There is a reason there is a magistrate in court of law who gives oportunity to BOTH parties to be heard before ajudgement is made. All i read in that link is an opinion of a pissed off munchkin.
I see no actual fault of the GM since all he describes are actions the suber mage munchkin primer character took to make the game miserable.
He mentions he ran that super mage in another campaign and got him to be super powerfull with custom tradition. Yea. so yopu bring in a super mage in a 1st session of a new campaign?
I bet there was some issues with the GM that may have been forced to have this dkhead in his group. Some people are not good at saying NO and communication their objection. SO the GM have tried to play along until this super mage broke the game balance with his super spells. So the GM fought back. Possibly split the party to isolate the super mage and remove him without hurting the party.
It wasnt the GM that killed the party. It was teh super mage special mana rift that took out the whole city block and then some.
That blog is a rant of a pissed off munchkin who perverts some facts. If he had proper evidence he would have spilled the play by play and let us find the truth. but his version of thetruth would have had so many holes we would have been able to find the GM was not to blame.
another thing he mentions is the GM had been GMing for the others in the group for a long time before these 2 (super mage and super spy) joined and started ruining the fun. Some groups tend to play low key campaigns and you throw in super mages and abused min maxed munchkins and it breaks the group harmony. Add into that socially inept GM who has no balls to tell other people to piss off when they are breaking his game and you have the ONLY way such a person can deal with opression. Split Personality Disorder. He calls in his GM super powers and throws his weight ingame trying to kill/solve the problem.
I can take a guess and see the other players secretely complained to the GM and he dealt with the problem. Too bad the mage took out the whole group to spite the all.
If I was the GM i would have simply told the super mage "Please dont come next time. Thank you" and leave it at that.
Full Version: Bad GMs
I think it depends on how the "stupid" came about. I have found on several occasions, what I thought was a really stupid plan, was actually reasonable based on the information the players had available. Sometimes, as a GM, you know your scene so well, that you forget to mention key information. Other times, you mention it, but the players don't always hear it.
So, if they are really coming up with a stupid plan, something I think that may hose the entire mission, then I'll ask them to confirm what they are doing and point out if they remember I said so-an-so, and if they still want to go forward with it, I'll let them and not have issue with them dying if that's where the dice fall. Most of the time though, they come back with a, "Oh, I didn't hear you say THAT." response and then we'll have a good laugh, they'll change their plans and we'll move forward having a fun session.
So, if they are really coming up with a stupid plan, something I think that may hose the entire mission, then I'll ask them to confirm what they are doing and point out if they remember I said so-an-so, and if they still want to go forward with it, I'll let them and not have issue with them dying if that's where the dice fall. Most of the time though, they come back with a, "Oh, I didn't hear you say THAT." response and then we'll have a good laugh, they'll change their plans and we'll move forward having a fun session.
QUOTE (Saint Sithney @ Dec 4 2010, 10:12 AM) 
The thing is, there weren't several instances, only that one first game where his custom magic tradition (MUNCHKIN ALERT) Prime got the "rocks fall" treatment. He claims that there were several instances, but so far that was the only play session. He's still talking about making his 2nd character, so there hasn't been a 2nd game yet. Because of that, I don't trust reddit's opinion regarding "he was upset that he didn't get to kill the whole team." Maybe he was upset because Old Super-munch killed all the other players in a tantrum.
Like I said, the only indication provided that this is a pattern of behavior is with the sniper's death in addition to the two Primes.
Even the "he ruled that Fireballs are essentially FAE bombs" statement is suspect. Both fireballs and FAEs have a consistent damage value everywhere inside their AoE. The only difference is that FAEs have blast effects which continue outside of their primary uniform AoE. I wouldn't see how that would come into play with killing the sniper. Did someone detonate a fireball high in the air above him and have the resultant DV at -2/m kill the guy outside of the AoE? That seems like a really stupid way to insta-kill someone by fiat, which is how Reddit describes the action..
Like I said, the only indication provided that this is a pattern of behavior is with the sniper's death in addition to the two Primes.
