Shadowrun is unique in how it rewards characters; in Dungeons and Dragons, for example, pretty much any character you play will benefit equally from increased experience and treasure. In Shadowrun, however, karma is the bread and butter of mages, while a street sammie's main focus is cash. That's not to say that each couldn't benefit from both karma and nuyen, simply that their priority is different. The one general constant between the two is that regardless of reward, death is (in general) the only thing to be lost. Sure, you can make a case about magic loss (set off easily enough by geasa), cyberware failure (I've yet to encounter this myself) and other such setbacks, but they're generally encountered only when death is imminent. This is not the case, however, when the character in question is a drone rigger. It's quite possible (and perhaps even likely, depending on what run they're on) that a rigger will come out of a run down a few drones- whether destroyed or in great need of repair.

You can argue, with some validity, that losing some material items (namely, drones) is nowhere near as bad as losing one's life. With that mindset, riggers come off easy- they almost never put themselves directly in harm's way. Sure there's dumpshock to deal with, but it ain't nothing compared to having to constantly soak up hoses of lead, or resist a deadly manabolt cast by an initiated shaman. Certainly, since riggers aren't as likely to die on a run, they've got a sweet deal even if they lose a few drones. Since this is a game, however, not real life, it seems less clear cut to me who is better off.

If your sammie dies on a run, that's rough. But you can create a new character and jump back into things without a whole lot of loss in power (depending on if you start with the same amount of karma as your old character, and if your character type benefits overly much from karma). A rigger who loses a drone, however, simply has to suck it up and keep going. This can make future runs much more difficult for the character, depending on what drones they have left. Chances are, they'll have to go on several runs just to get the funds to replace their old drone- assuming that's even possible, depending on availability/customization. Sure, they're not dead- but from a purely game-mechanic level, they might be a whole lot worse off than the sammie who bit the big one.

With these things in mind, it raises the question: how do riggers treat shadowrunning, compared with other archtypes? Given the relative "distance" between the rigger and actual danger, they don't necessarily have to be the same kind of hardened mercenary that other characters are sort of forced to be by nature of their work. Death isn't always something a rigger has to contend with, so might they view shadowrunning differently? And to what extent?

Does the average rigger feel like they should put all of their drones at risk on every run? Or does their involvement hinge more on the payout, than anything? What's worse, for instance: failing to complete a run that would net you 10,000 , or losing a drone that would cost you hundreds of thousands of nuyen to repair/replace? Your reputation as a shadowrunner might be affected by the first, but is that more acceptable to your average rigger than the second? How does (or, to put it normatively, how should) this affect players who choose to play riggers? Do you sit out if the pay for a given run doesn't justify the risk to your drones? Or do you go along with your fellow shadowrunners, since it has to be worth it for them to put their lives on the line?

Obviously, if your drones are getting destroyed, you're doing something wrong. Right? Well, that depends, doesn't it? Some GM's might feel that riggers who never suffer any damage to their vehicles simply aren't being challenged enough. And dang it, they may be right. If your players are coming out of every run without a scratch, you might have some really intelligent (or lucky) players. Or, you might not be throwing enough at them. Clearly, such a thing has to be judged on a case by case basis. If you're dealing with a group of players whose favorite style of game is to go into giant combats, guns and spells a blazing, you're apt to judge challenge a bit differently than if your group of players likes nothing better than to spend hours planning a perfect on-site datasteal. By the same token, a go-ganger campaign will have different threats than will a campaign where all of the players are shamans. In general, though, unless you go into the rather advanced (and thus unlikely to be researched to challenge one player) rules presented in Rigger 3, taking out drones is how a GM can make a rigger know that life ain't a cakewalk.

How should a rigger respond? Only send a drone or two along on runs? Demand compensation from a Johnson if your drones are damaged? Suck it up, and deal with the fact that you're apt to lose a drone now and again? Try to negotiate a higher share of the payment? Refuse to go on runs that won't pay for drones you might lose? None of these seem like good options, which is why I open the floor on this topic. How have others dealt with the issues I've mentioned? Am I way off base? Am I missing a blatantly obvious solution? Perhaps I'm just whining about a subject that really isn't important. Regardless, feel free to add your opinion.

Compensation and higher pay. Sammies and wizkids (not the company) are a dime-a-dozen. Riggers and deckers, now they're specialists; they need toys, so if you go ask them to play in someone else's sandbox you'd better be ready to pay for their toys.

Though similar things could be said about Hermetics, I suppose.

~J

in a standard shadowrunning team, it would probably be worth it to the characters to simply give the rigger a bigger piece of the pie. every round his drones soak up is a round that the characters themselves don't have to worry about; if the rigger can't afford to keep up his drone network, he'll probably find other employment, and the team will be stuck with no drones.

