Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Jirawat Uttayaya <jirawat@******.PHYS.UFL.EDU>
Subject: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 19:39:35 -0400
With all the talk about six-barrel shotguns and pistol panther cannons, I
am wondering if anyone has ever played a conscientious objector. I used
to play a doctor/magic healer named Hat Field who refused to kill (love
them NarcoJets). It created an interesting role-playing situation since
my convictions were tested on every run. In fact, I went so far as to
try to save some of my opponents from death. However, with that kind of
rep on the sprawl contacts and buddies are easy to come by. Of course,
at the end I got geeked by a tricked out sam. Oh well.
The moral: sometimes bigger guns are not the answer (but it helps).

Sincerely,

Jirawat Uttayaya a.k.a. Peaking Duck
Message no. 2
From: "Brian E. Angliss" <ANGLISS@******.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 23:38:32 -0400
Yep, I have run several pacifists, all of which I run on the Talk list in
one form or another.

Slash is a MacGyver type who knows subdueing combat, uses chem and stun rounds
instead of your standard lethal stuff, and loves to sneak in and out with
no-one seeing, smelling, assencing, feeling, or hearing him(tasting him is a
really big no-no). He has killed, but only in vengeance for the deaths of
family and those friends who are now family too.

Valentine is a druid initiate(Moon totem) who has seen far too much violence
in his time to let himself become part of it again. On talk, he recently
killed for the first time in a VERY long time(I won't say how long, but hint
at it by mentioning that he's an elf, but not from the 4th world) and broke
down on the spot, crying and lamenting over what he had to do to free himself
and those he loves from torment.

The only other one is a little weird. You can't call him a pacifist, really,
but he is reluctant. A "retired" surgeon turned involuntary and very
reluctant vampire. He's like Val, in that he's seen and committed acts of
violence that are horrible in the extreme, sometime just to live another few
weeks before he must eat again, but he hates what he is, the idea that he'll
live far longer naturally than any of his great-great-grandchildren, etc.

But I've also played the weird characters, the psychopathic killers, the
lunatics, etc. They can be fun too, but often don't give me the satisfaction
of running a truly unique character.

Brian
Message no. 3
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 19:01:57 +1000
Pacifist character? You have to be kidding!

No, seriously, I realise what a role-playing experience it would be to play
a pacifist character, but players generally don't have that view. At least
mine don't. Morals? Concience? Nope - not them either. In a way I would like
to try and convert them, but as Ivy says "make what you do suit the
players", and besides, actually finding players around here is difficult, I
don't want to lose the few I have. I may give it a little try though, any
good suggestions?

My players tend to view things in this manner: "Taking examples from
characters in fiction - most every character you can think of has some
weakness, something they will not do, or do not like to do. I just design my
character with none of those weaknesses. That way the bad guys have nothing
to hold against me - If I have it in my history that my family was killed in
a plane crash, and that I have no close friends, then they can't do anything
to them to get at me. Likewise, if I can kill freely, then I don't have to ever
worry about elaborate methods of incapacitating my enemies, if an enemy is
dead, he stays that way, and can never come back to haunt me."

Now, this may make highly successful shadowrunners, it is a bit lacking in
role-playing. The only motivation the runners ever has is money. Their
characters have about as much depth as a ten dollar note as well. They don't
see it that way though, they all have fairly extensive histories, and even
have odd quirks and idiosyncrasies (sp?), but due to the total mercenary
approach, the characters are not really characters. Now I try to encourage
different characters than this, but it is fairly limited, and to some degree
futile. Whats more, my players would see it as a decided disadvantage if I
used one of their family (or whatever) as a plot piece to get them into a
run. They would probably then revert back to the old way of "If I ain't got
any loose ends, then the loose ends can't be pulled to make me do something
I don't want to."

