Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: LoMo098@***.com LoMo098@***.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:52:31 EDT
Thanks for the responses! We have done some runs that are more stealthy, but
when combat breaks out its just difficult to have it balanced between
challenging and too deadly. It may get better since the player dropped the
form fitting shirt from under his armor jacket. I have also contemplated
using more called shots to target unarmored areas (head/legs) but I don't
want to over do it.
Message no. 2
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 23:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
--- LoMo098@***.com wrote: > Thanks for the responses!
We have done some runs that are more stealthy, but
when combat breaks out its just difficult to have it
balanced between challenging and too deadly. It may
get better since the player dropped the form fitting
shirt from under his armor jacket. I have also
contemplated using more called shots to target
unarmored areas (head/legs) but I don't want to over
do it.

Here's another thing you could try. It's a variation
on "Everyone Get the Troll!" It's called "Big Gun, Big
Gun, Who's Got the Big Gun?" :)

Basically, when you've got a combat situation
involving guns, don't give everyone the same weapons.
Have a variety, but have the nastier weapons be in the
minority (combat shotguns, assault rifles...assault
cannons...:) ). These support gunners are supposed to
go after the most powerful targets on the enemy team.
Ergo, the troll. Even a troll is going to have trouble
with a combat shotgun (base damage of between 11-13D
on burst fire) in the hands of someone who knows how
to use it, unless he's wearing heavy armour. Of
course, even then you can deal with that by giving the
bad guys specialty ammo - after all, with APDS and
enough dice, you can take down a guy in military
armour in a single shot. You'll just want to make sure
the mage is keeping his head down, otherwise he
becomes a priority target as well. Now, the troll's
player may start getting a persecution complex, but
handled right, that can be fun. :)

Building on that, it sounds like the troll can really
absorb damage, but he can't dish it out so well,
except in hand-to-hand. So have the bad guys learn
from that. After the troll punches the first guy's
head through his chest, have them pull back and use
fire patterns to keep the troll at a distance (if you
can "entrench" the bad guys, a minigun or two using
supressive fire is going to keep smart trolls
ducking). The ultimate extension of this is the
sniper...

Or, as the GM, you can always fudge things - or give
the troll something "his own size" to deal with. In my
Cyberpirates campaign, most of the crew has been
fighting off an Azzie corvette that's been boarding
and ramming them - the Azzie pilot is currently being
confused by a sea spirit and in his confusion is
trying to go forward, which just so happens to be
where the pirate ship is. :) Hmmm...I really should
change my name to Murphy. Meanwhile, the troll captain
has been wrestling a vampire inside the ship. Yes, a
vampire. The guy who's usually stronger than most
trolls and who can absorb (or regenerate) anything the
troll dishes out.

Similarly, to give the troll a hand-to-hand challenge,
have an adept with enhanced reflexes and melee combat
powers come after him. You could give him a
(powerful?) weapon focus to make him even more of a
challenge (best used on high cliffs, or over vats of
acid or other places that'll prevent avaricious PC
adepts and mages from getting their hands on the focus
after the enemy adept kicks the bucket). Or, if you
use the martial arts rules from CC, give the adept the
close combat manoeuvre. A lot of the troll's ability
in unarmed combat comes from his greater reach. If
they're both on an even footing (the close combat
manoeuvre negates all reach bonuses on both sides), or
if the adept has an edge (give him a natural aptitude
with whatever he's using, have him fighting the troll
from atop a bench/table/etc., have some buddies
helping), things change. If you can't hit the other
guy, it doesn't really matter how easily you can drive
his head through his chest, does it?

You can't always use the same technique, but there are
a lot of ways to make things more challenging for the
troll.

Here's one last thing - I wouldn't use it often. In
fact, maybe even twice would be too much, unless
you're a mean GM who likes torturing his players. But
it's something to get the troll's player thinking, if
that's something you want. Have an enemy mage cast
Paralyse (or whatever it's called) on him. Don't worry
about what the dice say. Have the spell work
completely. Have the troll COMPLETELY paralysed -
preferably after he attacked and while he's standing
there in the middle of the battle zone. Have the troll
standing there, frozen, totally reliant on his smaller
companions to protect him from the bad guys. That's
the kind of thing that'll get any combat monster thinking...

