Table Agreements

• Campaign: SINless and Sparkling. Los Angeles, 2060: a free city with no flag, surrounded on every landward side by Pueblo. See The Sixth World.
• System: Shadowrun Anarchy 2.0: rules-light and narrative-first. You need six-sided dice and nothing else.

These three are mine, not the table's: they're how I'd like to run this, written down so you can see them before you agree to them rather than discovering them in month three. If any of them doesn't suit you, session zero is where to say so.

1. We have worked together before#

No first meeting, no origin story, no session spent deciding whether to trust a stranger. I'd like the crew to have years of history and two shared fixers, and session zero is where you fill in the specifics: how long, what nearly ended it, what each of you owes one of the others, which fixer you use more. The campaign then opens by spending trust rather than building it.

2. No backstabbing unless we build it together first#

In-character friction is welcome and the campaign is designed for it: argue about a job, compete for the extra share, keep a secret, disagree about who to leave behind. What needs a conversation with the GM in advance is acting against the crew's interest for your own gain: selling them out, taking a rival's money to burn them, walking away from somebody on purpose. That can be a great story and it can absolutely happen, but as a plot arc we plan, not a surprise at the table. Everyone should be able to invest in these relationships and rely on them, because that's the only thing that makes losing them land.

3. Even shares#

The default I'd like: split the payout evenly. No negotiation, no argument, no floating pot to allocate. Three of us, so a third each, and every job on this wiki is priced in multiples of 7,500¥ so the arithmetic is 2,500¥ a head and nobody has to do long division at the table.

The exception: at most one extra share can be distributed differently without unanimous agreement. One, and it doesn't have to exist at all: most jobs won't have one. Anything beyond that needs everybody to actually agree to it, out loud.

Why I want this written down rather than left to the room: in this game nuyen is advancement. A runner who consistently out-earns the rest out-equips them, then out-survives them, and the table quietly splits into leads and passengers. Capping the gap at one share keeps a good negotiation worth making without letting it compound over six runs.

Reading this wiki#

• This wiki wins, not the books. Where a sourcebook and a page here disagree, the page here is right. If you've played before and something reads wrong, it's probably on purpose. Ask.
• Canon knowledge isn't an advantage or a liability. Nobody has to have read anything, and nobody who has read everything gets to be right about our Los Angeles.
• Ask about anything. The reason for every change is written down in the GM notes and none of the reasons are secret. The plot is secret; the design isn't.
• Tell us when something lands wrong, especially on reason five of Homebrew. That list isn't finished, and you'll notice things a 1992 sourcebook didn't.
• Nothing on this wiki is a secret from the table. GM-only material never leaves the notes.