What should I Ban Outright Options

[Mr. Smileys]

There are very few items or equipment that I feel is broken or cant be balanced with small changes. But there are a few things I have found that I feel are so broken as to just outright ban. The two main things I have found are Stick-N-Shock rounds and the Slow Spell.

Is there anything else in the SR4A system that you feel are to broken or would take to many house rules to fix that you just ban them?

[Warlordtheft]

Apparently the slow spell was errated out of the german version. I think Stalahasse could confirm that-I recall him mentioning it.

The only thing I would outright ban is Thor Shots, and nuclear weapons. When running a standard SR campaign, I remind my players that what they bring the corps can bring ten fold.

[Yerameyahu]

… Where would they ever get a Thor shot or a nuke? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It's probably a mistake to ban S&S entirely. Instead, consider dialing it back (less DV), or not giving it a full -Half armor.

[Epicedion]

I don't see a problem with SnS that isn't replicated in anything that causes Stun damage and reinforced fundamentally by the damage/armor system's Physical to Stun mitigation.

[Bushw4cker]

War! Book
Empathy Software (Especially Emotitoys)
Centaurs

[Yerameyahu]

It goes without saying that you'd ban everything in War!, yes. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

PC Vampires and Nosferatu, perhaps. Spoofing Life? PPP, maybe, though that's just my personal dislike. Pirated software.

Go check out the thread about Broken Rules in general.

[deek]

I've always outlawed Technomancers from my games. I leave them in the fluff, but don't allow them to be playable.

[Yerameyahu]

In general, nothing really needs flat out banning. Many things could benefit from tweaking, nerfing, or even gutting… but simply removing them from the game is too heavy-handed. I might not allow many players to play Infected, but I wouldn't say 'no one can ever do this, 100%'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Halflife]

There is almost nothing that needs to be outright banned. Probably the only thing would be Insect/Blood/Toxic Magic. But a LOT of things will need to be watched closely.

[Mr. Smileys]

I guess I should have rephrased. I will never 100% ban something and say that they players can never ever ever have it no matter what. What I generally do is say that the things on my Banned list are not allowed unless the players can come up with a way to balance the thing they want to be allowed into the game.

[Medicineman]

Apparently the slow spell was errated out of the german version. I think Stalahasse could confirm that-I recall him mentioning it.

The only thing I would outright ban is Thor Shots, and nuclear weapons. When running a standard SR campaign, I remind my players that what they bring the corps can bring ten fold.

not only Stalahassee (= Stahlseele = Steelsoul (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )
but every german Player
I would ban Comlinks & Progs Rating 7+, Grenade Burst Damage,
HMHVV,aspected Mana Static (if it still exists ?)Renfield (!)
I wouldn't ban Emoti(or other ) software but i would ask for a teamwork Test !

with A ban Dance
Medicineman

[CanRay]

The lack of the "Chunky Salsa" rule!

There needs to be more of that! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Vuron]

I my mind there are 3 major categories for banned items.

1) It breaks the game- Various options such as Slow probably satisfy this thing

2) Not gamebreaking but introduces too much power creep- Rating 7+ commlinks, other SOTA stuff that simply makes playing the game unfun for a lot of people

3) Stupid Stuff - YMMV but for some people it's TMs, PC AIs, Free Spirits, various alternative metahumans, SURGE in general, emotitoys, etc.

Honestly I prefer a soft ban on marginal stuff with the provision that taking or doubling up on overpowered options is bad news. Personally I feel few people like playing the BMX Bandit in a game where other people are playing Angel Summoner and games where everyone is playing Angel Summoner are boring powertrips.

[Draco18s]

PPP definately. War! obviously.

SnS can be balanced by making it "shotgun only."

And finally emotitoys and empathy software.

[Christian Lafay]

Not a damn thing? Always remember this, what every nasty toys your players can throw at you, you can throw right back. SnS Bust-A-Move will put fear into your players, MWUAHAHAHAHAH

[Draco18s]

Not a damn thing? Always remember this, what every nasty toys your players can throw at you, you can throw right back. SnS Bust-A-Move will put fear into your players, MWUAHAHAHAHAH

Because as always, if the player uses a grenade, then the GM uses one back and get a TPK due to chunky salsa, that's the player's fault. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif)

"You guys were in a narrow hallway, and all clustered near each other, and it was impact detonation." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif)

[Christian Lafay]

Because as always, if the player uses a grenade, then the GM uses one back and get a TPK due to chunky salsa, that's the player's fault. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif)

"You guys were in a narrow hallway, and all clustered near each other, and it was impact detonation." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/indifferent.gif)

There is a certain logic that is assumed to be there. Scaring the players is find, but TPK should only be used as.... Honestly, I can't think of a reason to use it. I, as a player, personally like it when playing an RPG almost becomes a game of chess with the GM. Perosnally I see nothing wrong with making players go "Holy shit! We almost died! Next time we plan!"

