Full Version: Bloodlust and "On The Run"
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| And we know that generally speaking your average wageslave has a ( Connection Rating 2 ). |
Meaning? Nothing.
It doesn't specifiy the people he knows, neither in exact quality nor quantity.
It only tells us what dice he would have if he's asked to network for someone else.
But it's a) about himself and b) he's dead.
| QUOTE (Ravor @ Jul 2 2007, 11:14 PM) |
| I don't know, although I strongly disagree with toturi's stance that the rules should trump the presented fluff and generally speaking don't like the sample NPCs in the book either, I do think his idea has some merit. And we know that generally speaking your average wageslave has a ( Connection Rating 2 ). |
Bear in mind, that fluff is actually manifestation of certain instances of the rules. The rules do not trump the fluff, so much as the fluff is a reflection of the rules.
| QUOTE |
| Meaning? Nothing. It doesn't specifiy the people he knows, neither in exact quality nor quantity. It only tells us what dice he would have if he's asked to network for someone else. But it's a) about himself and b) he's dead. |
Hence reverse-extrapolating from Networking(which is IMO better than House Ruling out of whole cloth). An inverse-Network if you will. And inverse-Favor.
Well it means that your average wageslave would have a dicepool of 4-5 if asked to network with someone so it does give us a general idea of what type of people he could have realibly gotten in touch with while alive so it gives us an abstract idea of how far his "social web" extends. (And considering that being dead should be worth a negative modifier it doesn't look too good for Joe Wageslave's chances.)
Of course don't get me wrong, if a DM has decided that Employee x123786a-0 is having an affair with his boss or that he has a brother who is a Lonestar detective or that he was working on some important project that stood to make the corp millions then by all means that is part of the story, but using the networking rules would prevent the DM from having to change the world after the fact for the sole purpose of punishing the players for doing something he doesn't like.
*Edit*
Well toturi personally I view the rules as serving as a reflection of the fluff, and not the other way around. Of course it's an imperfect reflection at best.
Of course don't get me wrong, if a DM has decided that Employee x123786a-0 is having an affair with his boss or that he has a brother who is a Lonestar detective or that he was working on some important project that stood to make the corp millions then by all means that is part of the story, but using the networking rules would prevent the DM from having to change the world after the fact for the sole purpose of punishing the players for doing something he doesn't like.
*Edit*
Well toturi personally I view the rules as serving as a reflection of the fluff, and not the other way around. Of course it's an imperfect reflection at best.
The networking rules only tell us that middlemen (the ones we are interested in) are handled like connections - not what connection ratings those have. And no, the initial connection rating doesn't matter.
So you have to make those up.
So you have to make those up.
Not entirely, we can use the connection rating table to get a general idea of who has what connection rating.
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| *Edit* Well toturi personally I view the rules as serving as a reflection of the fluff, and not the other way around. Of course it's an imperfect reflection at best. |
To me, fluff can only be a certain instance of a rule. For example, a street sam making a 100 ft jump from 1 building to another. That could be the result of his using his Edge. In another example, said street sam could fall down the stairs, well, he Critical Glitched. If you view it the other way around, then how do you know which rule is going to be responsible for which result?
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| Not entirely, we can use the connection rating table to get a general idea of who has what connection rating. |
Sure, you know what the dead wageslave had for connection rating.
That does not determine the connection rating of his connections...
The networking section does say you can modify the roll based on the relationship. I don't think it's unreasonable to think a dead wageslave with a crime lord brother might get a few extra dice for his beyond the grave request to be avenged.
But I suppose it might be easier for some people if we had a full page chart for this.
But I suppose it might be easier for some people if we had a full page chart for this.
