KA.

Re: Social or Psych Lim: which is it? A Social Lim pertains to how others see you. A Psych Lim pertains to how you see yourself. What really matters is how the character feels about the issue in question. Do you go to church because of a deep belief, or do you go to church because your family always has? KA.

Re: Villains and their Secret ID, post-trial Let me begin by saying that I don't think the way anyone else does it is "wrong". Also, my campaign is four color, so 'realism' is not at a premium. I can see, with the convoluted justice system present today there being some sort of law that would allow Supervillains to maintain their Secret ID. For one thing, it could be a trade-off for allowing costumed supers to testify without revealing their own Secret ID's. Something like a retinal scan could ensure that the villain could be held accountable for things that happened later, like violating parole or repeat offenses, without actually revealing their true identity. It also would help with the "Hero gets arrested" scenario that crops up every once in a while, unless you don't see a problem with automatically stripping away the PC's Secret ID if they 'do the right thing' and turn themselves in when falsely accused of a crime. Obviously any type of helmet or mask that was a focus would be taken away, but it could be replaced with a wrestling style mask that would keep the ID Secret without giving any sort of advantage during a breakout. They could even by placed in an Iron Mask that prevented them removing it. This would keep them from unmasking (and escaping by blending in with the regular prison population), and it could be fitted with some type of tracking device to help prevent an escape. Again, not telling anyone else how to do it, but I don't have a problem with it myself. KA.

Re: Player vs. Character Thanks for putting it much better than I seem to have. Since starting this thread I have been caught up in some time-consuming car repair issues, so I haven't had a chance to comment on the posts, but that is exactly what I was intending to ask. Not: "Is it appropriate for some characters in some campaigns to spend a lot of time considering tactics?" But: "How many of us sacrifice role-playing our characters to gain a tactical edge?" I do want to respond to some of the posts. Supreme Serpent: Good point. It is, to a great degree the GM's responsibility to set the tone. Are rash 'heroic' actions rewarded or punished? However, unless the players and GM are careful there can be unintended changes to the tone. If the players are expected to rush in and attack, the GM usually needs to make the opposing forces a bit weaker/less organized, so that the players don't get trashed every time. But, the first time the players get a 'bloody nose' from villains that are more of a challenge or roll well, the players might start acting a bit more sneakily. When they do this, they will have no problem rolling over the relatively light opposition, which can cause the GM to get a bit upset over his villains being 'disrespected'. Next thing you know, the GM has upped the ante by making the villains more crafty and prepared, and you can end up with the situation where every player move can lead to disaster. I am not saying that this more serious level of play is somehow 'wrong', but there is a difference between doing it that way on purpose, and ending up there by accident. Doing it on purpose can result in a tense tactical game that everyone involved enjoys. Doing it by accident can result in anger, paranoia, and a lot of negativity. Zed-F - Quite right. In a more realistic game, playing tactically makes sense. fbdaury - Your reply made me laugh. Are you a lawyer? It sounded like someone in the press had indirectly accused your character of hesitation during a crisis, and this was the press release intended to respond to the charge without admitting any wrongdoing. When I started this thread, I was mainly thinking of decisions I have made concerning my own characters. It seems like the way I worded my first post made people think I was somehow equating tactics with cowardice. I don't think that characters need to have a 'Hulk Smash' mentality, I just think that some players, including myself, play our characters like the relatively fragile, unheroic beings that we are, rather than the powerful figures that they are. Mister E - I try to go for the 'comics simulation' style too. If that is the style you are playing, you are supposed to fall into ambushes, get put in deathtraps, etc. etc. I consider it part of the genre, at least the genre I want to play. On a related note, other than godlike alien beings, how many classic comic book heroes go around with all their special defenses activated at all times? If you think about it, Iron Man should probably be immune to basically any NND attack in the world. How hard would it be to filter out gasses, biological agents, radiation, etc., with that kind of technology available? But, even though he can be immune to those effects, he doesn't seem to keep all of those defenses active all the time. Which means Gas Man's Gas Attack can actually harm him, at least the first time, then he comes up with a way to deal with it. I think if some players ran Iron Man, he would be in full 'Haz-Mat' mode at all times, which just takes away from the fun in my opinion. TheTemplar - Bravo! This is exactly what I hope to improve in myself. If a character is supposed to be tactical, that is fine. But if you are Mr. Impatient, you are going to wade in unless that appears to be suicidal or lethal to hostages/civilians. Lamrok - While I don't know if I want that sort of thing formalized, I like the idea of playing your character, rather than the game being rewarded. A bonus XP for good roleplaying can do the job just fine. sinanju - I admit to getting as much fun out of a good tactical victory as anyone, but I must refer back to my reply to Supreme Serpent. If this goes on too often then the GM will start to ramp up the opposition until you have to play tactically just to survive. Which is fine if that is what you want to do, but is not much fun if you don't really like that style of play. Battlestaff - Battlestaff - I admit that there are times when fictional characters do things that are just stupid. But there is a difference between stupid, flawed, and follwing your destiny. I mean, Bilbo could have taken the Ring, as soon as he got it, jumped on one of those giant eagle things, flown to Mount Doom, and tossed it in and saved everyone a lot of trouble. But that is not how the story goes. Bruce Banner could have realized that security was too slack around the test site, put up a fence, and prevented Rick Jones from ever getting in the way of the Gamma Bomb. John McClane could have decided to keep his shoes on. Sometimes playing out a good story means making some mistakes and taking some lumps. Avoiding all that can take a lot of flavor out of the game. casualplayer - Good point about pacing. The GM can run the game in a manner where spending an hour deciding how to open an envelope isn't an option. But I would want there to be player buy-in on running things this way. RDU Neil - I must say with tremendous respect and admiration that you play the game on a whole different level and in a completely different manner than I do. With the kind of attention to detail you describe, and the way you see the gaming experience, I would not begin to argue with your methods, even though they are not my own. savagewolf - I am mostly replying to your post to say hello. I don't remember talking to you before. Thanks for posting to this thread. However, I must respectfully disagree. The Iron Man comics I have been reading reprints of were: Tales of Suspense #73-99 Tales to Astonish #82 and Iron Man #1-11 as reprinted in Essential Iron Man Vol. 2. In these, Iron Man is constantly running low on power during a fight. Often even the energy required to lift something extremely heavy will strain him to the point that he must back off and fight defensively. Near the end of this run, Iron Man developed a thermocouple coating or something, that allowed him to get a recharge from extreme heat and cold, but before that he was constantly running low on power. Thanks to everyone who posted. I would like to discuss this further, but right now I have a car to fix, so I will be back later. KA.

