There is no need for players to know the statistics of any NPC.

100% agreed there!

Challenges are not about numbers. The number of dice don't matter, the number on the player's character sheet don't matter. The numbers on the NPC sheets don't matter.

What matters is if the players care. If the players have fun.

Some players do care about the numbers. That's fine, give them numbers, but show them other things.

The Runners faces the choice of shooting down that teenage punk in the street knowing that there will be no immediate consequences or risk. Will they do it? The choice they make will reveal much. Do you need to know if that punk ganger had 3 or 4 body? No. Do they get karma whether or not they shoot the punk ganger? Yes. Did they have fun with the choice they were presented? Only the players in that game can tell.

The Runners face the choice of fighting an overwhelming powerful opponent with severe immediate and overwhelming consequences. Will they do it? Is the fact the NPC opponent has 30 body really going to matter?

The Runners face a choice of fighting or running away from an opponent with unknown consequences. What do they do? They don't know what number they are going to face. What do they do?

Will they or won't they pull the trigger?

This kind of character decision is completely independent of the numbers on the sheets. It may be influenced by numbers, but in the end it's a decision the player/character makes.

Presenting and offering the fun choices are where the challenges are. No mechanical formula is going to help you. Talk to you your players. Present choices. See which ones they take, find out why. Give them different choices, see how they act. Give them the same choices as before. Do they stay the same, do they change? Did the character grow?

Have fun.

Of course that way leads to lots of TPKs.

I remember that from my old AD&D 2nd days. When there is no indication of how to build challenges for your players and you don't compare stats vs. stats you increase the chances of a dumb move killing the party. The OP is looking for ways to reduce the chances of "oops!" moments on his part so that if the PCs do decide to fight they at least have some chance of survival (even if it is a tough fight).

Another recommendation I'd give is to check out the (free to download) Shadowrun Missions modules for the Denver campaign. Each one has a blurb at the beginning of the module that explains Table Rating which is a semi-official attempt by people involved with Shadowrun to create a CR system. It's not perfect because SR is relatively unbalanced compared to some other systems out there but it can at least put you in the ballpark.

For the most part, I'll agree with DireRadiant, though I will add a couple points, mostly regarding the importance of making sure that expectations and outcome match up reasonably well.

If something is presented as the PCs needing to fight for their lives, the opponents should be statted up to actually give them a serious challenge; if the Street Samurai can sleepwalk their way through the fight while the rest of the team goes to grab a soykaf, that's a problem.

If it's presented as a cakewalk (hack into some random clubgoer's commlink, fighting a couple random gang members, etc), it should actually be easy.

Note: occasionally having this not work out is fine; what you see isn't always what you get, (sometimes, the random gang members includes a mage, sometimes the big fight is against people who are better at posturing than actually backing it up, sometimes the random clubgoer is actually someone who has reason to invest in better matrix security) but these should be the exception (going against expectations too often loses effect as players stop having the expectations you're trying to go against, besides, it gets a little silly when every stripper is a secret ninja assassin) and should generally be planned ahead of time (note: successfully adapting to the unexpected is an acceptable substitute for having planned it in the first place).

If you're presenting the PCs with a choice between two options, and one of them leads to certain death, you should make sure there were adequate warnings that this is the case. Yes, there's a risk of a lucky shot even from the basic goons, but when things get in the range of "if you do this, you will die" you should make sure that they know it (players who refuse to be warned are a separate issue).

Like Max have pointed out, it's on page 280 of SR4a starting at the fifth paragraph . Forgot about that, sorry.





If we are just using the old core, however, then the closest we have is..


Pg 272, SR4, fourth paragraph

Pg 272, SR4, fifth paragraph

And such. Overall, the section suggest that these rules exist as a guideline or optional rules that help the GM to run the game. They are by no means necessary or the only way to run them.




Similarly, the statistics provided for the grunts are just samples. They are not set in stone. Since they are examples and guidelines, there's nothing that prevent the GM from tailoring it to whatever they need.

