Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: Hermes on <07-06-12/1701:29>
-
One of my players have been abusing the rules of Shadowrun to his benefit.
He has driven away some of my players from my group, one of which is a good player, if given a chance to play and not debate rules all day. I'm going to tell him that he has two strikes against him before he's booted from my group. I've been keeping him away from a new player to Shadowrun, so we can keep her character around her concept and not generally optimize it.
So, how many abusive players have you kicked out?
-
When I was GMing for that other game, I started every campaign by saying that being a munchkin/rules lawyer would get them removed from the table quicker than a pizza at a frat house, and that Rule 0 (The GM is always right) is strongly enforced. We're here for fun and games, not debate and discourse.
I can't count how many "My character revolves around abusing this RAW mechanic" players I've told to go re-roll or GTFO.
-
Yeah, he's turned my game into a mockery of what it's supposed to be. Either intentionally, which is the case, or unintentionally. One of my players discussed this with me and we are coming to the same conclusion. He's usurping my game.
-
Game is a corabative effort between all the players and the GM.
It is the players responsibility to drive the story forward.
It is the GMs responsibility to lay out the basis, plot, and hooks of the story, and dictate the events of the players' actions.
Sadly, some players (and GMs too!!) fail to realize this, and expect it it to be all about them. Some willingly cheat, or hedge the system in their favor ignoring the spirit of the rules.
In over 25 years of GMing, I have kicked out about a dozen players for various reasons. Sometimes it's the only thing you can do. Other times, invoking GM fiat is the answer but do this wisely and across the spectrum (if the players can't, the baddies can't). Other times you can use their own concepts against them by building an antagonist from their own concept and unleashing it on them/him!
.......
If I might ask, what is this player doing exactly that is leading to the drama?
-
RPing his character like he was Kal-El from Krypton. In all honesty, he turned my Shadowrun game into the present DC Heroes RPG. He's playing a PL14 Paragon in Shadowrun clothing. The only things missing are heat vision, arctic breath, and super strength. If we were playing Mutants and Masterminds, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
But I do, and I tried to subtly tell him that he's gone out of bounds.
-
But I do, and I tried to subtly tell him that he's gone out of bounds.
This is personal experience, so YMMV, but players like that have always, with only one exception, been toxic to the group as a whole no matter how much 'suggesting' you as the GM do. I would tell him point-blank that he needs to knock it off or he'll be looking for a new group.
-
Just chiming in to second the GTFO thread for abusive players. I've tried what you are trying with players before. Subtle hints don't work and sometimes even the F&*K NO outburst doesn't work either. I haven't had the Kal-El level of abuse you describe but trolls with maxed body and armour when everyone else is around a 4 body were quite common, along with weapon foci for adepts at rating 6 and above. I never actually let these things into the game but the fight to keep them out just got to be too much. Easier to dump the player and find another who better suits the play style you are going for.
One thing I will suggest is to make sure everyone is on the same page when you start a new campaign or introduce a new player. Let them know what kind of power levels you are looking for and other things, like how desirable fights are or whether you are going Pink Mohawk or Mirror Shades and Trench Coat or something in between. Communication with the players and the GM are the easiest way to avoid this kind of power gaming and if it creeps in after you've all agreed how you are playing, they can't really complain if they get the boot.
-
Sometimes I sit down with the player and get him to go through every little detail of it and how he thinks the RAW apply to his character. 95% of the time there is a flaw in their logic that you can use to bring them to heel. 5% of the time they actually have that "winning" combo... And I wield the nurf hammer. And sometimes a just show them the door regardless. I'm not sacrificing 5 people's enjoyment to appease the ego of 1.
Do what you gotta do to get the most enjoyment for everyone at the table and remember, you're not alone in having to boot someone! Most GMs have at one point or another.
-
Kill the character. He does it again, kill it again. At some point he leaves or gets the picture. Everyone else enjoys the constant splat.
-
I'm really curious about the specifics of what he's doing that's so horrible, but really, that's besides the point. The point isn't how the player is being problematic, the point is that a player is being problematic. Details are interesting to know, but fundamentally unimportant. Once you've made up your mind that he's screwing up your game -- and you clearly have -- all that matters is that he's fucking up what's supposed to be a relaxing, pleasant, social experience. By that point it doesn't matter what happened, or how, or who started it, or why, or anything else. What matters is that one of you needs to stop showing up to the game, because otherwise BOTH of you will end up not having fun.
If it's your game and you're hosting, the decision's already made about which of you that will be. It's your game. He's gone.
