Annoying GM?

[Damian Magecraft]

The costs, per the optional training rules, is 100 gold pieces per character per level. Not 1,000. Which means he was just jerking us off and didn't really want us to advance at all. I don't mind the training rules, but we definitely filed them in the trash as low-level characters have no money, while higher-level characters have a seemingly endless supply of gold that they can get their hands on. The rules aren't balanced, and I won't use rules that aren't balanced.

ok my mistake... I thought the were higher than that...

[Vrykolas2k]

The optional training rules made little sense; I modified them somewhat in order to be logical and reflect how things actually work with self-improvement.

[drakinn]

I went for the GMPC option. The story is the PCs', not the NPCs'. While NPCs may be bigger fish than the PCs, the PCs are the ones who should be shining in the game.

I would have to agree all are bad I hope that I am none of the above I leave options for the players and characters have free will

[Chronicle]

i've been told that i am the "Watcher" Type. Watch teh players play, let them dialog., see what they are saying and integrate ideas and their fears into my settings. Even if it is the same story line i setup dozens of times. It is never the same. (as i think it should be). I watch react and if something goes wrong with the story or the players go a different direction from origionally planned, then i roll with it somehow, always remembering that the players have made enemies.

[GenThunderfist]

Wow. I know this is a pretty old thread, but I saw it just recently.
My annoying GM is a combination of 1 and the last one (I think 6 but i'm not looking at the question poll currently). We started off with next to no equipment. Well my character did, but almost instantly into the campaign we were knocked out and our equipment was taken from us. Then we went on a hell of a time escaping from a techno wizard and 3 minotaurs (possibly some form of men at arms occ, not sure, but strong). We went into a series of caves, got almost r@ped by giant freakin worms and a shape changing goblin wizard, then we make it into another series of tunnels and almost get killed by a trio of French-Canadian freakin' Psistalkers, followed by a made up creature that we couldn't kill and could insantly kill us with some sort of rust/degrade/poison/defile disease it spread. Apparently it burned really bad, I never touched it but the other player I played with did. Now remember, we are doing this with almost no freakin' equipment or weapons. Then we make it (barley) into a room of some Demon Mage. We barley get out of that alive, although we got a couple interesting Magic items...yeah...anyway then we get back to town and nearly get killed by a patrol of CS who notice that I am not human, the other player is a Psychic, and that we have a gross amount (more than three) magic items. So that went well. After we make it out of that by the skin of our teeth the first town we get to is...wrong...come to find out it is infested with demonic children and other stuff. I am fleeing from a particularly threatening mob and hit a dead end. The end of the alley is a fence, and by my understanding of the situation (since the GM is my eyes and ears here) I only see one way out. Turns out because of the "heat of the moment" the linear path to hell was all I noticed, although there were about 30 better options upon further disussion.
INSERT- I got some of my equip back by this time, but lost it running away from the demon children mob -END INSERT
Now I am stuck in what is basically hell with next to no chance of survival

Challenge is one thing...but this is ridiculous

[Colt47]

I think one of the things I tend to get annoyed by are when GMs like to jump ship into different settings after you've made a character that is for the originally announced setting. Like in Dungeons and Dragons when you are told the game is going to take place in Cormanthyr and then suddenly you end up in a High Seas adventure (hello heavily armored knight on a horse... who is now on a boat... with a swim check of -10... surrounded by people that go "ARR MATEY!"), or when the game is supposed to be a Rifts North America game and suddenly you end up on Phase World or some alien planet. I don't mind a GM using stuff from other settings in a Rifts Earth game, I just want the Rifts Earth Game to happen in the setting in question.

[Snow Hawk]

I know this is an old topic but I voted for the Railroader anyway

second is the GMPC they suck as well

[BillionSix]

Okay, here's a new one. It's not so much a type of bad GM as a type that can be applied to both players and GMs.

I call it: The Burn Victim.

