Nanotech for SR?
M. Nunes-Ueno
I'm sitting here in a cyber cafe in Puerto Vallarta, just kicking back,
enjoying the sun and he marguaritas and reading some books. I just
finished reading The Diamonda Age by Neil Somebody. In the Diamond Age,
nanotechnology has exploded (sometimes literally). The most powerful
weapons in the world (both on a personal scale and a global scale) are
nanotech.
This had me thinking, has anyone (who has read the book or is familiar
with nanotech) thought of incorporating nanotech into the shadowrun
campaing? I think it would be a great way to keep theplayers guessing.
Okay, they know about magic,they know about the matrix, but do they no
anything about nanotech? IN this case, whatyou don't know CAN kill you.
I'll post some more about this when I get back stateside.
========================================================================
By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C),
it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is
punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500,
whichever is greater, for each violation. All incoming unsolicited
commercial traffic will therefore be billed at a rate of $500 per msg
to compensate for loss of service.
========================================================================
Dave Davenport
M. Nunes-Ueno wrote:
>
> I'm sitting here in a cyber cafe in Puerto Vallarta, just kicking back,
> enjoying the sun and he marguaritas and reading some books. I just
> finished reading The Diamonda Age by Neil Somebody. In the Diamond Age,
> nanotechnology has exploded (sometimes literally). The most powerful
> weapons in the world (both on a personal scale and a global scale) are
> nanotech.
When I first read Diamond Age (by Neal Stephenson), I thought about
trying to put nano in SR, but quickly realized that the level of nano he
uses is just far too much for a cyber-type game. I'm currently
fermenting some ideas for less "in your face" types of nano. The cookie
cutter is one that I REALLY want to spring on my players. <evil grin>
> This had me thinking, has anyone (who has read the book or is familiar
> with nanotech) thought of incorporating nanotech into the shadowrun
> campaing? I think it would be a great way to keep theplayers guessing.
> Okay, they know about magic,they know about the matrix, but do they no
> anything about nanotech? IN this case, whatyou don't know CAN kill you.
>
> I'll post some more about this when I get back stateside.
A better book for manageable levels of nanotech would be The Bohr Maker
by Linda Nagata. The idea of using Assault and Medical Makers is
definitely going to pop up in my campaign. They keep shooting this guy
and he keeps standing back up. :)
--Rasputin
Hong Kong, 2057 Website: http://www.ntr.net/~rasputin/rpg/hk
Tuvyah
>>This had me thinking, has anyone (who has read the book or is familiar
with nanotech) thought of incorporating nanotech into the shadowrun
campaing? I think it would be a great way to keep theplayers guessing.<<
Errrr....IMHO, the problem with nanotech (certainly as its described in
most works) is that it's too powerful. Not just for the players, but for
the world as a whole. It represents such an awesome potential for change
that it will automatically transform the society that discovers it,
tossing all that lovely SR background right out into the can.
Possibilities just off the top of my head:
1. The world can be wiped out at any moment at the hands of any loony
group, from Alamos 20k to Sons of Sauron to Chicago Bugs to whatever. Just
have one hot-head release black nano to destroy a target without thinking
of the nano getting out of control;
2. Megacorps collapse, because nano makes most goods insanely cheap;
3. Customs restrictions collapse and smuggling mutates, because you no
longer have to smuggle tons of cocaine or boxes of CalHots -- just a
little vial of gray goo that will construct them for you;
4. Metahumanity is no longer an issue, because the nanites can rework your
genetic structure;
5. The converse of 4 -- body types come and go as fashion;
6. The skeeviest go-ganger can take out a dragon just by tossing the right
nano-grenade...
Well, you see what I mean. The cumulative effect, I think, would be an
enormous redristribution of power and wealth from the current players
(megacorps, governments, dragons) to the proles.
Of course, the whole thing depends on what inherent restrictions you place
on nano possibilities. Stephenson actually did something very clever by
postulating nano that could only be designed and created under the
auspices of a large organization/society/culture ("meme", am I right?)
But even highly restricted nano is so powerful that to use it in your game
and still be honest, you'd have to include its implications in the
background of your world. More work than I'd care to take on, chummer.
