Pacifism in the shadows, just a thought Options

[dionysus]

<noob>

Perhaps I'm being stupid to ask this, but has anyone ever looked into a pacifist character in Shadowrun?

This might range from someone who tries to only do stun damage, to someone who tries to offer no violence at all. I know this is a philosophy very much out of place in a cyberpunk dystopia, but I thought it might be a good mental exercise.

Or maybe just cannon fodder, I don't know.

</noob>

[cristomeyers]

It'd be an interesting concept, for sure. But you're looking at a number of hurdles, most notably of which is that no one is going to care that you don't kill, they're going to try and kill you regardless.

[dionysus]

[Kyoto Kid]

...pacifism aside, not leaving a high body count behind is still a good practise. Helps keep the Star & other sec agencies off your tail.

[ThreeGee]

I've DM'd pacifist characters on a couple of occasions, both with and without the Pacifist flaw. Works OK for certain types of characters. A Shamanic specialist healer, basically an extreme combat medic, can get away with it, he can be useful enough to the party that it doesn't matter that he can't harm anyone.

[cristomeyers]

It would really depend on how extreme you want to play it. A mage/shaman could take Stunbolt (or, as it's known in our group: Orgasm :please: ) and other non-lethal spells exclusively and anyone else could just take gel rounds.

But if you're the type that doesn't want to cause ANY harm, that's a different story.

[Mistwalker]

A hacker could get away with it too.

[Backgammon]

SR3 (and SR2 also I think) had the Pacifist Flaw.

IMO not a good character concept unless you really put some thought into it, and the GM runs a campaign that can accomodate you.

Pretty iffy all in all, but yeah, its possible to pull off.

[lorechaser]

As long as you don't try to enforce your pacifism on the other characters, you can easily do this - just play the Face/Decker/Greaseman.

[mfb]

i don't think pacifism should be an on/off switch. for instance, you could run a Humanis runner who considers himself a pacifist because he doesn't kill humans. you could run an anti-Humanis character of any race who doesn't kill people, but doesn't consider Humanis scum to be people. you could run a PETA extremist who refuses to kill animals, but considers metahumanity fair game. you could run the Pet Professional, who only kills animals. and so on.

[JongWK]

Sam Verner is a pacifist runner, IIRC.

[fistandantilus4....]

Was just going to mention him. He doesn't kill, uses the narcojet guns. He's a dog shaman in the Secrets of Power trilogy. Also shows up in an interview in the Sprawl Survival Guide (IIRC) discussing the very issue.

A pacifist would really depend on the syle of game as well. So ask your GM what they're going for. I;d say for instance that in my games, a acifist wouldn't last a long time. They would last for a little while, but eventually it's kill or be killed. But that doesn't apply for all of my games. Some campaigns have a different feel or type.If your character and the game type mesh, then yeah it could work. Pacifist working with a standard runner team, as long as the have "marketable' skills, yeah that could work. A pacifist in a real gritty street level game is going to havea much harder time. An organized crime game even more so. A group of runners that specialize in wetwork, not likely.

[dionysus]

[FrankTrollman]

Having PCs run around with Stunball and Narcoject is entirely reasonable. It doesn't work against structures or enclosed vehicles, but it's relatively quiet and doesn't generate a trail of blood or a high body count. There's a lot of places you can go with that - indeed entire teams can be done out in this fashion to quite decent effect.

On the other end of the scale, having an Insect Magician on your team can be quite efficacious as well. He'll kill a substantial (but not amazing) number of people and then he'll go hide the bodies by having them eaten by insect spirits. That's pretty useful too, albeit in the other way where CSI isn't tracking you through the bodies because one of your teammates is hiding the bodies.

Ironically, the guy who has the hardest time finding teams is the stone cold slice-and-dicer. A guy who runs around with a titanium razor who cuts people up and leaves their bodies to rot in the street - that guy leaves what we call "enemies" and also what we in the biz call "clues" - that's bad.

It all depends upon play style. A pacifist character is going to probably have problems with a stone cold slice-and-dicer or an Insect Mage. But that doesn't mean that any of those three characters are "wrong". Really, as long as you know what everyone else is doing and they all know what yu are doing, you can probably make a working Shadowrun team.

---

Interestingly, it is for this reason that I don't find that "pick-up games" of Shadowrun work terribly well. It's not like D&D where you can logically assume that all the players are intent upon breaking into peoples' basements and then stabbing them in the face for money. Some Shadowrunners do that, others do not - so if you throw down a couple of characters sight unseen there's no telling whether the characters can work together or not.

