Cyberpunk Red (I didn't know it was out!)

[MGibster]

I went down to my friendly local game store yesterday and saw a shiny new copy of Cyberpunk Red. I always had a great time with the original Cyberpunk games back in the day, 2013 and 2020, and couldn't resist the siren call and happily made my purchase. The first thing I noticed when I opened the book was the font on the table of contents. I don't typically notice something like fonts but it looked so much like the font used in Cyberpunk 2020 that it really brought back a flood of memories. I haven't read through the entire book yet so this isn't really a review so much as thoughts I'm having as I do read through it.

So let's talk about Humanity, it's loss, and cyberpsychosis. For those of you who are new to Cyberpunk, characters have a statistic (attribute) called Empathy which is the "ability to relate to and care for others, and take others into consideration. Particularly important as it offsets the effects of cyberpsychosis, a dangerous mental illness common in the Dark Future." A character's Empathy will determine their starting Humanity which is a "measure of how well you interact with the world and other people in it" which seems rather redundant now that I think about it. Every point of Empathy a character has translates to ten points of Humanity. i.e. If a character has a 5 Empathy they have a Humanity of 50. If they have an 8 Empathy they have an 80 Humanity.

The primary loss of Humanity in Cyberpunk will come from the installation of cyberware (mechanical arms, eyes, or the Mr. Studd Sexual Implant). Each implant comes with a random cost to Humanity. For example a cyberarm will cost the player 2d6 points of Humanity. So when the character gets their arm replaced if they roll a 7 on 2d6 they would subtract that from their Humanity. This might have an impact on their Empathy as well. If they have 70 Humanity and need to subtract 7 for that arm they'd have a 63 Humanity and their Empathy will have gone down from 7 to 6. And of course the lower your Empathy/Humanity gets the more disconnected you feel from other people until the problem is so severe you're in a cyberpsychosis situation.

Cyberpsychosis, or Depersonalization Disorder, is characterized by "feeling detached from one's life, thoughts, and feelings, People with this type of disorder say they feel distant and emotionally unconnected to themselves...they may perceive their body to be a different shape or size than usual...cannot recognize themselves in a mirror." In game terms, a cyberpsychotic character is often, but not always, violent, lacking remorse or guilt, impulsive, and characterized by callousness and a lack of empathy. (These are also traits common among PCs in general, right?)

Cyberpsychosis was always something I had questioned about Cyberpunk even when I was a snot nosed kid who didn't look too deeply at the implications of game mechanics in the games he played. Should a soldier who lost his foot to a mine have his Humanity lowered because he uses an artificial foot? Would an implant designed to correct a damaged nervous system result in the loss of Humanity? According to the rules of Cyberpunk 2020, so far as I can remember them, the answer was yes. But that's changed with Cyberpunk Red.

"Developing cyberpsychosis is not triggered merely by putting in cyberwear. It is the voluntary removal of a functioning body part to replace it with a machine." I'm not quite sure how to work that in from a narrative point of view. In the past, if my character had cyberlimbs I had always figured he had replaced his natural limbs which were damaged beyond repair. But overall I like this a lot better than cyberwear resulting in a loss of Humanity regardless of the situation.

Cyberpunk Red also has the possibility of Humanity loss through mental trauma such as torture, witnessing a horrific death, imprisonment, etc., etc. While I kind of like the addition, I'm not sure how that fits into the game itself. I see how it could fit into the genre, the the game really emphasizes style over substance so this seems like an odd addition in some ways. I wish they had done a little more with it. Perhaps doing some edgerunning for a good cause instead of money might give PCs a boost to their Humanity? Food for thought I guess.

 

[Waller]

Defining people with prosthetics as not human (or less human) is problematic.

 

[MGibster]

Defining people with prosthetics as not human (or less human) is problematic.

Yeah. Which is probably why Pondsmith went out of his way to make it clear that just having a prosthetic didn't result in a loss of Humanity.

 

[ruemere]

[...]
"Developing cyberpsychosis is not triggered merely by putting in cyberwear. It is the voluntary removal of a functioning body part to replace it with a machine." I'm not quite sure how to work that in from a narrative point of view. In the past, if my character had cyberlimbs I had always figured he had replaced his natural limbs which were damaged beyond repair. But overall I like this a lot better than cyberwear resulting in a loss of Humanity regardless of the situation.
[...]

It's archetypical devil's bargain. You gain something in exchange for a piece of yourself, with strong emphasis on the thing not being an equivalent piece of you.

