Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Gabriel Sims <grendel_22@*******.COM>
Subject: GM vs. Players
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 21:36:23 PDT
Hey Guys/Gals/Humanoids,
I'll be starting a campain here at Wazzu and I was wondering if I
could get your opinion on how I intended to start.
*********
As the story opens...
the players wake up in a burned out building that is located in the
middle of the Puallyp(sp?) Barrens. There is evidence of a fire fight
all around them (bullet holes in the walls, spent clips and empty
casings all around as well as 14 charred bodies). The characters
clothing is crisped but otherwise intact. In fact the characters are
100% A-OK...if it wasn't for the pesky little fact that they can't
remember anything. Everything about who they are and what they were is
gone.
*********

This is where my problem arises. Should I go ahead and make the
characters...or should I sit the group down, have them decide the
characters, and have me disperse them (I won't let them choose thier
skills and they may only spend 1/2 of their essence). All equipment
that they have will be non functional.

Any help you can send my way will be helpful.
Kudos to you if you help me, Thanks

Green Dog

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 2
From: Bull <chaos@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:02:39 -0400
At 09:36 PM 8/28/97 PDT, Gabriel Sims wrote these timeless words:
>Hey Guys/Gals/Humanoids,
> I'll be starting a campain here at Wazzu and I was wondering if I
>could get your opinion on how I intended to start.
>*********
>As the story opens...
> the players wake up in a burned out building that is located in the
>middle of the Puallyp(sp?) Barrens. There is evidence of a fire fight
>all around them (bullet holes in the walls, spent clips and empty
>casings all around as well as 14 charred bodies). The characters
>clothing is crisped but otherwise intact. In fact the characters are
>100% A-OK...if it wasn't for the pesky little fact that they can't
>remember anything. Everything about who they are and what they were is
>gone.
>*********
>
>This is where my problem arises. Should I go ahead and make the
>characters...or should I sit the group down, have them decide the
>characters, and have me disperse them (I won't let them choose thier
>skills and they may only spend 1/2 of their essence). All equipment
>that they have will be non functional.
>
>Any help you can send my way will be helpful.
>Kudos to you if you help me, Thanks
>
I have REALLY wanted to run a campign like this for a long time, just never
had the oppurtunity.

I would probably make up the characters, complete with background and
stuff, and then give the characters blank sheets, with you making a note of
which char is which, and only through game play aned experimenting do they
get to learn what skills and such they have.

OR...

You can allow them to make up one char each, with just numbers and race.
no sex, no name, no background, and no edges or flaws. Then give each
character backgrounds and such to fit your game, and possibly do like I
mentioned above, with them learning about themselves through game play.
however, with this method, everyone knows the stats of at least one of the
charcters.

If you really want this to be a good campign, I suggest you do all the work
yourself, so that the players get a much more enjoyable surprise as they
learn about the character and it's abilities...

For inspiration, read The first of Michael Stackpoles Dark Conspiracy
trilogy, Evil Ascending (I think that was the first), as well as the first
book of the Amber Series by Roger Zelazney (sp?). Both books deal very
well with their main characters waking up with no memory and they have to
learn what they can do, though sometimes they get "feelings" that they
might know something. (Gee that gun looks familiar. I think I can shoot
it!).

Good luck, and letr us know how you do...

Bull
--
Bull, aka Steven Ratkovich, aka Rak, aka a lot of others! :]

The Offical Celebrity Shadowrn Mailing List Welcome Ork Decker!
Fearless Leader of the Star Wars Mailing List
List Flunky of ShadowCreations, creators of the Newbies Guide,
in production now!
HOME PAGE: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/3604/home.html

"CrapGame, you bitch!"
-- R.C. during the Drive in the Country tournament
Message no. 3
From: Mike Sapp <cynner29@******.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 01:48:11 -0400
<mysterious firefight,amnesia snip>
>This is where my problem arises. Should I go ahead and make the
>characters...or should I sit the group down, have them decide the
>characters, and have me disperse them (I won't let them choose thier
>skills and they may only spend 1/2 of their essence). All equipment
>that they have will be non functional.
>
You're bothering with players? Why?
It sounds like you already got it figured out.:)

This is a plot device that works in movies, books, and TV but not so well
in RPGs. It removes alot of the input that players give the game and limits
thier choices. You can't write a part for a PC and expect it to get
followed, like an actor reading a script. People aren't going to think like
you, or look at something in quite the same way as you and this results in
them going in directions your plans won't allow for without major revision.
When you burn these players this hard in the beginning, be prepared for
them to downshift into "GM-Nightmare" mode and ignore your helpful
suggestions of where to go and what to do. I've seen GMN mode players, go
from roleplayers to munchkins in less time than it takes to say "You're all
my pawns to do with as I wish!"
At the very least give them warning of what is going to happen or
pre-generate the characters. Don't let anyone work hard to make a character
that you're going to re-define when thier "memories" return.


