I want to know if it's me, am I expecting too much from my players, am I making things too difficult for them or are they really not capable of do something more complex than basic snatch & grab or b&e.

I've been gaming with this group for 3-4 years now. GMed SR during farming season last 2 years, but otherwise, was a player in Starwars, which I don't care for. Starwars I mean.

Group
human PI, high areas are social & datasearch
hobgoblin thief, high area are sneak, with minor hacking capabilities
troll bounty hunter, high areas are perception & combat /w uncouth quality
Dwarf medic/tech, high areas firstaid & armorer, uses skill wires for hacking

Mission
Plant evidence indicating X is a spy for rival corp, have 2 weeks to complete
The have info on where X works, how much he's paid, family situation, etc. Pretty much if they want to know about him, they have it or can get it easily enough.
He is pretty much squeaky clean, as far as they can tell at least.

The problems I've noticed is:
A) The PI player has played 2nd ed, and keeps reverting back to that. His characters are always the same, (PI, librarian, or D&D ranger) but all have same skills/abilities no matter what system. He's also big into calculating odds, which takes him along time.
(ex. GM: Do you want to scan for any guards leaving or just wait for the one you know is a guard to leave.
player: ...
GM: ...
Player: ...
GM: Which is it going to be?
Player: ...
) That took about 3 minutes for him to decide.
B) Troll player thinks that since his character is uncouth, any situation where PCs will have to con/bribe their way through, he will automatically F* it up. He also keeps claiming to not understand how to make a character for SR since he's really only played starwars & D&D.
C) I think the Hobgoblin player doesn't pay attention as he keeps going back to something that's already been discussed and gets angry with the other players just tell him that it won't work. He also blows off his contacts, who could have helped him, when they return with the information and just want some $$ compensation.
D) Dwarf player keeps shooting down ideas without providing any new ones or work-around/answers to the problems. He also used to bring his PSP and play that, but he stopped doing that so far.
E) Me, I think I give my players too much lee-way when giving them the missions. All I give them is an objective and let them figure out a way to accomplish it. I also get fed up with the players when there are simple solutions that I see, and they don't pick up on it. I'm usually good at not saying anything and just B*t*hing about it after words. I've mostly played 4th ed, and a bit, tiny amount of 3rd. There's probably more for me, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

I guess I'm really pissed off because I spent the last 6 hours, of my only day off during the week, listening to the players turn down idea after idea when I purposely gave them the mission at the end of last session so they could discuss it some during the week. I even gave them a forum to talk on so when they'd arrive, they'd be ready. Hell, after a few hours of listening to them bicker, I even wrote down what I would do to complete this mission and gave it to them.

Best idea they came up with is, hire a NPC to do it all. When I told them how much it would cost, they backed down as it would use up all of their expense account and cut into the reward they are to get.

</rant>

Sounds like a classic case of "OoC Discussion Time". You need to clarify with your players (not PCs) what they want out the game and the kinds of stuff they will enjoy. If they enjoy hiring NPCs to have the adventure you intended for their PCs, there is clearly a disconnect.

I am loathe to give this suggestion, but I honestly feel it's a good way to give training wheels when all else fails.

I don't see any sort of hacker or rigger. I suggest giving the players a GMPC, where you make a character who gives them advice and suggestions and helps work them through the run. Such a character would take his cut of the nuyen for a mission accomplished, but as they do better missions because things are going well, they get more and more money and that doesn't matter.

If they already want to hire an NPC for this help, maybe a certain hacker/rigger just "appears" as they've been searching for prices and offers to take the job. Then you can use this guy to help them out in the way suggested above, via having the hacker/rigger watch their locations and give suggestions wherever they are. Once they start getting the hang of things on their own, you let them know that the GMPC has been using them in some manner or is otherwise untrustworthy, and they have to go after him.

I know it's not the kind of game you probably want to run, but it might be the kind of game they'd prefer to play in. Sometimes that's the best you can do until they start figuring things out for themselves.

Get an hourglass, for 30 sec or so. Let the sand flow, and inform the player that once it runs out, their character does nothing, just stands there frozen, dumbstruck.
Or something along the lines.


