Dragons PCs in Runner Companion, What is your vote let the Devs know Options

[WearzManySkins]

Here from another poll with less exact questions

WMS

[b1ffov3rfl0w]

Also, if you use Dragon PCs as NPCs, they're not PCs.

[Backgammon]

... Dragons already are NPCs, they are in the critter section of SR4.

[raverbane]

I have never been against having the option of playing dragons in a game. I am all about new and cool stuff in the game. I just want it done right. My concern has been with how poorly these rules were written as per my post.

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=660786

[mike_the_fish]

I am very much against allowing Dragons to be PC's, I am afraid. Just seems super-lame to me. Like a 7th or 8th grader came up with the idea or something. There will never be an actual Dragon PC in my game, ever.

[Ryu]

I voted "No" on the first question, but with a bleeding hearth. It would be so cool if I could play a dragon... but it would not be SR any more. Now back to convincing my ED GM that my char is dragonkin....

[knasser]

Interesting results so far in that we have 20 votes to 18 in favour of including Dragon PC rules but 26 to 12 against actually using them. That seems odd, but it's exactly what I voted: I think the rules would be interesting to see and I'm not against having those rules as options, but I still wouldn't allow Dragon PCs.

[Stalker-x]

... Dragons already are NPCs, they are in the critter section of SR4.

Why don't you tell all the Ghoul, Shapeshifter, Vampire and Drake-PCs out there?

---

At first glance, I found the "Dragon PC"-chapter a little late for an April Fool's Joke. But obviously Catalyst is serious about this. Apart from the fact that introducing a dragon to a "usual" Shadowrun campaign will make the term "game balancing" a running gag in any Shadowrun group - why the hell would a dragon master let his protégé turn to shadowrunning? And why would any dragon ever want to enter this kind of "businness"?
As Ryu said: Playing dragons is no SR any more, at least as far as I'm concerned. Consequently, they will not be available as PCs in any of my groups.
However, with making dragons player characters, Catalyst has crossed a red line. This decision will attract a kind of player for which I constantly fail to squeeze out the smallest drop of sympathy. And I feel pity for all the poor GMs at the conventions, who will sit at a table with an all-dragon group in the future, trying to play a street-level run with a bunch of scaled tanks.

[Tobias]

Just finished trawling through the here be dragons thread, and in the whole I don't see the short preview that bad. It has its place in a certain campaign but hey it would be fun as a one off or just a fun campaign.

[adamu]

Dragons as PCs

Short-term book seller

Long-term game system killer

[Maelwys]

At first glance, I found the "Dragon PC"-chapter a little late for an April Fool's Joke. But obviously Catalyst is serious about this. Apart from the fact that introducing a dragon to a "usual" Shadowrun campaign will make the term "game balancing" a running gag in any Shadowrun group - why the hell would a dragon master let his protégé turn to shadowrunning? And why would any dragon ever want to enter this kind of "businness"?

Because at the age that they're looking at making the Dragons, they don't have Masters. They're adults on their own, doing whatever the hell they want within the limits of Dragon society (which seems to be pretty lacking in the "Don't Shadowrun" rules, though I could see the character saying "The run is against S-K? Nope, sorry, I'm out").

Why are they running? Why does anyone? The reasons are just as varied for a Dragon PC as they would be for a non-Dragon PC. We're talking about Dragons that have just recently come out of a cocoon, and had spent time previous to that as a feral creature. He has no horde, he has no SIN, he doesn't have some massively spiffy lair. Its not like we're talking in the realm of "Man, why is someone the level of Dunkelzahn running?" The rules are talking about a relatively young adult Dragon, along the lines of Haesslich and Tessien. (though I will have to admit to being a little confused about timing)

As Ryu said: Playing dragons is no SR any more, at least as far as I'm concerned. Consequently, they will not be available as PCs in any of my groups.

Well, personally I'm glad that Catalyst doesn't just write their product for your game and Ryu's game. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) (and considering in some cases "Ryu" means Dragon, I'm sorta amused) And considering some of the original stories for Shadowrun had a Dragon runner or two sprinkled about, I don't see how they don't fit in the Shadowrun universe.

However, with making dragons player characters, Catalyst has crossed a red line. This decision will attract a kind of player for which I constantly fail to squeeze out the smallest drop of sympathy. And I feel pity for all the poor GMs at the conventions, who will sit at a table with an all-dragon group in the future, trying to play a street-level run with a bunch of scaled tanks.