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
Message no. 3
From: Fyre - AKA Colin fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 11:21:35 +0100
In article <20000808063343.28727.qmail@******.mail.yahoo.com>, Rand
Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> writes
>--- LoMo098@***.com wrote: > Thanks for the responses!
> We have done some runs that are more stealthy, but
>when combat breaks out its just difficult to have it
>balanced between challenging and too deadly. It may
>get better since the player dropped the form fitting
>shirt from under his armor jacket. I have also
>contemplated using more called shots to target
>unarmored areas (head/legs) but I don't want to over
>do it.
>
>Here's another thing you could try. It's a variation
>on "Everyone Get the Troll!" It's called "Big Gun, Big
>Gun, Who's Got the Big Gun?" :)

That's the other way... Although I would be careful not to simply throw
more and more deadly weapons at the character cos one time he's gonna
botch the roll and die. Not a pretty thing.

I'd tailor the guns to the target that you're wanting: Few damage codes
above serious, few powers above what his armour can't lower the resist
of to 6 or around there. Remember: On average he's only gonna roll just
over 2 sixes on 13 dice... A serious code weapon combining with that
means a moderate wound (perhaps more depending on the attacker's score)
hence a +2 to all TNs.
>
>Here's one last thing - I wouldn't use it often. In
>fact, maybe even twice would be too much, unless
>you're a mean GM who likes torturing his players. But
>it's something to get the troll's player thinking, if
>that's something you want. Have an enemy mage cast
>Paralyse (or whatever it's called) on him. Don't worry
>about what the dice say. Have the spell work
>completely. Have the troll COMPLETELY paralysed -
>preferably after he attacked and while he's standing
>there in the middle of the battle zone. Have the troll
>standing there, frozen, totally reliant on his smaller
>companions to protect him from the bad guys. That's
>the kind of thing that'll get any combat monster thinking...
>
Well... As has been said already: He's not all that much of a combat
monster; he just took a troll out of the book. Well: It's just a little
too mean for me... What exactly is the char supposed to think anyway?
Don't get into fights or a mage paralyses me? Perhaps if it were someone
who maliciously tries to screw the campaign over by killing everyone he
meets (I wasn't GMing at the time but I saw this char once. He tried to
kill the Jhonson and I'm talking gun to the head style), but not for
simply being a good fighter...
DarkFyre
--
fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Message no. 4
From: Nimster nimster@*********.net.il
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:47:13 +0200
> Well... As has been said already: He's not all that much of a combat
> monster; he just took a troll out of the book. Well: It's just a little
> too mean for me... What exactly is the char supposed to think anyway?
> Don't get into fights or a mage paralyses me? Perhaps if it were someone
> who maliciously tries to screw the campaign over by killing everyone he
> meets (I wasn't GMing at the time but I saw this char once. He tried to
> kill the Jhonson and I'm talking gun to the head style), but not for
> simply being a good fighter...

I, too, don't see the point in paralyzing a player. All it gets him to think
is "What a bitch GM" and then, "Common guys, you better not fail".
However,
About players not cooperating - they mostly do it if you don't give them
enough of a reason to co-operate. With my adventures, I always list- wrr,
haven't got the word for it in english right now... let's call it,
super-motives. It's motives beyond money to do stuff. For example, I'm
sending the group to chicago now (playing at the end of 2055.) Now, why the
hell would they want to enter the bug city? Well, I gave anyone a reason
enough. A (beggining) mage who had an important artifact taken from him in a
run prior to this one, a rigger which owes the seattle mafia big-time and
has to get away, plus he needs the money this run suggests, and so on. Some
of those reasons seem dumb, maybe. What can I say - You can put everything
under the stupid clasification. But give enough of those reasons and he'll
understand if he doesn't co-operate- he can say bye bye to his nice troll.
Oh, and, tell that GM, Johnsons who meet in person, meet with guards. I
mean, those are criminals we're dealing with here.
-Nimster
Message no. 5
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:37:06 -0700 (PDT)
> >Here's another thing you could try. It's a
variation on "Everyone Get the Troll!" It's called
"Big Gun, Big Gun, Who's Got the Big Gun?" :)
>
> That's the other way... Although I would be careful
not to simply throw more and more deadly weapons at
the character cos one time he's gonna botch the roll
and die. Not a pretty thing.
>
> I'd tailor the guns to the target that you're
wanting: Few damage codes above serious, few powers
above what his armour can't lower the resist of to 6
or around there. Remember: On average he's only gonna
roll just over 2 sixes on 13 dice... A serious code
weapon combining with that means a moderate wound
(perhaps more depending on the attacker's score) hence
a +2 to all TNs.

