![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#251
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
This part I don't get. In a convention game, like Missions, I can understand, the scenario is written ahead of time. You run as written. But in a home game, why would it magically not be available? If you added a clip of ADS, why would you as the GM incapable of simply deciding on the spot that even if it wasn't in your original plan, you added APDS, so the PCs get to have a clip or two. You post reads like once you write a particular scenario, it is mostly locked in stone and cannot be altered. I really don't get that. It just feels unnecessarily rigid to me. It may be my GMing style. I generally don't write out an entire scenario ahead of time. I write out a basic outline of stuff that might happen, and the details get made up on the fly at the game table. I write down any significant details I create for later continuity. I got fairly good at making stuff up on the fly without it looking like it's improv. Waay back in college, I started GMing for two different groups, and there was enough demand for games that I often had nothing at all prepared for a session, spinning out something in the 15 or 20 minutes it took for people to get settled in for the evening's game. As a result, most times my home games are run fluidly, the details getting hashed out as I run, little more than a handful of index cards with my basic plot outline as a base. It's also probably why I get annoyed at calling it "cheating". I can understand stuff like making up a counter on the spot to block a player's creative solution being called "cheating", but that falls more under "Dick GM" territory. But making changes, even big ones, to a planned encounter in response to changing conditions is not in and of itself "bad". It's the reasons behind the change that determines such. But I think I've said my piece. It's because I've seen this sort of thing happen. A lot. Not by any GM here, of course, but by bad GM's over the years. There was one game where a midrange NPC was using a belt-fed machine gun. He had trouble hurting us, so "magically", he switched to belts of APDS. Which was bad enough, but when we beat hi,m he coincidentally had just fired his last belt, and didn't have any ammo left to loot. That's what I mean. Fudging is a tool for the GM, but you have to be fair about it. And I'm sure everyone here is, but at the same time, there are those who aren't. And that's why you need to be doubly sure you're being fair when you make adjustments like that. Anyway, tjn has it right. By the rules, we're supposed to craft every NPC from scratch. 4.5 in particular specifies that every named, recurring NPC is supposed to be built with BP, which is a time consuming process. Now: I cheat and fudge that all the time. I'm sure everyone else here does. Which is great, because that works. But the actual rules themselves? They *don't* work. That's not saying anyone is doing it wrong-- the opposite in fact. Those who make it up are doing it *right*, and the rules are just bad. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#252
|
|
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 ![]() |
It depends on which rules you are reading (inconsistency? In Shadowrun? Inconceivable!). Sure, the section on building prime runners on page 385 of SR5 advocates creating them similarly to PCs (with adjustments for comparative power level), but earlier, on page 346, it talks about three ways of statting up NPCs - full build, story build (the NPC is simply assigned logical values for skills, etc. - and the text even admits that this "will probably be the one most commonly used."), and improvised build (making up stats on the fly).
