[Hellion]

Apologies RHat I misunderstood what you were getting at

Fair enough.  If you haven't been around here for a little while, you might not be aware of just what the general opinion is on Decompiling and Banishing (specifically, that they're basically worthless).  Given that Decompiling is trained only, it's a warning that should be offered because if there is a technomancer PC in the group, they may well have chosen to ignore that skill.

I wasn't aware that they are that badly thought of, but then again I think I tend to pick flavour over optimisation.... Not that either view on the matter is good or bad, it's a personal thing... I shudder to think what ppl would say about my current character

[Lysanderz]

Apologies RHat I misunderstood what you were getting at

Fair enough.  If you haven't been around here for a little while, you might not be aware of just what the general opinion is on Decompiling and Banishing (specifically, that they're basically worthless).  Given that Decompiling is trained only, it's a warning that should be offered because if there is a technomancer PC in the group, they may well have chosen to ignore that skill.

I wasn't aware that they are that badly thought of, but then again I think I tend to pick flavour over optimisation.... Not that either view on the matter is good or bad, it's a personal thing... I shudder to think what ppl would say about my current character

Exactly why I stopped posting characters on here a long time ago.

[Hellion]

Apologies RHat I misunderstood what you were getting at

Fair enough.  If you haven't been around here for a little while, you might not be aware of just what the general opinion is on Decompiling and Banishing (specifically, that they're basically worthless).  Given that Decompiling is trained only, it's a warning that should be offered because if there is a technomancer PC in the group, they may well have chosen to ignore that skill.

I wasn't aware that they are that badly thought of, but then again I think I tend to pick flavour over optimisation.... Not that either view on the matter is good or bad, it's a personal thing... I shudder to think what ppl would say about my current character

Exactly why I stopped posting characters on here a long time ago.

If I can put mine thru chummer so it looks a little neater than current scribble on my sheet ill post it....  Lysanderz I think that a lot of people see optimisation as being part of what makes their character come alive to them and that's why they do it (yes the fact that some of them have a group of absolute kick ass skills doesn't hurt either) where as you or myself simply enjoy bringing a more cinematic character to the table

[RHat]

Always a drop a point into it, if for nothing else than flavor. It's hard for me to imagine a Mage or TM that knows nothing about how to undo what they created. You can't put that much study into how to do something without learning at least a few tricks to cause that something to fail on the fly.

I can think of a lot of concepts where it would be Wrong, for the simple reason that the character would never even consider doing it, at least not until game events change that outlook.

I do think one point is a good investment for the simple fact that there's the odd occasion where there's literally no other option to do what you need to do.

[Lysanderz]

Always a drop a point into it, if for nothing else than flavor. It's hard for me to imagine a Mage or TM that knows nothing about how to undo what they created. You can't put that much study into how to do something without learning at least a few tricks to cause that something to fail on the fly.

I can think of a lot of concepts where it would be Wrong, for the simple reason that the character would never even consider doing it, at least not until game events change that outlook.

I do think one point is a good investment for the simple fact that there's the odd occasion where there's literally no other option to do what you need to do.

Not to call you a liar, but I fail to believe you can justify a way in which you can learn any craft and not know SOMETHING about how to disassemble it. A chef knows that too much salt can quickly sabotage a dish, an IT guy knows how to turn the Wi-Fi off of something, a mechanic knows you can loosen a spark plug and keep a car from starting and a military guy will know how to take a component out of a gun to make it useless.

[Kiirnodel]

Always a drop a point into it, if for nothing else than flavor. It's hard for me to imagine a Mage or TM that knows nothing about how to undo what they created. You can't put that much study into how to do something without learning at least a few tricks to cause that something to fail on the fly.

I can think of a lot of concepts where it would be Wrong, for the simple reason that the character would never even consider doing it, at least not until game events change that outlook.

I do think one point is a good investment for the simple fact that there's the odd occasion where there's literally no other option to do what you need to do.

Not to call you a liar, but I fail to believe you can justify a way in which you can learn any craft and not know SOMETHING about how to disassemble it. A chef knows that too much salt can quickly sabotage a dish, an IT guy knows how to turn the Wi-Fi off of something, a mechanic knows you can loosen a spark plug and keep a car from starting and a military guy will know how to take a component out of a gun to make it useless.

