Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Cutting of someone from the game because she don't know the rules well - aka when the technical side of the game go too far ?


Gamer Talk

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

So i'm in the middle of something unsual for our group and i would like some advice/opionion.

Our group of 8 people is going to start a new campaign, is gonna be a very peculiar campaign since the master is going to make us do some celestial with the mission to save the world or something.

It's peculiar because it would be a custom race with high rp (about 60-70), high lvl, high point buy and, according to the master, requiring a very high comprehension of the rules to survive.

And he decided that the latest addition to our group, a nice girl who's a good player but never had the will to learn the rule well and it's just at the begining (we basically had to force her at least to upgrade her char in the last campaign since she alway asked us to do it for her :V), can't play this campaign.

Now on one side i can understand his point of view, on the other is never nice to say to someone "you can't play with us" and i'm wondering if we are giving to much importance to the rules or what.

Thanks in advance for any opinion and advice :)


17 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Of all the reasons for excluding somebody, this is the worst. If we never let in people who do not know the rules, we'd never get new players.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.

Cutting someone out of the game just because they don't get the rules is kinda dickish. Don't be a dick.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to play the devil's advocate and go with the GM here. When I was young, I once played an epic-level AD&D one-shot, and we basically played as first-level characters with epic-level abilities. Because we hadn't worked our way up, and didn't know what we were doing. And you know me; I always know the rules as best I can. So someone who doesn't would just be doomed in that game, and it would be cruel to let them in.

Qadira

6 people marked this as a favorite.

To design a campaign that will purposely exclude one of the players is a really horrible thing to do. I personally wouldn't join in the campaign as a show of group solidarity. The GM/DM isn't the only person who decides what game is being played....it should be a group consensus.
I think losing a player over a selfish GM/DM is horrible and shouldn't be allowed to happen. Perhaps it is time for a new GM/DM to run something for the GROUP.


I think a lot of it really depends on how the player not knowing the rules manifests. If it's just that she needs a bit of help optimizing her character and such, then excluding her is a bit dickish. If she's a "I need fifteen minutes and three people helping me to figure out what to do on my turn" type of player, then I can kinda understand wanting to cut her out.

Qadira

Fredrik wrote:
I'm going to play the devil's advocate and go with the GM here. When I was young, I once played an epic-level AD&D one-shot, and we basically played as first-level characters with epic-level abilities. Because we hadn't worked our way up, and didn't know what we were doing. And you know me; I always know the rules as best I can. So someone who doesn't would just be doomed in that game, and it would be cruel to let them in.

So "Hey, it was great that you joined us in our group and were part of the team but I have created a really difficult game that you can't play in because you aren't good enough at the game. Good luck finding another game to play" doesn't sound dickish to you?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

To me it depends.

Is this someone who is a bit behind the learning curve, or is it someone who won't learn the rules? Excluding the first is dickish, but not excluding the second might be dickish to everyone else.

Cheliax

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I agree I think it is not cool. Everyone is new at one time and it often takes awhile to learn games. Especially games that are fairly complex like Pathfinder. Cutting her out will likely hurt her feelings and drive her from RPG's. We need to grow the hobby not shrink it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fake Healer wrote:
So "Hey, it was great that you joined us in our group and were part of the team but I have created a really difficult game that you can't play in because you aren't good enough at the game. Good luck finding another game to play" doesn't sound dickish to you?

No. Suboptimal, yeah. But given how hard it is for me to get inspiration just to make one character, I'm inclined to give a lot of latitude to a GM who has an inspiration for an entire campaign. Let them do it and then go back to a game that the rules-light lady can take part in. That's my perspective.


Dabbler wrote:
Of all the reasons for excluding somebody, this is the worst. If we never let in people who do not know the rules, we'd never get new players.

This.

There is no shame in having a character concept fleshed out by someone more knowledgeable of the rules. (In fact, it's usually a very good idea, because internal party balance is a very important thing to have in a group.)

