Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Gamemasters' Lounge => Topic started by: Dirtywork on <07-14-12/1115:06>
-
Quick back story......
I haven't played SR since 1st ed back in high school. Not long ago I got bit by the SR bug and got my hands on SR4A and the toolkit and I was off and running again.
Needless to say I have A LOT to learn and re-learn. I do as much research and study as I can before our game sessions. That way I'm not spending 20min looking up rules. Thanks to the advice I've received from the Shadowmasters here on the forums if I don't know exactly what to do I do a quick skill+attribute+modifier roll, make a note, then keep moving forward. So far so good.
At the moment we are in the middle of the On The Run mission that comes with the toolkit. Great mission by the way. More legwork than most of my players are used to but that's Shadowrun.
So....
One of my players is a GM. Lets call him Jim.
He runs Exalted and World of Darkness games. He has allegedly been doing table top games for years. I've been a player in his group a few times and he is very much a cinematic GM. He doesn't do much in the way of rolling dice but he does like to tell a story. He pretty much just asks us what we want to do and then he decides if we succeed based on our character sheets. That's his style and I respect that. His table his rules. As long as he's fair and the game is fun I won't complain.
He expressed an interest in playing SR and he said he would like to play because it would give him a chance to just kick back and be a player for a change. Plus it would give him an opportunity to do some gaming with his wife who is usually on the other side of the screen from her husband.
With that said.....
Last weekend we're running "On The Run" and we're getting all of the players into the club to meet with Mr. Johnson. Standard and simple. The club has a strict dress code and the front door is covered by a pair of Troll bouncers. For the most part the Runners were dressed appropriately and for those who weren't they greased the palms of the bouncers or pulled a little con or seduction. Everyone did their thing.
While I was resolving all of this I noticed Jim was making rolls. So when his turn came around and I asked him what his plan was he told me "I swing through the front door. I'm inside."
Wait what?
Jim is playing a street shaman who likes to attack and scalp Yakuza. He carries a pair of tomahawks and an assault rifle. Needless to say he wasn't dressed for the club.
So I ask him how exactly he got in to the club and he tells me he swings in via a zipline while under Improved invisibility.
I was a little upset by this. I'm not one for telling players they can't try something. If nothing else it's always fun to see what might happen. But in this case he just did what he wanted to do.
I tried to explain to him that the NPCs get a chance to try and stop/detect him and I asked him what he was rolling against. He just said he got enough successes to make it. Without knowing any of the modifiers or the stats of the bouncers, mundane club security, or magical security, I failed to see how he justified his roll.
So rather than giving him a chance to try and do the invisible ninja zipline thing I told him he's going to have to find another way in. At that point he said he didn't know what else to do.
He didn't try to bribe, sneak, or con his way in. He just said "Well then I guess I'll turn around and walk away." And that was it. I really really really didn't want to put on the engineer cap and tell him what he needed to do or that without the meeting with Mr Johnson there was no job. So I worked it out that one of the other players got him in.
So after that he spent the rest of the session sulking.
I really don't know what to do about it. His wife is a great gamer so I really don't want to tell them they can't come to the game. But at the same time he brought down the whole session and he refused to role play or even try. All of his interactions had to be forced or guided.
Since he has a vendetta going against the Yakuza I'm thinking I might have them plant a car bomb on his vehicle and have him lose a limb or two.
What would you do with a player like this? Would you just kick them off your table or would you try to get their attention in game?
Thanks in advance for any advice.
-
This is a simple matter of sit down and make sure you're both in the same page. Take a few minutes before the game and ask him to explain in depth who his character is. My guess is he won't be able to as he hast thought it through. Next you just explain that this is SR. The world is different and stupid gets you killed. Maybe suggest a few movies or books to consume before the next session to get an idea of what your game is.
-
As mentioned her and in a few other similar threads.
The only real way to sort these things out is to have an out of game word on the matter with the player in question. If you do it in game you either end up just pandering to them all the time or ignoring them and each is just as likly to cause friction in the group.
With refernce to the exact incident you described in your original post,
I'd have just told him to roll every single roll again in front of you as he hadn't yet declared his actions. Also how is he to know of modifiers etc.. untill the GM tells him.
-
His table his rules.