True, but does a programmer automatically know how to take apart a computer?
All of your examples basically include the knowledge to take those things apart as part of the base training. This is resonance (or magic, they work the same), there isn't really a real world analog. You can learn how to open up a doorway and greet the visitor that comes through, it doesn't mean you know how to get them to leave if they are there uninvited...

There are plenty of story examples where someone learns how to summon a monster and then doesn't know what to do once it gets there (or how to get rid of it). The argument I could see would be that being sufficiently skilled in Summoning or Compiling would allow a character to default on Banishing or Decompiling respectively. But RAW says you can't default on those skills period. So if you don't take, you can't do it.

[Lysanderz]

Always a drop a point into it, if for nothing else than flavor. It's hard for me to imagine a Mage or TM that knows nothing about how to undo what they created. You can't put that much study into how to do something without learning at least a few tricks to cause that something to fail on the fly.

I can think of a lot of concepts where it would be Wrong, for the simple reason that the character would never even consider doing it, at least not until game events change that outlook.

I do think one point is a good investment for the simple fact that there's the odd occasion where there's literally no other option to do what you need to do.

Not to call you a liar, but I fail to believe you can justify a way in which you can learn any craft and not know SOMETHING about how to disassemble it. A chef knows that too much salt can quickly sabotage a dish, an IT guy knows how to turn the Wi-Fi off of something, a mechanic knows you can loosen a spark plug and keep a car from starting and a military guy will know how to take a component out of a gun to make it useless.

True, but does a programmer automatically know how to take apart a computer?
All of your examples basically include the knowledge to take those things apart as part of the base training. This is resonance (or magic, they work the same), there isn't really a real world analog. You can learn how to open up a doorway and greet the visitor that comes through, it doesn't mean you know how to get them to leave if they are there uninvited...

There are plenty of story examples where someone learns how to summon a monster and then doesn't know what to do once it gets there (or how to get rid of it). The argument I could see would be that being sufficiently skilled in Summoning or Compiling would allow a character to default on Banishing or Decompiling respectively. But RAW says you can't default on those skills period. So if you don't take, you can't do it.

Let's take math into consideration, since it is abstract and not analog but follows specific rules as magic does. If you learn addition, by default you can subtract. Now can you subtract under pressure in the face of a huge mistake while the whole class is watching? Sometimes no. But that doesn't mean that after the incident is all said and done you can't sit down and analyze how you should have handled the situation. If you're summoning a spirit or sprite you obviously get a feeling that you're doing it right and get immediate results, so to me it makes sense that you can have a basic "feel" for how to do the reverse if you're not panicking (And when you summon a monster on accident, you panic like a motherfucker I imagine).

So maybe if your conjuring or compiling is like a 1 or a 2 I can understand you not having Decomp or Banishing, but anything above that and I consider you experienced enough to know how to undo what you did. So when I GM and a player takes 6 in conjuring and 0 in banishing, I nudge him and say "Brother, really? You're telling me that you're the stephen hawkings of summoning and don't know shit about how to get rid of them? I don't believe that."

When you do something

[Redwulfe]

For me I like throwing story at those that wish to break the system and go all out in this maner. Think about what the reaction of people around him would be. Cops would Harris the group even on the simplist of tasks. People in normal locations would make it hard for the team to be inconspequously accomplish even a meet with the Johnson. Certain establishments that have policies against weapons would not let him in. Life would be rough and people would fear him. In oth words the teams public awareness will start to rise rapidly.

In the shadows everyone would know of him, he's the crome jock that can't get the job done with attracting too much attention. Fixers and others wouldn't hire him or his team for most missions as the inability to blend or get past scanners makes the team a liability to the mission more than asset. In oth words the teams notoriety will start to rise rapidly, especially if he uses brute force to overcome obstacles that cold have been circumvented with subtler means in a normal team. If the team doesn't get hired you can start having them pay one or two months expenses before each run and if you are not already limit their pay on runs giving bonuses to negotiation rolls to the Johnson, since he has to hire a team that can't understand the concept of covert.

All in all I don't think combat should be removed, but in a world as presented by Shadowrun covert mission should be common as Johnson's don't want to be known, that's why they use an alias. Dock the team pay if the do something overt in a mission.

All of this does wo things, it's takes the amount of combat down in your game giving your players more to do since the combat monster would hog the spotlight otherwise, and it makes your players start to put pressure on the player that is causing the problem as everyone is now affected by his decisions.

