For some reason, a mix of HQ and urban distopia came to mind. I don't really know wha though, since I've never run/played anything cyberpunkish before. Probably influence by reading about the French Revolution. So, start the setting as a decaying version of NY. Government functions are privatized. Long distance travel/communication has broken down for most people.

Homelands are broad layers of society.

* nobs - Part super rich, part aristocrat. Manage things at a high level, but generally don't work at anything
* syncophants - get things done fo rthe nobs. Run divisions, pnats, etc.
* guards - similar to syncophants, but military traditions. Part bodyguards, part private security, part police, part military.
* drones - middle ages, middle classed, get things done. Watch the news for stories about the nobs, are glad they aren't proles
* proles - economically meaningless,. Blood and circuses, and an informal economy.
* punks - pointless rebels. Some versions of all the other classes, but rebelling against them.



The different versions of magic and religion break out as:

* animism - charms and superstitions for the proles. Most everyone else ignores it. The spirits are there though, some some people can do more than just charms.
* wizardry - cyberware and technology in general. Maybe a forced fit, but I like grimoires as big gadgets including replacement parts, and litergists as ritual mechanics who can generally patch things up for another use.
* theism - disjointed personal cults following charismatic leaders. More focused on the affinities and a point of view than really on Gods. A small one might just be a devote and a copule of followers, i.e. a guy with strange powers and his friends
* heroquesting - I don't really know how that might fit in, but it could be ignored for the most part. And, if the revolution angle would be played up, some of the actions might be basically hero quests iw/o the god time because they could change society.


It all roughly gels for me, but suggestions/comments are welcome. More importantly, I wouldn't want it to degenerate into endless firefights (which is why I might be tempted to try it with HQ rather than something that has lots of detailed gun rules). So, do anyone have any suggestions for good inspirational material about such a setting? (And, I guess that's a request for sim type material for use in what is being trumpeted as a great nar game system. :shrug)

Elgorade

I've been flitting around a few ideas on this topic myself. I had thought that "Homelands" would roughly equate to a combination of economic class and culture, with of course there being the Super-Rich (corporate barons, dilettantes, etc.), the Well-Off (corporate employees, managers and their families), the Middle-Class (shopowners, service workers), the Lower Class (dead-end jobs, no end jobs, criminals) and then the Invisible Class (akin to illegal immigrants, migrant workers). Of course, slight modifications would be made by race (Caucasian, Asian, South Asian, Arabic, Hispanic, African) to account for each races' general status in society and, of course, the Man keeping them down. Personally, I see social status in a cyberpunk game as being very stratified, rigid and unfair. No real political agenda here. I swear. :)

Then, of course, there are occupations, which would loosely fit a lot of the excellent distinctions that you've already brought to light, like "punks", "hackers", etc.

As far as magic goes, I think we have some different ideas.

Personally, I thought that cyberware would be more of a fit for the affinities and feats of Theism, rather than Wizardry. It was my notion that someone could take an affinity like "Boosted Reflexes" and later, after concentrating on Cyberware, could use feats like "Dodge Bullets", etc. Of course, one's highest rating in Cyberware should also work as an automatic penalty to any ability used in a social context (unless of course it's a "Relationship to Local Chrome-Addicts gang").

Animism, of course, would have to stay the same. We both agree on that. It could be expanded, however, to include Voodoo, Neo-Shamanism, Techno-Shamanism, and Nature Religions in the context of the setting.

I had a feeling that the Monotheism in Wizardry, unchanged, fit more with cults and fringe religions, while normal Wizardry might be more of a fit for Hackers, with Grimoires being replaced by Codes, and Spells being replaced by Programs. Of course, talismans would then be a perfect fit for memory cards, micro-disks or ROM sticks.

