Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Runners vs street scum
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Saint Hallow
SR takes place in a dystopia. A world filled with all kinds of morals gone flying out the window. However, my main thing is through most of the SR books, novels, etc... the thing that separates a Shadowrunner from a hired goon off the street is a number of things...

1. A Code. Runners get the job done in a professional manner. No matter what the drek goes flying, the complete the operation or take it as far as it can go.
2. Killing. Runners aren't sadistic murderers. While having no qualms about putting a bullet through the head of someone, they don't go carefree killing everyone in their path. Unless it's a black-op/wetwork job, no one needs to get killed. Corporations hate paying death benefits... & it's always possible that the victim had a family who calls in a favor from someone to get revenge.
3. Skills. Goons off the street are tough and resourceful, but they're not specialists. Runners have the skills to do the things that the corner mugger can't. Hacking. Demolitions. Laying down precise cover fire as ex-fil is going on.

So... when I play my game & I butt heads with the GM about some aspects, he bringing up how the world of SR is a dystopia & we're not being amoral enough. I fire back with how Runners are pro's & work a delicate balance on staying above the street level hoods & not becoming corp/government operatives.

I would like to know everyone else's take on what exactly constitutes being a Shadowrunner & what "moral" (if any) codes runners take to separate/distinguish themselves from the rabble.
kzt
It depends. In the classic pink mohawk game everything you say is false, the PCs leave a trail of bodies and blown up and burned out buildings behind them, and their opposition is composed of Inspector Jacques Clouseau leading the Keystone Kops.
CanRay
With a bureaucratic system right out of the movie "Brazil".
suoq
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Sep 5 2011, 10:48 PM) *
SR takes place in a dystopia.

I'm sorry, but at worst, it's a post-dystopia. The almanac has the UN almost giving all sapients rights. Even ghouls want their rights now.

QUOTE
I would like to know everyone else's take on what exactly constitutes being a Shadowrunner & what "moral" (if any) codes runners take to separate/distinguish themselves from the rabble.

I don't kill or torture anyone unless.
1) I'm being paid to.
2) I find it necessary to complete a job I'm being paid to do.
3) I find it necessary in order to protect myself.
4) I feel the person deserves it.

The main difference between myself and a street level hood is:

Warehouse loft
Comforts: Middle, Entertainment: Middle, Necessities: High, Neighborhood: Middle Security: High
Qualities: Easy-Going Landlord [1LP], No Neighbors [1LP], Workplace [1LP], Network Bottleneck [-1LP]

Yes, it's expensive, but it's worth it and so am I.

As for moral codes, I'm not being paid to be "moral". I'm paid to be discreet, effective, and to work within someone else's comfort zone. Where the rabble tends to be caught, ineffective, and works best within their own territory.
TheOOB
I don't think that shadowrunners are moral so much as professional. They're not going to look in the secret package Johnson is having them deliver, they're not going to cause a bunch of heat and dump it on Johnson, and they won't quit a run unless absolutely necessary.
CanRay
Some have a moral code, some don't. Some are professional, some write their name in the wall with a belt-fed weapon.

They are the people that DO NOT FIT INTO NICE LITTLE BOXES! And are damned proud of that very fact.
TheOOB
QUOTE (CanRay @ Sep 6 2011, 01:03 AM) *
Some have a moral code, some don't. Some are professional, some write their name in the wall with a belt-fed weapon.

They are the people that DO NOT FIT INTO NICE LITTLE BOXES! And are damned proud of that very fact.


They make caskets big enough for trolls
CanRay
You really think there's going to be enough left to bury?
Synner667
QUOTE (kzt @ Sep 6 2011, 04:52 AM) *
It depends. In the classic pink mohawk game everything you say is false, the PCs leave a trail of bodies and blown up and burned out buildings behind them, and their opposition is composed of Inspector Jacques Clouseau leading the Keystone Kops.

Actually, in SR v1-3, the novels and "flavour" text actually have no psycho-rabid dogs as characters - most of the stories involve a fast moving dark world a few steps from ours, where people very much do have morals and are often professional [Argent, Dirk, Sally, Sam Verner, etc are definitely not about leaving trails of bodies].

The no-holds barred shooting everything that moves and amorality is a player driven thing, and not SR driven [except for the trainwreck that's SR 4].

