Full Version: Emergence Review
| QUOTE |
| It's not intended as a handout for the players. |
I don't see why players can't read it. Ideally they'd refrain from reading the GM bits, but even that's only crucial if you're going to be running one of the adventure tracks. In fact, I'd like them to read it so they have a clue as to what's going on.
| QUOTE |
| I need information arrayed in a compact and easy to reference way. |
What information, exactly? Because the material in the last chapter was late out more normally for easy reference in the future.
| QUOTE |
| I don't need information buried and camouflaged throughout a fiction section so that fact-finding turns into some kind of easter egg hunt. I need the books to be more like textbooks and less like novels. I'm going to read the book once - I'm going to reference it for years. |
Ah. Ever read Tir Tairngire?
| QUOTE |
| Now this book comes out and says that it's 2070 all over again, but a very different 2070. |
To be terribly precise, Emergence is going on the basis that it is still 2070 at the time the readers turn page one, and then takes them through to 2071.
| QUOTE |
| It makes technomancers and AIs THE major metaplot element for the next year, but doesn't give any rules for them - just assurances that the rules are coming in Unwired, a year from now. Would a negative quality for AIPS have killed 'em? |
It's the Cumulative Crap rule-if you put a little crunch in every book, it builds up until you need twelve sourcebooks, six FAQs and a couple web articles to build your character or play a game-and the older stuff doesn't always line up with the newer stuff, meaning you have to put out updated older stuff that makes the older stuff obsolete...and, natch, the little company-crossing screwed up the schedule a bit.
Haven't yet read it, so no spoiler tags needed.
I'm a GM too. Certainly I use canned adventure, but then I rewrite large chunks of it to pull in environment (macro and micro), flavour, and always twisting in the PCs' personal interests and goals into the greater network. Good canned adventure that doesn't require any rewriting is relatively easy to find on the Internet, especially if you don't mind translating game systems and are willing to gloss the in-between time. (In fact I took major notes off a simple on-web adventure on the weekend -- and ended up running it as a one-off without once referencing those notes. Just having seen them and thought about them turned out to be enough.) It's the general idea and maps that I want, especially on those really tired days.
Thus I continually seek out environmental books, although I found all too few of them in the SR3 release. Ironically, everything people are saying about Emergence is making me want to get it -- almost exactly for the same reasons that those people seeking a straightforward adventure find it weak.
I'm a GM too. Certainly I use canned adventure, but then I rewrite large chunks of it to pull in environment (macro and micro), flavour, and always twisting in the PCs' personal interests and goals into the greater network. Good canned adventure that doesn't require any rewriting is relatively easy to find on the Internet, especially if you don't mind translating game systems and are willing to gloss the in-between time. (In fact I took major notes off a simple on-web adventure on the weekend -- and ended up running it as a one-off without once referencing those notes. Just having seen them and thought about them turned out to be enough.) It's the general idea and maps that I want, especially on those really tired days.
Thus I continually seek out environmental books, although I found all too few of them in the SR3 release. Ironically, everything people are saying about Emergence is making me want to get it -- almost exactly for the same reasons that those people seeking a straightforward adventure find it weak.
| QUOTE |
| I hope they come up with a similar book about magophobia. All it would take is one mage to force someone to kill his family or blow up a building and it'll be Salem 2.0. |
Ah, but two elements are necessary for that degree of backlash; and detached logic has nothing to do with either.
The first is a new force that comes across as a direct, if nebulous, threat: direct enough that fingers can be pointed, nebulous enough that dread and paranoia can easily generalise without requiring continual evidential reinforcement. (Not that the average SR campaign is lacking in evidential reinforcement of threat.)
But the second has to be enough weakness in the target to be able for regular people to properly attack it. In the SR universe, magery -- both individual and as a social/political force even pre-Dunkelzahn -- has become far too powerful for that.
Interestingly enough, technomancers haven't ... yet.
The existence of technomancers happened to coincide with both Matrix crash and a shift to a wireless world where sometimes it seems that everything, even one's own senses, is dependent on commlinks. The Crash -- a terrifying thing, laying naked the societal vulnerability of people on every socioeconomic level -- is at least somewhat generally known to have something to do with wild Matrix-related talent, although specifics almost certainly will have been lost amidst a wild sea of rumour. Easy enough for a nebulous dread to arise, and for at least some of it to target on the newly discovered technomancers. (Wasn't there even a chapter-intro story in the core book about how one runner came into the shadows as a result of a corp suspecting his sister to be a technomancer, and experimenting on her?)
A technomancer still new to their abilities doesn't have a support group, and isn't really powerful enough, in and of themself, to protect themself on every level. Most, having been some variant of decker before, wouldn't really have felt the need, not in the way children Awakening have almost always felt it in the sudden uneasiness and fear of their peer group and even (at the physad level) the continual barring from traditional physical competitive pursuits. After all, decking and datajacks were common, before, almost to the point of social invisibility.
