Forums of the Megaverse®

I'm going through a similar transition with my group.......and they follow my posts.

If Miguel's character continues to fight or not listen to commands from the CS Officer...he'd plug'em or if the Officer was in danger from someone else and couldn't defend against both. Also may depend on the Officer's alignment. Basically, play it as you see it and as if you are the Officer defending for his life.

i would hope, that after a few good hits from a blaster, that miguel would notice his armor was almost gone, and take defensive action. Like running.
It really depends on the GM. But realisticly, i believe the officer would take a shot if immediate back-up wasn't available to maybe take a prisoner. And the prisoner thing would be probably out of the question.
When my players rush into a fight they can't win, my gloves come off. Unless i made the battle especially difficult, then i fudge rolls.

take the gloves off if they have a encounter they should run away from and don't let the character get killed, if the know the system its all good, if the don't have them come across a guy in full armor how is still half vaporized on the in side do to a well aimed shot so the get the point and give hits that it's going to start getting harder, thats the point to get harder as you go along and to have the characters live through tough stuff to gain levels.

Dragon_blaze

Kn1ves wrote:One of the reasons I love RIfts so much is because it is such a deadly setting. Almost every combat situation has to be looked at as a very real threat to ones life. That being said, I've recently, within the last two months, started running a game for my two roomates. Miguel had never played Rifts or done much roleplaying at all before besides WoW. Rob had payed maybe 3 sessions of Rifts before in his life. Miguel settled on a Fire/Water Elemental Fusionist and Rob is playing a slightly tweaked, good version of a Corrupt. Their first couple adventures out I put them up against several weaker opponents with good tactics just to show them that, unlike other games, they could not just charge through and slaughter everything. They also didn't know the combat system so after a couple hints they were able to get past the first few encounters. They now grasp the system a bit better and are fairing well in combat but I have a problem. I've changed up enemy tactics mid combat and pulled punches several times to keep them alive seeing as how they didn't know the system. Now that they know what they're doing when should the gloves come off? If a coalition officer has blasted away the armor from Miguel's character is there any reason he shouldn't take the kill shot if it's available?

Screw the gloves.

If the CS officer is in a firefight with the PC's does it make sense for him to kill? Yes. It would be wrong of you if you were doing it to spite, but all is fair in, this case, war. You could have the officer give them a chance to surrender as an out, but if they don't take it......

To quote KC:

"Screw the gloves"

"You've gotten better at the game, so I'm going to make things worse"

I imagine your not actually into playing the game to win, like it's chess or a wow instance. So when you say this, it isn't a reward/a pat on the back and a recognition of skill (like unlocking hard mode in a comp game) - it's just a flat out punishment.

If your not a play to win group (and god knows so many people here would say they don't understand the concept) I would recommend giving luck points, and when it comes up as to whether the trooper shoots em when their armours down, they auto spend a luck point to avoid that.

You only recover say one or two luck points per session, max of four at any time.

That's still actually a punishment, cause you were soft on them and this is still harder than it was when you were soft on them. But that's the bed you made.

Noon wrote:If your not a play to win group (and god knows so many people here would say they don't understand the concept) ...

Well, I sure as hell don't play to lose.

I suppose it is possible for people to see it as punishment, but I really don't think of it that way, and I don't think anyone I've ever gamed with felt that way.
What it means is that as you get better, things get more challenging. The characters are taking on 'bigger' threats. Now that the charactes know they can take out a single deadboy, that's when they decide that maybe they can take out a small patrol squad. If they can do that, then they've gotten good enough that maybe they can take out a dozen of them.

For the first couple sessions when playing with people new to the game, there's nothing wrong with taking it easy on them. You've got the idea right though, that now that they've got their heads wrapped around how things work you should tell them the kiddie gloves are off.

Does that mean you should put them in deadly situations? No.
Present situations, and let the players get themselves into or out of it. Give them an escape route though, in case they decide they need it.

Should you fudge rolls, and make bad decisions? Well, personally, I would say yes. #1 because they are still rather new to the game, and probably don't want to lose their characters TOO early. I'd make it at least a half dozen sessions before somebody's first character ever to die. That being said, you should be careful, and only fudge rolls and make bad decisions IF YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. Don't let them realize you're fudging rolls. If they catch you, say, "ah crap, sorry, added it up wrong" or something like that. When causing an NPC to make a bad decision, try to explain why it's happening, and if you can base it off of something that one of the characters has done "The Coalition Officer sees that you're nearly done and expects you to run for it. He turns towards your comrade, and barks some orders to his fellow soldiers, confident in his armor's capability to fend off any attack you might try making in your weakened state"

Fudge things a bit if it keeps the game going, but never let them know that it's because you're being nice. Work it into the story, and get fed up with your 'crappy' rolls.

Fudging should only be used for a little while though, like an invisible set of training wheels to be used after the visible ones are removed. Keep the characters alive long enough for the players to care whether they live or die, and long enough for them to be involved in the story and setting of the game enough that they will WANT to make up another character in order to get back into the game.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Screw the gloves.

