[raggedhalo]

OK, so my PC group are, on average, very interested in the ethical side of things. To be specific, they're really against violence if they can possibly avoid it, and definitely against killing of any kind - wetwork most of all.

I'd like to really push them on this, trying to find the exceptions to the rules that change killing from a regrettably necessary evil, over time, to an option that's always on the table. [spoiler]I've just started them on Ghost Cartels, and I'd really like it if they took the wetwork job against the oyabun as the way into the international portion of the campaign.[/spoiler]

Any ideas of how best to push and challenge their ethics/morals and encourage them to be worse people gratefully appreciated!

[FastJack]

Sure. When you get to the wetwork job, have the Johnson detail how the target is a sick and demented person. Pedophile usually works.

Of course, whether or not that is true, and whether or not the team finds out before killing him makes it all that more interesting.

[raggedhalo]

It's a good start, but at this point I'm not convinced the PCs wouldn't just come back with "it doesn't matter how vile he is, he doesn't deserve to die." I want to break their metaphorical cherry before we get to that point, so it's a smoother transition.

[FastJack]

It's a good start, but at this point I'm not convinced the PCs wouldn't just come back with "it doesn't matter how vile he is, he doesn't deserve to die." I want to break their metaphorical cherry before we get to that point, so it's a smoother transition.

Lots of "accidental" deaths. When they are fighting, keep track of glitches. Makes it nice that when they are trying not to kill someone, the glitch actually does.

For instance, they roll to hit on their Pistols. They want to wound the target so that he's out, but not dead. They roll a glitch and the shot that was aiming at the target's shoulder instead hits them square in the forehead.

[kirk]

The "no good options" meme exists for a reason.

A clumsy version: They've caught a Bad Guy. They learn that if Bad Guy goes free, bad things  -- sorry, BAD THINGS -- will happen. They can put a permanent stop to the BAD THINGS by eliminating the BG. Oh, and they can't hand the problem off. BG is owed major favors or isn't on Law Enforcement's radar or...

The tough thing for you, the GM, is when the players choose to risk the Bad Things Happening. You have to make it personal then. It helps if you can decide what the personal things will be before the choice. You don't have to make it obvious that it's personal, but it's useful.

If you let him go, your residence gets destroyed. If you let him go, that talismonger you had? raped and tortured, no longer a source. If you let him go ... well, you get the idea.

[Malex]

I find it rather amazing that your group isn't a bunch of hotheads with something to prove. I sometimes wish my group was more interested in not getting themselves in a fight.
I'd exploit this by encouraging them to roleplay to the hilt and then at some point pushing them into a situation where they must make the decision to kill someone to save many lives or even their own.

Question: Did they all take the Pacifist Negative Quality?

[Zilfer]

That's what i was going to ask Malex.... xD

[JustADude]

First off, just let me say this: 


Honestly, I really don't see the point of playing Shadowrun if you're not going to play someone willing to get dirty. My characters would have the guy in Kirk's example dead on the floor before he even finished his rant about how he's going to make us pay.

Still, to each their own, right?

I'd have to agree with Kirk's handling, though. Stack the deck so that the characters are totally screwed if the guy lives and double-down by making him as much of a scum-sucking ass as you can stand to play him.

[Mirikon]

Alternatively, if they refuse to kill someone, have him hunt down their friends, families, and loved ones and do things to them that make Hostel look like Disney. That should get their attention.

[raggedhalo]

Lots of "accidental" deaths. When they are fighting, keep track of glitches. Makes it nice that when they are trying not to kill someone, the glitch actually does.

That's definitely something I'll be doing - as they often load Gel rounds, having a glitch turn that Stun damage into Physical might do just the trick.  Likewise allergies to Narcoject poison, etc. etc.

The tough thing for you, the GM, is when the players choose to risk the Bad Things Happening. You have to make it personal then. It helps if you can decide what the personal things will be before the choice. You don't have to make it obvious that it's personal, but it's useful.

If you let him go, your residence gets destroyed. If you let him go, that talismonger you had? raped and tortured, no longer a source. If you let him go ... well, you get the idea.

Indeed I do - thanks very much!  Making things personal, threatening their contacts, etc. should work nicely.  They just ripped off a Yakuza brothel for 30,000¥, so I figure a bit of payback is probably on the cards anyhow.

I find it rather amazing that your group isn't a bunch of hotheads with something to prove. I sometimes wish my group was more interested in not getting themselves in a fight.
I'd exploit this by encouraging them to roleplay to the hilt and then at some point pushing them into a situation where they must make the decision to kill someone to save many lives or even their own.

Definitely.  I think I'm going to start with a "backs against the wall," kill-or-be-killed kinda situation (fighting enemies with Hardened Armour would be a good one for this, I suppose*) and then step it up to the kind of difficult "one life for several" decisions you're describing.

Question: Did they all take the Pacifist Negative Quality?

Nope, none of them did.  I'm actually pretty glad about that, because the Pacifist Negative Quality takes away a lot of the roleplay aspect of this, IMO; it's much harder to pose an ethical challenge to a character who can hide behind the rules of the game for why they can't change their view.