Whether this is a plausible or realistic in any way, this is up for debate. Given the existence of phantom pain syndrome, and considering how difficult sometimes it is to cope with something that is artificial or not working (I have broken enough stuff to learn it the hard way, and still hate the experience), I would assume that the premise is not impossible or improbable.

 

[Tantavalist]

Cyberpunk's Humanity rules always struck me as strange. It felt like you were being sold on the idea of playing a cyborg by the game's elevator pitch and then punished for doing so. Would it be fun to play a Wizard in D&D if you slowly went insane and eventually became an NPC every time you got access to a higher level of spell? Vampire: the Masquerade had one of the most punishing morality systems in RPGs and even that didn't punish PCs for learning new Disciplines. Because vampire powers are cool and getting them is a key part of why players buy into the game.

And that's just from a game mechaics point of view, without bringing any real-world issues into it. Since Cyberpunk was first published the use of prosthetics in the real world has become a thing and I don't think anybody is going to claim that people being fitted with them are somehow becoming less human. The idea that voluntary vs. involuntary cyberware makes a difference is probably correct, except that real-world studies on the mental effects of physical trauma would suggest the game has it the wrong way round. The guy having a leg blown off and replaced would be the one with mental health issues, not the one actively seeking to have upgraded legs.

Cyberpunk 2077 made the correct decision to just ignore Humanity Loss from cyberware because doing otherwise would cause controversy and make the game less fun to play. I'd just ignore Humanity for the same reasons. How does it really hurt the game to do so?

The one major issue would then be Cyberpsychosis, which you'd need another explanation for. Given that most cyberware is second-hand tech from older generations installed in back-street clinics, along with how often PC software/hardware incompatibility causes bugs in the real world... Nope, can't see why people who jack large amounts of this direct into their nervous systems might go crazy.

Doing it this way turns cyberpsychosis from a "Man vs. Machine" issue to one of socio-economic inequality and oppression. I think that makes a much better theme to explore in the cyberpunk genre, as well as one that's more fun to play out at the table.

 

[MGibster]

Cyberpunk's Humanity rules always struck me as strange. It felt like you were being sold on the idea of playing a cyborg by the game's elevator pitch and then punished for doing so. Would it be fun to play a Wizard in D&D if you slowly went insane and eventually became an NPC every time you got access to a higher level of spell?

I never viewed it as punishment. Mostly I viewed it as a game balancing mechanism and a way to represent the disassociation one must have to voluntarily replace their body parts in order to run faster, have the most fashionable eyes, or to be able work a day job for a corp.

Since Cyberpunk was first published the use of prosthetics in the real world has become a thing and I don't think anybody is going to claim that people being fitted with them are somehow becoming less human.

Cyberpunk was first published in 1988 and humans were using prosthetics as early as 1,000 BCE. But like I said, in Cyberpunk Red, Pondsmith goes out of his way to make it very clear that simply replacing a lost limb doesn't result in a loss of Humanity. It's the act of voluntarily replacing your fully functional limb that results in a Humanity loss.

The idea that voluntary vs. involuntary cyberware makes a difference is probably correct, except that real-world studies on the mental effects of physical trauma would suggest the game has it the wrong way round. The guy having a leg blown off and replaced would be the one with mental health issues, not the one actively seeking to have upgraded legs.

We're not talking about "upgraded" legs we're talking about complete replacement. If I asked my doctor to replace my perfectly functioning legs with Oscar Pistorius prosthetics I have no doubt he'd have concerns about my state of mind.

Doing it this way turns cyberpsychosis from a "Man vs. Machine" issue to one of socio-economic inequality and oppression. I think that makes a much better theme to explore in the cyberpunk genre, as well as one that's more fun to play out at the table.

It's already a socio-economic issue in Cyberpunk. Therapy that mitigates the loss of Humanity due to cybernetics are available but few people can afford to pay for it or take the time off from work to go through such programs. Thus, those who are suffering some cyberpsychosis are typically coming from the lower socio-economic classes.

 

[Tantavalist]

It's already a socio-economic issue in Cyberpunk. Therapy that mitigates the loss of Humanity due to cybernetics are available but few people can afford to pay for it or take the time off from work to go through such programs. Thus, those who are suffering some cyberpsychosis are typically coming from the lower socio-economic classes.

I've played the older versions of Cyberpunk more than I've GMed them, and that was something like twenty years ago. But I don't recall anything like this.

Is the therapy you mention something that Cyberpunk Red added, or were there rules for it in older editions that I somehow missed or forgot about?