Short, sweet and to the point... must not be the real KC
Totally agree tho.

I have a player running a dragon hatchling who loves to grab my NPCs and either teleport or fly away with them, usually dropping them from a great height or eating them, makng short work of what should have been an otherwise difficult but doable engagment. That all changed the day he grabbed a 12th level Necromancer who's been studying Fleshsculpting magic!
I think losing both legs and an arm (Remove Living Bone) have taught him not to grab people willy-nilly!

All my players bring backups to the table. A grisly death is a fact of life in Rifts, almost an inevitability. Let the players feel it, if they can't handle it, send them back to WoW with their tails between their legs!

asajosh wrote:I have a player running a dragon hatchling who loves to grab [...]

BTW, how do you handle grabbing rules?

Roll to strike (defender parries or whatever and fails) then roll strength checks to try to get free. That's how I handle the basic grab.

You award experience points for playing character, right? Well, considering that both PC's are magic users, going for the kill shot, even if the CS officer is not in immediate mortal danger IS playing in character for the CS officer. The CS Officer would take the shot, and maybe a few more just make sure the magic user is dead.

mobuttu wrote:

asajosh wrote:I have a player running a dragon hatchling who loves to grab [...]

BTW, how do you handle grabbing rules?

Well I've had it easy so far, he only seems to grab folks without supernatural strength, so I run it as a straight forward roll to strike and roll to parry/dodge as normal.

Morrowcale wrote:Roll to strike (defender parries or whatever and fails) then roll strength checks to try to get free. That's how I handle the basic grab.

That's fine! Better than the Pinning rules (they are hard for an average PC).

Kn1ves wrote:I don't see it as a punishment, they have been given time to adjust and learn the ropes. When a parent takes the training wheels off of their childs bike is it considered a punishment? How about the first time they don't hold their hand to help them stand on thier own?

Your not their dad. If your players see you as a peer, this doesn't work. Think of it in reverse - what if they started training you as to the right way to roleplay - would it work?

As much as it would work on you, that's as much as it would work on them.

I don't know about you but I always hated when a GM saved a character from a bad situation. My last Rifts character was a Dogboy Preacher and I got the sneaking suspicion more than a few times that I was only alive through GM intervention. They're growing within the system and it's time to let them know that the training wheels are off. My next decision is if I scrap the G.I. Joe rule or not. I really hate that rule but it does increase player survivability.

Perhaps the GM was afraid that you'd say a character should only die 'if it makes sense', and in the heat of the moment you'd see a different version of 'sense' than him.

I don't have a problem keeping the gloves on...as long as they're filled with cement.

Gloves are for those afraid to get their hands dirty!

Kn1ves wrote: Now that they know what they're doing when should the gloves come off?

I'd say you've a minor problem.

You wanted to run a deadly game, but you put the gloves on to start off with, your players like it, and now you're worried about angering your party by having the bad guys be deadlier (and, by extension, making the characters die more). I would say, if you wanted the game to be deadly, you shouldn't have had any gloves to begin with. And your players could learn the joys of repeated character generation in the Palladium system.....

And it is such a joy, no really, nothing like re-checking all those skill percentages every time.... mmmm MMM! Lesser systems would have a system of skills that didn't require 20 minutes of flipping through books to get your skill %, but not Palladium!

However, since they're now used to having the gloves on, you want to take the gloves off. Firstly don't see them as 'gloves', I see them as 'how cinematically do you want to run combats'. It's not like 'training wheels', it's much more like 'style'.

Even though your players may be new, keep in mind what Noon said, you're their Peer. You want to change how the game is run. That's fine. But tell them first. After all, they should be prepared when Rambo turns into Saving Private Ryan..... Both are enjoyable war movies, but both movies paint combat in very different ways. If you sat down for one, and 30 minutes in, it became another, you'd be rightfully ticked.

Also, if they don't like the new way, then you may want to consider changing back.

WHAT GLOVES ?!?!

Was there suppose to be gloves ??? Ooops.

Firget gloves...run them through the GUANTLET now

Effective communication beteween GM and players is fundamental to a good game.

What happened to the villain...my spidey senses tell me after that assualt didn't work, he ran away?

I don't get it - if he tried to use one PC to rip the arm off another - why didn't he just plain kill that PC? Or have the PC kill himself, just to tidy up a lose end? It sounds like the villain changed his mind on what he was going to do to them, for no apparent reason.

It's pretty obvious I'm fishing here, so I'll say it - it looks like you still pulling your punches, but only after you've had the villain make a statement.

My spidey senses detect an angry rebuttal, even though I'm not codemning this. I'm saying it because I'm interested in chatting about the real situation, rather than seeing only what a player would see.

Okay, it seems like that's how events panned out. Though in a gamist context I wouldn't like it - if you can't save your own butt, it's time to lose rather the villain changing his mind. But if your running a world to run a world, yeah, seems really good!