Quote from: David RI don't give xp for contributing to the food fund, simply because I've never had a problem with folks handing over the cash We normally give 10 bucks each (8 players in all) to the host who gets us the goodies.

I think that in established groups, it'd not be an issue at all. But when you're always gaming with new people every few months, it can be good to establish what's expected of people. When I run and host the games, I'll be the one saying, "this is what we're going to do." I find listing it as xp awards is the best way to do it. It's non-confrontational, and positive. So people know they should show up on time, roleplay, be bold with their character, be constructive and keep things moving, and bring and share munchies, and they know it in a way that doesn't piss them off, the way some list, "this is what you must do, or face expulsion!" would do.

Quote from: David RBack to your game. Have you got a campaign outline or are you just going with the flow...an improv kind of thing. Have you stated out some specific npcs? Linking some of the pcs background to the campaign plot etc.

Yes, I have a campaign outline. I had to wing it a bit yesterday, all my notes were on my computer, and with the power off I couldn't get them printed out. But the basic intro was as I expected.

I wanted them to have some motivation to go exploring the occult underground, as well as the physical underground. There's no motivation like "avoid a life sentence"! "You must clear yourself of a crime you didn't commit, and the best way to do this is by finding out who did do it." That's an oldie but a goodie.

Once they explore and clear themselves, this will lead to more spooky stuff. It'll be plain to them that exploring further will explain many of their Trigger events, and some other stuff they've seen along the way. And of course some of them may discover an affinity for some kind of magic.

I can't speak in much more detail than that, since some of my players read this forum

Hey, are you planning to use any of the stuff you and I talked about in future games? We were chit-chatting a few hours beforehand, so I don't know if you were able, or wanted, to incorporate any of it, but I'd be interested in knowing if you're planning to.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineHey, are you planning to use any of the stuff you and I talked about in future games? We were chit-chatting a few hours beforehand, so I don't know if you were able, or wanted, to incorporate any of it, but I'd be interested in knowing if you're planning to.

I'll have to see how things pan out. At the moment, they're not sure what they'll do next. Two need to be bailed out, and the other two are on the run, though their names aren't known to the police, and won't be known unless the two in the can spill the beans. If they do catch Raimundo, he'll be in the klink for quite some time - grevious boldily harm on two cops! Or maybe if he's lucky deported, back to the land of mad cops randomly brassing up neighbourhoods of poor people, and dark-skinned girl's arses (hey, whenever the telly does a special on Brasil, that's what they show!)

It'll take a bit of effort just to get the party back together. What they do after that, I don't know. There are some obvious lines of action for them, but players can surprise you.

It's interesting how PCs create dilemmas for themselves. I try to offer such dilemmas, lots of equally shitty choices, because those choices make things happen, and create adventures or stories. But players come up with their own, too. For example, Erica calling the media - she wanted media attention so that the party would suffer less knocking about from the cops, but the increased media attention makes the cops more likely to keep them locked up and questioned. With 300 murders a year in that city of 650,000, they can't investigate them all thoroughly, they have to pick and choose. Media attention makes them more likely to investigate a particular case.

So the dilemma was, media attention and not getting beaten but more time locked up, vs no media attention and getting beaten but released after a few days. Tough one, and entirely player-created.

So... I weigh in a bit late but this is what I got from the first post:

A rocking, if cliched, character background... subject to possible abuse, with Jimbob whinging about how cliched it was...

Someone called you an elitist asshole, and I'll agree. It wasn't until you cleared up what you had asked for that you managed to earn that ire in my regard.

Seriously, What you got is a far cry from: My guy is ex army with no family, no freinds, he's a total badass in shades!  

He presumably has a family... that he's avoiding.  Sorry you can't use that, Jimbo.  So, you think his background calls for too many notches on his meters... so he's not as hardened as he acts.  

You see bad-ass loner in shades, I see 'I looked in the fuckin' heart of darkness, man! You ain't seen what I seen.'

As a player, if the GM reminded me I was supposed to be an unspecified University student (cause, btw, a lot of people will read that as 'college boy, eg 19-23 year old fresh faced, snot nosed, drinking partying studying punk, never mind that a lot of college students are older...), I would have probably changed about three lines of the initial concept to reflect 'where he is now' to match.  

As for revising your opinion of the guy based of his character concept? I think you have it backwards. I look at the character concept based of what I know of the guy. If unwashed trenchcoat boy hands me badass loner in shades I'm much more likely to kick him a few times than if Good-Gamer-Buddy hands me the same dude.

Quote from: SpikeYou see bad-ass loner in shades, I see 'I looked in the fuckin' heart of darkness, man! You ain't seen what I seen.'