Otherwise you end up with the STNG syndrome, where you cheerfully
introduce new technologies without any thought as to how they affect
people. ("Oh, we have replicators." "Then why is latinum so precious? Why
do you mine things?" "Uh....mmm...huh....")
--Smilin' (but negative) Ted
P.S. You're in Puerto Vallarta, man! You shouldn't be posting! You should
be partying!
Nosferatu
M. Nunes-Ueno <mar...@u.washington.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.OSF.3.95.970327...@saul3.u.washington.edu>...
> I'm sitting here in a cyber cafe in Puerto Vallarta, just kicking back,
> enjoying the sun and he marguaritas and reading some books. I just
> finished reading The Diamonda Age by Neil Somebody. In the Diamond Age,
> nanotechnology has exploded (sometimes literally). The most powerful
> weapons in the world (both on a personal scale and a global scale) are
> nanotech.
>
> This had me thinking, has anyone (who has read the book or is familiar
> with nanotech) thought of incorporating nanotech into the shadowrun
> campaing? I think it would be a great way to keep theplayers guessing.
> Okay, they know about magic,they know about the matrix, but do they no
> anything about nanotech? IN this case, whatyou don't know CAN kill you.
>
> I'll post some more about this when I get back stateside.
>
>
hmm othere than the fact that nanites(aka the little machines that are the
result of nanotech) are already present in Shadowrun(try Shadowtech
sourcebooks, what exactley do you think those Symbionts are?) And they are
used in gene tech, the problem with them as weapons, well they are just too
damn slow to spread effectively....
think about it even if they moved at 10 times their length per
second(the equivalent of a 6' man moveing 60' per second(somewhere in the
neighborhood of 50 miles an hour, sorry don't have a calculator handy))
when their length is less than a millimeter each it takes a while(actually
they would probably be measured in microns) the speed with which they would
kill someone would leave that person ample time to rip yer head off and
crap down yer neck, if you know what I mean.
/Nosferat nosf...@minn.net
Azeez Hayne
In article <333f8bb1...@news.smart.net>, che...@extremely.smart.net wrote:
> In the dying days of the second millennium, Tuvyah wrote:
>
>
> How about this. Make nanotech highly vulnerable to magic. Give it major
> minuses to defend against any sort of astral or spell-based assault. That
> way it can be kept under control and it adds to the tech vs. magic tension
> already present in the game. A runner could have the hottest nanotech on
> the planet, but be deadly afraid of a beginner shaman with the newly
> developed "confuse nanites" spell. (Your wee beasties lose their
> programming and begin doing semi-random things to you)
>
> ---
The problem of with this idea is that it goes completely against
everything FASA has said about magic vs. technology so far. The target
numbers for magic go up with the level of processing and
"non-naturalness," I would definitely say that nanites constitute highly
processed objects and hence are very very hard to influence using magic.
Azeez
"Trix are for kids, Lucky Charms are for your MOM!"
-me
"The reason the movements of 60's and 70's seem so radical is that the 50's were so dead..."
-J
"What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly...it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated."
Dave D. Decker
In article 333f8bb1...@news.smart.net,
che...@smart.net (Brian "Cheebie" Merchant) said:
>
>In the dying days of the second millennium,
>Tuvyah wrote:
>
>read the book or is familiar
>>with nanotech) thought of incorporating
>nanotech into the shadowrun
>>campaing? I think it would be a great way to
>keep theplayers guessing.<<
>>
>(certainly as its described in
>>most works) is that it's too powerful. Not
>just for the players, but for
>>the world as a whole. It represents such an
>awesome potential for change
>>that it will automatically transform the
>society that discovers it,
>>tossing all that lovely SR background right
>out into the can.
>
>vulnerable to magic. Give it major
>minuses to defend against any sort of astral or
>spell-based assault. That
>way it can be kept under control and it adds to
>the tech vs. magic tension
>already present in the game. A runner could
>have the hottest nanotech on
>the planet, but be deadly afraid of a beginner
>shaman with the newly
>developed "confuse nanites" spell. (Your wee
>beasties lose their
>programming and begin doing semi-random things
>to you)
>
>---
>The Mighty Cheebie: loyal drone in the service
>of Da Queen
>Eater of Oreos, wearer of wing weaves, maker of
>pillows.
>
>
What exactly do you mean by nanotech?
