With all the new books that have hit can we get an updated list of the books that are allowed in SRM?

Well, the rules about Reputation (from Mr. Johnson's Little Black Book) are used in "A Fork In Fate's Path". And the new Quick Resolution Decking Rules (fromt the same book) are also mentioned in this adventure.
So I suppose, GMs are encouraged to use these rules in Mission, right ?

Thinking of it, along the lines of the 'Karma'-discussion above:

Are we GMs supposed to implement the "Players awarding Karma"-Option (also from the MJLBB) in SRM sessions ?

you used that word! "option"...

No, we will not be using the optional Player Awarded Karma rule.

Shadows of Europe - A location book, so not usable during Character Creation. I'm still reviewing it, so as to whether or not it can be used in the game is unknown.

Mr Johnson's Little Black Book - As with Sprawl Survival Guide, there is a LOT of good information in here that both the player and GM should read. We will be using the quick resolution rules for decking/rigging. We will be using the Reputation rules, with some slight modifications to fit the campaign (more on this later).

SOTA: 2064 - Everything in this book is available, including during Character Creation (except for Optional rules still, of course). This includes the new adept abilities, spy gadgets, etc. Please note that Availability limits still apply. We will not be having a Resource Pool (or whatever it's called) for spy gear. Also, note that those that played Double Cross can spot some interesting information in the book as well...

we ALL lost touch with him...i haven't heard from him at all - he's seemed to disappear off the face of the earth...

he's probably no longer a Commando, since the program periodically culls the herd, and if he didn't respond to any emails, he got booted...

Umm, I just wrote this long post, new topic, and it failed to show. Are we allowed to add topics? Or only replies?

New topics are moderated. The moderator (bitrunner) has to approve it before it shows up. Sorry for the confusion.

When will A Dark and Stormy Night be available to non-commandos?

it was tweeked along with the other demo adventures and i'm just finishing up with the comments back from the Commandos - i'll be sending it to Adam and then it'll be in his hands...

until then, once i send it into Adam, until it is posted, i'll make it available to whomever emails me...and asks nicely!

Is there a logo or something like that for SR Missions that could be used for posters for conventions and the like ?

the logo is the one on the website...just right-click on it and save the picture...or email me...

So it's just the Shadowrun logo, nothing special for Missions, right ?

Or am I just to stupid to see it ?

as for the logo, i'm talking about the "blue" Missions logo that is on the page where you can download the adventures in the box on the right hand side of the screen...

as for a word on requesting adventures, i guess you could choose from a selection of four letter words....in other words, i'm still working on them - taking a little longer than I thought...

ok, now I found the logo ... seems I'm really too stupid to find that one on my own ...

decker poser! decker poser!

Question about the old "Archetype, vs book example, versus rules section" errata for the "Magic Theory" skill.

One Archetype has "Magic Background"-- which doesn't exist, as Background skills derive from Actives, so Sorcery Background and Conjuring Background, yes. "Magic Theory" went poof after 2nd Edition, AFAIK.

So, do we presume that only the Backgrounds exist or is there a "Magic Knowledge" Skill of some sort?

I presume that Backgrounds at (Active -3) is in use, since that's not technically listed as an optional rules, though grammatically the rules do include the word "may" in the sentence about implementing it-- then go on to presume that everyone will. So, if one has Demolitions 5 (the rulebook example), does one have Demolitions Background 3?

While I have you regarding Skills: how are you handling "Special" skills (e.g. Hobbies like Cooking, Singing, etc.)? One could just agree with the GM what they link to, but for improvement, etc., it would be good to know.

The old Shadowbeat had rules for a lot of this, but it is technically a 2nd Ed. book (though I suppose, since it has not been replaced/reissued, it could be used in 3rd Ed. also).

Thanks for your time.

There is a listed Sixth World Magic knowledge skill.

Really, Knowledge skills are limited only by your imagination. If you can think of anything, then it is likely to be a valid skill.

In your example, the dude with Demolitions 5 would have Demo Background 2, not 3.

SR2 'Special Skills' are considered Knowledge Skills in SR3.

In Shadowrun, Active Skills can easily be defined as 'Normally useful in the course of a typical Shadowrun skills'. Most other skills will fall under the catch-all Knowledge category.

Knowledge of Wines is a skill. I think Elven Wines could easily be a specialization of that skill. A case could also be seen where a character knows absolutely nothing about any other kind of wine, but is an expert at the rarer Elven variety, and is specialized in the crap that comes out of Azania.