I have been thinking of trying out a Pulp Hero campaign for my players. Thanks to comic reprints, they are familiar with some of the genre staples: Mad Scientists Oriental Masterminds Evil Mystics But I can't find a good example of the "Dragon Lady" type. The mysterious Oriental beauty that can go from stealing the Hero's secret plans, to becoming his love interest, to trying to poison him, all in one adventure. I know I could probably dig up some books eventually, but players are never all that patient, so can anyone recommend any films or TV shows that might be available on video with a decent Dragon Lady? Thanks in advance, KA.

First the background: Reading Marvel Essentials : Iron Man Vol. 2. As usual Iron Man is in a very tough fight and his power is running low. The villain knocks him to the ground, and flees through a giant steel door. He manages to find a source to recharge his batteries and then he must blast his way through the door. Now I don't know what Iron Man's character sheet looks like, but it seems like he has some type of End Reserve that can be recharged by nearly any electrical source, but also runs low after only a few minutes of fighting. So the situation is: You just fought a major menace that left you on the floor. You had to recharge your batteries. You just blasted through a huge steel door, which no doubt used up a fair amount of the charge you just got. What do you do? As a Character, Iron Man is dedicated to fighting evil, which means that he rushes right through the door. To heck with the batteries. Time to fight! As a Player, many of us would say: "Why not grab a quick recharge while I can?" Which is the basic problem I want to discuss. How many times do we act like Players of a Game, instead of acting like our Characters? Although smart tactics should usually be rewarded, do we fall into the trap of being a bit more 'tactical' than our characters would be? Not that every Superhero should wade into every situation with fists flying, but, unless you are playing the Dark Knight, would your character really spend hours watching the Villain's lair from a rooftop to determine the perfect plan for entry? I am not saying that there is something inherently wrong with tactics and planning, but many Superheroes tend to smash first and ask questions later. With no disastrous results. Unless you are in an Iron Age campaign, shouldn't you be able to just kick down a door once in a while, without planning for the landing at Normandy? And shouldn't you do it when you can? I often play characters that are quite powerful, but I often tend to play them like every move might be their last. Anyone else? Any comments on this topic would be greatly appreciated. KA.

