[KarmaInferno]

Most "lone wolf" character types don't do well in tabletop RPGs. Dedicated snipers included. They may seem cool as a concept but in actual play if you aren't playing a team character you're going to spend a lot of time doing nothing. Roleplaying games are a group activity, after all.

My point earlier was that the example of the assassin pixie with sniper rifle isn't a good example, when talking about special snowflake characters, because we are given so little information. As I said, the brief text given may even suggest he used that sniper rifle deliberately so it would get into the news - it was a 'public' assassination, meant to sent a message. For all we know the character may normally use other methods to kill people - it didn't say he ONLY used that weapon. Simply not enough info.

There are plenty of special snowflake characters in SR canon. That's just not a good example of one.



-k

[ScytheKnight]

And again, "Special Snowflake" and "Mary Sue" characters are a failing of their creator and have nothing to do the system.

[Duellist_D]

Maybe try hating the bad writers/RPers than the race?

Or better yet, once again reqlize that theres more to Shadowrun than your personal opinion of what it should be and grow the F up.

And again, "Special Snowflake" and "Mary Sue" characters are a failing of their creator and have nothing to do the system.

Yes, it does.
The system (or rather, some parts of it) enables the characters, having rules for something encurages people to build something with it.. Sure, you CAN build a special snowflake Character without anything except the base book.
But it is a lot harder (=> you see a lot less at tables) compared to having the rules to build a Trans-Ork reptiloid Furry-Kin/ half-Metalpony who is posessed by a Vodoon, readily available without any hassle.
Setting would lose nothing of value if most of these freaks stayed as non-playable races.

[KarmaInferno]

BadWrongFun: Are You Enjoying Yourself Correctly?

Fortunately, Run Faster was meant as a set of optional expansion rules, much like it's predecessors. If you don't like it, don't use it for your games. Others might want such things actually statted up.

My issue is that if you're going to have a book with rules on how the rules mechanics for X work, you might wanna actually put rules on how the rules mechanics for X work into that book.



-k

[Sendaz]

My issue is that if you're going to have a book with rules on how the rules mechanics for X work, you might wanna actually put rules on how the rules mechanics for X work into that book.

-k

+1

[Dinendae]

My issue is that if you're going to have a book with rules on how the rules mechanics for X work, you might wanna actually put rules on how the rules mechanics for X work into that book.

-k

+1

+2

[Medicineman]

My issue is that if you're going to have a book with rules on how the rules mechanics for X work, you might wanna actually put rules on how the rules mechanics for X work into that book.

-k

+1

+2

+3

HougH!
Medicineman

[MijRai]

+4

[Herr Brackhaus]

C-C-C-COMBOBREAKER!