[RHat]

I expect that's because you're assuming, inaccurately, that the whole thing is a GM power-trip.  Read a bit farther in.

Well, maybe my reading could have been colored by that that GM wanted character generation done completely backwards. The stuff like stats, skills and gear on a character should be done and finalized before any background or anything is done. Background and "fluffy" stuff can wait until everything is done, and can develop (and be revealed) as play progresses.

There's no one right way to do that.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Well, maybe my reading could have been colored by that that GM wanted character generation done completely backwards. The stuff like stats, skills and gear on a character should be done and finalized before any background or anything is done. Background and "fluffy" stuff can wait until everything is done, and can develop (and be revealed) as play progresses.

About 3/4 of the time, I develop the personality and background before I get to the crunchy bits.  You, on the other hand, appear to work the way one of my old friends did - couldn't develop background or personality to save his life, developed it all during game play, including if a bad guy came after him, he'd off-the-cuff give a reason why that meshed perfectly with everything else in his developing background.

That said - we'll just stuff a big 'IMO' into your statement and leave it at that.

In regards to the original concept, however, I would not take away any of their stuff.  Deactivate the obvious ware, sure.  Magemasks and technomancer versions, sure.  But once they bust out, you jump a week, two weeks - and what they bought in character generation, what ELSE they 'had to spend', is what they could scrounge up.  Or, if they're like me and others like me, it's the result of having several packages (cycle, pistols, ammo, armored clothing, basic commlink, some spare nuyen) stashed here and there throughout the sprawl.  Or perhaps in the matter of the Face, simply switching IDs and going to the place(s) associated with that ID.  For the high-explosives troll, maybe certain people owe him big, and they're paying him back by bringing his gear back up to snuff.  Or the mage had tucked away in an old doss a magical trinket that he hasn't used for years.

Whatever it may be, to take away anything but a key item - one that a) the character would move heaven and earth to get back, and b) that the player agrees would be interesting and make for a good run to do a) in regards to - is sketchy.  To do it to 'all their goods' is going to screw over either your mundanes (as they run into limits on what they can buy), or the techno/mystics (as the mundanes spend whole handfuls of BP on skills, since you've essentially stated that gear is all gonna have to be gotten in-game).  So ... walk carefully.

[RHat]

I do like to leave some undefined space to work with in character backgrounds - I get new ideas for what should be in there constantly.

[UmaroVI]

Yeah, having gear be what you get after you get out works well too.

[raggedhalo]

It means if you tell them "you can't buy anything but 'ware", they're going to spend more points on skills than they normally would. That would be meta-gaming, because they had a life before jail and they didn't in that life know they were getting thrown in jail, so they would have spent normally in that life. Meta means exactly what I think it means, exactly as I used it.

You and I clearly have different views on what meta-gaming is, which is absolutely fine.  You also seem to think that it's always bad, whereas I believe that it can have beneficial effects; sure, NPCs knowing everything the GM knows is clearly awful, but players making decisions about their character's actions based on what they would find more fun rather than what's most sensible IC can lead to a better game.

As UmaroVI said, we don't make people pay for stuff they had before the campaign started.  As they no longer have access to any of their old stuff (presumably the bulk of it is in some evidence locker somewhere anyway), why should they be charged BP for it?

As for A4BG's comments that there's nothing remotely enjoyable about this kind of game, well, my players disagree firmly.  It's as though there is no One True Way to have fun...

[emsquared]

You and I clearly have different views on what meta-gaming is, which is absolutely fine.

The thing about words is that most of them have definitions. Meta-gaming is one of those: using OOC knowledge to influence what you do IC.

You also seem to think that it's always bad, whereas I believe that it can have beneficial effects; sure, NPCs knowing everything the GM knows is clearly awful, but players making decisions about their character's actions based on what they would find more fun rather than what's most sensible IC can lead to a better game.

As UmaroVI said, we don't make people pay for stuff they had before the campaign started.  As they no longer have access to any of their old stuff (presumably the bulk of it is in some evidence locker somewhere anyway), why should they be charged BP for it?

So from two posts in a singular context, you know the entirety of my thoughts on meta-gaming? Right, good luck with future mind-reading efforts.

Did you even read what I said; have 'em buy gear as normal, confiscate what is appropriate (fake licenses could prevent a lot of it, just depends on how the PCs handle their stuff), getting it back (and whatever other neat things may be in evidence collection) is a run. Sounded like a fun idea to me, but it was just that, an idea. The OP asked for input, I gave him my insight onto how I would handle it, which boils down to 'don't make it into a free skill point grab', especially if you're just gonna give them free gear after the break-out. But I never said make 'em buy stuff and then take it away forever.

Also, you take out the buying of anything but 'ware, you're giving a HUUUUUGE boon to Awakened over Augmented Mundane. Basically, you do what he originally proposed and you're unbalancing chargen, period.

[Ernie55]

I think this idea has a lot of promise. And a mysterious third party busting them out in transit somewhere could lead to some nice runs to pay that party back?

As a compromise, to ensure balance between all parties, how about tell your players that they start their character building with 20-35 BP already 'spent' on gear they don't have access to? And then give them a way to get back it? I am amused by the raid on the evidence-storage facility idea.

That way it allows roughly normal characters, they can still buy some decent 'ware if they want, and means you don't end up with wierd PCs that have an extra 50 or so BPs in skills than normal

[raggedhalo]

The thing about words is that most of them have definitions. Meta-gaming is one of those: using OOC knowledge to influence what you do IC.

Indeed, we agree on the definition.  However I don't think that the GM providing certain rules for character creation (e.g. no gear except 'ware) necessarily even fulfills that definition.

So from two posts in a singular context, you know the entirety of my thoughts on meta-gaming? Right, good luck with future mind-reading efforts.

Well, I said "seem," so I'm certainly not claiming any sure and definite knowledge of your position.  I'm obliged to call it as I see it, though.

Did you even read what I said; have 'em buy gear as normal, confiscate what is appropriate (fake licenses could prevent a lot of it, just depends on how the PCs handle their stuff), getting it back (and whatever other neat things may be in evidence collection) is a run. Sounded like a fun idea to me, but it was just that, an idea.

It's a pretty good idea - the downside to it is that they potentially get no real reward for an awesome run on the evidence facility; after all, you're working them hard to get stuff which they've paid points for.  I'd be much more inclined to let them bust into the evidence store and take whatever the GM puts there as a decent reward for hard work.

Also, you take out the buying of anything but 'ware, you're giving a HUUUUUGE boon to Awakened over Augmented Mundane. Basically, you do what he originally proposed and you're unbalancing chargen, period.

My observation when I started a campaign this way was that the augmented characters spent much more on 'ware than they otherwise might have, narrowing the power balance quite considerably.  I made sure to give those PCs a chance to pick up decent gear pretty quickly and it worked out just fine.

Anyway, I'm not particularly interested in us arguing with each other for no good reason.  I'm happy to agree to disagree if you are.

[Black]

Personally, as long as the players are on board, this seems like a fine game concept.

I would like to give the players a chance to plan there own prison break, or at least have a key part in the escape... and any good escape has something unplanned occur

With gear, you have two options.  Either let them buy stuff and then let them get their stuff after the break, or don't, and then have the NPC 'rescuer' provide a pool of equipment choices.  With the second option, either set aside some BP to spend on the gear, or give it to the players 'free' of BP charge but with the usual 'you now owe us' thing that NPCs sometimes do and let the players either pay of the debt (with suitable conflict of morality challenges) or have them break free off the NPC rescuer and turn the tables on him.

Eitherway, a great way to start a targeted campaign/storyline.

Good luck!