shadowrun notoriety isn't real world notoriety any more than shadowrun karma is real world karma.
shadowrun notoriety is more a record of how unprofessional and/or violent/dangerous you are. how well known you are is handled by the public awareness score.
could your public awareness score increase for repeated murders? sure, no special rules against that. it's just "whenever the GM feels it's appropriate" pretty much. are people going to see you as being more dangerous because you murder multiple people as compared to one? will people in the shadows be less likely to work with someone who is a known multiple murderer than they would be to deal with someone who has only murdered once? that's what notoriety represents.
Full Version: Does this deserve a notoriety point?
QUOTE (Jaid @ Dec 28 2009, 01:28 PM) 
shadowrun notoriety isn't real world notoriety any more than shadowrun karma is real world karma.
shadowrun notoriety is more a record of how unprofessional and/or violent/dangerous you are. how well known you are is handled by the public awareness score.
could your public awareness score increase for repeated murders? sure, no special rules against that. it's just "whenever the GM feels it's appropriate" pretty much. are people going to see you as being more dangerous because you murder multiple people as compared to one? will people in the shadows be less likely to work with someone who is a known multiple murderer than they would be to deal with someone who has only murdered once? that's what notoriety represents.
shadowrun notoriety is more a record of how unprofessional and/or violent/dangerous you are. how well known you are is handled by the public awareness score.
could your public awareness score increase for repeated murders? sure, no special rules against that. it's just "whenever the GM feels it's appropriate" pretty much. are people going to see you as being more dangerous because you murder multiple people as compared to one? will people in the shadows be less likely to work with someone who is a known multiple murderer than they would be to deal with someone who has only murdered once? that's what notoriety represents.
I would posit that people would be less inclined to work with a serial killer than someone who has commit a murder. Likewise, I would think Johnsons would be less likely to work with a character who consistently pisses off Johnsons compared to one who has pissed off one Johnson. I also believe that a runner who has failed to complete multiple runs would also be less likely to get runs in the future. Many of the reasons to give Notoriety are reasons that would justify notoriety being earned...
"Earning a powerful enemy or contract on her life." - By all reasoning, if the character made an enemy of Lofwyr the character should earn a point of notoriety. If this character then later makes an enemy of Damien Knight, the character should not gain a 2nd point of notoriety.
QUOTE (Jaid @ Dec 28 2009, 02:28 PM)
shadowrun notoriety isn't real world notoriety any more than shadowrun karma is real world karma.
shadowrun notoriety is more a record of how unprofessional and/or violent/dangerous you are. how well known you are is handled by the public awareness score.
could your public awareness score increase for repeated murders? sure, no special rules against that. it's just "whenever the GM feels it's appropriate" pretty much. are people going to see you as being more dangerous because you murder multiple people as compared to one? will people in the shadows be less likely to work with someone who is a known multiple murderer than they would be to deal with someone who has only murdered once? that's what notoriety represents.
shadowrun notoriety is more a record of how unprofessional and/or violent/dangerous you are. how well known you are is handled by the public awareness score.
could your public awareness score increase for repeated murders? sure, no special rules against that. it's just "whenever the GM feels it's appropriate" pretty much. are people going to see you as being more dangerous because you murder multiple people as compared to one? will people in the shadows be less likely to work with someone who is a known multiple murderer than they would be to deal with someone who has only murdered once? that's what notoriety represents.
Like, for instance, my character got Public Awareness 1 just for being interviewed by Wharez Waldo (from Denver Missions) even though I have Street Cred 0 and Notoriety 0. I'll see later with my GM what I can do to drop this point.
In the case of the serial killer, he could have Notoriety 1 and public awareness 6 if he has killed, for instance, 6 people in 1-2 months. Now, the serial killer would only gain the Notoriety and Public Awareness after the fact becomes, of course, public. Unless he starts bragging about it and posting video-feeds on the Matrix showing his face, voice, Matrix persona, whatever, something that can be used to identify him later.
QUOTE (StealthSigma @ Dec 28 2009, 03:59 PM)
I would posit that people would be less inclined to work with a serial killer than someone who has commit a murder. Likewise, I would think Johnsons would be less likely to work with a character who consistently pisses off Johnsons compared to one who has pissed off one Johnson. I also believe that a runner who has failed to complete multiple runs would also be less likely to get runs in the future. Many of the reasons to give Notoriety are reasons that would justify notoriety being earned...
"Earning a powerful enemy or contract on her life." - By all reasoning, if the character made an enemy of Lofwyr the character should earn a point of notoriety. If this character then later makes an enemy of Damien Knight, the character should not gain a 2nd point of notoriety.
"Earning a powerful enemy or contract on her life." - By all reasoning, if the character made an enemy of Lofwyr the character should earn a point of notoriety. If this character then later makes an enemy of Damien Knight, the character should not gain a 2nd point of notoriety.
Pissing the same Johnson twice shouldn't raise your notoriety, you already pissed him once and he knows it. Unless of course you got creative on how you pissed the second time. But pissing other Johnsons should raise your notoriety, since the shadows will know how obtuse/annoying you are.
