Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Senko on <03-24-17/2349:41>
-
I'm curious if anyone knows how they decided if a species would be non-human? Some like dragons are obvious but why for example are sasquatches a non-human species that was in hiding while Cyclopses and Oni are sub types of metahuman variants?
-
It is all taxonomy, I believe. The metatypes and metavariants are all part of Homo sapiens. An elf is Homo sapiens nobilis, IIRC. Sasquatches are not part of Homo sapiens.
-
That doesn't really answer the question asked, though, Mirikon.
The question was "why is an elf, oni, or cyclops classified as a homo sapien, but a sasquatch isn't?"
To truly answer that question, we would have to talk to the minds behind some of the original creature/racial rules for Shadowrun and the get the reasoning behind them. But if I had to take a guess, I would say it is based on the source material, mythology.
Sasquatches, or Bigfoot as they are often called in American folklore supposedly pop up from time to time even recently. They aren't magical creatures of a distant past. So, the concept that they exist separately from humanity made sense. Same thing goes for Pixies, which is another example of a metasapient in the Shadowrun lore that sort of just appeared out of the woods one day. All the other (playable race) metasapients are basically just awakened animals. Centaurs are more closely related to horses than people, and the same goes for Naga. And of course Shifters are animals first, that can shift into humans.
Another possibility is based on how closely some of those species resemble or relate to animals instead of humans. Oni, Cyclopses, Satyrs, dwarfs, etc all resemble humans in many depictions. In modern fantasy games, a lot of them are considered "playable races" placing them on-par with humans. The only SR playable metasapient that even closely resembles humans is the Sasquatch, which we already covered as having a good excuse for being kept separate from humanity as a classification.
-
I'd guess at a decision making process even more mundane. Metavariants were created with the express purpose of being human variants, while metasapients originated in whatever critter section of whichever edition they first appeared in.
-
Sasquatches date back to the Shadowrun 1st edition core rulebook, where they were listed as an awakened creature that had been recognized as sentient by most nations. They had a few other early appearances in various bits of shadowrun lore.
Metavarients didn't appear until the 2nd edition Shadowrun Companion. My guess is that the developers just decided to leave the sasquatches as is rather than retcon them when metavarients were introduced to the game.
-
All the metahuman types can interbreed. An Elf can have kids with a dwarf or a Cyclops, and the child is again a metahuman (usually determinded by the parents type)
An elf (or any metahuman for that matter) cannot have children with a Sasquatch or a Centaur.
-
I think it was an organic design process that built on the initial premises, but that probably seems a bit arbitrary in hindsight. They started out with the core metatypes, along with the notion that these were essentially versions of Homo Sapiens, and had additional sapients that could basically fall under critters, infected (undead), or spirits. So new races or creatures would basically fall into one of those four categories, depending on which seemed to be the best fit.
There was some slight ret-conning (ghouls were originally a metatype rather than infected), and there are some some things that might have fit into another category (wendigos, with their original fluff about cannibal cults, would have been better as malign spirits rather than infected), but overall it is mostly coherent.
One thing that always amuses me is how the metahumans that have been playable for a while are considered "normal", but the newer character options are considered "special snowflakes". I do get that the newer types often stand out because they are comparatively rarer, but it is still funny seeing someone playing a hulking troll complaining about someone else playing an oni.
-
That doesn't really answer the question asked, though, Mirikon.
The question was "why is an elf, oni, or cyclops classified as a homo sapien, but a sasquatch isn't?"
Taxinomy is based on genetic analysis, and genetically a cyclops is a homo sapiens few extra gene expressions (as evidenced by their ability to have fully fertile offspring). On the other hand pesvastus pilosis (aka. a sasquatch) is seemingly removed far enough to not even quailify for the genus homo.
-
That doesn't really answer the question asked, though, Mirikon.
The question was "why is an elf, oni, or cyclops classified as a homo sapien, but a sasquatch isn't?"
