Problems with Affiliations Options

[Chance359]

Having played through the first couple of New York missions, I gotta say Affiliations need work.

How is it that as soon as my character gets a job, all of his affiliates know about it? I think it would make more sense that after the run has been presented to the players, they should be given a chance to contact their affiliates and see if there is any extras to be done.

I've heard that affiliations are being removed from the next season of missions, I think this is a mistake. These little side objectives, add some flavor to what would be regular jobs.

[Minchandre]

Remember, the corps know everything. It's not out of the realm of feasibility for the corps to keep track of some of their favorite disposable assets, and assign then missions of opportunity.

[BlueMax]

I wonder if campaign play is a #1 goal for missions. We played Denver that way but adjusted knowing that Missions were to be a tool of conventions and store demos/gatherings.

I can't wait to read the answers.

BlueMax
/or for missions to get the heck out of New York

[LurkerOutThere]

While I can't speak in an official capacity towards what and what might not happen (that's bull's job) I'd imagine that affiliations will stay around in some fashion.

As your GM chance I can tell you that I should have made it more clear that I presume you are all contacting your affiliates and informing them of what your up to, or they've installed software on your comlink, or some other such thing and it's part of what makes them able to give you your directives. In the interests of time sometimes I skip this step and maybe I shouldn't.

I think the greatest fix affiliations need as their presented in NYC is making it absolutely explicit that the runners are working to keep their affiliate corp informed of their mission goals and what their up to.

Bluemax: I'm not sure i follow what you mean.

[BlueMax]

Bluemax: I'm not sure i follow what you mean.

If you play Missions at a Convention, the stat matters and not the story behind it. An important part of missions was "portability".

I've never considered Missions designed to be a replacement for a home grown campaign in stable groups. However, I've never read the design pitch and that's purely my opinion.

BlueMax
/and probably just mine.

[LurkerOutThere]

Officially, and this is part of why missions are sold on the various sites is they can be adapted for any style of campaign with some minor cosmetic things. They are designed primarily for campaign play as that's kind of the idea but there's nothing about them that precludes them from home play. The biggest thing that distinguishes missions from home game's they are designed to be finished up all nice and neat in a four hour time period.

[DireRadiant]

How is it that as soon as my character gets a job, all of his affiliates know about it? I think it would make more sense that after the run has been presented to the players, they should be given a chance to contact their affiliates and see if there is any extras to be done.

Yep, the corps do know everything. Really. And you get to run anyway.

I've had a couple PC contact their affiliates. Are you suggested this should be a prompted step? The GM should give some sort of hint about this?

[LurkerOutThere]

Speaking as someone who primarily GM's I think the problem is if you make whether or not the PC checks in with their affiliate a voluntary item that is one more bit of overhead for the GM to have to keep track of, if you make that be a clear part and parcel of the affiliate program, that the PC's will inform the affiliates of what their doing (and not doing so may be grounds for termination of the contract along the same lines of droping hints of the affiliation) it speeds things up considerably. That way unless the PC slips a note to the GM "I'm not telling the affiliates ANYTHING about this mission" they may proceed with the contact as normal.

[Bull]

Affiliations as they stand in Season 3 are, IMO, a problem. In concept, they're a good idea. In execution, they lack. We're looking at changing the way they work a bit for Season 4.

Bull

[LurkerOutThere]

See for me, the affiliations, their secret orders and the potential conflict they represent are one of the most "shadowrun" things about missions. Could they be clarified and improved certainly but I think of themselves their a good idea.

[Warlordtheft]

I brought this up a while back with burning bridges, it made me want to scrap the run all together.

Bull, some suggestions:

Have people choose to be affiliated with a single corp or multiple corps. If the GM want's to be real sneaky like he could have each PC designate his affiliation in secret. That adds a level of intrigue to the game, where one team member does X and another does Y. And the combination of X and Y equals an annoyed Johnson and a botched job.

Another way is to have the GM hand out cards at the beginning of the game, basically offering a bonus to the PC if they do X during the next run-describing which corp and what the PC needs to do.