Now, suddenly, the visible datajack signifies a threat potential to the deepest connections of society in exactly the same way as has led to target profiling in other contexts.
Who could have predicted the suddenness of the change? Who knows where it will lead?
Yay, ninja'ed again!
| QUOTE |
| Ah. Ever read Tir Tairngire? |
Or Aztlan? (We really need a smiling, crossed-swords smiley
)Although you already know the answer will probably be no -- when was the last time it was on game store shelves? This is the first book that has come out since that sounds like it might even be comparable.
MFB: I don't want to use spoiler tags, because this is a thread about Emergence. What's the point of being coy? If someone doesn't want to know about the book, they shouldn't read a thread about it.
Ancient History: I'm not saying that the players shouldn't read the shadowtalk, I'm saying that it's meant more for the GM than players. It's GMs who buy plot books, after all. It's meant mostly to convey tone and theme, not raw information. If raw information was the priority, the writers would have used a textbook format.
And I'm not saying that the format is a complete failure - just not as good as it could have been.
I understand that spreading rules everywhere is not good game design. The point of my remark was that the scars on 4th - from the changeover and what-have-you - are very evident when this book introduces major metaplot elements, but we won't see the mechanics for handling those elements for six months to a year.
AH and Talia: Yes, I've read Tir Tairngire and Aztlan. And Sprawl Sites, The Grimoire, Paterson's Guide to Paranormal Animals of Europe, and Native American Nations Vol. I & II, to name a few. I remember the ram skull ads in Dragon that read, "Where Man Meets Magic And Machine. Coming Soon."
Ancient History: I'm not saying that the players shouldn't read the shadowtalk, I'm saying that it's meant more for the GM than players. It's GMs who buy plot books, after all. It's meant mostly to convey tone and theme, not raw information. If raw information was the priority, the writers would have used a textbook format.
And I'm not saying that the format is a complete failure - just not as good as it could have been.
I understand that spreading rules everywhere is not good game design. The point of my remark was that the scars on 4th - from the changeover and what-have-you - are very evident when this book introduces major metaplot elements, but we won't see the mechanics for handling those elements for six months to a year.
AH and Talia: Yes, I've read Tir Tairngire and Aztlan. And Sprawl Sites, The Grimoire, Paterson's Guide to Paranormal Animals of Europe, and Native American Nations Vol. I & II, to name a few. I remember the ram skull ads in Dragon that read, "Where Man Meets Magic And Machine. Coming Soon."
But the medium is also a part of the message. How something is conveyed is at least as important as what is conveyed.
Zen Shooter01 So in your opinion as a GM I should get the book read everything then forget it all when I get the chance to play??????
One thing to think about is that alot of those who GM also play now for me I get to play rarely but I do manage it from time to time so with your thought that this book is mainly for GM's would make me unable to play once I have read it cause then I know too much.
I think I'll stick to the theory (at least as much as I remember to) to think ok as a GM I know that as a player I don't.
One thing to think about is that alot of those who GM also play now for me I get to play rarely but I do manage it from time to time so with your thought that this book is mainly for GM's would make me unable to play once I have read it cause then I know too much.
I think I'll stick to the theory (at least as much as I remember to) to think ok as a GM I know that as a player I don't.
| QUOTE |
| And I'm not saying that the format is a complete failure |
It's exactly the same format that has been used in Shadowrun for nearly 20 years. I can only assume your new to this game.
Casazil: I'm not saying players should be forbidden from reading Emergence, I'm saying that plot books are aimed at the GM more than the players. They provide background for the campaign the GM is writing.
Someone who intends to be a player might want to hold off reading this book until their campaign has moved beyond its events, to preserve surprise. But that's not absolutely necessary, because knowing how the Sojourner crisis turns out isn't much help to a PC caught in a stampede out of the sprawl. Knowing that not all technomancers are evil isn't useful to someone caught in a technomancer terrorist attack.
ThreeGee: Yes, thanks for pointing out that this format has been used before. But this book has very long sections of shadowtalk which are primarily shadowtalkers interacting with, debating, and kidnapping each other. In previous books, the shadowtalk was briefer, and the shadowtalkers commented more on the original "post" than they talked to each other. The game information sections, by contrast, are lighter than in previous books.
I'm not new to Shadowrun. I bought a Big Blue Book when the Big Blue Book was new, and all there was.
Someone who intends to be a player might want to hold off reading this book until their campaign has moved beyond its events, to preserve surprise. But that's not absolutely necessary, because knowing how the Sojourner crisis turns out isn't much help to a PC caught in a stampede out of the sprawl. Knowing that not all technomancers are evil isn't useful to someone caught in a technomancer terrorist attack.
ThreeGee: Yes, thanks for pointing out that this format has been used before. But this book has very long sections of shadowtalk which are primarily shadowtalkers interacting with, debating, and kidnapping each other. In previous books, the shadowtalk was briefer, and the shadowtalkers commented more on the original "post" than they talked to each other. The game information sections, by contrast, are lighter than in previous books.