Taxinomy is based on genetic analysis, and genetically a cyclops is a homo sapiens few extra gene expressions (as evidenced by their ability to have fully fertile offspring). On the other hand pesvastus pilosis (aka. a sasquatch) is seemingly removed far enough to not even quailify for the genus homo.
Yes, I know what Taxonomy is. The point I was trying to make was that since pesvastus pilosis (aka sasquatch) is a fictional species, the way it was classified genetically was a choice made by a person, not by nature. The OP's question wasn't likely asking about the genetics or taxonomy of the various metasapients vs metavariants (etc), but was asking why they decided to classify them that way. So yes, sasquatch are "removed far enough to not even qualify for the genus homo," but why did they decide to classify them that way?
The answer is, quite simply, that's what the developers decided to do. The original decision is far enough back that we aren't likely to get an answer from someone who actually was a part of that decision process. Setting-wise, it gives an interesting set-up to the concept of Meta-sapient rights (the argument over whether creatures like Sasquatch, Centaurs, Pixies, etc. should have the same rights as the rest of metahumanity. And personally, I like the idea of having that distinct difference between creatures that are "human" at a fundamental level, while some creatures simply aren't. Shifters are my favorite because of that fundamental stage where they grow up as an animal and then gain the ability to appear "human" which gives them a vastly different societal viewpoint than other species.
-
I'd guess at a decision making process even more mundane. Metavariants were created with the express purpose of being human variants, while metasapients originated in whatever critter section of whichever edition they first appeared in.
Minotaurs and Cyclopses were introduced in Paranormal Animals of Europe as European variants of trolls but lacking in any mechanical effects. The Shadowrun Companion included them as expanded character concepts, but also featured mechanical differences for choosing them. Since there were already a couple for trolls, FASA made a couple of metavariants for orks, elves, and dwarves. Given the need to have discrete offshoots of those specific metatypes, they picked character types similar to how minotaurs and cyclopses would be related to trolls.
-
Interesting thanks for the info. Yes I was asking why the person decided on classifying some things as metahumans and some as non-humans rather than the mechanics of that decisison.
-
Its most likely has to do with all the different questions that shadowrun like to ask. What happens when some people can use magic, what happens when you start being more machine then person. So without adding aliens to the cyberpunk/fantasy mix having a sentient being that is not human had to be on the list. Dragons and spirits sort of fill this roll but they are too powerful to really fit the roll. If nothing else I feel it could just fall back on the number one deciding factor of all things in early shadowrun. The rule of cool. So it comes down to wouldn't it be cool if the human like mythical creatures were real but not human. Same as why shifters are animal that become human not the other way around. It introduces a way to throw off human logic while still appearing human like.
As for the how It would simply fall into the question of it being a human affected by UGE or a human like being that they wanted to be separate. Sort of like how they made spirits are not the same thing as ghosts.
-
What amazes me is how humans haven't killed every other sapient species (yet) like we did with the last sapient non-homo sapiens.
-
The last sapient non-human?
-
The last sapient non-human?
Neanderthals. We murdered the drek out of them.
-
Actually, it was more complicated than that. We interbred with them too, so while there was probably some murder going on it was moreso a case of out-competing them.
-
Actually, it was more complicated than that. We interbred with them too, so while there was probably some murder going on it was moreso a case of out-competing them.
Yea, but to be fair, we murder the drek out of just about everything. Including each other...
-
Actually, it was more complicated than that. We interbred with them too, so while there was probably some murder going on it was moreso a case of out-competing them.
Yea, but to be fair, we murder the drek out of just about everything. Including each other...
So what happens when we run into a better murder drekker.
-
Yea, but to be fair, we murder the drek out of just about everything. Including each other...
Reach Heaven through violence.