I know that that is not all there is to it, but you get the gist of it. Any
good suggestions on how to improve the role-playing abilities of my players?
It probably has to do with the fact that they are all power gamers (some may
even lean toward the munchkin side, but I don't realy feel that they are
that bad), they think character advancement is when you upgrade your wired
reflexes one for wired reflexes three. Another aspect of my players is that
they get bored if there isn't combat at least twice an hour. When we did
Silver Angel, they almost gave up on legwork altogether, but one player is a
preparation fanatic, so he pushed the rest through. Even I could see that
the others were getting ready to bind and gag him, and go for the frontal
assault, letting him out once the combat started, so he would have no choice
but to go along with them. Interaction between the runners and NPCs extends
no further than firing bullets at each other if they have any choice about
it.

It may seem like I'm bagging my players (and, well, perhaps I am a little),
but I agree with Ivys sentiment that a GM should design things based around
what his players like, but straight out firefight runs get a tad boring
after a while.

Any good thoughts from you Role-Playing GMs and players out there?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 4
From: Gareth Owen <glowen1@*****.NHS.GOV.UK>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 11:04:17 +0100
<Damion wrote stuff about power-gaming PCs>

Hmmmm.

Excessive use of force can seem a simple way to solve problems, but it
can cause more problems than it solves.

A corp is going to be a lot angrier with a team that destroys its
assets (ie kills its personnel) than one that doesn't. OK, shadowrunners
anoy corps big time all the time anyway, but killing loads of people
on the way in may make the difference between the corp absorbing the
damage and deciding to eliminate the Shadowrunners.

Police forces are going to give murderers a much higher priority than
people who commit common assualt (ie non-lethal combat).

How about having the team hired to achieve a mission without anyone
knowing - kill X and make it look like an accident, plant this bug
in the office of Y.

Lastly, reputation. A Shadowrunning team will acquire a reputation
based on its performance, if they go in all guns blazing all the time
they may find people react to them negatively, work may be harder to
come by.

Just a few thoughts, I hope you have some success.

Incidentally, my characters always try to minimise deaths, one of
them habitually carries two roomsweepers, one loaded with stun rounds
and the other with conventional flechettes. Don't kill if you don't
have to, it only causes trouble.

All the best

GLO

--
Gareth Owen | Mail: glowen1@*****.nhs.gov.uk
Message no. 5
From: Electron Dancer <C598706@*******.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 10:04:14 CDT
I used to have a problem with power-gamers (hell, I was one :) but we
all sorta had a forum and solved it. Well, I as GM told all the players
that power gaming would not be allowed or supported in my campaign.
We discussed the reasons for this, and it all boiled down to one thing:
in my game, I want the characters to be parts of a story, dynamic
players in a grand plot around them, as opposed to two-dimensional
pages filled with stats.

This really all started while playing AD&D (it's okay...I'm cured), with
everybody having 47th level cavalier/mage/thief/druids, and the GM
giving out treasure like "everybody gets (rolls a 20-sider)...9 magic
items. Look in Unearthed Arcana and pick them out. Yes, any." While
everybody else was getting mighty swords and Decks of Many Things, I told
the DM that all I wanted was "157 gold pieces and a new cloak." I figured
that was all that an average, lowly, adventurer needed. And while they all
spent two hours poring over their magic lists, I found a whole new adventure
and got lots of experience. Next time, they did the same so we could play
more.

Then when I ran the game, I made everybody make average, 1st level characters
who were _actually mortal_ and, despite initial grumblings, they had fun and
have since come over to my side...we play SR in a not-too-rich, down to
earth way that makes it more realistic, opens up new avenues for adventure,
and ultimately creates a more colorful world.

So my recommendation is this: talk to the players, "before we get started,
I'd like to take 5 minutes to improve the game." Tell them what you want,
why you want it, and get their feedback. If that doesn't work, put them
in a situation where they have no gear, no backup, and have to run to stay
alive. This will cause them to rely on their wits, intuition, and contacts
in order to survive and will show them the other half of SR: the colorful
world and characters that abound in it. They don't need to become pacifists
or anything, just need to develop the non-combat side and make 3D characters.
Having a shadowrunner hired against them may help...involuntarily liquidate
their assets...It's amazing what a decker can do to a credstick balance...

