[Marcus]

Michael pointed out to me in a private message that my replies here maybe consider dismissive and rude concerning the summoning issue. He also obviated the need for us to discuss it further, but I felt others may share his point of view and I thought this might a good moment to explain my logic, and that some may find my logic of some use to them.

When gaming, particularly con gaming, I practice what I consider to be, responsible table etiquette. Which is to say, I agree with sitting GM's ruling. Always. Even and Particularly when I know the GM made the wrong call, and yes if you're interested I have lost characters and even had a TPK as result of this. After the Game is over, I may talk to the GM and point out the rule, get his/her thoughts and logic. If I can't understand or agree then I may choose to skip that table in future, but that rarely happens.

To me this was case where a sitting GM made a perfectly reasonable call, so I support that call. For the same reasons I practice table etiquette b/c the GM's job is hard, should and must be supported. Now if I was talking with the GM I might have different suggestions to make. But that's a different question and set circumstances.

Now on the forums I love arguing about rules to me it's a lot of fun. I'm sure this concept isn't new to any of our regulars but maybe some home viewers will gain something from it.

[Sphinx]

When gaming, particularly con gaming, I practice what I consider to be responsible table etiquette. Which is to say, I agree with sitting GM's ruling. Always. Even and particularly when I know the GM made the wrong call ...

Well said. From the other side of the screen, it's always better to make a spot call and keep the game moving than put everything on hold and hunt for a rule. If I find out later that I made a bad ruling, I'll refresh a point of Edge by way of apology/compensation.

[Fedifensor]

When gaming particularly con gaming, i practice what I consider to be, responsible table etiquette. Which is to say, I agree with sitting GM's ruling. Always. Even and Particularly when I know the GM made the wrong call, and yes if you're interested I have lost characters and even a TPK as result of this. After the Game is over I may to talk to the GM and point out the rule , get his/her thoughts and logic. If i can't understand or agree then I may choose to skip that table in future, but that rarely happens.

To me this was case where a sitting GM made a perfectly reasonable call, so I support that calls For the same reason I practice table etiquette b/c the GM's job is hard, should and must be supported. Now if I was talking with the GM I might have different suggestion to make. But that's a different question and set circumstances.

I’m not going to go into the specific details of the incidents that started this particular discussion on a public forum.  I will say that in each case I accepted the GMs ruling, and briefly brought up my concerns after the end of the game session.  This is not about stopping a game in mid-session because of a dispute over a ruling.  The FAQ gives broad latitude for a GM to adjust difficulty as needed to make the session challenging but fun.  Where the concern arises is when a GM makes these changes not to create a better game, but because they have a pet peeve about a particular aspect of the rules.  A blanket table rule like “always spend Edge to resist Summoning if the spirit is at or above Force X” is an example of the latter. 

Regardless of the intent, GMs who have a stated preference and regularly institute module adjustments to enforce that preference drive away players who have made that particular aspect a large part of their character.  They may also create an impression among new players that their decision is part of the ruleset instead of a judgement call.  It’s particularly harsh on those who are using brand new characters, who don’t have the Karma or Nuyen to have a broad bench of skills and abilities.  This happens with all different character types, not just mages.  Deckers who can’t hack bad guys because the foes regularly run with wireless off.  Characters with AoE attacks (spells, grenades, shotguns, etc) who find that no bad guy will ever stand within 2m of another bad guy, regardless of the situation.  Social characters who can’t convince foes because even random bouncers use Edge to resist their manipulations.  The pickpocket who steals a 10 nuyen flashlight and is told he can’t keep it at the end of the module because the GM doesn’t allow ‘looting’.  It’s less about putting a new rule in the FAQ to fix things, and more about changing the culture.  Challenge the players, but don’t forget to give them a chance to shine in their area of expertise.

I’ve been affected by this in Missions.  Two of my characters have effectively been retired because I felt that either table rules or bias crippled a major aspect of the character.  I’m doing my best to create characters that won’t be affected by these situations, and trying to avoid the GMs that do this at their tables.  The problem is, when you only have two or three total CDT agents running games at a con, sometimes your only option for avoiding that GM is to not play.

[Marcus]

Not meaning in anyway to be rude but my concern with your argument is a blanket table rule like “always spend Edge to resist Summoning if the spirit is at or above Force X”  can be a perfectly valid policy for making the game better.

This forum has had several knock out, drag out brawls on the topic spirits summoning. The community generally doesn't care b/c most players do exactly what you do and summon a force 6 at the beginning of the run. Which is a perfectly legit thing to do. Certainly the game working as intended.

But there are builds and tactics designed around calling up small spirit army. When those builds show up, GMs often make some rules to help limit that sort situation from arising again, as it can be disruptive. Clearly I have no idea if this GM has had such an encounter, or maybe just read one of several threads on the topic.

I think making a new character if you feel something is too disruptive to it is fine a choice. I think rebuilding a character to adjust away from that aspect is also an equally fine or better choice.
 
Personally I've never run across a CDT agent whom I wasn't very happy to play with (though rumor has it I am marked for death by at least one such agent), further I've never met one who wasn't also very concerned about the happiness of their players. So I'd suggest expressing your concerns to your local agents. I'm sure any CDT agent would at-least take your concerns seriously.

[Jayde Moon]

Not meaning in anyway to be rude but my concern with your argument is a blanket table rule like “always spend Edge to resist Summoning if the spirit is at or above Force X”  can be a perfectly valid policy for making the game better.

While a true statement, it's less valid as a 'rogue element' in an medium where consistency is a pillar of organized play.

NOTE: I put that in ' ' because I don't mean anything negatively towards the GM that is doing this, as Marcus points out, there's nothing inherently wrong with it.