Now, I understand I was rude to you previously Polaris.


I thought however, you might like to know of a game called Hackmaster which is produced by Kenzer and Company under liscence. Whatever else might be said about it, it's actually a game that takes great joy in insisting everything be held to a canonical standard of gameplay (at least for HMA members: HMGMA 1400 something!).

to back up zazen here, read the entry for "Oversimplification" On This Page. It shows this is a valid tool, especially in this circumstance.

Nephyte,

I consider this to be rude as well, at least by implication. I am well aware of Hackmaster, and I hate it for exactly the combative atmosphere it engenders. This is also one of my primary criticisms of Shadowrun as well. [That and the world and setting make no sense.....shadowrunners should not exist as independant contractors.]

That said, you can not simply push people aside, and hide from bad rules and pretend they don't exist. Bad rules do exist in SR....and in fact the game is full of them, and I have the right and obligation to point them out.

-Polaris

P.S. Zazen, the fallacy you are commiting is called "False Analogy" Tending fish has nothing to do with combat therefore it can not be used to attempt a Reductio ad absurbum. Done.

Bitbasher,

Why don't we wait until WizKids comes back with an answer before you get too proud (because Zazen is attempting a false analogy which should be obvious even to you).

I fully expect you to eat some crow when I do get the reply.

-Polaris

Actually, given the existence of so many multi-national corporations within x-square blocks of each other, each having its own territorial jurisdiction, the "class" or "caste" of shadowrunner or independent expediter would inevitably manifest.

Especially considering the weakened Federal government.

Now, do I think it likely that so many "street" level characters would make it up the ranks? Maybe, maybe not -- virtual training being what it is.

It's not unlike professional criminals of today; there are successful hitmen who have long and distinguished careers working for various "F"amilies that only get caught because of snitches and similar deals.

Never mind how many crimes go unsolved yearly (etc. etc. etc.)

-Siege

Siege,

Actually no. Given the canonical wealth and power of the A, AA, and AAA corps, and given the implicit understanding that low-grade industrial espionage/sabotage is an acceptable business tool, and especially given the lack of power of most national governments, Shadowrunners simply should not exist at least as written in the books.

Consider this: Why spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of nuyen on "criminals that do horrific things for money" (to paraphrase Villiars) when you can have your own security personal whose loyalty is more or less assured to do the same jobs?

At best you would use these criminals as bait which would cause the market for independants to dry up pretty damn quickly.

As for deniability, that problem is really a non-issue. Even today, national governments send covert military and intelligence teams against each other all the time, and diability is never an issue.....it is simply how the game is played and everyone knows it.

-Polaris

the argument here is not about combat, polaris, it's about rules. in combat--actual combat--your gear can and will be damaged or destroyed by any number of causes. personally, i think the idea that you can be hit with a force 6 powerball and expect your wood-and-string dreamcatcher to pull through unharmed is absurd enough without dragging the poor fish into it.

Corporate Download gives the "reason" for shadowrunners. The Corporate Court can punish any corporation that engages in espionage/sabotage against another corporation or government. Which is what happened to Fuchi.

Shadowrun is supposed to be ridiculous; it's a "dark" parody world of our own.

Well, venturing off-topic even more so....

The problem lies in motivational loyalty:

American Spec Ops do some pretty dangerous stuff. Why? Motivation. Be it patriotism, religion or the occasional snake-eating nut, they believe in what they do.

While no spec-op soldier ever considers himself expendable, they do realize the potential for capture, death, torture and so on. But they still do it.

Can you inspire such motivation from wage employees? Maybe, maybe not. But with the amount of money it would take for a corp to develop it's own spec ops, why not go the infinitely more expendable and expedient route of hiring someone who's either

a) already trained
b) experienced
c) has a verifiable track record

I've had the displeasure of taking a class from a born accountant and accountants run businesses today. They think in terms of profit and loss to the absolute exclusion of anything else. This frag characterizes _everything_ in terms of a "winning" or "losing" transaction. And the vast majority of transactions, according to his philosophy, are losing ones. I'm waiting for the day when an accounting degree is required for every tactical commander in the field or they have to justify spending a $1000 per shell to clear a forward position.

Ranting aside, I have no doubts that this accounting professor would see the feasibility in hiring ex-SEALs rather than trying to produce their own resources: recruiting, training, equipping and so on.

