Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ghost Cartels
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
Machiavelli
We are just running ghost cartels and reached the clash-site in Honk Kong (Kowloon Massacre). At the end of our last session i entered the "Yama King is standing between you and your escape-helicopter"-situation and i really have to say that the authors either seem to be completely insane OR they donīt have the slightest clue how SR4 works. I had similar thoughts before, as we the GM told us the story about "attach a water-mine on a boat that is surrounded by masses of sharks" and i agreed to my feeling as we were attacked by 7!!!! shedim onboard. I donīt know how often the GM had to save our asses so please tell me which kind of runner-team is capable to survive this book? Ryanthusar and his expert team of super-runners? One shedim is doable, 2 are heavy but 7 at the same time? Nuts. I play a really strong mage, rating 3 initiate with magic 6 and now i am standing in a rating 3-4 domain. The Miniguns of the helicopter donīt harm the big demon, my comrades obviously canīt do more damage than this and every magical character is castrated by half they magic-rating. Is this a big bad (and expensive) joke?
Makki
their are lot's of heroic stories about the yama king. Again, you're not alone against him. therer are hundreds of gang grunts invading the complex across the roofs so, he will be interested in their hopeless souls, too. I banished him with two Edge-boosted attempts, btw.

however, every adventure is just a guideline for the GM. I don't think we had 7 Shedim, as our Runner Team was only 3 guys.
I think it's not the book's fault, but the GM. If he has to save your ass at the climax he should have adjusted the problem from the beginning.

btw, I'll be in Stuttgart soon wink.gif
Fatum
Agreed. Adventures are not scriptures cast in stone, an should be tailored for each group. Actually, more often than not you have to modify the adventure heavily since at least one player has already read the book (and of course he won't say).
Elfenlied
Our group creamed the Yama-king. Gotta love heavy weapons+possession mages.
Bigity
I've found that this kind of thing can be an issue for GMs who come from games that have a more detailed process for scaling encounters (READ: D&D of all flavors). SR relies much more on instinct and kludging die rolls (because let's face it, sometimes the players come up with a plan so genius it nullifies all of the difficulty, or a lucky roll, etc), and some GMs also fudge rolls to prevent TPKs, though I prefer SR to be more deadly in this regard.
LurkerOutThere
Also remember that just because he's between you and the helicoptor doesn't mean the helicoptor can't take off while he lives ala Zelda. Run past him and take your licks and GTFO if that's what you need to do.
Fatum
QUOTE (Bigity @ Aug 16 2011, 12:45 AM) *
I've found that this kind of thing can be an issue for GMs who come from games that have a more detailed process for scaling encounters (READ: D&D of all flavors). SR relies much more on instinct and kludging die rolls (because let's face it, sometimes the players come up with a plan so genius it nullifies all of the difficulty, or a lucky roll, etc), and some GMs also fudge rolls to prevent TPKs, though I prefer SR to be more deadly in this regard.
It's a bit offtopic, but really, D&D CRs are not that meaningful, especially if you have competent optimizers in your group. So good DMs don't pay them much attention, either.
Neurosis
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 15 2011, 03:08 PM) *
Our group creamed the Yama-king. Gotta love heavy weapons+possession mages.


What do you want to bet your GM toned it down in some way shape or form?
Cain
The first time I took players through it, they creamed the Yama King. Troll Archer + explosive arrowheads for the win.

The second time, they had the master shedim coming after them: the mystic adept tried to banish it, died in the attempt (pulled a HoG to survive) and seriously pissed it off. When it returned, it called all its buddies, and they started taking over the corpses of the fallen in the massacre... and there were a lot of fallen.

The players tried to negotiate; they managed to persuade the Yama King that the master shedim was a bigger threat, and they'd deal with it for him, if he agreed to let them pass. He agreed on the grounds that they deal with it right away. This forced me to take a half-hour break as I had to figure out how to send the PC's to hell. vegm.gif The Yama King ripped open an astral gateway to the Master Shedin's home realm, and they found themselves int he wild west, near Death Valley. Long story short, they defeated the master shedin in his home realm, destroying him for good. They returned to the real world with only a few seconds elapsed, and the Yama King let the go without a fight.

Now, I'm making this sound easier than it was: the team did a lot of arguing over what to do. At one point, they actually swung on each other, which I had to stop. Bottom line is, that wild tangent was a lot more fun that duking it out with the Yama King would've been.
Demonseed Elite
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Aug 15 2011, 10:55 AM) *
i really have to say that the authors either seem to be completely insane


Yes.

