 Bloodlust and "On The Run" |
  |
 Jul 2 2007, 03:28 PM
Post
#101
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000  Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951  |
Meaning? Nothing. It doesn't specifiy the people he knows, neither in exact quality nor quantity. It only tells us what dice he would have if he's asked to network for someone else. But it's a) about himself and b) he's dead. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Jul 2 2007, 03:56 PM
Post
#102
|
|||||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Bear in mind, that fluff is actually manifestation of certain instances of the rules. The rules do not trump the fluff, so much as the fluff is a reflection of the rules.
Hence reverse-extrapolating from Networking(which is IMO better than House Ruling out of whole cloth). An inverse-Network if you will. And inverse-Favor. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:00 PM
Post
#103
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Well it means that your average wageslave would have a dicepool of 4-5 if asked to network with someone so it does give us a general idea of what type of people he could have realibly gotten in touch with while alive so it gives us an abstract idea of how far his "social web" extends. (And considering that being dead should be worth a negative modifier it doesn't look too good for Joe Wageslave's chances.)
Of course don't get me wrong, if a DM has decided that Employee x123786a-0 is having an affair with his boss or that he has a brother who is a Lonestar detective or that he was working on some important project that stood to make the corp millions then by all means that is part of the story, but using the networking rules would prevent the DM from having to change the world after the fact for the sole purpose of punishing the players for doing something he doesn't like. *Edit* Well toturi personally I view the rules as serving as a reflection of the fluff, and not the other way around. Of course it's an imperfect reflection at best. :cyber: |
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:01 PM
Post
#104
|
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
The networking rules only tell us that middlemen (the ones we are interested in) are handled like connections - not what connection ratings those have. And no, the initial connection rating doesn't matter.
So you have to make those up. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:04 PM
Post
#105
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Not entirely, we can use the connection rating table to get a general idea of who has what connection rating.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:06 PM
Post
#106
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
To me, fluff can only be a certain instance of a rule. For example, a street sam making a 100 ft jump from 1 building to another. That could be the result of his using his Edge. In another example, said street sam could fall down the stairs, well, he Critical Glitched. If you view it the other way around, then how do you know which rule is going to be responsible for which result? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:24 PM
Post
#107
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Sure, you know what the dead wageslave had for connection rating. That does not determine the connection rating of his connections... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 2 2007, 04:37 PM
Post
#108
|
|
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
The networking section does say you can modify the roll based on the relationship. I don't think it's unreasonable to think a dead wageslave with a crime lord brother might get a few extra dice for his beyond the grave request to be avenged.
But I suppose it might be easier for some people if we had a full page chart for this. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2007, 05:34 PM
Post
#109
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 24-March 05 From: On a ledge between Heaven and Hell Member No.: 7,226 |
Its your campaign. It sounds like a good idea from the players. The rocker might not be staying in a Hotel. If I remember right his old gang was providing security, so he might be staying with them. Who is to say that he is in an area with matrix axcess. Trying to discourage good ideas that the party likes never really sets well. Besides writes can't think of everything. When writing a campaign, the writers come up with something that the think the players will enjoy, helps to set the scene, or tell a backstory. Something that the players might not be interested in. Going to the concert might have also been seen as the easiest means to each end. Also this scene gives the non-combatant non-hacker/tm a chance to shine. So let us get back on track. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 2 2007, 05:44 PM
Post
#110
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,706 Joined: 30-June 06 From: Fort Wayne, IN Member No.: 8,814 |
This is why I have a love-hate relationship with modules (sorry, I'll be off topic a bit here). To really run one well in an existing campaign, you have to get intimate knowledge of the entire module's concept, as well as all the details and thread your own campaign through it so it really hooks together tightly.
I know that I often read through a module 3-5 times until it feels like I have written it myself. I often have to change a lot of the NPCs and settings to make it mesh with my own campaign...but again, I like continuity when I put things out for my players, so modules end up being a quick shortcut to an idea, but I think I end up putting more work into a module adventure than one I create myself. So, back to topic, players can be selfish and individuals, but out of game, you have to make sure the player still realizes its a group effort and they need to play within those confines. Again, I don't have issues with players fighting in-character (and even a little out of character), but the end result should still be to move forward and have fun. I am hoping in this case, the physad being an NPC, that your player will have a new lease on life at becoming a solid member of the group. The whole fact that he shot the TM in the face when his background was setup that these two were pretty good friends, or at least have run together quite a bit, tells me that this was a lot more an out of character problem than anything else. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2007, 08:52 PM
Post
#111
|
|||||
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
I have to disagree, because once we know Joe Wageslave has ( Networking 5 ) then we can roll the dice and determine the connection rating of whoever cares about Joe's murder. With an average networking dicepool of 4-5 then unless there are some modifiers most of the time anyone who might care is unlikely to have any real power to do anything about it. Of course as you've said, do the runners really want to take the chance that Joe might roll really well with his 5 dice?
