cont'd: Infected as PC Options in SR, Vampire the Shadowing - a good idea? Options

[hermit]

Fine. Since we have been derailing this thread a lot and this is not finished, the continuation of the discussion from the other thread is here.

Since there are standing bounties on all Infected (ghouls included) I guess that does not apply to Infected and possibly non-homo sapients.

True, but there are also bounties on criminals. Also, the same article says there are no more bounties on the newly citizenised Infected - so no, the government in the UCAS will not give you money for killing a ghoul anymore. It'll give you handcuffs and jail time instead. Because you really don't need to contain the zombie apocalypse when it is still possible!

It is telling that only 35 nations around the world afford equal rights and citizenry to HMHVV infected, and those only to some.

This would refer to the feral Infected. Loup-Garou, Dzoo-Noo-Qua, Goblins and to a degree Banshees are hard to consider sapient, and so are many Ghouls. I suppose they check whether you filfill basic sapience premises before labeling you a citizen, dear child of the night.

"Poor/missing QA" (as the authors themselves have said) would be another good one

'Poor' is what comes to mind reading this, yes. Pity the RW stuff wasn't used for RC. Pity so much space was wasted on double entries for the WoD crowd when it could have been used for more interesting stuff. Pity the Infected were retconned down for playability, raping previously established background left and right. Pity no consideration was paid to the fact these PC should be received with hostility by any sane human (meta)human being. Pity they were forced into the setting with a nonsense UN initiative like AI and Neo clones.

[Sengir]

OK, hermit's problem with everything Emerged and Infected aside... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

It'll give you handcuffs and jail time instead.

Nope, RW says they can be legally killed for bounty. Handcuffs may be optional, but the bounty still is on dead ghouls

This would refer to the feral Infected.

Well, that's a matter of conjecture. It could just as well also apply to those Infected who can't just eat corpses but need to hunt down sapient being and drain their "life force".

[Starmage21]

OK, hermit's problem with everything Emerged and Infected aside... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Yeah, I had to quit reading his posts on the topic altogether around the time Runner's Companion originally was released. You can't absolutely refuse to see someone else's point of view and expect to retain any shred of credibility on the subject at all.

[Angelone]

Yeah, I had to quit reading his posts on the topic altogether around the time Runner's Companion originally was released. You can't absolutely refuse to see someone else's point of view and expect to retain any shred of credibility on the subject at all.

He has a point though. It is completely idiotic to give the infected rights and the protection of the law. These are things that kill and eat people, or infect you with a disease. Even in WoD where vampires are one of the character types you can play they actively hide from humans or they get hunted down and destroyed. While in a harsh future they are given the right to infect and kill people. Why? Seriously? It makes no sense what so ever, it boggles my mind with how stupid it is. Has the world (and education system) really gone that far downhill that people don't realize getting eatten or turned into a zombie is a BAD thing?

[Semerkhet]

I'll throw in with Hermit. The Infected as antagonists in SR is acceptable though unnecessary, imo. PC Infected are a waste of space. Let SR be good at what SR is good at and leave the WoD stuff to WoD. I admit I am biased because I spent a good number of years playing and running games in oWoD and I've had my fill. When I run Shadowrun I want to leave the vampires and werewolves behind and concentrate on the things that make SR unique.

[I Hate All Life]

Let me put my two Nuyen in.

I'm one of the "WoD crowd" hermit claims SR was catering to. And they may have been. I like playing games like Vampire and Kindred of the East, stalking the night as undead predator, struggling to reconcile my predatory urges with what remains of my human morality. There's a lot of fun to be had in such games.

And yet I can understand strong objections to Infected characters in Shadowrun. The primary advantage WoD's vampires have over their SR counterparts (other than being truly undead and considerably more powerful) is the fact few believe they exist, and no one takes the ones that believe they do seriously. In SR, the existence of vampires and creatures like them aren't a secret, unlike in Vampire. The Infected are predators, feeding on others' life force and bodies; however, they have no "Masquerade" or the like to hide behind. Second, no vampire type in the WoD -- Kindred, Laibon or Kuei-jin -- can pass on their "curse" just by biting someone. So considering the existence of Infected is public knowledge and they, it's very difficult to understand why metahumanity doesn't declare open war on them and attempt to wipe out HMHVV and its carriers altogether. They're agitating for rights, and make some good points about being free-willed creatures that didn't choose their fate... but I think the level of tolerance the world is about to reach a breaking point. A line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere, and in front of monsters that not only try to eat you but can pass their hideous curse onto their victims is a damned good place to draw it.