Have you tried discussing the issue? As a matter of fact, the player doesn't sound interested in playing SR, judging by that bit.


I can only repeat myself literally from the previous point.


See, the trick to open gameplay is throwing enough opportunities their way for them to pick one, not deciding on a single "correct" option. If the players are hesitating, something or someone can give them a push - contacts, rivals, and so on and so for. If nothing else is working, just throw them right into the fire, and let them sort it out.

Although you have left it very open and they can do what ever they want, perhaps its too open for them? They may need more of a direction to go in, instead of letting them tackle the problem at hand in what ever way they want. I had this in the past, lef it too open, and they got stumped for ideas. I changed it to keep it still open, but with ways that things HAD to be done, and as they progress and learn, they started coming up with better ideas and it became very open again.

Unless you're leaving information out that sounds like a pretty standard run structure. The saddest part of all is that they likely could handle this scenario like a simple snatch and grab if they really wanted to. For example, did their legwork indicate that the mark has pass cards or access to restricted areas? Get his cards/cooperation/whatever however you can, break in with those assets, and plant the evidence of other extracurriculars while snatching up some unrelated (but still potentially valuable) items or paydata on your way out as a red herring/extra sugar. There's plenty of ways you could brute force B&E this so that the victim at least must be considered a weak link in their operation's security even if it seems suspiciously obvious in the security team's later investigations. Either way, his reputation could very well be ruined, and that's likely what your employer is really after, although it may be worth asking if that it is vitally important that the specific evidence must be there at some appointed hour. For all we know they're framing the guy to cover someone else's ass, in which case style might mean something.

And that's just some stuff I came up with off the top of my head! Like the above posters I suspect there must be a general lack of enthusiasm undermining things a bit as well if people can't even come up with a bad plan. After all, even crappy plans can work if you have the skills.

Sounds like it's time for a chat with your players. Sit down with them (or send out some emails, or whatever - the important thing is that it's not during a game) and try to figure out what it is they want out of the game. This goes beyond pink mohawk vs. black trenchcoat - you want to know what they like about Shadowrun and structure your missions around that.

Maybe it will come out that they're just not that into SR, or that they have some gripe with you as a GM - be an adult about it, and ask them to criticize you constructively. But it sounds like something has to change. If a player brings a PSP to the table, either they're bored or have serious ADD.

So, to answer your question - it might be you. But you won't know for sure until you talk to your players.

Yes it is.

Your expectations are not being met. So what? Who cares.

I've read your post and know all your expectations. What I am interested in is what your players expectations are. So should you.

Ask them, find out what they want to do. I can guess based on some of their current behavior, but it's always good to check. Start a discussion.

You may very well find out they do want to presented situations where they need to choose between options A or B and that's it. If that's the case, start with that, and then build on it over time.

Now for some specifics
A. Give them the 30 seconds, to answer, then move on, make it clear moving on is because it's unfair to the other players for them to miss out on fun because he can't choose.

B. Explain that the troll player can go along with a "con" as long as the PC who can do social skills is the one rolling the dice and performing the skills. Uncouth doesn't make other PCs bad. It should only matter on group tests. So be clear that the social engineering plan does not require a group effort. And find out what he does want to do with the troll. If he wants to be a fighting machine, you'll need to let him do that every now and then in a positive situation for the team.

c. At least the Hobgoblin it trying a plan even if it is one that the team has shot down. If you can, maybe once in a while give this PC a bit of information or an idea of how to overcome the reason the rest of the team came up with. A cool one is if one of his contacts had something that would make him right. Tow birds with one stone. If he continues to ignore his contacts, they'll stop talking to him too.

d. See if you can get the other players to go ahead and do something he shot down anyway. Especially if it will succeed. They need a way to learn that he may not be right when he shoots something down. Otherwise kick the player from the game, no fun for anyone.

e. Have a default plan that you as GM will walk them through, ideally the best one they've at least discussed, and tell them unless they want to do something else that's what they are doing and start making the die rolls etc.

