[CanRay]

Hmm.  I do believe you're on to something with this whole ketchup-flavored dragon kibble Elf and greens t-shirt thing.

This, I simply must incorporate into my game world.

I'll give credit where it's due: the Natural Foods Division of Revaddict-Kirk-Nakano-CanRay (R.K.N.C.) Enterprises will soon market Ketchup-Flavored Dragon Kibble Elf Greens snacks, and produce t-shirts as a form of advertisement.  Their slogan will be obscure: "For lawyers who know the rules... and wanna eat healthy!"  Now with 200% more ketchup flavor!

... which is really just funny dragon-shaped mycoprotein-enriched ketchup-flavored soy crackers.  And, yes, the soy's Elven-grown.  How posh!

I want top billing.  *Stands Firm*

[Blond Goth Girl]

I know this is off topic, but why do you dislike running rules? And more specifically, are we talking about movement type rules, or some other rule I'm missing that also is known as running?

They have running based on strength.  Most runners/joggers while healthy aren't strong like body builders but are very agile.  Hence, I base it off of agility.  When I was a jogger, though I was fit, I wasn't strong but fairly agile.  Conversely, when I lifted weights and did other cardio, I lost my running speed but could lift more.

[CanRay]

I can confirm the Agility thing.  A friend of mine trained for the Triathlon and, well...  The things he could do would blow ones mind!

That was years ago, however...

[The_Gun_Nut]

The trouble is that motion like running isn't tied to a single attribute like strength or agility.  A combination or average of the two would work out better, simply because runners DO have a lot of leg strength.  It's explosive strength, as they have to tense and relax muscles quickly for maximum results with minimum effort.

[Charybdis]

*BUMP*

It was said earlier, but to re-iterate, there's a lot more to running a game than just rules.

If a Rules Lawyer wants to be involved (either by being a Sheldon-like resource for quotes, or as Assistance GM) then all well and good. I personally appreciate someone checking that the combinations of standard actions in-game are following the mechanics, so everyone's being fair (even me). But if I know the PC's are facing a Cyborg with 4IP and 30 dice to attack, but the PC's are asking me 'How does he have all those dice?!', I can smugly shurg and advise:
   You'll find out with an autopsy if you a) Live, and B) Have the time to investigate.

I also do a lot of rolls in advance for NPC actions in order to speed up gameplay. I get less questions asked if I just cross off a line in my notebook and say 'The Fixer for six successes' rather than counting out 18+ dice and rolling them. The PC's and players do not need to know how many dice enemies have. That's Metagaming.

What they DO need to know is the successes utilised, as these are the outward displays of skill that demonstrate what's actually happening in-game.
If an NPC repeatedly gets 6⁺ successes... the PC's (and players) will know it's a pretty impressive opponent..
But if an NPC repeatedly gets 2-3 successes, then a 6 followed by a few more 2-3's....PC's (and players) will consider that 6 a freak of luck, and play things out accordingly
A) This speeds up gameplay
B) It minimises potential for rules lawyer arguments about whether I should be rolling 12 dice, or just 11.

And in the end, if they're just dragging down the game, then it's time to hand over the reins to your new GM.... the Rules Lawyer

[Fallen]

I want top billing.  *Stands Firm*

Sure!  I'll send you 20% of all profits I personally make from introducing the concept into my game!

And in shiny nuyen too!  OOooAAaaa... 

I also do a lot of rolls in advance for NPC actions in order to speed up gameplay. I get less questions asked if I just cross off a line in my notebook and say 'The Fixer for six successes' rather than counting out 18+ dice and rolling them. The PC's and players do not need to know how many dice enemies have. That's Metagaming.

I can see how that would work well to keep things moving along and avoid unnecessary interruptions in the game.  Then again, I've always liked the feeling of discovering the outcome of a situation along with the players.  To me, it makes it feel like events are mutable and that I can never absolutely know for certain what's going to happen next.  It keeps me interested in what's going on as it's happening: like watching a movie or reading a book.  So I suppose that the method may not be the best for me because (however mildly selfish a thing it can appear to be) of it.

As a GM, I know beforehand many of the things (if not most) that are going to take place in a game session, scenario and campaign.  I've always enjoyed discovering new angles and different turns of events on the fly due not only the characters' actions themselves but how matters dependent on the results of tests evolve based on the results.

Still, I'll have a go at trying it out for the next session -- just to see how it feels, and how it affects my planning and the flow of the game.  It can be fun to discover (and try out) new things, I think.

