I agree, unless the sniper is doing his legwork and the PC leads him to a situation that is too good to pass up. "Hey look, the hacker I've been hired to kill just went to do some sunbathing and fell asleep on the roof of his building..."

Pfft. Hackers don't go outside. There's bears out there!

There're also beers out there.

"That's what my character would do." is also bad, yes. There's never only one option. This is the result of a player (or GM, as a GM is just a player behind the dice board) wanting to do something and using it as an excuse. Two wrongs don't make a right, however. Again, it should be discussed out of game to my mind.

You know, Critias, you and I don't always exactly see eye-to-eye, but in this case you've essentially spoken for me.

Sammies have Karma to burn relative to the awakened: having them burn a permanent point of edge isn't necessarily that bad in the long run. It keeps people on their toes and encourages subtlety and discression. It encourages the players to put some thought into things like "safe-houses" and "tail-evasion" and all those gritty aspects of 'running. I don't mean they need to give you blueprints or need to be real-life security experts, but if they put some effort (and Karma and nuyen) into it, then that shows good faith and usually they won't see any problems. But if they DO receive sniper fire, they can survive (if totally screwed up for the session) and the party then has to deal with the fallout. (Think about pulling this one at the end of a session as a cliff-hanger.)

And against a 'runner, there's no guarantee that it's going to be fatal. I would still expect my PCs to roll on the shot. But IIRC there was a (optional?) rule about limiting aim actions to your relevant firearms skill? Call the shot +4 to damage (head shot), 4 aim actions to counteract the penalties, and take your best shot. No dodge, so the Desert Strike is 7P+4(called shot)+1(minimum net hit)+any extra net hits. That's a minimum of 12P damage. Even a single net hit against an "average" body, unarmored individual is instand kill: 6 base physical boxes + 2 for BOD, then 3 Overflow boxes; Average a single hit to soak the damage. Think your sniper can get more than a single net hit? There's no reason to "fiat" the thing. If you don't get enough hits, you miss the head and hit outside the "sniper's triangle" by a smidgen. If they're wearing armor, you need that much more solid a hit. But even with Armor 12 and Body 8, that's an average of 6 boxes soaked (AP on a sniper rifle applies). 6+4(+8 overflow) means you need to get (18-11 base damage)=7 net hits to drop them cold. That's entirely within the realm of the possible, mechanically, but there's a world of possibility to miss or not connect well ENOUGH to take them to meat with that single hit.

Sure, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander", but that doesn't mean the gander isn't a very VERY tough bird with puisant birds around them to help out.

And as a final note, there's software (In Unwired, I think, but don't hold me to it) that when combined with an aray of microphones can act as a shot spotter, determining the angle from which the fire originated... assuming one of the PCs isn't sporting a radar. Being a sniper isn't a safe occupation, especially against competent targets. Their primary strength is as a foil to enemy morale and the ability to selectively remove a single target from amongst a crowd with a good shot. They aren't always the right tool for the job, however. And consider that firing an ATGM (If you torqued off somebody badly enough to get a professional assasin(s) after you, something like an anti-tank missile isn't out of the equation) at your team's van is just as deadly, if not more so.

As to the point about a sniper feeling "left out" or "unappreciated", I can vouch for that, having several of the faded, shrunken, cheapass t-shirts myself. But when things DO drop in the pot, having that rifle in position to keep the badguys' head down while the party beats feet is beyond price.

Wait, what?
Slight change of phrasing: "This is what would be the most (or only) reasonable responce from the (NP or P)C based on their background, modivations, resources and the information at hand" is bad for a roleplaying game?
What?

If you go kick Seader-Krupp in the preverbial junk, killing dozens of their top notch non-combatant employees, trashing the facility, selling the stolen multi-billion dollar objective to the highest bidder and make inadequeate effort to cover your tracks and conceal your identity you are probably dead. You are probably going to die as badly and publicly as can be managed (within allocated "vengance" budget, I might deside on a mechanic and roll some dice to determine how much is left in the budget and how cranky the Dragon is when the PC's make the top of the list) by one of the most powerful corps in the world. Maybe you were spot on character when you mooned the camera your heavily tatooed buttocks and burned your street name into the scalp of the lone survivor (you always leave one to tell the tale), or maybe you were just being dang sloppy on this job, but you are still going to have a no-nonsence kill team (and possibaly a few young dragons looking for brownie points with the Big Guy, whats the teams table rating again?) gunning for you and it won't be me the GM that does this to you. It will be the reasonable outcome of the situation. Yes there will be snipers on rooftops and worse (plural makes many things better) and yes, this is going to suck for the team. It will be "winnable" (I avoid running no-win senarios, no one, not even me, has any fun) but by no means easy or fatality free.