Not all knowledge skills have to be useful for the character all the time. A fair number should be fluff to round out a character and make him more believable.

Ok, take for example, the Knowledge Skill of 'Sixth World Sports'. This would be a broad category which would enable the character to know the general info regarding various sports being played. A specialization could be taken in 'Urban Brawl', which would mean that the character was quite knowledgeable in that sport, but still has a general background in the others.

Then we have the Knowledge Skill 'Urban Brawl'. This skill would enable the character to know the ins-and-outs of Urban Brawl, but would not really be of much help in puzzling out the rules for Combat Biking or Cyberhockey. A specialization of Urban Brawl might be a specific team, meaning the character is basically a fanatic over that team, knowing every trade and stat line for the various players, but still granting a fair overall knowledge of the game as it relates to the league.

It isn't a really important distinction in the course of a normal Shadowrun, but it helps to define the character better in the eyes of both the player and the GM.

Fortune is correct...the "Magic Background" skill comes from the "Sixth World Knowledge" grouping of skills and is all encompassing. It is different from the Sorcery Background skill that is based on the Active Skill. So, what is the difference??

Well, while not spelled out clearly, the intent is one of scope. This serves for covering your Wine and Elven Wine skills as well.

For instance, if I say:
"While perceiving, you notice a strange astral 'knotting' around the door..."

Now, you want to know what that is. I ask you if you think you have any applicable knowledge skills to recognize this. You tell me that you have Magic Background. Bob, sitting next to you, has Sorcery Background. If this is indeed a spell, but something new, I might give you, with Magic Background, a TN of 5, but for Bob, with Sorcery Background, a TN of 3, to reflect his specialty level of knowledge - yours is more general, and therefore you may or may not have heard of this new spell. Bob, who reads Spellslinger's Daily, watches the Magic Channel all day, etc, probably will hear about this spell sooner than most people.
For both of you, the number of successes will determine just how much you know. Ironically, if you happen to be lucky, and/or have a higher skill level, you may actually know more about it than Bob. If you have a skill of level 6, and roll 2 successes, but Bob only has level 3, and rolls 1 success, then you both know what it is, buy YOU know more...

The same goes for Elven Wine, or just Wine. Taste a wine, roll Elven Wine - the best you can hope for is either a) nope, i don't recognize this - it's not Elven wine, it's swill! or b) yes, this is Elven wine, and by the number of successes, you can tell from who/which vineyard, what vintage, oak barreled, aged, and what foods it goes good with...

As for your other question about Singing, Dancing, and other specialty skills. Well, Dancing could fit under Athletics I believe...I also agree that the performance skills such as Singing, Painting, Sculpting, Oration, Writing, etc should all be active skills and based on an Attribute such as Charisma (Oration, Singing, etc) or Willpower (Painting, Sculpting) (note that i'm just throwing this out - not necessarilysaying that painting should be willpower).

Bitrunner,

I recently completed 2 days at Gencon Socal were I played 5 missions. Yes, that was 20 hours of Shadowrun Missions in two days! Brings the total to 7 missions for me.

I have some questions and commentary.

How many missions are planned for the main story arc. I was thinking a minimum of 24 missions for a 2 year story arc. That would give 1 run a month, which is typical. However, a commando said you were planning 6 missions per year.

Also, is the pay scale going up? I just finished SRM01-02 and 03 and the pay was pitiful. I agree with the slow growth concept, but if you have a middle lifestyle its no growth. BTW, my character was Streetwise in both of those missions, but it didnt seem to change the rate at all.

Also, I am hearing from the GMs (including commandos) that the missions lack GM flexibility. They are very scripted and we have run into several situations that were not covered by the missions. The GMs were reluctant to be too creative and had to difuse situations in order to stop us from going outside of the bounds of the scripted mission.

Example: Harvest Time

Similarly, We were told many times that we could not take certain equipment from fallen foes.

Multiple Examples:

I was thinking that a little grifting was going to help out with the low pay, as it did in Demo Run (which is still the highest paying run if you strip the guards). However, that is aparently not the case.

While I am very much enjoying the missions, I think there are a few areas needing improvement. Many experienced players are trying to do the things that they typically did in their home games, like taking advantage of extra opportunities as they arrise. I think the reasons behind this are the low pay. I certainly wouldn't be willing to risk an HTR team in two minutes for a couple meters of monowire if I were being paid enough to be more professional and keep my hands to myself.

I look forward to your thoughts on this.