I only wanted to comment on this, mainly because I've had experience with this as well, AS THE PLAYER. I too set up a forum for our group, so that we could handle stuff out of session....so that we could get to the actual game/run faster in our sessions. The first couple of hours our sessions consist of updateding the GM with what we did during downtime, getting rules clarifications, etc. So I set up a forum. Hasn't been used. At all. I even put up the first initial threads and such. When I'd first mentioned it to the group, it sounded like they'd be into it. However, I know of at least one who doesn't want to think about the game and the session, unless they're currently playing the game during a session (which is fine, and that's their preference.)

My suggestion would be to find out if they even wanted to use it. I would also steer them towards the DS community. When I first started gaming in SR after playing DnD for so long, I had a hard time wrapping my mind around the other options available for accomplishing runs. Sometimes I still do. However, there are several good threads on here about legwork and such. Comes in very handy.

I'd consider talking to your peoples about rebooting to a Street Level campaign.

One of the benefits there is that most jobs can be ones where the players are hired as muscle for someone else's plan. Otherwise, there can be lots of fun just on the day to day living and hustling.

had a friend, raymond, who was a rule-monger. we would delay his action until he decided. eventually he got quicker decisions. usually good.


another player had this. he woutld carry around a human eyeball and suck on it at times...in front of our johnson...and the mafia don of new york...eventually we shot him and didnt let him burn edge to survive. he died in a hail of bullets falling from the 291st floor of the office building the mafia don owns.

as far as character creation, my group feels its beter to go for all the expensive stuff (the stuff that costs a lot of BP already that would just cost double in karma later) now and get everything else later. we min max at the beginning then round off the hard edges of our characters as the game progresses. in this way we cover each-other. i dont know what beter advice to give.

if i were a contact, and someone kept doing this to me, i wouldnt take his calls, and i wolodnt call him. he looses his contacts. plain and simple.

the ides shooting down, cant hyelp you. but that PSP sh*t needs to stop. your here to play a game, not play PSP.



your being too generous. my DM, the guy who asked me to run the game for this coming saturday, is not a nice person. if you blow off your rating 6 connection fixer, then fu*k you, he has beter things to do than sit here and wait for you, and next time you call him he aint gonna be so nice (his loyalty drops by one). if you do something stupid, darwinian theory kicks in. you wanna take out a human eyeball in front of the human mafia king of new york and suck on it? well he's gonna shoot a grenade at your ass. and as far as the guy who keeps nit-picking every plan, tell him that nothing is perfect.

one mission we had to help our mage with her initiation trial, kill this high powered spirit in this dead zone. out TM keeps shooting down ideas and wants to gather intel on the target area...while we're in enemy territory...heading towards their contral base....to kill their leader. i see his logic but at hte same time we dont have the luxury of time, and we're on their turf. me (weapons specialist, SMG) and the street sam think our best bed is to hit them hard and fast and escape in the confusion afterward, provided we're not delayed. we still had the element of surprise after all, no-one knew we were here.

in summary, stop being so nice and let them learn from what they dont know to be their mistakes.

I agree with making sure they want to actually use such a tool. I've been lucky to have the exact opposite experience as Brol. I've got a forum and even a wiki set up for my group and both get used extensively. We use the forums for writing up character histories, downtime stories, small character interactions and the like and it works out beautifully. The wiki was conjured up to make it easier to find old information (especially after we had to transfer the boards to a new server and board type). We've hit a lull in usage of late, but that's due to no hard need to use it. As those needs pick up again (the further into a campaign we get, the more it gets used because the players know their characters more as time goes on), so too will the usage.

I'm not exactly sure, because this is a rant, if these are rhetorical questions but....



Over-the-top "Roleplay" Syndrome. Do you go to dice? Uncouth does have a specific mechanical implication, right? Let him colour things a bit but let his dice settle the matter. Maybe even just an Intu or Logic + Social Skill test to know when to STFU, enough.

More important though is to figure out if he really is trying to play My Guy to the hilt, or he's just bucking to screw things up and piss on the game on purpose.



