 Take Aim and Called Shot |
  |
 Dec 7 2006, 08:02 AM
Post
#376
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116  |
Actually now might be a good time to put in an example of what I at least feel is 'bad GMing' since some folk seem to want a solid example of 'Good GM, Bad GM'
Now I at one time played alot of RPGs on MUSH/MUX/MOO text based interface. I dont so much anymore but thats largely due to the difficulty finding a place thats even still active around the same time of days as I can be online. Several years ago, I was playing on a MUSH called Rifts: JITU. I hate the Palladium system. But I still love playing Rifts cause of the setting. So I just swallow my hatred of the crappy system and play it anyway.. So at one point I ran into the following scenario. Myself and several other PCs were poking around the ruined remains of several skelebots and other wreckage following several months of some heavy fighting with the Coalition States. We were there purely on a salvage mission, and were specifically looking for intact skelebot reactors to use for some upcomming projects. So we bring in a massive cargo container to haul scrap metal and other salvageable goodies away in, the area is relatively hilly but due to the large use of incidnaries/ordenance/other the area was relatively clear cut with little to no foliage left. At this point the Staffer who was GMing the scene poped a supprise attack uppon us as several skelebots had been left in fully functioning order diguised as 'destroyed' units and they promptly started opening fire on us. Now for those of you not familar with rifts, one of the weapon systems utilized by skelebots is a hand held 'railgun' (really a massdriver but what ever). This system is fed by a belt feed from an ammo drum at the back. The cable itself even has an 'MDC' (read hitpoint) value to be destroyed and thus severed. Leaving the gun with at best one more volley to use before it goes empty. Now my character in question was basically setup to be an assassin. He was good with rifles, could snipe quite well and was also really good in melee combat. He wasnt so great in non combat areas but he was still a little twinky by most other RPG standards but thats Rifts for you. At any rate. durring the fight I 'run off' and find myself some cover, and begin promptly sniping at the skelebots. Namely the ammo feeds for their railguns. The guns alone dont do much damage but having 15+ wailing on you will end most people rather quickly. And thats exactly the kinda thing that was happening. All the bots were ganging up on one target at a time. (Which is sorta by the book but not really fair to the players in my oppinion). My weaponry couldnt possibly take otu the skelebots in a single hit but I could in one or two hits sever the feedline to their guns. Which would even thigns for us quite quickly. So I set about doing this. sniping away blah blah blah blah. The rifle I was using also happend to have an underslung grenade launcher, which I hardly used becuase in rifts Greandes are.. for the most part, pretty bloody useless, trying to take out basic infantry with one is like trying to take out a tank with a firecracker. They still have the odd use but not much their also horribly expensive. The entire fight I was using them at all, I was doing quite well doging and I was intentionaly moving away from the container to draw fire -away- from it, and clearly stated that as my intention. SUddenly mid fight, my internet connection crapped out for all of about 15-20 minutes. and when I log back in. My previously undamaged armor is not only heavily damaged, but the container is shot to useless slag and i'm takign cover behind it and i'd fired off all 4 of my very expensive and useless grenades beacuse the GM said so. SUffice it to say I was pissed off. That in my oppinion is -very- bad GMing. Takign control of my character without asking, doing so without giving me much time to get back on when people are known to be somewhat prone to disconnnection and further more giong completely against everything I specifically stated my character intended to do. Not to mention that my character had almost (and I'm pretty damn sure WOULD have) died while I wasnt even online due to circumstances totally beyond my control. Now granted this example is with antoher RPG system, but both situations could techncialy be covered by the RPG system since nither system specifically 'disallows' what happened, called shots or what ever. Hell the palladium has even less rules/definitions surrounding whats possible/not possible than SR4 does for things like 'called shots' and sniping. Now for my idea of a 'Good GM' they'd have at least waited the 15 mins or so as is customary for a MUSH before continuing, and they'd have at the very least had the courtesy to have my character continue his stated actions and goals, rather than totally reversing them against all reason, having my character run around in the open under the concentrated fire of 15 enemies specificallyt rying to kill him just so the GM can trash all our plans and shoot the hell out of the container etc. Never mind that there was plenty of other cover to use etc. |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 08:03 AM
Post
#377
|
|||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
more modifiers != more complexity. not by themselves, to any significant degree. sure, such a set of modifiers couldn't possibly cover everything--but they'd at least give a solid set of examples on how to handle things they don't cover.
