User talk:Gdaze
--Matts 12:39, 26 February 2007 (MST)I hope I never said that Robert "cheated". I was a little strict in the whole poisons incident, and for that I won't apologize, but other than that, I was sad that I never really gave much of a path for Robert to resolve his difficulties.
--Gdaze-- Slow day at work, yay! Anyway. You wrote this "...but I was too concerned with advancing my plot, giving you guys a scare, and honestly, "making an example" (something I never should have done) of Gabe's character for breaking the rules."
Sorry I used cheating, as to me cheating is breaking the rules. So what did you mean by this?
--Matts 17:31, 26 February 2007 (MST)Oh, Robert put on the mask and yelled "For the Dark Gods", which in any reasonable Warhammer game means you get eaten by Chaos. That's all.
--Edmiao 18:51, 26 February 2007 (MST) you should have just put him out of his misery right there and then. maybe letting him live was a greater punishment
--Gdaze-- Well I'd actually disagree here and say that usually, most usually, Chaos is a slow tant. It isn't fast at all. Of course this was a different universe then normal. But in any reasonable game someone usually doesn't have to roll to remember what item is in which hand, so to each his own. But I don't think I "broke the rules"!
--208.146.45.110 20:56, 26 February 2007 (MST)Whether its a slow taint or you get gobbled by a demon lord is up to the GM. Needless to say arousing the ire of chaos should carry with it significant consequences, and is an action that is, barring extraordinary circumstances, out of character for almost anyone in the old world, Matt's version or not. As for the two potions: it was, in my opinion, a bad decision made for reasons that, at the time, probably seemed ok to the GM. If the GM has to go back and edit every mistake he/she makes, there is no way the game is going to run. As I've said before, the GM makes way more mistakes (typically, unless they like to PK) in the group's favor than against them. In order to make the game feasible, someone eventually has to back down, and a game runs much better when that is the player 80-90% of the time. If it really was a mistake, the GM will feel bad as it is and try to make sure it doesn't happen again, and this should be sufficient succor for the players. Besides being a somewhat spineless GM, one of the reasons I often go to lengthy measures to preserve PCs lives is because of the fallout a player death almost invariably generates for me. If you want games to get rougher around the edges, with more PC failures/deaths/etc to sweeten those hard earned victories, you have to accept that sometimes that means you personally are gonna get fucked, maybe even fucked in ways the rules say you shouldn't get fucked: in the heat of the moment, the GM has to be free to take some liberties, at least in my opinion. In fact, the times Robert got really screwed, it was 100% within the rules: he got unbelievably unlucky a number of times and got Ulrich's furied, but that's an entirely GM-independent fucking.