From a design standpoint, I think the reason to make things like sasquatch and what not "non-humans" is to help establish them as especially uncommon for players. Contrast with how magicians are rare, but every player group has one Awakened at least. The game is written around having some kind of idea of what the players will usually be doing. To help keep this coherent and strong, they have to keep the basic, default concept of what a group of Shadowrun PCs are relatively clear. Sort of like...
Most play groups and most storylines would not work as well if someone was playing a centaur, for instance, without some amount of tweaking. These "non-human" races are different enough in a few key ways as to make them a little too complex or different to be group up alongside the default options.
-
They never should've opened this door by allowing shapeshifter PCs back in 1996.
-
They never should've opened this door by allowing shapeshifter PCs back in 1996.
I get you. It's an inevitability though. Eventually someone playing a tabletop RPG asks "Why do I have to be a person? It's all imaginary anyways." From that point on, more people ask, and the only option is to outline some as playable and some as "just too powerful". Hence why you can't be a dragon, but Drakes exist for people who would start a fight about it.
Not that I'm one to talk-- I thought the D&D 3.5 book Savage Species was the coolest and wanted to play a fire or earth elemental. It's one of those things that makes tabletops special (being able to roleplay as something truly inhuman) but it's not something every (or even most) tables or GMs should be able to work with.
-
Some of that stuff is for specialized games which is why playing a drake is about as rare as they come. But if it was a game where your team specifically works for a dragon then the GM letting you be one is more probable. Savage Species was a book with the goal of switching sides so that the players are monsters fighting adventurers and the like but most people that found it wanted to be something special next to the dwarf and elf in a normal party.
As for the no dragons bit I think that's more to do with rarity than power.(although they are OP) after all I know im not up to date on lore but I have only heard of adult dragons and one mentioning of eggs (and they got destroyed by a stupid son of one of the Tir's princes) So far I have never heard of dragon eggs hatching or any of the dragons laying new eggs. Sort of like the immortal elfs. They are too rare for players to go mucking about as one.
-
As for the no dragons bit I think that's more to do with rarity than power.(although they are OP) after all I know im not up to date on lore but I have only heard of adult dragons and one mentioning of eggs (and they got destroyed by a stupid son of one of the Tir's princes) So far I have never heard of dragon eggs hatching or any of the dragons laying new eggs. Sort of like the immortal elfs. They are too rare for players to go mucking about as one.
And there are even fewer of them now. :D
-
As for the no dragons bit I think that's more to do with rarity than power.(although they are OP) after all I know im not up to date on lore but I have only heard of adult dragons and one mentioning of eggs (and they got destroyed by a stupid son of one of the Tir's princes) So far I have never heard of dragon eggs hatching or any of the dragons laying new eggs. Sort of like the immortal elfs. They are too rare for players to go mucking about as one.
Reading between the lines of the Earthdawn Dragons book, it appears that Wyverns are actually dragons just past the hatchling stage, but not yet adult dragons. Or at least they are something close enough that they might be confused for one.
-
Some of that stuff is for specialized games which is why playing a drake is about as rare as they come. But if it was a game where your team specifically works for a dragon then the GM letting you be one is more probable. Savage Species was a book with the goal of switching sides so that the players are monsters fighting adventurers and the like but most people that found it wanted to be something special next to the dwarf and elf in a normal party.
As for the no dragons bit I think that's more to do with rarity than power.(although they are OP) after all I know im not up to date on lore but I have only heard of adult dragons and one mentioning of eggs (and they got destroyed by a stupid son of one of the Tir's princes) So far I have never heard of dragon eggs hatching or any of the dragons laying new eggs. Sort of like the immortal elfs. They are too rare for players to go mucking about as one.
Goblins life through their eyes the webcomic ;D
-
People do love being special snowflakes....
-
People do love being special snowflakes....
However there is a difference between wanting to play what is viewed as a special snowflake and wanting to be a special snowflake.
