Seeking a little gming advice

[Katherine]

I’m hoping to get some advice from the more experienced Champions GMs on the board. I’m hopefully starting a new Champions campaign for my gaming group. They are old friends and fans of the Aberrant setting. Most of them don’t actively read many comics, and the ones that do favor things like Stormwatch, The Authority and Supreme Power. We’ve all played “supers†games before but I’d argue we’ve never really played “Superheroes†before. Usually our games are fairly dark and gritty. I was hoping to go for something a bit more different this time out and get a more comic book feel for things.

 

The player characters are starting 350 point characters. I’m aiming for some world hopping and saving but still some human level drama for role playing purposes. They’ll be stopping street crime as well as occasionally stopping a menace to the world. I’m not using the official Champions Universe but a homebrew so the villains will be scaled to the PCs. They’ll effectively be the only superheroes in the world and as such will be quite important.

 

The characters I have are as follows:

 

Ebon Avenger: A cyborg fighting machine, basically a Midnighter clone.

Amazon: Chemically enhanced secret agent now acting as a “Superhero†for the US government

G.R.U.N.T: (Ground Unit Network Terminator): Robotic soldier gone permanently AWOL from its creator once it developed sentience.

Thrasher: Martial Artist/Acrobatic that rides an anti grav “Surfboard†he acquired from a crashed alien space ship.

Bushido: A Japanese Samurai wanna be with an unbreakable Daisho forged alien metal (Same race as that created Thrasher’s board)

Deus, the Ultimate Man: Genetically engineering “Ubermenschâ€. Supposedly perfect, lots of hyper attribute based abilities.

 

All good characters IMO and good backgrounds, but they seem a little, I don’t know perhaps not suited for what I was hoping to run. For one thing, none of them have CAK. My questions are:

 

Should I ask them to remake their characters to make them a little more Four Color or do these seem like they’ll work?

Should I require a Code against Killing of some sort? I’m a bit worried they’ll balk at that being fans of the bloodier stuff.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: Seeking a little gaming advice

 

350 is a good level to start......

 

These people have gamed with you for a good lenght of time...good

 

They have played Super RPG...good

 

If they want to kill .......make the enemies...cyborgs, androids, abberants, demons, undead, monsters, etc...

 

Your biggest problem is creating adversaries in power, numbers, and difficult locations to challenge them.

[Hawksmoor]

Re: Seeking a little gaming advice

 

The first thing I would do would be to ask the Players to watch a little Cartoon Network. Justice League is Action Genre/Four Color. That way they can see four color and also see that stuff still blows up good, it is just that Heroes do not kill. In fact when I run heroes that is my commandment to the players: If you play in my game you know that Heroes do not kill, ever.

 

That said only one person on your list has an explicit problem with that edict: Bushido. Not that a sword weilder (or any other Weaponmaster) cannot be used in a 4C setting just that the player must grasp his place in that world. Accordingly the sword should either be built as a MP with various other sword tricks so that he is less lethal or some other similar construct.

 

Finally, it is your game. GMs have so much baggage to deal with that while I am a big, big proponent of cooperative gaming in the end it is the players that must come up with characters that not only work together but work with the setting (including theme and tone) the GM creates for them to play in.

 

Good Luck

 

Hawksmoor

[OddHat]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

The players and the GM have to be in accord about this. In your situation, I've been very direct, and it has worked. Tell your players that this is not an Authority style game, that killing is going to have very serious consequences, and that it could derail the campaign. Then, ask them not to kill, and ask them if they want to take codes versus killing.

 

You do have three characters who might realistically claim to have been trained to kill in battle if they had to (Ebon Avenger, Amazon, Grunt). The others might claim to be sociopaths. I would stress that leaving a trail of bodies will turn this into a Supervillains campaign, and that this is not the kind of game you want to run. If they're good players, and if you avoid putting them in situations where they're fighting human foes who can only be stopped by death, it should work out.