Spoiler:

As an example, in my current gaming group, I have one rule-lover, character-tinkerer player, one with "standard" rule mastery, and two newer players that don't know all the rules yet.
Of those last two, one asks for regular advice on character building (that I gladly provide) and is getting up to speed on actual game mechanics, and the other is less interested by rules and has a character build by someone else with simplified options ("This is your attack bonus and damage with deadly aim already factored in, since it is almost always beneficial to use it"). Both still contributes meaningfully to the group, the campaign, and player dynamics.

That said, complete disinterest for rules AND no or few willingness to invest in games often reveal players either not really interested by our dearest way of spending time, or not finding their place in the gaming group. If such is the case here, it may be best to talk about it with the player directly rather than simply shun it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd have to know more about the situation before judging. If a person really is disrupting the game with their behaviour (intentionally or not), I think it's okay to start a new campaign without them.


Is she in NE Ohio? If he won't take her, heck, we will! We're down to 4 players, one of our guys is dumping the group to move out of state.

And one of our remaining players is a "rules lite" female.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Tales Subscriber

I'm not making any judgement, but a game with 8 players is already stretching things pretty far, so there's probably a reason why that player was cut.

I dunno. If I was the GM I'd run two separate games of 4 players each, with a mix of rule-strong and rules-weak players in each group to make for a better mix where each voice gets more playtime in a game.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Grey Lensman wrote:
Is this someone who is a bit behind the learning curve, or is it someone who won't learn the rules? Excluding the first is dickish, but not excluding the second might be dickish to everyone else.

My god-daughter (20) plays with us. She does not know the rules, and with dyslexia she will has problems trying to learn them. But she is imaginative, role-plays well, loves to be involved, and is a boon to have around. I get around her problems with a clearly marked out character sheet, spell and feat cards, and bit by bit she picks things up. We all help her out with the technical stuff, and it's great.

The point is, those of us that know the rules all work together to keep her in the game because it's fun with her in it. Nobody minds at all that she doesn't know the rules very well, although she is improving bit by bit. It's just her way of learning them is to play them.

Andoran

Let's be real here. The system itself places A LOT of importance on knowing the rules well.

It would be interesting to get all the players and the GM around a table and have the GM explain why he thinks it is not a good idea for the lady player to participate and everybody try to find a common point of view : either they all agree, or they find a solution to let her play that is acceptable for the GM.

After all, maybe the player herself will think that she will not enjoy playing this campaign.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The GM designed an entire campain. Lets assume this was started 'before' the newest player joined, and it was not built specifically to exclude her.

The GM does NOT dictate what game is played. The group decides. If happiness is not found, a new GM has to step up or an new group has to be formed.

The attitude of the player, and how they interact with the group, means everything. Is she fun? Boring? As-dumn-as-a-stump? If she's included in the discussion for the new campaign and wants to try anyway, and her lack of game mechanics mastery leads to constant death (as described) she may remove herself from the game, or strive for greater mastery. Ultimately, unless what she's doing is disruptive to the group as a whole, its her choice to leave or stay.

Spoiler:
I'm in a tabletop group that has been meeting weekly for 10+ years now. We lost one member a few years back because he was coming to game to drink his face off and get a ride home, not even to socialize. This is the level of 'disruptive' I mean.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dabbler wrote:
Grey Lensman wrote:
Is this someone who is a bit behind the learning curve, or is it someone who won't learn the rules? Excluding the first is dickish, but not excluding the second might be dickish to everyone else.

My god-daughter (20) plays with us. She does not know the rules, and with dyslexia she will has problems trying to learn them. But she is imaginative, role-plays well, loves to be involved, and is a boon to have around. I get around her problems with a clearly marked out character sheet, spell and feat cards, and bit by bit she picks things up. We all help her out with the technical stuff, and it's great.

The point is, those of us that know the rules all work together to keep her in the game because it's fun with her in it. Nobody minds at all that she doesn't know the rules very well, although she is improving bit by bit. It's just her way of learning them is to play them.

There is a huge difference between someone with a medical disability which they have ZERO control over and a person that asks ten sessions in how to roll to attack because they won't get off their lazy duff and read 20 pages to know the bare minimum of the system. If your life is "so busy" you can't read those 20 pages in two and half months then just maybe you shouldn't be wasting your time playing a TT RPG to start with.

