Would you play in a cyberpunk setting where you play as criminals existing in the shadow of neo-feudal government...

Would you play in a cyberpunk setting where you play as criminals existing in the shadow of neo-feudal government structures and ludicrously swollen and diversified investment banks in parts of the world (Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, the Chinese Interior) that were ravaged by the Third World War

Other urls found in this thread:

imgur.com/a/BzkvD
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Maybe, but it sounds like every cyberpunk setting ever. What about it makes it special?

Mmmmyep

There's an emphasis on the oft negelcted parts of the world outside of megacities that are basically post apocalyptic, and are essentially Europe a hundred years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire but with computers and the risk of your hamlet being eaten by a rogue nanoswarm or wiped out by a bio-engineered warbeast.

Sounds more like Twilight 2000 than cyberpunk, but keep going...

Go on...

the backcountry gets ignored too much during cyberpunk, OP. I like this, would play

Eh, doesn't sound that cool to me. Sounds like there would be a fine line between it and a straight-up postapoc setting. Personally I have little interest in postapoc settings.

That being said, if this something you think is really fucking cool then go and make it.

That may be the GM's emphasis, but what's going to stop the players getting bored as country bumpkins with F-150s and buggering off to the nearest megaplex for some "real action" at the first drop of Colt pistol?

The line seperating it from post-apoc is that there is still a functioning world order outside of theses areas, again like the post-collapse westen roman empires remnants.

A functioning world order run by whom?

According to which socio-politico-economic system?

Be specific, goddamn it. Your players will ask all these basic questions.

Speaking of which, I'm attempting to write a cyberpunk setting that functions as an alternate history to 2300ad. Instead of things getting nice, they get better but still bad after the Twilight War.

I'm not OP by the way

Intredasting. Care to post it? I'll try to rate it fairly.

Yes, I would play Shadowrun.

Yeah, and I find that line too thin for me to find it any more engaging than a postapoc setting.

>Papers, Please

Ham-fisted railroading ain't going to go well in a cyberpunk setting.

I'm not anywhere near done on it, and need to still write more, but... I guess I could post what I have now.

Here's the world map(s) imgur.com/a/BzkvD

Ignore the opening bit, that's from before I decided to set it in 2050 instead of 2026 (Which was sooort of pushing the possibility window of tech advancement after a nuclear war).

Your CRT font is pretty awesome, at the very least. Will read more in the morning and comment. Maybe you should start your own thread?

>cities not wanting Mad Max in their borders
>Ham-fisted railroading

You don't play much rpgs, do you?

Nah, it's in such an early stage that there's no point. I have barely even have enough lore to run a game in the setting (Which would probably help me write more lore for it).

Cool maps, bro. Wouldn't the USSR, UK and Ukraine splinter into a lot more statelets though?

The USSR Split in to more states than it did in real life. Or, rather, it lost more territory. It only retained Estonia and Belarus through war. It's also written from the viewpoint of the 1980s, where the more pessimistic thought the USSR would survive for ever. The UK splinted as well as it could, England being a junta and Scotland being an unintentional anarchist state (IE in a perpetual state of chaos).

It varies. There's a bit of a three-way cold war going on between South Africa (mildly fascistic military state), Japan (reationary imperialists), and Brazil ("democratic" oligarchy). WW3 (about 30 years ago in-setting) is referred to as the SovAm War (America fragmented, Soviets lost a ton of territory and are now a shell thats essentially a puppet of there homegrown Macrobank), but everyone from both Germanies to China to Iran was involved, so the above three had some room to grow, most of what isn't puppet states of the "Big Three" states are run by the Macrobanks, and the slivers between those is where the PCs operate.
Interestingly, the border between Macrobank-run Sprawls/puppet states and the "Outsprawl" is pretty fuzzy, which a) keeps tension/violence high, which provides business for the arms and security divisions every Macro has, and b) outsprawlers have uses as disposable, under-the-table assets, so entrance into a city needs to be easy for them.

Of course, Central Europe, where i intend to start my players, is just a whole mess of independent mini-sprawls and outsprawl regions, with only indirect Big Three and Macrobank influence.

The fact that leftover war materiel, being self-repairing, is easy to scavenge, and players have, at most, an IFV-turned-tractor-turned crude tank.

A) the players signing up for country bumpkin shenaniganery, and B) hopefully good work on the GMs part keeping the backcountry interesting

>signing up for country bumpkin shenaniganery
So, Stay Still Stay Silent?

Russo-American War would sound better in my opinion.

Not OP, but I had planned a small game in the outer edges of a conurbation after a civil war/interregnum in the United States. the theory is that sprawls still require resource extraction and even if your protein source is soybeans, you still need wide open spaces to grow them. So the big empty spaces in between cities have only become emptier still as everything that could be automated in the countryside was, and only viable communities remain. The population imbalance between cities and country has only gotten worse. PCs might see couriers running guns or drugs between cities using the old interstates, or there might be racketeering along the supply chains running into the cities done by gangs or cartels. There's a lot to work with, even in the empty spaces on the map.

"Macrobanks" is not a very good name. Stick with the classic megacorps or hypercorporations.