Fudging is another matter. I think that a bit of metagame fixing for a blatant mistake (not writing down ammo for an NPC guard, etc.) is fine, just as I would not be a dick GM if the players made a similar obvious mistake (sure, your character wouldn't show up to explore the sewers without a flashlight). I disagree more with adjusting stats on the fly; forget "challenge". It will come up occasionally, naturally, but this is a game where characters can range up and down the power scale, tactical decisions can give huge advantages (or disadvantages), lateral thinking can let you bypass problems altogether, and combat tends to be quick and lethal. Not to mention that a TN of 5 makes dice rolls very unpredictable. Just remind the PCs that they can always run, and be glad that Edge is there to smooth out unlucky rolls. I think there is some text in the game explicitly giving GMs sanction to do tweaking as needed. That really gets more into playstyles, though. Some GMs tweak encounters or even fudge dice rolls, while some have encounters set in stone and let the dice fall where they may; some GMs are story-oriented, and some have character-driven plots instead. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#253
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 875 Joined: 16-November 03 Member No.: 5,827 ![]() |
Those of you saying you use a different method than RAW? But if you really read the entire NPC chapter in the SR4.5 basic book, it states that it is absolutely RAW just to assign numbers to the NPC - for every kind of NPC, from squatter to CEO and great old dragons. Only in one very specific case it is recommended to use the BP/karma system. Again, only "recommanded", not "must be build". Saying that it is not RAW to just handwaive numbers etc is simply *wrong*. It has nothing to do with the role play police, but with the constant claim that in SR 4.5 every major NPC has to be built using the BP system by RAW - which is a false claim. Look some postings above you, I marked the corresponding part in the basic book in big letters ... Again: it is completely RAW to just handwaive anything for any NPC in SR. It is only *recommended* to use the BP system for a very small, very specific type on NPC. QUOTE However with the fact that most players reject RAW on this point They are not rejecting RAW. They are using RAW, because it is RAW that you as a GM can (if you want) just assign the numbers (or use the BP system if you want that). But as a GM you have a choice, and both choices are RAW and correct. SYL |
|
|
![]()
Post
#254
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
But if you really read the entire NPC chapter in the SR4.5 basic book, it states that it is absolutely RAW just to assign numbers to the NPC - for every kind of NPC, from squatter to CEO and great old dragons. Only in one very specific case it is recommended to use the BP/karma system. Again, only "recommanded", not "must be build". Saying that it is not RAW to just handwaive numbers etc is simply *wrong*. It has nothing to do with the role play police, but with the constant claim that in SR 4.5 every major NPC has to be built using the BP system by RAW - which is a false claim. Look some postings above you, I marked the corresponding part in the basic book in big letters ... You quoted one small section, when there are several relevant ones. You referred to one part of fluff text, which in full, reads as follows: QUOTE While the gamemaster is free to give NPCs any stats he deems necessary, he should strive to make them consistent with the tone of the game and to take into consideration the challenge or assistance NPCs are intended to offer player characters when devising their stats. So, even though you *can* make up whatever you want, GM's aren't supposed to-- they're supposed to stay in line with the rules, and the rules say you should use BP for recurring characters. QUOTE Again: it is completely RAW to just handwaive anything for any NPC in SR. It is only *recommended* to use the BP system for a very small, very specific type on NPC. And again: if the rule is "Make it up", what the heck did I just pay $60 bucks for? I can make things up without spending that much money, I buy rulebooks so I have help to make things. "Make it up" isn't a rule, it's a cop-out. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#255
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 875 Joined: 16-November 03 Member No.: 5,827 ![]() |
You referred to one part of fluff text That is not a fluff text, its a cruncy rule. One you do not like as it seems but a rule nontheless. Fluff is the intro story for a chapter for example. And yes, you pay 60$ for it (as the basic book really so expensive in the US?). Because it is not only filled with one rule on how to stat NPCs and 400 empty pages, but for a lot of other rules, combat, magic, initiation, skill usage, attribute test, world introduction, matrix hacking etc. And to be honest: this specific rule is enough. I have enough example NPCs and description in the book to estimate which level is appropriate for which situation (from veteran street crops to multi billion Ares CEO) to create NPCs on the fly if I really need them. Yes, sometimes I have to improvise and yes, sometimes I forget things and yes, I often go in the direction of "Would it make sense that this NPC have item x or ability Y" and introduce it on the fly (we know that you do not like this kind of gamemastering), but I still stay inside the rules, as"on the fly" is still RAW. But usually not the RAW you like. QUOTE I buy rulebooks so I have help to make things. "Make it up" isn't a rule, it's a cop-out. For that, Cain, you have the rest of the book, Grunts, Archetypes, critters, spirits, dragons etc. I am quite sure such an experienced GM as you can use these example npc and adapt them to your specific style of playing / gamemasterting. ############################################################################## On the other side: what would *your* best/perfect NPC contruction rules be? Where you would say "Woah, thats totally awesome how I can build NPCs here!"