| From: | Frank Pelletier <jeanpell@****.IVIC.QC.CA> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: ?? (was Re: Possession) |
| Date: | Thu, 25 Dec 1997 16:16:23 +0000 |
> On 24 Dec 97 at 1:19, Dvixen wrote:
> > Ralph and Ivy Ryan wrote:
> > > SRII is a game that rewards a good GM, and poor ones have to change the
> > > rules.
> > Really? Then I guess a good GM does't find much of a challenge with
> > the rules as they stand. Pity, then, that you refuse to use your own
> > creativity, and accuse those who do as lesser GM's as yourself. You
> > must be quite the 'good GM' to be able to stick to the rules as they
> > stand, lacking in such areas as they are. Stubborn and unbending
> > comes to mind. Is your totem Steel?
> Sorry to throw myself in there, but of course Ralph and Ivy are right.
> When a player has an idea that isn't covered by the rules - "it is not
> possible!" In fact, noone could think a human being could bve able to
> just run into enemies when it has no "Simple" or "Complex" Action
left
> that "Phase". By the rules, movement is not an action, but it's
> impossible to move into your enemies to distract their aim. Only lower
> GMs allow such a nonsense.
>
> No, sorry, didn't want to become sarcastic, but there are several
> things _not_ covered by the rules - obviously, one has to expand the
> existing rules with creative players (and I am happy I have a few in my
> group). Some rules aim for a style not everyone likes - for the overall
> benefit of the players and GM, they have to be changed.
>
> If that's a definition for a "poor" GM I am proud to see the faces of
> my players, happy with my poor style.
Now..wait, wait, wait, wait...take a deep breath...that's it. Cool.
I can see where Ryan and Ivy might have a point. It's perfectly allright
to invent and adapt existing rules to new situations that weren't taken
into account in BBB or any of the sourcebooks. That's great. Every GM
does that.
But when it comes to modifying existing rules (i.e. Melee, vehicle, etc.),
I think I'll side with R&I. SR was built with a balance between combat,
magic, matrix and vehicle in mind. Everything works fine (hey, it's a
RPG system, not RL in a bottle..so what there's a couple of
inconstintancies? There's some in all systems). Personally, I once had a
GM who modified and boosted the melee system (with martial arts and
maneuvers and shit). Well my my my, the Physads and Sams were having a
blast, but, boy!, did my poor little decker bore himself to death... The
group was great, the rules were fine, and we had fun... But the GM wanted
to add Muay Thai and Karate and all that shit...He ended up with a
campaign full of Street monsters, and one less player...
Now, what I think R&I wanted to say is exactly that. Sure, you must adapt
to new situations...but why worry with realism when SR as a whole works
great? (BTW, that's why I'm pissed with R2...why add a truckload of rules
for a system that works fine?). Heck, as the old saying goes: "If it
ain't broke don't fix it"...
(BTW, again, I wouldn't go so far as to call "Poor GMs" those people who
want to modify those rules...that's what Nerps are for, neh? But some of
you have gone way, way, way overboard with this, to a point where it
couldn't be called "Shadowrun" anymore...)
Salutations
Trinity
------------------------------------------------------
Frank Pelletier
Trinity@********.com, jeanpell@****.qc.ca
"Life is a blur"
