Jump to content

bloody malth

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bloody malth

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Chicago, Illinois, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

735 profile views
  1. And if I remember correctly, "Before the Awakening" (which I clearly haven't read) was published concurrently with the release of The Force Awakens opening in theatres, right? So it wasn't like it was some random author retconning silly parts of Finn's character, this was a part of Finn from the beginning. Thank you for the information, although, as you wrote, leaving it out of the films wasn't helpful. I don't think it would hurt the character to impart some explanatory backstory instead of yet another scene of him being the butt of the joke.
  2. What? I assume that must be from supplementary material somewhere because it isn't in the Force Awakens or The Last Jedi. It goes a long way toward explaining Finn's ability to fight against a lightsaber (but not with one), but neither film bothers to do that.
  3. @SEApocalypse you thought that was forced? Man, I'll have to work on my routine. Even the Force Awakens plays his position as a janitor for laughs. I don't know what he did for 20 years, but I doubt it was training with a lightsaber. I don't know if his unit was made up entirely of janitors, but he was certainly a janitor and he doesn't bother to defend his apparent lack of expertise to Han Solo. I also don't know what you are referring to when you write that his unit seems to be made up of elites, I didn't get that impression. I have no problem with Finn being portrayed as proficient with stormtrooper weapons, but his handiness with a lightsaber helped me come to the conclusion that in this trilogy you don't need any special training to wield one. If it were a card game, it would be called power creep.
  4. Though I agree with Maelora on a lot of her points about Rey, I still thought Rey was a good character in 7 and 8, with an emotional vulnerability that worked as a good counterbalance to her natural protagonist excellence. She was one of the only things I liked about episode 8. I enjoyed her relationship with Finn in episode 7, it was human and witty, and it was one of the only things I liked in that movie. I missed the three leads interacting with each other while I watched The Last Jedi, especially since I hated nearly every attempt at humor in that movie; it felt forced. Still, Rey does seem like a bit of a Mary Sue to me (as far as gender goes, I always thought that the phrase "Mary Sue" worked equally well for any gender: I don't like Superman because he is a Mary Sue), but I find that to be a problem that is indicative of this new trilogy and not specific to her. Luke was training in the Falcon before he ever used the Force for anything or before he used a lightsaber in combat, I thought that scene implied there was more training off-screen, but that could just be me projecting. But now a stormtrooper janitor can fight with a lightsaber almost as well as Kylo Ren, who was trained by Luke and Snoke. The same janitor is also immune to the dangers of crashing, it would seem. And the scripts for both movies make Poe Dameron such a ridiculously superior fighter pilot you wonder why he isn't sent to fight the entire First Order fleet by himself. The new protagonist, Rose, I think? Is a plumber who also happens to be mechanical engineer, a superlative horse rider, a solid pilot, and a quick-draw expert good enough to get the jump on the janitor who could fight one on one with Kylo Ren. I like all of these characters, with the possible exception of Rose, who I found to be boring after the scene that introduced her. And I understand the necessity to have them be extremely skilled at what they do in these movies. But it just feels unearned, like Mary Sue is now the starting point for all Star Wars heroes. It's not just that Luke and Anakin receive more training then Rey (they do), but this new era seems to heavily imply that you really don't need any training to use the Force or wield a lightsaber. I assume Oliver Twist the Force Witch isn't getting trained by the psycho space-horse beater before the former pulls the broom into his hand.
  5. I hated most of the movie, but yeah, it annoys me to no end to see people writing things like "anyone who likes (or dislikes) this movie is not a true fan of Star Wars!". Get over yourself.
  6. I hated the movie. Well, mostly. But I'm not here to convince anyone who liked it, or even loved it, that they're wrong. Far more interesting than the movie (from my perspective, of course), has been how divided opinions are on it, and despite some name calling in media forums and threads like these, they don't seem to be divided among demographic lines. My gaming group is pretty evenly split among those who loved it, those who felt "meh", and those who hated it. I've seen people who loved the movie be accused of being fanboys, while elsewhere, the same accusation is leveled at people who hated the movie. I've read a bunch of testimonials from people who grew up with the OT that felt like the Last Jedi re-captured the spirit of their youth and others who felt like it betrayed the spirit of Star Wars. My millennial friends hated it, but of course this is mostly anecdotal, plenty of people felt like this was the Star Wars for their generation. When I spoke to some friends who loved it, I found that our general impressions of what worked and what didn't were very similar, but how that translated to our overall enjoyment of the movie was very different.