Good point. Of course, it all depends on the effect
you're after. The basic rule is to have one or two
weapons (per "challenging character") that are a
"grade" nastier than the standard bad guy weapon. If
the bad guys are carrying heavy pistols, give the
support dude an SMG. If they're carrying SMGs, give
support dude an assault rifle, or combat shotgun. etc.

> >Here's one last thing - I wouldn't use it often. In
fact, maybe even twice would be too much, unless
you're a mean GM who likes torturing his players. But
it's something to get the troll's player thinking, if
that's something you want. Have an enemy mage cast
Paralyse (or whatever it's called) on him. Don't worry
about what the dice say. Have the spell work
completely. Have the troll COMPLETELY paralysed -
preferably after he attacked and while he's standing
there in the middle of the battle zone. Have the troll
standing there, frozen, totally reliant on his smaller
companions to protect him from the bad guys. That's
the kind of thing that'll get any combat monster
thinking...
> >
> Well... As has been said already: He's not all that
much of a combat monster; he just took a troll out of
the book. Well: It's just a little too mean for me...
What exactly is the char supposed to think anyway?
Don't get into fights or a mage paralyses me? Perhaps
if it were someone who maliciously tries to screw the
campaign over by killing everyone he meets (I wasn't
GMing at the time but I saw this char once. He tried
to kill the Jhonson and I'm talking gun to the head
style), but not for simply being a good fighter...
> DarkFyre

As noted, that was basically a once-off idea for
dealing with those sorts of problem players, more so
than simply problem characters. He's supposed to start
thinking, "Hmmm...maybe I'm not invulnerable after
all." I wouldn't recommend using it in this particular
situation. That's what everything else I said was for. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
Message no. 6
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 20:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
<snipt!(TM)>
> I, too, don't see the point in paralyzing a player.
All it gets him to think is "What a bitch GM"
<BigSNIP(TM)>
> -Nimster

Why? Hmmm? I don't know about you, but I'd be more
annoyed if the GM killed my character.

If you do this, obviously you're not going to make it
obvious that you fudged the die rolls to paralyse the
character (if that even proves necessary). So if the
player bitches and whines about it, you just ask if
he'd rather it had been a manabolt.

*sigh*

Let me make this plain once and for all. This is a
mechanism designed to get players who insist on
playing invincible combat monsters to the detriment of
the game thinking about the mortality of their
character. It's not something designed to challenge
your average tough character. That wouldn't be fair.

I know, I didn't make that plain before. By the time I
got to the end of the post where I mentioned this, I
was just rattling off whatever appropriate or
semi-appropriate ideas came to mind. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
Message no. 7
From: Fyre - AKA Colin fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 09:40:48 +0100
In article <003001c00171$75c8ccc0$d89a003e@*******>, Nimster
<nimster@*********.net.il> writes
>
>> Well... As has been said already: He's not all that much of a combat
>> monster; he just took a troll out of the book. Well: It's just a little
>> too mean for me... What exactly is the char supposed to think anyway?
>> Don't get into fights or a mage paralyses me? Perhaps if it were someone
>> who maliciously tries to screw the campaign over by killing everyone he
>> meets (I wasn't GMing at the time but I saw this char once. He tried to
>> kill the Jhonson and I'm talking gun to the head style), but not for
>> simply being a good fighter...
>
>I, too, don't see the point in paralyzing a player. All it gets him to think
>is "What a bitch GM" and then, "Common guys, you better not fail".
However,
>About players not cooperating - they mostly do it if you don't give them
>enough of a reason to co-operate. With my adventures, I always list- wrr,
>haven't got the word for it in english right now... let's call it,
>super-motives.

Alterior motives?

>It's motives beyond money to do stuff. For example, I'm
>sending the group to chicago now (playing at the end of 2055.) Now, why the
>hell would they want to enter the bug city?

