Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Aku Jul 6 2011, 03:43 AM

So, i'm working on a Face character, who i was original developing as sort of a Michael Westin mold, but after all the death he saw, he took an oath to "only" kill in self defense (pacifist level 1), then, i had the idea planted in my head (stares at Hermit) to make him a drone rigger/face. so I thought about the idea, completely ignoring the whole pacifist bit. If i'm outside the building, doing physical overwatch, with drones in the building i'm not REALLY responsible for any deaths that may occur so i'm not breaking my pacifist quality, right? is this like slice, not individually wrapped american cheese? or some good stuff, like freshly grated Parmesan Regiano ?

Posted by: DMiller Jul 6 2011, 03:52 AM

Total cheese, not even the good stuff. If you are in control of the drones jumped in, remote or simply ordered, you are responsible for their actions. If your drone kills someone, you've broken your Pacifism.

Just my 2 NuYen.

Posted by: Teulisch Jul 6 2011, 03:53 AM

if its your drone, and you armed it with lethal force, its as good as if you killed him in the meat from an ethical standpoint. your cheese is called denial. a smart GM will give you bad consequences if you try to avoid negative qualities with faulty logic.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 6 2011, 03:54 AM

I think that the Code of Honor from RC is more appropriate to this 'minimum force required' approach, than trying to use pacifism for something it isn't intended.

I also think that any sane GM will have you violate your pacifism every time you tell your drone to kill someone. Your toys are your responsibility.

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 6 2011, 03:59 AM

So you guys are saying that if I let a tiger loose in a day-care centre I'll be morally responsible for the grisly deaths? Fascists!

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 6 2011, 04:07 AM

There are so many 'better' NQs, anyway.

Posted by: Aku Jul 6 2011, 04:12 AM

Come on, no one wants to step up and argue against me? For the record, i agree it's not very good cheese, but i'd like to see someone try to argue it.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 6 2011, 04:17 AM

Didn't they? It's not pacifism if you cause it. It looks like… everyone said that.

Posted by: Critias Jul 6 2011, 04:38 AM

So just give your drones gel rounds (or some other non-lethal/less-than-lethal weapon). Ta da.

Posted by: LurkerOutThere Jul 6 2011, 05:24 AM

I don't often argue against flat earthers either. There's not much to argue when one side is wrong.

Posted by: TheOOB Jul 6 2011, 05:30 AM

Using drones to get around pacifism is like using a gun to get around it, in either case it was a machine that did the physical act, but you intentionally used to machine for the purposes of violence.

Posted by: phlapjack77 Jul 6 2011, 05:49 AM

Strange - Not that I'm trying to argue your point Aku, but I JUST had a discussion with a co-worker about the "level of abstraction" of killing someone - how disconnected from your target are you when you kill them? Knifing someone is so immediate, shooting someone is a little more removed...then up to fighter pilots having reported not feeling like their bombings are very "real killings" and so on...it makes a sort of (morbid) sense that the more removed from your target, the less real it would seem and the easier it becomes...

Using TheOOB's example, it's YOU pulling the trigger on the gun, likely you can see your target, see the effects of the bullet hitting them. Very real, visceral. Telling a drone to shoot people? Maybe more possible for a pacifist...

Posted by: Glyph Jul 6 2011, 06:00 AM

A pacifist character will actively avoid violence and only kill in self-defense. The quality as written is specifically a matter of principle, not level of abstraction. Letting a pacifist get away with any kind of remote-controlled murder opens the floodgates for "pacifist" demolitions experts, spirit summoners, riggers, and indirect fire snipers.

Isn't there already enough wiggle room for munchkins? "Well, those guards are firing at me and my teammates - I guess they consider blowing up the front gate and storming in with assault rifles to be some kind of hostile act on our part - so since they're firing at me, I'm justified in, um, defending myself!"

Posted by: Dahrken Jul 6 2011, 06:08 AM

Cheese it is indeed, and IMHO of the worst, artificially colored and flavored pase-in-a-tube kind... I guess nobody argues for it because it is unarguable.

The quality say "avoids needless violence and will not kill unless in self-defense". If you take that negative quality that's not the level of personnal implication in the violence you oppose, it's the violence itself.
Think about it : the desription of the 5 BP version explicitely states that you cannot participate in premeditated murder or wetwork - simply involving yourself is enough to break the negative quality.

In fact a pacifist is likely to use drones (with non-lethal hardware) to avoid being in a self-defense situation where he would need to possibly kill another metahuman, but definitively not to kill by proxy so he does not feel bat about it.

