Player A: "I do a flip and cartwheel over onto the table in the center of the room and then I, like, shoot my ninnnee milimetres when I do that"
GM (me): (thinking "right..." to self) "Ok, so make a... Grace + Acrobatics check for 3succ and then we'll change over to "
A: "Yeah ok... [goes to roll] but wait, I wanna shoot them while I'm moving, like that's my whole plan"
GM: "That's at least two actions, do you have your guns equipped?"
A: "No but I figured my guy could just whip em' out during the flip onto the table. [A's PC's name] is specially trained in duel-wielding shit, like he's got a 4 in Guns: Pistols"
GM: "Then that's three actions. So, make your roll--"
A: "But like I'm trying to... you know, like... not trying to be accurate and stuff, just trying to cover the gallery above so I can then climb-jump the wall"
GM: "So you're trying to make a suppressive fire attack? I shouldn't do this but ok, on your next roll when you shoot your guns you can do a -3 for me--"
A: "Penalty, for the shooting? I said I'm not trying to be accurate here--"
GM: "No nigga, I told yo' ass, you're making an attack and then doing that attack as suppressive makes it a full action"
A: "But dude, I'm trying to fucking just shoot these dudes on the balcony bit and [the PC] to a better location--"
GM: (Now legit irritated) "'Da fuck are you doing? You are trying to make me go ethnic tonight, I swear..."
A: "Yo, fuck you, I'm trying open up on these guys!"
GM: "Bruv, next turn."
A: "Ok, whatever. Your swirly ass been on the rules for a minute"
B: (legitly was around the corner at this bit, PCs still hadn't all met) "I see this crazy asshole jump on the table and put a bullet in him. I take my Holemaker and make a called shot at the head"
A: "Yo, what! We're playing together man? What da fuck is you doin'!"
B: "[static, satellite connection]...just... see him. Can I go GM?"
GM: "Yeah, let [A] do his roll..."
A: "MOTHERFUCK--"

Was reminiscing just now about an online game I did years back. One of the more interesting times I realized some of the bullshit players try to pull. It's funny, this was before the floating drone incident (starring a very salty Australian who also played a fairly snowflake-y commissar in another game I was doing...)

Anyone got a "Negotiator" at their table or had one before?

Yes, which is part of why I enjoy playing rules I know really well that include detailed and playtested rules for almost anything anyone could try, that makes most ridiculous nonsense stunts appropriately unlikely to work out, especially for beginning character with players who don't know the rules. And it's why for players who don't know the rules at all, I do some intro with them, and explain what their character knows about their own abilities and what's liable to work or not.

When there are other players waiting, I tell the waiting players they should be thinking about their next action so they are ready to say what it is. If playing with 1-second combat rounds (GURPS) with combat sense rolls to see how complex your option can be, the player above would foul out when they can't describe what they're doing and want to change their mind, resulting in their PC either taking a turn to just standing there thinking about what they're really going to do.

I find a lot of arguing can be avoided if I just say "OK, that's an (eg) Acrobatics check, roll (DC)" - I can set the DC as high as I like, have the PC go flying off the table, and they won't complain.

AFAICT your GMing was pretty poor. Much better to let the player do what he wants, with a check to not come a cropper, and not have it have any undesired in-world impact. That's especially true in a 'cool moves' genre game - I can understand outright banning it in Twilight:2000, but not Vampire or Savage Worlds or d6 System or Feng Shui etc. I'd probably allow it in Call of Cthulu - it just wouldn't do him any good.

On topic: I did have a rules negotiator in an online game (5e Wilderlands), but he was a guy who liked to outrageously twist the wording of the spells in the 5e D&D PHB to make them a couple orders magnitude more powerful. He was really really annoying since he would never accept correction. We parted by 'mutual' consent after a big finale battle. I had previously GM'd him without issue though, mustn't have been a caster PC.

Social contracts filter out those players.

I dont think I've had that sort of player so far. But then as a DM I allow players to do things within reason and with a stat roll if need be.

Sometimes I'll even suggest additional things they could do if I think the player wasnt aware their character could.

