It was not so much Needling, as a Jab...

Keep the Faith

I was referring to the part at the beginning of the movie Anger Management where the main character is in his first meeting and the therapist kept asking him who he was. When the main guy gave an answer, the therapist would reply "That's what you do. I want to know who you are." The way you typed the above phrase that I quoted directly reminded me of that. Like this, at about 4:30.

1) When does a Drake, a human who at some point in life learns that he can take on a Draconic form, stop thinking like a human?

2) How is the psychology of a dog significantly different than that of a human being? Both learn the same way and are driven by the same basic needs. The core of animal consciousness is the same from Human to Lizard. And besides that, they can turn into people. They freaking turn - into - people. Any significant difference in world-view is just the window dressing of socialization. Really, anyone who can play a psychotic can play a shifter, and I've never met someone who couldn't manage that infant mind state when given some direction.

3) Metasapient AIs are artificial personality constructs given free will. Their programming is based on human psychology. Their life-experience is significantly different though. They don't really feel pain or experience consequence like a living creature, so I usually drive players to go strongly hebephrenic with them. For grown-ass people playing games of pretend, hebephrenia isn't usually a hard mold to press.

4) Free Spirits, well, that's something I've never worked with. Hell, I don't even know what a Free Spirit is really free from or how. I'm just terrified by visions of bad Robin Williams impressions, and that's keeping my curiosity at bay for the time being.

Still, despite all this, if someone wanted to play their character in a different way, I'd want them to show me how they'd like to go about it. Insisting that they have these specific personality flaws is like insisting that every Street Sam is a sociopath, every Mage is schizotypal, every Decker is ADHD/OCD/HFA, and so on. That's really what Dr. F was getting at.

I figure since I'm asking questions, I'll do my best to answer yours.



You're applying stereotypes and prejudice to a subset of fictional characters and real players. I guess prejudice based on fictional race is still racism so long as it impacts real people? Hell, that's a thesis I'm not prepared to defend.. but I don't want to laugh it off either.
Anyway, I'm not in the habit of correcting Logical Bias, so I'm reticent to bring it up, but I have seen it affect one of your arguments in the past. (The logical backflip in that post where you paint the AmInds as oppressive invaders bent on domination, made my brain gurgle.)




Man, everyone is racist. It's not a matter of personal innocence. I'd never paint you as any kind of HUGE RACIST who's moods are driven by discrimination, but discrimination is a built in response for all people. The charge being laid is that your prejudice in this case is affecting your judgment. So, that's really what you have to address. To defend yourself, you have got to make the case that no one you're likely to play with will ever be able to handle a character like this with the respect given to its abnormal nature. I mean, I hope you don't think so little of the people you share your games with.



That's socialization 101. Bullying. I gotta say that an accusation tends to put people on the defensive, but it still brings attention to an issue. It's important to challenge beliefs in order to affect change or strengthen positions. Thought doesn't oft happen in a vacuum. Then again, not all thought is inherently valuable... But, to the question of, like, a card carrying racist being unperturbed by the label, I doubt it just slides off. There's a level of reproof and shame in the term. Sort of like how most homosexuals don't shine hard on being called faggots. But, hey, some will.



It's easier to get a guy's attention in person, so insults are hardly necessary. Personally, I'm not a dude to flip out and call names at people. I know what it is to do so though. I suppose it's the condensed nature of Internet conversation that leads to shit talk. It seems the most efficient way to guarantee a response. Tends to overshadow the conversation though...

When it realizes that its fun.

You haven't read enough TF (transformation) stories to really understand.

This part highlights quite well the kind of mental process that (can) go on. Admittedly Farm's method of TF does put two minds in one body (the new one tries to seduce or "devour" the old one such that it is dominant), but Farm (Mary Sue!) is alone in his head and still changes. Basically, it's an addiction: you'll fall as far as you think you should, but your mind will operate differently because you're different (better?) than everyone else around you. There's an entire part dedicated to him having to walk on all fours due to having over-exerted a muscle group, and is almost tempted to stay that way.

Fair Deuce.

Still, he doesn't forget how he was expected to behave, despite the priority shift. At least, I wouldn't think so..
But, to insist that a Drake must be a Megalomaniac, or at least an Egomaniac, is forgetting big daddy Dunkz. To say something is your nature is not to say that you can't fight your nature.