| QUOTE (Cellshade) |
| Hey all! I'm GMing a new SR4 game. I've got six players, half of which are brand new to Shadowrun. For the very first session, I ran "Food Fight". After the group beat the gang in the supermarket, one of the players (the physad) walked over to the sole surviving gang member, who was unconscious on the ground, and shot her in the back of the head execution style. The character was described to me as cold and professional, so I understood this action, even if it was a bit ruthless. I wasn't expecting everyone to play gung-go good guys. Here's the problem. The group has a character with a conscience. At our next session, this character (the group's Body 2, almost no firearms, not-at-all-a-physical-threat technomancer) set the video of the execution to loop on the AR display of everyone in the group, basically taunting the character that did it. At this point, the physad character basically went psycho. He started screaming at the technomancer to turn off the video. I informed the player that the technomancer had not hacked his commlink or anything, he was just sending over a video file, and that he could turn it off on his own at any time. The player basically ignored this and insisted that it was "not the point". When the technomancer had the video zoom in a bit to emphasize his point (he was upset over the needless killing), the physad pulled out a gun and shot him twice. Shot someone, that according to backstory, has been his teammate for months now, and he did it just because they got into a shouting match. The technomancer only survived by spending Edge on his damage resistance tests. After this, basically everyone in the group decided they could never trust this guy again. He basically went off the deep end over a tiny argument and almost killed a teammate because of it. It caused a lot of bad OOC vibes and arguments at the table. Am I wrong to be upset about the situation? The player of the physad described his character to me as a calm professional, but he portrayed him as a trigger-happy psychopath that shoots people at the slightest provocation. From my perspective, it looked like he wanted to make sure all the other players knew how much ass he could kick so that he could threaten them into doing things his way. He could have easily avoided the entire situation by calmly explaining his reasons for doing what he did to the character that was upset over it. What do I do with someone like this? In any case, the physad is now an NPC, and the player is drawing up a new character that will hopefully work a bit better with the group. How do I allow the players to have the elements of selfish individualism that are appropriate to SR without them shooting each other all the time? -- On another topic, I was running the first part of "On The Run". The group was supposed sneak into a concert and get an email off the commlink of a rockstar while the guy was busy performing onstage. The players pretty much thought doing things during the concert would be too difficult and decided to snag the info when the guy wasn't performing and was logged onto the Matrix. As far as I could tell, the book didn't account for the possibility of not going to the concert at all. They used their contacts to find out what hotel the rockstar was at, and then the group's technomancer (using help from a sprite) was able to breeze through the network, hack the commlink, and get the info all by himself. Is this just a failing of the book, or was I missing something that should have required them to go to the concert? |
Its your campaign. It sounds like a good idea from the players.
The rocker might not be staying in a Hotel. If I remember right his old gang was providing security, so he might be staying with them. Who is to say that he is in an area with matrix axcess. Trying to discourage good ideas that the party likes never really sets well. Besides writes can't think of everything.
When writing a campaign, the writers come up with something that the think the players will enjoy, helps to set the scene, or tell a backstory. Something that the players might not be interested in. Going to the concert might have also been seen as the easiest means to each end. Also this scene gives the non-combatant non-hacker/tm a chance to shine.
So let us get back on track.
This is why I have a love-hate relationship with modules (sorry, I'll be off topic a bit here). To really run one well in an existing campaign, you have to get intimate knowledge of the entire module's concept, as well as all the details and thread your own campaign through it so it really hooks together tightly.
I know that I often read through a module 3-5 times until it feels like I have written it myself. I often have to change a lot of the NPCs and settings to make it mesh with my own campaign...but again, I like continuity when I put things out for my players, so modules end up being a quick shortcut to an idea, but I think I end up putting more work into a module adventure than one I create myself.
So, back to topic, players can be selfish and individuals, but out of game, you have to make sure the player still realizes its a group effort and they need to play within those confines. Again, I don't have issues with players fighting in-character (and even a little out of character), but the end result should still be to move forward and have fun.
I am hoping in this case, the physad being an NPC, that your player will have a new lease on life at becoming a solid member of the group. The whole fact that he shot the TM in the face when his background was setup that these two were pretty good friends, or at least have run together quite a bit, tells me that this was a lot more an out of character problem than anything else.
I know that I often read through a module 3-5 times until it feels like I have written it myself. I often have to change a lot of the NPCs and settings to make it mesh with my own campaign...but again, I like continuity when I put things out for my players, so modules end up being a quick shortcut to an idea, but I think I end up putting more work into a module adventure than one I create myself.
So, back to topic, players can be selfish and individuals, but out of game, you have to make sure the player still realizes its a group effort and they need to play within those confines. Again, I don't have issues with players fighting in-character (and even a little out of character), but the end result should still be to move forward and have fun.
