NEWS

Antisocial characters

  • 237 Replies
  • 58938 Views

JustADude

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3043
  • Madness? This! Is! A FORUM!
« Reply #30 on: <02-17-12/1215:16> »
Someone might find out about their allergy, and coat their bullets in krill in order to inflict +4 DV.

True... and heaven forbid they run the Food Fight module. Chunks of shot-up Stuffer flying everywhere, they're bound to get something with Krill in it on them.

As for the social rolls... maybe it's just the fact that most of my experience on the Player end of things is from Missions, but I really don't see social rolls coming up all that much in any situation where a Face wouldn't be able to neatly step in and handle it.
“What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.”
― Albert Einstein

"Being average just means that half of everyone you meet is better than you."
― Me

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6423
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #31 on: <02-17-12/1227:12> »
Ease back a bit, gents. Remember, there's no need for snark when you disagree with someone.

Crash_00

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #32 on: <02-17-12/1245:14> »
Quote
Considering how many sheets I've seen where non-hackers, who never plan on going into VR, have Scorched and Sensitive Neural Structure, and other drek like that...
First off, look at the BP points of both of those added together. That's right, its half the value of Uncouth if they aren't hackers/Technos. Add on top of that, that there are many ways to bring them up outside of runs (possibly in runs) if you aren't playing a Missions style campaign where off-run stuff actually has time to occur. Maybe that hottie at the bar wants you to hop a moody with her over drinks and before you know it you're hooked again. Maybe that decker you pissed off last week loaded your favorite trid station with black ice. When you collapse on your couch and hop in, it slams your brain for some serious stun leaving him free to download whatever he wants to your commlink as retribution. Just because there is no intention of them going VR on the job, doesn't mean it won't ever happen, because lets face it. VR is still very much a part of the entertainment in Shadowrun, especially when you're at home.
 
Quote
Besides, the hypothetical "trog" hanging around the Face being his lackey is seriously limiting what the character can do during downtime. That's not "nothing", that's them being forced to actively change their play-style to compensate for the character's shortcomings.

I have no problem with things that just naturally "come up", but forcing the situation so that you corner the Uncouth character into having to resist social rolls while away from his "social buffer" is just plain bad sportsmanship.

I think you completely missed the point, again. There is a huge...very huge in fact...difference between shotgun wedding forcing an uncouth trogg to play Mr. Negotiation at a meet and forcing him to actually play the quality in the off time when he goes apartment hunting or has a mobster bump into him on the rail car home or gets mugged by the dwarf. You can say that he hangs out with the team to get rid of his weakspot, but that doesn't mean he's comfortable with the team. Uncouth characters are socially crippled, they aren't comfortable with anyone. Most people look at the flaw and think of Mr. Grouchy Surly Bastard that's Mean as a Rattler, but it's really more like Mr. Cried Himself to Sleep in the Corner Because his Friends Don't Like Him and that Hobo Looked at Him Mean. It's not a matter of Extra Discomfort so much as emphasizing the discomfort that already exists. Like making a character with Gremlins roll for things that most characters would normally automatically succeed at with no roll.

Quote
Think of it this way... someone has Severe Allergy (Shellfish) or (Mushrooms) for +20 BP. Common, yes, but easily avoided if you read the label on what you eat to make sure it doesn't have Krill or Mycoprotein(sp?), respectively. Does that mean they should have to "accidentally" get exposed to krill or mushrooms in the course of play to "pay for" the flaw?
But how easily avoided is it at a pre-served event...hosted by that mob boss...you know the one you dishonored last week when you checked out his mistress...the one looking at you like a shark stares at its prey?

Taking a flaw isn't just saying "oh this is neat". It's saying "I like this and want you (implying the GM here) to make sure it's taken into account." Do you right up a complete background for a character and think, well it shouldn't come into play at all just because I wrote it? Do you raise skills and think, well I shouldn't use those new levels just because I raised them? Do you take edges and think, well this shouldn't come into play just because I bought it? Taking flaws should be answered just like the rest. They are on your character and should come into play.

