My sister's a big fan of the sniper creed, and has been asking me to allow her to make a sniper for the current game. Now, admittedly, there's everything in the world in SR to make a damn good sniper, but this reminded me of the old question: Do you allow snipers in your games, and if you do, do you let them actually do their job 'correctly'.

In other words: Do you allow a sniper PC to set up a shot, have a spotter, wait, and pull off the kill as part of a run, or as the run itself?
Second: Do you use sniper NPCs?

I had a PC troll, damn near unstoppable, tick off a high ranked mafia type. In return, the mafia type hired a hitman, and the hitman, knowing the troll's reputation, sat a good ten blocks away, and pot-shotted the troll in the head. The troll went from 'pristine' to 'Serious Wound' in one shot. He got cover before the sniper could get a second shot off, and escaped with his life, but it was a close one...

After that incident, I tossed an e-mail to the editors for 3E SR, and asked about whether or not someone would get a dodge pool against a sniper shot. The answer was 'no, he's screwed'. My sister was quite satisfied with that answer, having a serious hate-on for 'soft' mechanics against such things.

What's your take on snipers?

I'd certainly allow one for a PC. As an NPC killing PCs, no, I wouldn't. There's usually multiple ways to do things -- there's pretty much always another way to accomplish something. Getting a head-shot from a distance with no way you can do anything about it isn't fun. It's simply the GM fiating that you're dead. Tossing a few dice doesn't absolve the GM of responsibility.

Re: goose, gander.

If a PC can park on a rooftop and take potshots at folks who don't get to attempt a dodge, why can't an NPC do the same thing if it's a warranted response from whoever the PCs have recently pissed off?

I certainly allow snipers, the rules support them just fine. I just make sure to remind the player that they are a shadowrunner, and not an assassin, which means that unless the team is large enough to have someone hang back like that, they are expected to at least sometimes get down in the thick of things.

As for sniper NPCs, I rarely use them. I sometimes use them as guards for super secure facilities(which means the team needs to be extra sneaky), but otherwise there are only used when the runners piss someone off. The Star and most corps don't bother going after runners who hit them usually, it is very risky and doesn't gain them any profit, but occasionally if the runners are really violent they can expect an assassination squad.

Because it's a game, perhaps? Players put a lot more effort into their characters than the average NPC has had. It's really easy as a GM to arrange a PK. That doesn't mean it's a good thing. Basically there's always multiple responses an NPC can do. There is never just one response. You go with the one that makes it most fun for everyone. A GM fiat kill doesn't do that for anyone but the GM.

If you think erasing a player's character without allowing a chance for survival is 'fun' you play at a very different table then I do. The fact remains if anyone ever gets pissed at the PC's then snipers, car bombs, missiles through bedroom windows, and hacking the targeting system of a thor shot are all much better ways of killing them then in face to face combat. They get the job done, only need 1 shot, and for the most part are reasonably inexpensive compared to the replacement cost of any assassins you might lose in a face to face battle. They also are no fun.

The biggest problem with Snipers is honestly that as a PC it can get very boring or make the sniper feel left out.

Yes, there are uses and times for snipers and those moments are awesome. But if you need to infiltrate a building, you'll have the team go in and the sniper hang out outside. In fact, if the run goes well enough, did you need the sniper(s)?

The problem we've ever had with snipers is that they can kind of get left out of the group. Now, if you run one of those games with 6-8 players in it, a sniper is probably not a bad choice at all since you will probably have overlapping character roles anyway. However, with a 2-4 man group, I would be harder pressed to want someone specifically geared to be a sniper.

Honestly, if the GM is keen on it and really feel he can incorporate that character into the game well, go for it.

As for snipers killing PCs, I do agree it does feel like the GM just fiating the death of whatever PCs get killed. That being said, don't feel so paralyzed that you can't exercise the option if you feel it appropriate or necessary. In fact, a sniper PC may get the most use by countersniping.

It just feels like if the PC group opens that can of worms, well so can the GM. This could result in a lot of PCs and NPCs dying and a lot of hostility between GM and player.

The GM I usually play with just tries to create a reality and let consequences merit themselves out, yet at the same time he's not going to viciously snipe us at every opportunity if we're playing competently and well.

I thing to do would br to cahge the game for running to wetwork. In a wetwork based game one could have a sniper and the rest of them team would have rolls as well. Same in a merc based game In mine I have two snipers as and mos of my PCs can strike at the 1.5km mark.

I use snipers and I allow them in my game. The following is from my point of view as a GM and from the issue of game mechanics, not realism.