? I mean in the course of a run (one evening) a player can ancounter dozens of NPCs, from very unimportant (Mike, the McHughes sales representative) to very imporatant (Johnson), from easy combat challenges (low level ganger) to elite combat (veteran SWAT knocking on the door). Do you create dozens of NPCs every gaming night? What do you prepare for a campaign? Hundreds of NPCs? Do you improvise at any level in any kind of roleplaying game? Not only SR12345 or DnD/Pathfinder or Star Wars or whatever. How do you create the thousands of NPCs, both important and not important during all roleplaying games both SR and non-SR (if you play other RPGs besides SR)? For may part, I can only say "i look at example characters and improvise and make stuff up". SYL |
|
|
![]()
Post
#256
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,801 Joined: 2-September 09 From: Moscow, Russia Member No.: 17,589 ![]() |
You really enjoy using words like "can't." Which is not a word I've used in my posts and misses the point of what I am saying. There's no lack of fascinating and fun tabletop RPGs out there, so if another great one attracts the players by letting them jump right in and attracts me as a GM because it's easy to run and allows me the freedom to improvise on the fly, then that is probably where I'll go. If a system does not allow you something, you can't do it within its confines. Simple as that.If I say: "What's there is there, I wouldn't let a PC get away with it, so he doesn't have any. Even though all the grunts do.", I might have destroyed the entire encounter balance. Instead of being a challenging fight, it might now be a cakewalk. But if I go: "He's a smart NPC, he'd have it anyway", not only do I swing things back too far in the opposite direction, I'm being very unfair-- I'm showing favoritism to my own NPC's. Unless you're building an NPC for a set amount of BP and not a BP more, and you forgot to fit non-conductivity into that; and unless the players have observed the NPC's armour in detail and you never mentioned it's apparently non-conductive, what difference does it make? Okay, you're writing stuff into the NPC's stats not before the session but during it. So? You just have to keep it consistent: if your NPC has that armour upgrade or uses APDS or whatever, you mark it down for when the players loot the guy. Otherwise, it's all behind the curtain stuff that the players have no way nor reason to know about.And even when there's combat, you can't predict what'll happen. If the players all roll well, and the GM rolls poorly (which happens to me on a regular basis), even a well-designed challenge can be beaten with ease. For example, I remember when I had a boss fight set up: someone made a potshot at him, but I thought: "Oh, he's got 13 Combat pool dice to spare, he'll dodge no problem." That was my SR3 record fumble: all 13 dice came up 1's. Shortest boss fight on record, that bad of a roll meant an insta-kill. On the opposite side, recently I did a Chicago Mission where someone pointed out that the troll over there wasn't really a troll, but an impostor. So I spent Edge and NERPS, and started rolling.... and ended up hitting the final boss with a surprise shot for 32 successes. He went down ignominiously, and that was fine. For me, that's a strong indicator that Shadowrun is not about fights at all, and these mustn't necessarily be a part of adventure (much less every gaming session like I've seen people boast). A single good roll by an NPC punk and a single bad defense roll incapacitates your character; a single spell against one of your weak attributes puts your character under control of the opposition's mage. The system is purposefully designed to be highly lethal and highly random; so using it should be an emergency.It may be my GMing style. I generally don't write out an entire scenario ahead of time. I write out a basic outline of stuff that might happen, and the details get made up on the fly at the game table. I write down any significant details I create for later continuity. Yep, that's how I do it, too. Instead of a set scenario path I usually just write up a plot intro ("a new AI fit into a fist-sized nexus was stolen from MCT lab") and then draw a relationship network: this actor did this and that, wants this and that, has these and that powers ("the researcher stole the stuff at the anarchist's urging; now as the corpsec is catching up to him he's looking for an extraction"; "the anarchist believes AIs sentients with equal rights; he had the AI stolen and now hides with it in the trid pirate community in Genericville", etc); then I visualize the links between the actors, and as the runners act, the world reacts. So whatever it is they decide to do (and at the end of it, roleplaying is about making decisions), a consistent, believable reaction is presented, even if it represents a challenge too hard ("we walk into the secret MCT research center in the middle of the day, guns at hand, to extract the scientist") or too easy ("we mind-control a girl living with the trid pirates to steal the AI's nexus for us"). Moreover, it allows for unexpected consequences that the players can in a way foresee ("the anarchist's grandma is a corporate bigwig, and she just wants her wayward grandson safe; she'll pay if he is captured or send a hit squad after the runners if he is killed; that will come up if the runners run a background check on the anarchist").