According to ShadowTech:
"During the (gene) therapy process, the patient is placed in a coma-like trance while the body is immersed in a nutrient
solution that contains tailored nanites."
Page 74, under the heading GENE THERAPY.
Also:
"This gene therapy program (LEONIZATION) involves making an initial genetic probe of the subject and then preparing a
nanite 'bath' matched to the subject's genome."
Page 76, under the heading LEONIZATION.
The Cosmic Tomato
Azeez Hayne wrote:
> The problem of with this idea is that it goes completely against
> everything FASA has said about magic vs. technology so far. The target
> numbers for magic go up with the level of processing and
> "non-naturalness," I would definitely say that nanites constitute highly
> processed objects and hence are very very hard to influence using magic.
Actually, all this nanotech hype is a leetle bit weird, if you consider
that you are talking about things on the same general scale of
existence as viruses. What makes viruses so damn dangerous is that
they self-replicate .... but otherwise, folkses, such sizes of things
tend to be pretty specific about what they do ... there isn't ROOM
to build much intelligence into them. So I can only see them being
of much direct influence in special environments; good for some
forms of technology, but I don't think that grey goo will do much for
long before sheer background radiation smashes it to smithereens.
Not to forget, btw, that things like cells and so on are VERY tough
nuts to crack; building a virus from the ground up is what it would
take, in nanotech terms, to `eat people' and we already have viruses
that do that, tyvm. cheaper and easier to pick up Biowarfare 101.
Nanotech could easily be used in tanks with controlled environments.
I could readily see a use where the nanobots self-replicate from
raw materials, and then break down to a useful material under suitable
treatment (a sort of tailor-made chem plant). But I don't foresee
any big, bad nanobot agglomerations eating streetsams without very
careful applications, such as tailor-made rubber-eaters on a joint.
--
The above has no correspondence whatsoever to anything at all. This
includes, but is not limited to, my thoughts, hopes, aspirations, dreams
and opinions. I deny responsibility for actions based on the above
content. Any attempt to construe the aforementioned above material as
having
any such significance will be met with the contempt it deserves.
cd skogsberg
On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 10:24:06 -0500, Dave Davenport <rasp...@ntr.net>
wrote:
>M. Nunes-Ueno wrote:
>> This had me thinking, has anyone (who has read the book or is familiar
>> with nanotech)
If you're really interested in nanotech, check out
http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Tech/ somewhere for more stuff on ultra-high
(and not so ultra-high) technology, incuding nanotech - I know that
there's a link to *the* classic of nanotech, Eric K. Drexler's _The
Engines of Creation_ (which is on the web).
>> thought of incorporating nanotech into the shadowrun
>> campaing? I think it would be a great way to keep theplayers guessing.
>> Okay, they know about magic,they know about the matrix, but do they no
>> anything about nanotech? IN this case, whatyou don't know CAN kill you.
>>
>> I'll post some more about this when I get back stateside.
>
>A better book for manageable levels of nanotech would be The Bohr Maker
>by Linda Nagata. The idea of using Assault and Medical Makers is
>definitely going to pop up in my campaign. They keep shooting this guy
>and he keeps standing back up. :)
How about a gun that fires a capsule of nanobot disassemblers - when
it goes in it hurts, and then you slowly melt...
Just my ¥.03 or so.
cd
--
"It's my exam on Suicide tonight, so it'll be really tough to survive
(and I guess if I survive it it will mean I've failed...)"
- Malka Susswein
Joe Mason
"Nanotech for SR?", declared M. Nunes-Ueno from the Vogon ship:
MN>just finished reading The Diamonda Age by Neil Somebody. In the
Stevenson. Also the author of Snowcrash.
joe
ş CMPQwk 1.42 9550 şROM BIOS Error: Press <F13> to continue...
Tuvyah
Azeez Hayne wrote:
> In the dying days of the second millennium, Tuvyah wrote:
>
>
> How about this. Make nanotech highly vulnerable to magic. Give it
major
> minuses to defend against any sort of astral or spell-based assault.
That
> way it can be kept under control and it adds to the tech vs. magic
tension
> already present in the game.<<
This is Tuvyah, Smilin' Ted, here. I didn't make this suggestion
attributed to me (unintentionally, I'm sure) by Azeez Hayne. My opinion on
the matter is that nanotech shouldn't be in the game at all.