Posted by: suoq Jul 6 2011, 06:15 AM

And when you toss someone off a building, they were perfectly fine when you let go of them. In no way were you responsible for the damage that the pavement did to them.

It's not even cheese. It's more like you read the name but not the actual description.

Posted by: Summerstorm Jul 6 2011, 07:24 AM

Eh... what the others said.

I mean: Technically you already violate your pacifism when you order/program a drone to "Attack anyone not carrying an legitimate ID chip in this area". Sure it is GUARD duty in your place. But still, anyone breaking and entering might die because of you. Instant gm-hammer *g*

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 6 2011, 07:28 AM

This approach to circumnavigating the pacifist quality is, as so many have already put, completely ineffective. If you want a character who can't handle pulling the trigger himself but is quite happy for others to do it for him then just play it that way - it's not worth any bonus BPs. Ultimately, as the book specifies, a negative quality has to be a detrimental one.

Here are some other options:

Combine with the delusion quality. Your character could believe that all megacorp employees (say) are some kind of mind-controlled puppets or machines that don't have families, friends, hopes or feelings. Though you should be in for a world of psychiatric hurt if and when the delusion is unravelled.

Take the multiple personality disorder quality and make just one of yourself a pacifist. It makes for a complicated character, but perhaps an interesting one.

Be an AI or a free spirit then convince your GM that you don't care about biological life. This option is a bit out there, but it might be fun to play a hacker who won't crash, attack, corrupt or in any other way defile anything with a Pilot rating, be it drone or IC. Sprites should probably be off-limits too.

Posted by: pbangarth Jul 6 2011, 01:43 PM

I have a Free Spirit PC, Bryneir, who was once a Valkyrie, but for some reason (Amnesia 1 - the GM has cooked up something 'special' for her) she has rejected some of the violence inherent in her past (Pacifist 1). She has combat spells, but all do Stun damage only. She recently saved from drowning an enemy who had tried to kill her and her team. This enemy has now turned into an arch-rival bent on the destruction of her team. She encourages her teammates to use SnS ammunition (not a bad idea anyway) and Unarmed Combat if fighting is necessary.

The only entity whom she is possibly seeking to destroy is another Free Spirit, who runs a whorehouse in Las Vegas, using mentally dominated metahumans as her stable of employees. A recent run-in between the two has left Bryneir disgusted with the depraved use of these innocents against their will, and she is collecting the resources to bring about the permanent Banishment of the 'Madam'. Otherwise, she will have to go to the Madam's home plane and take her down there. One way or another the depraved domination must stop.

I believe there is no evasion of the Pacifist 1 Quality in this.

Posted by: DamienKnight Jul 6 2011, 01:53 PM

This would be the equivalent of a Michael Westin who decides to leave deadly traps for all the criminals he faces. Sure, sometimes he puts the bad guys in a compromising situation and their bosses kill them, but he is not going to put a cyanide gasbomb in their car, or a brain frying tazer in their phone. He may not be present when the traps murder people, but he would still feel responsible.

Remember, the point behind pasifism is that your character doesnt want to kill other people. Its not a phobia of seeing death, its a real passion for life that wont let them murder with a knife, gun, remote detonated bomb or trap, or even a drone they are not currently rigging.

That passion for life is what makes this an interesting quality. They wont just run with a shadowrun team and look the other way when murder happens... they will buy Gel and Stick and shock rounds and distribute them to other team members before the job. They will turn down flat out wetwork. They will be the one who speaks up when interrogations start to go too far. They play the good guy that gets on the heartless mercenaries nerves... but is too useful to ignore.

Posted by: pbangarth Jul 6 2011, 02:09 PM

Yes, this is very much the case. Well put.

Posted by: Aku Jul 6 2011, 02:30 PM

Just for the record, this was a late night semi coherent idea. I wasnt planning on actually using this as cheese I wanted to see if anyone would actually make the argument for it working though, but as i had suspected, there really IS no argument :\ that was a boring discussion DS!

Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 6 2011, 02:46 PM

Not so much. Fikealox gave me the idea of putting a trid show similar to "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1PaL-S86OY" in the 6th World.

Posted by: suoq Jul 6 2011, 04:16 PM

Alas, that isn't quite true. A number of the qualities aren't detrimental.

Sensitive system is 15 free points for a character who was going to be minimally cybered anyway (< .5). Likewise Hung out to Dry is 10 free points if you're not starting out with any contacts. If you don't have the BPs or the character concept suggests passing on a group of items, there may well be a quality that pays you for what you were going to do anyway.

