Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:11:17 -0400 (EDT)
At 08:27 AM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:

>Bad Karma is not a statistic, it is a gm perception of a character. Example:
>
>Kato is a shark shaman, a grade 4 initiate. To date he has killed 75 people
>because "They pissed me off". The gm decides that Kato has accumulated a lot
>of bad karma (no numerical measure is needed) and, thru a NPC, communicates
>the idea that maybe he should stop. Kato vehemently refuses to consider it.
>The next time Kato crosses the path with a city spirit, the spirit ignores
>the rest of the party and concentrates on Kato. This is an example of how it
>is roleplayed rather than calculated. Kato then quests to "right his wrongs"
>by devoting himself to protecting the stupid and eventually the "black
>splotches" on his aura dwindle.

In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.

I'm still awaiting for a more definate description than "Oh, I don't like
what that PC did, so he's accumulated a lot of 'bad karma'". At least Terry
had a better idea than you.

BTW, a minor point, but I think Kato's behavior fits Shark pretty well.
Shark is described as a ruthless hunter, has bonuses with Combat spells, and
has a tendency to go into a feeding frenzy at the drop of a hat.

OTOH, if Diamondback the Snake shaman gets out of line and initiates combat
with everyone he meets and refuses to heal people, he'll soon discover he no
longer has his totem bonuses. And all without invoking "bad karma', too!

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 2
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 11:57:01 -0600 (MDT)
Ubiquitous wrote:
|
|At 08:27 AM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:
|
|>Bad Karma is not a statistic, it is a gm perception of a character. Example:
|>
|>Kato is a shark shaman, a grade 4 initiate. To date he has killed 75 people
|>because "They pissed me off". The gm decides that Kato has accumulated a
lot
|>of bad karma (no numerical measure is needed) and, thru a NPC, communicates
|>the idea that maybe he should stop. Kato vehemently refuses to consider it.
|>The next time Kato crosses the path with a city spirit, the spirit ignores
|>the rest of the party and concentrates on Kato. This is an example of how it
|>is roleplayed rather than calculated. Kato then quests to "right his
wrongs"
|>by devoting himself to protecting the stupid and eventually the "black
|>splotches" on his aura dwindle.
|
|In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.

<joins the fray> So *that's* what has been bugging me
about this. I agree with Ubiquitous in that using Bad
Karma in this manner is a way of controlling the PCs
actions. Do good and you'll be rewarded, do bad and you'll
be punished. If you and the group you play with like this
than run with it. But I don't see it as something that the
game needs. And as you've noticed by now every GM has a
different philosophy of good and bad and how the universe
reacts a character's actions. And when it comes to
morality you can get some pretty strong reactions.

On an end note (if you're still reading this :), it looks
like you've got the basics figured out well. I would say
just wing it when it comes to reactions to a blackened
aura. Anything that you view as inherintly good (nature
spirits maybe?) would view such a character with distaste
and maybe even hostility. On the other hand beings that
are inherintly bad might offer their "friendship" to the
character. Use it as a roleplaying mechanic instead of
altering TNs. But keep an eye on your player's reactions.
If they like it have fun, but if they don't be prepared to
toss it in the dumpster.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like
underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~~~~
Message no. 3
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:10:03 -0400 (EDT)
> Ubiquitous wrote:
> |
> |At 08:27 AM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:
> |
> |>Bad Karma is not a statistic, it is a gm perception of a character. Example:
> |>
> |>Kato is a shark shaman, a grade 4 initiate. To date he has killed 75 people
> |>because "They pissed me off". The gm decides that Kato has accumulated
a lot
> |>of bad karma (no numerical measure is needed) and, thru a NPC, communicates
> |>the idea that maybe he should stop. Kato vehemently refuses to consider it.
> |>The next time Kato crosses the path with a city spirit, the spirit ignores
> |>the rest of the party and concentrates on Kato. This is an example of how it
> |>is roleplayed rather than calculated. Kato then quests to "right his
wrongs"
> |>by devoting himself to protecting the stupid and eventually the "black
> |>splotches" on his aura dwindle.
> |
> |In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.

In other words, it's turned him from a Shark shaman into a Dog
shaman. Is that what the player had in mind I wonder?

