Full Version: Shadowrun is dead
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| As I may or may not have already said, it's unrealistic for a team to retire on as little as 4 million apiece if they managed to make that much. Keep in mind that a lot of their retirement cred is going to go to keep their past from catching up with them rather painfully. ~J |
"as little as" ? Well, when you're getting 25K apiece (including expenses) per mission and facing off against cyberzombies and insect spirits... exactly _when_ should you retire?
@ WR
I was suggesting that it's probably beefier than that, like an MMG.
It's not as if they were hitting people center mass every shot with those things. They mostly minced the target all over and made a pocked mess of the wall behind.
Bah, it's not worth defending. It is just a movie after all. If the rules of the movie say it can be fired from the hip in "protect gear," well, it can. And the point of the movie wasn't even stormtroopers shooting everything in sight.
I was suggesting that it's probably beefier than that, like an MMG.
It's not as if they were hitting people center mass every shot with those things. They mostly minced the target all over and made a pocked mess of the wall behind.
Bah, it's not worth defending. It is just a movie after all. If the rules of the movie say it can be fired from the hip in "protect gear," well, it can. And the point of the movie wasn't even stormtroopers shooting everything in sight.
Well, an M60 is considered an LMG, isn't it? Or am I wrong?
| QUOTE (Toxic_Waste @ Nov 19 2004, 02:01 PM) |
| "as little as" ? Well, when you're getting 25K apiece (including expenses) per mission and facing off against cyberzombies and insect spirits... exactly _when_ should you retire? |
If that's the pay for that opposition, you shouldn't be running. Shoot the J for being such an idiot, then sell his or her organs for more than that.
If one single runner has four mill, they could possibly risk retiring, maybe. Split that three or more ways and there isn't a chance in hell.
~J
An M60 is a GPMG. That's exactly what the MG42 (which, incidentally, is a strong "inspiration" for the M60) is as well, a textbook case of a GPMG. In SR terms, that equals a MMG -- it fires rounds you'd find in moderately powerful sporting rifles, there are machine guns in significantly less powerful calibers, etc. And in SR terms, you'd be spraying all over the walls with that thing, with no recoil compensation and double recoil mods.
The site is a bit, uhh, biased, even if it has a lot of solid information. For example, why does the writer say the 7.92x57mm(/8x57mm) JS(/IS) Mauser is "one of the best ammunitions of war of its time"?
7.92x57mm JS: 154gr @ 2880fps for 2835 ft-lbs of KE at the muzzle
7.62x54mm R: 180gr @ 2660fps for 2910 ft-lbs
.30-06: 150gr @ 2740fps for 2500 ft-lbs
.303 British: 174gr @ 2440fps for 2310 ft-lbs
The 7.92x57mm is also likely to slow down faster than the others because of the greater bullet diameter at the same bullet weight and shape -- so the 7.62x54mm R, for example, will catch up to it in speed somewhere downrange, and will retain more kinetic energy throughout its flight path.
Of course, with only 4 real contesters for the "best ammunition of war" in Europe at the time, it's true that the 7.92x57mm JS is "one of the best"...
The site is a bit, uhh, biased, even if it has a lot of solid information. For example, why does the writer say the 7.92x57mm(/8x57mm) JS(/IS) Mauser is "one of the best ammunitions of war of its time"?
7.92x57mm JS: 154gr @ 2880fps for 2835 ft-lbs of KE at the muzzle
7.62x54mm R: 180gr @ 2660fps for 2910 ft-lbs
.30-06: 150gr @ 2740fps for 2500 ft-lbs
.303 British: 174gr @ 2440fps for 2310 ft-lbs
The 7.92x57mm is also likely to slow down faster than the others because of the greater bullet diameter at the same bullet weight and shape -- so the 7.62x54mm R, for example, will catch up to it in speed somewhere downrange, and will retain more kinetic energy throughout its flight path.
Of course, with only 4 real contesters for the "best ammunition of war" in Europe at the time, it's true that the 7.92x57mm JS is "one of the best"...
M60 uses the same mechanism, but a different bullet. If I'm reading that right.
The MG-42 is 7.92x57mm.
edit: Thanks, Aust. I figured one of the gun-guys would happen by eventually. Yeah, the site is worshipful of the MG-42. But it deals directly with the movie in question, so...
The MG-42 is 7.92x57mm.
edit: Thanks, Aust. I figured one of the gun-guys would happen by eventually. Yeah, the site is worshipful of the MG-42. But it deals directly with the movie in question, so...
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
| Yeah, and you'd need that much Karma to get to the ridiculously high 35 CP I used as an example. 20 KP wouldn't help you out for more than a few Phases against 5 goons with no initiative-boosting ware. Whereas in D20 with DC 20 to hit them and 100+ HP, you could stand there in the open for minutes. |
two words: massive damage...