10 points of Amnesia can actually be downright fun to play.

Records on File. Distinctive Style, etc. has (so far in my experience anyway) been free points for anyone playing Missions. Someone let me know if they ever add a trace roll to a Missions mod.

Posted by: Mr. Smileys Jul 6 2011, 04:18 PM

This is an Idea I was mulling about in the back of my head. The only twist to it I had was that the other personality would have the Combat Monster NQ and be the crazed kill-em-all type. Kind of a Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde kind of deal with a specific key that would cause the switch, like intense fear and pain (i.e. being shot).

Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 6 2011, 04:41 PM

If the GM is allowing a character with a negative quality that is in no way detrimental to the character the GM ain't doing its job right.

Posted by: Fauxknight Jul 6 2011, 04:51 PM

I don't think this character idea qualifies as having the pacifists quality, on the plus side it seems he would be a good fit for one or more psychological disorder qualities instead.

Code of honor or similar is also a good suggestion, although 'only my drones may murder you' is more of a code of dishonor.

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 6 2011, 05:01 PM

Exactly.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 6 2011, 05:19 PM

An interesting variation on this idea would be the guy who sets things up so his opponents kill themselves.

I don't mean like tripwires setting off bombs either. I mean like the guy from Saw, where the victims have a choice, but to get what they want the victims have to knowingly take an action that may kill them.

I'm pretty much sure this wouldn't quality as Pacifist either, but it might qualify as Sadistic Bastard.






-k

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 6 2011, 05:31 PM

I'm just going to sum up the idea in the original post so that it's really clear cut.

You're going to arm you drones with bullets, and then claim ignorance.

Posted by: Marwynn Jul 6 2011, 05:37 PM

This isn't "Pacifism" but rather "Aversion to Direct Violence". Or perhaps "cowardice" especially since he's willing to let drones do his killing.

Talk with your GM, he'll probably give you a penalty for being shot at personally though.

It's really more like "Combat Paralysis" though.

Posted by: suoq Jul 6 2011, 05:58 PM

What do you do at your table with a technomancer or mage who has taken sensitive system? Do you ban the quality, turn down the character, deliberately implant something in the character, change the rewards in a run to implants only? How do you, as the GM, do the job "right"?

Posted by: Fauxknight Jul 6 2011, 06:02 PM

You roll up a newspaper and hit them with it while loudly proclaiming "BAD PLAYER", then you crumple up the character sheet and rub thier nose in it.

Posted by: DamienKnight Jul 6 2011, 06:22 PM

They really need to have two versions of this quality. One that is 15BP for mundane characters, and one that is 5BP for awakened characters.

Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 6 2011, 06:26 PM

Unless they implant something into them to include at least one augmentation, then yes, I'll say know to this character. Same thing if a player picks one of those negative qualities for hacker and said player also picks uneducated for instance, I'm willing to do what Fauxknight said.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 6 2011, 06:34 PM

Agreed: there's plenty of precedent for disallowing any NQ that isn't a negative, and for reducing the BP value of a mitigated NQ.

Posted by: Mäx Jul 6 2011, 07:32 PM

Not really being able to take ware is IMO enought of a negative quality in it self to justify both of those.
In other words, them not having any ware is the detriment.

Posted by: suoq Jul 6 2011, 07:47 PM

That's fascinating.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35279 - July 1. No one has issues.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35235 - Jun 27. No one has issues.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35205 - Jun 22 (the paladin). No one has issues.
OK. This one is just funny. http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35194 - Jun 20. It's in the deer. No. I'm not kidding.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35145 - Jun 13 (post #15). No one has issues.

I'm willing to bet there are characters right now in Welcome to the Shadows that have this.

I'm not going to argue if it's "right" or not, but I will state that it's endemic, even on these forums.

For a technomancer or a mage with less than .5 essence worth of ware. It's not a disadvantage. It's free build points. That was the term used back in 2008 according to one of my searches. No one disagreed then.

For a character who doesn't want a lot of ware, it's not much of a disadvantage, certainly not as much as the BP implies. In the end it's still free build points. How many free is up to you to decide.

But it's being endemic doesn't surprise me, because the system is filled with free build points. Restricted Gear and Muscle Toner 4 is a staple of character building. It's 40 points of super metahuman agility for a hair over 11 BP. If there is anyone here turning down characters using Sensitive System as free BP, that would be a surprise to me. If they are, I have to wonder if they're turning down Muscle Toner 4 as well.