It would require some retooling of how spells might be thought to work, but if you could take a Hacker with a remote link to the Matrix/Web/Network, etc., and have him cast a "Create Darkness" type of spell, then it could be explained as him hacking the Network and turning all the lights in a building off, with the blink of an eye. Hackers, as I'm seeing them, would be much more of a Neo/Carrie mix than the typical idea of a computer geek tirelessly pounding on a keyboard. With just a glance and a few mental gymnastics, I'm seeing that they could shut down electronics, communicate with electronics, and even have a person's cyberware turn against them. Now, for more involved activities (i.e. Rituals), some sort of deck would be required.

Wizardry/Sorcery, of course, could also be used itself as is. I might stay away from wands and staves, though, veering more towards amulets and gems, as focii, which is, of course, supported in the rules.

As for HeroQuesting, you could take a cue from Unknown Armies and have corporations and a clever group of Underground Adepts and Street Samurai in battle over the mythology of our present and future. In this way, a Mexican Shaman could travel back into the collective unconscious of myth, re-enact events to gain power or change the zeitgeist of the times. Corporations could do this through cults and schools of Wizardry. Shaman could do this through travelling out into the Spirit World. And Hackers could do this by travelling out into the far reaches of Cyberspace.

The end result is the same, either power is gained or something is changed in the modern world that no one can quite put a finger on. Imagine the attitudinal shifts if a Hacker went into Cyberspace and altered the collective unconscious so that the government or a specific corporation was implicated in, say, the murder of John Lennon. The results upon her return might be an increased resistance to corporate power, perhaps greater numbers of anti-corporate activists and certainly a greater mistrust of the Powers That Be.

This would certainly require a good deal of skill on the part of the Hacker, perhaps filing the assassin into the database of government employees. A Shaman could possibly travel into the Spirit World and alter the dreams of the assassin or witnesses to the event, so that they come forward with new memories of how things happened. Corporations and Cultists could travel back to the collective memory itself, altering it to their purposes.

If you treat most of what we consider our cultural history as myth (which to some degree it is), you really open the floodgates on the potential for using HeroQuests in a cyberpunk setting.

Overall, I think it would be a nice fit and this is sort of where I'm going with it. Sort of William Gibson meets Neil Gaiman meets Tim Powers meets John Tynes (Unknown Armies). It is certainly a setting that shows a good deal of promise. Let me know if you find any of my ideas useful/helpful.

Edit: added a couple of clarifications on Hackers.

Hi elgorade,

Here is how I would do it:

There would be no magic per se, since it is a cyberpunk setting (although fantasy/cyberpunk crossovers like Shadowrun has been done in the past).

I would use the Wizardry rules for cyberware and other high-tech, like you suggested. Wizardry in Glorantha is a sort of magical proto science, so it would fit perfectly as SF Tech.

I wouldn't use Theism at all.

I would use a variant of the Animism rules for Neuromancer-style netrunning. I.e. charms, and fetishes, and stuff are really computer programs that characters have written. Thus, "Animism" is only usable when connected to the matrix (or whatever you want to call the internet information highway). I would ignore the heroquesting rules. While the matrix may be similar to the hero plane, I don't think the same rules apply. I'd probably require a roll to "cross over" to the net, but that's it.

Above all: Don't feel restrained by the rules as written. While the Core Rules should probably remain the same, everything else is rather setting specific.

Cheers,

/Peter N

Some nice thoughts.

Scripty: I would stay away from explicitly putting in race . I'ld be worried that it would come off as too stereotypical. if I tried to put any specific mechanical (keyword based skills) in based on it. Not saying it couldn't be done, just that I don't think I could do it.

I pictured all the social classes/homelands as generally very static groups. Heros and villains are the ones who blur the lines and break out of the stasis. The prime example would be my 'Punks' group. At the background level, they are rebels w/o a clue. Violence, rebelion, attitude, but no purpose and it never gets anywhere. So I thiink we've got a similar picture of the society, just expressing parts of it differently.


I like cyberware mapping to grimoires because it gives a bit of mechanistic feel. You get your gear and it has a set list of powers (spells) which you have one overall rating, I also like the idea of characters having tech devises they don't (orderly) or barely (liturgent) understand . Of course, that's more of a decaying distopia than Shadowrun or the Matrix.