[Mantis]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

I think you're quite entitled to "enforce the genre" and ask your players to take a CVK. Even if they can convince you that their character has a good reason not to from their origin, remind them they still have the 0-pt LIM, "Reluctance to Kill", which is an inherent part of the Everyman package in the Superhero world .

 

Not that a sword weilder (or any other Weaponmaster) cannot be used in a 4C setting just that the player must grasp his place in that world.

 

I always think of Wolverine as an example of such a character, if that helps give him a context.

 

The suggestion of using opponent types (i.e. automatons) where CVK doesn't matter is a good one, too, but don't overdo it, or the points from the CVK LIM mean nothing!

[caris]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

I'm going to go a little against the trend and recommend that you do not use a lot of robots, demons, etc. It really just wouldn't deal with the problem and not make the players any less likely to kill humans when you finally do introduce them as antagonists.

 

I would suggest that you start by talking to your players. I would point out to them that to provide them with opponents that they can kill you are going to have to craft stories where their opponents are the kind of people that deserve the death penalty, and that you want to be able to do some stories that are a little liter than murder, rape, and torture.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

This is a problem as old as the hills. GMs run the games they'd like to play in and often don't consult the players what they want to play in.

 

I'm not saying that's your problem. Indeed given the background I'm sure you have discussed it but I'm not sure they understood what you actually want.

 

I wanted a fairly four colour game and while two players attacked it in a four colour way two others did not see the 'fun' in doing that and ended up killing several villains.

 

I ditched that campaign and ran a fantasy one instead where I didn't have the same problem with wholesale slaughter I plan to come back to four colour supers but only when I'm sure the players are all on board.

 

In all roleplay games the first maxim has to be Maximum Game Fun for everyone. If the players don't like the game you want to run then you wont enjoy it either.

 

My opinion would be to go through the characters and see if you can make them more four colour. Soften some of the hard Iron Age edges into something a bit more retro - that could be a fun session in and of itself...

 

 

Doc

[Lord Beavis]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

The constant war between players and the GM. Know it too well.

 

On a different thread, I suggested eliminating the OIF limitation for Powered Armor. You'd think I suggested eliminating attack powers or voting for John Kerry (kidding!!).

 

Having a good gaming group where players work with the GM and vice versa is a rare and wonderful thing.

 

Treasure the good times!!! They don't last.

[Katherine]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

At the risk of derailing my own thread. Why, pray tell, would you eliminate OIF for certain types of Powered Armor? It represents them fairly well. Can be damaged, taken away, etc ususally out of combat. If you don't want those Limitations, don't get OIF, get OIHID or nothing at all. I'm a newbie and I realize that.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

I’m hoping to get some advice from the more experienced Champions GMs on the board. I’m hopefully starting a new Champions campaign for my gaming group. They are old friends and fans of the Aberrant setting. Most of them don’t actively read many comics, and the ones that do favor things like Stormwatch, The Authority and Supreme Power. We’ve all played “supers†games before but I’d argue we’ve never really played “Superheroes†before. Usually our games are fairly dark and gritty. I was hoping to go for something a bit more different this time out and get a more comic book feel for things.

 

The player characters are starting 350 point characters. I’m aiming for some world hopping and saving but still some human level drama for role playing purposes. They’ll be stopping street crime as well as occasionally stopping a menace to the world. I’m not using the official Champions Universe but a homebrew so the villains will be scaled to the PCs. They’ll effectively be the only superheroes in the world and as such will be quite important.

 

The characters I have are as follows:

 

Ebon Avenger: A cyborg fighting machine, basically a Midnighter clone.

Amazon: Chemically enhanced secret agent now acting as a “Superhero†for the US government

G.R.U.N.T: (Ground Unit Network Terminator): Robotic soldier gone permanently AWOL from its creator once it developed sentience.

Thrasher: Martial Artist/Acrobatic that rides an anti grav “Surfboard†he acquired from a crashed alien space ship.