In the end, it's just different flavors of cheese. The game is so unbalanced that it seems funny to watch people suddenly drawing a line in the sand over something that's been right before them the whole time.

Posted by: Fauxknight Jul 6 2011, 07:59 PM

Its between the player and thier GM. I know in a serious game I don't like to take negative qualities that have absolutely no effect, I don't like my players do so, and none of the GMs I know do either.

Posted by: redwulf25 Jul 6 2011, 10:04 PM

"Stop being a munchkin man. Replace that with something that actually impairs you."

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 6 2011, 10:14 PM

There is a difference between "Nobody on Dumpshock objects to this" and "Nobody on Dumpshock who read those threads and had enough impetus to actually post about it objects to this."




-k

Posted by: Critias Jul 6 2011, 10:25 PM

Explain to them that you don't think it's a very negative Negative Quality, and ask them why they took it. Ask if they'd mind if you lowered the value of it to encourage them to take something else, find out if they have it as part of their character's back story, see if they think it might actually come up in-game, find out if they misunderstood how it works...talk to 'em, and see what's what.

For what it's worth, I'm a big fan of Qualities (both positive and negative), and it's very, very, easy for me to -- in a perfectly reasonable fashion -- put 40 or 50 points worth of them onto a functional character, all just by being left alone to flesh out his back story (and coming up with more and more Qualities). I invariably "boil it down" after that and find a way to fit all the really absolutely essential ones into the build point limits, but not everyone that takes NQ's is out to game the system. One of my favorite characters ever had Amnesia as a central point of his character, and quite a few of my other characters, both in games and just fiction over the years, would have had "illegal" builds if I'd given myself points for every NQ they had listed on their sheet.

I find plain old communication is the answer to about 75% of gaming's problems.

Posted by: Mäx Jul 6 2011, 11:08 PM

IMO "Character has sensitive system" is pretty much the only good answer to the question "Why doesn't the character have any ware"
After all there are pretty much 0 character consepts that wouldn't be better with some ware.

Posted by: Makki Jul 6 2011, 11:47 PM

"Why doesn't the character have any ware?"
-"Character has sensitive system"
"How did he find out?"

When I take Sensitive System I also take a datajack, just to make the char know and feel the pain of cyberware. The rest will be Bioware then...

Posted by: suoq Jul 7 2011, 12:20 AM

When he was awakened he didn't understand what was happening to him so he went to a street doc thinking it was AIPS or something. The docs tests were inconclusive but the doc advised him that his body wasn't a good fit for cyberware in case he was planning on modding my body in the future.

Posted by: Glyph Jul 7 2011, 02:31 AM

Sensitive system is one of those flaws that is a negative quality because it imposes a barrier to the character's potential. Obviously, qualities like that are taken by players who might have been disinclined to pursue that avenue of growth in the first place. Just like someone with Logic of 2, and Impaired Attribute, is not likely to be strongly affected by having a limit of 5, instead of 6, for his Logic.

The GM can make whatever tweaks he feels are necessary for the game. If you don't like the flaw, either lower the number of points that awakened characters get for it, make it affect bioware too, or simply disallow it. There's no need for pejoratives like "munchkin" for someone taking a logical flaw for their character (hell, the Combat Mage archetype has this flaw and two allergies), or passive-agressive crap like having the bad guys kidnap the character and implant some 'ware in him. Just explain your house rules to the player, and have him pick something else.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:39 AM

Regardless, there are some qualities that are more ridiculous than others. The GM should definitely consider them carefully, and make appropriate adjustments. Many people *are* munchkins, who *would* take 'Allergy: Lutetium' if they could.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 02:41 AM

Lutetium?

Why would you want to?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:48 AM

Cuz it barely exists. It's the same as taking Geas: Being Alive, or something.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 7 2011, 02:52 AM

Ooh, I never thought of that one before.
I did use Geas: In Dracoform once, though.
Also, Geas: In Adept Centering Stance.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 02:53 AM

I would not say that it barely exists. The abundance of Lutetium in the Earth crust is about 0.5 mg/kg. While not overly abundant, it is not exactly "barely existant." But I do get your point...

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:54 AM

Barely. Or, replace with even rarer things, like pixie corpses, or whatever.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 7 2011, 02:56 AM

Alergy, Sever: one billion dollars in pennies.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 02:57 AM

Heh... Got it...