The same high end run done without fatalities to S-K staff, little to no evidence left behind and the objective sold to persons unknown on the sly... well the Big Guy might seek out your identities anyway on "his own time"... his agent has some work for you. It is an 'offer' you cannot in fact refuse. You see you owe him one, for not killing you over *incendent*.

If you don't believe the above "High end" senario replace the corp facility with a Yakuza gambling front, Traid drug den, Lone Star Police Headquarters or what have you. There are people out there who will try to kill the PC's like dogs in the street if you get in their way or just as an example to others and snipers are by no means the only nearly undefendable attack in the game (see the ad-infinitum "Spirits ar broken and ar hazing Powarz" threads). If this is not the case in your games... well as long as you're having a good time at it go freaking nuts. But I like a grittier game (but I'm not picking sand out of my teeth just yet)

I think I get what eleint is saying. It's when people do things that are awful and disruptive to the game, because that's what their character would do, that's what is bad. What's bad is the inflexibility in roleplaying that ALSO screws everyone over, like you're screwing everyone over, but then pretending you had no choice. You ALWAYS have a choice, and making the wrong one is a blameworthy action, whether you shroud it in RP or not.

Like, let's say you have four people at the table. You need all four of them, because each has a different specialty and they don't work well except as a team. The GM has one Shadowrun planned, and one player decides that his character leaves the meet because he doesn't trust the J, since that's what his character would do. Now, the game session is over, because the GM needs to plan something new. Everyone came to play Shadowrun, but now they can't, because of one person's "roleplaying."

The point is, RP has to be flexible. Anyone who says "that's what my character would do," and won't budge on that no matter how much it fucks everyone over, is being an asshole. I'm not talking about in-game fucking over though, I'm talking about out of character. If your roleplaying actions cause the gaming session to end, or ruin everyone else's enjoyment of the game, roleplaying is no excuse. Nobody's character is a real person, everyone has a choice in what their character does. Nobody is just "following RP," not ever. They're doing what they consciously want to do, because there is always a choice -- even if a character has a set personality, there's no such thing as someone who never acts differently from how you'd expect. People need to recognize that their actions have RL consequences as well as game consequences. If their roleplaying has out of game consequences that really blow, they deserve all the blame for it, because they are in absolute control of their own character. It's like you have a puppet that you're trying to use to simulate life, then you make the puppet hurt someone, and blame the puppet. That's the bogus cop out that (maybe) eleint was referring to.

Reminds me of the old games of DnD where you occasionally would get the one player (always a "thief") who claimed his class was free license to steal from the party, screw them over, and stab them in the back.

In the worst instance, one player decided on his nightly watch to slit all the players throats. In the act of his murder I had a holy pilgrimage of knights, paladins, and pious clergy stumble on the scene and he wasn't much of a match by himself. To his credit he took the death and rolled up another thief. I killed that character in his sleep, to which he shouted "thats not fair!", "exactly, and it isn't very fun either" was my response. We all had a good laugh.

Well roleplayed, a little inter-party conflict is fine, provided it doesn't derail the game. The moment they ruin the fun for everyone, I drop the GM hammer on them or don't allow them to play at all.

As for the OP question. Hell yea I use snipers (not all that often). If the party isn't going to recon or prepare for what a mission might entail, well shadowrun can be brutal. I do however give them options to detect or otherwise notice the sniper in most cases, as insta-gib by the GM is pretty much just as bad if not worse when it comes to ruining the fun.

My players get pretty crafty and are well aware of what the competition and enemies can do. Decoy illusions, drones, high perception, thermographics, wireless signals all provide decent means to detect snipers. Thermal smoke gernades do a pretty decent job of providing some cover in areas they suspect someone is going to be taking pot shots at them.

A sniper in a group is fine, but they need to do more than snipe. A sniper in the military usually has a spotter because he has problems identifying the targets. A sniper's other duties are anti-sniper, foward observer and reconnaissance. The sniper also need a clear line of sight for long distances which is difficult in urban or shadowruns.

