Re: [BNW] Sneak Weak?

["iguana.1031" <iguana.1031@gateway.net>]

A good point but I see it working better the fewer players there are.  I
have 6 players in my group and, in a large group, a Sneak loses
effectiveness.  It's similar to the Decker (netrunner) in Shadowrun - It's
hard to have one as a PC in a group because, if you let them do their thing,
their thing is going off by themselves to scout and the rest of your players
sit their bored.  You can reduce this to a few die rolls ("OK, give me a
Stealth roll to get close, a Perception roll and a Stealth roll to get
back.") to keep things moving but this is very unfair to the player because
it keeps them out of the spotlight for the moments when they can shine.  I
don't allow Decker PCs in my Shadowrun game for this reason.  I haven't had
a player express an interest in a Sneak yet but, if it happens, I'll
probably recommend against it.



----- Original Message -----
From: Theo McGuckin <tsm@jlab.org>
To: <bnw@gamerz.net>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: [BNW] Sneak Weak?


> > >My group was talking about the Sneak PP. One of the players was
thinking
> > >about playing one, but it seemed under-powered to her/us.
> > >
> >
> > Well first of all, you expect "balance" in power packages.  Heh.  ;)
> >
> > Our observation is that any package without combat abilities is
> > "under-powered."  It kinda depends on how combat-intensive your campaign
is.
>
> See my last post for a response to this (I think in a good campaign all
> the packages should balance out somewhat, except maybe the genius :)
>
> > Unfortunately, given that your characters are (typically, although not
> > always) on-the-run, underground resistance types at this time, a certain
> > degree of combat is expected.
>
> But since they are on the run, underground etc. their should also be a
> good deal of stealth involved. Any resistance that relies souly on
> hihg-explosives and fisticuffs is going to lose. By defenition you are
> always going to be out-powered (otherwise you would be in power and they
> would be the resistance) so you have to rely on smarts and sneakiness to
> get the job done.
>
> > The problem with Stealth and Sneak, and or basing adventures on it, is
that
> > there is no...well, "drama" to it.  An adventure that ends with:
> >
> > "Okay, I make my +10 sneak roll, get by the guard, hack the files (maybe
> > dramatically spending a delta point or two), get the vital information
the
> > Defiance needs, and leave."
> >
> > Granted, your other combat-type characters may be doing dramatic things
> > (fighting to distract most of the base guards in this example, for
> > instance).  The problem is that that is...well, more dramatic.  With
> > Sneak/Stealth, you either do it or you don't.  Not much "drama" there.
> >
> > Stealth and adventures built primarly around it just don't have
> > the...dramatic impetus, shall we say?  ;)  There's no variation.  Either
you
> > make the Stealth roll(s), or you don't.
>
> <snip>
>
> These are good points. But I think part of the problem (and I've done it
> too) rests on the Marshall/Guide/DM. Your example of: ""Okay, I make my
> +10 sneak roll..." could just as easily be applied to combat: "Okay, I
> roll to hit and get a 12, my damage is..." The difference is all in the
> embellishment.
> Guides spend lots of time (at least I do) putting together villains with
> unique abilities and also in setting up combat scenarios that challenge
> the players. And a lot of times the same effort isn't put into other types
> of encounters.
> What really nails this for me is this:
> Every time my group (in Deadlands) gets into combat I take the time to map
> out the scene and place miniatures and describe details.
> I can't remember the last time I did that when the group had to sneak
> through a building.
>
> Another problem is that a lot of times people (again from my limited exp.)
> treat stealth skills as all or nothing: "OK, there are two guards in this
> room, but they don't seem really interested in what's going on, so make
> your stealth roll <opposed roll>:
> - "You slip past the guards and duck out of the room without a trace"
> - or - "You try to sneak by the guards, but one turns to stretch just as
> you roll by catching sight of you, roll init."
>
> Instead maybe it should be treated like combat, more of an action by
> action deal:
> Same room, but this time there's a map with curtains, chairs tables with
> table clothes, etc:
> "OK, I try to slink over to the curtains on the wall."
> "You start to make your way to the curtains when you see one of the guards
> get up and turn to stretch."
> <looking at the map> "I'll try to scuttle behind that table, and once I'm
> there I pull out my colt and wait for the worst but hope for the best."
> "Go ahead and roll your stealth, you get a +2 because the cover is so
> close [the player could have gotten a penalty if he had just gone ahead
> to the curtains, which are a good distance away, instead of re-evaluating
> his plan]"
> <making the roll>
> "OK you duck behind the table and slide out your gun. Holding your breath
> for several seconds you hear nothing (you can't see what the guards are
> doing from where your hiding). After a minute you hear one of the guards
> say, 'stop fidgeting murray, it gets on my nerves,"
> "I'll crawl around the table and see if they have their backs to me
> again."
> "Yeah, they've gone back to watching the front door."
> "OK, the curtais looking less friendly all the time. It's a short sprint
> to far door so I'm going to go for it while their backs are to me."
> [the guide gives him a penalty to his roll, but burning a delta point the
> sneak makes it through the room, only 4 more to go]
>
> This could make sneaking through the room just as exciting as a good
> combat.
>
> > And a Gunner can get AP bullets pretty cheaply (a lot more cheaply than
the
> > Kevlar Vest an opponent has that they render useless!).
>
> Well yeah, but other than minor repairs the vest lasts forever, you gotta
> keep buying the bullets. Anyway...
>
> -Theo McCracken, whose thoughts and ideas are solely his own and do not,
> in any way, reflect those of Jefferson Lab or its staff. Unless of
> course there is any money to made off those ideas, in which case the lab
> says: "Gimme, gimme, gimme!"
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
> unsubscribe bnw
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>
>