QUOTE (StealthSigma @ Dec 28 2009, 08:16 AM)
You haven't tasted the goodness that is girl scout cookies, have you? If you have, you wouldn't fault them for stealing the cookies. They're pretty expensive. =(
--
I think that falls under the lines of double jeopardy. OJ Simpson can't be tried again for the murder of Nicole Simpson, but he could be tried in another murder case if he were to murder someone else, say Kanye West.
If OJ Simpson killed Kanye West, would he become more notorious even though he's already murdered someone? I would say yes. This is a new murder, a different murder, regardless if the method is similar or vastly different.
--
Look at the serial killer archetype, and follow the public perception. The serial killer makes his first murder. The public doesn't really care, he's still not a serial killer with just one murder. He's no difference than any other murdering scum. The serial killer makes his second murder following the MO. Law enforcement will admit that the murders are similar, but it's still too early for the media to classify it as a serial killer. At this point, he's even more notorious with law enforcement. They suspect it's the same individual, and will be working harder to catch him. Then the SK makes his third murder. Law enforcement indicates that all three murders are the same suspect, media latches on and starts the serial killer story. This guy starts becoming known to the public at large. He continues to make murders, uncaught. For each additional murder, the media reports it and dedicates more time on the story. More people find out, more people want him caught, especially if they or someone they know may fit the MO. At some point, law enforcement will set up a temporary division specifically dedicated to finding and prosecuting the serial killer.
Notoriety, if we follow any proper definition of the word, is an indicator of of infamy. Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Jeffery Dahmer would not be as well known as they were if it weren't for the volume of kills they performed.
--
I think that falls under the lines of double jeopardy. OJ Simpson can't be tried again for the murder of Nicole Simpson, but he could be tried in another murder case if he were to murder someone else, say Kanye West.
If OJ Simpson killed Kanye West, would he become more notorious even though he's already murdered someone? I would say yes. This is a new murder, a different murder, regardless if the method is similar or vastly different.
--
Look at the serial killer archetype, and follow the public perception. The serial killer makes his first murder. The public doesn't really care, he's still not a serial killer with just one murder. He's no difference than any other murdering scum. The serial killer makes his second murder following the MO. Law enforcement will admit that the murders are similar, but it's still too early for the media to classify it as a serial killer. At this point, he's even more notorious with law enforcement. They suspect it's the same individual, and will be working harder to catch him. Then the SK makes his third murder. Law enforcement indicates that all three murders are the same suspect, media latches on and starts the serial killer story. This guy starts becoming known to the public at large. He continues to make murders, uncaught. For each additional murder, the media reports it and dedicates more time on the story. More people find out, more people want him caught, especially if they or someone they know may fit the MO. At some point, law enforcement will set up a temporary division specifically dedicated to finding and prosecuting the serial killer.
Notoriety, if we follow any proper definition of the word, is an indicator of of infamy. Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Jeffery Dahmer would not be as well known as they were if it weren't for the volume of kills they performed.
So he gets a point of Notoriety for the first one, and then receives additional Public Awareness with each additional one... works by the rules...
Keep the Faith
The problem is that the in game effects of the character's actions are never going to match up to the Notoriety/PA mechanics except by blind luck-- the in game effects will always be dependent largely on in game (non mechanical) factors. We can either crowbar the in game reasoning to fit with the mechanics, or crowbar the mechanics to fit the in game reasoning.
Personally, I like the latter.
Personally, I like the latter.
Yup. I think it works better if you don't provide a mechanic for the GM to use that everyone who has tried to use it knows is stupid and broken.
i'm not quite clear on what you're talking about.
the rules are basically:
the GM should add a point of notoriety when appropriate. (with some guidelines on when it is appropriate)
the GM should make a point of adjusting public awareness when appropriate. (with some guidelines on when it is appropriate)
notoriety can be reduced by 1 point by expending 3 points of street cred.
1 point of street cred is gained for every 10 points of karma earned.
public awareness increases with every 3 points of notoriety/street cred (but can be reduced by taking precautions)
now, i'll grant that certain attached rules could use some tweaking, but overall it really isn't a particularly bad system.
with some fairly minor changes, i think it could work even better, but it isn't like it's some sort of completely horrible system.
so what changes would i make?
1) street cred starts at 3 (because honestly, with 400 BP, you've got some more street cred than the average person).
2) street cred *can* drop below zero, but you can only spend positive street cred to cancel out notoriety.
3) most qualities which add to notoriety at chargen would instead reduce street cred.
4) street cred can be reduced at the GM's discretion by consistently unprofessional actions (but not usually by a single act).
the rules are basically:
the GM should add a point of notoriety when appropriate. (with some guidelines on when it is appropriate)
the GM should make a point of adjusting public awareness when appropriate. (with some guidelines on when it is appropriate)
notoriety can be reduced by 1 point by expending 3 points of street cred.
1 point of street cred is gained for every 10 points of karma earned.
public awareness increases with every 3 points of notoriety/street cred (but can be reduced by taking precautions)
now, i'll grant that certain attached rules could use some tweaking, but overall it really isn't a particularly bad system.
with some fairly minor changes, i think it could work even better, but it isn't like it's some sort of completely horrible system.
so what changes would i make?
