Quote from: ParaVox3In general, this whole note strikes me as a big GM whine because JimBob and I do not get along terribly well, and he clearly does not enjoy gaming with me. I'm sure everyone can imagine at this stage that the feeling is mutual.

Then may I ask what in the hell you're doing in the same room together tossing dice around a table? Or even in the same forum game if that's where you meet?

Quote from: SettembriniNo, JimBob, why did you show the pic to us?

I can't answer for JimBob, but I've found that when people show a picture on the internet it's usually because either they made it and they think it's cool, or they found it and they think it's cool. By your tone I can see you think you know why it was shown. Why is that?

He's shown the homunculus pic twice on this forum that I'm aware of so far.

That indicates to me that he thinks it's a goofy pic and he wanted to share it.  *shrug*

And yeah, posting about your players on a web forum is rude.  I've made that mistake in the past.  Best bite the bullet and apologize, IMO.  Particularly when you come up with charming nicknames like "Mary Sue."  (Which I've also done, natch.)

I'd give my left nut to sit in on one of these games right now.

I'm not going to start rehashing the arguments I've had with Jimbo in his earlier threads on this campaign, just chiming in to say, before I read RI and Paravox's comments, that I was seriously thinking that Jimmy was really not handling his players well.

I mean, they find the Big Bad (or who they think is the big bad, with some strong evidence) has some little demon guy, smash said demon guy, are attacked by the Big Bad...


... and he doesn't expect them to fight him, possibly to the bitter end? What the fuck did he expect? Tea?  

So the player's actions were not entirely realistic in a 'realistic' sort of setting.  No Oscar this year for best actress in an RPG.  

Paravox's character was blasted by the guy, so she fought him. Of course he's gonna threaten to blast her again. I'm not the expert on UA's rules, but I imagine there should be some sort of rolling involved, especially during a beat down!  The way it was presented it was Jimbo saying 'no, I don't want you to kill my NPC right now, so if you don't back off, he gets a free 'I kill you and take your stuff' attack to stop you. It's not the climax I wanted, and you can't spoil it for me.

Maybe Paravox is a bad player, maybe she isn't.  What I do know is Jimmy ain't coming across as half the GM his essays and posts try to paint him as.  Could be a fluke, but no one looks pretty in these situations. :what:

Quote from: RedFoxAnd yeah, posting about your players on a web forum is rude.  I've made that mistake in the past.  Best bite the bullet and apologize, IMO.  Particularly when you come up with charming nicknames like "Mary Sue."  (Which I've also done, natch.)

Well, no doubt it'll be taken as insincere, but I am certainly sorry for hurt feeings caused.

The fact is that I am a talkative person, and I like to try to sort problems out. Sometimes, people aren't welcoming of these kinds of discussions - but I still feel the need to talk. So if I can't solve the problem by talking to that person, then I'll try to solve it by talking to others. It tends to go like this for me,

1. Talk to the person involved. If that doesn't work, then,
2. Talk to others who know that person, and see if they have suggestions for dealing with it (other than, "boot them!"). If that doesn't work, then,
3. Open it up to more general discussion.

Feedback isn't accepted, so onto #2. Unfortunately, there were no good suggestions at this stage, those I tried didn't work. So, we got to #3, and that's where the hurt feelings come in, and for that I'm sorry. I can only say that the only alternative I could see was simply, "boot them!" I don't see that that's more constructive. Which is better? To simply boot the person, or discuss it openly like this, and try to find a solution? In this case, the discussion went on too long, and caused offence. When I began posting about it, I didn't expect it to spawn another two or three threads and have so much discussion about it. That's my fault; no-one makes you post or say anything.

So for that I'm sorry. Again, I didn't know what else to do, apart from a booting. In trying to avoid doing one wrong thing, I ended up doing a worse thing. For that I am sorry.

I would note that despite this, almost the same group was in my best campaign ever, Tiwesdæg Clíewen. So sometimes things work well, and sometimes they work badly, and both in the same group.

QuoteBy your tone I can see you think you know why it was shown. Why is that?

I got the impression, JimBob expects to stir emotions with that pic. Showing it to us, means, he thinks everyone should feel the same when seing this.

And this is a big DM fallacy.

When you have a  kewl scene, chances are high, not everybody think its kewl. Some will think it´s boring or silly.

Don´t railroad your players emotions.

They want to pick and chose for themselves.

Something tells me this thread is going to get more interesting...

Regards,
David R

I'd like to know -- were there any Cheetos at the table at all?

Quote from: SpikeI mean, they find the Big Bad (or who they think is the big bad, with some strong evidence) has some little demon guy, smash said demon guy, are attacked by the Big Bad...


... and he doesn't expect them to fight him, possibly to the bitter end? What the fuck did he expect? Tea?

