I finally figured out why the Shadowrun sucks.
I love William Gibson sprawl trilogy and his writing in general. The hi-tech dark future with the huge gap between the haves and have-nots, the control of the mega corporations, the existence of the net and AI's, the hint at the mystical and the importance information and it's possession can play in the world. The world of Shadowrun is spawned from that world but with its own twists and turns to make it unique but of similar feather to the original. Why then is William Gibson stories so good and most Shadowrun games and fiction dismal tedious and retched experiences?
Well for one, Gibson is just a good story teller but their is a another important difference. In Shadowrun the focus is on the character called Shadowrunners. The story mechanism always focuses around the Shadowrunners that work in the underworld as anonymous and deniable henchman for mega corps. This is the problem IMHO. The stories are always focused on the assembly of a team of runners, planning the run (the most excruciating part), exicuting the run, and dealing with the consequences. Its not all the great the first time as all the suspense and risk is planned out and then after a few times is starts to feel like Scooby-Doo in it predictability and this gets very borrowing to read about or play. In Gibson stories there are characters and shit happens to them and then they deal with it. That is far more interesting, spontaneous feeling and can have far more interesting twists and turns.
I think the way to save Shadowrun as a game and make it playable is to throw the whole concept of Shadowrunners out. The whole organized Shadowrun affiliation is the reason the game and stories suck. Destroy this story mechanism and the setting become far less ridged and far less formulaic. Certainly some stories or games will fit that mold but those constraint do have to be there. Make the setting more free form.
I know its not a great revelation and may not be entirely correct but hey it did sort of click to me this morning in the shower so I thought I would ramble about it here.
Well for one, Gibson is just a good story teller but their is a another important difference. In Shadowrun the focus is on the character called Shadowrunners. The story mechanism always focuses around the Shadowrunners that work in the underworld as anonymous and deniable henchman for mega corps. This is the problem IMHO. The stories are always focused on the assembly of a team of runners, planning the run (the most excruciating part), exicuting the run, and dealing with the consequences. Its not all the great the first time as all the suspense and risk is planned out and then after a few times is starts to feel like Scooby-Doo in it predictability and this gets very borrowing to read about or play. In Gibson stories there are characters and shit happens to them and then they deal with it. That is far more interesting, spontaneous feeling and can have far more interesting twists and turns.
I think the way to save Shadowrun as a game and make it playable is to throw the whole concept of Shadowrunners out. The whole organized Shadowrun affiliation is the reason the game and stories suck. Destroy this story mechanism and the setting become far less ridged and far less formulaic. Certainly some stories or games will fit that mold but those constraint do have to be there. Make the setting more free form.
I know its not a great revelation and may not be entirely correct but hey it did sort of click to me this morning in the shower so I thought I would ramble about it here.