1) street cred starts at 3 (because honestly, with 400 BP, you've got some more street cred than the average person).
2) street cred *can* drop below zero, but you can only spend positive street cred to cancel out notoriety.
3) most qualities which add to notoriety at chargen would instead reduce street cred.
4) street cred can be reduced at the GM's discretion by consistently unprofessional actions (but not usually by a single act).
The most basic is that the rules don't have any mention in the street cred about anyone having to know what you've done in order to earn it. They just mysteriously do. So if have 150 karma if doesn't matter if you've managed to have never had anyone ever seen you face on a run or if you did it running around on a video show with your name in 2 inch high letters on your back.
QUOTE (kzt @ Dec 30 2009, 08:08 PM)
The most basic is that the rules don't have any mention in the street cred about anyone having to know what you've done in order to earn it. They just mysteriously do. So if have 150 karma if doesn't matter if you've managed to have never had anyone ever seen you face on a run or if you did it running around on a video show with your name in 2 inch high letters on your back.
well, why don't we see what the rules supposedly say about that:
shockingly, this is right in the section about public awareness, which is really the last place anyone would think to look for rules about public awareness, apparently... (obviously, it is enlarged for emphasis, but it has apparently been overlooked quite routinely)
QUOTE (SR4A page 265 @ "Public Awareness")
At the gamemaster’s discretion, any exceptional efforts
the character has made to keep her profile low and activities secret can
be used to reduce this score. Likewise, if anything the character does
is intentionally or inadvertently splashed on the news, the gamemaster
should increase the score accordingly.
the character has made to keep her profile low and activities secret can
be used to reduce this score. Likewise, if anything the character does
is intentionally or inadvertently splashed on the news, the gamemaster
should increase the score accordingly.
gosh, that almost sounds like you can reduce the public awareness score by being extra cautious about making sure nobody ever sees your face on a run. if only someone had already quoted this earlier -- oh wait, hey, whaddya know? Here it is, 16 posts earlier in this exact same thread.
Can you show me how it says that for street cred? Darn, it doesn't. Which was exactly what I said.
It does have this bit about how people who know the reputation get hit and those who don't don't, but it's not all A or B unless you are a video star. But in SR it's A or B.
It does have this bit about how people who know the reputation get hit and those who don't don't, but it's not all A or B unless you are a video star. But in SR it's A or B.
QUOTE (kzt @ Dec 30 2009, 08:10 PM)
Can you show me how it says that for street cred? Darn, it doesn't. Which was exactly what I said.
It does have this bit about how people who know the reputation get hit and those who don't don't, but it's not all A or B unless you are a video star. But in SR it's A or B.
It does have this bit about how people who know the reputation get hit and those who don't don't, but it's not all A or B unless you are a video star. But in SR it's A or B.
Street Cred is a measure of your credibility on the street for people in the know... you do jobs for Fixer x, Johnson Y and Organization Z... word gets around that you are a professional (or not, dependant upon your notoriety)... people knwo what you do... sometimes, very important people know... that is what the Street Cred Score represents...
Public Aweareness measures what the everyman knows about you r actions... Public Awareness Scales based upon your actions both up and down... Street Cred usually does not, unless you change identities like underwear and move to different cities, at which point, your Street Cred resets with each new identity (how I would do it anyway)... if you ever screw something up, maybe identities become linked... happens from time to time I am sure...
Point being... Street Credibility is your Credibility within the Shadowrunner/Underworld Community...
Anyway...
Keep the Faith
What Tymeaus said. Street cred is situational. It should only really apply when the person knows about it already.
For instance, your fixers would know you've been doing jobs for a while. If they're good at their job then they ought to know that you do jobs for other fixers too. Even if they don't know the details of the work, they could pick up on if you do a good job or not. It could be as simple as the fact that you keep coming back alive. Word can get around without revealing sensitive details. Notoriety can behave in a similar way or be more directly informed to people. Anyone who has a reasonable chance to know about this would be affected by street cred and notoriety modifiers in social situations.
But you take Mr. Rando Nome (I love that classic RPG name to tell the PC's they're on the wrong track n_n) off the street or in a soycaf shop and he doesn't know a thing about the PC's rep unless their public awareness is high enough.
Nowhere in the whole thing does it mention that you NEED to be positively identified for the street cred or notoriety to be changed, though I consider it to only make sense that you should be ID'ed for notoriety to increase (usually, there can be exceptions). Being ID'ed is only really tied directly to public awareness and then only loosely.
Given these, I see no problem with street cred building from karma gain whether or not people know about their epic deeds. It only applies to people who should know about the characters well enough anyhow.
For instance, your fixers would know you've been doing jobs for a while. If they're good at their job then they ought to know that you do jobs for other fixers too. Even if they don't know the details of the work, they could pick up on if you do a good job or not. It could be as simple as the fact that you keep coming back alive. Word can get around without revealing sensitive details. Notoriety can behave in a similar way or be more directly informed to people. Anyone who has a reasonable chance to know about this would be affected by street cred and notoriety modifiers in social situations.
