And again, in SR universe, a possession spirit or Animate spell alleviates these problems as well.

I agree, but it just seems like poor form to me.

I would point out that the second lock was declared "unpickable" by the guy in the video, and he has considerable expertise and experience in picking locks.

In theory, yes, any lock is pickable. With enough research, the right tools, enough time, etc.

In practice, some high end locks are difficult enough that folks simply are not going to try. They'll just brute force the door.

Certainly, someone showing up cold without any custom tools won't really have any appreciable means of picking that lock. He'd have to come back. Not an option on most runs.

It is, in fact, permissable for a GM to have a seemingly impassable obstacle. There just needs to be an alternate means of approaching the problem. Maybe you have to get to the guy with the key. Or find another way in. Whatever.


-k

Why?

For the same reason that shooting someone in a martial arts competition would be.

If I were the GM trying to stump my Runners with something like an exotic lock paired with a requirement to leave no trace, and they got around it by using magic in a clever way that is entirely admissible by RAW and makes sense under RAI, I'd actually call that good form.


Unless, of course, the martial arts competition specifically allows for, say... Krav Maga, or Firefight or whatever.

I you were the only one who bothered to stop and figure things out and realize that a firearm-based martial art was totally admissable, that's not bad form - that's you being the only one truly on the ball, and everyone else being closed minded and making foolishly self-limiting assumptions.

I ask you, as an example, is this bad form? Or is it brilliance?

~Umi

... I think you missed the point as well. nezumi and I are referencing the discipline and honor that comes along with actual martial arts experience. If I go into a swordfighting match, I'm going to use swordfighting, not marksmanship. If I go into a hand-to-hand combat arena, I'm going to rely on my Kung Fu, Tai Chi, Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Ninjutsu, MCMAP, Aikido, Hapkido... ect, ect... to fight my opponent, not my marksmanship or swordfighting. It isn't sporting - it isn't fair.

EDIT:

That isn't applicable in this instance.

+1

Hmm . . other Idea . .
"Spirit, take a good look at this lock . . and now use your Wealth-Power to make me a key that will fit and open it."

See, you're making limiting assumptions.

First, Martial Arts are those arts which are "martial", or "related to war". The original point of every martial art that has ever existed is combat. Emphasis on other things like "discipline" and "honor" are secondary considerations, added onto the base structure of certain systems, and entirely lacking in others.

The notion of "bad form" only applies in things like sports - in friendly competition, where there is a certain spirit of behavior and decorum that is expected to be upheld. And since most martial arts in the modern day have been diminished in purpose from engaging in actual combat to merely providing exercise and amusement, I can see why you are making certain assumptions about "bad form".

It also doesn't help that mass media used movies and television and whatnot to sell us the "fairy tale" version of martial arts - ranging from Jackie Chan "Hong Kong Theatre" style choreography, to classic badly dubbed kung fu films, to countless cheesey B grade ninja flicks, to WWE style "Professional Wrestling" and even Mexican Luchadores. Real combat isn't as dramatic and exciting - it's typically just brutal and quick, and ruthlessly utilitarian - so it's understandable why realism isn't a concern for TV and films in this regard.

But Shadowrunning isn't a sport. It isn't friendly competition. You essentially get paid to shoot drekheads in the face for unsavory characters. And if you're trying to get through a locked door to complete your mission, no one cares about how stylish you are if you don't manage to pull it off, or what set of rules and limitations you impose on yourself that gets in the way and makes your life harder.

If someone tries to keep you out of a building with a fancy lock, but fails to account for the possibility of you just magicking the lock open with no trouble, that's not bad form on your part - that's shortsightedness on theirs. If all it took to stop people breaking into property was polite rules and sporting behavior, people would skip the locks and just put up signs saying "No visitors without appointments".

-----

Secondly, and even more importantly, this isn't so much about the in-game situation as it is about the out-of-game one. Any GM who pulls this sort of stunt is meta-gaming, trying to stymie the success of his players with cheap tactics.

