Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Focus's of Games and Setting
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
CrystalBlue
I'm an epic kinda guy. Epic games, epic stories, epic fails. biggrin.gif

I like centering my games around an epic story or theme. Big picture things. Instead of making enough to make rent this month, I like PC's that are centered on big picture issues. Immortal elves, prophesies, dragons, the sixth world, Horrors, and that sort of thing.

But, I've heard from people on these boards that when you get that far in a setting it breaks down what the characters are and loses the scope of what Shadowrun 'should be'. It's supposed to be a game of survival of the fittest. Once you get powerful enough, you basically retire into NPC status or die.

I've got my game centered around large story issues, a hive of bugs, a dragon looking to make some status changes himself, a corporation with an evil master plan, and the obligatory "OMFG, HORRORS! GTFO!!!!" I don't want to lose the focus of the game, but I want it to be fun AND to tell the story I have in mind...

Is this wrong to do? And if it isn't, are there any ideas you can give me? I'll give a rundown of what the first run was...

(Keep in mind, I had way too many players show up, so a lot of these battles kinda got cake-walked) The PC's are contacted by a mysterious fixer wanting to give the runners a shot at some nuyen. The Johnson is a weapon's dealer that hasn't gotten his mafia-supplied weapons from his dock contact. It's been sold to another buyer. He wants the runners to find out who bought it and to get him the shipment back.

They go to the docks and shake down the mafia contact to find out where the shipment is. They don't get that, but the hackers break into the warehouse network and find out that the shipment has been transported to a Aztechnology shipping company. The avoid the first fight with a bunch of mafia hitmen too.

Going to the warehouse, they find it crawling with dalmatian drones. 6 total. Normally, this should be hard, but the hackers blow through the drone's admin access, shut down and resubscribe them, and even intercept the warning signals that go back to the security spider. So, they blow through another fight, as well as netting themselves a few drones (I think I'm doing something wrong here...)

Finally, they hand the shipment and info back and go to collect the pay. After they do, they get another call from the fixer to head to downtown Seattle. Getting there, they find the mafia hitmen waiting for them. After the troll axes someone in half and the face chainsaws another one, two snipers begin picking them off. The mafia mage starts stun-balling them too and I ALMOST dropped the face. Did a 9 box hit on him, then started stunning. The troll shrugged off the first bullet, but kept getting hammered. Also, they took the cyborg and set off his cortex bomb by hacking his PAN.

Suffice it to say, they survived. Getting to the fixer, they find out he's a dragon. And he wants their help on something. He's agreed to be their fixer and doc contact if they help him later on.
Fuchs
Shadowrun is very flexible, and can accomodate a lot of themes and settings. High-powered "We're who you call when the Wildcats/Ghosts/Ferrets/Seals fail", gutter-level "We risk our lives for the next nuke-it burger, we're gangers", alternate "We're DocWagon, we're here to help you" campaigns, just about everything works if the group wants it.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (CrystalBlue)
Normally, this should be hard, but the hackers blow through the drone's admin access, shut down and resubscribe them, and even intercept the warning signals that go back to the security spider. So, they blow through another fight, as well as netting themselves a few drones (I think I'm doing something wrong here...)

No, that's exactly the reason why there are still plain old fashioned guards used most of the time.

Drones are extremely vulnerable once spotted - and in security duty, time is on the observers side.
ElFenrir
I agree, Shadowrun is good on any and all levels; it's just what players and GM prefers...and then you can always work at switching it up.

Im a middleground person myself. I do like my horror/high end/immortals/aformentioned ''we're the guys that get called when the SEALS and Special Forces get turned into goo in seconds'' sometimes, and my ''scum of the street lowend ganger'' sometimes too. But the extremes get a bit boring for me after awhile.

The high-end simply because its, well, high end-the same reason why some old D&D games got boring when we played at the high levels. Fun as hell for awhile, then you just...run out of stuff, because you either A. Face stuff that you paste, one way or another, physically, magically, in the Matrix, etc, or B. The stuff that CAN challenge you just outright flattens you. These are fun for 1-4 session short-runs/modules, IMO.

