I generally would throw melee-mobs at them. Go ahead, shoot into melee... unless you have that damn talent. Grumble.

Games without ammunition make this a conundrum. But you can set up narrow fire lanes and obstacles that make cover an absolute unless you get over that barricade etc.

Not super pretty but it does the job-

WARHAMMER 40K CHARACTER SHEET
Character Name:
Home World:
Career Path:
Rank:
Divination:
Quirk:
Gender:
Build: Ht: Wt:
Skin Colour:
Hair: Eyes: Age:

      Homeworld/Divination  Basic   Intermediate   Trained    Expert  Total
WS
BS
S
T
AG
INT
PER
WP
FEL

WOUNDS:
CURRENT WOUNDS:
FATIGUE:
DAMAGE EFFECTS:

FATE POINTS:
CURRENT FATE:

INSANITY POINTS:

CORRUPTION POINTS:

MOVEMENT:


EXPERIENCE POINTS:
Total: Spent:
Remaining:
Advances Taken:

TALENTS AND TRAITS:





BASIC SKILLS:
(X) Indicates a skill has been taken
   Awareness (PER)
   Dodge (AG)
   Barter (FEL)
   Carouse (T)
   Charm (FEL)
   Concealment (AG)
   Contortionist (AG)
   Deceive (FEL)
   Disguise (FEL)
   Evaluate (INT)
   Gamble (INT)
   Inquiry (FEL)
   Intimidate (ST)
   Logic (INT)
   Climb (ST)
   Scrutiny (Per)
   Search (Per)
   Silent Move (AG)
   Swim (S)




ADVANCED SKILLS:





GEAR:






WEALTH:
THRONE GELT:
MONTLY INCOME:

Background:





Personality traits:

WarriorPoet's game has a good one. It is formatted in the sheet section with /pre commands.

Name: Abigail Elshar
Age: 24
Home World: Imperial World
Career Path: Guardsman        Rank: Sergeant
Divination: "There are no civilians in the battle for survival"
Quirk:
Gender: Female

Characteristics:
    SP  TT  AT  CP            Build: Fit
WS  36  --  05  41            Height: 1.72m
BS  32  --  10  42            Weight: 67kg
Str 31  --  05  36            Skin Color: Fair
Tou 28  02  --  30            Hair: Brown
Agi 28  --  05  33            Eyes: Grey
Int 32  --  --  32
Per 32  --  --  32            SP = Starting Profile
WP  32  03  --  35            TT = Talents/Traits
Fel 38  --  --  38            AT = Advancements Taken
Wou 12  02  01  15            CP = Current Profile

Fatigue Level: 0
Critical Damage: None

Fate Points: 3      Fortune Points: 0
Insanity Points: 0
Corruption Points: 0

Experience Points (XP to Spend/Total XP Spent): 0/2900
Next Advancement: 3000
Advancements Taken:
Ballistic Skill (Simple) [100xp]
Awareness [100xp; S]
Drive (Ground Vehicle) [100xp; S]
Sound Constitution x2 [200xp; T]
Ciphers (War Cant) [100xp; S]
Common Lore (Imperial Guard) [100xp; S]
Dodge [100xp; S]
Drive (Ground Vehicle) +10 [100xp; S]
Quick Draw [100xp; T]
Drive (Ground Vehicle) +20 [100xp; S]
Navigation (Surface) [100xp; S]
Pilot (Military Craft) [100xp; S]
Basic Weapon Training (Flame) [100x]; T]
Rapid Reload [100xp; T]
Ballistic Skill (Intermediate) [250xp]
Agility (Simple) [250xp]
Secret Tongue (Military) [100xp; S]
Basic Weapon Training (Bolt) [100xp; T]
Melee Weapon Training (Chain) [100xp; T]
Pistol Training (Bolt) [100xp; T]
Strength (Simple) [100xp]
-Weapon Skill (Simple) [100xp]
-Literacy [300xp]

Movement: 3/6/9/18

HOME WORLD and CAREER PATH TRAITS:
Blessed Ignorance
Hagiography
Liturgical Familiarity
Superior Origins


TALENTS:
Melee Weapon Training (Primitive)
Pistol Training (Las)
Basic Weapon Training (Las)
Basic Weapon Training (SP)
Sound Constitution x2
Quick Draw
Basic Weapon Training (Flame)
Rapid Reload
Basic Weapon Training (Bolt)
Melee Weapon Training (Chain)
Pistol Training (Bolt)


