[Critias]

I'm pretty sure Joe was making one of those "joke" things, fellas.

[Digital_Viking]

I'm pretty sure Joe was making one of those "joke" things, fellas.

"That's a joke, I say, that's a joke, son."

[CitizenJoe]

Head shot.... Losing face...

[Sichr]

Apparently, watching too many Bessons movies may lead to this kind of misunderstanding...

[JustADude]

One caveat, Dude. Gangs have their own unwritten rules. Whether it is smart or not, disrespecting a gang leader in front of his gang forces him to lash out or lose face.

Oh, yeah, of course.

I'm assuming, though, that this theoretical group of Runners has a competent Face (if not a full-blown Pornomancer) and is going in with "talking" as their first option so, with the stated assumption of no preexisting prejudicial factors, that would only happen if the Face pooched his/her/its Etiquette roll.

[Sichr]

and there is no Uncouth character in the team, who consider question:

Hey motherfuckers, what are you doing on our turf?

as a good oportunity to say:

We came here to fuck you mothers, dickheads!

[Crash_00]

Admitted I understand giving consequences to a player or group that does something stupid, but it just seems like picking on someone for choosing that negative quality when they may have chosen it for any reason, though I doubt many mages will say they chose it so it would come back to haunt them.  Frankly I saw it as something was meant to limit use of augments, not something that means that the player should at some point o\have implants forced upon them aainst their will.

I never stated that its the only way to bring it up, in fact you quoted two ways it can easily come up that I mentioned (the other being the hard choice when good quality ware is offered). It does limit the use of augmentations heavily. The way I see flaws is as a core of the character, they are just as important as the characters  edges, attributes and/or skills. Nothing prevents a character from playing his character a certain way without taking the flaws, but taking the flaw is making it a part of your characters story.

Not to mention, wouldn't it be cheaper for the mafia to put some kind of collar or bracelet that would kill them instantly if tampered with of the mafia willed it.  I mean, if the mafia are keeping them alive it is for a reason, so they don't want to weaken the mage by putting implants into them, and the mafia certainly would know that would happen, it is a major business focused on secrecy, they known about magic.  I make it clear to my players that I will respond accordingly if they do something stupid and makes someone strong angry, but I don't wanna mess with a players stats without some REALLY big reason, because while it is my campaign, it is their character. 

That would depend entirely on the situation in question. Sure, if its a simple go here, kill this, we'll let you off the hook issue the bracelet would be easier.

If it's more of a "Let's toss a link and simrig into this guy so he'll lead us to his buddies that fragged our warehouse last week" situation, you being weaker in the long run certainly is no skin off their back.

Again, the issue here is not with Sensitive System, it's with the fact that the person is a mage and getting this treatment. If the mage chose sensitive system to be part of his story, he's going to be the one the mob chose for operation sneaky bastards. Not because he's a mage, but because he wanted that to be part of his story. Chances are he'll get it removed pretty soon, but he'll always feel that tug on his soul and feel that itch that you just can't quite get to.

I don't really see hitting a player with a single stat drop as a big issue. I know as a player, I would much rather have a stat drop a point (or even several) than have the character just flat out die randomly. Then again, most of the games I've played and run are a fight to survive rather than a fight to get upgrades. When you get right down to it, the character is the players, but the story is for everyone. Every character in the story needs to overcome challenges.

That, as you might imagine, puts them squarely in the realm of "bigger fish" for your typical Ganger. To one canny enough to have survived to a position of leadership a group of experienced runners represent a severely non-trivial threat, both in terms of immediate violence and delayed reprisals, should he piss them off. On the other hand, having a positive relationship with them could gain him valuable allies in the form of some quid pro quo, or even simply having them available to hire at all.

One in the position of gang leader will also understand the vast advantage of overwhelming numbers as well. Even armed with only knives and spurs, a couple dozen gangers that use cover until they move in, can provide a good threat for beggining runners. Toss in a heavy hitting gang like the ancients, or someone with extreme tactics like the halloweeners and their burn them to a crisp methods, and things can quickly go from non-trivial to put the initiates in the front.