-Smilin Ted
cd skogsberg
On 28 Mar 1997 17:35:07 GMT, tuv...@aol.com (Tuvyah) wrote:
[Why not nano?]
>3. Customs restrictions collapse and smuggling mutates, because you no
>longer have to smuggle tons of cocaine or boxes of CalHots -- just a
>little vial of gray goo that will construct them for you;
This I doubt - it would probably be cheaper to import the white powder
than the gray goo; YMMV, but I think that getting gray goo (probably
quite, if not hideously, expensive) and the raw materials needed - you
can't just pour it into a bowl and let the nanites attempt to form
coke out of air, the molecules, even if all of them are there, are
just too "spread out" so to speak.
>4. Metahumanity is no longer an issue, because the nanites can rework your
>genetic structure;
>
>5. The converse of 4 -- body types come and go as fashion;
True, but again I doubt that it would be a problem - people
gengineering their children would be more problematic, since if you
wanted a rebuild of your body you'd probably have to be immersed in
nanites for say a couple of months as they rework bone, muscle, etc. -
just because your genes have been altered *doesn't* mean that you
change. Your children will, if the nanos went into your balls and
reamed the sperm-producing cell DNA well and good.
>6. The skeeviest go-ganger can take out a dragon just by tossing the right
>nano-grenade...
And here's another common misconception; nanites *aren't* that fast
(see article <01bc3bbf$08bfa160$6ac99dcc@nosferatu> by Nosferatu).
Granted, a nanite that turns people to goo is powerful, but it would
work verrrrrry slowwwwwwly, not to mention that, if nano is common,
the dragon would have nano of his own that works as super-charged
immune defense, chomping down on invading nanites.
>Well, you see what I mean. The cumulative effect, I think, would be an
>enormous redristribution of power and wealth from the current players
>(megacorps, governments, dragons) to the proles.
If nano became availiable, it would (at first, at least) probably be
restricted to the "big players" as it would be highly expensive to
create the first nanos (assemblers), even if they then can be
programmed to build other nanos. The corps would probably keep this
stuff in their greedy little hands for as long as possible.
>Of course, the whole thing depends on what inherent restrictions you place
>on nano possibilities. Stephenson actually did something very clever by
>postulating nano that could only be designed and created under the
>auspices of a large organization/society/culture ("meme", am I right?)
A meme is a "mind virus", an idea (see David Brin's essays _The Dogma
of Otherness_ and _The New Meme_, and
http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Cultural/Meme, IIRC) that can be
communicated to others (the .sig virus that flourished in the earlier
days of USENET history is an example).
>But even highly restricted nano is so powerful that to use it in your game
>and still be honest, you'd have to include its implications in the
>background of your world. More work than I'd care to take on, chummer.
>Otherwise you end up with the STNG syndrome, where you cheerfully
>introduce new technologies without any thought as to how they affect
>people. ("Oh, we have replicators." "Then why is latinum so precious? Why
>do you mine things?" "Uh....mmm...huh....")
Take these words to heart if you intend to introduce nanotech into any
SF campaign (or any RPG campaign, for that matter) - it changes a lot
of things. Oh, and read William Gibson's _Idoru_, it has some stuff on
nanotech.
Azeez Hayne
In article <19970331100...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, tuv...@aol.com
(Tuvyah) wrote:
I didn't write this either, unless you snipped my writing. In any case, if
I did accidentally attribute it to you, I'm sorry.
Dave D. Decker
In article 19970331100...@ladder01.news.aol.com,
tuv...@aol.com (Tuvyah) said:
>
>Azeez Hayne wrote:
>
>> In the dying days of the second millennium,
>Tuvyah wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> How about this. Make nanotech highly
>vulnerable to magic. Give it
>major
>> minuses to defend against any sort of astral
>or spell-based assault.
>That
>> way it can be kept under control and it adds
>to the tech vs. magic
>tension
>> already present in the game.<<
>
>This is Tuvyah, Smilin' Ted, here. I didn't
>make this suggestion
>attributed to me (unintentionally, I'm sure) by
>Azeez Hayne. My opinion on
>the matter is that nanotech shouldn't be in the
>game at all.