So my question is the girl incapable of learning the rules? Or unwilling. One I can excuse and gladly work around.


Thanks to all for the advices :)

To give some more info of the problem in the dm (and some players)perspective is that being in a big group ( 8 ) if one don't know the rule well combat tend to be toooo long, and everything else too. To be completly honest i think that the problem of her being new is more heavy due to the fact that we are A LOT.

The core group (me and other 5) is composed of "veteran" and some of them are easily bored with a game that suit the need of someone starting .

And the major problem is that in the last campaign she left a poor inpression on the dm in a couple of occasion:

1-The first time when se entered the gm asked to talk to her about the char and what she wanted to do since we were half-campaign, we were going to met 7 days later. She didn't talk to him and never answered and seven day later at the game she said she didn't "feel like it" (and the master had to improvise).

2-The second time she asked a guy if he can (again) make the upgrade of her pg. The gm said that it was better for her to start doing them for herself (of course with advice) or else she will never learn and the answer was again that she dind't want to do it ...

So the problem is that it seem to be some sort of resistance in learning the basic rule or in putting some effort in the mechanical creation of the pg.

And honestly i don't understand why since she seem to enjoy herself and have fun everytime we play, and rules aside she's a nice player with good ideas and a very nice person to be with.

_________________

@Chengar Qordath: she's someway inbetween the two types

@sgtrocknroll: Sorry, Italy :P


And how long has she been playing with you? More than a few months?


A couple of months, maybe 3.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So she is lazy. End of story. She's a adult and not a unintelligent one. You haven't stated she has a learning disability so she's lazy. In my group we had a few people like this, they were significant others. They just wanted to be with their BF/GF's not play the game so they made no effort to actually learn the game. For the record one of them was my own. Which I found very rude to the people that actually took the time to learn them. It bogs down the game tremendously and that is disruptive. Again there is NOTHING wrong with slow learners, I do however find something grossly wrong with those that won't make the effort to learn.

If I was the GM I would give her a chance to step up her learning curve at least if she is bogging down the game. If she refuses then kick her.


eleclipse wrote:

So i'm in the middle of something unsual for our group and i would like some advice/opionion.

Our group of 8 people is going to start a new campaign, is gonna be a very peculiar campaign since the master is going to make us do some celestial with the mission to save the world or something.

It's peculiar because it would be a custom race with high rp (about 60-70), high lvl, high point buy and, according to the master, requiring a very high comprehension of the rules to survive.

And he decided that the latest addition to our group, a nice girl who's a good player but never had the will to learn the rule well and it's just at the begining (we basically had to force her at least to upgrade her char in the last campaign since she alway asked us to do it for her :V), can't play this campaign.

Now on one side i can understand his point of view, on the other is never nice to say to someone "you can't play with us" and i'm wondering if we are giving to much importance to the rules or what.

Thanks in advance for any opinion and advice :)

Being tactical is more important than knowing the rules. I have played with people that can build characters well, so they had to know the rules, but their in game strategy sucked. I have also had new people that think outside of the box well, but still had trouble building a character on their own.

As for her learning the rules I never upgrade anyone's character for them. I would help them do it. I figure if they never involve themselves in the process they will never learn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
eleclipse wrote:

1-The first time when se entered the gm asked to talk to her about the char and what she wanted to do since we were half-campaign, we were going to met 7 days later. She didn't talk to him and never answered and seven day later at the game she said she didn't "feel like it" (and the master had to improvise).

2-The second time she asked a guy if he can (again) make the upgrade of her pg. The gm said that it was better for her to start doing them for herself (of course with advice) or else she will never learn and the answer was again that she dind't want to do it ...

Now this I understand. My God-daughter is keen, and when I mention updating her character (I do them on HeroLab) she is always happy to come around, pick her spell selection, etc.

So yes, if she was rude and didn't want to know enough to not be interested in updating, or learning the system, then I can see why she is being booted. It's more a case of she is there because her SO is there, not because she genuinely wants to play.


eleclipse wrote:

Thanks to all for the advices :)

To give some more info of the problem in the dm (and some players)perspective is that being in a big group ( 8 ) if one don't know the rule well combat tend to be toooo long, and everything else too. To be completly honest i think that the problem of her being new is more heavy due to the fact that we are A LOT.