Such a "dystopian" world doesn't function.
Glyph
Shadowrunners are elite specialists who get their name because they do work that the corporations want done, but not traced back to them. They tend to be more augmented or more powerfully awakened, better equipped, and more skilled than common criminals - but because they are a title that common criminals aspire to, you will have lots of thugs and wannabes calling themselves shadowrunners.

In some campaigns, the line between runners and street punks will be blurred - runners often start out as more common criminals.

They tend to get slightly more subtle jobs than thugs. If the Johnson can get the job done with a half a dozen orks with Uzis, then he will do that rather than pay extra for pros.
Ascalaphus
I personally like the "professionalism" and "personal code" themes. I think that people good enough to be called shadowrunners should be so rare, that they can afford a personal code. And, to some degree, that code prevents them from becoming scum and falling into the kind of traps scum falls into.

It's a bit romantic, but then RPGs are make believe. Compare it to film-noir; an ice-cold character who makes no mistakes, has no limits to what he'll do has a much harder time being a sympathetic character than the detective who has limits, who sticks out his neck for what he believes in.

Should characters be "more amoral"? They should be willing to do the basic job of shadowrunning: high level espionage, sabotage, extracting (involuntary) employees. That's not the same as terrorism, casual collateral killing or sadism/torture - you don't have to be willing to do those, although some shadowrunners are willing.



Are there advantages to playing a principled runner? Maybe - maybe people regard you as a better, or less-bad person. Maybe you've got fans, or admirers in the secret/security community. It might count in your favor if you're ever apprehended. But it's probably not a big advantage in any obvious sense.

But I think there's something nice about being proud of not being a total scumbag, of being a professional who doesn't do the barbaric stuff. Playing a more sympathetic character and being proud of being light grey in a dark grey world.
Traul
QUOTE (Synner667 @ Sep 6 2011, 07:51 AM) *
Actually, in SR v1-3, the novels and "flavour" text actually have no psycho-rabid dogs as characters - most of the stories involve a fast moving dark world a few steps from ours, where people very much do have morals and are often professional [Argent, Dirk, Sally, Sam Verner, etc are definitely not about leaving trails of bodies].

The no-holds barred shooting everything that moves and amorality is a player driven thing, and not SR driven [except for the trainwreck that's SR 4].

Such a "dystopian" world doesn't function.

They might not be in the short stories, but there are gangers and eco-terrorists in the archetype list in SR3 at least.
Irion
Well, it is quite hard to have a feel real dystopia with powerfull characters.
Thats always a big problem.

In a dystopian setting you only can be a hero for a longer period of time, if you fail most of the time.

Thats the players chasing a serial killer/sadist/rapist/blood mage but only finding the bodys of his victims, because of the lack of infrastructure (maybe the manage to save some but the subject gets away).

Thats the players smuggeling weapons for a genocide unable to do something about it afterwards.

Thats the players trying to get back to the guy who beat his wife in a koma only to find afterwards, that he was connected and got his wife and her family murdered for telling on him.

Or it just could be the character getting a little look at the powers to be and beeing pushed back outside, realising he did not change anything. (Thats even holding true if he is revarded for his bravery, showing that the powers to be have resources to waste just to feel a bit more superior than they already do)

Thats why I agree with suoq, at most it is a post dystopia.

From the novels I have read there are only a few, really fitting the darker term.

It is pink mohawk without the balls to be pink mohawk.
You have some guys invading a building with a minigun and posing as they are special forces before instead beeing just plain honest and give them their earned pink mohawk.
If you characters act like punks, make them punks. If your characters are supposed to be an ex-seal team, make them act like one. (At least that much so someone with no military background does not want to hit his head on the table.)
Shadowrun has the same issue a lot of RPG have. Trying to work too many angles.
Midas
I like where you are coming from Saint Hallow, but the truth is that some folks prefer a pink mohawk approach (guns ablazing, take no prisoners) to my preferred black trenchcoat style (softly softly, leave no traces). It seems your GM is inclined to the pink mohawk side of things, but what about the other players?