Does that mean that your character should automatically be force fed Mushrooms of Allergenic Doom by the first NPC that catches him? No, nor does it mean that Shrimp Bullets, Purple Mushroom Grenades, or Lobster Coated Sais should ever come up. It means that the flaw should, in some way, wind up presented in gameplay. Whether its a choice between offending a Mob-boss or going to the hospital, eating the mystery soup offered by your rescuers after six days on a deserted and barre island while your stomach is doing the conga or starving, or simply being unable to resist the urge of jacking your favorite BTL "Shrimp Feast 2009" every chance you get because you recently developed an addiction to your totally favorite food, the aspect should be there.

Quote
As for the social rolls... maybe it's just the fact that most of my experience on the Player end of things is from Missions, but I really don't see social rolls coming up all that much in any situation where a Face wouldn't be able to neatly step in and handle it.
Missions (run as a Living Campaign) is an absolutely horrible way to judge the entirety of Shadowrun. In order to maintain the aspects that make it a Living Campaign, it must cut things down into four hour chunks which limits the time available for most of the out of run events that other campaigns have. Most Shadowrun campaigns I've played in have much much more downtime, legwork, and general off-run mayhem than actual run time. It's just part of the biz.

On another note, remember that instead of taking Uncouth for a character, there is always the incompetent option for specific skills. A big bad trogg that isn't completely bullyable wouldn't be Uncouth. He might be Incompetent in Etiquette, Negotiation, Con, and Leadership (20 BP worth of Negatives) though. Unlike Uncouth, he can never get points in those skills without buying off the quality, but its much more playable and closer to most people idea of what Uncouth should be.
« Last Edit: <02-17-12/1248:06> by Crash_00 »

JustADude

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 3043
  • Madness? This! Is! A FORUM!
« Reply #33 on: <02-17-12/1251:06> »
Ah, that'd be it, then; Missions has given me a skewed "world-view". Consider me contrite.

Also, I do like your idea for how to do a "proper" Big Bad Trog. The +4 Notoriety would fit that type quite well, too.
« Last Edit: <02-17-12/1253:08> by JustADude »
“What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.”
― Albert Einstein

"Being average just means that half of everyone you meet is better than you."
― Me

jolinaxas

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 6
« Reply #34 on: <02-17-12/1303:35> »
I'm going to have to come down on the side of "you got points for it, it should come up at some point." Otherwise, you might as well just start the character with 435 BP and save everyone some time. On that same token, a neo-primitive shaman being incompetent at piloting space stations or whatever is something your GM should take you aside for. If you want flaws, but don't want to pay for them, just role-play them. The Common Sense quality is a great example of this. Just because you don't have that quality doesn't mean you (the character) don't have common sense, but pay for it and it has actual, mechanical benefits.

That being said, if you have "Allergy: Cats" and your GM gives you nothing but missions in pet shops, you should maybe take him aside for a little discussion as well.  >:(

« Last Edit: <02-17-12/1313:11> by jolinaxas »

Crash_00

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #35 on: <02-17-12/1348:00> »
Quote
That being said, if you have "Allergy: Cats" and your GM gives you nothing but missions in pet shops, you should maybe take him aside for a little discussion as well.  >:(
Well if you took the day job flaw as well, you asked for the hell assignment in the family pet distribution center.  ;D

My general rule of thumb is to bring up a flaw every two to four sessions as a minor inconvenience and every six to eight as a decent hurdle. You might find a cat snuggling up to your gear or having slinked it's way into your apartment every few sessions, but every once in a while you'll have to go snag that awakened panther from the local zoo or extract an unwilling changeling named Tabby that is covered in cat fur.

Of course, some flaws specifically state when they should come up (or that they should as often as possible) and I usually just follow the guidelines for them (Gremlins, Combat Paralysis, Vindictive, etc.)

