IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Anythingforenoug...
post Jan 14 2006, 05:49 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 100
Joined: 7-December 05
Member No.: 8,054



I have a question about how other groups handle player requests for their characters that are either non-cannon, or pseudo-canonical at best. By way of background as to how this particular question has arisen in our group:

In one of my games I had an total sexploitation based NPC who was an adept assassin that followed a totem (Cobra) based path. She had mastered a unique metamagic which allowed her to use the critter power Confusion when she danced, which was the basis of how she operated in combat (as I said, a total sexploitation based character). I got the idea for this power/NPC in a total muchkin moment when I was reading through the totems and got to Horse, which grants its followers the ability to learn the critter power movement as a metamagic technique.

Now I am in the situation where I have players who want to have similar rule-bending elements for their PCs. We don't have any players in our group who generally ask for things for their PCs that don't make since, the standard is for things to line up pretty well with the character concept/backstory-so I don't get a lot of the outrageous you only want this because you think it is cool even though it makes no sense for your character at all, type of requests.

Being as this sort of question, how close to cannon the PCs must remain must be something that a lot of groups have to deal with, I was wondering, how do you come down on the question?

Thanks in advance for any of you who take the time to respond.

Anythingforenoughnuyen.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Herald of Verjig...
post Jan 14 2006, 06:08 AM
Post #2


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,066
Joined: 5-February 03
Member No.: 4,017



So, how unusual is it? On a scale from "different visible effects of the armor spell" to "complete non-magical immunity to lead" about where does this rule-bend fit?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Jan 14 2006, 06:11 AM
Post #3


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



My 2 :nuyen: , I'd say that if it makes sense for the character , make them work for it, but otherwise, why not? If a character can summon a spirit to use a power, why not let the character have the power? If you're worried about game balance, tweak the power a bit, or give it drain to balance it. Just make sure that it fits with the character, and it doens't get out of hand, like everyonewanting a unique metamagic poiwer. Then it becomes a superhero's game.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nick012000
post Jan 14 2006, 06:16 AM
Post #4


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,283
Joined: 17-May 05
Member No.: 7,398



Or, given the general tone of Shadowrun, a Supervillians game. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Jan 14 2006, 06:25 AM
Post #5


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



the villians were always cooler anyways. Really, who wanted to be a GI Joe hoser or autobot, when you could be a 'Cobra' or Deceptacon!? Bumblebee's a loser anyways. :D
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nick012000
post Jan 14 2006, 06:42 AM
Post #6


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,283
Joined: 17-May 05
Member No.: 7,398



Besides which, the overly complex plans? So Shadowrun. ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Jan 14 2006, 01:14 PM
Post #7


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0)
the villians were always cooler anyways. Really, who wanted to be a GI Joe hoser or autobot, when you could be a 'Cobra' or Deceptacon!? Bumblebee's a loser anyways. :D

But Grimlock kick butt! :D
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr.Platinum
post Jan 14 2006, 02:17 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 751
Joined: 7-June 02
From: Hamilton.LTG.on.ca
Member No.: 2,853



In my games all my Players have to make Canon characters or get out!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nyxll
post Jan 14 2006, 02:53 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 404
Joined: 22-June 05
From: Canada eh!
Member No.: 7,455



This is why we make house rules. There are many things in Cannon which are limited or we just do not like, so we make house rules to tailor the game to enhance our gameplay.

In my games, if there is something that will not overpower the gameplay, and really adds colour to the character I will let it stand. (I usually have some kind of flaw or drawback that goes with it for balance, although many times other players in the group have no idea about the negatives, and get a bit jealous at times till they find out more)

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Jan 14 2006, 02:58 PM
Post #10


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (Mr.Platinum)
In my games all my Players have to make Canon characters or get out!

In order not to have players asking for non-canon stuff, my (as a GM) NPCs are all canon too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr.Platinum
post Jan 14 2006, 04:00 PM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 751
Joined: 7-June 02
From: Hamilton.LTG.on.ca
Member No.: 2,853



QUOTE (toturi)
QUOTE (Mr.Platinum @ Jan 14 2006, 10:17 PM)
In my games all my Players have to make Canon characters or get out!

In order not to have players asking for non-canon stuff, my (as a GM) NPCs are all canon too.

Agreed, god i must be a Tyrant of a GM in my players cyber eyes.


god i'm such a shadowrun nerd.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Stainless St...
post Jan 14 2006, 04:30 PM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 25-May 05
Member No.: 7,414



I am usually fairly flexible, but I have the advantage of exclusivity, meaning my players don't take their characters to some other GM's table and try to convince them to let them get away with the same shenanigans that I do.

I try not to let the rule raping run rampant, but if I think something will add to the story or flavor of the game then I'll usually let it slide.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dawnshadow
post Jan 14 2006, 04:39 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 668
Joined: 15-February 05
From: Ontario, Canada
Member No.: 7,086



If you're going to add minor things to NPCs that are non-canon, then you should allow similar for PCs -- up to a point.

Half the fun of Shadowrun is that you are the little guy, compared to the opposition.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nyxll
post Jan 14 2006, 04:46 PM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 404
Joined: 22-June 05
From: Canada eh!
Member No.: 7,455



QUOTE (Dawnshadow)
If you're going to add minor things to NPCs that are non-canon, then you should allow similar for PCs -- up to a point.

Half the fun of Shadowrun is that you are the little guy, compared to the opposition.