Re: Who Do You Tthink Thay Will Lock Up In "Stronghold" (the book)? I would like to see a mixture of old and new villains, but I will say that this could be a great mechanism for any previous characters that have not been mentioned in 5e books, to be brought back into the current continuity. When Stronghold was first introduced, I thought of it as a Shiny New High-Tech Prison for Paranormals. I like that aspect, but I would like it to be built on top of an existing top-secret SuperPrison, that only the Warden of the "Public" Stronghold (and whatever Government Officials are involved in the construction) are aware of. Perhaps there were some supercriminals so dangerous that they needed to just "disappear" for a few years until the authorities were ready to deal with them. They have been in cryogenic sleep for the last X years (since their last official appearance), in a top-secret underground location. Now a new Stronghold is preparing to open, with a highly secured 'basement' that no one seems to ever go to. Only a few 'maintenance technicians' ever go down there. And they never seem to associate with any of the rest of the staff, they only report to the Warden. I just think it could provide a bit of 'Dark Dungeon' atmosphere to a bright shiny new prison. KA.

Re: Consequences ... Koshka, I hope you don't feel like you are being 'ganged up on', but I have to agree with C-- and RDU Neil. Perhaps you haven't explained the Player's actions fully enough, but from what I have read it seems perfectly Golden Age to me. If the "since there aren't any laws regarding telepathy yet, she's going to rip through the general's mind and grab all the information she can." is a direct quote, then the Player might not be capturing the Golden Age 'tone' too well, but the action itself seems perfectly appropriate. To get more specific: A) What was done. The player used their Telepathy power to try to discover the evil plots of a known villain. Sounds Golden Age to me. In the Golden Age reprints that I have read, "I'll tell you everything, just don't hit me again!" is an oft-repeated quote. Using something as gentle as Telepathy is hardly to be frowned upon. How it was done. Here we may have some common ground based on circumstances. To me, for this to have been perfectly 'Golden Age' the following changes would need to be made. 1) How you state your intention. "since there aren't any laws regarding telepathy yet, she's going to rip through the general's mind and grab all the information she can." has a couple of flaws. A Golden Age Hero should always feel like what they are doing is right, even if it falls outside the boundaries of what we would consider good behavior today. Quibbling about whether it is against the law is not the right tone. And the 'rip through the General's mind' is a little Iron Age sounding, even if the act itself is okay. I would have felt a lot better about the same action described as: "Innocent lives may be at stake. We don't have time to waste. I am going to have to use my Mind Reading Power to probe the General's thoughts." 2) How it was carried out. Even though it was a good strategy as far as the rules, I am not too thrilled with 'ganging up' on the General by having one person ask the questions while the player attempted Telepathy. That just seems a little cheesy for a Golden Age Hero. I would have liked it better if the Player had just walked up to the General and done the whole 'cloud your mind' bit and let the chips fall where they may. This is sort of like Captain America asking Bucky to hold a Nazi so Cap can punch him. Not quite cricket, really. If you can't punch you own Nazi, you don't deserve the title of Hero. Now if you are fighting a giant robot or something, that is different, but against a single opponent, this just feels cheap. It might be the easy way, but it sure isn't the cowboy way. KA.

Re: Help! Would You Allow This?

