Posts made by Ghost

@Roz said in GMs: Typical Player/GM Bad Habits:

@Ghost said in GMs: Typical Player/GM Bad Habits:

I hesitate to say that maybe there's a better way, like include in the prp signup a quick one-sentence explanation of how their character would be involved. Probably wouldn't go over well though if PrP runners got to pick their players.

That's so fucking nuts to me. I know exactly what you mean, and you're right that people would get salty, but that salt would be straight-up bullshit. If a PRP runner has a lot of demand, they should be able to pick from the volunteers whoever might be best suited and most fun for the plot they have in mind. But I also hate the signup system that boils down to "first come, first serve," because it just favors -- whoever's online when the event gets announced.

Right. Realistically it'd be great for a GM to weed out the "I'm bored and just wanna play" people from the people who have a distinct reason to be involved in the PrP, but ho-leeee-shit it would not go over well.

But then again I've dropped OUT of PrPs because another player I knew needed the scene more than me. I'd like to see more of that, too. Maybe ask "hey this person didn't sign up in time, but the PrP is currently important to their stuff. Anyone keen to give up their seat?"

@mietze You know, I remember seeing it plenty and hear about it still from time to time; the person who signs up for the Pro super quick, even if they're not equipped or involved with the PrP, so the valid people get bumped. Those, or definitely the people who dont pay attention to the content/post/details/come because a friend is in the scene/etc

I hesitate to say that maybe there's a better way, like include in the prp signup a quick one-sentence explanation of how their character would be involved. Probably wouldn't go over well though if PrP runners got to pick their players.

I think it's fair to say it would be considered respectful to pay attention and put in effort when someone runs scenes for you.

@mietze said in GMs: Typical Player/GM Bad Habits:

Player pet peeves of mine:

So, with the topic in mind, what is your suggestion to aid these people into being better players? Do you think there is anything a GM can do to reinforce people showing up on time or not reading the outline of the event? If these are what you feel are bad player habits at the gaming table or mush session, this thread is looking for constructive tricks and tips to mitigate/correct those bad habits. What have you tried to curb those bad habits and have you had any good results to share?

Also, I'll help keep players from fishing by telling them before they roll whether or not the roll is feasible.

For example, if a floating/levitating platform is 1000 feet up without wires or cables and they cant jump up and grab it, I'll let them know it's obvious that they'd need some way other than jumping to get up there.

@faraday said in GMs: Typical Player/GM Bad Habits:

If you just boiled it down to "I roll to figure out what's the best way into this building"

You touched on this and I wanted to say, I think this is super important to think/focus on, IMO.

All too often, GMs railroad, envision specific methods that are the only solution to their riddle, or punish players for making decisions that the GM may think are stupid.

I find that most of the time a player tries so hard to do nothing until they can coax the GM to tell them exactly which key will unlock the next level, its because of the above. Sometimes it's just a powergamer looking to slam dunk a one-roll solution to a problem, but overall I think players get into this bad habit as a result of being used to GMs who railroad or try to force them to guess the sole solution.

So everything you're saying, in my opinion, is solid advice for building gamers who think for their solutions and to get out of the bad habit of always trying to find the golden ticket solution.

Fellow GM tips for avoiding railroading:

1. AVOID having a GM PC in the party. This is bait for making the game/scene/adventure about your "NPC/PC" (air-quotes). The compulsion is hard to resist.

2. AVOID the "three part" model when designing a game. Don't write a beginning, middle, and (especially not) an end.

3. ALWAYS conjure up scene ideas with a few ways you predict it might end, but be flexible. They will flesh the rest of the scene out, make it fun, and you get to help them find an ending.

4. ALWAYS build more "ideas" based on interests the players chat about. OOC chatter will always show you what players like. You may have a few horror fans, a few swashbuckling fans, etc. Let them help you craft SCENE IDEAS (note: Not the story. Again, DO NOT consider the end of the story until you are totally ready to stop GMing it)

5. ALWAYS remember that you are a GM: a referee, a scene painter, and a voice for NPCs. You are not screenwriter, director, producer, and casting agent who simply tells the characters where to stand and what to do. THE WHOLE GROUP are the writers. Repeat this over and over again and it will make you a better GM. ALWAYS prod your players to be creative. ALWAYS remind them that you are needing their input as much as they need yours.

One more bad habit.

I call it the "Google Character Sheet".

"On this website it says that all you have to do to make C4 is <insert recipe>. So my character is going to make some c4."

GM: "Okay, roll demolitions. The website gives you a plus one."

"Do I really even have to roll? He's just following directions."

GM: "All bomb-making could fail, which requires a roll. Use of a recipe or help can give you plusses."