Thank you for sharing your approach, Charybdis.

[Charybdis]

I also do a lot of rolls in advance for NPC actions in order to speed up gameplay. I get less questions asked if I just cross off a line in my notebook and say 'The Fixer for six successes' rather than counting out 18+ dice and rolling them. The PC's and players do not need to know how many dice enemies have. That's Metagaming.

I can see how that would work well to keep things moving along and avoid unnecessary interruptions in the game.  Then again, I've always liked the feeling of discovering the outcome of a situation along with the players.  To me, it makes it feel like events are mutable and that I can never absolutely know for certain what's going to happen next.  It keeps me interested in what's going on as it's happening: like watching a movie or reading a book.  So I suppose that the method may not be the best for me because (however mildly selfish a thing it can appear to be) of it.

As a GM, I know beforehand many of the things (if not most) that are going to take place in a game session, scenario and campaign.  I've always enjoyed discovering new angles and different turns of events on the fly due not only the characters' actions themselves but how matters dependent on the results of tests evolve based on the results.

No worries

As a side note though, while I enjoy being surprised as much as the next person, I find that the players give me more surprises than the NPC's   

Using GM Fiat, I can decide what happens with NPCs if and when (rarely) required, however PC's throw me for enough loops as it is. Having some stability in knowng what the NPC's will do (and how well) gives me enough free headspace to keep the game flowing when the PC's throw me a curveball....

Also, due to variables like wound penalties, vision, cover etc, I can't do this for a majority of situations. It's normally legwork and the opening round of combat....

In the end, what worked best for me is a table list of 5 dice, 10 dice, 15 and 20, listed in columns with about 20 rolls in each.
If I need to roll 17 dice, I cross off the successes from an entry in the 15 column, roll 2 additional dice and add in any further successes.

This keeps the PC's guessing, and still allows for a little random variation at the time. Also as we're gaming remotely, having the extra speed to not roll so many dice all the time (even with online tools like FantasyGrounds or Invisible Castle) has made NPC actions much snappier....

[Fallen]

In my earliest forays into GM-ing for a Shadowrun game, I remember thinking something along the lines of:

"Hahaha.  They are so screwed (the players), man this NPC's so going to do this really badass thing coming right up..."

(I should note that, back then, I used to view NPC's as my personal representatives in the gaming world and, as such, I would sometimes root for them -- That was twenty years ago, mind you)

 -- I'd roll the dice and, woah, blink?  No success?  But... "This was supposed to be a really badass scene and the Players Needed To Be Taught Not To Mess With Shadowy Corporation X's Shady Corporate Exec MK-II..."

I guess facing the possibility of things going in a completely different direction just because of a toss of the dice not only gave me a much-needed lesson in humility, but actually had me looking forward to this sort of unexpected turn.

But, yes, as you pointed out, the players' actions offer much more surprise than anything else -- which is why gaming is so much fun!

[revaddict]

Hmm.  I do believe you're on to something with this whole ketchup-flavored dragon kibble Elf and greens t-shirt thing.

This, I simply must incorporate into my game world.

I'll give credit where it's due: the Natural Foods Division of Revaddict-Kirk-Nakano-CanRay (R.K.N.C.) Enterprises will soon market Ketchup-Flavored Dragon Kibble Elf Greens snacks, and produce t-shirts as a form of advertisement.  Their slogan will be obscure: "For lawyers who know the rules... and wanna eat healthy!"  Now with 200% more ketchup flavor!

... which is really just funny dragon-shaped mycoprotein-enriched ketchup-flavored soy crackers.  And, yes, the soy's Elven-grown.  How posh!

If I had a modicum of artistic talent, I'd design a graphic for the shirt.  Maybe CanRay would let ME keep top billing then.  :-)

[Bane]

So.... Only reading the first post for what this is about...

Even though I am a noob GM(an old hand at SR2 though...) I started up a group to play SR2. One guy has only played 2nd ed D&D, three others have never played tabletop before.

The guy who's played D&D before is okay, only bringing things up if I've missed them, or if he's just wondering. (Note, most of them only have a simple grasp of the rules.)

Another guy, sort of a jock that we're friends with but didn't want to play with, since he's kinda dumb... But he's actually really good with this, he's okay.

Another guy who gets things okay.

And the last guy... In almost every game we've played, he argues rules. That's okay for most games. But in tabletop rpgs... The GMs final word is law. Why? Because you sat there for an hour making a character, maybe a backstory. The GM sat there for days coming up with the story you are going on. The GM protects you if they want you to live. They adapt to your random plans they did not account for.