I am hoping in this case, the physad being an NPC, that your player will have a new lease on life at becoming a solid member of the group. The whole fact that he shot the TM in the face when his background was setup that these two were pretty good friends, or at least have run together quite a bit, tells me that this was a lot more an out of character problem than anything else.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Sure, you know what the dead wageslave had for connection rating. That does not determine the connection rating of his connections... |
I have to disagree, because once we know Joe Wageslave has ( Networking 5 ) then we can roll the dice and determine the connection rating of whoever cares about Joe's murder. With an average networking dicepool of 4-5 then unless there are some modifiers most of the time anyone who might care is unlikely to have any real power to do anything about it. Of course as you've said, do the runners really want to take the chance that Joe might roll really well with his 5 dice?
| QUOTE (toturi) |
| To me, fluff can only be a certain instance of a rule. For example, a street sam making a 100 ft jump from 1 building to another. That could be the result of his using his Edge. In another example, said street sam could fall down the stairs, well, he Critical Glitched. If you view it the other way around, then how do you know which rule is going to be responsible for which result? |
I'm not sure that I quite understand what you're getting at, because I'm fairly sure that I figure out what rule goes with what fluff the same way you would, the only real difference is when the fluff and the rules disagree I tend to try to figure out how the rules should be tweaked to come into line with the fluff whereas you would tweak fluff to come into line with the rules.
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| I have to disagree, because once we know Joe Wageslave has ( Networking 5 ) then we can roll the dice and determine the connection rating of whoever cares about Joe's murder. |
He's not making a Networking test for someone else from the grave - he's making a Negotiations test to convince his connections, which subsequently make networking tests themselfes.
But that doesn't determine the ratings of those connections. Those are entirely up to the gamemaster
| QUOTE (Ravor) | ||
I'm not sure that I quite understand what you're getting at, because I'm fairly sure that I figure out what rule goes with what fluff the same way you would, the only real difference is when the fluff and the rules disagree I tend to try to figure out how the rules should be tweaked to come into line with the fluff whereas you would tweak fluff to come into line with the rules. |
I would know that rule A would produce result K that would cause X fluff. But there are many ways to arrive at result K sometimes - Mr Lucky and Mr Social Adept both can produce similar results. You read a piece of fluff stating that Joe Blow did the Don's mom and made the Don his best friend, you'd think borken Social Adept, but maybe he is just a very lucky dog. There is very little fluff that cannot be rooted within the rules. Most of the time I see people tweaking the rules because they want the rules to produce a consistent result that fits their concept of the fluff, not that the rules cannot produce the result in the first place.
Rotbart van Dainig no if you want your contact to put you in touch with someone then that contact has to be able to make a networking test with a threshold equal to the person's connection rating in order to see if he knows enough people to make the connection you asked for.
So by making a networking test we do know the maxium possible connection rating that our dead wageslave could have gotten in touch with, either directly or through a friend of a friend.
I suppose that it makes sense to also throw in a quick negotiations test to see how far the contacted person actually cares about our dead wageslave and if you really wanted to you could even repeat the process using the new guy's dicepools although I think that would bog the game down too much to be viable.
toturi sure I agree. The difference is that I believe that the rules should provide results similair to the fluff the majority of the time.
After all I play Shadowrun for its style and to a lesser extent, the setting. If Shadowrun Fifth Edition was converted to d20 then I would still buy the sourcebooks for the fluff even if I had no use for the rules at all, it's the same as when I buy a GURPS book, I'm not going to use the GURPS ruleset, but they do write some damn good fluff.
So by making a networking test we do know the maxium possible connection rating that our dead wageslave could have gotten in touch with, either directly or through a friend of a friend.
I suppose that it makes sense to also throw in a quick negotiations test to see how far the contacted person actually cares about our dead wageslave and if you really wanted to you could even repeat the process using the new guy's dicepools although I think that would bog the game down too much to be viable.
toturi sure I agree. The difference is that I believe that the rules should provide results similair to the fluff the majority of the time.
After all I play Shadowrun for its style and to a lesser extent, the setting. If Shadowrun Fifth Edition was converted to d20 then I would still buy the sourcebooks for the fluff even if I had no use for the rules at all, it's the same as when I buy a GURPS book, I'm not going to use the GURPS ruleset, but they do write some damn good fluff.
