:help: with the Disad Lockout

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

The player keeps emailing me "The book says I can."

 

Strike the "reply" key.

 

Type "You have the following choices:

 

(a) Abide by the rules I am setting for my campaign, and game with my group.

 

( sit at home, playing with the book, and doing anything it says you can.

 

You may also want to look up the part of the book that instructs the GM to change the rules as necessary to make the game fun, describing this as "the book says I can too".

 

That's the nice approach. The not nice approach is as follows:

 

"OK, we'll follow the book."

 

When he uses the instant power, follow the suggestions others have made above - all his other powers shut down for the phase. The opposition fires on him, since this is too good an opportunity to pass up. Likely, the character dies.

 

Note that we are doing what the book says. A limitation which does not limit the character is not a limitation. The book says so. Since his lockiut is a limitation, it must limit his character. The loss of all other powers for the phase is the limit. And we have to do what the book says, right?

[Thia Halmades]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

*nods sagely* I tend to beat the rules lawyers into submission whenever possible because of BS like this. Don't hesitate to let him learn the hard way. Hugh's right - although if you're going to take the talking route, I'd do it a touch more delicately, but he's still right. "I'm the GM, my rule is the final rule. The book has all the mechanics, but I determine implementation." That's a conversation I recently had with another player in another game, oddly enough.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

I vote for the 'let him do it and get himself splattered over the landscape' theory. Few things are more entertaining than watching someone who insists on making a rules mistake shoot himself in the foot.

[Robyn]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Few things are more entertaining than watching someone who insists on making a rules mistake shoot himself in the foot.

 

That sounds like one for the "Useless Powers" thread.

 

Our Aim Sucks: +X OCV, only to hit oneself or allies (this is the archetypical "minion" power, seen used by guards in pulp movies everywhere).

[Thia Halmades]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Actually, Robyn, to pick nits a moment, what you're looking for is this:

 

6 Stormtrooper Shooting Academy: +4 OCV (20 Active Points); Only with Imperial Issue Blaster Weapons (-1/2), Only for Hitting Allies (-1), Only When Firing on the Main Characters (-1/2), Side Effect (+4 OCV applies normally whenever firing on NPCs or in non-critical situations, -1/2)

[Weldun]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Back to the topic at hand, if he's just fishing for points, point him to the multipower framework and the concept of ultra slots. He gets the point save without rectally violating the rules, and still gets THE EXACT SAME EFFECT.

 

C'mon people, I saw this in 3 seconds.

[ghost-angel]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Back to the topic at hand, if he's just fishing for points, point him to the multipower framework and the concept of ultra slots. He gets the point save without rectally violating the rules, and still gets THE EXACT SAME EFFECT.

 

C'mon people, I saw this in 3 seconds.

Yes but it's more fun to watch the would be munchkins splatter themselves. The guy is obviously an amateur to Hero Munchkinism, and thus must go through the hazing ritual.

[Bengalelf]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

The appropriate response is "Yes, I understand that, but in this case I belive the book is wrong and that's how I'm going to rule it. Any other questions?"

I do like this answer. I did a version of that. I told him and I quote. "I don't give a #@#@ what the book says! I created the world, and we do things the way I say. I am The GM after all!" (I didn't even raise my voice when speaking. I am so proud of myself)

 

We reworked his charatcer together. I think we are both happy with the results. No more Lockout. He even apologized. I don't think I will have any problems with him in the future. I also think he has a chance of becoming one of the better players in my Defenders of the Millenniiumcampaign.

[hooligan x]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Um, what I am not hearing is the real problem. Any dude who argues "but the book says..." is not a dude you want at your table. He is gonna slow down every combat with bullcrappery and rulesfutzery. Change the night you play and don't tell him. Move. Anything butruin your game.

[Robyn]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Um' date=' what I am not hearing is the real problem. Any dude who argues "but the book says..." is not a dude you want at your table. He is gonna slow down every combat with bullcrappery and rulesfutzery. Change the night you play and don't tell him. Move. Anything butruin your game.[/quote']

 

Yes. Never take a chance on new players. You see the slightest sign that they might be less than perfect, and bang! out they go. People like that can never change, and if they do, you want them getting better under someone else's tutelage, where even their gratitude, respect, and loyalty won't get anywhere near you.

 

__________________

Robyn must think that irony has something to do with iron; don't even ask about sarcasm.

[Weldun]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Um' date=' what I am not hearing is the real problem. Any dude who argues "but the book says..." is not a dude you want at your table. He is gonna slow down every combat with bullcrappery and rulesfutzery. Change the night you play and don't tell him. Move. Anything butruin your game.[/quote']Seriously, Hooligan. One should always take the time to work the problem through with a difficult player. Often, I have found that it is as much the poor ability of the GM to communicate what he had in mind as any "munchkinism" in the player. And with Champions, we must realise that there are some pretty "munchkiny" superheroes in the comic books, so there is always going to be the occasional slip among the adherents to this gaming genre.

