You forgot COL Klink running the place for the Japanacorps for a decade.

The who and what now?

So, now you're the omniscient one, who sees all players,all characters, and all games?

When I build n Infected character ... they are indeed a monster. Some of them struggle against that part of them; some of them revel in it. But none are "sparkly".


... or mandatete "Infertile Infected" quality for any PC Infected ...


Who says they're ignored? Not me. Dealing with that part of being an Infected is, well ... part of being an Infected.

The innane SR3 plot that had some Imperial Colonel mutiny and get a couple of marine divisions to follow him after being paid off by the Japancorps and take over the Bay area and run it for the sole benefit of the corps for a few years while the Empire did nothing about that (Because they don't really mind if a senior officer and 50,000 troops commit treason). The period where they carried out the wet dreams of Humanis.

I see.
That didn't happen in my game. Mainly cause I just now learned of it.
for info on how my San fran is, go check the "ch-ch-ch-changes" topic about how people's games diverge from the setting/metaplot.

I think next game before committing to the Swat Raiding, I'll tell the player straight what's going on, and give him a chance to get out of it.

I don't think all this would frustrate me so much if it wasn't for the whole attempted neck snapping incident at the very start of the game. that really ticked me off.
Going by some of what's been said it sounds like this one mage is just an exception. So its just bad luck that the first mage in my first shadowrun game is a sociopath.

The number of 'Sane' Runners I've encountered so far include...
I'll get back to you on that.
On the less sane side we have:
Cyber-Batman.
Cyber-Jesus.
A minigun happy rigger who recently sold off all their assets to afford a Unicorn strike drone.
A Ninja with distinctive style, Signature, and a burning hatred of the red Samurai.
A Mage who thinks he's a Jedi.
A Master of disguise with a full auto shotgun.
A Heavy weapons troll.
An Uncouth sniper sociopath.
A mage who moonlights as a male prostitute to feed his sex addiction.
A paranoid hacker.
A genetically engineered face.

Of them all the sanest character so far is the heavy weapon troll. go figure.

Of course despite their insanity most of the characters go out of their way to avoid hurting anyone that they don't have to and about half of them use or used less lethal force for preference.

BTW it sounds like this isn't the case for your player, but sometimes a Mindrape Mage can use his powers because he wants to avoid hurting anyone physically and so uses manipulation spells to move people out of the way without doing any lasting damage (Our Jedi uses his Jedi mind trick spell [not sure which one] in this way.)

You want to take this into another thread? I can refute every one of your claims on HMHVV. You're getting your viruses mixed up and you're forgetting that people can roleplay ("They don't act like monsters and expect others to cater to them").


I have no idea why you felt the need to point out that the BC from Astral Hazing was positive - that was never in dispute. Someone would only get the bonus dice (or penalty) if the spellcaster was in the BC of the person with Astral Hazing; you should go back and read that section closely (Street Magic, page 118, Backround Count And Magic, especially the first paragraph and the first sentence of the fourth paragraph).

So, like normal, your post makes sense unless you actually look at the rules.

EDIT:

Sounds like Compulsion.

And rightly so. I don't know the full situation, but it is completely appropriate to say that some material is off limits in your game and it does sound like he stepped over the line. If he wants to play in a game where he can go around making people kill their loved ones, I'm sure there are lots of creepy games that would be willing to take him. Just be prepared, occasionally players like this don't get why things like that are off-limits and think that not letting them play out their rape fantasies (or whatever) is somehow discriminating or unfair because there are not specific rules listed that disallow it. (yes, actually had it happen. And they were trying to rape another player's character, so double wtf?) Hopefully that isn't the case here and talking is the best method for dealing with it.

I even actually had to make an explicit houserule that any attempt to kill, molest, etc. a child in one of my games instantly grants the child psychic powers equivalent to the most powerful magic available in the setting that they instantly turn on the character in question. Only had to use it once fortunately.

You actually had to USE that rule? WTF? I feel lucky now that I've NEVER had to deal with sick drek like that. There's not much that pisses me off more than that stuff, and I'm not sure if I could keep enough control not to strike whoever did that...