See ya in the shadows --Trondo-->
Message no. 6
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 14:29:37 -0400
On Wed, 7 Sep 1994, Brian E. Angliss wrote:

> Yep, I have run several pacifists, all of which I run on the Talk list in
> one form or another.

I too have run several pacifist types (though not recently).
Actually, I am soon going to be running a fixer-type who feels that if he
has to draw a gun (with his firearms skill of 2) something has gone
horribly wrong. To make it worse, he's a Minotaur (you know, the
European phenotype of Troll from the Paranormal Animals of Europe
Sourcebook), so he doesn't really look the part of the pacifist.

> But I've also played the weird characters, the psychopathic killers, the
> lunatics, etc. They can be fun too, but often don't give me the satisfaction
> of running a truly unique character.

But sociopathic, cyber-psychotic, gun-bunny lunatics can be truly
unique characters as well. They can have unique and interesting
personality quirks, phobias, manias, etc. Like one turbo-charged sammi
who had a pathological hatred of Medkits (there was a damn good reason
too; who'd have thought that all three of the medkit's diagnostic
computer dice would come up 1's?). Lemme tell ya, that one made post-run
first aid a bitch. I will agree, however that such characters are often
lost in the number crunching.

> Brian
>

Marc
Message no. 7
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 15:01:24 -0400
Damion writes: [stuff about munchkinous players]

Sounds like it sucks to be you. Somebody (sorry, I forget who)
had some good suggestions (cops, corps, rep, etc) so I'll leave those
alone. But as far as campaign/run/NPC ideas go think about these (keep
in mind that all of these have occurred with great effect in the campaign
I run, so they're tried-n'-true):

1. Send the players on a run where they CAN'T have any weapons. Like a
prison. Heh. Johnson hires runners to kill target. Minor problem:
target is in prison. Ergo, runners have to go to prison to kill target.
But make things complicated. Like, when the runners get to the prison,
they discover that it is not the white-collar prison they have been led
to believe, but a maximum security penitentiary. Heh. Better still,
once runners arrive in prison, target is in solitary confinement. Ooops.
So runners have to wait and stew for a while in prison. Say maybe a
guard/warden/other inmate takes an extreme disliking to one or more of
the runners? Ooops. And say that after the job is done, the pardon and
payment that the Johnson has promised just don't come...ever. Double
ooops. You'd be surprised what runners will do for the right price (like
the undercover cop who agreed to smuggle 1.5 tonnes of seized BTL...) and
a fixer can offer a lot of money if he doesn't intend on ever paying it...

2. Have an NPC who the players desperately want to kill. Have that
character be so obnoxious that his or her very existence is an affront to
the players. Then engineer the circumstances such that they CAN'T kill
the NPC. Say the NPC holds some valuable piece of information/location
of something important/has a powerful (and more importantly, vengeful)
patron/has some skill that the players absolutely need/will net the
players much money if they keep alive/the list goes on and on. It gets
even funnier when there are multiples of the above.

3. Put the players in runs where the social situations are the real
danger. For inspiration, look at any Machiavellian corporate board
room. Or watch "Dangerous Liaisons." It's immensely funny to watch the
cybered-to-the-gills street sam totally outmaneuvered and paralyzed by
the wicked schemes of a woman (no offense, ladies).

4. Make runs where death is a no-no. Like the runners have to get into,
say, the Renraku Arcology to do a run. Say one of the runners has a
contact on the inside who agrees to get the runners in. But say that
this contact is a good sarariman at heart and doesn't want to se any of
his corporate comrades geeked. Have him put the stipulation on those
maintenance ID's that if anybody gets killed, the runners pay the
employee next-of-kin death benefit. At 20,000+ nuyen a pop, killing
decreases dramatically (in fact, when I pulled this one, only one of the
players even brought live ammuntion. Turns out they all needed it. Heh).

