There are a couple of recent threads that are dedicated specifically to the topic of GM/Player roles, interaction and politics. Could you please use them for the continuation of this latest derailment?

Some builds that we see here on Dumpshock one simply doesn't imagine in a normal group. I'd not have thought, before taking some looks at the characters here, that anyone would build such stuff, so I'd not have thought I'd have to mention that such stuff was not wanted.

Personally, I don't do the "those are the rules, build your character like you want within those rules" way anymore, too much trouble for no gain. Instead it is "Pick your character concept, then we build the character together with the entire group, amking sure it fits in, both background and stat-wise. If someone builds their character anyway before coming to my game, it gets adjusted - either upwards, or downwards, until it fits in with the other characters present.



Everyone is responsible to make sure everyone else has fun. That means making sure that one's character doesn't ruin the game for others, no matter the rules.

Also, a GM has to do all the work to prepare a run, picking plot, NPCs, and twists. You can't outsource that to the players without ruining the run.

Strange, because I've not really seen any legitimate build here that I haven't seen in a game at some point or other. You keep trying to make Dumpshock out to be some kind of munchkin haven, but that just isn't the case. If your opinion of this forum is so low, why do you keep returning to the site?

I don't have a low opinion of this forum. I just assume that the average "rules-savvy" for character optimisation is not as high among players who do not frequent DS, same as with the D&D optimisation board.

Ultimate Mundane Climber comes to mind

Finding a bug is a good chance for making a bugfix, isnt it? So why not try out to build uber characters just to see if theres any bug in the system?



I agree with everything but the "either upwards or downwards".
Certainly, every character being a specialized face is not very useful. So characters may have to be adjusted to fit together but letting the players build their pcs on theirselves spares time. If they have trouble with the rules while making characters, theyll certainly ask the group about it. We will try to find out how the particular rule works and if theres an obvious error in the rules, we'll houserule it.



Thats what I said. Its not the gms duty to control the players. If s.o. ruins the game theres nothing a gm could do what a player couldnt.



Yes, thats it. I'll do no more than these things. As a gm I will neither search for errors in the rules nor do anything else which hasnt directly to do with the run.

I don't hunt bugs.



It's not about making sure the rules are correct, it's about making sure everyone is on the same page with regards to power level - and that means there will be some adjusting upwards and downwards. And that's best done when all are together.

If you would you would be able to let the players build their pcs on theirselves while making shure that the whole group knows the game physics and can work with it.



Balancing is what the rules are for. If you want to adjust the power level then simply adjust the BP/Karma and let the rules work. The costs, conditions and restrainments for every single powers are quiet clear in the rules. I really dont need spending hours of character discussion and thats why I pay for the privilege of owning a rulesbook.

What bug? As far as I am concerned unless the devs come in to state that something is a bug and needs to be fixed (and that they would fix it), everything else is a feature, not a bug.

You don't need to pull surprise nerfs on players to accomplish this. I find it's sufficient to ask nicely. I just say: "Please cap your dice pools at 20", and most players will stick to it. I'll give the players my reasons; I won't slap down the limit without explaining that the system tends to break after that point. This also discourages hard-core munchkinism and encourages well-rounded characters, since there's no incentive to squeeze the life out of every last build point just to get one more die in your specialty.


I agree. You shouldn't need to house-rule everything. If the rules aren't stable by themselves, you have a problem.

Cain, I think he was saying instead of giving the players a cap at the start, he lets the players make their characters, then gets everyone together to talk about the game they want and such, and see where most of their power levels are at. He then gets the outlyers to adjust to be closer to that group level.

While that method works, I generally find it's easier to set expectations before people create their characters. That is best done together. But once people create a character, they get attached, and forcing a change downward may not be easy to take.

I also thought he was replying to my post earlier, which said that, IME, asking nicely has always been successful for me. I thought he preferred a rules-based approach, which I don't think works. I suppose this is a YMMV situation.

More or less, I expanded on it in the "Game Balance" thread. And yes, ideally, people make the characters together, so they sync well flavor and stat wise.

I also agree that asking nicely works fine. I don't think there really is a "rules based" approach to trying to get everyone power levels the same.