Actually you raise a very good point regarding death/injury compensation that I have often wondered about. If security grunts next of kin get insurance payouts if they are killed on the job, runners that leave a whirlwind of death and carnage behind them might have the insurance agents coming after their arses (as an insurance company, you don't want to leave such a group around so you have to make a multi-million payout in the next company these gutter punks attack). If there is no life insurance for security guards on the job, they will be extremely timid against runner-level opposition as the last thing they want is to leave their family bread-winnerless and destitute in dystopia. What gives?
Irion
Insurance is one point. The mafia has no insurance, as far as I know. But if you kill a hand full of mafia enforcers, you are in a lot of hurt I guess.
Megacons are less companys and more empires. In a world of sharks it is bad to seem weak.

So yes, the most important aspect of the black trenchcoat is "a hell of a payback if you leave a mess", I agree.

This does not mean they will go all berserk for blown up shack with some money loss but no deathtoll.

Because there is always the possibility of getting caught. And shooting some kids in the head for destroying some tools worth a few thousands bucks, does not look good.

Shooting a punch of guys, responsible for killing 4 police officers/guards gets you a much better representation.
Brainpiercing7.62mm
Hmm, I think the only CODE a runner needs to have is the one to get the job done without messing around.

Personally, my runners tend to be fairly nice guys, who are only ruthless towards people whom they think deserve it, but that's just a personal preference. Mostly runners in our groups have been regularly amoral, with a firm conviction that you can kill whoever won't be missed smile.gif.
Traul
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Sep 6 2011, 12:09 PM) *
Personally, my runners tend to be fairly nice guys, who are only ruthless towards people whom they think deserve it, but that's just a personal preference. Mostly runners in our groups have been regularly amoral, with a firm conviction that you can kill whoever won't be missed smile.gif.

You mean nameless NPCs?
Psikerlord
I think SR allows for a range of characters, pink mohawk to super spy and any other odd concept you can think up (we once had a PC who wanted to be a vampire and got augmentations that made him vampire-like, including teeth and claws - it was weird but memorable and quite themeatic!). The OP's team might be a mix of personalities - some have codes, some don't, etc. The GM should be flexible enough to accommodate different PC approaches.
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (Traul @ Sep 6 2011, 08:53 AM) *
You mean nameless NPCs?


I killed a PC and all I got was this lousy t-shirt
Ascalaphus
I think playing an idealistic runner is quite viable. You can be a corp-hating anarchist, and be a shadowrunner. You will take jobs to sabotage one corp for another's benefit; with the money you can acquire the guns you'll need for the Revolution. Sure, you're benefiting a corporation, but only by hurting another one.

So yeah, a runner like that wouldn't like a job to get rid of annoying peace activists. But he might consider corporate security to be willing stooges, and have no trouble gunning them down.

So many possibilities smile.gif
Brainpiercing7.62mm
QUOTE (Traul @ Sep 6 2011, 01:53 PM) *
You mean nameless NPCs?


There is a disconcerting tendency to directly attribute this to social status: Offing homeless bums, for instance, who just happened to pick the wrong car-park to escape from the rain, doesn't seem to trigger any conscientious response.

Likewise, the lives of street whores don't have any value whatsoever. There were repeated suggestions for hiring a cheap hore to seduce a guy and then off her so she couldn't talk. I find the easy way the PLAYERS talk about this, to kill a person who was probably knee deep in shit from day one, whose only offence was to be a victim all her life, and likely as not hardly voluntarily,... well... pretty scary, actually. It's de-humanization at work, simply by looking at social status. On the other hand, captured drug dealers, failed johnsons and other, seemingly more important people, are dumped alive.
Maybe it's what the movies educate you to do: In most movies, you immediately know which characters you are supposed to sympathize with when they die, and which not.

In response, I usually have my characters equipped with an extra large social conscience. They have fewer problems with offing guards and cops than with nameless poor sods.
Loch
Doesn't matter if you're a wiz chromed-up runner or a chip-head slum rat, either way odds are good that you don't have a legitimate SIN. That's supposed to be a pretty big thing in the setting. Without those digits, you don't exist in the world of the corps. Sure, as a runner you may be able to get a good fake, and even live a pretty good life that way, but all it takes is a good enough security system to tag your SIN as a fake and the plush rug gets pulled out from under you. Corpsec, the Star, The Man in general doesn't really care about you if you don't have a SIN. So why do runners have issues with killing cops but think nothing of bombing an orphanage or kidnapping a hooker if it gets their job done? Whose side are runners really on? The SINner/SINless dichotomy is one aspect of the social scene in SR that I find really interesting, and I try to work it into my characters whenever I can.
Critias
QUOTE (Brainpiercing7.62mm @ Sep 6 2011, 09:58 AM) *
There is a disconcerting tendency to directly attribute this to social status: Offing homeless bums, for instance, who just happened to pick the wrong car-park to escape from the rain, doesn't seem to trigger any conscientious response.