In an SR4 game, I had a sniper NPC that had to kill another NPC my PCs were hired to protect. Going by RAW, what the sniper has going for him is principly that he can prepare himself to take that shot, roll high on his Disguise, get mods that reduce the ability for others to spot him. Together with other Perception mods, he should usually be able to make that shot before anyone even thinks to find him. But bodyguards and such are hired precisely to do so - find him, even then with all the negative modifiers applying to the guards' Perception, most of the time they do not.

Enter the spotter. His job is to find the sniper before the sniper even makes that shot. And in the game of who has the most dice (in SR4 at least), the spotter has a chance. Mr Perceptive can find that sniper and take him out before the sniper even shoots. Worse yet, there are ways around Mr Sniper's mundane defenses. Assensing can cut through most of Mr Sniper's bullshit.

The very worst sniper in my game is the Mage sniper. The spotter can see him and he has already spotted him, but he doesn't know that the Mage sniper is going to cast that spell. An Assensor might be able to do read his emotions, but it is limited to a very specific build - an Astral Perception adept that is focused on Assensing.

Shadowrun can be extremely lethal, although I would use snipers, I would use them sparingly.

I'm playing a character that started out as one, but due to the small size of the group, tends to spend most of his time in the thick of things with the other PCs rather than watch the world go by at 900m. Thinking about it, I don't think he's actually pulled his Desert Strike off the shelf since the second session that I played him in, which, coincidentally, was also the first time he pulled the rifle out. A lot of people died to rifle rounds that they never saw coming. It probably won't again for anything other than episodes of personal spite.

I happen to agree with the "good for the goose, good for the gander" school of thought, and we've definitely had a instance or two of a well concealed ganger with a sport rifle nearly putting someone down. The group is just graduating to the level where someone serious might actually come after us and I fully expect that at some point, someone is going to catch an MA-2100 or SM-4 round to the head because they zigged when they should have zagged. I'm also of the opinion that a PC has to die every once in a while to keep the specter of imminent death hanging over everyone. When someone died in the last gunfight, people are a little more hesitant to start the next one.

I'd allow a player to play a sniper but would warn him that he won't always be able to use his sniping abilities. He might even have limited opportunities to do so (but it's up to the group to find ways to benefit from a sniper). So since it's the same skill for shotgun, I'd advise him to take one.
Oh, and I'd also insist on the fact that Shadowrun is a team game, and that I play a lot of social/everyday things so he might get bored if he decides to play the mute loner sniper archetype.

As for NPC, verisimilitude is king in my game. If it makes sense to have a sniper, there'll be one. If it makes sense that the opposition will have a sniper kill a PC, the sniper will try to kill a PC. I just won't have a random sniper starting to randomly shoot the PCs.
But I warn my players about that, as well: don't expect your character not to die just because it's 'just bad luck', 'not a good death' or 'GM fiat': Edge is there to counter bad luck, we're not playing an heroic/epic game and nobody will kill you if you don't give them a good reason to.

I don't have a problem with snipers and the 'no dodge' rule works fine for me.

The problem is getting the time to settup a proper sniper hide and once there what happens if something unexpected transpires?

Secondary combat skills would be a good idea for sniper characters, don't get too specialized unless you are going with the Mission Impossible approach where you bring in specialists from a PC pool.

NPC snipers? That is a tool to be used with great care. IMO...Shadowrun...is about the disposable PC and that the law of averages is very unforgiving.

Who said anything about a "GM fiat kill?" I'm not talking about one of this place's retarded orbital cows or something. I'm talking about a reasonably competent professional killer with a rifle. PC's can make Perception tests (often with some absolutely ridiculous enhancements). PC's can learn a little fieldcraft -- as professional criminals -- and try to avoid dilly-dallying around in situations where someone can predict their location, get a good hide, line up a shot, and wait for them (they can stick to crowds, rotate from safehouse to safehouse, have Spirits on overwatch, whatever). PC's can wear armor. PC's can spend Edge to boost soak rolls, or even outright to avoid death. PC's can not piss people off that bad in the first place (remember, I said "if it's a warranted response").

If one PC gets a shot from a sniper, the mage can toss up a Barrier, get busy healing him, and the rest of the team can -- very dramatically -- respond to the attack in their own way, going after the shooter, starting a high speed chase, sniper-duelling him, spooking him from his nest and getting them to work making knowledge skill checks and pumping their contacts for information to see what's going on.

And on and on and on.


If you think one guy with a rifle is "erasing a player's character without allowing a chance for survival," do me a favor, stop being melodramatic, and read the above.