To be fair, I introduced the table I'm playing at to Shadowrun with a job of finding a missing woman. On the way to finding the missing woman was a young child mage (6-year-old girl), and another child (her 8-year-old "brother")... something between a samurai and phys-adept. She made the nastiest combat monster turn his gun on the party and then himself, while the other child found the projecting mage meat in the fan and proceeded to destroy the body. It would have been a TPK, if the girl hadn't mind-slaved the survivor and took him back into the facility for brainwashing and repurposing.

Most of the table, and, mind you, I can't one-hundred percent tell if they're joking, do have a "live fire" rule for encountering any children on their own. I don't think our current GM will ever be able to use children in any way/shape/form since the incident.

I can see how a group could possibly consider children targets. Never the rest of that stuff. Ever. But killing? It just takes one... experience... to give players a valid concern/desire to off someone underage.

*It has a few extra drawbacks too : I don't think the target would be acting very normaly under such a heavy dose of manipulation. An as an extr problem, your low-Willpower puppet is very easy for any other mindbender to snatch and puppet around for his own use. With a fair chance to have the blame pinned on you....

It is already Negative, not only for the guy who has it, but also for any Mage around him.

Indeed. Perhaps there are situations where it's helpful to the character, but on the flip side, it is a major hindrance to any magic users on the team. And if one sidesteps that issue by making a team without any magic capabilities, the non-hazing team members will be sitting ducks against opposing magicians. A whole team of astral hazers would draw a large amount of attention to themselves, just by existing.

Yeah, I don't play with that guy any more. But you know how it is, he was friends with several other people in the group and I couldn't tell him to take a hike without pretty much dissolving the group.

And for the record, this was not a little devil girl that attacked him and I don't use children as villains so there was no reason to think she was dangerous. She was just a window dressing npc peasant girl in a dnd game. He beat her mother to death in front of her and then decided he would have to kill the little girl too so there were no witnesses. All so he could see if their peasant shack was hiding any magic items. This was also apparently Chaotic Neutral behavior. Much happier with my current group.

Oh. THAT guy. Yea... I know That Guy, too. I'm sure we all stopped talking to him long ago, as we grew up, right?

oh. wow.
Yeah my player isn't that bad.
Really it's the character not the player, I'm careful to keep them separate.
The only explanation for why they tried it was to 'test their power' or to 'experiment'. I now refer to that character as Mengela.

That's CE and he knows it.

My group beat up a young teen once - we were tracking a guy who was executing people remotely through the matrix by overclocking headware so their brains fried and we tracked his signal to a public library. We go to the back room where the signal was traced to and find a young teen pushing buttons on an old-style cyberterminal. We capture and interrogate the kid (which was interesting because of the public setting...) and have him tied up in my car with the punching Adept. We find out that the kid was just being paid to push certain button sequences and had no idea what he was actually doing, so we knock him out, drive real slowly near a police station, open the door and toss him out onto the sidewalk. I referred to it as a "catch and release program."

But yeah, we were not intent on harming the child and took steps to not cause undue injury.

I just read that story on the potent quotables thread

I think that all groups go through their problem phases or players. Inadvertently they grow out of it, go separate paths or get it beaten out of them.

It's a good one.

I'm one of the players in the game, and that's pretty much what happened. The GM describes a couple looking up at the night sky, and the first thing the mage does is cast mind control to have the guy snap his girlfriend's neck.

The absolute full weight of the law should come down on this person. It should be explained that Shadowrunners don't live in a vacuum, specifics should be listed, general rules should be reminded, and the player should write up a new character.

Anything else is the GM playing extreme soft ball with the player. I hope the GM is equally lenient with the group when they leave DNA, video, fingerprint, and SIN information behind on 'runs.

Yeah, I remember during character creation, I bought 3 rating 4 fake SINs. 1 is for my legal life, 1 for if I'm caught on a run, and 1 is for running away from everything. A couple of players thought I was being paranoid.

Technically all Fake SINs are illegal - none of them are tied to a legal life. If you wanted a legal one you should have gotten the SINner Negative Quality.

Pseudolegal?