sure. agreed. but my whole point is that a game shouldn't require a good GM to run okay. it's never going to run well under a bad GM, we all know that. but it shouldn't require a good GM, is what i'm saying. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 08:22 AM
Post
#378
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
Ehh it sort of does. It's yet more stuff to keep track of so its thus more (not necessarly significantly so but still more) complex. But thats my oppinion and I as I'm sure I've said before, I dont consider it necessarily a 'bad thing'. Just yet more stuff I have to keep track of, even though I find stuff like that is infact very handy to have, because then I can keep a handy dandy chart nearby and quickly work up the modifier total. On the GM side of things, to me really you only have three types of GMs. A good GM, a Bad GM and an inexperienced GM. Most inexperienced GMs I find turn into good ones, but not all. And at the time they can sort of go either way but thats not really something a rule system will make or break. How they handle the situation as it comes up is what makes or breaks it in my oppinion. If I'm GMing a system and somethign comes up (As has happened under SR3 when I had one full mage doign all sorts of stuff I wasnt used to handling) I'd quite simply state Umm ok I"m not quite sure how this works. And quickly go over with said player about the rules, look them up what ever and make a call from there assuming one really needed to be made. An inexperienced GM who at least references the rules should ultimatley (Albeit with abit more work perhaps) manage to run a game just as well as 'Mr. Ultimate Good GM'. And if they dont have the makings of a good GM no matter what the rules say their not going to be a good one at least at that time. I've seen a few bad GMs turn around and actually change (Though not too often to be honest but it -can- happen, there's still several I avoid like the plague even among the ones that have 'improved'). So ultimately -any- RPG 'requires' a 'Good GM' to play it. Good does not equate being 100 percent familar with the rules. It equates being capable of making 'reasonable' calls based uppon the information at hand. And if you make a call and a player says. But rule X states this, and it's a 'reasonable' request for the game style your working in then by all means you should run with it. However just cause the rules state tehcnically X is possible, doesnt mean you should just give in and let the player do it if your going with X degree of realism. If however X degree of bent realism would make it reasonable, then yes you should allow it. So it all comes down to finding a GM who GMs to the sort of 'realism setting' you expect. Some allow totally silly off the wall thigns cause the idea really is just to have fun and the group as a whole doesnt give a hoot as to how 'realistic' the game is. I've certainly been in several games where stuff just got kinda silly but it wasnt ever ment to be 'realistic' in the first place and silly totally implosible stuff was to be occasionaly expected. (Like one D&D game where my Kender got the party pack mule completely wasted on dwarven spirits, and then the GM had us passing a field of pot plants that I cant qutie recall how they caugh tfire so everyone got high and the Mule eventually ODed and died) |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 12:16 PM
Post
#379
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,978 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New Jersey, USA Member No.: 500 |
Kesslan: I'm a long, long time player on MUSH/MUX/MOO environments, so know of the environment in which you speak. What you speak of is not a problem of any system, period, it's with the staffer running the fight. A good system, a bad system, it would make no difference. 1) 15 minutes is a fairly long time. Every MU* has a different custom in that regard, and at some point you just can't wait any longer. 2) If it isn't likely you're going to be back soon, in the GM's estimation, they have to do something. This GM made a very, very bad call. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 7 2006, 02:40 PM
Post
#380
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I never said they were.
Really? How many bad calls do you make on average?
That would be a case of modifying a loose system to fit the desires of the group. If the entire group except the GM wants it, he should be democratic. Luckily it;s a loose system, so making that call is an easy one.
How so? They either decide to remove the skill and stat cas or they don't. The system is not going to fall apart.
Given how many people seem to like it, and the fact that it's won several awards, I think that "it's a nightmare" thing is your take, not the general perception. But ok. If SR4 is a nightmare to you, don't use it. It's as simple as that.