Hmmm. This is an incredibly weak argument. Its debatable whether a dog even has the neurological structures required for cognition and executive function (pre-frontal cortex to be exact). You should stick with the "they can turn into people" argument and leave the neuroscience out of it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Primary psychological drives are what I was getting at. Besides the primal drives of hunger, thirst, and copulation, the need for achievement and belongingness shows up often in animal psychology. Besides, if an animal was incapable of reasoning it would be incapable of learning. High-level reasoning might be on the level of a toddler, but that's why I equate their default reasoning patterns with those of psychotics, at least in their tendency to think in simplistic terms and only of direct (learned) consequence. He may not know why it's wrong to lick himself in public, but he knows that he'll get in trouble if he does.

But, yeah, they turn into people. This makes shifters just as capable as any person to learn and adapt to social mores. They may be coming into it with a handicap, but as has been pointed out, they're smarter than trolls..

I don't allow shifters, ghouls or anything else much that isnt covered in the BBB at chargen from a racial standpoint.

Why? just because. We dont play massively often and I'm the only person in the group (at the moment anyway) Who knows much about the sixth world. Other folks are learning. So it makes sense not to over complicate matters.

The whole thing about shifters and their intel? I think the books with Striper in covered it fairly well. But yes they are animals with a metahuman comprehension and intelligence grade. That is still a very distinctly differant thought process. I know the people in my group can do it justice so that really doesnt come in as a factor at my table. I just like to keep the options simple.

I stick to the availability rules but otherwise anything else that can be reasonabley explained can be had.

Oh, they're not going to be megalomaniacs or egomaniacs, they'll just have a shift in desires.

There's also going to be a rather strong instinctual fear. Drakes are hunted by fluff, and its pretty rational too: any hick with a gun is going to shoot at a giant reptile walking down the street.

So they'd start thinking more about themselves than other people, compared to before, but don't have no feelings for other people (technically a shadowrunner is already an egomaniac: "an egomaniac doesn't care if people get hurt in order to get what they want"). Existing relationships will be maintained ("I love my parents," "I really hate the guy behind the counter at the Shack," I'm good buddies with my friends"), but they'd be more reserved at making new ones.

Its a bit hard to talk in generalities, because everyone is different, as well as difficult to give examples due to having to build a situation and think about it two ways (I'm already multitasking pretty myself a bit thin a the moment).

I do know someone who could provide an example of the reptile brain though (that is, a more shifter mentality; intelligent but animalistic). I've seen him roleplay it very well (to the point where people would get frustrated trying to talk to him due to having a preconceived notion that he(his character) could do that).

Why would they?

Again we go back to a setting disconnect, within the context of the magical world where animals can become human appearing sentients it states in black and white that while possesing human level intellect (which whether your play your character's actions based solely on your logic attribute is up to you, personally I don't) shifter mentality and mindset remains animalistic in nature. What that means to you is open to interpretation but my point is presuming they are socialized just like everyone else is A) flatly contradicted B) Lazyness



Funny I thought what he was getting at was anyone who disagreed with him or wanted to suggest anything then his feelings on the matter was open to scorn and derision. What I suggested was that shifters in the setting should be represented as something close to an animal with a human form and not vice versa, the degree people go to is their own business. But i'll share a little secret with you and the whole wide internet another thread, and even posts by Dr. F no less caused me to reconsider my opinions on the mechanical side of Shifters, however my roleplaying concerns are still there. If a person wants to play a shifter but doesn't want to affect some of that stranger in a strange land mentality why are they playing a shifter at all.



Errrrr even by the loosest definition that I suggested a stereotype of real world people (those who play shifters) it is not a racially based concern. Once again the belief that a non-metahuman would think if not act differently then a meta-human isn't racism, it might not be fact I could prove in the real world as I said, no baseline but within the context of Shadowrun it is a well founded belief.


While their not invaders certainly that is still a belief I hold. Any other spin on the situation and they would be a hostile force bent on racial purity it's only because of two wrongs making a right and a retcon that their not.


Once again, guilty until proven innocent by your own stated belief that everyone is racist the answer your actually portraying is that it is not possible to prove oneself innocent. A belief in factcontrary to the rest of your paragraph. Avenue Q may make a lively ear worm tune of the subject but Just for your edification here's the dictionary.com definition of racist.



Now obviously your predisposed to believe otherwise but you'll have to take my word that I don't fit this definition and indeed you might say it is antithema to my own personal beliefs on self determination and individual worth.



I suppose it goes down to whether the person is responding to the connotation/accusation/slur in the spirit it is intended. Faggot is a tem coined more or less entirely to offend and is characterized as such racist is at least at it's face a technical term used to describe a person that holds beliefs. The thankfully few devout racists I've ran into over the years were unapologetic in their beliefs at least in private if not public and some of them (mostly white supremacist types) were fairly public about it while they were trying to sell me a copy of the turner diaries or whatever pamphlet they were hawking. These people arn't ashamed of being called racist, more proud of it, unfortunately we've got this false dichtomy in our public discussion where anyone who denies that their a racist is told their in denial in defiance of all logic to the contrary.

