Well, the fact that you think of it as a "fighter" certainly suggests that there is something eminently smiteable in your approach.

~J

whatever, what should i call them? Samurai is a type of shooter, Gunbunny is another.... calling them shooters sound wrong.... so please, tell me how i should adress the holy and mighty warriors, except for "target" that is...

"Lead magnet"

that's SUPPOSED to be the mages job......
now, excuse me while i let out some anger.....

AAUAUAUUUGGUGHGHGHGHGAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!RRRAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

ah.... much better....
honestly, fighter seems to be the fastest and most neutral term i can think of, the guy with a weapon, then you may call them whatever you want to, i was corrected when i said gunbunny, so now it's fighter....
i refuse to use a negative term for them, and i don't want to be corrected, so "fighter" soudns okay.....

Target works.

~J

To be fair, fighters and fighter-types have the hit points to take the brunt of the attack so the mages and lesser-endowed critters can return fire.

In SR terms, samurai have the body and 'ware to soak hits as necessary.

Although, a fairer approach would be to allow random determination of hits, barring obvious target indicators -- indicators like "Hi, I'm a mage...GEEK ME!"

-Siege

The only reason gunslinging sammies get such a poor rep is because less capable GMs don't know how to handle them. As Glyph had mentioned before, it isn't necessarily the fault of the player if he's dominating the game. Even if the character is overpowered, the blame ultimately still lies with the GM for letting it past character generation. If you think a character is too powerful for your campaign, then just put your foot down and say "No." The problem is solved before it even begins.

Some people, for god knows what reason, perceive that it isn't the role of gunbunnies to excel at combat. The same people wouldn't have a problem with deckers specializing in computers, or faces specializing in social skills. Combat is an essential slot that needs to be filled in most games - yet, many people whine when the person(s) who fills it doesn't turn out to be a jack of all trades. Of course the sammy is going to overshadow other non-combat oriented archetypes in a firefight...you might as well complain that the rigger should be sniped in the head because no one else can drive, or the decker should be nailed with a force 50 manabolt because he completely dominates all the other players in the Matrix. That's the whole point of team: so that each character's specialty will contribute to the entire group's versatility. If everyone can do everything, you might as well run solo.

If a player feels that their skillset is too narrow, they can always pick something else up so that they can participate more in the game. That's their problem, and their's only. There's no reason for anyone to whine if they're being overshadowed in a field that they didn't specialize in by someone else who did. If your abilities are spread out more evenly, you will be able to do other things that they can't, so it all comes out even. In the end, it's the GM's job to incorporate all the necessary elements into a run so that no single player gets more of the limelight than the others.

But combat is the one part of the game that a wise runner will go out of their way to avoid. Everything else is part-and-parcel of running, but a runner should never get into a fair fight unless they screw up.

~J

Gunbunnies are unbalancing when your GM *allows* Wired 3 or Boosted + Synaptic or *shudder* Move By Wire.

And let's face it -- any character sporting that kind of 'ware is gonna be unbalancing, whether it's a Face, decker or rigger.

That's one of the reasons why I don't like million nuyen characters with no creation limitations -- it gets absurd long before the game ever starts.

However, other points have also been made with equal validity -- if we take a million nuyen samurai sporting MBW and goddess knows what else and drop him in a situation where there's nothing to kill, the character is as controlled as anyone else.

Granted, you still have all hell to pay when the MBW bunny gets to swim in his element. But that's going to be true of any specialist.

-Siege

Check the Lone-Star Strato-9. Military-grade power in a security-oriented package with civilian-accessible prices.

~J

Let's see....

My gunbunny/spec-ops (I use a silencer ) had a few guns skills, a whole bowl of quickness and charisma-based skills out the yin-yang.
Why?
You can't buy the best toys without being able to talk nice to people.

Sure, cybered up.
Sure, my mage bud is still scratching herself if it comes down to a simple hold-up gunplay situation, but it's HOW you play a character, be it bunny, sammy or "geeky the mage", that makes it a good game or a crappy GM-dominated "throw the baddies at the bunny" blenderfest.

Knowing when to shoot is more important than having an init so high you out-draw god.
Knowing that a massacre is tres uncool for your rep and social standing will get you a better class of runs, with a greater reward.
Knowing, before you draw the gun, where the greatest threat is, and what it is, will save you more often than a HVAR with EX rounds.


Gm's are lazy, and so are players.
I was recently playing a ganger situation with a mighty adept who had Jonny-Woo'ed her way into the safehouse, taken heads (Note - beware Dikote blades when held by Troll Adept wearing Shock gloves.) and was shredding the opposition.
Thinking ahead, she positioned herself to take out the most dangerous (to her) opposition, a large troll with an SMG. Ok, did that, not a problem. So what did she do then? "Ok, I've got a few more coming, so I'll wait for them to pop their heads around the corner."

