[blinkdog]

Tonight, I had a new experience as a GM.

The Kilt (the team's fixer) called them up for a meet at a rundown warehouse.
They sat at the table with Mr. Johnson, who laid out the run:

- Clear River Prison is a privately run prison, a subsidiary of a subsidiary of ... all the way up to Ares.
- Mr. Johnson is an executive in that hierarchy and they have an extraction target currently in Clear River Prison.
- Bad News: The extraction target cannot be moved or removed early due to an already-executed agreement.
- Good News: The extraction target is due to be released in one week.
- Bad News: There is a rumor the extraction target has crossed somebody, and may be in some danger.

The Run:
Two runners to be placed as prison guards at the prison.
Three runners to be placed as additional prisoners in population.
Make sure the extraction target survives the week intact.
10,000 ¥ up-front
10,000 ¥ if/when the extraction target is released
5,000 ¥ bonus if any serious hazards are encountered

The prison is a medium security facility, male prisoners, mixed dwarf, elf, human, and ork population.
No trolls, as the prison is old and does not have cells spacious enough to accommodate them.
Despite its label as a medium security facility, the population is "the minimum security overflow wait list" (Mr. Johnson's words) rather than maximum security downgrades.

The runner response...
- The two runners to be placed as security guards agree to the run.
- The three runners to be placed as prisoners refuse and bow out of the run. (!!)  (!!)

I was really caught off-guard, almost in shock, really.
This team had pulled two jobs together before.
The last job was not a cake walk; one shaman had all his physical boxes filled.
To me, this mediumminimum security prison run was as close to a milk run as they came.
I even thought the team might use it to add a few more names to the old professional contact list.

The rigger was worried about cyberware damage from having his cyberware disabled. I said that wasn't an issue. The rigger still refused to go in as a prisoner.
The decker didn't think he'd be much use, although Mr. Johnson did reiterate the he was asking for "eyes and ears".
The shaman said he was too pretty for this job.

It never occurred to me that Shadowrunners might feel uncomfortable amongst "the criminal element" for a week.

So, the first half of the run proceeded with just the two runners as additional prison guards.
Three players at my table got to watch the other two play.

It still confuses me.
My sense of the SR universe is that most Shadowrunners would feel like spending a few days "in the joint" was just a part of life in the shadows.
Getting paid ~3,000¥/day to do it, and no troublesome Criminal SIN to boot, seems like it would be like Christmas in July.

Did I miss something taboo? Is this not a job for Shadowrunners?

[psycho835]

It's probably less "spending time amongst fellow criminals" and more "spending time being more-or-less helpless". Rigger, decker, shaman? These are NOT combat specialists who could make do without gear, except maybe shaman, and he would be kept away from the rest of the prison's population, in some really nasty place.

[ShadowcatX]

Ya... I wouldn't have accepted that job as the decker or the rigger either. People design characters they want to play, you took that away from them. That's no fun as a player.

However, I think that is a symptom of a larger issue. It sounds like this run was on the rails from the word go. If you had instead simply given the runners the mission parameters and let them devise their own method of dealing with it I think you would have had a much more engaged group of players and a much more successful game.

Also, you really should talk to your players about this. Ask them, out of game, why they refused, listen to their answers, and then never do it again.

All that aside, I think this was an awesome basis for a run and may have to steal it if I GM again.

[Sterling]

By having the Johnson tell them how to execute the run, rather than giving them the objective, you gave the impression of a railroad adventure with no options to improvise.  In my experience that is never a good thing with experienced RP'ers

Also, you really should talk to your players about this. Ask them, out of game, why they refused, listen to their answers, and then never do it again.

Speaking to the players is a great idea, but don't automatically assume you were in the wrong.  If the players can't give a rational, reasoned explanation then hit the characters with a loss of Street Cred and maybe even a point of Notoriety. Since the Fixer is going to be embarrassed by the character's actions have him reduce any payments the characters receive for a few runs.  That said, if the players do have a good reason then just wipe the session - it never happened.  Reset the clock and try again with a tweaked scenario.

