/srg/ Shadowrun General - All Your Nuyen Are Belong To Us

I think I've blown my load too quickly with my players and have them in a secret AAA reasurch facility fighting insect spirits on their 5th run. Where can I find a list of smaller corp names, by region if possible, so I can dial things back with the corps?

Just make them up. There's really no comprehensive list of smaller corps, and at that point, you don't need all too much of an identity for them, so think up a name, what they do, and go wild.

What's the in-lore explanation for the lack of European AAAs aside from S-K (and EVO if you count the slavs)? Clapistanians have 3, Nips have 3, and then there's just one for every continent except Africa which is a warzone on top of being full of incompetent niggers.

I'm just guessing here, but does it have something to do with how intact European nations are? More government control = less for MEGAs to exploit. Germany splintered, and S-K is German.

While calling the poor decker an insect.

shadowrun.wikia.com/wiki/Shadowrun_corporations

Read whatever setting book addresses the area you're in (old books are fine for this), or 6th World Almanac if there is none, and go from there.

Market Panic also mentions a few lesser-known corps and their current power plays, if you want to do tie it in with the latest fluff, but you'll have to basically read the several chapters in their entirety to find whatever hooks interest you.

Move the team to Finland and do some runs for Erika.

Japanese and Americans were the first ones out the gate with megas, so they took hold there first and grew fat before the world came apart. Europe got soaked in toxic chemicals, depleting what resources were left there, and some nations like France were too stubborn to allow megacorps to start.

It's not evenly distributed, one per continent. Australia doesn't have one, Japan had the only ones in the entire Eastern hemisphere before Wuxing emerged and EVO jumped to the mainland, CATCo is dead, there's nothing in South America beyond the Azzies who control only the northern part of that continent, etc.

Hasn't Erika merged into Neonet?

Yes, them and Transys Neuronet were the basis of it. I don't know if the Erika brand name still exists.

>Australia doesn't have one
Well I was only counting continents that matter in any way.

Apparently it did. I do not keep up to speed with every backstory event.

And honestly that sucks. I was very fond of thinking of Finland as a relatively isolated space, where Erika is pretty much in total control, without being a global player.

It provided a good microcosmos for campaign starts, where you could let your team find itself before going into the whole corp politics between AAAs.

I'm certain the brand still exists, but the company doesn't, so one cannot do runs for Erika, only for Neonet.

I'm guessing Neonet has a huge presence in Finland. Them and S-K, if I were to guess (isn't Lofwyr's second in command a Finn?)

Stealing millions from an A corp: Good idea or bad idea?

I always envisioned the whole Scandi union as anti-corp, myself.

Depends. Do you like being alive, and having friends and family who are alive?

It's just an A corp.

Which means that it's a powerful multinational corporation, though it still (allegedly) follows the laws of the nations it operates in. A ranked corporations are still huge and immensely powerful- Sandstorm, Spinrad, Trans-Orbital, Honda, and Telestrian are all A-ranking, and all capable of destroying you and your life with ease.

Pro tip: If you think you can steal millions from someone, remember they have millions more to spend to get it back.

I love some shadowrun but I admit I am very shitty at character creation. Anyone have some good ideas on a character for a campaign that is likely to be more pink Mohawk than black trenchcoat?

I'm thinking of either making an adept or face character but I don't even know where to start

A rank corps lack extraterritoriality and are rather small.

>Implying that stops them from doing all the tricky dicky shit corps do

Any news about Anarchy?

That's why I'm stealing millions and flagging their accounts to be frozen under KE review.

Ask yourself "how did they end up in the shadows" and go from there

"Rather small" is a huge understatement. They're a multinational corporation with tens or hundreds of thousands of employees. The fact that Nestle can't declare their own laws hasn't stopped them from paying for people to be murdered in our world, it's even less of a hurdle in 2078 when this is a well-known facet of public life.

You can't. In addition to the basic conceit that you can't steal from accounts in SR (the Ends of the Matrix by Trollman goes into the logical technical specifics, but the metagame reason is because otherwise the game would just be deckers doing bank fraud), Knight Errant has no authority to freeze or review the accounts of a multinational. KE is a security company hired by others, not world police, and even if you say they are currently acting as the police for Seattle, freezing accounts and investigating massive fraud is stuff that needs court orders and investigations from government agencies. The only people who might -MIGHT- still have that power would be the banks themselves. Zurich Orbital is under no obligation to comply with a UCAS government request to freeze accounts, but they might choose to do so to protect their client.