If your players are newbies and clueless or very understanding then maybe
it'll work. Otherwise, expect anything.
Message no. 4
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 07:54:17 -0400
> From: Gabriel Sims <grendel_22@*******.COM>
> Date: Friday, August 29, 1997 12:36 AM
>
> Hey Guys/Gals/Humanoids,
> I'll be starting a campain here at Wazzu and I was wondering if I
> could get your opinion on how I intended to start.
> *********
> As the story opens...
> the players wake up in a burned out building that is located in the
> middle of the Puallyp(sp?) Barrens. There is evidence of a fire fight
> all around them (bullet holes in the walls, spent clips and empty
> casings all around as well as 14 charred bodies). The characters
> clothing is crisped but otherwise intact. In fact the characters are
> 100% A-OK...if it wasn't for the pesky little fact that they can't
> remember anything. Everything about who they are and what they were is
> gone.
> *********

<Snip>

Okay, no offense to you, but I have to say that as a player, I absolutely
DESPISE the idea of a)not being able to create my own character, and
b)being so blatantly railroaded with such a lame thing as total amnesia.

As a GM I have to say that if this is the best way you can think of to get
the characters together, you should wait awhile before you GM Shadowrun.
Also, wanting to control this much of the gaming process (possilby to the
extent of creating the players' characters fo rthem), is the sign of an
overbearing GM. I, for one, would run far far away from this campaign.

Allow your players to create the characters they want to create, and then
design the runs based on their characters' skills and personalities. Then,
as time goes by, get more input from your players as to how things are
going and what scope they like for the campaign.

Justin :)
Message no. 5
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 07:13:19 -0600
Gabriel Sims wrote:
|
[snip: characters start with amnesia]
|
| This is where my problem arises. Should I go ahead and make the
| characters...or should I sit the group down, have them decide the
| characters, and have me disperse them (I won't let them choose thier
| skills and they may only spend 1/2 of their essence). All equipment
| that they have will be non functional.

Making characters won't be the problem. The characters really don't
have a reason to stick together. They don't have any background, and
don't know why they're there. Maybe a couple of the characters will
want to find out what's going on, but that still doesn't guarantee
that they'll work together. Most of the characters will either get
up and head for the nearest hospital, or they'll wander the streets
and add to the homeless population. At least that's the way that I'd
play a character in such a situation.

BTW, going through amnesia is pure hell. You don't have any
connections with the world. None at all. And you have no idea who
or what you are. Without help most people will lose it.

If you've got a group of great roleplayers inflicting amnesia on one
member of the team will make for some great drama, but doing it to
the whole team will be counterproductive, IMHO.

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 6
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:52:03 +0000
On 29 Aug 97 at 7:54, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> Okay, no offense to you, but I have to say that as a player, I absolutely
> DESPISE the idea of a)not being able to create my own character, and
> b)being so blatantly railroaded with such a lame thing as total amnesia.

I have to disagree. I have always wanted to play in a campaign like
this. Sure its fun to make your own character, but I think it would
be fun to play a pregenerated character, and try to figure out who
you are too. If you want to do this, you should tell the players that
you are creating such a campaign, and see how it goes over. If they
seemed open to it, do it. If they don't, don't. Then you are not
"railroading" them.

> As a GM I have to say that if this is the best way you can think of to get
> the characters together, you should wait awhile before you GM Shadowrun.
> Also, wanting to control this much of the gaming process (possilby to the
> extent of creating the players' characters for them), is the sign of an
> overbearing GM. I, for one, would run far far away from this campaign.

It could be the sign of a creative GM who has confidence in his
abilities to create an enjoyable and different type of campaign for
his players. Every played at a con? Those campaigns are very
tailored, and you play pregen characters. I wouldn't call those GM's
overbearing... and seems as if everyone has a blast.

> Allow your players to create the characters they want to create, and then
> design the runs based on their characters' skills and personalities. Then,
> as time goes by, get more input from your players as to how things are
> going and what scope they like for the campaign.

This is just plain silly.
No way am I going to design a campaign around a group of characters.
I will design a campaign, give the players guidlines for character
creation that will help them maximize their fun factor in that
campaign, and turn 'em loose in my world. Generally, fun ensues. Your
method above seems like the tail wagging the dog.