But you take Mr. Rando Nome (I love that classic RPG name to tell the PC's they're on the wrong track n_n) off the street or in a soycaf shop and he doesn't know a thing about the PC's rep unless their public awareness is high enough.
Nowhere in the whole thing does it mention that you NEED to be positively identified for the street cred or notoriety to be changed, though I consider it to only make sense that you should be ID'ed for notoriety to increase (usually, there can be exceptions). Being ID'ed is only really tied directly to public awareness and then only loosely.
Given these, I see no problem with street cred building from karma gain whether or not people know about their epic deeds. It only applies to people who should know about the characters well enough anyhow.
Page 257:
"Street Cred applies as a dice pool bonus to any applicable Social Skill Test in which the character's reputation is known and is a factor."
Page 258:
"Like Street Cred, Notoriety is only effective when applied to people who would know of the character's notorious rep."
So basically, the NPCs that the character meets don't magically know about his good/bad reputation, unless they have a plausible reason to. Basically, if they might have heard about the runner, they make an appropriate knowledge skill test, modified by Public Awareness.
"Street Cred applies as a dice pool bonus to any applicable Social Skill Test in which the character's reputation is known and is a factor."
Page 258:
"Like Street Cred, Notoriety is only effective when applied to people who would know of the character's notorious rep."
So basically, the NPCs that the character meets don't magically know about his good/bad reputation, unless they have a plausible reason to. Basically, if they might have heard about the runner, they make an appropriate knowledge skill test, modified by Public Awareness.
QUOTE (tagz @ Dec 30 2009, 08:43 PM)
Given these, I see no problem with street cred building from karma gain whether or not people know about their epic deeds. It only applies to people who should know about the characters well enough anyhow.
Ok, then. So if you have 150 karma and the person you are dealing with knows only some of what you have done you how much of modifier do you get? Rules say + 15 or zero. Which would you suggest?
First I'd wonder what kinda half assed background check he did on the PC's considering the setting of shadowrun and how info is life...
Then yeah, I'd likely apply a partial modifier that seemed to make sense.
Then yeah, I'd likely apply a partial modifier that seemed to make sense.
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Dec 26 2009, 09:42 PM)
"Terrorists Flatten Girlscout Troop, Come Back for Cookies."
Full of win.
The way I see street cred and notoriety. Fixer A was hired by Johnson B. Fixer A grabbed Runners C, D, E, and F. The job goes successfully, so now anyone who asks Fixer A or Johnson B about Runners C, D, E, or F will get positive feedback. Similarly if they were on run K and there is bad news around Location K at a time when run K was taking place(Something worthy of notoriety) then it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that RUnners C, D, E, and/or F likely had something to do with it, and thus if Fixer A or Johnson B get asked, they could mention it. That information spreads and that is how you get your Street Cred, Notoriety, and Public Awareness (The occasional guy overhearing about how Runner C did this or that as word of her spreads more).
And yeah, you can run away from your rep by changing names, faces, and cities, but that means you'll suddenly miss out on having a fixer go "Oh yeah, this guy is good for that." or anything similar, and that is how you get runs that pay well. You don't get high priority runs as an apparent newbie. You get 'fetch me this' runs and 'I need some people for asuicide slightly dangerous run'. runs
Edit: If a character does this, it isn't so out of the question to keep track of SC, N, and PA for the separate identities. Maybe "Bob the Badass" is well known as the best runner out there who has dozens of missions under his belt while "Parry the Passable" is a promising looking guy, but is totally 'new' to the shadows.
And yeah, you can run away from your rep by changing names, faces, and cities, but that means you'll suddenly miss out on having a fixer go "Oh yeah, this guy is good for that." or anything similar, and that is how you get runs that pay well. You don't get high priority runs as an apparent newbie. You get 'fetch me this' runs and 'I need some people for a
Edit: If a character does this, it isn't so out of the question to keep track of SC, N, and PA for the separate identities. Maybe "Bob the Badass" is well known as the best runner out there who has dozens of missions under his belt while "Parry the Passable" is a promising looking guy, but is totally 'new' to the shadows.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Dec 29 2009, 08:40 PM)
So he gets a point of Notoriety for the first one, and then receives additional Public Awareness with each additional one... works by the rules...
Keep the Faith
Keep the Faith
Only in the case of a serial murder that is publicized. However take the example of pissing off Johnsons. You've pissed off 10 different Johnsons, but you've only accrued 1 point of notoriety. You can't arbitrarily assign Public Awareness to the character, since Public Awareness is used for people outside of the shadows and Johnsons are definitely involved in the shadows. By the "can't earn notoriety from the same thing twice" school of thought, you've pissed off 10 Johnsons but have only earned 1 Notoriety because you were just a dick during negotiations.
Likewise, you can perpetually fail to complete runs, and unless you go about failing in a spectacularly different way, you've only accrued one point of notoriety.
Now let's look at the whole reputation system.
Street Cred, you earn 1 street cred for every 10 points of karma you've earned rounded down, plus additional street cred at GM discretion.