-Frank

[fistandantilus4....]

[deek]

I think it really depends on how you want to define it...

By definition, a pacifist is opposed to war/violence. I would say that regardless of lethal/non-lethal combat, its all still violence. So, a character that runs the shadows but just doesn't kill, could be debated on whether that is a pacifist or not.

As to the concept in SR4, I agree with a previous post mentioning a GM-tailored campaign. It can certainly work and I think it would be fun, as you have additional strategy in order to complete objectives without violence.

I don't think it would be as easy if the whole group wasn't of similar mindset...just thinking back to prior games I have run, there's usually always a non-lethal way to deal with the obstacles I have thrown at my players. A group relying on stealth, should always be striving to get in and out without anyone noticing and therefore without violence...I think the difficulty in the pacifist concept is two-fold:

1) When the drek hits the fan, is s/he just going to take the punishment, try to help the group without attacking or what?

2) Motivation...I think this is my biggest sticking point. If one is against violence, why be a shadowrunner? Even if you are not directly the cause of violence, most of the missions and plots have you indirectly causing some sort of violence to someone...so philosophically, it just doesn't seem to blend.

[nathanross]

Just adding my 2cents, though we've already plenty

Shadowrunners should never limit themselves to pacifism or not. I think making a character that avoids killing people is professional, better for real roleplaying, and more ethical. However, if you don't blow a hole in the sammys head who is about to kill you, you are just stupid. You should also never limit your professional repertoire. Everyone has to wet work now and again; Its how you deal with it that seperate the boys from men. I think Blackjack summarized it best

What it Means to Murder

[dionysus]

[pbangarth]

My wife and I just started a couple of characters in the Missions arc. Her character could be described as a pacifist, as she does not enter combat by choice and has only Dodge and a minimal Unarmed Combat skill if she has absolutely no choice. She is however, an adept focused on 'Face' skills and has helped every run we have gone on, and increased our profits greatly.

We haven't heard any complaints yet. Of course, no team we have played on has ever suffered from a lack of shooters. :D

[cristomeyers]

As to motivation: they could be a decker, first and foremost, deckers can be about as removed from actual combat as you can get. They could be attached to a member of the group, unable or unwilling to leave their side. Hell, they could just be the uber-medic, completely self-sacrificing in giving aid, though that's a bit of a stretch.

[dionysus]

[Kyoto Kid]

...maybe a new Flaw/Quality, (Similar to and old Champions/Hero System Disadvantage)

Personal Code Against Killing. Mental -1 (SR2/3) -5 (SR4)
Character avoids killing and always uses non lethal means to deal with opponents (stun spells, stun weapons/ammo, etc).

Just a thought.

[Crakkerjakk]

My Opinion:

If I were to play a pacifist character in SR, I would define pacifism as the desire to do no harm. This doesn't eliminate the right to self defense, but if someone does attack me and I drop em, I'm not gonna put a round into their braincase. In all probability, I would stabilize them if there was time at all. Only doing non-lethal seems like a bit of a copout. After all, pummeling multiple people into unconsciousness with your bare fists is not typically a sign of pacifism. It's not the mechanics that would make someone a pacifist. It's the roleplaying.

Again, just how I'd play it. Not necessarily the right or only way, just mine.

*EDIT*

For guidance, I think taking a look at the pacifism codes from GURPS might be a good idea. They had total non-violence, self defense, and no killing as three separate tiers IIRC.

[Drraagh]

You can have a criminal who doesn't kill but still goes on runs. Think of the whitehats, or even the grey hats. To use a comic book example, think of Spiderman and the Black Cat versus the Punisher. Spiderman is a good guy, who while he doesn't kill he beats up the bad guys and then hands them to the police or what not. The Black Cat is a professional thief, and I don't believe they've ever killed anyone. However, the Punisher was going out of his way to kill people. And I think you could see all on a Shadowrun team.

Basically, high stealth, decent unarmed or even melee combat skills, things like that and you can make a pacifistic character.

[cristomeyers]

Hmm, interesting character concept approaching...

(psuedo) Buddhist phyical adept. Combat oriented powers. Pacifist to a point.

"The Buddha will forgive you three times." The character does not take action to being struck the first three times. After the third time, the Buddha will no longer forgive, he initiates all stat buffs and powers and annihilates any opposition.

Most likely very short lived (esp when the first strike is from, say, an assault cannon), but interesting nonetheless.

Side note-watch the anime "Flame of Recca" to see this concept in action, it's a good fight.