[Draco18s]

There is a certain logic that is assumed to be there. Scaring the players is find, but TPK should only be used as.... Honestly, I can't think of a reason to use it. I, as a player, personally like it when playing an RPG almost becomes a game of chess with the GM. Perosnally I see nothing wrong with making players go "Holy shit! We almost died! Next time we plan!"

So, basically, the players can use the tools against the GM to unlimited efficiency, but the GM may not use them in a capacity that would result in even a single player's death? (excepting statistics and luck of the dice).

[Christian Lafay]

So, basically, the players can use the tools against the GM to unlimited efficiency, but the GM may not use them in a capacity that would result in even a single player's death? (excepting statistics and luck of the dice).

It's that or you take a black pen to most of the book(s) or roll up new characters every week.

[squee_nabob]

either determine how Iron Will works, or ban it.

[DireRadiant]

I ban banners.

[Yerameyahu]

Like, 'Happy Birthday, Steve!'? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif) That's harsh.

[Warlordtheft]

not only Stalahassee (= Stahlseele = Steelsoul (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )
but every german Player

with A ban Dance
Medicineman

Ooops--what what was thinking (Talahasse FL I think...)

With a Talahasse Tango,

Warlordtheft


(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[Oracle]

I've always outlawed Technomancers from my games.

May I ask you for what reason?

[LurkerOutThere]

… Where would they ever get a Thor shot or a nuke? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It's probably a mistake to ban S&S entirely. Instead, consider dialing it back (less DV), or not giving it a full -Half armor.

I've found the game works just fine without stick and shock, there are other non lethal options if the characters need them.

As far as things to ban i find less is more but here's my list:

Shifters
Possession Traditions
SnS
Detect Life
AI's (I run my game universe without little AI's or at least treat them as very very rare)


Things I look very hard at during character creation and am on the verge of banning:
Surge
Metavariants
Sustaining Foci:

I should also note that I pretty rigorously enforce line of sight for both sustaining and casting. Also emotoys are fine, they give the teddy ruxpin amazing abilities to determine someones mood and facial tics, that doesn't really help people much though. It's not full fledged emosofts.

[DMiller]

At our table...
Banned:
Control Thoughts spell
Mind Probe spell

Modified:
SnS is large bore weapons only (shotguns, MMG, HMG)

We look very closely at optical magnification items for spell casters.

We don't have War! or any of the new mini-optional rules books, we are running SR4 with the SR4a update PDF and all of the errata.

-D

[Digital Heroin]

I'm loathe to ban anything in a game outright. For those really downright WTF items I either examine how to make it hard for the player to get them, or to make their life hell for using them.

As an example, try to bring out and emotitoy at a meet, and watch as the Johnson either outright closes negotiations, or asumes he's working with clowns and cuts the payment offered down substantially. Yeah, you'll be able to judge he thinks your a git better, but good luck changing his mind after.

[Oracle]

Possession Traditions

This is another one I don't get. Why?

[LurkerOutThere]

I don't want to get into a debate on but possesion gains a number of awesome things for very little drawbacks

1.The vodoo tradition has one of the best spirit spreads in the game.
2. Force multiplication: Possesing an enemy not only removes an enemy but adds an ally.
3. General overpoweredness: The ability to add not only ITNW but also the stat buffs to yourself or an ally at will is just silly, and then they added channeling to get rid of any potential drawbacks it has despite the fluff to the contrary.

[Oracle]

I don't want to get into a debate

Didn't want to start one. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[DMiller]

As an example, try to bring out and emotitoy at a meet, and watch as the Johnson either outright closes negotiations, or asumes he's working with clowns and cuts the payment offered down substantially. Yeah, you'll be able to judge he thinks your a git better, but good luck changing his mind after.

I agree. I usually drop the NPC attitude two points negative for this. Friendly drops to Suspicious, Neutral (which is normal for most Johnsons) to Prejudiced, etc. Sure a -2 doesn't offset the +6 from the emotoy completly, however now the face/team has an NPC that really doesn't trust them and is treated as such from that point until they redeem themselves. Oh and Hostile and Enemy does mean no job for you (I actually treat it as a failed mission and award a point of notoriety). Usually I'll award a point of notoriety for just using an emotoy as well.

-D

[Vuron]

Yeah Emotitoys are a bad addition to the game

I like emotion + lie detection software running during a meet. Especially if the face has a cybereye camera that he's got linked to his commlink so that he can share the data with his gunbunny bodyguard, the mage and the hacker running VR overwatch.

I don't like that package in a little furby that the runners place on the table during a meet. I especially don't like the cost being a fraction of what emotion software runs.

[Faelan]

I don't want to get into a debate on but possesion gains a number of awesome things for very little drawbacks

1.The vodoo tradition has one of the best spirit spreads in the game.
2. Force multiplication: Possesing an enemy not only removes an enemy but adds an ally.
3. General overpoweredness: The ability to add not only ITNW but also the stat buffs to yourself or an ally at will is just silly, and then they added channeling to get rid of any potential drawbacks it has despite the fluff to the contrary.