The core group (me and other 5) is composed of "veteran" and some of them are easily bored with a game that suit the need of someone starting .

And the major problem is that in the last campaign she left a poor inpression on the dm in a couple of occasion:

1-The first time when se entered the gm asked to talk to her about the char and what she wanted to do since we were half-campaign, we were going to met 7 days later. She didn't talk to him and never answered and seven day later at the game she said she didn't "feel like it" (and the master had to improvise).

2-The second time she asked a guy if he can (again) make the upgrade of her pg. The gm said that it was better for her to start doing them for herself (of course with advice) or else she will never learn and the answer was again that she dind't want to do it ...

So the problem is that it seem to be some sort of resistance in learning the basic rule or in putting some effort in the mechanical creation of the pg.

And honestly i don't understand why since she seem to enjoy herself and have fun everytime we play, and rules aside she's a nice player with good ideas and a very nice person to be with.

_________________

@Chengar Qordath: she's someway inbetween the two types

@sgtrocknroll: Sorry, Italy :P

It seems to me that she shows up for the social aspect of hanging out than for the game itself, and she does not take the game as seriously as everyone else. I would ask her what her motivation is, and explain to her how serious the game is to the group.


Dabbler wrote:
eleclipse wrote:

1-The first time when se entered the gm asked to talk to her about the char and what she wanted to do since we were half-campaign, we were going to met 7 days later. She didn't talk to him and never answered and seven day later at the game she said she didn't "feel like it" (and the master had to improvise).

2-The second time she asked a guy if he can (again) make the upgrade of her pg. The gm said that it was better for her to start doing them for herself (of course with advice) or else she will never learn and the answer was again that she dind't want to do it ...

Now this I understand. My God-daughter is keen, and when I mention updating her character (I do them on HeroLab) she is always happy to come around, pick her spell selection, etc.

So yes, if she was rude and didn't want to know enough to not be interested in updating, or learning the system, then I can see why she is being booted. It's more a case of she is there because her SO is there, not because she genuinely wants to play.

Wait did I miss something? Did the OP state she had a SO at the table? Or are you and me assuming that's the case?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Waruko wrote:
Wait did I miss something? Did the OP state she had a SO at the table? Or are you and me assuming that's the case?

<Doublechecks>

Could have sworn he said she was an SO; ah well, good point well presented! Point remains, she's clearly not into the same aspects of the game the other players are.


Dabbler wrote:
Waruko wrote:
Wait did I miss something? Did the OP state she had a SO at the table? Or are you and me assuming that's the case?

<Doublechecks>

Could have sworn he said she was an SO; ah well, good point well presented! Point remains, she's clearly not into the same aspects of the game the other players are.

Think you pulled that from my comment.

Though eleclipse, is she dating someone at the table? That would certainly explain her reason for playing without having a interest in learning the rules.


Nope. Also i don't think that she like in that way anyone in the group (and just to be clear nobody in the group is interested in her in that way)


DM should just explain to her that for this campaign she has to invest more than she have previously done if she ants to participate. Is she willing to sit down with some of you and create, and leve up a high level character? Is she willing to learn the rules? Explain to her that it is a high level campaign and that it can't be played like a low level one. If she isn't willing the problem solves itself if she doesn't "feal like it" it also does. Maybe she will be happy to pass on this one? If she lies and sais she will and then doesn't you will still have a problem, but lets hope it doesn't come to that :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

People were kind of quick to attack the DM and call him a jerk when this thing goes BOTH ways.

If I have a player in my game that cant be arsed to learn, at the minimum, the basic rules of the game that youre playing? What the hell are you doing at the table? If you make the effort and still arent grasping things then yeah I get that and I or another player will be more than willing to step up and help you out.

NOTE: I want to point out that I really dont mind helping new players out. I do character audits, create cheat sheets whatever it takes to make play easier.

But if after 3 months you cant be bothered? I dont care how nice you are we can hang out doing something else, play Zombie Dice or Settlers of Catan or something but not even trying shows a level of disinterest and disrespect that's not cool.

