Comments for Genteel Steel http://genteelsteel.com genteel: adj. having an aristocratic quality or flavor; of or relating to the gentry or upper class; elegant or graceful in manner, appearance, or shape; free from rudeness or vulgarity. Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:05:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 Comment on Edion: A Basic Overview by fazydarezo http://genteelsteel.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-6 fazydarezo Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:30:34 +0000 http://genteelsteel.com/?p=44#comment-6 <strong>fazydarezo...</strong> <a href="http://namelindablog.info/dragonball-af-comics/" rel="nofollow">Dragonball Af Comics</a> ... fazydarezo…

Dragonball Af Comics …

]]> Comment on Evil PCs? by katie http://genteelsteel.com/?p=16&cpage=1#comment-5 katie Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:30:44 +0000 http://genteelsteel.com/?p=16#comment-5 One could make an argument for playing an evil character as an outlet for any diabolic thoughts that are totally unacceptable in real life. It's also kind of fun for the players to fight good for once--sometimes having foes that are a lot like their own characters. It depends on how the GM runs it. There are pretty much two methods: First, there's the larger than life, where you gloss over the worst and it happens behind the scenes and out of play. Most people are more comfortable here. Second, there's the dark. You need both more mature players and GMs, but it gives players a chance to interact with a different side of their characters' world. It can be a very useful tool for the GM and give the players more of a feeling of depth. They also learn a lot more about their foes. Since evil doesn't cooperate, you can still have the PCs fighting evil--they just do it in a very different manner. And if, at the end of the campaign, it becomes PC against PC...that can be pretty fun for the players too. During the course of it, though, it can be a bit of a pain. Thus, the GM should encourage subtle conniving and betrayals. Evil doesn't have to be stupid and brutish. One could make an argument for playing an evil character as an outlet for any diabolic thoughts that are totally unacceptable in real life. It’s also kind of fun for the players to fight good for once–sometimes having foes that are a lot like their own characters.

It depends on how the GM runs it. There are pretty much two methods: First, there’s the larger than life, where you gloss over the worst and it happens behind the scenes and out of play. Most people are more comfortable here. Second, there’s the dark. You need both more mature players and GMs, but it gives players a chance to interact with a different side of their characters’ world. It can be a very useful tool for the GM and give the players more of a feeling of depth. They also learn a lot more about their foes.

Since evil doesn’t cooperate, you can still have the PCs fighting evil–they just do it in a very different manner. And if, at the end of the campaign, it becomes PC against PC…that can be pretty fun for the players too. During the course of it, though, it can be a bit of a pain. Thus, the GM should encourage subtle conniving and betrayals. Evil doesn’t have to be stupid and brutish.

]]> Comment on Death and the PCs by katie http://genteelsteel.com/?p=18&cpage=1#comment-4 katie Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:20:49 +0000 http://genteelsteel.com/?p=18#comment-4 There's always the school of thought that the players themselves should be dealt with out-of-game and in private when they start becoming a problem. This helps to avoid bad feelings between the GM and players. Personal experience shows me that the other players will often intervene when the offender gets really annoying, or they'll do something to invite terrible consequences. On a side note, the PCs are often far, far more creative and aware of their resources than the GM. We GMs may place the party in positions we're positive there's no way they can get out of--only to have them escape, kill the villain, foil the plot, and probably level half the countryside in the process. It seems to be when the GM uses one of their own characters--that they know as well as the players know their own--as a villain when things go to hell for the party. There’s always the school of thought that the players themselves should be dealt with out-of-game and in private when they start becoming a problem. This helps to avoid bad feelings between the GM and players. Personal experience shows me that the other players will often intervene when the offender gets really annoying, or they’ll do something to invite terrible consequences.

On a side note, the PCs are often far, far more creative and aware of their resources than the GM. We GMs may place the party in positions we’re positive there’s no way they can get out of–only to have them escape, kill the villain, foil the plot, and probably level half the countryside in the process.