My group actually splits the pot with one extra share, ie, four people then five shares. The extra is "hazard pay", whoever eats lead, sucks mana, or otherwise needs a mechanic, technician, doctor, or healer, uses the hazard pay.

The rigger, being the pointman usually, gets this most of the time.

He also steals profusely to supplement his drone network. Rigger 3's hijacking a drone network rules put to good use, I suppose.

Also, don't be afraid to ask your team to help you ste... acquire new drones or drone parts. Team is the optimal word.

But, I think not using more resources than a job is worth or requires makes good sense.

Our rigger typically got quite a bit more than her fair share of the loot... not in cash, which we split evenly, but in kind. We fairly regularly stole anything that looked valuable and wasn't nailed down, and that included any disabled enemy drones that we had the carrying capacity to haul away, all of which ultimately went to the rigger for resale or repair and reuse on our side, as she saw fit. And most of the funds from the ones she sold went to repairing or upgrading the ones she kept.

As I recall, she got her miniblimp drone shot down twice, had to fully repair it, but we made a profit on both of those runs... and one of them was a set-up that we never actually got paid for. All of our income from that run came from the two enemy drones and assorted other loot that we recovered after the shooting stopped.

We treated other loot similarly... it got handed out to whoever could use it, or sold and the funds used for whoever needed it. The drones were almost invariably the bulk of the cash value of our loot, though (we never managed to gank a deck).

You think the rigger has it bad? Deckers risk their lives fighting Black IC and their decks with Black or Grey IC. You never really get over losing your deck and being out of action until you get a new one, especially when you have to pay 600k-1.5M or so to replace it before even thinking of the chips and software... (yes, you can use a Radio Shack PCD-100 but it is like trading in your Ferrari for a Skoda)

In response to Firewall i suggest you check the prices on a single passenger helicopter one day ;)


In response to the general question posed how do I handle the lose of drones ?

Any run where i am likely to (or requested to) lose a drone had better have an operateing expenses clause to cover my equipment losses over and above the price of my services.

Ask a sam to do a 5k run and tell him that in order to complete the run he will more than likely need to use 200 rounds of apds and see what he says.

Even if i am not expected to lose any drones, if you want to pay me 5000ny for a run, the run had better be about as difficult as driving you kid to school because thats about all I will do for that kind of money. The base maintenance costs on my vechicles is more that that.


If i lose a drone on what was supposed to be a milk run or as a result of normal day to day business, I suck it up. I have lost more than a few spider drones to area explosions just because folks started throwing grenades. Nothin like loseing three 12k drones in a single explosion that was so far away that the teams sam didn't even bother dodgeing. That's the price of doing business .

How do i recoup? why i do what even smart business man does, i pass the cost onto the consumer by raising my prices (and as one fellow already mentioned I steal anything not nailed down).

I have seen the prices for those, you win but I was just making a point; riggers and deckers have a lot to lose if things go wrong...

Perhaps you just need insurance. Ask the Johnson to cover expenses; that way, if he is not expecting trouble then he will say okay. If he is expecting trouble, he has two options. Say no and lose the team, say yes and pay. I mean, I would take a drop in my cut (maybe 25%) just to know that I am not out of business after it frags up.

Hmm. A toughie. On one hand I'd like to say that just like any other character, a Rigger (or any character template for that matter) shouldn't invest more resources than they're willing to lose. You might have a rigger able to field a droid army vs the gungans, but when that rigger does that, they should also accept the fact that that army could run into a snot nosed kid that blows them all up.

Johnsons are generally the ones that set the payoff for a run. Its not their responsibility to make sure everyone gets a fare share, or that it covers all expenses. If the overall offer is too low, the runners can turn it down, and the Johnson will find someone else to do it.

That being said. On the other hand, GMs are responsible for determining what the Johnsons offer the player-chars. But even still, GMs don't have to make sure the chars always end up at least breaking even. But, flipping back yet again, with SR3 settings Riggers are less "Drivers" and more "Remote Control Droid" dudes. So it may do well for a GM to be a little more generous with baseline payoffs, heck even default percentages for fencing goods.

Edit: Oops forgot to add. I'm sure its a common practice that others use as well. But generally in negotiations with Mr. J prior to a run, along with the overall payment for the run, we try to add on some sort of expenses coverage. Help to absorb at least some of the cost of ammo, biotech/first aid gear, disposable tools necessary to complete the mission, etc. Doesn't always work, but doesn't hurt to try.

If I was the Johnson, there is no way that I would agree to pay for lost drones. Not unless what I was asking the runners to do was just that. I don't pay to support failure or incompetence.

At the restaurant:
Why is my steak twice as expensive as the price I agreed to pay?
Well, the cook burnt the first and we had to throw it out.

At the mechanics:
What's this five hundred dollars of "breakage" on the bill?
Oh, that's the nut polisher. It broke while we were polishing up your nuts, so we charged you for the new one.