I've talked about Massive Damage at length with you on at least 2 occasions, I don't feel like going through it again. In short: it only reliably works to deter this kind of action when it the characters would get killed by the damage in short order anyway.
If you use base D20 Modern rules, Massive Damage just might happen -- but the DC to hit will sure as hell be 20, since you get a -4 just for using Burst Fire. If you use D20 Spycraft rules, the chances of getting Massive Damage with a SMG against someone with CON 14 is about 1/30 on a successful hit. Not fricken likely to happen, in other words.
If you use base D20 Modern rules, Massive Damage just might happen -- but the DC to hit will sure as hell be 20, since you get a -4 just for using Burst Fire. If you use D20 Spycraft rules, the chances of getting Massive Damage with a SMG against someone with CON 14 is about 1/30 on a successful hit. Not fricken likely to happen, in other words.
Wow...this is a true DSF thread.
Siderailed into tangent after tangent. I Love this place for that. It's like REAL conversation in large groups.
Because of the length of this post, I've put the entire post into a SPOILER tag so that it won't hog up the thread.
I'm warning you...this is a Loooong post.
Siderailed into tangent after tangent. I Love this place for that. It's like REAL conversation in large groups.
Because of the length of this post, I've put the entire post into a SPOILER tag so that it won't hog up the thread.
I'm warning you...this is a Loooong post.
[ Spoiler ]
Cyberpunk is alive and well it seems. 
cyberpunk as a genre is haveing a reawakening based on its core values, and dropping the imagery and style presented in the works of gibson and others. its still a dystopian future where corps and goverments dont bother asking the little man what they want. and where the only reactions are to bend over and take it, or become a outcast...
| QUOTE |
| cyberpunk as a genre is haveing a reawakening based on its core values, and dropping the imagery and style presented in the works of gibson and others. its still a dystopian future where corps and goverments dont bother asking the little man what they want. and where the only reactions are to bend over and take it, or become a outcast... |
Those, that you listed in the second sentence, are cyberpunks core values. It's not having a reawakening on those elements, as your first sentence suggests.
And style, artwork and fashions arn't really core values if that's what you meant.
If cyberpunk is getting a face lift out of the eighties, which is a completely odd statement to me given the continual cyberpunk material that has been continualy released throught the years with the present fashions and styles of it's time, then wooptie dooptie!
If cyebrpunk were a ballcap and the core values of it were that it had a cap and a sun-lid, then changing the logo and color would not be changing the core values.
Removing the sun-lid would be altering the core values.
| QUOTE (Garland) |
| M60 uses the same mechanism, but a different bullet. If I'm reading that right. The MG-42 is 7.92x57mm. edit: Thanks, Aust. I figured one of the gun-guys would happen by eventually. Yeah, the site is worshipful of the MG-42. But it deals directly with the movie in question, so... |
It's a bit more complicated:
+ Original M42 uses the 7.92mm Mauser
+ Post WWII MG42 (aka MG1) is changed to 7.62N by changing some minor parts (can be done by the gunner!)
+ MG42/59 (aka MG3) has additional changes (including a feed that takes the older permanent link belts and the new US-style disintegrating link belts) and still is 7.62N. Reduced rate of fire. Still has the "runaway steam-hammer mixed with circular saw cutting concrete" sound effect
+ The M60 uses concepts but IIRC a totally different recoil system (gas recoil)
+ The Allzweck-Maschinengewehr (GPMG) term used with the MG42 is due to it's tripod (AA capabel and then some, see "Steiner" for a properly used Spritze[Hose]), allowing it to fill the "long range cover fire" role.
Having lugged the MG3: Firing it from the hip means zero accuracy and having to cope with a serious amount of recoil. Still, one man can handle the gun and ammo and use it. That makes it a light MG in military terms. SR translates to RL:
Light MG(SR) => Squad Automatic Weapon (IRL)
Medium (SR) => Light /GPMG (IRL)
Heavy (SR) => Heavy MG
Birdy
| QUOTE (Birdy) |
| So maybe it's time for a new approach to "Shadowrunning", one less inspired by "Neuromancer", "Snowcrash" and "Hardwired" and more by "Oceans Eleven", "Foolproof" and "Top Job". Let the players be professional criminals, maybe even a team. Or freelance security consultants like "Bugs" Or even agents of the "This watcher will self-destruct in 10 seconds" variety. Birdy |
umm.....i don't see the issue here. This is how we've almost always played. Being a martyr gets sooo old.
| QUOTE (Birdy) |
| Light MG(SR) => Squad Automatic Weapon (IRL) Medium (SR) => Light /GPMG (IRL) |
If you really want to be difficult with the categories, a RL LMG could easily be either a LMG or a MMG in SR. In modern western armies, infantry fire team/squad/platoon automatic support weapons that are meant to be fired from a bipod mount (which is more or less the definition of a LMG) are more often chambered in 5.56x45mm than in 7.62x51mm, and thus in many/most cases a RL LMG would equate to a SR LMG.