Likewise, the lives of street whores don't have any value whatsoever. There were repeated suggestions for hiring a cheap hore to seduce a guy and then off her so she couldn't talk. I find the easy way the PLAYERS talk about this, to kill a person who was probably knee deep in shit from day one, whose only offence was to be a victim all her life, and likely as not hardly voluntarily,... well... pretty scary, actually. It's de-humanization at work, simply by looking at social status. On the other hand, captured drug dealers, failed johnsons and other, seemingly more important people, are dumped alive.
Maybe it's what the movies educate you to do: In most movies, you immediately know which characters you are supposed to sympathize with when they die, and which not.

In response, I usually have my characters equipped with an extra large social conscience. They have fewer problems with offing guards and cops than with nameless poor sods.

One group of people has a SIN, and as such legally exists. One group doesn't. While player characters taking a cavalier stance to morality and ethics is, well, standard player character fare in any RPG, really -- the simple truth is that in Shadowrun's society, they're right. Someone without a SIN is a lot more likely to eat a bullet than someone who legally exists, and/or who is a drug dealer or other "important" person (who's more likely to have contacts enough to track down and punish PCs for killing them).

GMs can always wreak merry havoc with that line of thinking by just happening to make that whore the kid sister of a hotshot company man, or just happening to have that down-on-his-luck whino be a former Shadowrunner who fell on hard times, or whatever...but by and large, offing the folks society has deemed disposable, as opposed to the ones society has deemed valuabe, just means your PCs are thinking about consequences a little bit. Killing a whore but letting a drug dealer live? That's just reasonable business practices.
Loch
If you're trying to be altruistic in Shadowrun (an often fatal endeavor, I know), it makes more sense to kill the cops rather than the whores. Those cops have a salary, a captain that (at least partly) cares for them, and most importantly, access to medical benefits. A cop gets shot, he can probably be revived by the DocWagon people, with whom he has a standing contract, or better yet, the trained medical staff of the corp he's part of. The hooker has nigh on zero probability of receiving medical care for her wounds without direct intervention. You'd be completely justified in shooting down corpsec goons because "hey, they're company men, they have insurance". The problem from a pragmatic point of view is that the people with insurance probably also have executives who provide that for them, and don't like to see bloodshed cut into their profits. So while it might at least be somewhat justifiable to gun down suits but spare the urchins, for most people it's just good business sense to do the opposite.
Brainpiercing7.62mm
The SIN/SINless thing is a big factor, although actually, at some point that guy WITH connections is a lot more likely to come after you if you let him live. I also wouldn't overestimate the value a SIN gives you within society: After all, once you're dead, you're worthless, again. While getting back at the murderers, and not letting chaos run rampant are valid concerns of law enforcement, remember that it's all for a profit, too.

Now luckily for both cops and corpsec we have the "one" ammunition that is better than all the rest, which will hopefully leave them alive in a firefight.

It's going to be interesting what my runner's will do with the couple of drug cartel execs they have/will have to capture to question.
AppliedCheese
I'll just weigh in here. On the dehumanization thing. Killing people is a pretty natural thing for people until Society says "Thou shalt not!". Honestly, watch what happens when you tell people "its aok to kill these folks - you get a by for them, actually hey we'd like you to go kill them for us." Mostly they set to it with a gusto, and the response for succeeding is more along the lines of watching a touchdown crowd than any thoughts of "oh, but it was a regrettable necessity." It doesn't matter if we're talking African Genocide, the occupation of the west, LA gangs in the 90s, or legitimate military action. The human reaction to killing who your allowed to is almost always a "hell yeah!" and not a "oh...oh..but why?"