Good reasons. The fluff definitely makes it seem more hazardous than the rules play out. I rewrote a bunch of stuff for my regarding possession spirits, hitting them with a reasonable NERF bat. I require a vessel to be prepared or in an altered state (fugue, sick, long term depression), that way I get my Exorcist type possessions and prevent the easy possession syndrome. Oh well, when the Horrors show up watch the possession Mages get massacred, and hunted down.

[HunterHerne]

I agree with Faelan. Reduce the power of possession, don't ban it. If nothing else, use similar rules to mental manipulations, where the possessee gets the chance to resist, and keep resisting until free. This may be obsolete in many battles, since the fight might be over before they get a second resist attempt, but it's still something to think about.

Also, like most people, I have a short lit of what I`ll ban. And I`ll allow almost anything as long as they have a good, non-superpowered badass, reason for it. That list is Nosferatu. They are simply too powerful for the point cost. Possibly too powerful for anything other then extremely rare NPC.

[Titus]

The only things I would ban would border on the ridiculous. No Shadowrunning group should have tanks, anti-aircraft armaments with a 5,000 foot range, aircraft equivalent to the president of UCAS or a major corporation, nuclear bombs, a virus that can cause devastation that rivals the bubonic plague or anything similar. Most anything else could probably be tailored.

[Mr. Smileys]

At our table...
Banned:
Control Thoughts spell
Mind Probe spell

-D

What is your main reason for banning these two spells?

[Christian Lafay]

The only things I would ban would border on the ridiculous. No Shadowrunning group should have tanks, anti-aircraft armaments with a 5,000 foot range, aircraft equivalent to the president of UCAS or a major corporation, nuclear bombs, a virus that can cause devastation that rivals the bubonic plague or anything similar. Most anything else could probably be tailored.

So not a fan of having a nuke in the sidecar of a motorcycle that is rigged to explode upon death the death of the owner of said bike?

[Raiki]

At the risk of turning this into a possession debate after all, I have to say that nerfing possession mages is just silly. They already suffer major drawbacks compared to materialization mages that make up for the benefits they grant.

A ) Possession spirits cannot affect anything on the material unless they have a vessel.
B ) Vessels, even willing vessels, must resist a possession attempt. This includes the mage himself (although they always count as a prepared vessel and grant the spirit a +6 to their opposed roll).
C ) If the spirit fails a possession attempt against a target, that target is immune to possession attempts from that spirit for 24 hours.

A materialization spirit suffers no such drawbacks, they just materialize and start womping face.

This effectively forces upon possession mages an 'instant fail percentage' that just isn't equivalent to anything that materialization mages suffer.

Also, the possession mage (or other PC being possessed) must abdicate all control of their character in exchange for the "ITNW [and] stat buffs...at will". This is only marginally remedied by Channelling. A Channelling mage may use their own skills and does maintain control over their own actions, to an extent, but still has a strong mental/emotional overlay from the spirit.

They also use the lower of the two sets of mental abilities to resist any spells/powers/etc, so if you have a spirit with a high enough force to give you ITNW of any consequence (see discussions of the Drake rules for how useful ITNW 3-5 really is) then you're forfeiting half of those stat buffs anyway, since you'll be keeping your own mental stats.

This isn't to say that possession spirits aren't powerful. They are. All spirits are powerful. They're just powerful in different ways.

As for the spirit loadout of the Voodoo tradition, I can't argue with you there...it's pretty gross. If they had dropped one of the elemental spirits and added Plant, I would say that it was the most disgusting spread ever, but fortunately they were smart enough to never give Plant spirits to a possession tradition (as far as I can recall anyway).


~R~

[Draco18s]

Also, the possession mage (or other PC being possessed) must abdicate all control of their character in exchange for the "ITNW [and] stat buffs...at will". This is only marginally remedied by Channelling. A Channelling mage may use their own skills and does maintain control over their own actions, to an extent, but still has a strong mental/emotional overlay from the spirit.

That's why you have the spirit possess your armor. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[HunterHerne]

That's why you have the spirit possess your armor. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

I don`t think we need any more of those shenanigans...

[DMiller]

What is your main reason for banning these two spells?

We found with a mage tailored towards mental manipulations these were just too abusable (along with any AOE versions).

Things like "shoot your friend in the head" and "shoot yourself in the head" made control thoughts too difficult to deal with. As for Mind Rape... err Mind Probe, I think that one is pretty obvious, but hey YMMV.

-D

[Raiki]

That's why you have the spirit possess your armor. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

This is allowed per RAW, however keep in mind that:

A) Unless the spirit is bound, it will disappear at sunup/sundown.
B ) If the spirit is bound, every time you ask it to possess your armour, that's another service.
C) If you keep a bound spirit in your armour for long periods of time I would (and I would encourage other GMs to as well) call 'Spirit Abuse' on your ass and have spirits start spending edge to resist your summoning/binding attempts.

Problem solved.


Edited: Syntax

~R~

[Draco18s]

This is allowed per RAW, however keep in mind that:

Mmmm....ally spirits....

[Raiki]

Mmmm....ally spirits....