On the low end, it gets tiring, again, because ive played in tons of the low level D&D games(1-4th level), when you ARE basically just fodder. I sometimes have trouble getting into those characters, because i don't want to get too attached..the low-end, gritty games tend to be so deadly that the body count is high, and while i LOVE to design characters with the 20 questions...i feel like it ends up wasted, no matter HOW smart i play(when you're only rolling 7 or so dice for your HIGHEST thing, failures and glitches WILL happen. It's just a matter of when). After awhile i get tired of being walked on for sessions and want to play a more professional game. These are also good, IMO, for those 1-4 short sessions(though i know plenty of people here like low-end, 'gritty', rough, ruthless games. It's just not for me for long periods). I found these havn't *lasted* much longer due to horrible luck on our part. (usually in these games the GM is much more strict on roll-fudging, which is why, even if we are careful, stuff goes wrong.)

I find the middle-ground suits me perfectly. Not too much, not too little. Ranging from 400-450 BPs(450 BPs isn't terribly high-end...you get maybe a couple extra attribute points or some more skills, or resources, contacts, or a little bit of each.) 450 is about as high as i like, 400 about as low, we usually play 400 point games. Good, solid characters with lots of room to grow still. Runs from kittycat to dangerous, and you never know. Enough danger and fear of death to keep you sharp; but not enough to cause despair and boredom.

And i like games that let me develop my character in game as well; to develop relationships of work or friendship with the other players depending, to branch out. A GM that lets us sort of take the leash and help develop the plot, do downtime stuff, make a little 'company team' kind of thing, hire ourselves out, etc.

Don't know if this had anything to do with your plot; but i figured to stick in a couple nuyen on some stuff. But it sounds like your game was pretty intense there at the end; i have to admit ive been in and seen a few situations like this myself when it all just hits the fan, so to speak.

mfb
i think there's room for epic stuff in SR. what there isn't room for, at least in games i run or care to play in, is good versus evil crap, which is what 'epic' usually ends up being.
Kyoto Kid
...you need to be careful for if the epic is too large, the PCs can feel they have no focus and can become lost in the plotline. Talk things over with the players before you embark, let them know what kind of campaign it will be. Above all, do not be afraid to take some input from your players as to what they are looking for in a campaign. This doesn't mean you have to give away any spoilers, but rather tailor things a bit more to the character's needs. Many of us like telling a story (myself included) but the story shouldn't overshadow the cast of PCs or they will feel like they are just going though motions without having much effect on the outcome

I recently did a re-run of a very successful campaign with a new group and found that the players felt lost. Even though we had preliminary meetings and I handed out notes on the campaign's background, it was far more then they expected. In the previous run of the campaign, it was with a group that had been together for some time, so the challenge I had set was rather advanced. A ways in, players in the new group mentioned they felt overwhelmed and were looking to develop characters more from a "starting out" basis in a smaller setting rather than gallivanting about Europe with what amounted to aspiring prime runners.

A word to players too, do not be afraid to speak up if you feel a campaign is getting too heavy. Ask to stop for a moment and discuss where things are going. Most if not all GMs should be accommodating, for the bottom line is, it should be fun for everyone involved.
Synner667
Sounds like what we oldies call "a campaign" - a series of linked "adventures" that build up to a "climax".

But seriously, I'm not sure people are using "epic" to mean the same thing.

CrystalBlue, your scenario doesn't seem very epic to me - just a standard "get something back for someone".

It may lead onto something else, but it's not mentioned so far - that's not a criticism, I just don't see what you describe as epic >shrug<


I like longterm games, with recurring places and people, players getting more capable and taking on more difficult tasks.
Almost always, the adventures involve very powerful people [I like to throw in fictional characters, the Players know], dangerous events, travel, things they don't expect, Things That Man Was Not Meant To Know, scenarios from any of a dozen different RPGs, events in 1 scenario that have an effect in another, reasons to do things beyond getting paid.

But they aren't there all at once..
..Events build and unfold, involving them more and more in things because of their characters - But I've never thought of them as Epic


The big problem with powerful characters is what do they do once they get to that level ??
There's very few scenarios set for that level, and most refs/players have a hard time working to that level.

In game terms, there's little difference between a starter character and the average "powerful" character except more/better weapons, more/better skills, more/better armour, etc.

Most games fall apart for powerful characters [and enemies] because most PCs are unrealistically focussed.
Whereas people in the real world develop, interact with people and places, travel..
..Characters shoot better, use more powerful magic, can buy better cars, can repair more complicated things - but they don't develop or change.
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (Synner667)
Most games fall apart for powerful characters [and enemies] because most PCs are unrealistically focussed.
Whereas people in the real world develop, interact with people and places, travel..
..Characters shoot better, use more powerful magic, can buy better cars, can repair more complicated things - but they don't develop or change.