Rules are fair and predictable based on what they do, not looseness or tightness. It's possible to have unpredictable tight rules (like SR3's multiple systems that work different from one anoter) and it's possible to have unfair tight rules. Nice try though.
That's not what I meant and you know it, because we've been over this several times. go back and reread the thread if you can't keep up with the rest of us.
Of course you can predict it. All it takes is GM/Player communication. "Excuse me, Mr. GM Sir (of whatever you call him), do you think it's reasonable for me to kill a man inside a citymaster with a sharpened stick in the dark from 50 feet away?" "No? Ok then, what should we agree on as a limit to negative modifers in a ranged attack longshot test?" Just because subjective can be unfair doesn't mean it will be. That's what talking things through is about.
So go away and play Wushu and Savage Worlds already. This however, is an SR4 board. Your constant proselytizing is out of place.
When did I say otherwise? And what the hell do I care about HERO on an SR4 board. Unless you're suggesting the designers replace the system with it, it doesn't matter how loose or tight it is, nor how stable or unstable. Again, your poroselytizing is out of place. People come here for SR4, not to hear you preach. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 05:55 PM
Post
#381
|
|||||||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
zero. i am perfect in every way. but seriously, McMurray, i know you've taken algebra. i know you understand the concept of a variable in an equation. you don't need to know the value of the variabe in order for the equation to work. if you want to come up with a real number, sure, you need to define the variable--but we're not looking for real numbers, just a simple "more than" or "less than" result. if x is the number of bad GM calls in a system that runs with less GM intervention, and y is the number of bad GM calls in a system that requires more GM intervention, x < y.
haha, there are people who like WinME? i guess somebody has to, if only to fill out the far ends of the bell curve. people whose sole purpose on this planet is not to fulfill statistical expectations, however, don't like WinME. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:10 PM
Post
#382
|
|||||||
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
So a system with zero GM calls is therefore perfect? Go have fun. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:15 PM
Post
#383
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Sounds alot like playing with a Computer for a GM...
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:16 PM
Post
#384
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
When this thread gets reduced to snark and jabs, it will be closed.
If you have anything to actually add to the discussion, I encourage you to do so. If all you want to do is prove that you win the internet, I discourage it. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:22 PM
Post
#385
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Wrong thread... my bad...
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:23 PM
Post
#386
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Not in the least. There's that whole other side, the "story and interaction" bit. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:27 PM
Post
#387
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
it's certainly perfect at the task of preventing bad GM calls. i don't think you'll find that i claimed anywhere that that's the only goal worth pursuing in game design. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 7 2006, 10:57 PM
Post
#388
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
I still notice that there has been a lack of even an attempt to name a game or system that is, however.
Which, as long as we realize that saying "a system that has zero GM calls" is sheer wishful thinking (not on all parties' part, mind you, I'm aware), is fine. You can call for what you would see as improvements to a system, and provide reasons that you feel that they would be improvements, but you can't say "compared to The Perfect Game, SR4 is too loose, and bad", because that's baseless, IMO, because TPG doesn't exist. (note that I'm not trying to say that this pokes holes in anyone's positions beyond any time someone compares SR4, or any system, to the mystical TPG ;)) |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:03 PM
Post
#389
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Actually, a couple have been named, specifically Wushu, as being an example of certain points being made. At the time though, even after having been asked to supply specific names, the poster was then accused of merely prosthletizing, and once again told to go away and play another game (which I personally don't think adds anything at all to the discussion, or to the overall forum atmosphere itself). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:07 PM
Post
#390
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
granted. but, then, i don't think anyone's asking for a system that perfectly eliminates bad GM calls. that'd be nice to have, but it's not a realistic goal. SR4's not being compared to some mystical paragon of game mechanics. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:19 PM
Post
#391
|
|||||
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
Instead of Reductio ad absurdum let's get into that hard hard algebra stuff. iA + jB = F where i = probability of GM Intervention A = value of GM intervention j = probability of Rules covering B = value of rules (usefulness) F = Fun! Some things to consider i + j != 1 i > 0 J > 0 A can be positive or negative B can be positive or negative (I do not believe A and B have a defined relationship to each other that can given a formula) We could extend this further by adding C = Number of rules, and modifying the formula as follows iA + jB + jC = F We could spend forever arguing this, but I'm only going to point out that all I want is to keep F at a high value, and the relative values I assign to ABCij are going to be different then anyone else's. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:22 PM
Post
#392
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
edit: Oops, I'm slow. This was written in response to mfb's preceding post.