Although AA and AAA corps would invest the money in spec units for their own security -- easier to support, maintain and keep alive. As opposed to being deployed deep within enemy territory. Governments, being what they are, are infamous for loving to waste money.

Compare that to dropping say $20,000 on four or five people who don't know who you are, can't be traced back to you, will either provide all their equipment or buy it from the "payment" they're receiving...I think it ends up being a good deal.

Maybe not from the shadowrunner's long-term perspective, but not everyone thinks along those lines. (unless you get in the adept vs samurai argument)

-Siege

Edit: And KT's explanation works too.

Kanada-Ten,

The problem is one of enforcement. It is not in the best interests of Corps to go to the Corp Court because of runners. They are better off trying to turn those runners and return the favor.

This has nothing to do with whether or not you can "prove" they are from a corp or not....and I can tell you from modern covert missions sponsered by governments, that a good government agency (or AAA corp in SR) can generate enough "paper" to "prove" enough plausible deniability to hold up in any Corp Court procedure. Of course no other Corp will believe it, but that's not the point now is it?

In short, Corp Download left me very unimpressed because the reason doesn't hold water.

-Polaris

Edit to Siege,

The problem is that Spec-Ops are a proven commodity for Natl Governments and A+ corps would almost certainly want some of their own. The reason:

LOYALTY

You can not put a price tag on loyalty and that is precisely why Megacorps would use their own people (with cut outs) rather than people off the street. Hardened criminals off the street are not loyal to you and can easily turn in your hand. In addition, they actually cost *more* (in the long term) than your own teams.

In short, no one would use them except perhaps as bait. They wouldn't be trusted *because* of their competance (the more competant, the more dangerous and untrustworthy they are).

What zazen is trying to show has nothing directly to do with combat, nor what you emailed to FanPro. And for the purspose which he is drawing that parelell his analogy is perfectly valid. His issue is one of common sense.

Bitbasher,

1. Common sense is not common.

2. Common sense is often wrong.

-Polaris

Believe us Polaris, You have convinced me, and my others of that exact fact! rejoice!

Bitbasher,

You joke but I was being quite serious. That second point alone negates Zazen's entire argument.

Common sense is often wrong.

It is. The classic example is the "called shot" rule that allows you to bypass an armor spell.....and that is the rule.

When you start appealing to "common sense" in a rules discussion, you almost invariably have entered the realm of houserules.

-Polaris

Provided you are willing to spend a million dollars training someone who may get geeked the first time he twitches left instead of right.

I would also refer you to the criteria I listed:

1. experience
2. track record

Is this professional criminal willing to die for you? Maybe, maybe not. He'll certainly be motivated to stay alive since he knows that he has no recourse in court and his employer won't bail him out.

And if he betrays his employer, he'll find it difficult to get another job -- not that he will have the means of hurting his employer ("Yeah, it was some guy in a bar. Nice suit. Mr. Johnson. No, I'm not kidding...hey...watch those cattleAAAARRRGGGHHH!"). Not like a Renraku spec-op who spends a couple of weeks in intensive debriefing.

-Siege

Siege,

And how does a corp verify their "track" racord....and for that matter why would they bother? You are much better off using your own operatives whose training, records, experience, and reliability are known factors.

"Shadowrunning" occures today between major governments, and these teams are just as cutthroat as their fictional counterparts in SR.

No national government that I know of uses independents for any of these missions. They may be "independants" officially, but they really are not (plausible deniability) for exactly the reasons I have already mentioned.

Given that this is a proven technique (including plausible deniability) for governments, I see absolutely no reasons why megacorps with the budget and power of (and exceeding) a national government to do the same. In fact it seems likely to me.

-Polaris

Link, Polaris?

Kanada,

Look up the declassified missions of the CIA, KGB, and OSS sometime. In addition to that w/r/t the Corp Court, the fact they can use Mind Probe (although how they do that on a space station is beyond me), would be yet another reason why no megacorp would go to the Corp Court. Besides, all the corp has to do is supply plausible deniability. If politics rules the day anyway, then the corp really has nothing to worry about.

Zazen,

Actually you are incorrect. In many cases the lack of a rule is in fact a rule. Just wait and see what WizKids has to say. I think you will find that this is such a case.

-Polaris

I've gone to some length to explain why a corp might not want their employees deployed in covert, unofficial and deniable missions.