It seems to be when the GM uses one of their own characters–that they know as well as the players know their own–as a villain when things go to hell for the party.

]]> Comment on Death and the PCs by cara http://genteelsteel.com/?p=18&cpage=1#comment-3 cara Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:50:31 +0000 http://genteelsteel.com/?p=18#comment-3 As someone that has experienced that sort of thing more than once, I don't think it is fair to pit players against someone that they have no chance against. One of the rules of GMing I like is not to steal the PCs' thunder. I don't think its fair to pit us against enemies we can't take care of ourselves and then have NPCs come to the rescue. If you want to have NPCs that are more powerful than the PCs then have them giving out advice to the players or something, but let the PCs take care of their own problems, or else they'll probably want to kill your precious NPC. If there is someone playing in your game that you didn't invite and you really don't want there and they're causing a disruption, then I see nothing wrong with killing their character. Its probably more polite then telling them to get out of your house. If they try to generate another character to use, you could always tell them politely the reason(s) that you don't want them in your game. And I don't see why any player that's causing a problem (like rules lawyers) wouldn't be acceptable targets. On the last question, 'what about those monsters that are apparently designed to destroy characters?'. I think that its fair to do that if you are killing off the PC for the reasons above and not just being vicious, or if you're going to let the PC kill it. Otherwise in my opinion, its cruel and unusual and shouldn't be done. As someone that has experienced that sort of thing more than once, I don’t think it is fair to pit players against someone that they have no chance against. One of the rules of GMing I like is not to steal the PCs’ thunder. I don’t think its fair to pit us against enemies we can’t take care of ourselves and then have NPCs come to the rescue. If you want to have NPCs that are more powerful than the PCs then have them giving out advice to the players or something, but let the PCs take care of their own problems, or else they’ll probably want to kill your precious NPC.
If there is someone playing in your game that you didn’t invite and you really don’t want there and they’re causing a disruption, then I see nothing wrong with killing their character. Its probably more polite then telling them to get out of your house. If they try to generate another character to use, you could always tell them politely the reason(s) that you don’t want them in your game. And I don’t see why any player that’s causing a problem (like rules lawyers) wouldn’t be acceptable targets.
On the last question, ‘what about those monsters that are apparently designed to destroy characters?’. I think that its fair to do that if you are killing off the PC for the reasons above and not just being vicious, or if you’re going to let the PC kill it. Otherwise in my opinion, its cruel and unusual and shouldn’t be done.

]]> Comment on Evil PCs? by cara http://genteelsteel.com/?p=16&cpage=1#comment-2 cara Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:36:07 +0000 http://genteelsteel.com/?p=16#comment-2 In some games. I don't think they should be playing 'evil' characters in a campaign with other players that aren't also evil, semi-evil, or neutral. Party cohesion is somewhat important.... The GM tends to get upset when the party members are killing each other.... depending which character is dying. Some PCs need killing. I don't think that playing evil character makes people evil, I think that you're either going to end up with a badly played evil character or the player is already conniving enough, or smart enough to play the evil character. Some players are good at playing evil characters, but some people shouldn't be allowed to. Some people can only manage some form of neutral, but it's bad when they try to play evil characters. In my opinion, it really depends on which players are involved. In some games. I don’t think they should be playing ‘evil’ characters in a campaign with other players that aren’t also evil, semi-evil, or neutral. Party cohesion is somewhat important…. The GM tends to get upset when the party members are killing each other…. depending which character is dying. Some PCs need killing. I don’t think that playing evil character makes people evil, I think that you’re either going to end up with a badly played evil character or the player is already conniving enough, or smart enough to play the evil character. Some players are good at playing evil characters, but some people shouldn’t be allowed to. Some people can only manage some form of neutral, but it’s bad when they try to play evil characters. In my opinion, it really depends on which players are involved.

]]>