying to remember if i've ever seen Rolemodel start posting in a thread before 5 pages have gone by?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 20 2005, 08:04 PM
Post
#282
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
Whee! I brought some marshmellows! If someone's got chocolate and crackers we can make smores!
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 20 2005, 09:50 PM
Post
#283
|
|
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,546 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 |
RM, I do believe that was a bit excessive. I don't agree with Sabosect either, but somehow I feel simply writing 'I disagree and this is why' suffices. It seems a fairly effective method, although perhaps not quite as personally fulfilling. I would highly recommend it over your current method, amusing though it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 20 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#284
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 807 Joined: 9-October 04 Member No.: 6,741 |
The more you speak, the more I am convinced that you are trying your best to derail this thread simply because you are not mature enough to handle the conversation as it has progressed. Well, too bad. Anyone who bothers to read this thing can tell that all you are spewing is bullshit, and bullshit not even based in solid information. I at least am man enough to stand up when I think I am right and admit when I am wrong. It's too bad you have not passed enough through puberty to reach that stage yet.
Ya know, that brain of yours must feel lonely, never having contact with the outside world. After all, those of us who bothered to do such simple things as read, pay attention, ask questions, and come to conclusions supported by the evidence present at the time. It's pretty damned hard to not come to a simple conclusion about the intended level of play when they have such quotes as
written into the description of the SR4 book. Wait, that requires you to use reading comprehension, something you have failed to do. After all, being able to comprehend what you read is a requirement to be able to see the utter worthlessness you are spewing and to see that you are more wrong about me than I was about Exploding Sixes in SR4. Worse, you are apparently also the lowest form of the idiot species, as any regular idiot can be bothered to read my posts and tell you exactly why I said I have to rework the system and who it is that is essentially requiring it. So, please, have your teacher go over my posts first so she can translate for you.
Ya know, I bet even my dog would be able to point out the flaws in your post. Tell me, where are you getting the idea I ever said any modifications I make have to be used by others? I mean, besides pulling it out of your ass. And, really, the points comment has got to be the most ignorant one I have seen. Have you not bothered to read the little book multiple posters, including myself, have effectively written on the issue? Wait, that requires reading comprehension. Oops.
Well gee, Mr. Pot, I guess you could say I am black. Pots and kettles, sonny. Pots and kettles.
Aye. A small book can. And that same small book would include the number of times I have been disproven, as well as the number of times I have admitted it. But, unlike a certain jackass I am responding to, I don't claim to know everything and don't claim to be right all of the time. Hell, I know I'm not and can point out three items on here with ease to prove it. I swear, when you finally get into your adult years, you're going to look back on these days and realize what a fool you were. But, until then, don't worry. You'll have plenty of us here who know better about the world to sit back and laugh at you.
:sniffs: Smells like excrement to me. Now, try packaging that as fertilizer instead of logic. You'll actually sell it then.
Wow. I'm amazed at how hard it is. You mean to say you cannot simply read a few lines, decide you don't like it, and move on? Or simply see a name and scroll past their comments? Wow. That has about as much sense as saying California has no coasts. Tell me, how much would you like to pay for ocean-front property in Arkansas?
Ya know, that tool comment got me laughing. It's always amazing to meet someone who doesn't know the proper context of how to use it and expects it to be an insult when they misuse it. Now, let's get a dictionary meaning:
Well, from your usage, we can rule out "penis" as the intended meaning. But, the one that applies also doesn't. You see, as an insult it was intended as a way of telling people they are being used, usually in a way they shouldn't like. It is a way of indicating their ignorance. The problem is that no one even has to try to prove your comments are in ignorance. All they have to do is find a few quotes by me on here. They can also find a few quotes by others as well. If my comments were really in that much ignorance, I'm pretty damned sure I would have been slapped down by someone deserving of respect. Instead, I get the forum loser, the one person in this place guaranteed to have a lower rank than anyone, trying to gain points. Please. Go somewhere else and try someone else. I'm not impressed, and I'm pretty damned sure no one else is either.