This is someone who was burned by a bad style of play or GM in the past and is now obsessed with it, to the point where he can't enjoy the game at all. As soon as he sits down, he starts obsessively looking for any hint of the thing that burned him.

So, a Burn Victim who had a bad experience with GMPCs in a game will freak out when an NPC gains any prominence.
"So, the scholar coughs and agrees to help you find the information."
"Oh, I bet this guy knows everything!!"
"Um, not everyth..."
"And I bet he's going to offer to go on the adventure for us, and we'll just be his ****ing entourage!!!"
"Um, no, he..."
"And I bet he has like a milliondy billion percent in every skill and knows every spell!"
"What are you talking about?"
"What's that notebook behind you? The 500 page one! I bet it's where you wrote his intelligence score! You needed 500 pages to fit all the zeroes!!!"
"Um..."
"I KILL HIM!!!"
"Uh, he dies."

Or the Burn Victim who hates railroading,
"The old man tells you of a mysterious cave."
"Oh, and I bet we are suppose to go into the cave!"
"Um, you don't have to. There are a lot of adventure hooks you can..."
"Yeah, but if we don't take this one you're just going to punish us. I see how it is."
"No, do what you want?"
"Why don't you just write down everything our players do and we can read it afterward???"

Most Burn Victims are players, but they can manifest as GMs.
Like a Burn Victim who is super paranoid about rules lawyers or munchkins...

"Hmm. I think I'd like to play a full conversion Borg."
"Oh I bet. You'd like to be this armored tank destroying everything!"
"Um, no. I just think it would be an interesting roleplaying challenge. Someone who regrets selling off his humanity for..."
"Yeah, right! You can play a Borg. But you only have a quarter of your MDC left! And no weapons! And you lost your legs so you have to drag yourself by your arms!"
"Hmm. That sounds like a real challenge! Sure, I can..."
"Stop trying to dominate my game, munchkin!!!!"

It's one thing to hate all these qualities when you see them, it's another to be so scared of them cropping up that you can't see anything else.

Someone on a forum (I forget who) said something like that the fear of munchkinism can be more destructive to a game than munchkinism itself.

Brian

[DhAkael]

The GMPC: An NPC that is run by the GM who actually becomes the central and focal point of the story. And no matter what the PCs do or say, the GMPC still becomes the coolest thing next to sliced bread because it makes the GM happy to "win" with this character.

Present GM... he calmed down for a while... now?
It's ALL about 'the Dude' now

[DhAkael]

I think one of the things I tend to get annoyed by are when GMs like to jump ship into different settings after you've made a character that is for the originally announced setting. Like in Dungeons and Dragons when you are told the game is going to take place in Cormanthyr and then suddenly you end up in a High Seas adventure (hello heavily armored knight on a horse... who is now on a boat... with a swim check of -10... surrounded by people that go "ARR MATEY!"), or when the game is supposed to be a Rifts North America game and suddenly you end up on Phase World or some alien planet. I don't mind a GM using stuff from other settings in a Rifts Earth game, I just want the Rifts Earth Game to happen in the setting in question.

Tough dude... it is a MEGAVERSAL game setting; that's the entire point of it.
Unless you just want Gama-world (tm) with magic. Which is okay too, but that's not Rifts.

[MaxxSterling]

I'm with DhAkael, the entire point of this game system is to get rifted to new and crazy places. If you only want to use 1 book, then play a different game. Don't even waste your time with Rifts. I always use as many books as possible in my games and characters are rarely ever on Earth because it sucks.

And I think being a good GM, actually involves being a little bit of all the things in the poll, but knowing when to be each of those things is the part that many do not get right. And, on top of having an awesome GM, you need to make sure you don't have idiot players.

[escargotini]

The Clueless: Wants to be a GM badly, doesn't invest the time to read/plan, doesn't have a strong grasp of the game mechanics.