BASIC SKILLS                    CHA  Taken  +10  +20
Awareness                       Per   Yes
Barter                          Fel
Carouse                         Tou
Charm                           Fel
Climb                           Str
Command                         Fel
Concealment                     Agi
Contortionist                   Agi
Deceive                         Fel
Disguise                        Fel
Dodge                           Agi   Yes
Evaluate                        Int
Gamble                          Int
Inquiry                         Fel
Intimidate                      Str
Logic                           Int
Scrutiny                        Per
Search                          Per
Silent Move                     Agi
Swim                            Str


ADVANCED SKILLS                 CHA  Taken  +10  +20
Speak Language (Low Gothic)     Int   Yes
Speak Language (High Gothic)    Int   Yes
Common Lore (Imperial Creed)    Int   Yes
Common Lore (Imperium)          Int   Yes
Common Lore (Imperial Guard)    Int   Yes
Common Lore (War)               Int   Yes
Ciphers (War Cant)              Int   Yes
Drive (Ground Vehicle)          Int   Yes   Yes  Yes
Literacy                        Int   Yes
Navigation (Surface)            Int   Yes
Pilot (Military Craft)          Int   Yes
Secret Tongue (Military)        Int   Yes
Secret Tongue (Acolyte)         Int   Yes
Literacy                        Int   Yes

Melee Weapons
Weapon: Combat Knife
Quality: Common
Class: Melee
Damage: 1d5+3 R
Pen: 2
Special:
Weight: 0.8 kg


Missle Weapons
Weapon: Stormfront                 Weapon: Bolt Pistol
Class: Basic                       Class: Pistol
Damage: 1d10+3 E                   Damage: 1d10+5 X
Pen: 0                             Pen: 4
Range: 100m                        Range: 30m
ROF: S/3/-                         ROF: S/2/-
Clip: 60                           Clip: 8
Reload: Full                       Reload: Full
Special: Reliable, Targeter        Special:
Weight: 6.5 kg                     Weight: 3.5 kg

Weapon: Flamer
Class: Basic
Damage: 1d10+4 E
Pen: 3
Range: 20m
ROF: S/-/-
Clip: 3
Reload: 2Full
Special: Flame
Weight: 6 kg


ARMOR WORN                                     ENC
Guard Flak Armor                              11 kg

Armor Points: H(04), B(04), LA(04), RA(04), LL(04), RL(04)


GEAR - CARRIED                                 ENC
3 lasgun charge pack
2 flasks of fuel
24 bolter shells
4 Frag Grenades
2 Krak Grenades
Backpack                                      2  kg
The Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer   0.3kg
Infantry Lamp Pack                            1  kg
Tool Kit                                      1  kg
Weapon Maintenence Kit                        1  kg
Micro-Bead
2 bottles of Amasec
1 flask of Recaf
Medikit
Syth-skin                                     2  kg


GEAR - OTHER/STORED





WEALTH:
THRONE GELT: 65     MONTLY INCOME: 65

Well here is the Rogue Trader one I use.  Attribute Increases  are denoted with a * making each advance having been taken.  When a Basic skill is trained it moves to the trained grouping and since the notation is for tests at a base 'bonus/penalty' of +0 (aka challenging) you note either the skill alone or with a +10 or +20 after the relevant attribute to denote those increases and adjust the number in the parentheses accordingly.

Shifting it to Dark Heresy takes a little changing around of the top section due to different baseline things but isn't difficult at all.

---

Personnel Dossier, Version 2.0
Name:
Home World:
Birthright:
Lure of the Void:
Trials and Travails:
Motivation:
Career:
Gender:
Age:
Appearance:

Characteristics:
(00)  Weapon Skill
(00)  Ballistic Skill
(00)  Strength
(00)  Toughness
(00)  Agility
(00)  Intelligence
(00)  Perception
(00)  Willpower
(00)  Fellowship

(00)  Wounds, Maximum
(00)  Wounds, Current
(0)   Fate, Burned Permanently
(0)   Fate, Total
(0)   Fate, Current
(0)   Insanity Points
(0)   Corruption Points

Movement
Half Move:       m
Full Move:       m
Charge:          m
Run:             m
Leap:            m
Standing Jump:   m
Max Carry:       kg
Max Lift:        kg
Max Push:        kg

Notable Traits:


