This has suddenly turned from "how do I defend against an insanely armored melee troll" into "what's the worst plan to get out of being hunted for a debt"....
I'm waiting for the guy to suggest paying someone to crash a plane into the troll.... so it looks like an accident...

Ok, so a little more background. It was neither the player nor the GM's idea to have him be collecting my debt - it was mine. We needed a way to bring his new character into the party (after a, umm, conflict of interests which saw his previous character geeked), and I was In Debt, so I figured "Here's a way to bring him in that won't get him totally ignored." Trouble is, he decided to threaten the sister. So that meant, to me, that conflict was likely. Not necessarily imminent, but likely. This is more an issue of the characters he wants to play (he likes to play characters who use violence, or threats of violence, to solve their problems) and the character I'm playing (He tries to use his skills to get things done with a minimum of violence, but is very, very loyal to his family and equally protective of his sisters, and he is very good at applying violence, if need be) than an issue with the GM's running things. As much as it may seem ideal, I can't just preemptively chunky-salsa him, as that wouldn't be in character. I'm envisioning something more like Simon Tam's talk to Jayne Cobb at the end of Trash - I'm going to lock him into VR (he has a simrig, confirmed by prior use of BTLs) and give him a talking to. If that doesn't convince him to behave, I'm gonna geek his ass (I consider the talk to be fair warning).

Also, I'm hopefully going to make enough from this job we just pulled to pay off my debt in full.



Interesting that you mention that...We're currently on a plane, and our current plan is to crash the plane (evidence disposal)...I may be leaving him on the plane, if he chooses not to agree to behave.

Which brings us back to the doing X would/wouldn't be in character for my character pissing contest which is generally a lot more trouble than it's worth.

If it was your idea it falls to you to, if not resolve it peacefully, then make sure what the other players actions will likely lead to. Make sure he is aware of how in-debt works and that asking for more than you are required to pay is not on. Explain that threats against your characters family are even less acceptable. Do this OOC. If neccessary, admit the idea of making him a debt collector was a mistake, which it sounds like it was.

Doubtful. I arrive at the conclusion I have based off of the core rulebook, not the FAQ.

Emphasis mine.

And we're back to a poor person spending large amounts of money to avoid paying a debt. The tangents this thread has gone on is crazy.

OP: Help me make an adept that dual wields pistols that can take out troll tank. Everyone else: You should totally buy a bunch of explosives or use expensive drugs on the troll preemptively or make a mage instead or spend a ton of cash on avoiding one of your teammates.

Edit:
@OP Bonus points for the troll actually being unable to move. Double bonus points if you actually quote Simon directly. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Let's see if I understand the situation correctly

You set him up in such a way a violent conflict with your character was nearly inescapable considering his taste in characters, then ask here about a really effective way to kill his character and even talked your GM into making your dependant more powerful (+100 BP) so she is more likely to do the killing for you ?

I agree with Zyerne, you should talk to the player before something definitive happens.

Well, that's just the nature of the internet, is it not?

And running (away) isn't exactly an option, because it would effectively take my character out of the game. I'll admit, my plan to get the Street Sam into the group may not have been the best one, but it's what I'm working with. We play again tomorrow night, so I'll be giving him a talking to then, and hopefully we can come to a peaceful solution. If not, I crash a plane with him in it, or cap him, or otherwise cause him to not be alive any more.



I set him up in such manner that he can be made part of the group without question - violence was not inescapable at that point, as I was already gathering funds to pay back my debt. He then decided that I had to collect all of it immediately, or else he would harm me - and then he threatened my sister. This is where the seeds of violence were sown. The GM also decided to make my dependent more powerful (making her a full 400 BP character) because he saw it as likely that my current character would get geeked, and so I'd have a ready made back up. I came here looking for ways to prevent my character's being killed, give his sister a way to hold her own just in case, and to get help in building a dual-pistol-wielding gun adept, and for advice on how to deal with the impending Giant threat.

I'm going to talk to the character, in character, because I see this as being an in character issue. If he doesn't want to play ball then, after I have given him fair warning, things may get ugly. I want a peaceful solution to this, despite how it may seem. I just see violence as likely, unfortunately.