Honestly, I really don't see the point of playing Shadowrun if you're not going to play someone willing to get dirty. My characters would have the guy in Kirk's example dead on the floor before he even finished his rant about how he's going to make us pay.

Well, quite.  I pitched the game to my players as being themed around professionalism, and that killing should rarely be the first resort but should be something that's always there as an option, but they seem to have fixated on the first part and not spotted the second!

*: ISTR that Hardened Armour never lets Stun damage through.  Is that right?

[JustADude]

ISTR that Hardened Armour never lets Stun damage through.  Is that right?

Actually, I'm not sure if there's actual "Hardened Armor" in 4th ed. If there is, I'd love to get a book/page number from someone so I can check it out.

[raggedhalo]

Actually, I'm not sure if there's actual "Hardened Armor" in 4th ed. If there is, I'd love to get a book/page number from someone so I can check it out.

Critter power, pg. 295, SR4A.  And the description of it mentions no immunity to Stun damage.

Perhaps drones are the solution - they don't suffer from Stun damage.  Does that mean that passengers in vehicles are protected against attacks doing Stun damage?

[CanRay]

Wait...  Your group actually has morals?  How the hell did that happen?

Closest thing my group ever came to it is laying a major beatdown on a spouse abuser.

[JustADude]

Perhaps drones are the solution - they don't suffer from Stun damage.  Does that mean that passengers in vehicles are protected against attacks doing Stun damage?

Okay, anyone inside a conventional vehicle is considered to be under Good Cover, for purposes of aiming. Additionally, they get the vehicle's Armor (plus ranks of the Personal* Armor mod, if any) added to their own Armor value.

My suggestion would be to do something custom-designed based off the Iron Will exoskeleton (Attitude, p154), which is armor that is treated as a vehicle, basically turning the wearer into a drone with a squishy human center... or at least that's how you can declare it via GM Fiat to make things go your way.

The armor has a Body of 6, so you can give it Armor 12, Life Support 2 (aka, hermetically sealed, so forget CS Gas), Improved Sensor Array (from Vehicle to Extra-Large Vehicle), and a mounted weapon up to LMG in size.


*Is it just me, or would Personnel Armor be a more appropriate name?

[raggedhalo]

Wait...  Your group actually has morals?  How the hell did that happen?

It's probably my own fault.  The initial pitch for the game went like this:

[spoiler]
Theme:   Professionalism
      The idea is to look at the demands of being a professional criminal, often asked to do morally repugnant things, and the consequences this has on your interpersonal relationships and the rest of your life.

Influences:
   TV:   Burn Notice
      Chuck
      Human Target
      Leverage
      Smith
      White Collar
   Film:   Collateral
      Domino
      Grosse Pointe Blank
      Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang
      Lucky Number Slevin
      Miami Vice
      Ronin
      Smokin’ Aces
      Strange Days
      The Transporter
      The Usual Suspects
      Way of the Gun

Concept:   I want to run a Shadowrun game heavily influenced by the films and TV shows above.  The idea is that cleverness is more important than brute force, or more simply: tact is more important than dakka.  I envisage that most people will not use weapons bigger than pistols with any regularity whatsoever.

I’m keen to use the rules to create the atmosphere of a crime-based TV show or fairly clever action film.  I love heist movies and so I’d like to make legwork and planning a big part of the game.  I’m also keen to emphasise that your characters are criminals but should probably not be sociopaths, unless that’s a feature: killing should not be an easy option and particularly visible acts of violence or murder will certainly be met with police investigation.  So each and every time you kill someone in the game should be a conscious decision that you’ve made.  It may sometimes be a necessary evil but it is certainly never a good thing or an easy out.

You will start play as a group of criminals (with the appropriate flaw) who are in transit between two prison facilities in Seattle, along with a number of other criminals.  You might just be starting your sentence, or on your way to your final parole hearing.  You might be innocent, or you might be proud of your crimes.  You might have been imprisoned for two months or twenty years.  All that matters is that your character is in the transfer vehicle when it’s attacked, and left behind after the guards are killed and the target of the extraction is removed.  Your characters should be the sort to work together and go into business as a shadowrunning team, as you don’t have any other options.

In that line of work, you can mostly expect not to get totally betrayed by your employer but you should be aware that you are likely being used, manipulated, lied to and kept in the dark at any given point.  Over time, I hope that the campaign will develop in such a way that there will be much international travel and involvement in many high-stakes activities that challenge your characters’ morals and capabilities, with the end result being lots of fun for everyone.
[/spoiler]

Somehow, from that, they got to this place where they obsess over not killing people.  I should stress that one member of the party doesn't really have the same qualms; the houngan managed to summon a Force 10 Guardian Spirit during the last mission, and selected Natural Weaponry as one of his optional powers.  He killed every single person he attacked on the first blow; when the other PCs found out, they (verbally) tore him a new one for going so far off-plan.