I’m really hung up on combat and weapon harm. My gaming history is all D20 stuff, so I’m trying to let go of the metered combat I’m used to, but whats really got me confused is why weapons have a harm rating. If on a 10+ a killer with 2 SMGs is just as effective at killing a room full of guards as a hacker with his bare hands then why even give weapons a harm rating. Just to clarify, this is not a critique, i am genuinely confused.
I’m really hung up on combat and weapon harm.
I’m really hung up on combat and weapon harm.
Two things: for when those weapons are used on the characters. How does fictional damage interact with this collection of moves and numbers I have on a sheet in front of me?
Second, a hacker is certainly not as good at killing a bunch of guards with his bare hands as a Killer with 2 SMGs. Firstly because of skills and cyberware, but assuming that is all equal, the results of mix it up look very different in the two cases. Both succeed in their objective (which should very rarely be murder), but if the Hacker wins, the opposition are probably very much alive (although perhaps bruised and embarrassed!) whereas the Killer’s opposition are probably riddled with bullets (although again, maybe not all dead).
Mix it up is about achieving an objective by using violence, it’s not about killing people.
Harm is a mechanic that adds some mechanical teeth to the fictional circumstances.
Awesome, this really makes more sense to me. Thanks for being so helpful and responsive. I am very much looking forward to running this.
No problem, Tyler! I’m sure the implications will make more sense as you play. I hope you enjoy it!
Also, the Harm rating on the weapons is mechanically relevant when those weapons are being used against the PCs… whether by NPC antagonists, or by each other.
(I usually avoid PvP bloodshed, but when some bugger puts everyone else in jeopardy for a chance at a few more cred, well… sometimes you feel justified in giving a harsh lesson about teamwork).