Organizational Contacts is the second thing I was personally looking for in Run Faster:

The "Who You Know" section held a few pleasant surprises for me. I really like the concept of having details about the contact type being clearly defined for contacts as well as what the contact wants. I was glad to then see this in both the random contact generator as well as the sample contacts.

The Organizational Contacts chart on the top of page 177 was completely out of place. The term "Connection Bonus" was used nowhere else than the table. What is it? The very next section, "I Know A Guy" allows you to pull people from your past, adjusting loyalty to the character history, but each contact in the chart is a group, not an individual. While it discussed using karma to make contacts permanent, it did not correlate to the table. Conversely, the other text on contacts did reference a SIN, but neither Connection Bonus, nor Karma costs, and nor the non-linear progression of cost/bonus was defined. Completely out of place and frustrating.

Finally, I simply disagree on the organization loyalty being limited to a rating of 1 though.I think that a limit of 3 is probably more representative of real life.

Thoughts?

i've always felt like loyalty rating 1 should be described differently.

being willing to do business with you is the default status of most people in the world towards you. whatever it is that they're selling, with the exception of a few people who are actively opposed to you, they're probably willing to sell to you.

that shouldn't be something you have to buy in the vast majority of cases. by that definition, the guy at the stuffer shack who is willing to sell you the stuff in the store is a loyalty 1 contact.

Yeah, just like I think, that one success on a perception test should mean more than to just notice the obvious. SR is a bit odd with its scales and charts.

Agreed. That is really a loyalty "0", if we were to expand the charts. I also think negative loyalty is a mechanic that would work.

Having seen a person step right over a coiled rattle snake oblivious to it, having seen the statistics on failed eye witness accounts, and just having witnessed people missing the obvious, I don't have heartache with this one; I do see your position though.

Isn't a Loyalty '-1' Mechanic the guy who doesn't actually work on the car?

*looks out at the car with three mechanics sleeping on it, yep got our three best guys on it right now.*


Amen. I love my teenage stepson dearly, but he should be listed as visually impaired.

He is not blind or actually impaired but the number of times he asks where something is and it's right there on the counter in front of him.........

The scariest part? He is the 'scout' for his MMO guild.

Loyalty should be the degree to which a contact will spend effort or take risk on behalf of the character. I don't see how it could apply to people you don't know or things that law-abiding people routinely do. The context is access to favors, information, illicit goods and the like, not shopping at stores or asking for directions. It's not Pizzarun.

Everyone probably has wittnessed people missing the obvious, but these are things that I would see as a glitch (some more critical than others). Also don't forget the context, as shaowrunners usually are people that, especially on a job are expected to have a basic alertness, while they guy who just is not used to be in danger, will tend to be more oblivious.

Now I did see people that do not want to do business with everyone who offers and I also see, how criminals will be carefull of who they do business with. Still I would put it into context and say, that every businessman, basicliy is willing and wanting to do business, if you approach from the right angle. That should however not only be, the case for, or symbolizing a connection rating.

I can see people walking... some do stumble though... so walking checks anyone?

So all in all, our everyday life, with feelings of relative safety and visits to the mall for everyday needs, allows for some carelessness, while I would not use that standart, for a shadowrunner. If I really need to check for the obvious, I need to check all the time for things just too obvious to check for.

Agreed. I'd say that lines up nicely with the thought that the text for loyalty 1 better represents loyalty 0.

I see your point and thought about it a bit before posting my previous response. Allow me to elaborate: Failed perception means you did not see the snake. Glitch means you saw it at the last second and tripped avoiding it. Critical glitch means you stepped on it and it bit you - roll resistance please.

Still, while RAW might want it that way, missing the obvious, is more a side effect of something else, than simply not rolling a hit. In fact I wont call for a test, if someone sees the obvious, but may have them miss something obvious as part of a glitch, when they check for something more challenging. Rolling the dice should resolve situations that are somewhat challenging, not everything you do (breathing for example).

I do admit though, that there are situations, that would call for such a check, but that would mean, that you are very preoccupied in the first place.

While I do see your point, I think that putting something like "noticing the obvious" in place, as the standard result, for a successfull test, paints a bad picture. At least I think, that RPGs should be more than just a game of dice.

To some degree I agree.The trick is when to call for the test. I also make good use of both distracted (-2dp) and actively looking(+3dp).

I think contacts have been wonky for some time.*

But I agree that a group should be capable of loyalty higher than 1. The group could be a gang the PC grew up in or a religious organization that sees the PC as one of their own. Based on the text you quoted, those would behave a lot more like a Loyalty 3.


(*Personally, I think Connection rating should be set by the contact's backstory and loyalty should be purchased as a multiple of connection. That's usually how I house rule it.)