I'll admit this one starts out fun, but quickly goes downhill. Overall the PCs were pretty weak but we knew our capabilities. We killed the main villain halfway through the first session in one shot. We stole his ship and devised a plan better than the incoherent plot that would accomplish the same ends. The second and final session, a ship of vampire pirates boarded us in our sleep in an attempt to drag us back to the rails. They outnumbered the party 5:1, we massacred them and continued on our way.

I've been in games with new GMs before, but this one kept asking us about rules and was constantly amazed when we used any powers or abilities. It was worse because this person had been in our group as a player for over a year, and apparently didn't yet understand the system very well.

A similar example was a kid in high school who always begged us to play in his game. I'd heard bad things from other people and he was kind of annoying so the answer was always no. Finally, he approached two of us with this desperate offer:
"If you play in my game, you can start with any magic item you want."
"Fine," I said, "I want a Dagger of DM Slaying."
"No! You can't have that! Any magic item except that one!"
My friend immediately chimed in with "Ok, I want a Ring of DM Slaying."
"NOOOO!"

[drewkitty ~..~]

Gm's that run 'Dice-less games' are the worst. I will drop out of the game the instant the GM says the game will be dice-less.

[MaxxSterling]

I know "diceless" games exist, but if I want to sit around a table B.S.ing with some friends, I don't need a game to facilitate that. So I really don't get that concept at all.

And I think really, that worst thing, as mentioned above is actually a G.M. that doesn't know the rules. Or at least doesn't know them as well as the characters do.

[Colt47]

Actually another thing that bugs me is when GMs fail to understand that Rifts itself is it's own game and not just a sandbox. Rifts is a High Fantasy game that merges technology and magic. While this makes everything compatible with Rifts to some degree, that doesn't mean that it will work just tossing it in without modifying the background to fit the game.

Also, I wish more GMs would check to see if something in the setting can't already fill whatever villain / monster role they need, like Xiticix instead of trying to shoehorn in Invid (they are the same concept, just different adaptations for different settings). I'm guilty of doing this as a player and content maker as well, usually with a friend or fellow player pointing out the issue.

[Colt47]

Actually, another term that my local group uses for railroad RPG sessions is the marathon of death because usually the GM gets so caught up in the story they don't let anyone rest, recover, or gain rewards outside of experience (call them the three R's of Pen and Paper RPGs). Characters get tossed rapidly from one story point to another without any downtime.

[Jay05]

I voted railroader. The others I can deal with to a point. The GM pc isn't so bad as long as they don't get final say in party decisions which would be the same as railroading.

[DhAkael]

I voted railroader. The others I can deal with to a point. The GM pc isn't so bad as long as they don't get final say in party decisions which would be the same as railroading.

Already had this discussion off-thread...and I agree.

[dragonfett]

I voted railroader. The others I can deal with to a point. The GM pc isn't so bad as long as they don't get final say in party decisions which would be the same as railroading.

I find that the God GM is very close to the Railroad GM, with the exception that at least with the Railroad GM, you at least have some sort of rule consistency. I don't like either, but I hate the God GM even more than the Railroader.

[The Dark Elf]

I forced all my players to vote railroader.

[Akashic Soldier]

I have been pretty lucky with my pick of GM's most of the time. However, I've learned a lot from the bad things they do so in a way I am a bit of a "burn victim" as mentioned above but I try hard to swallow my medicine and do my absolute BEST to be a fair and just Game Master and handle a situation without personal biases while still building an engaging game world for my players.

I've played with one God/GMPC and it caused me to leave the game. In my opinion when "the players are doomed and there is no hope" because you thrust them into that position its incredibly tacky to have a pet NPC appear and unleash an ultimate weapon system that saves the day. Then, to deny another PC with the ability to utilize the same weapon system access to it based entirely on the GM's personal opinion about the player ("He's an idiot") rather than giving the player a chance to use his abilities to the fullest, well to me that is just wrong.
As a GM I feel like it is our responsibility to make the players the main characters of the game and controlling them with NPCs or Lording "heroic" NPCs over them rather than allowing them an opportunity to be heroic is kind of... well... lame. Likewise, retconing previous statements and then mocking the intelligence of the players because "you" as the GM changed reality is also very crass. In the end it left me feeling that there was no point and all that I had to look forward to was being insulted each game week or listening to the GM ***** about the other players who at the time I considered to be friends. So, yeah... I dropped out.