Yup. Groups tend to turn down runs to highly dangerous places... It may
not be nice but it's realistic.

>Well, I gave anyone a reason
>enough. A (beggining) mage who had an important artifact taken from him in a
>run prior to this one, a rigger which owes the seattle mafia big-time and
>has to get away, plus he needs the money this run suggests, and so on.

I've not seen this too many times, but once the group was run out of
town by a couple of the big gangs (for getting in the middle of their
gang war)...

>Some
>of those reasons seem dumb, maybe. What can I say - You can put everything
>under the stupid clasification. But give enough of those reasons and he'll
>understand if he doesn't co-operate- he can say bye bye to his nice troll.

I think the character I'm talking about was an ork but...

>Oh, and, tell that GM, Johnsons who meet in person, meet with guards. I
>mean, those are criminals we're dealing with here.

There were guards, but they were busy looking cool watching the entrance
(etc.) from various points in the room and not actually sitting beside
the Jhonson... Anyway: I think the character died and the player didn't
come back.
DarkFyre
--
fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Message no. 8
From: Fyre - AKA Colin fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 09:52:02 +0100
In article <20000809023706.21517.qmail@******.mail.yahoo.com>, Rand
Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> writes
>> >Here's another thing you could try. It's a
>variation on "Everyone Get the Troll!" It's called
>"Big Gun, Big Gun, Who's Got the Big Gun?" :)
>>
<snip>

>Good point. Of course, it all depends on the effect
>you're after. The basic rule is to have one or two
>weapons (per "challenging character") that are a
>"grade" nastier than the standard bad guy weapon. If
>the bad guys are carrying heavy pistols, give the
>support dude an SMG. If they're carrying SMGs, give
>support dude an assault rifle, or combat shotgun. etc.

'makes sense. You just need to be careful handing out those Assault
cannons...
>
<snip>
>
>As noted, that was basically a once-off idea for
>dealing with those sorts of problem players, more so
>than simply problem characters. He's supposed to start
>thinking, "Hmmm...maybe I'm not invulnerable after
>all." I wouldn't recommend using it in this particular
>situation. That's what everything else I said was for. :)

Yup... Although it is a useful strategy and I can think of more than one
times that I wish I'd thought of it.

PS: Have you ever had a (non-rigger) PC sit in their car for an entire
session and do nothing but watch TV and phone a coupple of contacts? He
complained when I gave him less EXP than the rest of the group (who were
busy bluffing their way past guards and investigating crime scenes)...

DarkFyre
--
fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Message no. 9
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 17:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
> >Good point. Of course, it all depends on the effect
you're after. The basic rule is to have one or two
weapons (per "challenging character") that are a
"grade" nastier than the standard bad guy weapon. If
the bad guys are carrying heavy pistols, give the
support dude an SMG. If they're carrying SMGs, give
support dude an assault rifle, or combat shotgun. etc.
>
> 'makes sense. You just need to be careful handing
out those Assault cannons...

Oh, hell, yes. I've never once used an assault cannon
against my PCs. Closest I've come was using a rotary
autocannon. Of course, that was my Cyberpirates
campaign, the PCs were in a naval-class corvette and
the mage sent a water elemental over to rust up the
cannon's guts (causing it to explode) before I even
fired on them, anyway. :)

> >As noted, that was basically a once-off idea for
dealing with those sorts of problem players, more so
than simply problem characters. He's supposed to start
thinking, "Hmmm...maybe I'm not invulnerable after
all." I wouldn't recommend using it in this particular
situation. That's what everything else I said was for.
:)
>
> Yup... Although it is a useful strategy and I can
think of more than one times that I wish I'd thought
of it.