Given that, shadowrunners (aka, professional purveyors of high stakes espionage, burglary, kidnapping, and violence) being aok with killing someone that the society of 2072 has pretty much said "meh, we don't really care" about doesn't seem particularly outside the realm of likelihood. Especially as, being by and large SINless, the runners probably came up from a background with a lot less "life is a sacred flower" and a lot more "Life starts cheap; you gotta work to make it expensive".

Plus, you know, it is game. With very detailed rules on killing people and taking their stuff. Entire sourcebooks of nothing but better ways to kill people. One of the high end goals is to be able to kill really important people, and get away with it. It kind of breeds in a bit of a mindset.
Saint Hallow
If such is the case, then I see that I need to either...

1. Speak with my GM about how he wants the game to be played vs how I want to play the game.
2. Point out all the notes people here made about how SR4 is not a dystopia anymore, but a post-dystopia.
3. Find a new game.

Thanks for the opinions & thoughts people.
Critias
1 and 3 are the only options that actually matter, and of them, #1 is the way to go. Pointing to an internet thread and saying "See? Your core understanding of the game world is wrong! The internet says so!" isn't going to convince him of anything. Go with #1. Sit down, talk to the dude, and get on the same page about what kind of feel/attitude your Shadowrun is -- not Dumpshock's Shadowrun, not the writers' Shadowrun, not the Shadowrun from the novels, or anything else, just your game table counts.
suoq
Where is that +1 button?
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (suoq @ Sep 6 2011, 06:53 PM) *
Where is that +1 button?


Different website.
Saint Hallow
I plan on talking with my GM in a few weeks. We aren't playing this weekend, so I have some time to properly word my points and issues in a peaceful, non-threatening, non-bitching manner... I hope. I would rather not leave the game as its the only SR game I've found in NYC.
Erik Baird
If it helps any, Fields of Fire spent a lot of space in the fluff text discussing runner behavior and morals.
CanRay
"Bite My Snake"
Irion
QUOTE
GMs can always wreak merry havoc with that line of thinking by just happening to make that whore the kid sister of a hotshot company man, or just happening to have that down-on-his-luck whino be a former Shadowrunner who fell on hard times, or whatever...but by and large, offing the folks society has deemed disposable, as opposed to the ones society has deemed valuabe, just means your PCs are thinking about consequences a little bit.

A down on his luck shadowrunner shot in the head, is also just a dead body with a hole in his head.
And finding out who shot your sister you did not care about in the head, somewhere in a dark ally? Good luck with that.

I dislike fucking PC because you do not like their style of play, if done to obvious.:devil:
The hooker thing is so bound to blow up in the faces of the players, anyway.
And to kill some guy in your car... Well, some guys were caught because of parking tickets...
They sent in a girl, knowing nothing about shadowrunning after (I suspect) quite a high target.
She might just be a pawn to the players, but even a pawn is able to ruin your game if it is just standing in the wrong place at the right time...
Neurosis
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Sep 5 2011, 10:48 PM) *
SR takes place in a dystopia. A world filled with all kinds of morals gone flying out the window. However, my main thing is through most of the SR books, novels, etc... the thing that separates a Shadowrunner from a hired goon off the street is a number of things...

1. A Code. Runners get the job done in a professional manner. No matter what the drek goes flying, the complete the operation or take it as far as it can go.
2. Killing. Runners aren't sadistic murderers. While having no qualms about putting a bullet through the head of someone, they don't go carefree killing everyone in their path. Unless it's a black-op/wetwork job, no one needs to get killed. Corporations hate paying death benefits... & it's always possible that the victim had a family who calls in a favor from someone to get revenge.
3. Skills. Goons off the street are tough and resourceful, but they're not specialists. Runners have the skills to do the things that the corner mugger can't. Hacking. Demolitions. Laying down precise cover fire as ex-fil is going on.

So... when I play my game & I butt heads with the GM about some aspects, he bringing up how the world of SR is a dystopia & we're not being amoral enough. I fire back with how Runners are pro's & work a delicate balance on staying above the street level hoods & not becoming corp/government operatives.

I would like to know everyone else's take on what exactly constitutes being a Shadowrunner & what "moral" (if any) codes runners take to separate/distinguish themselves from the rabble.