[Rapier]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Wow.

 

First of all, I cannot imagine ever allowing a power in one of my games with lockout that was not in a framework.

 

On the off chance (WAY off chance) that I would, it would specifically be based on how many (and the utility) of the powers that could not be used while the power was locked out. After getting that answer back, my very next question would be why are all of these powers not in a framework if they are so closely related in source.

 

To make a long story short, there is no rule that you cannot spend 10000000 points in STR either. Doesn't mean I'm gonna let you have it.

 

At some point YOU have to be the GM. Sit them down and explain your reasoning. Have them come here and ask us if WE would allow the construct (which we, of couse, won't) and why we would/wouldn't. At the end of the day, its your game and your universe. You don't have to rule with the ironfist-parental "because I say so" but you are still the final word on what works and does not work within your game.

[Bengalelf]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

I feel I handled the problem very professionally. Remember, we are talking about someone who bought a 5th edition rule book two weeks ago. I don't think he even knew Champions existed up until then. All he had played was D&D. I told him I would be happy to sit down with him Saturday before the game and help him create a character.

At best I don't believe he could of read up to Power Frameworks by the time the first version of his character was emailed to me. I told him nicely, I didn't like the way he was using Lockout. He told me "the book says I can". I can be wrong at times, so I promised to recheck the book. I did and emailed him back explaining my point of view and why I felt the Limitation was wrong (it was not placed in a Power Framework). The next time I saw him, again, he said "The book says I can!" That was when I blew up.

Remember, He kept sending me copies of his character before I could sit him down and help him create one..

He hasn't given any trouble since I raised my voice that one time. Sometimes as a GM, you have to show the players that you will not put up with their @#@#! I hate'd to do it, but if I didn't, he would probably walk all over me. He now knows I am in charge, as the GM should be. I feel all will be well from now on.

Hopefully he will learn to enjoy Champions as the rest of us do. He still seems to be exicted about the game. Maybe even someday we will see him on this discussion board. :-)

[Bengalelf]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

Yes. Never take a chance on new players. You see the slightest sign that they might be less than perfect' date=' and [b']bang![/b] out they go. People like that can never change, and if they do, you want them getting better under someone else's tutelage, where even their gratitude, respect, and loyalty won't get anywhere near you.

 

__________________

Robyn must think that irony has something to do with iron; don't even ask about sarcasm.

 

Sometimes a new player can breathe freash life into an old campaign. There are times I prove to be less than perfect, however I feel I am a decent role player.

I would rather take a chance on a new player that could breathe fresh life into a campaign, than say no. I always talk to people who appear to be creating problems in my game, new or not. Give them a chance to change. If they don't, I approach them again and give them a more firm warning. Expressing if they do not change they will be told to leave the game. I have only had to do that once.

[ghost-angel]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

I feel I handled the problem very professionally. Remember, we are talking about someone who bought a 5th edition rule book two weeks ago. I don't think he even knew Champions existed up until then. All he had played was D&D. I told him I would be happy to sit down with him Saturday before the game and help him create a character.

At best I don't believe he could of read up to Power Frameworks by the time the first version of his character was emailed to me. I told him nicely, I didn't like the way he was using Lockout. He told me "the book says I can". I can be wrong at times, so I promised to recheck the book. I did and emailed him back explaining my point of view and why I felt the Limitation was wrong (it was not placed in a Power Framework). The next time I saw him, again, he said "The book says I can!" That was when I blew up.

Remember, He kept sending me copies of his character before I could sit him down and help him create one..

He hasn't given any trouble since I raised my voice that one time. Sometimes as a GM, you have to show the players that you will not put up with their @#@#! I hate'd to do it, but if I didn't, he would probably walk all over me. He now knows I am in charge, as the GM should be. I feel all will be well from now on.

Hopefully he will learn to enjoy Champions as the rest of us do. He still seems to be exicted about the game. Maybe even someday we will see him on this discussion board. :-)

Send him our way. And we shall show him the Way Of The Hero. And he shall be enlightened and trouble you no more.

 

So says I.

 

 

 

and if that doesn't work you'll just have to beat him into unconciousness with the rulebook

[hooligan x]

Re: with the Disad Lockout

 

I have had many newbies join the game, but I can usually tell who's going to be a problem. The younger ones often get it but if a dude is in his thirties and he's been looking for loopholes in every system he's played since the Reagan administration, I cut him loose. It's not my job to rehab poor roleplayers.

 

You may have had better luck than I. You may be less of an a-hole than I. I suspect both. But I only have 3 hours a week to play this game and I ain't wasting it on people who put numbers before character.

 

Some of my best players still don't know how to figure a to-hit roll. I had to circle one player's OCV because she never looked at her sheet. But she had a fun character who riffed off of the other characters and really influenced the flavor of the game.