The irony of this statement knows no bounds. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:27 AM
Post
#285
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 117 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,094 |
It struck me that the most appropriate response to your post would be to filter through various threads, pulling out each appropriately ridiculous claim, quote it here, and proceed to rip it to shit. And while it would have been an excellent means of demonstrating the mindless degenerate banter you have to offer, it would be a horrible way for me to spend my time. But, given that I do receive some small degree of satisfaction at grinding my polished-to-inspection-order size twelve’s into the fragile ego's of the socially and intellectually inept, I will go as far as to pull a few of my favorite claims out and proceed to waste a bit of my time, if only a bit. ;)
It took me a few seconds to jump to the front of this thread, and grab this particular piece of trash. While I'm sure there are plenty more gems to be had, I like this one in particular because it touches on several key points that define your complex of idiocy. Let's begin with the obvious, shall we? So, you say that when this character faces something challenging, it's skills will be wasted points. Obviously an overstatement, and at the least, more than that, a -moronic- overstatement. To boil down that first sentence to it's core components, you are implying that this character will not be able to stand, on it's own feet, to what has vaguely been labeled as 'challenging'. 'Challenging', I might add, being an entirely subjective term. Yes, subjective, even when tagged with your qualifier as '...this system define(s) as challenging.' And so, my dear idiot, you state the obvious, albeit over-exaggerate it. I could rewrite your comment to read: This character have a difficult time with something challenging. But then again, fucktard, -anyone will have something difficult with something challenging-. Difficult being a defining portion of the word challenging. Ring a bell? You seem to be more comfortable with text straight out of the dictionary, would you rather hear it from Webster than from me? This character in question stands alone, complete. It is, then, the circumstance and basis of comparison for challenge that determines whether or not '...this character's skills are mostly a waste of points'. And if this character is designed for a low-power campaign, then in a low-power campaign it will function as designed. Dipshit. Then at the end, you just reinforce your blatant pattern of imposing your phallic standards on the rest of us: '...see my typical first adventure outright killing a group of runners before they even have a chance to get to the actual challenge.' As if this was a matter that anyone to give a shit about, except for the poor individuals that have been forced into some dominatrix style submission with you as their GM Overlord? Dear lord, if you're incapable of tailoring a challenge to the level of the players at the table, I know I wouldn't sit down at your table; Overlooking every other piss poor quality you exhibit as a gamemaster, let alone a human being. I fail to see how -your preferred level of power in a campaign disqualifies this template as useful-. And the reason I fail to do so, is because -your preferred power level of campaign does not disqualify this template as useful-. The only thing disqualified, unfortunately, is your own ability to add something constructive to this forum without the self important airs of a critical wannabe-intellectual. Oh. Here's another great one.
Ahh. What a little jewel. Here we have you caught red handed trying to exercise that little mind of yours! It's so cute! I can almost feel the smoke churning out from the gears. However, try as you might, you -still- can't manage to make a lick of sense. Let's poke around, and find out! Come on, it'll be fun! Here you introduce the notion that someone falling off a building should be very difficult to survive. Something that I completely agree with you about. It is rapidly after that agreement, that you make your first fatal mistake. You present that a TN of 30 is somehow the equivalent of a threshold of 12, ignoring that we've already been told that a threshold of -4- is reserved for extremely difficult tasks. So, demonstrating that contrary to claims, you have no understanding of the mechanics of one system, or the other, you go about attempting to mathematically prove one system is superior to the other. And while that can be an opinion that you hold, math, my dear, has nothing to do with it. Observe that as a GM you choose both the TN and the threshold in both situations. Now, in the first situation, you give an arbitrary number that is difficult, yet attainable. And in the second...? You provide an unattainable threshold. Yet, if -you- as the GM are the deciding factor, how can you presume to imply that the two scenario's are even. If the threshold is mathematically impossible to obtain, then the TN must also be mathematically impossible to achieve. That would make the situations -equal-. After all, you are modeling reality on an abstract dice system, no? If a TN of 30 in one scenario can be hit, albeit difficultly, -then you must ALSO- create the same situation with the second system, using thresholds. OBVIOUSLY (dipshit) a threshold of 12, if it cannot be attained, is the same as a test made with an infinitely difficult target number. So, you have several options: First, adjust the TN to infinitely. -Or- Second, adjust the threshold to simulate an extremely difficult, but possible roll. -Or- Third, shut your fucking mouth and think about what you say, next time, before flooding my screen with stale logic. The last line, you admit that as the GM you have the power to set the threshold too high for the player to hit. What you are essentially saying is that in this system, the GM will be more obvious about abusing the system. Whereas, a bullying asshole GM could say, "TN:30, roll 'em." in the previous system, now he is given clearer accountability to his players in a more transparently tracked means: Thresholds. I suppose being an asshole of a GM, unable to use creativity to create challenges, and relying simply on dice, rather than tact, that's bad news for you, huh?