Kill the character. He does it again, kill it again. At some point he leaves or gets the picture. Everyone else enjoys the constant splat.
That's a pretty passive-aggressive way to handle the problem, and meanwhile (a) the game is being derailed, and (b) you've got to figure out why the rest of the group isn't getting murdered, too. It's goofy.
You cannot handle an out-of-game problem in-game. You cannot handle an out-of-game problem in-game. Not only doesn't it work, but it's retaliating against immaturity with immaturity. Don't throw handfuls of dice and GM fiat at him until he goes away, that's just returning bullying with bullying.
Sit down and talk to the player like you're both grown-ups. It's not that hard. Tell him you don't like what he's doing, tell him his playstyle isn't fitting the feel you're going for, and ask him not to show up next week. It's not the end of the world. Just do it. In the grand scheme of things, it's not that big a deal, so the best advice is to just handle it. There's no need for hyperbole or melodrama, accusations of usurpation or corruption, and there's not REALLY any need for genuinely hurt feelings. It's just a game. The entire point of games is to have fun, and if that's not happening, you're doing BOTH of you a favor by not gaming with him any more.
Just bite the bullet and tell him you don't want him in the game any more. Done.
-
In all seriousness critias is right the fastest way to handle it is just tell him. Look i am done finish your beer/drink and go home. Its simple its to the point, dont make a big deal or go on about it. After he goes just take a smoke break or 5 what ever tell the players iam not dealing with "superman". When break is done, get back to the game and stay with the game dont let it derail because of what just happened.
Cass100109 does have a point. If you can stomach it ;) If you can actually kill him off and not the party. If you want that way I suggest Cops then increase to swat and heavys after he blasts a patrol. When he dies and remakes. As soon as power monger number 2 starts acting up again, bust out some bounties hes racked up with gangs/organized crime. His contacts dry up and the ones who will work with him are low loyalty and will sell him to the highest bidder. But i forwarn you, i have seen this quite a few times when you kill a "superman", watch his rolls cause he will start cheating hardcore the moment he starts taking damage. When he finally dies it gets ugly. You going to watch a grown man turn into a big little kid and throw a temper tantrum . Right at the temper tantrum pull the plug, kick him off the table.
Also, have you tried optional rules out the core book? I found many bring alot more balance to the game. I already mentioned this in a differnt post but if you can get a hold of "cyberpunk listen up you primitive screwheads" book, buy it Best GM book, talks about how to deal with problem players. Yes they even say after a couple talks and it still continues you need to kick him off the table you are going to lose more people if you dont.
-
Also, have you tried optional rules out the core book? I found many bring alot more balance to the game. I already mentioned this in a differnt post but if you can get a hold of "cyberpunk listen up you primitive screwheads" book, buy it Best GM book, talks about how to deal with problem players. Yes they even say after a couple talks and it still continues you need to kick him off the table you are going to lose more people if you dont.
Critias is right, however, it's getting down to optimizing NPCs to kick his desert @$$ of a PC. If this doesn't work, I'll ask him to play fair in respect to the other PCs. This started when one of the players judged him as to being a cheat. As for the variant rules, I've added a SR newbie to one of my groups. So I'm cautious as to adding any new variant rules until I'm sure what group she does join.
-
That's a pretty passive-aggressive way to handle the problem, and meanwhile (a) the game is being derailed, and (b) you've got to figure out why the rest of the group isn't getting murdered, too. It's goofy.
Not really. He knowingly screwing with your game, so you use the same tools to screw with him back. It's not like you can follow him out to his car and beat his ass. What you're dealing with here is a player who a) doesn't respect the game, b) doesn't respect the other players, and c) doesn't respect the GM, who is willing to put in extra time to create a gaming experience for multiple people. I would speculate that if you were to go back and talk to any previous GM, he's been doing this shit for years. Very simply, he's a bully and a jerk. Talking to people like that doesn't work. They have another need inside them that they are using their superiority in the game to fulfill. Honestly, unless this is a friendship that has been going on for many, many years, the time necessary to invest in someone like this is way beyond the means or patience of people who may or may not like him. So, the easiest and quickest way to bring this to heel is to use the game, that is propping up his ego, to beat him. It's a simple matter of reinforcing that you are in charge. One of two things will happen: he will quit and find another GM to screw with, or his attitude will break. Regardless, even the latter option will involve a lot of backhanded sniping, whining, and all around s***headedness. Best thing to do is kill the character and bounce him.
