 Munchkin Edges/Flaws, What have you learned to ban? |
  |
 Nov 5 2005, 08:17 AM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,283 Joined: 17-May 05 Member No.: 7,398  |
I prefer Severe Allergy (peanuts).
|
 |
 
|
|
Nov 5 2005, 03:57 PM
Post
#52
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Which is why I am the GM and I tell my players that I'm going to interpret the rules strictly as printed. If the book recommends that I "consider carefully" certain Flaws, then that is what I will do. Otherwise, no holds barred. Also the balance in BPs for Edges/Flaws is for Priority Chargen only, for BP chargen, the difference is recommended to be 5. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 5 2005, 06:52 PM
Post
#53
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
Sorry for having decent players who can keep themselves in line, and don't need their GM to enforce every suggested limitation tooth and nail in the name of preserving balance. Somehow I get the feeling that I wouldn't enjoy playing under you anyway. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 5 2005, 10:14 PM
Post
#54
|
|||
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
I've seen a great example of that before (better than the movie for sure, which may or may not mean anything to you all). I wrote one, but it was different because the character ended up skipping ahead to a new identity (basically, she became like the Bourne the novel character's concept is based upon) but within a SR context. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 5 2005, 11:58 PM
Post
#55
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 28-October 05 Member No.: 7,904 |
:rotfl: nothing I can say to that - the "the GM can't" has got to be ironic... 1. she/he is the GM, she/he CAN 2. if you think otherwise, think again .... well all should be in reason of course... - and yes caramel when all play nice (as they should in my mind too, then all is well but sometimes or with some players you have to be firm... ) :noflame: intended |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 12:34 AM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
*shrug* I don't really find it ironic at all. The way I see it, the GM is just another storyteller in the group with some powers of arbitrage. Others apparently see sitting behind the screen to be the equivalent of being granted a god given right to screw their players as hard as possible, in every way possible. I can't really understand how people find this style of gaming enjoyable, but hey, whatever turns you on.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 01:57 AM
Post
#57
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Now that is really ironic. Because sometimes the GM CAN'T. If you think otherwise, think again. When the players all stand united against you or post on here forums and we all tell the players to beat the GM on the head(not an unusual occurance)... you can just go find a new group to GM (if you can find another group in the first place). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 02:59 AM
Post
#58
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 120 Joined: 3-May 04 Member No.: 6,298 |
This is the way flaws work in the new World of Darkness system from White Wolf, though the flaws are more limited in scope there than in Shadowrun. Things like addictions and insanity get you XP if they negatively affect you durign a session. That way a player can't abuse having a phobia for something that they'll never run into (or force the GM to work albinos into the game, yet again to make the phobia meaningful), and at the same time, it provides some balance for the cases for where a phobia (or addiction or whatever) starts coming up all the time because your Fixer, who everyone else loves, is also the subject of your phobia/splatism/etc.
I basically agree. In amnesia cases I might allow the player to give some input on the general sort of history they'd like to have, but in general, I only want people to take flaws (or edges, really) if they're taking it because they think it would be fun or interesting to play them. And in that case, it's typically more fun to play an amnesiac when, as the player, you really don't know the backstory. That way when you start to find things out you can enjoy the mystery.
I think there's a middle ground there. I see being the GM as having the power to arbitrate and the responsibility to tell a good story. One of the keys to doing this well is to see them not as something in conflict, where you're either letting the characters run wild or you're hurting them as hard as possible, but to see them as complimenting each other, where characters run wild or get hurt based upon the needs of the story. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nov 6 2005, 03:25 AM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
How come you think it's in the domain of the GM to decide what's fun for the players? I'm honestly curious. :?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 03:58 AM
Post
#60
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
It's not so much deciding what's fun for the players, as it is the weight of GM'ing experience in attempting to provide fun for the players and finding out what works really good and what doesn't. Not to mention many GMs are themselves players or have been at one time and know what other GMs have done that ended up being fun for them
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 04:09 AM
Post
#61
|
|||||
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
There are limits to what even an absolute ruler can do. We know this from history. There is a line that a GM should never cross. If the players murder the GM and stick his head on a pike in town square for all to gawk at, then he has probably crossed that line. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 6 2005, 04:12 AM
Post
#62
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
How do you figure that? I don't see how deciding to slap down a ruling forbidding a player with Amnesia from writing a background when the player explicitly expressed his desire to do so has anything to do with "weighing GM experience." There are only two possible reasons for such a scenario: you either have a shitty player who needs to be kept on a leash because he can't roleplay his own limitations or you have a shitty GM who likes fucking with his players just 'cause he can. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 04:26 AM
Post
#63
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 57 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,767 |
A phobia of albinos in Shadowrun is completely reasonable and really quite sensible, considering the fact that every albino in the sixth world is either a brutally powerful magician or an eye-buggingly min-maxed otaku.
