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

[Grinder]

And since you are still repeating it, this is what RC has to say on wendigos: Wendigo engage in the most extensive ritual cannibalism of all the Infected documented to date, and their transformation very often results in the triggering of latent magical talents.. To top it off they have the Influence power, which is a serious problem for anybody who thinks he can just go ahead and shoot a wendigo - chances are the wendigo will have more hits on a Charisma + Magic roll than the target's Willpower roll (no counterspelling since it's not a spell), and unless somebody tells the poor guy "hey, eating people is wrong" the wendigo has a new loyal servant.

Yeah. So? Which PC will actually engage in this? It was a nescessity before. Now, it is an option, and every last PC wendigo is gonna be the Drizzt do'Urden of Wendigos, the rare L/G type, just because wow, it puts a stereotype on it's head and the player can feel oh so angsty and persecuted wrongly.

This is bad news for an NPC wendigo, since they just became a whole lot more nasty (how many people can they keep under thier influence at a time? unlimited? Wendigo cannibal apocalypse?), but for PC wendigos, nah. Never gonna happen, if only because there, metagaming will win.

So, it is both a cheap cop-out for PC wendigos and a possible major design flaw, all in one. this is even worse than I thought.

How much clearer does it have to be written? Reading the passage quoted from RC, it is clear that Wendigos are cannibalists - I can't read a line that makes it to a rule for NPCs only, so it's the same for PCs and NPCs.

[hermit]

I'm sad for you that such a middle ground between genres cannot be found - especially with Shadowrun which is built on combining two genres (magic, of which vampires have, and cyberpunk which vampires parallel the dark side of the tech with the loss of their humanity through HMHVV).

Actually, I don't see where you're going for middle ground there. It seems to me more a notion of 'everything's better with vampires' and about as inane as playing an elf in Cthulhu because everything's better with elves. Your 'middle ground' means every other player has to bend theitr characters over backwards to accept your character, the plot needs to ignore your character and how NPC would adversely react to it (remember, the Masquerade is there for a reason). In effect it would be you and your vampire (and some other dudes who don't mind vampires at all).

And essence loos does NOT automatically equal humanity loss. It means you lose your True Pattern, which is bad in itself, but does not affect your humanity. Yeah, cyberpunk was all technophobe and all about how tech is gonna kill your sould. Cyberpunk also is dead. SR never subscribed to cyberware = humanity loss (that would be CP2020, which incidentally also has a Vampires book, because unlike SR, CP2020 and VtM have a lot in common).

And Shadowrun magic is more about all myths are true than anything from Vampire or even MtA.

----

All of those variants are for people who want to throw a twist into their games. I like that there are rules in RW if I want to throw in a bad guy in my game, and another for the same thing if I want to let a player play one of those critters. It's just more tools for the GM to use. What's wrong with that?

Only one set of rules would be needed. Two is a waste of space that could have been used for something else entirely. I'd even have welcomed rules for Dour, Munchkin, Leshy, and ohther small humanoid PC. The amount of redundant coverage the Infected got, though, is about as annoying as the amount of redundance in regard to AI.

----

And you said these orgiastic vamps were combat monkeys as well? Yeah, that's not very conducive to Humanity. But I'm willing to bet bottom dollar they and their Storyteller had no idea what to do with a Vampire book. I've met plenty like that myself.

Probably not. Yeah, kind of makes sense, but their game was more like Elfen Lied with more gay sex.

Why use a wrench as a hammer when you can use a hammer as a hammer? *shrug*

I guess because some people need to play a vampire regardless of system. Because everything's better with vampires! Of course, that may or may not be as inane as playing elves in Cthulhu or a surly P.I. in a high fantasy game.

IMO. Masq is great and Twilight is just dandy, but their protagonists belong in the SR setting about as much as drow elves and Klingons.

Agreed. Oh, and I still am quite surly about the dumbing down of many of the vampiric vampires in RC. That was unnecessary.

----

I figure that's just the dietary requirement, not their requirement for total calorie intake. They're probably filling out the rest with pig's blood or flat Sprite or something.

Sprite Sparkles. For ... you know.