Did I get that right, you (OP) told the other player to make a character that is a Vory Legbreaker, while your character is indebted to that crime syndicate?
Now this character is doing his job (intimidating your character to make him pay his debt) and your character is probably going to try to kill him for it?

I think an OOC talk between you the other player and the GM is in order to find out if all are fine with the development. If CvC is the norm in your grpoup this may be unnecessary.

I'm guessing the problem is that the intimidation is unnecessary because the OP is working on the debt like he is supposed to. And of course if you look at what the OP actually wanted in the first place, it was help for making a character that could defend herself should the troll actually decide to attack her. He didn't want help on how to strap explosives to the troll.

He was already making a ganger, and we had no reason to bring a ganger in at the time (we were going on reconnaissance, and wouldn't likely need a street sam) so I gave him an 'in' for his character. Maybe this wasn't the best idea (I didn't think it was, at the time, but we literally had no reason to have contact with the character he created, and I'm a sucker for party cohesion, believe it or not) but it's what I have to work with. Yes, he threatened me, which was expected, as part of his job. He didn't have to demand all of the money up front (especially because I was ready to pay my month's interest, and then some, when he arrived) nor did he have to threaten the sister character. He also shouldn't have decided (and told me) that he'd simply kill me and call it a bad debt if I didn't pay, forthwith, when I was ready, willing, and able to make my month's payment - that's just bad business.

We already spoke, OOC, and I made it clear that further moves towards my sister would not be tolerated by my character (or his sister), so everybody's cool about that. I'm going to give him an in character prod to remind him of this, and hopefully things will go peacefully. I came here and asked what I did because when going up against a 30-soak Street Sam it's good to have a contingency plan, just in case. I'm not going to kill his character out of hand (which is why a preemptive strike is out of the question, if I haven't already made it clear enough) but I'm not just going to roll over and play a new character either.

OK, then.

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned before, but keep records of every crime he commits, especially those against people with resources and a tendency to hold grudges. If he threatens you or your sister again leak or threaten to leak that information to the wronged parties and take cover. Or be even more devious fake such evidence. You should make clear though that killing you will not prevent the information being released.

Looks a lot like you forgot to tell the player how In Debt is supposed to work and what should realistically be expected from your character, and he did what he though his character should do.

How do you think his character (and him) are going to react to an "in-character prod" that is basicvally putting him into an helpless state (stuck in VR) where you can threaten him back at your leisure ? Intimidation attempts are often among the WORST way to make a player character do something - unless you want to trigger the reverse action ! Think about it for a second : you character (and you, the player, I guess) reacted very poorly to being bullied in the first place.

I don't advocate your character "rolling over", but you two players should try to agree that some things normally would not have been said and would be better for everyone involved to be retconned a bit - or have a conference call with your Vory money-lender so he can explain to his man what amount he is supposed to collect (in simple, unambiguous words).

OP- You have other options, you just don't want to pursue them because being able to say "My guy can kill your guy." is an ego trip.

You rag on this dude because he only plays violent characters, but that is exactly what you re doing. You've shot down dozens of idea to deal with this guy without PK. The only conclusion is that you just really want to gak this guy.

His response to "locking him in VR" isn't going to be to back off, it's going to be to get angry and try to kill you in your sleep or something else asinine. I'm sure he'd start a thread asking how to kill you and get a million responses.

If your character is killed, then you're just going to make another one and try to kill this guy again. I'm sure you'll come up with an "I'm just playing my character" reason to do it, too.
Best case scenario, you and your sister kill the guy, the he makes another PC who will then try to kill you again.
This cycle will continue until one of you leaves the game. If that's your end game, either stop playing or tell the GM to stop letting this guy play and save yourself some time.

You are not a slave to an archetype. You have multiple in character options. Simon didn't kill Jane, even though that would have been "in character."
The same goes for Jane not sniping Mal in the first episode and Mal not shooting Jane out an airlock. The fact they made these decisions helped define their characters, making them whole cloth three dimensional people, not just cowboys in space.
Come up with a solution besides PK so your character can be the same.