-
That's a pretty passive-aggressive way to handle the problem, and meanwhile (a) the game is being derailed, and (b) you've got to figure out why the rest of the group isn't getting murdered, too. It's goofy.
Not really. He knowingly screwing with your game, so you use the same tools to screw with him back. It's not like you can follow him out to his car and beat his ass. What you're dealing with here is a player who a) doesn't respect the game, b) doesn't respect the other players, and c) doesn't respect the GM, who is willing to put in extra time to create a gaming experience for multiple people. I would speculate that if you were to go back and talk to any previous GM, he's been doing this shit for years. Very simply, he's a bully and a jerk. Talking to people like that doesn't work. They have another need inside them that they are using their superiority in the game to fulfill. Honestly, unless this is a friendship that has been going on for many, many years, the time necessary to invest in someone like this is way beyond the means or patience of people who may or may not like him. So, the easiest and quickest way to bring this to heel is to use the game, that is propping up his ego, to beat him. It's a simple matter of reinforcing that you are in charge. One of two things will happen: he will quit and find another GM to screw with, or his attitude will break. Regardless, even the latter option will involve a lot of backhanded sniping, whining, and all around s***headedness. Best thing to do is kill the character and bounce him.
I disagree very strongly. The GM derailing everything else he has planned for a game and, instead, throwing the whole world (at one character, out of the whole group) and killing them over and over again, accomplishes nothing but giving the problem player the spotlight and sidelining, ignoring, and irritating the other players even more. They and the campaign gain nothing, and actively lose both gaming time and verisimilitude, when just one member of their crew suddenly has the whole universe pull out the stops and kill them (but not everyone else), over and over and over again, in the hopes that some sort of real-world lesson gets learned.
It's cheap, it's easy, and it proves nothing, while the game continues to suffer (and, in fact, suffers MORE).
Cowboy up, talk to the person one adult to another, and disinvite them from your game. Don't plot and scheme, don't scour rulebooks for ways to "beat" them, don't make it some huge piece of melodrama. Don't invite them to the game and then make a big show of kicking them out after they've made the trip, which invites terrific anger and frustration. Just give them a phone call before the next game session, and let them know you don't want them there. That's all it takes.
At any rate, I've said my piece. I don't think repeating ourselves back and forth is going to sway anyone, and I don't want to turn this thread into an argument (over an argument).
-
Has anyone bothered to consider that sometimes a player or players gets jealous that someone os better at making characters than they are and so they accuse the more mechanically capable of cheating and other things to try and get the GM to boot them? I'm not saying it is necessarily the case, but it is still a possibility that any GM must consider.
-
We're only getting one side of the story, but it sounds like the alleged cheating is almost irrelevant. The main problem seems to be incompatible play styles. I agree with Critias - it's better to just boot the offending player, than to waste everyone's time coming up with a scenario to "beat" his character.
-
Has anyone bothered to consider that sometimes a player or players gets jealous that someone os better at making characters than they are and so they accuse the more mechanically capable of cheating and other things to try and get the GM to boot them? I'm not saying it is necessarily the case, but it is still a possibility that any GM must consider.
This can happen and is an issue I deal with from time to time. I have a mixed group, optimizers and non optimizers and I've made it quite clear to my players that optimizing is not cheating. It's more of a style or taste issue. Some groups enjoy optimizing all characters, some don't. It can be difficult when you have a mix of both players, as you have to make both sides have a fun time. I'm a bit amused at all this talk of booting characters because I've played with the same group of people basically for 17 years since we started in high school. It's a bit harder in such situations to just boot someone.
But yes if arguing over optimization gets really out of hand, that gaming group should probaly split up. No one is wrong and no one is cheating, they are just two styles of play and it takes a lot of patience and diplomatic skills to make a mixed group of optimizers and non optimizers work.
The thing about optimization doesn't really have much to do with intelligence or the like. Only newbies don't know the main tricks of how to optimize. What usually happens is the more intelligent players read the books and pick the best combos. Then, the rest of the group watches what they do, copies it, and soon everyone knows the same tricks. Once you're at that point, it becomes a matter of if players want to restrain themselves or not. (Or the GM, but I prefer not to be that heavyhanded. I lean toward the non optimization camp, but I recognize that many players enjoy this type of play and trying to trample it out is a sure recipe for splitting up my gaming group)
-
Honestly it sounds like your at the meltdown point so I'll echo Critias.
The second option is you talk to him about your concerns and ask him to play a different character and then exercise collaboration with them on their next character.