I take some exception to this; while it's not my stance addressed directly in your post I'm implied (since we're referencing the troll intelligence comment) - I never state anywhere that they're socialized just like everyone else... I state that they're capable of being just as socialized as the average shadowrunner - a group who collectively, at best, are sociopathic, which is to say that they lack the very abilities (socialization, living within society successfully) that you are ascribing to shifters. a minority of them are just as animalistic as any feral dog would be; if a little better at remembering your license plate.

I would guess that shifters in general would get along quite well with people who run for a living




Racism within the context of modern day humanity is specifically the belief that ethnicity is a primary determinant of human traits and capacities; sexual orientation isn't ethnicity; this would be good old fashioned homophobia if we're sticking specifically to textbook definitions. the motivations behind both statements are the same. (it's typically xenophobia)

that said, we're already moving away from the use of Faggot as a pejorative against homosexual men, the modern american is more likely to use it in the same sense that our forebears used 'idiot' or 'retarded' - as a perjorative against people whose immediate actions we disapprove rather than a judgment of the person's lifestyle.

Faggot, to my knowledge, has never been a technical term for anything incidentally (well, maybe a cord of wood.) the link has a good summary in the first paragraphs explaining the origin of the term in english slang.

claiming all metasapient* shifters are animalistic, however, within the context of the shadowrun world, would be a racist statement if made by one of the players or an npc. (one could argue for calling it specifically xenophobia and no more, (zoophobia?) but I expect that by 2072 racism as a term will have extended beyond H.Sapiens to include all metasapients - race as race as well, rather than just ethnicity.)


*I use metasapient to imply an autonomous, tool-using, sentient, sapient, semi-mortal creature. creatures that truly cannot die (as opposed to just having no built in obsolescence program like Humans do today) are probably not metasapient; AI and IE are killable, so they would be metasapient under my usage of the term.

Ladies and gentlemen, Boys and girls....

The discussion on shifters compus mentus is just going around and around in circles and in the end neither standpoint is entirely valid as there is such a limited source of reference work to base your descisions upon. The only long time reference to Shifter Shadowrunner is in the Striper books. Shje has both some very bestial outlooks and some very human outlooks, and after all her time in the shadows most of her human style emotions feelings and thoughts she doesnt attribute to metahumans at all. She believes such things are unique to ShapeShifters until the very end of the last book. Even then she decides some metahumans may be unique in that they can feel and think like she does.

Now you can try and justify X and counter justify Y. But in the end, it doesnt matter because the source material is so thin Both could be Right and Wrong at the same time. So far fact and counterfact have been grabbed out of thin air and based on human psych analysis (which is pretty limited in scope and capability with the species it was designed for) or personal interpretation of a limited amount of text.

So...what ELSE do we not allow at the table, and why.

Animalistic merely means a different set of driving motivations. The average shifter would likely have no concept of value/money other than what they've picked up living around people. They're not going to have a moral compass beyond "will it keep me alive?"

For example, a shifter face would more than likely sit down with the Johnson, get offered a price and go, "sounds good" and be done. They won't haggle because money to them isn't a lifestyle it's something "they use" and don't really "get" it. Then when the split comes they might not take a share more than "oh, I need to get X and it costs Y."

They'd probably either get their own food at "home" or they'd buy the expensive and real stuff (no soycaf). They'd be unlikely to ever use (recreational) drugs because "they don't see the point." As a point of reference, half the cats my family has ever had have had no interest in cat nip. The ones we have now tend to only play with the toys for a few minutes before losing interest (and if we as humans can't smell the 'nip the cats want even less to do with them).


I'd also like to bring this back up, as it seems it was buried:

If a person wants to play an Elf character but doesn't want to affect the aloof dandy mentality, why are they playing an Elf at all?

If a person wants to play a Japanese character but doesn't want to affect the honorable swordsman mentality, why are they playing a Japanese character at all?

If a person wants to play an Adept character but doesn't want to affect the reserved focused monk mentality, why are they playing an Adept character at all?

If you can't trust your players to create characters whom they can flesh out to everyone's mutual satisfaction, why are you roleplaying with them at all?