Also, the term MMG is used IRL as well, and would almost always equate to a SR MMG.
They way I always figured it back when I was in Our Beloved Corps was the SAW was the LMG, the 240Golf was the MMG, and the 50cals were the HMG. Not that this has much of anything to do with anything. In SR, I figure it like this: the LMG does 7S, the MMG 9S, and the HMG 10S. Whereas IRL the 50cal is a significantly more intimidating weapon than the 240 and that isn't really borne out by the SR figures, thats simply the way it goes sometimes.
Further, while the SAW was a one man weapon, the 240 was fired by a 3-man team and the 50cal was strapped to the back of a truck. SR doesn't really support the idea of crew-served weapons, those being more the domain of the hardline merc campaigns or tabletop strategy sessions more than the "typical" shadowrun. Though, I'd be surprised if some hasn't posted the mechanics for it somewhere online.
Further, while the SAW was a one man weapon, the 240 was fired by a 3-man team and the 50cal was strapped to the back of a truck. SR doesn't really support the idea of crew-served weapons, those being more the domain of the hardline merc campaigns or tabletop strategy sessions more than the "typical" shadowrun. Though, I'd be surprised if some hasn't posted the mechanics for it somewhere online.
| QUOTE (DrJest) |
| When I said SR was anime, I was referring to a combination of styles that is rarely, if ever, seen outside of the genre. The mixture of high technology and mysticism is almost solely the purview of the anime genre; this is why the latter Matrix films are such bones of contention, imho, since the Matrix trilogy is clearly a live-action anime (the Wachowski brothers are heavily into manga and anime). SR is also a mix of high-tech and mysticism, albeit leaning more heavily on the mysticism if you ask me. That, to me, screams anime - not the BESM anime of Bubblegum Crisis, but the more gritty, apocalyptic stuff of Ghost in the Shell, Akira, Megazone 23 or Monster City. |
Star Wars, oh boy do they have magic.
And Star Trek, they have Gods, and more than one type! They have magic people,also more than one type.
| QUOTE (Cynic project) |
| Star Wars, oh boy do they have magic. And Star Trek, they have Gods, and more than one type! They have magic people,also more than one type. |
While this may be true. Magic isn't the integral part of Star Wars and Star Trek as it is in SR. I would say Star Wars has more psionics than anything.
| QUOTE (Solstice @ Nov 20 2004, 03:58 PM) | ||
While this may be true. Magic isn't the integral part of Star Wars and Star Trek as it is in SR. I would say Star Wars has more psionics than anything. |
Before Lucas ruined The Force, it was considered magic. They even referred to it as mysticism.
Startrek also had magic, though often in the form of an incredibly advanced/powerful being.
stumps, i may have messed up the post but the point i was trying to make (i think) was that many people read cyberpunk as 80's hairstyles and punk clothing, basicly the presentation of it in gibson and contemporary. they dont see the deeper topics. in that context cyberpunk died when the world rolled into the 90's and then the 21. century.
the stuff released now as cyberpunk is more focused on getting the core values right rather then getting the 80's style right. this is allso reflected in the "mutating" appearance of SR.
therefore i see it as a reawakening. atleast in the eyes of the public. cyberpunk have gone mainstream and is now a part of the general sci-fi style...
the stuff released now as cyberpunk is more focused on getting the core values right rather then getting the 80's style right. this is allso reflected in the "mutating" appearance of SR.
therefore i see it as a reawakening. atleast in the eyes of the public. cyberpunk have gone mainstream and is now a part of the general sci-fi style...
| QUOTE (Shadow) | ||||
Before Lucas ruined The Force, it was considered magic. They even referred to it as mysticism. Startrek also had magic, though often in the form of an incredibly advanced/powerful being. |
Yeah, midochlorians my ass.
"Your devotion to that sad religion hasn't helped you conjure up those secret plans! When this battle station is fully operational-" <ahasghfgj>
"I find your lack of faith disturbing..."
"I find your lack of faith disturbing..."
Without wanting to hijack the thread -
My take on the midichlorians (when I bother to acknowledge that brainfart at all) is that they are the Force equivalent of a datajack. They don't do anything at all except act as an interface to whatever the Force may be; the more midichlorians you have, the greater your "bandwidth" for the Force.
Honestly, Lucas made a real pig's ear of Star Wars this time out. I could write a long rant about it, but sci-fi writer David Brin already did it sooo much better here and here . I particularly like his theory on how all the plot inconsistencies can be tied together
Lucas' problem is he's spent the last twenty years in a bubble with people telling him how great he is. Amazing how many bum-kissers the profits from Star Wars can buy.