The other bad experience I have had was with God/Railroading GM (although I was not gaming, I was watching) wherein the GM literally had giant rocks fall out of the clear blue sky and crush the characters of my little brothers and a couple of my friends when they chose to walk down the LEFT path instead of the right (Why even give them a left path then?!). Then to make it worse they had the magical ability to dodge or parry any single attack in a melee, yet for no reason those abilities failed when they tried to block the boulders or dodge the rocks. It was an ugly experience and after getting a "please help us" look from one of my brother's friends I had to get up and ask the guy to leave my house because the game was over. Needless to say, he was not invited back and among the players there was much rejoicing.

Finally, the other GM-type I hate to play under is the guy that has no consistency in his stories and uses his game world as a way of compensating for the fact that in life he is a miserable angry person (We've all met this kind of person I am sure). In it the laws of physics change on a whim and most of the NPCs you encounter will be manifestations of a difference of opinion that he can use to kill you or the other player characters just for **** and giggles. He encourages PVP in his players and tries to get them to team up to kill other members of the party for him in an effort to "gang up" and make someone the sigma of the gaming group. Gaming to him is about personal power (likely because of the inadequacies of his own life) and he uses role playing as an outlet to express his hatred with his "friends" (the players) being little more than the unfortunate souls caught in the crossfire or pawns to be conqured.

Other than that, the vast majority of my experiences with Game Masters have been really good ones.

[scottypotty]

The god npc is not fun. I've played with a GM who had one in every game we played. Making the characters sidekicks and essentially useless kills the game.

Now, as a GM, I might be considered a railroader....although one of diabolical cunning. I create subplots that entice characters and appeal psychologically to the player. I downplay them and even wait several sessions for them to come to fruition. More often than not, every "choice" the players make has already been made by me. It also helps that I am good on the fly and have a quick wit at times to roll with the unplanned. I find it fun after the conclusion of a lengthy campaign to show the players just how many of their decisions were predetermined by me.

[KillWatch]

that... doesn't sound like my kind of fun

[scottypotty]

When a GM knows the players very well, it's fun. Everything they're probably going to do is prepared for, or things are set in motion that 9 times out of 10 they are going to pursue. That's why I said it might be railroading.

[JuliusCreed]

When a GM knows the players very well, it's fun. Everything they're probably going to do is prepared for, or things are set in motion that 9 times out of 10 they are going to pursue. That's why I said it might be railroading.

Not really railroading so much as it is anticipating your players' actions. After playing with a group for so long, you get a pretty good feel for what they'll likely do in a given situation. This can be a dangerous ground to tread because if your players get too predictable, the adventures and campaigns you set in front of them can start to get pretty stale in a 'Been there, done that" sort of way. Kudos to you for sticking with a single group for that long, especially if you can still manage to keep things fresh for them, but I'd start looking at a change of scenery in the game... maybe a different GM, a new player or two (I'm sure someone in your group knows someone who'd be interested in joining), a radical new campaign, a different setting or an entirely new game altogether. Either way, grain of salt here, just dropping my 2 coppers.

[KillWatch]

Well apparently you know your players. And it is railroading in the technical sense. Their freedom is an illusion. However once I learned of this It would nag me and I would have to start screwing things up. The other issue is that apparently they are not getting into character enough, OR you are just a master of all character traits. Different characters should have different motivations, dispositions, alignments and histories that make them act differently. If not and they are just playing themselves as a paladin, as a dwarf, as a thief, as a glitterboy, then I am no longer as impressed.