Notoriety, you earn 1 notoriety when you commit an action the GM deems fit for notoriety. You can't earn notoriety for the same event twice. Notoriety can be reduced by spending 2 street cred to reduce 1 point of notoriety.
Public Awareness baseline is one third of your accumulated street cred and notoriety, plus can be adjusted by GM discretion up and down.
So how can a GM affect all three?
Street Cred- Only Up
Notoriety- Only Up
Public Awareness- Up & Down
So back to my Johnson example. Runners piss off a Johnson for the first time by being utter jerks during negotiation. GM assigns a point of notoriety. Runners piss of a second, different, Johnson during the next meeting. They haven't done anything different, just behaved like jerks again. Since this is a shadows incident that will never be splayed on the trids for everyone, the GM can only affect Street Cred and Notoriety. The GM cannot force street cred down, so his only option is to increase notoriety. However since you've shackled the GM to only giving notoriety for a type of incident once (ie never more than 1 point of notoriety for pissing off a Johnson unless it's done in a vastly new way), the GM has no way to account for this indiscretion via game mechanics and stats.
Let's look at another example. Failing to complete a run. I'm not sure how you can fail to complete a run in new and innovative ways. If the run was not publicized in any way, shape, or form then once again Public Awareness cannot be used. Street cred obviously makes no sense. Once again the runners cannot earn more notoriety for failing to complete more than 1 run. Once again, the system fails as the GM has no way to account for this dismal failure within the shadows.
Not every notoriety earning action is in a situation where increasing public awareness is viable. The "only earn 1 point of notoriety for a class of actions" interpretation falls flat on its face when dealing with shadows only situations.
Here's another way to look at it...
Numerically speaking, and I'm going to pick some arbitrary odds here...
Failing or refusing to finish a run - 1 in 25 (0.04)
Insulting or otherwise pissing off a Mr. Johnson - 1 in 25 (0.04)
Picking a fight and losing - 1 in 50 (0.02)
Incredibly obnoxious or callous behavior - 1 in 50 (0.02)
Getting arrested - 1 in 100 (0.01)
Betrayal - 1 in 500 (0.002)
Killing an innocent person - 1 in 75 (0.013)
Earning a powerful enemy or contract on her life - 1 in 250 (0.004)
Working for a dragon - 1 in 750 (0.0013)
Exceptional bad luck - 1 in 250 (0.004)
That means that a runner will earn about 0.1543 notoriety per run.
Let's put the odds of runners earning additional street cred at a rate of 1 in 15 (0.067).
Let's put the average karma per run at 5 (0.5).
That means that a runner will earn about 0.567 street cred per run.
If we assume that a runner will pay off notoriety with street cred, then a runner nets 0.2584 street cred every run, so the runner will improve his street cred by one about every 4 runs. That's a rather fair rate. However if we can only earn notoriety once for a class of event, you'll earn street cred a lot faster, and the GM will have to come up with new and innovative ways to assign notoriety if street cred is getting too high.
Bottom line it's a GM judgment call for everything except karma increasing street cred, and this doesn't prevent the GM from bumping street cred for other reasons.
The rule about not earning a point for something they've already done seems mostly a guideline to me to prevent either player "harvesting notoriety" to get a bonus to intimidate or GMs handing it out for the same thing over and over again, even if it's vital to mission success or proper roleplaying.
Honestly, the whole rep system has to be approached with a more "spirit of the rules" view then "letter of the law" view IMO.
For me, that serial killer issue as an example of how I would handle it:
The PC would get a point of notoriety for killing the first person in cold blood. Then the PC would get another when I consider him to have crossed the line from "murderer" to "serial killer" as a murderer and a serial killer are different things and the world will think about the two things differently. A fixer might work with a murderer but say that a serial killer is just something he doesn't want to mess with. If the PC was successful enough he might become a "mass murderer" or "enemy of humanity" and I would award another point of notoriety. The PC might be doing the exact same action each time, but to me it's not the same thing. I wouldn't be giving the PC a point every time but repetition in itself can change the circumstance of the situation and thereby the something the book mentions with such vagueness.
The rule about not earning a point for something they've already done seems mostly a guideline to me to prevent either player "harvesting notoriety" to get a bonus to intimidate or GMs handing it out for the same thing over and over again, even if it's vital to mission success or proper roleplaying.
Honestly, the whole rep system has to be approached with a more "spirit of the rules" view then "letter of the law" view IMO.
For me, that serial killer issue as an example of how I would handle it:
The PC would get a point of notoriety for killing the first person in cold blood. Then the PC would get another when I consider him to have crossed the line from "murderer" to "serial killer" as a murderer and a serial killer are different things and the world will think about the two things differently. A fixer might work with a murderer but say that a serial killer is just something he doesn't want to mess with. If the PC was successful enough he might become a "mass murderer" or "enemy of humanity" and I would award another point of notoriety. The PC might be doing the exact same action each time, but to me it's not the same thing. I wouldn't be giving the PC a point every time but repetition in itself can change the circumstance of the situation and thereby the something the book mentions with such vagueness.