My take on the midichlorians (when I bother to acknowledge that brainfart at all) is that they are the Force equivalent of a datajack. They don't do anything at all except act as an interface to whatever the Force may be; the more midichlorians you have, the greater your "bandwidth" for the Force.
Honestly, Lucas made a real pig's ear of Star Wars this time out. I could write a long rant about it, but sci-fi writer David Brin already did it sooo much better here and here . I particularly like his theory on how all the plot inconsistencies can be tied together
Lucas' problem is he's spent the last twenty years in a bubble with people telling him how great he is. Amazing how many bum-kissers the profits from Star Wars can buy.
| QUOTE (Solstice) | ||
While this may be true. Magic isn't the integral part of Star Wars and Star Trek as it is in SR. I would say Star Wars has more psionics than anything. |
Um,and psionic power is not magic, why?Is it becuase it's name?
| QUOTE |
| Um,and psionic power is not magic, why?Is it becuase it's name? |
Traditionally, psionics and magic have always been defined as two separate things (SR is the only game I know where the one is a "tradition" of the other).
Psionics refers to classical mental phenomenon - telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance, etc. Although magic can typically do all these things as well, the primary difference is that the psionic/psychic character utilises only his own internal power to make them happen, whereas magic manipulates energy flows outside the self. Frequently, psionics are considered "natural" and magic is considered "supernatural".
| QUOTE (DrJest) |
| Without wanting to hijack the thread - My take on the midichlorians (when I bother to acknowledge that brainfart at all) is that they are the Force equivalent of a datajack. They don't do anything at all except act as an interface to whatever the Force may be; the more midichlorians you have, the greater your "bandwidth" for the Force. Honestly, Lucas made a real pig's ear of Star Wars this time out. I could write a long rant about it, but sci-fi writer David Brin already did it sooo much better here and here . I particularly like his theory on how all the plot inconsistencies can be tied together Lucas' problem is he's spent the last twenty years in a bubble with people telling him how great he is. Amazing how many bum-kissers the profits from Star Wars can buy. |
I really disliked the Star Wars prequels and most of the Star Wars novels that sprang up between the 70s and now. But, I don't like David Brin either.
Firstly, he laughably oversimplifies Joseph Campbell, and actually misrepresents him:
| QUOTE |
In "The Hero With a Thousand Faces," Joseph Campbell showed how a particular, rhythmic storytelling technique was used in almost every ancient and pre-modern culture, depicting protagonists and antagonists with certain consistent motives and character traits, a pattern that transcended boundaries of language and culture. In these classic tales, the hero begins reluctant, yet signs and portents foretell his pre-ordained greatness. He receives dire warnings and sage wisdom from a mentor, acquires quirky-but-faithful companions, faces a series of steepening crises, explores the pit of his own fears and emerges triumphant to bring some boon/talisman/victory home to his admiring tribe/people/nation. |
(from http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/19...in/index1.html)
I read The Hero With A Thousand Faces like 5 times when I was in middle school because at the time I was a real Joseph Campbell nut. While Campbell did point out common themes between world mythologies, he did not portray a single story that sounds like the plot of Red Sonja as being the only story. His analysis was much more complex and he looked at many different stories or common elements. Very importantly, he NEVER mentioned "quirky-but-faithful companions" as some kind of vital common element. *That* is straight from Red Sonja and not Joseph Campbell.
So, I don't know what kind of crap he's trying to pull here.
Secondly, he nutrides Star Trek because it allegedly promotes democratic participation and good citizenship. Whoop de doo. Does that mean that Star Trek is somehow "better" than Taxi Driver because Taxi Driver is gritty and features a desperate nihilistic shootout at the end? Or are they just *different*?
That's a matter of personal preference and nothing else. Personally, I like Howard's Conan better than Captian Picard. Does that mean that I'm wrong and Brin is right? Of course not.
Thirdly, Brin busts out the ad hominem:
| QUOTE |
Lucas often says we are a sad culture, bereft of the confidence or inspiration that strong leaders can provide. And yet, aren't we the very same culture that produced George Lucas and gave him so many opportunities? The same society that raised all those brilliant experts for him to hire -- boldly creative folks who pour both individual inspiration and cooperative skill into his films? A culture that defies the old homogenizing impulse by worshipping eccentricity, with unprecedented hunger for the different, new or strange? It what way can such a civilization be said to lack confidence? |
(from http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/19...in/index2.html)
Way to attack the creator as being a blind hypocrite, Brin. That's the height of literary analysis right there, Mister Pee Ayche Deeeh.