Marc
Message no. 4
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 20:09:23 -0600 (CST)
<joins the fray> So *that's* what has been bugging me
>about this. I agree with Ubiquitous in that using Bad
>Karma in this manner is a way of controlling the PCs
>actions. Do good and you'll be rewarded, do bad and you'll
>be punished. If you and the group you play with like this
>than run with it. But I don't see it as something that the
>game needs. And as you've noticed by now every GM has a
>different philosophy of good and bad and how the universe
>reacts a character's actions. And when it comes to
>morality you can get some pretty strong reactions.

Not anything more then the threat if Lone Star.

>On an end note (if you're still reading this :), it looks
>like you've got the basics figured out well. I would say
>just wing it when it comes to reactions to a blackened
>aura. Anything that you view as inherintly good (nature
>spirits maybe?) would view such a character with distaste
>and maybe even hostility. On the other hand beings that
>are inherintly bad might offer their "friendship" to the
>character. Use it as a roleplaying mechanic instead of
>altering TNs. But keep an eye on your player's reactions.
>If they like it have fun, but if they don't be prepared to
>toss it in the dumpster.

That is the idea. Altering TN's was just a thought, but we have been playing
with is as you have just described.


Ahz
Message no. 5
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 20:09:20 -0600 (CST)
>In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.

No. No. No. It is an added "flavour" to the game.

>I'm still awaiting for a more definate description than "Oh, I don't like
>what that PC did, so he's accumulated a lot of 'bad karma'". At least Terry
>had a better idea than you.
Fuck the mathematicians and statisticians. I don't need a new stat to deal
with, just a new dimension to the game.
>
>BTW, a minor point, but I think Kato's behavior fits Shark pretty well.
>Shark is described as a ruthless hunter, has bonuses with Combat spells, and
>has a tendency to go into a feeding frenzy at the drop of a hat.

When wounded or wounding, sure. Kato killed them because he felt like it.
BTW, Kato was MY character. I was bored, and had learned a new spell.
>
>OTOH, if Diamondback the Snake shaman gets out of line and initiates combat
>with everyone he meets and refuses to heal people, he'll soon discover he no
>longer has his totem bonuses. And all without invoking "bad karma', too!

I say again for possible penetration!!!! BAD KARMA NIS NOT A
PUNISHMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is a new
factor to concider. Kato liked lots of Bad Karma. He used it to his advantage.


Ahz
Message no. 6
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 20:09:25 -0600 (CST)
> In other words, it's turned him from a Shark shaman into a Dog
>shaman. Is that what the player had in mind I wonder?
>
>From SRII rulebook (p.122)
"A Shark shaman may go berserk when wounded in combat or if he kills an
opponent....Even if he is not berserk, Shark believes that the only good
enemy is a dead enemy. If challenged, he does not waste time with threats of
bragging, but strikes, usually to kill."

Kato killed a kid because he "felt like it". I know this because Kato was/is
my character. He wasn't challenged, threatened, or wounded. He saw the kid
pretending to be a vampire and killed him out of boredom. Not out of hunting
or a reaction to violence. THAT is why it was bad karma.

Ahz
Message no. 7
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 22:07:01 -0400 (EDT)
At 08:09 PM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:
>Marc wrote:

>> In other words, it's turned him from a Shark shaman into a Dog
>>shaman. Is that what the player had in mind I wonder?
>
>From SRII rulebook (p.122)
>"A Shark shaman may go berserk when wounded in combat or if he kills an
>opponent....Even if he is not berserk, Shark believes that the only good
>enemy is a dead enemy. If challenged, he does not waste time with threats of
>bragging, but strikes, usually to kill."

Kato, the Shark shaman so mean he killed a guy, just for looking at him funny.

>Kato killed a kid because he "felt like it". I know this because Kato was/is
>my character. He wasn't challenged, threatened, or wounded. He saw the kid
>pretending to be a vampire and killed him out of boredom. Not out of hunting
>or a reaction to violence. THAT is why it was bad karma.

No, that's just plain poor role-playing! It'd be even worse if you did it
deliberately for non-existent "bad karma" points.