Bushido: A Japanese Samurai wanna be with an unbreakable Daisho forged alien metal (Same race as that created Thrasher’s board)

Deus, the Ultimate Man: Genetically engineering “Ubermenschâ€. Supposedly perfect, lots of hyper attribute based abilities.

 

All good characters IMO and good backgrounds, but they seem a little, I don’t know perhaps not suited for what I was hoping to run. For one thing, none of them have CAK. My questions are:

 

Should I ask them to remake their characters to make them a little more Four Color or do these seem like they’ll work?

Should I require a Code against Killing of some sort? I’m a bit worried they’ll balk at that being fans of the bloodier stuff.

 

While these characters don't initially lend themselves to a four-color feel, if they come with a "want to be redeemed... sick of killing... want to do good" kind of attitude the could work.

 

I'm really not one to give too much advice, as what you describe as your initial campaigns is much more up my alley... but at the same time... as gritty as my games COULD be... they usually aren't that bad for a few reasons.

 

If the heroes defeat a villain who is sent to prison... THEY FRICKIN' STAY IN PRISON. Thus you prove that non-lethal means work.

 

If heroes go out of their way to prevent property damage/save people... despite how human psychology normally plays out in these situations... I will make sure they get good press, happy citizens, good will from cops, etc. Reward the heroic behavior.

 

If you want the heroes to be Silver Age... make the villains Silver Age. I've stated this before, but my quote is "This means Joker ties Gordon to a giant penny... not Joker slaughters a bus full of cub scouts." If nothing else, keep the villains away from the overt maniacal killer/terrorist/type.

 

Finally... let the characters build. If they see something like "villain is bad because he's desperate to steal high tech stuff to save his dying child" then ALLOW the heroes, if they find this out, to help the villain in some way. Don't force them to fight a villain if they have genuine offers of help. If the whole fight comes down to GRUNT saying, "Hey... wait a sec. We can help you. I know a top notch neurologist who has mapped more of the brain than anyone, and he owes me a favor!" Don't have the villain go "I don't trust you! BLAM BLAM BLAM!!!" just because it wasn't how you wanted your "plot" to end up.

Let the character build a relationship with the villain, where he becomes a trusted NPC after his child is saved, or whatever. This building helps players feel they can change the world without killing someone.

 

In the end, the biggest thing you can do is talk to the players ahead of time, and tell them what you want. The issue is, they may not care or want the same thing. It takes some maturity in players (in my experience) to get past the point of believing that their character is super only if they kick everyone's ass. Or... some of us just aren't interested in a game where violence is "clean." In my games, there are plenty of times when positive, constructive, non-violent options are taken... not because it is "four color" but because the violent alternative is so potentially grim that they don't want to risk it. What I hate about four color is the odd "protect the status quo through violence... but that violence really has no consequences and is cartoony" mentality.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

At the risk of derailing my own thread. Why' date=' pray tell, would you eliminate OIF for certain types of Powered Armor? It represents them fairly well. Can be damaged, taken away, etc ususally out of combat. If you don't want those Limitations, don't get OIF, get OIHID or nothing at all. I'm a newbie and I realize that.[/quote']

 

Please don't cross-pollinate that thread here - it's still going on. You're welcome to join the rest of the crowd disagreeing with the concept in that thread.

 

As for the topic of this thread, I'm on the "talk to the players" side here. Are they looking for a more lethal/not four colour campaign? Are you willing to run a more lethal/less four colour campaign? If so, change the preconceptions of the game.

 

If not, change the characters. "Guys, the bottom line is that, in this campaign, killing your enemies will mean you become the villains. That means you will likely end up in prison. This isn't a setting where lethal force is accepted by the populace and ignored by the authorities, or one where the characters can ignore the populace and hide from the authorities. Your characters need a different approach."

 

Let us know how it works out.

[Lord Beavis]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Please don't cross-pollinate that thread here - it's still going on. You're welcome to join the rest of the crowd disagreeing with the concept in that thread.

