[HoE] PC & Game Control (Re: Road Warriors)

["Paul Zichichi" <rook_7@hotmail.com>]

>Roadwarriors.  I prefer my games to be much more Mad Max like than 
> >anything else.  If you watch Road Warrior or Thunderdome, you can >count 
>on one hand the number of times you see a weapon actually >mounted on a 
>car.  Everyone else used small guns or crossbows.  It's >a common 
>misconception about the movies.  So, in my last HoE >campaign, we had one 
>(big R) Roadwarrior, who drove a minivan that
>had a bushmaster mounted on it.  Every other character had a >souped-up 
>vehicle, but none had weapons on 'em.

You too, huh?  My game played out the same way.

I've got six PC's, three of them with vehicles: a Harrowed Monster Hunter on 
a motocycle (no extras), a Harrowed Professional Sidekick (that's right, two 
characters who drew Joker/Joker/Red Card) with an SUV (no extras), and a 
"Big R"  Roadwarrior (ala Tank Girl) with a conversion van that is fully 
tricked out for highway warfare.  And I didn't have to ban mounted weapons 
or anything, the other two vehicles just wouldn't be IN CHARACTER with all 
of those extra toys.

See, IMHO, a good camaign is all about finding the right PLAYERS.  If you 
have good players, you can leave ALL options open, even the sickest, most 
broken ones, and they'll still make balanced characters. I've got a party of 
6, including 2 DEAD PEOPLE, and they are still a balanced group of good 
characters.

Denying them options just means that you're either afraid of them (bad idea) 
or you are only interested in TELLING a story that your PC's WATCH, not 
letting your PC's CREATE a story that they PARTICIPATE in (and there IS a 
difference, and I've seen both, absolute nightmare).

And, IMNSHO (In My Not So Humble Opinion), if either of those facts are true 
about you as a GM, you're either on the wrong side of the GM screen or in 
the wrong hobby.  If the former case is true, and your PC's worry you, you 
should PLAY, not GM.  Confidence in your own GM-ing ability is KEY to a good 
camaign.  If your players know that their powers and abilities worry you, 
you're done.  Pack it up, because they can walk all over you.

If the latter is true, you should write a book, not GM a campaign.  Running 
games where your only interest is telling your players a story that they can 
witness is a mistake.  If your players just watch, or act only as supporting 
characters, they won't stick around more than one story.  It's obvious you 
don't care about their needs as players or characters, so why should they 
care about your plans as a storyteller.

The solution is easy.  Listen to your players.  Find out what they want, how 
they want their characters to grow and progress, what kind of nasties they 
want to deal with.  It's not that hard, really.  You don't even have to be 
blunt and ask.  Watch how they play the first two sessions or so, and you'll 
see it.  I promise.  White Wolf had the right idea with running prelude 
stuff.  A couple of sessions getting the PC's up to speed and working on 
their characters, and you'll know what they want, need and (most 
importantly) deserve, and they'll know how you're going to give it to them 
and whether it's to their liking or not.  Then ask what they think.

If you don't like the way they're playing, you can discuss their character's 
motivations and actions, and they can ask why you GM'ed things the way you 
did.  By session 2, you'll either have reached an understanding and 
everyone's happy, or the bad apples (re: Munchkins & Rules Lawyers) will 
leave because your style is not up to their liking.  And everyone will be 
happy either way, trust me.

Believe me, you don't want unhappy players.  They outumber you at least 4-1.

Nihil Privatus,

Paul Zichichi
Squisher of Munchkins, Final Arbiter of Rules Lawyers.

"There is a fine line between `hobby' and `mental illness.'"
-Dave Barry-


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com