"Okay, we've accepted trolls, dwarves and the like are actually people and deserve equal rights. Fair enough, my cousin is married to an orc and he's a nice guy. And we're trying to protect intelligent creatures unrelated to humans, like sasquatches and naga. Well, they're causing no harm to me, so I don't see why not. These 'technomancers' and emergent AIs... these guys scare me a little, as they're hooked into the Matrix, and the Matrix is hooked into everything -- including bank accounts and missile defense and the like. I'm trying really hard to wrap my head around this, because I'm an open-minded gal and I want to respect everyone. But now there are lobbies and movements by these Infected freaks? There's a real possibility goddamned ghouls -- a pack of which butchered and ate my brother's son, by the way -- will be recognized by the UCAS and afforded the rights and privileges of citizens? Are you shitting me? You know, with legal rights being given to mass infections and the very lives of my family at stake, I think maybe lovey-dovey tolerance isn't the way to go here..."

That needn't be the case in your personal SR setting, but it will be in mine, by-golly. I can see the brouhaha triggered by the Infected rights movements not only creating a shitstorm for them, but backlashing on other entities (like Emergents and Sapients, even some metahumans) and setting back civil rights for them.

I thought it was odd they presented the Infected as playable characters in the Runner's Companion. For that matter, I don't like drakes much either. But I don't object to them being in the book. As a GM I can simply say they're off-limits as PCs in my games; that's easy for me to do. It would be a lot harder for some GM to have to create rules for PC Wendigo if he's willing to allow them and a player really wants to play one.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

He has a point though. It is completely idiotic to give the infected rights and the protection of the law. These are things that kill and eat people, or infect you with a disease. Even in WoD where vampires are one of the character types you can play they actively hide from humans or they get hunted down and destroyed. While in a harsh future they are given the right to infect and kill people. Why? Seriously? It makes no sense what so ever, it boggles my mind with how stupid it is. Has the world (and education system) really gone that far downhill that people don't realize getting eatten or turned into a zombie is a BAD thing?

Like giving full citizenship to dragons? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Just kidding, yeah, I get the difference, it is not like SR vampires could live of Tru Blood™ if it existed, since they ACTUALLY NEED vital force through blood instead of just blood.
It never made any sense to me they got citizenship either and no matter how biased the UN council might have been to the green agenda, Infected are not necessarely tree-hugers or any crap like that, they are people who got infected by a disease that forces them to kill other metahumans to keep alive.

I mean, if Ghouls and vamps can have citizenship, why not the squatters don't try to become one? gaining Magic and becoming dual-natured makes them possible to work in corp security or research or something and this is better than live on the streets and scavenge for food or shelter.

[Starmage21]

I mean, if Ghouls and vamps can have citizenship, why not the squatters don't try to become one? gaining Magic and becoming dual-natured makes them possible to work in corp security or research or something and this is better than live on the streets and scavenge for food or shelter.

Not a bad way to look at a portion of the infected wannabees.

[Dr.Rockso]

I mean, if Ghouls and vamps can have citizenship, why not the squatters don't try to become one? gaining Magic and becoming dual-natured makes them possible to work in corp security or research or something and this is better than live on the streets and scavenge for food or shelter.

I'm away from books, so don't quote me on this, but I think vamps and ghouls are restricted to criminal SINs, aren't they? I doubt this is something most of them want. Not to mention the infected in the workforce would be a bit ridiculous. We can't have Henry the office ghoul near the other wageslaves, now can we? What I'm getting at is if they are offered citizenship its more to keep tabs on them rather then give them any rights.

[Sengir]

He has a point though. It is completely idiotic to give the infected rights and the protection of the law.

