Please, omg, I can't even reply to that post it was so retarded. I'm overcome with sorrow.

Can you not read the flaw as stated in the SR Comp?

It fucking says 24 hours!!

24 hours not 2, not 3, but 24.

As in a full day, one full rotation of the Earth.

Would my character be freaked out that a water spirit is killing everyone on a godforsaken ship out at see? Yes! Would I leave immediately (after a couple hours) knowing that the Johnson will have my nuts when I get back? No. Would I jepordize my rep and possibly frag up a job to teach a newbie a lesson? No. He isn't a full memeber yet because he is new and green.

Get with the program you jackass. Preferably before you go calling bullshit on things you obviously do not fully comprehend.

The rest of us seem to see it as a +9 against ogres.

As I've clearly shown, not having the same viewpoint on flaws hardly warrants going around calling someone a jackass. You're technically correct. The flaw "doesn't kick in until 24 hours has passed".

However, you are, IMO, interpreting the flaw in a horribly narrow (and dare I say munchkinny?) way. The numerical penalties of the flaw don't affect you for the first 24 hours. The character still has the flaw, and a suggestion that you roleplay it is hardly out of line.

You're reading the flaws as build points rather than an integral part of the character that you're playing. That's fine. But you could at least make the attempt to understand where others are coming from, especially when you ask for advice and the give it freely.

Umm, well you did bring up the flaw somewhere in your post. Let's see....the first sentence? But hey, your "problem" could be solved by you following the clearly worded Vindictive flaw. So maybe you aren't in the best position to be spouting off like a......jackass?

Word scramble!!!

There. Now it has definite mechanics to use whenever one needs a handy substitute for roleplaying.

[insert obligatory smiley of your choice to soften the snark]

That would have been fine if you hadn't seemed fixing to channel said belligerence into the noob.

That would have been fine if you hadn't seemed fixing to channel said belligerence into the noob player.

If it is anything like this board posters would nag him about how drugging the candy is much more efficient, allowing him to pick up multiple targets and once, reducing overall noise pollution, and eleminating the need for the hatchet in most cases. The later is relevent to the question since the hattchet is more likely to cause blood splatter than the bone saw is. Someone else would them reply that drugs don't always work and that he should just use a machine gun. Someone else would ask if he sells the organs and rip him a new one if he doesn't and someone else would offer to buy the bodies from him so long as they came with barbecue sauce.

Actually, that was a result of a gun wrangler screwing up. They put dummy tips in the revolver so that it would appear to the loaded for one scene. When it came time to actualy shoot they put blanks in but forgot to remove the tips. The result was the blank propelling the tip out of the gun as if it were an acual bullet.

If you got to it right away, you could try salt. I know that works on red wine on carpeting. Of course, if the cushion is vinyl or leather, you should be more or less clear. If it's upholstry... Man, I couldn't guess. Might be time to upgrade. Leather is much nicer for what you're trying to do anyway.


Oh wait, I think we got derailed somewhere.

But they sure as hell are funny!

Also, that is why it's called the Vindictive flaw

The PROFESSIONAL response would be to walk away from the "team mate" who drew down on you and never work with them again.

The PROFESSIONAL VINDICTIVE response would be to kill them for committing such a massive faux pas during a mission.

As I stated earlier, either of these two responses - even though they may be in character, would have the real effect of forcing the noob to make another character. This was his first game? Continue to force him to make a new character every game session and the only thing you are teaching him is to hate chargen.

For the above reasons, I still whole-heartedly support beating the noob character half-to-death, then reviewing what they have learned during recuperation.

OK, maybe only beat them to Moderate, but anything less is just a slap on the wrist.

That may be the funniest thing I have read in a week.

hyzmarca, my hat is off to you sir.

Wow that analogy was soooo right on. That's exactly what it's like.




As for my supposed PK tendencies. If I had PK tendencies I would have beat him senseless with my troll buddy and left him on the ship to be killed by the pissed off spirit.

And don't talk to me about munchkining. There is a difference between being a munchkin and being a little bit unsure as to how to get revenge on a brand new PC with a brand new player. Totally valid by me. Totally invalid by you. If munchkining means wanting to follow in the spirit of the flaw then I guess I'm guilty. As for insulting my logic. Well, if the flaw states "24 hours" than I guess I have a valid reason for finishing the job in a couple hours don't I? You can't get more logical than that.

Of course it would. If you were playing a chaotic stupid barbarian with an intelligence of three.

Oh wait...wrong game.

But you aren't. You're following the letter (or in this case, the number) of the flaw.
Granted, this is just my way of looking at things, but if a person is terrified of being on the open ocean, they don't walk around on a boat that's being harrassed by a big bitch of a water spirit for 23 hours 59 minutes 59 seconds and then suddenly go "Oh shit! I need to get me on some land!" It just doesn't make any sense. The numbers, as I said before, are the eventual numerical/mechanical effects of the flaw, not the only thing it should encompass.

Or if you were playing in a game in which people actually expect their actions to have realistic consequences.

It might be excessive... but it sure as hell is not an inherently stupid thing to do. If anything, keeping someone who panicked and turned a gun on a teammate around because they happen to be a PC is pure D&D...

Did I say it was "exactly what it was like?" No. I gave an example, and asked a question. If someone posted the above, do you think everyone would ignore the "why is he asking this?" and pay attention to his question, and only his question? Instead of answering my hypothetical question, you rolled your eyes. I think that's because you know the answer.

What made you think you could post something on Dumpshock, and not get people nitpicking it? I can think of six or eight times this shit's happened, easily, just off the top of my head. If all you want is a bare bones answer to a question, say "Someone's pointing a gun at my Vindictive character and demanding we call off a job, mid-session. I say no, we work things out later and complete the job. Now what should I do, to RP my Flaw?"