Trained Skills:
Test at +0


Basic Skills:
Test at +0
(00)             Awareness (Per)
(00)             Barter (Fel)
(00)             Carouse (Fel)
(00)             Charm (Fel)
(00)             Climb (S)
(00)             Command (Fel)
(00)             Concealment (Ag)
(00)             Contortionist (Ag)
(00)             Deceive (Fel)
(00)             Disguise (Fel)
(00)             Dodge (Ag)
(00)             Evaluate (Int)
(00)             Gamble (Int)
(00)             Inquiry (Fel)
(00)             Intimidate (S)
(00)             Logic (Int)
(00)             Scrutiny (Per)
(00)             Search (Per)
(00)             Silent Move (Ag)
(00)             Swim (S)

Talents:


Melee Weapons
Weapon:
Quality:
Class:
Damage:
Pen:
Special:
Kg:

Ranged Weapons
Weapon:
Quality:
Class:
Damage:
Pen:
Range:
ROF:
Clip:
Reload:
Special:
Kg:


Armour Worn:   
Armour Weight: 0.0 kg
Armour Points: H(--), B(--), LA(--), RA(--), LL(--), RL(--)
Toughness:     H(--), B(--), LA(--), RA(--), LL(--), RL(--)

Gear - CARRIED
Small Rock                                                          1kg


Total Carry:                                                     01.0kg

Gear - OTHER/STORED
Big Rock                                                            8kg


Items of Note:


Other Personnel Notes:

Background Of Note:
Taken at creation -

Advances of Note:
000xp     Placeholder
---------------------------
(0000xp)  Used
(0000xp)  Unused

As much as I dislike the inbalance between melee and ranged combat, trying to weaken the effective of ranged combat like that is actually bloody hard because of the way the rules work and more importantly does not actually give other characters time to shine, especially not those that are not focused on combat in the first place (Adepts, Arbites, Cerics, Cog-Boys, some Scum and the rare and elusive non-combat Psyker).

It just means your PC's are getting hacked apart with sowrds, yes your guy with a bit of skill with a sword may survive a bit longer but under a mob, but he will still die, and being the last to die under a random unstopperable mob is not really an achievement for players in a game.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:36, Wed 23 Mar 2011.

Sorry, meant "mob" as in "MMO mob." Not a group of huge quantity but the actual opponent is melee-specific. Daemons and genestealers, blade-servitors, arco-flagellants etc.

This was my immediate understanding.  I had to stop and think to see the meaning that Banjo had seen.  I'm such a nerd. ;)


On topic, my understanding of it is that the assault marine is there to keep the meleeing monsters off the devastator who can't fire thatheavy bolter at all if he's in close combat.  The assault marine hacks and chops and keeps them occupied whilst the devastator guns them down from range.  It's a team effort, you know?

Current DW rules are resulting in Daemon Princes etc being taken down in a single round by single Astartes Heavy Bolters and players and GMs are noticing it, putting it on the FFG forums and thus starting the moment to shine chain of thought.

Until the basic mechanics that control ranged and melee are changed melee will be weak compared to ranged, little can be done to change that even with clever planning by the GM during fights.

But melee vs ranged is not what I'm pondering, essentially I'm wondering how we as GMs go about making various characters feel special?

Do we have to make them feel special in the first place? I would hope the answer here  is yes because I find it hard to believe people will draw enjoyment from playing a nobody without any potential.

How do you reward the player for being the character make and them feel valid, which not the same as xp rewards.

Is it done through giving out moments to shine or is there other methods?

I remember Dan Abnett initially being terrified about writing Space Marines (ie writing them as generic nigh-unkillables), so he started with the Gaunts Ghosts to get a feel for the universe and the "humanity" then once he had done that he went back to Space Marines feeling he understood them a little better.

Sorry. There is a point to this.  Space Marines are designed for combat and are great in short bursts and campaigns.

The general opinion to which I am prone is that space marines are combat wombats.  They are, there is no doubt about that, but what type of combat wombat they are can only be decided by the player.  Perhaps consider not assigning any demeanours at all play a few sessions, see which character first suggests studying the tactical situation, which player charges headlong into battle who ends all their speeches with a supplication to the emperor and assign personalities that way.

Possibly put them in training in their Deatwatch squad and put them up against npc deathwatch squads.. just throwing ideas out there.
This message was last edited by the player at 14:13, Thu 24 Mar 2011.

I agree with Dlantoub. I think DW is a real finicky game to run because I want the Marines to be unkillable-super-freaks-with-guns. That's why I've always thought of DW as a supplement to DH/Asc/RT. Have the players each stat up a member of an SM killteam that runs around with the group. Can't haul them out for everything but when you do, it's clobbering time!

