PC类型 PC Types
劇透 - :
The GM should determine what kinds of player characters are appropriate for the campaign before beginning it (see the Campaign Plan on p. 128). A street gang or rock group is unlikely to have a cybertank jock at their disposal. Most two-group combinations can be rationalized, but the GM has to look at how larger groups will work together; a group with a corporate executive, a homeless drifter and a mobster could be set up, but it would be stretching things a bit. The GM should be aware of what kinds of plots he's going to run and what kinds of skills and resources will be necessary to cope with the problems he's going to pose. When he brings characters into the group he should consider what kind of contribution they will make to solving those problems. If it's likely that cybered assassins are going to go after the PCs, then they should have someone with some bionic combat enhancements in the group. Netrunners are integral to the genre, but can be boring for other players to watch in action; if the GM isn't prepared to do one-on-one role-playing with the netrunner while the rest of the players are idle, he might want to have the group's netrunner be an NPC.
Unalloyed heroes are rare in cyberpunk literature, and they should be rare in cyberpunk gaming as well. On the other hand, soulless killers and unredeemably venal graspers can grow rather tiresome, both to watch and to play.Cyberpunk PCs should be a complex mix of positive and negative traits; these don't have to be consistent, so a character may be pushed to seemingly random actions that don't serve his self-interest. The theme of the search for identity, of coming to terms with a discordant mix of motivations, is important in cyberpunk. PCs can begin with some illusions about themselves, and some inconsistencies, which can be worked out over time.
玩家数量Number of Players
劇透 - :
A one-player campaign (plus GM) can be very interesting. The GM can control all aspects of the environment, and all the NPCs, so the player never knows who to trust and who not to trust. The game can go at the pace of the GM and the player, and the player can follow whatever angles of the plot he wants to, in whatever depth.
Cyberpunk literature often features two main characters who rely on each other, a well-balanced pair able to handle any situation. Thus, a GM may wish to set up a game with two PCs;this gives players someone to share their experiences with, and still lets them go into as much depth as they want to. Two-person groups rarely keep secrets from each other. The PCs may even be linked directly in some fashion, either by some sort of sensors on one or the other, or even a direct link through the Net. There is a degree of intimate camaraderie in a twoplayer group that simply cannot be maintained in a larger group.
A group with more than a couple of players invites conflict and betrayal. The PCs should be given a reason to trust each other, perhaps they have a common history, perhaps they are a team assembled for some specific purpose. Most adventures in this kind of campaign will be missions assigned by a patron.
A diverse group will be interesting, but difficult to run, since PCs with different specialties they will attack problems in radically different ways. It is more likely that a large-group campaign will have PCs similar to each other, such as a research team, a military squad, a street gang, a business enterprise, a musical group, etc. In any case, the GM must create reasons for the PCs to work together as a group. See the sidebars on pp. 120-121.
劇透 - :
It's very easy for a player to say, "I want to have a character who is working against the group." In fact, mistrust and betrayal are a common theme in cyberpunk literature.
However, it makes difficult gaming. In other genres, it would be rare, and would therefore add an interesting surprise twist to a plot. In cyberpunk games, it's just too predictable. It only takes one incident to permanently turn all the players against each other.Some players may,briefly,find working with their enemies to be intellectually stimulating, but over a long-term campaign it can be prove damaging.
This is not to say that individual characters can't have hidden agendas. Characters in a cyberpunk campaign can work toward secret goals. However, such differences should not generally lead to violent confrontations.
If the GM does want to set up a betrayal situation, it's best to use an NPC. Most players will expect this, so it will take some work from the GM to pull off properly. It works best when the PCs interact with many NPCs on a regular basis, some friendly, some hostile, and some neutral. In such a detailed campaign, the betrayer should not be a hostile or neutral. It's one of the friendly NPCs, established over a number of game sessions, preferably one who has already shown that he's on the side of the party, by taking risks or making sacrifices on the party's behalf. This can be a good person compromised by enemies, or a plant, set up originally by a villain, waiting to strike at the proper moment.Either way, it should be someone the players have truly come to count on, someone they'd risk their characters' lives to protect. Then the betrayal will be a genuine surprise. Thus, it only works well later on in a long-term campaign.
It is possible to have a PC involuntarily betray his fellows, by drugs, brainwashing, or cybernetic mind control of some sort. In this case, the betrayal will not be something "in character" for the PC, so the party (or at least the survivors) can forgive him for it afterwards. However, anything less coercive falls in a different category; even something like blackmail, such as a threat to a loved dependent, creates a measure of voluntary betrayal on the player's part that will cause lasting mistrust. 。
PCs in a cyberpunk campaign have more than enough to worry about from direct enemies,powerful authorities of whatever sort,random violence,and even ordinary day-to-day living in a world of social and environmental collapse. The GM should not encourage them to betray one another. It will be hard enough to keep them from doing so anyway.