You could also do it while people are doing legwork on the mission. In this case though it would only come via contacts they have asked questions about (this might be too dependent on the PC's taking the right contacts).

[LurkerOutThere]

I think the fix is actually simpler then that, if you choose to affiliate you acknowledge that the corporation is going to keep tabs on you and expects you to keep them up to date, it would re-enforce the "selling out" portion of things.

[KnightRunner]

I like the idea of affiliation being treated more like a group contact. (As presented in Runners Companion.) The choices you make during missions can either add or subtract to their loyalty rating and compensation can be determined by loyalty rating. This gives each player more control over how much they want to sell out. This method also allows for multiple affiliations, but since many are often at odds it can be hard to please one without making others mad. Thus offering the runner some interesting choices. I would also propose that if a runner earns a negative to a loyalty rating during a run, and this reduces the loyalty to zero, then they have lost that affiliation.

Just a thought anyway.

[Wasabi]

I like it as a partially-nebulous mechanic. I would like the dangers to be quite bluntly stated and the rewards to be touched upon so its not a tease, but that the manipulation of Affiliations as yet another lever PC's use to gain advantage to instead be a hard to manipulate, recurring risk that likewise grows in riskiness as the effectiveness of the lever grows.

It should be quite opt-in so new players dont have to burden themselves with it and its risk of negative consequences.
It should have solid expectations set and a full page handout in every mission that says "AFFILIATIONS: What you need to know" so at the moment of greatest temptation players can see the carrot as well as stick.

[Chance359]

Personally I would like to see the following changes:

Affiliates are treated as a contact, example "Head of external resources". I dont think you should ever know who your affiliation actually works for.

Also gear should work on a sliding scale. The more objectives you complete, the better award they offer.

Instead of random loot item that may or maynot be useful to the player, the player may use the affiliate to help them get a hold of a desired item. They player will still have to pay for it though.

[SaintHax]

Remember, the corps know everything. It's not out of the realm of feasibility for the corps to keep track of some of their favorite disposable assets, and assign then missions of opportunity.

But they don't-- that's the point of ShadowRun, you stick it to them where others can't.

I think the problem is that this was supposed to feel like Paranoia's "secret societies". For those that don't know, in Paranoia you must have one secret society, and they (from time to time) give you secret goals to do during a mission. It's a load of fun as you often attempt to sabotage a mission to succeed with your secret goal.

The difference is Paranoia isn't a cooperative game, so to say. You don't mind screwing over the party, and you have more loyalty to your secret affiliation, so you do pretty much tell them everything. Your job is also not a secret, so it's very justifiable for a S.S. to know what you are doing.

In ShadowRun you are secretive. You may have multiple fake SIMs, disposable commlinks for meets (one just for your fixer, and one for your chummers), a few safe houses, and both Matrix and magical security. You are in the shadows and outside of what the corporations watch. To ever just randomly get contacted from a stranger via box text, destroys that illusion and violates your planning.

If affiliations are going to stay in SRM, then they need to give the control back to the player-- runners are renegades, even if we are going to deal with the devil, we aren't selling out. We are independents. Also, not all affiliations need to have an interest in every mission.

[BlueMax]

But they don't-- that's the point of ShadowRun, you stick it to them where others can't.

I think the problem is that this was supposed to feel like Paranoia's "secret societies". For those that don't know, in Paranoia you must have one secret society, and they (from time to time) give you secret goals to do during a mission. It's a load of fun as you often attempt to sabotage a mission to succeed with your secret goal.

The difference is Paranoia isn't a cooperative game, so to say. You don't mind screwing over the party, and you have more loyalty to your secret affiliation, so you do pretty much tell them everything. Your job is also not a secret, so it's very justifiable for a S.S. to know what you are doing.

In ShadowRun you are secretive. You may have multiple fake SIMs, disposable commlinks for meets (one just for your fixer, and one for your chummers), a few safe houses, and both Matrix and magical security. You are in the shadows and outside of what the corporations watch. To ever just randomly get contacted from a stranger via box text, destroys that illusion and violates your planning.