---

As for making each character shine... the SM's are designed for combat from boots to brows. You definitely have to think about their abilities but you're going to find it much harder when everyone is really good at smashing stuff. I think the best approach is to stage encounters where some heroic actions would turn the tide... a scene where a bridge needs to be held while the others deal with something else, a rescue in the middle of combat etc.

Create opportunities for heroism and hope your players jump on the chance. If they really grok SM's and the concept of renown/selfless that SM's are supposed to embody, they should seize those chances to really become a hero against faceless hordes and insurmountable odds.

In a combat game I ran sometime back (non-40K), I always made little encounters that would allow a PC to dig deep into their character. It was a modern combat game and I would have a little kid run out into the middle of a street during a firefight, the team kicking down a door to find a frightened and injured family, the confusion caused by bystanders who were in the line of fire etc. It gave the players a chance to show a different side of hero and not just super-soldier.

Something like that may work for Space Marines as well. But that would depend on how you and the PC's play them.

Stepping away from combat characters how do you do give non-combatants moments to shine?

And how do you stop once character stealing another characters thunder as it were?

This is something that I started thinking about during the week at the end of a WoD game that is part of a national setting (we were part the official White Wolf/Camarilla group until recently). Now the national game has been ruuning for years and PCs get starting xp based on a rating derived from national events attended and things they have done for the society as a whole (ST-ing organising game locations etc) so long story short we have a wide range of characters of varying xp levels in a single game. Now when an ST throws out some plot for a character the more experianced characters move in, take it for themselves and solve it with their super powered stats, skills gifts etc in a matter of moments and leaves us little guys standing around with bugger all to do.

Now that is harder to do in table top games and rpol games as most of the time characters are the same level and so balanced, but one character can still take the lime light over another and leave them in the cold, which is not a good state to reach.

Wall of text:

This is the core GM problem: Short answer, there is no solution and the GM must cope as best he can.

Longer answer:

1. Know your players [If all your players enjoy playing social dilettantes, don't run a combat game]
1a. Control your characters. [Suggest specialities for new entrants to the game to cover skill sets or powers you don't have that will be useful.]
2. Know your game [If your game is set on the battlefield of Zar and every player is supposed to be combat veterans, suggest that if you have a socialite, he should still be able to point a gun at an enemy]
2a. Have a plot! [Don't try and solve all the world problems at once open ends and sidequests are good, but don't let them rule your campaign, and oddly enough don't let the players either.]
3. Run smaller games. [In theory, the fewer characters your game has, the fewer characters you have to control and the more time you can give to each one.]

Once a game has started, the issue of non-combat skills can be very difficult, if not impossible, to resolve. Or of combat skills in a non-combat game.

In so so many games I see GM's who, and I see their point, tell players to play what they want to play, the problem with this is that it really CAN be detrimental to the game as a whole.  Some allow games with so many members, to take care of drop-out, that there is no way they can avoid overlapping skillsets, or give each player individual attention.  I learned I can never handle more players than five, so that is what I run to.

Point buy games and point assignment games can be particularly problematic where some stats and skills are noticeably stronger than others (*cough*Exalted/White Wolf*cough*) and there really is no obvious practical solution in any game to prevent optimised characters steaming through anything you put in front of them.  It has become more of an issue because as rpg's have "matured" this has become the de rigeur way to play. As you may have noticed people who try not to do this may be very successful and interesting characters but not successful withing the rules mechanics of the game itself so it becomes players playing rulebooks and not characters.

I apologise for the rant.  I emphasise these are my opinions only and you are free to agree or disagree as you choose.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:04, Thu 24 Mar 2011.

That wasn't a rant it was sheer gaming genius.

Every noob GM should copy and paste that info to the inside of whatever game book they are running from.

EDIT:

I realised that my comment about not letting players rule the game could be taken the wrong way.

This does not necessarily mean that you should railroad your players towards an ending but actual having an end point or goal for this particular game, session or campaign really adds to a players feeling of achievement.

This is how MMO's do it. The goal is to look like that amzing high tier player that ran past you.  To look like that you have to do xyz.

By all means take players ideas and suggestions on board.  Keep a record of them somewhere, you don't have to act on them "right now." Right now, they might be in the middle of a swamp and getting out should be more important than a players ideas for ocean dwelling civilisations.  When they meet the civilisation later on, you can just smile.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:07, Thu 24 Mar 2011.