I really don't see many Johnson's providing Drone Insurance. Does they provide workman's comp, life insurance and dental? Do they have claims investigators who come out to make sure you didn't park the supposedly lost drone in a van someplace?

A good face could get a Johnson to boost the payout due to the value of the equipment a rigger is putting into play. But once again, this is only going to happen if the face can convince me that the rigger is an absolute must for completing my mission.

Riggers have it rough, most runs are not going to have a good risk v reward for them. Well, they'll have an excellent risk(of death) v reward, but a bad risk(of profit loss) v reward.

It's the problem of damage and repair that makes playing a rigger so difficult. Frankly, the typical vision of the rigger doesn't work at all - the risk-to-reward doesn't work out at all well for them. There are a couple of ways to alleviate the problem:

1. The group I GM for splits the payout as follows: take lump sum, deduct expenses, split the remainder. Expenses include drone repair, summoning materials for elementals, medical bills, etc. More than once the team has ended up in the red when they've covered expenses, but oh well.

2. Don't play a ultra-modified vehicle rigger. While the 500k nuyen SUV with turrets, oil slicks, rating 6 sensors and what have you may be really cool, when it gets nailed, you are going to be screwed. And yes, it's a when, not an if. And I never give out payouts large enough to cover than kind of expense.

3. Play a quick-and-dirty rigger. Off-the-shelf vehicles and drones with minimal modifications. That way, when your drone gets waxed, you aren't in hole too bad.

4. As the GM, there are a couple of things you can do to make it a bit easier for the rigger. Still go after their drones as much as you like, but give the riggers some freebies: allow them to steal common vehicles relatively easily, have the Johnson throw in a drone or two on the deal from time to time, that sort of thing.

- Runner Smurf

I agree in part with runner smurf, Drone riggers should defenitly stay as stock as possible, to keep costs down.

but smugglers and couriers, that one souped vehicle is there entire livelyhood. if they lose it they have "died" in there career. so the risk is the same as a Sammie, it's just a little different way to look at it.

sometimes the single souped vehicle is the best way, sometimes the swarms of cheap drones is the way.. sometimes one well placed drone is the way... the job of the rigger is to only take jobs that his riggs will work best for... and the job of the GM is to recognize this in his planning and not force a drone rigger to do smuggling or vice versa...

-Mike R.
edit typos

Well, the smuggler rigger is an entirely different kettle of fish than the more standard drone rigger that's been the topic of this thread.

I agree, they're going to have a ton invested in a single vehicle. Their profit will turn around and go into making that vehicle even better. However, this type of rigger IMO, only works if the campaign is based around smuggling. You and your team of fearless smugglers, where all the pcs are smugglers, either in their own vehicles or playing passenger/gunner/crew in yours.

The drone rigger is the most common way that riggers try to stay involved in normal runs. Sitting in the car and waiting as the getaway driver pretty much sucks.

You bring up a many valid points relevant to all shadowrunners as contract employees. It's called fair recompense for services rendered. I take an aggressive aproach to this all the time. Kilometerage may vary....

1) Be your own face and/or fixer! You are in the driver seat! You set the terms and have no one else to blame for any of your problems. Don't forget you don't have to take every job, even if your GM really wants you to.

2) Side jobs! As any good contractor will tell you this is how you butter your bread. Rake in a little that your mates have no stake in by smuggling goods between sessions. You and the Gm can work out a steady income through smuggling. Let him determine when things are going bad. He gets a plot hook at some later date and you get a lot of cake walks to supplement your income. Don't forget to hire on your buddies every once in a while to keep them happy.

3) Invest your money! Even a shadow-bank offers an interest rate on their savings accounts. Even better, play stocks, collect and sell assets (paintings, property, paracritters, vehicles). Making money with money is a lot easier than shadowrunning. Marry well, divorce, make a new will, die, and repeat as necessary.

This is only glossing the top of the schemes you can run in a _realistic_ roleplaying game to make money. Coming up for ways that a mage can earn extra karma is harder. You usually have to make new rules to allow it. But I usually let them use cash for karma even if no-one else can.

Just remember: More money, more problems.

If the run doesn't need drones, the rigger shouldn't be losing any if he uses them. If the rigger is being stupid, yes, you're right, the J isn't going to pick up the tab, but if the drones are required and at risk then hell yes he or she is going to be paying; that or they're not going to have anyone taking the job.

~J

Even if the mission absolutely, positively, had to have a rigger to succeed, I can't see any Johnson worth the title paying for lost gear after the fact.

Like Arz said, you work that stuff out at the beginning. Your face says that you are likely going to have to use Very Expensive Drone, and that there is a very good chance that you will indeed lose Very Expensive Drone doing the job. I've got no problem with a Johnson paying for that risk. But it's paid for up front, as part of the total payout. Not as reward for failure.

