|
You can have players roll with it or not. IMO the fun of Paranoia is: As a GM, watching the players squirm. Laughing at their shenanigans. As the player, getting out of impossible Catch-22s. Screwing over the other players when it would be funny. Just mindlessly blasting each other or constantly screwing over the other players is dull. Players should work together until it would be funnier not to.
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
I dunno, there's a restaurant that I go to and one of the servers has one of the most shrill, obnoxious voices I've ever heard. She's actually a really nice person and a great server. Having said that, playing an RPG with her would be maddening. THAT VOICE. Edit: Based on what was said below, however, this is clearly not the same situation. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jun 21, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
If everyone in that story is less than 15 it's understandable. I didn't say "desirable". I didn't say "acceptable".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2012 00:10
|
|
|
LordZoric posted:What a waste. Never play with this person again. And I'm really sorry you had to put up with that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:Do some people just not understand how fun works or something? No, some people really don't. Also you know a lot of people have legitimate psychological issues that are manifesting in-game.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
Arx Monolith posted:I've always heard arguments against it, but I see no problem casting Create Water (2 gallons) into somebody's lungs, mouth, or generally inside a living thing. "Magic is a tool," says a guy who then describes a Not-Tool.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Arx Monolith posted:How is magic not a tool? That's the argument in whole heap o' fiction where people fear magic. Good wizard posits that magic is a tool and can be used for either good or evil. That's like saying a hammer isn't a tool. It's a hammer. You may only hammer with it. Are you for real?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:funny enough the particular DM tends to play murderhobo character like having 10k gold but trying to pick pocket some stranger for his meager wallet. Then forgetting what city he is wanted for murder in and complains that "his character would know" when he doesnt do a disguise check before entering back into said city. Your DM is a turd who can't stop playing out vicarious power fantasies, up to and including dominating your characters.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Highlights, yes. Mostly comparing and contrasting how you did things then vs how you would do them now. That would be interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:But, he does a charade of looking at the book and pretending like he located it in the book. You need to privately confront him about this and tell him he's about to lose another player with his bullshit. Unless, of course, you're going to continue eating his garbage. Edit: I skimmed your post history in this thread because I remembered you telling a story about your grappler being too good (because of DM houserules). You're going to quit this campaign anyway, why not leave now? This guy is loving awful. He's a railroading house-ruling idiot and I gotta say your best move is just to walk away and spare yourself the frustration. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:The rogue failed multiple perception checks from the necromancer doing the whole pickpocketing schtick back. That whole thing with the rogue is lame as poo poo, IMO. It's partly the fault of Pathfinder for having dumb poo poo like Geas in the system in the first place, it's partly the fault of designing a situation so that the rogue, a master of skullduggery and sleight-of-hand, gets clowned on his home turf by a loving NECROMANCER of all people. Oh you rolled bad 3 times in a row, now you're the DM's plaything. Not my kind of deal but if your player is enjoying it more power to him or her, I guess. I certainly wouldn't.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Now that is some prime murderhoboing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Hard Rock Cafe It's themed like an asteroid mining facility
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
hitting on a 20 in blackjack: oh, be one! That's not a casino name I just wanted to post a stupid pun
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
Mr.Misfit posted:Now at this point I have to explain the following: As you might have figured out already, the giant painting is a trap. Some worthless trinkets of personal value are hidden behind the portrait which EVIL MAGE had setup for specifically the purpose of getting stupid people to trigger the trap, which will send out a lightning bolt directly into the idiot triggering it. Now the players had already encountered and thrashed the place and figured, it was a trap and left it alone. However, seeing as Mr.T was greedy and believed he had the right to get everything he wanted (he would often complain again and again until he got something ingame) and wanted to be clever. Now, being clever has often times killed someone as you are never as clever as you believe yourself to be.The trap triggers as soon as the portrait is moved and will focus on the closest living target. Your player is almost certainly part of the problem but this is a garbage attitude for a GM to have and it's part of why your game fell apart. When you decide to "teach a player a lesson" in-game it usually blows up in your face. A trap that goes off if you touch "X" is always stupid, btw.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:It's like when you find a chest in a room by itself surrounded by bones and dissolved clothing. Everybody laughs and says, "haha, that's a mimic". Then six combats later the rogue sneaks back in by himself thinking, "but what if it isnt?!" No, actually. This is really stupid and don't do this. You've created an interesting little tableau for the players and then said "don't interact with it". Bad GMing. There's a tiny band of time where players "deserve" to get hit by stupid "touch X and die" traps. When they are starting out, they don't deserve it because they don't know any better. Then, there's a tiny band of time where they would probably leave it alone. Then, they become seasoned vets and say "oh it's probably a double-bluff, I bet that's not a mimic at all!" and arrange to tickle the chest with a feather while using mage hand or throwing darts at it from across the room or whatever. Punishing players for being curious about the world they've built is actually something that a garbage GM does. Don't use "ding! you die!" traps. Hope this helps.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