[Dracain]

I tend so see it a little differently: Taking the quality automatically has negative consequences, as the character, for example, may not take as much cyberware as he could otherwise. As every character, even mages, could gain from some cyberware-stuff, it really is a disadvantage, as it restricts the character. The character doesn't have to have cyberware forced into him to make it one. Of course, the negative quality would be a much bigger disadvantage for, let's say, a troll samurai than an elven shaman, but negative qualities don't have to cripple your primary skills to count. If someone takes incompetent, this already IS a negative thing, because he cannot do something. I don't have to force him into situations that would require him to do it anyway, just to make it count. Of course, if it happens, bad luck, but I wouldn't try to force him into such a situation deliberately.

That is generally how I see it when it comes to sensitive system and the like, and while I will punish a character for doing something stupid, but still I can't really think of many situations where the mafia would find forcing implants into a runner group to really be beneficial, as there are more certainly cheaper and easier to obtain ways to get what they want.  There is also the fact that the mafia who the runners angered has a need for them, otherwise they would just kill the runners outright.  So the mafia boss would than say to himself, do I go through with a surgery that would weaken these runners and cost more to me?  Or do I slap some exploding necklace on them and call it a day?

I am not saying that there is not a point where forced implantation would come up, and if it seemed like what would happen, I would to it to one and all, but if I can't really figure a good reason for the implanters to be doing that when they could do something cheaper or more efficient, of course they could just kill the runners and be done with it. 

[Leevizer]

If the mage chose sensitive system to be part of his story, he's going to be the one the mob chose for operation sneaky bastards. Not because he's a mage, but because he wanted that to be part of his story.

So picking on your players is A-OK. What if he just wants his character to be, you know, weak to implants, it doesn't necessarily mean that he feels it's justified that you pick up on him. If you have an equal opportunity at choosing one if your players, do it randomly. If it hits the mage, then it's his fault for choosing the flaw, but if you just dump it on him, it can be seen as your fault, which typically creates bad blood between the GM and the players, which usually isn't the required effect, since it leads to nobody having fun....

And about that "headshotting the leader" thing... Sure, a gang might have it's own ways of working, but honestly, do you really think that if a street sam tells him to buzz off, while that mage next to him is twirling a fireball in his hands and his troll friend is sporting a BFG, I don't think the gang leader would throw his troops at them like that... Doesn't anyone ever take morale into account when playing this game? You can't just say that gangers and Humanis "troops" are just mindless zombies who will stop only when everyone of them is dead... Which is precisely why the "shoot the leader" thing might work out to scare them off. Or if you're into that, you could have your own gang now.

[Sichr]

That is why Redmond Barrens is such a safe place. Because gangs are practicaly harmless. They dont have their own magicians, they dont have some extra bonuses for playing on their own territory, and they never come in superrior number. Look. I know that most firefights with gangs are more spice than raw meat in the run, well if your GM use averything gangs have to offer, it`s not such rosegarden walk as you describe it. Use of molotov cocktails, some barghests/hellhounds and othe paracritters, gang street shamans, even a sniper from time to time. And even if you are standing amongst 30 gangers armed with Streetsweepers, you need to wipe them out in the first pass before any of them pulls the trigger, or get ready to get hurt. And I know, that sometimes dicepools make this situation riddiculously easy to survive. In this situations I strongly recomend my players to get some feeling of the street and dont start acting like omnipotent arogant dicepool monsters.

[Crash_00]

So picking on your players is A-OK.

It's not picking on a player. I'm not slicing one of my players open and attaching a delicate piece of cybernetics to his even more delicate fleshy brain bits. It's bringing part of the character's story into the game. The Character and Player are not the same thing. If a player can't see the difference, he really needs to work on some things.

What if he just wants his character to be, you know, weak to implants, it doesn't necessarily mean that he feels it's justified that you pick up on him. If you have an equal opportunity at choosing one if your players, do it randomly.

Nothing keeps a player from choosing flavor for his character and not actually taking in game flaws for them. If a player tells me, my guy has problems and tends to reject implants, but I don't really want to take Sensitive System, because it's not really a part of his story, then it isn't going to sway the random decision in any way. He didn't choose it to be part of his story. The same player that chooses Sensitive System for his character, chooses for that flaw to become part of their story. They choose to be the number one if a situation comes up where that flaw is coming into the story.