[Nightmask]

The list is missing 'The Favoriteer', the GM who plays favorites. He's got someone who's a favorite so you see them decked out with things the rest can't hope to get, even worse if he's 'The Bastard' since everyone else is struggling along.

I'm afraid I probably slide into 'Burn Victim' territory as a player though, burned just enough it's difficult to trust any GM because of those bad experience.

[say652]

nothing worse than a GMPC the invincible swordsman that can parry bullets and energy, autododge, sense weakness of enemies automatically and all mdc becomes sdc. and constantly critical hits no roles slays 50 vampires barehanded in a melee and is somehow 15th level in a level 2 adventure. need i go on. i almost forgot about the infinite credits and seven armies the GMPC isthe general of. GRRRRRRRRRRRR. second most hated is the railroader, dude people have free thought, that means the plyer characters have free thought.

[SmilingJack]

I think we need to add another gm type

How about The Boring Gm:

Aka their adventure is totally insipid and banal, they spend half the time looking up things which results in everyone getting off track and utterly bored waiting, the adventure goes no where and everyone leaves feeling like they wasted precious hours of their lives

[Razzinold]

I voted the weirdo, even though I've had a gm that was all of them.
Nothing worse when they put you in a scenario that can only be solved one way and he is the only one who knows what that one way is.
Or when they act weird when girls are in the group. I remember I played in this one game and the only way we could get out of jail was to have one of the girls in the group have sex with one of the guards. It was creepy because he had them describe it in detail, everyone else was like dude just go rent porn.

It was stupid, the jail we were in was everything proof, didn't matter how strong we were, what kind of magic or psionics that was the only way out. So I voted for weirdo.
I noticed a lot of people voted GMPC, maybe it's because I'm used to playing in a smaller group (usually the GM plus 2 or 3 others) but the GM always had a PC that stayed with the group full time. He never tried to take the spotlight though, he always played minimal roles like drove the truck or was our contact with the group we were visiting. I remember one time the guy was a monk who took a vow to abstain from violence so he didn't even join us in combat.

I do the same when I GM with a small group, I have a PC full time with the group but I always make myself the mechanic, driver, bar owner that the merc group uses as their base and I stay in contact via radio. I never try to swoop in a save the day, neither did my GM Paul.

[arthurfallz]

I noticed a lot of people voted GMPC, maybe it's because I'm used to playing in a smaller group (usually the GM plus 2 or 3 others) but the GM always had a PC that stayed with the group full time. He never tried to take the spotlight though, he always played minimal roles like drove the truck or was our contact with the group we were visiting. I remember one time the guy was a monk who took a vow to abstain from violence so he didn't even join us in combat.

I do the same when I GM with a small group, I have a PC full time with the group but I always make myself the mechanic, driver, bar owner that the merc group uses as their base and I stay in contact via radio. I never try to swoop in a save the day, neither did my GM Paul.

We have these in my group too. We call them PCNPCs, or (as my ex used to call them) puck-neh-pucks. Basically, a helper character along to aid the group, often a support role. As a GM, I use it, all of my friends use it. They make great support NPCs. But when they steal the show, that's no fun at all. We called them PCNPCs because, well, when we GM it's often one person GMing for over a year, and he or she doesn't get to play much, so that PC is some little bit of personal character that's put in the game.

As a side note, I find players get irritated when those same PCNPCs act useless and run off at the worst times (see Gandalf's behaviour in The Hobbit book as the classic example). I think a lot of the GMNPC depends on presentation and intent. If the GM intends the NPC to be an aide with personality, a member of the group, it works out. If the GM wants his Elric son of Conandore to be the mysterious star of the story... then you've got GMNPC running amok.

[arouetta]

I said the Weirdo. I'm female. I'm fine with consensual adult sex in a game. Anything else triggers phobias and nightmares. Yes, I have to be careful about the news I read and shows I watch.