Once they fEel this pressure make the character an offer to join a merc company or become the bodyguard for a fixer in the game. If the players have been money starved, are pressuring the player and they are having problems getting jobs done smoothly he will jump at the offer and you can write him out on and have the player make up a new character.

No matter what though keep your world consistent and somewhat realistic and these types of problems usually fizzle out on their own, and players will also tend to shy away from these situations.

Just my 2 cents,
Red

[All4BigGuns]

For me I like throwing story at those that wish to break the system and go all out in this maner. Think about what the reaction of people around him would be. Cops would Harris the group even on the simplist of tasks. People in normal locations would make it hard for the team to be inconspequously accomplish even a meet with the Johnson. Certain establishments that have policies against weapons would not let him in. Life would be rough and people would fear him. In oth words the teams public awareness will start to rise rapidly.

In the shadows everyone would know of him, he's the crome jock that can't get the job done with attracting too much attention. Fixers and others wouldn't hire him or his team for most missions as the inability to blend or get past scanners makes the team a liability to the mission more than asset. In oth words the teams notoriety will start to rise rapidly, especially if he uses brute force to overcome obstacles that cold have been circumvented with subtler means in a normal team. If the team doesn't get hired you can start having them pay one or two months expenses before each run and if you are not already limit their pay on runs giving bonuses to negotiation rolls to the Johnson, since he has to hire a team that can't understand the concept of covert.

All in all I don't think combat should be removed, but in a world as presented by Shadowrun covert mission should be common as Johnson's don't want to be known, that's why they use an alias. Dock the team pay if the do something overt in a mission.

All of this does wo things, it's takes the amount of combat down in your game giving your players more to do since the combat monster would hog the spotlight otherwise, and it makes your players start to put pressure on the player that is causing the problem as everyone is now affected by his decisions.

Once they fEel this pressure make the character an offer to join a merc company or become the bodyguard for a fixer in the game. If the players have been money starved, are pressuring the player and they are having problems getting jobs done smoothly he will jump at the offer and you can write him out on and have the player make up a new character.

No matter what though keep your world consistent and somewhat realistic and these types of problems usually fizzle out on their own, and players will also tend to shy away from these situations.

Just my 2 cents,
Red

This is not a "consistent world". It is not "realistic". All it is is passive aggressive douchebaggery spawning from not having the balls to say "No. That character isn't acceptable. Please make something else." right from the start.

[emsquared]

This is not a "consistent world". It is not "realistic". All it is is passive aggressive douchebaggery spawning from not having the balls to say "No. That character isn't acceptable. Please make something else." right from the start.

You better believe it, Redwulfe! A4BG knows passive-aggressive douche-baggery when he sees it!

Personally, it doesn't seem to me like this player has broken the game. As demonstrated in this thread, there are lots of ways to nullify his advantage(s). But if it's ruining your, or other players', experience you just need to confront him cordially with that information. If he's responsive and understanding, great. If not, you and the rest of the group should decide what needs to be done. Although as others have said, you've allowed the character in the first place, it's really your responsibility now as GM to deal with that in the context of your story.

[I_V_Saur]

This is not a "consistent world". It is not "realistic". All it is is passive aggressive douchebaggery spawning from not having the balls to say "No. That character isn't acceptable. Please make something else." right from the start.

Seems you skipped the 'passive' here, Guns. Chill a bit? He has his own points there, even if you don't like them. I don't either, but that's no reason to bite anyone's head off.

[Mirikon]

This is not a "consistent world". It is not "realistic". All it is is passive aggressive douchebaggery spawning from not having the balls to say "No. That character isn't acceptable. Please make something else." right from the start.

Seems you skipped the 'passive' here, Guns. Chill a bit? He has his own points there, even if you don't like them. I don't either, but that's no reason to bite anyone's head off.

Indeed. A quick beheading is much better. Less chance of getting spinal cord stuck in your teeth.

[All4BigGuns]

This is not a "consistent world". It is not "realistic". All it is is passive aggressive douchebaggery spawning from not having the balls to say "No. That character isn't acceptable. Please make something else." right from the start.

Seems you skipped the 'passive' here, Guns. Chill a bit? He has his own points there, even if you don't like them. I don't either, but that's no reason to bite anyone's head off.