One dude with a rifle shouldn't be a total party kill in a game that revolves around competent Shadowrunners, people. What it should do is spook the hell out of the player characters, moderately-to-seriously injure one, and add a whole hell of a lot of tension. It should act as a wake-up call that they've done something particularly brutal, stupid, or both, it should tell them they're getting sloppy, it should let them know they've pissed off someone powerful who's taking it more personally than most marks.

I swear, some people are so fucking scared of applying a little pressure to their PCs, I wonder just how fun and exciting their games can be in the first place.

I think there is a good balance between applying pressure and appearing as if you're enacting GM revenge.

I also think that you shouldn't feel afraid to use a sniper yourself.

If the situation warrants it, a sniper or multipler snipers should be there. If not, then no snipers should be present.

There is the "escape death" capability that PCs can have access to (although if I recall it requires burning a permanent point of Edge and if you only have Edge 1 you can't, no?). Anyhow, if the PCs piss off the wrong people and those wrong people decide to go for a sniper to solve their being pissed off, then I think that's fine.

Besides, in an urban environment where the PCs make conscious choices to not expose themselves to sniper-friendly areas, I think that sniper would be hard-pressed to find an awesome spot in which he could reliably expect the PCs to show up...

I do allow snipers if they're appropriate for the situation. However, NPCs need to lure the PCs to the spot in the first place (i.e. - the ambush). A PC who allows himself to be led into an ambush, or who allows his safe house to be compromised, is already basically dead. The question is just how.

(I will say, I also have a VERY professional group of runners. They are far too smart for me. So I don't mind not pulling punches any more. They've had two encounters with snipers, once against snipers who were gunning for their Johnson, while the runners were aware of trouble and were running, so the sniper didn't have much of an opportunity, and once against barely trained gangers given rocket launchers from another source - again while the runners were expecting the ambush and reacted appropriately.)

I tend to play Hackers / TMs, and have a habit of making them snipers as a backup to their hacking abilities, so when we get a run that requires legwork but no actual hacking I can still be useful without everyone having to worry about me dying. Especially in 4th, where I can set up a camera on my rooftop and use AR to run overwatch while keeping an eye on my killing field to disrupt possible reinforcements / provide cover fire for an escaping team.

As a GM I will use snipers if my group does something to warrant one. But they know this and are careful to not establish behaviors that would enable a sniper to get a good clean shot. And if the rolls go horribly wrong and a sniper does get off a shot that should be a one hit kill, I'll usually drop the damage to 1 box under full, to give the player a chance. Of course the sniper will still keep shooting if they don't react appropriately.

And if you decide to go hang out in a public park 2 days after a bungled run on Ares... you deserve the one shot finish.

Oh definitely. And PC's getting sniped? Happens. Ftr, I've not sniped a PG while GMing, because i usually run one-shots between campaigns. Shadowrun is a dangerous game when people die. Your charcter has 10 'hit points'. This isn't D&D. If you get shot, you die from it. Happens.

But anyway, arguments aside, Yes, we allow sniping by anyone who wants to snipe in our games, PCs and NPCs alike. It kills my suspension of disbelief to think that if I piss off some powerful party they will send an assassin with a knife to come take me out. Seriously? Snipe me already, it just makes more sense.

I am currently using my sniper pc while my specialist pc has a few years downtime ( taking on aztec and being marked by an ant hive for death...yeah i practically had to built my own stealth space station >.<) i put alot of thought into grey. I didnt want him to be the "guy who sits back and just shoots 1 trick poney" i gave him other skills and edges that would benefit the rest of the group in the instance that

#1 my position is compromised - demolitions (set booby traps to stop/slow down enemies so i can escape or finish the job i was doing)

#2 un-expected armor - competence with ranged missile weapons ( take out tanks/bugs or make an opening for the team to escape)

#3 perceptive - helps with spotting etc.

#4 and an AK if i find myself in some close trouble

plus small unit tactics and a few other survival skills helps, if i have to guide my team out of a bad situation.

Often are the times a player takes an action that is not 'fun' for anyone but himself. This is despite the fact that there are always multiple responses a PC can do. However, since many players I've seen are routinely selfish, I feel that the GM is allowed the same luxury from time to time.

See, I'd say this something to be discussed out of game. Punishing a player for poor behavior by sniping him? What sort of behavior is that? Discuss issues that are a problem out of game rather than attempting to punish the player in game. One would assume everyone in the game are adults, or at least teenagers capable of acting like adults (I started playing SR in my teenage years, so had to toss that in.)