The better, far less feasible option is to go back in time and set expectations before hand. I make it very clear to my players that there are no rules gotchas against me. If there's something that bothers me mechanicly I have no problem with spot patching it or just flat disallowing it. But the thing is my players know their not really in competition with me. Setting the tone of the game early on is very important to me as is playing with people who are my friends and have a good rapport with.
-
This doesn't sound like a simple matter of optimization. You're always gonna have power gamers. That's a given. But you can optimize and still play the game and be a part of the group/ team. Once you have no respect for that dynamic, though, you're taking up space at a table no one wants you at.
-
To answer Hermes original question in what's likely 15 years of running games (damn I feel old all of a sudden) I've actually out and out kicked out one player for game related items. I have also been the conveyer of bad news when the group decided in spite of me to remove someone. Likewise outside of my home group I have told people I will be auditing their character after the game, which without fail has lead to people leaving the table, and often the campaign as their character wouldn't stand up to audit.
In short if it really has reached an unworkable point your going to just have to bite the bullet.
-
That's a pretty passive-aggressive way to handle the problem, and meanwhile (a) the game is being derailed, and (b) you've got to figure out why the rest of the group isn't getting murdered, too. It's goofy.
Not really. He knowingly screwing with your game, so you use the same tools to screw with him back. It's not like you can follow him out to his car and beat his ass. What you're dealing with here is a player who a) doesn't respect the game, b) doesn't respect the other players, and c) doesn't respect the GM, who is willing to put in extra time to create a gaming experience for multiple people. I would speculate that if you were to go back and talk to any previous GM, he's been doing this shit for years. Very simply, he's a bully and a jerk. Talking to people like that doesn't work. They have another need inside them that they are using their superiority in the game to fulfill. Honestly, unless this is a friendship that has been going on for many, many years, the time necessary to invest in someone like this is way beyond the means or patience of people who may or may not like him. So, the easiest and quickest way to bring this to heel is to use the game, that is propping up his ego, to beat him. It's a simple matter of reinforcing that you are in charge. One of two things will happen: he will quit and find another GM to screw with, or his attitude will break. Regardless, even the latter option will involve a lot of backhanded sniping, whining, and all around s***headedness. Best thing to do is kill the character and bounce him.
I disagree very strongly. The GM derailing everything else he has planned for a game and, instead, throwing the whole world (at one character, out of the whole group) and killing them over and over again, accomplishes nothing but giving the problem player the spotlight and sidelining, ignoring, and irritating the other players even more. They and the campaign gain nothing, and actively lose both gaming time and verisimilitude, when just one member of their crew suddenly has the whole universe pull out the stops and kill them (but not everyone else), over and over and over again, in the hopes that some sort of real-world lesson gets learned.
It's cheap, it's easy, and it proves nothing, while the game continues to suffer (and, in fact, suffers MORE).
Cowboy up, talk to the person one adult to another, and disinvite them from your game. Don't plot and scheme, don't scour rulebooks for ways to "beat" them, don't make it some huge piece of melodrama. Don't invite them to the game and then make a big show of kicking them out after they've made the trip, which invites terrific anger and frustration. Just give them a phone call before the next game session, and let them know you don't want them there. That's all it takes.
At any rate, I've said my piece. I don't think repeating ourselves back and forth is going to sway anyone, and I don't want to turn this thread into an argument (over an argument).
I don't disagree with you entirely and I think we're seeing two different issues. It appears to me that you're seeing a guy who isn't in tune with the rest of the group. I see and have seen something else entirely and we all know this guy. For most of us nerds and geeks, this medium makes the fantasy and sci fi we enjoy interactive and it's fun. But for some of us, for whatever reason this character they've made is a surrogate. It serves as the badass he will never be. We all know him, have been friends with him and have games with him. When the character is so closely tied to that ego, no amount of talking and reason fixes it. That's a psychological barrier of epic proportions. I call it the Han Solo/ Boba Fett syndrome. We all recycle tropes and concepts we've consumed. Originality is pretty rare, but that's not a bad thing or a criticism. Just that we've consumed so much fantasy and sci fi that we can't help but be influenced. Most people want to be Han Solo; a good guy for sure, but not perfect and with plenty of personal character failings and class lapses to make it interesting to role play. We can build substance and a real living, breathing character who isn't perfect and has growth and pathos. But some, they want to be Boba Fett, the most feared man in the galaxy. They don't care why or how, but by god they will be the baddest thing walking.
-
And there isn't a darn thing wrong with such. In my opinion, someone wanting to remove someone from their group for that needs to get off their high horse and lighten up.