Finally, at http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/19...ain/index3.html Brin attacks "Return of the Jedi" because Darth Vader is redeemed in the end, even though if it were up to the Nuremburg tribunal Vader wouldn't be let off scot free. Then Brin continues to give a concrete example illustrating why he dosen't buy the whole "fear leads to anger...to the dark side" thing:
| QUOTE |
In other words, getting angry at Adolf Hitler will cause you to rush right out and join the Nazi Party? Excuse me, George. Could you come up with a single example of that happening? Ever? |
I think this just proves that Brin has massively missed the point. Even though he cited Campbell towards the beginning of his article, he dosen't seem to know that the first three Star Wars movie are directly based upon Campellian ideology. As such, the ending is not meant to be taken literally, as in Vader didn't go to Jedi Jail even though he should have. The film is rather refering to how someone can be saved from a negative or toxic psychological state, i.e. the Dark Side. It's not about forensic evidence against Darth Vader.
And Campbell was pointing out a theme from world religions. In many religions, there is an idea that someone can be redeemed on a spiritual level regardless of their past. For example, in Buddhism, no matter how tortured and evil of a person you were, it would still be possible for you to let go of your desires and finally free yourself mentally and spiritually.
What happened to Vader in the end had to do with him being able to finally shed his toxic mental state because of the love of his son, and absolutely zero to do with whether or not Marcia Clark would approve of Vader. Brin manages to spectacularly miss the point.
If that last quote was actually on that page, I need to go stab this man many times.
No, I'm not going to read the links. For my own blood pressure.
~J
No, I'm not going to read the links. For my own blood pressure.
~J
*shrug* i don't agree with all of brin's points, but i definitely agree that Lucas is, or has become--especially with his latest two SW movies, along with the rewrites of the originals--a really, really bad storyteller.
I enjoyed the first three movies when I saw them much in the spirit they were intended; largely mindless but enjoyable space operas. With everything that has come out since then (the retconning special editions, the prequels, and so on), the only thing I can say is that if Lucas were a game master, I'd have quit playing in his game a long time ago.
I've never read any of Brin's books, so I can't say if I think he's a better or worse storyteller than Lucas (there may be an element of professional jealousy to it as well, a man can only make so many billions before it draws the ire of his contemporaries), but Brin does a good job of finding Lucas's weak points and exploiting them. (And putting aside the camp appeal of the movies for a moment, even the devoted fans I know admit there are serious flaws in Star Wars.) Also, Brin's theory to wrap up the third prequel is very good, would be an wonderfully unexpected twist, and solve a lot of the problems Lucas has created for himself.
But for all that, the most enjoyable article I found in a link buried in all those pages that I am far and away to lazy to try and find again, about the Empire being the actual good guys. Since that author seemed to have less emotion invested in the subject, I think that article came off a little better.
I've never read any of Brin's books, so I can't say if I think he's a better or worse storyteller than Lucas (there may be an element of professional jealousy to it as well, a man can only make so many billions before it draws the ire of his contemporaries), but Brin does a good job of finding Lucas's weak points and exploiting them. (And putting aside the camp appeal of the movies for a moment, even the devoted fans I know admit there are serious flaws in Star Wars.) Also, Brin's theory to wrap up the third prequel is very good, would be an wonderfully unexpected twist, and solve a lot of the problems Lucas has created for himself.
But for all that, the most enjoyable article I found in a link buried in all those pages that I am far and away to lazy to try and find again, about the Empire being the actual good guys. Since that author seemed to have less emotion invested in the subject, I think that article came off a little better.
Ok...if you want to know some things that might help everyone understand the MAJOR diference between the first and latest Star Wars movies...here you go.
1)
Lucas only directed E4 and not E5 and 6. Generally speaking...Lucas sucks at directing. Case in point...Howard the Duck.
2)
Lucas got most of his ideas for E4,5, and 6 from his original draft which was massive, and extremely boring if you read it, being devided into three seperate drafts.
This forced him to have to come up with more material to fill up the sudden 2 additions to the script, which he did by writing an entire BS history (which became the outline for 1-3) for SW.
Second to this, his ONE true stroke of genius was his decision to split his original stories 3 acts (beginning, middle, end: which translates to intro, tragedy, conqure tragedy) into a film for each act. In doing this, each act was able to explore deeper levels of the same elements that had once existed in the original 3 acts.
3)
Almost EVERYTHING about Darth Vader and Luke came DIRECTLY out of an old movie called Billy Budd made in 1962. The "sadistic master-at-arms " wears all black, a tall black hat, a long black cape, while our hero is a young, bright blond who sees the "good" still inside of the master-at-arms who claims that "it is too late for him" in a lovely one on one chit chat between the two characters.
