[GiraffeShaman]

So we see how it should be done,

Who can find a way to totally frag this scenario beyond the conventional?

Well, there is the obvious. "We don't negotiate with terrorists!" I've seen this a surprising amount of times, even sometimes when I've had a gun on a player character of the team.

[Lysanderz]

Interesting. Give up the payday and walk away with whatever they can loot from dead bodies? I don't imagine it would play well and I suspect certain members of the group would stop such things....

[GiraffeShaman]

Heheh, well you may not have a group who's would do this, but players can surprise you. It can depend on the character too, not just player. I wouldn't do this with the  majority of my characters, but I could see it happening.

I'm not fully sure what prompts players to do these things. I think partly it can be frustration at lack of action. There's also a certain bravado about many gamers, wanting to prove they have the biggest Johnson. It can also be character related. Maybe your character literally does not negotiate with terrorists.

Another scenario I just thought of. They could start kidnapping the kidnappers and use them as negotiation tools. Karma is a bitch.

Both Highland and Burn Notice have good hostage episodes I recall, but sadly don't recall exact episode names. Oh, Dark Angel had a good one too, with the crippled hacker stuck inside.

[Lysanderz]

Yeah, following character personalities can be a bitch. My group that I play with (Not GM with) is having a serious debate IC about whether or not they should allow Raizor to continue to run with them. Half of them think he's psychopathic (Thanks to him leaving behind his Signature, a Glasgow grin on anyone that he kills with his knives) while the other half find him an effective tank/street sam. I love forcing IC strife over a conflict of interests. Like this run, when they discover who the hostages are.

[Michael Chandra]

Wouldn't Radar and a sniper rifle do miracles here?

[Lysanderz]

Radar doesn't identify hostages from shooters. So you'd literally be firing blind at little dots and hoping you A) Killed them in 1 shot, B) They weren't hostages and C) Your rifle doesn't drill through the baddies into the innocents.

[Michael Chandra]

I'm not talking the cheap stuff, I'm talking the properly-rated Radar implant which works in detail and even has a chance at detecting cyberimplants. No way it can't see the difference between armed and unarmed individuals. And it's far from firing blind.

And you don't need 1 shot, you just need 2.

[Lysanderz]

You mean Ultrasound Radar? That requires a sensor in the room last I checked. I don't know what kind of radar can do what you say AT RANGE. And even then, you're still dealing with at least a -4 to modified blind fire as you shoot through a Window/Blinds/AR advertisements.

[Ghoulfodder]

You mean Ultrasound Radar? That requires a sensor in the room last I checked. I don't know what kind of radar can do what you say AT RANGE. And even then, you're still dealing with at least a -4 to modified blind fire as you shoot through a Window/Blinds/AR advertisements.

Ultrawideband radar works through 5 x rating(?) barrier rating of 'stuff' and you can use it as a cyber scanner which can locate weapons and cyber. Unless I've misread things.

I'd be inclined to say that it can't do both at the same time though. That seems rather excessive.

It'd certainly be useful, if you can get close enough to the building to use it effectively. Pin point bodies at least, you may be able to get an idea of who's hostage and who's terrorist from context. For example a large group who seem to be sitting still might be hostages, whilst a couple sitting to one side and several others patrolling would likely be terrorists.

Stealthed microdrones could be a boon as well. Intel = win.