Especially Bobby. *nods*

cool.gif
Fatum
QUOTE (Cain @ Aug 16 2011, 03:06 AM) *
At one point, they actually swung on each other, which I had to stop.
Why?
CanRay
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Aug 15 2011, 10:55 AM) *
i really have to say that the authors either seem to be completely insane
They're artists.

Insane is part of the job description.
Cain
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 15 2011, 04:52 PM) *
Why?

Why'd they swing on each other, or why'd I stop them?

The characters almost came to blows over the best way to handle the Yama King. The mystic adept was going to single-handedly charge the Yama King, and the other player was going to shoot him in the back to stop him. The players blew up over the fact that one of them was going to kill the other outright. I don't allow PvP in my games, consider it a house rule. I had to firmly remind them of that fact, so the scene could go on.
CanRay
Hey, Kid Stealth once saved Wolf by shooting him in the back.

Of course, the Murder Machine shot him in a way that wasn't lethal, and knew just how much armour Wolf wore...
Neurosis
QUOTE (Cain @ Aug 15 2011, 07:06 PM) *
The first time I took players through it, they creamed the Yama King. Troll Archer + explosive arrowheads for the win.


So you're that guy. : )
Megu
Yeah, we had our mage just levitate us the fuck away. It became the chopper's problem and they ran the other direction. I think they made it but I don't remember. The moral of the story is, sometimes the fact that they're bigger and scarier than you simply means you should not try to fight them.
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Demonseed Elite @ Aug 15 2011, 08:17 PM) *
Yes.

Especially Bobby. *nods*

cool.gif


I don't think that was meant as praise. wink.gif
Fatum
QUOTE (Cain @ Aug 16 2011, 07:58 AM) *
Why'd they swing on each other, or why'd I stop them?

The characters almost came to blows over the best way to handle the Yama King. The mystic adept was going to single-handedly charge the Yama King, and the other player was going to shoot him in the back to stop him. The players blew up over the fact that one of them was going to kill the other outright. I don't allow PvP in my games, consider it a house rule. I had to firmly remind them of that fact, so the scene could go on.
Why'd you stop them. The characters had IC reason to attack each other, apparently, why prevent them from taking the course of action they desire?
I strongly feel that GM's job is sometimes akin to that of a game engine - while it's him who places the obstacles for the runners to overcome, his rulings on what they can and can't do should purely be based on the rules (first) and the way RL world works (second).
I consider not letting players do what they want to do and what their characters are perfectly capable of doing because of reasons like "your alignment does not allow that" or "no PvP at my table" to be an extremely suboptimal GMing choice, since it ruins the feeling of the IC world being alive; and also severely limits your roleplaying experiences (going with the aforementioned examples, in the first case, your characters will never change alignment on their own volition, in the second, you'll never know how the runner will react to killing his own teammate [and being left alone with the opposition]).
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 10:04 AM) *
Why'd you stop them. The characters had IC reason to attack each other, apparently, why prevent them from taking the course of action they desire?
I strongly feel that GM's job is sometimes akin to that of a game engine - while it's him who places the obstacles for the runners to overcome, his rulings on what they can and can't do should purely be based on the rules (first) and the way RL world works (second).
I consider not letting players do what they want to do and what their characters are perfectly capable of doing because of reasons like "your alignment does not allow that" or "no PvP at my table" to be an extremely suboptimal GMing choice, since it ruins the feeling of the IC world being alive; and also severely limits your roleplaying experiences (going with the aforementioned examples, in the first case, your characters will never change alignment on their own volition, in the second, you'll never know how the runner will react to killing his own teammate [and being left alone with the opposition]).


That's all fine and dandy when you are playing with adults that understand that it is just a game and a game where "friends" might shoot you in the back.
When you are playing with people that can hold a grudge for ten years, because "he killed my 15th level half-golem/half-dragon-half-celestial barbarian/fighter/sorcerer" then you start enforcing this kind of rule.
Bigity
I agree with the above.

I still know a guy that still resents me for killing off a AD&D character 10 years ago. He was doing something stupid and I let his level 3 guy pay the price.

Apparently this guy had only played RPGs with Mommy and Daddy who never killed any PCs, ever, no matter what.




Hey, when you need a body to fill a chair, your standards take a hit.
Warlordtheft
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 15 2011, 04:08 PM) *
Our group creamed the Yama-king. Gotta love heavy weapons+possession mages.