The other areas of the plot are hibrid mixtures of greek mythology, flash gordon serials, pirate serials, and re-hashed american grafitti and THX plot lines. Seriously...watch THX. Then try to imagine if you think that the Empire is really much of a creative difference than that.
Francis Ford Corpola hated working with Lucas because he cited him as "lacking cinematic imagination"
Extra glitter in the movie really comes from a love for racing, his dog, wanting things half the size and cuter than a wookie (seriously), a hamburger (ever wonder how the malinium falcon got it's shape?), the college students (who invented the Pilsbury Doughboy and (to date) have made such achivements as ET, Casper, Jaws, Indiana Jones, and more...), and an excellent drawing team influenced by psycadelic 60's and 70's culture and artwork.
The original story of Star Wars was a great shomanship of Lucas' ability to write a good story.
The hero's were set out to battle against the villainous Wookie space-biker gang that had an entire planet of their own in which everyone was an evil Wookie space-biker.
They flew all over the galaxy being some sort of hells angels in space.
The good guys were actually the Empire who were struggling to hold onto the social order of things in which they ran around trying to save the galaxy from these horrible space biking wookies.
Yeah....great fucking plot there.
And if you wanted to know where the ewok came from. After Lucas re-wrote the story, the wookie became just one character instead of a mass collection of hairy creatures on a planet. But Lucas really wanted to still have a planet of "hairy creatures on a planet. I just thought it a neat idea. I liked it." and so "I decided to cut the wookie in half and make them these little loveable tribal creatures called wookies."
I mean...if you ever listen to the guy talk about his stories in interviews you want to bash your TV screen with a hammer because it's as close to hitting him as you can feel.
1)
Lucas only directed E4 and not E5 and 6. Generally speaking...Lucas sucks at directing. Case in point...Howard the Duck.
2)
Lucas got most of his ideas for E4,5, and 6 from his original draft which was massive, and extremely boring if you read it, being devided into three seperate drafts.
This forced him to have to come up with more material to fill up the sudden 2 additions to the script, which he did by writing an entire BS history (which became the outline for 1-3) for SW.
Second to this, his ONE true stroke of genius was his decision to split his original stories 3 acts (beginning, middle, end: which translates to intro, tragedy, conqure tragedy) into a film for each act. In doing this, each act was able to explore deeper levels of the same elements that had once existed in the original 3 acts.
3)
Almost EVERYTHING about Darth Vader and Luke came DIRECTLY out of an old movie called Billy Budd made in 1962. The "sadistic master-at-arms " wears all black, a tall black hat, a long black cape, while our hero is a young, bright blond who sees the "good" still inside of the master-at-arms who claims that "it is too late for him" in a lovely one on one chit chat between the two characters.
The other areas of the plot are hibrid mixtures of greek mythology, flash gordon serials, pirate serials, and re-hashed american grafitti and THX plot lines. Seriously...watch THX. Then try to imagine if you think that the Empire is really much of a creative difference than that.
Francis Ford Corpola hated working with Lucas because he cited him as "lacking cinematic imagination"
Extra glitter in the movie really comes from a love for racing, his dog, wanting things half the size and cuter than a wookie (seriously), a hamburger (ever wonder how the malinium falcon got it's shape?), the college students (who invented the Pilsbury Doughboy and (to date) have made such achivements as ET, Casper, Jaws, Indiana Jones, and more...), and an excellent drawing team influenced by psycadelic 60's and 70's culture and artwork.
The original story of Star Wars was a great shomanship of Lucas' ability to write a good story.
The hero's were set out to battle against the villainous Wookie space-biker gang that had an entire planet of their own in which everyone was an evil Wookie space-biker.
They flew all over the galaxy being some sort of hells angels in space.
The good guys were actually the Empire who were struggling to hold onto the social order of things in which they ran around trying to save the galaxy from these horrible space biking wookies.
Yeah....great fucking plot there.
And if you wanted to know where the ewok came from. After Lucas re-wrote the story, the wookie became just one character instead of a mass collection of hairy creatures on a planet. But Lucas really wanted to still have a planet of "hairy creatures on a planet. I just thought it a neat idea. I liked it." and so "I decided to cut the wookie in half and make them these little loveable tribal creatures called wookies."
I mean...if you ever listen to the guy talk about his stories in interviews you want to bash your TV screen with a hammer because it's as close to hitting him as you can feel.
Let's try to drag this back on topic or let it die, please. Cheers. 
As suggested, I looked back on this topic a few pages and as it turns out, its about shadowrun being dead. In that vein, I will continue.
This was a long section of my personal experience with SR that I wrote, decided was too long, and didn't have the heart to cut out. So I put it in a spoiler wrap.