I disagree. Strongly.
The OP already stated that this was a group where all players, including the GM (which is the OP, btw) are beginners. He did the smart thing and asked how to handle such things. He now has an idea what to do, but the first step is to talk with the player in question. This is not 'playing extreme soft ball', it is sensible interaction between two human beings and very probably friends. If it gets better, all is well. If not, your proposition is still on the table.
But outright killing a 'newbie's' character before explaining possible consequences is simply a dick move and will only breed resentment and, quite possibly, lead to the player in question not having fun anymore and quitting the game.
And even first explaining and then removing the character will have a similar effect, in my experience.

Yes. There are and should be boundaries in every group. Some are self-explanatory (e.g. the child molesting thing ... I hope), others need to be talked about. You can't expect a group which just started a dystopian RPG to have thought about the setting in-depth and discussed possible stumble blocks beforehand.

Funny how that works, btw. Murder and torture seems to be okay with most groups.

Yeah, pseudolegal. That is, it is the SIN with as little connections to the Shadows as possible. The second SIN gets thrown away a lot, because it comes in contact with the Shadows frequently. And the third is an emergency escape SIN.

Sure, why not?

If a player can't get over a character death in a highly lethal game then they've chosen the wrong game to play. If a player expects absolutely no response for some of the worst crimes that can be committed then they need to find a Pink Mohawk GM.

Like I said, it should be reiterated that Shadowrun is a game with certain laws, then general laws should be stated, specifics to the character should be pointed out, and then the character should get the hammer thrown at him. If the player is smart they'd just allow their character to go off screen quietly and reroll a new character. If not he'll want to play out being attacked by a well-prepared SWAT team in the hopes that his mind-magic will get him through.

I did something very similar with one of my groups' earlier games: they did a 'kidnapping run on an old folk's home and all was going well until they started murdering guards and destroying property. On camera. With no masks/helmets/ect. The way I handled it was a rival mid-to-high-level executive figured out who they were before the exec who was in charge of that home did and kidnapped the group. I used a Tir Ghost squad's stats and hit them all simultaneously at home, using Slab capsule rounds in their weapons. When they woke up the whole group was shackled into chairs and had the Johnson monologue to them a bit about how they were terribad at what they did, but since it was against one of his corporate rivals he kinda liked it. The mages had magecuffs on so one tried to do something and was zapped back unconscious. The J then took blood samples of everyone, used some of it to make full body clones so he could "track down and execute the criminals" while they were actually still alive, and the rest was used as a ritual link so he could have the group contacted through a Dream spell and told to do certain things later. The Dream casting was also used to show the group that the Johnson could take them out if he wanted. The group ended up doing about 4 missions for the guy out-of-pocket.

The reason that worked for me is because the group did one massive mistake to a corporation. The reason it won't work (as well, possibly) for you is because your player has done multiple horrible things to multiple corporations and a government or two.

Possibly you may be able to modify my suggestion for the single person, but it would be best used as a method of character retirement in your case, unless you wanted to give the character surgery to change biometrics (possibly costing Essence, definitely resulting in an In Debt negative quality that the person then has to pay on) and giving them a criminal SIN (maybe the criminal part only known to that particilar corp/govt.) and some Notoriety.

I take offense at your tone, or rather what I perceive as your tone. To me, you come across as very self-righteous, even arrogant, by letting only your understanding and definition of the setting count. Correct me, if I misunderstood you here, internet communication is fraught with peril.

That being said:
It's a good thing you are not the authority to decide what is pink mohawk and what is not and what new players should and should not do.
There are different styles of play between the extremes and the convenient labels and drawers.


It's not entirely self-evident that these rules and laws are in place, and neither is it self-evident, what kind of game a group is playing if they just started playing.
So yeah. There's such a thing as a freebie before you're told "Rocks fall, you die." Because you're playing a social game with friends, not something where some dick tells you he doesn't like what you're doing by killing of your character.
Instead, the GM should explain what he expects and talk to his players, and in the ideal case, find a middle ground.
Shadowrun is a highly lethal game. Drive by killings happen all the time without the perpetrators being found out automatically because some guy just isn't comfortable with that setting.