Posted by: Glyph Jul 7 2011, 03:17 AM

Allergies don't come in "barely ever encountered". They come in common, and uncommon. Taking an allergy for a ludicrously rare substance is botched munchkinism. Either the GM will disallow it, or the GM will go out of his way to vindictively have you encounter the supposedly rare substance every adventure.

But there's a difference between trying to game the system with ludicrous allergies or incompetencies (incompetent: aerospace or some such), and using an obviously superior option from the book. People will pick sensitive system, get muscle toner: 4 with the restricted gear quality, use smartlinks, cast manabolt, and so on. It's not munchkinism - it's having some common sense and seeing that a few things in the book are pretty damn blatantly superior choices. It's like when AD&D introduced double specialization - every fighter got it. If you think it gives too much of an advantage too cheaply, then again, just disallow it, nerf it, or make it more expensive. That's what I would do with emotitoys and empathy software, for example.

Posted by: pbangarth Jul 7 2011, 03:17 AM

There have been so many arguments here on Dumpshock that an adept who does not have implants (particularly certain ones) is severely limited and will function less efficiently than one who has them. Anybody who wanted to play a non-implanted adept was told something like "Sure, if you wanna, but she's a waste."

It always seemed to me then that a player who wanted to have a 'purist' adept could make a case for the use of Sensitive System both as fluff to explain why the adept is not tricked out like the hottest runner adepts and as recompense for the 'weaknesses' he has chosen.

Posted by: redwulf25 Jul 7 2011, 03:23 AM

So that's why kryptonite pops up so often in Superman . . .

Posted by: redwulf25 Jul 7 2011, 03:26 AM

No one called Sensitive System on it's own munchkinism. Taking it and then suffering no drawback because you don't have any cyber was called munchkinisim. Much the same as Geas: Being Alive.

Posted by: suoq Jul 7 2011, 03:42 AM

Do. The. Math.

If you're not awakened and you take it you suffer no more than the guy who has no cyber.
If you're awakened and you have less than .5 essence of cyber, you suffer no more than the guy who has no cyber.
If you're awakened and you have >1.5 cyber then you don't take it because it costs B.P. Who wants to PAY B.P. to have a disadvantage?
If you're in the remaining group, it's still 5 free BP. Probably not worth it and you have to figure out why your character went for the essence loss when he should have known better.

This is no point where it makes sense to take it that has any more drawbacks to what you're calling "munchkinism". So yes, you are calling it on it's own "Munchkinism".

Posted by: Glyph Jul 7 2011, 03:42 AM

Except that most of the stuff an adept would get is bioware, and the flaw doesn't affect bioware (one of the things GMs can house rule, if they want to tweak it and make it more of a disadvantage)

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 03:51 AM

Glyph, that's the point: allergies have anti-munchkin rules already. That's all this is, preventing people from taking NQs that have no effect. As I said above, Sensitive System is hardly a great example of that, and the main idea here is *not* 'ban it'. It just happened to be the example that came up in a thread specifically about cheating the NQ system.

Posted by: Glyph Jul 7 2011, 03:54 AM

I would disagree with the premise of that. It's like saying someone with Unlucky and one point of Edge is a munchkin if he never spends Edge. But in actuality, by not raising Edge, and not using it when it can be used effectively 5 out of 6 times, the character is actually limiting himself more than the character with 3 Edge who occasionally spends it, and on the rare occasion has it backfire on him.

A character with sensitive system and no 'ware is essentially giving up on the possible advantages of 'ware completely. Compare that with a hermetic mage who gets, say, cybereyes: 2 with lots of goodies, a datajack, and cerebral booster: 2. Sure, if he didn't have sensitive system, he could have crammed in a bit more stuff, but he has what he wanted. For this character, who is affected by sensitive system, it is actually less of a disadvantage.

Honestly, the term "munchkinism" is being way too overused on this board lately. Munchkinism is using "creative" rules interpretations, exploiting loopholes, and outright cheating, to create characters designed to "win" the game at the expense of everyone else's fun. Not simply picking a game option that others might think is underpriced or overly optimal.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 04:08 AM

*shrug* One man's 'exploiting loopholes' is another man's 'optimal choice'. The point is that the bonus BP from NQs should fit the sacrifice. No sacrifice = no BP, mitigated sacrifice = reduced BP.

Sensitive System, like Unlucky, isn't a great example of the former (because you're always affected by the barrier to 'ware). It *might* be a good example of the the latter, though (again, depending on the group, player, and GM).

The fact is, all perk/flaw systems in all games are munchkin-bait, and people read them thinking 'which of these will affect me the least?'.