5. Make runs that don't involve death, like reconnaisance, infiltration,
investigation, etc.

6. (My personal favorite) Declare martial law over the whole damn city.

You get the idea. Be creative, have a ball. Watch your players writhe
in anguish as you torture them. It sounds crazy, but they'll love you
for it.

Marc (So, Gangster...how many of these do you recognize from personal
experience? Heh.)
Message no. 8
From: "Brian E. Angliss" <ANGLISS@******.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 16:10:49 -0400
Actually, my major problem with the psychopathic killers I have seen run
are that they have no personality. I wouldn't object if they had some
quirks, but they are generally numbers on paper, rather than characters with
a history.

Besides running pacifists, I have run characters who thought that death was
just another aspect of life and had no problems killing. They generally
thought it was a bad idea(cops don't generally like murders) logically, but
if you still refused to move, blam. Death was just another thing to be
passed by, part of life as it were.

What I personally would REALLY like to run is a schitzophrenic character, ie
with skills and attributes split between the personalities. Talk about a
roll-playing challenge...

Anyone out there every try this?

Brian
Message no. 9
From: Chad Hessoun <chessoun@*******.COLUMBUS.OH.US>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 17:33:49 -0400
Along the lines of 'runs that challenge players beyond just blowing things up:

I was a player for this one [non-SR, homegrown shoot-'em-up game], and had a
great time. The GM unilaterally sent us all on vacation on a space ship
that did not allow any heavy weapons. We could take equipment if we were
willing to sacrifice clean clothing (it was a two week cruise and we were
only allowed a few bags), and a service pistol (government permits). The
ship was attacked, and we were the only people on board who could fight.
The adventure turned into a running battle that split us up in unfamiliar
territory, with VERY few resources. We didn't win. In fact, we barely
survived.


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- C H A D H E S S O U N -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> itinerant OTISian ArchBishop formerly of Kenyon and Greater Gambier
<<<
>>>>> "There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn." --
Camus <<<<<
Hail OTIS! Find out more: ighf@******.com or hessoun@******.edu Hail Spode!
Message no. 10
From: Gian-Paolo Musumeci <musumeci@***.LIS.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 18:36:42 -0500
In one of my Vampire campaigns, one of the characters played a schitzophrenic
character: 15 year old teenage slut, 75 year old man with a penchant for telling
stories, 25ish graduate student in library sciences who cracked while writing
his dissertation, 40-50 year old mother...

(the last one was really funny with the 28 year old leather-and-black-lace
anarchist in the party..."Here, have a shawl, dear, aren't you cold in that
...THING"

*laughs*

/gdm
Message no. 11
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 09:44:48 +1000
Damion writes about his players' 2D characters...

Maybe the suggested scenarios that force them to avoid Big Guns as the
solution will improve things, maybe not. It's certainly worth a try.

Tell me, what are the players like in real life? Are they interesting
to talk to socially, do they have lots of outside interests? If they
do, then roleplaying should come reasonably naturally to them - they
maught just need to learn how. If not, I'd say you'd have to wait
until you introduce some fresh blood into the group.

As far as learning - you could try to lead them by example. Which
means designing a couple of NPCs specifically for them. One that
they're supposed to value and _like_, one that they're going to love
to hate, and maybe even want to kill.

I'd say the most important thing in making these NPCs come alive, is
that they will have to earn the players respect. Then they'll care
about the NPC's opinion of them.

In the long run, hopefully some or all of your players will see the
extra sort of fun you can get from this, and start following suit.


As far as playing pacifists - yes, I've done it. In SR. At least,
played someone who was truly good, and always tried to act in that way.
Actually, he was also certifiably insane - it just didn't interfere
very much in dealing with real life.