Even the "he ruled that Fireballs are essentially FAE bombs" statement is suspect. Both fireballs and FAEs have a consistent damage value everywhere inside their AoE. The only difference is that FAEs have blast effects which continue outside of their primary uniform AoE. I wouldn't see how that would come into play with killing the sniper. Did someone detonate a fireball high in the air above him and have the resultant DV at -2/m kill the guy outside of the AoE? That seems like a really stupid way to insta-kill someone by fiat, which is how Reddit describes the action..
Hm? I misread the comments then, I was under the impression that there had been other games besides this one.
I still say neither party is innocent, and I'm not exactly shedding tears that Johnny Awesome got his. I just would've done it in a more entertaining manner - like Rube Goldberg death trap in space.
Aren't you all drawing waaaay too many conclusions based on a small and vague piece someone posted? It's just a barely coherent rant, how can you be so sure about what was really going on?
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Dec 6 2010, 03:30 PM)
Aren't you all drawing waaaay too many conclusions based on a small and vague piece someone posted? It's just a barely coherent rant, how can you be so sure about what was really going on?
This is the Internet. It's fueled by paranoia and gross assumptions based off little to no information.
Goodness, what were you expecting?
QUOTE (Maelstrome @ Dec 3 2010, 05:48 PM)
warning wall of rant.
my group had a bad gm that we tolerated just because we used his tool shed for our games in high school.
it started off well enough he had his character run along ours as a decker. he started getting very competitive where his decker had to be useful in about all situations and he became upset if anyone outsmarted him or defeated a challenge of his easier than he expected.eventually he started changing various rules on the fly without asking for the thoughts of the players. he even went as far as to change the stats and gear of npcs during the scenarios or combat. he got very upset when any of us killed the opposition but stressed how the opposition wanted to kill us. he would blame us or the book for the rewards that he gave us that made us better.(biggest example was 2.5 kilos of orichalcum) in the end he made an attempt to kill all of us in the last session.he split us up, he killed the mundane demo expert with an invisible mage, i didnt fall into the trap, the gun adept was captured and blew himself and his captors up but hand of god his way out,the sword adept escaped. after we finished our mission he tells us all our contacts have been killed. and some kind of god came down to fight us casting force 20 slay spells, the sword adepts described his hog as his goddess coming to smite the enemy. it all may sound epic but it was nothing more than railroading. one player left early because he was tired of the gms bs the rest of us stayed until the gm was pissed and told us to leave.
a few years later he decides that he wants to run d20 modern. doesnt want the players to have copies of the rules. gets quite pissed when he finds out we had them. tells us that atleast one character will die per session doesnt let us choose how to build our characters imposes several artificial limits and removes all our equipment at the begining of play without warning us and to top it all off he payed off another player to try to pick a fight with me at the table so he could claim i was to violent to play or some such. in the end teamwork and outsmarting the gm had us survive the first session then we decided to never play with him as a gm again. which apparently extended into playing anything with him at all.
my group had a bad gm that we tolerated just because we used his tool shed for our games in high school.
it started off well enough he had his character run along ours as a decker. he started getting very competitive where his decker had to be useful in about all situations and he became upset if anyone outsmarted him or defeated a challenge of his easier than he expected.eventually he started changing various rules on the fly without asking for the thoughts of the players. he even went as far as to change the stats and gear of npcs during the scenarios or combat. he got very upset when any of us killed the opposition but stressed how the opposition wanted to kill us. he would blame us or the book for the rewards that he gave us that made us better.(biggest example was 2.5 kilos of orichalcum) in the end he made an attempt to kill all of us in the last session.he split us up, he killed the mundane demo expert with an invisible mage, i didnt fall into the trap, the gun adept was captured and blew himself and his captors up but hand of god his way out,the sword adept escaped. after we finished our mission he tells us all our contacts have been killed. and some kind of god came down to fight us casting force 20 slay spells, the sword adepts described his hog as his goddess coming to smite the enemy. it all may sound epic but it was nothing more than railroading. one player left early because he was tired of the gms bs the rest of us stayed until the gm was pissed and told us to leave.
a few years later he decides that he wants to run d20 modern. doesnt want the players to have copies of the rules. gets quite pissed when he finds out we had them. tells us that atleast one character will die per session doesnt let us choose how to build our characters imposes several artificial limits and removes all our equipment at the begining of play without warning us and to top it all off he payed off another player to try to pick a fight with me at the table so he could claim i was to violent to play or some such. in the end teamwork and outsmarting the gm had us survive the first session then we decided to never play with him as a gm again. which apparently extended into playing anything with him at all.