This last line changes the pace up, because it does not fault you in an intellectual light, or a basis of argument, but as a person. I think so many things that I have read from you can be tied to the attitude behind this quote. You'd like to be one of the big dogs. You want the attention you deserve. You want to be funny. You'd like the people you hang out with to fear your capabilities. Your potential. You want people to understand how great you are, and how wise, insightful, and educated you are. You, you, you. Unfortunately, you're not one of the big dogs. You're only getting attention because I'm sick of listening to you run your mouth on and on, and brought this in the light. You're not funny. The people you hang out with see you as a self-centered, insecure, pseudo-intellectual with a shallow understanding of the world around him. You have no potential. You are not great, you are not wise, you are not insightful, and your education is tied strictly to the fine art of being a dipshit. Yes, you, you, you. Were you expecting us to care, when you said that? Did you want a 'ROFLMAO!!!11!!111 Serious d00d!? n0 way, b4da$$!!!!111!!!' response? Did you want us to ask you what magnificent achievement you, the mighty Sabosect, were able to make that would -ban- you from playing Street Samurai? "What possibly could have gotten you banned, Sabopimp?" - "I'd tell you, but you just wouldn't believe it!" - "*Gasp* You're such a cool dude. Hang out with me, I want to be like you." Heh. You want to be something, but you're going around it the entirely wrong way. In the detached life of text based interaction, you are ultimately the words you put on the page before me. When those words are so consistently self-absorbed and worthless, -you-, in turn, become worthless. So. That's pretty much that. In closing, let me suggest you take this like a man, accept the beating, salve the bruisings, and take your sorry ass home. Take a few notes. Take a little time. And in the future don't waste our time. Moron. -Rolemodel "I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely." P.S. Re: Tool - The magnitude of your Toolocity™ can only be counted in quantum measurements, my good man. And so to call you a tool, singularly, would not have done you justice, as you and you alone take it to a level of plurality previously unknown to man. Unfortunately Webster's didn't have an easy breakdown of that, for you, or you could of saved yourself the embarrassment of me explaining it to you. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:32 AM
Post
#286
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
ever notice that the longer a post is, the less likely it tends to be worth reading?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:33 AM
Post
#287
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 458 Joined: 12-April 04 From: Lacey, Washington Member No.: 6,237 |
I only have three words: "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!" Only thing I miss about Junior High . . . :grinbig:
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:37 AM
Post
#288
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 442 Joined: 23-April 04 From: Pennsylvania Member No.: 6,280 |
The forums have achieved Terminal Toolocity! Everyone brace for impact!
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:41 AM
Post
#289
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 117 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,094 |
I would have liked to have kept it brief, but there's only so much mileage you can get out of saying, "You're an idiot, shut your mouth," before you need to explain it to them in no uncertain terms. ;) -Rolemodel "I haven't figured out how to say 'FUCK YOU' politely." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 21 2005, 12:54 AM
Post
#290
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 257 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Los Coronados | San Ysidro CA Member No.: 106 |
My Take on SR4 with what I have seen of it so far (books in possession).