>
>
>-Smilin Ted
>
>
>
I'm confused: Nanotech _IS_ already in Shadowrun, and is described quite well...
M. Nunes-Ueno
========================================================================
By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer
meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C),
it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment.
By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is
punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500,
whichever is greater, for each violation. All incoming unsolicited
commercial traffic will therefore be billed at a rate of $500 per msg
to compensate for loss of service.
========================================================================
Okay, I suppose that there is already some nanotech in SR, but it's
relegated to a relatively minor role and players don't encounter it too
often.
But like some others were saying, nanotech (as outlined in The Diamond
Age) is terribly powerful stuff that would unbalance the game
dramatically.
What I had in mind when I posted the original question was more in lines
of this: Use nanotech as a flavor devise. Throw it in every now and
again to create a certain campaing ambiance. Use in this manner it can
be used as a method to show the players just how complext the world has
become in 2057.
I also think it would be a good idea to keep players that make it a hobby
of memorizing the sourcebooks wondering what the hell is going on. Corps
using cookie-cutters or dog-fences will keep a certain level of surprize
in the game. Just one more way to let the players know that there is a
whole lot of stuff out there that they have not even thought about, and
that "stuff" can kick your ass if you're not careful. . . .
Marcos.
Dave D. Decker
>>The problem of with this idea is that it goes
>completely against
>>everything FASA has said about magic vs.
>technology so far. The target
>>numbers for magic go up with the level of
>processing and
>>"non-naturalness," I would definitely say that
>nanites constitute highly
>>processed objects and hence are very very hard
>to influence using magic.
>
>Change the spell from "confuse
>nanotech" to "reject nanotech". Now the spell
>is acting on the user of the
>stuff. It would cause a severe rejection
>syndrom in response to the
>nanotech. You could use the "level" of the
>nanotech (whatever we decide
>that means) as the target for an opposed test.
>Each net success for the
>caster caused a level of damage.
>
Actually, nanotech (in the Shadowrun world) is biological...
Conceivably, if you were able to focus on a single nanite, and then cast an area effect spell, you could get all of them...
I guess...
Along with beneficial intestinal bacteria and the like...
Matb
>Actually, nanotech (in the Shadowrun world) is biological...
>
>Conceivably, if you were able to focus on a single nanite, and then cast an
area effect spell, you could get all of them...
>
>I guess...
>
>Along with beneficial intestinal bacteria and the like...
Amazing how you get line-of-sight on an organism *within* another
organism...
Though the argument might be made that their auras have mashed together
and count as the same...
Dave Davenport
Dave D. Decker wrote:
> Actually, nanotech (in the Shadowrun world) is biological...
>
> Conceivably, if you were able to focus on a single nanite, and then cast an area effect spell, you could get all of them...
>
> I guess...
>
> Along with beneficial intestinal bacteria and the like...
Maybe a Transformation Manipulation "Sterilize: Nanite" :)
--
Dave D. Decker
In article 5hsss5$b...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com,
mbr...@ix.netcom.com(Matb) said:
>
>>Actually, nanotech (in the Shadowrun world) is
>biological...
>>
>>Conceivably, if you were able to focus on a
>single nanite, and then cast an
>area effect spell, you could get all of them...
>>
>>I guess...
>>
>>Along with beneficial intestinal bacteria and
>the like...
>
>organism *within* another
>organism...
>
>Though the argument might be made that their
>auras have mashed together
>and count as the same...
>
>
>
That's my point...
Short of examining a character with a microscope, how would you even *TARGET* a nanite with a spell?
David Schreiber
In article <5hkdpn$2...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>,
Dave D. Decker <dake...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>"During the (gene) therapy process, the patient is placed in a coma-like
>trance while the body is immersed in a nutrient
>solution that contains tailored nanites."
Nanites are not nanotech. Nanites are cells, they are wet as opposed to hard
nanotech. The important distinction is that though they are both self
replicating and small, nanites rely on solution phase chemistry rather than
machine phase chemisty of true nanomachines.
David Schreiber
In article <5hpman$b...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>,
Dave D. Decker <dake...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>I'm confused: Nanotech _IS_ already in Shadowrun, and is described quite
>well...
SR has nanites, which are quite different. Perhaps you are thinking of 2020?