Almost forgot,

A special thanks goes to Grendel, Blue and Ecclessiastes (sp) for their great story telling and GMing. I thoroughly enjoyed the missions as presented by them.

Grendel has to be one of the best GMs Ive ever played with.

Blue did a great although Cockneyed imitation of Saint James. And she had a cold! Also, she rolled well with the constant changing dynamic of the team.

Ecclessiastes had about 3hrs of sleep and no prep time, and yet Forced Recon was one of my favorite runs. Still wish I could have taken the Monowire.

A big thanks.

we're still trying to strike that balance...

with that many missions under your belt, you should be able to start drawing some higher pay based on your reputation...

to be honest, "pay charts" were not included in the adventures for the con, so you may have fallen a little bit on the back end...

as a general rule, we discourage looting. It will be very clear in an adventure if you are supposed to "loot" or not. Generally, the concept of a SHADOWrunner, as you know, is to get in and get out...without evidence of you being there...depending on what you steal, you're just pissing off the target corporation more - do it enough and they'll retaliate. there is an unspoken rule that if the runners don't kill personnel or don't steal non-mission related items or do collateral damage, that they just chalk up what they DID loose (prototype, the scientist you extracted, etc) as a cost of doing business...if you exceed that too much, then they get pissed...

the other thing to remember is game balance....sure, if you could get ahold of monowire, it would pay more than what you would make in a year of shadowrunning...realistically, once the stuff is mounted, it should be difficult to safely remove, or else there would BE NO MONOWIRE because as soon as the corp installs it, someone is gonna swipe it!

It's difficult to put in a challenging team, or in some cases, you want to put in a team that is "impossible" to beat, because you don't want the runners to get into a certain area (and the mission does NOT require them to go into that area) and yet the team manages to come up with something off the wall and knocks out the guys and then everyone in the game has Ares Alpha combat guns and light security armor.

i don't know, to be honest with you - in a home game, it is a lot easier - in a living game, it is really hard...what i CAN tell you is that the adventures (with the exception of one or two, Double Cross is definitely linear, but for a purpose) provide more of a framework for the GM to work with, thereby giving the players a little latitude and wriggle room to do stuff - I will edit the current selection to ensure that the GMs are aware of this, and where the wiggle room stops...

also, you can be rest assured that you can 'loot' anything that you could normally get through character creation - anything with device rating of 6 or less, and an Availibility of 8 or less, and non-military, can be freely 'looted'...most of this stuff, the GM will have a "Fence Value" already computed for him/her in the adventure - if there is no "Fence Value" listed, then for some reason, we don't want the characters to have it.

Remember the spirit of Shadowrun, and the fact that we're not running an amoral campaign here...the goal is to have everyone be able to maintain a certain level of lifestyle depending on their rep. At this stage, the average player (playing 7 missions by now is NOT average) should be able to maintain Low lifestyle with no problem, and those that have strong negotiation or charisma skills (which can bargain for more money, fence goods for more money, etc) should be able to afford Middle lifestyles most of the year...as you progress, you'll start to see that brass ring more and more...

If anyone does have any suggestions on how to handle the situation, send me a private message or email...

Finally, glad you're having fun!

Thanks, Dr. Black. The GM team at GenCon SoCal had a great (if tiring) time. Hope to see you all next year.

I'm glad you enjoyed the game Dr. Black.

And a big thanks to OurTeam for loaning me his notes!

Just reread my post, seems a bit negative. Let me see if I can add something constructive.

I fully agree with the acting like a professional, not a thug concept. Meaning, we are not there to knock off the guards and see how much loot we can steal. That would lead to the obvious consequences of the Corps either hunting us down or turning it over to Lonestar to hunt us down. However, In all 5 of the missions I played at Gen Con, there was only one potential fatality. (docwagon employee, HTR I think. We did break his wrist band though, and someone may have put a trauma patch on him before we ran for it) Given that we tend to leave the opposition alive (something the corps should appreciate) it only makes sense that we strip them of their weapons, radios, armor etc. I tend to think the Corps would overlook the theft of the items and be thankful that we took out their employees using non lethal means.

When I say GM flexibility, this is one of the things I am referring to. The GMs should have the ability to evaluate the merits(or lack thereof) of each team of runners on a mission and adjust mission outcomes appropriately. When I mean adjust, I am referring to the use or disuse of third party intervention (lonestar, sec guards, strike teams) as a means to allow or disallow runners to take certain actions as well as the inclusion/or not of optional portions of the run. If they are causing a high profile scene then lonestar or a strike force or HTR team showing up quickly would make sense. Additional unnecessary combat takes a great deal of time and should rule out other portions of the run that may be lucrative (in cash, goods, contacts and or karma). Runners who have maintained stealth, professionalism and kept the body count down should be able to complete more mission objectives, follow up on additional optional objectives, and collect more resources.

