When I play Shadowrun as an actual player (which is virtually never) I really beat up my PC. What would normally simply be called out by the GM as light damage from a punch would probably give my PC a black eye. After a big fist fight the first thing my PC usually has to do is go to a dentist to get most of his teeth replaced because I informed the GM that the moderate punch my PC just took knocked out all of his incisors. Light physical may take off an ear lobe, or punch a hole in my hand, or even blow off a finger. Moderate wounds may mess up my wired reflexes, break an elbow into little pieces, or lodge a bullet in an uncomfortable - but nonfatal - part of my skull. I don’t regularly declare that I’ve lost a leg, although if I get racked by a serious wound, I just may. Even if my PC took a grand total of moderate plus 1 boxes of damage during a run he tends to emerge after it’s over looking like somebody who tried to challenge a panzer to a fist fight.

People tend to question me about this. “Why in the hell,” they say “would you do that to your own PC?” My answer is simple: I wrack up my PC because my PC isn’t a condition monitor; it’s a person. When real people take a bullet a stack of boxes doesn’t magically appear on their chest and start filling up with ‘damage’. They lose fingers, get holes in unnatural places, and end up with various body parts strewn around the sidewalk. While PCs are sometimes comic book character-like in the way they can shrug off damage, once they get hurt they GET HURT. Even when my PC doesn’t get hurt I still relay the fact that the PC has been shot and that he isn’t quite as well off as he was before. If my PC takes an SMG blast to the chest and manages to roll off the damage I’ll still inform the GM that my PC is dismayed over the fact that a few of the pieces of his orthoskin are now lying on the ground. The next time I take a bullet in the chest I’ll probably drop my armor rating by 1 to reflect this damage. The point is that I don’t treat my PC as an action figure; I treat him as a (meta)human.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that, when my PC is nearing an important part of a run and takes Moderate damage, I’ll start blowing his limbs off. I like to keep my PC alive as much as the next person and to do such a thing would not only threaten his life more than it already is but would also take him out of the game. At such junctures I’m more likely to go for a more traditional simple wound to the chest or arm or something like that. One thing you’ll never hear me say after my PC has taken damage is a simple ‘OK’.

I allow the players in the games I GM to do the same thing. Far too often (in other people’s games; not mine), the GM/player dialogue during a fire fight (i.e. the dialogue when the events themselves are described) takes on the following form:

GM: The moderate shot hits you.

Player: Damn.

This can get pretty boring after a while. Hopefully the GM would also at least describe where the shot hit, which adds a bit more depth but still leaves things kind of bland:

GM: The moderate shot hits you in your right cyberarm.

Player: Damn.

If the GM is really on the ball he or she may throw in even more color, but the statement still tends to leave the player with little to say in response:

GM: The moderate shot hits you in your right cyberarm, blowing off several plates of steel and breaking the motor controls of your hand.

Player. Double damn.

The GM could ramble on about which individual cyber arm motors were damaged if he or she wanted to, but the player would be left with nothing to say except for a line pertaining to the fact that, yup, he got hit. This is why I like to allow the player to generate some, or, in many cases, most, of the information on exactly how his PC was hurt, as shown in the following example:

GM: The moderate shot hits you in your right cyberarm.

Player: My grip on my pistol spastically tightens, shattering the weapon. I stare at the arm for a moment, amazed at what just happened.

By making the above statement the player not only roleplays the fact that his PC has been shot but also flushes out exactly how the damage affected him (i.e. his cyberware has been damaged and is apparently shorting out.) If I was the GM I would reward the player somehow for his creativity; probably by dropping the physical damage to light. But, in return, the player now has to fix whatever is causing the short in his cyberarm (and, of course, buy a new gun). Since the damage received was minimal, I would probably let him get away with only having the short act up occasionally and wouldn’t be so mean as to insist that the PC continue fighting with a completely useless and spastic hand. Unless, of course, the player WANTED to have a temporarily useless limb because they might view it as a challenge or because, hey, they were going to replace the arm after the run anyway. One thing the PC is NOT allowed to do is forget about the fact that his arm is damaged. This isn’t a one second deal with the GM so you can get out of taking damage. You’re stuck with what you do to yourself which, when you figure what the GM might do to you had you not stepped in, may not be such a bad thing.

These small acts of player/PC empowerment don’t necessarily have to apply only to combat situations, as shown in the following example:

Store Owner: Can I help you?

PC: Just need a leather jacket.

Store Owner: On the rack in the second aisle. 750 each.

PC: Cool. (Browses) Hey, how much for this one that says ‘Harley Scropian’ on the back? Looks like they screwed it up.

Store Owner: They sure did. You can have it for 400 if you want.

PC: Double cool.

The player decided that he’d add a little color to the game by buying himself a messed up jacket. The thought of placing such a ‘prop’ in the game probably never would have occurred to the GM. Since the action doesn’t really throw off the balance of the game, I don’t see why the GM shouldn’t allow it to happen.

Ok, now for a few examples of players taking control of a situation in the WRONG way. Remember, the whole point of this PC/GM interaction is to create a more colorful playing environment. It is not intended to be used by the player solely for the purpose of personal gain. Normally, both the PC and the GM should benefit in some way. It’s when you tip the scales too much in either direction that things get messy, requiring that the GM step in and make a few corrections:

GM: The moderate shot hits you in your right cyberarm.

PC: It pings harmlessly off the steel.

GM: ...nd ricochets up your nose.

Store Owner: Can I help you?

PC: Just need a leather jacket.

Store Owner: On the rack in the second aisle. 750 each.

PC: Cool. (To the GM: I walk over to the jacket that says ‘On Sale’) I’ll take this one that says 20 dollars.

Store Owner: Ok, but it’s made primarily out of old cereal boxes.

Giving the PC power to control their environment above and beyond normal levels of interaction not only makes for happier players, but less stressed GMs as well. Plus, the GM always has the option of declaring what actually occurred before the players have a chance to interject or, in extreme cases, ban player from making such decisions at all if he or she’s being a jerk. Not that I’m saying that all players are jerks.

Just about 95% of them are.