Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The false disadvantage
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
James McMurray
QUOTE
But aren't you on the side of 'It would be hell'?


I'm on the side of "GMs should put the PCs into positions that highlight their weaknesses. If that weakness is so blatantly glaring as a complete inability to function socially, then the challenge presented will most likely be such that it is hell."

If a character opted to have a 1 logic instead, then when the intellectual problems arose, they would be hell for him. A 1 in any stat, especially when coupled with the lack of skills to make up for it, will put that character into hellish positions that would otherwise just be a challenge.

Every moment of the game should not focus on that character's lack of social skills, because there's more to SR than that, and it isn't fair to the player(s). But neither should it be glossed over.
Brahm
QUOTE (Charon)
But aren't you on the side of 'It would be hell'?

Yes. Ironic I think. wink.gif
James McMurray
Now it spills over into another thread. Kinda sad really.
Charon
QUOTE (James McMurray @ Aug 2 2006, 10:16 AM)
QUOTE
But aren't you on the side of 'It would be hell'?


I'm on the side of "GMs should put the PCs into positions that highlight their weaknesses. If that weakness is so blatantly glaring as a complete inability to function socially, then the challenge presented will most likely be such that it is hell."

Hell implies extreme hardship so perhaps we're just not communicating well here.

Hell would be standing in front of the Steattle's most powerful oyabun and negotiating a life or death deal to get the Yakuza to accept apologies for a past slight on their honor. But under what contrived scenario would it fall on the Charisma 1 PC to lead that negociation!?

Normally when a PC who is socially inept has to handle a social challenge, it's because it has crept up on him despite his best effort. These challenges usually won't be 'hell'.

And they often can be handled by the PC's strenght if he is clever instead of by his weakness.

Say the Hacker with charisma 1 is confronted by a cop could hack the commlink and place an emergency call for the cop before he reach him. Eh. Smarter than trying to con him. Or the combat monster may simply opt to shut up and let the cop do his thing. If your Fake ID is solid and you weren't doing anything illegal at the time, it can be the easiest solution. Failing that, swiftly knock him out and commlink team mates to advise them that cops will be alerted in anywhere between right now (If incident witnessed by security cam) to 5 minutes (if no witness and cop simply fail to come in on the radio in a while). Or the Combat monster could signal the hacker and have him to the emergency call trick. With a magician present and some illusion you could even do something even fancier.

None of these solution are as elegant and efficient as a simple successful con/etiquette roll, but neither are we in hell by SR standard. But that kind of hardship happens to every runner. No one is so well rounded that he doesn't get caught in a situation were he has all the perfect competence at above the level required to succed that particular challenge.

The Face with 11 dice to roll on con and who still failed an important test which started an alert could rue his diminituve combat abilities but that's life in the shadows.

QUOTE
Now it spills over into another thread. Kinda sad really.


Am I missing something here?
Brahm
QUOTE (Charon @ Aug 2 2006, 10:39 AM)
Am I missing something here?

Nothing important, as his comment isn't relavent.
QUOTE
But that kind of hardship happens to every runner. No one is so well rounded that he doesn't get caught in a situation were he has all the necessary competence at above th elevl required to succed that particular challenge.

I agree, in a reasonably rounded game, that situations come up where one ability or another are nice to have. In trying to impose suffering or making things hell usually the GM has to artifically create single points of failure. Which are usually bad. Generally PCs get in trouble all by themselves, through some weakness or other. Especially if you aren't being a cruel GM and pouncing on any particular misstep, or nitpicking on "well this stat is a little low", it'll happen all by itself fairly quickly.

EDIT If a character has a goal they are heading towards or a played up personality trait that tends to be the challenge the player is interested in. Just busting chops aiming at a particularly low stat here or there loses focus on what the player is interested in.
James McMurray
Hell was perhaps a poor choice of words, since it isn't communicating my point. Rephrased:

QUOTE
I'm on the side of "GMs should put the PCs into positions that highlight their weaknesses. If that weakness is so blatantly glaring as a complete inability to function socially, then the challenge presented will most likely be such that it is much more difficult than it normally would be."

If a character opted to have a 1 logic instead, then when the intellectual problems arose, they would be much more difficult for him. A 1 in any stat, especially when coupled with the lack of skills to make up for it, will put that character into hellish positions that would otherwise just be a challenge.


Your ways around the situations are definitely good, and would work. They require more thought on the part of the player, are very situational, and as you said, aren't as easy as making a con/etiquette roll. Because of that, they indicate that having a low charisma will make life harder for you, especially if it's a situation where your other skills don't normally apply or would be a bad idea to use.

IMO the GM's duty is to mix in some challenge, some triumph, and some tragedy into every campaign; and do it all without railroading any of it. In many ways having a character or three in the party with huge glaring weaknesses is a good thign, because they make the challenges and triumphs more memorable.

Nobody remembers fondly the time the GM said "here comes a cop, roll etiquette" to the face. Everybody remembers the time the GM said "here comes a cop" and it turned into a running gunbattle because the character botched his etiquette test and decided to replace social skills with combat ones.
Charon
Well, I think that's that then. Not much to add. Seems we're in rough agreement.
Cain
QUOTE
You also have to remember that someone who is incompetent has to make tests for everyday things that the rest of us take for granted. Incompetent at software, make a Logic test to program your commlink.

That's a Computer test, which he may or may not have. Incompetence: Software means that he can't write programs. Unless he's a wageslave, that's probably not ever going to be much of a limitation.
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