QUOTE (MrOramri @ Dec 26 2009, 07:29 PM)
Okay on my last run my shadowruners were in a car chase driving away a stolen car followed by two sedans with bad guys. Near the end of the chase I had a Pilot groundcraft test for both cars to avoid a pedestian crosing that was filled with pedestrians. Both cars failed the test hurdling them into a mob of girl scouts and sending the girls flying into the air then fall back to earth with a loud "THUD". Also later the fighter ran over and stole multipal boxes of girl scout cookies from the dead scouts in question.
Does that deserve a notoriety?
Does that deserve a notoriety?
It definitely deserves it.
I like how StealthSigma uses the words: The GM can't.
AFAIK the GM can do anything she darn well pleases.
I agree with Tagz, it works okay as long as you use it like you use the rest of the rules, with human interpretation and not as a set of program instructions that cannot be altered or otherwise used in any way not exactly as written.
AFAIK the GM can do anything she darn well pleases.
I agree with Tagz, it works okay as long as you use it like you use the rest of the rules, with human interpretation and not as a set of program instructions that cannot be altered or otherwise used in any way not exactly as written.
[img]http://verydemotivational.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/129032245949552641.jpg[/img]
QUOTE (StealthSigma @ Dec 31 2009, 06:16 AM)
Only in the case of a serial murder that is publicized. However take the example of pissing off Johnsons. You've pissed off 10 different Johnsons, but you've only accrued 1 point of notoriety. You can't arbitrarily assign Public Awareness to the character, since Public Awareness is used for people outside of the shadows and Johnsons are definitely involved in the shadows. By the "can't earn notoriety from the same thing twice" school of thought, you've pissed off 10 Johnsons but have only earned 1 Notoriety because you were just a dick during negotiations.
Likewise, you can perpetually fail to complete runs, and unless you go about failing in a spectacularly different way, you've only accrued one point of notoriety.
Now let's look at the whole reputation system.
Street Cred, you earn 1 street cred for every 10 points of karma you've earned rounded down, plus additional street cred at GM discretion.
Notoriety, you earn 1 notoriety when you commit an action the GM deems fit for notoriety. You can't earn notoriety for the same event twice. Notoriety can be reduced by spending 2 street cred to reduce 1 point of notoriety.
Public Awareness baseline is one third of your accumulated street cred and notoriety, plus can be adjusted by GM discretion up and down.
So how can a GM affect all three?
Street Cred- Only Up
Notoriety- Only Up
Public Awareness- Up & Down
So back to my Johnson example. Runners piss off a Johnson for the first time by being utter jerks during negotiation. GM assigns a point of notoriety. Runners piss of a second, different, Johnson during the next meeting. They haven't done anything different, just behaved like jerks again. Since this is a shadows incident that will never be splayed on the trids for everyone, the GM can only affect Street Cred and Notoriety. The GM cannot force street cred down, so his only option is to increase notoriety. However since you've shackled the GM to only giving notoriety for a type of incident once (ie never more than 1 point of notoriety for pissing off a Johnson unless it's done in a vastly new way), the GM has no way to account for this indiscretion via game mechanics and stats.
Let's look at another example. Failing to complete a run. I'm not sure how you can fail to complete a run in new and innovative ways. If the run was not publicized in any way, shape, or form then once again Public Awareness cannot be used. Street cred obviously makes no sense. Once again the runners cannot earn more notoriety for failing to complete more than 1 run. Once again, the system fails as the GM has no way to account for this dismal failure within the shadows.
Likewise, you can perpetually fail to complete runs, and unless you go about failing in a spectacularly different way, you've only accrued one point of notoriety.
Now let's look at the whole reputation system.
Street Cred, you earn 1 street cred for every 10 points of karma you've earned rounded down, plus additional street cred at GM discretion.
Notoriety, you earn 1 notoriety when you commit an action the GM deems fit for notoriety. You can't earn notoriety for the same event twice. Notoriety can be reduced by spending 2 street cred to reduce 1 point of notoriety.
Public Awareness baseline is one third of your accumulated street cred and notoriety, plus can be adjusted by GM discretion up and down.
So how can a GM affect all three?
Street Cred- Only Up
Notoriety- Only Up
Public Awareness- Up & Down
So back to my Johnson example. Runners piss off a Johnson for the first time by being utter jerks during negotiation. GM assigns a point of notoriety. Runners piss of a second, different, Johnson during the next meeting. They haven't done anything different, just behaved like jerks again. Since this is a shadows incident that will never be splayed on the trids for everyone, the GM can only affect Street Cred and Notoriety. The GM cannot force street cred down, so his only option is to increase notoriety. However since you've shackled the GM to only giving notoriety for a type of incident once (ie never more than 1 point of notoriety for pissing off a Johnson unless it's done in a vastly new way), the GM has no way to account for this indiscretion via game mechanics and stats.
Let's look at another example. Failing to complete a run. I'm not sure how you can fail to complete a run in new and innovative ways. If the run was not publicized in any way, shape, or form then once again Public Awareness cannot be used. Street cred obviously makes no sense. Once again the runners cannot earn more notoriety for failing to complete more than 1 run. Once again, the system fails as the GM has no way to account for this dismal failure within the shadows.
I guess that I would look at it this way...