I'm not new to Shadowrun. I bought a Big Blue Book when the Big Blue Book was new, and all there was.
ThreeGee and ZenShooter are both right, basically. The basic format has been used before, but Emergence does have a heavier use of shadowtalk than similar books have in the past. The comparison to Universal Brotherhood is a solid one, but instead of shadowtalk, the majority of the in-character fiction in that book came from single-perspective entries.
I miss the broad, teasing kinds of books which don't outright tell you what to do with them, but I've read enough threads (such as this one) to know why they were no longer considered desirable. I had started to think that there was no more room in corporate publishing for anything that didn't give fact and only fact. We would have lost thereby, and never recognised what we were losing.
Maybe this pattern always happens when books begin to be farmed out to fandom to write, market-targeted to a fandom that wants facts and facts only and sees much of the rest as disjointed and unnecessary -- but written piecemeal besides, with several isolated specifics that never feels like a linked whole.
I stand firmly on the other side of the desirable, the side that doesn't believe in spoiler protection and a one-time use (until the players have read, and are then considered to know too much to use again), the side that can suspend belief and even knowledge in the interest of a deeply fleshed-out storyline, contributed to by both players and GM, that doesn't end each time with each isolated run.
But I do know that I might be very much alone in this. The market tells me so.
Maybe this pattern always happens when books begin to be farmed out to fandom to write, market-targeted to a fandom that wants facts and facts only and sees much of the rest as disjointed and unnecessary -- but written piecemeal besides, with several isolated specifics that never feels like a linked whole.
I stand firmly on the other side of the desirable, the side that doesn't believe in spoiler protection and a one-time use (until the players have read, and are then considered to know too much to use again), the side that can suspend belief and even knowledge in the interest of a deeply fleshed-out storyline, contributed to by both players and GM, that doesn't end each time with each isolated run.
But I do know that I might be very much alone in this. The market tells me so.
| QUOTE (Zen Shooter01 @ Jul 4 2007, 02:45 AM) |
| MFB: I don't want to use spoiler tags, because this is a thread about Emergence. What's the point of being coy? If someone doesn't want to know about the book, they shouldn't read a thread about it? |
Because you'll notice that this thread was begun by myself as a review and explcitly kept spoiler information to a minimum. Therefore there's an expectation that you might be able to read through it safely. This is further embedded by the fact that most of the respondents used spoiler tags for significant information, so when someone (yourself) suddenly breaks with that, it could catch someone off-guard when they thought they were safe. It's just about consideration.
| QUOTE (Zen Shooter01) |
I see Knasser's point about the shadowtalk - but he's not seeing the point. It's not intended as a handout for the players. It's intended for the GM to provide tone, |
I really, really, really wish that you would actuall read the whole post. What I said was first two reasons why I said that I thought the Shadowtalk was not suitable for players (which you seem to agree with) and then proceeded logically from there to question whether 2/3rds of a book being spent on material that is strictly teasing dialogue that will only be seen by the GM is a good use of that book. That was my point. So don't be so quick to say "he's not seeing the point" when you haven't got mine!
-K.
| QUOTE (Ancient History @ Jul 4 2007, 12:39 AM) | ||
I don't see why players can't read it. |
You seem to have skipped where I covered good reasons for this. I'll quote them again:
| QUOTE |
For me, RPG's are not movies or novels. If I pass on Shadowtalk posters' comments to my players then I fully expect them to try and be involved in those discussions. I can't imagine many players that wouldn't. And that means you do either of the following: (A) Keep all the shadowtalk until the end, so that the players can get a big dollop of behind the scenes backstory. Passing the players a 100 page book that they can share around and read as the finale to an adventure is not a good conclusion to me. (B) Give the players bits of the Shadowtalk as you go along and either allow the players to respond and descend into the quagmire of Shadowrun: Forum Edition, or don't allow them to respond and generate resentment as they find themselves relegated to your captive audience. |
If it's information for the GM, then I want it in a form I can reference and it to give me answers. Teasing "ooh, what's going on" is for the players, not the one who needs to be knowledgable. If the players think that I don't know what's going on in my own world, then that weakens the whole game. Two thirds of a book being unusuable is a vast waste to me. I'm not saying anyone shouldn't buy the book, but I'm explaining what is not good for what I want. I have a game to run. I don't need to read through eighty pages to glean all the things I want to pass on my players. I want the product to support me in running a game. An ongoing dialogue does not give me that.
I didn't skip them, I just disagree. I believe you may be limiting yourself unnecessarily in your interpretation. I still don't understand what exactly you want "easily referenced," as you haven't given any pointers.
It's a PDF, mate. You can search the document. Hell, if you have the right software you can bookmark pages, copy and rearrange pages, select and paste text. I don't know what more you need for referenceability than a search function. Build THAT into a paperback.
