Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:48:38 -0400
At 12.11 08-31-99 -0700, you wrote:
>I disagree. Being disturbed by a gruesome activity can be enlightening
and has its place in SR. This isn't a game for little kids.

Err....
Where is the age rating on the core rules, in that case. I'm willing to
bet I can answer your question without even looking at my book- there isn't
one.
Other than WW's WOD and a handful of others, most RPGs are targeted for
the junior high crowd, who (no offense guys, this is just IMO) ARE still
pretty damn young.

>Again, I disagree. Adult issues have their place in SR. This isn't a
happy-go->lucky universe where everyone skips around singing all day.
People die during

Reading the older books, there was nothing in it that said that every day
was bomb-your-buddy day. Betrayal and dishonor used to be bad things. (I
dread SR4- they will probably be calling it a good thing.) Most of us would
rather play a game where honor still existed, and that the runners were
(largely) the "good guys" (most of the time). You know- no killing little
kids, no raping nuns, no tossing satchel charges into crowds, that kindof
thing.

>world that feels real. Does no one get mugged, raped, beaten, or killed
in your >campaign? All of these are potential "danger zones" for some
people, but are

Yes, but we display it as the aberant behavior that it is. People die
quite frequently in my games, and not all of them NPCs (I average a dead PC
about once every five or six missions), but killing the innocent or
needlessly is a very bad thing, with conciquences, like fewer and fewer
people want to deal with you. Beating- we've delivered them by the score-
just ask the guy who had his leg torn off by the Troll sam last weekend.
Muggings- we don't commit them, they are for a lesser class of criminals,
and make you look unproffessional.
And although the "system" doesn't always work, runners and mercs usually
do. You can be the "uber baddass", and cause the cops to dive for cover,
have parents call thier kids in, and have wee babes and old women weep, by
doing nothing more than walking down the street. In which case, if you
want to be "accurate", the last thing you ever do will be to reach for the
gununder your pillow when Lone Star blows your door and a team of people
with BIG guns who take your existance very personally run in.
OR, you can be a man of honor, have people who remember you and come to
you later for jobs or have a favor to be paid. The gangers respect you
becuase with a four man team you took out thirty of them, but allowed them
to live when you could have killed them. Your names are known to the
Oyabun, the Don and local corps as a team that can get the job done quietly
and with a minimum of mayham, and treat you as a pro.
I've made an observation, which may or may not be accurate, and may or may
not apply to many of the people here, but it has often appeared to me that
the people who make the claim of "(insert grossly antisocial act of choice)
makes the game more realistic" are younger/more immature and thier games
more prone to less realistic PCs.




Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 2
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 14:03:22 -0700
On Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:48:38 IronRaven wrote:

> Err....
> Where is the age rating on the core rules, in that case. I'm willing to
>bet I can answer your question without even looking at my book- there isn't
>one.
> Other than WW's WOD and a handful of others, most RPGs are targeted for
>the junior high crowd, who (no offense guys, this is just IMO) ARE still
>pretty damn young.

So be it. It's not responsibility to demand age ratings on roleplaying games. In a game
where the majority of players are, by definition, violent criminals, it's pretty safe to
assume that the game isn't meant for little kids.

> Reading the older books, there was nothing in it that said that every day
>was bomb-your-buddy day. Betrayal and dishonor used to be bad things. (I
>dread SR4- they will probably be calling it a good thing.) Most of us would
>rather play a game where honor still existed, and that the runners were
>(largely) the "good guys" (most of the time). You know- no killing little
>kids, no raping nuns, no tossing satchel charges into crowds, that kindof
>thing.

I would prefer that my players not play psychopaths from hell, but I don't dictate their
actions. They do what they want to do and there are ramnifications.

My point is that it's a cyberpunk world. If you read the source material and the novels
you will find scores of examples of wrongdoings and violent activities. It's a part of
the SR world. Just because I recognize these things as being part of the world doesn't
mean I'm a "depraved sicko".

> Yes, but we display it as the aberant behavior that it is. People die
>quite frequently in my games, and not all of them NPCs (I average a dead PC
>about once every five or six missions), but killing the innocent or
>needlessly is a very bad thing, with conciquences, like fewer and fewer
>people want to deal with you. Beating- we've delivered them by the score-
>just ask the guy who had his leg torn off by the Troll sam last weekend.
>Muggings- we don't commit them, they are for a lesser class of criminals,
>and make you look unproffessional.

All true. I'm not arguing that. You're taking this out of the scope of my post. All I'm
saying is that bad things happen in SR. If someone is uncomfortable with that, they're
playing the wrong game.

<Snip of more out of scope stuff>

> I've made an observation, which may or may not be accurate, and may or may
>not apply to many of the people here, but it has often appeared to me that
>the people who make the claim of "(insert grossly antisocial act of choice)
>makes the game more realistic" are younger/more immature and thier games
>more prone to less realistic PCs.

Well, that's a pretty big judgement to make. I'm not saying that I get pleasure out of
having these violent things happen. They are merely part of the story. If I ran a world
where violent acts no longer ocurred, it'd be pretty damned difficult to run a Shadowrun
campaign there. After all, shooting the guard who just happens to be on duty when you
decide to break in and steal some paydata is a violent act.

>Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 3
From: Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 08:19:48 +1000
>but are necessary elements of the SR universe. If you don't wish to discuss
>or deal with such issues, then you're playing the wrong game.
>
>No. Just choosing not to game with depraved sickos.