The idea is for everyone to have fun, and that includes the GM.  If you've worked hard to create a run and the players decide to s*^% all over it for no good reason you're not having fun, are you?  The basic idea of babysitting a target until an extraction is feasible is a good one, so don't throw the whole thing away if it can be avoided.

[Poindexter]

I know I'd ask for a helluva lot more than 10,000 if I was to be inside a prison, ACTING as a prisoner. If things go wrong, I DO go to jail. I do not pass go, collect 200 dollars, nothin. I go DIRECTLY to jail. Did they ask for more money before bowing out?

[Tarislar]

I know I'd ask for a helluva lot more than 10,000 if I was to be inside a prison, ACTING as a prisoner. If things go wrong, I DO go to jail. I do not pass go, collect 200 dollars, nothin. I go DIRECTLY to jail. Did they ask for more money before bowing out?

THIS ^^

Its one thing to be on the run in a huge city where you can hide if a run goes bad.
Its completely another to volunteer to go into lock down.

The overall goal could have been accomplished by the Johnson w/o involving the runners.  Just bribe/call in favors to keep the target safe for a week.

Was there a plan to get the other 3 out?  It says the "target" was being released.  So how were the 3 others supposed to get out?  Stage their own jail break?  Yeah, it sounds a lot more complex &/or railroaded into place.

1st thing I would have done is ask for volunteers to go into the population.  The melee/samurai/adepts would have been better at this IMHO.
Meanwhile the Shaman, Rigger, & Decker would have actually been of great use as guards doing specialized security positions.
I imagine someone to work the computers & cameras would both be of use & a caster able to control prisoners with his mind would have also been useful. 
I don't know what archtypes the "guard" positions were but to me if it was the muscle then yes, they should have been swapped.

[firebug]

Yeah, there's a lot of reasons why runners won't do that sort of job especially early on, and none of them are related to "being around other criminals".

One, they pay is too low.  Twenty-five thousand nuyen is a good pay for a beginner runner, but this is a week-long job that requires them to be helpless around guards and in prison without their best gear, and the shaman would either never use any magic for the week to hide as being unawakened (unlikely if he is a shaman, they look like shamans) or be kept in the higher security, possibly solitary confinement, "have this mage hood and stay in this artificially high background count" area.  Awakened criminals do not just get shuffed in with all the other guys, that would be stupid.

The decker and the rigger probably feel worthless and vulnerable without their gear--  This isn't the kind of job they'd be hired for, if it meant they had to give up their equipment.  That'd be like...  Well, hiring a normal rigger to get into fist fights.  A hobo on the street could potentially be better for this job.  How many of them are skilled at unarmed combat or could smuggle in a form of non-lethal combat?  Because the guys who would kill the target don't care about the punishment they will receive, but something tells me the players won't be so okay with getting punished for prison murder.

Tarislar's point is also valid.  If it's that kind of prison, you could either bribe guards or even pay a crime syndicate in it to protect him.  If it's a prison ruled by one syndicate (such as a local mafia's dump, or the vory's recruitment camp) then he really has no chance.  He will literally be killed the moment he's there, and the runners would be accosted by criminals skilled at combat in prison, and potentially better armed than them.  That rigger and decker would die and the shaman, if he's even around somewhere...  Look, he'd either be nowhere to be seen because he's awakened, or the criminals would have...  No, there's simply no way to put it.  If he's awakened, he's getting a hood and being kept in solitary.  A single magician in an unawakened prison could use mind control and summoning to destroy the place.  He wouldn't get to do a thing.  The books actually do specify, many prisons don't hold awakened prisoners.  If this one is so old it can't even hold trolls?  It doesn't have what's needed to hold a magician.  If the Johnson can bribe the whole prison into allowing a magician (who, to them, means a prison break and wide-scale chaos and death is a given) then he wouldn't need the runners.  He could just buy the prison.