Clap it with me, retard.

A corps are not multinational.

'Multinational' is literally the definition of and slang used for an A-ranked corp. Any corp within one nation, no matter how big, does not get ranked by the Corporate Court.

What you're thinking of is 'extraterritorial'.

...

>retarded cunt BTFO instantly
Oh good, the shitposting hasn't caught up yet.
4e is shit

I never envisioned this question to turn into bait. Goddamn.

I go to play MMOS and people start a shitfest.

1E, 2E. 3E, 4E, 5E are shit

If that's legit I'm curious why you think so.

forgot anarchy

Enough reasons to make me think they're shit but not enough reasons to stop me from playing Shadowrun out of game desperation

That was not intentional

Are mixed-role characters still viable in 5e, or did that end with 4e?

They're still viable, but work best where there's obvious synergy. The classic example is a combat samurai/adept. They're going to have fantastic Agility, Reaction, and Intuition. That lets them double as a physical infiltrator (Gymnastics, Sneaking), an escape driver (Pilot), or just being really good at Perception/Assensing for legwork, casing, and other espionage.

Points tend to be tight enough, though, that trying to combine archetypes with fuckall overlap (street samurai and faces, for example) or heavy resource drains (decker and rigger both costing a fucking lot of money apiece) tends to not work out well. Or at all.

Another combo I like is Shaman and face, bit tight on skills but all you need is huge cha and will

And body to not die. And reactions/intuition for initiative so you can actually contribute in combat.

What about Street Sam/Rigger?

All a shaman needs - really needs - is Charisma and Willpower for magic and Intuition for Assensing, at least as far as non-special attributes go. You're talking about making them into functional cross-role combat characters as well.

That's like saying street samurai need Charisma for 'lying to security guards and passing Etiquette tests.'

Sure, they benefit from it in that way, but it's not actually directly relevant to the core archetype itself, it's a crossover bonus.

Everyone needs some body, reaction/intuition you can pick up a spell or two for

Street Sam/Rigger has the same problem. They're both huge and largely opposite draws on cash. The closest you're probably going to get is, say, a character with tons of Reaction Enhancers and Wired Reflexes for the (up to) +6 Reaction, a control rig for jumped-in driving, and a single tricked out cyberarm for dice pools and armor. But you're not going to be able to afford drones and RCCs and such that direction; you'll just be managing to be a halfway decent samurai and a fucking amazing driver.

>I will never have to worry about combat because I didn't build for it
>this is equivalent to something that the samurai can get someone else to do

>>I will never have to worry about combat because I didn't build for it
Not the guy you're responding to, but that's correct. Handling physical security is the Samurai's responsibility.

Let me rephrase: a drone-focused combat rigger who can also shoot a gun.

>NPCs do not understand GtMF
>samurai are omnipresent

The mage can just stay invisible and let the samurai do his job. Or sit behind cover and not reveal that he's a mage.

If the mage lets someone jump on him during downtime, he's a complete retard. And you never split the party.

That is entirely plausible. Some 'ware will be purchased anyways (something with REA bonuses for driving your van full of drones away from the scene) that will help with shooting, and being a decent shot with one type of weapon is easy enough.

Boosted Reflexes are cheap enough for an extra die, it's easy to get 10+2d6 and be a backup gun.

>the mage can do nothing and avoid being geeked
>everyone should just hide behind the sammy in any fight

>>the mage can do nothing and avoid being geeked

Well, yes, he can.

>>everyone should just hide behind the sammy in any fight

I'm not saying that they should, I'm saying that physical combat isn't their job, and they're entirely entitled to keep themselves out of battle and instead concentrate on their actual role.

>entitled to keep themselves out of battle
>"Mr. GM man you're not allowed to shoot at me, I'm entitled to stay out of fights, NPCs should not try to stop me."

Yes, they're allowed so shoot, and they probably will if the party has to go loud. That's exactly why the street samurai is there.