Well, the point of this thread is the question whether vampires are given rights, because the canon info is ambigious at best. The fight for ghoul rights has long been a part of the backstory, and objectivley Ghouls are not that bad - they eat dead bodies, which in many places are simply thrown into the gutter or sold for parts, and have a communicable disease, which hardly is a reason for segregation (assuming you use injection and not contact vector, but I'm just going to assume some basic sanity here (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ). IMO this fits into the universe quite well - nobody cares if a SINless hobo dies, so why should anyone care if somebody munches on the body? Humanis, obviously, but SINs and social acceptance are different things.


Vampires on the other hand can go to the local blood bank for one half of their dinner, and their HMHVV variant is less communicable. But the other half of their nutrition requires them to do permanent damage to a sapient being, which is hardly allowed in any jurisdiction. Another problem is that HMHVV I is extremely rare, which means vampires simply do not have the lobby of Ghouls. Probably even many ghouls have adopted a kind of "kiss up, kick down" mentality: "we are good upstanding citizens, the problem are those filthy bloodsuckers"

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

I'm away from books, so don't quote me on this, but I think vamps and ghouls are restricted to criminal SINs, aren't they? I doubt this is something most of them want. Not to mention the infected in the workforce would be a bit ridiculous. We can't have Henry the office ghoul near the other wageslaves, now can we? What I'm getting at is if they are offered citizenship its more to keep tabs on them rather then give them any rights.

Corps can provide SIN's too. And even if they can't be around other employees (for dietary requirements issues), you may as well have a complete division or sector run by Infected.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

Well, the point of this thread is the question whether vampires are given rights, because the canon info is ambigious at best. The fight for ghoul rights has long been a part of the backstory, and objectivley Ghouls are not that bad - they eat dead bodies, which in many places are simply thrown into the gutter or sold for parts, and have a communicable disease, which hardly is a reason for segregation

I thought they also require Essence on their meal, don't? If so, ok, Ghouls are "less" dangerous then vamps, but HMHVV is not the same thing as HIV (although I can see where the inspiration came from)

[The Monk]

Seems like there are a lot of gaps in the Infected canon. Not surprising since the game doesn't center around vampires. WoD has all sorts of background, organizations, and other detail. To make vampires make sense in Shadowrun, players and DMs are going to have to fill in all the gaps.

This is fine, in fact I prefer it that way because I don't want the writers to really devote that much time to Infected at all. There are some rules, they need some cleaning up, but all of that other detail should be left to the players. I mean, do you want an Infected in the Shadows book? Not me.

In my own game, a powerful NPC is trying to develop weaponized HMHVV including a small elite force of Vampires to be used in a military role. One of the PCs got turned into a vampire by him (he's actually that PC's level six connection contact), he's beginning to learn that having a very powerful contact isn't all roses cause he's been manipulated by this guy a lot.

Meanwhile the PC is stuck in the middle of a number of forces, some trying to develop the same technology, some trying to keep it from becoming a weapon, some just trying to hunt vampires for profit and umm, well they're vampires, what other reason do you need to kill em? Not to mention the other runners, who are beginning to wonder how he heals so quickly, and why he never seems to eat or drink anything.

The vampires that have Sins have it because they are working for the UCAS. It's amazing what power hungry corrupt people will do after all.

Anyways, they can be an interesting part of the game, but only if you work at it.

[Sengir]

I thought they also require Essence on their meal, don't?

More or less...the HMHVV II and III Infected require meat (or other parts) which once had contact with a metahuman aura, so they cannot survive on cell cultures*, but they do not need to drain Essence from a living victim.


*: OK, a sidebar in RC says that clones and even bioware are suitable food, but since this contradicts everything else we have heard about HMHVV (why would Big D promise a reward for ersatz ghoul food if simple vat-grown organs do the job?) I just ignore that (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[hermit]

That needn't be the case in your personal SR setting, but it will be in mine, by-golly. I can see the brouhaha triggered by the Infected rights movements not only creating a shitstorm for them, but backlashing on other entities (like Emergents and Sapients, even some metahumans) and setting back civil rights for them.

Yeah, that wraps up the worse additions to the setting all in one. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

But yeah, I'll handle this mess like that too, I think.