-
All of which goes to show how important it is that GMs and players be on the same page, from the very start of a campaign, and have similar expectations, ideas for what the world (and the team) is going to be like, and the power level/challenge level/optimization level of the game.
-
And there isn't a darn thing wrong with such. In my opinion, someone wanting to remove someone from their group for that needs to get off their high horse and lighten up.
There is something wrong with it if it comes at the expense of your game and eberyone's enjoyment.
-
If it's impacting enjoyment for others, then in most cases I think the last two words of my prevous post are particularly apt to the situation.
-
So everyone else has to "lighten up" to provide the ego boost for one guy? How does that even found right?
-
Well if it's being impacted like that then in most cases it's a sign that they're taking the game WAY too seriously.
-
Well if it's being impacted like that then in most cases it's a sign that they're taking the game WAY too seriously.
Or they prefer a less "Pink Mohawk" type of game. Not everyone enjoys superman power fulfillment fantasies.
-
Well if it's being impacted like that then in most cases it's a sign that they're taking the game WAY too seriously.
I don't think so, (to be fair I'm running my first shadowrun game Thursday, and normally do DnD,) but characters who power-game, or just be the #1 can suck the fun out of the game for everyone else. And that's not right, it's not only about them, it's about creating a story, also, if a player is too over-powered then a gm has to do this weird balancing act where they have to send in strong enemies for the one, and weakling for the other three, it makes it harder to gm and tends to turn the game into a huge joke. Roleplaying should be fun, and then numbers should only be an accurate representation of your character's abilities, not a way for you to become Cyberpunk Jesus.
-
If it's impacting enjoyment for others, then in most cases I think the last two words of my prevous post are particularly apt to the situation.
See you make statements about people needing to lighten up but also make arbitrary statements about this or that being acceptable. This leads me to believe that there's something that's gone on for you in your own experiences. I'm going to put it bluntly, if you want to be the one guy out of the group not jiving with the rest of the groups theme that's not them needing to lighten up, that's just them not wanting to kowtow to your play style. That's not to say your play style is wrong or theirs is right. Their just not compatable.
It's like the old Pink Mohawk vs Mirrorshades debate. You can have a mirrorshades guy in a mohawk game, but it doesn't work well to have one pink mohawk guy in a mirrorshades universe/game. It doesn't matter if you want to play the character who's name strikes fear in his enemies, starting characters don't get that privilege unless their GM allows it, no matter what their soak pool is.
-
I just got tired of all the "boot him" comments from people who don't even know the guy. Though the only thing that is anywhere near that bad in my opinion is the person who is such an a$$hole that if someone tries to drive things forward themselves the "a$$hole" just raises their voice to a higher volume so only their "story driving" is heard.
-
Again you sound like you've got your share of baggage. Hermes original comment is he's got a player that's powergaming so badly he's driving people out of the game and he's worried about it continuing to happen. I stand by the "talk then boot" response because it's really the only rational thing to do as a GM when the person you don't like is causing the people you want to keep to leave.
-
I just got tired of all the "boot him" comments from people who don't even know the guy. Though the only thing that is anywhere near that bad in my opinion is the person who is such an a$$hole that if someone tries to drive things forward themselves the "a$$hole" just raises their voice to a higher volume so only their "story driving" is heard.
I'm suggesting "boot him" because the alternative being suggested is "kill him over and over again, for the lulz, until he boots himself." Read Hermes' posts and it certainly sounds like his mind is made up that the guy isn't fitting in, and that Hermes is taking it kind of personally -- seriously, dude's using language like "usurp" and "abusive" and "mockery" -- so it sounds like he's got absolutely no plans of keeping the dude in the campaign. Since he wants the guy out, what seems to be left is deciding how to do it.
And if the options are "talk to him like a grown up" versus "LOLOLOL murder him in his face until he doesn't come back," I know which suggestion I'm making.
-
And if the options are "talk to him like a grown up" versus "LOLOLOL murder him in his face until he doesn't come back," I know which suggestion I'm making.
Some people deserve mockery.
-
Me too... endless muder is hard to ... oh wait... yeah, talking seems the way to go. T ;D
Without knowing the context, the details, the actual people involved, the question appears to be :
"how do I remove player x from my game". So, without making judgement calls on Hermies or Player X, talking would be the most mature approach to the issue....