Something to be avoided is the extremes that some runners were allowed to go to in Virtual Seattle. I applaud the Missions team efforts in keeping more rigid controls on what is allowed in the Missions setting. This allows for better game balance. However, it may end up with all runners progressing more less the same. I believe this may reduce individuality, but hopefully over the long run that will not be the case.

Perhaps a non mission specific set of rules or guidelines for GMs to follow, as well as a branching, or more branching, decision tree for each mission. I say "non mission specific" because then they only need be guidelines that can be followed for all missions. A branching decision tree for each mission is harder to write, however, it allows for many more outcomes for each mission, many more ways of achieving the mission objectives, and time permitting more optional scenarios that could result in more resource rewards. This ultimately creates a more flexible environment that should please players as well as GMs. (GMs I spoke with desire more flexibility as well) When I say flexibility, think of the flexibility allowed a GM in a One Shot Adventure.

Of course, this should still fit in 4 hours. Which I believe can be achieved if a team is more prepared, more professional, engages in less combat, functions better together, does not overly plan or waste precious time. Basically, if they don't waste time then they can do more and earn more. This should result in players designing characters that are more flexible, being more knowledgable about the rules and their characters, being more familiar with how to be a professional shadowrunner, and not act like a thug, etc.etc.

I hope that was constructive. Either way I'm hooked.

One group of new players that I played with did go and purchase some SR books at the CON after playing a Missions game. So it must be working.

DB

Two other Items.

I did notice how it is virtually impossible to negotiate additional pay out of the Johnsons/fixers. In 5 missions I was only able to negotiate some expense reimbursements, and the potential offer for access to some wares(which no one took him up on interestingly enough). There was never an increase in the actual fee as a result of negotiations. Now, my character is Charisma 6 with Etiquette 6, Negotiation 6, Phsycology 6 and Kinesics 3. All the non missions runs I have played or GMed always involved a little negotiation and if the rolls or roleplaying was sufficient it resulted in a shift in pay - as would be expected in a negotiation. I always operate under the concept that the Fixer or Johnson intentionally low balls the pay in expectation that it will get negotiated up.

How many missions per year are we looking at. Rumor said 6. Is that correct?

who said i was sane to begin with??!?!?

okey dokey...i WILL say that most of the demo adventures certainly are non-linear and provide for multiple paths to reach the common goal, or even open ended to where you can have more than one outcome.

the first story arc adventure, as i've already stated, is a little heavy handed in the deus ex machina department in order to work it into the SOTA2064 book.

the second and third, which debuted at this con, although well received, i think are the focus of your comments, and i've received comments back from the GMs as well - these adventures are being tweaked now before being released again...

as for negotiating, the others have it pegged...I have designed the adventures so that it is difficult for lower reputation characters to negotiate extras or more money - those with higher skills and more reputation should have an easier time. with that said - and with the skills you mentioned, i can only assume what the others have said - either you had bad luck or the GM was not flexible...

I think the GM flexibility thing is definitely an issue. I think that most of us remember the problems from VS, and that they see that we're trying to keep a tight rein on things so that they don't blow out of control. however, as i mentioned above, we are trying to write the adventures so that they are non linear and have multiple paths to do things. for example, the adventures should have 3 ways of getting something done - the magic way, the matrix way, and the mundane way. if you have a tech wiz in the party, they are going to try to do things that way - if you don't have a tech wiz, you'll never know that this option was available more than likely. How you get from Point A to Point Z is certainly up to the GM, and the adventures obviously cannot cover everything - they instead (and it is written as such) say that "here are some common scenarios that the runners may attempt". As long as a GM is comfortable going "outside the box" and keeps any "looting" to a level commensurate with that in the given scenarios, and the "spirit" of the adventure is maintained, then the GM can roll out that flexibility. However, i think most are cautious about doing so. It will just take some time, but until then, i'll try to add to the GM section of the website more information about flexibility.

for those that haven't read this section of the website, here is what is already there that adresses the flexibility issue:

Bit,

From what you have said, and what I observed/played I would guess that the GMs were being cautious about additional pay, looting, etc. That is a good thing. I think perhaps all this discussion is good for the GMs to know how much flexibility is reasonable and in keeping with the Missions design concept. Certainly settles many questions/nagging issues in my mind.