I personally date the death of cyberpunk with the release of the Billy Idol album of the same name, which even if that isn't the moment of its passing is at least a leading indicator that it jumped the shark. Like anything: it was good, it got popular, it got overexposed, and we got sick of it. Usually the popular phase is matched up by the cashing in phase, in which a great rush of people try to make money off of it, not letting that they are significantly less talented than the people who started it hinder them in any way.
Anyway, there are few things in this world I am less qualified to talk about than the evolution of cyberpunk (with the possible exception of the mating habits of African fruit tree bats, which I can only assume are wild), because I never really got into cyberpunk. Shadowrun was my only real exposure to it, aside from the occasional movie or science fiction novel. I read a few Gibson short stories because the people I gamed with were into them, but I never really cared all that much. What brief forays into cyberpunk I did go on, it was just to get more ideas and inspiration for Shadowrun.
Come to think of it, I was never really into fantasy either (even though I played AD&D for a decade), so it seems odd to me that my favorite game would be the cross-pollination of two genres I care nothing about. Part of it, I think, is that Shadowrun is more than just fantasy and cyberpunk (or science fiction) combined. As a rules set-- forgetting for a second the entire game world-- its damn near universal. It beats d20 all to hell (though d20's approach seems to be to suck equally for everything, so thats not saying much). If it was just that, a d6 system, I would still prefer it to anything currently on the market (and as a friend of mine pointed out recently, SR would make a much better system for Star Wars than anything d20 can come up with).
But the world works too. I am not speaking strictly of the metaplots (IEs, et al), because I never really read, used or cared about them. I am just speaking of the setting in general. For one thing, depsite the appearance of magic, metahumans, and the sci-fi technology, the world is pretty much like the one we live in today (unless you live in Terra Haute, Indiana, in which case brother, you're on your own). That helps. The more alien a game world, the harder it is to suspend disbelief. The fantastic elements, be they technology or magic, tend to enhance the setting rather than intrude upon it, though this could simply be a matter of playing the game so long that a troll working at Burger King no longer seems unusual to me.
I won't consider SR dead until I'm bored with it, which probably won't happen until I exhaust all its possibilities. And since its possibilities are limited only by what we think of, it seems unfair to call the system "dead" simply because we run out of ideas.
This was a long section of my personal experience with SR that I wrote, decided was too long, and didn't have the heart to cut out. So I put it in a spoiler wrap.
[ Spoiler ]
I personally date the death of cyberpunk with the release of the Billy Idol album of the same name, which even if that isn't the moment of its passing is at least a leading indicator that it jumped the shark. Like anything: it was good, it got popular, it got overexposed, and we got sick of it. Usually the popular phase is matched up by the cashing in phase, in which a great rush of people try to make money off of it, not letting that they are significantly less talented than the people who started it hinder them in any way.
Anyway, there are few things in this world I am less qualified to talk about than the evolution of cyberpunk (with the possible exception of the mating habits of African fruit tree bats, which I can only assume are wild), because I never really got into cyberpunk. Shadowrun was my only real exposure to it, aside from the occasional movie or science fiction novel. I read a few Gibson short stories because the people I gamed with were into them, but I never really cared all that much. What brief forays into cyberpunk I did go on, it was just to get more ideas and inspiration for Shadowrun.
Come to think of it, I was never really into fantasy either (even though I played AD&D for a decade), so it seems odd to me that my favorite game would be the cross-pollination of two genres I care nothing about. Part of it, I think, is that Shadowrun is more than just fantasy and cyberpunk (or science fiction) combined. As a rules set-- forgetting for a second the entire game world-- its damn near universal. It beats d20 all to hell (though d20's approach seems to be to suck equally for everything, so thats not saying much). If it was just that, a d6 system, I would still prefer it to anything currently on the market (and as a friend of mine pointed out recently, SR would make a much better system for Star Wars than anything d20 can come up with).
But the world works too. I am not speaking strictly of the metaplots (IEs, et al), because I never really read, used or cared about them. I am just speaking of the setting in general. For one thing, depsite the appearance of magic, metahumans, and the sci-fi technology, the world is pretty much like the one we live in today (unless you live in Terra Haute, Indiana, in which case brother, you're on your own). That helps. The more alien a game world, the harder it is to suspend disbelief. The fantastic elements, be they technology or magic, tend to enhance the setting rather than intrude upon it, though this could simply be a matter of playing the game so long that a troll working at Burger King no longer seems unusual to me.
I won't consider SR dead until I'm bored with it, which probably won't happen until I exhaust all its possibilities. And since its possibilities are limited only by what we think of, it seems unfair to call the system "dead" simply because we run out of ideas.