Shadowrunning may not be a sport or a game, but playing Shadowrun is. The ruthless mercenaries trying to sneak into a locked building for nefarious purposes in the game world aren't the one's exhibiting "bad form" - the GM is, by purposefully trying to screw over their players for their own amusement. Compromising suspension of disbelief to shoehorn in an unrealistic challenge for no reason other than to make the players lives harder goes against the entire point of playing the game - which is to have fun with friends while building and sharing stories.

~Umi

As a Marine, you should be willing to adapt and overcome, not pigeon hole yourself into a Niche.

I've been a Marine for two years. I've been in more than 17 forms of martial arts for 21.

Don't get me wrong - I'd probably be the one to magic open the door. It'd still make me feel dirty though. Money washes that all away, however.

Indeed. There's nothing more annoying in a computer RPG than doors that you just can't open, or invisible walls. PnP games should NEVER have things like this.

If you want to use a hard lock then make the lockpicking target number high like 6 or 7 if it's the hardest lock ever. If the PC picks it because he has 18 dice then he's just damn good at his job, if he had to use edge then he just got lucky.

Personally, if you want the lock to be too hard to pick, then just don't make it a lock, make it a door that is barred on the other side or something.

When I'm GM'ing I personally don't have invisible walls in my campaign. I certainly have guide-rails, but if they have a good reason to jump over them, or better yet an unexpected one then by all means jump.

I don't know what the OPs original intent was with the fancy lock, but it was coming across as 'Here's something my PCs aren't going to be able to do and I like annoying them so'. I may has mis-interpretted that though.

Why?

Suppose it was an ordinary lock, and instead of picking it with hand tools, you picked it with an autopicker? Would you feel dirty?
Or suppose there was no "leave no trace" nonsense, and you just used a hammer or some C4 or whatever to brute force in? Would you feel dirty?
Or suppose the door was locked, but the window wasn't and you just opened that and climbed through? Still feeling dirty? Yeah, didn't think so.

Why is being smart only bad form for you when it involves magic? Why are other work-arounds considered "within the rules" to you, but not a cleverly used bit of spellcasting?

~Umi

This sums it up for me as a GM. If it's a lock, then it's pickable by lockpicking means. If it's not pickable, then don't skin it as a lock. Make it something else entirely, so your players aren't jarred out of suspension of disbelief by encountering a fiat NO.

+50

I'd say that the GM is attempting to foster thinking rather than Roll-playing. Which is his purpose within the game.

@Umi~
'cause magic is always cheating.

You know I never meant to start was evidently is a pretty passionate issue with several people. The thread I started in Shadowruntabletop forums even got locked. I found these locks and thought how funny would it be for un-prepared runners to come up against these. I didn't think it would need to be said that if I was throwing something that is obviously outside of the norm for a run that the GM would have plenty of clues and such in the appropriate legwork part of the run, because I thought that should be obvious.

Well there you go using logic again, that never does anyone any good.


But again, each GM has their own style as does the groups so responses will vary wildly.

Some groups will have more leeway than others in how far off the rails they can go while others operate under tighter constraints so they have to work with what is right in front of them, ie the door.

At TJ's table for example, I imagine he would have infiltrated the place months in advance and worked his way up the ranks until he became the assistant(and practically a second son) to the guy who had the key only then setting off a series of events cascading so that he was literally handed the key by the higher up with his blessing to 'secure' the prototype behind the door.

Of course THEN he probably blows a hole in the side of the building 37 floors up and paraglides away while a very confused boss and secretary pool look on.

Yeah... bet you thought I forgot about Hong Kong didn't you, you fragging--?!?

*takes slow calming breath*

anyway....

I have not had the pleasure to game with you Nyl, so again what may be obvious at your table is not always the case at other tables and we can only operate with what we saw in the OP so perhaps we can all be forgiven if wrong conclusions were drawn.