If you incorporate a sniper into the group my recommendation is make sure this is their secondary role
(unless you have a large group). Their primary role should be something else such as face or something where they can contribute to the group every shadowrun. I don't think players want their sniper to make 1-5 shots per game before they are discovered and neutralized.

As for NPC snipers they are perfectly valid assuming they have a reason. If the players have high notoriety, stole from a mafia or something where it is more than just business then they will hire an assassin. The characters should hear about the fact they are wanted and be allowed to counteract that issue. It is perfectly acceptable to shoot a player, but don't kill them on the first shot. A bad wound where they are trapped and need to be rescued is fine. General rule is the opponents will use as much discretion and firepower as the PCs. Also the PCs deserve all the bad luck they get based upon the way they play.

*nods in agreement*

Kerenshara's not primarily a sniper, but it's the duty she takes any time the rest of the (small) group is required for the up-close work and she isn't. Primarily, she's the sneak and entry specialist and in combat she's more about really close work when she's not on a rooftop.

Ordinarilly, if the rigger is "remote", I would expect them to be the one on extraction/overwatch in the team vehicle. In this case, he was too busy stuck hacking (TMancer) into a comlink we were trying to physically access at the time, and no way was I fitting in among the majority of the clientelle (read: Orcs and Trolls). That left me odd-girl-out, and I had no problem up top. OK, OOC it's boring as hell, when my initiative rolls were averaging 18 and I have a spare init pass. But I know my team could go in with the certainty that if things came apart, their backs were covered.

You know, a sniper + rigger combo works fairly well. When the sniper isn't trying to blow someone's head off, they can control drones -- which fit most of the roles of the spotter as well. Hmm. Need to talk to my sister about this.

Actually, I would completely disagree. Here is why:

A sniper needs excellent stealth, marksmanship, and the athleticism to get into position.

A rigger needs a broad selection of technical skills and vehicle skills.

A rigger operating a number of drones/vehicles has their attention spread pretty wide, and the focus needed for spotting/sniping would seriously take away from their ability to rig effectively.

Now, a rigger/decker has so much synergy it's scarry. Make them a TMancer, and toss a little extra Karma at them, you have somebody SERIOUSLY capable.

If you're controlling your own drones, and they have the proper programming to run themselves (which is isn't that hard to do even now, let alone in 207X), I don't see using drones to act as remote spotters as being a problem. I've made it a point to keep a finger on the pulse of modern technology specifically so I can apply it to Shadowrun -- I see what's coming out now and say 'so, 60 years into the future, this would look possibly like that'.

Well, we'll see how my sister runs with this. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'll let you know the result.

People have this idea that drones fly themselves, and are so cheap that any archetype can just add drones. Snipers can have a drone fleet, mages can have a drone fleet... everything is solved by drones! Not so. Though drones are cheap, they typically come with 3-4 Pilot and no autosofts. That kind of drone can't fly itself or fight with any real aptitude. An off the shelf drone piloting itself is going to critical glitch and crash into the nearest obstacle much of the time. You need to spend thousands of yen on pilot and thousands of yen on autosofts, not to mention upgrading sensors and adding things like Encrypt and ECCM. Being able to command drones takes pretty much nothing, but having drones that actually understand commands and execute them competently, that's damned expensive.

I would recommend the Sniper be the heavy weapons and demolitions person. Those skills are not often needed, but the player would have a whole slew of tricks at the ready. Smugglers, face and weapon specialists where IPs and close combat skills are less critical, but they are more support characters.

Can the player trust the GM to not screw over the players? If there are Johnsons who will screw over runner teams it's perfectly reasonable for a character and the player to decide no deal and walk. There isn't any amount of money you can offer that will allow you to kill me. If the GM isn't prepared for the characters/players to not blindly walk into his traps then it's the GM's issue.

I do not mind if one player were to drop out of a particular game, he can play the bad guys and then he can kick himself for missing out on the easy cred.

Kzt, you raise a valid point; the players absolutely have to have the authority and willpower to say "I don't trust this," or they're going to get slotted from behind. That said, if you walk out on Mr. J, you run a considerable risk of, as Larme put it, ending the game session.

Here's my idea for a compromise.