If you just want to whack this guy to prove that he can't get you and that you can "beat him at Shadowrun" that's fine.
Just don't try feeding us a pile of bull drek about how there is nothing you can do.

....oO(and to think that I tried to Help WhiskeyJonny with this Bullshit....makes me feel bad now !
I thought the Samurai was a NPC....)

with a Dance full of regrets
Medicineman

Not really. I've talked to him out of character about the issue, suggesting that we find a way to deal with it that leaves both our characters alive. He's not exactly open to it, as he feels he has the upper hand (30 soak dice). He's not the kind of player who will have his character listen to the face, regardless of what the dice say.



I see this as a false dilemma. Best case scenario, this guy decides to back down, play nice, and become a member of the team. I don't see this as impossible, mind you, especially if I can convince him that it would be at least an even fight or even one with the odds stacked in my favor (much like Simon did to Jayne).



You're right, however, I didn't come here looking for advice on how to play my character. There is inter party conflict. I did not start it. I'm choosing this course of action, that is, having a viable contingency in place in case this guy decides to take me out, because it seems logical and in character to do so.



I have a solution which doesn't involve PK, you acknowledged it earlier in your post. Much like Simon giving Jayne something to paralyze him, so he wouldn't hurt his back, I'm going to paralyze the street sam. I'm going to make it clear that we can "Circle each other and growl, sleep with one eye open, but the thought wearies me." I'm going to make it clear that I'm going to take no further action against him, unless he decides to attack me or my sister.



I don't want to whack the guy, believe it or not. His player has made it quite clear that there is likely to be violence, however, so I am planning accordingly. I don't know where you got the impression that I wanted to "beat him at Shadowrun" - I just want my character, who I have worked very hard on developing, doesn't get diced by a Giant with an O-Dachi. Is that unreasonable? I think not.

Medicineman: I'm sorry to disappoint you. I'm also sorry that this whole business with the Street Sam got mixed in with my request for a Dual-Wielding Gun Adept, along the lines of John Preston from the film Equilibrium. But, c'est la guerre I suppose...

Emphasis mine. I'm not saying my interpretation is correct, just that here is where I am drawing mine from.

Max force isn't in anyway what so ever a factor of your magic based skills.

All that line means is that the magic attribute used in skill tests linked to magic, like spellcasting, is the amount of magic dedicated for mana-based abilities.

But it is your own suggestion that triggered the whole mess isn't it ? It would be fair that you take more steps than him for sorting it out.

Having his Vory bosses telling him to stop at collecting your monthly due and not the whole sum you own will IHMO go a LONG way into defusing the situation and allowing him to function as a team member - by removing the inital reason of his threats and the conflicting loyalties that would result from him siding with your team rather than by metaphorically beating him into acknowledging you could gain the upper hand.

If that does not work, then the VR trick for showing him that he is not as invulnerable as he feels, but you should delay this as much as possible as it is much more likely to backfire.

Talk to your GM about pulling a job for the Vory in order to pay off your debt?

If the Vory tell the Sammy "Hey, dont rough him and his up just yet, we want to see if we can get him to pull a job to pay of his debt."

Hed have to back off then.

I'm going to ask two questions that I don't think have been explicitly asked yet: are you making your monthly payments to the Vory, and is the giant street sam's player aware that this is how the In Debt quality works?

Yes and no respectively. Despite my explaining how it works, in fact.



I suggested it, but it wasn't an option.



True, true. I am a bit responsible for my problems, but only because the other player has decided to ignore the way In Debt works. I'll see if the GM will get him to back off, but it seems that the GM has his own plans for him.

Even if you are paying on time a representative of the debt holder most likely would intimidate you and threaten your family. Since you can't really pay it all off unless you have the BP though that isn't feasible. Still I'd expect intimidation from him it kind of goes with the territory of in debt. If you fail to make a payment, he follows through on the debts and heck some of the follow through can happen while you are making payments to make sure you really understand the situation.

That may be true of must people, but do you really want to push someone who shoots other people in the head for money if they're already making payments?

QFT.

Additionally this practice may even scare away potential customers. Everyone knows that the mob sends over legbreakers if you don't pay your monthly rates, but if they already break your legs for being in their debt, who would ever borrow money from them?