 

I agree, that is a discussion for a different thread. The specific is not important, the point is there will be disagreement in the game between the players and GM. Most people will like to agree and work together, some will not.

 

The trick for both players and GM is to be able to compromise. Compromise is the key, in games, marriage, politics, work, and in life.

[AlHazred]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Compromise is fine in some facets of the game, but not all. It seems to me that you have definite deliberate moral conflicts designed into your game. Don't compromise on those. It seems to me that you're setting out to contrast with the Authority/Aberrant style of play. That's your prerogative as GM.

 

I predict you're going to have problems with some of your players. Some of the character concepts do not seem to have been constructed with your campaign precepts in mind. I'd talk to the players again and emphasize what kind of superheroic genre you're running.

 

Then, when you run your game, enforce consequences, both positive and negative. You may have to use "dramatic editing" to adjudicate some player actions; keep in mind that the campaign is a comic book and don't try to stay purely "realistic."

 

Good luck. I've had that problem before, and it meant the death of the campaign, which was fine as it was obviously not what a few of the players wanted. Just make sure that the few do not derail the fun of the many.

[incrdbil]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

It may be best to have a group meeting, a sit down, and do a little 'campaign ebvisioning'--perhaps describe a typical scenario, ask the players their likely character reactions/tactics--then explain the probable results in the campaign world as you have it in your mind right now. It might suprise the players--their reactions might suprise you. From that point, you can open up a discussion and move in whatever direction seems best to where you are all on the same sheet of music.

 

You can set the scale of a campaign where killing isn't going to immediately have them hunted down, but it better be justified--killing an agent when its been shown time and again they cant hurt you wont fly, unless he is about to severely injure/kill someone else and you have no other non-lethal alternative. Let them know with good examples when the gloves can come off, and when they have to act like heroes. But maybe the players are wanting to play a vigilante camaign where the bodycount rivals action films consider revising the campaign, maybe even grabbing Dark Champions. If the players really want 'Punisher' style games, you'll just have problems trying to force Justice League on them without some serious discussion.

[farik]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Add another voice to the

 

"tell the players what type of game you want to GM" camp.

 

Now to make your desire abundantly clear try a simple edict like

 

"If you intentionally kill someone you will need to make a new character"

 

If they think that's unfair then you need to accept the fact that this group won't be willing to play the type of game you want to run. What you do after that will depend on how badly you want to run 4 color supers. If you really want to play your 4 color game then you might have to decline GMing for the group for awhile and possibly even seek a second (or new) group to play 4 color with.

 

I had to do this with 2 player. 1 has come back and agreed to try 4 color he's struggling but at least he's trying.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Before I start I’d like to know the level of offensive and defensive power you’re allowing. If I started a 350-point game with my experienced players I’d be in for a REAL tough time. With that many points and their creativity I’d always be fighting an uphill battle… Is your max attack around12d6, maybe defenses leveling out around 20pd/20ed? Just curious.

 

Now, as for dealing with the dark nature of your players… Personally, if they’ve already spent a great deal of time going through the process of point allocation and character background I wouldn't enforce a change. First I’d ask them if these are characters that they’d LOVE to play… long term. If not, start over. But if the consensus is that they all love their creations and are looking forward to playing them, let them stand. The best games come from players who adore their characters. Though its important for the GM to enjoy himself/herself you must remember that you’re only one of 7. The groups overall happiness is paramount.

 

Now, assuming that you’re stuck with the gritty heroes… don’t fret. There are several ways to get around this; you’ll just have to be clever. Several good ideas are listed above… But what about this:

 

You be the good guys.

 

I think you might have a great opportunity to have a load of fun and perhaps teach your players the virtues of Truth and Justice…

 

First, set up the game as if your players will be the primary heroes. Get them primed to fight the bad guys? Pump them up with bold threats from your villains even before they begin the game… Then hunker down and get ready to rock their world…

 

With all the chips in your hand you can prepare for their failure as heroes. Make sure you have a good grasp of the legal system in your world. Be certain to come up with some great personalities for the District Attorney, a few cops, the Mayor, maybe a special crime-fighting organization like SHIELD (and more).