And how often, in open form combat sparring, do you switch between forms from moment to moment? From my experience it is not, at all, uncommon for that to happen.

Not sure why it would make you feel dirty. You adapted and overcame and moved along. Why get hung up on the details of success?

Rewatching the video, he said that *he* cannot pick it, and that his picks can't fit in because of the restricted keyway. However, he also said it's someone else's collector item, and so he's not willing to risk anything that might damage it (such as disassembling it, although anything that might scratch or jam it are also off the list). He never said it's unpickable.



That's true. But most folks haven't sunk umpteen XP into lockpicking.

Yes, like Smash said, I expect this to be a high TN lock, with some sort of task action to pick it. If it takes your team 16 hours to pick the lock, that probably is not a viable option, and they have to explore other options (such as brute force). But it's not unpickable. They just have the wrong tools and the wrong skillset.



Overall I would agree. But the challenge should ideally be believable. If you have a lock, it is pickable--it may require special tools or additional time, but that is an option. However yes, maybe the door is barred from the other side. Now the PCs need to figure out an alternate method.

I consider any circumstances where the lock can 'only be opened with the blue key!' or whatever to be poor GMing.




I think this got hashed out pretty thoroughly. But basically, you don't want any single skill or archetype being the auto-win for every type of challenge. Locks are ostensibly the responsibility of the B&E specialist. If your magic user just rolls 6 dice vs. TN of 4 and magic fingers every lock open, why do you have a B&E specialist? How is that fun for that player? Or really, any player except the mage? Why would a facility even use a lock like that, that's so easily popped open (there are wayyy more magic users in Shadowrun than there are people with any skill in picking locks).

This isn't to say I don't like unconventional solutions. Defeat the cyberzombie by turning the road into ice? Sure. Electrified a nearby radio tower so the EM radiation jams his transmitter? Awesome. Just that particular solution for removing locks is sooo easy and sooo general, it's actually game-breaking.

Yeah... Hong Kong was ... Entertaining indeed...

Of course it was the 42nd Floor (just outside the VP's office). It was either that or fight through all the combat drones and security personnel.

Entertaining thing about that situation is that we had planned it for months, having infiltrated the building half a dozen times prior to that (and yes, actively working as a Computer geek in the security department), and had a contingency plan to blow that hole and use either wing suits or chutes... and we still had a couple of the characters ill prepared for it when it arrived. Entertaining indeed.

Fond memories of that entire run. Next time you are there you should check out the Mitsuhama Towers. I hear they finally secured that place, but I always personally viewed it as a security sieve.

Simply put, if you have to ask you'll never know.


Don't sweat it - we're used to passionate debate here, and it isn't even that passionate... yet.


Right, but you're still using hand to hand martial arts in those instances. It's testing who's better at adapting HTH MA, not who's better at winning. It's a knowledge-based competition, pitting adaptability, practical application, and endurance against each other.

Sure, I could throat-punch a guy, give his testicles a hard squeeze, and gouge his eyes, but those are looked down on for similar reasons as wearing lead-lined knuckle-dusters also.

In a Competitive format, yes, That would be no issue at all. You don't "Cheat" when you are trying to test that knowledge.
In Life, however, there is no such thing as cheating, only survival.
So, you still have not actually answered me why you would feel dirty using magic to bypass a lock in a run against a megacorp. Why would that cause issues for you, especially if it is of such complexity that your lock specialist takes a look and throws his hands up in frustration. To me, that is just having a good backup plan... or even a good primary plan.

I don't quite believe you meant it that way, but I'm letting you know right now that this response is immensely insulting and patronizing, and always has been, and always will be.

If you're not willing to answer a simple question and explain your point of view to people who aren't somehow magically innately like-minded, just don't even bother saying anything. There's absolutely no need to respond only to say you refuse to respond, particularly when your apparent motivation for refusal is so inherently presumptuous and dismissive.