Goes without saying, probably, but it's a fine and blurry line between runners and street scum, and there is no 'right' or 'wrong' answer.
Glyph
The problem isn't really with the GM running a crapsack world - that's well within the tolerances of the game. And it can be fun and challenging to play a character struggling with his conscience in such a world. I'm only getting the player's side, so the following may or may not be accurate:

But the problem doesn't seem to be with the game world, it's with the GM stepping outside of his bounds to tell the players how they should be playing their characters. Yeah, the GM should set an overall tone for the game - but it should stop short of imposing D&D-style alignments on everyone.
CanRay
Mine is "Chaotic-Shooty".
Mardrax
QUOTE (AppliedCheese @ Sep 6 2011, 07:15 PM) *
I'll just weigh in here. On the dehumanization thing. Killing people is a pretty natural thing for people until Society says "Thou shalt not!". Honestly, watch what happens when you tell people "its aok to kill these folks - you get a by for them, actually hey we'd like you to go kill them for us." Mostly they set to it with a gusto, and the response for succeeding is more along the lines of watching a touchdown crowd than any thoughts of "oh, but it was a regrettable necessity." It doesn't matter if we're talking African Genocide, the occupation of the west, LA gangs in the 90s, or legitimate military action. The human reaction to killing who your allowed to is almost always a "hell yeah!" and not a "oh...oh..but why?"

Beware overgeneralisation here. Although this holds true in some parts of the population, some demographics over others, it's not as much a given as you make it sound.
Brazilian_Shinobi
QUOTE (CanRay @ Sep 8 2011, 12:53 AM) *
Mine is "Chaotic-Shooty".


Mine is "Lawful-Puncher".

Hey, we could star one of those "back-to-back opposites" trideo shows. _o/
LurkerOutThere
QUOTE (Glyph @ Sep 7 2011, 10:47 PM) *
But the problem doesn't seem to be with the game world, it's with the GM stepping outside of his bounds to tell the players how they should be playing their characters. Yeah, the GM should set an overall tone for the game - but it should stop short of imposing D&D-style alignments on everyone.


I had a longer and more eloquent response but it was eaten by my works internet. It basically boils down to while GM's shouldn't impose a hard alignment system neither should they feel obligated to run a violence/combat/rape simulator. In fact a lot of the dillema's involved in storytelling, revolve around an audience who frankly won't just con, lie, mind control, and demolish their way to all objectives. Take the classic case of a grieving parent wanting to have those responsible for their offspring's death brought to justice. What could be a fairly satisfying yet still paying moral quest could theoretically be solved into mind control puppeteer a hobo into confessing to the crime in gory detail, editing soem trid footage to have co-aborating evidence and then throwing the "Guilty" on fire off a bridge. Twenty minuets work tops not counting driving time.

For me a question as interesting in solving the Shadowruns laid out to me has always been "What won't my character do and why."


In any case I think it's important to set what sort of game world your expecting to play in up front, I tend to shoot for shades of heroic in the shadows but others tastes may vary.

As a thought experiment I think i'm going to offer bonus karma, up to hundred for characters playing at the next game I run. The caveat is the players have to explain to me what sort of ethical code the runners live by and how they gave it. 100 points would be for the most extreme, stringent, and actually hampering code, less points would be for more flexible doctrines or those based on less morally sensitive contexts like honor or family or organization loyalty. If the player ever violates their code their going to loose access to what their code bought them until they atone.

The end idea being if you want to play a good guy your life should be harder, but there should be that little somethign that helps even the odds. Plus if done right it should lead to some good roleplay fodder which is always a plus.
camberiu
QUOTE (Saint Hallow @ Sep 6 2011, 03:48 AM) *
So... when I play my game & I butt heads with the GM about some aspects, he bringing up how the world of SR is a dystopia & we're not being amoral enough. I fire back with how Runners are pro's & work a delicate balance on staying above the street level hoods & not becoming corp/government operatives.

I would like to know everyone else's take on what exactly constitutes being a Shadowrunner & what "moral" (if any) codes runners take to separate/distinguish themselves from the rabble.


As the GM of the game in question, it seems to me that this is a classic case of player/GM mis-communication.