By easily referenced I meant that the information is in an organised and concise form. I don't want to read through a couple of pages of dialogue and press-cuttings to learn what is going on. I want the actual number of sentences necessary to convey that information to me.
This is not a case of either you or I being wrong. I am saying what is useful to me in a supplement. And I have been very fair in saying why I don't like certain things so that those people who do want what Emergence is, can see that my comments don't apply to them.
But what people cannot do is tell me what I do or do not find useful. What I have done here is explain how it applies to me.
Knasser: You were saying that letting the players read the shadowtalk didn't seem to lead anywhere. By raising that issue, you gave me the impression that you thought the shadowtalk was meant by the book's writers for the players. Apparently, my impression was mistaken.
Ancient History: I offer the Hong Kong incident as an example of what I mean - and don't mean - by easily referenced. I refer to my PDF of Emergence.
If you look at the pdf bookmarks, the words "Hong Kong incident" do not appear. "Technomancer Escapees Devastate Hospital" is the entry in the bookmarks, which implies that only the hospital, and not big pieces of Hong Kong, was damaged.
Use the search function to find "Hong Kong Incident", and the first thing that comes up is the document's table of contents, pointing you to page 46. Pg. 46 is part of a game information section, and it makes glancing references to the Hong Kong incident that presume you have read the fiction section. But the fiction section requires further searching, and as I just mentioned, the phrase doesn't appear in the bookmarks.
When you do find the fiction section, you have to read two full pages to find out what happened in the Hong Kong incident. And that is only the public version of events. To find the truth of the matter, including MCT's real motive and spin doctoring, requires even MORE hunting through the document.
When I say "easily referenced", I want an entry in the book, perhaps in the game information section, that says "Technomancers held prisoner for illegal experimentation by MCT broke out in spectacular fashion during the Hong Kong incident. MCT spun the breakout to demonize technomancers." This is the information I need as the GM. Keep the shadowtalk, I don't mind. But make the book easy to reference, because I'm going to read it once, and reference it for years. It is a reference work, not a novel.
Ancient History: I offer the Hong Kong incident as an example of what I mean - and don't mean - by easily referenced. I refer to my PDF of Emergence.
If you look at the pdf bookmarks, the words "Hong Kong incident" do not appear. "Technomancer Escapees Devastate Hospital" is the entry in the bookmarks, which implies that only the hospital, and not big pieces of Hong Kong, was damaged.
Use the search function to find "Hong Kong Incident", and the first thing that comes up is the document's table of contents, pointing you to page 46. Pg. 46 is part of a game information section, and it makes glancing references to the Hong Kong incident that presume you have read the fiction section. But the fiction section requires further searching, and as I just mentioned, the phrase doesn't appear in the bookmarks.
When you do find the fiction section, you have to read two full pages to find out what happened in the Hong Kong incident. And that is only the public version of events. To find the truth of the matter, including MCT's real motive and spin doctoring, requires even MORE hunting through the document.
When I say "easily referenced", I want an entry in the book, perhaps in the game information section, that says "Technomancers held prisoner for illegal experimentation by MCT broke out in spectacular fashion during the Hong Kong incident. MCT spun the breakout to demonize technomancers." This is the information I need as the GM. Keep the shadowtalk, I don't mind. But make the book easy to reference, because I'm going to read it once, and reference it for years. It is a reference work, not a novel.
| QUOTE (knasser) |
| By easily referenced I meant that the information is in an organised and concise form. . |
Why not just read the summary at the end of each section then?
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) | ||
Why not just read the summary at the end of each section then? |
I have. My issue is that this makes 2/3rds of the book of very limited use to me. It's not what I want and I can't give to my players. I've very clearly stated my point and you seem to have missed it.
Anyway, I'm only continuing to argue this here because people keep shooting at my points and telling me I'm wrong. I'm not - I'm saying what is useful to me. Emergence is well written, nicely produced and may be perfect for many people. I feel my original review was quite fair and I took a lot of care to explain the reasons my opinions were based on. Because I'm now just repeatedly having to justify my criticisms of the book, I must now be sounding like I'm I have an absolute loathing of it. I don't. This is my personal preference. People should go back and read my original review. It contained everything I thought after reading almost all of Emergence and wasn't just the low-points repeated ad infinitem to people who keep telling me I'm wrong to want different things from it.
I had hoped to give a useful idea of whether or not the book would be worthwhile to others and perhaps to share my feelings with the developers. That was all. In endlessly having to repeat the negative comments to people who didn't like my perception, I've gone beyond that and I owe the developers an apology. I adore Shadowrun 4th Edition greatly. It is a fantastic piece of work, both in idea and execution. I want to see it succeed massively. If nothing else, the vast quantities of material I've written for it for free on my website should be evidence of that.
So this is my last word on the subject. Emergence is not much use to me, but the PDF is the price of a meal and it's Shadowrun 4th. I'm not traumatised that I bought it. If people feel it may be of interest or use, then they should buy it, too. Probably a lot of people will just because they want to keep pace with what's going on in the Shadowrun 4th edition setting.