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| if you want your contact to put you in touch with someone then that contact has to be able to make a networking test with a threshold equal to the person's connection rating in order to see if he knows enough people to make the connection you asked for. |
Indeed. Which requires you to have defined initial Contacts. Thanks for agreeing with that.
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| So by making a networking test we do know the maxium possible connection rating that our dead wageslave could have gotten in touch with, either directly or through a friend of a friend. |
Wrong. We would know the initial connection rating of the first intermediary. Subsequent networking tests go from the last intermediary.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Indeed. Which requires you to have defined initial Contacts. Thanks for agreeing with that. |
No it doesn't, when you roll someone's Networking Pool to see if they can contact someone then by default that means you have not stated out their initial contacts. We are aren't talking about a NPC Runner here, we are talking about a NPC who at best would be classed as a Goon and I'm talking about rolling the dead wageslave's networking pool not his imaginary contacts which we both know that no DM is really going stat out in advance.
Now if you want to simply use you DM fiat to alter your universe in order to punish the players for doing something you didn't like, then by all means you are still free to do that even if you adopt this proposed system.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Wrong. We would know the initial connection rating of the first intermediary. Subsequent networking tests go from the last intermediary. |
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| I suppose that it makes sense to also throw in a quick negotiations test to see how far the contacted person actually cares about our dead wageslave and if you really wanted to you could even repeat the process using the new guy's dicepools although I think that would bog the game down too much to be viable. |
(Boldfacing added.)
*Edit*
Although given the odds unless you are very lucky rolling each link would probably produce either equal or worse results then simply going with the first roll, plus the first time you fail the negotiations test you proposed the daisychain ends and the person simply doesn't care enough to be bothered by Joe Wageslave's death.
*Edit*
Although given the odds unless you are very lucky rolling each link would probably produce either equal or worse results then simply going with the first roll, plus the first time you fail the negotiations test you proposed the daisychain ends and the person simply doesn't care enough to be bothered by Joe Wageslave's death.
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| No it doesn't, when you roll someone's Networking Pool to see if they can contact someone then by default that means you have not stated out their initial contacts. |
Sure, but adapting this for initial use is a houserule - the RAW does not specify the situation.
That's all I'd like to point out - at some point you either fiat some connections, or you adapt a rule to do determine them randomly...
| QUOTE (Ravor) |
| Although given the odds unless you are very lucky rolling each link would probably produce either equal or worse results then simply going with the first roll, plus the first time you fail the negotiations test you proposed the daisychain ends and the person simply doesn't care enough to be bothered by Joe Wageslave's death. |
Which, on average, is perfectly fitting, don't you think?
But we are talking about the exception.
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Edit: Also, "a PCs raping other PCs, yes or no?" vote seems completely unnecessary to most groups, but it is. Just trust me on that one. It is very important to a clear "don't rape other player's characters" rule at the beginning of the campaign, especially if there are any female players with female characters. Unless the female players are into that kind of thing, of course. I cannot stress strongly enough that many good campaigns have been ruined because this issue wasn't properly addressed before things got out of hand. |
Really? With whom you are really playing? There has been at least one female player with female characters for about 15 years in our group and there has never been a situation that came even close to anyone raping her (no matter the game). On the other hand our group may be capable of wanton killing but not for raping anyone. Even sex is very scarce issue, even today... Maybe that's why that raping thing has never come up.
To answer the original question I really agree that the adept was not anywhere professional. He was more like cyberpsycho to me than a professional runner or even professional killer.
I agree that the TM's recording was kind of a hot potato and compromising to the character but if his character was such a pro he could have handled the situation differently. Like talk it over and if it came to extortion then cap the TM.
Anyway executing a helpless ganger is not that professional in my book but on the other hand I don't know exactly what the situation was. Why it was important to kill that last surviving ganger?
I agree that the TM's recording was kind of a hot potato and compromising to the character but if his character was such a pro he could have handled the situation differently. Like talk it over and if it came to extortion then cap the TM.
Anyway executing a helpless ganger is not that professional in my book but on the other hand I don't know exactly what the situation was. Why it was important to kill that last surviving ganger?
