GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[MGibster]

I mean, maybe I'm getting stuck on the example but, why wouldn't a werewolf or a mage want to keep the sabbat out of chicago? Why couldn't one be an ally of one of the vampires?

I accidentally clicked the laugh button for your post. My apologies, I'm not laughing at you or your post but I don't know how to undo it. In the old World of Darkness, vampires were the mortal enemies of werewolves. There is some fraternizing, some werewolves are comfortable coexisting with Gangrel, but for the most part we're talking kill-on-sight. Werewolves are one of the reasons most vampires avoid the countryside.

But that's not important. The important thing is the campaign pitched was vampires fighting against a sabbat incursion. A werewolf is not a vampire.

 

[billd91]

I accidentally clicked the laugh button for your post. My apologies, I'm not laughing at you or your post but I don't know how to undo it.

Click the link again - that should toggle it off. At least it does with the generic Like.
Edit: just tested with your post. If you select HaHa, you can select it again to undo it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yea, but the '90s era White Wolf games are really, really dependent on their fluff. Far more so than almost any other game, knowing and playing with the campaign lore is those game's raison d'être.

That isn't germaine to the interaction you're replying to, though. If the three cannot be thought of as part of the same "world" in terms of character options, then the original example I replied to wasn't valid in the first place. If they can be, and thus the example is valid, then my counter-question is equally valid.

The fluff matters to the games, but the fluff is not such that werewolves and mages can't be PCs in a mostly vampire game. The fluff just makes that require explanation.

If we are treating the three as separate games, then the example is uselessly absurd, and in no way comperable to someone wanting to play an elf in a DnD game.

 

[zarionofarabel]

It sounds like you are happy to kick out a player. That seems like an unhealthy attitude for a GM to me. Did the player run over your dog or something?

No, but it is a game hosted at a public location. The participants are not a group of longtime friends, at least they told me they don't socialize outside of the game. I was invited to take over GM duties by the operator of the public space as the previous GM has commitments elsewhere. I started by pitching Pendragon and was unanimously voted down, as always. Then I pitched my GoT pastiche, 3 players said yes, 1 player said only if they get to change the premise of the campaign to suit their personal preferences. Then, in essence, they got voted out 4 to 1. I don't know what to tell you. If you think I'm supposed to feel bad, I don't. If the odd player out could, or would have, just given up on playing a particular character that didn't fit the premise I and three other people were keen on playing, they wouldn't have gotten the boot. I don't have a problem spending my time and effort running a game I'm interested in running, I absolutely won't run a game I'm not interested in running just to make others happy. I want to have fun with my hobby. Running a murderhobo fantasy adventure is not my thing, neither is kitchen sink fantasy. None of the other players, including the one who got the boot, have any interest in being a GM, so either I do the GM thing or all the players lose out. Hopefully the ousted player will find a game they enjoy participating in soon. I assume they will, as other groups hosted at the same location are looking for new players, and those games are much more what that player is look for as far as I can tell. If it makes you feel better, those other games are probably going to lose players, opening spots for my ousted player, because players in those groups want to join my game apparently. Lucky for me, the new perspective players sound like they are excited to play something other than kitchen sink fantasy murderhobo adventuring so hopefully they have compatible character concepts in mind.

 

[zarionofarabel]

That isn't germaine to the interaction you're replying to, though. If the three cannot be thought of as part of the same "world" in terms of character options, then the original example I replied to wasn't valid in the first place. If they can be, and thus the example is valid, then my counter-question is equally valid.

The fluff matters to the games, but the fluff is not such that werewolves and mages can't be PCs in a mostly vampire game. The fluff just makes that require explanation.

If we are treating the three as separate games, then the example is uselessly absurd, and in no way comperable to someone wanting to play an elf in a DnD game.

You should reread my OP. No system is mentioned. There are several systems that have both humans and elves as playable races in the core book that are not D&D. Examples include: Burning Wheel, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying, Age of Shadow, and OpenQuest.

I also believe the post was simply being used as an example of how sometimes a character concept does not fit the premise and can be disallowed simply for that reason.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You should reread my OP. No system is mentioned. There are several systems that have both humans and elves as playable races in the core book that are not D&D. Examples include: Burning Wheel, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying, Age of Shadow, and OpenQuest.

I also believe the post was simply being used as an example of how sometimes a character concept does not fit the premise and can be disallowed simply for that reason.

I wasn't replying to the OP, so what was or wasn't mentioned in it is irrelevant.

 

[zarionofarabel]

I wasn't replying to the OP, so what was or wasn't mentioned in it is irrelevant.

Well, in the entire line of linked posts, D&D was not mentioned. The word "fantasy" was used, but that doesn't automatically mean D&D as there are lots of fantasy RPGs that are not D&D. Assuming anyone means D&D without them saying so is disingenuous.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, in the entire line of linked posts, D&D was not mentioned. The word "fantasy" was used, but that doesn't automatically mean D&D as there are lots of fantasy RPGs that are not D&D. Assuming anyone means D&D without them saying so is disingenuous.

Buddy, I have no idea what nonsense you're talking about.

 

[TwoSix]

That isn't germaine to the interaction you're replying to, though. If the three cannot be thought of as part of the same "world" in terms of character options, then the original example I replied to wasn't valid in the first place. If they can be, and thus the example is valid, then my counter-question is equally valid.

The fluff matters to the games, but the fluff is not such that werewolves and mages can't be PCs in a mostly vampire game. The fluff just makes that require explanation.

If we are treating the three as separate games, then the example is uselessly absurd, and in no way comperable to someone wanting to play an elf in a DnD game.

It isn't germaine, no; it's merely providing context for the "just fluff" statement in the previous post for the edification of the audience. Sometimes it's fun to learn instead of argue.

 

[Lanefan]

So what?

Because after the same character showing up ten times in ten different guises it's going to get a bit tedious for everyone else. Same problem as a player naming every character Bob, only here the name changes while the underlying character doesn't.