[squee_nabob]

So possession and mental powers are unbanned? How about the crafting rules?

[Bull]

Possession may still end up banned, but until the FAQ is updated, nothing is official.

Crafting rules are/will be though.  That's too far outside Missions perameters.

Bull

[Wasabi]

One control would be to have a certain level of Public Awareness cause a loss of a character. Then just have written into the mod Public Awareness gains for attacking a Johnson, etc., and then you have a built in limiter. (not Notoriety gains because Notoriety is hardest to come by and spent to reduce Public Awareness. Folks may do it on occasion but they'll be cautious if they do it enough they lose their character.

And before someone cries "House rule! House rule!" yes, its a house rule and something limiting Mental Manipulations is a lot better than a blanket ban.

-Wasabi
  (who has no mental manipulation spells)

[Dr. Meatgrinder]

One control would be to have a certain level of Public Awareness cause a loss of a character. Then just have written into the mod Public Awareness gains for attacking a Johnson, etc., and then you have a built in limiter. (not Notoriety gains because Notoriety is hardest to come by and spent to reduce Public Awareness. Folks may do it on occasion but they'll be cautious if they do it enough they lose their character.

The problem there is that you already generate Public Awareness from all the Street Cred you're getting.  And already I've heard people talk about purposely being dirtbags to generate Notoriety so they can use it to burn off excess Street Cred...this could make it worse.  Notoriety might work, but I doubt the offenders will care much.  But maybe that just brings the character into the death spiral...

Hit 'em where it hurts...the Karma rewards.  The biggest offenders almost certainly are using their problem powers in place of roleplay, and they're almost certainly ruining the mission.

Faction ratings almost certainly should go down across the board, since word of this kind of drek will get out.  Sooner or later, all the faction contacts will refuse to deal with them at all.

I think my inclination is to warn the offending character's player (as the action is being declared) that such behavior is...unhealthy in the shadows.  If he or she persists, drop the hammer.

[Wasabi]

In Denver I had an Aztech mage who really didn't care about reprecussions and I RP'd him as if he didn't care. In D&D terms he was loyal to his team but Chaotic Evil to everyone he didn't need and so to say they aren't RP'ing isn't necessarily the case. To say disruptive behavior should be punished is a-ok though. I just dont think it should include how to RP a character although sure, some folks will use Mob Mind to crowbar and it ALWAYS breaks a mod unless the caster's intent is to not break the mod and do something silly with it. ("Spin in Circles!" given to guards so they get dizzy and fall down for instance.)

As to the Public Awareness from Street Cred at 9 Public Awareness folks wants autographs and corporations offer NASCAR endorsements. Its a stretch to think a person would run the shadows with corporate sponsors but thats what Public Awareness 9 is. Its silly to tolerate it so in my mind not a stretch to say, hey, if you hit PA 10 you lose your character. Bundle it with getting closer to losing that character by getting a rep for attacking the Johnson or being a douche and hey, there ya go.

As for mechanics used in RAW games, yeah the Notoriety needed to burn off PA is a problem at present. We made a joke of it at Dragoncon but you're right that it makes no sense despite being by RAW. I wish 4 Street Cred could be burned to get rid of 1 point of Public Awareness. It makes no sense as written but its what he have and what we use so ...meh.

[nojosecool]

Just saying, Gamemasters have a lot of ways to handle things, if a player is being a problem.  I think it comes down to a certain amount of "Player Entitlement" these days.  There's been an attitude in the gaming community for the last decade or so where it's suddenly become a no-no for a GM to take a strong hand in his games.  That you can't chastise or punish a player for his or her actions in a game, because it "ruins their fun" or some such.  Which IMNSHO is a bunch of elephant dung.  if players are looking for someone who's just going to recite a story and roll dice, but has no real authority?  the players should just go play video games, because theat's what they really want.  A Gamemasters job is to tell a story, to entertain, but also to challenge, to arbitrate, and to make sure everyone is having fun, including himself. And sometimes, that means smacking down a player or having bad things happen to the a character that's beyond the characters control. 