And despite the infuriating aspects of his personality, and the numerous
problems that he caused them, he was a remarkably well-liked character by
all the other players.

luke@$0.02
Message no. 12
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 19:48:49 -0400
>>>>> "Gian-Paolo" == Gian-Paolo Musumeci
<musumeci@***.LIS.UIUC.EDU>
>>>>> writes:

Gian-Paolo> In one of my Vampire campaigns, one of the characters played a
Gian-Paolo> schitzophrenic character: [...]

Minor nit: the appropriate term is "multple personalities disorder."
Schitzophrenia is a /completely/ different psychological problem, a
paranoid detatchment from reality is the simple definition.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> |Warning: pregnant women, the elderly, and
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox|children under 10 should avoid prolonged
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |exposure to Happy Fun Ball.
Message no. 13
From: Joanna Goodhartz <JGOODHAR@****.STEVENS-TECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 20:09:49 -0400
[Comments about non-roleplaying roleplayers <g>]

I've been shuddering at all the booby traps, tactics, and big gun discussions.
Thankfully, my GM prefers a "cinematic" campaign style, and lots of
roleplaying. Our scrags are minor, and if we have them, we screwed up.
Or, *we're* in control of the situation. Usually we plan for several hours
before a major attack. By now, it probably sounds like our team's a bunch
of weaklings. Trust me, we're not. But, we all've put a lot of work into
our characters, so we don't want to see them die. We do have a large
pool of characters to work with: everybody has two or more, so that we can
mix-and-match skills, and so if we're in the middle of a run, and not enough
people show next week, we can run something else simultaneously.

I suspect we could hold our own in the situations being mentioned, but we
don't have any combat monsters. And, most of us are shadowrunners by
accident: my characters: Sallah, a bodyguard whose last job went sour, and
now she's looking for the guy who killed her job....; Nightwing, who started
out as a corp kid who was bored, became a minor street sam, and wound up
as a vampire phys ad with too many connections (she was lucky (?) enough to
meet Laverty, Ehran and Lowfyr at once - a long story <g>); as for some
of our others: a racoon shaman, whose parents were killed by a corp; a bear
shaman adept, the local healer; a troll street sam, need I say more <g>;
an elven hitman; a dapper orc; and a failed assasin created by some corp...

Our GM gives the most karma for good roleplaying. I heartily approve. :)

Joanna Goodhartz
(Sig up and coming)
Message no. 14
From: Jirawat Uttayaya <jirawat@******.PHYS.UFL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 21:29:16 -0400
<Mr. Milliken's complaint about trigger-happy runners geeked by
trigger-happy runners>

This very syndrome ,ie let's waste them all and take their treasure mentality,
is the reason I created Dr. Hat Field. From my old D&D days, I would
hack-and-slash my way through every problem (um, yes Mr. DM I did roll three
18's in a row). But with Shadowrun, I would purposely generate characters which
were not statistically the best but which had style and substance. Dr. Field,
for example, was a disillusioned young med student who turned to healing magic.
Thus he had a 5 biotech AND a 4 Socery(healing). Sure it was not the prefect
allocation of dice but it had depth of character (he also had a 3 in cooking
from when he worked as a chef during med school). Remember, role-playing
is NOT about winning (and believe me Dr. Field ran away a few times with his tail
between his leg) but about having fun and exploring your character.

Now about gun happy mercs in your game. KEEP THEM. Lead and sulphur are a
legitimate means of doing a run. But not the best way. Mass carnage tends to
take the shadow out of a shadowrun. With a rep like that, the team is not
going to be getting alot of high paying slip-n-slide missions where silence
is the key. The corp will view the team as cannon fodder and treat them as such.
Mr. Johnson: Let's see here, we have an assignment to kill a dragon. Oh yeah,
we'll send those stupid mercs and sams as decoys, ...um ..., I mean
"professional shadowrunners". If they survive with all objectives accomplished
(and that's a big if), they won't be getting those big credsticks they dreamed
about. These jobs are just not as high paying. Thugs are replacable,
professionals are not. But whatever you do, avoid the trap of steering the
game to the way you, instead of the players, want it. The GM can nudge but
not push.