A more reasonable fear-response, however, is to shoot them twice in the head. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 05:23 AM
Post
#64
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
Fear manifests in a subjective manner in each individual.
-Siege |
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 06:15 AM
Post
#65
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 485 Joined: 25-October 04 Member No.: 6,789 |
True a GM CAN do anthing they want. Shortly there after they can look for new players and friends. The game is a way to have fun, not do one upmanship. Can't accept that fact? Too bad! |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 6 2005, 08:16 AM
Post
#66
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 120 Joined: 3-May 04 Member No.: 6,298 |
Or a third option: the GM is only interested in telling a story with an amnesiac in it if part of the experience of that story is trying to figure out the history of that amnesiac. And, as that experience should be the most direct for the person playing the amnesiac, he doesn't want that player to already know the history of the amnesiac. I don't get your problem with a player not knowing details of a character's history that the character himself doesn't know. Of course a good player could convincingly play his character even if he knew that backstory, but that isn't the only consideration. I've had players who, if I told them in advance that a situation was a trap, would still walk in there because their characters didn't know that, but that doesn't mean that telling them in advance is a good idea. It is perfectly acceptable to not tell players things their characters don't know. GMs do it all the time: we don't tell them the layout of buildings they haven't seen, we don't tell them that people are concealing weapons if they haven't searched them, and we don't tell them what's inside a safe if they haven't opened it. Controlling the flow of information is simply part of what a GM does, and just because amnesia means concealing information about the character doesn't magically put it into the box of things only a terrible GM does. Now, if a player came to me and said they wanted to play an amnesiac, but they wanted to know the backstory themselves, I wouldn't shoot it down, I'd ask why. And if they had a good enough reason, I'd let them do it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 10:56 AM
Post
#67
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,283 Joined: 17-May 05 Member No.: 7,398 |
Or street samurai who want to get that extra attribute point for that little extra bit of edge. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 03:27 PM
Post
#68
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 276 Joined: 29-September 02 Member No.: 3,348 |
I've seen a player where this didn't work in live games. Told by the other players and/or the GM that something was a bad idea he always did it anyway. It's only due to luck and a misguided sense of loyalty from the other players that he wasn't making new characters constantly. He was still making new characters more than everyone else combined. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 04:03 PM
Post
#69
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
Yeah, the GM is there to have fun too, but if the only way you can have fun is by putting arbitrary restrictions on character creation that are in no way supported by canon or your players, then you might want to rethink your policy. I could easily say that only people who create blonde lesbian trolls dressed in frilly tutus can play in my game. That doesn't make it reasonable.
No no no, you haven't been listening. I don't. What I do find disturbing is the fact that so many people seem to think that they have more license to write a background for an amnesiac than they do for any other character. This is simply not the case, especially if your intent for doing so stems out of some twisted desire to screw the player over. If a player wants me to come up with a history for him because he likes the mystery and suspense of finding stuff out for himself, I'll be all up for it. If he doesn't 'cause he thinks he'll enjoy writing the background more, then I won't. I'm not going to ruin his good time just because he took a particular flaw during character creation. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 6 2005, 06:45 PM
Post
#70
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 7-February 03 Member No.: 4,025 |
I've found that amnesia, dark secret, and even day job (and some others) can at times help or hinder me as a GM. Sometimes, the character's background, and background related edges and flaws can really screw up your campaign....