David Schreiber
In article <19970328173...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
tuv...@aol.com (Tuvyah) wrote:
>1. The world can be wiped out at any moment at the hands of any loony
>
>2. Megacorps collapse, because nano makes most goods insanely cheap;
>
>3. Customs restrictions collapse
These three require self replicating nanomachines. These are all good
reasons not to allow fully flegged nanotech assemblers into the game.
>4. Metahumanity is no longer an issue, because the nanites can rework your
>genetic structure;
Reworking the generitc structure requires that you actually understand it
first. Nanotech makes geneering cheap, it doesn't neccesarily make it
easy.
>6. The skeeviest go-ganger can take out a dragon just by tossing the right
>nano-grenade...
Assuming the dragon doesn't have a physical barrier spell.
I have used nanotech in a CP style campaign. The nanotech the players
can get hold of is usually very limited. The most common form, called
`melta' simply disassembles anything it contacts. Quite usefull, but hardly
world shaking stuff. It can't self relplicate, and because it works fast it
also wears out fast.
cd skogsberg
>Okay, I suppose that there is already some nanotech in SR, but it's
>relegated to a relatively minor role and players don't encounter it too
>often.
>
>But like some others were saying, nanotech (as outlined in The Diamond
>Age) is terribly powerful stuff that would unbalance the game
>dramatically.
This would depend on three limiting factors: avaliability, power,
and scale of the nano- or microbots.
Availiability can mean that either it's difficult[1] to get hold of
or very difficult[1] to keep hold of once you got it, or that it's not
all *that* difficult[1] to get, but getting programming units to make
it do, say, illegal things (like disassembling everything it comes
into contact with) are virtually impossible[2].
The power is also a very limiting factor - how are the 'bots
powered? And what kind of tasks can they preform? A nanobot that runs
out of power ten minutes after being activated isn't that impressive.
And if all nano is good for is building houses/vehicles or medical
purposes (which can be sinister enough - see below) it won't affect
the runner's world all that much.
The scale is the third limiting factor. Medical nano has to be small
enough not to clot bloodstreams, and if it's to be used for DNA
alterations it's have to be able to employ practically atomic
manipulations. If the smallest stuff is, say, a millimeter in lenght
(.04 inches), it might be only used for "rough" medical tasks (muscle
repairs, stiching together wounds), but it would be perfectly good for
things such as (dis)assembling stuff (which is basically what medical
nanotech is for too). If it's nanometer-sized, it can quite probably
go into your cells and unravel and stich together your DNA.
Medical nano deserves special mentioning. If it's simply used to im-
prove healing (esp. if using "organic" components, in effect tailored,
programmable bacteria), it can be used to make (not so) subtle
malterations to the patient - large scars, a wasting-away of muscle or
nerve tissue, leeching out the calcium of your bones or something
eually unpleasant. If it reams your DNA it can do all sorts of spliffy
mods, especially if it's "hacking" your reproductive cell DNA. Note
that, even if you alter all DNA, a person won't change shape/species/
sex that easily - read "at all". Too many things are more or less
permanently fixed (bones, brain, C&PNS etc.). Medical nano can also be
used with cyber-/bioware; to wit: much nerve stuff - you didn't think
wired reflexes were simply placed with such crude butchery as using
scalpels and microwaldoes, did you? Much easier to use nanos that
attach themselves to the nerve sheats and die, forming conductor paths
- in Shadowtech, they claim it's using tailored bacteria, but I'm
pretty convinced that nanos are cheaper. Much brain "surgery" would
probably be done with nanos, too.
>What I had in mind when I posted the original question was more in lines
>of this: Use nanotech as a flavor devise. Throw it in every now and
>again to create a certain campaing ambiance. Use in this manner it can
>be used as a method to show the players just how complext the world has
>become in 2057.
Again I urge those interested in nanotech to read _Idoru_ by William
"Cyberpunk popularizer" Gibson. Nano plays a somewhat important role
in that book.
Also useful can be the alt.devilbunnies FAQ (Appendix 3a), of all
places. It holds some interesting stuff on nano, including directions
to other nanotech sites.