I'm sure we all can. :)

> PS: Have you ever had a (non-rigger) PC sit in their
car for an entire session and do nothing but watch TV
and phone a coupple of contacts? He complained when I
gave him less EXP than the rest of the group (who were
busy bluffing their way past guards and investigating
crime scenes)...
> DarkFyre

Nope, but I did have a guy come in halfway through the
session once (the resident munchkin), complain when I
couldn't work him in immediately (the game had already
been going for a full session before that and it was
only a two session game, so it was effectively
three-quarters over - also, he hadn't been there for
the first session and it was a new campaign, so his
character didn't know any of the other characters) and
then left an hour later. :)

====Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow, aka Doc'booner, aka Doc' Vader)

.sig Sauer

Can you SMELL what THE DOC' is COOKIN'!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
Message no. 10
From: Snake Eyes snake.eyes@***.net
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:11:13 -0700
At 05:51 PM 8/10/00 -0700, Doc' wrote:

> > 'makes sense. You just need to be careful handing out those Assault
> cannons...
>
>Oh, hell, yes. I've never once used an assault cannon against my PCs.
>Closest I've come was using a rotary autocannon. Of course, that was my
>Cyberpirates campaign, the PCs were in a naval-class corvette and the mage
>sent a water elemental over to rust up the cannon's guts (causing it to
>explode) before I even fired on them, anyway. :)

Oh, I've rarely ever had to go beyond the mere threat of using a PAC on a
PC, troll or otherwise. It's just important that everybody knows up front
that I reserve the option. I follow a mutual escalation approach to the
balance of terror in my campaign(s). There is an optimal zone that exists
between cake-walk and bloodbath. NPC's need only be powerful enough to
pose an actual threat.

I find that a perfectly acceptable amount of destruction can be wrought by
an APDS-equipped Enfield AS-7 in the hands of an appropriately skilled
NPC. Anybody remember the liquor store robbery scene in "Alien Nation"
with the souped-up shotgun slugs that can go thru an engine block? Turns
out they go thru chipped trolls, too.

I generally won't up-gun, up-cyber, up-mage, or up-deck the competition
until the PC's do first, unless I need to send a message. And even then
force usually need only be *displayed* for everybody to get the
picture. Of course, the above necessarily assumes a group of rational PC's
with a strong self-preservation instinct. If they can't take a hint, well
-- shame on them.

Rare occasions have called for more drastic measures -- like advancing the
plot by shooting down an escape chopper or kidnapping/taking a PC into
custody. Which begs the question: what kind of firepower is required in
your world(s) to subdue your baddest-ass PC (or a group of PC's) or better
yet get him to surrender in the face of superior force rather than try and
fight his/their way out (as seems to be the MO of most shadowrunners)?

~ Snake Eyes
Message no. 11
From: James Mick sinabian@********.net
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 09:59:35 -0400
Which begs the question: what kind of firepower is required in
>your world(s) to subdue your baddest-ass PC (or a group of PC's) or better
>yet get him to surrender in the face of superior force rather than try and
>fight his/their way out (as seems to be the MO of most shadowrunners)?
>
>~ Snake Eyes
>

Lo and behold. I am the Lord of the Munchkin Players. My SR team has three
grenade launchers, two panther assault cannons, three or four sniper rifles,
one or two LMGs, and a cybered partridge in a pear tree! Almost all of this
thanks to the Munchkin GM. That's not yet mentioning how many of the
characters have light or heavy security armor or even heavy military grade
armor. And if they can't fight their way out, all they have to do is snap
their fingers and Acme air-drops them enough C12 to level a city block.
::heavy theatric sigh:: This, of course, is why I don't GM any more. And why
I perceive headaches when I do start GMing again.

Just a sidenote: The infamous Munchkin GM has developed a reputation for
dealing with the problems he's caused by making things ridiculously
impossible and then miraculously useless if you DO accomplish them... I know
that winning is nowhere near as important as having fun, but it would be
nice to succeed ONCE in a while...

In short.....HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLP!!!
Message no. 12
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:04:05 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Snake Eyes wrote:

> Which begs the question: what kind of firepower is required in
> your world(s) to subdue your baddest-ass PC (or a group of PC's) or better
> yet get him to surrender in the face of superior force rather than try and
> fight his/their way out (as seems to be the MO of most shadowrunners)?

