Nerf'd, you are not an evil GM, an evil GM is someone who as an object lesson to an annoying little punk, lets the rest of the PCs narcojet his hide and leave him in the first section of the lab in DNA/DOA locked in the room with the sleeping monster.

An evil GM is one who when the team is guarding maria mercurial and a pair of them decide they need to have their heavy hardware to do the job right, sends a pair of aguilar attack helos after the team because they have kept MM from Aztechnology, and then because they have a million dollar mafia price on their head, and survived the destruction of the truck, sends a gang of TROLLS after the elf of the pair who is simply trying to get his post toasty hide back to their hidey hole and recover with the pistols he has in his hands, having lost all his weapons but the pistols on his person and the panther that he had in his hands when the truck blew up.

Nerf'd, I, for one will give you an atta boy. It's been my experience that a: players used to shooting everything until the game finishes need some hard lessons in reality and that 2: player like being beat up, bloodied, and nearly (note I say nearly) killed, as it makes the victory all that much sweeter.

I vote firmly on the side of hard GMing in Shadowrun. It should be a seat-of-your pants thrill ride where players *aren't* sure that their characters will survive intact, requiring using your wits and putting a serious sweat on your brow. For days that you don't want to do alot of thinking and worrying, break out the D&D, or the spongebob squarepants.

now mike you cant say much about D&D games, i remember someone opening a door before they allowed either of the rangers or the rogue to check the door, and caught an arrow trap dead center...dumb but dwarf cleric

Man you're a realistic gm. I try to be one but it's exceptionally hard to stay above my players since their mental acuity is as such that I struggle just to stay one step ahead of them. Alot of the time they focus on a means to super crack themselves out to the point of taking the fun out of the session for the new players. So hence why you steamroll your party everystep of the way. Good job! It gives me hope that my players will enjoy the game and live in abject fear.

I have got to admit that some of my best times and memorable moments was playing where something literal happened, and the other players - even the GM to a point - assumed we were going to handwave the incident away and get on with the objective.

A couple of examples, and neither one strengthened the position my character was in.
1. A character with little combat skills made a habit, maybe to grab spotlight time, of rushing through whatever we happened to be exploring at the time. He would open one door and if there wasn't any "treasure", rush to open the next door. So one night after he says, "I open the door," I follow with the action, "I follow him into the room." Of course, the guy shuts the door after the GM describes a roomful of people and proceeds to the next door, and so on. Eventually initiative is rolled. It gets to me, and the GM asks me where my PC is. "Back down the corridor in that room with all the people."
2. Similar situation really, I get clobbered with a sap and lie unconscious in an alley. The rest of the group chase after the assailant in vain, then get on with hunting down leads. Now I was roleplaying real well and staying silent until they wanted me to do something. I ask how much time has passed dince I got sapped, and I think everyone just assumed I was figuring TN modifiers. The GM says enough time has passed for me to regain consciousness, so I reply that I awaken and wonder where I am, as no one had said anything about carrying my dead weight along. The GM laughed, went with it and brought into play an admirer had found me and taken me to their home to have their way with me.

Both examples led to some hilarity really, and it was from trying to stay in character and going by what had been declared even if it was potentially detrimental to the character. Sounds like how the players in question took the situation.

If Buck means that the more experienced players are better at min-maxing, and the newer players aren't as good - that may or may not be a bad thing. He needs to ask himself why the more experienced players being better "takes the fun out of the sessions" for the newer players.

If the more experienced players are being attention hogs and going out of their way to make the newbies feel useless, then he needs to have an OOC talk with them. They need to let the newer players try things without being pushed aside or argued down all of the time. He also needs to be harder on what he allows at char-gen, if their min-maxing actually makes it excessively difficult to run adventures.

However, if it's the newbies whining because their sammie isn't as "tough" as the seasoned player's sammie, then he needs to talk with the newbie, and explain that, while everyone should feel like they are contributing to the game, players who are more experienced can put together more effective characters. Once they learn more about the game, they will be able to do the same.

A game shouldn't neccessarily be equal. Instead, it should be equitable, with people getting more out of their characters if they have invested more time in learning the system, and people getting to affect the campaign more if they make more of an effort at roleplaying and pursuing their character's goals. Encourage newbies, take them under your wing, and make an occasional effort to coax a reticent player out a bit, but don't give someone who's being a slug the same reward as someone who's hustling for it.

I don't think it was brutal per se... just even handed and non-partisan.

If when running a game, be it BattleTech, MechWarrior, D&D (of some edition), or Shadowrun, I follow one rule religiously.

If something causes me to do a double-take on a situation, someone is going to be made into an object lesson. I'm talking things like "I'm going to do a full charge while firing my rifle at the bad guys".

I'll give the player an out by asking them if they are sure they want to do this as well as ensuring they are aware of the potential consequences.

One guy I played with assured me that was *exactly* what he wanted to do. My response: Let the dice fall where they may.

Turned out he was a lucky bastard. He did exactly what he said he was going to do and managed to pull it off with style AND humor. (He never did tell me how he manages to do these things from game to game)

I'm a big fan of letting the player / character hang themselves. I'll happily provide the rope if they insist on using it.

That said, I typically don't have to.

Why is everyone arguing about a GM doing something goofy and harmless to a PC? The technomancer made it out with merely stomach/groin pains. Woo.

And why are people getting bent out of shape about a GM getting tough with Min-Max characters? A strength of 1 or possibly even 2 is ridiculous for almost any character. And for a character that uses guns that have the thing I like to call recoil? HAH!

Seriously. What the hell?

Exactly!

Here's a good benchmark if an action should require a players attention in game ( But isn't a major plot point.) , take a look at the difficulty of the event and compare it to buying hits. ( Every 4 points in a pool equal an automatic hit.)

If the hits exceed the threshold ( After mods of course.) don't trigger the event. On the other hand if the hits are under the threshold then you could trigger the event. ( Just don't get carried away with this as it can derail a good adventure.)

Well, to the OP: while the Technomancer bit i might have been a little more lax on, i'm patting you on the back for doing something about the Str 1 samurai wonder. Those 5 Body, 6 Agilty, 5 Reaction, 4 Blades, 6 Automatics, 3 Athletics Group well developed unrealistic weaklings have been a thorn in my side since SR4 came out. Yes, i'm aware that the Strength score needs a little bit of help in terms of linked attributes. Yes, i'm aware that you can't have everything high, nor do i condone maxing out everything in sight. Yes, im aware corners must be cut sometimes.

But seven christs on an ironing board, suck it up, realize that someone who has developed every physical aspect through diet, exercise, martial arts and heavy weapon training will NOT have the strength of a drunken slug, roll 16 Automatics dice instead of 18 for once, put a couple of those BP into Strength, if anything, to make the character a LITTLE more believable and not so obviously twinked, mmmmkay?

I have to let you on a little secret, it was a Rolemaster game so no stabilization rolls, just bleeding to death...

Come to think of that the GM should have notified other players about my character's situation as it was pretty obvious. But I am kind of proud that I managed to keep my trap shut about the situation. After the situation cleared one of the players asked me why I hadn't told them what my status was

Yeah, there's nothing like telling a player he kicked himself in the jewels without bending his knee to make my day.