In UA, if someone hits you with magick...  like, say, fleshcrafting blasts...  they mean to fucking kill you.  It's worse, in fact, than shooting someone because psychologically it's more damaging.  Rules-wise, even.  If you're shot at, that's a Violence and Helplessness check.  If you're hit with a magic blast, that's an Unnatural, Violence, and Helplessness check.  Along with the physical damage, which is in no way "kid gloves."

i.e. if someone walks in the door and tries to rip you one with flesh-crafting, he's trying to murder you.  Getting someone to back off in the middle of a scuffle like that is like trying to stop a live fire-fight.  It's possible, but really fucking difficult.

Quote from: SpikeI mean, they find the Big Bad (or who they think is the big bad, with some strong evidence) has some little demon guy, smash said demon guy, are attacked by the Big Bad...


... and he doesn't expect them to fight him, possibly to the bitter end? What the fuck did he expect? Tea?  

As I said, I certainly expected them to not like him, probably to attack them, etc. I had no problem with that at all.  

Quote from: SpikeI'm not the expert on UA's rules, but I imagine there should be some sort of rolling involved, especially during a beat down!  The way it was presented it was Jimbo saying 'no, I don't want you to kill my NPC right now, so if you don't back off, he gets a free 'I kill you and take your stuff' attack to stop you. It's not the climax I wanted, and you can't spoil it for me.

No, it was, "this guy is more powerful than you realise, so be careful." I was quite happy for them to kill him - but he might have taken one or two of them with him, I wanted them to be aware of that. If PCs walk up to a dragon, okay they expect it to be powerful. But in a modern setting where the PCs don't yet know about "magick", then they don't expect a skinny little goth to be powerful. Even without the guy's "magick", Unknown Armies is "the roleplaying game of power and consequences." And the combat chapter begins with "six ways to stop a fight," noting that killing is a big deal. So it's very much in the spirit of the setting to ask players to consider seriously before their character kills another.

That may fit your own idea of a fun game, or not - but that's the setting the players signed up for. It's what I promised them, so I gave it to them.

And as I said, that was not the subject of any dispute in the game group.

Quote from: SpikeMaybe Paravox is a bad player, maybe she isn't.  What I do know is Jimmy ain't coming across as half the GM his essays and posts try to paint him as.  Could be a fluke, but no one looks pretty in these situations. :what:

My essays present an ideal; I've never said I always live up to that ideal. For example, in one thread we discussed how combat is often bland because it seems to be set in a "white room", featureless and dull. I said that ideally we'd give better descriptions and make things exciting, and that I wish I could say I did that, but I often forgot it in the heat of the combat.

I've also often said that the most important thing in any group is that everyone gets along. No amount of brilliant GMing or roleplaying can help you if someone just plain doesn't like you. ParaVox3, it's now revealed, just plain doesn't like me. If someone has a GMing or roleplaying tip which can help you game wonderfully, or even just okay, with someone who dislikes them - then I don't think I'd be the only one who'd love to hear it.

Lastly, I have good GMing advice because I make a lot of mistakes

Quote from: StuartI'd like to know -- were there any Cheetos at the table at all?

Unfortunately, not. Recently the players had requested that I as host supply them with "healthy" food. I'm sure the lack of cheetos didn't help  

Mate, the schadenfreude now appearing in this thread is amazing. I hate you all!

Quote from: JimBobOzAs I said, I certainly expected them to not like him, probably to attack them, etc. I had no problem with that at all.  


No, it was, "this guy is more powerful than you realise, so be careful." I was quite happy for them to kill him - but he might have taken one or two of them with him, I wanted them to be aware of that. If PCs walk up to a dragon, okay they expect it to be powerful. But in a modern setting where the PCs don't yet know about "magick", then they don't expect a skinny little goth to be powerful. Even without the guy's "magick", Unknown Armies is "the roleplaying game of power and consequences." And the combat chapter begins with "six ways to stop a fight," noting that killing is a big deal. So it's very much in the spirit of the setting to ask players to consider seriously before their character kills another.

Dude, the warning was the homunculus.  That should tell people that the dude either A: has access to a powerful ritual, or B: is a flesh-crafter with no small power.  Either way, it means he's a Duke, which means bad news.

Of course, then you had the guy come in and start ripping people apart, at which point the warning's kind of a moot point.  When a Duke is bearing down on you and expending charges with intent to kill, you really only have the option of fleeing or fighting.  And it's very likely that reason isn't going to enter into people's reactions.  I know if someone was tearing huge chunks out of my flesh, I wouldn't be very reasonable either.

And I'll say again, I didn't have a problem with their pounding on him then.

Quote from: JimBobOzMate, the schadenfreude now appearing in this thread is amazing. I hate you all!

This is the interesting part :deviousgrin: How's that go again? Payback a ...

BTW did I ever mention the two main mooks in my Feng Shui game named, Mr. Schanden and Mr. Fruede ?

Regards,
David R

QuoteMate, the schadenfreude now appearing in this thread is amazing. I hate you all!

Well, JB, what do you expect? You come on very strong when giving advice to other people, and you often put the blame on the GM/players/group.

I offered you advice in good faith (and I had to reach back into my memory to do it), but I have to say that, like Spike and Settembrini, there were certain doubts in my mind as to whether we'd heard the real story. That's based on your online behaviour as well as what I've heard elsewhere.