I think both of you are taking excessively extremist stances here, and
no-one's going to convince anyone. Let's face it; everyone is a broad
spectrum, and it also depends WHO you play with. I know one gaming group
that actually makes me thinks SERIOUSLY about my characters, and if I
roleplayed out a rape or other truly distressing event with them, it would
really make me think - expand my horizons, probably. In another group,
however, we don't deal with the 'serious stuff'; we just have a good time
and blow shit up. ;-)

How about we all choose to agree with one or other of the following:

"I choose not to roleplay distressing events for the sake of the mental
tranquility of myself and the rest of my gaming group. I accept that this
is not everyone's choice, and that other groups may find it appropriate to
deal with these sorts of issues in their games, and that that does not
necessarily make them depraved sadcases or immature thrillseekers."

OR

"I choose to roleplay more distressing events with my group in order to
push our boundaries and to challenge ourselves. I accept that this is not
everyone's cup of tea, and that it does not _have_ to be an integral part
of the game."

Come on, guys, put up or shut up. Surely everybody should be able to agree
with one or other of those?

Lady Jestyr
~ Hell hath no fury like a geek with a whippersnipper ~

* jestyr@*****.com | URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr *
Message no. 4
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 19:17:49 -0400
At 18.29 08-31-99 -0400, you wrote:
>who he has kidnapped, I'm willing to bet 9 out of 10 sinless in shadowrun
>(out of realism of course) will take that offer.

Most runners are beings without honor. Some acts stain the soul too
deeply to committed, no matter what the cirucmstances or the payment, yet
they accept them any ways, either to quite a rumble in thier belly or a
craving in thier vains or an insanity in thier mind. That is why I am I a
mercenary, and why I must wish you a good day, sir.
--Hideoshi O'Leary, hungry mercenary
(My favorite, bar none, RPG alter ego)

And yes, he makes those kinds of comments in runner hang outs.



Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 5
From: caelric@****.com caelric@****.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 16:12:06 -0700
You know, what it all boils down to, is what your group of players in your
campaign are comfortable with. If it is causing emotional trauma in a
player, why would you want to include it (be it rape, murder, etc...) in
your campaign. On the other hand, if you all are comfortable with it, then
fine, if you think it adds atmosphere to the game, include it. The point
is, SR is a game and you and your group should be enjoying it!

For some people, these scenes may be some sort of emotional cathartis
(sp?), and it is good to include them. In others, it may cause problems,
and it would be bad. In the majority (I would think) it doesn't go either
way, and unless such a scene is an integral plot point, then why bother?

Also, just because you include such things in your campaign does not make
you sick and depraved, and the converse to such is that just because you
don't include them does not make you an uptight wimp who can't handle it.

Dave
Message no. 6
From: Josh strago@***.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 21:24:42 -0400
IronRaven wrote:

> At 18.29 08-31-99 -0400, you wrote:
> >who he has kidnapped, I'm willing to bet 9 out of 10 sinless in shadowrun
> >(out of realism of course) will take that offer.
>
> <SNIP derogatory remarks by IronRaven towards shadowruners>

OK, I've sat here and read everything said by both sides, as well as the
attack on Lady Jestyr after she TRIED to solve the problem rationally. Now my
group is one in which we just "blow shit up" (to quote Lady Jestyr) so we don't
deal with role-playing issues. But that doesn't mean that we are immature just
because we choose to let our "fun" look like a John Woo action movie. It also
doesn't mean that those who choose to let their "fun" mean roleplaying are
stuffy old fogeys. Why do I bring up this comparison? Because those who
choose to 'expand their horizons' through roleplaying traumatic events (even
those which are morally despicable) are just trying to deepen the "fun" of
roleplaying. You might not like that. I wouldn't like that. But they are NOT
depraved because they are doing what they would like to do.
What is roleplaying? Taking on a role. It's all just degrees of how far one
would like to go.
To quote my favorite wrestler, "That's the bottom line 'cuz Stone Cold
said so!"


--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+ M-
Message no. 7
From: Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 14:58:58 +1000
>Or perhaps:
>
>"I choose not to roleplay depraved events as I do not find any entertaining
>
>value in them or anything in them I would see as useful for a person to
learn.
>I
>accept that this is not everyone's choice, and that other groups may find it
>
>appropriate to deal with these sorts of issues in their games, and that that
>
>does more than likely make them depraved sadcases or immature thrillseekers."
>
>
>OR
>
>"I choose to roleplay more distressing events with my group in order to
>explore how cool it is to be dark and goth like and do things in a game I
could
>not
>get away with in real life. I will do this to 'simulate reality' no matter
what
>the cost
>to the enjoyment of the others I game with. And if they don't like it that's
>just too bad
>cause they're wimps and babies. So Nya nya nay."
>
>I'd agree more to that. It's what I've always seen bear out in practice.

Well, pardon us for breathing.

I'm sorry, but I'm now REALLY mad - and those who know me know how
difficult that is to achieve. You've just proved to me, at least, how
self-righteous, narrow-minded and offensive a fellow gamer can truly be.
Not to mention I can only assume that you're being DELIBERATELY inflammatory.

Fine, I'm going to stop now, before I get any madder.

Lady Jestyr
~ Hell hath no fury like a geek with a whippersnipper ~

* jestyr@*****.com | URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr *
Message no. 8
From: Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject: Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin'
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 15:09:44 +1000
My apologies for replying to a GridSec-killed thread; I didn't see Dvixen's
post due to the red mist obscuring my vision...

Lady Jestyr
~ Hell hath no fury like a geek with a whippersnipper ~

* jestyr@*****.com | URL: http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr *

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Getting Nasty to Your Players (WAS: Re: The Friggin\, 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.