 

Next make some fun villains. These guys should be tough and gruesome. Match the bloodlust of your heroes 1000 fold with bald-faced villainy. Call them by names like Gorecrow, Bludletter, Deathknell, Skinstripper, Bush, and any other nasty name you can think of. Back up those names with personalities that would make Jeffrey Dohmer cringe. The good guys will have NO problem offing these societal cancers. GREAT! Let ‘em at them!!! They'll love you for it!

 

Then, as the heroes slowly dig their own grave, after Law officials and perhaps a few superheroes have warned them… It’s time for you to spring your trap.

 

BOOM, the good guys attack. Perhaps the first wave is a 2nd rate team looking to make good on tackling this group of vigilantes. The come in after a warrant has been issued for one of the characters… he’s a murderer, regardless of how bad the creep he killed was. He must be brought in.

 

Will they kill fellow heroes to escape? If so the game is ON!!!! Now YOUR heroes come after them wave after wave. Now it is THEY who are the villains. Got Psych Disads… I bet you do. USE THEM, mess with their minds.

 

What if they turn themselves in? Be ready for this contingency as well. Maybe they’ll be hit by a wave of regret. So take them through the Legal process. Regardless of what some people might say such a string of adventures can be quite exciting if the GM is clever and well prepared. They will obviously go to ail… SUPERJAIL! Where they may meet other villains.

 

Perhaps they’re busted out by a villain coalition (Viper?) and given an offer they can’t refuse (money, blackmail, threatened loved ones, etc) They’ll HAVE to accept. Then, as above… THE GAME IS ON!!!

 

Okay, thanks for sticking with me this long. Here’s the big payoff: As hunted villains they’ll have to continuously fight to prove their innocence and heroic intent. As a GM you can weave a tapestry of lessons and interactions that TEACH them the values of heroism and self-sacrifice.

 

If by the end of this they still want to play bad guys… so be it… THE GAME IS ON!!!!!

 

But always remember… We play for the fun of it. Don’t make the game something they dislike.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Golden Age wrote:

The best games come from players who adore their characters.

 

WOW do I disagree with this statement.

 

The last thing I want is a player so in love with their character that they don't take risks, they don't allow the character to grow and change... they aren't interested in interacting with the other players, just living out the "adorable" life of their fantasy character.

 

Do you want to play this character long term?

 

Do you want to play this character as part of a team long term?

 

Those are good questions... but the adore part scares me. A player should have questions about their character... some open ended, not quite finished aspects... all of which are developed IN GAME... not before hand in a 746 page background history.

 

Players (GM included) should adore the GAME... adore the STORY being told. That is critical... their characters are just one part of the story. The story is bigger than any one player, or the GM, or any one character.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Players I know that adore their characters put everything they have into playing them. They show extra effort in combat, go above and beyond as role-players and spend off time creating stories and art. Such devotion elevates my story as it promotes a quid-pro-quo approach to story-telling and campaign creation.

 

I've never seen a player who didn't really like his/her character put forth that much effort. It's the adoration of a character that allows him to remain in the game, constantly evolving and mutating as the story morphs and twists.

 

I find that players lacking a real affection for their characters drop them too easily. Perhaps I cut off a character's arm, or change someone's gender... What then? Well, the right-minded player will take that adversity in stride, rise up to the challenge and work WITH the GM to create the very best game. For example: a character starts out an energy projector but is forced to become an armored hero or irradiate the entire city... No problem, the CHARACTER still remains, his memory and life experiences intact. On the other-hand, if the game gets tough for a player who only harbors moderate feelings for his character, its usually a good enough reason to scrap them in order to try something new. That's lost potential. (Not to mention that it's quite hard to get a satisfying reaction out of a lackluster player by murdering his character – I need some fun too, ya know)

 

Playing for the story is great... But it's the characters that give it a vibrant life. No story is above the characters. The story is the cradle in which the characters languish. A bad story is uncomfortable, a good one awesome. No matter how fantastic the story is; the true stars are the characters.