Sincerely,

Jirawat Uttayaya a.k.a. Peaking Duck
Message no. 15
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 23:20:07 -0600
in reply to Damion:

Hmmm.... Suggestions? Well, if there are any female players, make one
pregnant, and otherwise, say that an old flame came back and said they
fathered a child. There's nothing like kids to throw a wrench in the
works. And also, they can't use the excuse of "well, my player never had
sex" because this is Shadowrun, and there are ten times more things to
think about than in real life. They are going to slip up somewhere. And
if they don't roleplay their character (in your opinion) properly, then
dock karma awards. This is entirely justifiable, and it's a good way to
get them to think (unless, of course, they're munchkin 12-year olds, then
there's no hope at all).

Anyway, if you get them thinking, they will probably find out that they
like role-playing just as much or even more than bouncing dice.

Just my two cent's worth,

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 16
From: Alex van der Kleut <sommers@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 09:54:06 -0400
I know from personal experience that the martial law thing really sucks.
But you get all sorts of other interesting chances to do things. Like
sell weapons to the people opposed to the martial law.
Psst... Hay budy, wanna buy a SAM or two?
Message no. 17
From: Gian-Paolo Musumeci <musumeci@***.LIS.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 10:02:33 -0500
Pardon me. I was using "schitzophrenic" because it was the term that was used
in the previous message.

/gdm
Message no. 18
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 11:32:37 -0400
Joanna Goodhartz writes: [stuff about cinematic characters/campaigns]

Bravo. I agree wholeheartedly. Just because I post things about
tactics or corp death squads doesn't mean that they are the exclusive plot
device in my campaign. In fact, some of my players most memorable runs
are those which were just plain bizarre. Like the Renraku
infiltration/mistaken identity run, where there were no shots fired. At
all. Just chaos and mass confusion on the parts of not only the PC's but
the NPC's as well. Not to mention the fact that there were about four
subplots intermingled with the whole thing. Crazy. But fun.

Marc
Message no. 19
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 11:50:09 -0400
>>>>> "Gian-Paolo" == Gian-Paolo Musumeci
<musumeci@***.LIS.UIUC.EDU>
>>>>> writes:

Gian-Paolo> Pardon me. I was using "schitzophrenic" because it was the
Gian-Paolo> term that was used in the previous message.

Just clarifying things; I guess I missed the first one (I was in skimming
mode yesterday).

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> |Warning: pregnant women, the elderly, and
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox|children under 10 should avoid prolonged
PGP Public Key: Ask for one today! |exposure to Happy Fun Ball.
Message no. 20
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 12:05:50 -0400
On Fri, 9 Sep 1994, Alex van der Kleut wrote:

> I know from personal experience that the martial law thing really sucks.
> But you get all sorts of other interesting chances to do things. Like
> sell weapons to the people opposed to the martial law.
> Psst... Hay budy, wanna buy a SAM or two?
>

Yeah, too bad that SAM you sold only served to make the situation worse.
Who would have thought that thet'd put in a hard-liner as the new
Governor General?

Marc
Message no. 21
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 00:40:10 +1000
Phew!

Ok I'd like to thank Ken Webb, GLO, Electron Dancer, Debbie, Marc, Chad
Hessoun, luke, Christopher Church, Jirawat Uttayaya, John IV, Neil, David
and any others who I have missed accidentally, for their great advice on one
of my sore problems. Thanks a million guys (and gals), it'll help my
campaign no end.

Ta muchly, & I'll be seeing ya all. [virtually anyhow :-)]

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 22
From: Doctor Doom <jch8169@*******.TAMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 16:30:19 -0500
Herr Milliken's comments regarding Power Gamers are merely another
occurrence of an all-too-common lament of Game Master desire to reign in
the insanity and cause the Player Characters to respect the fact it is
intended to be ROLE-playing.

There are, juxtaposed to many preceding and quite meritorious examples,
two principal suggestions I would submit, both of which necessitate that
you place them in a situation wherein they shall bite off more than they
can proverbially chew.

