Inspired from: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?716868-101-no-goes

in which the GM simply has to put his foot down and say NO to the players.

These are the no-goes in my WFRP campaigns:

1. I don't care how high you rolled. You cannot convince the Emperor to let you take Deathclaw out for a spin.

2. Oh, your combat-monkey, min-maxed, 2 Fellowship Trollslayer wants to speak in a social encounter? Take 5 stress, sit down and STFU.

3. I don't care if your Toughness is 5, there's no way you can justify taking 10 maneuvers this round.

4. What part about draw 3, choose 1 do you not understand?

5. What part about no duplicate cards in a party do you not understand?

6. You hit a group of henchmen with 1 arrow for 20 wounds eh? Ok. ONE dies. That's right. Maybe next time you will think of using arrow storm instead of sniper shot.

7. From #1 modified to WFRP: Yes, you get a corruption point every time you slaughter an innocent.

8. No, you cannot burn down another town to quell the brewing Chaos before the adventure has even begun.

9. This is Warhammer and you're in the Empire. No you cannot name your character Spongebob

10. "I don't care how many wealthy relatives you write into your PC background, your starting gold will not change."-rpg.net

11. "I don't care how high your strength score is. You can not intimidate the Emperor.

And no. Your high Charisma will not let you seduce the Empress. No, nor their daughter."-rpg.net

12. #22

13. Stop liking having Marks of Chaos already!

14. "No, you don't get to play the entire campaign without learning the basics of the setting and rules" and no, I won't make a character for you. ~from RPG.net

15. Stop liking mutations already!

You GMs have any cool no-goes from your games?

jh

You want to fire your pistol in town to intimidate someone?

Re #2, I welcome the Fel 2 character trying to talk in a social encounter. In fact, I make him roll to be inoffensive even if staying quiet to see if he burbs, belches, otherwise acts oafishly just trying to stand off in corner and not screw up the Fel 5 PC's winning smile.

Re #6, I make an archer cross of # of arrows = henchmen wounded and/or killed. May the elven uber archer burn through them fast hee hee (added - and I do enforce the Enc rules, the archer typically not having great St to carry stuff with). It's narrative time so sure you can "legolas" a few henchmen.

Blackpowder weapon users have to accept that they may not be as effective as that many chose. If you "kill 3", really you killed 1 and 2 get so spooked by his/its brains blown out they run (but next rally step if fight still on they may be back).

I'm lucky that my Players generally "design to character and setting" and enjoy "being in the Old World". I have to remind them sometimes (yes you're noble but you can't read, you went drinking at university instead of to class don't you recall, you have no Education skill) but they don't quibble.

I think you covered them all, JH

My newest group is having trouble with #4 but if they're willing to create an interesting group with a fantastic background story I may let them Shrug It Off.

For my table I like to suggest....

Some of my favorites ...

- What part of "elves are rare and feared/distrusted by the common citizens of the Empire", which I clearly explained before you made your elf character, don't you understand? No, the townsfolk aren't going to rally around you...

- No, that shopkeeper is not going to give the stuff on his shelves to you for free. I don't care how well you rolled.

- No, there is no post office or express mail service, only hired couriers. You can't just mail a letter to someone halfway across the Empire and then expect a reply within a couple days.

- No, you cannot invent a revolver or semi-automatic firearm. I don't care if you CAN explain to me in technical detail how it works. Is your character an engineer or a dwarf? He isn't? Too bad.

- I don't care if you are a priest, breaking and entering is against the law, and you will be arrested if caught.

- No, you cannot carry those 5 weapons as well as a full suit of plate armor, and a backpack, and miscellaneous gear. Your strength is only a 3...

Oh dvang, dang it, my sympathies if you have Players who actually think any of that stuff would fly. Take them to the top of a tall building and be rid of them since obviously they think they could just flap their arms and float to the ground.

8. No, you cannot burn down another town to quell the brewing Chaos before the adventure has even begun.

Dammit. Back to the drawing board.

GM: "thinking on my next adventure"

PC: "Oh! Make it about me!"

GM: "Okay, I'll have a look at your background"

PC: "Great, I'll send it to you next week."