This is you, at least in part....the larger part. "Simple solution that I see" but they don't screams that you aren't getting the world across to them. The lot of you don't have a common understanding of how this world works. And maybe a little bit of "they don't care"...but it sounds like at least some of them do. Why are you being quite during the game and choking this down then dumping on them afterwards?

Have you read any of the fiction in the SR4A book? There is one on pg. 76 called Fresh Meat. I read it and liked it so much that I decided to start a group of newbies off that way (minus the film of course). Maybe that would work for your group. Give them a mentor that walks them through their first couple of runs as he slowly weens them til they are on their own. It may give the players the confidence to start to work as a team.

The other thing is to make sure the group can work as a team (I mean the Players not the PCs). If they can't work as a team, then the PCs aren't going to either.

We did this and it is working real well so far.
The other Idea is make up a character for each one agaist type and run a quick on-off. Tell them what you are doing and it will give them all some diferent ideas. Tell them after words if they want to keep the Character they can.

On the subject of "GM PCs," I generally think they're a bad idea but sometimes you don't have many other options. I must admit that I basically had the Wolf visit the team once after a really bad run in order to clean up the mess.

If said character doesn't have Con or Negotiation, Uncouth indeed means No Defaulting and thus, automatic failure.

I reccomend shock collars. Few things keep a player in line better.

I play my game via OpenRPG. As the GM this has pros and cons. During planning session I can wander around, nuke some food, tinker with facebook, etc. On the other hand without voice communication (have players who cant use vent. *sigh*) I also have to adjucate interrupts and such. And of course the inevitable disconnects, ninja-afks, etc.

So I quickly set down table rules. You have 30 seconds to begin a reply (I can see when your typing) and 1 minute to spit something out. Got 5 other people waiting on you.

Nearly everything has either a rolled or a agreed initive. If you miss the time limit above the next person goes. In some situations I will NPC you until you come back. Again, 3 people waiting on you.

I know everyones character sheets by heart. I have 2 vetran players and 3 rookies. If theres a situation of not knowing the rules I tell them what to roll and give em a post session explaination.

I like to impress time on them. While I dont try to rush them, we have a 4-5 hour play time every week. And they have a forum to refer too. And are all instant messenger networked. If they are beating a long dead horse on planning I crack the whip. They may have two weeks to complete the mission, but the J wants some updates. If theres no progress in a few days he needs to find another team. I dictate how much time goes by in planning based on progress. If they are actually getting somewhere (wether its where I wanted them to go or not) I'll let em go all night (until they start counting bullets and separating C-4 into tic tac sized pieces). If they are going in circles I will break in and inform them "You continue the discussion well into the night until you fall asleep. Next day. Resume planning." Just to let em know they need to focus.

Ultimately its a matter of group cohesion and how much the group is enjoying it. If they LIKE planning all day, cool. Grab a soda, sit back, and nap. But if its a couple people holding back the whole group and making the others wonder why they bothered showing up, break out the whip.

Or the shock collar.

Ak, it really just sounds like the players are simply not interested in playing shadowrun, whether they dont like the setting, their characters, the play style, whatever, might possibly be something you can work on, but might not...

I'm having that problem right now... my game group has played lots of other games, but I can't seem to stir interest in shadowrun to make a game happen... I'm literally feinding for a shadowrun game, but just can't find other players, let alone somebody to run it... I've even considered an online play by post or something but honestly dont ever see that as being fun, mostly because of the pace and the lack of real interaction... so I'm left jones'in for shadowrun with no relief in sight...

From what I can see hear I can only give you the default solution to any GM problem: Talk to the players about how you feel. The strongest bond you can use to keep a game alive is a open-door policy on both sides of the table.
However should this fail you, I think its time to drop SR with this group, if you've been playing /w them for three years then you should drop back onto one of the games you played with them befor shadowrun. Regardless, if this problem isn't fixed by next session its time to move on one way or another.

Some people play roleplaying games not so much to roleplay, but to play out fantasy characters that succeed. Playing a badass that everyone respects, getting into fights and winning all the time, etc. They might just like winning and not care much about actually playing. So if you're not like that, you might need a new group. Some situations can't be "solved".

ya mean losers.