Which, IMO, is also how you handle it. As a GM I am often handed some speech by some RL expert on astrophysics, firearms, the military, etc who lobbies for drastically reduced roll difficulties or hand-waving of rolls based on their OOC knowledge (or belief of knowledge) of a certain topic.

Fix?

"That's great that you know these things. If you would like your character to know these things, we can discuss what YOUR skill level translates to, and then we can work on your character leveling up to THAT level of skill."

OOC player Google searches don't excuse dice rolls. Ever. Oh, and also?

...it's rude to Google "how to make C4" while connected to the Wi-Fi on someone else's router.

@Thenomain said in General Video Game Thread:

You are in-sane.

Just in the mem-brane.

I don't think Fallout 4 was as good as 3 or NV, but I'm kinda waiting for something new from Fallout, yanno? I'm ready for a Fallout-type game that isn't a rehash of "leaves vault, explores landscape, decides whether or not to join the Brotherhood of Steel".

IMO Fallout needs to expand or end.

I used to have a problem with min-maxing in my games. Not to pundit, but I think that min-maxing isn't in the spirit of RPGs. Even Conan the Barbarian had other skills than being a badass swordsman.

As a GM I don't look to fuck over my players by specifically designing adventures around their faults. Instead, I just design adventures with a number of different required skills across the board where one skill can't handle everything. You could have a plus 3000 base attack bonus and be skill statted for combat, which will do you well if combat is the viable answer to everything, but when it comes to noticing things or hacking a computer/door, your lack of spread will be your downfall.

I simply "prepare a spread". This means the combat players will get some combat, but may eventually have to defer to PCs with the other skills. This goes the other way, too. Intelligence/Charisma players can't talk themselves out of everything and may need to call their MurderHobo buddy to bail them out.

I used to have a big issue with players who simply avoided putting dots into social skills at all under the assumption that they could RP/convince me as a GM that dice weren't necessary. That cleared up really quick when I reinforced that game mechanics would require them to be more than PLAYERS WHO COULD ROLEPLAY but with the sheet of an emotionless AC43 Robocop MurderMachine. Too bad we weren't rolling the PLAYER'S social/int/skill dice, but the CHARACTER'S.

@SG Ugh yeah. I've had GMs do that and it drives me crazy. I get that there are some shows/video games that take the dramatic route that the players get beaten down by a formidable foe and have to come back to beat them, but it can be a major drag for the players to go through this.

How I keep from doing this?

1. If the players get cocky and try to run in and one-shot the big bad, I will absolutely let the big bad hand their asses to them. (If the players push for the fight)

2. I will have the BigBad visibly direct the mini-bosses. It could be scrolls/parchment, radio communications, holographic orders, or even being in the distance pointing his/her finger down at the PCs. I let the BigBad be named/visible as the director of the hurdles the PCs have to overcome, which results in the BigBadBossfight actually feeling more like the last 30 minutes of Final Fantasy 7. That Sephiroth fight, right?

#2 has had good results with my group, and because of #1 they have stopped trying to MurderHobo every evil NPC I put in play.

Sidenote: This is easier with games that don't publish the "Challenge Level" of monsters/bad guys. D&D-type games are notorious for having an idea which monster manual entries they are/are not stronger than. Some even memorize stats/abilities. This is metagaming. Which I helped nip that bad habit by either not listing the power level of my BigBad or by stating ahead of time that I've made modifications to some Monster Manual Monsters.

WHAT THIS THREAD IS NOT is a specific calling out of people.

WHAT THIS THREAD IS is a thread designed to discuss bad habits of players and GMs, and to constructively discuss great ways to correct/work with said habits to make GMs better GMs, and players better players.

WHAT THIS THREAD IS ALSO NOT is a discussion on isms (sexism, racism, gender pronouns). THIS IS ABOUT PLAYSTYLE/GMSTYLE ISSUES, not about social norms and/or differences involving choice of language or beliefs.

Example, I will start:

As a GM on TT night, I regularly come across players who do what I like to call "leading the GM". This is when a player will state what they think the GM should do with an NPC prior to a roll or use of a power/spell that doesn't exactly work that way, perhaps even to try to justify that a roll doesn't even need to happen. Example:

Cop NPC runs into a room where the vigilante PC is in a shootout with an evil NPC:
"I bet the cop doesn't even know which one of us is the good guy or not."

While there's nothing inherently wrong with chatter, some players have the bad habit of throwing out their perceived direction of a scene, which usually results in them arguing what an NPC would or wouldn't believe, what they should or should not have to roll, or what the difficulty should be.

In the above example, the GM may be planning for the the cop to be LIKE A COP and take the "everyone is getting handcuffed" approach. This would be in contradiction to what the player was trying to lead, which can then run into accusations of railroading, etc.