Snipers should be rather rare to non-existant unless the team F***s up hard.

Who deploys snipers? (not going to be exaustive or accurate list, sorry)
SWAT teams in hostage situations or similar - the bad guys (the runners) are pinned down for some time while the authorities are informed and these guys get deployed to support an assault and minimize casualties. How bad did the team F-up to get in this situation? Probably epic fail level F-up. Runners die, I like mine to live cause it tells a better story, but if I can't believe ANYONE could get out they are probably not going to.
The Army - Why is the army attacking your runners? Seriously. Either you are deployed in some sort of war zone as part of the mission and should be expecting this kind of crap (servaliance and stealth drones out to 2 km with kitted sensors, spirits using the Guard, Search and Stealth powers etc.) or you are attacking the WRONG place (and should be expecting this kind of crap).
Hitpersons - Organised criminal syndicates will hire killers, so will: disgruntled co-workers, that crazy lady you cut off in traffic the other day, other runner teams you have run into who have grown tired of your continued living, etc. This is the only one the players would get little warning of and will usually be the least skilled out of the 3 options presented - most hired killers of this stripe will be some degree of "crazy with a gun". Don't get me wrong, I can totally see such a person occasionally tossing 14-16 dice, but they are a fair bit less likely to have full kit (cyber eyes, spotter drones, smartlink with multipule redundancy, uber scope, agility 9+ etc. etc..) Thing is, even if I as the GM feel this is warrented most runners have a network of contacts connected to the underworld and many of these people have at least a token interest in keeping the runners alive and I can drop them the info. Now rather then a "BANG, your dead" and a dull thud, I have an extended paranoia filled tension fest as they (the mark and, if they care, the rest of the team) avoid open spaces, keep low, keep ranged servalince running 24/7 - oh and your Fixer called, he's got work for you - good work, better get going. At this point even in the unlikely event I am doing it just to kill the Runner I've given fair warning and they can be careful, smart and probably live.

Players as snipers? Sure, rock on. As others have mentioned though it is of limited use on most missions, but it will occasionally transform a hard to near impossible mission into a cakewalk. 20+ dice get rolled, edge spent - re-rolls failures - 12 hits and 20+DV latter - "Bang. He's dead" and a dull thud. And keeping in mind the Goose and the Gander - the target of such a run my easily get some warning that the infamous sniper has been hired if you are not careful. You are infamous right? Cause if you being hired doesn't fill the target with wetting their pants dread why am I hiring you to kill people when I can give a couple of dozen chipheads and hobos decent guns and offer 5000nY and some drugs to the one that gets them?

Perhaps, but "That's what [NPC X] would do." is just as valid as "That's what my character would do." A GM is not punishing them for poor behavior so much as just withdrawing any unnatural protection some people seem to assume PCs are due. This is not to say I encourage wilful malice on the part of the GM towards the players, just a greater emphasis to play things straight-up. A 'no carrot' approach is not the same as the 'stick' approach.

In terms of snipers as PCs, they're fine, IF and only if they're willing to do something other than snipe. As an example, here's something that happened in a MUX game I GM'd once:

Me: "Ok, the team is invited to the meet with some vory, where they will discuss a job."

Sniper (privately): "So, what's my role here?"

Me (privately): "We're playing out the meet, you'll find out soon!"

The meet goes on with the other characters, they meet the boss, find out the job, accept it. Sniper never says anything or even indicates that his character is there.

Sniper (privately): "So what's my role? Am I hired to go keep watch on the team and kill them if they betray the Johnson or something?"

Me (privately): "What? No! When did I indicate I was willing to run your own mini-plot for you?"

Sniper (privately): "Oh, I thought you knew [without any hint] that my character only works alone and only as a sniper. You should have planned the run with some way to include me."


THAT is the kind of thing I have a problem with. Snipers who are "lone wolves," who refuse to work with others and sometimes even to talk with others. Snipers who think that their only job is to snipe, and that everything can be accomplished by sniping. Making a master sniper PC who is an expert at stealth and perception and rifles? Great! As long as he maybe owns a shotgun or something for when a job doesn't involve sniper tactics. PCs who think they can dictate all the details of the run just because they made a certain archetype are just bogus. Not every job is going to allow for sniping, in fact, most won't. Case in point, infiltrating a facility. A sniper could take out the guards on the outside, but then their job would be over. That shouldn't be enough to earn a full share of the pay. The worst though are fanboys who don't know anything about real snipers, who assume that NPCs will stand around stupidly and get killed while you snipe like they do in most FPS's, instead of all taking cover and thereby becoming immune to further snipeage.