If the GM has a concept for a game that he wants to run and the other players are on board he should scuttle his game because of ONE PLAYER who cant be bothered to learn the most basic rules of the game? REALLY? and HE/SHE is the jerk in this situation?

To reiterate: My issue isnt with a newbie player. It's with a newbie player that's putting no or minimal effort into learning the game. Especially when them not putting the effort in is going to serve as a possible hinderance to other people at the table.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber

I feel some sympathy for the GM. 8 is a lot and if there is someone who really doesn't have the will to get into the rules then it can be a pain if you are a rules advocate.

My advice would be to maybe split the group if there are likeminded fellows - part of group B can be still in group A so everyone gets to play, you just need one more GM.

Qadira

eleclipse wrote:
The core group (me and other 5) is composed of "veteran" and some of them are easily bored with a game that suit the need of someone starting.

Are there enough players who are not bored by starting play to split the group and run a low-level game to allow the new player a chance to get used to the rules? [Edit: Ha! Ninja'd]

Given that she started half way through a campaign, I'm not surprised that she is having trouble.

I don't see this as lazy, I see it as drowning. We play an immensely complicated game that is hard for people new to the idea of role-playing to pick up. Start her off from the very beginning and she will likely grow into an excellent player. Kick her from this advanced game and she may never try to play again.


8 players.

The GM wants to start an esoteric hard-mode game.

An otherwise nice, friendly player doesn't know the rules that well.

My recommendation: take the 2-3 least grognardy players and start a second campaign. You can even play it at the same time and place. There should be no hard feelings about this, and the new game doesn't have to be a condescending "training wheels" mess — it just has to be the game with relatively normal assumptions and difficulty.

As a GM, I'd almost always rather have the novice player, they're usually more imaginative and easier to thrill.


Honestly I do think it's somewhat a dick move to cold shoulder someone new over system mastery.

And for that matter 3 months isn't very long to have been playing a game like Pathfinder I mean I've been playing for almost a year but if you ask me what the specifics of the grease spell are or the bonuses and penalties on a disarm maneuver I'm not going to know it.

To me it sounds like she isn't strong in terms of system mastery it's also possible that she isn't confident in it (a situation which could easily be exacerbated by a cold relationship with a DM who insists she shape up and who therefore doesn't want to take care of that aspect of the game because she doesn't wish to be reprimanded again)

Now I'm not saying this is the way it is but it's at least as possible as her being a lazy jerk who doesn't want to learn the rules.

You say you're playing in a game with 6 veterans and what 2 newbies? I'd assume you guys are playing at a fairly high difficulty level, aka pretty optimized characters often fighting higher CR encounters than normal etc, and that the girl is somewhat overwhelmed.

Now depending on this it's possible that she doesn't know where to go with the character, it's also possible that she was okay with running a weaker character and was pressured by the DM/vet. players to play up to their level and since she had no interest in that she decided it wasn't her problem and left it to aforementioned players who cared about it.

Without more information there's really no way of saying for certain.


It's a difficult situation. First I was like "what a rude DM", but now knowing more about the situation I can understand it to some extent.

I think one way to go about this is to try to find another game with her. Either if someone else in the group would prefer another kind of campaign and joins her in finding something "simpler", or if she finds one herself. I do think it would be nice of you to help her find it in that case - asking around with your other gaming friends if anyone has a campaign where she might fit. In particular, check to see if there's any campaigns using another/a simpler/no system rather than pathfinder - because pathfinder is quite rules-focused. Something like WoD or freeform might fit her better.

Also, some in this thread sounds a bit condescending towards the player being excluded. Please don't. You can love the roleplay and be there for the roleplay without having the slightest interest in the rules. You might fit better in a free-form game, but not being interested in the rules does NOT mean (or even hint at) you not being interested in roleplaying, the story, the characters, or that you are just there because you have a partner at the table. It's rude, condescending, and a lot like screaming "BADWRONGFUN".


To me, there's a huge difference between not being particularly intent on learning how to translate your character concept into a proper character sheet, with all the rules mastery it usually demands, and not being willing to learn how to use said character effectively in game.
While I'm fine with helping a player, even rather extensively, building a character and laying out options for him, not showing any interests for learning basic rules for combat, skill checks, etc is usually a sign of a complete disinterest for the game itself and should be discussed with the player.