Oh, I don't believe you to be a racist, that's not my word here. But, if you do so value self-determination, then to insist that "X must be like Y because it is X's nature" doesn't make much sense to me. I mean, sure, generalizations are accurate by definition, but it's pretty lazy expecting everything to conform to them precisely. And, when you expect only some things to conform to your generalizations, then that's an indication of bias. Taking it a step further, when you let bias inform your preferences, then that's prejudice. Is this situation analogous to racial prejudice? I guess so. Is it Merriam-Webster racial prejudice? No. Does that shit matter to me? Not a skosh.

I'm not trying to say that letting your past experiences influence your opinions is really anything but sensible, but to try and take a handful of examples and form a rule out of them, well.. that's what you're really doing here, and it's poor logic. And trying to claim that "no one could understand something simpler than themselves because it is *different*" is 1) false and 2) a cop-out. Seems to me you've just seen a thing abused and are looking to blame the thing rather than the players. There's mileage to be got from every possible choice. Just not every possible choice for every possible player, I guess.

I don't allow philisophical debates on the mental capacities of imaginary creatures at my table....

But seriously, I don't allow Oxygenated Flourocarbon Capsule Rounds (even though they're RAW); I do allow spirits to actually Materialize, Possess, or Inhabit, despite the fact that those are Physical abilities and you can't use Physical abilities on the Astral; I don't allow players to act out their sedutions of other PCs; and I do not allow starting PC cyberzombies (I may allow cyborgs, but it hasn't come up yet).

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

What? 5l clearly fit into a capsule round. This is madness.

Silliness! Those powers should not work.

Mwahahah more Power!

More seriously though I can totally understand your reasoning. But how would you balance the cyborg with the other PCs and the gameworld?

People don't have a concept of value/money aside from what they've picked up living around people.


Anyway, can we please stop tossing around racist and prejudiced like they mean the same thing? The connotations involved are making the conversation a bit more shrill than they have to be.

The most seduction can do is convince the target that their romantic/sexual intentions are sincere, its part of the con skill not a magic spell that warps their will.

Dakka Dakka already covered the flourocarbon, its a five liter's a douse,

Ok, let's try getting this thread back on track[I am the great De-railer (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) ].

Something I won't allow again... Predator suits... After the first time... Things got messy...

The problem is with acting it out, not with actually using skills against PCs. I don't want to see John RP his female elf grinding on Steve.


And we've already covered that that's not a rules section, but a fluff section. The rules care about doses, which OF has. Size means nothing - the rules simply and only care about "Does it have a dose? Then put it in."


By using the suggested rules for them in Augmentation.

Those rules basically make them a "multiclass" hacker/rigger/street samurai, and a damn fine one of all three. It's not at all balanced with basic characters. I toyed around with one once just to see how it turned out, and it was embarrassingly overpowered compared to other starting characters. The only way to really keep them in check at creation is to limit their anthroform body to something painfully weak. But even then it gets pretty silly pretty fast without even trying.

Meh. you could always limit how many BP they get to cash, or limit their BP total, if you really wanted to do it.

Or, you know, you can tell the person making it to be mature with his decisions. That works too.

Then wouldn't the problem exist between NPC and PC to. Is it any less uncomfortable roleplaying that encounter if one of them is an NPC.



Really, how much the dosage is for the drug is fluff?, the very nature of how its supposed to work if fluff. Next your going to say capsule rounds can deliver ingested vector toxins by skin contact. By your logic you load enough carbon dioxide into a capsule round or dart to cause a fatal reaction. The rules shouldn't need to spell out common sense. You can't load in a 5-liter dosage and fire it out of a gun. If you ignore the fluff section on P4M0, then its secondary effect from another dose is also fluff because its in the same paragraph.
You have no justification to call the 5-liter dosage of P4M0 fluff.

The rules for capsule and dart rounds do not say they ignore dosages or vectors and how the drug is used. Simply they can be used to deliver toxins and drugs. That doesn't mean they overrule the how the drug is applied. A dart gun can be loaded with toxins or drugs but not any toxin or drug. There is a difference
If if a drug such as nopaint requires you paint your entire body with the stuff for it to take affect, then by RAW that is how it must be done. Unless it is a really really big capsule round your not going to paint them in one shot.

Which applies equally to everything you and anyone else won't allow. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Bah why ask easy questions like this. It's really simple, just remember to replace SEX every 20 seconds with SQUIRREL.

Seriously though if I ever had a desire to play an infected I would make sure that the rest of the group was ok with it. Since if most of my characters had a fixer set them up with one, the infected would have a clip emptied in the back of thier head within 3 blocks of the meet up. Figure it would take about 3 times for the infected to go "missing" that the fixer to get a general idea of what was happening and never do it again.