In my group, the gun physad blew edge on a longburst from an assault rifle. He got just enough net successes to cause damage (which given the correct armor was around 20, so he did about 28 boxes of damage, which still plastered the Yama king even after it spent edge). The Yama king was disrupted, and the guy's PC was considered a great hero by the Triads.
Neurosis
Silly Yama King should have edged the defense roll instead. : )
Fatum
QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Aug 16 2011, 05:35 PM) *
That's all fine and dandy when you are playing with adults that understand that it is just a game and a game where "friends" might shoot you in the back.
When you are playing with people that can hold a grudge for ten years, because "he killed my 15th level half-golem/half-dragon-half-celestial barbarian/fighter/sorcerer" then you start enforcing this kind of rule.
Why am I playing with people like that, again?
Adarael
The thing that always blows my mind about the Yama King (or any other big bad spirit) threads is that I've never found the Yama King to be unbeatable. It's dangerous as hell, but it's not really any more dangerous than any other powerful opponent on a rooftop.

Why? Two reasons.

The first is that players always seem to pack a variety of problem-solving equipment, such as APDS, or a Physad with wangtastic hand to hand abilities, or Filtering, or a couple of spirits to drop the thing's defense pools before one of the prior tools is applied. In the specific case of the Yama King, the problem solving method was APDS in a sniper rifle and a physad with wangtastic hand to hand abilties.

The second is that in the specific case of the Yama King, the most dangerous thing about him ISN'T his powers. It's that you're on a building, and he can throw you off of it. I killed a player that way.
Ascalaphus
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 05:47 PM) *
Why am I playing with people like that, again?


You obviously aren't, because you're perfect. But some other people just don't like PvP at their table, and there's nothing wrong with an agreement against it.
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 01:47 PM) *
Why am I playing with people like that, again?


Because it's either that or don't play at all.
Mind you, there are friends of mine that I don't play with anymore exactly to not end the friendship.
LurkerOutThere
I tend to strongly discourage PVP at my Shadowrun tables through in character means. The biggest reason is not all character choices are as valid from a combat standpoint but all have varying degrees of usefullnes in a game standpoint. In a face to face initiative drops conflict the street same might beat the mage, the mage might beat the street sam, both will kick the living shit out of the hacker. So what do we have, we can either play in a world where we freely allow PVP and one of two things occurs, the person with the biggest combat beat stick runs the table until the other players decide to backstab them at an inopportune moment and various vagaries that go with that: The deckers never leave the decker bunker and keep blackmail on everyone, the mage keeps ritual samples etc etc.

The other alternative can basically be summed up as this: Professionalism, the players and characters know that no matter how the conflict goes down everyone looses, their rep suffers, they'll be out a resource they can't replace mid job etc.

Now I have had some PVP, a couple of times i've had characters who by backstory hated each others guts, but worked together for one reason or another (money and revenge against a common enemy) and I have had a player do something that he knew the other characters were going to respond extremely badly to if he was caught and then got caught.

So all things being equal I think having a gentleman's agreement of no PVP has served me very well. It's not universal, but the sixth world is already hostile enough without having to worry about your team mates shooting you in the back.
Fatum
I think that the stimuli for characters' in-game decisions should only come from in-game sources (for the reasons provided above).
Yeah, killing a valuable team member cripples the team. What were you thinking shooting that hacker, then? Yeah, constant in-team paranoia is taxing, and doesn't make running an enjoyable experience. So here's one more reason not to shoot your teammates. Etc.

Actually, come to think of it, a prearranged agreement everyone's consciously submitted to is not that bad, and the storytelling continuity doesn't get broken because of it (since the issue is never even mentioned).
However, when a player declares his action, and the GM replies: "No, you can't do it just cause", this is obviously not the case.

After all, there's always the Internet for finding the players you can play with...
Blitz66
Pre-deciding to have an in-character reason to not have PC-on-PC violence is often a good call. The GM can invoke that later, telling the players that their characters' loyalties or whatever ought to be kicking in right about now.
Elfenlied
At our table, we have the following Gentleman's agreement between each player and the DM:
No torture, rape, FA grenadelaunchers from WAR! and PvP will be used on a PC unless one of them starts it first.
Warlordtheft
QUOTE (Neurosis @ Aug 16 2011, 11:18 AM) *
Silly Yama King should have edged the defense roll instead. : )


He did, but the GM (me) rolled poorly... spin.gif
Fatum
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 16 2011, 10:18 PM) *
At our table, we have the following Gentleman's agreement between each player and the DM:
No torture, rape, FA grenadelaunchers from WAR! and PvP will be used on a PC unless one of them starts it first.
No torture? What happens if the corpers happen to capture a runner?
Cain
Honestly, everyone at my table knows how I feel about PvP, even before I had this conversation. It did help, though, when I reminded everyone of how I felt about it in my games, said I didn't like it. I gave them the option of keeping it and dealing with the ensuing TPK that'd follow (the mystic adept was the only Awakened one, so only he had a chance to hurt the Yama King) or taking it back and negotiating, allowing for extra stress in their characters. Since a half hour of real time later, they were in hell, I think that was a fair tradeoff.