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Sure, but adapting this for initial use is a houserule - the RAW does not specify the situation. That's all I'd like to point out - at some point you either fiat some connections, or you adapt a rule to do determine them randomly... |
True, I didn't intend to imply that this fit the letter of RAW, I happen to think that it does fit within the spirit of the networking rules and serves to play out your example of "unoffically offical" revenge however.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
| Which, on average, is perfectly fitting, don't you think? But we are talking about the exception. |
Yeah it is fitting, but as a point of clarification I've been agruing from the perspective of what is normal.
| QUOTE (Ikirouta) | ||
Really? With whom you are really playing? There has been at least one female player with female characters for about 15 years in our group and there has never been a situation that came even close to anyone raping her (no matter the game). On the other hand our group may be capable of wanton killing but not for raping anyone. Even sex is very scarce issue, even today... Maybe that's why that raping thing has never come up. |
It has never happened in a game that I've played, but it has happened.
http://www.tasteslikephoenix.com/articles/women.html
In most groups, it wouldn't even be considered. But, it is important enough to deserve mention, particularly when interplayer boundaries are already being violated.
It seems to me that if you're hanging out with the sort of people where you need to lay down a "Raping over PCs, yes or no?" ground rule, to be voted on and for the group to go with the majority's opinion, maybe you're hanging out with the wrong people and need to get a new circle of friends, anydamnedways.
But if the female players vote "hell yes", then maybe your hanging out with the right people.
There is, of course, a difference between grit and playing out sexual fantasies. We can assume that, in a gritty game, the PCs will suffer some abuse at the hands of antagonists and, perhaps, at the hands of each other. It just depends on how far you want that abuse to go. There is a reason why homosexual male rape perpetrated by a very large "love troll" is a running gag on Dumpshock.
There comes a point where the lack of prison rape can break the suspension of disbelief, though prison rape is inappropriate unless of the the players are completely comfortable with it, the victim especially so.
Of course, if the group wants to roleplay anti-social sexual fantasies and everyone is cool with that, then it's all good. The only question is whether or not it'll evolve into something that requires large amounts of lube (and strap-ons) in the real world.
There is, of course, a difference between grit and playing out sexual fantasies. We can assume that, in a gritty game, the PCs will suffer some abuse at the hands of antagonists and, perhaps, at the hands of each other. It just depends on how far you want that abuse to go. There is a reason why homosexual male rape perpetrated by a very large "love troll" is a running gag on Dumpshock.
There comes a point where the lack of prison rape can break the suspension of disbelief, though prison rape is inappropriate unless of the the players are completely comfortable with it, the victim especially so.
Of course, if the group wants to roleplay anti-social sexual fantasies and everyone is cool with that, then it's all good. The only question is whether or not it'll evolve into something that requires large amounts of lube (and strap-ons) in the real world.
I must now ask either Squinky, Holychampion, or both to draw Bubba the Love Troll.
If it's agreed to have mature and gritty content like we have, i'll say go for it (thats if you dare to do it) maybe it wont fit your team (or for you) but try it.
My cahar (Raven, elf 'girl' face/spec.op. ex-joygirl/ex-exotic dancer/ex-escort
) character was raped during one hectic and dangerous run, it was 'sad' but it was coming. This run was dangerous but on the other hand there was good reward succeeding it...
It was kind of inflintration mission when my character, all alone (she had backup partner but he wasn't too near) had to infiltrate this gang hq get some information from its boss. Let's make long run short story.
It was done by seducing this orc gangboss (dancing, seductive looks and flirting with boss, great succeed) and she got in, there was party (drugs, alcohol, music, etc) with this boss, three other girls and Raven (my char) was trying to inject some drug to boss not succeeding to do it. She was hold down by much bigger orc, fighting and trying to get free. Her backup was called in, he was 'littlebit' late to save her ass (so to speak) but managed to save her life and he (they) got the needed information, saving the day and run most important saving her. Three other girls were dead after this party, my char was all mess up and she wasn't capaple of doing anything. Luckily there was those drugs, she was so high on drugs she cant be sure what has happened. She still have these nightmares conserning what happened to her. So this was 'mild' (I know, i know) comparings to possibility to die on that bed.
There was no hot description about the act, only a stong hint/implication of it. It made me feel little bit sad and angry can't do anything but try to struggle powerless and helpless.
Nowadays they (savior and my char) live together, they don't get together right after this episode but theres been this guardian/hero and a girl thing between them ever since that episode. And this orc (adept, yes he was somekind of faceadept) gangboss, is her main adversary/enemy nowadays, she trying to get even.