The rest don't impact me outside the game other than annoy or anger me and I'm now learning how easy it is to find other gaming groups.

[Vrykolas2k]

I said the Weirdo. I'm female. I'm fine with consensual adult sex in a game. Anything else triggers phobias and nightmares. Yes, I have to be careful about the news I read and shows I watch.

The rest don't impact me outside the game other than annoy or anger me and I'm now learning how easy it is to find other gaming groups.

Welcome to the boards.

[ZorValachan]

I noticed a lot of people voted GMPC, maybe it's because I'm used to playing in a smaller group (usually the GM plus 2 or 3 others) but the GM always had a PC that stayed with the group full time. He never tried to take the spotlight though, he always played minimal roles like drove the truck or was our contact with the group we were visiting. I remember one time the guy was a monk who took a vow to abstain from violence so he didn't even join us in combat.

I do the same when I GM with a small group, I have a PC full time with the group but I always make myself the mechanic, driver, bar owner that the merc group uses as their base and I stay in contact via radio. I never try to swoop in a save the day, neither did my GM Paul.

We have these in my group too. We call them PCNPCs, or (as my ex used to call them) puck-neh-pucks. Basically, a helper character along to aid the group, often a support role. As a GM, I use it, all of my friends use it. They make great support NPCs. But when they steal the show, that's no fun at all. We called them PCNPCs because, well, when we GM it's often one person GMing for over a year, and he or she doesn't get to play much, so that PC is some little bit of personal character that's put in the game.

As a side note, I find players get irritated when those same PCNPCs act useless and run off at the worst times (see Gandalf's behaviour in The Hobbit book as the classic example). I think a lot of the GMNPC depends on presentation and intent. If the GM intends the NPC to be an aide with personality, a member of the group, it works out. If the GM wants his Elric son of Conandore to be the mysterious star of the story... then you've got GMNPC running amok.

I agree a lot with arthurfallz. My group was formed originally from people who never played RPGs and it was like 1992 when I gathered everyone (before that it was hit or miss with another group of friends from 1986-1991). All of them except 1 had never thought about an RPG and then there was no internet or anything else in our 198 person village for anyone to 'research'. So GMPCs started as a way to interact with the PCs and get them to learn IC vs OOC and other various things. Sadly (and I take a huge piece of the fault here), the too-powerful GMPCs started to pop up and later me and another co-GM got into a GMPC 'pissing contest' that probably still leaves a bad taste in our player's mouth. But over years, one type of GMPC I noticed is loved by the players. The one that the GM did not make as a GMPC, but the PCs actually made into a party member.

Current example of this from a D&D game. Party was trying to end a kobold threat and after the first fight captured a kobold and got him to reluctantly tell them where the secret lair was. A couple PCs used the kobolds' reverence to dragons to set up their dragonborn fighter as a 'mentor' and change the kobold's allegiance from tiamat to bahamut (bad and good dragon gods). They love their little kobold thief now. Things like this (against my knowledge and desires-I had sword off GMPCs at the time) seem to be a lot better than me coming up with a preconceived GMPC and dropping him into the party. I have also found a GMPC who is more of an acquaintance and on some, but not all of their adventures is not seen in ill-light also. In one recent game I had, the party (a squad in an established company) was taling with some NPCs and suddenly asked 'hey why don't you come with us?'. I couldn't think of a good reason not to (besides just saying no), and they had 3 GMPCs on their next series of adventures. They made it back and dropped 2 off and the 3rd decided to go out with my other group (2 groups playing in the same world at the same time are part of the same company brings an 'realness' to the game that is very cool). These GMPCs being around the same level (give or take a level) has helped in that they never 'steal the show'. maybe a 'steal the moment', but every character has one or two of those a game.

[say652]

New type the realist, all game mechanics must boil down to real life physics?????? What? Dude you do know this is a Game? Right?

