Hi all,
I plan on DMing Missions at our local gaming group. I've read the Season 4 FAQ and the first mission of Season 3. Now, I remember some posters on this board claiming that mental spells and possession magic traditions are banned in missions, but could not find any ruling in the FAQ supporting these statements.

Are there special rulings regarding Missions that are not listed in the FAQ? If so, what are these rulings?

See this thread:
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35239

As far as I know, Bull briefly banned mental manipulation stuff, but ultimately decided not to put it in the final FAQ and just trust the GMs to handle it when it came up. At least, it appears so since the banning did not appear in the later final version of the FAQ.

There were a handful of cases where players were abusing the hell out of it, but slapping the entire playerbase for the actions of a few wasn't really a fair solution.




-k

Pretty much what Karma said.

It's something we've been bouncing around a while. But the thing is, the spells have some usefulness that isn't "abusive". They're good utility spells that, used in moderation, are cool things to have. And punishing everyone for a couple abusive players isn't really a cool thing to do, so ultimately we decided against that.

I still need to get an updated FAQ done (If nothing else, to cover some of teh new release books). I will likely be adding a bit about these areas of magic to clarify them a little bit when I do (Which means I need to find the time. Argh!) ...

1) Clarify that these spells are not particularly subtle, and that the target is aware of them. So you can't just mind screw Mr. Johnson and expect to get away with it. The Noticing spellcasting rules are in full effect for these.

2) No "PvP". There will be a blanket rule that in "Open Play" (Non-home games, such as Convention games and events at a CDT Firebase), you cannot use mental spells or possession against an unwilling PC, and that you should not deliberately attack, hack, or otherwise screw with another player.

I get so pissed off when i hear stories about someone sitting down at a table to play a game of Shadowrun with a bunch of strangers and they had a miserable time because some twinked out munchkin spent the whole game screwing over their character. Especially if they justify it by saying "It's in character".

Fuck. That. Noise.

In a home game, sure. Shadowrun isn't always fair, and players can be backstabbing assholes. But at an open game with a bunch of strangers, if your fun is coming at the expense of another players fun, you're doing it wrong. Everyone at the table should be able to enjoy the game. This goes doubly so for any game at a convention where someone may have paid $4-6 to play.

Things like this should be common sense and a part of common courtesy, but those are rare traits these days. Thankfully this doesn't seem to happen much, as i've only heard about a few instances. But teh fact taht they do happen annoys me. So we obviously have to add rules for such things.

Bull

Any new estimate of when that'll be?

I'm soooo glad to hear that you're taking this stand. Kudos!

Robert (aka Spanner aka Socket)

Me too. I come from LFR where the RPGA banned it. And it's how I've always played.

I've sat at enough tables where some builds seem to dominate game play (I've been the guilty party there), but at least when they did it was to the objective of successfully completing the mission. Players who get their rocks off screwing other players over need to grow up.

I'm not sure how I feel about that.

I'm reminded of Batman, a figure who's had an influence on most of my characters in some way, large or small.

Batman always wanted an edge on someone he worked with. Painting everything he owned yellow when he worked with Green Lantern, for instance.

Now, If I'm worried that the uncouth, paranoid, racist Dwarf rigger might go to far on a run and kill plenty of folk who didn't have it coming, why *shouldn't* I be able to put a backdoor into his comm-link? Even though he won't be attacking me, it's my nuyen, my rep, and my karma on the line.

The moment he starts, cut all contact with the guy and give him up, then continue the 'run without him.

'Runners like that give the job a bad name. Or you can call the Shadowrun and have a game of Dwarf Tossing.

You could.

You could also plan ahead, which tends to happen on most runs. It seems arbitrary to say that you cant plan around an unknown runner because it might hurt someone's feelings.

The issue is a juggling match between griefers and RPers that actually want to try the game, not just go on a murder spree.

If you want backstabbing and murder sprees, there's always Paranoia.

Yeah, that's a good point that I hadn't thought of; New players. I'd be a little worried if at my first game the hacker broke into my commlink "Just in case".

Exactly. Just as those commercials say, "Pick the game that's right for you."

Learn Shadowrun while playing nice, then learn to play dirty.

Then do things that make dirty look good in comparison.

But the second two should not be for convention play.

Playing an SRM Mission at a convention?

First chance you get, execute all your fellow runners and steal all their stuff. Fence what you can't use and giggle like a maniac when the GM signs your missions sheet...

You're taking Bull by the horns with that kind of idea.

I may have, um, in the past handed out friend-or-foe transponders for teammates to wear so my drones don't shoot them by accident.

At least that's what I called them. They did have such a function. The fact that they also had as much plastic explosive as I could pack into them is another issue.



Probably just as well that I never got to use that little feature.




-k

This is pretty clearly a situation where real-world humans-playing-games concerns override 'roleplaying purity'. Bravo, Bull.

I know that in certain new york missions this was impossible to avoid ...."Do this and dont let anyone else find out" ....ok well since I dont know who my team mates are working for I'll hack the Comlink so I can monitor the Com's and control the information coming out of it

IMO, a lot of the nonsense can be avoided by the GM stating, upfront, that everyone paid money to play the game, and that general doucebaggery, including PVP, will not be tolerated. Putting this into the FAQ goes a long way to begin fostering that attitute at conventions. I'm sorry to Mr. Doucebag who doesn't have a home game to screw around with, but don't bring it to a convention table.

Can you tell I feel strongly about this issue?

Robert (aka Spanner aka Socket)

Guys, it's just a "don't be a dick" rule. Do we really need to argue about a "don't be a dick" rule? Seriously?

Yes, we do. Because if people have a "Don't Be A Dick" rule in place, they'll be even bigger dicks because of it.

and of course, everyone will have different opinions on what constitutes 'a Dick'...

But it's a great stance for Bull to take. There are many players out there who can't have fun unless someone else at the table isn't having it.

You are also looking at this one sided: in a New York mission I had a player wan to screw over the Johnson for a secret contact goal. Pointing out that if my character caught him, he'd kill him for it was a legit response, IMO. I didn't want to PVP, but my character had a reputation as a successful professional. Screwing over the Johnson that hasn't screwed with you is something that can't happen. We avoided such a confrontation.

I agree with no PvP, but when you take away that option, you are now telling said DB player that they can do everything else and not worry about a player fragging them. Just another thought.