----

How much clearer does it have to be written? Reading the passage quoted from RC, it is clear that Wendigos are cannibalists - I can't read a line that makes it to a rule for NPCs only, so it's the same for PCs and NPCs.

The cannibalism cult's an option and not a must any more. And the wendigo doesn't have to corrupt the people they deal with any more either - which would have been the players - but instead can just quietly chew on Squatter parts and essence drain someone every few weeks. The optionality of it means no PC must ever do what is as central to the concept of the wendigo as drinking blood is to a vampire. And that is not the cannibalism in itself, it is the cannibal cult and corruption of people. Essentially, this reduces the scariest of the pseudovampires to ghouls with hair. For playability, presumably.

And they're not toxic any more either, but that went quietly with SR3 already and was annoying enough back then.

[Grinder]

So the part quoted from RC had "option" or "optional" or sth. similar as a header? Or do you need hard rules how a cannibalistic cult run by a Wendigo (PC or NPC) has to be brought into the game?

[hermit]

So the part quoted from RC had "option" or "optional" or sth. similar as a header? Or do you need hard rules how a cannibalistic cult run by a Wendigo (PC or NPC) has to be brought into the game?

It didn't have a must, which is just as good. Something like a compulsion would have been necessary.

[Sengir]

Yeah. So? Which PC will actually engage in this? It was a nescessity before.

And once again your standard problem, you assume crappy roleplaying and then complain that a wendigo played with blatant disregard to the canon turns out as a wendigo in blatant disregard of the canon, just like a vampire played as metrosexual sparkling emo turns out to be a metrosexual sparkling emo.

Following your logic, streetsams also suck - I mean there is no rule stopping you from playing a sam as an oh so tragic emo goth, how stupid is that?!
Oh, mages also suck, for the same reason. And hackers, faces, riggers and every other concept, too. So in short the whole game world scuks, which is really emo, so...

[hermit]

And once again your standard problem, you assume crappy roleplaying and then complain that a wendigo played with blatant disregard to the canon turns out as a wendigo in blatant disregard of the canon, just like a vampire played as metrosexual sparkling emo turns out to be a metrosexual sparkling emo.

Uhm, yeah, I assume the standard PC screen of protection and not wanting your own character to be shot in the face by other players, let alone not pissing the group off by fucking with their charactetrs, and the GM for shooting his campaign just because you absolutly HAD to play a wendigo.

That goes for the vamp on a lesser degree, and not for the sam or mage, because last time I looked, "eat fellow PC" was not a prerequisite of either concept (and toxic/twisted mages are strongly advised against in SM because of exactly the above mentioned problem with those characters).

Because, if played appropriate to canon, a wendigo (and, to a slightly lesser degree, any Infected) is unfit for any but the most fucked up groups. And even there, it'd probably cause strife. So you either play the wendigo like crap or not at all. Unless, of course, you accept RC's plethora of retcons. Speaking of which, didn't nosferati originally need elf blood with certain genetic markers?

[Muspellsheimr]

Hermit, you are essentially whining about how vampires & other infected are "gay sparkling emo's", with absolutely no support whatsoever outside your own personal opinion, which you are blatantly throwing around as if it was undisputed fact.

That seems rather emo to me. Seems like playing one of your "hated" vampires would be a damn good idea for you to try.



From personal experience, essentially every one of your assumptions about what a vampire is like is blatantly false. Yes, some vampires may be like that. Just like some humans, elves, trolls, hackers, whatever may be like that.

Having the Infected as playable options does, in fact, add quite a bit to the game - very little of it negative. If you don't like the Infected, just don't play one, and shut the fuck up.



For the record, I played in a single session of Mind's Eye Theater (WoD LARP), and a single short lived World of Darkness campaign, & I will likely never go back for multiple reasons - every single one you have stated not being on the list, as they never actually appeared in the game.

I have two vampiric characters - one of which vaguely fits your 'stereotype', but was that way long before I decided to make her a vampire (which took several months to actually decide upon, & was based on numerous things). The other is not even remotely close to what you describe, and the few other vampiric characters I have seen played have never been like that either.

Oh, & the 'normal' vampiric character is not well suited to a standard Shadowrun game, but fits quite well into the setting overall. The sadistic bitch works quite well as a Shadowrun player character.