Maybe there's a rule somewhere that says you MUST use the rules in Friends and Foes section  and MUST use the statistic as given. If that's the case, I'll just go with SR4a where the rules state that as a GM, I can give NPC any stats as necessary.




While I do think it's a good idea to have some degree of consistency like needing the same language to communicate (RAW), to say that grunts don't have language and thus can't speak is a bit silly. Not to mention that's not really RAW unless some rule say you must use the stats identically. you are just doing Stats as Written (SAW) and that's not required by RAW.

As a side note, grunts don't have ammo. Do they run out after ammo after they empty the clip that come with their gun? 

As DuctShuiTengu points out, so what as long as the players/characters know that is the choice that they had. The characters almost always have the option to simply walk away.

Finally, there is a mechanic built into the game that allows the characters to choose to survive their own mistakes. Something AD&D doesn't have.

A classic scenario in Shadowrun is barely surviving when all you are trying to do is get away or avoid the situation.

Ugh, AD&D didn't have reincarnate/raise dead but SR does? Yes you could burn an Edge but if that has to happen frequently then something is wrong (what happens when you hit Edge 0?). Also, there is a big difference between the GM thinking the encounter is okay, communicating this to the players, and then TPK because the GM grossly underestimated the encounter. Same thing for players. If they think they can handle it and trust the GM they might stay and fight in what turns out to be a vastly overpowered encounter.

If the OP is a seasoned SR GM then I'd say that DuctShui is spot on. However, he appears new to SR and is possibly new to the hobby. He doesn't necessarily have a wealth of knowledge on when to tell his players to run and when not to.

I don't know, I personally don't think it is the DM's place to tell the players whether or not a fight will be ok, that is something that they have to judge for themselves. Of course sometimes they'll misjudge and in those cases they will probably die, which is a good thing because it gives them a chance to learn.

Well, to go back to D&D for an analogy here, you (the GM) don't need to stop and tell the party of 1st level characters that yes, the great wyrm red dragon will kill them, but unless they've done something to seriously screw themselves over, they shouldn't have their first indication that this lair contains something more than just kobolds be said red dragon frying them all with its breath weapon. Find a way to have the fact that there's a dragon there brought to their attention ahead of time; they should hopefully realise from there that fighting it will just get them killed.

Going by that standard that you require a "must" to actually use the rules as written then it would be meaningless to discuss Rules As Written, nothing in the book actually says you MUST use any of the rules at all. As you have noted, the passages suggest that the rules are optional, if so, then there are no RAW rules for NPCs if you choose not to use them, unless you go to SR4A, where the rules have been changed. Which is fine for individual games.

In fact since the stats of the NPCs are the rules in themselves (they are not differentiated from the fluff or examples by any differentiated lettering or such), the stats themselves are Rules As Written - SAW is a subset of RAW. Any rules unless explicitly Optional is RAW.

Of course, the grunts run out of ammo.

I disagree. If there is no need for the players to know the statistics of any NPC, then the mage does not need to know that the spirit he has summoned has Guard or any of its abilities. If you enjoy that sort of thing, sure go ahead.

Since the players do not know the stats of the dragon, they have no reason to suspect that the dragon will outclass their PCs, especially if their PCs have no knowledge of dragons.

Agreed...

According to RAW. Grunts don't have any ammunition listed in their equipment. Since weapons don't state that they come with ammo, grunts have 0 ammo at the start of a fight. I guess this goes along well with the fact that they cannot communicate effectively since they don't have any language skills.



There is a difference between stats and abilities. Players should know abilities, if it's within their realm of knowledge of the NPC. To use a D&D example, since I am more familiar with it. Players should know that dragons can fly. Players should not know that a dragon has a flight speed of 180ft a round. To use your example. Players should know that a spirit of earth has guard and search if it's within their realm of knowledge. Players should not know that the spirit of earth has force + 4 body, force - 2 agility, force x 2 reaction, and force + 4 strength.