Yes you can jump on the table and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. Doesnt even use up a free action.
Yes you can jump on the table, pick up a candle, and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The candle will use a free action.
Yes you can to a backflip jump onto the table, pick up a candle, and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The flip and candle will use both your free actions. And that will be a DEX check vs DC 10 for the flip.
No you can not do a backflip jump onto the table, pick up a candle and throw it in the face of an enemy, and do your attack. The candle throwing counts as an attack and you only have one. So choose one or the other or hold the candle throwing for next round. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The flip and candle grab will use both your free actions. And that will be a DEX check vs DC 10 for the flip.

Quote from: Skarg;1013954[what Skarg said here]

Quote from: S'mon;1013987I find a lot of arguing can be avoided if I just say "OK, that's an (eg) Acrobatics check, roll (DC)" - I can set the DC as high as I like, have the PC go flying off the table, and they won't complain.

AFAICT your GMing was pretty poor. Much better to let the player do what he wants, with a check to not come a cropper, and not have it have any undesired in-world impact. That's especially true in a 'cool moves' genre game - I can understand outright banning it in Twilight:2000, but not Vampire or Savage Worlds or d6 System or Feng Shui etc. I'd probably allow it in Call of Cthulu - it just wouldn't do him any good.

On topic: I did have a rules negotiator in an online game (5e Wilderlands), but he was a guy who liked to outrageously twist the wording of the spells in the 5e D&D PHB to make them a couple orders magnitude more powerful. He was really really annoying since he would never accept correction. We parted by 'mutual' consent after a big finale battle. I had previously GM'd him without issue though, mustn't have been a caster PC.

It's amazing how utterly different yours and Skarg's opinion are. Two sides of the spectrum, hah hah.

Hah hah, what is with the poor GM'ing thing on me with you right now?

I think your crazy DC check is passive-aggressive as all hell, man. I literally would catch a moment from my more outspoken players pulling crap like that, that's like seriously, legitly bad GM'ing on your part if you did that. I'm not sure where these ideas are coming from in this hobby that this "roll to fail anyway" thing is a thing but man, I've been pissed when it's been pulled on me (it's why I don't do it). Just tell them no. Learn to use the word no. It will cure heart disease -- you'll get plenty diagnoses dealing with bullshit players try to get past you.

Also, is Vampire a cool moves genre? Seriously? Or is this a Requiem V Masquerade thing?

I like crazy stunts and I mostly run "cinematic" games where physics be damned and I lean toward the "rule of cool".

The PC wants to do some acrobatics, draw two guns and shoot wildly. Coolio.
But its clearly multiple actions, which is fine, but it incurs penalties.

PC is doing acrobatics, thus some kind of Acrobatics / Dex check.
PC is dual-drawing guns, depending on the system, its a free or half action.
PC is shooting and the player isn't concerned with accuracy.

Sounds good. Let's do this.

Dex check (or equivalent skill) vs. standard difficulty.
Ranged combat check with significant disadvantage.
Perhaps notable success or notable failure of the Dex / Acro check would affect the Shooting roll.

If the player bitches, they can take another penalty to their roll.

Quote from: Omega;1014067I dont think I've had that sort of player so far. But then as a DM I allow players to do things within reason and with a stat roll if need be.

Sometimes I'll even suggest additional things they could do if I think the player wasnt aware their character could.

Yes you can jump on the table and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. Doesnt even use up a free action.
Yes you can jump on the table, pick up a candle, and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The candle will use a free action.
Yes you can to a backflip jump onto the table, pick up a candle, and do your attack. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The flip and candle will use both your free actions. And that will be a DEX check vs DC 10 for the flip.
No you can not do a backflip jump onto the table, pick up a candle and throw it in the face of an enemy, and do your attack. The candle throwing counts as an attack and you only have one. So choose one or the other or hold the candle throwing for next round. Long as you have the movement left to get up there. The flip and candle grab will use both your free actions. And that will be a DEX check vs DC 10 for the flip.

Your latter suggestions are in conflict with the earlier ones. I can gather you're just trying to give generic examples to cover all bases but I can't think of many (any at all, honestly) that would even allow -- let alone condone -- these combos. By saying you can't do an attack, for instance, all you're doing is establishing "this is mycomfortable limit of actions". Assuming the absence of an AP-based system, that's incredibly arbitrary.