As for my rolls? Who knows, with Kinesics 3 and 6s in every else I figured I should have walked all over them for negotiation/etiquette situations. We role played allot in those areas, and to be honest, I dont remember rolling as much as roleing. As the face, though, I felt it my responsibility to come up with some additional perks for the team.

Thanks for all the responses.

Lastly, I want to see the Missions be as fun to GM as a one shot adventure is. I *distinctly* got the feeling that those were more fun for the GMs and that might translate to more fun for the players as well. And fun is what we are all after.

DB

Dr. Black, I don't even remember anyone asking for more money in the game I ran. In fact, out of the three missions games that I ran, only in one did it get mentioned and all the other players told the guy who asked to keep quiet (which I couldn't help but laugh at).

I wouldn't bother giving them a hint. If they don't remember it isn't our fault. I just thought it was great when I had one guy ask about it (the street sam) and the other players (ya know... the ones with the social skills) told him they were getting enough already.

Ecclesiastes,

Don't get defensive. I am not attacking anyone in my posts. Being the face character I always ask and try to negotiate where possible. The run with you was Forced Recon and as you explained the more info we acquired the more we would get paid. That kind of put the damper on the whole negotiate for more pay concept. In restrospect there may have been an opportunity to negotiate for more pay at the end of the adventure, and I started to make the usual stink a face makes about needing to get paid more. You explained the pay scale and the amount we got and played that we were being well compensated as we completed most of the goals.

To me, that is negotiating. You did not have me make any negotiation rolls to see if Lyle was going to pay more, so I figured it was not negotiable. Perhaps I should have pressed the point and demanded that we roll negotiations. Of course you only had 3 hours of sleep and no prep time. I had been playing for 12 hours that day and was pretty tired. I do not blame you. I am merely inquiring the powers that be and explaining my experiences so that Missions can be the best it can be. Afterall, this is supposed to help keep player and GM interest in the game system and continue to sell materials.

GMs, if the players start to negotiate IC about the pay, have them roll for it, or if they negotiate IC well then skip the Rolls and make a decision on whether extra pay or compensation is warranted.

DB

I wasn't defensive, sorry if my post came off that way. Its all good.

i will say that GMs should go by the guide that excellent ROLE PLAYING obviates the need for ROLL PLAYING...

IMNSHO, you only need to be rolling if you as a player are not suave and/or quick witted in real life enough to sound good.

and yes, i have had players that have negotiated through role playing successfully - whereas if they had rolled, they could have botched it...

also remember that as a GM, you can modify the target numbers based on the player's role playing as well - if the player talks a good game and is very convincing, you can apply a modifier to the target number to make their rolling more effective. Keep in mind that you still don't need to tell the player the real or adjusted target number.

So a good actor/smooth-talker can play a Troll with Charisma 1, no Etiquette, and Uncouth and get by?

~J

MAYBE!

the point i was trying to get across is that if a player has a character with a high charisma, but the player does not in real life, then you have the dice to fall back on - however, role playing should be encouraged...

now, with that said, it is theoretically possible for a character with a Charisma of 1 and no etiquette to be able to roll a very high number on a skill test - that, however, is only one success - he can also roll Karma Pool dice to augment that test...and once again, could roll really high...is it going to happen? not likely, but that chance is still there. HOWEVER, the GM should be taking this into consideration.

if a Johnson and said character are negotiating, and the character says
"Look, wanker, i'm puttin' me butt on da line here and i knows dis is a tuff nut to crack - you know my rep - i'm gonna git da job done, or you can hump me ma! so'z ifn you want me to be on dis team for da fire support i know, and you know, dey are gonna need, i'm gonna need some up front money for a few supplies.."

now, if i'm the GM, and a character says that to me, and he's playing a troll with gunnery skills, a Charisma of 1, has no etiquette or other social skills, and his background says he's uncouth (because we don't use Flaws of course), then, the first thing i'm going to do is turn around at the table and try to keep from laughing my own ass off, and then i'm going to turn back and tell him that the Johnson seems to have a slight smile break his otherwise business-like exterior for a split second, and then tell him that the Johnson will agree to a small percentage up front for such expenses, maybe 20%...i'm not going to make him roll any dice for it...

on the other hand, if the player says "my character says to the Johnson - hey, i'm going to need some ammo for this run, you cheap bastard! We're going to need some money up front, say...1,000 nuyen?" then i'm going to have the character roll for it...

back to the first guy though, keep in mind that there's going to be little or no wiggle room for further negotiation - the player impresses me, he gets a 'cookie'...

along with that - later on the same troll goes to a party, and needs to get in without an invitation. the player says to the maitre d' "excuse me, sir, but i believe that i've misplaced my invitation. i know that i had it right here wrapped around this certified credstick for 1,000 nuyen". now, in this case, he's not acting in character - the character, in fact, is trying to act - this is definitely going to require a skill check...

so, i stick by my original answer...MAYBE!