J Miracle posted:Attempts to talk about this have gone nowhere. The wood elf and dwarf cleric say they are "just playing their characters." In fact the wood elf guy got pissy and said "my character is a STREET URCHIN if she wasn't cautious she was DEAD!" I don't know about you but when I think about Oliver Twist, Aladdin, Selena Kyle, etc I definitely think "super cautious and risk averse." So I'm at a bit of a loss. They aren't playing their characters. They are playing their preconceptions. As you pointed out there plenty of street urchins that play fast and loose. There are a lot of traditional crime figures that came from poverty and rose up through the ranks and became big-time flashy guys. You might point out that she used to be a street urchin, but she is not anymore and remaining constantly on-edge after you've escaped the situation in question is a classic marker for PTSD. Regarding the other character, it's entirely possible to be a dwarf guy whose clan has died and adopt a devil-may-care, fatalistic attitude while you seek revenge. If you've ever seen Lethal Weapon the character of Martin Riggs is a 100% badass who suffered a huge tragedy and his response is to basically be irreverent suicidal maniac. Martin Riggs never made a Perception check in his life. But anyway the real problem is that these players are running perfectly legitimate characters that happen to be clashing with the style and tone of the campaign, and I'm sorry to say it's 4 vs 2 so they are in the wrong. So you should try to talk to them, find a nice way to point out that their characters and playstyle don't fit (in the same way that showing up to a friendly flag football game with an NFL "win at all costs" mentality would be completely inappropriate) and ask them to either get with the program or gtfo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Here's another older post of mine I dug up about this, you can add "preventing interesting things from happening in the narrative despite the objections of the group" to the list.Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The problem is that most players are bad actors (not in the legal sense, but in the professional "acting" sense) and have no idea how to play drama or desires. They say "my character doesn't like Person X, so I won't do what Person X tells me/deal with Person X in any way" but of course that's not how anyone works in real life. In real life there are long term consequences, there are social relationships that need to be considered, etc. etc. etc. All of us have people in our lives that we don't like and want nothing to do with but still have to subsume this desire and deal with them on a frequent basis. This sort of push-pull of desires is very rarely modeled in table-top "role-playing", player characters are generally simplistic cartoons with 1 - 2 desires that override everything (usually based on the player's own frustrations, which is why teenage boys are more likely to play characters who try to sleep with everything) and that they pursue with a sort of psychotic dedication and stubbornness that borders on parody. In fact there's an entire RPG dedicated to overcoming this problem called Hillfolk where players are actually rewarded for caving in to others or compromising their desires. You want to have fun narrative shennanigans. They want to play your typical poo poo D&D garbage. There are 4 of you and 2 of them. They need to get with the program.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Yeah, I should point out something else: I can totally see a taciturn dour dwarf as the anchor to all this magical goofiness, but the problem is that he is quite literally killing the opportunities for jokes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
It's funny because just recently I was talking to a grognard friend of mine who complained that one of the players at a recent 2e game had random-rolled a 4 Intelligence and used it as an excuse to be a huge disruptive dick and got the party in a lot of trouble by basically antagonizing powerful people and they spent most of their session dealing with the fallout, which pissed everyone off. I told him that as a DM I would have ruled that before the words came out of his mouth he would vanish from existence like Marty was doing in Back to the Future because he was clearly too stupid to make it to adulthood. My take is that the group needs to gel on expectations for tone and premise of the campaign. Are we doing a dungeon crawl or feudal politics? That sort of thing. If the player just has a premise mismatch with the character and the campaign they should change it. I actually had one of my long-running players do this to himself in my Feng Shui game because he knew that was my stance. He just couldn't justify the character's desires with the campaign's direction so rather than throw a huge hissy fit or be disruptive he rolled up a new guy no problem and said he might bring the other guy back when it gelled more with what he wanted (and I promised to try to move things in that direction after the current arc was resolved). Another thing you can do as GM is remind the player that somebody who behaves like they do would never have made the life decisions to get into their current professions/situation in the first place. A guy who murders fleeing dudes does not become a priest in a good guy church. That sort of attitude speaks to an entire mindset that leads to you being the bad guy inquisitor that the good guys take down halfway through the campaign (in fact that player pretty much sounds like your boilerplate sympathetic bad guy - his clan was murdered and now he's snapped and gone over to the dark side) A guy who jumps at shadows and OCD checks every square for traps doesn't go adventuring in the first place. etc. etc. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:DOUBLE EDIT: If they're smart enough to finally go "hey we need to go after Crime Boss and clear our names before the rest of the heroes throw us in jail," make sure Crime Boss gets a chance to say something along the lines of "honestly, I'm surprised it took you this long, I thought you would have figured it out ages ago. Well, I guess even idiots can get superpowers. But smart people can buy them." And then he activates his Crime Mecha or whatever. FYI I would mark out so incredibly hard if my GM did this
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
If you haven't played it, the Spider-Man game for the PS4 starts with him putting away the Kingpin and the Kingpin telling Spidey that he would 100% regret putting Kingpin away because he was the organizing force that kept all the other criminal factions in line and kept them from openly feuding and hurting innocent people. Turns out he was like 80% right!
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
Bieeanshee posted:I think the DM sussed out that he was reading from a copy of the adventure too, but that's so generic a dick move that it could have been anyone else. I thought about making a one-shot game where one of the players was a sort of "Dr Manhattan" character who had read the adventure, but only every other sentence was visible. So they would be suitably vague about what could happen.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Sorry, just caught up with the previous page and the idea that a player would send me a "shut up and do it my way" letter from their other DM who I don't even know has me sitting here in total befuddlement. I thought i had seen it all but clearly not.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 01:44
|
|