[hermit]

Hermit, you are essentially whining (...) absolutely no support whatsoever outside your own personal opinion, which you are blatantly throwing around as if it was undisputed fact.

That seems rather emo to me. (...)

From personal experience, essentially every one of your assumptions about what a vampire is like is blatantly false.

Muspell, you are essentially claiming no vampire ever is a Twilight and/or Ann Rice type emogoth at all, with absolutly no support whatsoever outside your own personal opinion, which you are blatantly throwing around as if it was undisputed fact. Seems rather emo to me.

And, y'know, from my own personal experience, your claims are blatantly false. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[HappyDaze]

Well, we know that all trolls are big-eyed pink-haired treasure trolls with bear-like homoerotic tendencies that demand that the group bend over backwards to make concessions for their size and eccentricities. How inappropriate! They shouldn't be PCs!

If you don't like the Infected, just don't play one, and shut the fuck up.

If you don't like the Infected, just don't play one, and shut the fuck up.

Musp said the above twice, and while it may have just been a double post, I really feel it needs to be said a more few times.

[hermit]

Musp said the above twice, and while it may have just been a double post, I really feel it needs to be said a more few times.

I think Muspell is very happy you edited his posts!

Also, why can't you take the concept of Infected as PC be criticised in a rational (mostly) manner, but instead seem to take any and all criticism of this concept so personal?

In other words, grow up and/or stop reading this thread if it gets you so upset.

Not to mention this opinion is far from only my own. Several people have expressed personal disregard for Infected characters, including the author of the most comprehensive bit of fiction about the Infected in a sourcebook so far. So, it should not only be 'fuck you, hermit' but also 'fuck you, Angelone, TheMonk, Patrick Goodman' and several others. Think about it before insulting so many people next time, maybe.

[HappyDaze]

You might be surprised that I have never played an Infected character, nor have I ever had one in a a game I GMed. I have played in one game alongside a pair of ghoul PCs. They neither dominated the game nor detracted from my enjoyment. So I don't know where you see vampires as "my beloved" at all, but since the rest of your points make no sense either...

[Megu]

You know, the line of argument's been brought up at several points here that runners would not be okay with having Infected teammates. I'm wondering how true that holds at lower levels. Magicians can't be all that easy to come by for a runner team; the fic with what'shisname in the new core book working with a team of new kids, he says as much, that their team is lucky to have a magician at all. I could see a lot of newbie runner teams being desperate enough for some kind of astral support and spirit defense that an always-dual-natured ghoul might be accepted just on the basis of that need.

[hermit]

Well. At least before SR4 screwed up the payment balance, shadowrunning was just a good way for Awakened to make fast creds. Somehow, there is not the shortage in mages in the shadows that exists in the general population. I agree it would make sense for very base level teams in a way, but then again, would the risk be worth the benefits? Also, would street level runners even be so aware of the intricacies of magical security measures? I'd assume they would be with the problems Ghouls cause. Plus, associating with Ghouls warrants bad rep.

A Vamp might be worth it, being a full mage. A Ghoul? If they're not a close combat ace, they get their ass handed to them by a med level fire elemental. Not to mention they have a hard time passing through wards, which makes them all but useless in silent infiltration.

@HappyDaze: (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohplease.gif)

[Muspellsheimr]

Muspell, you are essentially claiming no vampire ever is a Twilight and/or Ann Rice type emogoth at all, with absolutly no support whatsoever outside your own personal opinion, which you are blatantly throwing around as if it was undisputed fact. Seems rather emo to me.

And, y'know, from my own personal experience, your claims are blatantly false. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

You rather specifically claim that vampires are"Twilight and/or Ann Rice type emogoth". You are quite hesitant, at best, to even allow for the possibility that not all player vampires (if not all vampires entirely) do not fall under this.

I rather specifically stated (which you conveniently ignored for your poorly executed attempt to refute my statement) that a vampire can be like that, just like anyone else.

You state your biased opinion as fact with no support whatsoever, & utterly ignore any claim to the contrary.