I'm done here.
-Khadim.
| QUOTE (Knasser) |
| It's not what I want and I can't give to my players. I've very clearly stated my point and you seem to have missed it. |
Yes, in fact I had. Apologies, was not intending to push your buttons.
When I pick up a book like Emergence, I do so for two reasons.
1) To be entertained. This it succeeded at. As a book to read and become imersed in the story, it is well written.
2) To use in my game.For me it succeded at this. Now I know alot of you will disagree with me, but its format makes this easier for me, not harder. I believe that a game has to have a "feel" to it, and for a GM to convey that feel , they must first experience it. Reading through Emergence I got a feeling of, "whats going on?" and "Oh my god, it's the Crash again/ poor Technomancers". This means I can now convey that feeling to my players.
Emergence is all about the feeling of doubt, hysteria and outrage. If you simply wrote that down fact-wise, it wouldn't give the proper impression. As an example, watch a documentary on WWII, then watch Saving Private Ryan. Which one givesa you a better impression fo what it was like to be there?
1) To be entertained. This it succeeded at. As a book to read and become imersed in the story, it is well written.
2) To use in my game.For me it succeded at this. Now I know alot of you will disagree with me, but its format makes this easier for me, not harder. I believe that a game has to have a "feel" to it, and for a GM to convey that feel , they must first experience it. Reading through Emergence I got a feeling of, "whats going on?" and "Oh my god, it's the Crash again/ poor Technomancers". This means I can now convey that feeling to my players.
Emergence is all about the feeling of doubt, hysteria and outrage. If you simply wrote that down fact-wise, it wouldn't give the proper impression. As an example, watch a documentary on WWII, then watch Saving Private Ryan. Which one givesa you a better impression fo what it was like to be there?
Have not read Emergence but have played a technomancer for many months. I always had my character refer to himself as a "hacker of sorts". Though considering I'm the only one in the group with hacking skills of any sort they dont really care much. They have seen me do some strange things "If you let me have access to your equipment I can make it work better" ; then again the voodoo shaman is probably more creepy at the moment as he wants access to your body to do... voodoo things to it.
I can't really see why the world would suddenly turn against technomancers. Sure they can do some crazy stuff, many of which better then a hacker. But hackers have been around far longer and density wise have been more of a problem. Heck any gutter trash can pickup some of the basic essentials (ie comlink/programs) using their impressive 5-finger discount card.
Therefore I can really only see this witch-hunt for technomancers ending up spilling out and taking a lot of hackers with them. After all how can you detect someone is a technomancer?
1) another technomancer
2) 5 hits on an asensing test [decent mage]
3) Hacker with enough skill and time to watch/study a TM as they do their thing; though considering how everything in the matrix is subject to customization, seeing the differences would be difficult.
So to John Q. Public anyone that does hacking of any sorts might be a TM and therefore needs to be shot/lynched/etc. From this I feel that there will be an effort from both hackers/TM to cover up/hide a lot of the info about this. TMs will have the advantages (again) with the abilities gained from submerging whereas hackers will have a little more difficult time hiding.
I think corps will want TM alive to 'brainwash into good little corporate drones'. Runners will want them on their team; and its a bad rep to sell out your chummers.
Hmmm I suddenly see most TMs getting a DocWagon 'high end' package for the Heavily armed backup support.
I can't really see why the world would suddenly turn against technomancers. Sure they can do some crazy stuff, many of which better then a hacker. But hackers have been around far longer and density wise have been more of a problem. Heck any gutter trash can pickup some of the basic essentials (ie comlink/programs) using their impressive 5-finger discount card.
Therefore I can really only see this witch-hunt for technomancers ending up spilling out and taking a lot of hackers with them. After all how can you detect someone is a technomancer?
1) another technomancer
2) 5 hits on an asensing test [decent mage]
3) Hacker with enough skill and time to watch/study a TM as they do their thing; though considering how everything in the matrix is subject to customization, seeing the differences would be difficult.
So to John Q. Public anyone that does hacking of any sorts might be a TM and therefore needs to be shot/lynched/etc. From this I feel that there will be an effort from both hackers/TM to cover up/hide a lot of the info about this. TMs will have the advantages (again) with the abilities gained from submerging whereas hackers will have a little more difficult time hiding.
I think corps will want TM alive to 'brainwash into good little corporate drones'. Runners will want them on their team; and its a bad rep to sell out your chummers.
Hmmm I suddenly see most TMs getting a DocWagon 'high end' package for the Heavily armed backup support.
I'm going to break my promise and "radio silence" on this thread just to note one thing.
It is important to go into Emergence understanding that you as a gamemaster or player know about a technomancer's actual abilities and their comparative "power level". By now you have a pretty good idea of what they are capable of and how far their powers go.