>the street samurai exists
>I am now immune to bullets and grenades and should never worry about combat
>it's someone else's job

READ THE LAST THREAD

Yes, the street samurai's role is pulling physical security and dealing with threats in the meatspace.

Of course the mage isn't immune to grenades or bullets, that's why the samurai is there to draw fire and attention while the others deal with their own roles.

>>it's someone else's job

That would be correct.

Okay, real talk. Do you really think that the samurai is infallible, that things never go wrong, and that you shouldn't insure against worst-case scenarios, like the samurai not being able to 100% protect the party?

Not him, but
The mage has one job
Do magical stuff
His role isn't "Be good in a fight", for that you have the Fight Monsters: Sammies, Adepts and Drone Riggers

In 5e they only need to get 10 init for full defense, nothing more

>the samurai is infallible
of course not, but his M.O should be to give the others enough time to get the fuck outta dodge and leave
>like the samurai not being able to 100% protect the party
again, not protect, more draw attention away from
Everyone should try to deal with the sammies so that the mage, decker and face can get away

So do all of your fights happen in hallways, with the enemy coming from one end and the door to freedom at the other?

Not the user you've been arguing with, but it's impossible for the 'Fight Monster' be everywhere at once, and to draw all the attention of every security asset. There are going to be guards are not going to be distracted by one guy while three other armed runners, including the orc hung with fetishes and the dwarf carrying the cyberdeck and all the paydata, run away.

And saying 'Don't split the party' is a very foolish thing indeed to say in SR. The ability to be able to walk away from someone and still talk to them via commlink is the most important thing about playing in any modern/future setting compared to D&D. If you want the mage to go 'do magical stuff', he needs to be in the best place to do it, not shuffling along with the decker, street samurai and infiltrator in a clump. Inevitably, there are going to be times and places where they don't have someone else to jump in front of the bullets, and having basic weapons competence is a very good thing to have in that situation.

>Okay, real talk.
Sure.
>Do you really think that the samurai is infallible,
Nope.
>that things never go wrong,
They do, which is a good reason to hire a samurai in the first place.
>and that you shouldn't insure against worst-case scenarios,
Being in combat is a worst-case scenario.
>like the samurai not being able to 100% protect the party?
Possibly not, but he will hopefully be giving others enough time to make their escape.

Exactly. Mage's job is Doing Magic Shit. Decker's (or technomancer's) job is to Do Tech Shit. Face's job is Do Talky Shit, and infiltrator's job is Do Sneaky Shit. And so on.

Those are their primary jobs. You can branch out to combat, but that is not the primary function of the role you're playing.

Similarly, it may be sometimes necessary for the Samurai to start hacking shit, or the face to start wishing that he knew magic.

You wrote a whole lot, but said nothing of relevance.

>Being in combat is a worst-case scenario.
Depending on how much D&D is in your group, combat may very well just be a given in any run.

Being able to give a token defense is a part of being a PC. It's not part of their character role, it's just a part of "I'm making a character, at all".

Any combat that happens is either a planned occurence, in which case the sam should be able to easly deal with it, or the run has gone tits up.

>in which case the sam should be able to easly deal with it
What if the idea is to attack from multiple directions at once?

Also, here's one, what if the mage wants a goddamn burrito and goes to Stuffer Shack, only for Food Fight to happen without his sammy in sight?

So, how about that errata progress? Giving shifters dual-natured seems to have stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest.

>What if the idea is to attack from multiple directions at once?

Then I would suggest planning in a fashion that don't involve your runners having to take up roles that they aren't specialised in.

>Also, here's one, what if the mage wants a goddamn burrito and goes to Stuffer Shack, only for Food Fight to happen without his sammy in sight?

Then he has nobody to blame except himself since he left himself get in that situation. A mage that lets himself get caught pants down is a dead mage, as you very well know.

Luckily, magic is pretty useful, and a summon should be able to cause enough chaos to let the mage to pop invisibility and bugger off.

In that case you do as the wise sage 2D did
AND GET THE FUCK OUT

>Then he has nobody to blame except himself since he left himself get in that situation. A mage that lets himself get caught pants down is a dead mage, as you very well know.

Yeah, all the characters should live together, move as one unit, and never engage in acts of spontaneity or individuality.

