The "bitch about your GM" thread:
Mah. The bigger the table, the more dramatic the impact.
Mura: -flips the bird to veterinary science with one hand and Euclidean geometry with the other-
Give me a big enough table and I'll move the campaign world!
Sailing the big blue sea
Do you need wheels on the table first?
Our GM is pissed at the party, more specifically the necromancer. He threw a giant crocodile at us, we killed it, the necro animated it, and now Mike follows us around and turns our enemies (at least the low-level ones) into meaty chunks. Mostly, the GM is pissed because the Necro can, at-will, "inflict" negative energy damage, which heals undead, and the GM threw nearly everything at the crocodile and still didn't kill it. *
I meant we have reasonable discussions and bring in a lot more voices then mainstream society does - Silasw
WARNING: Contains a lot of fire.
What are you guys playing? Your GM sounds like he doesnt quite get the amount of power he has over the game.
Steam me @chivazrigol
Earth Over All
Yeah, there are plenty of ways to counter stuff like that.
In a Dresden Files rpg campaign, I played a pure mortal FBI agent, who had to work together with a bunch of supernatural beings and wasn't particularly happy about it. He never refused to help, but he was somewhat reluctant. The DM didn't like this character, and started messing with his background story (like "your mentor who was turned into a red court vampire and whom you killed isn't really dead"). I tried to ignore it, but then we discovered that Red Court was bribing local FBI department to ignore tem. Of course, I wanted to take the motherfuckers down, but the DM was "no, there's literally nothing you can do here". Okay. Then, during our last session, he told me that now my character was an emissary of power - something I never agreed to in the first place. After the game he told me that I didn't play the character the way he expected and he did it deliberately (to punish me, I guess).
World's biggest wannabe
Tell the GM that if he has a certain way he wants the characters to act, he should write a novel.
People say I have a problem with authority. I say that authority has a problem with me.
Don't do that. Srsly.
as I understand, he didn't like the whole concept, as he expected my character to be really interested in dealing with supernaturals and gaining power and influence in their world. I, instead, played him as someone who deals with faeries and wizards and such because he has to, and bringing justice to the criminals and speaking for the victims was the most important thing. The DM didn't like that, and also said he won't allow me to play his character as a pure mortal nor will he allome to play any pure mortals in his games anymore.
Oh, the funny thing? Other players liked that character.
I'm not sure I'm going to talk to him in the next few weeks, if not months. I'm really pissed off at the guy right now.
Well, to be fair, most games have a certain theme and sometimes some character types just do not fit.
But G Ms
should discuss this with their players about it before starting the game
. It is very rude not to do so, especially when he's railroading characters to that point.
we actually discussed the character and his aspects before the game, and he seemed okay with it. The game actually had a theme, but it was saving the world, and not "grab as much power as you can", and the character was actually useful.
The fact that he was ok with it then and possibly changed his mind now or just lied then makes it worse.
just had a talk with the DM. Apparently, he wanted my character to become someone like Marcone mafia boss from the books, and that was the reason he let me play as a pure mortal. He expected that from a character whose main aspect was called "We work for God", and, mind you, that was a character he greenlighted. He was also surprised that I didn't like my character's new powers, saying that I either will play him as an Emissary of power, or won't play this character at all. And I'll have to create some kind of a war machine on two legs, apparently, since I am "not able to play a social type of character".
Ugh... I just... Fuck this. All he had to do was to talk to me.
This is very facepalm worthy
. How many people are there in the game? I would actually quit from the group if I were you.
There's five of us, including the DM, but he only D Ms
the Dresden Files campaign (and some other stuff I don't care about). For now, we're done with the Dresden Files and won't return to the game at least for a month, so I guess I just won't be playing with this particular guy as DM anymore
Earth Over All
Your DM is the exact kind of person that groups shouldn't let run games.
I'm dismayed. The type of game I'm most interested in running right now is
A.) Something I could never pull off effectively and
B.) something that really doesn't work with a group of players.
Mind elaborating? That sounds interesting.
Well, I just finished watching Steins;Gate so I'm interested in settings where the PC/reader/whoever can't really trust their reality too much from one moment to the next.
But that's a real hassle, and if you expect it going in, it loses a lot of the kick-on the flip side, if you DON'T expect it going in, it's a "What the hell GM?" and then you find yourself in this here thread!
Foreshadowing is your friend.
I'm not very good at it~ The original idea I had involved the party being in a lame comically tropey generic Dn D
setting, where they meet a bard who offers to "save their game" but they end up finding "glitched data" that causes them to black out and instantly time advance to the next day, with "memories" of what happened but not having the "experience" of it.
And then the players are supposed to load their game, effectively mentally traveling back in time.
But, I figured it probably wouldn't work out properly, so I'm doing something a little more conventional instead. That being a shonen manga-y 4th edition Dn D
campaign. With pulp fiction elements.
Two words: Nazi Gnomes.
Well, if I were you before the P Cs
see the bard I would have them overhearing a conversation from another group of adventurers who dealt with the same thing. Obviously, they won't know the whole story but at least that would given them a hint. And if you fear that they would figure out that is what is going to happen to them throw in more different weird adventures from other parties (because, you know, it's a tavern) as Red Herrings
(or turn them into foreshadowings instead if you feel like using those ideas later on).
Oh, no, they're the only ones who can perceived the glitched reality or use save states. That's the entire point.
If that's the case then the other NP Cs
can still go "There's this weird thing that happened to me on the other day..." or have them see the effects of "glitch" (little things like an NPC enter a room that the PC knows is empty, but two people exit) no one else can notice.
edited 8th Aug '12 4:39:00 PM by IraTheSquire
No, see, the glitch is a glitch in the system. The P Cs
have memories of the time they were "unconscious" because they're programmed into them. The thing is, the P Cs
are aware of the true time flow, rather than the perceived time flow-NP Cs
wouldn't be aware of the true time flow, so they'd just have the memories of what was supposed to happen.
The point is that the P Cs
are the only ones that can actually perceive that there's anything wrong, because they're the only "true" consciousnesses in the system.