I didn't say it

I don't like to impose time restrictions but I do implement the 30 second rule when people are piss farting around at a dramatically intense moment.

I have one player in particular that if he cannot belabour the point for a full 10 minutes and discuss it with everyone, he cannot decide on a single course of action. Thus when we hit the 30 second rule, he either routinely passes his action (!!!) or determines a course of action that is so ineffectual he literally puts himself out of the scene entirely for reasons I cannot fathom.

I also have other players who claim to know the rules but I'm convinced do not. E.g. I have an AI hacker who has a Cracking skill group of 3 and hasn't raised it since character creation over a year ago. This was before he purchased Agents to help him out too. Sigh.

- J.

Way to be judgmental and vocal about it.
People play games to have fun. Having fun most often includes winning, y'know.

yep. people are coddled too much and I will not contribute to such sissyness. I've never seen a competitive person like being handed a victory. course this is starting to get off topic...

Players sitting around with their thumbs up their asses during combat is plenty annoying, to be sure, but it's also really annoying when players sit around for ages debating minor decisions under any circumstances. Our hacker spent about fifteen minutes trying to decide whether he wanted to hack a node on the fly or probe it - there was nothing on the node that mattered at all and I was trying to drop hints that he was wasting his time, but he just couldn't make up his mind.

At times like this I don't know what to do other than have the party attacked by a random marauding band of ninjas.

So you like losing, that's fine. But I do expect most people to like winning.

I am a competitive person and I don't care how I get my victories. Handed one or not, a victory is a victory. And people who get victories are victors, winners not losers.

competitive, but don't like competing? winning easily is ok, but boring after a while. The best victories are hard fought. well I guess Conan type victories are ok as well as long as the losing party cries.

In general players never come up with the solution to a puzzle or complex problem the GM expects. This is because the GM has a lot of unspoken assumptions and information that he will never verbalize in entirety to the PCs. This is likely the problem the OP is butting against. I feel a good GM should have a lot of diagrams and a carefully constructed text in writing that spells out all the information that will come into play when looking at the diagrams.

And but of course, everyone should be exactly like you.
Apparently, everyone is having fun the wrong way, and only you know the only right one.

Did I say everyone should have fun like me? I'm fine with people being losers I just don't care to mince words about it.

Join the club. Unless you can claim to win all the time, there are times where you are a loser. But then again I could just concede defeat and hand you the victory for this argument, in which case you are still a loser because by your definition, a loser is someone who has victory handed to them.

If you can't figure out how to win, it isn't the GMs job to make you. He can only give you the chance to succed, if you can't win the game that dosn't mean you can't have fun doing it.

Hey... What is wrong with a Cracking skill rating of 3? Seems to be working pretty well for me currently.

2 of the 3 skills in that group for me are a 3 (group has been broken); though I admit that I have raised them over the course of play... still trying to get them to a 4, will eventually get there I guess...

Keep the Faith

Touche'. I don't claim to win all the time, on occasion I am the loser. Without real struggle and competition though there can be no victory, and that is something even Princeton will agree with me on: a successful ending of a struggle or contest.

am I the only one who chuckles and thinks "we're crackers because we crack the system" every time someone mentions that skill?

Some players just don't get some settings. Its not that they're stupid, the setting just doesn't do anything for them. Many people have trouble with "urban" campaigns for some reason.

Consider throwing a run out in the boondocks, either a guard run, looting a facility that dropped off the books during the Crashes, or a bug hunt. Something that is more in the style they are accustomed to. Ease them into the setting and mechanics. Let them kill some stuff.

Some players just don't get some settings. Its not that they're stupid, the setting just doesn't do anything for them. Many people have trouble with "urban" campaigns for some reason.

Consider throwing a run out in the boondocks, either a guard run, looting a facility that dropped off the books during the Crashes, or a bug hunt. Something that is more in the style they are accustomed to. Ease them into the setting and mechanics. Let them kill some stuff.

