Author: Junk Addy

Hamish,

If I made a modified character sheet based on the player aids you released, what’s your policy on releasing to the Google+ Sprawl community?

I am guessing it’s OK but don’t want to step on any toes.

EDIT: Now that I have permission, this is shared in the comments below. As an FYI: We play remotely, so we keep our data in tablet-displayable format. This also lets me do stuff you can’t do on physical paper (er… in meatspace?), like write on a black sheet in a white pen.

The goal is to compile a PDF we can then mark up during play, with our markups syncing live to the cloud.

It’s not the most elegant solution – that would require better software available – but I like the way the final product displays on a computer.

I’m happy to take comments if people are so inclined. Keep in mind that (1) I’m not a professional typesetter or graphical designer and (2) I have a day job and personal commitments, so my ability to update these to a professional level of quality is limited. But as long as people keep that in mind, I’m willing to take suggestions and make improvements as best I can.

“Loose” creds.

How liberal are you in providing cred other than what the players stake in the mission? Obviously there is paydata, but greedy characters (particularly those with financial directives) may be looking for other valuable objects to palm and sell into the seedy underworld.

On top of this, missions can get quite expensive to finance – especially if you are hiring help or procuring specialized equipment. This to say nothing of the serious loss the players take if they get paid in a useless currency or if they fail the mission – on top whatever they have already paid for hired help or equipment.

As I think about it, leaving more loose creds in the game world feels like it gives me more freedom to have their employers screw the characters over without feeling like the MC is screwing the players over. I also think it gives a better “hard scrabble” feel to the team if they are constantly scavenging and scrounging.

Others have any thoughts on this?

Having just run a legwork phase that wound up being more circuitous than I would have liked, I reread the rule book in search of an “only roll of failure is interesting” principle a la FATE.

I didn’t exactly find it, but I did spot something similar in ch. 1, when the book covers die rolls more generally:

6 or lower (abbreviated as 6-) is a miss; something goes wrong. You might get what you want anyway, but it’ll definitely have strings attached. The MC will make a move which will complicate the situation and make your lives more difficult.

I thought this was very helpful and thought I’d point it out. it has certainly helped me rethink how to formulate meaningful misses, particularly since hits are so clearly defined mechanically.

Missing moves – Mix it up

Want to see what people do when their players miss a “mix it up” move in a firefight.

A firefight is a clear invitation for the MC to make a hard move – perhaps most obviously “inflict harm” (a la dungeon world) – but the Sprawl is already a very deadly environment and I think it cheapens the scene somewhat to keep trading “hit points,” particularly if the character is a quick type who isn’t wearing armor (though I guess they’ll be dead in short order if that’s the case).

One choice is to end the firefight with a negative fictional consequence – but what if the PC(s) have gone to great lengths and cornered a mission-critical NPC? Give a PC the choice to take harm to keep the firefight going?

Another rules question – is mil specs +2 against an individual and +1 against a small squad (less than a gang), or is it +1 against both?

When you initiate a countdown clock for a corp, does it start at 12:00 or do you immediately fill it up to 15:00?

More questions.

What is the resetting of Links supposed to represent thematically? I can see it as a mild interpersonal conflict or a discovery that makes you realize that you don’t understand a character as well as you thought, but I thought it to be a bit odd that your ability to work together diminishes as you get to understand each other better. ((Mechanically, I understand that it’s a useful way to keep character relationships (again, on a mechanical level) in flux.))

I imagine after a few sessions of play it’s not unlikely that the team will have fairly strong links to each other. It seems like the moves that let you substitute a stat for Links when helping are most useful (1) when a team is new (or members are replaced) and (2) in smoothing out the bumpiness that comes when Links reset. Is that the gist of it, or are there some other fundamental circumstances that I’ve missed?

Another rules question – not particularly important, but for major advances, is it intended that you can only take each one once?

I’m not sure that our campaign will get here, but it is one of those rules things that has been nagging at me because I can’t quite tell.

Is harm cumulative for Harm rolls? For example, if a player takes 2-harm, makes a harm roll, then takes another 2-harm later, is the second Harm roll at 2d6+2 or 2d6+4?