I'm away from books, so don't quote me on this, but I think vamps and ghouls are restricted to criminal SINs, aren't they? I doubt this is something most of them want. Not to mention the infected in the workforce would be a bit ridiculous.

But ... but Infected rights! They're people too! And with essence regeneration, they mustn't even really kill you by sucking out your soul, they can slap a bunch of creds into your hand and ship you off to uniomni to regenerate so they can feed on you again!

they do not need to drain Essence from a living victim. (...) OK, a sidebar in RC says that clones and even bioware are suitable food, but since this contradicts everything else we have heard about HMHVV (why would Big D promise a reward for ersatz ghoul food if simple vat-grown organs do the job?)

One of the Retcons I was refering to.

Vampires on the other hand can go to the local blood bank for one half of their dinner, and their HMHVV variant is less communicable. But the other half of their nutrition requires them to do permanent damage to a sapient being, which is hardly allowed in any jurisdiction. Another problem is that HMHVV I is extremely rare, which means vampires simply do not have the lobby of Ghouls.

One could argue that they, having their own world conspiracy, are better networked than other Infected.

Also, Ghouls are a plague. Why should anyone let them get into contact with uninfected?m Taht is so stupid it boggles the mind. HMHVV II always is a zombie apocalypse waiting to happen. And where the idea that ghouls are some kind of persecuted, innocent minority comes from is anybody's guess anyway. Who would stand up for pedo rights? Hey, they only need to rape a child once a month and never chose their fate! Just give them contingencies on orphans, they're screwed up anyway! Eh? Where's the pedo rights movement?

And Pedos don't even turn perfectly harmless people into more pedos. Still, they receive quite a shitty treatment. Ghouls, on the other hand, are now somehow accepted (much like AI, because AI aren't prone to genocide AT ALL).

[I Hate All Life]

Yeah, that wraps up the worse additions to the setting all in one. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

But yeah, I'll handle this mess like that too, I think.

Glad to see my contribution wasn't completely overlooked. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Rasumichin]

Oh look, it's this thread again.

[Kid Chameleon]

It's amazing what power hungry corrupt people will do after all.

I think that should be emphasized. Depending on who is running the show, enough money or influence and anyone can get their agenda passed. Not everywhere in the 2070s follows the will of the people.

[Patrick Goodman]

Replying to the old thread in the new thread. Hope I don't really botch things up or upset people or stuff like that. Mostly, I hope I don't botch things too badly.

Also, the dragon PC would, had they been put into the Comp, not have made for most stupid PC option (that goes to the Infected, but near ties with the AI - some things really should not be playable). Amusing, though, that seemingly Comp and Running Wild were entirely uncoordinated and now we're settled with three unplayable and several other playable WoD refugee emo chars that sparkle in the sunlight for no reason whatsoever.

My Infected do not sparkle. Just sayin'....

I believe Bobby had seen my earlier, SR3-version of the Running Wild piece (and critiqued it savagely, as one might expect and as the piece needed at that stage of the game), but it didn't have much effect on what he did for Runner's Companion. Nor should it have. It did, however, leave me with a bit of a problem.

I don't like Infected PCs. In fact, I fought fang and claw (you'll pardon the expression, I hope) not to do them back in the day (see my initial proposal for my stance on that). I thought Infected PCs in the RC was a bad idea when I heard about it. It's also not Bobby's best work, by any stretch of the imagination...and that pains me to say, because I like Bobby and in general I like what he's brought to the game.

That chunk of the Runner's Companion, though, was not among his works that I like. Especially since I had to deal with the after-effects of it in my Running Wild piece when Synner approached me for that book. Having to deal with those after-effects definitely affected my approach, but I tried to work past it as well as I could without ignoring it completely (which neither Peter nor John would let me do, and which was probably wise from the standpoint of developing the line).

There were some real vocal discussions, though, and I tried to buck the RC stuff where I could, especially where it flew in the face of decade-plus-old canon.

As for the Infected, there is a line of games dedicated to them. If that floats your boat, play WoD. I see zero need to upgrade them from Threats to angsty gothy crybaby chars or food for the gorn trolls.

I tend to agree with the first two sentences. A lot. That was my reasoning against Infected PCs then, and it remains so now.