Me: "Okay, so this new campaign has you sitting around a booth at your favourite strip club when..." Player 1: "Argh! I'm having a flashback about my mother!" Player 2: "I'd never go in there, I can only live in the forest." Player 3: "I have to be at sea in three hours." Player 4: "Who are you people! I'm drawing my gun." However, dark secret, hunted or amnesia is a lifesaver when you didn't have time to write that week. For us, character creation sessions are also campaign creation sessions. We can hammer out characters that match the upcoming game and vice versa. My players know that if they have a character who's got a dark secret, the campaign will largely be about that flaw. So if I already have a strong idea about how I want the plot to progress, I'll ask them to forego on such traits and they know it'll be to help them enjoy the game. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 07:36 PM
Post
#71
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 7 Joined: 26-December 04 Member No.: 6,905 |
Ambidexterity is the one that makes my GM cringe ( no one dares ask him for aptitude).
all the other ones ive seen have their place, but only if RPed properly, so my GM has 3 rules. 1. If it dosen't cause you problems then its not worth points 2. write 1/3-1/2 page on why you have said flaw/edge and justify yourself 3. if you dont RP the flaw ( or at least attempt) then you dont get any karma If you consitantly ignore your flaws then its open season on you |
|
|
|
|
Nov 6 2005, 08:07 PM
Post
#72
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 120 Joined: 3-May 04 Member No.: 6,298 |
First, as I specifically said, if someone had a compelling argument for knowing things about his amnesiac character that the character himself didn't know, I'd let them do it. My point is that I see what makes amnesia primarily interesting as a game concept is the mystery, and as such, I'd hope the player was interested in exploring that. As such, I consider the default to be that the player not know anything their character doesn't know. However, like every other rule, I'd be happy to bend it if it meant the players having more fun.
Well, I'd say you have more license because it's more in theme for an amnesiac to now know their backstory than it is for a normal character. However, it doesn't come out of a desire to screw the player over, but out of a desire to provide an interesting mystery and roleplaying experience. I think that experience is heightened by the player himself not knowing the backstory. If the player can argue why, in his case, that's not true, then fine, and we'll go with it. My point is not that I try to use amnesia to screw a player, but that I think that amnesia, as a storytelling device, is best used if the player doesn't know the character backstory. In general, I don't have much sympathy for the "a good GM should try to screw his players' characters as hard as possible" school of thought. I know that when many people say it they're just getting at the idea that many of Shadowrun's best moments come when the drek is hitting the centralized air recycling unit, so a good game will often include times when everything is coming down around a Shadowrunner's head. However you have to be careful to distinguish between telling an engaging story involving a run gone wrong, and trying to kill the characters for no other reason than to screw the players.
I'm pretty sure we agree. I just think we differ on what the default assumption is going to be for who writes the backstory is. I assume I'll be doing it and can be convinced otherwise. You assume they'll be doing it but are willing to do it if they want you to do. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nov 6 2005, 11:15 PM
Post
#73
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 21-October 05 From: In a Starbucks™ café near you Member No.: 7,870 |
I don't agree with a few of your points, but for the most part, you're probably right. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 6 2005, 11:22 PM
Post
#74
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
Personally, I wouldn't immediately veto a player wanting to write his amnesiac character's background, but I would scrutinize it pretty carefully. One of the major reasons that amnesia is a Flaw is that it involves not knowing people who used to know you, and having to deal with surprises, misinformation, and manipulation from those people. I wouldn't have a problem with an amnesiac written by the player, with no dangling plot threads from the past, but I would have a problem if the player expected to get Flaw points from that - it's not really a disadvantage at that point, just background flavor text. If the player wrote a background that included some actual detriment to the character, and some potential for complications arising from the past to arise, then I would be far more likely to allow it.
That's for the 2-point version, though. For the 5-point version, I don't really see it. You don't even start out knowing your own stats for that one, so I think, for that version of the Flaw, you really are turning control of what kind of character you will be playing over to the GM. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 7 2005, 05:28 AM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 207 Joined: 3-November 05 From: KCMO Member No.: 7,922 |
For the 2-point amnesia, I think that the player should be involved in developing his background & history. He should work closely with the GM to do so, but I see no reason not to let him be involved if you as GM trust him to not use said information in his play (except when he remembers something).
For the 5-point amnesia, I think the most the player should do is give the GM a rough outline of an idea--say, a Tir paladin with no memory of who he is--and let the GM create the character, the backstory...everything. The difference? For 2-point, IIRC, it was implied that the character knew what they could do, just not why. For 5-point, you don't even know what you can do. Speaking from a player's perspective, if you know you have 0 skillpoints in pistols, you're going to either tend towards skills you know you have a better shot with, or you're going to end up playing it kinda "cartoon-y" because you'll know that you don't have that skill. It's much harder to play total amnesia well if you know what's coming... Of course, you have to trust your GM. IMO, anyway. my 2 :nuyen: |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd August 2026 - 05:30 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.