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#257
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE That is not a fluff text, its a cruncy rule. No, a crunchy rule is one with numbers and actual rules. That section is a guideline, part of an introduction, and clarified in later paragraphs to say you should use BP. QUOTE Do you improvise at any level in any kind of roleplaying game? Not only SR12345 or DnD/Pathfinder or Star Wars or whatever. What a silly question. Roleplaying games are all about improvising and making things up. The rules are there to *help* you make things up. When a rule actively hinders you from being able to make things up, as in Sr4.5, it's a bad rule. And that's evidenced by the fact that people here are almost universally ignoring the rules, instead of using them to help. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#258
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
QUOTE Unless you're building an NPC for a set amount of BP and not a BP more, and you forgot to fit non-conductivity into that; and unless the players have observed the NPC's armour in detail and you never mentioned it's apparently non-conductive, what difference does it make? In other words, if I'm making a NPC by strict 4.5 RAW. Because then, you *do* only get so many BP, and not a BP more. See the problem? QUOTE For me, that's a strong indicator that Shadowrun is not about fights at all, and these mustn't necessarily be a part of adventure (much less every gaming session like I've seen people boast). A single good roll by an NPC punk and a single bad defense roll incapacitates your character; a single spell against one of your weak attributes puts your character under control of the opposition's mage. The system is purposefully designed to be highly lethal and highly random; so using it should be an emergency. Despite the claims, Shadowrun has never been that lethal of a system. Runner deaths are decently rare. Above and beyond this is the fact that no system should force a single-approach method. I've known GM's who love making combat scenarios, and force players to fight, even when they come up with other solutions. On the flip side, I've known GM's who hate combat, and brutally punish players who choose the combat option. Shadowrun in particular encourages lateral thinking and problem solving, so there should be no pressuring players into choosing any one way of winning. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#259
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 875 Joined: 16-November 03 Member No.: 5,827 ![]() |
But the rule is "make up the stats". Its a very basic rule and perhaps not for every GM (certainly not for you as is seem), but still ... its a rule. Rules are always crunch and never fluff. I would like you still to answer the question regarding on what rule system you find good for NPC creation/administration? How does it work? Because you criticize both the "make stuff up"-rule and the "use the normal character system to create NPC"-rule.
Which rule system / RPG is your perfect "NPC creation" system? And how does it work? SYL |
|
|
![]()
Post
#260
|
|
Mr. Quote-function ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,316 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Somewhere in Germany Member No.: 1,376 ![]() |
Somehow I have the feeling that - once again - the ongoing discussion is not about the thread's topic but certainly serves as an example to demonstrate what happened to Dumpshock ...