The emphasis at the end is mine. When you say "Gorn," I see a two-meter tall, very strong reptilian life form with a bad attitude. I don't think that's what you mean here. What are you trying to get across?

I always loved the fact that vampires in SR have nowhere to run on sucking blood. They need to do it, and when they do it they do massive and irreparable harm to their victims. Self aware victims. They can't suck rats and cry about how tortured they are. If they continue to live they are monsters, and that makes me very happy.

This is a very true point. Vampires and banshees are hemovores, and must consume a considerable amount of metahuman blood to survive (though some of the Infected are cannibalistic carnivores; it's a lot harder to recover from being a goblin's meal than it is to recover from being a vampire's).

It's harder still to recover from Essence Drain, which requires Sapience. The two do not automatically go together, however; vampires sucking blood (which they must do to survive) doesn't do permanent damage unless the vampire in question is really thirsty and drains the victim out. Draining the victim's Essence, however, does.

So no, they can't subsist on rats (though they can raid blood banks if they don't mind the taste of anticoagulants), even rats endowed with the Sapience power (which is kind of sick, and not worth the work considering a rat doesn't have much Essence to drain in the first place).

It also makes for some really interesting characters, the type of characters you got before being a bloodsucker became socially acceptable.

I would argue that, Infected rights weenies aside, being a bloodsucker is not, in fact, socially acceptable. Vampires and banshees are viewed askance even in quote-unquote Infected-friendly countries. Even Aztechnology doesn't just give the Infected a SIN and say, "Here's the keys; don't forget to fill the tank when you're done." Not because they might misconstrue "fill the tank" (though that is a risk), but because even to a blood magician, the Infected are creepy.

I'll expound more on that later; I'm overdue reading my daughter some Fancy Nancy book or another...so chew on that and I'll get more vocal and wall-of-texty later.

[Tanegar]

(much like AI, because AI aren't prone to genocide AT ALL).

Since when does every single AI ever have to be HAL, Skynet, or Deus?

[Tanegar]

When you say "Gorn," I see a two-meter tall, very strong reptilian life form with a bad attitude. I don't think that's what you mean here. What are you trying to get across?

"Gore" + "porn" = "gorn."

[Megu]

Let me put my two Nuyen in.

I'm one of the "WoD crowd" hermit claims SR was catering to. And they may have been. I like playing games like Vampire and Kindred of the East, stalking the night as undead predator, struggling to reconcile my predatory urges with what remains of my human morality. There's a lot of fun to be had in such games.

And yet I can understand strong objections to Infected characters in Shadowrun. The primary advantage WoD's vampires have over their SR counterparts (other than being truly undead and considerably more powerful) is the fact few believe they exist, and no one takes the ones that believe they do seriously. In SR, the existence of vampires and creatures like them aren't a secret, unlike in Vampire. The Infected are predators, feeding on others' life force and bodies; however, they have no "Masquerade" or the like to hide behind. Second, no vampire type in the WoD -- Kindred, Laibon or Kuei-jin -- can pass on their "curse" just by biting someone. So considering the existence of Infected is public knowledge and they, it's very difficult to understand why metahumanity doesn't declare open war on them and attempt to wipe out HMHVV and its carriers altogether. They're agitating for rights, and make some good points about being free-willed creatures that didn't choose their fate... but I think the level of tolerance the world is about to reach a breaking point. A line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere, and in front of monsters that not only try to eat you but can pass their hideous curse onto their victims is a damned good place to draw it.

"Okay, we've accepted trolls, dwarves and the like are actually people and deserve equal rights. Fair enough, my cousin is married to an orc and he's a nice guy. And we're trying to protect intelligent creatures unrelated to humans, like sasquatches and naga. Well, they're causing no harm to me, so I don't see why not. These 'technomancers' and emergent AIs... these guys scare me a little, as they're hooked into the Matrix, and the Matrix is hooked into everything -- including bank accounts and missile defense and the like. I'm trying really hard to wrap my head around this, because I'm an open-minded gal and I want to respect everyone. But now there are lobbies and movements by these Infected freaks? There's a real possibility goddamned ghouls -- a pack of which butchered and ate my brother's son, by the way -- will be recognized by the UCAS and afforded the rights and privileges of citizens? Are you shitting me? You know, with legal rights being given to mass infections and the very lives of my family at stake, I think maybe lovey-dovey tolerance isn't the way to go here..."