(In all honesty, it's the first time she's played something so gun orientated, so I have to cut her some slack. But she DOES know about the cover rules...Sigh.)

She didn't think that the opposing forces would use their knowledge of the building to their advantage. Or that they'd ambush her ("Ok, surprise situation, roll reaction." "Huh? You haven't described them to me yet...CRAP!" "(Evil Grin)) and knock her down to very damaged through her armour-clad ass.

[Funnily enough, geeky the mage kicked their hoops, even with mod stun, using his pistol skill. ]

I think of these things, my players NOW think of these thing. All GMs should think of these things. You're not fighting mindless constructs, these fraggers don't want to die and it should show.

L.

It's Darwinian. The stupid die first. So play smart and don't whine, meat.

All of them.
I still find it amusing that the time you came closest to dying thus far was against a group of guys armed with nonlethal rounds. (Narcoject)

~J

Simple: You shoot the guy that's watching you through the scope of his Barret.

There is another complaint that often comes up in regards to gun bunnies that I would like to address. This is the notion that someone who is much better at combat than the rest of the group is "unbalancing". Hogwash. That's just lazy thinking from GMs who make every run devolve into little more than heavy combat. The gun bunny outclasses others in a firefight because that is the gun bunny's role. He is a specialist, because a shadowrunning team is composed of specialists who work together.

That's something a lot of people seem to forget - a running team needs people to break into the security, hack into the mainframe, deal with magical guardians, negotiate the best payment for the team, etc. The gun bunny doesn't complain when he is decking a public node to call up the hotel plans while the decker is busy doing the more important hacking. He doesn't whine when the face does most of the talking with the Johnson and he only brings up a relevant tactical point when it's important. He lets the rigger do the driving, and he lets the mage take care of the corporate compound's wards.

But whenever a firefight breaks out, everyone cries: "Wahhh! My character can't kill as many people as his character can, even though that's not even my character's main area of expertise!" or "Wahhh! My character got involved in a firefight when he should have been taking cover to let the gun bunny do his job, and now I'm wounded! It's the gun bunny's fault!"

I'll give some advice to the GMs: tailor the opposition to the gun bunny, and if the other players get caught in the crossfire, tell them "What the hell were you doing out there? That part of the run's not your job."


Note: Yes, other characters can support the gun bunny in combat. But they should still know when to take cover and let him handle the heavy stuff - just like the sammie might step back and let the adept with a weapon focus handle a toxic city spirit.

no kidding. my character's got 12+4d6 init, 8 skill in his chosen weapons, and six points of pain resistance. guess what? you don't see him slinging code very often! instead, you see him shooting people in the face (or, more probably, getting kicked in the ribs).

yes, it can be a problem when a player doesn't fill out his gunbunny character beyond "he was in the Paladins and they gave him lots of cyberware and he wears sunglasses all the time". but that's a problem for any character type.

I think the biggest problem with players whining about gunbunnies is that combat is almost totally controlled by the dice. Initiative and skill are determined by the numbers and most players don't have enough appreciation of tactics to sway combat their way (I've certainly never held a gun, nevermind actually been involved in a firefight). However, when it comes to negotiations anyone can get involved, no matter what the numbers say. I realise that the same holds true for decking and rigging, but I definitely think it's a factor.

Personally I always make sure that every character has some combat skill and that combat types have other skills/contacts to actually get by. I also have a tendency to play combat types who try and avoid combat.

I remember years ago playing CP2020 - I had a heavily chromed Solo with high combat skills - the other characters were pretty weak in comparison and got into a bar fight when knives were drawn. I headed straight for the door and waited outside with pistol drawn (just in case one of them followed me), whilst the rest of the team slugged it out with some thugs, getting slowly beaten. I could have easily turned the tide, but given the ease of dying and randomness of combat thought it better not to. To me that's the essence of combat-type characters - knowing when to fight and when not to, especially in high risk systems like SR has become.

Combat is bad, don't draw a gun, Magic is the key, blablabla...

Sorry guy but has anyone ever thought about the idea that some groups actually like! the occassional violence? That the combination of near future/scifi (I HATE fantasy) with some action is what they are looking for?

If I want to play one of those "better" and "more challenging" characters like a decker/face/... I don't have to play - I pull extra hours on my job! There I have to discuss, make detailed plans, keep tight shedules and all the stuff. When I sit down at the gaming table I really don't need some "No combat I'm the mage fay" players who turn the game into another hours long discussion and end up with a "let's talk this through/be all nice" solution.