This guy argues rules with real life logic.

Example. Our heavy weapons guy wants to bust down a door our mages weak elemental failed to bust, so he decides to unload his 40 round clip into the door. I try and persuade him that a 7 round burst would be doable without recoil mods and weaken the door. The guy not involved in this area argues that the recoil mods shouldn't be there, because a door is bigger than a person. Yes it is. But you still get mods to hit a Panzer assault tank with the same machine gun.
After some arguing, the heavy weapons guy fired the burst and damaged the door enough to let the elemental take it down.

And this was the same guy I mention in another thread who took a quick sewer poop bath and tried to become invisible to ghouls.

Also... He got attacked, and took a Serious wound. The boss that hurt him got taken out by our friend with the MMG the very next turn. But before the other guy could go, after we had rolled and damage calculated, he remembered a piece of armor he had failed to apply. Which was about five or so minutes after it had happened. Said armor would have allowed him to take no damage. I'm like "Bro... This is going to be over in ten seconds anyway, and this gaming session will be over, and we can go home. Just take the damage." My logic is if you forget to calculate something that could have helped you, that's your bad. But even though he was the only one of us working the next day, he argued it for a decent amount of time. I said drek to that and let him be unscathed.

On the bright side, he no longer wants to play SR.

[Fallen]

This guy argues rules with real life logic.

While I'm all for using real-life logic and applying it to a game, there's always going to be a situation wherein real-life logic becomes incompatible with the published rules or general mindset presented by a gaming system and its setting.  The limits of real-life logic, to me, is that it must be worked into the existing bounds of the body of rules governing a given system's overall game-play.

So yes, maybe something should happen or result in this instead of that in real life, but there's always going to be the necessity to cut through all that and fall back to the rules to see through events, their circumstance and their outcome.  Otherwise, well, every GM out there will eventually have to get a PHD on everything just to make sure he/she can apply the rules as suiting real-world logic.

he remembered a piece of armor he had failed to apply. Which was about five or so minutes after it had happened. Said armor would have allowed him to take no damage. I'm like "Bro... This is going to be over in ten seconds anyway, and this gaming session will be over, and we can go home. Just take the damage.

Either way of dealing with it is fine, I think.  Ideally, things that would slow down play or require something to be retconned should wait to be resolved after the gaming session.  Ideally.  That's not always going to be the case and a GM has to make a judgement call in how he/she chooses to handle the matter.  What's important, and as many people mentioned earlier in this thread, is that there needn't be any sense of "competition" against the GM (nor him/her against the players) and how a situation is resolved.  It's all (ideally) meant to settle a matter expediently and allow all participants to get to the most important part of the session -- having fun! -- without too much in the way of undue delay.

I recommend you take the time to read up one some of the things that were mentioned earlier in this thread: a lot of people contributed excellent ideas and methods to help resolve the kind of situation you brought up.

[CanRay]

This guy argues rules with real life logic.

...

...

...

In a world that has magic and people who hack computer systems with the power of their brains alone?  Logic has left the building long and ever ago.

[Bane]

With him, it seemed not about having fun, but having things his way. I toned down things to make it so they'd get scratched, but NOT DIE. Sorta glad he doesn't want to play anymore.

And I shall read through this thread.


And yes. Applying logic to SR is...... kinda stupid.

Makes me think of a Firefly quote.

(Not quoted exactly) "She's psychic? That sounds a little science fiction."
"You live on a spaceship, dear."

[CanRay]

(Not quoted exactly) "She's psychic? That sounds a little science fiction."
"You live on a spaceship, dear."

"So?"

[BSOD]

And this was the same guy I mention in another thread who took a quick sewer poop bath and tried to become invisible to ghouls.

I was reading through this and thought of something I'd seen used a few times, but hadn't been mentioned in the thread.

The Rule of Cool - When the GM and Players enter an argument over the outcome of an action, ask yourselves, how cool will it make my character.

For example ; The big bad is about to finish of the last member of your team, so in last ditch attempt you aim you auto-cannon at the ceiling and let rip, in an attempt bring a section of down on the opponents head. Now I have no idea  whether physics in general would allow this to happen, or how you would calculate damage if you succeeded. I do know that it would be badass. Therefore should the player sufficiently damage the ceiling, using an arbitrary structure and armour ratings, he will manage to knock the opponent unconscious.
Rolling in faeces is never, have never, and will never be in any way, shape, or form, cool.