QUOTE (Fatum) If a system does not allow you something, you can't do it within its confines. Simple as that. Your initial inference didn't sound like you were talking about the system but rather about what Demonseed Elite can or cannot do with regards to the individual ability of performing as GM as well as the involved player's ability to handle the system (opposed to the willingnes of doing so). As such your remark could easily be mistaken as a direct insult ... and your general 'tone' certainly helped with making exactly that interpretation. And this certainly can be viewed as one of the main problems this board suffers from. Posters - and I can't exempt myself there - way too often choose to act antagonistic just for the sake of being "right" within the confines of their respective roleplaying preferences in general and their understanding of what SR is "supposed to be". |
|
|
![]()
Post
#261
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
But the rule is "make up the stats". Its a very basic rule and perhaps not for every GM (certainly not for you as is seem), but still ... its a rule. Rules are always crunch and never fluff. I would like you still to answer the question regarding on what rule system you find good for NPC creation/administration? How does it work? Because you criticize both the "make stuff up"-rule and the "use the normal character system to create NPC"-rule. That's not a rule, that's a cop out. Look, any GM can make up whatever they want. If someone wants to make a Shadowrun version that runs on d12's, that's fine! But after a bit, you have to ask yourself: "If I'm not getting any useable ideas from the Shadowrun books, why am I paying for them?" Try it this way: why are there rules for building PC's? Why not just let every player make up whatever they want? So, one guy can play Al the street rat, and the other guy can play Clark Kent, the flying adept? Second, introductions aren't rules. Rules are things like: QUOTE prime runner is a unique individual, as unique as the player characters. As such, they should be built using the Build Point System (see Building a Shadowrunner, p. 80). The total number of Build Points used to build a prime runner depends on the character’s strength relative to the player characters: Inferior, Equal, Superior, or Superhuman. It's a very specific rule, and refers back to a complex chart full of numbers. QUOTE Which rule system / RPG is your perfect "NPC creation" system? And how does it work? There isn't one. No such perfect system exists. That said, some are worse than others. The ideal system would provide a strong guideline for the desired outcome, provide consistent results, is easy to use with very few fiddly bits, and can be prepped quickly. The SR4.5 version fails on all of these: there are no guidelines for default power levels, BP provides wildly inconsistent results, has way too many moving parts, and takes forever, even when making stuff up, because there's too many essential pieces to consider. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#262
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 875 Joined: 16-November 03 Member No.: 5,827 ![]() |
Try it this way: why are there rules for building PC's? Why not just let every player make up whatever they want? So, one guy can play Al the street rat, and the other guy can play Clark Kent, the flying adept? Challenge and Fairness between players. Its like Monopoly: everyone starts the same. From there, its your ambition, luck and experience on how far you get. QUOTE That said, some are worse than others. Which one? Please give examples. Which were the good ones? @mods: perhaps the part of NPC creation / interaction should be brought into a new thread. SYL |
|
|
![]()
Post
#263
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 ![]() |
Somehow I have the feeling that - once again - the ongoing discussion is not about the thread's topic but certainly serves as an example to demonstrate what happened to Dumpshock ... I have the exact same feeling. Your initial inference didn't sound like you were talking about the system but rather about what Demonseed Elite can or cannot do with regards to the individual ability of performing as GM as well as the involved player's ability to handle the system (opposed to the willingnes of doing so). As such your remark could easily be mistaken as a direct insult ... and your general 'tone' certainly helped with making exactly that interpretation. And this certainly can be viewed as one of the main problems this board suffers from. Posters - and I can't exempt myself there - way too often choose to act antagonistic just for the sake of being "right" within the confines of their respective roleplaying preferences in general and their understanding of what SR is "supposed to be". Well said. The whole side conversation on building encounters and NPCs and improvising is getting into the weeds, but in some way I think it does have a point. Some of the methods of building encounters in Shadowrun can be very time consuming and have a lot of variables to keep track of that a GM may forget about (ex: APDS ammo or non-conductive armor mods that might just be a given in your campaign). Sometimes a GM has to fudge things to cover up that they forgot some detail and in order to keep the encounter fun or challenging, but if it happens too often, you have to wonder if there's just too much involved in creating the encounters to begin with. Personally, when I was a freelancer, I absolutely dreaded building encounters in Shadowrun adventure books. It was difficult because power level is such a sliding scale in Shadowrun; the freelancer just doesn't know whether a given group has to worry about commonplace APDS ammo or non-conductive armor mods or whatever. Beyond that, it was just too easy to miss things, which I know many people on this forum have noticed and called-out various books for. It pretty much meant that an individual GM was going to have to tailor my encounter for his group anyway, so was it worthwhile to fully stat the encounter up or is it more worthwhile to provide guidelines to that GM? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#264