F*** "advanced roleplaying"

Michael

yeah, there are rumors.... about people that like to shoot things.....
people that like to play... the gunbunnies....... *everyone: *
Yes, it is true! I once saw one of them... his exact words were.... "Screw roleplaying, can't we just have a shooting run this time?".....
PH33R!!!!!!

or maybe not.....

I must admit the potential of shooting things is better than the actual shooting.

Theres nothing better than facing down the mooks with your gun out with the "Do you feel lucky" face on.

Chances are if you play it well, they'll run for it.

Thanks for the praise gknov.


And the answer to your query of who to waste first?

The DM answer is "The idiot who got you into the situation in the first place" -which may be you...

But saying things like that can get you showered in dice, so...

The player answer - Depends on the situation.

Prepardness, ability, knowledge of what's going on - these will drive a combat rather than "Looky, that guy got big gun...me waste him first?" (A common mistake that I fully exploit.)

For instance - Back up, got it?
Is your friendly "Geek the Mage" lurking on the sidelines with a control thoughts spell to even the odds a little? Or mob-mind? Or Hell-blast? Or a M-damage pistol?
Never underestimate a bit of friendly co-operation. It will save your ass more often than delta-grade cyber with accessories from the street fair.

Preparation-
Is the rigger about to open a can of whoop-ass on the hostiles with his usurpation of the security system? Have you bribed the right people to look the other way, or to leave a door helpfully unlocked? Is another go-gang trying to muscle in on the area, and can they be "encouraged" to be a bit active on the night of your run? Did you get that personel file from your decker and READ IT?

Please, please... Do a bit more preparation then "Ok, there's an alley here, we'll park the truck there and jump through a window if things screw up." (Hands up those who have heard this once too many times.)

Legwork saves lives.

Knowledge and Awareness of the mess you're in.
PERCEPTION = INT. The mage or decker might spot something out of place, and tell you about it. Try and listen even if it takes naval-class damage to make a dent in your head.

Knowledge - do you have a background skill in a particular topic to help a roll?
Maybe you know enough about Small unit tactics to help figure out what's most likely to happen, or if that Mage is carrying an ineffectual light pistol.
Hell, what mage is going to waste a combat round for an aimed shot when they can dump a power bolt on you?
What Troll is going to fumble for a secured weapon when this tire-iron is, literally, to hand?
What Sammy has enough Will to resist a stunbolt 9? Or 6 (heh, heh....)


Oh, and a GM rant now-

Please note:
Stun gasses can't be shot to death. And tends to be harsh in melee, too.
Wired reflexes don't help resist disease or pollution or shock or cold or fire damage.
8 Stunball is harsh.
Spirits are notoriously hard to snipe successfully.
So is "Toxic Wave".
Specialities work best in their element - try, at least.
Exploit the gaps, fake what you haven't got and misdirect attention like mad. People looking in the wrong direction get hammered 10 out of 9 times.

L.
"A friend in need is a friend to be avoided, a problem shared is a problem doubled and a stitch in time will leave you sewn up. Have a day."

I just wanted to get a few words in on some big errors I've seen here so far. Some of them have already been corrected, but I can't help myself.

First, gunbunnies are not the only high-initiative characters out there. I've seen plenty of mages sporting 4d6 initiatives in my time and I know I'm not the only one. A high initiative character is always going to be effective, regardless of whether they use a gun, spell, sword, deck, vehicle, or whatever. I'd much rather face off against a chrome king gunbunny than a Bear shamanic sorcerer loaded with quickened Health spells.

Second, gunbunnies aren't the only specialists out there. Every character is a specialist, except the most generalized characters out there (skillwires & skills for miles on a magician with lots of low force spells... done) and they're only useful for gap-filling on a small team. A character may have secondary skills, but they should all boil down to one or two very obvious things that they excel at. I know that if I were a decker and I had to go somewhere that put me in physical danger, I'd want a teammate/bodyguard that could handle it. I'd definitely choose the guy who moved like a blur and never missed a shot over the guy who wasn't so quick or accurate, but who's nice to talk to. You want people who can handle their roles first and foremost; everything else is just gravy.

Third, a lot of people seem to have no idea how to handle availability. It's really hard to get most seriously unbalancing items in the game. It's also really hard to get some menial items and amazingly easy to get some that should be difficult. Do the players have the right contacts to get X? Can the contact get X? How much of X can the contact get? What's the contact's markup? Will someone else give X a better price? Is it worth it to someone to kill the contact in order to get X? Despite all of this, if you feel something would unbalance your game, say so and deny access to it. If the player isn't a munchkin, then he'll fit his shopping list to the game. If he is, then he'll whine and cry and flail and leave if you're lucky. If your GM is too thick to notice this, maybe bring it up to him or, god forbid, exercise a little self-restraint.