Ah, yes, the infamous "You'll never take me alive, copper!"
syndrome. I find that NeuroStun, concussion grenades, and shock weapons
work wonders for subduing all but the most prepared PC's. Used properly,
of course.
The other thing that will encourage surrender is when the PC's are
aware that even if they get caught by the authorities, they may very well
never see the inside of a jail cell. Use the trial rules to your
advantage. Once you have the players accustomed to a "revolving door"
justice system, they're far more willing to surrender themselves for minor
offenses, especially when they know they can't be linked to their bigger
crimes.
That's when you hit them with that little slip-up they made eight
runs ago and send them up the river for good, forcing them to eother
escape themselves or (if any weren't apprehended) bust their compadres out
of the hoosegow. That's a run that they're motivated to do. It doesn't
come from a Johnson, it doesn't have a payout, and they'll use all the
reasources they have in trying to accomplish it.
In other words, it's a perfect plot hook and roleplaying
opportunity.

Marc
Message no. 13
From: dbuehrer@******.carl.org dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:07:53 -0600
James Mick wrote:

>Lo and behold. I am the Lord of the Munchkin Players. My SR team has three
>grenade launchers, two panther assault cannons, three or four sniper rifles,
>one or two LMGs, and a cybered partridge in a pear tree! Almost all of this
>thanks to the Munchkin GM. That's not yet mentioning how many of the
>characters have light or heavy security armor or even heavy military grade
>armor. And if they can't fight their way out, all they have to do is snap
>their fingers and Acme air-drops them enough C12 to level a city block.
>::heavy theatric sigh:: This, of course, is why I don't GM any more. And why
>I perceive headaches when I do start GMing again.
>
>Just a sidenote: The infamous Munchkin GM has developed a reputation for
>dealing with the problems he's caused by making things ridiculously
>impossible and then miraculously useless if you DO accomplish them... I know
>that winning is nowhere near as important as having fun, but it would be
>nice to succeed ONCE in a while...
>
>In short.....HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLP!!!

Roleplay, roleplay, roleplay :)

Run an adventure where the characters have to solve a murder. All their
big guns won't help them find clues, interact with the NPCs, or solve the
crime.

There was a fun X-files adventure where this guy managed to transfer his
consciousness into a computer. He then went about selectively killing all
the scientists who had helped him achieve his goal. One of the scientists
hires the runners to find the computer and destroy it. Again, it's all
about roleplaying and using contacts to track the computer down. And the
bad guy has access to a wide variety of resources, including L-Sats. But
he is limited by what he can access from the internet (web cams, defense
satelite imagery, police bands, radio, TV, etc).

In short, make the primary events of the adventure roleplaying events. Go
ahead and toss in combat encounters, but use them as flavor and spice, not
the main ingrediant. That way, when the PCs blow the opponents away, it
won't really have affected the adventure. For example, as the characters
are looking for a runaway, they encounter a gang. The gang doesn't know
about the runaway, nor do they care. They just want to wax the PCs. The
PCs blow away the gangers and continue on their way. The players' needs
for winning at combat are satisfied, and your adventure hasn't been scrapped.




To Life,
-Graht
http://www.users.uswest.net/~abaker3
--
"Warm nights, good food, kindred spirits....great life!"
Message no. 14
From: James Mick sinabian@********.net
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:20:34 -0400
>There was a fun X-files adventure where this guy managed to transfer his
>consciousness into a computer.


Ooh...I've seen this one at Mage Blade's in a pdf file...


For example, as the characters
>are looking for a runaway, they encounter a gang. The gang doesn't know
>about the runaway, nor do they care. They just want to wax the PCs. The
>PCs blow away the gangers and continue on their way. The players' needs
>for winning at combat are satisfied, and your adventure hasn't been
scrapped.
>
>

I hadn't really thought about it that way...hrmmm. And actually that will
fit in quite nicely for a campaign I've been mentally preparing... Yes.
Thank you oh almight GM guru who doth know how to smite down the mighty
cybermunchkin!
Message no. 15
From: dbuehrer@******.carl.org dbuehrer@******.carl.org
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 09:01:50 -0600
James Mick wrote:

>For example, as the characters
> >are looking for a runaway, they encounter a gang. The gang doesn't know
> >about the runaway, nor do they care. They just want to wax the PCs. The
> >PCs blow away the gangers and continue on their way. The players' needs
> >for winning at combat are satisfied, and your adventure hasn't been
>scrapped.
>
>I hadn't really thought about it that way...hrmmm. And actually that will
>fit in quite nicely for a campaign I've been mentally preparing... Yes.
>Thank you oh almight GM guru who doth know how to smite down the mighty
>cybermunchkin!