|
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 ![]() |
apple, Cain: move that to PM.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#265
|
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,546 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 ![]() |
And this certainly can be viewed as one of the main problems this board suffers from. Posters - and I can't exempt myself there - way too often choose to act antagonistic just for the sake of being "right" within the confines of their respective roleplaying preferences in general and their understanding of what SR is "supposed to be". I second that. I don't think it should be 'forbidden'. I'd hate to have tone police floating around. But yeah, there are some people who are way too eager to "win" Dumpshock. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#266
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
Personally, when I was a freelancer, I absolutely dreaded building encounters in Shadowrun adventure books. It was difficult because power level is such a sliding scale in Shadowrun; the freelancer just doesn't know whether a given group has to worry about commonplace APDS ammo or non-conductive armor mods or whatever. Beyond that, it was just too easy to miss things, which I know many people on this forum have noticed and called-out various books for. It pretty much meant that an individual GM was going to have to tailor my encounter for his group anyway, so was it worthwhile to fully stat the encounter up or is it more worthwhile to provide guidelines to that GM? Weren't you the one who came up with a great story idea, submitted it, and had someone look at it and say: "It's a great story, but it goes against this really obscure rule hidden in this really old book?" That tale bothers me to this day. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#267
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 ![]() |
Weren't you the one who came up with a great story idea, submitted it, and had someone look at it and say: "It's a great story, but it goes against this really obscure rule hidden in this really old book?" That tale bothers me to this day. Hmm...honestly, I don't remember. It wouldn't surprise me much. But the first book I was a freelancer on was Brainscan, which is a campaign adventure, full of encounters. Mike Mulvihill was really supportive when I pitched the book and loved it enough to add it to the product line and make me a freelancer, but he also made the smart decision to have Rob Boyle mentor me on the book and clean up all our writing. Because I can promise those encounters I built in my part of Brainscan would have been terrible if not for Rob's work. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#268
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 ![]() |
Hmm...honestly, I don't remember. It wouldn't surprise me much. But the first book I was a freelancer on was Brainscan, which is a campaign adventure, full of encounters. Mike Mulvihill was really supportive when I pitched the book and loved it enough to add it to the product line and make me a freelancer, but he also made the smart decision to have Rob Boyle mentor me on the book and clean up all our writing. Because I can promise those encounters I built in my part of Brainscan would have been terrible if not for Rob's work. Brainscan was my favorite campaign adventure of SR3. Nothing can replace Harlequin in my heart, but Brainscan was the adventure where I perfected the mind fuck. I spent months laying down plot threads, only to have them all suddenly tie together in the climax of Brainscan. You know that otaku who betrays the team and gets them all captured? Four months before I started the adventure, I had a player's girlfriend ask to join the game. I gave her a free-roaming NPC: she could act as she saw fit, but I reserved the right to tell her what she had to do. She was playing an otaku named Bit, and she charmed everyone. See where this was going? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/vegm.gif) These guys would have spotted an NPC traitor, or at least been more suspicious. But when little Bit started crying, and then tossed the troll though a wall, they didn't know what to do. They couldn't even fight her, because she was their friend! It was a hell of a mind screw, and it all came together so nicely. Anyway: I'm pretty sure they don't do the mentoring part anymore for Shadowrun freelancers. If nothing else, I wonder who has enough experience to mentor, anymore. Certainly none that have the experience of you, or the other longtime writers. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#269
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 ![]() |
Hah, that's awesome! I love it.