Yes, the SR world that I run is very dystopic, individualistic, corrupt, dark, bleak, inhabited by many immoral, ruthless and cruel individuals. There are few social safety nets, the gap between the rich and the poor are huge and the average American saw their standard of living drop dramatically during the 21st Century. Law enforcement is lacking in many "working class" areas. Drugs, organs and human trafficking are rampant. Most of the citizens are barely scrapping by, having to endure long working hours, low wages, food based mostly on soy and artificial flavors, tiny living quarters subjected to random water rationing and little prospects for improving their lives. It is a world full of chipheads, child prostitution, street kids, pimps, mobsters, loan sharks, smugglers, con-artists, serial rapists, insect spirits, ghouls and worse.

This is Shadowrun to me. This is how I see the world when I run my games. Other GMs might see/imagine SR world differently, and that is fine.

However, I never said that the players have to be like that. I have no issue with the player characters having a honor code, being idealistic, altruistic and just plain kind. Of course, there is a cost for being a "good person" while dwelling in the underworld and shadowworlds. As Shadowrunners, you will be exposed to and have to interact with the worst meta-humanity has to offer. Many of your customers, contacts and even allies will be scumbags of the worse kind. You will be asked to do some pretty distasteful things. Can you walk away, turn your back on such offers? Of course! Just be aware that there are consequences for doing that, just like there are consequences for being a sadistic psycho-killer.

Based on the fact that you had to open this topic here , it is obvious that, as a GM, I have not done a good job explaining that you have options and that you do not have to play as an "amoral" character. Also, you might want to consider that a lot of the pressure you are getting to play the "amoral" character might be coming from the other players and not from the GM.

At any rate, we can discuss it further during our next game session.
Paul
Like so many others have pointed out a lot of this comes down to personal preference in play style. I've played Shadowrun since shortly after it was introduced, and have played off and on ever since. It's my favorite game system because it's very flexible.

In my own games it varies-depending on the themes we want to explore the PC's can be stone cold killers who adhere to one code-anything goes-to gang-bangers who are too busy trying to survive to worry about code, to National Geographic photographers who are just normal people to mercenaries who have Bushido style codes. Each campaign is different.

As a Game Master I have a few personal preferences, and luckily most of my players most of the time agree with me. They include but are not limited to:

  • Slapstick and Pink Mohwak has a very limited presence in our games. We're not against humor, we just don't like this kind most of the time.
  • We love a good 80's action flick as much as the next bunch of dudes but there are realistic consequences for mayhem and murder. As a GM I like to let this build a little-so one day things are going well, the next it's raining trouble.
  • The rules serve the game, and are not the sole purpose-we limit rules lawyering to 45 seconds during game time. We can debate a field ruling after the game is over.


At any rate back to the topic at hand-professional's vary, as do the definitions of them.
Brainpiercing7.62mm
QUOTE (LurkerOutThere @ Sep 8 2011, 04:08 PM) *
For me a question as interesting in solving the Shadowruns laid out to me has always been "What won't my character do and why."


This is easily even more interesting (or actually, ONLY really interesting) if not doing something will actually bring hard or at least disadvantage to a character...
Adarael
My personal rule for what makes a Shadowrunner vs "street scum" is basically pretty simple: once it's a regular job, you're a runner. You might suck at running, you might murder all the guards and be a psycho, you might be the most ice-cold pro ever... but to me, street scum are the ones who moonlight as runners to fund other pursuits, while runners are the ones who have consciously decided to ride that train as far as it'll take them.

Then again, I like my runners and street scum on a gradiated scale, rather than a more binary one.
CanRay
Like the sliding scale of 'hawk?
Adarael
Very much so, except it's more like a sliding scale of invested they are in their work.

I mean, Joebob the ice-cold pro fixer with his 6 grand suits and fifty grand bmw can still be street scum, if his primary role in the shadows is helping smugglers move hookers from thailand into Los Angeles. Conversely, the guy with the pink mohawk who brands security forces with his personal seal and works for chump change and drugs because he loves his work that much (and hates MCT passionately) is a hard-core shadowrunner, because he's decided, "I'm gonna run the shadows cuz SHIT, bro, I got nothin' else I wanna do."
Paul
See in my own games the latter would last exactly one game. We like that sort of harsh noir feeling to our games though!
CanRay
So give him a fedora and a trenchcoat. nyahnyah.gif
Paul
That'll be a little akward, although the fedora will cover the large caliber exit wounds in his head... biggrin.gif
LurkerOutThere
No complaint about how my houserule would be super unfair and force people to play THEIR characters a certain way, man dumpshock, your slipping.
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