Your Example of the team that pisses of Johnsons...
The Individual/Team would Earn a Notoriety Point for said Behavior... Then the next time he/they does so, the notoriety may not increase, but the Johnson, who probably has a lot of contacts, gets in contact with his fixers, and other contacts, and puts your names out on the streets as troublemakers... continual offenses reap additional rewards in the fact that you will be contacted less and less for prime jobs, until eventually you stagnate or die (my guess is that the team would eventually off the offending individual, or terminate their association with him, and attempt to repair their damaged Reputation)...
Your seriel Killer will reap the same basic scenario.. eventually, no one will deal with the team if he is involved, and it is quite possible that he would inherit a hit squad, or someone will drop dime on him, and the authorities will take him away... all without affecting the fact that he only gained a single notoriety point from the actions...
The world is a living and breathing entity, and eventually the world will hand out repercussions for behavior that is counter productive... the GM represents that world... piss in someone's wheaties often enough and you WILL pay the price for doing so... Even if you have only earned a single point of Notoriety for said bad behavior...
Keep the Faith
QUOTE (Karoline @ Dec 31 2009, 09:23 PM)
I like how StealthSigma uses the words: The GM can't.
AFAIK the GM can do anything she darn well pleases.
I agree with Tagz, it works okay as long as you use it like you use the rest of the rules, with human interpretation and not as a set of program instructions that cannot be altered or otherwise used in any way not exactly as written.
AFAIK the GM can do anything she darn well pleases.
I agree with Tagz, it works okay as long as you use it like you use the rest of the rules, with human interpretation and not as a set of program instructions that cannot be altered or otherwise used in any way not exactly as written.
You're right, the GM can do whatever he darn well pleases, however using a RAW interpretation the GM is limited.
--
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Jan 1 2010, 01:47 PM)
I guess that I would look at it this way...
Your Example of the team that pisses of Johnsons...
The Individual/Team would Earn a Notoriety Point for said Behavior... Then the next time he/they does so, the notoriety may not increase, but the Johnson, who probably has a lot of contacts, gets in contact with his fixers, and other contacts, and puts your names out on the streets as troublemakers... continual offenses reap additional rewards in the fact that you will be contacted less and less for prime jobs, until eventually you stagnate or die (my guess is that the team would eventually off the offending individual, or terminate their association with him, and attempt to repair their damaged Reputation)...
Your seriel Killer will reap the same basic scenario.. eventually, no one will deal with the team if he is involved, and it is quite possible that he would inherit a hit squad, or someone will drop dime on him, and the authorities will take him away... all without affecting the fact that he only gained a single notoriety point from the actions...
The world is a living and breathing entity, and eventually the world will hand out repercussions for behavior that is counter productive... the GM represents that world... piss in someone's wheaties often enough and you WILL pay the price for doing so... Even if you have only earned a single point of Notoriety for said bad behavior...
Your Example of the team that pisses of Johnsons...
The Individual/Team would Earn a Notoriety Point for said Behavior... Then the next time he/they does so, the notoriety may not increase, but the Johnson, who probably has a lot of contacts, gets in contact with his fixers, and other contacts, and puts your names out on the streets as troublemakers... continual offenses reap additional rewards in the fact that you will be contacted less and less for prime jobs, until eventually you stagnate or die (my guess is that the team would eventually off the offending individual, or terminate their association with him, and attempt to repair their damaged Reputation)...
Your seriel Killer will reap the same basic scenario.. eventually, no one will deal with the team if he is involved, and it is quite possible that he would inherit a hit squad, or someone will drop dime on him, and the authorities will take him away... all without affecting the fact that he only gained a single notoriety point from the actions...
The world is a living and breathing entity, and eventually the world will hand out repercussions for behavior that is counter productive... the GM represents that world... piss in someone's wheaties often enough and you WILL pay the price for doing so... Even if you have only earned a single point of Notoriety for said bad behavior...
I tend to prefer systems and methods that are self balancing. The serial killer really isn't a viable scenario, as Public Awareness would handle that. It's for dealing with shadows work that I'm more concerned with, and I feel that being able roll that into a value which is already tracked in the game is the best method. I try to limit the amount of ad hoc that I perform. Further, by allowing separate events of the same category to acquire notoriety it allows notoriety to become a more effective inhibitor to prevent runners acquiring large negotiation bonuses easily.
Let's look at this from a game perspective. If this were a real economy, a runner group that failed 50% of the time would not last long. No one would hire them, or they would just hire them to cause distractions. Here's the problem, these runners are played by your players. How many will disagree with rolling new characters if their characters are living and breathing? Very few, unless their PC is well off and can retire or the player is dissatisfied with his character.