This, of course goes out of the window in case an experienced player tries to pull such shit.
For example, based on your earlier tales of the exploits of your Nosferatu, I'd have gone medieval on your character's ass. But hey, just a matter of taste.


Not my kind of game, but a valid response without killing characters out of hand, to be sure.
It's also not my cup of tea do to this without a warning, but I can't infer that from the details you've given.
Me, I'd have told my players "This is probably not a good idea and the next time you screw up, the kid gloves come off.", before presenting them with the consequences.

For now, I'd give the character in question one or two free points of notoriety, and I'd hint at the player that KE or LS or the SFPD is on his tail and that he should try not to screw up anymore if he wants to keep his character, at the same time giving him the reasons for it. Offplay, that is.

If a player commits an horrid offense potentially out of ignorance of hwo the game is supposed to work, then any GM who drops a lethal hammer on them without warning, is a poor GM.

And not one I'd play under, a second time. Sometimes no gaming is better than bad gaming.

Just to add to the conversation, my character has begun laying the ground work to kill/get her killed. Now I just need to figure out how to tell the mage that unless she shapes up, she's dead.
EDIT: Or better yet, Stick N Shock her unconscious and drop her off at the local police station.

You perceive my tone. Read my quote in my signature.

I'm not letting only my understanding and definition of the setting count in the least - I'm simply stating that the above character has gotten so many powerful people and organizations (namely the police) upset with them that there isn't a perceivable "way out." The character has multiple counts of attempted murder on unsuspecting people in public areas against them, leaving evidence all over the place. This is different than shooting on a botched run - this is blantant, sociopathic behavior, like you'd expect more out of a rabid animal than a human.


Right, but this is not a single incident; nor do drive-by shooters leave DNA and SIN information behind at the crime scene (this guy's astral signature has been found and he's on camera, for Spirits' sake!).


Such as..?


You and I play completely different types of games then. I expect my players to think about their actions and play their characters as actual people inside the game universe, and every action they have has a consequence. Given enough time, any crime can be traced - it's just a matter of keeping the reason for tracing those crimes low. The higher the body count and property damage, the higher the chance the corp will go through the extra effort to catch your group.

To refresh your memory, the list of offenses and people who want this character are:

The freakin' dragon mayor is aware of this character, for Spirits' sake. It simply cannot end well for this character.

Well, to me, you slip. A lot. So walking proudly does not necessarily mean walking straight. But yeah, whatever floats your boat.

I've made my point, and your and my understandings of good GMing are apparently on different ends of the spectrum, so I won't go into much further details where we disagree.
To you, there is 'no perceivable way out'. To me, there doesn't need to be. Metagaming is part of the game and it includes communication between GM and players, and even between players and players. If it gets better after the communication, there doesn't need to be a way out. It can simply be dropped.
If it does not get better ... well, the character had it coming, be it from his fellow teammate or the righteous fist of whoever decides to crush him.

Slapping every mage around flatly with arbitrary background count, for example, is IMHO not a solution but just a GM scrambling to use whatever tools are available while disregarding what would even be sensible. Across-the-board solutions also hurt everyone else who has a magic rating, which is not a desired outcome, either.

My memory is just fine, thank you very much. I just don't think that you need to slap around a player with rather final consequences without exhausting other options beforehand. Which is basically where we disagree.
You postulate: Explain that this is not the way, then kill the character.
I say: Explain that this is not the way, and if it doesn't get better, kill the character. If it gets better, let him be.

A GM is not a teacher, but communication is preferrable between friends.

I agree with you Neraph, at the same time I don't.
Yes the character have done so much damage that she'll need to go eventually.
However dropping the thor shot on a inexperienced player that haven't had continuous reinforcement that action have consequence is just asking for trouble. Having no consequence suddenly turn into the ultimate consequence is bound to cause bad blood.