Well, that's my two cents.

--
===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
Why is abbreviation such a long word?

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 7
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 10:31:34 +0000
On 29 Aug 97 at 7:13, David Buehrer wrote:

> Making characters won't be the problem. The characters really don't
> have a reason to stick together. They don't have any background,
> and don't know why they're there. Maybe a couple of the characters
> will want to find out what's going on, but that still doesn't
> guarantee that they'll work together. Most of the characters will
> either get up and head for the nearest hospital, or they'll wander
> the streets and add to the homeless population. At least that's the
> way that I'd play a character in such a situation.

Well, this is easy to overcome. Give them all the same tatoo, or
scar, or something. This will give them a sense of connection with
each other, and a place to start.

--
===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
People are idiots that deserve to be mocked.
-Dogbert

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 8
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 09:10:29 -0600
Drekhead wrote:
|
| On 29 Aug 97 at 7:13, David Buehrer wrote:
|
| > Making characters won't be the problem. The characters really don't
| > have a reason to stick together.
|
| Well, this is easy to overcome. Give them all the same tatoo, or
| scar, or something. This will give them a sense of connection with
| each other, and a place to start.

I don't know. Even then you're pushing it, IMHO :) What I'd do is
sit down with the players and tell them that I want to run a campaign
that starts off with everyone suffering from amnesia (without going
into details). And, that I want them to play the characters as a
team. Then, if they want to go for it, great.

Hmm.. I just got an idea. Make an NPC that isn't suffering from
amnesia, but fakes it. He's the one that rallies the players
together. He's part of whatever reason the PCs have amnesia (a
player in the conspiracy).

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 9
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 11:24:35 +0000
On 29 Aug 97 at 9:10, David Buehrer wrote:

> | Well, this is easy to overcome. Give them all the same tatoo, or
> | scar, or something. This will give them a sense of connection with
> | each other, and a place to start.
>
> I don't know. Even then you're pushing it, IMHO :) What I'd do is
> sit down with the players and tell them that I want to run a
> campaign that starts off with everyone suffering from amnesia
> (without going into details). And, that I want them to play the
> characters as a team. Then, if they want to go for it, great.

That is basically what I said at first as well. It is definitely only
something you could do with player cooperation.

> Hmm.. I just got an idea. Make an NPC that isn't suffering from
> amnesia, but fakes it. He's the one that rallies the players
> together. He's part of whatever reason the PCs have amnesia (a
> player in the conspiracy).

That would work.

--
===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
I'd explain it to you, but your brain would explode.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 10
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 12:51:11 -0400
> From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
> Date: Friday, August 29, 1997 5:52 AM

> On 29 Aug 97 at 7:54, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> > Okay, no offense to you, but I have to say that as a player, I
absolutely
> > DESPISE the idea of a)not being able to create my own character, and
> > b)being so blatantly railroaded with such a lame thing as total
amnesia.

> I have to disagree. I have always wanted to play in a campaign like
> this. Sure its fun to make your own character, but I think it would
> be fun to play a pregenerated character, and try to figure out who
> you are too. If you want to do this, you should tell the players that
> you are creating such a campaign, and see how it goes over. If they
> seemed open to it, do it. If they don't, don't. Then you are not
> "railroading" them.

Sure, if you get the players' approval ahead of time. However, if you just
chuck amnesia at them, it can ruin the game for many players. Trust me, I
know from experience.

> > As a GM I have to say that if this is the best way you can think of to
get
> > the characters together, you should wait awhile before you GM
Shadowrun.
> > Also, wanting to control this much of the gaming process (possilby to
the
> > extent of creating the players' characters for them), is the sign of an
> > overbearing GM. I, for one, would run far far away from this campaign.

> It could be the sign of a creative GM who has confidence in his
> abilities to create an enjoyable and different type of campaign for
> his players. Every played at a con? Those campaigns are very
> tailored, and you play pregen characters. I wouldn't call those GM's
> overbearing... and seems as if everyone has a blast.

Apples and oranges. A Con involves one-scenerio runs. That is a far cry
from the standard campaign that lasts far longer. It's okay and sometimes
lots of fun to play a pregen character for a session or two. Getting stuck
with a character you had no input in creating for a long period of time, on
the other hand will often result in the player not meshing well with what
was given to him and being unhappy.

> > Allow your players to create the characters they want to create, and
then
> > design the runs based on their characters' skills and personalities.
Then,
> > as time goes by, get more input from your players as to how things are
> > going and what scope they like for the campaign.