I'm not sure that I quite understand what you're getting at, because I'm fairly sure that I figure out what rule goes with what fluff the same way you would, the only real difference is when the fluff and the rules disagree I tend to try to figure out how the rules should be tweaked to come into line with the fluff whereas you would tweak fluff to come into line with the rules. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 2 2007, 10:43 PM
Post
#112
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
He's not making a Networking test for someone else from the grave - he's making a Negotiations test to convince his connections, which subsequently make networking tests themselfes. But that doesn't determine the ratings of those connections. Those are entirely up to the gamemaster |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 3 2007, 01:18 AM
Post
#113
|
|||||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
I would know that rule A would produce result K that would cause X fluff. But there are many ways to arrive at result K sometimes - Mr Lucky and Mr Social Adept both can produce similar results. You read a piece of fluff stating that Joe Blow did the Don's mom and made the Don his best friend, you'd think borken Social Adept, but maybe he is just a very lucky dog. There is very little fluff that cannot be rooted within the rules. Most of the time I see people tweaking the rules because they want the rules to produce a consistent result that fits their concept of the fluff, not that the rules cannot produce the result in the first place. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 3 2007, 07:18 AM
Post
#114
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Rotbart van Dainig no if you want your contact to put you in touch with someone then that contact has to be able to make a networking test with a threshold equal to the person's connection rating in order to see if he knows enough people to make the connection you asked for.
So by making a networking test we do know the maxium possible connection rating that our dead wageslave could have gotten in touch with, either directly or through a friend of a friend. I suppose that it makes sense to also throw in a quick negotiations test to see how far the contacted person actually cares about our dead wageslave and if you really wanted to you could even repeat the process using the new guy's dicepools although I think that would bog the game down too much to be viable. toturi sure I agree. The difference is that I believe that the rules should provide results similair to the fluff the majority of the time. After all I play Shadowrun for its style and to a lesser extent, the setting. If Shadowrun Fifth Edition was converted to d20 then I would still buy the sourcebooks for the fluff even if I had no use for the rules at all, it's the same as when I buy a GURPS book, I'm not going to use the GURPS ruleset, but they do write some damn good fluff. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2007, 09:19 AM
Post
#115
|
|||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Indeed. Which requires you to have defined initial Contacts. Thanks for agreeing with that.
Wrong. We would know the initial connection rating of the first intermediary. Subsequent networking tests go from the last intermediary. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 3 2007, 01:33 PM
Post
#116
|
|||||||
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
No it doesn't, when you roll someone's Networking Pool to see if they can contact someone then by default that means you have not stated out their initial contacts. We are aren't talking about a NPC Runner here, we are talking about a NPC who at best would be classed as a Goon and I'm talking about rolling the dead wageslave's networking pool not his imaginary contacts which we both know that no DM is really going stat out in advance. Now if you want to simply use you DM fiat to alter your universe in order to punish the players for doing something you didn't like, then by all means you are still free to do that even if you adopt this proposed system.
(Boldfacing added.)
*Edit* Although given the odds unless you are very lucky rolling each link would probably produce either equal or worse results then simply going with the first roll, plus the first time you fail the negotiations test you proposed the daisychain ends and the person simply doesn't care enough to be bothered by Joe Wageslave's death. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jul 3 2007, 01:58 PM
Post
#117
|
|||||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Sure, but adapting this for initial use is a houserule - the RAW does not specify the situation. That's all I'd like to point out - at some point you either fiat some connections, or you adapt a rule to do determine them randomly...
Which, on average, is perfectly fitting, don't you think? But we are talking about the exception. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 3 2007, 06:48 PM
Post
#118
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 3-July 07 From: Finland Member No.: 12,130 |
Really? With whom you are really playing? There has been at least one female player with female characters for about 15 years in our group and there has never been a situation that came even close to anyone raping her (no matter the game). On the other hand our group may be capable of wanton killing but not for raping anyone. Even sex is very scarce issue, even today... Maybe that's why that raping thing has never come up. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 3 2007, 06:53 PM
Post
#119
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 3-July 07 From: Finland Member No.: 12,130 |
To answer the original question I really agree that the adept was not anywhere professional. He was more like cyberpsycho to me than a professional runner or even professional killer.