On the other hand, if the player contributes meaningfully to the group, and slowly ramps up in the roleplay and/or rules mastery department, what's the problem exactly ? That the character isn't completely her own because it was built partly or mostly by someone else ? Why is it even a problem if she's okay with that and someone can do a better job at something she's just not interested in ? (And do note I'm not talking about the character concept itself, that absolutely still should come from the player)

In the end, you should definitely take the time to talk about all this with her, what are her motivations for playing the game, and what she and the rest of the group are willing to do to ensure everyone is having fun.

Spoiler:
For those of you that may be familiar with the rulesets, would you tell a Mekton Z or Heavy Gear player that he doesn't have the right to play the game because he's unwilling to spend the massive amount of time needed to learn how to build effective mechas for his character ? I mean, really ?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This all depends on the player. If you have a player that refuses to learn the rules and is there just to hang out because it's what's happening on Thursday nights then fine exclude them. They probably won't even be upset with being excluded as they aren't really into it that much.

If you have someone that is eager to learn it can take some time to learn the game and experience is the best way to learn. So excluding here would be doing that person a disservice.

As for those who like to roleplay, I find they generally have a great handle on the rules but they don't optimize characters. They build character to roleplay and generally suck in combat. Stuff like fighters with an 18 in Charisma and 12 Strength.


It's about fun, not law school. My brother played for years and never had a really firm grasp of the rules (maybe because he's dyslexic) but it never bothered us. He always played the greatest characters and had the most innovative solutions to problems. Usually in the pee-your-pants funny sort of vein.

So let her play. Be patient with her. And it the DM has a problem with her, do a slow motion table flip and leave.


SkHi, hello! I have a lot to say about this, but am stuck on my phone, so I apologize in advance if this is a little disjointed or ineloquent.

This is my understanding of the situation: You have a very large group, with a 'core' of five people and three others you're introducing to gaming. Most of these new people have picked up the rules now, but one of them hasn't.

A lot of things can impact this player not picking up the rules, and honestly I don't think the size of your group is helping. When you and your five core buddies were all starting out, you were probably all on equal levels of experience. You learned together and shared an experience. Your added players do not have that shared experience, instead they have the experience of joining an established group where everyone but them knows what they're doing. This works for some people. For other people, it may be making them feel inconsequential.

Maybe your player really is uninterested in levelling up their own character, or maybe they feel like their contributions will never be of significant worth amidst these 7 other experienced players.

(Edit, sorry, browser problems. Adding the rest of what I wanted to say:)

If you are interested in mediating this situation, you should have a private talk with this player, and you need to be as nonjudgemental as possible. Ask your player what they enjoy about the game, why they don't want to level up, and if they think they'd enjoy a game with less (or different) rules.

Ask the player if they like their character, if they think a different class would be more fun or engaging.

Also, it does seem to me like they are more interested in the social aspect of the game than in the specific game itself. Maybe you should do a second game night with some other games? Board games, social multiplayer video games, rules light roleplays, and the like.

But you need to talk to the player. Only they know why they do things, if they are enjoying themselves, and if they are interested in a game with so many rules.

But do not - do NOT - ask them if they are 'having fun.' That is a loaded question and it will impede honesty with other questions that follow it. Ask them what they enjoy, instead. Ask which aspects of the game are fun.


I had a player in a game I ran who just couldn't be bothered to learn the basics of his PC. He'd been playing RPGs for 20+ years but new to Pathfinder.

I printed out the sections for his PC, sent him links to the SRD and asked him very nicely all I expected from him was to understand the rules which applied to his PC. A Paladin BTW.

6mths into the campaign he was still spending 5 mins plus deciding what to do, still asking what his Smite Evil did... this held the game up and pi$$ed me and the other players off.

I again nicely asked him to read the rules and understand them and that his lack of understanding was disrupting the game for me and other players. If he needed anything explained we would help him.