One more thing.  If this is a prison even tenuously connected to Ares, it means they'll be in great contact with an Ares High-Threat-Response team.  The good ones that Knight Errant keeps for their home turf.  I don't think any runner wants to tangle with that armed with a carved spoon or at best the tasers and sidearms the "posing as guards" guys get.

Now...  Almost all of these things could have been stuff you didn't think to include or just would try to find a reason to exclude.  The players didn't know that, and could have easily gotten as "No way, this Johnson is gonna screw us" vibe without even being able to place it.  Just a knowledge of how it would not go as smoothly.

That's another thing...  If the Johnson has a strict plan for you, it should be expect to never end up going that well.  This is such a risky job to a runner that only the most experienced would willingly put themselves in prison...  And only after they know that Johnson for years.  Imagine this set up:

"Oh, you know those runners who performed that extraction on our Seattle branch the other week?"  "Yes...  Irritating, but they seemed a bit green and sloppy."  "Yes, well, I have through one of my contacts found their fixer."  A quick conversation about a plan to hire them to be prisoners, a laugh, and then a check mark and potential raise.  It'd require just doing nothing and you'd just have a bunch of runners in prison who willingly allowed you to disable their 'ware and make sure they don't have any big dangerous stuff.  Then the guards just turn on the ones who "posed" as guards...

Again, another completely paranoid thing, but possible, and a runner wouldn't be out of their mind to be cautious.  So many things could go wrong in this run, it'd require a much higher pay and confident, experienced runners to pull off.

[ShadowcatX]

Speaking to the players is a great idea, but don't automatically assume you were in the wrong.  If the players can't give a rational, reasoned explanation then hit the characters with a loss of Street Cred and maybe even a point of Notoriety. Since the Fixer is going to be embarrassed by the character's actions have him reduce any payments the characters receive for a few runs.  That said, if the players do have a good reason then just wipe the session - it never happened.  Reset the clock and try again with a tweaked scenario.

The idea is for everyone to have fun, and that includes the GM.  If you've worked hard to create a run and the players decide to s*^% all over it for no good reason you're not having fun, are you?  The basic idea of babysitting a target until an extraction is feasible is a good one, so don't throw the whole thing away if it can be avoided.

This is a bad idea. Do you think the players enjoyed sitting around doing nothing while other people played? If a DM even thought about punishing me for sitting out a game where I wouldn't have fun, I'd quit the game and likely at least 2 other people would quit with me.

Punishing players is always, and I mean always, a bad idea.

[Sterling]

@ShadowcatX

I'm going to presume you didn't read my whole answer.  I said that if the players had a good reason for their characters not taking the run then wipe the session and reset the clock, the whole thing never happened.

What suggests they are being punished?

If they chose to sit there because they weren't going to be the focus of the scenario and they didn't think that they would be able to hog the spotlight then yes, there should be repercussions for the characters.

Do you think the players enjoyed sitting around doing nothing while other people played?

Unless the GM said that they could only play if they stuck to his story then no-one forced them to sit and watch.  They could have suggested alternatives, or provided backup in other ways, or even played NPC prisoners / guards.

An RPG is a co-operative pastime.  Why didn't the other two players feel that the group as a whole would turn down the run?  Did they even suggest other ways that the run could be achieved?

That said, if a GM insists on players sticking to his scripts the players have every right not to play along.

[Glyph]

Yeah, what everyone else has said.  The run was too railroady/micromanaged, required the players to give enormous trust to a new Johnson, and required them to place non-combat oriented characters into a dangerous environment of violent criminals and possibly corrupt/abusive guards.  And not only are the helpless, they don't have any opportunity to use their skills/abilities.  Seriously, why put a decker who can't deck, a rigger who can't rig, and a shaman who can's use magic into prison?  A Johnson will pay for deckers, riggers, and mages when he needs them.  If three ork gangers can do the job as well, he will save his corporation some money and hire three ork gangers.  I would have turned that job down, too.  Frankly, you are lucky you didn't have three players walk out of the game permanently when you had them just sitting there for a whole session.