And, your table your rules. Tell him that you are the GM, you have your style of GMing and that he should respect that. The GM will decide if an actions has success. If he can't accept that, because he is used too much of GMing himself, he should leave, or maybe just sit a session aside and watch and learn how to play. If he need it, sugar coat it. But essentially that is what he needs to know.
-
GMs from other systems can either be the best players or the worst players :(
I would sit this guy down and offer encouragement while pointing out the inherit differences in the systems used by White Wolf and SR. White Wolf is very much a ROLEplayed played game with description and plot/story trumping most everything else. While SR is more of a ROLLplay game.
WhiteWolf likes the macabre, paranoia, dark mystical elements of fantasy/sci-fi and relies a lot on description and theatrical elements. The GM is telling (literally) a story and the players are responding to that story. As such there is more in "talk" less "rolling" in the base rules. (there are still rolls made and rules for how to resolve combat, record damage, etc... But most GM of WoD that I have met gloss over them just like your buddy. It's the story telling that is important to them)
Shadowrun is more dystopian, grunge, fatalistical in atmosphere. The game is centered around the overcoming of challenges. As a GM you are setting the groundwork of a story, that the players change with every success or failure. To help you (and the players) there are many ROLLs that determine the out come of what they do. As well as how well they do it! (which you can use in your description of events to add tension or fluff an ego depending on the ROLL)
Explain the subtle differences to him in the machanics of the game, show him that you are not trying to be hard it mean to him, just that it's a different system with different ways of working out the story. Maybe he will come around.
If not, continue to let him play for a few more game sessions, but let him act LAST in the out of combat elements of the game. Let him observe how and what happens when other players describe what their characters do. (declare actions, determine modifiers, roll for success, describe outcome) eventually he will either come to understand the underlying mechanics if the system or he will fail to show up to the game.
-
The issue seems to be that this guy thinks he's his own personal GM. As others have said, make the point that if he's not declaring actions and resolving them through you, they don't happen.
-
I was going to put in my two cents, but someone went ahead and said everything I had to say. So, echo all the bits above about making him roll in front of you, and explain that he does need to roll his invisibility spell and something for the zipline, and the bouncers do get to resist the spell, and so on.
-
Let alone i'm not sure what Force of Spell he did for his improved invisibility but!!! If it was a Force 3 (which i guess would be decent to get past the bouncers) I really doubt he didn't get spotted. If he cast lower than force 3 than i'm sure the bounces can get at least 2 hits on perception, if he cast higher, its a catch 22 where the bouncers can spot him casting and then disappearing. xD (Then they get a +3 dice to perception rolls for "searching" for it specifically).
As most people in the thread said, just talk to the guy make him understand that part of being a player is submitting to the will of the GM. You can always tell the DM at the end of the game what you liked and what you didn't like.
-
Invisibility is an illusion spell, and is thus opposed by Willpower (Plus Counterspelling if available) IIRC. They only get to make a Perception check if they resist the spell. Also, they still get to see the zipline and the weight that is moving it.
-
Invisibility is an illusion spell, and is thus opposed by Willpower (Plus Counterspelling if available) IIRC. They only get to make a Perception check if they resist the spell. Also, they still get to see the zipline and the weight that is moving it.
That seems correct, but invisibility does nothing about noise or smell or observable contact with the environment (like opening a door). IIRC it imposes a perception check penalty = to force to observe these things.
-
To me, it's just the notion that "invisible zipline" was someone's go-to answer for how to get into a nightclub. I have trouble taking the rest of the conversation seriously or trying to come up with rules suggestions and GMing ideas and stuff, because every time I think "invisible zipline to get into a club," I start to giggle uncontrollably.
-
To me, it's just the notion that "invisible zipline" was someone's go-to answer for how to get into a nightclub. I have trouble taking the rest of the conversation seriously or trying to come up with rules suggestions and GMing ideas and stuff, because every time I think "invisible zipline to get into a club," I start to giggle uncontrollably.
Yeah, Control Thoughts for "you can't see me!" probably would've been better.
-
Simple solution.
He smartens the frag up, or Sirrug eats his ass. Sirrug downs jetliners to get one dude, razes cities and wrecks faces out of the blue. He's the honey badger/Chuck Norris/60's Spiderman of SR. Sirrug would totally eat this guy on a whim, he does crazy drek like that all the time.vwbvvt
-
To me, it's just the notion that "invisible zipline" was someone's go-to answer for how to get into a nightclub.