A) No, I do not agree with absolutely everything I have seen or discussed so far that has been changed. HOWEVER!!!!! B) What I have seen I must admit does streamline the overall speed by which a combat scenario can be implemented. We here (HHH.com group) have not had time to really play the new version yet, but we are not so far disturbed as deeply as we felt we could have been. Initial Considerations: A) As I figured, the mechanics *for the most part* simply move what was previously a modifier to a target number into becoming a modifier towards the number of dice rolled towards a test. On a fundamental level, this means the game has truly become a "numbers game" with regards to how many dice one can manage to roll. For those of us with the PDA and/or Laptop/PC dice rollers, we're safe. Everyone else should do okay with not much more than 12 dice on the outside for beginning/street level characters. Trolls exemption potentially here, but you all get the idea. B) I am very grateful that at least the beginnings of Initiation as well as Technomancers (the former Otaku) are included in the base/Core rule book. I wish enough space could have been implemented for spell design, but with everything else included I can also respect the reasons not to include such. C) I know that Rob feels that "weights" were really something that weighted down the game insofar as the overall amount of bookkeeping a player-character and/or GM might have to perform ... but at the same time I feel that by not including weights for all the items/gear it leaves the game open in the end for some really poor initial development/judgement by players. Common Sense as always should rule some aspects of the game, but at the same time the tools for the GM to say "hey wait just a second here....how much ammo are you carrying?" would have been good. On the other hand, it does save ink-space. D) It saddened a LOT of people at the 'Con that System Failure was not out prior to the SR4 book ... including Rob and the rest of the staff at FanPro and Wizkids. However, I am grateful that there is an updated map in the Core book as well as a "5 Year in Review" kinda thing. Not as meaty as the "Shadows of ..." books we are starting to see, but still it was helpful. Would have be nice to have known that the big SR Tournament games were the SF game/story however. I might have adjusted more of my schedule to have at least watched some of the games if not outright joined them then. E) I finally remembered one of the questions I messed up and forgot to ask Rob at the "What's Up With..." Seminar this morning. The question is "during the several storylines that are being wrapped up, and given that in Loose Alliances there is some significant mention of the Yucatan situation being resolved in the near gameline future, is that storyline also finally done?" It might be in some part of the Core book I have missed so far, and if so cool ... otherwise, hope he hears I'm asking this here. F) A statement I made at some point here on Dumpshock about "we're presuming Staging-2/Net Successes are being kept." Well, they are not. Everything is one-to-one now. The "Hit is It" so to speak. The new system is odd compared to the old in how this is handled in nearly every aspect, but not soooooo much so that the system feel is so dramatically altered at this time. Please remember, we have not had time to really play with the new system yet, so this opinion may yet change. That's it for now. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 01:09 AM
Post
#291
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
It will take some thought and/or experience to notice all the implications of the change in mechanic. For example, while combat is probably going to be faster, the outcomes and good strategies are likely to be a fair bit different (especially those things that really make or break a combat). You may or may not like the change.
Edit: funny you should mention ammo, though, since those values were one of the least realistic in SR3. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 01:09 AM
Post
#292
|
|||
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
"Common sense" isn't. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 21 2005, 01:33 AM
Post
#293
|
|
|
Ain Soph Aur Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,477 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Montreal, Canada Member No.: 600 |
I would have prefered a "cumbersomeness" value. 3 shotguns, 5 pistols and 3 boxes of loose ammo isn't going to make you sink into the mud. But how the hell are you gonna carry it?? You gotta stick those guns somewhere.
I'd see a system where guns have this cumbersome value, and people have maximums. You can pick up gear, such as slings, holsters and ammo pouches to increase your capacity to hold stuff. Obviously as a GM you once again go with "common sense", but hey, this is a rulebook, there should be rules fro these things. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 01:55 AM
Post
#294
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 807 Joined: 9-October 04 Member No.: 6,741 |
Translation: I was planning on making sure I only looked at the posts that proved my point and ignoring the others. However, I'm incredibly lazy.
Wow. Tell me, does your ego enjoy the feel of your shoes?