This is vitally important because most characters, including most PCs, in the Sixth World do not know this. Technomancers are an unknown quantity in every respect - their origins, their "impossible" ability to naturally mimic thousands of nuyen worth of technology, their ability to mentally subvert Matrix technology, their intuitive interaction with the Matrix, their ability to command spontaneous constructs, etc. But most importantly people in the Sixth World have no idea of the limits of those powers (and I daresay not even TM PCs do since Unwired isn't out). Given the circumstances of their public coming out, the associations made in the media, the confusion involving AIPS - and technomancers suddenly become a public menace.
It is important to go into Emergence understanding that you as a gamemaster or player know about a technomancer's actual abilities and their comparative "power level". By now you have a pretty good idea of what they are capable of and how far their powers go.
This is vitally important because most characters, including most PCs, in the Sixth World do not know this. Technomancers are an unknown quantity in every respect - their origins, their "impossible" ability to naturally mimic thousands of nuyen worth of technology, their ability to mentally subvert Matrix technology, their intuitive interaction with the Matrix, their ability to command spontaneous constructs, etc. But most importantly people in the Sixth World have no idea of the limits of those powers (and I daresay not even TM PCs do since Unwired isn't out). Given the circumstances of their public coming out, the associations made in the media, the confusion involving AIPS - and technomancers suddenly become a public menace.
Sure - but Blog's point is: How does Joe Average distinguish Joe Hacker/Businessman from a TM? All of them access the matrix without any visible tool - the first two because they have implanted comlinks, the latter because he is a comlink.
That is the major weak point of the witchhunt part - the lack of stigmata.
That is the major weak point of the witchhunt part - the lack of stigmata.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Sure - but Blog's point is: How does Joe Average distinguish Joe Hacker/Businessman from a TM? All of them access the matrix without any visible tool - the first two because they have implanted comlinks, the latter because he is a comlink. That is the major weak point of the witchhunt part - the lack of stigmata. |
I am not so sure there is no stigmata, it just isn't as obvious as the big red TM on the forehead, but it is going to be very clear when dealing with a TM you are dealing something different.
What is a Hacker going to see with a Matrix Perception test on the following?
- A TM Persona?
- A Complex Form? This doesn't look like other software does it? You certainly can't interact with it the same way a Hacker does with other software.
- A Sprite?
The basic Hacker tools and interactions do not work the same way with TM tools.
| QUOTE (DireRadiant) |
| What is a Hacker going to see with a Matrix Perception test on the following? |
That depends on the success of the scan and what he's looking for. And that method is about as 'average' as a mage assensing the TM (it's debugging info, and, honestly - ever seen a luser looking at that?)... but addidionally requires the TM to actually do something on the same node. And if you found one, you have to track him back... with an accuracy of 50m.
Nope, that's not going to help sorting them out of a crowd.
Can a Hacker Spoof a Sprite?
How does Analyze software work on a complex form?
How does Analyze software work on a complex form?
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jul 6 2007, 03:02 PM) |
| Sure - but Blog's point is: How does Joe Average distinguish Joe Hacker/Businessman from a TM? All of them access the matrix without any visible tool - the first two because they have implanted comlinks, the latter because he is a comlink. That is the major weak point of the witchhunt part - the lack of stigmata. |
Joe Average doesn't distinguish and that too is a source of general paranoia that prevades 2070.
But that's not really a problem since from the outset Joe Average couldn't really care if he's been contacted via webphone by a technomancer or a business man.
He won't worry unless he detects he is being hacked or he's worried about the possibility of being hacked.
The threat of technomancy is largely spun by the media on the "illegal" use of TM abilities (including their attacks on people and property, their ability to fake an account every time they log onto the Matrix, etc) and the potential danger those abilities pose in the hands of inherently unbalanced individuals (ironically rendered unstable by virtue of those same powers). This is increased by the fact that nobody knows exactly what the limits of those powers are. If a TM can spontaneously generate code constructs (sprites) and programs (complex forms) what's to stop him generating a virus at will? Or a mega virus at that?
Thatis the fundamental difference between hackers and technomancers. A hacker has specific and pratical limits on what he can do. Technomancers may very well have the limits of their own, but people just don't know- and more importantly aren't willing to wait until it is too late to find out and put it into check.
Blog is right that hackers, in the strict sense of the term, are going to be caught in the splash over - this actually happens several times in Emergence - and even those that aren't suffer from the increased paranoia and security measures. Many quite rightly put the blame for their troubles on technomancers (though in fact this goes both ways technomancers could get blamed for stuff a hacker with an implanted commlink did - as showcased in one of the newsitems in Emergence. This sets up a natural rivalry and even antagonism between hackers and the upstart technomancers which is one of the less glaring consequences of Emergence.
| QUOTE (DireRadiant) |
| Can a Hacker Spoof a Sprite? How does Analyze software work on a complex form? |
No and yes - when issueing an MPT on a TM persona and asking what programs it runs.
Now please iterate how this helps Joe Average to determine whether the person in front of him is a TM, at all. Wait - it doesn't, for reasons I alreaded pointed out a post ago.