That has to be the most unsubstantiated doom and gloom pronouncement that I've seen...well, ever. I'm sure someone has said the same thing about Otaku, Technomancers, shape shifters, Ghouls, the Wireless matrix, jarheads, AIs, Immortal Elves, and probably half a dozen other things (SURGE too I'm sure). A Red Line you say. A type of player that doesn't fit your style of play. Oh my. Oh no. Save yourself Catalyst, its a Red Line!

Good thing those GM's at conventions usually provide the characters, and in the case of Missions, there's no indication that any of the optional rules will be allowed, much less all of them (heck, some of the "Core" rules aren't even allowed).

And god forbid that people that might want to play a Dragon start buying Shadowrun products. Gee. I'm sure Catalyst would be happy to ignore potential customers because of a Red Line

[ornot]

Interesting results so far in that we have 20 votes to 18 in favour of including Dragon PC rules but 26 to 12 against actually using them. That seems odd, but it's exactly what I voted: I think the rules would be interesting to see and I'm not against having those rules as options, but I still wouldn't allow Dragon PCs.

+1

[Kyoto Kid]

Here from another poll with less exact questions

WMS

...I don't know, they seem to fit my stand on the issue perfectly:

No
.
.
No
.
.
None of the Above

[underaneonhalo]

I'm with maelwys on this one. I'm not going to allow dragon PC's in any sort of circumstance, hell there's never even been contact with a dragon in one of my games, but ya know what? I like having the rules to make a dragon as a prime runner that could be killed by my players without the aid of a force 12 dikoted spirit of cheese and some naval scale artillery. So yeah, thar be dragons in the critter section but thar be runners in the archetype section and we still make characters and prime runners from scratch.

[suppenhuhn]

My answers were no,no,none of the above. I think dragons as player characters are gamebreaking for most campaigns and in the ones where they could fit (not that i'd want to play or gm in such a campaign) you don't need to count those pesky bps anyways.
As for making npc dragons i never created a prime runner using the char creation rules and thus would just give the dragon what i think is reasonable as well.

[raverbane]

I have never been against having the option of playing dragons in a game. I am all about new and cool stuff in the game. I just want it done right. My concern has been with how poorly these rules were written as per my post.

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=660786

I voted "yes....no.... NPC" reason being that I like for any book that I buy to be chock full of crushing bits. Not that I always use ALL the crushy bits in the book, but nice to have lots of QUALITY content available.

[ravensmuse]

I messed with the data. I said yes to all three.

Why? I'm okay with Dragon PCs. I've made my points before in the previous threads, but my feeling is that it can be used as a tool, an optional tool, for players and GMs alike. I've done up a dragon already, for instance.

Yes you're going have to rein that shit in like crazy, but c'mon, you're a GM and you know how to say "no" to a player. We already do it with some of the more broken options out there (that have been discussed here on Dumpshock; I stand by my stance that if you're familiar with DS, you're familiar with telling a player "no") so why not this one? Relegate it to a special game, a special NPC, or if you're running an established campaign with some high karma players.

Convention gaming? Most of the games I've ever participated in utilized pre-made PCs to speed things up and give the GM have a good grasp on what the group is capable of. Unless it's advertised as an all Draco game, there's little need to worry.

Will this turn Shadowrun into some Munchkin-esque shennanigan fest? Are you telling me it's not already? With the available magic, tech, augmentations, and gear out there, there are some crazy out there wacky concepts that a player could use before a dragon is even brought to the table. We're not talking Exalted levels of crazy here guys, we're talking an optional race included in an optional book. I very much doubt we'll see much "requires a 500 BP dracoform to play!" note in any of the fluff or adventure books to come.

tl;dr: I think this is a lot of sturm and drang about nothing. Those that like it will integrate it into their games as they see fit. People who weren't interested in Shadowrun before might just notice it and then buy into the rest of the series. People who refuse to see the light will be rounded up by the Draco Foundation and sujected to a very long slideshow (soundtrack provided by Dragonforce) concerning just how how very wrong they are.

And that's just the way it is.

[ravensmuse]

I voted "yes....no.... NPC" reason being that I like for any book that I buy to be chock full of crushing bits. Not that I always use ALL the crushy bits in the book, but nice to have lots of QUALITY content available.