Simple as that. Don't go on about other flaws, the situation as a whole, etc, etc, and expect for the ravenous mongrels of DS not to tear it apart, like the bunch of jackals, hyenas, or wolves (depending on the day of the week) we are. It's no one's fault but yours.

Hey, stop that your watering down my milk.
Needed that. Thanks.

it doesnt require that you KILL him. but to "revenge" the slight. So if whatever the other person does to you is minor, your vindictiveness return should be slight (or a little more) unless this is a repeat offender. But if the slight is major then the return is major (evening killing the person).

I had a character that had that flaw. One of the other players slighted me but not horribly. I did something shortly later that embarassed them in front of their single contact. No death, or dismemberment. Just egg on their face in front of their contact. Same player on a different character did a big offense to me (or at least I perceived it to be) and I killed that character. The GM saw what I was doing, and I did it in a way that did not effect the other players. And that player was warned a few times from the GM about my character's flaw, so he let me do it with no blow back.

that is the rules I live by. And those are the rules the NRA, the Boy Scouts and the US Military has taught me. If you point a gun at someone, your intent is to shoot (kill) that person. period.

for SR, this is a great plan!. Personally most of the time I would go from step 1 to step 3 but it would all depend on the situation.

dx

I'm fortunate in that the people i have played with that have taken the flaw (i don't remember ever taking it myself, but i might have) do not use/abuse the flaw in that way. I'm sure i'd be pissed though if i came across a player that did....up until the point that the player stopped doing it or their character died a horrible death.

RL i personally actively avoid anyone that is willing to combine firearms with being even slightly drunk/stoned. So ya, tisoz, i get not wanting to be around people that point firearms in your general direction. I just can't picture myself looking to kill them because that would involve:
1) Being where they are.
2) Possibly spending a long time in prison wondering exactly why it was that important that i kill the guy.
3) Perhaps not #2 because i'm dead.

Ditto.

Good to hear he got put away.

In my layman eye for the first senario, if you would have lived and he not, that looks like selfdefense from your description. But hunting a guy down after he left the room would have likely needed a good lawyer, you not to shoot off your mouth, or a favourable jury/jurisdiction to get self-defense? Depends a lot on convincing someone that it was reasonable for you to see that as your best defense. Thus the importance of keeping your mouth shut if it was revenge and not survival on your mind.

Heat of the momment? Ya it might play out different when i get there, and a lot of variables would factor into it. Such as roughly what i see as, from the imperfect POV of the momment, the best choice for my goal i have in my mind (survival likely being near the top of the list). It's like when i took an extended First Aid/Emergency planning course. Until i used it in the first real senario there were those little doubts about WTF i'd do in the real crunch, and it can be a real relief when you actually go through it and keep enough of your head to not only do get yourself hurt but actually do good things.

My ex's new SO is a real nuckle dragger, and one time (actually the last time ever) i dropped off my son at their place i was 15 minutes late (and had had someone phone ahead to let them know why, that a friend's kid had gotten sick and i was dropping them off first). He stepped out in front of the vehicle as i pulled up and if not for putting on the brakes hard i would have popped him right there with the 3/4 ton truck. Then he proceeds to yell and scream at me through the windown, freaking my 9-year-old out. In retrospect i should have just drove off there, but my son was already getting out the other side to go to his mom....and in the process unlocked my door too. The neatherthal kicks off his shoes and is prancing around on the pavement in his barefeet Pulls open the door and tries to pull me out, and mostly succeeds then goes back to dancing and trying to goad me. Besides him being about 3" taller and about 40 lb heavier, this generally looks like a bad idea (fortunately the ex had enough sense to get the kid out of there straight off). I have no idea WTF chemical (synthetic or "natural") is running this guy's brain because he's not acting right. So i'm not biting and get back in...only he starts pulling me out again.

So i decide i'm not getting out of there clean (driving down the street dragging him clinging on me isn't going to be clean) and turn around and pummel him but good. Ask me earlier in the day without given specifics if that's what i'd say it was very unlikely i would try, muchless succeed. Maybe i got lucky and whatever he was riding had taken him out of it at that point (through the grapevine i've heard he cleaned up whatever it was after that incident). Or maybe i just surprised the hell out of him and got back in the vehicle before he regrouped. But i can't say i'd ever make the exact same choice again, but then again how can i say i wouldn't?

That was really what was sitting in the back of my mind when i asked about the shotgun guy. How the intent you preceive played into it, and i think you summed it up well there.

Hunting a guy down after he leaves doesn't require a good lawyer it requires moving to Costa Rica before the police can find you. Not even Denny Crane or God (Who thinks he's Denny Crane) could name that self sefense.

So an armed burglar comes into your home, sticks you in the closet and tells you to stay there while he leaves the room. There is a weapon in the closet and other people in the house. You grab the weapon and hunt through the house looking for the burglar and the people you knew were present. The descriptive term for how you move could be said to be stalking or hunting. I guess I am packing my bags for Costa Rica, or maybe Texas where such coddling of criminals is laughed upon.

Here is an even more blatant act of not defending oneself and family from criminals for you liberal jackasses. When I was 14 I was home alone with my younger brothers, dead mother and father working nights. One night around midnight there are gunshots behind our house. I turn on the outside light and turn it back off after gunfire erupts with a couple shots sounding like they land nearby. I get a semi automatic shotgun out and load it up, taking a seat in the dark where I can cover the entrances leading to the bedroom end of the house (built on a slope so they are above ground level.) I am going to assume because I was prepared and laying an ambush for anyone breaking into our home, I was not defending myself or my family. I do not believe you need to be a victim to defend yourself.

I meant with needing to turn every post into a falsely bi-polar political tirade.