Why'd the GM get pissed? I don't get it. I'm currently running a sci fi horror campaign set in the modern world and I allow the players to use anything that they can come up with.
A player who actually sacrifices his character to kill the bad thingy would, as Scott said, get a pretty substantial bonus on their next character (and the love of this GM, I love a good story and self sacrifice for the greater good almost always works).
If the GM didn't want you to kill the thingy, he should have planned better. I just finished an adventure based on Robert McCammon's Stinger.
The bad guy, an alien bounty hunter, sends out cyborg replicants of people he's killed. While these replicants can be damaged to the point of uselessness by gunfire, explosions and the like, the only real threat to them is... electrical light.
Flashlights, headlights, florescent lights. The town involved lost it's electrical power when the alien landed, so these ights aren't nearly as common as normal.
I didn't punish the players for shooting up these replicants, running them over with cars, and blowing them up with dynomite. These things were all within the real of possinilities that I as the GM allowed them to have.
Your GM is stupid and immature. He allowed you to have the shotgun. He created a creature that could be killed with said shotgun, albeit through an explosion. And then he put your character in a no win scenario. So why was he surprised when you didn't just lay down and die?
If you tried killing one of my characters then you'd better be prepared for a high body count because I'll take out as many motherfrakers as I can before I go!
Your GM should reward you for ingenuity (you killed the creature in a way that he didn't expect), for roleplaying your character as a real person rather than a set of numbers on a piece of paper, and then he needs to get over and plan the next adventure better.
From the little you've written, you may already be a better GM than this person. Maybe you should give that a try. Just be careful, that GM will try to screw up your campaign out of spite if they play.
"I've seen a rich man beg
I've seen a good man sin
I've seen a tough man cry
I've seen a loser win
And a sad man grin
I heard an honest man lie
I've seen the good side of bad
And the down side of up
And everything between"
Why'd the GM get pissed? I don't get it. I'm currently running a sci fi horror campaign set in the modern world and I allow the players to use anything that they can come up with.
A player who actually sacrifices his character to kill the bad thingy would, as Scott said, get a pretty substantial bonus on their next character (and the love of this GM, I love a good story and self sacrifice for the greater good almost always works).
If the GM didn't want you to kill the thingy, he should have planned better. I just finished an adventure based on Robert McCammon's Stinger.
The bad guy, an alien bounty hunter, sends out cyborg replicants of people he's killed. While these replicants can be damaged to the point of uselessness by gunfire, explosions and the like, the only real threat to them is... electrical light.
Flashlights, headlights, florescent lights. The town involved lost it's electrical power when the alien landed, so these ights aren't nearly as common as normal.
I didn't punish the players for shooting up these replicants, running them over with cars, and blowing them up with dynomite. These things were all within the real of possinilities that I as the GM allowed them to have.
Your GM is stupid and immature. He allowed you to have the shotgun. He created a creature that could be killed with said shotgun, albeit through an explosion. And then he put your character in a no win scenario. So why was he surprised when you didn't just lay down and die?
If you tried killing one of my characters then you'd better be prepared for a high body count because I'll take out as many motherfrakers as I can before I go!
Your GM should reward you for ingenuity (you killed the creature in a way that he didn't expect), for roleplaying your character as a real person rather than a set of numbers on a piece of paper, and then he needs to get over and plan the next adventure better.
From the little you've written, you may already be a better GM than this person. Maybe you should give that a try. Just be careful, that GM will try to screw up your campaign out of spite if they play.
"I've seen a rich man beg
I've seen a good man sin
I've seen a tough man cry
I've seen a loser win
And a sad man grin
I heard an honest man lie
I've seen the good side of bad
And the down side of up
And everything between"