If you enjoy the taste of black holes that's fine. Having tried to stat up an ally spirit for a possession mage myself, all I found is that it's like a roach motel for karma. Karma goes in, but it don't come out.

And on a more practical note, that's 2 initiations plus the cost of the spirit formula. On top of which, spirit abuse rules still apply to ally spirits, they just have a higher tolerance for metahuman bullshit than most others. But if they snap, you might as well just kill yourself now.


Edit: Also, I don't mean to be confrontational, by the way. I'm just an ex-debater, so I can come across that way sometimes.

~R~

[Faelan]

A ) Possession spirits cannot affect anything on the material unless they have a vessel.
B ) Vessels, even willing vessels, must resist a possession attempt. This includes the mage himself (although they always count as a prepared vessel and grant the spirit a +6 to their opposed roll).
C ) If the spirit fails a possession attempt against a target, that target is immune to possession attempts from that spirit for 24 hours.

A) And your point is what? Materialization Spirits can, but they can't do...
B) A possession Spirit with over a Force of 3 is going to possess the average unprepared NPC vessel 50% of the time. It gets worse from there since his ability to possess is directly linked to the only spirit stat that matters Force, which technically has no limit, while it is resisted by two attributes which do have limits. Fact the possession spirit is always at an advantage it takes its best attribute and compares it to two attributes which in many cases will not be anywhere near as good, and no knowledge or skill will allow you to protect yourself with any real ability. Banish only works after the fact and guess what once it has you in its grips you don't get to self exorcise. Materialization Spirits do not provide an instant WIN, Possession Spirits can and often do. Requiring a prepared vessel is not a huge restriction and it prevents an insta-win from happening.
C) Your point being what? The likelihood of it failing becomes lower and lower as the Force goes up. It is the only real limit on possession spirit use, and essentially limits the Mage to a set number of insta-win attempts, unless he chooses to dismiss and summon a new spirit to try again. This all at the grand cost of one complex action.

I would have to disagree with all your points and think it is rather silly to allow them in a game using the RAW of course YMMV.

[Raiki]

-snip-

I would have to disagree with all your points and think it is rather silly to allow them in a game using the RAW of course YMMV.

::Shrug::

I'm just saying that adding a fail % chance to something that doesn't usually have one is a limiting factor.

Also, I'm not a fan of the "high force spirits" argument. Once force gets above 6, it doesn't matter if your spirit manifests or possesses, it's going to kick ass, take names, and probably ruin your game. That's a problem with spirits in general, not possession spirits specifically.

For example: Materialization spirits have ITNW at a level equal to Fx2 (as do possession spirits, but hear me out). On top of this, the spirits agility, body, and reaction scores all scale with force. Add in that some spirits can take skills as additional powers, and you've got a materialization spirit whose ability to shoot, dodge and soak bullets is only limited by Force, an attribute that you yourself mentioned has no hard limit (but a soft limit of "when it kills you").

This spirit can outshine any Sam around, and is effectively an insta-win as well.


~R~

[Draco18s]

If you enjoy the taste of black holes that's fine. Having tried to stat up an ally spirit for a possession mage myself, all I found is that it's like a roach motel for karma. Karma goes in, but it don't come out.

Because wearing a possessed suit of military grade armor is made of sexy, sexy win.

[Faelan]

While a high Force Spirit is going to be a pain in the ass either way, one offers a path of resistance and hope, while the other takes all the players options away. That is why I limit possession spirits and requiring a prepared vessel is not that big a deal.

[LurkerOutThere]

I am pretty well convinced that anyone who defends possesion as balanced either A) Has never had someone play a possession mage at their tables or B) Is playign said possession mages.

The addition of a fail chance on possessing vessels nowhere near counteracts the tactical advantages the posesion confers. You may believe otherwise but i suspect you fall into one of the above categories.

[Raiki]

Because wearing a possessed suit of military grade armor is made of sexy, sexy win.

...Until that spirit decides it doesn't like you anymore and you commit suicide by jumping off of the highest nearby structure, as the spirit conveniantly unpossesses right before you hit the ground.

I am pretty well convinced that anyone who defends possesion as balanced either A) Has never had someone play a possession mage at their tables or B) Is playign said possession mages.

The addition of a fail chance on possessing vessels nowhere near counteracts the tactical advantages the posesion confers. You may believe otherwise but i suspect you fall into one of the above categories.

You're half right and 100% wrong.

I have played possession tradition mages before (I'm actually a voodoo fanboy, not just in SR but in life in general), though not with any of the ally spirit/invoking/chanelling/F12 spirit shenanigans that are so often brought up here to prove how "broken" they are. However, I'm not playing one currently, have had runners play them before in my previous games, and actually have someone playing a Qabbalist in my game right now. The spirits aren't quite as powerful as the voodoo layout is, but all of your other gripes would still apply.


Edit: Just noticed this.

That is why I limit possession spirits and requiring a prepared vessel is not that big a deal.