Of course, given the tech of 2060, it's entirely possible to create soldiers and operators who literally know no fear, have no memory after signing on the dotted line and will have their active memory wiped for the x number of years they served in the corp "special projects" division.

(Hey, an interesting reason to take Amnesia...)

I'll point out that governments are far more willing to "waste" money on sending Green Berets to do drug interdictions and spy missions than a bottom-line minded corp.

Silly question -- just how much practical knowledge do you have on national governments and their covert operations?

-Siege

Reducto ad absurdum isn't a large phrase, it's a rather common one. I fundamentally disagree with most of Polaris' points, but I have to defend his use of the phrase.
Though I still say it's a valid technique.

~J

Postscript: everywhere I look it seems to be spelled reductio, but yet I lost points on a latin test some time ago for spelling it that way instead of reducto... common error, or should I go argue for my points?

Is it just me, or does Polaris come across as the Gary Gygax of Shadowrun?

-Siege

Siege,

I can answer that to a degree. When I was in the US military, I reported to Ft. Meade MD although I was stationed in Alaska (officially).

That should be enough for those that are familiar with the US Alphabet soup.

-Polaris

He needs to quadruple his lexicon, then yeah.

And then once again Polaris, if a lack of a rule is in fact a rule, then since there are no rules on feeding tropical fish, then tropical fish cannot be fed?

Polaris,
What service?

Fine, Knowledge Skill; Fish Tendering. Default to intelligence if you don't have that particular skill.


I'd definitely say it doesn't require an active skill test Once you pass the knowledge skill test, the feeding should be quite simple.



As far as rulings go: That is perfectly defined within the rules. Any knowledge skill used without actually having a skill is a default to intelligence with a TN penalty. Fish Tendering is a perfectly acceptable knowledge skill as the book says anything can fit in the various categories and only proceeds to give a few examples rather then an exhaustive listing.

Destroying things is pretty well covered in the rules too. The question is does Powerball destroy your cloths and you? The answer is: it can.

Seville,

I was officially assigned to the 6981 ESG (USAF) in Elemdorf.

-Polaris

Kanada,

Actually, it can not going by the strict reading of canon. However, a Powerball can destroy a pile of cloths next to you. That is why Fireball is used instead of Powerball in many cases...because it can destroy some items.

-Polaris

Powerball would consider your cloths a valid target because they are physical and in sight of the mage.

Kanada,

I will concede that the canonical rules can be read that way. However, that assumes that you treat your items as seperate from yourself, and that is not the way the combat system is geared. The moment you no longer possess an item, it is not part of you and thus a seperate (and valid) target. If you do possess it, then it is considered part of you. At least that is how I read the combat system (and I feel I am on fairly firm ground on this).

In addition to all of that, bear in mind that the errata I quoted does apply to Powerball, and most items are considered technological at best (OR and many would most likely be considered highly processed (certainly ballistic cloth should be since it is plastic) and that is OR 10.

That means you need a power 5 Powerball (which is no joke drain wise) just to cast the bloody thing, and it would be highly unlikely to affect those objects in any case even going by your interpretation. I also note that if do use your interpretation then no mage will use a Powerball because it can destroy the very items that the runners may need to get clues from (like the terminal in the office to name one example).

-Polaris

Electronic Security, Air Force Intel and independent reporting to the NSA on a PACAF base.

One more question: were you an officer or enlisted.

Let me know if you need a helping hand.

Zazen,

Actually Nephyte is right and made the point much better than I. W/r/t knowledge skills, there are standard target numbers and numbers of successes for average tests, easy tests, hard tests, etc etc.

Feeding Fish would be an easy test, which would require a TN of 2 (and one success) of the Knowledge, Fish Tendering skill. That would require a TN 6 (just one) on an Int check. All of this is strictly canonical....including the guidelines for the GM.

-Polaris

That's ok with the Powerball 5, I'd just use a feitish

Seville,

I was enlisted at the time. Used the service to help me finish my degree and pay for graduate school. After a few years with NSA, I had enough (and refused to come back as an officer after I got my degree).

I am doing fine right now but thanks for asking. Anything else. I have given as much of my bona fides as really should (you understand I hope). Everyone else will have to either believe me or not.

-Polaris

Zazen,

If the fish are exotic, then up the difficulty. The point is that such rules exist in canon....which means your reducto ad absurbum fails.

-Polaris