Fourth, SR is completely about combat or, more accurately, conflict. Whether it takes place in the astral, the matrix, the highways, or the alleys, SR is all about pitting X against Y and duking it out. This could be a conflict between stealth and perception, deckers and databases, guns and armor, whatever... the whole thing comes down to conflict and resolution of that conflict.

Finally, SR *requires* dice. I know, "perish the thought", but dice are what allow for resolution. If you aren't good at a thing, then you probably shouldn't attempt it unless it's an emergency. Some say a good GM doesn't need dice. I say that a GM who doesn't use dice where they're needed fails in his job. The various numbers on a player's sheet, along with suitable background material, should always determine how the character is played and how others react to them. They don't represent absolute ability to function exactly the same way under any circumstances at any time, though. They represent a general scope of ability. The dice show how a given character does at any specific time in any specific situation.

Examples:

1. A player comes up with a wonderfully stealthy plan, but their character has no clue how to do so, I'll flat out tell them that they don't know how to do that and they won't until they get the appropriate skills. I may let them try to implement it anyway, but it'll fail.

2. A player comes up with a wonderfully stealthy plan and their character has the ability to do so, but the others don't have the ability to implement it. They'll all still be rolling for themselves and it's likely that it'll go to hell. Still, for the good planning I'd give a mod to the players to help them along.

3. A player comes up with a wonderfully stealthy plan and all characters have the ability to do so and implement it. They'll all still be rolling, again with a mod for good planning, but failure is still failure. One lucky guard and one unlucky character makes for a blown plan.

Basically, nobody ever gets a free ride. All the planning you do won't overcome bad luck/information for you and/or good luck/information for them. It never has, it doesn't now, and it shouldn't in the game. Just because a person is good or even among the world's best at blackjack doesn't mean the house bends over when they walk in the door. The game still has to be played and the cards may not favor them that day. Same goes for everything else. Potential is all well and good, but show me results before I applaud.

I think what SolidCobra has also been getting at is: why is the gun bunny always the target? Well, here's some thoughts on that.

The average gun bunny of the ilk we're talking about here looks like a threat. Often the biggest threat the bad guys are immediately facing. Lots of GBs sport obvious chrome, often obviously offensive chrome. They may have all silver cybereyes which is just odd, especially after Deus, they're probably sporting guns or other weapons.

Now, if the gun bunny is a human with no obvious ware except maybe a chance to spot reflex enhancements because of how he moves, ostensibly bearing only a pistol or an SMG, but there's a big fraggin' troll lurking behind him with an LMG, the troll is gonna cop for the first burst in my game. If there is a mage mid spell or with obvious spells sustained already then the geek the mage first 'rule' comes into play, then the troll will get it, assuming the GB hasn't leapt over there and torn them all a new drek hole.

Its about perception. If that same human was a total body conversion complete with macdonalds-pepsi sponsorship and an articulated arm mouting a chainsaw clutching in his hands his favorite assault cannon with 'betsy' stensilled on the side in his own blood (and not forgetting the multicoloured optic fibre mohican), then I'm afraid Mr Gunbunny has just earned himself twelve to eighteen round of hypervelocity lead as the bad guys freak out completely and ignore the possibility of the mage or the troll or anything except making whatever that thing is die. Giftwrapped, sir?

if you go somewhere inbetween with a GB who's wired, maybe a cybergun or other discreet, internal cyber, but is covered in body armour with a skillsoft jukebox maybe strapped to his leg, with a belt with spare clips, and general kit, and with his assault rifle or combat shotgun in his hands and almost certainly another back up gun or gun for a different job, then it becomes a more difficult assessment. As a GM, I'll make that assessment on an instance by instance basis. If the character does in fact scream 'target' at the bad guys, then he should expect those bad guys to deal with him if they can. If the player doesn't learn from this, then they can expect to be the ones usually shot at.

I had a player complain in my game a while back that they were the only ones getting shot fully auto at. The reason? they were an LMG wielding troll. The only other character in the group who looked like a threat (with an obvious cyberskull) got shot every bit as much as the troll, with the exception of if cover or range was a factor, since the troll didn't really hide so well...

The other characters in the group were adepts, or not-obvious magic users. they didn't look like a threat. once they cast a spell or somehow revealed the fact to the bad guys, they often DID get the geek the mage treatment.