According to RAW, Grunts have weapons. It would depend on how you view the weapons listed in the gear section. There is ammo listed for each weapon. Grunts can communicate in SR4 by defaulting, whether they do so or not depends on their stats.

Force is a stat listed under NPC and Critter Stats too, so the player of a mage who summoned the Earth spirit shouldn't know that what Force his character summoned his spirit at? The summoner doesn't know that his Earth Spirit is pretty tough and strong (F+4), not quite nimble (F-2 agility) with pretty good reflexes (F+2 reaction) with respect to its Force?

A player shouldn't know that his PC's Fixer contact is pretty charming (Charisma 5)? Or that his Street Doc friend is quite smart (Logic 5)?

To me there is no reason to hide the stats of the NPCs, there is no reason why the players should not know the stats and abilities of my NPCs. They might not want to know, if so, then I would not tell them. If they want to know, then I'd tell them. They should not use player knowledge if their characters do not if they want to roleplay well. Their characters might or might not know, but that would depend on how the character is built.

A player can't know that his PC's Fixer contact is pretty charming, or that their Street Doc friend is quite smart without knowing the exact stats attached to this?

Of course not.

Corporate Security Unit
Gear: Armor Vest, Fichetti Security 600, H&K 227, Stun Baton

I see no mention of ammo, nor do I see anything within the gear section that states guns come with a full clip of ammunition. Therefore, by RAW, grunts have no ammo. Therefore grunt's guns are useless except as clubs or weapons to throw at enemies.

A player doesn't need to know that an earth spirit gets F+4 strength. Tough, Strong, good reflexes, but not too agile would be sufficient information to tell a player.

I will say this. Your usage of RAW makes zero sense in a role playing game. If all you're concerned about is playing Shadowrun by the numbers, or if you're incapable of GMing on the fly, then it's fine, but everything you've mentioned regarding RAW destroys the suspension of disbelief which is necessary for role play. RAW by itself destroys the suspension of disbelief due to a lack of rules, and it is practically impossible to make up a pen and paper RPG that covers every possible situation. Shadowrun is no different.

There is ammo listed. Therefore, by RAW, there is ammo. I do not see anything within the gear section that states guns do not come with the ammo listed.

RAW does not destroy suspension of disbelief. It requires suspension of disbelief, but either you have it or you do not. RAW cannot provide it for you, nor does it destroy it. Playing it RAW means that you have to be capable of GMing on the fly because RAW mandates it - p266 SR4.

However, neither can I see a place where RAW guns come preloaded, hence by RAW they do not.

RAW guns have ammo. 4th column after damage.

Except that the "ammo stat" is the size of the clip, not the number of bullets in the gun.

Except that "ammo stat" is the amount of ammunition in and the way it is loaded into the gun.

A weapon with ammo 1 and no reloading method listed or explicit reloading game mechanic cannot be loaded at all if the ammunition didn't come with the weapon.

No, it's a capacity and load method statistic.

Page 300 SR4 - Gear Rating Sidebar - Italics my emphasis


In no way does the ammo rating indicate that ammunition comes with the weapon.

I concede the point that Ammo refers to the amount of ammunition a range weapon can hold. In no way does it indicate that the weapon doesn't hold that amount of ammunition, however. But more importantly, how do you even use an Ammo (number)(no reload/explicit reload mechanism in text) weapon if you apply your interpretation consistently?

Even though this is quite the impractical discussion, when my players buy weapons, they do not come with any ammunition. Any ammo is listed separately on their character sheets and is tracked.

So, if I was shackled to only using what is written in stat blocks and disregarding any common sense or the ability to actually play a game, I'd say that none of the grunts or example contacts have any ammo for the weapons listed.

Wow. This thread went from interesting to absurd........no language skills, so they have none, no listing the number of clips, so at best they have 1.