[ksyr]

I have found in general that players don't like it when they loose control of their characters so I try to avoid it. A very short imprisonment where they have the hope of getting away based on their own actions is about as far as I would go. Going to prison for a week and the only way out is to trust a stranger would be a complete no no in my group. The players must have the possibility of getting out on their own. They have to be able to affect their own situation and destiny. Also, as others have pointed out, the client would have been much better off just hiring experienced prisoners and as a shadowrunner I would find the current plan rather suspicious. It just feels wrong.

It is not without reason that imprisonment is considered punishment in the real world. If I enter a small room and lock the door then I feel fine. If someone else locks the door and I can't unlock it then I am not fine. It is a horrible feeling, loosing control of your own situation.

[ZeldaBravo]

If they chose to sit there because they weren't going to be the focus of the scenario and they didn't think that they would be able to hog the spotlight then yes, there should be repercussions for the characters.

And why is that? Not taking a job you're not proficient enough to do is something that any professional freelancer would do. Nothing wrong with that. If those characters enjoyed being unable to choose their jobs and being bossed around they would be wageslaves.

[Sterling]

Which is why, in every response I've made, I've tried to highlight that if there were good reasons for not taking the run then wipe the session, reset the clock, and move on.

Having a character refuse a run because they are professional enough to say "I would fail" is a good, or even great reason.

Having a character say "the setup is impractical, can we try another way" is also professional and a good reason.

The reasons given at the time were:

The rigger was worried about cyberware damage from having his cyberware disabled. I said that wasn't an issue. The rigger still refused to go in as a prisoner.
The decker didn't think he'd be much use, although Mr. Johnson did reiterate the he was asking for "eyes and ears".
The shaman said he was too pretty for this job.

Does the last sound professional?

If the run stands, then how should the Fixer view the characters that refused?  Presumably the Fixer recommended these runners because he thought they were the right ones for the job, and they proved him wrong.  Surely that would have repercussions, which is why I still suggest that if the GM is satisfied with the players reasons for their characters' refusal to do the run they whole thing should be wiped.

Finally, I would remind you of the first part of my first response:

By having the Johnson tell them how to execute the run, rather than giving them the objective, you gave the impression of a railroad adventure with no options to improvise.  In my experience that is never a good thing with experienced RP'ers

[Dr. Meatgrinder]

If the run stands, then how should the Fixer view the characters that refused?  Presumably the Fixer recommended these runners because he thought they were the right ones for the job, and they proved him wrong.

In-character, it sounds like this group of runners has a bigger problem than an untrustworthy Johnson.  They have a Fixer who is untrustworthy, incompetent, and/or desperate...maybe it's time to find out which one it is.  (That could be a run itself.)

I don't think I'd have pitched this run at all to a group of runners under normal circumstances.  I might have used it if they got arrested--have the Johnson visit during booking and offer to get them off the hook in exchange for protecting his asset.

[ZeldaBravo]

Does the last sound professional?

Yes? The shaman was legitimately worried about his security. Prisons and pretty boys don't mix well, you know.

If the run stands, then how should the Fixer view the characters that refused?  Presumably the Fixer recommended these runners because he thought they were the right ones for the job, and they proved him wrong.  Surely that would have repercussions, which is why I still suggest that if the GM is satisfied with the players reasons for their characters' refusal to do the run they whole thing should be wiped.

They should probably discuss that in character. Fixers are people too, they can make mistakes. Maybe it's time for a new fixer.

By having the Johnson tell them how to execute the run, rather than giving them the objective, you gave the impression of a railroad adventure with no options to improvise.  In my experience that is never a good thing with experienced RP'ers

Absolutely.