If affiliations are going to stay in SRM, then they need to give the control back to the player-- runners are renegades, even if we are going to deal with the devil, we aren't selling out. We are independents. Also, not all affiliations need to have an interest in every mission.

I would like to throw up a flag here. In your section that begins with "In ShadowRun you are secretive", isn't accurate. It should be titled "How I view and play ShadowRun". The assumption that there is only one style of play, well, its not something with which I can agree.

BlueMax

[LurkerOutThere]

Also, not all affiliations need to have an interest in every mission.

They arn't.

I'm a little tired of people ascribing problems to the system that exist only in their head. For one thing manhattan island is a surveilance state society, it doesn't play quite like the rest of the SR world because it's basically one big zero zone with more people. I'm not saying the affiliation system is perfect or even that it doesn't strain believability at times but what about this game system doesn't? After all if your a runner living completely off the grid a digital ghost who's actions are so completely unknown who the heck calls you for work and why?

Many missions the affiliations don't have an interest in, that's where all the no objectives given affiliations come from. The corps arn't looking for anything specific but always have their eyes open for new talent. You can always choose to not accept an affiliation and continue to stay off their radar presumably taking steps to avoid them contacting you again.

Fixes I would make in the existing affiliations:

1) Make it absolutely explicit that runners once they have accepted the affiliation will keep that affiliate up to date on what's going on. Emphasize that you are selling out.

2) Limit the runners to a single affiliation. They may change affiliations but may only have one at a time.

3) Similarly cut the number of affiliations down by half. Secondly move the affiliations to second tier corps, for example sindicates and double A megas rather then triple A's. This will make it much less likely that the runners affiliation will directly contradict the mission but when it does sparks will fly. This will avoid situations like in burning bridges or In and Out when you would think NYPDinc would blow a gasket when they catch wind of what the team is up to.

4) Have the affiliations have their own story to tell ove rthe course of a mod or a couple of mods. Make this thinking be visible to the players and less random. Basically treat the affiliations like chessmasters using the runners as pieces or at least having them move the pieces.

[SaintHax]

I would like to throw up a flag here. In your section that begins with "In ShadowRun you are secretive", isn't accurate. It should be titled "How I view and play ShadowRun". The assumption that there is only one style of play, well, its not something with which I can agree.

I've yet to meet even a pink mohawk runner that goes around and commits crimes, violates mega-corps, and doesn't try to keep some level of secrecy as to where he squats. As for different campaigns have different styles (some GM's allow you to just put on glasses to protect a secret idenity, and reality is suspended), that should go with out saying. The name of the game, literally is someone that runs in the shadows out of sight of others.

[KnightRunner]

I would like to throw up a flag here. In your section that begins with "In ShadowRun you are secretive", isn't accurate. It should be titled "How I view and play ShadowRun". The assumption that there is only one style of play, well, its not something with which I can agree.

BlueMax

Ummm Yeah, I am gonna have to cry foul here as well. Your play style argument does not hold much water as what we are discussing is based on the core concepts of the game. Can someone throw all that out the window in their game? Sure. But at that point you are altering the game, which falls outside the realm off play style. And I am not knocking crazy alterations to a game, but it makes for a very poor argument, especially when referencing a shared campaign.

[TranKirsaKali]

Affiliations have bugged and intrigued me since they were introduced. They bugged me for many of the reasons that have already been mentioned here.

I do not like the "suddenly somehow you have not been as careful as you think you have been and before you can even take your first job in this town the corps know you are here and they want your help" mentality. (sorry for the run on sentence. ) I do, however, like what the first GM did with us after playing 03/01. We got the affiliation notices after the run if I remember correctly. And as to Johnson's in Manhattan knowing you, well if the 03's were played in order you get introduced to Peaceman and get your first Fixer contact. This all happens because of Denver jobs. So it works with you still staying hidden from corporate eyes. They have always seemed to me a bit like the panda mission where you take notoriety just because it was written that way.