And here lies one of the biggest problems in RPGs. You have a ruleset to facilitate playing characters within a setting, those rules determine what happens so a character built to the rules wins hands down. Now as a GM you can intervene and overrule the game rules but then whats the point in using the rules in the first place if you are just going to shove them asside and if you do shove them asside in one instance you have to be prepared to do it again in a less favourable situation.

So how do you help out the good chracters and make them feel worth it when they are surrounded by other individuals with stats to throw at problems?

Hence why the short answer is there is no real solution.  You can only experiment and hope. Any solution to this creates it's own problems.

It's something that can only really be modified right at the start of the game, before any characters have moved or a dice has been thrown. At the start of the game you can examine backgrounds, compare them to skills, quizz players on their advantages and disadvantages and any other possible adventure hooks that you can use on them (provided you have enough time).  These then become your sidequests.

You can't scale down the encounters very easily because that means the optimised characters will still blow through them and you are no better off.

You can't scale the challenges up because the non-optimised characters, who couldn't succeed before, will be even less likely to succeed now.

You can drop the characters into an area where particular abilities don't work.  But do this too often and you'll be accused of not playing to the spirit of the game.

Some players expect that if their character has a weakness to say fire, every enemy they face will be armed with flamethrowers. I believe this is also not playing to the spirit of the game, because unless every enemy is a member of the same organisation there is no way that every enemy could be so armed against a particular character. Even in this case, it is unlikely all the flamethrowers would be in one place. It also starts being a joke, and not a threat.  Also by concentrating on one player's weakness you are giving that player even more time.

You can houserule but as you rightly said if you are going to houserule too much what is the point of actually using the rules.

THe only thing you can really do is try running periodic adventures for the other characters. The problem is the perfectly optimised characters can still muscle in with their stats and deal with it (you know adventuring party, they are supposed to be together), unless they have to do something else.  Which then means if you are effectively having to run two games, perhaps you should be running two games.

I recently read an article in Game Informer that defended easy mode in console gaming. The article could be summed up as saying "hey I play games to live vicariously. Why would I want to play hardcore mode and be frustrated by how little my character can accomplish?".

I kind of see RPGs this way. I have no problem with characters being able to do awesome. I mean as a GM my attitude is that I'm weaving a story the way an author writes a novel or a screenwriter a script. How interesting is a story in which the hero cannot do anything? I labor very hard to avoid the GM vs Players mentality that seems to dominate gaming culture.

Another ome of those damned if you do and damned if you dont situations then.

Actually talking about encounter sizes has reminded me of something.

Is it just me or do all the FFG published campaigns end up in a fight one way or another?

Now I can see why Deathatch would do that, war is what marines are for, speartip of the Imperium etc and I get the 'There is only War' mentality of GW but Dark Hersey and Rouge Trader are meant to be showcasing other aspects of the 40K universe beyond it's battlefields to players.

Why in do we end up in epic battles all the time when the plot comes to a close?
This message was last edited by the player at 23:40, Sat 26 Mar 2011.

In reply to Banjo (msg #38):

That's basic story structure. Leading action, Rising Action, Climax, Falling Action. Without conflict it's not a game, it's playing house.

In reply to Lord Dubu (msg #39):

There are other types of conflict. But because the system has a really hard time representing other kinds of conflict, it's big battle again and again. Which works great for Space Marines, but maybe less so when your group consists of a charming rogue trader and his brilliant space accountant/spy.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:36, Fri 25 Mar 2011.

Conflict and action are good, but conflict is not all about actually physically fighting.

If you play a guardsman, a combat psyker or an assassin you can be confident that you will get the chance to be instrumental in the final outcome of a FFG campaign because they all come down to one moment and it's always a scrap.

Your Adept's data searching and analysis of the heretic govorners accounts, your Scum's planting of listening devices to get the evidence, your Tech-preist's hacking of databanks means bugger all because the govorner will turn out to be possessed by a greater daemon and his defeat will be at the hands of your combatants who all get cheered on for their awesome sword swinging, shoot-fu antics.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:51, Fri 25 Mar 2011.

I think again, player mentality, recent authorship mentality. Once you've had the big battle, no-one really cares about the "afterwards".  Except the GM, who uses the afterwards to plan next sessions adventure.

All three games are combat-centric. Ignore what the blurb says about the settings, look at the amount of space in the rulebooks devoted to combat as opposed to other forms of challenge or obstacle. In DH you are supposed to root out and eliminate threats to society in the form of heretics, xenos or demons. The climax of the adventure will inevitably be the 'eliminating' bit. RT has the potential to create narratives with different sorts of climax, but in practice the rules militate against other forms of climax. Let me elaborate.