So, in brief, snipers are cool as long as they're flexible. As long as they're willing to work with the team, and are willing to do something other than snipe in situations where sniping is useless.

I had something very similar to this happen once. I laughed in his face, went back into the gaming room laughed some more. Explained to everyone else why I was laughing, everyone else laughed. After some molification of the Player in question I handed him a tweeked Weapon speciallist architype to play for the run and ran the game. It went well. There were nachos.

Eagle, I agree pretty strongly with your post about the three occaisions for snipers, with the addendum, remember that snipers are generally tied to a particular place they can predict the PCs to be (assumig it's not just a general killing field). PCs don't get sniped in Central Park unless they go to Central Park with some degree of regularity, or have a meet there or something. If they've never been there before, there's little reason to expect a sniper is waiting there to put a bullet through their eyes.

I agree, unless the sniper is doing his legwork and the PC leads him to a situation that is too good to pass up. "Hey look, the hacker I've been hired to kill just went to do some sunbathing and fell asleep on the roof of his building..."

Pfft. Hackers don't go outside. There's bears out there!

There're also beers out there.

"That's what my character would do." is also bad, yes. There's never only one option. This is the result of a player (or GM, as a GM is just a player behind the dice board) wanting to do something and using it as an excuse. Two wrongs don't make a right, however. Again, it should be discussed out of game to my mind.

You know, Critias, you and I don't always exactly see eye-to-eye, but in this case you've essentially spoken for me.

Sammies have Karma to burn relative to the awakened: having them burn a permanent point of edge isn't necessarily that bad in the long run. It keeps people on their toes and encourages subtlety and discression. It encourages the players to put some thought into things like "safe-houses" and "tail-evasion" and all those gritty aspects of 'running. I don't mean they need to give you blueprints or need to be real-life security experts, but if they put some effort (and Karma and nuyen) into it, then that shows good faith and usually they won't see any problems. But if they DO receive sniper fire, they can survive (if totally screwed up for the session) and the party then has to deal with the fallout. (Think about pulling this one at the end of a session as a cliff-hanger.)

And against a 'runner, there's no guarantee that it's going to be fatal. I would still expect my PCs to roll on the shot. But IIRC there was a (optional?) rule about limiting aim actions to your relevant firearms skill? Call the shot +4 to damage (head shot), 4 aim actions to counteract the penalties, and take your best shot. No dodge, so the Desert Strike is 7P+4(called shot)+1(minimum net hit)+any extra net hits. That's a minimum of 12P damage. Even a single net hit against an "average" body, unarmored individual is instand kill: 6 base physical boxes + 2 for BOD, then 3 Overflow boxes; Average a single hit to soak the damage. Think your sniper can get more than a single net hit? There's no reason to "fiat" the thing. If you don't get enough hits, you miss the head and hit outside the "sniper's triangle" by a smidgen. If they're wearing armor, you need that much more solid a hit. But even with Armor 12 and Body 8, that's an average of 6 boxes soaked (AP on a sniper rifle applies). 6+4(+8 overflow) means you need to get (18-11 base damage)=7 net hits to drop them cold. That's entirely within the realm of the possible, mechanically, but there's a world of possibility to miss or not connect well ENOUGH to take them to meat with that single hit.

Sure, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander", but that doesn't mean the gander isn't a very VERY tough bird with puisant birds around them to help out.

And as a final note, there's software (In Unwired, I think, but don't hold me to it) that when combined with an aray of microphones can act as a shot spotter, determining the angle from which the fire originated... assuming one of the PCs isn't sporting a radar. Being a sniper isn't a safe occupation, especially against competent targets. Their primary strength is as a foil to enemy morale and the ability to selectively remove a single target from amongst a crowd with a good shot. They aren't always the right tool for the job, however. And consider that firing an ATGM (If you torqued off somebody badly enough to get a professional assasin(s) after you, something like an anti-tank missile isn't out of the equation) at your team's van is just as deadly, if not more so.

As to the point about a sniper feeling "left out" or "unappreciated", I can vouch for that, having several of the faded, shrunken, cheapass t-shirts myself. But when things DO drop in the pot, having that rifle in position to keep the badguys' head down while the party beats feet is beyond price.

Wait, what?
Slight change of phrasing: "This is what would be the most (or only) reasonable responce from the (NP or P)C based on their background, modivations, resources and the information at hand" is bad for a roleplaying game?
What?