Speaking personally I love foxes (even if I know their viwed as pests/hunting targets in many places) and will take pretty much any opportunity to play a Kitsune/Hengeyoki (fox)/foxgirl/shapeshifting fox or whatever that game offers. To many GM's/Players you say you want to play that and they think you want to be a special snowflake (or a furry ;D) however that really isn't the point to me. I'd play them if they were a core race, were (as is the case in 5th ed shifters) mechanically and RP wise shooting yourself in the foot, had other more powerful/special/rare options available. The point has never been to play a "I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me" character (although admitedly there is a strong trend towards that in roleplayers its part of the appeal afterall) but just to play something that I find personally fascinating. I've in the past played them in settings where they had to hide what they were to avoid being hunted down and killed, settings where they are not that powerful just another PC race, settings where I spent nights ingame curled up in a crack in a cave wall eating cockroaches as they were all my character could get, I've even retired more powerful characters when the GM made them available because I love them. The powers/setting/availability was only ever an issue in a what can I do sense and honestly I'd be happier if they were a more common character option so I could play them more often rather than ringing the special snowflake alarms.
On the other hand as you said you have players who just want something special/unique/powerful I just wanted to point out that there is that difference in motivation as I'm sure other people out there love playing Elves, Onl, children of gods, powerful mages or what have you for the idea rather than being special in their game e.g. Scion the RPG just like there are those who love playing a gritty, realistic, you will probably die game.
-
It's really all about expanding the opportunities to be born in the wrong body ("Why does she have more fur than I do!")
-
"I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me"
Reminds me of that one player who had a minotaur character, and basically introduced saying "I descend from the ancient greek gods, now bow."
-
"I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me"
Reminds me of that one player who had a minotaur character, and basically introduced saying "I descend from the ancient greek gods, now bow."
Ouch, yes that sort does exist but you see my point I hope?
@Knppel
Yes if you aren't human there are a lot of little things to bring your character to life such as the pixie griping "I hate fashion all those size 0 dresses are a tent on me!" Followed of course by perfectly justified pixiecide.
-
Pft, being born into the wrong body is nothing. Haven't you noticed that the vast majority of shadowrunners were born into the wrong socioeconomic class and that nearly every campaign revolves around them trying to fix that situation?
-
"I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me"
Reminds me of that one player who had a minotaur character, and basically introduced saying "I descend from the ancient greek gods, now bow."
How did that not end up with the troll adept pulling out his compound bow and shooting his ass?
-
[quote
How did that not end up with the troll adept pulling out his compound bow and shooting his ass?
Sadly the joke doesn't work in french, but I'm pretty sure it would have happened otherwise.
Going back to the topic (or slightly at least), would you consider Infected as Metahumans ? I mean, before the HMHVV hit them, they certainly were, but after that, they change so much that I do wonder.
-
[quote
How did that not end up with the troll adept pulling out his compound bow and shooting his ass?
Sadly the joke doesn't work in french, but I'm pretty sure it would have happened otherwise.
Going back to the topic (or slightly at least), would you consider Infected as Metahumans ? I mean, before the HMHVV hit them, they certainly were, but after that, they change so much that I do wonder.
People with leprosy, cancer, elephantiasis, or any other horribly disfiguring disease are still considered human, right?
-
[quote
How did that not end up with the troll adept pulling out his compound bow and shooting his ass?
Sadly the joke doesn't work in french, but I'm pretty sure it would have happened otherwise.
Going back to the topic (or slightly at least), would you consider Infected as Metahumans ? I mean, before the HMHVV hit them, they certainly were, but after that, they change so much that I do wonder.
People with leprosy, cancer, elephantiasis, or any other horribly disfiguring disease are still considered human, right?
True but this does go a bit further (different powers, reactions, requirements), personally I'd stil say yes they're metahuman.
-
[quote
How did that not end up with the troll adept pulling out his compound bow and shooting his ass?
Sadly the joke doesn't work in french, but I'm pretty sure it would have happened otherwise.