I state that I have, and have seen played by others, numerous vampires that do not fall under this trope (& have not even seen a vampire character actually played like that, ever). There are numerous examples of vampiric characters utterly unlike that throughout numerous works of fiction. Thus, your claim cannot be correct. Mine cannot be incorrect (I did not make a blanket true-or-false statement in a true-andfalse instance as you did).

I think Muspell is very happy you edited his posts!

And when did quoting become equal to editing?



You have been trolling this for quite some time now (yes, you are a fucking troll - you rant on the topic without any regard to actual discussion whatsoever). Your repeated whining on the subject looks very much emo to me - precisely what you claim to hate about vampires. You have provided nothing substantial or constructive to conversation.

Until you can come up with something other than 'vampires suck and everyone who says otherwise is wrong', Stop Fucking Posting.

[hermit]

Oh, sorry, I missed that this piece of profanity was an actual quote. I apologise. I should have known better anyway. It's not like you have any rational arguments left, so resorting to profanity is the logical way to go.

Your arguments, which come down to "I play different vampires, and I am right, because I say I am!" are childish and immature, as are your insults. I am sorry to trouble the Moderators with your childishness, but you and HappyDaze have been reported for violating ToS.

And you, might want, like HappyDaze, to extend your 'fuck you' to others, like Patrick Goodman, too. Because they 'troll' the forum with similar opinions.

Learn to live with dissenting opinions or don't post at all, if you have nothing else to contribute.

[Chrome Tiger]

Man, it is like watching an old married couple argue about how their brand of emo muffins is better than the other brad of sparkly muffins. Or something. Cool it down a bit. Want to know one great thing I have always loved about roleplaying games? It is the disclaimer that almost all of them have at the beginning of the book, without fail, stating that you are free to run the game however you want. The world will not end if you choose to not run vampires or if you choose to run wendigos the way you want to run them.

Keep in mind that this is all make believe. And arguing about make believe just makes you look stupid. Not like you are arguing the fate of the real world or anything.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

Keep in mind that this is all make believe. And arguing about make believe just makes you look stupid. Not like you are arguing the fate of the real world or anything.

What?!?! But when December 24, 2011 shows up, this will be the real world™ (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Now, I can see hermit's point about giving Infected build points as a bad move. It is just like DnD, if you give character creation rules for something, then there will pe at least one player wishing to play as one, no matter how disruptive, inappropriate to the game it might be, like a friend of mine who once wanted to play as a half-clay golem/half-celestial/human...

Infected and Artificial Intelligence are the kind of characters that have every reason to be distrusted by anyone, EVEN runners. While Artificial Intelligence might even get along with technomancers (but what kind of actual player's group you would find a TM and an AI together?) most of the time they will have to hide their nature because:

a) there might be a corp who wants back its "IP" or/and
b) people might as well remember Deus and the Renraku Archology Shutdown

If I discovered that the "shy" hacker tagging along with us through a drone was actually an AI, I would try my best to destroy it or try to sell it to some corp for extra cash.

The Infected get the same treatment. The whole "Ghouls are people too" movement does not make sense. It is human nature. When leper was uncurable, the infected were exiled/mistreated all the time, because they were infectuous and sick. The same thing goes for the HMHVV-Infected... Human rights is not even 400 years old. Only now the world is becoming more "civilized" and even then, the dystopian world of Shadowrun sure as hell is not more civilized than ours. So, yes, playing with Infected is not comparable to playing with good, rebel drows who forsake their old ways and now try to live under the sun's light with their elven brethren. They are similar to playing with Illithid, sure, the squid-thing might be a good friend now and sure he is a great wizard. But are you really going to trust him(it?) when his(its?) stomach begin growling?

[Rasumichin]

When leper was uncurable, the infected were exiled/mistreated all the time, because they were infectuous and sick.

Hint : ghoul rights turned out to be the same as that the day the Cabrini refuge was opened.