The game you are describing is so fucking trenchcoat and tightly regimented it sounds like a Choose Your Own Adventure book with all the choices but one crossed out on every page.

>Yeah, all the characters should live together, move as one unit, and never engage in acts of spontaneity or individuality.

No, I didn't say that. All well built characters should have a good chance of avoiding combat or at least getting the hell out of dodge if combat does happen. Fighting is never in your best interest.

>The game you are describing is so fucking trenchcoat and tightly regimented it sounds like a Choose Your Own Adventure book with all the choices but one crossed out on every page.

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not saying that you shouldn't cross-class, but that's exactly what it is, cross-classing. The role of a mage is to do magic shit, that's it. Also you're talking to two different people.

It's always a good sign when there are people taking each sentence of a previous post, then giving it a paragraph-sized response.

I do like how Goodman just threw out that they hadn't gotten to Pixies and ducked out, though. Shows uncommon good sense
still better than the discussion in this thread

I don't see anything new? Unless that's your point.

Putting a couple points into being able to shoot a gun is the same as putting a couple into being able to slip past a dude or excuse yourself in a pinch.

Shit happens is what we're trying to say. Refusing to put into points into being able to fight seems like you consider that kind of shit happening to be a the point where you say "Oh well I give up". Like you "lost" somehow.

Nigger, when your D&D wizard knows how to shank a bitch should he get jumped, he isn't multiclassing into rogue.

That's the kind of logical leap you're taking here.

We got a tiny preview of a char sheet in (I think) the last thread

>Also you're talking to two different people

So are you.

Also, there is no 'cross-classing'. Shadowrun uses archetypes for a reason- they are broad character strokes, not strictly regimented mechanical classes. Nothing awful happens if the mage has 4 points in Pistols, just as nothing awful happens if the mage has 4 points in Running and hoofs it every time someone coughs loudly. It's not wrong to play either way, but I will say it is wrong to insist that a character can only do one thing, like magic or fighting or physically infiltrating, and that if they end up in a situation where they choose not to do that then they have failed.

It's the issue of talking from a theoretical charop shit.

Someone tries to suggest the practical 4 points in pistols, and someone else points out "but he's a MAGE and every point he puts into that is points not spent on being a MAGE".

Just wanted to throw that out there because this discussion is going to go nowhere unless someone does.

>Nigger, when your D&D wizard knows how to shank a bitch should he get jumped, he isn't multiclassing into rogue.

>That's the kind of logical leap you're taking here.

Not quite, because everyone can shank a bitch in both games without spending points to do it.

A better analogy would be having the Wizard take a melee weapon focus talent just in case someone gets in his face.

>Putting a couple points into being able to shoot a gun is the same as putting a couple into being able to slip past a dude or excuse yourself in a pinch.

Yes, both of those are examples of cross-classing.

>Shit happens is what we're trying to say. Refusing to put into points into being able to fight seems like you consider that kind of shit happening to be a the point where you say "Oh well I give up". Like you "lost" somehow.

If you have to go loud, chances are very high that you have indeed lost.

Thanks for point that out.

My response would be that points put into Etiquette, Con, Computer, Running, and all the other basic skills are not points spent on being a MAGE, but they are points spent on being a runner, a person who lives in this world and works as a professional criminal. Even charop discussions generally include 'be able to handle everyday life, because minmaxing only gets you so far'.

Couple threads back I re-posted the character sheet, which has the unfortunate drawback of being made for ants. Beyond that we don't really know anything new; it's still narrativist drek that has nice art, Cue System is still terrible, one of the sample characters is a shaman mechanic that thinks Dragonslayer is one of God's angels, and that Blades in the Dark hack seems to be more thematically shadowrun than 'Cue, but it has dicebuckets!'.

Last I heard it's still on track for an end of year release.

The guy in the picture looks like such a dweeb desu.
>animated flames
>fingerless gloves
>heterochromia
>'cool' scar
What a nerd.

>So are you.

I know.

>Also, there is no 'cross-classing'. Shadowrun uses archetypes for a reason- they are broad character strokes, not strictly regimented mechanical classes.
Classes, archetypes... I'm trying to avoid repeating the same word like a broken record. It's all semantics anyway.

>Nothing awful happens if the mage has 4 points in Pistols, just as nothing awful happens if the mage has 4 points in Running and hoofs it every time someone coughs loudly.