(Even the DC10 is way low. And we're imagining here that this is a Bruce Lee fit gymnast here to even be attempting this)

Quote from: Spinachcat;1014110I like crazy stunts and I mostly run "cinematic" games where physics be damned and I lean toward the "rule of cool".

The PC wants to do some acrobatics, draw two guns and shoot wildly. Coolio.
But its clearly multiple actions, which is fine, but it incurs penalties.

PC is doing acrobatics, thus some kind of Acrobatics / Dex check.
PC is dual-drawing guns, depending on the system, its a free or half action.
PC is shooting and the player isn't concerned with accuracy.

Sounds good. Let's do this.

Dex check (or equivalent skill) vs. standard difficulty.
Ranged combat check with significant disadvantage.
Perhaps notable success or notable failure of the Dex / Acro check would affect the Shooting roll.

If the player bitches, they can take another penalty to their roll.

I'm seeing a lot of -- and I'm slightly hesitant to say this -- "theory GM'ing" going on around here. I'm not saying everyone is doing this, I'm not even saying what your perspective here-is is that. It's just along with Omega's bit where it's on that line of "mmm, ok, don't think we're dealing with reality here". Not just in this thread but a not-insignificant amount of threads on this forum.

I agree on the bitching part 100%. I have literally had emails back and forth with players about that very idea of bitching and not taking things in stride and making the best of things. I have seen people go red or go stoneface at the table many times when other players bitch or whine or moan. I think it's this level of maturity you've got to have doing RPGs. Otherwise, as expressed above, you get into this pandering-to state, even if you didn't intend to.

The worst part is I was being really nice because you are NOT supposed to allow PCs without guns with an Auto factor to use that type of attack in the system we were using. The player was trying to deal serious DMG... without trying to be accurate. Just... no.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1014114Your latter suggestions are in conflict with the earlier ones. I can gather you're just trying to give generic examples to cover all bases but I can't think of many (any at all, honestly) that would even allow -- let alone condone -- these combos. By saying you can't do an attack, for instance, all you're doing is establishing "this is mycomfortable limit of actions". Assuming the absence of an AP-based system, that's incredibly arbitrary.

(Even the DC10 is way low. And we're imagining here that this is a Bruce Lee fit gymnast here to even be attempting this)

The example was using a limit of two non-com actions. 5e for example allows just one. If it were 5e Id have suggested the player choose one or the other. Or if they were dead set on candle chucking then suggest saving the acrobatics for getting off the table.

I went with a DC 10 because its not combat related and is just for show. But a failure could have an impact.

Wildly cart wheel our of the way while laying down supressing fire sounds legit.  

As long as you don't care where the bullets go.  

Rookies would be suppressed.  A bad ass wpuld carefully aim and shoot you out of the air.  Or he might miss you are a moving target.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1014110I like crazy stunts and I mostly run "cinematic" games where physics be damned and I lean toward the "rule of cool".

The PC wants to do some acrobatics, draw two guns and shoot wildly. Coolio.
But its clearly multiple actions, which is fine, but it incurs penalties.

PC is doing acrobatics, thus some kind of Acrobatics / Dex check.
PC is dual-drawing guns, depending on the system, its a free or half action.
PC is shooting and the player isn't concerned with accuracy.

Sounds good. Let's do this.

Dex check (or equivalent skill) vs. standard difficulty.
Ranged combat check with significant disadvantage.
Perhaps notable success or notable failure of the Dex / Acro check would affect the Shooting roll.

If the player bitches, they can take another penalty to their roll.

That's a check for the Acrobatics, probably at a high difficulty to account for drawing and firing guns in mid-tumble.
No roll needed for the shooting. It's suppressive fire in the middle of an acrobatic leap/roll/tumble it automatically misses, does not hit anything of consequence.

Everyone else around reacts to the fire as appropriate. Mooks duck for cover, made guys make a coolness check to return fire.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1014108It's amazing how utterly different yours and Skarg's opinion are. Two sides of the spectrum, hah hah.

I think he was writing about D&D, and I'm a simulationist GM writing about GURPS, while I take it you're a WoD GM.