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 8
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 01:11:03 -0600 (CST)
>Kato, the Shark shaman so mean he killed a guy, just for looking at him funny.
>
When he started he was a borderline mass murderer/ psychopath.

>No, that's just plain poor role-playing! It'd be even worse if you did it
>deliberately for non-existent "bad karma" points.
>
His problem stemmed from being messed up by some corp meat mongers. They
were trying to reprogram him for an astral assasination team. They removed
his arm to give him a power focus and implanted weaponry that he could use
in astral combat. His favorite trick was to transform a humanoid into a
jellyfish, cook it, then eat it. He did it to a vampire in mist form. :)

Yummy.
Message no. 9
From: "Ferri Pagano" <Ferri_Pagano_at_STRM__Amsterdam1@******.com>
Subject: Re[2]: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 96 10:01:48 EST
-----------------------------------reply-------------------------------

>Kato, the Shark shaman so mean he killed a guy, just for looking at him funny.
>
When he started he was a borderline mass murderer/ psychopath.

>No, that's just plain poor role-playing! It'd be even worse if you did it
>deliberately for non-existent "bad karma" points.
>
His problem stemmed from being messed up by some corp meat mongers. They
were trying to reprogram him for an astral assasination team. They removed
his arm to give him a power focus and implanted weaponry that he could use
in astral combat. His favorite trick was to transform a humanoid into a
jellyfish, cook it, then eat it. He did it to a vampire in mist form. :)

Yummy.
===---------------------------------------------------------
I truly hope that spell was quickened and not only sustained, and that noone
ever uses a dispel on it/you. It'd cause a REAL mess!!!
[exploding stomach ache anyone: :) ]
Ferri
Message no. 10
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:58:33 -0400 (EDT)
At 08:09 PM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:

>>I'm still awaiting for a more definite description than "Oh, I don't like
>>what that PC did, so he's accumulated a lot of 'bad karma'". At least Terry
>>had a better idea than you.
>
>Fuck the mathematicians and statisticians. I don't need a new stat to deal
>with, just a new dimension to the game.

Well, if that's the case, why do you keep giving players points for being
naughty and vague "thresholds" with it? If you're counting points, then it
IS a stat, otherwise, you're sounding arbitrary.

>>BTW, a minor point, but I think Kato's behavior fits Shark pretty well.
>>Shark is described as a ruthless hunter, has bonuses with Combat spells, and
>>has a tendency to go into a feeding frenzy at the drop of a hat.
>
>When wounded or wounding, sure. Kato killed them because he felt like it.
>BTW, Kato was MY character. I was bored, and had learned a new spell.

Once again. Why, knowing you'd get "bad karma" for that?

>>OTOH, if Diamondback the Snake shaman gets out of line and initiates combat
>>with everyone he meets and refuses to heal people, he'll soon discover he no
>>longer has his totem bonuses. And all without invoking "bad karma', too!
>
>I say again for possible penetration!!!! BAD KARMA IS NOT A
>PUNISHMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is a new
>factor to consider.

No, in your description of this "non-stat", you claimed that terrible,
terrible things would happen to those who accrued enough points, such as a
"portable background count", severe penalties to social interactions, and
spirits attacking him in preference to those his summoner orders it to.

>Kato liked lots of Bad Karma. He used it to his advantage.

Oh, really? You said it was a Bad Thing [TM], and now it's not?

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 11
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 15:17:36 -0600 (CST)
>>Well, if that's the case, why do you keep giving players points for being
>naughty and vague "thresholds" with it? If you're counting points, then it
>IS a stat, otherwise, you're sounding arbitrary.
>
There isn't a numerical value. How many times do I have to say that? It is a
roleplaying device, not a ROLLplaying device.

>Once again. Why, knowing you'd get "bad karma" for that?
>
My Character didn't know about bad karma at the time.

>No, in your description of this "non-stat", you claimed that terrible,
>terrible things would happen to those who accrued enough points, such as a
>"portable background count", severe penalties to social interactions, and
>spirits attacking him in preference to those his summoner orders it to.