<bows humbly> :)

Chalk it up to experience. I spent many years dealing with a persistent
munchkin :/

FWIW, most of what I've learned about GMing I've learned from watching
James Bond movies.

Combat in Bond movies is usually treated as an obstacle that he must
overcome before he can continue on his mission. And rarely does he use
force as a tool to defeat the bad guy. Even when force is required to beat
the bad guy, it's just one of the many steps he must take to stop the bad
guy's plans. For example, after beating the bad guy, he still has to
deactivate the bomb.

I have three types of planned combat encounters: easy and winnable,
challenging but winnable (assuming the players don't do anything stupid),
and unwinnable. The easy combat encounters are the most common of all the
combat encounters. Challenging combat encounters are uncommon. Unwinnable
combat encounters are rare, and when the PCs are presented with an
unwinnable combat encounter, it's quite obvious (outnumbered 10:1, the
other guys have Really big guns, etc). I use unwinnable combat encounters
to capture the NPCs, turn them aside and force them to find another path,
let them know that it's time to back off and try something else,
etc. I.e., the unwinnable combat encounter is a message from the GM that
the PCs are going to have to think their way through/out of the next part
of the adventure.

There is also a fourth category: reactionary combat. This happens when the
characters decide that they are going to solve a problem with force. When
this happens I try run the event as realistically as possible. A
non-combat NPC may try to run away if possible. The police may be
called. The PC's rep may be tarnished. Etc. Or, the PCs may pull it off
perfectly and get away with it. But if they kill a major NPC before
getting that vital clue, oh well.


To Life,
-Graht
http://www.users.uswest.net/~abaker3
--
"All things are at all times, in motion. Take the time to watch the dance."
-John Caeser Leafston
Message no. 16
From: James Mick sinabian@********.net
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 11:11:58 -0400
>There is also a fourth category: reactionary combat. This happens when the
>characters decide that they are going to solve a problem with force. When
>this happens I try run the event as realistically as possible. A
>non-combat NPC may try to run away if possible. The police may be
>called. The PC's rep may be tarnished. Etc. Or, the PCs may pull it off
>perfectly and get away with it. But if they kill a major NPC before
>getting that vital clue, oh well.
>
>

I've got a story for this one I've just got to share... LoL! My
fiancee...god bless her, I love her. She has this tendency to react very
violently to NPCs when she has difficulties especially with them...
<Spoiler Space>












...so anyway... My brother, the Munchkin GM, had us run a one-shot adventure
based on Deep Blue Sea. And at one point, one of the NPCs (the equivalent of
Samuel L. Jackson's character) was standing next to a wet dock in the middle
of a rant. She was getting frustrated so she decided her character would
strangle the NPC... Do you see where this is going?!? I saw it. The other
player saw it. And we both started saying OOC "You really REALLY don't want
to do that right now...you don't want to be near him!" ::laughs:: Well my
brother just gets this big cheezy grin and says "too late"...

Needless to say she was one character down shortly thereafter...
Message no. 17
From: Fyre - AKA Colin fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 10:45:59 +0100
In article <20000811005148.11488.qmail@******.mail.yahoo.com>, Rand
Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com> writes
<snip>

>Oh, hell, yes. I've never once used an assault cannon
>against my PCs. Closest I've come was using a rotary
>autocannon. Of course, that was my Cyberpirates
>campaign, the PCs were in a naval-class corvette and
>the mage sent a water elemental over to rust up the
>cannon's guts (causing it to explode) before I even
>fired on them, anyway. :)

The biggest shit that ever happened in one of my games was some ritual
magic involving 5-6 Mages... At that point my campaign became overly
screwed and I decided to end it there with two greater western dragons
rampaging through Tacoma and the group driving _REALLY_ fast to get out
of the city before people worked-out what woke them up ;)

<snip>
>>
>> Yup... Although it is a useful strategy and I can
>think of more than one times that I wish I'd thought
>of it.
>
>I'm sure we all can. :)