Posted by: Critias Jul 7 2011, 04:28 AM

Points totals (particularly from Negative Qualities) don't always matter much when statting up NPCs, but just as a quick aside, I've got an adept in an upcoming product that's done exactly that. I don't even remember if I bothered to give him the points for the NQ, but it's in there, primarily as a justification for why he's never indulged in that particular shortcut.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 7 2011, 04:56 AM

My take is Sensitive System is only munchkin if the player who took it for his character never intends to get any 'ware for the character in the first place. He's taking a penalty to something that doesn't affect him, not at character creation nor in the future, just for the points.

For example: A Pixie is unlikely to get Cyberware, ever, in 99.9% of campaigns out there. So a player taking "Sensitive System" for his Pixie character is probably guilty of munchkinism.

I don't include folks that have builds that MIGHT reasonably take 'ware in the future. Intent is important.

Note that I tend to seperate powergaming from munchkinism. To me, powergaming still has standards and attempts to stay within RAI. Munchkinism flat out ignores RAI in the quest for more power.




-k

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 7 2011, 11:52 AM

If I ever get a player thinking along these lines I'll offer them the full 35 BP bonus without having to take any negative qualities at all*. The meta-game of getting something for nothing at chargen has nothing to do with roleplaying or anyone else at the table – it's a self-set challenge. Roleplaying games are meant to be the opposite of board games, free and flexible and communal to enjoy as the group wishes so if people are desperate for those extra points then f*** it they can have them. Let them game the system on their own time. Meanwhile, at the table, they can look at those extra BPs and start to wonder what they're really worth.

Hell, if they caught me in a bad mood I might offer them a bonus 400BPs with no attribute caps, no skill cap, no availability cap, no restrictions of any kind. Then (depending on my subsequent mood) either they'll have the dullest game ever due to a complete lack of challenge and uncertainty (on the mechanical level) or they'll quickly be reminded that NPCs have no BP limit ...

My personal take on Sensitive System is that the character should already have an applicable implant. I for one couldn't consider it a negative quality otherwise.

* I guess I would have to offer this to the other players as well for fairness, but a bit of the game would die for each one that accepts

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 12:47 PM

Freaking fuck. If you do not want to play a pacifist, DO NOT TAKE THE FREAKING QUALITY.

It should not only be reflected in his action, but also in his character sheet.

For example for a mage:
Mentor spirt should not be warrior or the like.
Spells should not involve a collection of elemental ball spells.
He probably should not have a high fire arms skill.
And so on.

@Yerameyahu

I mean come on, you got 35 Points of flaws out of I guess more than 500 possible. So it should not be too hard to pick something fitting and not crippeling.

@Glyph
I totally agree with you on the regards of sensitiv system and unlucky.
Nothing gives you the edge, edge 5 gives you without the quality. So yeah, you get some more points to spend, so what?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:03 PM

I thought that this one would be obvious... Superman is not a Shadowrunner.
Comic Books have different standards for Weaknesses.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 01:48 PM

Irion, I didn't say it was hard. I just said that's what perk/flaw systems are. Glyph was implying that munchkins are rare, that we're talking about perfectly innocent players who just happened to take minimized/negated NQs, and that it's just so darn mean to call them 'munchkin'.

Posted by: suoq Jul 7 2011, 01:52 PM

Please explain to me how, if they have an applicable implant, it's actually a disadvantage that has to do "with roleplaying or anyone else at the table". Show me the case where it IS a negative quality as you define NQs.

If you really want to create the system you describe, the simplest way to do that is to state that players get no BPs for disadvantages, but they're still free to take up to what would have equaled 35 BPs of disadvantages. The players who take them are the players you're looking for, not the players who played you for BPs.

And, in many ways, you might get better characters. 0BP worth of pacifism is enjoyable to play as is 0 BP of Big Regret. I've played a character that had both of those traits in my notes, just not on my character sheet and during play learned reasons and ways to deal with such things.

There seems to be a belief here that it's the things that cost or gave BPs are the things that define a character. I don't believe that to be true. The things that cost or gave BPs are the things that define dice rolls and character creation and limit or expand character choices in play. The things that define a character are who they are, who they were, and who they want to be. And those things aren't in any character generator.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 01:55 PM

I don't see that belief. I see that Negative Qualities should negatively impact the character. This isn't some grand speech about the soul of roleplaying. Mechanics have rules for a reason.