Some things are done just for effect. Every GM at times fudges dice for "cinematic value" some times stats and abilities are massaged in the same manner. I do not do that to frustrate players but to add colour and memerable moments to the game.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aku
post Jan 14 2006, 08:23 PM
Post #15


Running, running, running
*****

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,220
Joined: 18-October 04
From: North Carolina
Member No.: 6,769



i think that if it's a technique available to multiple NPCs, than it should be avaialable to PCs as well, If its only one NPC however, than you can safely say that they "discovered" the technique or whatever, and not make it available to PCs, atleast, not without a price...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 14 2006, 08:59 PM
Post #16


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,010
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



I do not make everything I make available to my NPCs available to my PCs. This is canon—Otaku abilities before Brainscan, Insect Totems, Path of the Righ, etc. etc etc.

That said, I (with one exception) generally approve non-canon things for PCs if I want to make them allowable to anyone in the future.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
eidolon
post Jan 14 2006, 09:42 PM
Post #17


ghostrider
********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 4,196
Joined: 16-May 04
Member No.: 6,333



QUOTE (Nyxll)
Every GM at times fudges dice for "cinematic value" some times stats and abilities are massaged in the same manner.

I DON'T! Fudging is CHEATING!!11!!one If you fudge roll's, you're SO playing the game wrong.


:silly:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nyxll
post Jan 15 2006, 12:25 AM
Post #18


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 404
Joined: 22-June 05
From: Canada eh!
Member No.: 7,455



QUOTE (eidolon)
QUOTE (Nyxll @ Jan 14 2006, 11:46 AM)
Every GM at times fudges dice for "cinematic value"  some times stats and abilities are massaged in the same manner.

I DON'T! Fudging is CHEATING!!11!!one If you fudge roll's, you're SO playing the game wrong.


:silly:

It is not called cheating when you are the GM. >>>insert maniacle laughter<<<

but seriously, there are sometimes when you are trying to scale npc's to the team's level, rather than A. have them completely obliterate a team just because the GM put down some wrong stats, or B. need to offer some challenge so that the NPC's are not just walking targets.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pendaric
post Jan 15 2006, 12:46 AM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 993
Joined: 5-December 05
From: Crying in the wilderness
Member No.: 8,047



My stance is that every Ref automatic answer to "please give me question" is NO!
If the player can jump through Ref's stringent hoops of credibility and consistency, I might downgrade to Maybe.
That being said, there are grey areas that beg to be explored, all it requires is a little subtly.
And a excessively sized, crude length of deciduous forest. :evil:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 15 2006, 01:52 AM
Post #20


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,010
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (eidolon)
QUOTE (Nyxll @ Jan 14 2006, 11:46 AM)
Every GM at times fudges dice for "cinematic value"  some times stats and abilities are massaged in the same manner.

I DON'T! Fudging is CHEATING!!11!!one If you fudge roll's, you're SO playing the game wrong.


:silly:

You use sarcasm, but you're entirely correct. If you don't enforce the rules as agreed by the group, you remove the ability of players to anticipate the consequences of actions.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Glyph
post Jan 15 2006, 06:08 AM
Post #21


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,116
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,449



I agree. The dice are there to provide a fixed measurement of concepts such as skill or toughness, as well as add a truly random element to the game. I understand that sometimes GMs need to adjust things on the fly, but shy away from messing with dice rolls. If the PCs are having a rough time, then it's their own fault if their characters don't run away. If they are having too easy of a time, just let them. You can always make the opposition tougher next time. There is a fine line between "adding cinematic value" and railroading.


On allowing things equally for both PCs and NPCs, I would say that NPCs cover a wider range than the PCs do, from squatters and wage slaves up to dragons and immortal elves. So at the higher end, there are a few things, such as Path of the Righ, that are out of the reach of PCs, at least starting ones. You can also limit them from abilities that are either an exclusive discovery of one NPC, or limited to a secretive group of NPCs. However, if NPCs with special, non-canon abilities are fairly common, then it is only fair to allow PCs the same opportunity if they want something special for their character.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fistandantilus4....
post Jan 15 2006, 07:47 AM
Post #22


Uncle Fisty
**********

Group: Admin
Posts: 13,891
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Next To Her
Member No.: 6,928



QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

That said, I (with one exception) generally approve non-canon things for PCs if I want to make them allowable to anyone in the future.

~J

out of curiosity, what's your exception?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 15 2006, 08:32 AM
Post #23


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,010
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0 @ Jan 15 2006, 02:47 AM)
out of curiosity, what's your exception?

I once approved a Highlander-style Immortal using Bull's rules for a player who was having a hard time making and keeping a character that was both interesting to them and effective in the group. I did this despite having no intention of ever allowing another one.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RunnerPaul
post Jan 15 2006, 09:43 AM
Post #24


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,086
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 364



QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
I once approved a Highlander-style Immortal using Bull's rules for a player who was having a hard time making and keeping a character that was both interesting to them and effective in the group. I did this despite having no intention of ever allowing another one.

Well, after all, There Can Be Only One.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Jan 15 2006, 11:53 AM
Post #25


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (RunnerPaul @ Jan 15 2006, 05:43 PM)
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Jan 15 2006, 03:32 AM)
I once approved a Highlander-style Immortal using Bull's rules for a player who was having a hard time making and keeping a character that was both interesting to them and effective in the group. I did this despite having no intention of ever allowing another one.

Well, after all, There Can Be Only One.

:D :rollin:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th June 2025 - 05:04 PM

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.