Ever read 'The Munchkin's guide to Powergaming'?
>
>> PS: Have you ever had a (non-rigger) PC sit in their
>car for an entire session and do nothing but watch TV
>and phone a coupple of contacts? He complained when I
>gave him less EXP than the rest of the group (who were
>busy bluffing their way past guards and investigating
>crime scenes)...
>> DarkFyre
>
>Nope, but I did have a guy come in halfway through the
>session once (the resident munchkin), complain when I
>couldn't work him in immediately (the game had already
>been going for a full session before that and it was
>only a two session game, so it was effectively
>three-quarters over - also, he hadn't been there for
>the first session and it was a new campaign, so his
>character didn't know any of the other characters) and
>then left an hour later. :)
>
Clip from the 'Are you a munchkin?' questionaire:

What type of sword do you use:
A: An Eppe
B: A two-handed sword
C: A two handed sword that only someone with your superhuman strength
can wield that doubles your strength and dexterity and was given to you
by a god for no particular reason

Guns; What's the Bee's Knees:
A: A .38 Police Special
B: A .44 magnum
C: A .50 desert eagle with extended barrel, telescoping night sight,
custom grip and autofire conversions.

PS: There were another few features in both of the Cs but I can't
remember them all.
DarkFyre
--
fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Message no. 18
From: Phil Smith phil_urbanhell@*******.com
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 10:11:21 GMT
>From: Fyre - AKA Colin <fyre@******.demon.co.uk>
>
>What type of sword do you use:
>A: An Eppe
>B: A two-handed sword
>C: A two handed sword that only someone with your superhuman strength
>can wield that doubles your strength and dexterity and was given to you
>by a god for no particular reason
>
>Guns; What's the Bee's Knees:
>A: A .38 Police Special
>B: A .44 magnum
>C: A .50 desert eagle with extended barrel, telescoping night sight,
>custom grip and autofire conversions.

You are riding down the road on your way to a meet when a Lone Star squad
car pulls out from behind a sign and starts wizzing its sirens at you, do
you:
A: Pull over, this is probably nothing; if the cop thought you were
dangerous he would have called for backup instead of trying to arest you
himself.
B: Speed up and try to out run him.
C: Rotate the turret 180 degrees.

In an airport you set of a metal detector, security start to sidle towards
you, do you;
A: Do nothing; you're not so stupid as to carry a gun to an airport so its
probably just your steel toecaps or something.
B: Activate your wired reflexes and feel for your knife in anticipation of
trouble.
C: Set off the twelve kilos of C-4 you left in the Mens room.

You come across 1000000¥ in the street, do you;
A: Retire to some stable country and live out the rest of your life in
relative luxury.
B: Invest in some real estate in a stable country, soup up your car, and
upgrade some of your more annoying cyberware.
C: Undergo surgery to espand your skull to dimensions that can fit a SOTA
millitary computer.

On your way to a meet you get a flat tire, do you;
A: Change the tire as fast as possible and pray that your contact is
patient.
B: Pull out your gun and liberate the closest fast vehicle.
C: Heave a sigh of relief that you tank does not have tires.

Phil

Let us assume we have a can opener.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 19
From: Fyre - AKA Colin fyre@******.demon.co.uk
Subject: A Balance Question
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 11:02:44 +0100
In article <4.3.2.7.2.20000810201541.072cdc00@**********.worldnet.att.ne
t>, Snake Eyes <snake.eyes@***.net> writes
>At 05:51 PM 8/10/00 -0700, Doc' wrote:
>
>> > 'makes sense. You just need to be careful handing out those Assault
>> cannons...
>>
>>Oh, hell, yes. I've never once used an assault cannon against my PCs.
>>Closest I've come was using a rotary autocannon. Of course, that was my
>>Cyberpirates campaign, the PCs were in a naval-class corvette and the mage
>>sent a water elemental over to rust up the cannon's guts (causing it to
>>explode) before I even fired on them, anyway. :)
>
<snip>
>
>Rare occasions have called for more drastic measures -- like advancing the
>plot by shooting down an escape chopper or kidnapping/taking a PC into
>custody. Which begs the question: what kind of firepower is required in
>your world(s) to subdue your baddest-ass PC (or a group of PC's) or better
>yet get him to surrender in the face of superior force rather than try and
>fight his/their way out (as seems to be the MO of most shadowrunners)?
>
I don't know... How man army battalions are we allowed to use? ;)

DarkFyre
--
fyre@******.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about A Balance Question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!