[The Dark Elf]

I used support NPC's on a lot of occasions. Archie was with the group for 75% of the time during PFRPG Book VI: Island at the Edge of the World and he was much more powerful than them which could unbalance the game. but-

He was a support NPC. He was not a PC. He did not get experience. He did not steal any limelight. He did not direct the plot other than that of picking a destination (how, what route, when were all up to the group as were side quests). In fact I played him to wander off "on his private business" in towns etc. so that he was there to be able to save the day should I need to bring the plot back "on track" (which wasnt often if at all).

No character controlled by the GM is any form of PC. They are NPC's. Even if they were once a PC.

[The Oh So Amazing Nate]

I said the Weirdo. I'm female. I'm fine with consensual adult sex in a game. Anything else triggers phobias and nightmares. Yes, I have to be careful about the news I read and shows I watch.

The rest don't impact me outside the game other than annoy or anger me and I'm now learning how easy it is to find other gaming groups.

uuughhh My GM does this. He tried using a female NPC to engage my PC in that type of situation. Luckily I was able to get out of it and made my point that if the NPC tried to "grab my junk" again I would literally kill everyone in the village and burn it to the ground.

The worst was the most recent. I was helping a female NPC rescue some rustled livestock. We got surrounded by the bandits (out numbered 4:1) and fought our best. The female NPC is knocked unconscious and I'm held at gun point. 2 of the bandits then proceed to rape the unconscious NPC. I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination, but when the GM (and maybe it's just this guy) brings a sexual element into the game (never played with it when I was younger and don't think it belongs in my games now) it literally makes my skin crawl. I just want to pick up my dice and leave. But since I'm playing while at work (3rd shift, what a blessing) that isn't an option.

Please send any specific reply via PM with a non related subject, as I won't be following this thread. I let the GM read forum related emails as they usually pertain to issues in our game (and he is almost computer illiterate).

[Vrykolas2k]

New type the realist, all game mechanics must boil down to real life physics?????? What? Dude you do know this is a Game? Right?

As long as they're consistent, I'm actually ok with this.
I mean, there are worse...

[Damian Magecraft]

New type the realist, all game mechanics must boil down to real life physics?????? What? Dude you do know this is a Game? Right?

As long as they're consistent, I'm actually ok with this.
I mean, there are worse...

except when his rules are complex enough to make rolemaster look like snakes and ladders.

[say652]

To me game mechanics are well game mechanics and real life has nothing to do with a game.

[arouetta]

To me game mechanics are well game mechanics and real life has nothing to do with a game.

I go 50/50 on this statement. To me a rule has to make sense for me to wrap my brain around it, but I work best with a consistent set of rules. To pull from a current topic, on one hand it's important to figure out coin weight and volume (I don't want a player saying his character is carrying 100,000 gold on his belt in a teeny little purse), on the other hand I'm not going to get ridiculous and work out rules for 1000 gold. Physics count, and I've overturned more than one ruling when the players came up with a logical reason for why something should or shouldn't work if the rules about that topic were hazy.

[Vrykolas2k]

New type the realist, all game mechanics must boil down to real life physics?????? What? Dude you do know this is a Game? Right?

As long as they're consistent, I'm actually ok with this.
I mean, there are worse...

except when his rules are complex enough to make rolemaster look like snakes and ladders.

That's taking things a bit far, obviously...

[Damian Magecraft]

New type the realist, all game mechanics must boil down to real life physics?????? What? Dude you do know this is a Game? Right?

As long as they're consistent, I'm actually ok with this.
I mean, there are worse...

except when his rules are complex enough to make rolemaster look like snakes and ladders.

That's taking things a bit far, obviously...

most realists tend to take things that far...

[Giant2005]

I voted for the bastard.
I am fine with starting with crap - I even expect to, but when they take away anything decent you manage to get your hands on, every time you get your hands on something decent, it is a problem. Those toys are pretty much the only progression Rifts offers - take away the progression and there isn't much point - no matter what trials and tribulations your character goes through, he is always going to be in the exact same situation he started in.

