Shadowrun
Shadowrun Missions Living Campaign => Living Campaign Discussion => Topic started by: ericbives on <08-04-15/2323:47>
-
I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but I wanted the campaign coordinators to know that as a first time player I was very disappointed and frustrated with my experience at Gen Con, especially with "The First Taste".
I had been looking forward to playing a real game of Shadowrun for a long time, having bought the book two years ago, and having built a character at the Welcome to the Shadows event the prior year. I signed up for one of the missions, but since I still didn't feel very comfortable with the combat system yet and didn't want to frag someone's mission due to inexperience, I signed up for The First Taste as my very first event at the con. But the adventure we went on was a complete waste of time -a story with a few skill checks and no combat at all! Why would you guys completely waste the opportunity to help a new player get prepared for a real game by running something so pointless? Especially in the two hour time slot! Because I didn't feel any more confident about the game after that, I turned in my ticket for the mission and found something else to do.
In comparison, have you guys seen the Quests that Paizo was running for new Pathfinder players? They are designed to be short, but at least they are designed to get the new player comfortable with the combat system along with skill checks and such.
Obviously, I'm really bummed about this, or I wouldn't be taking the time to write this post. I hope in the future you will offer a better introductory experience, because I would really like to play sometime.
Eric
-
I have not played in one of the 5th Edition Convention Games, but my GM has been running
Missions games, and, frankly, they do not give opportunities for Faces or Mages. Having played
this week in Heroes of Rokugan games from that living campaign for Legend of the Five Rings,
I am rather disappointed in the Missions games. The Heroes of Rokugan modules give opportunities
for all three types of characters(Courtiers, Bushi,and Shugenja..ie Social, Combat, and Magic) to
not only matter, but be vital. I think that this might be a better way for Missions to go in the future.
-
Eric,
First off, sorry for your experience at GenCon. I hate the fact we didn't provide you a good experience. I really appreciate your feedback as we want to bring quality and fun events to all players.
The First Taste was a new event for GenCon, so we expected there might be some items which needed to be fixed and I'm glad you pointed out one of the items we need to fix. I will discuss this with the new Lead RPGs Agent so we can improve the event for future conventions.
Mara,
Once I get the post GenCon stuff done, I'll be working with the writers to review our Missions and work to provide y'all the best product we can. Thank you for the feedback!
-
Well, without echoing Ray too much, I just want to say that as agents, our goal is to do our best to make sure everyone has a good time. If we fell short of that goal, then that's something we have to pick up and get better. I know it kills some agents to have a player walk away unhappy. It does happen though, and it's good to know about it when it does.
As far as the other comment in the thread, what I can say is that missions are built with lots of things in mind, but one thing that's impossible to plan for is who is going to sit down at your table. You may end up with a table full of nothing but mages infiltrating a super high background count place, or a bunch of deckers in the wilderness.
If we make something hinge upon that character type, and they don't show up at the table, we are equally screwed. Say a mission revolves around slick facework. What happens when you get 5 uncouth trolls and two reality impaired technomancers? Bottom line, the opportunities are there, but they simply can't be so pivotal that without them the mission fails. Having someone be so vital can cause a lot of issues when they decide to take the day off.
Ultimately, its up to the GM to tailor the mission to the table. If you get a table full of faces, there wil be more negotiating and bluffing opportunities than straight combat. to go the other way, I ran a mission at origins that was supposed to be an undercover kidnapping at a swank party and the team decided to blow up the mark's car on the way to the party and grab them on the exit ramp after launching missiles at their bodyguards.
Really, if you have been playing in a home game and missions, and the GM isnt giving you ample opportunity, it sounds more like an issue there than with the mission itself.
-
That said, Shadowrun in general has always been very 'Here's the situation - do with it what you will.' If you feel that you don't get much opportunity as a Face or a Mage, get more proactive and make those opportunities happen. One of my favorite parts about GMing Missions, is being witness to the sheer variety of different approaches that each table takes to solve each problem.
- Wailer
-
That's definitely a legitimate observation, Wailer! I'll add that as Agents, we should also be on the lookout for folks who may not be as able to put their assertive foot forward, especially folks new to the game!
To the OP and others, all feedback is welcome and helps us to perfect our game, either at the Team level or at the individual level.
-
Echo that
Faces and mages sometimes need to step up and make things happen for them
faces place shouldn't just be get the best deal at the beginning of the mission
mages shouldn't be the guys who summons the spirit for concealment or track someone down
sometimes new players get stuck with these archtypes, and are not sure how to play these characters
hopefully, more experienced players can help nudge new players into action
also, the writers of the missions cannot prepare for every type character who may be at the table, and may not include a scene for each archtype to shine
-
When i GM a table i like to atleast be asking everyone individually what they are doing during another persons "turn" when were not in combat. I find it actually brings those people who are a little more of the shy-away-from-the-spotlight people to the front and allows them to do something. You will however have those people at a table who "control" the action and the flow of the mission via their actions...
-
If we make something hinge upon that character type, and they don't show up at the table, we are equally screwed.
I'd argue that you can design challenges with multiple solutions (or clever players will create them), but yes, you can't design missions reliant on a specific skill or ability. However, I've been running missions for my regular group and the Decker and Face characters are typically underutilized.
My suggestion to the mission writers is to hide bonus lewts and prizes behind skill checks. For example in the season five stuff all set in Chicago you've got runners dragging a hacker into the CZ to make a Hardware test or three. (Essentially). You could scatter around things like small data steals or con jobs or stashes of reagents or stranded motorists for the possibility of someone with the appropriate skills or abilities. Mind you GMs can do this on the fly, but they could also be written into the Missions.
Not necessarily something for everyone in every mission, but a few side quests scattered around. Sorta like you've got in Critic's Choice with Becky 99 and the Trid recordings, but maybe gated by some social checks or more hacking on the back end. Anyway, few extra paragraphs here and there for the specialists that don't throw off the Missions economy but let the players that invested in specialties have a mini-spotlight moment.
Little rambly, but overall I do like the Missions for what they are. I use them for our weekly game that meets for a couple hours and they're great for that since I'm too lazy to write my own ; )