I don't even know if that sort of mentoring was a tradition or just something they did in my case. But it was certainly valuable. I never formally mentored any new freelancers at FanPro or CGL, but I unofficially did when we were put on books together. Sometimes even on books I wasn't part of, a new freelancer would email me his drafts before he submitted them and I would offer a sort of first-pass advice. And while it wasn't mentoring, it was pretty common for Bobby, Peter, and a few others of us to share our drafts between us before handing them in, which I think benefited everyone involved. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#270
|
|
Prime Runner Ascendant ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,568 Joined: 26-March 09 From: Aurora, Colorado Member No.: 17,022 ![]() |
But the rule is "make up the stats". Its a very basic rule and perhaps not for every GM (certainly not for you as is seem), but still ... its a rule. Rules are always crunch and never fluff. I would like you still to answer the question regarding on what rule system you find good for NPC creation/administration? How does it work? Because you criticize both the "make stuff up"-rule and the "use the normal character system to create NPC"-rule. Which rule system / RPG is your perfect "NPC creation" system? And how does it work? SYL I can answer this one... NPC's in the FATE system are a breeze to make (but then so are the PC's). BEST, Most Ideal NPC construction model ever... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Minor NPC - A few skills and a description and done, Significant (Minor + a few extra descriptors), all the way to a Whole Character sheet (Major NPC - which still only takes a minute or two, certainly no more than 5 minutes). Happy New Year, and Have a nice day. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#271
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 993 Joined: 5-December 05 From: Crying in the wilderness Member No.: 8,047 ![]() |
Fudging something has one guideline. If the players enjoy it, its fine.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#272
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,973 Joined: 4-June 10 Member No.: 18,659 ![]() |
I can answer this one... NPC's in the FATE system are a breeze to make (but then so are the PC's). BEST, Most Ideal NPC construction model ever... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Minor NPC - A few skills and a description and done, Significant (Minor + a few extra descriptors), all the way to a Whole Character sheet (Major NPC - which still only takes a minute or two, certainly no more than 5 minutes). Happy New Year, and Have a nice day. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I prefer 7th Sea, in which only the plot-important named NPCs are statted, and everything else is just a Brute Squad that requires a certain number of successes to defeat. However, they're explicitly simulating swashbuckling action movies, so nameless mooks just there to be defeated are the flavor of the day. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#273
|
|
Freelance Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#274
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 993 Joined: 5-December 05 From: Crying in the wilderness Member No.: 8,047 ![]() |
Basically there is nothing here now of interest to either most old players or new players. Threads derail constantly, new rules are argued over rather than discussed, old rules have entrenched camps, there's nothing new added. Any inquiry devolves into a flame which the OP needs to trawl through to ultimately choose what ever aligns best with their needs, if their lucky.
The same things are said to the same old questions peppered with personal venom. And grudges seem to be held. New rule set comparison now means ed wars from about half a page in. RAW and RAI arguments result in a sentiment of," why dont I just make a descision and avoid the 2nd hand abuse of raising a question.". I come here out of habit because am too stupid to quit and give up hope. There has been one idea in a, no, two years that I found interesting that didn't come out of a new suppliment. And that was from a poster I have the home phone number for, for crying out loud! Politeness, innovation, actual help and relevence. You disagree with something fine, one post is enough 99% of the time. Mostly, and as a SR3 player I dont like to say it, target the Editions that are still throwing up new ideas and issues. Having a crowd that can answer virtually any question about the background is great. But sadly, again relevence, when there is maybe one question a month? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#275
|
|
Great Dragon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 ![]() |
I think newbies do get their questions answered when they post here, it's just that the newbies tend to gravitate more towards the "official" forums when they want an unclear or contradictory rule explained, or help creating a character.
For quick NPCs, the existing full build/story build/improvised build guidelines are fine. Two things - first, for quick NPCs, you won't often need stats for everything, just a few numbers and relevant dice pools. Secondly, there are lots and lots of stock characters ready to be used; not just the grunts, but the character archetypes (good for non-optimized characters comparable to, but not as powerful as, the PCs) and contacts. I dislike using the "full build" approach for most NPCs for two reasons. One, NPCs range from far inferior to far superior to the PCs. Two, build points (or any of the other creation systems) are a horrible way to approximate power level. Shadowrun's character creation systems offer a lot of choices and options, but as a result, characters created with the same rules can vary greatly in power, skill, and experience. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 16th May 2025 - 06:48 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.