Power Gamers can be extremely difficult to extricate from their ways, and
perhaps having the so-called "thinking" runs may not be sufficient to draw
their attention to the fact that their power-mongering ways are not
welcome.

That is to say, give the mission all the outward appearances of normality:
a simple smash and grab. However, as is so often true in life and in
ShadowRun, appearances can be quite deceiving. THIS 'run is a trap for
anyone who draws his ordinance without consideration. Give them the
opportunity to perform the mission "their way," and once the battle is
joined, give them sufficient rope to hang themselves, such that it is
apparent that the genesis of their downfall lies with their own gung ho
tendencies.

At this juncture, you have two options:

1. Killing one or two of them.

Typically, Game Masters do experience a degree of reluctance when it comes
to the termination of player persona, and I do not necessarily /advocate/
such a course of action.

That having been said, it must be admitted that there are circumstances
which require no less than the death of a Character to truly acquire the
attention of the Players. Also, to my mind, a case of rampant stupidity
is sufficient justification of the liquidation of characters.

You may not, however, deem their actions not worthy of such a fate.

2. Contrariwise, at the point of death perhaps you relent.

They escape by the very skin of their teeth. Doc Wagon arrives (although
this requires that any magicians present are so injured that they cannot
affect healing of their compatriots). They are treated to an extended stay
in hospital healing and repairing cybernetic equipment.

The Johnson dispatches a terse message to the effect that their services
shall nay longer be required. Their Fixer contacts them at hospital,
exhibiting considerable dismay, displeasure, and disappointment at their
ballistic methods: He set up this mission, and he shall be held at least
partially responsible for their behavior. He delivers to them an
ultimatum: Either act more like professional SHADOWrunners or leave . . .
his/her tirade shall probably also be coupled with various (un)veiled
threats to the effect that should they e'er cause him such a loss of face
again, he/she shall bring about their demise of his own accord.

Further, the above scenario does not e'en take into account the possible
effects of the recently-assaulted corporation's efforts to find the
trigger-happy runners . . .


Colonel Count von Hohenzollern und von Doom, DMSc, DSc, PhD.

Doom Technologies & Weapon Systems -- Dark Thought Publications
>>> Working on solutions best left in the dark.
<<<
[ Doctor Doom : jch8169@*******.tamu.edu ]
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
"Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "If if was so, it might be; if
it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic."
Message no. 23
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 22:04:19 -0600
[ in reply to DM's thank you ]

No problem. That's why we're here. To talk about SR & how to play it &
run it. The way I like to do things is discourage ROLL-playing and
encourage ROLE-playing. (Thanks to whoever coined the term roll-playing.)

P.S. What does "ta muchly" mean? Just curious.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 24
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 20:15:48 +1000
John IV writes:

> No problem. That's why we're here. To talk about SR & how to play it &
> run it. The way I like to do things is discourage ROLL-playing and
> encourage ROLE-playing. (Thanks to whoever coined the term roll-playing.)

Actually I think the term has been around for a while, we didn't coin it.

> P.S. What does "ta muchly" mean? Just curious.

"Thankyou very much", you know, ta is what toddlers say for thanks, and
muchly is one of those great non-english (non-anything really) words which
people can easily work out what it means. :-)

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 25
From: Micah Levy <M.Levy@**.UCL.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 15:30:50 +0100
ta is also an English slang way of saying thanks
Message no. 26
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 10:49:50 -0700
My players are trained to not bring heavy ordinance unless they
REALLY need it. Here's how:

1) Heavy munitions fired in close spaces tend to produce
blast effects. A player brought along a four-barrel AVM, and capped off
all four against a group of Dzoo-No-Qua (can't say as how I blamed him,
though) Since this was in sewer tunnels, by the time the blast effects
had been resolved everyone was a thin red paste with the exception of the
Rigger (who was in a vehicle with armor) and her passenger. I'd say five
player characters bought it on that one.