I dunno, though: when I was underage and trying to get into clubs, an invisible zipline would've been a godsend ;)
-
Yeah, Control Thoughts for "you can't see me!" probably would've been better.
That's how he got inside to attach the bottom end of the zipline! ;D
-
This is a funny post lol. How are we going to get inside Steve? Well what do you have in mind Chriss? We could just act normal and just pay the cover. Lets see bribe our way inside if that dont work? Naw all that stuffs for amatures kid.. what we will do is control thoughts "you didnt see anything." Then you hold on to me and hum the Peter Gunn theme while i use my trusty zip line to get us past the goons to our reserved table. Are you sure this is going to work Steve? Certainly, I just seen it on the penguins of madagascar show this morning. Now hold tight and start humming Chriss.
-
To me, it's just the notion that "invisible zipline" was someone's go-to answer for how to get into a nightclub. I have trouble taking the rest of the conversation seriously or trying to come up with rules suggestions and GMing ideas and stuff, because every time I think "invisible zipline to get into a club," I start to giggle uncontrollably.
I'm with you on that. It would have taken me days, perhaps even years, to come up with using a zipline to get into the club. I'd almost say the player was trying to intentionally to disrupt the game as that is really pushing it, especially with him not being able to come up with any other idea to get into the club.
-
This is a funny post lol. How are we going to get inside Steve? Well what do you have in mind Chriss? We could just act normal and just pay the cover. Lets see bribe our way inside if that dont work? Naw all that stuffs for amatures kid.. what we will do is control thoughts "you didnt see anything." Then you hold on to me and hum the Peter Gunn theme while i use my trusty zip line to get us past the goons to our reserved table. Are you sure this is going to work Steve? Certainly, I just seen it on the penguins of madagascar show this morning. Now hold tight and start humming Chriss.
lol I'm going to be laughing all night now.
-
The point that my brain latched onto is this... why was he making rolls without you asking him to?
It's all good that he has this idea for his character... but unless it fits into your campaign it means nothing.
He is not the GM in this, you are. If he feels the need to start making rolls and interpreting them as if he were the GM, then there's a serious need to sit him down and point out that it's not him that makes decisions for your campaign.
-
A dual wielding, scalping Amerind who kills first and asks questions later? Am I the only one who wonders why his teammates keep him around? Guys like that end up dead or hunted way way way too quickly. My big question is: Does he fit in on this team at all or is he just in this for the guns and magic?
-
My first question on this: A zip-line has 2 connecting points, one at the high mark and one at the low mark, which makes the actual task do-able. Where was the high point, and how exactly did he get the low point INTO the club beyond the 2 trolls so he could actually do the zip-lining?
My second question on this: Considering he is the one, when he GMs, that decides if something works or not in his games, at what point did he honestly think that he could do it as a player in someone else's game?
-
Easy. Roll for Initiative.
-
I think his attempt is more humorous than frustrating.
"So this zip line. The bottom end is attached just above the door so you swing in like a monkey. Or, is it just running straight through what must be an open door to the club? Gee maybe the door isn't even open....let's see"
Good for a laugh.
-
My favourite method of dealing with uncooperative players is taken from the game Paranoia.
1) No matter what everybody says, the players are ultimately there for your amusement. If you're not having fun running the game, what's the point of doing so?
2) Therefore, you must make sure that the players make the game enjoyable for you. You will want them to repeat the behaviours you like, and not repeat those you do not like. The best way to do so is to train them using operand conditioning, which works as follows:
3) Reward the players' behaviours that you find amusing. Clever ideas, daring stunts, amazing roleplay, letting you hog the Cheetos bag.
4) Punish the behaviours that are not amusing. Arguing rules, taking their sweet time, acting out-of-character, hogging the Cheetos bag themselves.
5) The players will eventually learn which behaviours are rewarded, and which are punished. They will want to do more of the former, and less of the latter.
6) A common mistake is to punish the characters, not the players - this can be seen as arbitrary GMing. But if you can't take the characters' shinies or karma, the question arises, how do you punish players for bad behaviour? (Unless you're _that_ kind of a Dungeon Master, in which case I am staying the hell away from your basement). Likewise, how do you reward them without compromising game integrity?