GURPS itself can be played anything from wild action cinematic (e.g. the expansion GURPS Gun Fu) to gritty down-to-earth (e.g. the expansion GURPS Tactical Shooting), but even in Gun Fu, in order to do your PC's move, you need things on your sheet that say you can do something like that, and there are rules or at least guidelines about how to GM it. In GURPS Tactical Shooting, you might not even notice the guys on the balcony, and every silly/"cool" thing you say you do, as well as every non-ideal circumstance, is going to be a modifier reducing your chance of being effective compared to if you were nicely motionless braced behind cover using both hands etc.

Since I like games that try to give you an experience of facing the actual in-game situation (and not the movie/comic-book tropes version), I want the acrobatic backflip fast-draw into the most exposed position while suppressing foes with dual-wielded SMGs to be an atrociously disastrous move unless the character has crazy levels of skill and the foes aren't very sharp.

I have a player like this in my CoC game. He's not a spotlight hog or anything, he just gets excited when there's an action scene and wants to do everything right now. We talked about it like adults, and since then roll/action negotiation hasn't taken up much table time at all. It's amazing how quickly people's turns can go when everyone is focused and patient. He does still enjoy trying "weird" actions that require extra GM consideration, but that's OK.

Quote from: PrometheanVigil;1014108It's amazing how utterly different yours and Skarg's opinion are. Two sides of the spectrum, hah hah.

Hah hah, what is with the poor GM'ing thing on me with you right now?

I think your crazy DC check is passive-aggressive as all hell, man. I literally would catch a moment from my more outspoken players pulling crap like that, that's like seriously, legitly bad GM'ing on your part if you did that. I'm not sure where these ideas are coming from in this hobby that this "roll to fail anyway" thing is a thing but man, I've been pissed when it's been pulled on me (it's why I don't do it). Just tell them no. Learn to use the word no. It will cure heart disease -- you'll get plenty diagnoses dealing with bullshit players try to get past you.

Also, is Vampire a cool moves genre? Seriously? Or is this a Requiem V Masquerade thing?

Well I've not played Vampire, but I hear a lot about "Trenchcoats & Katanas", right? PCs are supposed to have superhuman reflexes?

DC - well thinking 5e D&D, if it's well outside what characters are normally expected I'd likely set it at Acrobatics DC 25 - Very Hard. Most characters will probably fail, but a high level Rogue with Acrobatics Expertise could have +17 on the check (+5 DEX 20, +12 expertise with Proficiency +6 at level 17-20) making it quite doable. IME, like I said, if I tell the player "OK, but DC 25 Acrobatics" I get a lot less arguing than if I'd just said no. I will say no sometimes, if the rules clearly say it can't be done, but I would rather eg grant an Athletics check for the STR 10 PC to attempt a 15' long jump than just ban it & refer to the 5e Jump rules that limit him to 10'.
The highest 5e DC I ever set was 27, for a history check to know some extremely obscure info about the Runelords of Varisia. Player looked a bit gobsmacked that that was I think higher than she could roll (INT 20 (+5) with no History prof I expect), but I don't think it was unfair. I don't check their sheets before checking DCs. A really good historian might have made the check.

>>what is with the poor GM'ing thing on me with you right now?<<

Well you seem quite full of yourself while boasting about bad/mean treatment of your players. I guess it rubs me the wrong way a bit. I have visions of a bunch of Vampire Goths - you and your groupies - tormenting some poor newbie for some imagined offence.
Usually when people say "My players suck..." they have some detailed horror story most people can agree is bad. I don't see that with you.

Plus, I have had a really bad week.

Quote from: DavetheLost;1014141No roll needed for the shooting. It's suppressive fire in the middle of an acrobatic leap/roll/tumble it automatically misses, does not hit anything of consequence.

I tend to refer to the Twilight: 2000 suppressive fire rules in situations like this. If blazing away randomly at short range with people in the way, typically take half the bullets and roll d6s for each 1, each 6 hits someone, unless they duck (etc). That's best case scenario; in this one I wouldn't take more than 1/4 the bullets to roll for, then give a DEX save type roll (DC 10 in 5e)  if people falling prone. Still the shooter might get lucky, which is what prompts people to duck in the first place.