Ghoul rights, at least in practice, isn't affirmative action, it's switching from bounties to leper colonies as a means to deal with the problem.
The fluff says little about that, but every time they get specific on what ghoul rights actually mean when they are implemented as actual policies, it's something along that lines.
Well, actually it's a lot worse than that, just read up on the description of ghoultown in Bug City ("inside, it's like a sewer and feeding time is like a zoo").
Which is why you have ghoul radicals like Blaine Hammond.
Which is why there should be descriptions of ghouls leaving their ghettos only in hazmat suits, or controversies about how to handle non-infectious second generation ghouls, or how to minimize infection with multiple strains among the infected population.

My main concern about ghoul rights is not that they are there in the first place.
We are still dealing with human beings, it automatically opens up a moral and legal dilemma in a world that remotely shares the morality and laws of ours.
The problem is that the fluff fails to clearly bring across how this would logically be implemented.

[I Hate All Life]

Until you can come up with something other than 'vampires suck and everyone who says otherwise is wrong', Stop Fucking Posting.

Dude, it's not your right to shut him up. Someone could just tell you to stop fucking reply, and I'd take issue with that too. You don't like his opinion, you don't agree with it? Fine. I don't agree with him on everything either; I don't particularly care for the idea of Infected as PCs, and I feel that the space devoted to them could have been put to better use, but it's not that big a deal to me. He has a right to complain about people trying to emasculate vampire weaknesses to make them less like what they are and more like something else; in fact, it's his right to bitch about what he damned well pleases. I do like AIs, and I think they make delightful PC options, but I don't tell hermit to shut up about them because I like them.

We're discussing things. That's the point of this thread, this whole damned forum. You can try to end the discussion, or his part of it, by yammering at him to shut up. And it won't work. It just makes you look childish and may well turn the discussion into a flame war that provoke the mods into shutting down the thread. If that's your actual intent, it's trolling, and I imagine against the forum's rules -- and it's futile anyway, because someone will just start another thread.

So, I ask you to pretty effing please find something else to do than yell "shut up, no one likes you, you suck, shut up!" to hermit. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Patrick Goodman]

Not to mention this opinion is far from only my own. Several people have expressed personal disregard for Infected characters, including the author of the most comprehensive bit of fiction about the Infected in a sourcebook so far. So, it should not only be 'fuck you, hermit' but also 'fuck you, Angelone, TheMonk, Patrick Goodman' and several others. Think about it before insulting so many people next time, maybe.

Emphasis mine. More on this later, if I'm not lucky.

Hermit, while you're right that I don't care for Infected PCs, and some of the superficial reasons we both have are the same, a lot of your core issues with the concept are not my own. I don't feel the least bit insulted by what Muspellheimr said, because it wasn't aimed at what I've been saying, and I don't feel like he told me to go fuck myself.

While I appreciate the support, and will continue to support the "Infected PCs aren't good for the game" stance...with respect, in future I'd ask you not to put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. If I ever feel insulted by anything said here, I'm quite capable of defending myself.

Thank you.

[hermit]

Hint : ghoul rights turned out to be the same as that the day the Cabrini refuge was opened.

Ghoul rights, at least in practice, isn't affirmative action, it's switching from bounties to leper colonies as a means to deal with the problem.
The fluff says little about that, but every time they get specific on what ghoul rights actually mean when they are implemented as actual policies, it's something along that lines.
Well, actually it's a lot worse than that, just read up on the description of ghoultown in Bug City ("inside, it's like a sewer and feeding time is like a zoo").
Which is why you have ghoul radicals like Blaine Hammond.
Which is why there should be descriptions of ghouls leaving their ghettos only in hazmat suits, or controversies about how to handle non-infectious second generation ghouls, or how to minimize infection with multiple strains among the infected population.

My main concern about ghoul rights is not that they are there in the first place.
We are still dealing with human beings, it automatically opens up a moral and legal dilemma in a world that remotely shares the morality and laws of ours.
The problem is that the fluff fails to clearly bring across how this would logically be implemented.

That is not the impression I have, though it would indeed make sense (until you'd have to come up with a way to feed the Ghouls, that is). Granted, there're Ghoul Caps, but whether they actually work or not is debatable (and it would be a bit cheap of a cop-out again IMO).

My impression is, however, they're going for Integration. And that makes no sense whatsoever. Same with the other Type 2 and 3 Infected, and doubly so with those who need to consume the souls of intelligent beings to sustain themselves - vampires, wendigos, banshees, dzoonooqua, and goblins.