Well, implanted commlinks aren't usually that hard to notice ... got a dand antennae sticking out of your head and a big chrome half-dome back there. The Alpha-grade stuff is more inside, mind you, which is why it gets so hard for a scanner to detect 'em, but teh standard issue isn't exactly buried under your cranium ... how would you ever get upgrades and troubleshoot?!
Besides, those types are few and far between. The vast, and by this I mean VAST, majority carry normal commlinks to do stuff.
Watching somebody start interacting with no commlink in hand, no wires in his head ... yeah, kinda freaky.
Besides, those types are few and far between. The vast, and by this I mean VAST, majority carry normal commlinks to do stuff.
Watching somebody start interacting with no commlink in hand, no wires in his head ... yeah, kinda freaky.
| QUOTE (Wakshaani) |
| Well, implanted commlinks aren't usually that hard to notice ... got a dand antennae sticking out of your head and a big chrome half-dome back there. The Alpha-grade stuff is more inside, mind you, which is why it gets so hard for a scanner to detect 'em, but teh standard issue isn't exactly buried under your cranium ... how would you ever get upgrades and troubleshoot?! |
YMMD.
Seriously, it's all nano-tech implants in the 70s - so no, without a cyber scanner or mage, you won't know the difference.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| Joe Average doesn't distinguish and that too is a source of general paranoia that prevades 2070. |
Indeed. And for paranoia turning into a witchhunt, you need an image to hate.
Say... wearing glasses thick enough to repel bullets? Other classic geek stereoptypes?
que Ogre -- "NERRRDDS!!!!"
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
Indeed. And for paranoia turning into a witchhunt, you need an image to hate. Say... wearing glasses thick enough to repel bullets? Other classic geek stereoptypes? |
You are erroneously assuming the witchhunts target the right people and not "innocent" victims doing things that are associated with technomancers (ie. hacking without an apparent commlink, performing "impossible" Matrix feats in the eyes of the uninformed, etc). Technomancers who lie low and hide their abilities by using commlinks can potentially ride out the witchhunts untouched. The ones who don't know how to control their abilities yet, the ones who are unbalanced by AIPS, the ones who don't take precautions, the ones who are surprised in the act, the ones who told a blabber-mouth friend, the ones who told an untrustworthy fellow runner - those are the ones that get lynched or picked up by the corps. The witchhunts don't number thousands of victims, there aren't that many technomancers to begin with. They number a few dozen maybe a few hundred worldwide but every time something of the sort happens it gets huge airtime because of the general craze (further feeding the flames).
You're also assuming that unreliable methods aren't used (there are actually 3 new methods of detecting technomancers introduced in Emergence, more if you believe the spammers).
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
Indeed. And for paranoia turning into a witchhunt, you need an image to hate. Say... wearing glasses thick enough to repel bullets? Other classic geek stereoptypes? |
Oh, I'm sure the Corps and Governments will come up with an easily used color code system to help the public know exactly who a TM is.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| You're also assuming that unreliable methods aren't used (there are actually 3 new methods of detecting technomancers introduced in Emergence, more if you believe the spammers). |
Does one involve a feather and water?
I was watching for some specific reference in Emergence to the portable CAT scan device introduced in Brainscan. Did I miss it , or was it just not there?
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| You are erroneously assuming the witchhunts target the right people and not "innocent" victims doing things that are associated with technomancers (ie. hacking without an apparent commlink, performing "impossible" Matrix feats in the eyes of the uninformed, etc). |
Actually, you got that backwards - I'm well aware (and advocating) that people ending up burned on the stake are not witches.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| You're also assuming that unreliable methods aren't used (there are actually 3 new methods of detecting technomancers introduced in Emergence, more if you believe the spammers). |
Nope. Neither am I assuming this, nor are those methods new - they are already refered in the main book.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Actually, you got that backwards - I'm well aware (and advocating) that people ending up burned on the stake are not witches. |
| QUOTE (Robart) |
| Actually, you got that backwards - I'm well aware (and advocating) that people ending up burned on the stake are not witches. |
That would be at odds with...
| QUOTE |
| Indeed. And for paranoia turning into a witchhunt, you need an image to hate. |
... since I'm pretty sure witches didn't have an "image" to qualify for the stake.
| QUOTE | ||
Nope. Neither am I assuming this, nor are those methods new - they are already refered in the main book. |
No. When I said 3 new methods, I meant 3 new methods (ie. not Assensing et al. in the main book).