Re: Help! Would You Allow This? Fnord23, See Page 179. That gives you all the justification you will ever need. "Clever" limitations, that never limit the character, are worth no points. Period. This response can seem a bit harsh to some players, so please allow me to give you a bit of "philosophy" to back it up. While there are some who choose to play it that way, Hero is not supposed to be "Player vs. GM". It is not supposed to be a legal contest based on the players trying to find ways to 'slip things past' you, and you trying to come up with ways to 'screw' them. It is supposed to be a cooperative effort, in which the entire group, including the GM, has fun by using the rules to create a world they want to play in. Part of that effort is maintaining balance. Everyone should want a world that is 'fair'. Your job as a GM is to be a combination of creator and referee. And one of the referee's jobs is to make sure that the rules are followed. A Limitation is not just a source of 'free' points so that you can have a stronger character. It is meant to be a way of defining a character's abilities. Example: In a Golden Age campaign, a player wants to create "Jet Boy". Jet Boy uses a cool-looking Jetpack to fly. The Jetpack never seems to need fuel. It never breaks. It never gets lost or stolen. It just looks cooler than sticking your arms up in the air. Is the Jetpack a Focus? NO! It is just a Special Effect. (How the power looks.) If Jet Boy's player says that they want to make the Jetpack an Obvious Accessible Focus, and take the -1 Limitation, it now becomes both your right and you duty as referee, to make sure that Jet Boy has some kind of problem due to it being a Focus about 50% of the time the Power is used. Which means every other time Jet Boy uses the Jetpack, it may: Get Grabbed in Combat Need Fuel Be Unusable because the Exhaust would set something on Fire Have been Stolen by one of Jet Boy's enemies etc. etc. etc. Where did this crazy notion come from? See Page 194 : Limited Power Guidelines A Power with a -1 Limitation means that the Power loses about half its effectiveness. Which means that if a Player takes a -1 Focus Limitation, then roughly half the time that Power should be either Limited, or completely Unavailable, simply because it is a Focus. Not everyone enforces this as harshly as it is laid out here, but that is the way the rules read. So, by now, I am sure you can see where this is going. If a Player insists on taking some goofy Limitation on a Power, like: "Does not work in Snowstorms, in July, in Tampa, Florida: -1/2" All they have done is ensure that about one third of the time, their character will be in a Snowstorm, in July, in Tampa, Florida. In a sense, Limitations don't reflect reality, they help create reality. Disadvantages work in a similar way. If you think about it, is Lois Lane just plain stupid, or the unluckiest woman on Earth? Why is she always the one to be taken hostage, caught in landslides, discovered by mobsters while searching their warehouses, chosen for space missions, etc. etc. ? Not because of any flaw in her own character. But because Superman chose her as a DNPC, 14 or less. She is doomed to constantly be in trouble because of his decision. So when your player complains about being constantly Knocked Out, or forced by circumstance to turn off her Powers with extreme regularity, remind her that this is what she chose when she took the Limitation. If she prefers another choice, now is the time to make it. KA.

Re: Building Power Armor

Re: Building Power Armor I think I would go a compromise route. To actually design and build powered armor would require a huge array of skills, many of which would never be used again. On the other hand, you want this character to grow, and end up with both a set of Armor, and a reasonably impressive set of Skills. On the third hand you may not want to end up with a character who should, realistically, be able to build basically any weapon in the universe, based on his skill set, including suits of power armor for all his teammates, friends, DNPC's, etc. So, on to the compromise solution, as suggested in previous posts. Have him, and the team if you want to run it that way, go on a "quest". Iron Man remembers that, many years ago, he had to leave a prototype suit of Armor behind in some dangerous location. It was radioactive, stuck in lava, whatever, and at the time he had to abandon it because some major crisis was going on, and he had better suits back at Stark Industries. Since it was crude (by his standards) and he had removed the weapons systems, he saw no reason to go back after it, so it still is buried where he left it. If the character wants to retrieve it, Iron Man will provide the codes necessary to activate it. That character will end up with a decent set of Power Armor. Armor, Flight, Life Support, etc. He will have to design his own weapons, or at least modify weapons he has, to work with the suit. That way the character can grow by adding new Skills, and the suit will become more powerful over time. KA.

Re: Batman vs Midnighter I have not read any Batman in years, and the only "Authority" I have read was actually Stormwatch, so I do not in any way consider myself having an expert opinion in this matter. That being said, the "My combat computer can blah blah blah . . ." sounds like a Special Effect to me, not a Power. My question is, What is on the Character Sheet? +6 SPD vs. Mooks? 10 Overall Combat Levels? I mean if Midnighter's GM (well, Writer) wants to say "He is the God of Combat and wins every fight because I say so!" that is fine, but if he is entering the 'game' then he has to be built on points like every other character. If the argument is: Midnighter is built on 1000 points and Batman is built on 500 points, and since they have basically the same build, except Batman 'wasted' a bunch of points on Skills, Contacts, etc., then I guess the fight goes to Midnighter. But you don't get to win just by having an SFX of "Infallible Combat Computer". You may as well build a 100 point NPC Superhero with the SFX of "My Power Automatically kills Midnighter no matter what he does." KA.