GM: "What, you still don't have a background?! No Go!"

Or similar: PC: "I am an orphan. My village was boring so I decide to travel & seek adventure."

GM: "Good for you, I can't do **** with that and its the worst background ever."

In other words: "If you don't bother to make a decent background, don't expect the GM to come up with something that ties your hero to the adventure."

Since the 90's, I've had "The Rice Rule". It states, "You may not have any character named after any pop-culture reference, nor anything tangentially related to such references. Nor L337speak."

This one started out when I had a parade of newbie naming disasters that originated with characters from Ann Rice novels (we weren't even playing a World of Darkness game). Then I had to expand it to Star Wars (playing a boy-knight named Skywalker in a gritty fantasy game doesn't work). And then to the l337speak crowd (between KeWlDoOd, and DoodleMesiterMeisterDoodler I was pretty much done with this nonsense).

Character names must fit the setting. You get three tries before I give you a random name.

We almost had to make a Dr'zzt rule (or however you spell that name). There was a period where everyone was playing a Dark Elf. When we didn't have a Dark Elf, a player (I swear to god) said, "Okay, I'm playing an Elf... who is... DARK".

I'm not making that up. I'm not even making up the dramatic pauses. That character was like gaming with a Mel Brooks skewed angsty William Shatner.

He kept " DRIFTING BACK ... into the shadows...!"

He kept climbing the trees to snipe any foe who attempted to attack the one girl who played with our group (she played a female fighter) because he... "was RESCUING HER... from harm ....! <and then I drift BACK ... into the shadows...!"

Before I could make a rule the party... revolted.... and threw the player OUT of the group... and into the shadows...!

No you can't write a Grudge against mankind because the charge of the room in the three feathers inn is to high in your opinion.

Why not let players just do stuff if they want to? It might be a near impossible task to convince the emperor of something but if the players wants to ... Maybe he insults the emperor (on chaos star) and get thrown into prison: suddenly the plot is not at the center but the player is.

6. Love the part where the GM just ignores the rules and tells his player NO! Combat is not split into 3 second rounds. It is more like 1 scene therefor it is not understood as "I shoot once." but as "in this combat sequence I shoot several arrows which are boiled down to 1 roll." Just breaking rules is ...

8. Why not? The adventure does not begin when the GM and players sit at the table and start playing? Is the train late? When will it arrive?

13. Why?

15. Why?

** edit **

nevermind. I had written out a fairly detailed explanation concerning #6 supporting why JH would want to do that with plenty of references to RAW but then it occurred to me that I don't care.

** edit **

nevermind. I had written out a fairly detailed explanation concerning #6 supporting why JH would want to do that with plenty of references to RAW but then it occurred to me that I don't care.

It's best to not care. Your first tip was the clear misunderstanding of ammunition rules. It rolls downhill from there. I typed this in a 3 second action.

** edit **

nevermind. I had written out a fairly detailed explanation concerning #6 supporting why JH would want to do that with plenty of references to RAW but then it occurred to me that I don't care.

It's best to not care. Your first tip was the clear misunderstanding of ammunition rules. It rolls downhill from there. I typed this in a 3 second action.

More like a dismissal. How many crossbow bolts can I shoot in 1 action anyway? How about reloads? Ah, so fussy.

** edit **

nevermind. I had written out a fairly detailed explanation concerning #6 supporting why JH would want to do that with plenty of references to RAW but then it occurred to me that I don't care.

It's best to not care. Your first tip was the clear misunderstanding of ammunition rules. It rolls downhill from there. I typed this in a 3 second action.

What did he misunderstand about the ammunition rules?

I had written a fairly detailed explanation of what bothers me with these posts and then decided to boil it down to: Why even write something so vague and then label it as clear or go the extra mile to point out you do not care?

** edit **

nevermind. I had written out a fairly detailed explanation concerning #6 supporting why JH would want to do that with plenty of references to RAW but then it occurred to me that I don't care.

It's best to not care. Your first tip was the clear misunderstanding of ammunition rules. It rolls downhill from there. I typed this in a 3 second action.