7) Paranoia has a system where players are giving poker chips (or other markers) as a reward for desired behaviour. These chips can later be traded for favours from the GM, like roll bonuses, advantageous circumstances, Plot Armor(TeeEm), or a go at the Cheetos bag. As punishment, these chips can be taken away, or black chips can be given - these hover over the player like the Sword of Damocles, for at any time the GM can take all (or part) of them away and smite the player with a mishap of appropriate severity. The chips are usually re-set to at each game (but subject to GM's fiat and level of annoyance).
8) Shadowrun already has a similar mechanic in Edge. A homerule may be made to allow the GM to manipulate Edge more arbitrarily, and allow GM-given temporary Edge to exceed the Edge attribute, or to be reduced below 0. At the end of the session, the Edge is re-set to its current level, or the Edge rating, whichever is the lowest.
9) This also helps if you want to move the game closer to your particular style - if, for example, you run a "cat burglar" campaign, and a player has a tendency to go through the front door guns-a-blazing, you can deal with it by punishing the brute force tactics, and rewarding stealth and cunning.
-
My favourite method of dealing with uncooperative players is taken from the game Paranoia.
1) No matter what everybody says, the players are ultimately there for your amusement. If you're not having fun running the game, what's the point of doing so?
2) Therefore, you must make sure that the players make the game enjoyable for you. You will want them to repeat the behaviours you like, and not repeat those you do not like. The best way to do so is to train them using operand conditioning, which works as follows:
3) Reward the players' behaviours that you find amusing. Clever ideas, daring stunts, amazing roleplay, letting you hog the Cheetos bag.
4) Punish the behaviours that are not amusing. Arguing rules, taking their sweet time, acting out-of-character, hogging the Cheetos bag themselves.
5) The players will eventually learn which behaviours are rewarded, and which are punished. They will want to do more of the former, and less of the latter.
6) A common mistake is to punish the characters, not the players - this can be seen as arbitrary GMing. But if you can't take the characters' shinies or karma, the question arises, how do you punish players for bad behaviour? (Unless you're _that_ kind of a Dungeon Master, in which case I am staying the hell away from your basement). Likewise, how do you reward them without compromising game integrity?
7) Paranoia has a system where players are giving poker chips (or other markers) as a reward for desired behaviour. These chips can later be traded for favours from the GM, like roll bonuses, advantageous circumstances, Plot Armor(TeeEm), or a go at the Cheetos bag. As punishment, these chips can be taken away, or black chips can be given - these hover over the player like the Sword of Damocles, for at any time the GM can take all (or part) of them away and smite the player with a mishap of appropriate severity. The chips are usually re-set to at each game (but subject to GM's fiat and level of annoyance).
8) Shadowrun already has a similar mechanic in Edge. A homerule may be made to allow the GM to manipulate Edge more arbitrarily, and allow GM-given temporary Edge to exceed the Edge attribute, or to be reduced below 0. At the end of the session, the Edge is re-set to its current level, or the Edge rating, whichever is the lowest.
9) This also helps if you want to move the game closer to your particular style - if, for example, you run a "cat burglar" campaign, and a player has a tendency to go through the front door guns-a-blazing, you can deal with it by punishing the brute force tactics, and rewarding stealth and cunning.
There is techinically a ability that will allow you to exceed your maximum edge. A great Dragon can grant extra edge. I'm not sure if anyone has done this In Game. I bet it's one of those things that go under utilized, but i'm sure you could easily say a great dragon may have taken an interest or amusement in their antics or just not explain why this is happening all of a sudden. :P To each his own :D
-
[Snip]
... if, for example, you run a "cat burglar" campaign, and a player has a tendency to go through the front door guns-a-blazing, you can deal with it by punishing the brute force tactics, and rewarding stealth and cunning.
Instead, I feel it's a better idea to reevaluate the game rather than punishing the player for what he/she enjoys more.
-
I think GMs already tend to reward game play styles that are compatible with their own. They should be trying to keep the game at least semi-enjoyable for players with different (but not completely incompatible) play styles, not using metagame rules to make the game even less fun for them.