At the moment, the Hunter playbook is mostly based on Deckard (Blade Runner), Shadowrun Detectives and other noir and neo-noir archetypes.
It’s a bit weak in the mission phase, so I’m thinking of beefing it up with more of a Bounty Hunter approach. What kind of moves would you expect to see with that approach? What media should I look at for inspiration?
I don’t know the Hunter looks like it best while hunting which is what the playbook seems to encourage. With the right application of moves and fiction you can research, track, locate, lie in wait and ambush your target which seems pretty hunter to me. hmm Maybe an incapacitate move? so you can bring your targets in alive. What are you seeing when you play? I haven’t actually run Sprawl yet, but it is on my to do list.
The issue is that most of the moves occur in the legwork phase, so they’re left without much unique flavour in the mission phase. I’ve added a move to convert +Intel into manoeuvre hold which should help.
In play the Hunter works fine, so this is a bit of an academic problem, but it is a design goal to make each of the playbooks special in both parts of the mission.
I had a few thoughts
Hunter could used a Blend in move, so the Hunter can get close to the target. When the move is taken the Player chooses which element the PC can seamless blend in with, Street, Corp, etc…then the move can be taken multiple times to add in more elements. on a hit the blend is seamless, on a condition something is wrong, on a miss you misjudge something and you have a automatic tell. OR the move could just give you the ability to move freely when dealing with that group.
I was also thinking that the Tech move “it all fits together” would work better with either Reporter or Hunter. As those two playbooks are the ones who will be asking the question’s and pursuing facts. What the Tech needs is a monkey wrench Move, that will allow the PC to creatively sabotage technology in the game. maybe generates holds that they can spend….or you roll and get to pick off of a list for specific things you’ve managed to get to.
I like the idea of a narrow blend in move for the Hunter.
That Tech move is based on Gentry’s obsessive investigation in Mona Lisa Overdrive, but I’ll think about that suggestion as well. Thanks!
In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Deckard is literally a bounty hunter. They’re much more directly violent toward androids, too. I’m not sure how helpful Dickian fiction is going to be in regards to developing usable moves, though.
Well the more I think of your problem (for the lack of a better word) the more I realize that is what cross playbook moves are for. Let the hunter be good at hunting, If the player wants more he can cross playbook a move from another playbook to get what he feels is lacking or needed. I would think this philosophy would/should carry through to all the playbooks. Don’t worry about the playbooks being well rounded, just let them be good at what they are representing.
Thoughts?
Yeah, that’s a fair point. I do want them to be a little bit rounded though, sufficiently so that they have their own skills to contribute in both phases of the game.
Maybe to give the Hunter more umfph in the throw down phase? Give them a move called preferred target where after they’ve investigated a group say like the 2nd Street Razors they get a +1` forward for the rest of that game/scenerio towards them. For as the hunter they know how that group moves, thinks, tactics, etc….
Thoughts?
The Hunter has a move like that for individuals, but I’ll consider expanding it to include groups.
I’m was thinking mooks…more importantly ones that the Hunters Quarry are using or hanging around…. like the 2nd street Blood Razors, or Militech security Guards. Maybe make it an advanced move that builds off of “Big Game Hunter.” And the Hunter can only have one group selected at a time, as they have equipped and adjusted their tactics to deal with that one specific threat. If they want to change it they have to re-investigate the new group and drop the tactics for the old. Just a thought.
I’ll definitely think about that, Sean. Thanks!