If you go kick Seader-Krupp in the preverbial junk, killing dozens of their top notch non-combatant employees, trashing the facility, selling the stolen multi-billion dollar objective to the highest bidder and make inadequeate effort to cover your tracks and conceal your identity you are probably dead. You are probably going to die as badly and publicly as can be managed (within allocated "vengance" budget, I might deside on a mechanic and roll some dice to determine how much is left in the budget and how cranky the Dragon is when the PC's make the top of the list) by one of the most powerful corps in the world. Maybe you were spot on character when you mooned the camera your heavily tatooed buttocks and burned your street name into the scalp of the lone survivor (you always leave one to tell the tale), or maybe you were just being dang sloppy on this job, but you are still going to have a no-nonsence kill team (and possibaly a few young dragons looking for brownie points with the Big Guy, whats the teams table rating again?) gunning for you and it won't be me the GM that does this to you. It will be the reasonable outcome of the situation. Yes there will be snipers on rooftops and worse (plural makes many things better) and yes, this is going to suck for the team. It will be "winnable" (I avoid running no-win senarios, no one, not even me, has any fun) but by no means easy or fatality free.

The same high end run done without fatalities to S-K staff, little to no evidence left behind and the objective sold to persons unknown on the sly... well the Big Guy might seek out your identities anyway on "his own time"... his agent has some work for you. It is an 'offer' you cannot in fact refuse. You see you owe him one, for not killing you over *incendent*.

If you don't believe the above "High end" senario replace the corp facility with a Yakuza gambling front, Traid drug den, Lone Star Police Headquarters or what have you. There are people out there who will try to kill the PC's like dogs in the street if you get in their way or just as an example to others and snipers are by no means the only nearly undefendable attack in the game (see the ad-infinitum "Spirits ar broken and ar hazing Powarz" threads). If this is not the case in your games... well as long as you're having a good time at it go freaking nuts. But I like a grittier game (but I'm not picking sand out of my teeth just yet)

I think I get what eleint is saying. It's when people do things that are awful and disruptive to the game, because that's what their character would do, that's what is bad. What's bad is the inflexibility in roleplaying that ALSO screws everyone over, like you're screwing everyone over, but then pretending you had no choice. You ALWAYS have a choice, and making the wrong one is a blameworthy action, whether you shroud it in RP or not.

Like, let's say you have four people at the table. You need all four of them, because each has a different specialty and they don't work well except as a team. The GM has one Shadowrun planned, and one player decides that his character leaves the meet because he doesn't trust the J, since that's what his character would do. Now, the game session is over, because the GM needs to plan something new. Everyone came to play Shadowrun, but now they can't, because of one person's "roleplaying."

The point is, RP has to be flexible. Anyone who says "that's what my character would do," and won't budge on that no matter how much it fucks everyone over, is being an asshole. I'm not talking about in-game fucking over though, I'm talking about out of character. If your roleplaying actions cause the gaming session to end, or ruin everyone else's enjoyment of the game, roleplaying is no excuse. Nobody's character is a real person, everyone has a choice in what their character does. Nobody is just "following RP," not ever. They're doing what they consciously want to do, because there is always a choice -- even if a character has a set personality, there's no such thing as someone who never acts differently from how you'd expect. People need to recognize that their actions have RL consequences as well as game consequences. If their roleplaying has out of game consequences that really blow, they deserve all the blame for it, because they are in absolute control of their own character. It's like you have a puppet that you're trying to use to simulate life, then you make the puppet hurt someone, and blame the puppet. That's the bogus cop out that (maybe) eleint was referring to.

Reminds me of the old games of DnD where you occasionally would get the one player (always a "thief") who claimed his class was free license to steal from the party, screw them over, and stab them in the back.

In the worst instance, one player decided on his nightly watch to slit all the players throats. In the act of his murder I had a holy pilgrimage of knights, paladins, and pious clergy stumble on the scene and he wasn't much of a match by himself. To his credit he took the death and rolled up another thief. I killed that character in his sleep, to which he shouted "thats not fair!", "exactly, and it isn't very fun either" was my response. We all had a good laugh.

Well roleplayed, a little inter-party conflict is fine, provided it doesn't derail the game. The moment they ruin the fun for everyone, I drop the GM hammer on them or don't allow them to play at all.

As for the OP question. Hell yea I use snipers (not all that often). If the party isn't going to recon or prepare for what a mission might entail, well shadowrun can be brutal. I do however give them options to detect or otherwise notice the sniper in most cases, as insta-gib by the GM is pretty much just as bad if not worse when it comes to ruining the fun.

