Help! Inequality in the Group: Players outshining others during play.


Advice

51 to 100 of 117 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:

Wait, what? The arcanist, the guy who can summon rogues and empowered maximized fireballs, feels out-shined by a rogue?! What!? Really!?

If he wants to do damage, then you should tell him he should prepare /learn much more evocation spells and for gods sake use metamixing and tell him to stop being a child.

First, there is no need to be insulting.

Second, how does a 10th-level caster cast empowered maximized fireball spells (which require an 8th-level spell slot) when they only have access to 5th-level spell slots by default?

Third, even if the player in question has enough system mastery to cast empower maximized fireballs at 10th-level, how does that help him defeat energy resistances and spell resistance (which sound to have been the real problem in this particular encounter)?

Sorry if it sounded insulting, didnt meant it sounded like that.

And yes he can do it because he is an arcanists, he can get metamixing. How he defeats energy/SR? well the same way average arcanists do, arcane school emulation+spell penetration.

What i said was an example of what arcanists can do, he should in any circumstance feel overpowered because he had a tought day. His problem is not the class, its just his system mastery and circumstances. Crying for the DM to "tone down/nerf/ban" the poor rogue because he had good time its just a really childlish behavior.
Both the other players basically say that they "always HAVE to be better than the rogue in any circumstance or encounter". Sorry if it sounds insulting but I have a 5 year old sis with more guts than these two.


To expand upon a solution that some people have mentioned:

A single combat is rarely, if ever "balanced" equally amongst the players in glory.

The balance of the game, and the character-driven strength of most RPGs, is how each character's strengths and weaknesses emerge through a variety of scenarios.

Someone clever upthread said "Next time it's a swarm." This person gets it.

The key to balancing glory amongst the players is NOT to alter the rules or have them change their characters. Instead, evaluate your own GMing style and try to look for encounter types that you might be missing.

Try to make sure you use all of the games variables some of the time. A grand melee with evil outsiders is fun, but if one character dominates in that type of encounter, then they will generally continue to do so until you change it up.


Swarms are annoying and also probably make the Warpriest feel useless. Don't do swarms. Instead, have one of the Horsemen throw a few Elementals their way.

The Arcanist is clearly not optimized, but none of these really are. He did, however, run into an encounter that was clearly really bad for his build-- however poor the build may be. So, if you want to throw him a bone, fodder in a few creatures that the Rogue would have issues with that the Arcanist and Warpriest can both shine in. And yeah, in the same encounter maybe add a few demons so the Rogue doesn't feel totally useless. The Horsemen learned that the Rogue can tear apart their demons, now they're unleashing their new minions to help handle her. Fits into the story unless the villains are intentionally idiots.

Ideally, the Rogue player should be trying to help the other two learn things. I imagine that she's doing this somewhat already, teaching the Warpriest about the value of fighting tactically. She might not be able to help the Arcanist as much, but every little bit is something.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I play almost exclusively Ninjas and Rogues ( I will certainly be adding investigators and slayers now) and I regularly do significantly more damage than most of the other players in the party. From my experience the notion that Rogues are underpowered is largely a myth, at least in pathfinder as opposed to 3.5e. If a player focuses on the right abilities, skills, and equipment (instead of sacrificing for the good of the group) they have the potential to consistently outshine their comrades, especially Ninjas. I'm not playing in a group of inexperienced players either, its a group where the least experienced players have been playing 3.5e since release, and the more experienced have been playing for 25+ years, and we all optimize.

That said, I see no reason it should be so significant as to upset a caster, especially an Arcanist. It sounds to me like the Arcanist may need a rebuild and some assistance in that process.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

The other 2 players should come to the boards with their own "Getting outshined by the rogue" threads and post their builds. It feels more like a player not knowing how to utilize their characters problem rather than a GMing issue. It would also be a wonderful gift to the community :)


kestral287 wrote:
Swarms are annoying and also probably make the Warpriest feel useless. Don't do swarms. Instead, have one of the Horsemen throw a few Elementals their way.

The heart of my message is that you should do both of these things, plus the Grand Melee with evil outsiders, some of the time. And anything else you can think of.

If you switch to all swarms or elementals all the time, you're still doing it wrong.


GM_Solspiral wrote:
The other 2 players should come to the boards with their own "Getting outshined by the rogue" threads and post their builds. It feels more like a player not knowing how to utilize their characters problem rather than a GMing issue. It would also be a wonderful gift to the community :)

Please advise them to wear crash helmets.


Mythic Evil Lincoln has the right answers here.

Higher level monsters get rough for evocation. Everything has spell resistance. Mechanically, the monsters typically have a 50% chance to resist outright and then a 25%-75% to make the saving throw.