Even if you could force everybody to turn over their corpses to ghoul feeding and all medical waste too, it'd not be enough. You'd have to clone vast numbers of bodies for a growing population of Ghouls. What to do with them? How long will this work?

Ghouls have to be kept in check. All infected have to be. It's where rights end. Because sooner or later, they will turn upon uninfected metahumanity. It's the same as with bugs, really. Bugs are clearly sapient creatures too. Bugs also used to be human. Busting bugs is just the same as busting Ghouls - taking out an awakened threat.

[The Monk]

Only one set of rules would be needed. Two is a waste of space that could have been used for something else entirely. I'd even have welcomed rules for Dour, Munchkin, Leshy, and ohther small humanoid PC. The amount of redundant coverage the Infected got, though, is about as annoying as the amount of redundance in regard to AI.

But they do different things. If I wanted to throw in a Wendigo bad guy into my game I don't want to build one with BP. The stuff in the RC is for players to make characters.

I would much rather they clean up the rules in the RC to be consistent with established cannon. If it makes some of them unplayable in a typical group, so be it.

But it would be weird and cool to play a group of shadowrunners with a wendigo "leader," where you are trying to find people to join your cannibal cult so that you can feed them to Wendy the Wendigo, along with jobs from the Johnsons. How many years of playing cyber spy magic ninja before this concept becomes appealing?

[Sengir]

Uhm, yeah, I assume

I think you made your assumption quite clear: Everybody plays the Infected as angsty crybaby goths.

And since there is no rule saying "don't play Infected as angsty crybaby goths" you deduct that the rules suck. Now, the rule "don't play streetsams as angsty crybaby goths" doesn't exist either, so when can we expect your rant about that archetype, or an arbitrary other one?

[Grinder]

So the part quoted from RC had "option" or "optional" or sth. similar as a header? Or do you need hard rules how a cannibalistic cult run by a Wendigo (PC or NPC) has to be brought into the game?

It didn't have a must, which is just as good. Something like a compulsion would have been necessary.

I'mn sorry, but I don't get what you're trying to say here (may be a translation issue).

[hermit]

I'm sorry, but I don't get what you're trying to say here (may be a translation issue).

Trying to say that the PC wendigo has nothing that - as has been canon before - forces the creature to engage in ritual cannibalism. He may engage in it, but he doesn't have to. The player can just decide his character is the Drizzt among the wendigo, who doesn't corrupt others because that is not nice, and thus become a viable PC (unlike the corruptor, who is guaranteed to stir up trouble in the group as he dooms and ultimatly eats all other PC). Also, the path of the nonconformist wendigo almost demands various angsty clichés, like the creature being persecuted on false premises despite being the only of a type of creature not being a monstrous corrupting cannibal cultist; angsting about the urges he has but brushes away to blend in and how little acceptance he gets by evil mainstream society and other, similar problems (not a 'must', either, though).

If the RC rules were designed with keeping canon in mind instead of streamlining by retconning, as they seem to me, there would at least be a compulsion (must form cannibal cult) flaw associated with the wendigo 'edge'.

But it would be weird and cool to play a group of shadowrunners with a wendigo "leader," where you are trying to find people to join your cannibal cult so that you can feed them to Wendy the Wendigo, along with jobs from the Johnsons. How many years of playing cyber spy magic ninja before this concept becomes appealing?

I'd rather switch to a system dedicated to that sort of game (possibly WoD of some kind or Cthulhu) than force this into shadowrun, which is designed not with this, but magic spy ninja mercenaries in mind. I'm not seen much of an appeal there, anyway, but that's personal taste.

@Sengir: Where does

Uhm, yeah, I assume the standard PC screen of protection and not wanting your own character to be shot in the face by other players, let alone not pissing the group off by fucking with their charactetrs, and the GM for shooting his campaign just because you absolutly HAD to play a wendigo.

(meaning why if one wants to play a wendigo it basically has to be dumbed down non cannibal hairy ghoul type wendigo that misses the central idea of being a wendigo) mean

Everybody plays the Infected as angsty crybaby goths.

Please explain.