 

* Perhaps I should have used the word commitment instead of adoration. The intent was the same. I love players who are commited to their characters. That way I can be equally committed to them as well and my story can be created with them in mind.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Players I know that adore their characters put everything they have into playing them. They show extra effort in combat, go above and beyond as role-players and spend off time creating stories and art. Such devotion elevates my story as it promotes a quid-pro-quo approach to story-telling and campaign creation.

 

I've never seen a player who didn't really like his/her character put forth that much effort. It's the adoration of a character that allows him to remain in the game, constantly evolving and mutating as the story morphs and twists.

 

I find that players lacking a real affection for their characters drop them too easily. Perhaps I cut off a character's arm, or change someone's gender... What then? Well, the right-minded player will take that adversity in stride, rise up to the challenge and work WITH the GM to create the very best game. For example: a character starts out an energy projector but is forced to become an armored hero or irradiate the entire city... No problem, the CHARACTER still remains, his memory and life experiences intact. On the other-hand, if the game gets tough for a player who only harbors moderate feelings for his character, its usually a good enough reason to scrap them in order to try something new. That's lost potential. (Not to mention that it's quite hard to get a satisfying reaction out of a lackluster player by murdering his character – I need some fun too, ya know)

 

Playing for the story is great... But it's the characters that give it a vibrant life. No story is above the characters. The story is the cradle in which the characters languish. A bad story is uncomfortable, a good one awesome. No matter how fantastic the story is; the true stars are the characters.

 

* Perhaps I should have used the word commitment instead of adoration. The intent was the same. I love players who are commited to their characters. That way I can be equally committed to them as well and my story can be created with them in mind.

 

Commitment works better... but I still say a character without a story is pointless. (Or in Hero... is just a pile of points.) The players I know who obsessed about their characters would never allow me to do anything to threaten them or change them. They had created a perfect model of their character in their mind, and anything that deviated from this ideal they hated. They didn't cooperate with others, nor were they open to anything that challenged their preconceptions.

 

Someone who is committed to their character by your description is committed to the STORY of their character. Where their character is going, what they will do... what they will become... how they will change the world and be changed BY the world.

 

THAT... I'm all for... but for me this comes as players become comitted to their character's over time... as they are played and grow and change... not and obsessive, out of the box "ideal" concept that resists interaction and change.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Commitment works better... but I still say a character without a story is pointless. (Or in Hero... is just a pile of points.) The players I know who obsessed about their characters would never allow me to do anything to threaten them or change them. They had created a perfect model of their character in their mind, and anything that deviated from this ideal they hated. They didn't cooperate with others, nor were they open to anything that challenged their preconceptions.

 

Someone who is committed to their character by your description is committed to the STORY of their character. Where their character is going, what they will do... what they will become... how they will change the world and be changed BY the world.

 

THAT... I'm all for... but for me this comes as players become comitted to their character's over time... as they are played and grow and change... not and obsessive, out of the box "ideal" concept that resists interaction and change.

 

Ah, now I see where our perspectives diverge. You've confused my definition of "Character" with your own.

 

To my players and me the character is created well before a player invests time on the trappings of power. It requires thought and planning, yes, including a history (usually less than 700 pages though). Anyone can make a champions character based on points and powers. I'm fortunate enough to play with people who build characters from the inside out.

 

Sure, many times one of my players will be intrigued by a certain power set or something other than a personality. But usually that's just the beginning. From there a great deal of thought is put into why that person has those powers, how the power has influenced his life and the lives of others and how he's hoping to utilize his abilities in the future. Suddenly, the power (or skill or talent) once again becomes secondary to the character. It's the only sophisticated way to make a superhero. That way diversity enhances rather than detracts from the player’s enjoyment. No matter what I do to the physical shell the character remains and thus so does campaign continuity... And with campaign continuity established and maintained my story is allowed to blossom, becoming something great and organic rather than clunky, comprised of short and choppy serial adventures.