I have been reading Marvel Essentials : Daredevil recently, while at the same time reading Villainy Amok. Between the two, an idea was born, for helping motivate players into having more rounded characters. Most superheroes seem to have an array of skills and abilities that some players seem to 'forget' to include when actually building a character. Things like Area Knowledge, Professional Skills, etc. Nearly every comic book hero exhibits these abilities from time to time, but players often seem to want to omit them in favor of one more die of damage. It was while reading Villainy Amok that I got an idea of a good way to help motivate players to add these abilities with experience, or, perhaps, build them in when characters are created. In Villainy Amok, they describe a scene where a hero is on patrol and hears an alarm go off. He immediately thinks: "that came from the Sixth National Bank" But imagine the player's reaction to the following: "You hear an alarm going off, somewhere below you." "Okay, what's down there?" "Well, you are flying over the city, it could come from anywhere in a couple of block radius." "Okay, I swoop down, where is it now." "You think it is somewhere near an intersection you see, but you don't know the names of the streets." "Okay, I'll just follow the sound." "Since you don't have any enhanced senses, it is kind of hard to tell, the buildings are all brick and glass and the sound is bouncing all over the place. After a few more seconds, it stops." "Well, crap! Okay, I'll start searching in a grid pattern, up and down the blocks until I find something." "After a while you see the front of a jewelry store. The front window is smashed, and it looks like someone cut the alarm wires and then stole everything in the front cases." "Why didn't I know there was a jewelry store here?" "Ummmm, Area Knowledge?" Now I am not talking about GM's trying to pick a character to death for not having every possible skill. But I would like some help with ways to show players the value of purchasing something other than just combat abilities. Think of it this way. If a player spent all his points on Knowledge Skills, you wouldn't let him say: "I ought to be able to hit Grond with a 20 d6 Energy Blast, after all, I'm a Superhero!", so why should the player who spent all his points on the Energy Blast be able to say: "I ought to know where every Bank and Jewelry Store in my city is, after all, I'm a Superhero!" KA.

Re: 10th Muse RPG Sorry, Squire! KA.

Re: 10th Muse RPG

Re: 10th Muse RPG Since I seem to have had a part is stirring this up, let me attempt to help cool it off. The sudden rush of posts, from brand new posters, all promoting a single entity, looked spammish to me. Some others saw the thread before I did, reported it, and the thread was closed. Ben issued a retraction of the closure, at which point I made some rather mean-spirited sarcastic comments. After I realized I was needlessly annoying Ben, and had perhaps been unfriendly to some new posters, I issued my own retraction. Never in the course of this thread have I seen anyone threatened with banning. Even if some type of 'warning' was issued at the start of this, when it looked like it really was a spam thread, that has obviously been retracted too. Sheesh! Sorry! If you saw me in your yard at late at night, you might come out of the house wielding a bat. But if you didn't actually hit me with the bat, and you listened to my explanation of why I was there, and then apologized for the misunderstanding, I would hardly feel justified going around for days, saying: "I can't believe you came out with a bat! What are you, some kind of lunatic?" There are some situations that call for a degree of vigilance. Ben is a Webmaster. Spam is a big deal. If you let it get started, it can take over your whole board, or you have to spend endless time deleting spam posts. So, Ben is reasonably protective over his 'yard'. As far as I know, nobody was Banned. I am positive that nobody was done any actual harm. Why can't we just put this behind us and move on. Also, specifically Brother Jim, but also the other posters that are previous board members, I hope it did not appear that any of the 'spam' comments were directed at you to begin with. Obviously a regular poster could be drawn into a "spam" thread. If I happened to own and love a PSP, I could easily post something to a: "Win a free PSP" thread. That doesn't make me a spammer, it just means that the spammer in question started a thread that piqued my interest. Anyway this appears to be something that has blown way out of proportion. Sorry for whatever part I had in making it worse. KA.

Re: 5ER to 5E Page Numbering Wow! I just noticed this for the first time. What a tremendous job! Many thanks. KA.

Re: Pulp Character Suggestion Thread (it was inevitable) Depending on the tone of your campaign, I think it would be really cool to encounter Hope and Crosby or Abbott and Costello in an adventure setting! If your players have seen the Road pictures, or any of the more exotic Abbot and Costello movies, imagine their surprise to find either pair involved in an actual adventure! "Oh sure, we make comedy movies about this stuff, but in out spare time, we take it seriously!" Based on my limited recall, Hope and Crosby displayed more actual "skills" in their films, (picking pockets, etc.) but I could see Bud Abbott having a fair number of 'heel' skills, like Gambling, and Costello having Breakfall, Brawling, and a high PD. I may have to watch some movies and write them up! KA.

Re: 10th Muse RPG No problem, Ben. Despite my occasional outbursts, I try to be a good board citizen. I would never want to drive away new posters. This thread just looked fishy. If it isn't, then it isn't, and that's all I have to say about that. On the good side, by constantly posting to it, I have kept the thread active, so that those who are interested might notice it. KA.

