Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Tough Calls
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
This is a very interesting thread. Congratulations.

Now, I would not throw -or carry- any grenades. My character most certainly would. wink.gif
Do you know what I mean? It's a character call, not a player vs. player issue. If the latter happens, well, I believe those situations should be solved outside the gaming table. But I'm straying off-topic. I shall return to it.

Given the tactical situation, the characters I have played would have thrown the grenade. (but none of them ever carried one) -a mage, -a japanese street samurai and an elven hitman. BTW the elven hitman did kill another (rather suspicious) party member just to make a point. The player was a little surprised, but after a little OOC chat, everything has been fine. The rest of the group -as characters- shared my suspicions but were stll shocked at the elf's radical solution to the problem. No players were offended. I just play Shadowrun with my friends, though.

I do not like playing with people who uses Shadowrun to unleash their most sociopathic impulses at the cost of the rest of the gaming group. On the other hand, high morals and concern for other people's lives is not a shadowrunner essential.

I think that what defines a shadowrunner group -as oppossed to an heroic fantasy adventuring party or a conniving group of black hearted vampires- is professionalism. From that point of view, it is not a good shadowrunning decision to kill without thinking and/or recklessly endanger the lives of other team members on a whim. Other people won't work with you, or take it personally, anyway, it makes bad rep. At the same time it is not professional to put yourself, the client and the rest of your team in a (more) dangerous situation because you were too cautious.

Making such tough calls requires some tactical assessment plus the personality, history and moral values of the character in the situation. If any of the characters actually playing in my group had been there I am quite sure that they all would have thrown the grenade like the subject there did. (though not cheerfuily, and all would also have taken immediate measures to heal, reanimate or at least pay some respects to their endangered team mate)

Except for my friend Dominguez' samurai, who, had he been in such situation, would have mowed the guards down, rescued his friend unscathed and reloaded in the first surprise phase. wobble.gif


QUOTE (Lucifer @ Nov 16 2005, 09:41 PM)
There's really nothing wrong with missing the point, as long as you're having fun, but when posting on a message board dedicated to a game you generally have to assume that most people there play to the genre (or close enough).

I'm implying that something is very amiss in the assumption that a party of evil characters cannot be taking part in a heroic fantasy [in the role of heros]. Primarily in the form of meaning #1, though the others may apply as well.

Now if you talk in generalities of the genre how the stories are actually done you invariably start getting into novels, and there-in can lie a problem. For example there is a disconnect between the tone of SR novels, and the tone of SR rules with the level of what is sometimes called "grit". The published offical SR adventures sitting generally on a spectum between those.

Yes, in times past AD&D was offically Evil = NPC only. But you'll also notice that with D&D 3e the main rules changed tone on the subject of the Neutral-Evil boundry.

Certainly today the term "hero" tends to have a nice, fuzzy warm connotation tag reading 'Good' attached to it. But then again that shouldn't be surprising in a culture dominated by a Christian background where the only one at the god level is the ultimate source of 'Good'. However that is more out of step in a world in which there is a pantheon. Especially so if the pantheon has top dog(s) that are ascribed more human frailties.

I'm named after the star, not any supernatural manifestation of evil.  Any attempt to imply otherwise will be subject to full legal reprecussions of libel or slander as appropriate the situation!

Yes, well that is where the misunderstanding about supernatural manifestation of evil took hold as well. smile.gif
Kyoto Kid
This is an interesting concept

Normally I am not into blatant PC vs. PC play (that is what Halo is better suited for). I agree with most posts on this thread to pitch the grenade, particularly since it is concussion instead of anti personnel.

Admittedly, the idea of Good Vs. Evil is a hazy subject in the shadowrun world. Runners for the most part are mercenaries, primarily in it for the Nuyen and Karma. A few PCs (such as the Earth Mother Shaman, Miste in my campaign) do have a special agenda based but it is primarily based on their totems or beliefs.

Even my character Leela, who other players took as being so sweet and innocent, had a very dark past. Before becoming a runner, she was a demolitionist with the Croatian Resistance and was responsible for a fair amount of Sabotage which earned her a less than favourable reputation with the Serbs (though she was only known by a codename). When she entered the shadows (after being extracted from the Balkans) she still shot people & blew up buildings, considering running to be an extension of her fight for her people's freedom. Her motive was to make enough money to help support the resistance effort back home and to try and figure out who may have been backing the Serb occupation. In a sense, she had "good" intentions even though she was committing questionable acts to support them.