I personally don't think there is any 'winners' or 'losers' in roleplaying (not in the way you guys see it anyways), just because I fail a mission or my character dies, does not mean I 'lose'. I 'lose' if I'm not having fun, and I 'win' if I'm having fun.
Personal preference though, take it with a grain of salt, I'm not saying my way is 'right' or yours is 'wrong' though

I wouldn't complain if he was a more well rounded character but this character was used for online hacking only and was lacking critical programs required to even properly control drones and skills until more recently.

- J.

I just really, really object to the idea that people are losers for using gaming as a form of escapism. Sometimes sessions are good for just blowing off some steam, others are more like collaborative problem solving. It's why my own group has been known to just drop a planned session in favor of playing Munchkin or coming up with a quick one shot if people don't feel like playing a more in-depth game.

Yeah, I can see where that would suck...

Keep the Faith

I don't think the comments were calling players losers for desiring escapism but rather if the game was being used to "win" whatever the cost. Some people are only happy if they get to roll buckets of dice and laugh maniacally wading through whatever opposition the GM can pit against them. It ain't roleplaying at that point, its just rollplaying.

- J.

It's GM's job to make sure everyone is having fun.
If the players just can't grasp what his preferred running style is all about, if they don't feel like doing whatever they're supposed to be doing, and it's up to GM to change the game to fit their expectations more.


Certainly didn't look like it.

Personally I couldn't figure out WTF was going on. I still can't, every post since then has been a total cypher to me. Except for the tangent chatter about the Cracking 3 character and The Jake's suggestion about the timer, the latter I find to be a dubious suggestion given the results he saw.


Perhaps this is how the OP's players feel? Left in the dark by cryptic messages?

I am the first to admit I'm perhaps not the best role model. In many ways, some of my GMing tactics border on pure evil IMHO. Then again, my missus listens in on my sessions and she's admitted that if she were GMing she would have murdered several of my players long ago.

Take that for what you will.

- J.

I've learned, the hard way, to just stop playing with people that need the murdering. At lot less digging required, less clutter in the crawlspaces.

Stress (noun)
The confusion caused when ones mind overrides the body’s natural desire to choke the living shit out of some asshole that desperately needs it.

*deep breath*

One of my players (the one who kept passing turns) rarely gets to play because his wife won't let him out. He won't attend for a month and then attempts to cram 3-4 weeks of roleplaying moments into one session, repeatedly trying to steal the thunder of all the other players. He also does incredibly stupid things with his character that annoys the crap out of the other players.

Case in point, he plays an eagle shapeshifter who insists on doing aerial recon every mission, irrespective of whether or not it is appropriate. He also insists on shapeshifting at the most inappropriate time, solely for dramatic effort, with no regard for whether this will inconvenience the other PCs or draw attention to them all, or just elevate hostilities. We would have murdered him years ago except for the fact we largely pity him - that and his general insanity often leads to moments of pure genius once every ten sessions or so that is a marvel to behold (often saving the day in a spectacular way).

Whenever he does something blatantly stupid now, I deal with this now by simply telling him "no". I don't ask him if he's sure, I don't try to clarify his intentions, I don't try to talk him out of it. The clownshoe never learns. Ever. He firmyl believes that all his ideas are brilliant. Killing off his character doesn't get the point across (this has been done in numerous campaigns - in D&D it was so common it was a running gag that he was the most resurrected character). Logical attempts at persuasion usually lead to heated arguments, often with multiple players that go nowhere and consume valuable gametime.

So I avoid it all by just saying "no".

Yes, it sucks to rob the player of his right to choose but as far as I'm concerned, the right for him to swing his fist ends where another persons' nose begins. Him sucking up valuable game time and causing arguments with his stupidity needs to be stamped out, not entertained and it caters to the lowest common denominator (i.e. the rest of the group). After 10+ years of playing with this guy, this method I have found to be the swiftest way to end disputes, keep arguments at a minimum and propel the game along.

I can give more examples of the player behaviour I have to tolerate at times but I think you get the idea.

- J.

Laughing maniacally while wading through whatever opposition the GM can pit against them is a role. People claiming to be roleplaying often ignore that because it doesn't fit their idealised vision of talky-talky touchy-feely.

The problem is many times we hear one side of the story. The GM comes along and tells us his sob story. Or the player does. We almost never get a balanced picture.