I think the next time I run a game, I'm going to include "No PvP" on my advance warning list, instead of hinting at it. The players can justify it however they like. The simple fact is, I don't like the drama that comes with it, and I don't want to deal with it unless I'm forced to. And since it's my game, I can ban it for no other reason than I say so. I usually give the players a short list of expectations, house rules, and banned rules before the game begins; this will just be another one of them. There's no harm in any house rule, as long as it's clearly communicated in advance.
Cain
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 10:34 AM) *
No torture? What happens if the corpers happen to capture a runner?

Psychotropic programs or "Fade To Black" works for me. Just say: "You're being tortured", and let the player's imagination stew on it.

I refuse to describe torture scenes, but I will describe the aftermath: like finding a guy in a room with a car battery, a set of jumper cables, a bottle of conductive lube, and a life-sized Bubba the Love Troll doll. biggrin.gif
Megu
Maybe I'm the odd one out here, but I've had good experiences with "PvP" in Shadowrun. My players are smart enough to realize their rep goes down the toilet if they hit each other openly, but there's a lot of plotting and backstabbing, up to and including attacks on contacts, hiring lower level runners, things of that nature. We did Emergence recently and had a team split on their allegiances re: technomancers, resulting in a lot of emails to the GM with people moving their pawns, so to speak. Eventually one player's allies revealed another player, a hardcore Islamist, as an adept, and she checked out to do the Hajj and find herself, so I guess the player that pulled that off won? Anyways, just trying to kill your teammates openly is dumb, but there's absolutely a place for betrayal. It's so in genre, and it helped that everybody was on the same page about that going in. You're criminals, that shit happens. So my players were ready to treat it as Diplo with mirrorshades.
Mäx
QUOTE (Machiavelli @ Aug 15 2011, 06:55 PM) *
We are just running ghost cartels and reached the clash-site in Honk Kong (Kowloon Massacre). At the end of our last session i entered the "Yama King is standing between you and your escape-helicopter"-situation and i really have to say that the authors either seem to be completely insane OR they donīt have the slightest clue how SR4 works. I had similar thoughts before, as we the GM told us the story about "attach a water-mine on a boat that is surrounded by masses of sharks" and i agreed to my feeling as we were attacked by 7!!!! shedim onboard. I donīt know how often the GM had to save our asses so please tell me which kind of runner-team is capable to survive this book? Ryanthusar and his expert team of super-runners? One shedim is doable, 2 are heavy but 7 at the same time? Nuts. I play a really strong mage, rating 3 initiate with magic 6 and now i am standing in a rating 3-4 domain. The Miniguns of the helicopter donīt harm the big demon, my comrades obviously canīt do more damage than this and every magical character is castrated by half they magic-rating. Is this a big bad (and expensive) joke?

All you need to him down is a pair of Defiance ex Shockers and someone who can shoot them.
Bigity
The problem with PvP is that it easily destroys a tabletop campaign. When your players all kill each other in the middle of Emergence, you can't exactly just make new PCs and start over, without much hassle by the GM.

So, it seems pretty reasonable to disallow it. If you, as a player, don't like that, you could always find a new table or GM a game instead.

It's one of those things that you accept in order to keep a GM happy I guess, just like house rules.
Warlordtheft
PVP---I let it happen so long as the agressor explains to me why he was doing it and is not just doing it to be a #$@!. It is one thing if it advances the storyline, quite another if the person is just doing it cause he thinks he can.
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 16 2011, 03:18 PM) *
At our table, we have the following Gentleman's agreement between each player and the DM:
No torture, rape, FA grenadelaunchers from WAR! and PvP will be used on a PC unless one of them starts it first.


You forgot to mention the use of atomics against each other.
Fatum
QUOTE (Cain @ Aug 16 2011, 10:37 PM) *
I think the next time I run a game, I'm going to include "No PvP" on my advance warning list, instead of hinting at it. The players can justify it however they like. The simple fact is, I don't like the drama that comes with it, and I don't want to deal with it unless I'm forced to. And since it's my game, I can ban it for no other reason than I say so. I usually give the players a short list of expectations, house rules, and banned rules before the game begins; this will just be another one of them. There's no harm in any house rule, as long as it's clearly communicated in advance.
Fair enough, when agreed upon in advance.