It has been implied a few times, mostly in hyperbole. I can't speak directly to Wushu, but I highly doubt it's the grail that it was made out to be. Of course, that's simply me being wary of anything of that nature that I read. The old "find out for yourself" thing kicks in, even when I have no such intention. :cool: |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:29 PM
Post
#393
|
|||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
What I'm saying is that GMing is a function of a huge number of variables. Trying to reduce it to one and then saying "see, the formula is right" is a waste of time, especially since one of the things that factors into GMing is system, and many GMs like a loose system. But I already said all that, so I guess it doesn't really "add anything."
I was referring to SR4. There are a lot of people that like SR4 and it has won several awards.
That was my fault. It's my typical reaction to Cain, whose only reason for visiting this board seems to be to tell everyone that SR4 sucks and his flavor of the month is the best thing since sliced bread. Perhaps Wushu is a very tight loose system, but just saying "this game is the roxxorz" adds no more than "then go play it." |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:31 PM
Post
#394
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
There are lots of things that win awards that go on to suck mightily. ;)
edit: no intended implications there beyond "awards mean drek-all sometimes", btw |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2006, 11:55 PM
Post
#395
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
True, but they also don't tend to sell well, garner a large following, and generally kick ass. SR4 does all those, in spite of what cain, mfb, and a few others think.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 8 2006, 12:21 AM
Post
#396
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
If that is what had happened, you'd have a good point. I was specifically not trying to point any fingers though. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 8 2006, 01:13 AM
Post
#397
|
|||||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
well, you certainly did put up a lot of letters. hard to argue with them, since you didn't try to prove anything with them. regardless, i really don't see what's so hard to grasp, here. if someone is prone to screwing up, and you give them lots of chances to screw up, they're going to screw up a lot. if you give them less chances to screw up, they're going to screw up less.
see above. the basic principle doesn't require algebra; i only went there because you were arguing the point on an algebraic basis without taking into account all of the germane principles of algebra.
not point. Wushu was brought up, as i recall, as a counterpoint to the idea that game designers can't make a loose game that covers all the bases. it wasn't brought up for its own sake at all. and as for sucking mightily, well, lots of people bought WinME. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Dec 8 2006, 01:34 AM
Post
#398
|
|||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Cool. I wasn't. <snarky comment snipped> I've yet to see any awards ME has earned. However, both can be BSOD'd very readily, as this thread has demonstrated.
You *asked* for a system, then ignore it when I provide one. This can be referred to as an Ignoring the Evidence fallacy, At any event, your claim was that no system managed to fit the criteria of tight and broad (although nice try at shifting the language again!); Wushu defeats your premise. Capes also is a game that totally lacks GM fiat. And i don't even play Capes. So, there's your counterevidence. I'll also add that saying "SR4 roxxors" isn't any more productive. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 8 2006, 01:50 AM
Post
#399
|
|||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I've argue the point other ways as well, but you don't seem to have seen them. Might I suggest rereading the last few pages?
No, but you were trying to compare SR4 and WinME. I decided to ignore the inappropriate comparison and remain on topic. I'm sorry if that confused people.
Excellent. Do you have any proof, or are we expected to take you at your word?
You're right. Luckily I haven't said that, or I'd have egg on my face right now. And, I'll suggest again that you may want to reread a little of the thread, or indeed the entire thread, as my stance has never been the equivilent of "SR4 Roxxors." Yes, I do think SR4 is a really cool system, but it's not my stance in this discussion. My stance in this discussion has always been that if you don't think SR4 roxxorz, you're well within you're rights, and are free to change it or play something else. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Dec 8 2006, 01:55 AM
Post
#400
|
|||||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
This is no time for yolks. ~J |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th April 2024 - 11:14 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.