...one of the reasons I am not very fond of tournaments at cons. You get this kick butt character with no personality & no real background. Just a bunch of numbers on a sheet going against other bunches of numbers the GM/DM throws at you.

This is also why I really like my namesake as she started waaaaaay back in 1st ed and earned her way up to Prime Runner status..

My all time favourite was a character from that other game (the much earlier edition) who started at 1st level with a rusty short sword knocking off Kobolds for copper pieces. Five years later (Playing time) he had become one of the region's more celebrated heroes (at only 10th level - tough campaign) which was when I retired him. When I brought him into an "open" tournament at a con, the DM laughed as the average character level for the adventure was about 18 (most of which were rolled up on the spot). In the end this character (with barely half the magical "equipment" the others had) was one of the few to not only make it through but also accomplish the objective. the DM wasn't laughing after that.
deek
A very good point that Synner makes (about power levels) and one that I think does make it really easy to get into epic runs. Especially with the use of skill caps, as a GM, I know pretty much exactly what kinds of opponents are going to give my runners a challenge.

I've not yet gone the epic route for my group, although they did just leave Denver for Seattle last session, to get to some more lucrative and dangerous runs, so I think they'll be getting some epic tidbits soon enough.

But the SR4 rules scale very well, IMO and give a GM solid tools to work at any power level.
Kyoto Kid
...admittedly the "epic" campaign I ran was in 3rd ed. Haven't really played 4th enough to develop characters that far, particularly as a number of what I consider important resources have not been released. Hence, most of what I ran so far in 4th ed have been one shot runs as I am not going to second guess setting canon this time around (had an issue with the TT sourcebook way back in 2nd ed. which came out midway through a Portland based campaign I was running at the time).
DTFarstar
KK was your character a ranger? That sounds really similar to a story I read once... I can't remember if it was here or on the Char Op boards over at WotC. I will second the statement that familiarity with the characters capabilities and the ability to be innovative are at least as important as personal character power. Gah.... don't even get me started on the World's Largest Dungeon fiasco we had here. My freaking players for that game were especially REALLY damned stupid and just "Hur hur, I hit de ting with de 'ammer, boss." They died so fucking much I kind of felt dirty.

Chris
Kyoto Kid
...as a matter of fact he was. I may have mentioned him here in one of the Roleplay vs Roll Play threads. Then again, I have also been on the WoTC forums as well.

I currently have been suckered into an advanced level campaign (15th - never ever had a character that high level) & am having great difficulty getting into the characters. This is why I feel the Epic styled campaign needs to be built up to not just dumped in the player's laps.

This was the mistake I made with with the recent run of RiS. Because at the time 4th ed didn't have some of the source material I needed (& I didn't want to take a lot of time converting things) I kept it in 3rd. The thing is 4th ed is here to stay and running a more protracted campaign in 3rd (e.g. taking say a year to run other missions that built up to RiS) really wasn't a viable option as the players also wanted to do runs in the new system.
DTFarstar
Yeah, I've played some DnD games in the 15-24 range several times, but there were three campaigns at that level that I played in that actually succeeded and all three of them too about a year or more of buildup from level 1-5 to that level. Sometimes a character would irrevocably die and it wouldn't be the same character, but I would be invested in the story itself at that point, regardless of my part. The few times we have tried to just drop in at that level have either intentionally been farce games or have ended up that way because that amount of power + unfamiliarity + the feeling of invincibility and not truly having an attachment to the character = people doing stupid, if funny, shit.

I'm currently leading a shadowrun plot up to epic levels, but it is going to take 6 months or so at least and that is with relatively high karma rewards. Giving homework every week and really making them get invested in their characters should make them think things through and hopefully actually use tactics. *sigh* It's an uphill freaking battle, I swear.

Chris
ThePolo
QUOTE
But, I've heard from people on these boards that when you get that far in a setting it breaks down what the characters are and loses the scope of what Shadowrun 'should be'.

Yeah, I've noticed that too, but then again, look at all the core modules that have been released over the years... Harlequin, Survival of the Fittest, Brainscan, Mob War... all of them place the characters in a pivotal position, where the outcome of their work can change the face of Seattle... or even the world. I'd say that 'epic' is certainly a flavor that's popular with the SR writers!