Bull

There's so much truth to this rant that I'm imagining Bull standing at a pulpit with dramatic organ music in the background.  Much like James Brown in Blues Brothers.  GM's, TAKE THE POWER BACK!!!

[Dr. Meatgrinder]

Just saying, Gamemasters have a lot of ways to handle things, if a player is being a problem.  I think it comes down to a certain amount of "Player Entitlement" these days.  There's been an attitude in the gaming community for the last decade or so where it's suddenly become a no-no for a GM to take a strong hand in his games.  That you can't chastise or punish a player for his or her actions in a game, because it "ruins their fun" or some such.  Which IMNSHO is a bunch of elephant dung.  if players are looking for someone who's just going to recite a story and roll dice, but has no real authority?  the players should just go play video games, because theat's what they really want.  A Gamemasters job is to tell a story, to entertain, but also to challenge, to arbitrate, and to make sure everyone is having fun, including himself. And sometimes, that means smacking down a player or having bad things happen to the a character that's beyond the characters control. 

Bull

There's so much truth to this rant that I'm imagining Bull standing at a pulpit with dramatic organ music in the background.  Much like James Brown in Blues Brothers.  GM's, TAKE THE POWER BACK!!!

Nice. 

I think part of the perceived sense of entitlement comes from the attitude that since they're paying to play (at a con), they should have fun.  However, players have not bought the right to have fun at the expense of other players.

[Solomon]

Just saying, Gamemasters have a lot of ways to handle things, if a player is being a problem.  I think it comes down to a certain amount of "Player Entitlement" these days.  There's been an attitude in the gaming community for the last decade or so where it's suddenly become a no-no for a GM to take a strong hand in his games.  That you can't chastise or punish a player for his or her actions in a game, because it "ruins their fun" or some such.  Which IMNSHO is a bunch of elephant dung.  if players are looking for someone who's just going to recite a story and roll dice, but has no real authority?  the players should just go play video games, because theat's what they really want.  A Gamemasters job is to tell a story, to entertain, but also to challenge, to arbitrate, and to make sure everyone is having fun, including himself. And sometimes, that means smacking down a player or having bad things happen to the a character that's beyond the characters control. 

Bull

There's so much truth to this rant that I'm imagining Bull standing at a pulpit with dramatic organ music in the background.  Much like James Brown in Blues Brothers.  GM's, TAKE THE POWER BACK!!!

Now I am sad..... I need to start generating a new character.

[Dr. Meatgrinder]

Why do I feel the need to have a rigger drive a car through a mall? 

[KarmaInferno]

Roleplay is all well and good but there is a limit to what is acceptable, namely at the point where it disrupts game play or otherwise makes things "not fun" for the other players.

The GM should be able to recognize this and try and rein it in, but the players also have a responsibility not to muck things up for their fellow gamers.

In short, roleplay is never an excuse for a player being an ass.


-k

[Mason]

Are custom magical traditions allowed so long as they do not interfere with the established fluff? The FAQ sort of implied they are disallowed, but didn't outright state it. However, for technomancers, it DID state that streams other than those provided in the books are disallowed. I need to know, because Arc is trying to set up a game using Missions rules running us through SRM Season 2 and then on up.

I'd also like to know if it is kosher to take negative qualities beyond the 35 BP limit without receiving the bonus BP, just to represent the character's flaws by having the quality. The character concept has Bad Luck and Gremlins and is a SINner but also has allergies and also has Spirit Bane (Insects), and I am irritated that I can't cram all the qualities the character would have in there.

[UmaroVI]

The first one has been asked before, and the answer is no, they aren't allowed.

The second one, I think you are fine and I can't imagine anyone objecting to you having more negative qualities than you got points for.

[KarmaInferno]

Bull seems to be okay with using an existing tradition and re-flavoring the fluff, though.



-k

[Mason]

Bull seems to be okay with using an existing tradition and re-flavoring the fluff, though.



-k

That'll have to do. Thanks!

[Mason]

Another question. Are the spell creation rules given in Street Magic allowed? Can I make Fire/Lightning/Acid Balls of DOOM (spraying brains everywhere as i do so)?