2) Another character sets up nice with his sniper rifle.
Now, the other players are loafing around, talking plans in there
vehicle, so a suspicious cop comes up and asks them their business. One
thing leads to another, and with the astral backup fingerprinting
everything the player had to leave behind his nice, shiny, customized
Barrett. It wasn't the money so much as the time required getting it ....

3) Vehicular car scene -- shadowrunners in Westwind and
motorcycle, chased by bad guys in car. Dwarf samurai opens sunroof,
hefts grenade, takes aim. Gets shot by bad guy. Falls back into
(mostly) enclosed vehicle, blows up real good. Resulting crash finishes
PCs lucky enough to survive. Motorcycle wipes out and crashes into cars
remains, for 100% player mortality. Ensuing mess is strafed by bad guys
on drive-by, just to make sure.

And so on. With the proliferation of telekinesis and fire
spells, none of my players bring along heavy firepower unless they have
to have it.
There's also role-playing considerations, but I find the above
tends to drive home the point faster.

+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|Adam Getchell|acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu | ez000270@*******.ucdavis.edu |
| acgetchell |"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent"|
+-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 27
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 23:52:33 -0600
On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Doctor Doom wrote:

[ delete verbose rambling ]
> Further, the above scenario does not e'en take into account the possible
> effects of the recently-assaulted corporation's efforts to find the
> trigger-happy runners . . .

Contrary to what Thesaurus Boy says, you have a great deal more than one
option. One of the easiest of which is to just not give out as much
Karma when the players do not role-play well. You could also have a
random decker wipe out their funds, have them come down with VITAS, etc.,
etc.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 28
From: Doctor Doom <jch8169@*******.TAMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 01:59:41 -0500
Von Herrn Moeller:

>Contrary to what Thesaurus Boy says, you have a great deal more than one
>option. One of the easiest of which is to just not give out as much
>Karma when the players do not role-play well. You could also have a
>random decker wipe out their funds, have them come down with VITAS, etc.,
>etc.

You woefully mis-characterize my recommendation, Herr Moeller: You
neglected to mention that previous to my launching into an exposition upon
my particular viewpoint, I included the following disclaimer:

"There are, juxtaposed to many preceding and quite meritorious examples,
two principal suggestions I would submit, both of which necessitate that
you place them in a situation wherein they shall bite off more than they
can proverbially chew."

I merely wished to amend the forerunning advice with my own perspective;
neither did I suggest nor imply that mine was the sole solution.

And as to the churlish appellation which you applied to me, I offer but one
admonition/warning:

"Be polite. Write diplomatically. Even in a declaration of war one observes
the rules of politeness."
-- Chancellor Otto von Bismarck-Schoenhausen


Colonel Count von Hohenzollern und von Doom, DMSc, DSc, PhD.

Doom Technologies & Weapon Systems -- Dark Thought Publications
>>> Working on solutions best left in the dark.
<<<
[ Doctor Doom : jch8169@*******.tamu.edu ]
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Infidel defilers...they shall all drown in lakes of blood.
Now they shall know why they are afraid of the dark.
Now they shall learn why the fear the coming of the night.
-- Doom
Message no. 29
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 23:59:16 -0600
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, Doctor Doom wrote:

> "There are, juxtaposed to many preceding and quite meritorious examples,
> two principal suggestions I would submit, both of which necessitate that
> you place them in a situation wherein they shall bite off more than they
> can proverbially chew."
>
> I merely wished to amend the forerunning advice with my own perspective;
> neither did I suggest nor imply that mine was the sole solution.

Well, quit dancing around with words. Get the point across.

> And as to the churlish appellation which you applied to me, I offer but one
> admonition/warning:
>
> "Be polite. Write diplomatically. Even in a declaration of war one observes
> the rules of politeness."
> -- Chancellor Otto von Bismarck-Schoenhausen

I apologize. But even former Kaisern realize that conciseness is a merit.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Pacifists ie. Big Guns sucks, 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!