The rules make combat the only sort of conflict that can easily act as a climax. You set up a combat scene, and you're creating a 10-20 minute sequence (maybe longer) with the game mechanics ensuring that there is suspense, potential for phenomenal success, sudden reversal, catastrophic failure, and the ability for everyone to get involved (because like it or not, in a firefight the rules ensure that the only real difference between a combat and non-combat character is probably that the combat character hits around 20% more frequently - anyone can fire a gun that does a decent amount of damage). If, say, you have the climax as the PCs needing to defuse a bomb before it blows up, then you've got at maximum a five minute sequence (and that's assuming you add in some running around trying to find it, maybe some climbing somewhere inaccessible to get to it and a complex mechanism requiring several rolls to disarm) that only a few specialists can play a key role in whilst everyone else stands around watching. And the combat sequence essentially writes itself, with the rules creating interesting variety naturally (right, there's a psyker, so that changes the dynamics of combat like *this*) whereas in the alternative every obstacle requiring rolls and involving different skillsets has to be actively designed by the GM ahead of time. Combat is easier to set up and run and allows the whole party to affect the outcome. That's just the way the rules work.

Now, unless you're going to massively rewrite the rules, allowing other sorts of conflict to run on a combat-round type sequence with all players getting a chance to affect the outcome, combat becomes the lowest common denominator - the way to avoid having half the party standing around at the end with nothing to do. You can do this in a film or story - one character gets the chance to save the day by making a speech, flying the starship, defusing a bomb etc because it's fine to allow the other characters to drop out of sight for a little bit - but in an rpg you can't do it and have it last very long without most of the party getting bored. And most people being bored is not what you want at the climax of your adventure.

I tend to have combat as the climax to an adventure for all the reasions above, though I try to make sure that the party is actively trying to *do* something that the other side are trying to stop them doing rather than just throwing both sides into a room to kill each other, ideally giving a non-combat character a chance to shine in the middle of it. So, the scum must convince a diplomat to change sides whilst the rest of the party hold off the guards in the next room, the party must fight their way through the bad guys so that the adept and tech priest can attempt to decypher the archeotech device and deactivate it etc. This may give the feeling that the climax to the adventure is something other than combat.

It is a shame that the system has no expanded mechanics in place for various tasks and other sorts of conflict.

With regards to the final fights in the published materials which have a tendancy to be kill the enemy before they kill you scenrios at the core, I'm always a bit condufused as to why half the charcter classes in the game would ever be there, "Dont worry Adept, we know you have no proper combat training and only carry a las pistol as a side arm, but it's just a Greater Daemon of Khorne, you'll be fine".

I've always thought it would be cool to have a proper bit of spy/crime thriller in a DH game where the climax is rooting out the bad guy within the system who protected himself with various laws, shifted blame and hid evidence and the big moment is for the acolytes to shatter his lies and misdirection bit by bit infront of him and reveal his betrayal to an Inquisitorial conclave rather than just walking upto him and shooting him and whoever happens to be in his office at the time.

Something a bit more like the Millenium trilogy rather than Rainbow Six.

Before I say anything else.  I agree with you! I really do! (I'm not very good at intrigue play at any level but that is beside the point)[I must also say I'm very drunk

Firstly: what everyone else has said about the set piece battle, expected climactic endings; lowest common denominator beging combat.  All are more important than the little addendum I wish to drop in.

Players are human!  If the bad guy is intelligent enough to bounce blame and shift targets around there is no guarantee, unless you railroad your players very obviously with big flashing neon lights (and then some) that they will come to the same conclusions you did when writing the story. If enemies are that intelligent they run the risk of actually winning!!

The Evil Overlord list gives a good idea.  The theme crops up in Watchmen.  The Evil Overlord list is at great pains to point out that even Drakken from Kim Possible, is only ever defeated because he wants to be, and if he ever decided to be as truly competent as he was, in his own words "What sort of evil overlord would I be if I did that."

It is so understood by the player community at large that if the villains genuinely decided to be as competent as they were, heroes wouldn't get a foot in the door.  So players have come to accept a certain amount of artificial stupidity.

Sorry I appreciate none of this actually helps...  In the end though, a smart villain as presented in these sort of adventures, is not stopped by death.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:27, Sun 27 Mar 2011.