Requiring a prepared vessel is a HUGE deal (an all caps italicized sized deal even (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) ). Imagine playing a standard mage and then having your GM say "Oh yeah, whenever you want to summon something you had better have a magical leaf that you meditated over for a week before hand, or you're screwed". Not to mention the cost of the reagents involved. To say that this isn't a big deal is ridiculous, and I say you have either never implemented it or never had a player play a possession mage, that is how patently absurd an idea this is.

~R~

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Because wearing a possessed suit of military grade armor is made of sexy, sexy win.

Not really... *shrug* (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Sephiroth]

I am pretty well convinced that anyone who defends possesion as balanced either A) Has never had someone play a possession mage at their tables or B) Is playign said possession mages.

The addition of a fail chance on possessing vessels nowhere near counteracts the tactical advantages the posesion confers. You may believe otherwise but i suspect you fall into one of the above categories.

And whenever possession rules debates like this come up, I get the peculiar impression more often than not that people slamming possession especially brutally haven't read the possession clarification stuff in Digital Grimoire. Draco18's thing with possessed armor is specifically dealt with in DG, for example (though admittedly it would work better with military armor than other armor because of the Body x 3 limit for encumbrance with those).

[Raiki]

Well, let's try to get this thread back on topic.

As for things to ban, I would stick with what most people here are saying and not hard-ban anything.

Do, however, take a good hard look at anything out of WAR! (especially MRSI software, doubly especially if the troll tries to apply it to his smartbow). Also take a hard look at any builds that rely on strange metavariants, SURGE, or going down to .01 Essence.

Personally, in my game, I tell people that they're only allowed to be Incompetant in 1 thing; Not because most people aren't bad at more than one thing, but because Incompetant (Automotive Mechanic), Incompetant (Aeronautic Mechanic) etc. was starting to really irritate me.


~R~

[longbowrocks]

I've always outlawed Technomancers from my games. I leave them in the fluff, but don't allow them to be playable.

Why?

[baronspam]

.

Do, however, take a good hard look at anything out of WAR! (especially MRSI software, doubly especially if the troll tries to apply it to his smartbow). Also take a hard look at any builds that rely on strange metavariants, SURGE, or going down to .01 Essence.


~R~

I can get down to .01 Essence with just the basic rulebook. All you need it some focus and an enterprising spirit.

[Raiki]

I can get down to .01 Essence with just the basic rulebook. All you need it some focus and an enterprising spirit.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) Yeah, and that's part of the fun of a cyber character. I didn't say that there was anything wrong with it, just that the OP might want to take a good look at any such builds. After all, who's going to get down to .01 except someone trying to squeeze every possible (mechanical) benefit out of their 6 points of essence?


~R~

[Yerameyahu]

… Honestly, probably a new player. They'll grab a few high-Essence things, a couple tiny ones, and find themselves there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I really can't see any problem with how much/little Essence someone has, because the dangers depend on what they got.

[Raiki]

… Honestly, probably a new player. They'll grab a few high-Essence things, a couple tiny ones, and find themselves there. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I really can't see any problem with how much/little Essence someone has, because the dangers depend on what they got.

::Shrug:: I'm just saying that .01Ess should warrant a look. If it's because they got two cyber arms and a couple other small things, you probably don't have a problem. But if they have Alpha Wired II, Muscle Toner 4, Reaction Enhancers 3, blah blah blah, and then a datajack just to tip the cyber/bio back to a favorable outcome you should maybe look a little closer.


I personally think that all hyper-specialized builds should be scrutinized to see if they're going to cause problems during gameplay, but I was just listing some things that might be warning signs of potential System Abuse. As always, YMMV, but nobody likes to see a poor abused system lying on the side of the road with NERAPH!!1! tagged on it's face in bring orange spray paint.




~R~

[Medicineman]

Bah 0.1 Essence
Noobs
try to beat the 0.02 of my Char "Cyb Ork" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

with a boasting Dance
Medicineman

[Manunancy]

Modified:
SnS is large bore weapons only (shotguns, MMG, HMG)

I would alter than to shotguns, heavy pistols and HMG - today's 12-gauge shotguns have a 18mm bore, .50 is 12.7mm and a .45 is about 11.5mm. Most MMG are in .30 (7.62), on par with light pistols in bullet size.

[Blade]

FFBA : The only effect it has is giving every player who knows about them a few more armor dice for free.
Emotitoys : Empathy Software can be fixed by a house-rule, emotitoys are easier to ban than to fix.
Electric weapons, especially dart tasers : more powerful than guns, legal and quite cheap. Either every criminal is carrying one or every person who might get in combat with a criminal wears insulated armor.

[Grinder]

not only Stalahassee (= Stahlseele = Steelsoul (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )
but every german Player

Wrong.

[The Jopp]

I would not ban spoofing life.

Spoofing life is not a positive quality so there are drawbacks.

Sooner or later some accountant will connect the dots and after about six months to a year certain actions can be traced back to the spoofer.

I would raise the risk the higher lifestyle of the character.

[Medicineman]

Wrong.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)
every Gerrman Player that either owns it or checks it
go to Korinthen (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Hough!
Medicineman

[TheOOB]

I generally ban SnS ammo, though I have reintroduced it as a new ammo type that is rare, expensive, and not available for all weapon types. Gel rounds do stun damage just fine thank you.

