Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Actor NPC

Posted by: Badmojo Jun 15 2004, 12:05 AM

Hey looking for some helpful info on what an Actor action hero might have as far as skills, ware, gear, etc. The said NPC will be playing a key role in the beginning off a starting campaign. I'm even considering making him a reoccurring villain .

The NPC Actor will be an aspiring Bruce Willis Die Hard type. I'm deff thinking he will have some sort of skillwire system, knowsoft, datajack.

So any feedback would be great.

Posted by: KillaJ Jun 15 2004, 12:10 AM

It seems to me that an action star with skillwires would have most of his points in charisma linked skills, with the chip based skills filling in all the "action" requirements.

Edit-Also it seems at least plausible for him to have some normally pretty restricted gear. It seems to me that there has got to be a least one or two functioning props on the set for him to boost.

Posted by: JaronK Jun 15 2004, 12:34 AM

I wouldn't expect him to have skillwires. With lower essence, he wouldn't have enough "spark" as it were. I'd expect minimal cyberware... enough to ware a simrig and some boosts to projection, but that's about it. He'd have performance skills, as well as low level skills in most weapon types. Perhaps a knowledge skill: stage combat, that he can roll as a complimentary skill to any weapon skill when trying to make it look like he's good at using the weapon? He'd definitely have high ettiquete and negociation (you need them to get anywhere in the buisiness).

JaronK

Posted by: Ditaki Jun 15 2004, 01:23 AM

I would almost rule that having Knowledge Skill: Stage Combat would never compliment a Weapons Skill, at least if you were trying to hit somebody. Stage combatants are trained to never put their stage opponents in any real danger. Guns are always pointed so that a bullet accidentally fired won't hit the opponent, all strikes towards an opponent are put so that they are at least a few inches away from the person they're "striking", it's really all just placing so it looks like the person's being hit, but really isn't.

Then again, if you're purposely trying to miss somebody, roll away.

(which, I think, was your point in the previous post. Cptn. Obvious...Away!)

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 15 2004, 01:38 AM

I believe Jaron was only suggesting that it be allowed as a complementary roll for style, not for anything useful. Not that I even agree there (as you said, it would be an impediment more than anything else), but it is a separate issue.

Posted by: JaronK Jun 15 2004, 02:36 AM

I was saying that Stage Combat would allow him to look good, not strike effectively. With that said, my own stage combat abilities are somewhat helpful, since it does give you a pretty good idea of balance, reactions, and a lot of defensive goodness (stage attacks are fake, stage defense is often real). I could see parts of it being an impediment, since being trained to show your moves before you make them is a real problem, but I think it would balance out.

Anyway, I was trying to say he should be able to look like he was very competant with almost any weapon, not that he'd be able to actually be competant.

JaronK

Posted by: Glyph Jun 15 2004, 06:04 AM

I disagree on the low Essense "spark" argument. If low Essense really diminished an actor's "spark", then people wouldn't like simsense stars (a simrig is even more of an Essense hog than a good set of skillwires). It wouldn't be that hard to justify an actor having skillwires, either, if he was a charismatic actor but lacking in "action" talents.

Posted by: GreatChicken Jun 15 2004, 06:18 AM

QUOTE

The said NPC will be playing a key role in the beginning off a starting campaign. I'm even considering making him a reoccurring villain.

Give him the Stealth skill that handles disguise, for his experience in the film field (for various roles) helps him in that respect. Special: he does better disguising himself as a generic 'man on the street' (eg low-rank soldier, wage slave, taxi driver, cleaner; +4TN to blow his cover) rather than any given specific named/unique person (Army general, chief of police, Manager and above; -4TN instead).

If you intend to make him evil, the above ability could be dangerous (even with it's limitation). You could, for example, make the players think that the CEO of <insert well known company here> is responsible for everything, when all along it was that lowly janitor they walked past in the first floor of the same building...

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 15 2004, 06:36 AM

QUOTE (Glyph)

Ultimately, it's up to the player or the person designing the character. For some, a drop in essence does strip them of their 'souls.' Whether this is any genuine function of essence or a psychological issue or just a psychosomatic side effect is ultimately the preorgitive of the person working out the character, and this is really as it should be.

As for the actor getting a light disguise ability: why the limitation on disguising him or herself as a common person?

Posted by: GreatChicken Jun 15 2004, 06:43 AM

QUOTE

why the limitation on disguising him or herself as a common person?

Well, I don't see said actor getting experience at observation and imitation...something only spies have. Also, the actor's likely to be 'drilled' in 'standard cliches/behaviour for <insert category of people here>' from film school. He may not be able to fully imitate a person who's more in the limelight for these reasons....

Although if you want to make him a bigger threat, you can freely remove the weakness as you see fit...but don't you think that 'CEO-who-hired-us-is-an insider' plot is somewhat overdone...especially for cartoons?

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 15 2004, 07:01 AM

I don't know where you got those perceptions of acting, but at best, they're true of bad actors, and even that's a very thin case. Acting encompasses a lot of disciplines, skills, and abilities, and observation and imitation are assuredly included. That's not to say mimicry is going to let you get in anywhere, of course.

Posted by: GreatChicken Jun 15 2004, 07:07 AM

QUOTE

I don't know where you got those perceptions of acting, but at best, they're true of bad actors, and even that's a very thin case.

Then my apologies; I got the view from watching my country's English productions, which tends to show all these traits.

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 15 2004, 07:18 AM

That's very unfortunate. What country are you from?

Posted by: GreatChicken Jun 15 2004, 07:28 AM

Singapore. For some reason, characters in even the newer programs look and sound too 'forced'...like what you'd get from a stage production.