Whoa. Last week's intro of 'you all feel a needle or the like, then the next you know, you're waking up in a cell with a horrible hangover and none of your magic or cyber works' doesn't sound quite as bad.
In my DM's case, the plot is, 'we own you now. Do our stuff or rot.' Building(s) will fall from this... due to a rigger with Thrill Seeker and Paranoid...
Anyway, thanks for the perspective!
QUOTE (Squiddy Attack @ Dec 4 2010, 12:18 PM)
I have a GM who calls for an intelligence roll whenever someone gets a really bad idea.
I second that (well, logic or intiuition as appropriate, usually logic). Sometimes a player is a lot smarter or dumper than their character, but the characters always have more information than the players do. They've actually lived in the world and see and hear much more than what you describe to the players.
Conseqently smart players with dumb characters might find plans falling between cracks they didn't know about (though I suppose this doesn't happen all that often, I try to describe things well). While a duller player might be given some extra information, and a few extra hard whacks with the cluebat.
While not a roll or anything, I also tend to give characters with players smarter than they are more time to think.
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Dec 6 2010, 02:57 PM)
Hm? I misread the comments then, I was under the impression that there had been other games besides this one.
I still say neither party is innocent, and I'm not exactly shedding tears that Johnny Awesome got his. I just would've done it in a more entertaining manner - like Rube Goldberg death trap in space.
I still say neither party is innocent, and I'm not exactly shedding tears that Johnny Awesome got his. I just would've done it in a more entertaining manner - like Rube Goldberg death trap in space.
I was also under that impression. Didn't the guy say in one of the comments that he had tried GMing before, and the player who ended up getting the whole team killed was this fiat-abusing GM in question?
Sithney, are you sure you went through the comments as well as the actual story? I'm confused as to why you say this was the first time this sort of thing had happened with that GM.
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Dec 6 2010, 10:34 AM)
This is the Internet. It's fueled by paranoia and gross assumptions based off little to no information.
Goodness, what were you expecting?
Goodness, what were you expecting?
Cake and drop bears.
QUOTE (Sephiroth @ Dec 7 2010, 10:53 AM)
Sithney, are you sure you went through the comments as well as the actual story? I'm confused as to why you say this was the first time this sort of thing had happened with that GM.
Heh.
Pretty sure I didn't go through all the comments. After reading "get a new GM d00d" for the 12th time, I just gave up on them.
I do see the 2nd to last one where he describes another campaign.
From the first post where he described the first session with the TPK and the follow up of "I wanted to make another character just like my first" and "now we're going through that rift" I jumped to conclusions.
QUOTE (Warlordtheft @ Dec 7 2010, 06:54 PM)
Cake and drop bears.
...
I could settle for that.
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Dec 8 2010, 07:14 AM)
...
I could settle for that.
I could settle for that.
*drops*
QUOTE (Squiddy Attack @ Dec 8 2010, 05:45 PM)
*drops*
Not on me, you won't. I stay away from trees in the Sixth World, thank you very much.
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Dec 8 2010, 11:34 AM)
Not on me, you won't. I stay away from trees in the Sixth World, thank you very much.
What if I dropped bearing cake?
QUOTE (Squiddy Attack @ Dec 8 2010, 08:37 PM)
What if I dropped bearing cake?
It's a lie, though Portal 2 had now better have drop bears with cakes.
QUOTE (Doc Chase @ Dec 8 2010, 03:15 PM)
It's a lie
"Ceci n'est pas un pipe".
~J
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Dec 8 2010, 03:46 PM)
"Ceci n'est pas un pipe".
~J
~J
Que?
The text on Magritte's famous La trahison des images. It's been some time since I've played Portal, but I remember that while it does not have cake, it does have images of cake (this is from the character's perspective rather than the player's, for whom there are only images of images of cake). Upon realizing the obvious parallel I was unable to help but draw it.
~J
~J
Ah, but for the player there is also an image of cake - and about a hundred redundant AI cores.