HOW I ADDRESS THIS: Tell the player that you have in mind the initial response from the officer. Don't tell them what it is. Instead, tell them that if they would like to use a deception/persuasion check, they can explain what they're trying to sell the cop on, and you will set the difficulty based on how radically this would alter the cop's current inclinations.

I've had great results falling back on to dice systems to determine successes rather than discussing NPC rractions as a matter of creative control. Every player has the same capability of putting points into their character sheet.

@Jaded I'm assuming like Conan Exiles the US/EU main different will involve nudity differences.

Which is bullshit if it is.

@Scorn said in Dealing with bad actors:

Maybe produce some proof of a person's wrongdoing before advertising their identities and making serious allegations against them on a pseudo-public forum -- while laying out in elaborate detail what other games should do in order to ban this person.

Some ideas are just too radical, Scorn.

Is it really our right to deny people their vindication?

(Yes, this is tongue-in-cheek)

@Arkandel Fallout 4 is every other 1st person Fallout with a few new features and (yet) another "ole timey patriotic" setting. If you played Fallout 3 or New Vegas, Fallout 4 is really those with "base building".

Divinity 2 is special.

@Wretched said in General Video Game Thread:

@Auspice I have had similar feelings. But the no Pre order rule is in effect... so far.

I have a strong feeling that this game is gonna be safe to pre-order. CD Projekt Red delivers.

@Sparks Thanks, that's what I was looking for. I wanna read up on this stuff, because there's rarely a smoking gun, but I'd like to hear better accounts.

@Roz Question, though. I think a lot of people assume that Hollywood chooses to "not take chances on women or POC", but has anyone actually seen, read, or heard (interviews/articles) where it's explained by the people who make the decisions that they're not "taking chances" on women or POC?

I'd be curious to see some actual details on that. Mind you, this isn't me saying "prove it or you're wrong", but more so that people get passionate and like to theorize, and theories don't necessarily equate to what is truly going on. I think there's a lot of speculation, and that it isn't necessarily about women or POC specifically, but that they (Hollywood) is constantly having to rotate and search for ones that put butts in the seats.

Hollywood is a pep rally that knows they're gonna make money off of the popular actors/actresses. Truth is, for whatever reasons particular actresses/actors don't track well, that's more on whether or not we are giving them our money.

@insomniac7809 said in Fandom and entitlement:

Like, Catwoman was considered a risk, because it was a superhero movie about a POC woman (even if Halle Barry probably works for a gender flip of the "any white male, or Will Smith" criteria that movies were using in ~1998). It flopped, but that might have had more to do with the movie being steaming garbage on toast.

I don't think that Catwoman flopped or was "risky" because she was a POC. I think it's pretty well documented that it had a shitty script/screenwriting, people didn't like the character design (open for heels), and that critics butchered it in the press. At the time Halle Berry was losing her strength as a leading lady with Gothika and Die Another Day.

Hancock netted over 400 million in profits, Halle Berry was well liked in the X-Men movies, and both have a pretty loyal fan base. So when you're talking "Black Leading Actor/Actress", you gotta look at what is successful and compare it to what wasn't successful, then ask why. In Catwoman's case it's pretty clearly that it was considered all around to be a shitty film with a 9% tomatometer and 18% fan score on rotten tomatoes.

@Ghost said in General Video Game Thread:

RUMOR HAS IT... That 'From Software' (Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Sekiro) is going to unveil a new game in a few weeks at E3.

From what I'm reading, the likelihood (least likely to most likely) is as follows:

• Sekiro 2 (yeaaaah prolly not. Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice just came out in March)
• Bloodborne 2 (While this is #1 on my wishlist as a FromSoftware fan, Sony actually owns this IP and is stated to not be present at E3. Presumably they are working on PS5, but it is unlikely that they wouldn't be there for a Bloodborne 2 reveal)
• Dark Souls IV (it's been a while and DS3 killed it in sales)
• Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice DLC reveal
• Entirely new IP reveal (Sekiro is a new IP, but in the same vein as some of their older games. Could this be a trend or a one-off?)
• OLD IP reveal (Armored Core, Tenchu, Otogi, King's Field)

Who are we kidding, though? If frickin Borderlands doesn't own E3, then it's because they didn't even try to.

We have a winner! It has been leaked FROM SOFTWARE is going to/is developing a SOULS style game that is being co-written by the minds behind Dark Souls and George R. R. Martin. It will be called: "Elden Ring"

This means 3 things:

1. New SOULS style game. Squee.
2. Add this to the pile of "YET MORE SHIT GRRM IS DOING INSTEAD OF FINISHING HIS FUCKING BOOKS" and...
3. ....somebody should make a mush in this setting really quickly before the Blood of Dragons people do.

@Alamias It's like a little SURPRISE PARTY! Enjoy it.