That needn't be the case in your personal SR setting, but it will be in mine, by-golly. I can see the brouhaha triggered by the Infected rights movements not only creating a shitstorm for them, but backlashing on other entities (like Emergents and Sapients, even some metahumans) and setting back civil rights for them.

I thought it was odd they presented the Infected as playable characters in the Runner's Companion. For that matter, I don't like drakes much either. But I don't object to them being in the book. As a GM I can simply say they're off-limits as PCs in my games; that's easy for me to do. It would be a lot harder for some GM to have to create rules for PC Wendigo if he's willing to allow them and a player really wants to play one.

I do see your point about the limits of tolerance, and it's a good one. My approach has traditionally been to water down the predatoriness and infectiousness of the Infected rather than push societal attitudes towards more of a forceful approach, because in my mind, if those attitudes were that strong, the Infected would be wiped out. An Infected population that's seen as less of a threat explains the citizenship rather than violently purging. So I'm toying with making Essence Drain something like the Vitae system in WoD; it doesn't tick away on its own, it's just if you use your powers or something. And you have to actually be clawed by a ghoul to get Infected, not just touched. Although, I do make the vampiric infection spread a little less mystically; I just treat it like HIV in terms of infection vectors, which I think opens up a lot of possibilities to twist the associations people have between vampires and sexuality.

So really, the vampire you are most likely to meet in my games is the guy that does night shift in the gas station in the C-security neighborhood, whereas an infectious ghoul probably lives in a remote leper colony type facility out in the back woods. Those are kinds of things you wouldn't be able to get in WoD; you really couldn't get them in any other setting. And it still leaves things like feral ghouls and nosferatu as less-than-ambiguously-hostile opponents.

"Gore" + "porn" = "gorn."

I think the usual term is "guro". That people will understand.

[Sengir]

But ... but Infected rights!

Your rights end where they inhibit other people's rights.

One of the Retcons I was refering to.

The same sidebar still mentions efforts to give ordinary meat the traces of a metahuman aura required by the Infected. A section which is not even internally consistent doesn't retcon jack (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Also, Ghouls are a plague. Why should anyone let them get into contact with uninfected?

Some reason we don't put HIV positive people on an island? Unless you get some ghoul blood in your bloodstream nothing happens. And given the conditions many people in the barrens live in, one extra plague hardly makes their life worse.

And where the idea that ghouls are some kind of persecuted, innocent minority comes from is anybody's guess anyway. Who would stand up for pedo rights? Hey, they only need to rape a child once a month and never chose their fate! Just give them contingencies on orphans, they're screwed up anyway! Eh?

Nicht alles was hinkt ist ein Vergleich...if you want a to compare it to a paraphilia, how about necrophilia?

much like AI, because AI aren't prone to genocide AT ALL.

Your standard problem...you see something in the worst possible light and then complain that it sucks (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
Sure, if you see AIs as homocidal maniacs their inclusion sucks, just like vampires suck if you only see them as sparkling emos ^^

[hermit]

Since when does every single AI ever have to be HAL, Skynet, or Deus?

Up until SR4, that's what AI in SR were like. Every one of them. And that Tlaloc-Station-Seizing AI that wanted to wipe out a city every hour until it got it's way certainly wasn'T any different. I don'T say it's a physical nescessity that AI be genocidal or anything, but I have serious problems to accept AI being as accepted as they are after Emergence because Horizon mediablitzed everyone. Talk about cheap-ass plot devices. And people complain about Ghostwalker.

Even IF the crash somehow generated ohnly nice AI (which it didn't), I'd imagine them to face a steep uphill battle for acceptance. However, just a few years after three AI caused the second crash and killed millions, an AI is trusted to run AL's public facilities and surveillance, and nobody cares. That flat out makes no sense. Humans don't dispose of prejudice easily, and they have a much harder time when this prejudice is entirely justified by previous behavior.

There were some real vocal discussions, though, and I tried to buck the RC stuff where I could, especially where it flew in the face of decade-plus-old canon.