I agree that the TM's recording was kind of a hot potato and compromising to the character but if his character was such a pro he could have handled the situation differently. Like talk it over and if it came to extortion then cap the TM. Anyway executing a helpless ganger is not that professional in my book but on the other hand I don't know exactly what the situation was. Why it was important to kill that last surviving ganger? |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2007, 11:05 PM
Post
#120
|
|||||
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
True, I didn't intend to imply that this fit the letter of RAW, I happen to think that it does fit within the spirit of the networking rules and serves to play out your example of "unoffically offical" revenge however. :cyber:
Yeah it is fitting, but as a point of clarification I've been agruing from the perspective of what is normal. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 3 2007, 11:32 PM
Post
#121
|
|||||
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
It has never happened in a game that I've played, but it has happened. http://www.tasteslikephoenix.com/articles/women.html In most groups, it wouldn't even be considered. But, it is important enough to deserve mention, particularly when interplayer boundaries are already being violated. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 4 2007, 04:39 AM
Post
#122
|
|
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
It seems to me that if you're hanging out with the sort of people where you need to lay down a "Raping over PCs, yes or no?" ground rule, to be voted on and for the group to go with the majority's opinion, maybe you're hanging out with the wrong people and need to get a new circle of friends, anydamnedways.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 4 2007, 04:59 AM
Post
#123
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
But if the female players vote "hell yes", then maybe your hanging out with the right people.
There is, of course, a difference between grit and playing out sexual fantasies. We can assume that, in a gritty game, the PCs will suffer some abuse at the hands of antagonists and, perhaps, at the hands of each other. It just depends on how far you want that abuse to go. There is a reason why homosexual male rape perpetrated by a very large "love troll" is a running gag on Dumpshock. There comes a point where the lack of prison rape can break the suspension of disbelief, though prison rape is inappropriate unless of the the players are completely comfortable with it, the victim especially so. Of course, if the group wants to roleplay anti-social sexual fantasies and everyone is cool with that, then it's all good. The only question is whether or not it'll evolve into something that requires large amounts of lube (and strap-ons) in the real world. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 4 2007, 06:24 AM
Post
#124
|
|
|
Horror Group: Members Posts: 5,322 Joined: 15-June 05 From: BumFuck, New Jersey Member No.: 7,445 |
I must now ask either Squinky, Holychampion, or both to draw Bubba the Love Troll.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 4 2007, 06:44 AM
Post
#125
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 114 Joined: 9-February 07 From: Pohjois-Sawo, Kuopio, Finland Member No.: 10,964 |
If it's agreed to have mature and gritty content like we have, i'll say go for it (thats if you dare to do it) maybe it wont fit your team (or for you) but try it.
My cahar (Raven, elf 'girl' face/spec.op. ex-joygirl/ex-exotic dancer/ex-escort ;)) character was raped during one hectic and dangerous run, it was 'sad' but it was coming. This run was dangerous but on the other hand there was good reward succeeding it... It was kind of inflintration mission when my character, all alone (she had backup partner but he wasn't too near) had to infiltrate this gang hq get some information from its boss. Let's make long run short story. It was done by seducing this orc gangboss (dancing, seductive looks and flirting with boss, great succeed) and she got in, there was party (drugs, alcohol, music, etc) with this boss, three other girls and Raven (my char) was trying to inject some drug to boss not succeeding to do it. She was hold down by much bigger orc, fighting and trying to get free. Her backup was called in, he was 'littlebit' late to save her ass (so to speak) but managed to save her life and he (they) got the needed information, saving the day and run most important saving her. Three other girls were dead after this party, my char was all mess up and she wasn't capaple of doing anything. Luckily there was those drugs, she was so high on drugs she cant be sure what has happened. She still have these nightmares conserning what happened to her. So this was 'mild' (I know, i know) comparings to possibility to die on that bed. There was no hot description about the act, only a stong hint/implication of it. It made me feel little bit sad and angry can't do anything but try to struggle powerless and helpless. Nowadays they (savior and my char) live together, they don't get together right after this episode but theres been this guardian/hero and a girl thing between them ever since that episode. And this orc (adept, yes he was somekind of faceadept) gangboss, is her main adversary/enemy nowadays, she trying to get even. But on the other hand so is this gangboss too, he lost his face and loyalty (towards company mr.J) and hes angry. ;) Its life, dangerous life. Now she and her hero, and one other runner is going against this boss and gang again, this time it hard hitting avenge thing. But they know it and two of three char take some damage on run... Its game, its fun, sure this episode wasn't, but still it was some kind on rewarding experience. Hope you get it and understand all ;) |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd November 2025 - 08:19 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.