You can homebrew monsters to have damage reduction against spells instead of spell resistance. I find it's more fun, as a player, to do something less effectively than to do something that's negated outright.

Consider designing the next boss fight to all players strengths and weaknesses. Combine the boss with the henchmen so that in order for the rogue to even get in position the arcanist has to clear out the henchmen.


Mythic Evil Lincoln wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Swarms are annoying and also probably make the Warpriest feel useless. Don't do swarms. Instead, have one of the Horsemen throw a few Elementals their way.

The heart of my message is that you should do both of these things, plus the Grand Melee with evil outsiders, some of the time. And anything else you can think of.

If you switch to all swarms or elementals all the time, you're still doing it wrong.

Very true. Re-reading I don't think I phrased things as well as I should have, but what you said is absolutely spot-on and I was largely trying to back that up. I would just steer away from swarms in particular because they're likely to make the Warpriest--the newest player-- also feel useless. Instead, yeah, mix things up so everybody can play to their strengths-- everybody including the Rogue, but not just the Rogue.


Detoxifier wrote:
From my experience the notion that Rogues are underpowered is largely a myth, at least in pathfinder as opposed to 3.5e.

Maybe not a myth, but very over-stated. The problems with the rogue are as follows:

1) Very reliant on needing a full attack.
2) Very reliant on flanking.
3) Very little that can be done when the target is immune to sneak attack.
3) Most skill checks can be circumvented by spells by level 11.

I'm fine with points 1 and 2, because good strategy can make up for them. Point 3 is a problem, so the rogue needs some alternate to sneak attack when dealing with such enemies. 4 is a problem with the system in general and how powerful spells are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:
Detoxifier wrote:
From my experience the notion that Rogues are underpowered is largely a myth, at least in pathfinder as opposed to 3.5e.

Maybe not a myth, but very over-stated. The problems with the rogue are as follows:

1) Very reliant on needing a full attack.
2) Very reliant on flanking.
3) Very little that can be done when the target is immune to sneak attack.
3) Most skill checks can be circumvented by spells by level 11.

I'm fine with points 1 and 2, because good strategy can make up for them. Point 3 is a problem, so the rogue needs some alternate to sneak attack when dealing with such enemies. 4 is a problem with the system in general and how powerful spells are.

You forgot that they are about the only 3/4 BAB character class without a good way to self-buff, the sneaking rules don't work very well, and they no longer have the skill advantages they used to have.

The usefulness of the Rogue will vary wildly based on GMing style, style of the other players, and scenario. Want to make the Rogue feel useless? Throw in a construct or ooze.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BretI wrote:
Throw in a construct or ooze.

Constructs are not immune to critical hits.


Melkiador wrote:
Detoxifier wrote:
From my experience the notion that Rogues are underpowered is largely a myth, at least in pathfinder as opposed to 3.5e.

Maybe not a myth, but very over-stated. The problems with the rogue are as follows:

1) Very reliant on needing a full attack.
2) Very reliant on flanking.
3) Very little that can be done when the target is immune to sneak attack.
3) Most skill checks can be circumvented by spells by level 11.

I'm fine with points 1 and 2, because good strategy can make up for them. Point 3 is a problem, so the rogue needs some alternate to sneak attack when dealing with such enemies. 4 is a problem with the system in general and how powerful spells are.

I agree with you on 1 and 2, but I fail to see how 3 is a problem in Pathfinder, given that constructs, plants, and undead are all subject to sneak attacks and critical hits. The only creature types immune to sneak attacks that are encountered in any considerable number in most campaigns are incorporeal, swarms and oozes. It is certainly not as common as it was in 3.5e. Also, every roguelike I play puts a healthy dose of skill points in use magic device and carries items for those situations where he faces a swarm, ooze, or incorporeal.

As far as number 4 is concerned, any Roguelike worth his salt is going to have nondetection on him by 10th level.


BretI wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
Detoxifier wrote:
From my experience the notion that Rogues are underpowered is largely a myth, at least in pathfinder as opposed to 3.5e.

Maybe not a myth, but very over-stated. The problems with the rogue are as follows:

1) Very reliant on needing a full attack.
2) Very reliant on flanking.
3) Very little that can be done when the target is immune to sneak attack.
3) Most skill checks can be circumvented by spells by level 11.

I'm fine with points 1 and 2, because good strategy can make up for them. Point 3 is a problem, so the rogue needs some alternate to sneak attack when dealing with such enemies. 4 is a problem with the system in general and how powerful spells are.

You forgot that they are about the only 3/4 BAB character class without a good way to self-buff, the sneaking rules don't work very well, and they no longer have the skill advantages they used to have.

The usefulness of the Rogue will vary wildly based on GMing style, style of the other players, and scenario. Want to make the Rogue feel useless? Throw in a construct or ooze.