Going back to the topic (or slightly at least), would you consider Infected as Metahumans ? I mean, before the HMHVV hit them, they certainly were, but after that, they change so much that I do wonder.
People with leprosy, cancer, elephantiasis, or any other horribly disfiguring disease are still considered human, right?
True but this does go a bit further (different powers, reactions, requirements), personally I'd stil say yes they're metahuman.
I feel the same. They're metahumans afflicted with a truly horrifying disease (and I do mean "horrifying" very literally), but they're still metahuman.
-
I thought I remember reading that they still count as their original metatype. For example a Troll infected with Strain III (Ghoul) would be targetable by both the Slay Ghoul spell, as well as Slay Troll. On a quick search I couldn't find the quote, but it seems reasonable.
That being said, it would mean that they are still technically metahuman.
-
I thought I remember reading that they still count as their original metatype. For example a Troll infected with Strain III (Ghoul) would be targetable by both the Slay Ghoul spell, as well as Slay Troll. On a quick search I couldn't find the quote, but it seems reasonable.
That being said, it would mean that they are still technically metahuman.
I remember reading that too, but I'll be damned if I know where.
-
I thought I remember reading that they still count as their original metatype. For example a Troll infected with Strain III (Ghoul) would be targetable by both the Slay Ghoul spell, as well as Slay Troll. On a quick search I couldn't find the quote, but it seems reasonable.
That being said, it would mean that they are still technically metahuman.
I remember reading that too, but I'll be damned if I know where.
Ah the Joys of cross edition backtracking.
Sadly in 5th they left it sort of vague, namely Pg 134 of Run Faster
Becoming Infected does not remove a character’s
inherent metatype abilities. A dwarf becoming a gnawer
does not lose her thermographic vision, for instance.
So the Infected is still of their original metatype, though now what we call a subspecies thanks to some HMHVV-loving, though again thanks to 5th's tendency to leave out various bits in the transition, this can be pretty easy to miss.
For better clarity you need to roll it back to 4th with pg 77 in Runner's Companion:
Sufficiently Inhuman
The Infected are still metahumans (except for bandersnatchii),
and still subject to most of the things that target
metahumans, but are sufficiently different that they can be categorized
separately using magical theory. Thus, an Infected can
be targeted and affected by a spell that targets its metatype (Slay
Human, Slaughter Ork, etc.) as well as a spell that targets its
specific subspecies (Slay Vampire, Slaughter Busaw, etc.). The
character can also still take qualities and equipment restricted or
built especially to accommodate her metatype. Bandersnatchii
can be targeted and affected by a spells that target sasquatches
(Slay Sasquatch, etc.) as well as spells that target its specific subspecies
(One Less Bandersnatch, etc.).
-
I thought I remember reading that they still count as their original metatype. For example a Troll infected with Strain III (Ghoul) would be targetable by both the Slay Ghoul spell, as well as Slay Troll. On a quick search I couldn't find the quote, but it seems reasonable.
That being said, it would mean that they are still technically metahuman.
I remember reading that too, but I'll be damned if I know where.
Ah the Joys of cross edition backtracking.
Sadly in 5th they left it sort of vague, namely Pg 134 of Run Faster
Becoming Infected does not remove a character’s
inherent metatype abilities. A dwarf becoming a gnawer
does not lose her thermographic vision, for instance.
So the Infected is still of their original metatype, though now what we call a subspecies thanks to some HMHVV-loving, though again thanks to 5th's tendency to leave out various bits in the transition, this can be pretty easy to miss.
For better clarity you need to roll it back to 4th with pg 77 in Runner's Companion:
Sufficiently Inhuman
The Infected are still metahumans (except for bandersnatchii),
and still subject to most of the things that target
metahumans, but are sufficiently different that they can be categorized
separately using magical theory. Thus, an Infected can
be targeted and affected by a spell that targets its metatype (Slay
Human, Slaughter Ork, etc.) as well as a spell that targets its
specific subspecies (Slay Vampire, Slaughter Busaw, etc.). The
character can also still take qualities and equipment restricted or
built especially to accommodate her metatype. Bandersnatchii
can be targeted and affected by a spells that target sasquatches
(Slay Sasquatch, etc.) as well as spells that target its specific subspecies
(One Less Bandersnatch, etc.).