For some reason this thread has reminded me of an old campaign in SR3 where I sat down at a table and everyone in my Seattle game had taken Sea Madness. Completely coincidentally (I didn't look at characters until we were about to start) their first run was on a two week cruise liner. It didn't end well...not well at all.  ::)

All4BigGuns

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7531
« Reply #36 on: <02-17-12/1359:44> »
I'm going to have to come down on the side of "you got points for it, it should come up at some point." Otherwise, you might as well just start the character with 435 BP and save everyone some time. On that same token, a neo-primitive shaman being incompetent at piloting space stations or whatever is something your GM should take you aside for. If you want flaws, but don't want to pay for them, just role-play them. The Common Sense quality is a great example of this. Just because you don't have that quality doesn't mean you (the character) don't have common sense, but pay for it and it has actual, mechanical benefits.

That being said, if you have "Allergy: Cats" and your GM gives you nothing but missions in pet shops, you should maybe take him aside for a little discussion as well.  >:(

I take it you're one of these people who throws a hissy when someone takes Sensitive System on a Mage or Adept?
(SR5) Homebrew Archetypes

Tangled Currents (Persistent): 33 Karma, 60,000 nuyen

Crash_00

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #37 on: <02-17-12/1413:32> »
No, that's just as easy to bring up in game as any other hindrance. Just because mages and adepts lose magic from ware doesn't mean that they should never have ware, don't benefit from ware, or don't want ware (in character at least). With sensitive system, when that big cartel boss rewards the group with a piece of pimped out delta cyber, the sensitive mage is left trying to figure out if it's worth the full essence cost or not while everyone else is rejoicing. Likewise when you piss off the same cartel and they pop a mysterious implant into you, you're going to get hit twice as hard. I get pissy when a player puts a flaw on his sheet and get's all hissy when it comes up in play. Then again, I'm a Die Hard style GM and most of the players that give me those issues want a God Mode style game.

All4BigGuns

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7531
« Reply #38 on: <02-17-12/1424:29> »
No, that's just as easy to bring up in game as any other hindrance. Just because mages and adepts lose magic from ware doesn't mean that they should never have ware, don't benefit from ware, or don't want ware (in character at least). With sensitive system, when that big cartel boss rewards the group with a piece of pimped out delta cyber, the sensitive mage is left trying to figure out if it's worth the full essence cost or not while everyone else is rejoicing. Likewise when you piss off the same cartel and they pop a mysterious implant into you, you're going to get hit twice as hard. I get pissy when a player puts a flaw on his sheet and get's all hissy when it comes up in play. Then again, I'm a Die Hard style GM and most of the players that give me those issues want a God Mode style game.

If you're forcefully popping implants into a player's mage, then he has full rights to get pissy with you on the matter if not get up and walk out or straight up punch you in the face for intentionally screwing them over.
(SR5) Homebrew Archetypes

Tangled Currents (Persistent): 33 Karma, 60,000 nuyen

Crash_00

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #39 on: <02-17-12/1507:34> »
If a mage makes the wrong enemies, they aren't going to treat him different just because he's a mage. I don't expect my players to use kid gloves with the NPCs in the world, and I don't really use kid gloves with them either. I have no qualms tracking a character that has made him/herself known down with enemies, capturing them, and installing ware to keep tabs on the character and his friends/allies.

If the PCs had the money, resources, and time would they have any qualms about doing it to joe the wageslave? If that answer is no (and 90% of the time is undoubtedly is, doubly so if joe the wageslave is usually in an area to provide them with key intel), then I really fail to see the difference.

I don't have problems stunbolted low Will characters, I don't have trouble poisoning low Body characters, and I don't have any issue capturing, torturing, extorting, blackmailing, or being generally ruthless to any of my PCs as long as it fits with the NPCs character.

If an issue comes up and I have to pick a character that's going to get a mysterious spy suite implanted by enemy #5, it's going to be the guy who took Sensitive System, because he told me (by putting that flaw on his sheet) that he wanted Sensitive System to come up in the game.