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 02:00 PM

@Yerameyahu
I mean I do not get it. There are a lot of NQ out there. And some have to fit the character. And negativ qualities fitting the character are not really getting yourself into a problem, because you wanted the character to be that way.
For example, if I choose pacifist, I (as a player) made the choice that this charcter does not want to kill because of his background.
So hell, the quality takes nothing from me.
If somebody can't find something like that, he or she really did not think about the character she/he is playing.

Yes, fitting disadvantages do not hurt that much. Thats reasonable to assume.

The only weakness which really is a bit of is in dept. (Which unfortunatly just fits fine a lot of character concepts and gives a first class motivation).

Posted by: KCKitsune Jul 7 2011, 02:00 PM

I took Severe Allergy: Silver for my SURGE character... who happens to have a fox tail and fox ears. Everyone at first glance would think "Fox Shapeshifter... load up the silver ammo!"

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:10 PM

But, Irion, the character concept is already limited. The something has already been taken. *I* (and most others) are not saying that's a problem. Sensitive System (again again, a bad example, not mine) is indeed limiting characters (so that they avoid 'ware). I gave better examples above, but others are available—some are in the book, even. Things like Borrowed Time in a one-shot game. Spirit Hated (I forget the name) for the Astral Hazing sam.

And NQs are not 'always', not even 'usually' part of the character background. All the sample characters have random stuff like Gold allergies tossed on; nothing *wrong* with that, it's just not very character-first. I agree, the big ones probably *are*, and you deserve the points if you're fulfilling the sacrifice… like being a pacifist.

Posted by: suoq Jul 7 2011, 02:15 PM

at availability 12R. That's a Negotiation + Charisma Extended Test with a 1 day interval needing 12 hits and they need a license to buy it on the legal market. So, unless the group is pre-stocked for some reason I can't think of, they need to order it AFTER they see you. Am I missing anything? And then they either need additional clip or they're shooting silver ammo at everyone. Even with additional clips, it's really crippling their effectiveness against the rest of the team to load silver ammo to shoot at you with.

Out of curiosity, how often do you get shot at with silver ammo?

(Note that I have no problem with it, I'm just curious how often it actually impacts play to the party's detriment.)

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:17 PM

Maybe they did their legwork. Besides, NPCs don't use the player gear rules.

Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 7 2011, 02:30 PM

I played as a Jaguar Shapeshfiter once, the campaign lasted for some 10-ish sessions. In one of them I was stabbed with a silver knife, in another one, one of the players, after figuring out I was a shapeshifter and doing his legwork to find out about what shapeshifters can and can not do, finally bought some silver bullets and actually tried to shoot me once but I dodged and tripped him.

Posted by: DamienKnight Jul 7 2011, 03:59 PM

Its the most common metal allergy, capable of harming many infected and shapeshifters. I am thinking it would be standard issue for HRT teams to have a clip of silver ammo to deal with things like this.

Posted by: Aku Jul 7 2011, 04:03 PM

Well, again, for the slightly angry among us, if i DO go with pacifist, it is in his background, sort of as to why, and will be played as such. It was really just a thought to see what the response from DS would be, exactly as i had planned

Posted by: KCKitsune Jul 8 2011, 12:34 AM

Sorry I didn't get a chance to reply to this post earlier today.

As for how much I get shot at... God, I wish I was playing, but with my Medical Lab Tech classes (Clinical Microbiology, Clinical Chemistry, and Urinalysis) I don't have time to play. When my workload eases I will try to get into a game.

As for silver ammo... can't you load your own? I mean with a shotgun it should be easy-peasy.

1. Buy silver
2. make large BB's (for buckshot)
3. Load it in the shells
4. Profit!!!!

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 12:43 AM

Sure, but they you won't even do Physical damage.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 8 2011, 01:08 AM

Why?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 01:10 AM

Cuz it's a lame shotgun with 'flechette'. It won't beat your armor. Hell, I'm not even sure Allergy applies to things that don't touch your body.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 8 2011, 01:14 AM

You assume a LOT there Yerameyahu. I have seen those "Lame Flechette Rounds (Shot)" from shotguns absolutely shred their target, and those in good Armor at that. You are making assumptions that I have yet to see borne up in the game... Is it possible that your attack will do no damage. Sure. Is it Likely, Not really.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 01:17 AM

It's SR4. Shot shotguns are trash, unless you're hunting critters. Maybe *you're* assuming a silly number of net hits, or something.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 8 2011, 02:10 AM

Nope, just empirical evidence gained from 5 years of playing SR4/SR4A.
Your experience may be different, and I acknowledge that, but a Shotgun, even in SR4A, is not insignificant.