QUOTE (Cain @ Aug 16 2011, 10:40 PM) *
Psychotropic programs or "Fade To Black" works for me. Just say: "You're being tortured", and let the player's imagination stew on it.
I refuse to describe torture scenes, but I will describe the aftermath: like finding a guy in a room with a car battery, a set of jumper cables, a bottle of conductive lube, and a life-sized Bubba the Love Troll doll. biggrin.gif
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 16 2011, 10:18 PM) *
No torture [...] will be used on a PC unless one of them starts it first.
Otherwise, yeah, good old sex and ultraviolence are better done off-screen, unless you happen to be into Scandinavian larp or something.


QUOTE (Brazilian_Shinobi @ Aug 16 2011, 11:14 PM) *
You forgot to mention the use of atomics against each other.
Why ban something you just got the rules for? The writers put effort, and you want to just throw those stats for nukes away?!
CanRay
QUOTE (Elfenlied @ Aug 16 2011, 01:18 PM) *
At our table, we have the following Gentleman's agreement between each player and the DM:
No torture, rape, FA grenadelaunchers from WAR! and PvP will be used on a PC unless one of them starts it first.
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 01:34 PM) *
No torture? What happens if the corpers happen to capture a runner?
"After the slowest elevator ride that ever happened, you stumble out of it in a bloody heap. The security guards all are shaking their hands as if they hurt. 'He fell down the stairs. A lot.' the highest ranking one says, and there are only nods in the room as everyone distinctly works diligently at their work."

Damn I miss SPD. frown.gif
Brainpiercing7.62mm
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 09:38 PM) *
Fair enough, when agreed upon in advance.

Otherwise, yeah, good old sex and ultraviolence are better done off-screen, unless you happen to be into Scandinavian larp or something.


What's scandinavian larp?
LurkerOutThere
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Aug 16 2011, 06:08 PM) *
What's scandinavian larp?


I'll tell ya' when your older.

Megu
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Aug 16 2011, 05:08 PM) *
What's scandinavian larp?


Are we heading for a camping in Norway joke?
Fatum
You can just google it. Or, say, "Fat Man Down" as an example.
Elfenlied
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 07:34 PM) *
No torture? What happens if the corpers happen to capture a runner?


Happened only once. If they don't set this kind of precedent, I'm kind enough to only Mindprobe them. In this particular instance, a spoon, a car battery, some devil rats, a bucket, a handheld flamethrower and Bubba the love troll were involved. In a graphic description.

QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 16 2011, 07:34 PM) *
Otherwise, yeah, good old sex and ultraviolence are better done off-screen, unless you happen to be into Scandinavian larp or something.


Well, I for my part like Jeepform, and for that matter, Fiasco.
Machiavelli
QUOTE (Makki @ Aug 15 2011, 05:14 PM) *
their are lot's of heroic stories about the yama king. Again, you're not alone against him. therer are hundreds of gang grunts invading the complex across the roofs so, he will be interested in their hopeless souls, too. I banished him with two Edge-boosted attempts, btw.

however, every adventure is just a guideline for the GM. I don't think we had 7 Shedim, as our Runner Team was only 3 guys.
I think it's not the book's fault, but the GM. If he has to save your ass at the climax he should have adjusted the problem from the beginning.

btw, I'll be in Stuttgart soon wink.gif

Ah, howīs that? Business?^^
Of course an adventure is a guidline, but it is much too detailed to be only a "rough" guideline. We are talking about --- i donīt know ----20-30 bucks with informations and detailed NPS. People put work, time and sweat into the production and not only because they get paid, also becaus we pay for this work, it should be a workable, playable result. If i have to adjust every part of the adventure because the devs either donīt know what they do or they simply donīt care, i donīt need to buy a complete hardcover-book. In this case a half-page-sized summary would be enough.

The book says that the adventure is for experiences runners, but we ARE experienced runners and if you play it realstically you are toast on every second page of this adventure. Magical combat with a spirit rating 9 in his own domain rating 3...tell me one mage that can handle this. You can use edge, the spirit can do that too. He is rating 9, so he should have more edge than you. His ITNW is unpassable for mundanes and we donīt have an adept with death-touch. Even if he would have it, he probable has less than 19 dices the monster has for unarmed combat. There are so many things that makes no sense, that i canīt point them all out.
Cain
Force 9 spirits can be beat. My first time through, we were using the 4.0 rules, and the troll archer with EX-arrowheads did a lot of damage on his first shot. The second shot pretty much finished it off.
Machiavelli
We are 2 Sams with Ares Alphas and Exexplosive, a mage with (now) magic rating of 3 (Sorcery 5+Specialisation combat) and edge 5 plus a rigger with a small rotordrone. Tell me how to survive.
LurkerOutThere
Run
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012