If I have to randomly pick the guy who's going to catch a ghoul bite, its going to be the one who took weak immune system, because he told me (by putting that flaw on his sheet) that he wanted it to come up.

If I have to pick which character is going to get screwed over by enemy #1, its going to be the one that actually has the flaw Enemy #1, becuase...thats right, he told me he wanted it.

Players shouldn't take flaws just for the points, they should take the flaws to make their characters and form the story. As a GM, I'm a storyteller, and the primary tools I have to tell the story are the PCs. Their stats come to life in the game, including their qualities, and if that graceful elf mages high magic ability is supposed to come up in the story so should her sensitive system flaw. If player's like the concept, but don't want it to actually come up/penalize them in game, they shouldn't take the flaw and should just RP it.

If a player punches me in the face, they have full rights to the police cruiser that picks them up. Its a game and shouldn't ever be worth that. I feel sorry for anyone not mature enough to just get up and leave a game if they don't care for it. Likewise, if a player gets pissy for story development that isn't 100% beneficial for their character, they should stick to a simpler system that rewards hack and slash power gaming rather than play in a more story based system like Shadowrun. This 100% or GM is out to get me attitude got old a long long time ago and I think most roleplaying groups are better off if those players do walk out. It's a story based game afterall, and the story is shit if the characters aren't challenged.
« Last Edit: <02-17-12/1538:28> by Crash_00 »

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6423
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #40 on: <02-17-12/1536:36> »
Okay, SECOND warning.

Cool some jets or this will get locked. You all are treading a very fine line with the ToS right now, and I'm just putting the warning out there to let you know you're still on this side of the line. But I can see where some comments may lead.

Sichr

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7202
  • TOTÁLNÍ FAŠÍRKA ZMRDI !!!
« Reply #41 on: <02-17-12/1554:31> »
Well, isnt this a nice Uncouth thread...

Sichr

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7202
  • TOTÁLNÍ FAŠÍRKA ZMRDI !!!
« Reply #42 on: <02-17-12/1608:00> »
By the way, Im watchin Sherlock series right now, modern adaptation of clasics, and who saw this series would agree with me that this "highly efficient sociopath" as he call himself is most of the time brilliant example of Uncouth character, so we are not talking just about grunts with shotguns. IMHO it right on contrary: If this quality is taken by some character who happens to need to understand human behaviour but fails to participate on social interactions, this quality can be really very interresting for roleplay.
I can see Uncouth character with Psychoilogy/Sociology/Anthropology PhD, who is able to analyze every move and interaction exactly, well usualy uses: "Go fuck yourself!" type of response in standard social situations...when asked for directions ie...

Crash_00

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #43 on: <02-17-12/1611:44> »
I think you just described Bones pretty much.

Glyph

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
« Reply #44 on: <02-18-12/2338:12> »
Not every flaw will "come up" as such.  A lot of flaws are lateral limiters - they limit the character by closing off an avenue of advancement, or by making it expensive and inconvenient to do so if the character changes his or her mind.  Things like sensitive system or simsense vertigo fall into this category.  They are, obviously, almost always taken by characters that are not oriented in that direction anyways (uncouth troll bruiser, Neo-Luddite shaman with simsense vertigo, etc.) - because otherwise, they are prohibitively crippling.  It is for this reason that such flaws are most often singled out as "cheesy" or exploitive.  Personally, I think if a lateral limitation alone is not seen as enough of a drawback, the GM is better off disallowing the flaw than trying to make it come up in the game - the latter can be seen as "punishing" the player, even if that is not the intent, because the circumstances will seem too contrived.

But that is how I feel about negative qualities in general.  Disallow cheesy ones, rather than turning the game into an adversarial one of the GM versus the players.  If someone took a severe allergy to dinosaur poop, I would say no, instead of having a flock of pterodactyls escape from a secret Ares cloning facility, and occasionally shower Seattle with diarrhea from above due to their problems with digesting the local fauna.