[Vrykolas2k]

Of course, another Bastard trait is to make his/ her NPCs omniscient.

[Aaryq]

I have a consistent NPC that operates in all of my Rifts campaigns. I don't think he steals the spotlight and the players are always happy to see him. I actually started one campaign as our group adjusted (Military groups always have old guys leaving and new people joining) and they work for this NPC. He doesn't do any of their missions or things of that nature. Additionally he gives them plenty of time off (to keep him out of the spotlight). I don't think I'm GMPCing this campaign though.

[Warshield73]

I voted for the Weirdo. All of the other types can be annoying when taken to the extreme and even suck the fun out of the game over time but only the weirdo makes gaming feel weird and makes me want to leave in the middle of the game.

[pblackcrow]

Since I can only pick one one, I would like to go over things.


The Railroader (wants you to be like characters in a story which he runs, with little say of your own)

I honestly have never encountered one of those. But I have had to bring my players gently back to a plot. But never said you can't do something.

The Weirdo (your character gets raped, humiliated, murdered, and so do their families)

I hate those types, but if it is part of an over all plot, I'm more or less okay with it.

The God (it works this way because I say it does, THIS time... consistency, what's that?)

This is what I hate the most.

The GMPC (I'm king of the world!! You all get to deal with my narcisistic masturbation.)

This I have only dealt with only one time and it was part of a story plot. So, I have no problem with it.

The Cryptic (you don't know what's going on from what he says until it springs at you; he may be a short fat bald guy with long hair and funny clothes).

THIS ASPECT I LOVE!!! The cryptic clues and plot twists.

The Bastard (never lets your characters start out with decent things, if you acquire decent things later he takes them away).

Yeah, I've ran into them. What is the most irritating thing to me is not being aloud to acquire land, build a home, town, or the like when we have acquired the money to be able to do so.

[Swift-13]

I admit, I railroad from time to time, but just to get the characters going in, well, ANY direction, really. There are times when it's called for, just to preserve the flow of gameplay. I don't mean outright, "Okay, your characters WILL take the train to Timbuktu!" But a mild earthquake to shake up the cavern their exploring might be the hotfoot they need.

As far as the Weirdo, yeah, I've dealt with them. One husband and wife lot: the GM kept getting his wife's characters knocked-up in game after game. 'Nuff said there.

Like railroading, it can help to be a Bastard, too. There are cases where you might have to set up the group losing track of their gantrium-forged Greatest Rune Weapons. This is an appropriate counter to the unmentioned "Monty Haul" sort of GM. Loot is nice, but giving your fiancé's Line Walker 1-million credits and a Battle Fury Blade in the first game is a bad start.

Now, the Cryptic can be downright fun! In the right circumstance, of course. Beyond the Supernatural and Nightbane, being that kind of horror game, lose their edge of the players know exactly what their up against. Likewise, the motives of Alien Intelligences or insane A.I.'s usually remain outside the ken of your average player-character. It's useful to turn this sort of encounter into a game of mental chess, as long as too much time isn't spent trying to piece it together before the big finale.

[Alrik Vas]

I think you guys are confusing the "Cryptic GM" with the "Mystery GM"

Cryptics are often overthinking everything and expecting you to do so as well, but you rarely ever do it in the same direction. Read all the detective novels, practice all the Sudoku you want...get into remote viewing...whatever, it doesn't matter. You're just not going to figure ANYTHING out until he springs it on you.

Case in point, we're the new guys in town and beat up the local thugs, chasing them off. That night we get killed a Vampire Intelligence. Apparently the thugs were special vampires that would be hurt by normal weapons, and they could walk in the day for a short amount of time, but no not half vampires or whatever, they were servants of the Intelligence who was waiting for us to show up so it could turn one of us because he foresaw that person destroying him (we were level 1).