> This is just plain silly.
> No way am I going to design a campaign around a group of characters.
> I will design a campaign, give the players guidlines for character
> creation that will help them maximize their fun factor in that
> campaign, and turn 'em loose in my world. Generally, fun ensues. Your
> method above seems like the tail wagging the dog.

Well, it keeps the players happy while allowing me to explore whatever I
desire. If the players want an epic campaign, I'll give it to them. If
they prefer a gutter campaign, I can do that too. I am not a walking
talking FASA module. I prefer to be flexible rather than generate a
campaign and force the players to create characters that will fit.
Sometimes a specialized campaign works well this way, but not a typical
one.

I just want everyone to be happy, and am flexible enough of a GM to be able
to handle whatever scope the players desire. What's so wrong with that?
Oh yeah, I forgot...I'm god and shouldn't listen to them, right?

> Well, that's my two cents.

Justin :)
Message no. 11
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:04:01 +0000
On 29 Aug 97 at 12:51, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> Sure, if you get the players' approval ahead of time. However, if
> you just chuck amnesia at them, it can ruin the game for many
> players. Trust me, I know from experience.

Agreed.

> Apples and oranges. A Con involves one-scenerio runs. That is a
> far cry from the standard campaign that lasts far longer. It's okay
> and sometimes lots of fun to play a pregen character for a session
> or two. Getting stuck with a character you had no input in creating
> for a long period of time, on the other hand will often result in
> the player not meshing well with what was given to him and being
> unhappy.

True enough. But with a creative group, it can be done.

> Well, it keeps the players happy while allowing me to explore
> whatever I desire. If the players want an epic campaign, I'll give
> it to them. If they prefer a gutter campaign, I can do that too. I
> am not a walking talking FASA module. I prefer to be flexible
> rather than generate a campaign and force the players to create
> characters that will fit. Sometimes a specialized campaign works
> well this way, but not a typical one.

But what happens if you don't put some guidelines to a group, is you
get a party with a Humanis, and an ork, a ex-Lone Star cop, and a
ganger punk, for example. These dudes would never hang together.
Giving the players exactly what they want has always been a
precursor to munchkinism in my experience. You have to set
guidelines, allow them to work within those guidelines, and make it
fun, because in the end, the fun factor is the only thing that they
will remember.

> I just want everyone to be happy, and am flexible enough of a GM to
> be able to handle whatever scope the players desire. What's so
> wrong with that? Oh yeah, I forgot...I'm god and shouldn't listen to
> them, right?

Who doesn't want their players to be happy? Unhappy players=no
players. You can be flexible and creative, and still set a basic
framework for your game to work with. And of course you should
listen to your players. If you tell them that "here is the type of
campaign I have in mind" and their eyes roll back in their heads, you
know to try something else. If you say "how about this" and they say
"that sounds cool", run with it. That is all I am saying. It doesn't
diminish flexibility. It doesn't stifle creativity. It just gives
the game a focus.

--

===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
If at first you DO succeed, try not to look astonished!

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:33:35 -0600
Drekhead wrote:
|
| But what happens if you don't put some guidelines to a group, is you
| get a party with a Humanis, and an ork, a ex-Lone Star cop, and a
| ganger punk, for example. These dudes would never hang together.
| Giving the players exactly what they want has always been a
| precursor to munchkinism in my experience. You have to set
| guidelines, allow them to work within those guidelines, and make it
| fun, because in the end, the fun factor is the only thing that they
| will remember.

My Champion's GM did something new recently. He gave each of us a
"type" of character to create. But within that frame we were allowed
quite a bit of latitude. For example, my task was to create a grim
vigilante. My first thoughts were of batman, but I don't like to
copy. I came up with a woman who was regularly beaten by her husband
before he shot her, their children, and himself (she survived with a
mutilated face). She's a very angry person and in some sense, has
become what she hates. She reacts to conflicts with violence, has a
strong distaste for all men, and trusts no one. She volunteers at a
battered woman's shelter, which further fuels her anger towards men.
However, deep inside she hates herself most of all. I'm really
looking forward to playing this character over time and see if she
learns to love, grieve, and trust people and herself. I'm also
looking forward to seeing how the other characters react to her
"attitude".

-David
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing
which ones to keep."
Message no. 13
From: George Metz <W0lfstar@***.COM>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:34:42 -0400
In a message dated 97-08-29 14:04:42 EDT, you write:

> But what happens if you don't put some guidelines to a group, is you
> get a party with a Humanis, and an ork, a ex-Lone Star cop, and a
> ganger punk, for example. These dudes would never hang together.

