I am currently the GM of a shadowrun group which was passed onto me at the beginning of the year, sense then we have had a session every Sunday. When I first came on I said that I would like my players to keep the same characters throughout the campaign.
The players are currently in the middle of a drawn out plot which I had spent a lot of my time working on, in the course of which, one of the players who's extremely powerful character was getting in the way of his enjoyment of the game asked me to switch, last week, my amount of players took a short drop from 6 players to three, leavening only two characters tied to the plot.
This week I have been rather busy with several other things to contact the players (we play through Skype) and they are all planning new characters, which would destroy all the plot hooks and subplots. (Most of which were tied to the teams hacker)
I have not fully had a chance to discuss how I feel with the players, I have voiced my dismay at having all ties to the plot cut they suggested I just try to tie the new characters in, but I feel like I spent allot of time working the plot around their current characters and am dismayed to see them move away.
Am I being selfish for wanting the players to keep there characters? Or should I stand firm on the position of no new characters? Should I just let the plot go seeing how many players have left? Please share your thoughts.
PS: If my any of my players see this I'm sorry for not talking to you guys directly, I'm just not sure how to handle the situation.
PSS: Sorry for my grammer.
Tricky but ultimately we do this to have fun.
Let me say that again, the only reason we do this, is to have FUN.
If the players regualrly change up their characters then it's a pain but if they are not enjoying their characters and want a change then they shopuld, after all these guys are dropping all the toys and karma and contacts and going back to square one. So it's not all sweetness andl ight but there are times you want to switch thnigs up a little to keep it fresh.
That having been said it's a bother for you as the GM. You should be somewhat flexible. I mean what would happen to all your plans if it all depends on player A doing X, Y and Z over the next three weeks and by dumb luck he dies on the first week, hit by a run away blimp? You plans so tightly wirtten are still going to be trashed and the player is upset that his character is being burried with a perminant "Goodyear" embossed on his back.
Try and see if you and the players can set up some arrangement, bring in the new characters as contacts of the others.
For example players 4&5 still have their original characters and players 1,2 & 3 want new ones. Well the survivng ones know they need help, maybe a new gun bunny or mage or hacker as their old chummer has been drafted into the girl scouts and shipped to iceland, "But i know a chummer who might be willing to do some work for us..."
Bottom line, remember how this started, this thread, this game and this hobby- HAVE FUN
Let me say that again, the only reason we do this, is to have FUN.
If the players regualrly change up their characters then it's a pain but if they are not enjoying their characters and want a change then they shopuld, after all these guys are dropping all the toys and karma and contacts and going back to square one. So it's not all sweetness andl ight but there are times you want to switch thnigs up a little to keep it fresh.
That having been said it's a bother for you as the GM. You should be somewhat flexible. I mean what would happen to all your plans if it all depends on player A doing X, Y and Z over the next three weeks and by dumb luck he dies on the first week, hit by a run away blimp? You plans so tightly wirtten are still going to be trashed and the player is upset that his character is being burried with a perminant "Goodyear" embossed on his back.
Try and see if you and the players can set up some arrangement, bring in the new characters as contacts of the others.
For example players 4&5 still have their original characters and players 1,2 & 3 want new ones. Well the survivng ones know they need help, maybe a new gun bunny or mage or hacker as their old chummer has been drafted into the girl scouts and shipped to iceland, "But i know a chummer who might be willing to do some work for us..."
Bottom line, remember how this started, this thread, this game and this hobby- HAVE FUN
What we are doing with the Ghost Catels is our GM is running in 3 parts. After the 1st part we are planing a break were somone else will run something a few times and then we will go back to the main campain. This would give a chance for them to play their other characters.
Though I am relatively new to GMing SR, I have had extensive experience GMing other games.
In a few campaigns I have had similar problems. At least for me, there are two conflicting interests: The GM wants to tell a consistent story with the same major characters. The players want to change their characters, for various reasons. Both of these relate to Snow Fox's main point, that we play this game to have fun. If the GM has to deal with swapping characters out every game session, then it is less fun, or not fun at all, for the GM. If the players feel forced into playing characters that they don't want, it is less or no fun for them.
Of course, the only reasonable solution is compromise. You need to talk to your players about why you don't want changing characters, at the same time understand that sometimes a player makes a mistake and a character they thought would be fun to play turns out to be boring beyond belief. In your specific case, I would recommend asking your players to accept that you want to keep character changing to a minimum, but let them swap their current one out now if they are going to. Along with that, ask them to create a back story for their new character using what they players have already learned of the over arching plot. This way your plot isn't ruined, though it may change, and they get to enjoy playing a new character.
As a side note, how I have handled this in SR is to require new characters to be 400BP characters with no karma. That is how all the characters started, but of course they have gained karma and money as the game goes on. This serves as a penalty for character death, and for changing characters on a whim. I believe one of the reasons this works is because I have kept rewards, especially karma, low. This is important because it means that the remaining characters are not obviously better than the new characters.