Sheesh-can't we all agree to read between the lines and understand that the RAW NPC stat blocks are not kept at the same level of detail as PCs.

Wow, the more I read, the less you guys say.

On the actual topic (I think is says 'Reasonable Resistance, not Hau Meny Boolets R Der In Mai Guun!') any resistance should be geared to the facility or operation, not the PCs. If an average facility has a staff of 100 (PR 4) guards then those PCs better come in quietly or not come at all. I run the NPCs by using their Professional Ratings, those with lower PRs are prone to mistakes that those with higher PRs wouldn't make. Most Security with a PR of 5 or 6 will wipe out a Shadowrunning team hands down. They have the gear, the tactics, and the training and I don't pull punches. On the lower PR the PCs can get away with stupid mistakes from time to time.

It's not my interpretation. Your interpretation is that if it isn't there they don't have it. So going by YOUR interpretation, since weapons do not say if they have ammo, there must not be ammo in them. Going by YOUR interpretation that NPCs only have what is on their stat sheets means that the NPCs must have guns without ammo since ammo is not listed in their stat sheets. You're the one that's applying your interpretation inconsistently to get around the fact that your interpretation has huge glaring holes.

Thanks for staying on topic

In reply, I have come to agree with your point of view (as several others have stated similar). However, that isn't the core of the issue that I originally brought up. I understand (now) that I need to have Corp defenses be Corp defenses. However, I can't have new players going up against corp defenses because they'll get slaughtered. I need to present a run to the new players that is up to their talents and skills. The trouble is, how do I know what that would be?

Several suggestions was to ensure that the run provides for several waves of weaker guards (rent-a-cops, etc) so I can control the lethality imposed on the team. Others mentioned by controlling just how tactical they are I can take a mook and play him like a navy seal. That would increase the difficulty to the PCs to a point that I feel it's needed.

Hopefully i've clarified my point ^_^.

I'm a big fan of gangs and organised crime. They provide an excellent source of less hard targets to feel out how the PCs work together and what they're capable of without having to deal with "what makes sense".

@Tricen
It seems to be that you are putting the cart before the horse. You don't know the strength of your own players, therefore I wouldn't recommend starting them with a run where they have to beat a Corp Defense.

Now, if you want to have them do something pertaining to Corp Defense, have your team be the ones that cause a diversion while another team cracks the defenses.

Or, start them out with other, less polished runs and gauge their power level until you do feel comfortable knowing what to put them up against. A carjack, a kidnapping, bodyguarding, a package delivery run...all give opportunities to get into combat and gauge your players.

@deek
That's what I've come to understand. I'm only using Corp defenses as a extreme case to make my point. I could just as easily said Mafia hit-men. The point was, I need to understand the power of the opposition as related to the PCs.

Tricen I don't know how much spin up time you have but id consider running a few runs against gang level resistance. The players have to steal something from a gang on their own home turf. THey'll be facing mooks but entrenched mooks with some reasonable (but not corporate level) defenses and knowledge of the area. THis can give you a good baseline to figure out and also stands as a good teeth cutting run.

Not having ammo at all is you inconsistently applying my interpretation. Consistently applying my interpretation, ammo is listed in the weapon stats and thus listing the weapon is sufficient, although the ammo is a highly limited amount. Consistently applying my interpretation also means that the NPCs have no extra ammo, apart from that listed in their weapons since it is not listed.

As others have posted, you could send your PCs up against opposition that is much less competent and less able than your PCs. Once you have some idea of your PCs' relative power, you could run them through a virtual combat sim on the Matrix, like a mod of a Matrix game, where you could throw better opponents without the risk of wiping out your PCs.

I still really like the Denver SRM campaign as an introduction for the players. It has a very balanced and steady progression to it that fits well with new gms/ new players.

Edit: Although I guess that may not fit with where you want to set your campaign. But at the very least you can use it for ideas.