Rather, as I suggested.
You discuss the issue with the player, explain how such things does not only ruin the mood of the game, but also lessens the enjoyment of everyone else in the group as they become mere witnesses to the players power indulgence. Explain that RPGs is not about "winning" it's about the journey and the enjoyment you garner as a group. You're playing with your group, not competing against it (That goes double for GMs).
After you've done all of that, you show the player that there is indeed consequence. Like, by having him get his arms broken or his eyes stabbed out by the hombres who's girlfriend he killed.
Make it absolutely clear that his actions will catch up to him, very soon.
If he starts to rectify his ways, give him the offer of either taking his due punishment (the character will remain but will be out of action for a while and have a bunch of baggage) or simply abandon it and reroll.
If he keeps going, drop the hammer hard.
Either he's going to learn a lesson from it, or he's not worth the effort anyway.

As a note. I do not put any blame on the GM, learning a new system, spinning a story and making sure people enjoy themselves is a tall order. Especially the last one makes it harder to punish players, you want them to play your game after all. It's hard to apply fair judgement and corrective actions to friends, even in a game.
If it's not done however, you risk to end up in a situation where no one is enjoying the game.

Your perception of arrogance and confidence.

EDIT: The issue is that this character has done so very much and gotten in so deep with so many different sources that there's little that can be done with the character. If the mayor or AI catches the character, it's turned into an NPC. If the cops find her, she's jailed for a long time, if not executed. If the Yaks find her, executed or severely maimed.

Remember, there's going to be public outcry if it's found that a mage is going rampant. There's going to be serious pressure on the police to find the guilty party and give them harsh punishment. These consequences are not just hand-waived away without a serious suspension of disbelief, which is poor storytelling.

Of course. And no hard feelings.

Just being Devil's Advocate here:

I saw nothing about how the other players are enjoying things. As such, with lack of information to the contrary, one must start out acting on the supposition that only the one person has a problem, in which case there is no real problem.

Read more: At least one fellow player plans to kill the character

If even oen person at the table, GM included, is unhappy ... then tehre most certainly is a problem.

And this thread would not exist, if there hadn't beent hat "at least one" to begin with.

What I was getting at is if it is only the one person, then majority rules, that one person should suck it up and deal.

But it's not just one person.
Also: Dealing can mean 'finding a compromise' and not necessarily 'sucking it up'

I just think there's too many cases in the world today where it seems that the majority has to kow-tow to the minority.

Whether that is good or bad most certainly depend on the circumstances. Majority rule gave us most of the horrible problems of the 20th century.

Relevant content:

I've made my peace with severely restricting mind control, spirits and overpowered combat spells. I tell the player that if she really wants to mind control people or summon overpowered spirits, she will do so sparingly.

I've had a PC agree to that, and not really submitting to it, after which we agreed that he play another character. After that, things were peachy!

Don't be afraid to talk things through out of play with your players, things will run smoother for it.

Atleast two people. Believe it or not but the GM enjoying his own game, is kinda important.
@All4. This is friends hanging out with friends, not politics.

Like I said, I was trying to do the Devil's Advocate thing. I know it's not about politics or anything like that (which is why I didn't bother trying to come up with examples).

And yeah, it is important that the GM is enjoying, but not more important than the collective whole of the group. Basically if one or two people have a problem, but they're in the minority among the group, it's probably best that the one or two rethink things rather than mess things up for the others (and possibly cause everyone to not enjoy).

My experience has generally been, that the GM is also the Host. As such, the GM by themself out-votes the entire rest of the group combined. Also as such, it is slightly more important to ensure that the GM is having fun - without a given player, the group is smaller. Without a GM, the group is dead.

We're reaching a derail, but I'd agree that compromise is the most important thing. Last I ran shadowrun, it was with a close-knit group I've played with for over 10 years - when members of the group stopped liking Shadowrun, we moved on. It's a matter of time and place, I guess.

Somebody just needed to take the other guy's side. It's just been too one-sided with dogpiling against the poor guy (who isn't even here to defend himself).

Deadly neurotoxin. Just make sure the AI controlling the facility has an inhibitor core to prevent it from releasing the deadly neurotoxin except when the facility has been compromised by a mage.

I guess that's a geek the mage solution....

Okay... snipers. They'll make mages sh..... wait that'll just geek them too....

I'm out of ideas.