Yeah, let's begin with the obvious. Let's take a look at the fact you, in your lack of bothering to read, missed a part of the post that has relevance. Here, let me post it for you.
First sentence right after the section you quoted. Maybe, next time, you'll bother to use the sense God gave bacteria and look for a connection.
Uh huh. And what part of the words "I suspect" translate into "I know"? Better yet, how could you fail to see the little item about "a better examination when I have more information to work on" that came after that section? Any common idiot can read that, see it is speculation, and have enough sense to wait until I give that better examination. I'm not saying the statement is right, but pointing out how your use of it makes you a moron.
A challenge, dumbass, doesn't automatically mean something the players can survive. Winning chess against a pro is a challenge. So is surviving being dropped 150 stories and having C4 strapped to your chest blow up. Now, using proper reading comprehension skills, let's rewrite that statement to show what everyone who paid attention in English class knows it to mean: "If they face what is defined as a challenge, they lose." Now, using common sense, that would mean that the definition of a challenge in the speculation is beyond the ability of the characters to survive. As for a low-power campaign: No shit, Sherlock. Wow. You discovered the obvious. Now, what does said low powered campaign define as a challenge? Keep in mind that varies from system to system before you spew your bullshit.
Oh, wow, Mr. "I know what I'm talking about" once again proves a potato could outwit him. Hey, stupid shit, you ever consider the players might be the whole reason I even stated any of that? Of course not. That's too much like using common sense. Or too much like checking your misinformation to see what the truth it. I swear, for as much as you accuse me of having no touch with reality, you seem to have even less. So, tell me, what's it like in Candyland?
Sonny, just because you are a wannabe intellectual doesn't mean all of us are. Stop projecting your problems onto others. That's how you got your ignorant ass into this arguement in the first place. Okay, I shouldn't even nhave to state whose preferred power level it is. Really. I've bitched about it enough that even Nerbert figured it out. Here, since you are too much of an ignoramus to figure it out, let me spell it out for you.
Now, stop and use logic and try to see if you think it is really me who is pushing for the power level. And if you say it is again, I'm going to have to verbally beat you like the little fungus you are.
This should be interesting. It'll be interesting to see how you manage to use this one while ignoring the whole conversation that happened at the time. This is going to be a great indicator of how immature you are.
Which is: 1) Information I did not have at the time and was generally not available from the official sources (the FAQs), 2) A couple of numbers I very obviously pulled out of my ass. Oops. Maybe you need to consider the time scale it was posted in instead of proving you have no concept of time, and 3) Wrong, as you didn't bother to get the fact the TN I set was 40, which says a few things about your reading skills and brings into question how much you bother to read before making an ass out of yourself through assumptions.
Uh huh. And how did you come to that conclusion about the first system? Or, for that matter, decide that knowledge I had back then is equal to knowledge I have now? The answer is that you did not bother to consider the issue of how much time has passed and assumed that I, like you, do not grow in knowledge level about something in a few days. Oh, and interestingly, I wasn't using math for that.
Okay, let's use common sense. Under SR3, I set the TN to create an AI at 200. For SR4, I could set the Threshhold at, just to choose a random number, 40. Now, lets say the player has six dice in both situations. Under SR3, the player has a possibility of doing the near-impossible and rolling a 200. Now, under SR4, there is no way in Heaven, Hell, or anything in between a player can ever roll a 40 using just those six dice. And, no matter how high I set the number in SR3, it can theoretically be attained at some point. Even if the number is close to infinite.
Or you could realize these items: 1) It's theoretically possible to hit a TN of infinity, just very improbable. 2) A Threshhold of 12 can actually be hit if one uses Edge dice. 3) At the end of the day, there are plenty of numbers in SR4 that will be impossible while SR3 will always have a system that is mostly improbable.
Actually, if you look, I said TN. Which was later proven wrong by Kat when it comes to SR4. But, it still makes a point: I can set numbers the players cannot reach, only under SR4 it's not as obvious.
Nah. That's what the sleeping hellhound inside the rat shaman's lodge is for.