It's a formula that's classic in Sci-Fi/Fantasy lit, too... and I personally think it makes great campaign fodder when done right. You're 'average joe' gets thrown into situations where his choices effect the world around him, on a grand scale. Makes for a good story smile.gif

One tip: If you're running 'Epic', make sure that you illustrate the repercussions of the PC's actions. Doing so shows that the morality of their decisions has direct consequences on people they don't even know, and makes each of those decisions a lot more 'epic' in and of themselves.

QUOTE
...one of the reasons I am not very fond of tournaments at cons. You get this kick butt character with no personality & no real background. Just a bunch of numbers on a sheet going against other bunches of numbers the GM/DM throws at you.

Not to sidebar, but I actually think this is one of the reasons that I like cons... at least if you get the right players. The challenge of taking those bland numbers and wrapping a personality around them in so short of a time... it's pretty cool.

I actually leveraged that concept for the last campaign I ran. It took a lot of setup time, but it was so worth it:

All of the players were long time role-players. I pre-made all of the characters... about twice as many as we needed. I left a few skill points unassigned for personal 'flair', but 95% of the work was done. I sealed the character sheets in envelopes along with a few paragraphs worth of background, and then pasted nothing but a picture, a one-word archetype, and a quote that embodied the character on the outside... No other information was given to the players. It took the players about 10 minutes to decide which characters to play. Once they all had a decision, then I let them open the envelopes. I gave them 15 minutes to review thier choices, then we started.

The unopened envelopes were left in a pile, and could be returned to later if the player felt like a change, or if a certain archetype was needed for a certain run. Basically they represented their fixer's 'stable' of runners.

The players all really got into the challenge of taking the characters as described, and trying to role-play 'outside the box', if you will. Most of them ended up with runners that were vastly different then a character that they would have rolled up themselves...

The whole thing made GMing really easy, too. All the contacts were pre-fleshed out by me, all the backgrounds could be woven in and out of the individual adventures as needed... it was a really fun campaign. A few of the players thought that they'd hate it, but thy're all really disappointed that we're not doing it for the next SR campaign that I'm running....

(That was longer than I thought! Again, sorry to go OT!)
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (ThePolo)
One tip: If you're running 'Epic', make sure that you illustrate the repercussions of the PC's actions. Doing so shows that the morality of their decisions has direct consequences on people they don't even know, and makes each of those decisions a lot more 'epic' in and of themselves.

...this happened several times in the first run of RiS. In one instance where they needed to be stealthy, they went in "guns a blazing" so to say, creating a nasty scene in Beograd. The PCs managed to elude capture and went underground in the ethnic district of the city. Instead of going after the team, the SSID attributed the incident to Croat operatives and launched a retributive airstrike against a several locations Zagreb. The Serbian response was of course publicised within the country and purposely "leaked" to the rest of Europe by the Bureau of Information. While exact details were changed, it pretty much was seen by the PCs as being linked to their actions.
ThePolo
Good example, KK. Exactly what I meant. Thanks.
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (DTFarstar)
I'm currently leading a shadowrun plot up to epic levels, but it is going to take 6 months or so at least and that is with relatively high karma rewards. Giving homework every week and really making them get invested in their characters should make them think things through and hopefully actually use tactics. *sigh* It's an uphill freaking battle, I swear.

Chris

...I'm still "laying low" so to say until I get Corporate Enclaves and Arsenal. As I have mentioned in the past, I tend to play up the corporate, political, and tech angles more than magic & GD/IE metaplot stuff. I do have an idea in the works so to say, but it is still in a very preliminary stage.
Synner667
I was talking to someone recently about campaigns and the Joss Whedon "Dollshouse' concept was talked about.

It's not new, but might allow people to play characters whose "core" advances, but the details change from session to session.

Similar to what was used in the Dream Park RPG or the TSR Amazing Engine set of games.


Deek..
..It's unfortunate, but notable that there's a Synner and a Synner667 on these forums - But we're not the same people !!

I only mention it, in case people reference the wrong person for a comment !!
Synner667
My group used to get well and truly annoyed with games like Call of Cthulhu, where EVERY campaign was a global scale, end-of-the-world event.

But in the words of The Big 'C' - 100 point characters taste just the same as 1000 point characters.


I like more-than-normal-person power level games, where there are risks, challenges and characters can develop..
..The domain of TV heroes, Action Films, Novels.


Really, Batman is much more fun to play than Superman, because [almost by definition] there's not much to challenge Superman.
Fortune
Dream Park was an interesting concept. One of the very rare rpgs besides Shadowrun and Deadlands that I actually wish I had a chance to play more.
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