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| ... since I'm pretty sure witches didn't have an "image" to qualify for the stake. |
The whole 'witches' thing is the archetype of stereotype generation, so I'll disagree.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| No. When I said 3 new methods, I meant 3 new methods (ie. not Assensing et al. in the main book). |
If I meant those obvious ones, I wouldn't used 'refered'.
| QUOTE (Blog @ Jul 6 2007, 02:16 PM) |
| I can't really see why the world would suddenly turn against technomancers. Sure they can do some crazy stuff, many of which better then a hacker. But hackers have been around far longer and density wise have been more of a problem. Heck any gutter trash can pickup some of the basic essentials (ie comlink/programs) using their impressive 5-finger discount card. |
This isn't me continuing on with the good/bad threads. I wont respond on those from here on. But I can offer a strong reason why Technomancers would be subject to such tremendous fear and prejudice and that is if the GM emphasizes an AI connection. This is mucking with the order of events and revelations in Emergence (ish), but if you really play up the angle that these are people that have been hacked by the Matrix, or non-human entities therein, then you get the hang-em-high fear.
Note that I am aware that there are hints of this in Emergence - what I'm saying is that it requires greater emphasis. But other than a preconception that there has to be some big "AI's Exist" revelation, there's no reason you can't do this and stop worrying about whether TMs would actually provoke hysteria or not. If a program has taken control of someone to create agents amongst you, then TM's will produce such a reaction.
To take the historical witch trials, identifiers for who was to be branded a witch were nearly always made up. They were superstitious leaps of false rationalization that a mob mind picked up on and ran with. Sometimes it was little more than someone not being approved of by the Powers-That-Be in a given town.
Similarly, it wouldn't necessarily take much to be branded a technomancer, even if you were not one. After all, most technomancer abilities are hard to detect and seem indistinguishable from "innocent" things that people do all day. People can come up with all manner of ways to point out a technomancer, or perhaps they simply believe the word of someone important (say, the media).
Hell, the guy the got on a plane and flew around with drug-resistant tuberculosis recently received tons of death threats soon after the media aired the story. By people who had nothing at all to worry about from the guy.
Similarly, it wouldn't necessarily take much to be branded a technomancer, even if you were not one. After all, most technomancer abilities are hard to detect and seem indistinguishable from "innocent" things that people do all day. People can come up with all manner of ways to point out a technomancer, or perhaps they simply believe the word of someone important (say, the media).
Hell, the guy the got on a plane and flew around with drug-resistant tuberculosis recently received tons of death threats soon after the media aired the story. By people who had nothing at all to worry about from the guy.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Oh, and BTW - big Booos for putting that as a fact in Game Information: [ Spoiler ] It completly cut's the cliffhangers from System Failure. |
As with anything else...
Are we so certain they kicked the virtual bucket? IIRC, one of Big D's bequests in his will saved Captain Chaos / Fastjack (can't remember which and not at home to look) by doing some really strange stuff in the Matrix.
So with such obvious rule bending / ignoring, can we really be certain the big AIs are in fact dead? Who isn't to say they aren't simply doing what others have implied the good Doctor who screwed over Renny are possibly doing... looking really & convincingly dead while off performing other nefarious deeds.
Just food for thought...
| QUOTE (darthmord) |
| Are we so certain they kicked the virtual bucket? |
Yes. Because... it's stated as GM information.
thats not to say new ones can gain that level of power, now is there?
Emergence makes certain to explain that the new AIs are way more 'normal' and comparable to other characters.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Emergence makes certain to explain that the new AIs are way more 'normal' and comparable to other characters. |
[ Spoiler ]
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Jul 12 2007, 05:27 PM) | ||
Yes. Because... it's stated as GM information. |
Emergence says that the three god-like AIs died with the old Matrix... though if there's one thing we know about death in the Sixth World can be something of a transitional state. After all, Dunklezahn and Captain Chaos died too (and in the Game Information too).
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| though if there's one thing we know about death in the Sixth World is that it's not always terminal. |
No, 'we' don't know. The only thing known is that another form of existance might be possible, though Street Magic goes great lenghts to avoid that issue.
Unfortunatly, in the case of the AIs, it's not only declared that they 'died', but that it was 'the end' also.
Which rules out any such possibility.
If that wasn't the intention, then the intention is badly implemented.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| After all Dunklezahn and Captain Chaos died too (and in the Game Information too). |
While a certain disconnect exists for Dunkelzahn between Game Inforation canon and Fiction canon, Captain Chaos was always declared a cliffhanger by the author.
| QUOTE (Synner) | ||||
Emergence says that the three god-like AIs died with the old Matrix... though if there's one thing we know about death in the Sixth World can be something of a transitional state. After all, Dunklezahn and Captain Chaos died too (and in the Game Information too). |
Good point. But we sort of have to take the Game Information as fact. What is our alternative? Assume that rumors are just rumors and facts are just rumors, so we know nothing? Gosh, that makes me feel a lot better. I feel so liberated. I think I'll strip naked and run around.
WHEEEEEE!
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
| Gosh, that makes me feel a lot better. I feel so liberated. I think I'll strip naked and run around. WHEEEEEE! |
Don't forget to paint yourself orange.
| QUOTE (knasser) | ||
Don't forget to paint yourself orange. |
It's okay, I have a lot of Edge. You'll never see me.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.