Actually, that has to do with a history of me and sams. I accidentally blew up a large portion of Seattle using a rocket launcher. The GM said nothing about the methane in the sewers or the fact of how close we were to the waste treatment processing plant, and for some reason mapping systems didn't work. He's learned since then.
And you are exactly the same way, in every regard. But guess what? I at least have an idea of where I stand on this board. You don't. So, really, get off your high horse.
And, I find it interesting you are under the self delusion you are one of the people who matter. A self-delusion that, in the end, doesn't hold up. You think Mfb's shot was just at me? He was talking about you as well. I can at least say I'm doing this for entertainment value. You actually think you are being taken seriously by those who matter on the forum. You might want to take your own advice and realize every statement you said in that quote applies to both sides of this arguement. I'm just mature enough to see it.
Actually, I was making a point. Everyone here who has read the quotes from back then knows exactly how rediculous the games were. My point was that the character stats in question are rediculous enough that even my group of the time wouldn't accept it. These days the group is serious, but the fact that a group which pulled goofball items all the time back then wouldn't accept something like that is saying something. And, really, no one needed to ask because they could look back to those posts and get an idea. Nor did I expect people to ask.
And tell me, who is more self absorbed? Me, who is willing to admit their mistakes, or you, who is acting like an idiot and thinking they are something hot? I'm doing this for the entertainment value of others. You're doing this because you think you are actually proving something and because your ego is so big you have to attack someone simply because you dislike their posting style. Well, too bad, dipshit. Life doesn't give a damn about you. And you're not going to change anything by doing this either. In the meantime, I'm playing the role I chose to play and enjoying the comedy value of your posts.
Wow. I didn't know the voices in your head counted as multiple people. As for wasting time: People don't have to respond. If they don't want to, they don't. That's life. It seems to work pretty well for the intelligent people on this forum. Why don't you try it? And, really, you've only beat yourself, mainly by proving that your intelligence is really much lower than even my insults claim it to be.
Actually, you used it wrong. You don't use plurality, but size. For example, saying that in the tool world someone would be a jackhammer. If you wanted to try that insult, you should have used the Word of God as a tool for it. However, instead, you had to undergo the embarassment of giving an explanation to back your lack of logic and me having to correct you. If you are going to use old-style insults, at least use them right. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Aug 21 2005, 02:03 AM
Post
#295
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Thanks Rolemodel. Though your speech is a "bit" rude, which I think is more a sign of weakness then of superiority, you mention exactly the points that I meant before. Blaming the system for his or others bad GM performance is just outright ridicoluos. Add flawed reasoning and flawed math to this and it gets embarrasing. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 21 2005, 02:07 AM
Post
#296
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 807 Joined: 9-October 04 Member No.: 6,741 |
Hey, Serbitar, I thought I got you to shut up already. Now, provide nonhypothetical examples of me blaming SR4 for decisions. In fact, find any place where I blame the system that doesn't also involve people being to blame.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 02:13 AM
Post
#297
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Sorry Sabosect, but I was not talking to you. Believe what you want, but my time is too precious to post pages and pages to argue with you. You can even conclude that Im trying to hide, that I have no "examples"at all, if that makes you feel better. I dont care.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 21 2005, 02:15 AM
Post
#298
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 807 Joined: 9-October 04 Member No.: 6,741 |
No, but you were talking about me and apparently thought I wouldn't reply.
All I'm asking is one example. Considering the amount of posts on here, do you think it's really that hard to find? Edit: And, if your time is so precious, why waste your time commenting at all? |
|
|
|
 Aug 21 2005, 03:19 AM
Post
#299
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 119 Joined: 17-August 05 Member No.: 7,566 |
Here is something that can be construed as you blaming the system...
Note, that this was before the SR4 rules were widely known, and was earlier in this thread. Now less name calling everyone and more discussion. :D |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 21 2005, 03:23 AM
Post
#300
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
For fuck's sake, will both of you just shut up already? Take it to PMs or something.
~J |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 11th March 2025 - 11:44 AM |
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.