Posted by: Entropy Kid Jun 15 2004, 07:57 AM

Film school is for film makers (directors, cinematographers, editors, etc), not actors. Stupid nitpick? Yeah, you got me there. I wouldn't be surprised acting is taught in those programs though.

"Observation" is important so he knows how to act; knowing how many people are in a room, who is armed, and which one is the plain-clothes cop is a different skill.

For an actor to be effective, the audience has to accept whatever role is being played. After the initial and unavoidable "hey, I saw her in that last movie..." a good actor makes you forget (with the audiences help, they want to forget) that it's acting. Of course, when an actor says something inappropriate to a role (the fault of bad writing) you'll be shocked out of the illusion.

The only difference with stage acting and any other kind is the extra need for voice projection (which can be solved with mics) and blocking/body positioning which is more of a directing thing. A realistic play shouldn't feel forced.
##

I think the original idea works fine. The datajack should be induction or hidden some other way. If the NPC will be going around town pretending to be other people, he'll need a lot of varied knowsofts so he knows the right thing to say. The comment about having hard-to-get gear makes sense since he probably has the money to get things and buy the right contacts.

If you do formal stats for NPCs, he'd have a 1 or 2 rating in many combat skills (being an action hero type); and decent ratings of Car, Bike, and maybe a skill for horse riding. [or does he rely entirely on the skillwires?] He'd probably really have Athletics at 3 or 4 as well.

The skillwire idea makes a lot of sense. It'd be faster and cheaper to buy or rent skillsofts for actors instead of teaching them how to look good for their roles, even if they only need to learn choreography or one song, dance, etc.

Some might not like the idea, but I'm sure there are producers willing to fit a dance or stunt company with skillwires and chip whole scenes, which would cut a lot of time down rehearsing and shooting. It'd make stunt work generally safer too. They'd still need to make sure it looked "right" though, which would take practice.
##

I don't think Essence is an issue. The *only* reference I know from the game books is on the color page for the street samurai- saying he walks the line of insanity or something because of all the 'ware. A friend of mine that was a second edition player made comments about low Essence having an effect on personality in a roleplaying way. I expect CP2020 players often bring their ideas of cyberpsychosis and Humanity with them when they play SR. I do think that certain kinds of cybeware and excessive cyberware can potentially change someone's worldview, but I don't think there's a direct connection between personality, behavior, and Essence.

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 15 2004, 08:47 AM

QUOTE (Entropy Kid)

The only difference with stage acting and any other kind is the extra need for voice projection (which can be solved with mics) and blocking/body positioning which is more of a directing thing. A realistic play shouldn't feel forced.

Not quite. Stage acting differs substantially from film acting in that much more physical subtlety is involved in the latter. Given the distances stage actors must work at, facial expressions are exaggerated, as are physical movements that would be otherwise largely imperceptible at a distance. Intonation also works differently, as you mention, with projection. It's also worth noting that purists (in my opinion, rightly) tend to avoid mics. It's not purely an issue of adherence to tradition, however; past that, mics can dramatically change the way a composition holds together, and can often be a bad idea. Also, bit of a nitpick more than anything else, but to clarify, blocking really is something actors need to pay almost as much attention to as the director. In any case, suffice to say that while a good play should not be forced, there are substantial differences between the two media, and in a lot of ways, stage acting takes a hit in terms of subtlety, minutia, and freedom that film, in comparison, does not.

Posted by: Abstruse Jun 15 2004, 11:28 AM

I went to film school for two semesters and I deal with actors/directors/writers on a daily basis (no, I'm no one important, but I'm friends with people who know enough people to be important). Anyway, most action star actors do learn the basics in real combat, even if they train not to strike. And don't think they don't make contact. Watch the documentary film My Stunts by Jackie Chan for some background on how Hong Kong does their action filmmaking. A lot of the stuff won't apply in the US because American actors have an insane union and insurance companies that cover the films go crazy when that kind of stuff goes on. Also try checking out the behind-the-scenes documentaries on several films as well (The Matrix comes immediately to mind, at least the first one). The HK way, though, seems more likely because stuntmen are a lot harder to find for simsense.

An actor in Shadowrun would probably have simlink cyberware if they were a pro as the studio or their agency would front the money to have them implanted, and probably alpha at least and probably beta. They might have some minor reflex boost cyber to help them perform stunts better, maybe a pair of cyberspurs or something like that if they typically play a street sam (because ALL street sams have cyberspurs...). He probably wouldn't have too much cyber though, esp. cyberlimbs, because large amounts of cyberware tends to freak out normal people. He'd have at least 3 in Pistols (actors spend time at shooting ranges to train just like everyone else that knows how to shoot) and probably 2-4 in some form of martial art or unarmed combat. Again, it depends on what types of simsense he does as to what kind of equipment or skills he has.

The Abstruse One

Posted by: Badmojo Jun 15 2004, 01:12 PM

Yea, I'm really starting to think that having a Sillwire system, simrig, knowsoft. And a bunch of chips would be rather beneficial to an actor in the 2060's maybe more for the Studio that is supporting the actor. To think about all the time spent training the actor, when he could spend twice as much time filming more than one movie, than in the time that it would take to teach him a skill they would need to make him more believable in a scene. He would already have the knowledge to perform in the next 10 films.

However I know the actor would still have to have great charisma skills, acting, negotiation, persuasion. Something that I think having a chip for could not reproduce in quality, that is frequently called Improv.

Posted by: KillaJ Jun 15 2004, 08:54 PM

Could you get the encephalon task pool bonus if you were using a chipped skill?