Plot device or by the rules

[cyst13]

Hyperman suggested above that players should implicitly trust the GM to roll the correct number of dice each time and never fudge rolls. This sounds ideal to me. Where do I find players like that?

I have to admit that in my own case, I'm more GM than player. When I am a player, I'm always thinking back to my own experience as a GM to all the times that I have faked die rolls and broken rules specifically to get the game to go the way I want it to go. No matter how much players may say they want the GM to play on the up-and-up, they really don't want the entire story to come crashing down because of a freak head-shot or something similar. As GM, I break the rules whenever I feel it suits the best interests of the story. A lot of times I even pretend to make die rolls in order to fool the players into thinking that I'm not just forcing things on them.

Obviously, I don't let them know I am doing this to them. However, when I'm playing a PC, I can't help trying to guess when the GM is doing these same things to me.

Am I completely amoral or is this the way you guys GM as well?

[zornwil]

Hyperman suggested above that players should implicitly trust the GM to roll the correct number of dice each time and never fudge rolls. This sounds ideal to me. Where do I find players like that?

I have to admit that in my own case, I'm more GM than player. When I am a player, I'm always thinking back to my own experience as a GM to all the times that I have faked die rolls and broken rules specifically to get the game to go the way I want it to go. No matter how much players may say they want the GM to play on the up-and-up, they really don't want the entire story to come crashing down because of a freak head-shot or something similar. As GM, I break the rules whenever I feel it suits the best interests of the story. A lot of times I even pretend to make die rolls in order to fool the players into thinking that I'm not just forcing things on them.

Obviously, I don't let them know I am doing this to them. However, when I'm playing a PC, I can't help trying to guess when the GM is doing these same things to me.

Am I completely amoral or is this the way you guys GM as well?

Not at all to gloat or anything, but we've never had a problem with people mistrusting dice rolls of the GM. Of course I believe everyone (or almost, I'm not sure about one guy) in our group has GMd, so that might be well to your point, I'm not sure.

[Dust Raven]

Hyperman suggested above that players should implicitly trust the GM to roll the correct number of dice each time and never fudge rolls. This sounds ideal to me. Where do I find players like that?

[snip]

I'm fortunate to have a group of players who, if not trust me, accept the fact that I am GM and the dice are not. With that in mind, I keep a watch on events and simply ommit a die roll when I feel failure would be bad for the overall story. This includes players as well. If I think something if obvious, or someone really needs to notice something, I'll just roll dice behind my screen to determine who sees it first. If the city will blow up if the bomb isn't disarmed and I (or the players, it's their game too) feel that blowing up the city is "bad" for the campaign I'll make the player's Demolitions roll for him (noting the results and promptly ignoring them) and tell him the timer's still counting down... pause... then say it suddenly stops at 00:01. There's no point if killing everybody just because of one die roll unless the players wanted new character's anyway.

[Magmarock]

Heh. I wish my players trusted me that much. Actually, I don't really have too many problems with my players, other than the occasional push for munchkinism. Then I have to slap 'em around like orphaned smurfs and they eventually come to their senses.

But really, when I used to roll my dice in front of them, the game turned more into a them vs. me situation. I really dislike the game when it comes to that. So I always try to roll behind a screen. I very rarely have to fudge my dice rolls, but the attitude of my players are a marked improvement when I use a screen.


Mags

[TheEmerged]

RE: Trusting the GM not to fudge rolls. A wise man once told me that people always expect out of others what they would do if they could get away with it.

The flip side of that of course is that there *ARE* whackjob GM's out there...

[Metaphysician]

Okay, so def 25, Body 25, Damage Red. 50% can't survive a nuke.

That means said nuke has to do 125 Body or more.

IOW, you just blew up the moon, if thats where the battle is taking place.

[ghost-angel]

Okay, so def 25, Body 25, Damage Red. 50% can't survive a nuke.

That means said nuke has to do 125 Body or more.

IOW, you just blew up the moon, if thats where the battle is taking place.

Well, a nuke does multiple damaging affects.

Air Blast, this is the shockwave force of the blast and does the most physical damage by simple physica of pressure - a 25Megaton blast does 20psi within 6.5 miles, it only takes a 5psi blast to knock over a standard wood house.
Direct Radiation, this does pure radiation damage. Gamma rays.
Thermal Radiation, this is fire and heat. five miles or closer to a small 1 Megaton explosion causes third degree burns on exposed skin.

Then there's the Fallout, which is more radiation.

Between the combination of all those effects most livings things are toast, they state a 25Mton blast has 100% kill ratio within 6.5 miles. 50% initial kill ratio in the next 10.7 miles (post-fallout death climbs to near 100% in this area due to radiation poisoning and other fallout effects).

So, yes - a superhero has a chance of surviving a 25Mton nuke assuming he's not in the ground-zero ring. Inside that ring the combination of everything has a really good chance of killing him, especially since in Game Terms I'd consider all effects of a Nuclear Blast to be a Multipower Attack.

If you've got 25 Body, 25rPD, 25rED, 50%+ Damage Red to rED and rPD and Life Support: High Radiation Environment. I still wouldn't stat out a nuke, I'd probably let that guy live. but he'd be hurting a bit.

[Magmarock]

RE: Trusting the GM not to fudge rolls. A wise man once told me that people always expect out of others what they would do if they could get away with it.

The flip side of that of course is that there *ARE* whackjob GM's out there...

I'd like to think that if my players considered me a whackjob, then they wouldn't ask me to run the game. Or they'd at least protest a little when I offer...

Mags

[zornwil]

RE: Trusting the GM not to fudge rolls. A wise man once told me that people always expect out of others what they would do if they could get away with it.

The flip side of that of course is that there *ARE* whackjob GM's out there...

Don't I know it. The first Champions GM I had was one, amazing I got into the game despite that - tells you how good the game is!

WIthout going through all the details, he was the type of GM who: 1) couldn't stand to "lose"; and 2) had no idea how to move people through a plot except in a single straight line, no deviations allowed - and ANY deviation brought on weird deux ex machina stuff. One time (not HERO but AD&D) we wanted to go outside of a building or inside a building or whatever, and suddenly all these werewolves appeared, just to hered us in the singular direction the GM needed. Just so we'd go in the correct direction. You had to be there to see how transparent it was, it doesn't come across in this post, I'm sure.

[Foxx!]

I'm behind Zornwill and Dust Raven. I use Mechanics only when I need them.

Cheers