 

A perfect comic book example of this is Marvel’s Warren Worthington III of the X-Men. Though he has gone through tremendous changes at the hands of others and himself he is still there, still a part of the rich history that he help create from day 1. All heroes should be so lucky to survive such strife allowing them to later, while sitting around the campfire, herald in the old days and reminisce over past adventures.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with your lust for a great story. I too devote a great deal of my time creating a compositional tapestry that is weaved throughout with melodies both uplifting and terrifying, simple and complex. But my stories never grow in a vacuum. They are pollinated by the imaginations of my players.

 

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve integrated a player’s character background into my story only to find that the new amalgamation is incredibly better than my original concept. By incorporating my player's imaginations into my story I accomplish two things:

First, 8 heads are better than 1. By tapping 7 other fantastic imaginations I’m able to create a better product.

Second, I’m able to customize the campaign to the characters both in the short and long term. This really enhances the player’s enjoyment as they feel a part of the story rather than feeling like puppets, constantly responding to a story created outside of their existence.

 

"The players I know who obsessed about their characters would never allow me to do anything to threaten them or change them. They had created a perfect model of their character in their mind, and anything that deviated from this ideal they hated. They didn't cooperate with others, nor were they open to anything that challenged their preconceptions.

 

I feel a bit sorry for you. You seem to be the kind of GM I would enjoy playing with. It's too bad you haven't found a group of erudite and compassionate players yet.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

I feel a bit sorry for you. You seem to be the kind of GM I would enjoy playing with. It's too bad you haven't found a group of erudite and compassionate players yet.

 

Don't feel sorry for me. I've had game running for 18 years with great players. Players who don't "adore" their characters... but want to cooperate and tell a great shared story. The kind of players I dislike... I don't game with them. ONe of the key "red flags" I look for in players are those who obsess about every detail of their character without asking "How will this character fit in the world? What kind of character is best for this campaign? How can we all work together to build characters that work together?"

 

Character creation is a group activity at some level. It is not something totaly controlled by a single person on a fantasy trip.

[nexus]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Well, we all have our different play styles. One person's Heaven is another one's hell, etc, etc etc.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

ONe of the key "red flags" I look for in players are those who obsess about every detail of their character without asking "How will this character fit in the world? What kind of character is best for this campaign? How can we all work together to build characters that work together?"

 

Character creation is a group activity at some level. It is not something totaly controlled by a single person on a fantasy trip.

 

Oh, I totally agree! My advice is for the players to read my initial campaign description then, and only then, make a character that they'll really enjoy playing. We also keep up with each other as concepts come in order to create a logical grouping of heroes and to avoid overlap.

 

Occasionally power and/or concept duplication occurs. But when it does the characters usually separate naturally over time as they develop differently.

 

After I receive the characters I complete the campaign setting with them included.

 

I actually think we're on the same page! It’s a shame you're not near by RDU Neil, I think I'd love playing in your campaign. (Ever get to Lake Geneva, Wisconsin (just North of the border from Chicago?)

[GoldenAge]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Well' date=' we all have our different play styles. One person's Heaven is another one's hell, etc, etc etc.[/quote']

 

Too true, but I'd rather talk about styles and keep an open mind then dismiss all ideas but my own.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Seeking a little gming advice

 

Oh' date=' I totally agree! My advice is for the players to read my initial campaign description then, and only then, make a character that they'll really enjoy playing. [/quote']

 

Sometiomes, a great character concept and a great campaign concept just don't match up, and it's time to shelve the character for another day, and make one that will be fun in THIS game. [eg. everyone else wants to play mercenary supers in a hard, iron age setting. My Big Blue Boy Scout will probabkly be happier in a different game later on.]