[Grinder]

every Gerrman Player that either owns it or checks it

That's true. But stay away from generalization, ok?

[Raiki]

Bah 0.1 Essence
Noobs
try to beat the 0.02 of my Char "Cyb Ork" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

with a boasting Dance
Medicineman

Not to rain on your dance (unless that's what you were dancing for?), I'm sure you'll note the 0 that you dropped. A tiny, insignificant number, zero, but important nonetheless.

Also take a hard look at any builds that rely on strange metavariants, SURGE, or going down to .01 Essence.

Emphasis mine. (Sorry, I had to say it.) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


With a wet dance.

~R~

[Medicineman]

Ok. Jup, Guess I did drop it ....
Gonna pick it up right now (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

He who dances in the Rain
Medicineman

[Socinus]

Honestly, I wouldn't ban anything.

Yes there are certain things I dislike about the system, but I've always considered banning an absolute last resort, especially in Shadowrun where there are DOZENS of solutions to even the most stubborn player build. I guarantee there is no player build within the rules that is un-killable or that cant be killed without turning TPK.

If you have a particular player abusing an aspect of the game, quietly discourage that in a calm conversation with the player.

Have some faith in your players; just because something CAN be abused doesn't mean it WILL be abused and it isn't fair (or fun) to punish players for something they haven't even done yet.

As a side note, BAN TECHNOMANCERS!? GAAAAHHHH! NOOOOOO!

[Dez384]

FFBA : The only effect it has is giving every player who knows about them a few more armor dice for free.
Emotitoys : Empathy Software can be fixed by a house-rule, emotitoys are easier to ban than to fix.
Electric weapons, especially dart tasers : more powerful than guns, legal and quite cheap. Either every criminal is carrying one or every person who might get in combat with a criminal wears insulated armor.

How is it easier to ban emotitoys when you can "fix" empathy software? They both function the same.

[Faelan]

Requiring a prepared vessel is a HUGE deal (an all caps italicized sized deal even (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) ). Imagine playing a standard mage and then having your GM say "Oh yeah, whenever you want to summon something you had better have a magical leaf that you meditated over for a week before hand, or you're screwed". Not to mention the cost of the reagents involved. To say that this isn't a big deal is ridiculous, and I say you have either never implemented it or never had a player play a possession mage, that is how patently absurd an idea this is.

"The body of a magician or mystic adept is considered a
prepared vessel for any spirit he conjures, no special preparation
needed. Likewise, an astrally projecting character’s
empty body counts as an available vessel, whether it has been
specially prepared or not." - p.95 Street Magic

Also I should have been more specific, I noticed I left out the important part, I only require it for living targets. Possess the car, drone, statue, whatever all you want. I really tire of the way people fling the "You have never" around followed by casual references to something being silly or absurd. Try to be civil. I have had it happen, I have seen it abused, I have had the misfortune of playing with a power gamer, and GMing for one, so everything I can do to head off abuse before it happens saves a lot of arguing at the table. This one slipped by and that is why I enacted it, it was essentially a ban on free mind control.

[deek]

May I ask you for what reason?

We started playing our first campaign just weeks after the first SR4 core book came out and reading through it, the matrix was already overwhelming (and nowhere near as well-written as in the anniversary edition). I felt it added another dimension to an already hard to grasp ruleset, so I just made the call to say no TMs. I kind of introduced them as we played through Emergence, but my earlier ban combined with a lack of player desire has just kept them as plot device only.

So, really, it was timing and trying to reduce the amount of options to learn when we first started playing.

[Blade]

How is it easier to ban emotitoys when you can "fix" empathy software? They both function the same.

A software that captures non-verbal communication cues makes sense.
A software that analyzes them could be possible.
A character who spends several thousand nuyen for that software and has the skills to use it correctly should be able to get some bonuses on some rolls (mostly Judge Intention).

An emotitoy is a toy. It has the price range of a toy. A 6000 nuyens emotitoy won't happen (except maybe for a limited set for rich people). And there's no way a toy-priced object will be able to replicate the functions of a software that cost at the very least 1000 nuyen.
Seeing how that cheapest empathy software can't give less than 1 die, there's no reason for an emotitoy to give even 1 die of bonus.

And even if you could fix emotitoys, then you'd have a toy-priced object that gives some bonuses for social situations. A toy price isn't much to spend even if it's just for a +1 bonus, so it'd become something that it's absurd not to have, just like the smartlink. Except that it's a toy. Do you really want all runners to carry a toy to help them in social situations? I don't.

[Omer Joel]

I think I'll adopt a strategy of considering most stuff from the sourcebooks as the domain of the GM, except for the Qualities and Lifestyles in the Companion, maybe, and restrict starting characters to the core-book (and the Companion Qualities/Lifestyles) only. This way I could introduce the sourcebook stuff gradually, and refrain from introducing certain items, and thus avoid both an information overload and the power creep.