My players get pretty crafty and are well aware of what the competition and enemies can do. Decoy illusions, drones, high perception, thermographics, wireless signals all provide decent means to detect snipers. Thermal smoke gernades do a pretty decent job of providing some cover in areas they suspect someone is going to be taking pot shots at them.

A sniper in a group is fine, but they need to do more than snipe. A sniper in the military usually has a spotter because he has problems identifying the targets. A sniper's other duties are anti-sniper, foward observer and reconnaissance. The sniper also need a clear line of sight for long distances which is difficult in urban or shadowruns.

If you incorporate a sniper into the group my recommendation is make sure this is their secondary role
(unless you have a large group). Their primary role should be something else such as face or something where they can contribute to the group every shadowrun. I don't think players want their sniper to make 1-5 shots per game before they are discovered and neutralized.

As for NPC snipers they are perfectly valid assuming they have a reason. If the players have high notoriety, stole from a mafia or something where it is more than just business then they will hire an assassin. The characters should hear about the fact they are wanted and be allowed to counteract that issue. It is perfectly acceptable to shoot a player, but don't kill them on the first shot. A bad wound where they are trapped and need to be rescued is fine. General rule is the opponents will use as much discretion and firepower as the PCs. Also the PCs deserve all the bad luck they get based upon the way they play.

*nods in agreement*

Kerenshara's not primarily a sniper, but it's the duty she takes any time the rest of the (small) group is required for the up-close work and she isn't. Primarily, she's the sneak and entry specialist and in combat she's more about really close work when she's not on a rooftop.

Ordinarilly, if the rigger is "remote", I would expect them to be the one on extraction/overwatch in the team vehicle. In this case, he was too busy stuck hacking (TMancer) into a comlink we were trying to physically access at the time, and no way was I fitting in among the majority of the clientelle (read: Orcs and Trolls). That left me odd-girl-out, and I had no problem up top. OK, OOC it's boring as hell, when my initiative rolls were averaging 18 and I have a spare init pass. But I know my team could go in with the certainty that if things came apart, their backs were covered.

You know, a sniper + rigger combo works fairly well. When the sniper isn't trying to blow someone's head off, they can control drones -- which fit most of the roles of the spotter as well. Hmm. Need to talk to my sister about this.

Actually, I would completely disagree. Here is why:

A sniper needs excellent stealth, marksmanship, and the athleticism to get into position.

A rigger needs a broad selection of technical skills and vehicle skills.

A rigger operating a number of drones/vehicles has their attention spread pretty wide, and the focus needed for spotting/sniping would seriously take away from their ability to rig effectively.

Now, a rigger/decker has so much synergy it's scarry. Make them a TMancer, and toss a little extra Karma at them, you have somebody SERIOUSLY capable.

If you're controlling your own drones, and they have the proper programming to run themselves (which is isn't that hard to do even now, let alone in 207X), I don't see using drones to act as remote spotters as being a problem. I've made it a point to keep a finger on the pulse of modern technology specifically so I can apply it to Shadowrun -- I see what's coming out now and say 'so, 60 years into the future, this would look possibly like that'.

Well, we'll see how my sister runs with this. I'll let you know the result.

People have this idea that drones fly themselves, and are so cheap that any archetype can just add drones. Snipers can have a drone fleet, mages can have a drone fleet... everything is solved by drones! Not so. Though drones are cheap, they typically come with 3-4 Pilot and no autosofts. That kind of drone can't fly itself or fight with any real aptitude. An off the shelf drone piloting itself is going to critical glitch and crash into the nearest obstacle much of the time. You need to spend thousands of yen on pilot and thousands of yen on autosofts, not to mention upgrading sensors and adding things like Encrypt and ECCM. Being able to command drones takes pretty much nothing, but having drones that actually understand commands and execute them competently, that's damned expensive.

I would recommend the Sniper be the heavy weapons and demolitions person. Those skills are not often needed, but the player would have a whole slew of tricks at the ready. Smugglers, face and weapon specialists where IPs and close combat skills are less critical, but they are more support characters.

Can the player trust the GM to not screw over the players? If there are Johnsons who will screw over runner teams it's perfectly reasonable for a character and the player to decide no deal and walk. There isn't any amount of money you can offer that will allow you to kill me. If the GM isn't prepared for the characters/players to not blindly walk into his traps then it's the GM's issue.

I do not mind if one player were to drop out of a particular game, he can play the bad guys and then he can kick himself for missing out on the easy cred.