In the end, she voluntarily retired from shadowrunning, because one of her contacts (the mercenary who who extracted her from Croatia) was systematically hunting down the runner team she was with. There was a very nasty confrontation in which several people (both NPCs and PCs) were either badly wounded or killed. Seeing this made her realise that she did not want to be the cause of any more deaths and in the session that followed she gathered both partied together to tell them she was quitting to go back to her true calling as a concert pianist. It was tough choice, for she had only been a runner for about 6 months of real time and was a real blast (sorry...) to play. The other characters also liked her very much and were actually sorry to see her go. In the scheme of things however, it made absolute sense. Afterwards, the Mercenary group and runner team agreed to cease the fighting each other and went their own ways.

Instead of "good" the term "noble" fits better here. Leela does not have any regrets for her past, and as an NPC in the "Rhapsody" arc, still was fiercely loyal and committed to her beleaguered homeland. The only thing different is that instead of committing acts of sabotage, she now uses her concertising to both inspire her countrymen and help fund several relief efforts she has set up.
My initial reaction was the captured player was dead when he was taken prisoner. He may face a fate worse than death, but thus far he has cheated death. The GM gave him a second chance and made the plot more interesting, and set the potential for another rescue mission. But the captured character gave up control of his character with his freedom. He lives at the whim of others.

The only way this reaction gets trashed is if your group sees surrender/being caught as a viable option. I know many groups that have a no surrender attitude, just wondering if yours is an exception.
For me, this is not a tough call.

You're staring down 6-7 NPCs who are of unknown quality. If you do not throw the grenade, you are probably dead and the whole mission is fragged. You're certainly not going to take out their whole team with a single pistol.

The answer is simple to me: you toss the grenade, and pray for your teammate.
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Nov 16 2005, 07:34 PM)
He was unwounded. Under the initial assumption that the walls were Structural Material, estimated damage code was 58M Stun, staged by rolling half Power against TN 4, with damage stageable into physical.

Hmm, how exactly do you interpret the rules on this one?

The way I'm interpreting it is you stage up the stun damage to deadly, and deadly overdamage is the part that overflows into physical (1 box of physical per two successes). Staging up stun damage doesn't let you start staging up on the physical track, it requires you to use deadly overdamage (at least as I read it), see sr3.126.

With the way I interpret, with 58M, you could have at most 29 successes on the damage, which will result in 12 boxes of overflow into physical (burn four staging up to deadly stun, leaving 25, divide by two, round down). That will only instantly kill a character with a body of one. And that would only be in the most pathological case; two less successes will never kill anyone who's uninjured. Anyone else will be hurting, but not dead.

Am I misinterpreting?

EDIT: And nick is correct -- body 2.
Umm... it'll kill everyone with a Body of 2.
QUOTE (Vaevictis)
Hmm, how exactly do you interpret the rules on this one?

It's been long enough that I don't remember the original source (whether interpretation of rule, house rule, optional rule, or "I stayed up too late several days in a row and imagined I'd read this somewhere", which does happen from time to time), but we stage Lstun-Mstun-Sstun-Dstun-Lphys-Mphys-Sphys-Dphys for non-melee stun overdamage (since melee already kicks power with extra successes).

am i the only one that can just pick up the book?
QUOTE (page 125 SR3)
If damage is stun, it carries over into the physical column.
(reference thecondition monitor in the bottom corner)
That's half of what I base my ruling on. However, there are only two provisions for doing more than ten boxes in a single attack that I can cite—one is the overdamage rules, and the other is naval damage. The rules you cite are, by themselves, useful only if there's already some Stun on the condition monitor.