~Umi

Whereas i meant what i wrote.
Magic is always cheating.

It is. That, of course, makes it bad form for a lockpicking expert who views the lock as a challenge and a sport. That's entirely okay
Cheating well, however, is good form in general shadowrunning I think nobody here denies that.
Maxim 31: Only cheaters prosper.

I don't mean to be insulting and patronizing, but it is literally like trying to describe color to a blind man. You literally can't understand it if you don't get it - maybe taking years of martial arts would help. This isn't something that makes me better than you, it just makes the two of us different, and that's okay.

Please just stop.

You are only making yourself look even more elitist and full of drek. You're saying the kind of self-absorbed nonsense I'd expect from Stephen Seagal.

You don't have some mystical knowledge that can only be imparted via your specific experiences, you're just either unwilling or incapable of expressing it as a coherent concept. Failure to adequately communicate on your part does not constitute an inherent incapability of understanding on someone else's.

And what the heck does martial arts training have to do with anything? We were talking about using magic to pick exotic lock designs being "bad form". Or are you still hung up on the comparative analogy of using a gun in a hypothetical martial arts tournament?

And even in that context, are you just ignoring my points about how "sporting form" is not intrinsic to all martial arts, and about how there martial arts that specifically make use of firearms? Your entire argument is that it's never ever "fair" to bring a gun to a knife fight, but when I point out various contexts in which it would be quite fair, you just feed me a line of bull and tell me I can't possibly understand?

No, I'm sorry, that's not how rational communication works. You made an argument, I pointed out flaws in the argument. Those revealed flaws are not negated just because you insist I'm not a True Scotsman.

~Umi

Think he meant Steven Seagal, because Stephen Segal is actually pretty cool.

*facepalm*

I hate variant name spellings.

Well played.

~Umi

Well, if you are a lock-picking runner you either want to pick that critical lock because it allows you to keep silent (goal-oriented), or you want to show of your special skill (a matter of pride). In the first case you´d be willing to see magic used, in the second you would not. My group is pretty goal-oriented, so whoever has the best chance of getting a door open gets to do the task.

Now to be a spoil-sport I´d call opening a complicated lock "fine manipulation" not doable via Animate. We are lucky that Locksmith is Agility-based rather than Logic-based, yes?

Fair enough although you might want to select a better title next time:

Mechanical locks, or "How I plan to screw with my players"

sends the wrong message

Aye, with a title like that..... *puts on sunglasses* you should have realized some folk would get keyed up over it.


Yeeeaaaahhhh

The trouble with "clues" is that things that seem obvious to the GM can often be far from obvious to the players. Especially if the GM is doing something that goes against the playstyle of the players. If the players habitually do legwork, then they will find out about the "special" locks and work on finding a lateral solution to the problem. If the players don't habitually do legwork, then they are basically being set up for failure.

Yeah Glyph, but something like this could be used to teach players that they need to do legwork. For instance they break into a place, make it to a safe, and then discover that they can't actually get past the lock? So either they do the legwork DURING THE RUN, or they leave, do the legwork, come back, and then bust the safe.

It's okay for the GM to set up the players if the GM doesn't make it impossible for the players to deal with the obstacle. If the GM knows the players will fail the run, the GM better have made sure that it's okay for the players to fail the run. This is the kind of thing to throw on what would otherwise be a milk run, and then the players have to come back to the beefed up security the next day.

Alternatively it can be a barrier to a secondary objective, or there is a secondary objective and it's a barrier to the primary one, so the run isn't a complete waste of time and money.

And to boot, sometimes players can decide that finishing the run is more important than finishing it "without a trace" and as a result just destroy the lock instead of picking it.

But to reiterate, it's okay to force players to "fail" if you don't punish them for failing. Especially if there was actually a way to succeed, but you simply knew they wouldn't figure it out. Maybe you could make the players get caught, so that the people they're attacking make a counter offer.