QUOTE (sunnyside @ Dec 7 2010, 01:09 PM)
I second that (well, logic or intiuition as appropriate, usually logic). Sometimes a player is a lot smarter or dumper than their character, but the characters always have more information than the players do. They've actually lived in the world and see and hear much more than what you describe to the players.
Conseqently smart players with dumb characters might find plans falling between cracks they didn't know about (though I suppose this doesn't happen all that often, I try to describe things well). While a duller player might be given some extra information, and a few extra hard whacks with the cluebat.
While not a roll or anything, I also tend to give characters with players smarter than they are more time to think.
Conseqently smart players with dumb characters might find plans falling between cracks they didn't know about (though I suppose this doesn't happen all that often, I try to describe things well). While a duller player might be given some extra information, and a few extra hard whacks with the cluebat.
While not a roll or anything, I also tend to give characters with players smarter than they are more time to think.
I agree.
As the GM, I'm the eyes and ears of the PCs. I need to provide the window in to my game world.
The other thing I need to do is give the PC (not the player) credit for who they are. You need to provide the Context.
They are going to how to do a lot of things and had past experiences that the GM and players have little real world experience with.
They are also going to know when some thing feels off.
An experienced Shadow Runner in his home turf is going to know what weapons can be carried safely where.
And what will attract Starrie and Rent a Goon attention.
He is going to know when some thing is doesn't smell right about the new bartender (Can you say Bacon?).
The PC won't always be right, but they will at least have half a clue.
As a GM it is my job to help provide that info to the Players.
A good GM does not set up his players to fail unless he has a way out for them.
So if the players are talking full advantage of the information they have available and the plans are stupid, then it is not the players fault.
I don't have much sympathy for the guy. He sounds butt-hurt that he lost his super powerful character and that he couldn't then write a novel about how awesome his old character was by having his new character completely devoted to the awesomeness of his old character. If I was GM that'd be two strikes against you already. I don't mind you coming up with back story but not everyone at the table gives a shit about what your character used to be/do.
Also, I've done that to my players several times. Hell, SR3 even had a rule for it -- called "the Walls have Ears." I have at least 2 TPKs because the group went along their merry way thinking everything was hunky dory even when everyone in Seattle knew exactly what they were up to. And they still went ahead with their plans despite warnings. Some of this guy's subsequent comments makes it sound like he is used to GMs letting up on him so that his character could continue to be awesome.
Also, I've done that to my players several times. Hell, SR3 even had a rule for it -- called "the Walls have Ears." I have at least 2 TPKs because the group went along their merry way thinking everything was hunky dory even when everyone in Seattle knew exactly what they were up to. And they still went ahead with their plans despite warnings. Some of this guy's subsequent comments makes it sound like he is used to GMs letting up on him so that his character could continue to be awesome.
QUOTE (cndblank @ Dec 8 2010, 08:32 PM)
The other thing I need to do is give the PC (not the player) credit for who they are. You need to provide the Context.
Actually I'll second this idea again.
Usually I find dumb players make dumb characters, and players with bad social skills make characters with bad social skills.
However I like to encourage improvement as a person or at least as a player, so when someone stretches the mold to try and RP a character smarter or smoother than they are, I'll really try and give them a hand.
I do find that additional details are a good way of doing this. Give some extra clues to the "detective" and social related details to the face. If you just say that there's a guard you probalby can't expect much more out of them than a dice roll. However if you throw in some detail, like something about a picture on their desk, maybe some leading statement they make to someone before the player approaches. Give 'em something to work with.
After re-reading the linked article, I think the GM wasn't entirely wrong, even if the way he mamanged the oppostion's reaction isn't what I'd call fair.
I mean, the players have :
* liberally spread a pile of spirits and watchers on astral surveillance
* set alarms, claymores and booby traps in not one but several major building's stairs (from his comments it seems they didn't tamper only with the roof's door, but the whole flight of stairs. All 40 floors of it...)
Even if the PCs themsleves aren't spotted, I'd think at least some of their crap would have been, with a janitor getting a clamore facelift or the like. Which would probably be enough to cause a major security lockdown and keep the target well clear of the intended killzone. It also would have been quickly obvious to whatver security was involved that the baddies were somewhere on the roof/top floors from the pattern of the alarms and traps they've set up.