What did he misunderstand about the ammunition rules?

Probably just another one of our infamous language barrier mishaps, but I'll take a stab at it.

Pretty simple stuff concerning JH's #6. Unless you're just following RAW to the letter you're left battling abstract vs. simulation. While in many rpg's a single action can be a flurry of several separate actions WFRP 3e is clearly not setup this way in many areas.

Let's take ranged attacks...with a bow specifically. Let's say you have 12 arrows in your quiver. After the encounter you can roll fortune dice to reclaim lost arrows. So here we have a fairly definitive system in place to track ammunition. Not as fiddly as Shadowrun but not as abstract as Fate. This leads us to the Ranged Shot action card. Shot, as in singular. This card and the roll of the dice does not mean you fire a flurry of arrows at your target and see what sticks...there are cards for that. You fire an arrow. One. So, with no blast, AOE, or multiple, repeating shots it therefore makes sense that a single arrow could not take out the 3-4 targets in a minion pack with one hit. JH's solution makes sense at this point because while yes the player might "lose" some damage points he or she is not killing 3 henchmen with a single arrow. Is this too simulationist and not in-line with the abstract nature of 3e? Who knows who cares. It makes sense and isn't "gamey" so I'm in support of the idea.

So, what's the alternative? Your Ranged Shot actually represents multiple arrows that hit the henchman pack for 20 damage, killing all 3? Ok, Legolas. Are you tracking every arrow in that barrage? Are you taking fatigue for reload maneuvers? It's hard to have it both ways with this situation so you're left following RAW to the letter for the sake of doing so, or finding the lesser of the evils as a solution.

I believe the point is, JH isn't "breaking rules" or doing anything crazy. In fact, he's throwing a simple house interpretation in that's bringing mook casualties in line with the rest of the damage accounting for the whole game, keeping munchkinism at bay, and adding some "dark and gritty" to the dark and gritty in a manner that doesn't have the players performing extra math and slowing down combat.

Seems like we're ok here. Please continue.

Back on topic, my no-go's...

* No crying or table flipping when your character dies. The disclaimer of "this will happen" was clearly laid out 1st session.

* Put your **** smartphone away.

* No mid-encounter rules lawyer-ing. I'll accept your thesis during an extended rally step or after the session.

No fun! Only I may have fun. That is all.

Agreed on the smart phone and computer. If you're going to play, get in the game. We've usually got one person at the table who's updating our WIKI info (or generally surfing) and I don't get too worked up, but it is a bit more engaging if I'm not trying to overcome whatever's on reddit. It's worse if the GM has had too much sake before the game and our ADD player forgot to take his stimulant as well.

I'm not a fan of tech at the table, but I endure it because that's how the Kids roll.

Re: #6.

WFRP is intended, when using the henchmen rules, to give life to EPIC and HEROIC scene-stealing actions. Legolas and Gimli at Helms Deep as the most notable example. Scenes where the heroes are literally wading through scores of enemies.

So, IMO, yes, one arrow CAN kill 3 henchmen. It was an amazing shot that went through 3 of them. Or, perhaps the shot hit one, knocking that one into the other two and taking them off the edge of the cliff, wall, etc. and killing the other two as well. Or, perhaps the arrow killed the first henchman, causing that henchman's sword to stab sideways into another henchman, causing a domino effect, etc.

There are many story-plausible ways to explain it happening, that feel EPIC to the players. That is the primary intent behind henchmen in the first place.

One big rule, no funny accents; if you use one, lose it quick or I will ensure you will die sharpish. (Completely arbitrary rule, accents are such a pain to remember and the player (or GM) tends to think they're on Live at the Apollo. Excruciating. We are laughing AT you, not with you).

Do all of the player characters and NPC's sound like Ben Stein?

The only accent I can't take is when someone plays a low int character or ogre and plays them as a mentally retarded person, otherwise I can handle most accents. Heck, I ran "With a little help from my friends", which has Alphonse "the Belgian sounding gnome, and ran it on Skype with a BELGIAN player! He says I didn't do so bad, but I probably sounded like a German attempting a BIG TEXAS USA accent