I'm not going to sugar coat on this. It's his own fault that a character that isn't acceptable for his game got through, so he can either do the 'cordial chat' to deal with the situation or he can suck it up and deal with it.

[dertechie]

For me I like throwing story at those that wish to break the system and go all out in this maner. Think about what the reaction of people around him would be. Cops would Harris the group even on the simplist of tasks. People in normal locations would make it hard for the team to be inconspequously accomplish even a meet with the Johnson. Certain establishments that have policies against weapons would not let him in. Life would be rough and people would fear him. In oth words the teams public awareness will start to rise rapidly.

In the shadows everyone would know of him, he's the crome jock that can't get the job done with attracting too much attention. Fixers and others wouldn't hire him or his team for most missions as the inability to blend or get past scanners makes the team a liability to the mission more than asset. In oth words the teams notoriety will start to rise rapidly, especially if he uses brute force to overcome obstacles that cold have been circumvented with subtler means in a normal team. If the team doesn't get hired you can start having them pay one or two months expenses before each run and if you are not already limit their pay on runs giving bonuses to negotiation rolls to the Johnson, since he has to hire a team that can't understand the concept of covert.

All in all I don't think combat should be removed, but in a world as presented by Shadowrun covert mission should be common as Johnson's don't want to be known, that's why they use an alias. Dock the team pay if the do something overt in a mission.

All of this does wo things, it's takes the amount of combat down in your game giving your players more to do since the combat monster would hog the spotlight otherwise, and it makes your players start to put pressure on the player that is causing the problem as everyone is now affected by his decisions.

Once they fEel this pressure make the character an offer to join a merc company or become the bodyguard for a fixer in the game. If the players have been money starved, are pressuring the player and they are having problems getting jobs done smoothly he will jump at the offer and you can write him out on and have the player make up a new character.

No matter what though keep your world consistent and somewhat realistic and these types of problems usually fizzle out on their own, and players will also tend to shy away from these situations.

Just my 2 cents,
Red

Just by the fact that a chrome monster was created and stuck around for the second campaign, I'm guessing this is a pretty pink mohawk campaign.  If it is, suddenly going heavily trench coat on the players is kind of dick.  You can move the mission objectives to favor less combat and more planning/stealth/social engineering/magic shenanigans to keep other people in the spotlight, but potentially sabotaging the entire team's fun to make the guy who's already hogging the spotlight ship out seems like a bad idea.  Explaining to the nice KE officer why he shouldn't take the whole team downtown for the 3rd time this week probably isn't fun. 

Remember, the Face will be packing Tailored Pheromones (F), the B&E guy a pile of R/F gadgets, the Hacker's commlink is a pile of R programs and potentially damning logs, the Mage technically isn't supposed to know that pile of Combat spells, and even an R6 Fake SIN fails to a R1 scanner 3% of the time (ties something like 14%), and KE won't be packing an R1, so you'll have to head him off before he starts checking SINs.  Every.  Single.  Time.  Chromeboy is just a helluva lot more obvious in his F gear (and to be frank, while I disagree with switching campaign types, he probably should be more discreet about that outside executing runs).

[ImmortalShade]

Looking to the future you may want to consider how you want to deal with this in general.

For the groups I dm/gm/storytell/ect one of the first things I like to do is talk with the group about what every one expects and wants. one of the subjects that I like to always cover is this one specifically "what do we want to do if one player or players character is starting to be a problem". For my group I am setting up runs for right now we call it the 4/5ths rule. If 4/5ths or more of the players agree that a character has become a problem, then in game the character gets put in a tough spot that is usually life or death. This is the warning shot, if things continue then the character is killed off in a apropos manner.

If a player has become a problem, then the group as a whole sits down and has the "hey listen man" talk.

It sounds like you and the group do not mind that your player's char is a combat tank to the max, aside from trying to make the combat mean something. I would say though that you probably want to keep an eye on how the other players are feeling about the whole thing. If every one is chill with it great, but if the other players are not... then you have more than just a balance problem.

As for a creative way to up the challenge in combat? Put some turrets on tracks and kite, make use of more traditional counter measures eg pit's, walls, large falling objects, air tight rooms that vent the air.  The "traditional" dnd style traps can still work wonders, and can fit in perfectly especially if the group is hired to go poking around something's lair that has been around the block a few times or if you give them a modern twist.