It might not have killed the PCs, but would probably have caused the run to fail.
I mean, the players have :
* liberally spread a pile of spirits and watchers on astral surveillance
* set alarms, claymores and booby traps in not one but several major building's stairs (from his comments it seems they didn't tamper only with the roof's door, but the whole flight of stairs. All 40 floors of it...)
Even if the PCs themsleves aren't spotted, I'd think at least some of their crap would have been, with a janitor getting a clamore facelift or the like. Which would probably be enough to cause a major security lockdown and keep the target well clear of the intended killzone. It also would have been quickly obvious to whatver security was involved that the baddies were somewhere on the roof/top floors from the pattern of the alarms and traps they've set up.
It might not have killed the PCs, but would probably have caused the run to fail.
Now given we have only heard one side, but killing off someone favorite character by teleporting the opposition in even if the player is an A**hole is rude and worse unimaginative.
I think we can take as a given that the two characters he described were experienced and properly paranoid.
His point was that they had no real warning.
If said janitor got his claymore facelift then they would have heard the explosion. Hell the claymore might have reported it (with attached picture of the soon to be ex target).
And they would have had to decide if they wanted to wait around until security showed up.
If the two new player's old characters wouldn't fit the GM should have said NO or had them rewrite them down to the level of the current group.
And if he felt they deserved to have the hammer dropped then you sell the PC's enough rope and wait until they hang themselves.
It usually won't take long and is so much more enjoyable when they do it to themselves.
This was just ""frightfully bad show" as the English put it.
So who says the opposition teleported in? Shadowrunners make their living getting past watchers, wards, security cameras, tripwires, and booby traps -- what on Earth makes them think an NPC or two can't do the same thing?
The solution to the vast majority of problems is "Don't game with dicks!"
This is tempered with the explosions in space rule, but for the most part if you are gaming with a dick the problem lies not in the system or the character build, but in your choice of compatriots.
I've been on both sides of the fence.
I've begun a game with:
GM- You are in the desert, dying of thirst. Take a -2 for thirst. In between you and an oasis is a band of jackals.
Me- I fight the jackals(fighting ensues. I win)
GM- You win. What do you do?
Me- I go drink from the oasis.
GM- A crocodile strikes at you.(rolls dice) It hits you. Save versus massive damage.
Me- I get a 15 out of 20
GM- You die instantly. Wow, you suck at this game!
I've also ran a game like so:
Me- Your fixer calls you and tells you about a job.
Player- Screw him. I get on a train to DC to kill the president.
Me- Ok. you get to 1600 PA and the guard ask what your business is.
Player- I stab him and run toward the oval office.
Me- The 100+ Secret Service team rolls better than you.
Player- Way to railroad me. Wow, you suck as a GM!
There is no amount of prep on my part that would have made either of these scenarios work out better. The only solution to the problem is not to game with people whose goal is not to have fun or to tell a story, but to 'win'
Whatever the hell that is.
This is tempered with the explosions in space rule, but for the most part if you are gaming with a dick the problem lies not in the system or the character build, but in your choice of compatriots.
I've been on both sides of the fence.
I've begun a game with:
GM- You are in the desert, dying of thirst. Take a -2 for thirst. In between you and an oasis is a band of jackals.
Me- I fight the jackals(fighting ensues. I win)
GM- You win. What do you do?
Me- I go drink from the oasis.
GM- A crocodile strikes at you.(rolls dice) It hits you. Save versus massive damage.
Me- I get a 15 out of 20
GM- You die instantly. Wow, you suck at this game!
I've also ran a game like so:
Me- Your fixer calls you and tells you about a job.
Player- Screw him. I get on a train to DC to kill the president.
Me- Ok. you get to 1600 PA and the guard ask what your business is.
Player- I stab him and run toward the oval office.
Me- The 100+ Secret Service team rolls better than you.
Player- Way to railroad me. Wow, you suck as a GM!
There is no amount of prep on my part that would have made either of these scenarios work out better. The only solution to the problem is not to game with people whose goal is not to have fun or to tell a story, but to 'win'
Whatever the hell that is.