Kzt, you raise a valid point; the players absolutely have to have the authority and willpower to say "I don't trust this," or they're going to get slotted from behind. That said, if you walk out on Mr. J, you run a considerable risk of, as Larme put it, ending the game session.

Here's my idea for a compromise.

If your character is so paranoid that he doesn't trust Mr. J/the GM (or, rather, intelligent enough that he doesn't), it makes sense to me that, rather than spook and leave, he should've hit the matrix/streets/Astral Plane and done his homework. Who does Mr. J work with? Do all his employees mysteriously die? Is he known to have ties with someone who'd want to hurt the PCs? Is he privately biased against some group (say, changelings) that half the group happens to be? That way, the paranoid character can either be reassured that (as far as he can tell) he's not walking into a trap, or, if he's not convinced, he can cancel the meeting and not waste everyone's time. From a metagame perspective, the GM is likely to reward the forethought of research, as long as it's intelligently done. If it turns out to be a trap anyway, then either you're bad at legwork (and your character shouldn't be, if he's of a mind to do it often) or the GM has just decided that you're fated to walk into a trap, in which case you're going to find your way into it one way or another.

And the other thing about bolting from the meeting is that, isn't the character interested in money? I mean, if he isn't motivated to run in the shadows, he shouldn't be in shadowrun.

If the players don't want to play the predesigned scenario, then it is up to the players to decide their own shadowrun. I get very tired of players just sitting waiting for Mr. Js to give them missions. The players should also have motivations and contacts they need to help.

Why don't the players pick out targets? They can do the legwork and decide how to penetrate defenses. A good GM should be putting down hints about several locations or rumors of what is going on. Maybe the players decide they want to clean up certain neighborhoods or even create their mafia gang. The secret about GMing is the players tell the stories and the GM just throws in plot twists.

I suppose i cant really blame this anyone....well okay. i was running a sniper character, Elf ex-tir ghost, and we were hired to get rid of this renraku exec. Well when our GM puts effort into an enemy he really doesnt want them to die. I was sniping her from across a park while she was eating lunch with the "bait" (our female party member, turns out the exec. was a lesbian, which made things interesting for the alchoholic womanizer in our party...), and i lined up my shot and took it. i used edge and wound up with 14 hits. Our GM used the hand of god rule and had her do a backflip off her chair even though she was completely unaware of us. later on he told us it was because they had someone spying from the astral. okay....so she just starts sprinting towards me, pulling out a heavy pistol. i take another shot, with a resounding 11 hits, and so she "burned another point of edge" and proceeded to do that once more before beating the living hell out of me. I've learned snipers dont really work well with our GM, since the people i would usually need to snipe wouldnt die even if i hit them. so i gave up and made an adept face for the current game, and my fingers are crossed they dont "burn edge" to beat me in social combat.

That would make me walk from the game, period. I call that 'cheating'.
At the very best, if I burned an edge to have the character survive, I'd have her drop like a stone, and look 'dead' for all intents and purposes. Then I'd have security show up so the PCs would have to flee, rather than allow the PCs to 'make sure'.

The resolution to the story is better. im assuming our complaints reached his brain at that point so he put the hand of god rule into use how it should be. We chased her down an alley, threw a grenade into the limo she jumped in, it went off. apparently, again she evaded sweet sweet death by jumping out the other door. We did end up killing her, when she returned to her ship our bow-troll nailed her for around 21P. Hehe our face made a disguise of her, got onto her ship, into the cockpit and called all the crew to the cargo bay saying she suspected an intruder. she locked down the ship. flew outside the docking port(this was a space station btw) and ejected the crew into space.

I guess it all works out. it still ruined snipers for me.

A sniper doesn't always have to be about the high power rifle on a roof. With great stealth, athleticism, and ballistic skills, he/she can be effective in many situations. Even with an assault rifle/pistol and in the midst of things she can still be about stealth positioning and one or two well placed shots.

You mean the fact it can only be used once per adventure? /snark

Our team walked out on one J that I can remember. It did end the session. The GM also later admitted it was a setup.



The critical drawback to that is that if you DO know who the J is you've just motivated the target to come after you, as they would really like to know that too. On of your defenses is that you are are a cut out. You don't know who hired you or why, so chasing you down and methodically torturing you to death isn't going to tell the angry target anything useful. Once you DO know you are no longer a deniable asset. It is both in the interest of the J to kill you and the target's interest to hunt you down and hurt you or people you care about until you tell him everything you know. This is BAD.


My personal feeling is that I'm not motivated by the idea to having someone pay me tomorrow to commit suicide by cop tonight.