Kato didn't care. He could kick hoop in astral combat and had a level 5
power focus (this was before Awakenings and foci addiction)

>>Kato liked lots of Bad Karma. He used it to his advantage.
>
>Oh, really? You said it was a Bad Thing [TM], and now it's not?
>

Please read the other related posts. I have explained it before. If you
don't like it, offer a better system in it's stead. I am tired of reading
your messages that only contribute to the clutter. If you can't offer a
solution better than "it sucks, do away with it", than stay off of the
thread so that I can read solutions, rather than bitchy complaints.

Ahzmandius
Message no. 12
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 20:17:25 -0400 (EDT)
At 01:11 AM 8/8/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:

>>Kato, the Shark shaman so mean he killed a guy, just for looking at him funny.
>
>When he started he was a borderline mass murderer/ psychopath.

Which proves my point. Your character was acting "evil" and got zonked with
"bad karma" for his effort. So much for a role-playing enhancement. I've never
needed a mechanism for evil psycho characters in my many years of playing, and
I still don't see any use for one now.

>>No, that's just plain poor role-playing! It'd be even worse if you did it
>>deliberately for non-existent "bad karma" points.
>
>His problem stemmed from being messed up by some corp meat mongers. They
>were trying to reprogram him for an astral assassination team. They removed
>his arm to give him a power focus and implanted weaponry that he could use
>in astral combat. His favorite trick was to transform a humanoid into a
>jellyfish, cook it, then eat it. He did it to a vampire in mist form. :)
>
>Yummy.

Thanks for clearing up where you're coming from. Say "Hi" to Dorothy and
those little guys for me, Ahz.

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 13
From: "Terry L. Amburgey" <xanth@********.uky.edu>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:17:03 -0400 (EDT)
At 08:09 PM 8/7/96 -0600, you wrote:
>>In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.
>
>No. No. No. It is an added "flavour" to the game.
>
>>I'm still awaiting for a more definate description than "Oh, I don't like
>>what that PC did, so he's accumulated a lot of 'bad karma'". At least Terry
>>had a better idea than you.
>Fuck the mathematicians and statisticians. I don't need a new stat to deal
>with, just a new dimension to the game.

Note to self: next time Ahz asks for comments remember to blow him off. He
doesn't want commentary just an excuse to expound. Terry

Terry L. Amburgey
Associate Professor of Management
College of Business and Economics
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40506-0034
Phone: 606-257-7726
Fax: 606-257-3577
Message no. 14
From: Helge_DiernÊs <hedi93ac@*******.ECON.CBS.DK>
Subject: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 10:32:39 +0200
>From:
>rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU[SMTP:rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU]
>Sent: 8. august 1996 23:17
>
>>Once again. Why, knowing you'd get "bad karma" for that?
>>
>>Oh, really? You said it was a Bad Thing [TM], and now it's not?
>>
>
>Please read the other related posts. I have explained it before. If you
>don't like it, offer a better system in it's stead. I am tired of
>reading
>your messages that only contribute to the clutter. If you can't offer a
>solution better than "it sucks, do away with it", than stay off of the
>thread so that I can read solutions, rather than bitchy complaints.
>
>Oh boy, Matti would love this thread - a sacred war, fought with holy
>flames.
>Seriously, you're a tad aggressive, aren't you? If the replies aren't
>to your liking, you should give !"#%"/&! about them and turn your
>energies elsewhere, as the possible positive feedback rather seem to be
>doing just that :Q
>
>I've been watching this war for some time, though finding the concept
>of bad karma too outlandish to actually trying it out. I'm probably
>just being too lazy :)
>What rather shines in my eyes are the argumental barriers you've
>encountered, and your rather ... eruptive counterattacks.
>
>From my point of view, the chemistry here doesn't work with this
>issue.. leave it off, you and your opponents obviously are either not
>speaking the same language, are too stubborn to aggree on anything but
>the fronts own terms, or you've developed a concept that will work
>great wonders in five years, but for now it is just too...... well, how
>big a percentage of history's genius were recognized in their own time?
>
>--
>Regards,
>
>Silhouette
>
Message no. 15
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:56:49 -0400 (EDT)
At 03:17 PM 8/8/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:

>>Well, if that's the case, why do you keep giving players points for being
>>naughty and vague "thresholds" with it? If you're counting points, then
it
>>IS a stat, otherwise, you're sounding arbitrary.
>
>There isn't a numerical value. How many times do I have to say that? It is a
>role playing device, not a ROLLplaying device.