If your character is so paranoid that he doesn't trust Mr. J/the GM (or, rather, intelligent enough that he doesn't), it makes sense to me that, rather than spook and leave, he should've hit the matrix/streets/Astral Plane and done his homework. Who does Mr. J work with? Do all his employees mysteriously die? Is he known to have ties with someone who'd want to hurt the PCs? Is he privately biased against some group (say, changelings) that half the group happens to be? That way, the paranoid character can either be reassured that (as far as he can tell) he's not walking into a trap, or, if he's not convinced, he can cancel the meeting and not waste everyone's time. From a metagame perspective, the GM is likely to reward the forethought of research, as long as it's intelligently done. If it turns out to be a trap anyway, then either you're bad at legwork (and your character shouldn't be, if he's of a mind to do it often) or the GM has just decided that you're fated to walk into a trap, in which case you're going to find your way into it one way or another.

And the other thing about bolting from the meeting is that, isn't the character interested in money? I mean, if he isn't motivated to run in the shadows, he shouldn't be in shadowrun.

If the players don't want to play the predesigned scenario, then it is up to the players to decide their own shadowrun. I get very tired of players just sitting waiting for Mr. Js to give them missions. The players should also have motivations and contacts they need to help.

Why don't the players pick out targets? They can do the legwork and decide how to penetrate defenses. A good GM should be putting down hints about several locations or rumors of what is going on. Maybe the players decide they want to clean up certain neighborhoods or even create their mafia gang. The secret about GMing is the players tell the stories and the GM just throws in plot twists.

I suppose i cant really blame this anyone....well okay. i was running a sniper character, Elf ex-tir ghost, and we were hired to get rid of this renraku exec. Well when our GM puts effort into an enemy he really doesnt want them to die. I was sniping her from across a park while she was eating lunch with the "bait" (our female party member, turns out the exec. was a lesbian, which made things interesting for the alchoholic womanizer in our party...), and i lined up my shot and took it. i used edge and wound up with 14 hits. Our GM used the hand of god rule and had her do a backflip off her chair even though she was completely unaware of us. later on he told us it was because they had someone spying from the astral. okay....so she just starts sprinting towards me, pulling out a heavy pistol. i take another shot, with a resounding 11 hits, and so she "burned another point of edge" and proceeded to do that once more before beating the living hell out of me. I've learned snipers dont really work well with our GM, since the people i would usually need to snipe wouldnt die even if i hit them. so i gave up and made an adept face for the current game, and my fingers are crossed they dont "burn edge" to beat me in social combat.

That would make me walk from the game, period. I call that 'cheating'.
At the very best, if I burned an edge to have the character survive, I'd have her drop like a stone, and look 'dead' for all intents and purposes. Then I'd have security show up so the PCs would have to flee, rather than allow the PCs to 'make sure'.

The resolution to the story is better. im assuming our complaints reached his brain at that point so he put the hand of god rule into use how it should be. We chased her down an alley, threw a grenade into the limo she jumped in, it went off. apparently, again she evaded sweet sweet death by jumping out the other door. We did end up killing her, when she returned to her ship our bow-troll nailed her for around 21P. Hehe our face made a disguise of her, got onto her ship, into the cockpit and called all the crew to the cargo bay saying she suspected an intruder. she locked down the ship. flew outside the docking port(this was a space station btw) and ejected the crew into space.

I guess it all works out. it still ruined snipers for me.

A sniper doesn't always have to be about the high power rifle on a roof. With great stealth, athleticism, and ballistic skills, he/she can be effective in many situations. Even with an assault rifle/pistol and in the midst of things she can still be about stealth positioning and one or two well placed shots.

You mean the fact it can only be used once per adventure? /snark

Our team walked out on one J that I can remember. It did end the session. The GM also later admitted it was a setup.



The critical drawback to that is that if you DO know who the J is you've just motivated the target to come after you, as they would really like to know that too. On of your defenses is that you are are a cut out. You don't know who hired you or why, so chasing you down and methodically torturing you to death isn't going to tell the angry target anything useful. Once you DO know you are no longer a deniable asset. It is both in the interest of the J to kill you and the target's interest to hunt you down and hurt you or people you care about until you tell him everything you know. This is BAD.


My personal feeling is that I'm not motivated by the idea to having someone pay me tomorrow to commit suicide by cop tonight.