Compare these to a group of runners which have only failed one mission. For the sake of numbers, I will use 10 missions with 5 karma per character for each completed mission and 4 karma for each failed mission (only 1 karma earned is for completing the mission). Successful Team A has earned 49 Karma but failed one mission. That gives them 1 Notoriety and 5 Street Cred. Bad Team B completed 5 missions and failed 5 missions earning them 45 Karma. That gives them 5 Street Cred and 1 or 5 notoriety depending on interpretation of the rules. In negotations, Notoriety and Streed Cred would overwrite each other. So Successful Team A would have a +4 negotiation bonus, while Bad Team B would have a +4 or +0 negotiation bonus depending on interpretation. The fact that Team B can have the same bonus as Team A is wrong. I see no logical justification why this should be the case. True, you could argue that you just give the opposing side a bonus to negate Team B's bonus, but it's far more crippling to remove dice than to grant the opposition a larger dice pool.
Of course, I'm also inclined to give out fractional notoriety rather than a solid point for each event. In the case where it is obviously one individual that caused the notoriety point, only the responsible culprit gets a full point, while the rest of the team get a partial point for association. But hey, you're free to interpret as you will, I'm just trying to line out why I interpret the way I do.
QUOTE (StealthSigma @ Jan 4 2010, 06:55 AM)
You're right, the GM can do whatever he darn well pleases, however using a RAW interpretation the GM is limited.
I tend to prefer systems and methods that are self balancing. The serial killer really isn't a viable scenario, as Public Awareness would handle that. It's for dealing with shadows work that I'm more concerned with, and I feel that being able roll that into a value which is already tracked in the game is the best method. I try to limit the amount of ad hoc that I perform. Further, by allowing separate events of the same category to acquire notoriety it allows notoriety to become a more effective inhibitor to prevent runners acquiring large negotiation bonuses easily.
Let's look at this from a game perspective. If this were a real economy, a runner group that failed 50% of the time would not last long. No one would hire them, or they would just hire them to cause distractions. Here's the problem, these runners are played by your players. How many will disagree with rolling new characters if their characters are living and breathing? Very few, unless their PC is well off and can retire or the player is dissatisfied with his character.
Compare these to a group of runners which have only failed one mission. For the sake of numbers, I will use 10 missions with 5 karma per character for each completed mission and 4 karma for each failed mission (only 1 karma earned is for completing the mission). Successful Team A has earned 49 Karma but failed one mission. That gives them 1 Notoriety and 5 Street Cred. Bad Team B completed 5 missions and failed 5 missions earning them 45 Karma. That gives them 5 Street Cred and 1 or 5 notoriety depending on interpretation of the rules. In negotations, Notoriety and Streed Cred would overwrite each other. So Successful Team A would have a +4 negotiation bonus, while Bad Team B would have a +4 or +0 negotiation bonus depending on interpretation. The fact that Team B can have the same bonus as Team A is wrong. I see no logical justification why this should be the case. True, you could argue that you just give the opposing side a bonus to negate Team B's bonus, but it's far more crippling to remove dice than to grant the opposition a larger dice pool.
Of course, I'm also inclined to give out fractional notoriety rather than a solid point for each event. In the case where it is obviously one individual that caused the notoriety point, only the responsible culprit gets a full point, while the rest of the team get a partial point for association. But hey, you're free to interpret as you will, I'm just trying to line out why I interpret the way I do.
I tend to prefer systems and methods that are self balancing. The serial killer really isn't a viable scenario, as Public Awareness would handle that. It's for dealing with shadows work that I'm more concerned with, and I feel that being able roll that into a value which is already tracked in the game is the best method. I try to limit the amount of ad hoc that I perform. Further, by allowing separate events of the same category to acquire notoriety it allows notoriety to become a more effective inhibitor to prevent runners acquiring large negotiation bonuses easily.
Let's look at this from a game perspective. If this were a real economy, a runner group that failed 50% of the time would not last long. No one would hire them, or they would just hire them to cause distractions. Here's the problem, these runners are played by your players. How many will disagree with rolling new characters if their characters are living and breathing? Very few, unless their PC is well off and can retire or the player is dissatisfied with his character.
Compare these to a group of runners which have only failed one mission. For the sake of numbers, I will use 10 missions with 5 karma per character for each completed mission and 4 karma for each failed mission (only 1 karma earned is for completing the mission). Successful Team A has earned 49 Karma but failed one mission. That gives them 1 Notoriety and 5 Street Cred. Bad Team B completed 5 missions and failed 5 missions earning them 45 Karma. That gives them 5 Street Cred and 1 or 5 notoriety depending on interpretation of the rules. In negotations, Notoriety and Streed Cred would overwrite each other. So Successful Team A would have a +4 negotiation bonus, while Bad Team B would have a +4 or +0 negotiation bonus depending on interpretation. The fact that Team B can have the same bonus as Team A is wrong. I see no logical justification why this should be the case. True, you could argue that you just give the opposing side a bonus to negate Team B's bonus, but it's far more crippling to remove dice than to grant the opposition a larger dice pool.
Of course, I'm also inclined to give out fractional notoriety rather than a solid point for each event. In the case where it is obviously one individual that caused the notoriety point, only the responsible culprit gets a full point, while the rest of the team get a partial point for association. But hey, you're free to interpret as you will, I'm just trying to line out why I interpret the way I do.
I see us as approaching it from both sides of the coin... per se... Each works for what it is trying to do, and both can be seen as well within the Rules As Written...
If it works for you, then it is okay...
Keep the Faith
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.