[Kyrel]

Ban outright? IMO nothing, beyond THOR Shots and Nukes. Stuff like that simply don't belong in a standard type Shadowrun game IMO, and neither should it be something that players can get their hands on. You could argue about rating 7+ comlinks etc., but as long as you apply some common sense and make things hard enough to get, and let the consequences of using them be high enough, no items tend to cause any problems.

There are plenty of ways for creative players to abuse various rules, but IMO you should simply deal with those if they occur. Tell your players to try and build characters based on "Rules As (likely) Intended" rather than RAW. If a given combo or item seems imensely powerful, then it probably wasn't intended to be used in that way.

Personally I have a long list of house rules and tweaks, but very little is outright banned from the game.


/Kyrel

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Bah 0.1 Essence
Noobs
try to beat the 0.02 of my Char "Cyb Ork" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

with a boasting Dance
Medicineman

Well... My Cyberlogician had an Essence of 0.015 before he started trying to recover his Essence Holes though transgenic treatments. Long Story...

[Cheops]

Unhinged (Unwired) and Running Cracked (Runner's Companion). Both are shit and break the system. Also anything with Jason Hardy listed as the line dev.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Unhinged (Unwired) and Running Cracked (Runner's Companion). Both are shit and break the system. Also anything with Jason Hardy listed as the line dev.

Two of the Best books out there... Just Wow... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Blade]

While I wouldn't completely ban RC, I certainly take a very close look to characters using elements from it. There is a lot of potential for power creep in that book.

[sabs]

Unwired is actually pretty good. It has some issues, but the pirated software, and registerd stuff adds some money sinks into the otherwise cheap hacker.

Software Clusters are awesome. The Virus ideas are... intersting.

The Agent armies and the DDOS stuff is kinda meh.

[X-Kalibur]

I agree with limiting or preventing control thoughts and mind probe.
SnS going to shotguns OR not allowing net hits to increase the stun damage (or just capping it at half skill rating perhaps?) Given that they do decent S damage and only get half impact AND cause a -2 to all dice pools regardless of resisting the taser dance. For cost they are quite powerful.

Keep an eye on allowing the use of the restricted gear positive quality. Sometimes it's totally cool and allows a character to shine, other times it just allows a character to steam roll and steal glory from others. The rigger using it to soup up his car? Totally awesome. The gun bunny using it to make a burst fire barret? Not so much.

But most importantly make sure you're more aware of the rules than your players. It's very easy to take 2 or 3 interpretations to almost any rule in the book. So discuss it with your players for possible group decided interpretations on grey areas.

[Crazy Ivan]

Generally, the only things I "ban" are SURGE and Infected. SURGE I will allow as long as we don't jump into the realm of the silly or excessive. Admittedly, I'm a relatively new GM to Shadowrun (about 8 monthes experience), its a basic thing. Infected I have a problem with just on concept, but one of the first groups I ran for Shadowrun had a player who insisted on playing something "not common, cause he's played every other race." He ran a vampire, and was promptly surprised when his street samurai infected (we'd determined that the implants were in place before infection, so Regen wasn't functioning to max output) couldn't deflect bullets.

Though admittedly, this is a player who played "that other game" and was treated to a DM there who firmly believed that it wasn't knowledge skills and background, but simply a title of a class that determined everything about you. Very frustrating.

[Draco18s]

Just as a point of curiosity, who would allow a player to show up to the char gen session and say, "I want the Amnesia (level 2) quality" and allow it?

[Oracle]

Just as a point of curiosity, who would allow a player to show up to the char gen session and say, "I want the Amnesia (level 2) quality" and allow it?

I would. But my players know me well enough not to. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

[James McMurray]

We allowed everything at chargen and only banned or house ruled things as they became a problem. So far the only bans are capsule and SnS ammo, because their damage potential is too high compared to the cost. IMO the game works as written for the most part, and you only need to ban thing that you specifically don't like. Asking others to tell you what those bits are is pointless.

[Draco18s]

I would. But my players know me well enough not to. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

I did it to my GM on Sunday. I was kinda poking around at a character and went, "Can I have amnesia? Level2?" And he just groaned out a "No."

[Faelan]

I would allow Amnesia Level 2 if it was a very small party, of one or two players. To do it right just takes too much attention to one character for it to be fair for a larger party.

[Draco18s]

He wouldn't let me be a double agent either. Shucks.

[Raiki]

Also I should have been more specific, I noticed I left out the important part, I only require it for living targets. Possess the car, drone, statue, whatever all you want. I really tire of the way people fling the "You have never" around followed by casual references to something being silly or absurd. Try to be civil. I have had it happen, I have seen it abused, I have had the misfortune of playing with a power gamer, and GMing for one, so everything I can do to head off abuse before it happens saves a lot of arguing at the table. This one slipped by and that is why I enacted it, it was essentially a ban on free mind control.

Okay, I admit my response was a bit harsher than was strictly necessary. As I've stated before, I'm an ex-debater, and we're trained to make strong authoritative declarations. I appologize if I came off as rude.

