QUOTE (mmmkay @ Apr 19 2010, 02:32 AM)

How do GMs decide the the response to lethality vs. non lethality?
Personal taste and the group. The big question is, do you want to spend game time asking about cleaning up fingerprints afterwards and shaving your head to avoid leaving DNA evidence? Most groups say no. To a degree, being SINless is supposed to address this - there's no record of you to match against.
QUOTE
Are the PCs suppose to clean up the evidence somehow? When is it acceptable to kill? What campaigns lean more towards lethality vs not? I've been having some trouble figuring this out and I'm not sure how this question varies on the pink mohawk (PM) scale. Any light on this topic would be wonderful.
Depends on the job, depends on the group. Who are you working against? A B-rated corp? Meh - you can be sloppy. A triple-A corp with a reputation for revenge? What are you stealing? Is there incentive for the corp to retrieve it? To exact punishment? Is the crime high-profile, or should it be kept quiet? I think not leaving evidence is almost always (note: almost) ideal, but at what cost?
If my group is doing a 'standard' run, they normally go to the level of using common firearms and picking up their brass. But very often the run is either necessarily smash and grab, without time to worry about evidence, or the sort of thing where the evidence gathered isn't on the runners, but on who hired them. So those concerns don't always apply.
I've had one runner have problems with killing, and it was with any killing other than self-defense. It's really an individual's choice. There are long discussions on whether it's better to kill or stun. I'll let you find those on your own

But that's a business decision.
QUOTE
Do shadowrunners feel guilt over murder? On one hand they are criminals, but on the other they are "human". Hence I'm guessing you see a spectrum that on average is more acceptable of murder. Does this change with setting and PM scale?
Depends on the character. Some characters are just too messed up to feel guilt. Generally I've never seen guilt from killing during self-defense, but outside of that, yes, it happens.
QUOTE
What type of police (insert correct terminology here) response is expected over a murder case? Who cares if it's a slummer or a corporate executive? Does that only depend on the level of influence of a character? Again how does PM scale and setting matter? And if a store clerk is murdered, do you send a few people to investigate the murder and then send a large enough force to deal with it if enough evidence is found?
Really depends on the 'who'. The bad guys in Shadowrun are motivated by the cold rationality of profit, tempered by inefficiency. If a slummer dies, there's no profit from pursuing it, so no money is really invested in it. If a mid-level exec dies, he's easily replaceable, but you have to consider deterrence. Find an ork in the barrens, try and punish him. If the president dies, the runners are clearly working for a larger power. That needs to be investigated. The runners are just tools - punishing them is like punishing a hammer. You are willing to crush them, but only because you're trying to get to the hand that wielded them.
IMO, whether PM or BT, that stands, more or less. The difference is in BT, they're more likely to be trying to deter the runners too, and there's more likely to be more convoluted politics, and better CSI methods brought to bear.
If a store clerk is murdered, that's an attack on a store, which is worth money. It must be deterred. Funny enough, I think Aztechnology would spend more money on finding the precise guy responsible for knocking over a Stuffer Shack (and making that guy's life living pain), than they would on finding the killer of a mid-level exec. If they have a squad of high-level guys sitting around on payroll doing nothing, I don't see any particular reason NOT to use them for that. There's no case the guy you're targeting is another mid-level exec

QUOTE
Or if you find out that the perps are SINless do you just bomb their house? How does that work and who takes over when it's the difference between SINners and SINless, or shadowrunners or not, or high vs. low notoriety, etc.?
Which costs more, bombing the house or sending some guys with shotties to bust in? Which one has a stronger deterrence effect? SINners don't exist. Do what you want with them. Collateral damage is fine. Just don't rile them up so much that they start rebelling. Anyone can pick on the SINless. Notoriety doesn't matter either, if you're SINless. You STILL don't exist.
QUOTE
What typical measures do runners make to remove evidence? Or do they just attempt to never generate evidence in the first place (seems ideal but not always possible)? Again setting, PM scale, etc. matter.
My group picks up their brass. I've had evidence collected (security tapes, for instance) be used to create a dossier and match them to other crimes, or used against them when they had the specific Hunted flaw. It's never been used for law enforcement running an investigation (usually because the people the runners ran against were also doing dirty work, or were spinning the incident to make it look intentional, so inviting LE would be bad).