Say we figure you've got a fifty fifty chance of getting your 200K drone through the scenario, Johnson should have no problem boosting the total payout on the run by 100K. You get lucky and make it through with your drone intact, you got a better payday than you would have normally. You survive 2 such runs with that drone, and you're in the gravy.

But the Johnson shouldn't pay for your lost drones directly, just like he shouldn't pay for the totally tricked out sniper rifle of doom that your samurai dropped into the lake by accident while flipping off the pursuing cops.

Then we're in agreement. The payment decided upon up front should be enough for the risk, or the rigger should walk. Though I could see a J offering to pay for damages up-front because if damages were not incurred he or she would end up paying out less than if the total payment were upped, they wouldn't agree to do it after-the-fact unless they fed the runners false info.

~J

For a detailed discussion of a very similar problem, try and pick up FASA's old "Field Manual: Mercenaries", for the Battletech line. In fact, FanPro has just released a revised version of this book.

The original edition (and the revised, according to the Table of Contents) goes into an in depth discussion on the typical contract terms that mercenary units and employers ask for and get. And, as far as I can remember, every one has a correspondence to the shadowrunning market, who are, really, just another form of mercenary.

If I were at home instead of work, I'd be quoting from it right now, I guarantee. But one thing I do remember is that, if FASA is to be believed, Jaded is just plain wrong. Compensation for loss of materiel (Why do they spell it with an 'e'? Just how different in meaning is it from material?) is a negotiable contract term with several options ranging from "You break it, you bought it" to "Go nuts, it's on us" and many in between.

http://www.classicbattletech.com/cbt_updat...ewreleases.html

There's even, if you care to make the conversions, a detailed contract negotiation ruleset, for those inclined to cost accountancy.

Materiél has a different meaning entirely from material.

~J

I suppose I should've done this on my own instead of dragging the list into it, but http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=materiel suggests that, in addition to the accent going on the first e, materiel really isn't so different from material, especially if you're going by Webster's Revised Unabridged instead of The American Heritage.

I'm such a snob...

I agree in that a rigger (or any Shadowrunner really) shouldn't take a run if it's likely that the risk involved would likely put themselves into the red just to accomplish said run.

But one of the snags I've run into on this is just how does one evaluate the risk involved?

Johnson's, at least in games I've played, are notoriusly closed lipped about what a run may constitute unless the team agrees to the run before hand.

When talking out of character about this, the response is because the Johnson doesn't want runners hearing their goal and then refusing and then blabbing it off, them being paranoid little buggers.

But if the runners don't know the basics of what would be needed to accomplish said run, how do they know the money they are being offered to do the job is sufficent to get the job done?

That's when you start negotiating some of the contract options mentioned on this board and that book I plugged. I'm so hyped about that book I'm going to go home right now, re-read the relevant chapter, and see if I can distill something useful for the board. This is fun for me!

Then, cuz it's Friday, I'll pass out and forget about telling the board anything.

OMG, someone's hacked Dictionary.com! Or is it the Office of Acquisition?

Whatever, I bow to your superior kung fu.

Muahaha. *Flexes kung fu grip*

*Gets taken off the shelf, attached to a rocket, and shot into low earth orbit*

~J

Well, maybe it is just a case of going ahead with it and saying 'frag this for a laugh' when it all goes to drek. To be fair, we riggers/deckers have one advantage; a decker can jack out and a rigger can tell dog-brain to retreat while they go grab a cold one from the dash-mounted fridge...

Maybe the rigger has to suck it up and lose a drone but he is normally in his car / tank already, the Samurai has to get to the car first... (and the decker is quite possibly in another time-zone, being massaged by scantily-clad meat-puppets)

I assume that the Johnson will tell you the type of run 'assault of a convoy of 3-4 vehicles and retreval of a package' along with some idea of how good the opposition will be along with how much he is wiling to pay. If you agree to do the job, they he tells you what vehicles and what package. If you refuse, what do you really know about the job?

You know everything you can know without knowing specific details. General information as to defenses is something that would be critical to know before accepting a job rather than after.

~J

And when the GM doesn't give that sort of information? Am I wanting too much information to base the decision on?

Usually it seems to be something (very simplified) like "I am in need of a team to do an extraction, to which I will pay 20k each, so do I have your agreement?"

Could be StufferShack... could be the Renraku Arcology under Deus.

On one hand I do understand why a Johnson would want to leave out as many details as possible, but on the other, I don't see any Runner team accepting a job without at least thinking they have a good chance at coming out ahead.

I can't help but think that any team that would accept an offer like that wouldn't last very long.

But if the runner teams do the smart thing and decline citing a lack of knowledge... that leaves the game in a lurch if every meeting goes down like the above.

I can certainly see the J trying to give out that little at the start, but if the Gm doesn't give out more info if pressed and the players walk every time, well, that's the GM's problem.

~J