Re: 10th Muse RPG To the recent group of "10th Muse" enthusiasts: I hope you don't interpret my posts as an attack on you. There was a recent incident where a pair of longtime posters were revealed to be a single disturbed individual who enjoyed the 'sport' of making friends with, and prying personal information from, several of the posters here, under very false pretenses. Sadly, due to that, some of us are a bit more suspicious than perhaps we should be. On the other hand, having a group of new posters suddenly appear, endorse something, and disappear, seems a bit odd to say the least. If you actually are here to discuss something, including a possible "10th Muse" rpg, then Welcome. It may be that you are distinct individuals that all just happened to arrive here with a common interest, and spontaneously posted to this thread. Or, it could be that there is a single individual that feels very strongly about this topic, and feels that it simply must be noticed. But, in any case, you (the group or the individual) seem to be coming on a bit strong. Take a look around. Read some of the other threads. Post a few things, get some replies, give us a chance to get to know you a little bit, and get to know us a little bit. That will make us a lot more likely to pay attention to what you have to say. KA.

Re: 10th Muse RPG

Re: 10th Muse RPG Okay, if this isn't a spam thread, then pass me the Kool-Aid. I have never actually heard of 10th Muse, but it seemingly is the greatest thing that has ever been created. All scheduled production of Hero materials should be put on hold, and all DOJ resources immediately devoted to 10th Muse projects. KA.

Re: Quote of the Week from my gaming group... Wow, glad to see this thread alive again. I went looking for it several days ago and could not remember the name. Anyway, last weekend we started an All Flesh Must Be Eaten campaign. Our characters are low level, normal people, which means that we aren't very good at things like shooting! The campaign is just starting so our characters know nothing about zombies. We were visiting a college campus and they started popping up. We found a couple of guns, killed a couple of zombies, managed to escape the campus, and headed toward the nearby town. The first building was a Police Station. Inside we see a Biker in a small cell being menaced by a Zombie. We take a couple of shots at it, but do very little damage. From inside the cell, the Biker yells: "Aim for the head!" At this point we both shoot and roll "1"s, the worst possible miss. As a couple of bullets whiz past him, the Biker yells: "No! Aim for its head!" KA,

Re: I Give Up!!!!!!!!!!!!! You know, Super Squirrel, I don't think I would have a problem with letting this character be used as written, after all. As long as he didn't mind being renamed "The Plow". Based on what he has put together, whenever he uses his 'running', he must be "in contact with a surface". And he is doing 39 d6 of "Side Effect" damage to his 'environment', which would include the 'surface' he is 'running' on. Which means that, based on the Breaking things rules on 5th Ed. p 302-304, he is creating a man-sized hole with every step he takes! If you count the surface of the Earth as a 'Wall' for purposes of this calculation he is doing way more damage than that! And remember that according to the 'Side Effect' rules, the targets of 'Side Effect' Damage get no Defense, you just count up how much BODY he is doing. In order to keep 'running' he must stay in contact with a surface which means he could end up doing massive property damage just running around. Since he is 'Totally Honest', 'Must Protect Innocents', and is 'Easy to Find' he would surely confess to doing the damage and turn himself in to protect the public. Maybe in thirty years or so, after the government is finished 'studying' him, he may have enough control of his powers to be a useful member of society. Right now he is more dangerous than Cyclops with no Ruby Quartz and a compulsive blink. KA.

Re: I Give Up!!!!!!!!!!!!! Super Squirrel: 1) Hit this player on the nose with a rolled up newspaper. 2) Stop this now! I understand that you are a nice person who wants everyone to get along, but this is just silly. New campaign rule: All characters must be created by the GM with player input. You meet with each player, they tell you the concept, you fire up HD, and together you work out a character that fits their concept and is acceptable to you. There is no reason on earth to go through this crap in a campaign. There is nothing that says the player has the right to create whatever munchkin crap they want, and that the GM must somehow 'justify' their campaign limits. It is the other way around. You come up with what you find acceptable for your campaign, and they have to justify what they want. I am not an unfair or unreasonable GM, but I would rather read a good book than try to ride herd on a group that was trying to get away with this kind of BS. If you don't like taking the aggressive role, try emulating the manager from 'Office Space': "Yeah, uuuummm, this character really isn't going to work in my campaign. Did you get that memo I sent out last week about campaign limits? I'll email you another copy of that. And, uuuummm, you should probably get started on another character. Yeah." You don't have to fight or argue. Just passively refuse to budge from what you want, or to take any action until the player meets your requirements. A couple of sessions of sitting on the sidelines because their character has to be redone, and you can't do it while you are GM'ing, should either bring them in line or cause them to quit, either of which would be preferable. KA.