In a few campaigns I have had similar problems. At least for me, there are two conflicting interests: The GM wants to tell a consistent story with the same major characters. The players want to change their characters, for various reasons. Both of these relate to Snow Fox's main point, that we play this game to have fun. If the GM has to deal with swapping characters out every game session, then it is less fun, or not fun at all, for the GM. If the players feel forced into playing characters that they don't want, it is less or no fun for them.
Of course, the only reasonable solution is compromise. You need to talk to your players about why you don't want changing characters, at the same time understand that sometimes a player makes a mistake and a character they thought would be fun to play turns out to be boring beyond belief. In your specific case, I would recommend asking your players to accept that you want to keep character changing to a minimum, but let them swap their current one out now if they are going to. Along with that, ask them to create a back story for their new character using what they players have already learned of the over arching plot. This way your plot isn't ruined, though it may change, and they get to enjoy playing a new character.
As a side note, how I have handled this in SR is to require new characters to be 400BP characters with no karma. That is how all the characters started, but of course they have gained karma and money as the game goes on. This serves as a penalty for character death, and for changing characters on a whim. I believe one of the reasons this works is because I have kept rewards, especially karma, low. This is important because it means that the remaining characters are not obviously better than the new characters.
"As a side note, how I have handled this in SR is to require new characters to be 400BP characters with no karma. That is how all the characters started, but of course they have gained karma and money as the game goes on. This serves as a penalty for character death, and for changing characters on a whim. I believe one of the reasons this works is because I have kept rewards, especially karma, low. This is important because it means that the remaining characters are not obviously better than the new characters." - graymagiker
This is an interesting point. Our Missions group began New York Missions with about 150 karma each, plus accompanying equipment. At that time, a new player joined our group. Our main GM insisted that the player create a new starting character, 400 BP. I was somewhat dubious about the matching of power level. Our new player creating a throwing adept and she is surprisingly competent, fitting in well with the group.
The only problem that I noticed was in the first couple of Missions when the old characters had far superior armour. This was quickly fixed.
This is an interesting point. Our Missions group began New York Missions with about 150 karma each, plus accompanying equipment. At that time, a new player joined our group. Our main GM insisted that the player create a new starting character, 400 BP. I was somewhat dubious about the matching of power level. Our new player creating a throwing adept and she is surprisingly competent, fitting in well with the group.
The only problem that I noticed was in the first couple of Missions when the old characters had far superior armour. This was quickly fixed.
With our group, going back to our D&D days if you wanted a new character, fine, but you came in from scratch. When most of us were playing 9th level characters the new one came in at 4th level. For SR, you went back to the basic charcter-we use the priority levels so you lose the toys and karma. that prevented people fromsaying 'oh hey this week I want to play a CZ, next week i'm freaking Gandalf!
Try to run 2 different campaigns or one with 2 different groups. Weave the stories so they cross each other or possibly even a backstory. Use some of the greater literary techniques by having 2 different tones where ones can have a horror flavor and the other a high action. Start to bring the storylines to a final conclusion. Maybe even do it as 2 different eras. One in 2050 and the other as 2070 or something like that. This was the old story gives them a clue about the past of their more current storyline.
Consider enforcing that only one (or two) player can change characters a week. This way the players can still change out if they really are feeling bored with their character, but you manage to keep enough of the original team from week to week to keep the plot going. Also, as others have said, the new characters should be basic characters with no bonus karma, nuyen, or gear to help catch them up.
You might want to consider increasing the rewards in karma and nuyen and gear slightly as well, so that people will feel a bigger loss when they switch characters. If you're only handing out a couple of karma a week, they could be switching just because they don't see any improvement in their current character.
You might want to consider increasing the rewards in karma and nuyen and gear slightly as well, so that people will feel a bigger loss when they switch characters. If you're only handing out a couple of karma a week, they could be switching just because they don't see any improvement in their current character.
Or it could be their idea of the old character doesn't quite merge with the GM's style. they characters were developed with the old GM. Not a good or bad style but just different. Think LotR vs Myth Inc - both fun but you can't trade off the characters. In SR I usually play a spell slinger and it's comfortable. When I played D&D it was diffrent. We had two differnet GM's. With one I played a Druid. With theo ther a theif. I loved both games but could not have traded off the characters. The DM for the thief's game had more of a sense of humor. It would have felt different to play her in the more realistic campaign of the DM who ran the druid's campaign. and she would have been too uptight for the Thief's game.
QUOTE (Karoline @ Mar 11 2010, 02:39 PM) 
You might want to consider increasing the rewards in karma and nuyen and gear slightly as well, so that people will feel a bigger loss when they switch characters. If you're only handing out a couple of karma a week, they could be switching just because they don't see any improvement in their current character.
That could be it.
Some people want to try a lot of things, and if karma moves too slowly, it seems like the only way to try something new is to start over - if you wait to buy it with karma, you'll never get there. Of course, that's not a cure-all, especially when people want to try different races.
I think the best thing you can do is talk directly to the other players. Sometimes they ask if a change is ok, and if the GM doesn't seem to care, they're more willing to swap out. However, if the GM doesn't want people to swap, they're much less likely.