Well, they might, but there'd better be a damned good reason for it - like
the Humanis is trying to get the ork to commit atrocities in a public manner
by manipulating him, the ex-Lone Star ain't ex and he's trying to slam the
Punk, and the Punk is out for the Humanis because he killed his adopted
sister who was a meta. And for some reason they're all being real subtle
about it. =)

> Giving the players exactly what they want has always been a
> precursor to munchkinism in my experience. You have to set
> guidelines, allow them to work within those guidelines, and make it
> fun, because in the end, the fun factor is the only thing that they
> will remember.

True, but the best way to handle a situation in which the PC's are going
munchkin can be to completely screw them over. Have 'em wake up in a jail
cell with a set of titanium-covered cyber-restraints on 'em, and they can't
remember the past 72 hours or so. (It works even better if they've got
eidetic/photographic memory). I had this done to me in a solo adventure once,
and I was having a blast. I even had to get killed before I could get to the
real plot-line. You can do a LOT with de-munching PCs....

> > I just want everyone to be happy, and am flexible enough of a GM to
> > be able to handle whatever scope the players desire. What's so
> > wrong with that? Oh yeah, I forgot...I'm god and shouldn't listen to
> > them, right?

Yuppers. You are G.O.D. - Game Ordinance Director. =)

> Who doesn't want their players to be happy? Unhappy players=no
> players. You can be flexible and creative, and still set a basic
> framework for your game to work with. And of course you should
> listen to your players. If you tell them that "here is the type of
> campaign I have in mind" and their eyes roll back in their heads, you
> know to try something else. If you say "how about this" and they say
> "that sounds cool", run with it. That is all I am saying. It doesn't
> diminish flexibility. It doesn't stifle creativity. It just gives
> the game a focus.

True, but sometimes the game goes that much better if the PCs DON'T have any
clue that they're about to get screwed. It really depends on how well you
know the players and what type of people they are.

Wolfstar
Message no. 14
From: James Lindsay <jlindsay@******.CA>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 20:26:41 GMT
On Wed, 3 Sep 1997 13:34:42 -0400, George Metz wrote:

> In a message dated 97-08-29 14:04:42 EDT, you write:
>
> > But what happens if you don't put some guidelines to a group, is you
> > get a party with a Humanis, and an ork, a ex-Lone Star cop, and a
> > ganger punk, for example. These dudes would never hang together.
>
> Well, they might, but there'd better be a damned good reason for it - like
> the Humanis is trying to get the ork to commit atrocities in a public manner
> by manipulating him, the ex-Lone Star ain't ex and he's trying to slam the
> Punk, and the Punk is out for the Humanis because he killed his adopted
> sister who was a meta. And for some reason they're all being real subtle
> about it. =)

This isn't Shadowrun, it's Paranoia (a gaming universe where even
CancerMan could not survive)!



James W. Lindsay Vancouver, British Columbia
"http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero";

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
the grace to accept the things I cannot,
and a great big bag of money."
Message no. 15
From: Tobias Berghoff <Zixx@*****.TEUTO.DE>
Subject: Re: GM vs. Players
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 19:02:00 GMT
on 03.09.97 W0lfstar@***.COM wrote:

W> > But what happens if you don't put some guidelines to a group, is you
W> > get a party with a Humanis, and an ork, a ex-Lone Star cop, and a
W> > ganger punk, for example. These dudes would never hang together.
W>
W> Well, they might, but there'd better be a damned good reason for it - like
W> the Humanis is trying to get the ork to commit atrocities in a public
W> manner by manipulating him, the ex-Lone Star ain't ex and he's trying to
W> slam the Punk, and the Punk is out for the Humanis because he killed his
W> adopted sister who was a meta. And for some reason they're all being real
W> subtle about it. =)

Wolfstar, you've just created a situation which will end with four dead
PCs and some pissed of players (I had that. I played a guy, who sold
rockets to the 'Knights Of The Red Branch', who fired them at our decker.
Now, let's say the girl, who played that decker really takes things
personal and we ended with her nearly crying (you might erase the
'nearly', as she left the room) and me being *really* pissed of. No fun)



Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx a.k.a. Charon, your friendly werepanther physad.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+(+++) o? K?(-)
w---() O- M-- V- PS+ PE- Y+>++ PGP-
t+(++) 5+ X++ R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++
e>+++++(*) h! r-- z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about GM vs. Players, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!