Okay, then the disparity makes sense (And the RC options will just be ignored by me). Also, yes, your Infected don't sparkle. RC', however, do. Much as I enjoyed most of Ancient's previous work, I cannot say I found much good in this at all. I can only imagine he was given directions to make them playable.

And Jeez, Infected Rights. Why not give rights to the Bugs too? They're clearly sapient. And oh, the horrors ... they're just hungry. Can you blame them for being hungry?

I agree with the Life-Hater: you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere, just like you have with tolerance of other things, like deviant sexuality (many would agree to leave homo/bisexuals in peace, since they don'T hurt anyone; few would say the same about pedos).

I would argue that, Infected rights weenies aside, being a bloodsucker is not, in fact, socially acceptable. Vampires and banshees are viewed askance even in quote-unquote Infected-friendly countries.

So would I; however, since those countries recognise them and give them basic human rights, or are prepared to, how do they justify denying them sustenance? Clear violation of article 3. Why give them rights at all then? This makes no sense whatsoever.

So I'm toying with making Essence Drain something like the Vitae system in WoD; it doesn't tick away on its own, it's just if you use your powers or something.

Please don't take that as a personal offense, but that would take away the entire concept of the vampire as a monster and generate sparkly, clean emo goth type characters. Go for it if it floats your boat, but for all I am concerned you could just rename your game into Seattle: Olympic Coven, then.

This is exactly the kind of stuff RC opened the door to I loath to see added to SR, myself. There's WoD for this kind of stuff. Why drag it into a different system?

I think the usual term is "guro". That people will understand.

Will keep that in mind, thanks.

Your rights end where they inhibit other people's rights.

By that reasoning, the Infected violate human rights by existing. So how exactly should human rights for them be justified?

Some reason we don't put HIV positive people on an island? Unless you get some ghoul blood in your bloodstream nothing happens.

Wrong. HMHVV3 is contact, not injection.

HIV infection works differently from HMHVV3 (Contact versus Injection). If it were touch transmissible, there would be absolutly no reason not to put them on an island at all - wh do you think there were Leper colonies back when the disease was a serious issue? (No, ignoring the rules will NOT make them go away). If you want to compare diseases, compre Ghouls to Lepers, not HIV infected.

if you want a to compare it to a paraphilia, how about necrophilia?

Would work for ghouls, but not for the other infected. Still, there'S a reason necrophilia is shunned by most people (and in SR, another reason to not keep corpses lie around,w hich requires life, pre-corpse storage, which gets us back to pedophilia as in, massive abuse and trauma caused in victim before murder).

And given the conditions many people in the barrens live in, one extra plague hardly makes their life worse.

Oh, of course not, why would a zombie apocalypse matter.

As for AI, I have presented my reasoning. Like with Vampires, the change of public opinion makes flat out no sense, but then again, so does the entire attitude of carelessness of everybody with the new, improved and incredibly insecure wireless matrix in general, which is the biggest mind-boggler in SR4.

[The Jopp]

I dont really have a problem with Ghouls – If i would play one. But my other characters sure as hell would. With that in mind when playing a Ghoul one understands a few things.

Although there is a written text saying that a ghoul has protection under law and at the same time there is a bounty we have several things that can happen.

1: I am protected under the law
2: …Unless someone has a bounty hunting license for ghouls
3: …Or the guys I work with who are all criminal shadowrunners who shoot me in the face regardless.

End result? Regardless of “laws” and “protection” a player who is a Ghoul must have the acceptance of the GM to play one, and must be able to keep it secret from the team because you don’t know hot the other characters will react regardless of what the players tell you – why should they reveal all their characters motives and backgrounds…

Regarding sustenance for Ghouls. I can accept bioware and cultured parts as long as they have once been connected to a metahuman – otherwise I might as well go to the butcher shop and buy meat and sprinkle some blood from the hospital on it.

Getting a SIN. Yea, if a Ghoul manage to convince the government or the right people that he is a SANE Ghoul then he can get a SIN, preferably by getting said SIN before revealing his condition to a medical staff to become registred – this might be easier if one has the quality of Infertile Infected (which should be a POSITIVE quality…).

Just my 2 yen.