[quote SR3, page 126]
Deadlier Over damage Over damage is simply damage created by extra successes afte a weapons damage level has been staged up to D. Every 2 successes translate into 1 additional damage point, which is applied againist the targets physical condition monitor (if the attack cuased deadly stun damage) or body overflow (if the attack caused deadly physical damage.)

now, maybe i'm confused, but i dont get the problem. You take stun damage, and over flow into the physical, which is also causes a deadly physical wound, but theres still damage to go, so it goes into body overflow. I'm not one thats just gonna wipe damage away because one line filled up.
QUOTE (Aku @ Nov 18 2005, 12:48 PM)
QUOTE (SR3 @  page 126)

Deadlier Over damage Over damage is simply damage created by extra successes afte a weapons damage level has been staged up to D. Every 2 successes translate into 1  additional damage point, which is applied againist the targets physical condition monitor (if the attack cuased deadly stun damage) or body overflow (if the attack caused deadly physical damage.)

now, maybe i'm confused, but i dont get the problem. You take stun damage, and over flow into the physical, which is also causes a deadly physical wound, but theres still damage to go, so it goes into body overflow. I'm not one thats just gonna wipe damage away because one line filled up.

And that is an optional rule that groups can use to avoid some ridiculous results. SR3.126, first paragraph under Deadlier Over-Damage, where you cited the last paragraph.
Been reading the stories on this thread a bit, and I am in the camp of 'it depends on the character'. I mean, most of the folks i game with don't play out and out cold people (ie, teammate captured, they are all in a car, throw frag grenade in window kind of cold), but the concussion grenade(yeah, stun damage is nasty too)...isn't there a way to sort of 'off center' the grenade to prevent the maximum damage(blast radius), or is the room just too small? I might have passed over the post with the room dimensions...and i can't quite remember the blast radius on an IPE concussion grenade.(I remember defensive had less blast radius)...but in a 3 meter by 3 meter room that ain't gonna matter i suppose.

Again, wether i'd throw the grenade depends on the character. One of my current characters would not do it...being a Wolf shaman he protects his 'pack'...he's be more likely to try the Stunball in a desperate situation instead(less damage, really no chance of killing the teammate there), but if your char doesn't have that...but he wouldn't do anything that could possibly affect the teammate's life.

Now, my adept, with a more 'the strong survive' kind of attitude, would have done thrown the grenade and cross his fingers that the teammate survived.

The Good vs. Evil discussion is also interesting...Ive played pretty 'noble' runners before, that when one caused his first death(in a kill or be killed situation), he felt bad for a VERY long time(a Troll critter hunter that had no like of fighting people.) Esa(my Wolf shaman), doesn't go out of his way to harm folks either...but like the totem...a wolf won't kill unless it's for food or self defense...he looks at it as a sort of natural selection...but he still will try to incapacitate human opponents instead...unless it's sort of the 'trapped animal' scenerio. (Or he fails the test of the Berserk.) But he takes no pleasure of killing people...with the few exceptions of Polluter toxic shamans.

Simen, the black magic adept on the other hand, has a bit less qualms about going lethal in a fight. Not with lowly street punks or anything, or bouncing people, but he definatly has a darker view on life and tends to think people who just won't let up are asking for it anyway. Then again, he actually gets satisfaction about scaring the bejeesus out of them with his massive(and improved) Intimidation skill instead. Of course, some may argue that scaring someone to the point of trauma is even MORE cruel than plugging them clean. I suppose this is where the whole good/evl thing comes up with him...what's more sadistic, being neutral during a lethal fight, or actually enjoying someone being so scared they pee themselves and never mess with you, or anyone again?

But back to the scheduled program...yeah, risking party members is tough, but look at A. Character and B. Is there REALLY no other options?
am i the only one that can just pick up the book?

It could be that you're also one that picks up the book without actually reading it.

If you look in the actual book, the place where it says that damage overflows from stun into physical is in the *application* of damage, NOT in the staging.

In fact, if you look in the deadlier over damage section, there is a distinct implication that direct staging from stun to physical is NOT the default behavior:

QUOTE (SR3.126)
Over-damage is simply damage created by extra successes after a weapon's Damage Level has been staged up to D.  Every two extra successes translate into 1 additional Damage Point, which is applied against the targets Physical Condition Monitor (if the attack caused Deadly Stun Damage) or Body Overflow (if the attack caused Deadly Physical Damage).

The implication is that the overflow from Stun to Physical in the "Applying Damage" section only applies after staging (with the exception of the Deadlier Over-Damage optional rule). The section begins with: "Once the damage has been staged, the target character is subject to any damage that remains." (sr3.125), and if you look in the section on Staging Damage (sr3.114) doesn't say anything at all about staging damage across types.

The reason that I asked is because I am obviously not the strongest in rules-fu, and was curious how people came to conclusions other than mine.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012