A month later nothing had changed and I dumped him. Obviously he moaned and complained but honestly I wouldn't sit down to play any game with someone who couldn't/wouldn't understand the rules. RPGs, Risk, Monopoly ANY GAME.

If this is the case with your player fine, it needs to be done.
If they want to learn and are keen then throwing them from the game is a dick move.

All IMHO of course :D


The game is about having fun.
Assumption:If 8 of you agree with the GM and have decided on having fun is playing in this hardcore, high level game which involves many rules, complex combat and you want to achieve a high level of immersion by not having to be bothered with explaining rules again-and-again, than this game is not for her. Kick her out - in a nice way.

Sorry, but why should 8 people suffer from one not fitting in?

If, on the other hand you yourself (and a majority of the rest of your group) are not quite happy with this, heck, start your own group and start a game on a less advanced level including the newcomer and help her catching up.
But, to me it is absolutely essential, that she is willing to do so. If she can't offer this minimum of involvement I'd question her motives for joining your group and picking up this hobby.

What it boils down to: the GM presents her idea of having fun by introducing a new campaign arc. If that coincides with your idea of having fun, you side with the GM, if not, you should move on and pick a different campaign.

*sits down, picks up popcorn*

Ruyan.


Shrug sounds like my experience with girls joining my table top games. Although I only had that happened twice it has been disastrous. They never bother to learn even the most basic rules. They don't even try and roleplay, or even bring a character concept.

Now I don't even bother with inviting girls to join our table top games anymore.


The Monarch: OH! DICK MOVE!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I can't help but take the GM's side. I'm running a smaller game with 1 or 2 players who have to be reminded of several basic rules of the game every single session. I wouldn't be able to stand that with an 'epically' complex game with 8 players.

However, instead of leaving the player out, I would do this: I would just just politely tell the player that she needs to be able to handle her turns without being told what dice to roll and what numbers to add, because the game would take faaaar too long otherwise. An honest person would be able to think about it and say whether or not she would be able to do this, and would leave of her own volition if necessary.


Gignere wrote:

Shrug sounds like my experience with girls joining my table top games. Although I only had that happened twice it has been disastrous. They never bother to learn even the most basic rules. They don't even try and roleplay, or even bring a character concept.

Now I don't even bother with inviting girls to join our table top games anymore.

The hands down best roleplayers I've ever seen have been women. They wrote multi-page character backgrounds with the PC's goals, its good things and bad, and constantly talked with me about things they wanted to do to help make the game more interesting for everyone involved.


Generally speaking I've never thought of learning the rules as the key indicator of interest in the game. If she has been showing up consistently that's the best indicator of interest.

We have a player in our group who's older than us who forgets things, I've just suggested when he plays characters to focus on non spellcasters to keep the class complexity down. Just talk to the dm and then her as long as she plays a char that's mostly rolling iterative attacks it should be fine.

That said the idea of playing an 8 person group boggles my mind. Splitting the group to two smaller groups would make for a much faster game.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Gignere wrote:

Shrug sounds like my experience with girls joining my table top games. Although I only had that happened twice it has been disastrous. They never bother to learn even the most basic rules. They don't even try and roleplay, or even bring a character concept.

Now I don't even bother with inviting girls to join our table top games anymore.

Yeah, I have the same problem with all white people.


Mojorat wrote:


That said the idea of playing an 8 person group boggles my mind. Splitting the group to two smaller groups would make for a much faster game.

Totally OT but I remember back in the day having 8-15 people playing at the same table... making coffee was a chore :D


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Gignere wrote:

Shrug sounds like my experience with girls joining my table top games. Although I only had that happened twice it has been disastrous. They never bother to learn even the most basic rules. They don't even try and roleplay, or even bring a character concept.

Now I don't even bother with inviting girls to join our table top games anymore.

This post sounds like my experience talking with men. Although it has only happened twice, it has been disasterous. They don't even bother to bring more to the conversation than circumstantial personal anecdotes of isolated events. They don't even try to acknowledge that, just as men can have varied interests, women are not all the same person.

Now I don't bother talking to boys.

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gamer Life / Gamer Talk / Cutting of someone from the game because she don't know the rules well - aka when the technical side of the game go too far ? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.