You specifically said in an earlier message that you assign points and then
abjudicate accordingly, but refuse to explain yourself further.

>>Once again. Why, knowing you'd get "bad karma" for that?
>
>My Character didn't know about bad karma at the time.

Your GM didn't tell you about his house rules? *boggle*

>>No, in your description of this "non-stat", you claimed that terrible,
>>terrible things would happen to those who accrued enough points, such as a
>>"portable background count", severe penalties to social interactions,
and
>>spirits attacking him in preference to those his summoner orders it to.
>
>Kato didn't care. He could kick hoop in astral combat and had a level 5
>power focus (this was before Awakenings and foci addiction)

A power focus 5 cyberarm?

>>>Kato liked lots of Bad Karma. He used it to his advantage.
>>
>>Oh, really? You said it was a Bad Thing [TM], and now it's not?
>
>Please read the other related posts. I have explained it before. If you
>don't like it, offer a better system in it's stead. I am tired of reading
>your messages that only contribute to the clutter. If you can't offer a
>solution better than "it sucks, do away with it", than stay off of the
>thread so that I can read solutions, rather than bitchy complaints.

I already offered my way of dealing with it, but you keep dodging the issue
whenever I ask legitimate questions on it. How you determine the
relationship between "bad karma" and "background count" without being
arbitrary, for instance? Which actions count as "bad karma", without
subjective judgement?
The only "clutter" I see is your attempts to dodge the issue and inability
to define it. At least Terry and someone else had some good ideas to add.

--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 16
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 11:28:22 -0600 (CST)
Enough. This thread is dead.
Message no. 17
From: rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Ahzmandius)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 11:28:20 -0600 (CST)
>>Oh boy, Matti would love this thread - a sacred war, fought with holy
>>flames.
>>Seriously, you're a tad aggressive, aren't you? If the replies aren't
>>to your liking, you should give !"#%"/&! about them and turn your
>>energies elsewhere, as the possible positive feedback rather seem to be
>>doing just that :Q
>>
>>I've been watching this war for some time, though finding the concept
>>of bad karma too outlandish to actually trying it out. I'm probably
>>just being too lazy :)
>>What rather shines in my eyes are the argumental barriers you've
>>encountered, and your rather ... eruptive counterattacks.
>>
>>From my point of view, the chemistry here doesn't work with this
>>issue.. leave it off, you and your opponents obviously are either not
>>speaking the same language, are too stubborn to aggree on anything but
>>the fronts own terms, or you've developed a concept that will work
>>great wonders in five years, but for now it is just too...... well, how
>>big a percentage of history's genius were recognized in their own time?
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>>
>>Silhouette
>>
I agree, thanks for the advice. I was trying, but hey, sometimes I get
misunderstood.

Ahz
Message no. 18
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 02:16:28 -0600
David wrote:

>Ubiquitous wrote:
>|
>|At 08:27 AM 8/7/96 -0600, Ahz wrote:
>|
>|>Bad Karma is not a statistic, it is a gm perception of a character. Example:
>|>
>|>Kato is a shark shaman, a grade 4 initiate. To date he has killed 75 people
>|>because "They pissed me off". The gm decides that Kato has accumulated
a lot
>|>of bad karma (no numerical measure is needed) and, thru a NPC, communicates
>|>the idea that maybe he should stop. Kato vehemently refuses to consider it.
>|>The next time Kato crosses the path with a city spirit, the spirit ignores
>|>the rest of the party and concentrates on Kato. This is an example of how it
>|>is roleplayed rather than calculated. Kato then quests to "right his
wrongs"
>|>by devoting himself to protecting the stupid and eventually the "black
>|>splotches" on his aura dwindle.
>|
>|In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.
>
><joins the fray> So *that's* what has been bugging me
>about this. I agree with Ubiquitous in that using Bad
>Karma in this manner is a way of controlling the PCs
>actions. Do good and you'll be rewarded, do bad and you'll
>be punished. If you and the group you play with like this
>than run with it. But I don't see it as something that the
>game needs. And as you've noticed by now every GM has a
>different philosophy of good and bad and how the universe
>reacts a character's actions. And when it comes to
>morality you can get some pretty strong reactions.
>

Would everyone please quit claiming that as he GM they are not
controling the lives of their players. Who decides what jobs
they will be offered? Who decides how the cops (and corps) will
respond to the runners actions? Who shapes the events of the
world around them?