I guess it's just interesting that by the time SR started catching up to real life, real life started looking like SR. And I still consider it a base predictor of future events because the world just seems to be sliding that way anyway. I mean, when the craziest stuff mentioned in the trid chapter of Shadowbeathas been surpassed IRL (save for bloodsports), it's kind of hard to really accept that everything's okay, and it's also hard to surpass what we expect now in a game set 60 years in the future. A striking example was how relatively trivial it was that Europol was hunting down the terrorist who killed 8,000 metas with VITAS in Munich. Woop. 50,000 bounty. Well, let me just strap on my sixguns...
At the same time, mimicking real life gets tedious because that seems, to me, to defeat the purpose of gaming. When I read Orxploitation and can recall firsthand memories of directly analoguous incidents and people to the rap, and specifically gangsta rap, communities, it's just... It kind of loses something. Especially when compared to the description of Concrete Dreams' debut in SB.
And once you stop going for shocking, silly, and absurd (SR1) and move away from huge fantasy plots (SR2) for huge other plots and mundane life (SR3) then it's hard to see where the focus is. Especially since SR allows you to play anything and do anything (how neo-anarchist). I just get the feeling a lot of material is just filler.
I don't know.
At the same time, mimicking real life gets tedious because that seems, to me, to defeat the purpose of gaming. When I read Orxploitation and can recall firsthand memories of directly analoguous incidents and people to the rap, and specifically gangsta rap, communities, it's just... It kind of loses something. Especially when compared to the description of Concrete Dreams' debut in SB.
And once you stop going for shocking, silly, and absurd (SR1) and move away from huge fantasy plots (SR2) for huge other plots and mundane life (SR3) then it's hard to see where the focus is. Especially since SR allows you to play anything and do anything (how neo-anarchist). I just get the feeling a lot of material is just filler.
I don't know.
I've always felt that the grandeur of the background is what set SR apart from the half-dozen other cyberpunk games that are still ticking along out there. There ARE big stories, and the players become part of them.
Yes, SR3 has moved away from the fantasy plot towards more "mundane" plots, as far as I can tell. Bearing in mind here that I am still catching up with a lot of the background, but:
The major thrust of the Grand Fantasy plot was the imminence of the Second Scourge, the turning of the wheel back to the days of Earthdawn. With Dunkelzahn's sacrifice, the Horrors have been effectively blocked from mass incursions for some considerable time to come (do I have that right?)
Now is the time for the "mundane" (in the sense of non-magical) world to shine. We know that Dunkelzahn and Harlequin both felt that (meta)humanity's strength lay not in magic alone but in the marriage of magic and mundane. So with the Horror storyline temporarily closed down, it's the turn of the rest of the world.
I'm not saying the Horrors are gone. We all know they'll be back eventually. I'm not even saying that future SR releases won't deal with them once again. But with the major focus across SR2's lifespan having been the secrets of the past, it's now SR3's turn and time for the dreams of the future.
Yes, SR3 has moved away from the fantasy plot towards more "mundane" plots, as far as I can tell. Bearing in mind here that I am still catching up with a lot of the background, but:
The major thrust of the Grand Fantasy plot was the imminence of the Second Scourge, the turning of the wheel back to the days of Earthdawn. With Dunkelzahn's sacrifice, the Horrors have been effectively blocked from mass incursions for some considerable time to come (do I have that right?)
Now is the time for the "mundane" (in the sense of non-magical) world to shine. We know that Dunkelzahn and Harlequin both felt that (meta)humanity's strength lay not in magic alone but in the marriage of magic and mundane. So with the Horror storyline temporarily closed down, it's the turn of the rest of the world.
I'm not saying the Horrors are gone. We all know they'll be back eventually. I'm not even saying that future SR releases won't deal with them once again. But with the major focus across SR2's lifespan having been the secrets of the past, it's now SR3's turn and time for the dreams of the future.
| QUOTE (DrJest) |
| With Dunkelzahn's sacrifice, the Horrors have been effectively blocked from mass incursions for some considerable time to come (do I have that right?) |
There's an implication yes, I don't remember a direct statement either way, and personally I'm heavily rooting for no.
~J
The best thing about SR is that it can be any game you want it to be. You can have a high-Sci Fi world changing type campaign or you can have a gritty-pull-yourself-up-from-the-gutter criminal or "don't let the man get you down" campaign. Or you can have a little something inbetween like a mercenary campaign with some semi large battles maybe involving a nation or two. The beuty is in the scale.
At least it is more cyberpunk than "Cyberpunk".
I have played a shadowrun game where the main goal for my character was his coming to terms that no mater how evil and wrong the idea of mega corps are,they aren't nearly as bad as what came before them. That was a fun game. He was a rather cynical and pragmatic guy, but it was a fun game.
I have played a shadowrun game where the main goal for my character was his coming to terms that no mater how evil and wrong the idea of mega corps are,they aren't nearly as bad as what came before them. That was a fun game. He was a rather cynical and pragmatic guy, but it was a fun game.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.