>I also think it would be a good idea to keep players that make it a hobby
>of memorizing the sourcebooks wondering what the hell is going on. Corps
>using cookie-cutters or dog-fences will keep a certain level of surprize
>in the game. Just one more way to let the players know that there is a
>whole lot of stuff out there that they have not even thought about, and
>that "stuff" can kick your ass if you're not careful. . . .
There is always something meaner than you around. That rule goes for
everything, even the Horrors.
And always remember the Golden Rule of Roleplaying... It's your
game, do with it as you will.
I fear I have raved about nanotech overlong. That's my ¥40 or so.
cd
[1]: Read: "impossible".
[2]: Read: "don't even begin to form the vaguest idea of a hint of
beginning to consider it, boy".
--
"And it has come to pass that the Lord of the Woods, being ...Seven
and Nine, down the onyx steps ...(Tri)butes to him in the Gulf, Aza-
thoth, He of Whom Thou has taught us marv(els)..." -H. P. Lovecraft
cd skogsberg/c...@alfakonsult.se
Jim Stevenson's reader
c...@alfakonsult.se (cd skogsberg) writes:
>On Tue, 1 Apr 1997 13:53:37 -0800, "M. Nunes-Ueno"
><mar...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>
>>But like some others were saying, nanotech (as outlined in The Diamond
>>Age) is terribly powerful stuff that would unbalance the game
>>dramatically.
Yep, runners sprinkling cookie-cutters onto all the evil corp
execs could create a social & industrial upheaval in CP or SR
> This would depend on three limiting factors: avaliability, power,
>and scale of the nano- or microbots.
> The power is also a very limiting factor - how are the 'bots
>powered?
The novel "The Diamond age" by Neal Stephson has some in depth
technical explainations on a few different 'bot power sources ( one I
seem to recal used pressure diferentials between the 'bots different
parts- others used solar-like heat dissipation & focused that energy in
order to use a LIDAR like detection devise )
> And what kind of tasks can they preform? A nanobot that runs
>out of power ten minutes after being activated isn't that impressive.
It is very impressive if the 'bot reproduces itself every other
minute so that after 1 dies it leaves a few other to take over its job!!
Anyways with nanao tech ( supposedly ) you would'nt have a power problem
such as 10 minute powersources
>And if all nano is good for is building houses/vehicles or medical
>purposes (which can be sinister enough - see below) it won't affect
>the runner's world all that much.
IMHO I disagree
> The scale is the third limiting factor. Medical nano has to be small
>enough not to clot bloodstreams, and if it's to be used for DNA
>alterations it's have to be able to employ practically atomic
>manipulations.
Yep atomic manipulations are a central idea around
nano-tech!!!!!
> If the smallest stuff is, say, a millimeter in lenght
nano tech== nanometers ( billionths of a meter )
micro tech== micrometers ( millionths of a meter )
millitech == milimeters (thousandths of a meter )
>(.04 inches), it might be only used for "rough" medical tasks (muscle
nano tech works on a scale 10^(-9) NOT millitechs 10^(-3)
>repairs, stiching together wounds), but it would be perfectly good for
>things such as (dis)assembling stuff (which is basically what medical
>nanotech is for too). If it's nanometer-sized, it can quite probably
>go into your cells and unravel and stich together your DNA.
> There is always something meaner than you around. That rule goes for
>everything, even the Horrors.
Yep, but I'm pretty mean myself ( esp. be4 my 1st cup of coffee
in the mornin' ;)
> And always remember the Golden Rule of Roleplaying... It's your
>game, do with it as you will.
Always!!!!!
> I fear I have raved about nanotech overlong. That's my ¥40 or so.
Nah, this is a fun thread :)
See ya
- There are no longer "dancers," the
possesed. The cleavage of men into actors
and spectators is the central fact of
our time We are obsessed with heroes
live for us and whom we punish ...
We have metamorphasized from a mad
body dancing
on hillsides to a pair of eyes
staring in the dark.
-Jim Morrison
- Screw jim and the accountants I'm
gonna webdance the matrix from L5 forever...
-Sean Nelson
Timothy White
Jim Stevenson's reader wrote:
> nano tech== nanometers ( billionths of a meter )
> micro tech== micrometers ( millionths of a meter )
> millitech == milimeters (thousandths of a meter )
Hmmm. Millitech or Militech. Hey cool, Militech should be a pushover
then!
yeah right