  7. Well, if your gm is also a fan of ancient Roman literature, The Golden Hind could meet another ship that's been almost completely changed by modifications, The Golden ***, and you could see how long your group's maturity lasted.
  8. Deathwatch was his first RPG, and he loved it, as you guessed. He is a huge Space Wolf fanboy, but he could do without the Wolfy Wolf Wolfy Wolfen McFrostWulf Frost that seems to be modern Space Wolves. Come to think of it, Rogue Trader adventures could probably also be re-skinned for Star Wars investigations. Less so Deathwatch.
  9. The other day I was talking to a friend of mine about why I liked Dark Heresy (of the old Warhammer 40k RPG line) and he didn't. He said it lacked the epic things he liked about 40k: Space Marines, rampaging Orks, Eldar, and the like; that it was too much like Blade Runner. By contrast, that's exactly why I liked it. There is a slightly generic feel to Dark Heresy that means you could re-skin it for Star Wars if you have access to any of the books. As far as I know, all the published adventures for it are investigative, but they usually end up with the pc's fighting a daemon at the end (even the introductory adventures, for some reason), so you would have to change that to something else like the Sith or a dark side spirit.
  10. @Archlyte I should be clear that I agree with you wholeheartedly when it comes to character death. My suggestions above are not meant to be taken as a way for a gm to cheat death for his or her players. In a game in which combat is one of the main conflicts (this includes most rpg's), there must usually be the real threat of death and failure for success and the rewards to have any depth of meaning. Most anything else is just kids' candy: sweet but unsatisfying. There are some exceptions of course (I once ran a Changeling game where the PC's were effectively immortal and I used a partially homebrewed system of slowly increasing insanity to replace the threat of death. And they could still fail, of course. But this digression is off topic), but some of my favorite memories as a player are when we escaped what looked like certain death by our wits and the skin of our teeth, or when we eked out a partial success against tough opposition and we had unfinished business and still alive enemies to look forward to later. By contrast, some of my most unsatisfying moments in gaming were when I could tell the gm had started pulling his punches, usually because our opposition was much deadlier than he anticipated, but sometimes because it served his story or because one of the other pc's was too attached to their character and the character became "sacrosanct" as you describe.
  11. @Archlyte Yeah, you were right to ask me to back up my assumptions. After I read through my original post I realized that in my zeal to express my ideas about fair gm'ing, I had glossed over the reasons I felt that the post was needed in the first place.
  12. Because that is not my opinion of the situation. Based on several factors: the "newness" of the gm to narrative role-playing and role-playing in general, the 20 minute scene in the sewers where nothing happened, the overpowered force of enemies that they had no chance to win against yet were immediately thrown into combat with because of the Despair, the unwillingness of anyone to talk about it face to face afterwards, the abandonment of the campaign and gm for something else, and the central point of this thread, that one PC wanted their character "resurrected", seem like very strong indicators that the PC's were frustrated as a group, not just the one player. As I wrote before, this is my assumption, based on my personal experience, because I don't know of any data sets to reference for player behavior. You have a different opinion. That's fine, I wanted it to come across in my above post that I did not believe that I was correct in my assumption with 100% certainty. I too have friends that would not bring a character back if they felt it cheapened the game. I also have other friends that would move heaven and earth to keep their characters alive and would charge the gates of **** to bring their dead characters back.