You da real MVP
-
"I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me"
It's funny because it's true (and because belief shapes magic in Shadowrun, the myths are why minotaurs even exist).
It also makes me wonder how much belief shapes the traits, i.e. attribute bonuses, to the core metatypes. Because they do for the metavariants.
-
"I am unique and special and their are 3,000 year old prophecies about me"
It's funny because it's true (and because belief shapes magic in Shadowrun, the myths are why minotaurs even exist).
It also makes me wonder how much belief shapes the traits, i.e. attribute bonuses, to the core metatypes. Because they do for the metavariants.
Probably more than is initially obvious. Might be another reason behind why the IE's wanted to make a purely elven nation. People's beliefs were mutating their race. Might...maybe...I could be full of drek for all I know.
-
They got to Tolkien.
-
They got to Tolkien.
How do we know Tolkien isn't one of them? (I'm looking at you, Ehran...)
-
I'm pretty sure he get name-checked in an IE conversation. I can't remember between whom, but not as if he was one of them.
-
Frost does paraphrase Tolkien in Threats pg 57
>>>>>[Do not meddle in the affairs of immortals, for they are subtle and quick to anger.]<<<<<
—Frosty (19:01:35/06-05-57)
>>>>>[Hey! No paraphrasing Tolkien on this board!]<<<<<
—Goblin-Boy (19:12:53/06-05-57)
>>>>>[Is that who first said that? Sorry, I thought it was someone else.]<<<<<
—Frosty (19:17:32/06-05-57)
If you like to ponder more on other people of history new & old and how they might have been early forerunners of things to come, like Stephen King being a shedim, why not look here:
http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=1556.msg18583#msg18583
Or if you really want Tolkien as History of SR, there is always this one fanmade concept:
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=14317&view=findpost&p=438844
-
I remember that. I thought there was something else. Maybe it was just one of those web pieces from Tom Dowd when Ehran and Harlequin chat, probably the one after Dunkelzahn died. Or Harlequin and Ambrose in VR2.0.
-
I remember that. I thought there was something else. Maybe it was just one of those web pieces from Tom Dowd when Ehran and Harlequin chat, probably the one after Dunkelzahn died. Or Harlequin and Ambrose in VR2.0.
Where can I find those conversations?
-
Hmm... the only other reference I can recall is from the 'Into the Shadows' anthology with Tailchaser by Paul R.Hume where the Mage Johnson makes a Tolkien joke but seeing as far as I recall Thorn isn't an IE, so I wasn't sure this fits your criteria....
“Indeed. Well, ah, Thorn, we require an expert in, shall we say,
physical security penetration. A burglar, in other words.” The dapper
mage grinned suddenly. “I realize that when a wizard looks for a
burglar, he’s supposed to hire a hobbit. Unfortunately, there are
none available.”
Thorn and the troll protested simultaneously at dragging Tolkien
into the discussion. The 20th-century fantasist was not well regarded
by many metahumans. After the first wave of Goblinization
in 2021, the stereotypes created in The Lord of the Rings had been
used to whip up public distrust of the new races, especially the orks
and trolls. A lot of elves also objected to the “airy fairy” image the
old talespinner had pinned on them.
Edit: there is mention of floor-toceiling
wall murals depicting scenes from the works of
Tolkien and other fantasy authors in the APN building during the Harlequin Adventure, but don't see anyone talking directly about it.
-
Hmm... the only other reference I can recall is from the 'Into the Shadows' anthology with Tailchaser by Paul R.Hume where the Mage Johnson makes a Tolkien joke but seeing as far as I recall Thorn isn't an IE, so I wasn't sure this fits your criteria....