I also think that if anyone tries to play a rigger in your game that calls himself Smiley, that character needs to be shot in the dick. Nothing good can come of that. Anyone who would play such a character obviously has an unnaturally large wang and feels like a freak because of it.
I also think that if anyone tries to play a rigger in your game that calls himself Smiley, that character needs to be shot in the dick. Nothing good can come of that. Anyone who would play such a character obviously has an unnaturally large wang and feels like a freak because of it.
As one of the players in question, and as the hacker no less, I think I should weigh in on a few salient points. I tried to explain this, but I guess there was still alot of confusion.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
Why not hire-in an NPC-sammie to fill-up that cannonfodder-role?
QUOTE (Warcry @ Mar 12 2010, 06:20 AM)
As one of the players in question, and as the hacker no less, I think I should weigh in on a few salient points. I tried to explain this, but I guess there was still alot of confusion.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
I see your point, but on some levels that just makes the game more interesting. you can't always have the mix of skills you'd like. sometimes you have to improvise with what you have on hand. Drone riggers can be nuclear-powered monofiliment buzzsaws in combat. The sniper has to be somewhat sneaky to do his job, he'll just have to learn to be sneaky in different ways. It's not always easy, and it can't always get done the way you'd like. Stay on your toes, be creative, and work with what you have.
If it was just a question of players wanting to toy with other aspects of the game I'd be all about running a secondary game that may or may not be tied to the existing storyline. If it's to fill percieved holes in capability, I say stick with what you have and get creative or contract for the skills you lack.
An NPC Combat Specialist creates a problem with the players. The general consensus of the group is that the combat specialist should lead the group in tactical situations, as his hoop is the one getting shot. If we choose a tactical solution, that puts the solution of a run in the hands of an NPC. If we don't choose a tactical solution because it puts the run in the hands of an NPC, that leaves us hamstringing ourselves. Not a fun game to play IMHO.
As far as drones go, I agree that they make excellent combat support. Most of the runs that we've completed in this campaign still require a metahuman touch at certain points. That precludes just sending in the drones for everything.
As far as drones go, I agree that they make excellent combat support. Most of the runs that we've completed in this campaign still require a metahuman touch at certain points. That precludes just sending in the drones for everything.
In the past my group has had npc allies run by players during combat. It helps the gm as he has less to concrate on and keeps tactical control with the players. It's not perfect but run that by the gm. Or maybe each player run two characters, group size stays relatively the same size and you fill in the holes your group has.
A character-pool is always a good option...
QUOTE (Warcry @ Mar 12 2010, 01:20 PM)
As one of the players in question, and as the hacker no less, I think I should weigh in on a few salient points. I tried to explain this, but I guess there was still alot of confusion.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
First of all, we lost half of the group, and four of the characters, in one night. Our Mage, Samurai, Medic/Demolitionist, and Face all went poof. The player that was playing the Mage swapped for a Sniper, but then we lost our muscle shortly thereafter.
The group as it stood became a Sniper, a Hacker, and a Rigger. No front line person prepared to actually do the grunt work. The Hacker can shoot a pistol, but if he has to penetrate a facility alone, and gets caught, he's very likely screwed. I'm willing to play that out, but with one Critical Glitch, I'm probably creating a new character anyways.
The group cannot operate in it's current condition effectively. This is Shadowrun. We need to be able to infiltrate facilities to do our jobs. We also need to be able to get out if it goes bad, or we will have a very short career and campaign.
I won't change characters on a weekly basis. But if the group changes, and we have gaping holes that need to be filled for everyone's enjoyment, I'll step up to the plate and give her the old college try.
Nemesis, the Hacker in question, is more than willing to pass on everything he knows to Smiley, the Rigger, so that the story could continue. But we need a combat person, and until and unless we get someone to fill that slot, we're unlikely to accept any runs at all. And that would kill the campaign faster than just switching out a couple of characters.
I'm willing to work with you, boss. You just gotta talk to me.
One more thing I would like to point out: The Hacker became involved in the plot so deeply because I, as a player, saw ways of doing things to stay involved. I saw openings and took the initiative in unexpected ways. The new character will get just as involved and drag the group along kicking and screaming. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, if you give us a chance.
Perhaps a bit of Hand-wavium is in order. Maybe the hacker could move a few points from skill A to skill B and no one says anything... In game that is, but discuss it between players and GM... Perhaps the sniper isn't as good in long-arms as he was, and is suddenly much better in automatics?
Or, perhaps the Hacker is now stuck hacking an epic peice of paydata with so much IC it makes the Zurich orbital's asshole freeze over... Still around, but he's just busy... And in the mean time they Player can pick up another character.
Perhaps the hacker's Player can pick up one of the characters who would have gone "poof". If one of the other players is gone, pick up "Their" Combat mage. Talk to the GM for relevant plot points in the toon's back ground, work in some of your own, build it up yourself, use the old sheet, or mix it up enough to feel fresh but still be "the same mage"....
It sounds like the players are open to working with you Mr. GM. Players, It sounds like your GM is concerned, but I am willing to bet he'll be talking to you about this soon.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.