QUOTE (Critias @ Dec 10 2010, 12:39 AM)
So who says the opposition teleported in? Shadowrunners make their living getting past watchers, wards, security cameras, tripwires, and booby traps -- what on Earth makes them think an NPC or two can't do the same thing?
Player entitlement and being pampered by previous GMs. The group I first started playing SR with was like that. No matter how bad you fucked up or how tough the opposition was you'd live through it. Very boring and led to us doing stupid shit just to dare the GM to kill our characters. That group splintered shortly afterwards.
My first GM was of this kind. Every session one PC died, no matter what we did: he "cheated" on rolls. We tried talking, but it didn't help ("It's a nasty, brutal world"). After like 6 or 7 sessions, we just told him we had enough and never played with him again. Then one of the players started GMing and was great at it, possibly best GM ever.
Now (10 years later), in my new group, we have this rule: one adventure - one GM. We swap in GM hat. This is great, as allows anyone see both sides.
EDIT PS: The mentioned "best GM ever" also cheated on rolls, but as plot tool, not way to kill PCs.
Now (10 years later), in my new group, we have this rule: one adventure - one GM. We swap in GM hat. This is great, as allows anyone see both sides.
EDIT PS: The mentioned "best GM ever" also cheated on rolls, but as plot tool, not way to kill PCs.
QUOTE (Critias @ Dec 9 2010, 05:39 PM)
So who says the opposition teleported in? Shadowrunners make their living getting past watchers, wards, security cameras, tripwires, and booby traps -- what on Earth makes them think an NPC or two can't do the same thing?
So a professional Shadowrunner should know how to set up dead zone system of bobby traps and alarms that is impossible for any normal security force to get past without tripping an alarm No?
Especially since he shouldn't have to worry about another team of Shadowrunners coming up his six.
My point is that the PC should have had some warning.
And it was a lazy way to geek a PC.
QUOTE (cndblank @ Dec 11 2010, 11:02 AM)
So a professional Shadowrunner should know how to set up dead zone system of bobby traps and alarms that is impossible for any normal security force to get past without tripping an alarm No?
Works like this:
On the side of the door near the PC he puts a camera. This camera does nothing but watch the door (the only physical route to the camera) and is in offline mode (or is hardwired, either works). When the door moves the camera alerts the PC (either by enabling its wireless or by using the wired connection).
As the wireless is only enabled for a single action it is impossible to remotely hack it (and if its wired, its impossible to get physical access).
Game, set, match.
QUOTE (cndblank @ Dec 11 2010, 11:02 AM)
So a professional Shadowrunner should know how to set up dead zone system of bobby traps and alarms that is impossible for any normal security force to get past without tripping an alarm No?
Especially since he shouldn't have to worry about another team of Shadowrunners coming up his six.
My point is that the PC should have had some warning.
And it was a lazy way to geek a PC.
Especially since he shouldn't have to worry about another team of Shadowrunners coming up his six.
My point is that the PC should have had some warning.
And it was a lazy way to geek a PC.
My point is that maybe the PC shouldn't have had some warning, because one's successful ability to set up a "dead zone" assortment of traps and alarms is based upon one's skill, just as one's ability to then successfully navigate that sort of dead zone without setting off any traps and alarms. Those skill ratings are accompanied by dice, and those dice are then rolled to see how well one manages it.
In a game where dice, magic, hacking, cyberware, and edge are involved, there are precious few sure things. Improved Invisibility handles most security just fine. Traceless Walk takes care of pressure sensors and helps with mundane stealth. Watcher spirits are, despite their name, far from infallible sentries, and even Wards can be routinely overcome.
There are ways past security, so there's no guarantee the PC should have had "warning." Instead, the PC got a fight, the details of which he was very sloppy about sharing with us. Was he successfully ambushed, or not? If he was successfully ambushed and killed before he had a chance to act, how did he cast the Fireball that killed the rest of the team (on neighboring buildings) and tore a hole in reality? Why didn't he just directly take out the two bad guys attacking him, or throw up a Barrier spell and then heal himself?
The GM didn't "rocks fall, everyone dies," the complaining player did with his Fireball. All that happened to the player was a couple bad guys with rifles surprising him, which could've happened plenty of different ways that are all completely within the rules.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.