Anyways...

Posted by: Glyph Jul 8 2011, 02:10 AM

Actually, they'll think "It's a furry... load up the armor-piercing explosive assault cannon rounds!"

But seriously, I don't consider silver to really be that out of line. It's something you're unlikely to encounter very often, but still something you could plausibly run into, as ammo, jewelry, etc.

I'm a mellow GM, though. A lot of the other posters here would probably have a coronary if someone tried to play the Combat Mage archetype.

"Sensitive system? Where's your 'ware? How can you have sensitive system if you don't have any 'ware? Mild addictions to simsense? and stimulants? Oh yeah, big fricking disadvantages - he's addicted to popular entertainment, and coffee! Listen, you don't get a mild addiction to simsense and stimulants in my campaign, unless it's snuff BTLs and Nitro! And what's this? Mild allergy to sunlight, huh? Yeah, that's really crippling, since shadowrunners like doing their jobs in broad daylight and all. Wait, wait, wait... what is this munchkin crap? You gave yourself 10 points for that? Sunlight as a common allergy? Dude... the game is set in SEATTLE!!"

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 02:19 AM

In fairness, the sample characters suck for *many* reasons. They *do* have a silly number of weird little NQs.

Posted by: Irion Jul 8 2011, 10:32 AM

Powergamer:Puts an effectiv generated character and the rules over the fluff and roleplay.
Munchkin: Puts the power of his character over the rules too. (Reading only half the rules, out of context, apply it only if fitting etc.)

Why is that a problem.
Sorry, you get not much BP for negativ qualities to start with.
I mean beeing unable to move not even gets you over 35.
So yeah, I guess they are not meant to really hurt your concept big time.
(Which would be quite self contra dictionary)

It does not fit to take sensitiv system if you cram yourself with cyber. Yes, it fits some shaman who probably will never use cyber.
Yeah, you do not take simsense vertigo if you are playing a hacker, because well, it makes you a poor hacker.
You get 35 BP to flesh out your character a bit. Even if none of the "drawbacks" ever hurt you, it is not a big deal after all.
They only should fit the character and if they trigger, they should be accepted.
So if you take pacifist and never run in a problem because of it, you do good roleplaying/smart thinking. No problem with that.
But if you shoot people as soon as you run in a "problem", well I guess you should not have taken this quality.

Simsense vertigo might be free BP for a lot of characters. But still it might be played out if someone wants to meet the characters in the matrix. Yeah nothing life threatening, but you only got 5 BP (or was it 10?) for it, so I would say it does not qualify for that.

How often is the 11 dice on a role making a differance?

Yes, it is quite a good idea to only take mentor spirits with compulsion test, if you got yourself a high charisma and willpower. (At least 10)

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 02:06 PM

Simsense Vertigo is crippling for all but total luddites; it's just *extra* bad for Hackers.

My definition of munchkin does not require (or include) outright cheating, and overlaps heavily with 'powergamer'.

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 8 2011, 04:03 PM

Likewise. I always thought of 'munchkin' as simply a cuter term for 'powergamer' whilst 'cheat' needs no such synonym, especially here.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 8 2011, 07:32 PM

I run a Cat Shaman with pacifist 1, and have gotten great mileage out of it. I get synergy by not using guns, not contributing to wetwork, using/learning only stun combat spells and using it as a roleplaying hook (I work to actively stop executions, and go after cold blooded murderers with lots of non-lethal gustu). It even works nicely as a background item for my character.

It's been a fun challenge and a great role playing aide, and I havn't had to thread the needle to keep the whole thing legit.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 8 2011, 07:37 PM

The thing is… we all know that Stun is optimal anyway. SnS, Stunbolt, etc. So it's not exactly crippling to ask a player to abide by Pacifism, if they *choose* the NQ.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 8 2011, 08:08 PM

That's true. But I think roleplaying is where NQ's provide value. Nothing's more lame to me than just choosing Allergy.... to... sunlight. For no reason at all. Where's the fun in that?

I found that taking Pacificism led to more NQs like vendetta and enemy. And voila! Character concept and background. Plus it helped in other ways, like costs. No ammo to worry about, or guns, fake gun licenses, gun accessories, gun mods. My GM now has plot tools to work with also. So it's all been surprising fun.

I know that everyone harps on the 'Paraplegic Hacker' concept. But I kind of like the idea. Not for powergaming, but for roleplaying opportunities and challenges.