But on the other hand so is this gangboss too, he lost his face and loyalty (towards company mr.J) and hes angry. Its life, dangerous life.
Now she and her hero, and one other runner is going against this boss and gang again, this time it hard hitting avenge thing. But they know it and two of three char take some damage on run...
Its game, its fun, sure this episode wasn't, but still it was some kind on rewarding experience.
Hope you get it and understand all
My cahar (Raven, elf 'girl' face/spec.op. ex-joygirl/ex-exotic dancer/ex-escort
) character was raped during one hectic and dangerous run, it was 'sad' but it was coming. This run was dangerous but on the other hand there was good reward succeeding it...It was kind of inflintration mission when my character, all alone (she had backup partner but he wasn't too near) had to infiltrate this gang hq get some information from its boss. Let's make long run short story.
It was done by seducing this orc gangboss (dancing, seductive looks and flirting with boss, great succeed) and she got in, there was party (drugs, alcohol, music, etc) with this boss, three other girls and Raven (my char) was trying to inject some drug to boss not succeeding to do it. She was hold down by much bigger orc, fighting and trying to get free. Her backup was called in, he was 'littlebit' late to save her ass (so to speak) but managed to save her life and he (they) got the needed information, saving the day and run most important saving her. Three other girls were dead after this party, my char was all mess up and she wasn't capaple of doing anything. Luckily there was those drugs, she was so high on drugs she cant be sure what has happened. She still have these nightmares conserning what happened to her. So this was 'mild' (I know, i know) comparings to possibility to die on that bed.
There was no hot description about the act, only a stong hint/implication of it. It made me feel little bit sad and angry can't do anything but try to struggle powerless and helpless.
Nowadays they (savior and my char) live together, they don't get together right after this episode but theres been this guardian/hero and a girl thing between them ever since that episode. And this orc (adept, yes he was somekind of faceadept) gangboss, is her main adversary/enemy nowadays, she trying to get even.
But on the other hand so is this gangboss too, he lost his face and loyalty (towards company mr.J) and hes angry.
Its life, dangerous life. Now she and her hero, and one other runner is going against this boss and gang again, this time it hard hitting avenge thing. But they know it and two of three char take some damage on run...
Its game, its fun, sure this episode wasn't, but still it was some kind on rewarding experience.
Hope you get it and understand all
Ah, I get it now. Yes, there definitely are room for "adult" oriented material in this genre like Marghos so well described. Besides his character description/background already had this "working girl" type written so adult themes seemed to be OK with him. Maybe it is different for male player's female character to get raped than for female player's female character facing the same fate.
But in any case I agree that there should be some sort of understanding between players and GM concerning that kind of stuff. Whether it is through vote or just by knowing each other long enough.
I know an event where an NPC orc raped a PC. Both were male. The tale tells that the player was almost crying (he was quite young at the time). Me, I quit the game some time before that happened so it's just a second hand story.
But in any case I agree that there should be some sort of understanding between players and GM concerning that kind of stuff. Whether it is through vote or just by knowing each other long enough.
I know an event where an NPC orc raped a PC. Both were male. The tale tells that the player was almost crying (he was quite young at the time). Me, I quit the game some time before that happened so it's just a second hand story.
Yeah, I make it quite clear that if they want me to run a cyberpunk world for them then they need to be able to deal with adult themes, including when it happens to them. So far I haven't had any problems with people not being able to deal with it, but then I only game with people I know and have screened for being mature.
I have no qualms whatsoever with there being "adult" material in games I'm in (whether as a player or as GM). Ask around, shit. The last big thing I ran involved all the players being randomly on the wrong block at the wrong time, as a local Mitsuhama security chief cordoned off the block -- completely at random -- with armored cars and prisoner transport vehicles (complete with a chopper overhead for additional shock/awe), gunned down everyone with rubber bullets, waded in with stun batons to clean up...
...and then proceeded to pick out anything and anyone that looked halfway fuckable and toss them into the prisoner transports. They were then carted them off to give to the local Yakuza boss (a distant relative) in exchange for an obscene amount of money. Then off they go to bunraku parlors (after a little cleaning up)
It was a hooker harvest, in other words, that the half dozen or so players just happened to be caught in the middle of. For no reason. Just wrong block at the wrong time.