Maybe it is your group that sucks, Solid, I don't know them really. But its my feeling that unless you're doing something to justify drawing fire more than others in the group, then you obviously shouldn't be drawing it.

Why is the gunbunny shot at most?

RP reasons: Looks most dangerous/scary of the group, enemies have a thing against character's race/look/whatever, gunbunny is in front of everyone else, everyone else is behind cover

Metagame reasons: can take the damage (best armor, highest body), GM just doesn't like gunbunnies

Random reasons: the dice said so, gunbunny is at the top of the "who gets shot at first" list

There shouldn't be much of a question as to why the gunbunny gets shot at most. It's like wondering why deckers are the ones who get targeted by IC more than mages, or why mages take drain when they cast a spell while a rigger doesn't. It's what they do.

But I don't think that has anything to do with the topic at hand. The topic is a metagame "hatred" of them.

take my current RL gunbunny as a example...
Ware that can be noticed: Wired Reflexes II, Dermal Sheat (is that spottable?), that's it!
and yet i get shot at the most, even if the Adept uses dual SMGs and i only use a single AR/SMG/Shotgun, even if the Troll wields a LMG, even if the mage just fried half the enemy squad and he shines with his nice "Armor" Spell.... and i just shot 2 of them (OMFG! The adept shot 3 and the troll shot 2.... the mage fried 5....)
Who gets targeted?
Is it the obvious mage that screams "I'm a mage, kill me!"?
Is it the troll with a LMG that just ripped their friends skulls out?
Is it the adept with dual SMGs that is keeping the survivors behind some boxes with suppressive fire?
NO!
It is.... you guessed it! The only one in the team with a essence lower than 2......
Sure, i survived, but why do they use APDS ammo on me? and not the mage or the troll?

gah, i guess all my GMs just plain suck (not my current online GM, he seems nice....)

Another reason is that because gunbunnies generally tend to be the simplest character type and the one most inexperienced players tend to start with, more people probably have memories of runs going horribly wrong as the result of the actions of a gunbunny than any other character type.

~J

Kagetenshi, Excellent point.

L.

"Uh, how come your magic 8-ball says "die?""
"That's because it's a Magic 8-Ball, cretin."

It was quite an impressive mistake. Still, I'm partly to blame; never again will I try to make burst-fire dartguns! Fellow GMs, nearly killing characters with Narcoject overdoses is not a good idea for what is not intended to be the main fight of a run.

~J

Gunbunnies rule!

That said, there's more than 1 type of gunbunny. I'm assuming the problem is with gunbunnies that are really, really good at what they do but are out of line with the group's capabilities

I have found that a lot of these issues solve themselves if the GM tells the group before the campaign starts what the game concept is. That tends to make characters think about what they'll need as well as what they want. It also helps if they players make their characters at the same time and talk to each other about what they're making. But if ya try and mould the game to the characters after they're made and no player knew what any other player was making? Gah! Headaches!

For one of my paused long-term IRL campaigns, we each had a niche to fill. We had two randoms, one mage, one rigger, and two meats. You made three characters to fill your niche, and stuck with one until it died or you felt it was time to retire it.

That can help resolve the "gunbunny" issue, since then the GM can make games around the niches working together. However, that is entirely up to the GM, and not the gunbunny. If the gunbunny takes the spotlight during combat, guess what...

IT'S HIS JOB!

Yell at the GM for making you fight, not the gunbunny for being good at what niche he's filling.

Make the gunbunny take Intimidation (Which, IMHO, shouldn't be linked to Cha, since most of the time you're trying to scare them, meaning you should have lower Cha than anything else).

Cha represents force of personality, not just luscious gams.

True, in a way. Low Cha, as I see it, can either mean really hot and really arrogant, or really ugly, or he just can't talk to people without acting like an idiot.

High Cha could mean ugly and is just really good with people, or really hot and people just like to be around him because of his looks.

But this is all based on your own thoughts and views. To each their own.

doesn't she, though!

Solidcobra, it looks like it's just your GM! So far, no one posting has said anything negative with regards to their own attitudes towards gunbunnies. And in view of your example of that firefight in which you were singled out for attack despite the more obvious threat posed by the others, especially the mage, I'd say your GM either has it in for you or your character, or has a bias against gun-toting sammies.

*looks at all his Trolls wielding LMGs*

None of them ever died/were targetted because he was the gun-toting Sammie.

One did get put in jail for 10 or so years. He was fun.

That's just bad GMing then. I know the first thing I would shoot at would be the huge ass monster with an equally huge ass weapon in his hand. I don't care if there's a freaky mage glowing blue standing next to him, the monster's getting my first clip of ammo.