“Indeed. Well, ah, Thorn, we require an expert in, shall we say,
physical security penetration. A burglar, in other words.” The dapper
mage grinned suddenly. “I realize that when a wizard looks for a
burglar, he’s supposed to hire a hobbit. Unfortunately, there are
none available.”
Thorn and the troll protested simultaneously at dragging Tolkien
into the discussion. The 20th-century fantasist was not well regarded
by many metahumans. After the first wave of Goblinization
in 2021, the stereotypes created in The Lord of the Rings had been
used to whip up public distrust of the new races, especially the orks
and trolls. A lot of elves also objected to the “airy fairy” image the
old talespinner had pinned on them.
Edit: there is mention of floor-toceiling
wall murals depicting scenes from the works of
Tolkien and other fantasy authors in the APN building during the Harlequin Adventure, but don't see anyone talking directly about it.
I meant the conversation Harlequin and Ehran had after Dunkelzahn died. I keep hearing about it, but can't find it written anywhere.
-
Hmm... the only other reference I can recall is from the 'Into the Shadows' anthology with Tailchaser by Paul R.Hume where the Mage Johnson makes a Tolkien joke but seeing as far as I recall Thorn isn't an IE, so I wasn't sure this fits your criteria....
“Indeed. Well, ah, Thorn, we require an expert in, shall we say,
physical security penetration. A burglar, in other words.” The dapper
mage grinned suddenly. “I realize that when a wizard looks for a
burglar, he’s supposed to hire a hobbit. Unfortunately, there are
none available.”
Thorn and the troll protested simultaneously at dragging Tolkien
into the discussion. The 20th-century fantasist was not well regarded
by many metahumans. After the first wave of Goblinization
in 2021, the stereotypes created in The Lord of the Rings had been
used to whip up public distrust of the new races, especially the orks
and trolls. A lot of elves also objected to the “airy fairy” image the
old talespinner had pinned on them.
Edit: there is mention of floor-toceiling
wall murals depicting scenes from the works of
Tolkien and other fantasy authors in the APN building during the Harlequin Adventure, but don't see anyone talking directly about it.
I meant the conversation Harlequin and Ehran had after Dunkelzahn died. I keep hearing about it, but can't find it written anywhere.
http://shadowrun.wikia.com/wiki/Source:Post_Mortem
-
nice find :)
Though nothing really Tolkienesque there.
But at least we can cross that off the list now.
-
Hmm... the only other reference I can recall is from the 'Into the Shadows' anthology with Tailchaser by Paul R.Hume where the Mage Johnson makes a Tolkien joke but seeing as far as I recall Thorn isn't an IE, so I wasn't sure this fits your criteria....
“Indeed. Well, ah, Thorn, we require an expert in, shall we say,
physical security penetration. A burglar, in other words.” The dapper
mage grinned suddenly. “I realize that when a wizard looks for a
burglar, he’s supposed to hire a hobbit. Unfortunately, there are
none available.”
Thorn and the troll protested simultaneously at dragging Tolkien
into the discussion. The 20th-century fantasist was not well regarded
by many metahumans. After the first wave of Goblinization
in 2021, the stereotypes created in The Lord of the Rings had been
used to whip up public distrust of the new races, especially the orks
and trolls. A lot of elves also objected to the “airy fairy” image the
old talespinner had pinned on them.
Edit: there is mention of floor-toceiling
wall murals depicting scenes from the works of
Tolkien and other fantasy authors in the APN building during the Harlequin Adventure, but don't see anyone talking directly about it.
I meant the conversation Harlequin and Ehran had after Dunkelzahn died. I keep hearing about it, but can't find it written anywhere.
http://shadowrun.wikia.com/wiki/Source:Post_Mortem
"Caustic goat" HAHAHAHAHA