'cept it wasn't really that appropriate for the sort of game JimBob had pitched.  To clarify both sides of the argument... JimBob pitched several campaign ideas (and he is usually fairly specific in his pitches) and a few of us agreed on what we were most interested in playing.  A new guy then joined the group.

To me, it looks like the new guy read the intro rules to Unknown Armies but didn't really take much notice of the campaign material.  As I understand it, the guy has played a fair bit of D&D, so he's probably used to lame-arsed, gonzo settings and campaigns that commence with a handful of completely unrelated characters that all "meet at the inn".  

His second character was much more appropriate for the campaign and, as JimBob described, the game went swimmingly well (IMHO, all parties, including the new guy, played very well).  I don't think the first session would have been anywhere near as good if the original "bad arse" character was allowed to stand.

I've played too many games that fell apart in early sessions because the players created disparate characters.  I definitely think that giving players clear (and sometimes narrow) guidelines on character generation helps get things ticking over nicely in the first few sessions.  At a high-level, everyone will have similar motivations.  Later, as the game progresses, characters can develop more specific and interesting motivations.

Quote from: Tyberious FunkJimBob pitched several campaign ideas (and he is usually fairly specific in his pitches) and a few of us agreed on what we were most interested in playing.  A new guy then joined the group.

Actually, he didn't ask to join the group, he asked to join the specific "underground" campaign. So it seemed fair to assume he'd read the campaign background.

"We could play campaigns X, Y or Z."
"Let's play X!"
"Yeah, X sounds great!"
"Hey, can I join in? X looks very good."

Usually you'll assume the last guy read about X.

Quote from: Tyberious FunkTo me, it looks like the new guy read the intro rules to Unknown Armies but didn't really take much notice of the campaign material.

I think that in his keenness to join in, and fit in, he got carried away as he read the UA stuff, and quite simply forgot about the "underground" stuff.

It's about getting into a new group, fitting in. Some people just stroll on in, others get really enthusiastic and come up with wild ideas, so enthused with those ideas they forget about whether they match with what's already there.

Quote from: Tyberious FunkI don't think the first session would have been anywhere near as good if the original "bad arse" character was allowed to stand.

Well, Raimundo would have had some company in smacking over those cops

Hey, as I hope I made clear in my initial post it wasn't the total situation that had me in arms, it was the presentation through the early part of the thread.

Based on the OP, Jimbob was being an elitist snob.  It wasn't until roughly halfway down the thread that it came out that the original pitch was more limited.  Even after that came out, Jimbo was still all about snarking on the concept as a means of weeding out undesirables.  


Personally if you don't think any badasses go to college I have to wonder about either your local schools or your definitions of badassitude. I can go to any one of the half dozen local schools and find a handful of soldiers, both active duty and recently 'ex'... many of whom have combat expirence. I can find guys in the gym who play extreme sports (rock climbing, parachuting, etc..), can lift up small cars and either box or do martial arts for a hobby. I can find an entire kendo/iaijutsu club that meets on one local campus... any one of those people have the potential to be 'badass', and we haven't even gotten into the police officers that might be taking a few extra classes.

If you want to convince me that loner badasses are terrible characters, you'll have to find an example as bad or worse than mine:

A character who is a Fuchi security guard, on the run, his family murdered by Fuchi. He has no freinds, as a Fuchi Security Guard he had no time for friends and lived in the corporate enclave. He had no hobbies, as a Fuchi Security guard he had no time for hobbies, he lived in the corporate enclave. Why was his family murdered? Due to Fuchi's power toss up they were killed as a threat to one of the new powers...

I shit you not, every answer for any personal question about his character was 'Nope, I was a security guard' or 'i lived on the corporate compound'... which by implication is nothing more than a series of life support cold sleep beds.  That guy is a sunglasses loner badass, teflon psycho if you will.

Your example, while admittedly cliched (and yes, I get it, not inline with the campaign pitch... without a tiny modification (he's taking college courses... and likes exploring his environment to understand the 'lay of the land' as part of his paranoia), is a fucking masterpiece of hooky-ness compared to Fuchi guy.  Hell, reading his character background I can think of about half a dozen psychological thriller movies that have focused on characters just like him... and that isn't a bad thing at all. That's not even counting the horror books I've read in the same vein.  He's got enough characterization for an entire novel to be based off of and you're bitching about him?

Quote from: SpikePersonally if you don't think any badasses go to college I have to wonder about either your local schools or your definitions of badassitude.

Hell, one of our regular posters is a college-attending badass, by any definition of those two words