No, but then again, all points not spent in the main role will make the main role weaker and so another failure point. If you spread yourself too thin, chances are much higher that you will have to fight your way out.

> It's not wrong to play either way, but I will say it is wrong to insist that a character can only do one thing, like magic or fighting or physically infiltrating, and that if they end up in a situation where they choose not to do that then they have failed.

Have you even been reading what I wrote? I'm not saying it's what you HAVE to do. I'm saying that it's not the mage's responsibility in a group to have capability in combat, that's the samurai's job.

What the mage does in his own time and what happens to him is his own responsibility.

>BitD hack
que? seems I missed it

drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzeOkUYkhGYNUWlva2txbDEwTTQ?usp=sharing

>If you have to go loud, chances are very high that you have indeed lost.
Are you sure? Are you sure it doesn't just shake things up and make it more interesting?

Unless you're playing with a GM who hates going loud to the point of having a dragon eat anyone not the sammy who shoots a gun

>all points not spent in the main role will make the main role weaker and so another failure point
If you specialize too hard you run the risk of sitting out for half the game because you're only good at one thing.

>I'm not saying it's what you HAVE to do. I'm saying that it's not the mage's responsibility in a group to have capability in combat, that's the samurai's job.
You can't agree with us AND tell us we're wrong

>Have you even been reading what I wrote? I'm not saying it's what you HAVE to do.

>all points not spent in the main role will make the main role weaker and so another failure point

Maybe you mean something else, but it's not what is being said. What is being said is that everyone has strict roles to play, and any capability outside that role is a failure because you are not minmaxing as hard as you possibly can, being a perfect autist with exactly one area of expertise.

Your 'team' is a bunch of of uber-specialists with such narrow focus that they put a telescope to shame, with tightly controlled areas of 'responsibility'; each is expected to solely handle that area, without any interaction from other PCs..

Mate, nobody's saying that a mage can't or shouldn't have combat abilities.

They're saying that combat abilities aren't in any way a fundamentally core part of being a mage, and instead represent cross-archetype investments, the same as a street samurai buying stealth skills like an infiltrator, or a decker buying social skills like a face.

Most people have secondary and tertiary specialties. Because they'd be retarded not to.

In the same way that a Street Samurai buying Charisma up to 3 represents investing outside of their archetype but also plugs a clear weakness, a shaman buying Body and Agility up to 3 represents investing outside of their archetype while also plugging a clear weakness.

But they're distinct things representing investment outside of your main schtick, rather than mandatory/default aspects of your primary archetype.

many thanks yekka

This entire argument has been because of someone being against investing outside of your main schtick.

>Are you sure? Are you sure it doesn't just shake things up and make it more interesting?

No, it only serves to make characters dead. No funsies.

>Unless you're playing with a GM who hates going loud to the point of having a dragon eat anyone not the sammy who shoots a gun

No dragon, but magical, technical and conventional forensics, yes. While some entities are graceful enough to understand that the runners are merely doing a job and thus are not to blame, others are not as benevolent. Tracing is a scary thing.

>If you specialize too hard you run the risk of sitting out for half the game because you're only good at one thing.

That's always a risk, yes. There's hardly ever a session where people don't have a job to do during any of the phases.

If planning and execution go well, the sammy won't be able to do his job either. That's part of the game though, and you can make up with that with good roleplaying and party interaction.

>You can't agree with us AND tell us we're wrong

I'm telling you that you are wrong in your assessment that a mage should have combat skills, but I'm agreeing in that it's not a bad idea.

The mage has different responsibilities. The responsibility he has to the group is to be a mage, which doesn't involve anything except Do Magic Shit. His responsibilities to himself though are to be somewhat capable in combat so as not to get killed if shit hits the fans AND Do Magic Shit.

No, this entire argument has been about one guy being shitty at explanations, and a second guy misunderstanding the first guy.

I just clarified the actual shit being said into non-retarded, non-autistic language.

So how about you two stop shitting up the thread, you stupid fucking faggot?

Holy fucking christ.

I want you both to die in the same fire, you tremendous faggots.

Come on, I'm having too much fun with this autistic argument.

Too much fun to die in a fire, that is.