Stop squirming and fess up.

Piatro
Message no. 19
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 12:30:15 -0400 (EDT)
At 02:16 AM 8/10/96 -0600, Piatro wrote:
>David wrote:
>>Ubiquitous wrote:

>>|In other words, it's your excuse for controlling your PC's.
>>
>><joins the fray> So *that's* what has been bugging me
>>about this. I agree with Ubiquitous in that using Bad
>>Karma in this manner is a way of controlling the PCs
>>actions. Do good and you'll be rewarded, do bad and you'll
>>be punished.
>
>Would everyone please quit claiming that as he GM they are not
>controling the lives of their players. Who decides what jobs
>they will be offered? Who decides how the cops (and corps) will
>respond to the runners actions? Who shapes the events of the
>world around them?

It all depends on what you mean by "control".
Sure, the GM runs the game, but if he controls the PC's, he may as well
be playing with himself.


--
"I dyde shyte thre grete toordes." Fables of Aesop,
Caxton translation,
V15 1484
Message no. 20
From: bluewizard@*****.com (Steven A. Tinner)
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 19:46:18 -0500 (EST)
>>Would everyone please quit claiming that as he GM they are not
>>controling the lives of their players. Who decides what jobs
>>they will be offered? Who decides how the cops (and corps) will
>>respond to the runners actions? Who shapes the events of the
>>world around them?
>
>It all depends on what you mean by "control".
>Sure, the GM runs the game, but if he controls the PC's, he may as well
>be playing with himself.
>
>As a rule, I try to have very little control over the PC's lives. I
certainly shape the world they live in, but I need their input to do so.
My PC's have rich detailed lives that have litle to do with the way I run
the game.
I would never have planned for my main shaman to have become romantically
involved with the woman who now rules the Mantis hive in Bug City!!!
It's all one big compromise.
Message no. 21
From: Pete Sims <petesims@********.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:00:39 +0100
In article <01I80JPIYBGQ0000IA@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU>, Ahzmandius
<rhoded01@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU> writes
>>Kato, the Shark shaman so mean he killed a guy, just for looking at him funny.
>>
>When he started he was a borderline mass murderer/ psychopath.
>
>>No, that's just plain poor role-playing! It'd be even worse if you did it
>>deliberately for non-existent "bad karma" points.
>>
>His problem stemmed from being messed up by some corp meat mongers. They
>were trying to reprogram him for an astral assasination team. They removed
>his arm to give him a power focus and implanted weaponry that he could use
>in astral combat. His favorite trick was to transform a humanoid into a
>jellyfish, cook it, then eat it. He did it to a vampire in mist form. :)
>
>Yummy.
>
>

(my 2c) OK, if Kato was a borderline psycho as a result of corp
manipulation and poor essence, then why is he penalised with bad
karma??? He is acting in character, according to the results of
corporate manipulation of the characters psyche. If he killed someone
because he could, this surely is in line with the character's make up
and Kato is unable to analyse his actions to decide that it was wrong,
he is acting in a manner according to his present mental state. So....
I repeat my question, why is penalised with bad karma, when he is
acting, not of his own volition, but through mental instability???

In the event of some long term psychiatric treatment "repairing" his
condition, there is a possibility that he may regret his actions and
consider some form of reperation to "right his wrongs", but I don't see
any need for a bad karma rating on this character.

I admit I don't like the idea of bad karma, or good karma, for that
matter. I prefer to let the characters police themselves and remind
them of the laws when necessary through the game mechanics presently
available. I'm not saying the idea is crap or anything, but I don't
really see a need for it. There are methods already in place to cover
the concept. The GM already has a massive capability to govern and
judge player actions without adding an arbitrary rule modification, that
again is open to GM and player misuse.

No flames please, my fireproof clothing is at the cleaners.
--
Pete Sims

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [SR2] In defense of Bad Karma, 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!