The feats and affinities from theism seem so nicely flexable and varried that they fit well with the singular leaders, strangers, heros and villains. They aren't using technology, and they aren't making packs with the spirit world. Maybe they are worshiping Gods, maybe they are tapping into psi powers, I'ld probably leave that open. That might cover someone with reflexes fast enough to dodge bullets, charisma to sway crowds, a natural link with nearby electronics, or even just a knack of always knowing where to scrounge food.


Anyway, thanks fo rthe ideas.

Elgorade

I think the keyword stuff may well indeed be fleixoble enough to work this way. However, I also recommend spending some time thinking about how you will runn combat with ranegd weapons; this will be a much mroe prevalent feature in such a setting. I'm not sure to what extent the current printing discusses this, but the initial one didn't deal with it very deeply. You'll need a solution you are comfortable with.

I'ld like to say that you can always state a goal for each side (e.g. "get to the soor" vs "stop them from entering") and use that as the contest. The shooter isn't in any real danger of being hurt, but he is in danger of failing. But you're right, that might fall flat in actual play. It would take some getting used to, but I think it could work.

I haven't read the yahoo group discussions (I should), but are any canonical example situations that people use as examples of awkward ranged combat? My niave view is that the contest always breaks down to
- both sides fight at range
- one side fights, the other tries to hide, get cover or run
- one side fights, the other tries to get some seperate action done
I guess they all have problems with characters who can't join in in the task their side is doing. But that seems true of other systems as well.

elgorade

The real bugbears come down to:
-how many exchanges does it take to cover a given distance with a given movement ability
- how you deal with cover and ammo supply
- what is the loss condition for the shooter
- what happens if new combatants enter the contest

Some others may develop

I haven't run HQ, so I may be being very niave. And, I can certainly imagine player not going for the following "answers". But I'll ramble away anyway. And I'll write it as if the answers are obvious, 'cause that's easier than putting in "I think", and "I'ld try" everywhere.



- How many exchanges does it take to cover a given distance?

That depends on how many action points you risk. If the goals of the conflict are "get to the shooter" and "don't let him get to me", maybe you cover the ground when you run him out of AP. So you might be cautious and move from cover to cover getting closer, or you might try a mad rush.

Of course, I imagine you're thinking of a more standard combat scene --- people scattered around, bad guys opening fire on the good guys, good guys trying to run in close, etc. --- so the main conflict isn't just get to the shooter. I think I'ld fall back on a combination of the above and guesswork. I'ld probably try to agree with the player what was a reasonable move distance . Then resolve it as an unrelated action with the guy you are closing with or the terrain opposing.


- How do you deal with cover and ammo supply

If someone is sniping from cover, I think I'ld just use a simple contest for their shot. That would seem to make a sniper pretty dangerous -- he can take you out with a mjor victory, probably against something like a 14 defense -- but I like that.

After you spot the shooter, I'ld probably just make cover an augment to defending in an extended combat. That's basically how I understand armor to work as well.


- What is the loss condition for the shooter

I think that's the big one. It covers movement, ammo and the basic question of "shat on earth does my martial artist do that hurts the shooter in the third floor window?" I think the answer is 'nothing'.

Actually, I think the answer is that if you don't have any ranged abilities to effect the shooter with, your goal in the contest isn't defined in terms of effecting him. Maybe your goal is to get to cover. Or to get to the shooter's position. If you win, you achieved your goal. maybe because he ran out of ammo, maybe because you were fast, maybe because you scared him off, that depends on your actions.

As a side note, if it is a martial artist on a factory floor facing a shooter in the catwalks, the extended comtest might include some parts of spotting the shooter, some of closing with him and some of disabling him. I think part of the idea of handling it well would be getting the changes of descriptions in the right places. The pc fighter is doing well, he's got in close and his skill is turning the tide. The npc shooter comes back with a daring move, he's turns the tables in some way. Plotting it out with accurate inches, movement rates, and ammo usage would seem to be a problem.



I don't know if that all made sense. I really should try running the system some time. :-)