I, on the other hand, find it silly that every single Shadowrunner in SRM should be squeamish when it comes to wetwork.

Heh, well, in a game where we play orcs, trolls, dwarves and elves who gad about in a magical world wearing dusters, using cyberware and smgs, and essentially play freelance, fringe criminals who hire out for corporate espionage, "silly" may be in the eye of the beholder-- which makes your point as valid as any.

I prefer to think of the ones who actually assassinate the opposition as being in-house. If you're going for "no survivors", you may as well use your really well-equipped hit squad.

It all depends on the flavour you want. It's quite possible to play a home SR campaign where you're all "stone killers", or "amoral professional and/or angst-filled pros from Dover", or whatever, who collect Bad Karma.

However, this is a multi-area campaign for public consumption, designed to highlight the system and let as many people as possible cooperate in fun play.

I don't think that too many professional wetwork people play well with others, unles you want to do the "Whole Nine Yards" gig, which is just as silly. Frankly, it would be better for my bottom line if my "team-mates" didn't survive, either.

So, since we suspend disbelief and play in this terrific fantasy world, we can also choose to suspend disbelief and, for the sake of escapism, play shadowrunners who are cool, crisp, professional, nova-dangerous-- but draw the line at profiting the way that the scum that are usually after them do.

Perhaps not "heroes"-- but not just one more group of scum. The Sixth World has plenty of scum around already.

Or, to put it another way, not every group of Shadowrunners is squeamish about wetwork-- and we may end up having to go after the ones who like it too much.

I think people should be allowed to play their characters they way they like. If everyone in SRM is required to think along the same lines as far as wetwork (or anything) is concerned, it seems to me that this would stretch the suspension of belief to the breaking point. Forcing everyone to think along the same lines is, as i said, silly, and detracts from people's fun, and the game as a whole.

The fact that we disagree is a sign that not every player (or character) thinks, or even should think the same way.

It shouldn't have to be an either/or situation, where people are either ultra moralistic or 'stone cold killers'. There is some middle ground ... quite a bit in my opinion.

As for 'Bad Karma', that is just a poorly implemented idea. The less said about those rules, the better.

Why would a Corp use its own in-house team for assassinations? There is still the possibility of a screw up, and deniability would be top priority in this type of work.

If, as you say, we end up going after the ones that like it too much, isn't that still wetwork in and of itself?

I personally find the concept of a moral Shadowrun campaign to be absurd. Morality belongs in the characters IMO, not the campaign, though I admit it is more difficult to make provisions for players whose characters walk on certain mission offerings.

~J

Which is better: to end up having players walk because they won't play murderers, or to have them walk because they can't play murderers?

Better not to have them walk, period, so give options. When your scenario has Mr. Johnson give the characters their assignment, killing the target is better given as "only one of the options" (and in my opinion, the one used by the ones who just aren't good enough to get the job done otherwise).

The concept of "moral" Shadowrunners is not silly at all. Check out the huge amount of "rebels against the unjust ruler" fiction in China, Japan, Europe and, within the last couple of centuries, North America. People who have extraordinary abilities and who are very deadly, who can kill (and often end up doing so)-- but who do so not for simple personal profit, but for a moral and usually unavoidable reason.

You could easily think of them as Shadowrunners. Outlaws against "The Man"-- is that not what Shadowrunners are portrayed as being? They do the corporations' dirty work, but that's because they prefer to live marginalised, rather than become corporate wage-slaves. And there's a strong theme, in the source material, of Shadowrunners as "Street People" or the new "Heroes of the People", not simply as a bunch of cybered-up urban thugs.

Anyway, this is likely one on which we'll just have to agree to disagree. Coming full circle, I'm glad to support a campaign that lets the characters be pros at corporate espionage, without forcing them to play contract killers. I'm, sure that there will be plenty of opportunities for us to be tough metas and cap some of the opposition along the way, without it being the raison d'etre.