You know, I get that you have a real problem with the editing and quality of the books, but is it truly necessary to quote the same damn thing in every thread? I think that the point's been made already.

[raverbane]

You know, I get that you have a real problem with the editing and quality of the books, but is it truly necessary to quote the same damn thing in every thread? I think that the point's been made already.

I dont think my point will have been made until some dev gives a thorough response to everyone's thoughts and concerns on the subject. Instead of an oblique (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[Stalker-x]

Why are they running? Why does anyone?

Let me reply in the same rhetorical question-style, but provide more answers in doing so: Does the average Joe Runner hatch out of an egg? After that, is he indoctrinated by a mighty elder and introduced to the strict rules and tradicions of an ancient society? Having undergone these teachings, does he feel encouraged to cooperate with humans rather than regarding them as mere instruments to be used at his will? Isn't he determined to build up a hoard and to strive for a sphere of influence of his own? Why then should he pursue plans that do not serve his purposes, but those of an ominous "Mr Johnson", a fragile little human giving orders to a creature that should consider itself superior? Additionally, those pesky criminals calling themselves "shadowrunners" don't seem too comfortable with having a fire-breathing buddy aboard, do they? So far, they haven't heard anything good of his species; after all, "meddling with the affairs of dragons" comes along with bad reputation (c.f. Core Rules).
As for your Haesslich and Tessien, they are pretty bad examples for Running Dragons ™. Haesslich works for United Oil in a relatively high position, and Tessien's motivation for running with Hart is never plausibly explained. Apart from that, personally, I strongly dislike for the Charrette trilogy built up around superhero Sam...

And: Nope, German cons do not always have such restrictions. People may bring their own characters, and experiencing slay-em-all-shapeshifters and drakes has been enough of an annoyance already.

[Malicant]

You want examples of Dragons fitting into the Runner archetype? Perianwyr. Damian might have the right attitude to justify that, too.

Seriously, imagine you are a dragon, you just maneged to survive your teenage horror years and you will not be able to do anything meaningful in your society until you managed you grow up again, which might happen in a few millenia. Why not running the shadows for some time? First, you get some thrill out of it. Second, you can learn something about the downside of society. And of course you learn a lot about people, who you might need to understand a little to play them better.

Sure, dragons are not for everyone, but you can build them into a campaing fairly easy, if you don't switch into "I don't like freaks, stick to elf wizards and dwarf warriors" mentality common in D&D. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[mike_the_fish]

Why then should he pursue plans that do not serve his purposes, but those of an ominous "Mr Johnson", a fragile little human giving orders to a creature that should consider itself superior?

Precisely. The idea of a Dragon - an adult dragon with no master - actually performing in Shadowruns just seems completely silly to me. Dragons should be the Mr. Johnson of a game, not actually taking orders/jobs from one. Including them in Shadowrunning teams really downplays their scheming and power. Now I know not every dragon is on the Lofwyr level, but Shadowrunners are always referred to as being "deniable assets". Can you REALLY think of a Dragon consenting to be a deniable asset? Ridiculous.

The only possible explanation - in my mind of course - would be if a Dragon became a shadowrunner out of some sort of whimsy. Like he was some quirky oddball that was just messing around. Still somewhat of a lame concept, but PERHAPS logical. But I am fairly sure that that was not the intent of these rules.

[Malicant]

...but Shadowrunners are always referred to as being "deniable assets". Can you REALLY think of a Dragon consenting to be a deniable asset? Ridiculous.

FYI Aztechnology uses dragons as deniable assets. Makes you wonder what is actually behind that corp. Also, GDs use lesser dragons as deniable assets.

It's not ridiculous, it just needs some thought and adjustements to the campaing to work out.

[Nightwalker450]

Dragons aren't born with hordes and power. Starting as a runner to build the contact base, get the inside on a few companies (by helping them / sabotaging them), get the skills that will further your own agenda, as well as earn some swag that can be used further. Not all runners are trying to make the rent, some use it as a stepping stone to get further. Dragon's just biding his time, and trying to build power. The shadows are good place to be, considering most people think that the rarity of mages are all in corps, rarely will someone on the street be able to ID him. Learning and Living the Street Life, will get him further then living a cushy life and not be able to defend himself when the drek hits the fan.

[mike_the_fish]

I am sorry - it's just a bunch of crap. It opens the door for way too much silliness, and does SR dragons a huge disservice. At least that's the way I see it. Including those rules for player use was a huge mistake.