[Sipowitz]

I don't "keep the characters out of situations they are good in"  I also don't "keep the characters only in situations they are good in"
I strive for Game Consistent Reality^tm

Again I allow the players complete freedom to make whatever they want to make, if that means 3 PhysAds and a StreetSam who have no computer, social or magic skills, so be it.
Unfortunately computer, social and magic skills is Game Consistent Reality^tm for Shadowrun and I will use them to keep the Game Consistent Reality^tm

[Glyph]

Nothing wrong with that approach, as long as you realize that "game consistent reality" is something that varies from GM to GM, so it is usually helpful for the GM to give players a rundown on his game world before play starts.  A character can be normal in one GM's game, gamebreakingly effective in another GM's game, and too conspicuous to even be a viable character in a third GM's game.

One of the strengths of the game is that it can support a wide variety of tones and subgenres, and that it lets players craft characters of wide-ranging abilities and specialties.  This strength can become a downfall, though, if everyone is not on the same page.

[ArkangelWinter]

[quote/] Are the players doing that same thing or are they trying to exploit weaknesses? I've never seen a group say "Okay our gunbunny is going to take on your gunbunny,  our hacker against yours, face against face, mage vs mage"  That comes down to 'let's see how hot your dice are'

...Is the Face going to look over the group with a critical eye, "hmm I see a suave looking fella over there and a bib wearing ork with a golfbag full of automatic weapons, which one can I manipulate the easiest...Oh I know that suave guy he looks like a likely target."
[/quote]

I don't know how you havent run into this. What player doesnt want to prove he's the best at what he does by beating the best? Especially hackers and street samurai.

[Glyph]

I thought it was kind of an apples and oranges comparison.  Yes, of course PCs try to exploit enemy weaknesses - Shadowrun is a tactical game.  That doesn't justify the GM excessively exploiting PC weaknesses.  That's comparing in-game behavior to metagame behavior.  The NPCs are the ones who should be exploiting PC weaknesses, and they should be limited to their own knowledge, not the GM's omnicient view.  In other words, the enemy wage mage might look at two characters and cast his stunbolt at the troll with a Willpower of 5, instead of the hacker with a Willpower of 2, because he'll think "Hey, big dumb trog."  Obviously, if the group makes a recurring enemy who knows about some of the group's weaknesses, or if a PC's weakness is well known or blatatly obvious, it's a different story.

[Katrex]

Very very off topic. Why not set up this in general chat or something.
My two cents on the matter is this. This is not an ordinary rpg, this is shadowrun, this world is deadly. You shouldn't be making npc's easier or harder for the players. If an npc flattens a party, regardless of better stats or not it flattened them because they wern't prepared for it, a team should only go in to a fight if they know they're going to win.

[Sipowitz]

I don't know how you havent run into this. What player doesnt want to prove he's the best at what he does by beating the best? Especially hackers and street samurai.

Not every player wants to do that.   I don't like to use exceptions to the norm as the norm.

I thought it was kind of an apples and oranges comparison.  Yes, of course PCs try to exploit enemy weaknesses - Shadowrun is a tactical game.  That doesn't justify the GM excessively exploiting PC weaknesses.  That's comparing in-game behavior to metagame behavior.  The NPCs are the ones who should be exploiting PC weaknesses, and they should be limited to their own knowledge, not the GM's omnicient view.  In other words, the enemy wage mage might look at two characters and cast his stunbolt at the troll with a Willpower of 5, instead of the hacker with a Willpower of 2, because he'll think "Hey, big dumb trog."  Obviously, if the group makes a recurring enemy who knows about some of the group's weaknesses, or if a PC's weakness is well known or blatatly obvious, it's a different story.

Sorry the players will excessively exlpoit NPC weaknesses.  A GM unwilling to excessively exploit PC weaknesses is not playing Shadowrun as a tactical game.  If a Gm is only willing to excessively exploit PC weaknesses 1/5 of the time.  The players are not getting any better as a group, they are not learning different tactics to use, they are not going up against competent competition, etc.

hyperbole* I don't want to game with a bunch of Paris Hiltons and Kim Kardashians.  I want the players to earn their reputations.

[All4BigGuns]

I don't know how you havent run into this. What player doesnt want to prove he's the best at what he does by beating the best? Especially hackers and street samurai.

Not every player wants to do that.   I don't like to use exceptions to the norm as the norm.

I thought it was kind of an apples and oranges comparison.  Yes, of course PCs try to exploit enemy weaknesses - Shadowrun is a tactical game.  That doesn't justify the GM excessively exploiting PC weaknesses.  That's comparing in-game behavior to metagame behavior.  The NPCs are the ones who should be exploiting PC weaknesses, and they should be limited to their own knowledge, not the GM's omnicient view.  In other words, the enemy wage mage might look at two characters and cast his stunbolt at the troll with a Willpower of 5, instead of the hacker with a Willpower of 2, because he'll think "Hey, big dumb trog."  Obviously, if the group makes a recurring enemy who knows about some of the group's weaknesses, or if a PC's weakness is well known or blatatly obvious, it's a different story.

Sorry the players will excessively exlpoit NPC weaknesses.  A GM unwilling to excessively exploit PC weaknesses is not playing Shadowrun as a tactical game.  If a Gm is only willing to excessively exploit PC weaknesses 1/5 of the time.  The players are not getting any better as a group, they are not learning different tactics to use, they are not going up against competent competition, etc.

hyperbole* I don't want to game with a bunch of Paris Hiltons and Kim Kardashians.  I want the players to earn their reputations.

What he was saying was that the GM should be held to the same standard (higher in my opinion) as the players in that he should NOT ever use his own personal knowledge of the PC's stats to have the enemies target specific weaknesses--as was mentioned in the example as the mage targeting the troll with the stun bolt instead of the hacker. The mage would in setting generally think of the troll as having lower willpower even though in actuality the hacker had the lower stat in that area. If the GM targeted the hacker then he has proven that his priority is to be "against" the players rather than creating a fun game for everyone involved.

[Sipowitz]

What he was saying was that the GM should be held to the same standard (higher in my opinion) as the players in that he should NOT ever use his own personal knowledge of the PC's stats to have the enemies target specific weaknesses--as was mentioned in the example as the mage targeting the troll with the stun bolt instead of the hacker. The mage would in setting generally think of the troll as having lower willpower even though in actuality the hacker had the lower stat in that area. If the GM targeted the hacker then he has proven that his priority is to be "against" the players rather than creating a fun game for everyone involved.

I know what he was saying and chose to ignore it because, people are purposing that the GM should use his own personal knowledge of the PC's stats to have the enemies NOT target specific weaknesses more often than Game Consistent Reality^tm expects.

Or

Gm metagaming is fine if it helps the players.

That is something I do not buy into as a GM or player.  As a player I want to experience the setting as much as possible taking the good with the bad.  As a GM I'll let the players experience the setting as best I can.