Resolved,There is no point to statting up anything that is not a PC

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Ragitsu

Unless we discourage that kind of impulsive posting.

There is nothing impulsive about telling people to treat some insanely complicated plot device a player will never have or will only use once as what it is.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Not going to happen, teaching people to wing it is the best advice anyone can give any prospective GM.

IMHO-

Research and prep are good things- but a GM should be able to improvise, adapt, and remain flexible.


Cost of a cab ride in Frisco? Just wing it if you don't know. Does anyone really care that much if the GM's estimation of a given cab fare is spot-on? The adventure should be good enough to distract players from such minutiae.

[Ragitsu]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

There is nothing impulsive about telling people to treat some insanely complicated plot device a player will never have or will only use once as what it is.

You should re-read my very first post.

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Dude, you've never played Amber, or any other diceless system, have you?
I don't think you'd want to know what a typical Amber player would think of you for that type of statement...
*ig*

Which is fine in some cinematic campaigns, but silly results attributable to crits aren't always going to fly in other settings.

Its true, Ive never played Amber or other diceless systems, but those arent really whats at issue here. Its GURPS we're discussing and appropriate use of the dice and the true reporting of those values are fundamental to the system.

In the specific potato case, the GM ruled that it hit the Laser Rifle and made it unready. It bought us a second, but it was a valuable second and its one of the moments that comes up from time to time as we think back over cool gurps moments.

One action, one dice roll, imagination meets probability and Heroic Deeds and Good times are born.

Nymdok

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Nymdok

Death IS fine. It is the risk that makes the reward sweeter and applies the tenison to the conflict. If there is nothing to loose, is there really a point?

There are plenty of things for the PCs to lose other than their lives.

Unexpected player actions are meaningless without the success or failure tied to the actions. We use dice to decide the success or failure. Removing that element removes the GAMES unpredicatability.

Again, "no death" does not mean "no failure".

I never said I didn't use dice. I said in some cases I ignore them.

Players are players, they/we ALL do wierd stuff because it keeps the game fun and exciting and makes us feel clever as players. We need those dice outcomes to keep some imparitality in those decisions, otherwise its just the GM saying 'thats a dumb idea.'

As GM, I once encouraged a player to cast "water to wine" on a vampie in mist form. The player initially had considered it, but thought it was dumb. I told the the player "No, it's not. I like it".

[zorg]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

Again, this is a terribly circular form of reasoning. What is the game you are going to play, then?

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

What kind of winging and fudging activities do your players get to enjoy?

The kind we agree on before the game starts. Communication is the key.

Frex, right now, we play a hughly cinematic game, where characters will not die, unless in the final climax of the adventure, or while sacrificing themselves nobly for some reason. When in doubt, we discuss the matter.



Also, Happy New Year!

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

You know Jeff, if you really mean what you're typing here, you should realize that that type of attitude is what kills games and destroys GMs.

If more people did what you suggest this forum would be a desert with a couple of gearheads in it and the hobby would be dead.

Although the particulars that Jeff has chosen are not the particulars that I would focus on, his stament is still valid. If your going to put your players in an environment, they need to have consistent and reasonable ways of interacting in that environment.

The cost of a taxi might be something Id have to improvise as I dont know San Francisco or its contained Cab rates, however Id at least try to think ahead of time about the setting so as to have stats for things that are likely to happen. Street cars come to mind. HOw fast they go and where they run might be useful in an Espionage game. Their DR might be useful to know in a post-apoc game.

Planning ahead doesnt kill GM's, an unwillingness to plan ahead is what breaks down story objectives (What are we doing here again?), interrupts game flow (Whats that rule again?), and helps to destroy continuity (The last set of mooks weren't nearly this hard!).


Nymdok

[copeab]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

That would be great for you and your group if it were really all that openly represented, but I can't have any confidence that is the case when you say you are playing GURPS but you are really playing some kind of derivative system with as much as half of the original rules replaced by house rules, as your posts over the years attest.

And what percentage can be replaced by house rules and it still be GURPS?

(And I'm nowhere near 50% -- I'm not even sure I'm near 10%)

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by copeab

There are plenty of things for the PCs to lose other than their lives.

Again, "no death" does not mean "no failure".

I never said I didn't use dice. I said in some cases I ignore them.

As GM, I once encouraged a player to cast "water to wine" on a vampie in mist form. The player initially had considered it, but thought it was dumb. I told the the player "No, it's not. I like it".

True there are dissads and other associated things, but at some point, being a dead broke, quadraplegic, blind, mute, Dominated vampire blood cow is going to limit that charachter's adventuring potential :)

If you choose not to USE dice in a situation because it is trivial/impossible(Or other reasons), thats fine! No one rolls against DX to get out of bed. IF you roll and then disregard or 'fudge' the result, thats cheating.

You encouraged it because you liked that idea. What about an idea that you werent so fond of? GMs shouldnt have that much influence on the game.

Nymdok

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Nymdok

Although the particulars that Jeff has chosen are not the particulars that I would focus on, his stament is still valid. If your going to put your players in an environment, they need to have consistent and reasonable ways of interacting in that environment.

Sure, and any GM worth his salt can wing a consistent and reasonable environment just as easily as he can write it down, that's what gives us wings after all, and we don't even need Red Bull, just the Dew. *grin*

Originally Posted by Nymdok

Planning ahead doesnt kill GM's, an unwillingness to plan ahead is what breaks down story objectives (What are we doing here again?), interrupts game flow (Whats that rule again?), and helps to destroy continuity (The last set of mooks weren't nearly this hard!).

That's as bad a strawman as what Jeff is going on about, bad and inconsistent GMing has nothing to do with either overstatting or winging things.


Oh, and happy New Year to one and all from the catbox.