This is seen constantly in just about every story media. Characters have weaknesses, and half of a good story is overcoming those weaknesses and flaws. Negative qualities are flaws and weaknesses.

If it hits the mage, then it's his fault for choosing the flaw, but if you just dump it on him, it can be seen as your fault, which typically creates bad blood between the GM and the players, which usually isn't the required effect, since it leads to nobody having fun....

If the mage took the flaw, it was his choice from the beginning (despite the apparently popular view here, I don't force my players to choose certain flaws for my own amusement). If a player asks, "Why did I get chosen, do you have it our for me," I'll explain exactly why. If the player still feels that I have it out for them, then they probably need to take a break and really think about growing up a bit so that they can differentiate between them and their character.

You can't just say that gangers and Humanis "troops" are just mindless zombies who will stop only when everyone of them is dead... Which is precisely why the "shoot the leader" thing might work out to scare them off. Or if you're into that, you could have your own gang now.

The moment they show weakness, they're dead. It might not be the runners that kill them, but the other gangs in the area will. If they take down those runners, no one will mess with them for a good long while. Gangs are almost always up against a wall in these situations, because even if fighting is a sure-to-lose situation, backing down is just as bad if not worse.

Also keep in mind that they tend to roam in packs. If encountered on their own turf, you can most likely expect there to be a good dozen members in the buildings around you taking up beads and waiting to take their shot. Sure the eight or ten you see might not be a big deal, but what about the other dozen popping shots from the windows that you didn't notice? No reaction to dodge, makes it a pretty nasty situation, combined with the take aim (usually a plus one or two a ganger levels) and called shots for +4DV, players can drop relatively fast.

I am not saying that there is not a point where forced implantation would come up, and if it seemed like what would happen, I would to it to one and all, but if I can't really figure a good reason for the implanters to be doing that when they could do something cheaper or more efficient, of course they could just kill the runners and be done with it.

Some things are just flat out hard to hide. While bracelets, necklaces, drones, etc. can be used to force cooperation or get surveillance, a Simrig and commlink (with the link not hooked up to DNI but just run by an agent set to broadcast information to a secure commcode) can gain surveillance and the player is going to have to be scanned for anyone to notice (assuming the BBEGs takes the precaution of cleaning up after the surgery). Likewise, a one-shot auto-injector is much harder to deactivate than an auto-injecting necklace/exploding bracelet. A double implant (2 one-shots) can store both a chemical agent and its antidote with minimal threat of tampering (let's face it, implanting for extortion is pretty much the only point for that ware).

Sure, they could try to find the rest of the runners themselves and gut them, but with a mole, they can find contacts, family, etc. They'll have enough leverage that they may be able to get the runner's to just come along willingly. They may be able to find out other moles in their operation. Also keep in mind that simrig's record emotional responses as well, allowing a lot more information about the importance of every person the mole meets.

[Sichr]

That mage we ae talking willingly traded
i.e.: Sensitive system (15BP) = Counterspelling 3(12BP) + Counterspelling Foci 3 (15k=3BP)

If he never want to use those, Its ok for me that Sensitive system never comes to play. Otherwise...

[Irian]

"Senstive System" already came into play, as the mage doesn't have cyberware (or pays a lot more essence for it). Forcibly adding another negative quality (magic loss/unwanted cyberware) has nothing to do with the Sensitive System quality "coming into play".

[Mirikon]

Agreed. There's making sure negative qualities are appropriately roleplayed, and then there's just being a dick.

[Sichr]

IMO it is a GM + Player issue, which hardly can be generalized, but it seems that for lot of people here is normal option, when during character creation there is a moment, where player says:

P: Well, you know, Im playing the mage, and since cyberware would cause essence loss and lowers my magic, Im not going to take any during the gameplay and character developement.

GM: OK, so take another 15 Build points and use them as you will.

Agreed. There's making sure negative qualities are appropriately roleplayed, and then there's just being a dick.

With stress put on the world "Roleplayed"

And note, that once again we are talking about Sensitive system in thread dedicated to Antisocial characters.
It is much less possible, that character with Sensitive system would have to undergo some kind of replacement surgery, that possibility, that Uncouth character would have to participate on some kind of social interaction. The difference is
Maybe once per life  X 100 times every single day at least