  13. @Imperial Stormtrooper At this point I believe that the real issue is that you lost the trust and respect of your players. This is an assumption sure, but the fact that the player who wanted his character back now just wants to play a completely different game, coupled with the other two players deciding that they don't want their characters back even when offered, speaks to my assumption. Plus your description of the situation. You've come to the realization that you should not have forcibly put the characters in an unwinnable situation and if you apologize and explain your mistake, this should go a long way toward regaining their trust and respect. In the same vein, although you like the "reality" of deciding to go right or left in an unfamiliar area (in this case, the sewers), you admitted that you weren't prepared to run them there. So I can assume that you lacked real life sewer maps for reference, that you didn't have a clear idea of how water reclamation and sanitation works in Star Wars, that you didn't know what chemicals would be present in the water, and that you hadn't watched every sewer scene you could find in Star Wars media. I don't mean to be pedantic and this may seem facetious, but my point is that is you are already lacking a great many details that will add realism to the scene, so why be a stickler for direction? In a narrative game like this one, you can simulate reality well enough with a statement of intention from the players and a die roll: i.e. "What do you guys want to accomplish here in the sewers?" "We want to find out where our adversaries went" "Okay, you don't see any clues at first. Roll Streetwise (Cunning) to navigate your way down here". Wait for roll. "Okay an hour has passed and you still can't find any clues, but you've explored this area". Draw a map of where they went, including any left or right directions you think are important. Even players who like realism as much as you do will get frustrated if 20 minutes or more of precious game time is spent exploring someplace that has no importance and nothing happens. You can waste the character's time all you want, but don't waste your player's time. Frustrated players make stupid, rebellious decisions and then blame you (I've been on both sides, because I was either gm'ing poorly or I was getting frustrated as a player). Also, I highly recommend against sending extremely powerful characters against new players or new characters. In a new game, even experienced role-players may be unsure of their characters capabilities within the game system, but after a few games in their characters' shoes, players begin to understand how powerful they are (and aren't) and what they can stand up to. Your players may not have known they were completely outclassed in that combat encounter (especially if they were silently frustrated from the sewers), but after a few regular normal combat encounters, they might have understood what Rivals with vibro-axes and 5 minions really means in terms of power. Now having written that, you might have still salvaged the situation if you hadn't had the enemies all burst in at once. They rolled a Triumph with Despair, right? So you could have told them that the enemies are already here in the building (or the vicinity of the building), but the Triumph is that they don't know exactly where the PC's are. Then, because they are new, tell that it looks like they are outnumbered two to one and heavily outclassed in a straight up fight. This would give them the chance to try to sneak past the enemies, create a distraction, pigeonhole or ambush them one at a time so that they don't have to fight them all at once, create traps, or yes, even escape through the window.
  14. In my experience, munchkins are types of players, not disposable bad habits. If you find yourself seated with an entire group of them, you will probably have to accept that there will always be some level of munchkinism in your game, unless you want to go home. "Item worship", as you put it, has been around in Star Wars rpg's since West End games and it's part of the enjoyment for even non-munchkin players. So, my first point is that you are going to have to tailor your expectations if you find yourself with another group of munchkins. But really you want to know how to mitigate their munchkinism. The best and most reliable ways to do that, from my experience, is to make their characters seem like total badasses when they succeed at challenges they didn't munchkin for and to make a lot of their over-preparing/min-maxing moot by throwing challenges at them that they are not prepared for. When you show the munchkin player that they can be awesome without min/maxing and that over-preparation is often fruitless, it can help to change their ideas of risk and reward (although I've never seen munchkinism disappear completely from a player who has those tendencies). There are a lot of good ideas in this thread to do that, and even punitive measures can work if you are fair and even-handed. This isn't necessarily easy and will require some really good improvisational skills as you will be changes things on the fly a lot. Being extremely clear with your players about your expectations (and vice-versa) before the game starts is a really important lesson that I had to painfully re-learn recently. But it's not too late to talk even if you're deep in the campaign. I often find that post-game discussions are the best for figuring out what everyone wants, as you can point to specific actions and decisions relatively soon after they happened. Stop the game early and find out what everyone thought of it and don't be shy about bringing up things you think didn't work, both PC decisions and your own. Good luck, and at least they aren't cheaters...
  15. I didn't GM it, but I know that the GM loved the elderly Chiss pacifist doctor who scolded the rest of us all the time for our violence and sometimes healed our enemies. There was also Trey Nord, a human droid engineer whose hands were so clammy and limp that shaking them was like grabbing a dead fish, complete with the slightly moist feeling afterwards. He had all the charisma and sex appeal of a spider, but was generally a nice guy if you got to know him, which almost no one did. I played a brutish thug of a smuggler who was sick of beating people and just wanted to play pranks on the rest of the crew. He accomplished that last part. There was also Castor Troy, who earned the title of Galaxy's Worst Bounty Hunter in game by forgetting to get an IPKC and by not claiming a single bounty during the entire campaign until the very end, when he returned a prized pet pig-thing to a distraught, but bemused, noblewoman. The captain, who just wanted to make money and lower our Obligation, had no idea what to do with us. The GM thought it was the greatest, though.
  • Create New...