As for your rulings, this rule is much more reasonable. I honestly can't say that I agree with it, but I can see where you're coming from and won't call it absurd. I would probably still play a possession mage even with this restriction because I love the feel and flavor so much.

Incidentally, do you also ban Control Thoughts?

Also, my condolences on the munchkin situation.

Edit:Spelling.

~R~

[LurkerOutThere]

And whenever possession rules debates like this come up, I get the peculiar impression more often than not that people slamming possession especially brutally haven't read the possession clarification stuff in Digital Grimoire. Draco18's thing with possessed armor is specifically dealt with in DG, for example (though admittedly it would work better with military armor than other armor because of the Body x 3 limit for encumbrance with those).

Really? I found the entire section in digital grimore an affirmation of why possesion should be banned. The notion that spirits of possesion traditions are just as easy to manage as spirits of other traditions is flatly disproven by having to have an entire section on "oh guys their totally balance because of binding material costs and a -4 dice modifier to posses dikoted katanas." You may feel otherwise but I stand by my statement again and again those who defend possesion most strenuously in it's current incarnation are the ones who are riding that power curve.

[Raiki]

You may feel otherwise but I stand by my statement again and again those who defend possesion most strenuously in it's current incarnation are the ones who are riding that power curve.

And completely ignore any evidence to the contrary? Like for example, this:

You're half right and 100% wrong.

I have played possession tradition mages before (I'm actually a voodoo fanboy, not just in SR but in life in general), though not with any of the ally spirit/invoking/chanelling/F12 spirit shenanigans that are so often brought up here to prove how "broken" they are. However, I'm not playing one currently, have had runners play them before in my previous games, and actually have someone playing a Qabbalist in my game right now.

Just because a system has the potential to be broken, doesn't mean that no one can enjoy using said system without abusing it. If we're going to trim out everything that can be abused in SR, there goes the matrix, rigging, all mages, gun modifications, the BP/Karmagen system (because the priority system is much harder to min/max), any race not in the core book (and orks are pushing it). I could keep going, but I don't want to beat the point into the ground. The Shadowrun system has its flaws, yes, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.


~R~

[suoq]

Adding Krav Maga. Not sure how it hasn't be mentioned in this thread already.

Not banned but modified: Any gun that contains a F accessory built in but is only rated R, should, in my opinion, be rated F. Examples: Morrissey Élan & HK-227X.

[Raiki]

Adding Krav Maga. Not sure how it hasn't be mentioned in this thread already.

I've always looked a bit askance at any of the martial arts rules. Based on what styles/maneuvers the player wants to take, I have yet to need to hit any of it with the ban-hammer, but I have added it to the list of Things To Watch Out For.


~R~

[X-Kalibur]

He's referring to spending a measly 5 BP on Krav Maga to take aim as a free action or draw/ready weapon as a free action. It's definitely riding the line of cheesy.

[LurkerOutThere]

Your evidence isn't as contrary as you think Raiki but i'm not going to pursue it further. Keep telling yourself that possession is balanced and fair with conjuring if it's what you must do. I would say the fact the game designers felt there needed to be a whole tract in Digital Grimore saying "yea guys it's really totally balanced, but here's a whole bunch of optional rules to pare it down" is fairly compelling evidence to the contrary.

[Raiki]

Okay, I'm good with agreeing to disagree if you are. I really didn't mean to start an argument, as you're one of the posters on here that I have quite a bit of respect for. Good gaming, chummer.


~R~

[Faelan]

Okay, I admit my response was a bit harsher than was strictly necessary. As I've stated before, I'm an ex-debater, and we're trained to make strong authoritatize declarations. I appologize if I came off as rude.

As for your rulings, this rule is much more reasonable. I honestly can't say that I agree with it, but I can see where you're coming from and won't call it absurd. I would probably still play a possession mage even with this restriction because I love the feel and flavor so much.

Incidentally, do you also ban Control Thoughts?

Also, my condolences on the munchkin situation.


~R~

I don't have a munchkin situation because I took control of it. I do not ban Control Thoughts because the resistance mechanism is much more equitable. My players get Shielding and a skill added to the mess instead of pure attributes. They have an even chance instead of the deck being stacked against them.

[Raiki]

I don't have a munchkin situation because I took control of it.

Fair enough, sounds like just different GMing styles to me. I don't like to hard-ban anything, I prefer to work out any potential problems/broken rules if/when they come up. Most of them don't make it past character creation.

I do not ban Control Thoughts because the resistance mechanism is much more equitable. My players get Shielding and a skill added to the mess instead of pure attributes. They have an even chance instead of the deck being stacked against them.

Honestly, I was just curious if it was a dislike for mind control in general or if it was possession specifically. I've seen it both ways. And you should do whatever is best for your game, I'll do the same. It takes all kinds, even in the shadows.


~R~

[HunterHerne]

Especially in the shadows

[longbowrocks]

Two of the Best books out there... Just Wow... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

You guys complain about WAR! breaking the game, but RC, SR4A, and AU working in tandem will net you a chance to roll 41 dice with a sniper rifle (updated value). There isn't much to break after that.