Or we could get some kicks about how to repeatably kill some guys character? :)
Eitherway, I'm good 8)
-
The group I play in will sometimes take a week off to discuss the current state of the campaign when the main GM feels things are threatening to go way off the rails. The GM leads the discussion and fires off what he sees as the problems, and from that we can 'check' each other as players rather than having it continue to spill over into our game time among the characters.
That being said, I am playing with a fairly old group of players (late 30's and up) and our issues fall into the category of players losing focus on the game and dragging the story down rather than outright disruption of the game. In the end though, if the problem player is a friend, I think it might help to clear the air publicly rather than conspiring.
Just my 2 nuyen...
-
and suddenly i feel like an ass for GMing Paranoia, kill em, and kill em a lot. (but then that's the theme)
but overall, i would hope to be grownup enough to talk to the player offline and maybe get them to step into line with the rest of the players.
not really saying it would actually play out that way, cuz sometimes repeated death is just fun.
-
Paranio rocks, particularly at conventons. :)
Going back to kicks, maybe run a ground hog day type mission, and kills his character 1001 different ways, with the day repeating and repeating... that way you dont waste time making new character sheets and you still get to kill his character again and again! oohhhh Evil Gm heaven....
I think there was a great supernatural episode where they did this. Inspirational stuff.
-
What is rules abuse?
???
-
I for one would advocate against kicking the player untill you're left with no other option.
I will admit that I am a power gamer / munchkin / min-maxer / etc...
I have had both GM's of the 4 games I play come to me out of game and ask me to tone it down.
In at least one of the games (from what I have been told) players were ready to leave because of me.
I am happy to say that after the GM's sat me down and told me flat that I could change, or I could leave, I have improved my game and am getting allong well with other players again.
If you can keep players like that around, they can help (both the party and the GM) with their knowledge of the rules. In some cases one of my GM's has asked me to confirm his rulings.
One other thing you can do with the player, is use his characters against him. Let him know that if the character is too powerful, it'll become an NPC to be run by the GM, that'll change his ideas, or at least built weaknesses that you would be able to exploit.
One other thing that one of my GM's has done, is have me design NPC's from scratch.
He said that there are no rules appart from the books, and I can powergame NPC's to my hearts content, the catch, no all these NPC's are hostile, it may be used as the doc wagon team to rescue the party...
Just some thoughts and a vote to not kick them unless it's the only option.
Thankyou,
~Jaffer
-
I for one would advocate against kicking the player untill you're left with no other option.
I will admit that I am a power gamer / munchkin / min-maxer / etc...
I have had both GS's of the 4 games I play come to me out of game and ask me to tone it down.
In at least one of the games (from what I have been told) players were ready to leave because of me.
I am happy to say that after the GM's sat me down and told me flat that I could change, or I could leave, I have improved my game and am getting allong well with other players again.
If you can keep players like that around, they can help (both the party and the GM) with their knowledge of the rules. In some cases one of my GM's has asked me to confirm his rulings.
One other thing you can do with the player, is use his characters against him. Let him know that if the character is too powerful, it'll become an NPC to be run by the GM, that'll change his ideas, or at least built weaknesses that you would be able to exploit.
One other thing that one of my GM's has done, is have me design NPC's from scratch.
He said that there are no rules appart from the books, and I can powergame NPC's to my hearts content, the catch, no all these NPC's are hostile, it may be used as the doc wagon team to rescue the party...
Just some thoughts and a vote to not kick them unless it's the only option.
Thankyou,
~Jaffer
Jaffer, your too harsh on yourself. Your style of character creation just leads to towards these very focused outcomes. Interestingly, you do write up very good character backgrounds, but often the play of the character which can lead to concerns.
In general, a player, at least in my opinion and in my games, needs to consider the following:
- let ll players have there chance to shine. When someone else has the spotlight, give them some space.
- role play the character and give it some personality. Blood thirsty killer, is generally not very interesting. When blood thirsty killer is played across two allegedly separate characters, it gets very boring. Ps. Personality is vampire level angst , it just means have some character traits and perhaps a story and background.
- avoid talking about your character's awesome stats and how dice you roll. I'm not playing a wargame, I'm playing a role playing game. Impress me with your character's Character.
- don't talk about other games etc, during the shadowrun game. Before, after and during breaks, cool. Middle of combat side conversations on WOW? Not cool.
- don't fret the rules. It's not a versus type game. The gm isn't out to get you and fudging the rules to keep things moving? Cool in my book.
- it's a team game. Work with your teammates, enhance each others game.
- communicate, talk with each other. No use going home feeling unhappy about something. No one wants that.
- have fun. It's the number one rule :)