I can handle adult themes. Hell, some players come to my games specifically for the grit it gets under their nails. It's fun to shoot really bad people square in the face, many would say more fun than just shooting random pay-earning security guards.
But there's a world of difference between the NPCs being horrible sadistic bastards, and one of the PCs deciding it would be fun to rape someone else sitting at the game table with them (so to speak). At best, it's the sort of disruptive bullshit that will lead to a group falling apart (I'd wager 99% of the people out there would rather a player character just cleanly kill another PC). At worst, it's a sign that someone's got some serious issues (particularly if they're so disassociated from the feelings of others that they think they'll be looked at the same by the other players afterwards).
So, yeah. Rape in the game world? It happens. The Sixth World is a shitty place sometimes. Rape at the game table? Fuck that. Time to find a new group.
...and then proceeded to pick out anything and anyone that looked halfway fuckable and toss them into the prisoner transports. They were then carted them off to give to the local Yakuza boss (a distant relative) in exchange for an obscene amount of money. Then off they go to bunraku parlors (after a little cleaning up)
It was a hooker harvest, in other words, that the half dozen or so players just happened to be caught in the middle of. For no reason. Just wrong block at the wrong time.
I can handle adult themes. Hell, some players come to my games specifically for the grit it gets under their nails. It's fun to shoot really bad people square in the face, many would say more fun than just shooting random pay-earning security guards.
But there's a world of difference between the NPCs being horrible sadistic bastards, and one of the PCs deciding it would be fun to rape someone else sitting at the game table with them (so to speak). At best, it's the sort of disruptive bullshit that will lead to a group falling apart (I'd wager 99% of the people out there would rather a player character just cleanly kill another PC). At worst, it's a sign that someone's got some serious issues (particularly if they're so disassociated from the feelings of others that they think they'll be looked at the same by the other players afterwards).
So, yeah. Rape in the game world? It happens. The Sixth World is a shitty place sometimes. Rape at the game table? Fuck that. Time to find a new group.
There is a difference between raping the character and raping the player through the character. The latter is what horror stories are made of but it only occurs when the PC rape is a violation of the player's boundaries. If it isn't a violation of the player's boundaries, then it is little different from any other sexual or pseudo-sexual RP, depending on how detailed it is and far it does.
And everyone has different boundaries that should be respected. Personally, I'd feel a little uncomfortable being love-trolled by a male GM in a face to face game (it does not matter in an internet game) if it were only a single sentence and more than a little uncomfortable if it were more descriptive. On the other hand, I'd happily RP a several-hour long thrust-by-thrust love-troll anal-rapping if the love-troll were played by a female player. But that's simply because I enjoy being sodomized by women, thus it isn't nearly as creepy when it is done roleplay.
It is the sexual aspect that I find uncomfortable, rather than the being raped aspect. I would be just as uncomfortable RPing a consensual sexual relationship with a male player's PC in a face-to-face game due to the difficulty separating the character from the player in a face-to-face setting.
And everyone has different boundaries that should be respected. Personally, I'd feel a little uncomfortable being love-trolled by a male GM in a face to face game (it does not matter in an internet game) if it were only a single sentence and more than a little uncomfortable if it were more descriptive. On the other hand, I'd happily RP a several-hour long thrust-by-thrust love-troll anal-rapping if the love-troll were played by a female player. But that's simply because I enjoy being sodomized by women, thus it isn't nearly as creepy when it is done roleplay.
It is the sexual aspect that I find uncomfortable, rather than the being raped aspect. I would be just as uncomfortable RPing a consensual sexual relationship with a male player's PC in a face-to-face game due to the difficulty separating the character from the player in a face-to-face setting.
TMI indeed.
In my experience, the worst kind of conflicts did not escalate on the issue of sex and/or violence - but mindcontrol. It's called mindrape for a reason.
In my experience, the worst kind of conflicts did not escalate on the issue of sex and/or violence - but mindcontrol. It's called mindrape for a reason.
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| It is the sexual aspect that I find uncomfortable, rather than the being raped aspect. I would be just as uncomfortable RPing a consensual sexual relationship with a male player's PC in a face-to-face game due to the difficulty separating the character from the player in a face-to-face setting. |
I think that this has been my problem so far. I intend to stretch the boundaries a bit in my next game, SR (hopefully) or not.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.