Secondly I do not like the secret missions that may screw your team ideas. However, for some tables that is not an issue. Not everyone has the honor among thieves mentality. And from what I know, most do not play with the same people over and over again at cons. The groups that do are an anomaly. I can see Kali telling the team she is part of "hey guys was offered this extra payday do we want to try for it?" But not all teams are like that.

Thirdly, most of the gear that has been given to me after the fact has been useless to me. A chunk of it I have either given to Swamp Gator (our gun bunny) or am holding on to to give to Gator when I see him this year at the con. I can't use it.

The first two issues I see as role playing issues. There needs to be a reasonable way for the affiliates to contact you. For the paranoid out there to be willing to accept the contract. And the rest is in party game play.

But the third, well that is writer based completely. I agree with the statement made that we should be told what the reward will be for completing the side job. If the reward or rewards are not something the player would want, why would they jeopardize the teams main mission? Or bother putting in the effort? Especially for selling things at half value. And the magical rewards seem to be lacking in appearance. The only one I have run into so far is having access to a enchanting shop. Not something that is useful for most of the shadowrunners out there. Even the casters are not going to want (for the most part) to take time off to do that in a mega corps eyes. So I think there should be more options for the GM to offer as rewards to the runners.

[Minchandre]

But the third, well that is writer based completely. I agree with the statement made that we should be told what the reward will be for completing the side job. If the reward or rewards are not something the player would want, why would they jeopardize the teams main mission? Or bother putting in the effort? Especially for selling things at half value. And the magical rewards seem to be lacking in appearance. The only one I have run into so far is having access to a enchanting shop. Not something that is useful for most of the shadowrunners out there. Even the casters are not going to want (for the most part) to take time off to do that in a mega corps eyes. So I think there should be more options for the GM to offer as rewards to the runners.

I prefer that the runners not know the reward, personally. What would be nice is if the corp gave something useful based on the individual runner. If the corps are so omnipresent, why are they giving a fancy gun to an unarmed combat adept? Maybe instead of stated rewards, one should have more of a price and availability range (e.g. "2000-2500 nuyen, up to 14F").

[LurkerOutThere]

Errr how are you getting 50% standard rule for swag is 20 I thought?

[TranKirsaKali]

[quote name='Minchandre' date='Jun 16 2010, 01:25 PM' post='942980']
I prefer that the runners not know the reward, personally. What would be nice is if the corp gave something useful based on the individual runner. If the corps are so omnipresent, why are they giving a fancy gun to an unarmed combat adept? Maybe instead of stated rewards, one should have more of a price and availability range (e.g. "2000-2500 nuyen, up to 14F"). [quote]

I see letting the runners know what the item is as the carrot for doing the job. What the corp may think I would want and what I think may not coincide. To me it is kind of like the Johnson telling us how much he is going to pay us before we start. I mean would you really be willing to do a job for the promise of some random amount of (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) ? I know I wouldn't. Heck we like Mr. Smith because he gets us as much (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) as possible. Now I am not saying that the extra run should have a chance for negotiations. Just that I am more likely to do the extra job if I know what my prize is.

[quote name='LurkerOutThere' date='Jun 16 2010, 02:05 PM] Errr how are you getting 50% standard rule for swag is 20 I thought? [quote]

I am sure you are right Lurker. I am not always a good with the rules as it looks like I am (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) . I grabbed that bit of trivia out of my brain and hoped I was right. But it even more makes the point. At 20% of the value I mine as well give the useless bits to people in the team before attempting to sell them. But the job should have helped me not my team mates.

[Bull]

YOu need to add a slash ( / ) to the closing tags for them to work properly (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) {Quote}Like this, but with regular brackets!{/Quote}

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Like I said, I have plans for the Affiliation System. For those that played Denver and New York, I'm pulling a little from Column A, a little Column B and adding a new twist to them. We're going abck to calling them Factions, and expect them to be much more active in the game, rather than being passive, all knowing, all seeing entities hovering in the background. Also, the factions will be plotline specific, so you'll only be dealing with a small group of them in any given adventure.

Bull