 

[billd91]

Cyberpunk's Humanity rules always struck me as strange. It felt like you were being sold on the idea of playing a cyborg by the game's elevator pitch and then punished for doing so. Would it be fun to play a Wizard in D&D if you slowly went insane and eventually became an NPC every time you got access to a higher level of spell? Vampire: the Masquerade had one of the most punishing morality systems in RPGs and even that didn't punish PCs for learning new Disciplines. Because vampire powers are cool and getting them is a key part of why players buy into the game.

And that's just from a game mechaics point of view, without bringing any real-world issues into it. Since Cyberpunk was first published the use of prosthetics in the real world has become a thing and I don't think anybody is going to claim that people being fitted with them are somehow becoming less human. The idea that voluntary vs. involuntary cyberware makes a difference is probably correct, except that real-world studies on the mental effects of physical trauma would suggest the game has it the wrong way round. The guy having a leg blown off and replaced would be the one with mental health issues, not the one actively seeking to have upgraded legs.

It's worth noting that there's a genre Cyberpunk has been trying to emulate. It's not simply about the glitz of flashy cybernetic eyes and style, nor is it just about the pursuit of superior performance (combat, skill, hacking, or even sexual with the aforementioned Mr Studd) with cybernetic enhancements. Hand in hand with all of that is the social dissolution, even sociopathy, of megacorp/post-apocalyptical/cyberpunk culture. Pursuit of those enhancements and agendas comes with the inexorable decline in real human connection.

 

[Tantavalist]

I read quite a lot of Cyberpunk novels when I was younger- a good chunk of what the Cyberpunk 2020 rulebook listed as inspiration. I don't recall any of them showing a direct causal link between getting implants and becoming less human. While the CP2020 rulebook explicitly stated that it was getting the implants that made you lose Humanity, not the things you had to do to get them.

There's a genre that Cyberpunk tries to emulate but the Humanity rules actually make it worse at doing that rather than better. What should probably have been done is a system for putting the Cyberware outside of what PCs can typically afford and then requiring them to play out those Devil's Bargains to get them.

But enough about Humanity (which I recall being divisive even back in the 90s). Focus on the positives. Are there any changes to the game in CP Red that stand out as improvements over CP 2020?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There's a genre that Cyberpunk tries to emulate but the Humanity rules actually make it worse at doing that rather than better. What should probably have been done is a system for putting the Cyberware outside of what PCs can typically afford and then requiring them to play out those Devil's Bargains to get them.

The Red rules definitely take it closer to the genre, but yes, that was problematic. Shadowrun and 2020 also shared a deep flaw in that more expensive cybernetics cost LESS humanity and/or rich people could get therapy to prevent cyberpsychosis, which felt like it ran hard against the genre. Rich people should be able to conceal their psychosis better, but it should be channelled into being a serial killer on the side or something, rather than simply being more human or more able to cope. I'd need to check to see if Red fixes that in some way too. It does definitely have some stuff about losing humanity from stuff other than the implants. Honestly I like your idea that humanity loss is about what you do (which could include chopping your arm off to replace it with a 12mm SMG, but is not limited to it), and then maybe the expression of that loss could be modified by stuff like what caused it.

I glanced through Red myself a few weeks back. The rules seem... meh. For my money, Cyberpunk's combat peaked in 2020, with the original FNFF, and all those since have felt like generic rules applied to Cyberpunk in a way that doesn't quite work. It's the same here. The other rules are definitely towards the "rules-heavy" end of the scale, not quite all the way there like GURPS, say, but pretty heavy, enough to completely put me off running it with those rules.

The setting on the other hand I think is probably the best iteration of the Cyberpunk setting. It's set in 2045 and it manages to nail a different tone which whilst more post-apocalyptic, seems more modern and also just seems like it would actually allow for the sort stuff that all the Cyberpunks (2013, 2020, Cybergeneration, V3.0, Red and 2077) say goes on, to go on. In particular corporations are much LESS powerful and MORE numerous - i.e. corporations are the focus not megacorporations, and this makes so much more sense for the setting.

2077, as expressed in the CRPG, is more like 2020, and seems like it would be a worse fit for a TT RPG. Initially I was confused as to why Pondsmith had gone for a game in-between 2020 and 2077 rather than capitalizing on the likely success of 2077 (and despite the issues it's had, it is very successful), but the gameability of the setting clarifies that.

All that said the one example adventure I read, in the long tradition of example adventures for cyberpunk RPGs, was some of the dumbest naughty word I've ever read. Plus ca change I guess.