Rogues are great for self buffing. Just pay the party wizard and cleric to draw you up a few scrolls or potions. If you play a rogue and don't have maxed out skills in UMD then you are doing it wrong.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"You can put the same investment into UMD that anyone else could" =/= "Rogues are great for self buffing".

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

Quote:
3) Very little that can be done when the target is immune to sneak attack.

Aside from oozes and high level barbarians almost nothing is immune (it's not like 3.5 in that regard)

Quote:
3) Most skill checks can be circumvented by spells by level 11.

You to hit roll and just about any challenge can be circumvented by spells but those are also a limited resource...

The under powered label is only applicable when all other factors are even a smart player with a weak class trumps a noob with an op class.


Jiggy wrote:
"You can put the same investment into UMD that anyone else could" =/= "Rogues are great for self buffing".

UMD is not a class skill for every class, and for most classes CHA is the dump stat, so no, not everyone else can get the same return on investment.


Jiggy wrote:
"You can put the same investment into UMD that anyone else could" =/= "Rogues are great for self buffing".

No no they are amazing! ;)


Pathfinder Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Undone wrote:
BretI wrote:
Throw in a construct or ooze.
Constructs are not immune to critical hits.

Really? Guess that is yet another change I wasn't aware of between PF and 3.0. Although nice, I'm sort of surprised by this change.

Sovereign Court

Chaco Rockhammer wrote:


So I guess my question to everyone is this: How do I resolve this issue? It seems that no matter what I do, someone feels under accomplished in my campaign.

Advanced players are good at min/maxing, but he may be struggling because he's a beginner or more of a roleplayer.

Suggestion: allow that player a ONE TIME complete rebuild of his character. Propose that he invest more points in dexterity and suggest that his spellcaster take point-blank shot and precise shot. Tell him to focus on the following spells: 1st- grease, snowball; 2nd- arrow eruption, burning arc, fiery shuriken, scorching ray, stone discus; 3rd- aqueous orb, battering blast, fireball, fly, lightning bolt; 4th- arcane eye, blink, dimension door, empowered scorching ray, ice storm, wall of fire; 5th- cloudkill, cone of cold, maximized scorching ray.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Chaco Rockhammer wrote:


So I guess my question to everyone is this: How do I resolve this issue? It seems that no matter what I do, someone feels under accomplished in my campaign.

Advanced players are good at min/maxing, but he may be struggling because he's a beginner or more of a roleplayer.

Suggestion: allow that player a ONE TIME complete rebuild of his character. Propose that he invest more points in dexterity and suggest that his spellcaster take point-blank shot and precise shot. Tell him to focus on the following spells: 1st- grease, snowball; 2nd- arrow eruption, burning arc, fiery shuriken, scorching ray, stone discus; 3rd- aqueous orb, battering blast, fireball, fly, lightning bolt; 4th- arcane eye, blink, dimension door, empowered scorching ray, ice storm, wall of fire; 5th- cloudkill, cone of cold, maximized scorching ray.

+1 to the rebuild option.


Spellcasters need to have a strategy to deal with high SR opponents. Summon Monster plus a few other spells that don't allow SR can help. Another option they have is to buff the melee in their party with something like Haste.

Well-played rogues that I've seen can regularly get one Sneak Attack in a round, but not several.

Vanish is one way they can get into position for a stealthed full attack, I'm not sure what other options there are.

Full attack from a flanking position means either the opponent didn't move out of its flanked position, or the rogue had some well-timed help from someone else in their party.

Without sneak attack on a full attack, rogue damage is not that impressive compared to other martial classes.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Detoxifier wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
"You can put the same investment into UMD that anyone else could" =/= "Rogues are great for self buffing".
UMD is not a class skill for every class, and for most classes CHA is the dump stat, so no, not everyone else can get the same return on investment.

You know that in Pathfinder anyone can put ranks in any skill, right? The class skill bonus is a static +3. I'm not sure a 3-point difference in UMD is enough to justify "rogues are great for self buffing".

As for CHA usually being a dump stat, the same is true for rogues. There's no built-in reason for the rogue class to invest in CHA; the only reason to do so is for CHA-based skills, which is also true for all the other CHA-dump classes.

You cite higher CHA as a reason that rogues are good at UMD, but what's the reason for a rogue to have a higher CHA in the first place? To invest in UMD. I really really really hope you can see the circularity there.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:


As for CHA usually being a dump stat, the same is true for rogues. There's no built-in reason for the rogue class to invest in CHA; the only reason to do so is for CHA-based skills, which is also true for all the other CHA-dump classes.

You cite higher CHA as a reason that rogues are good at UMD, but what's the reason for a rogue to have a higher CHA in the first place? To invest in UMD. I really really really hope you can see the circularity there.

Now Jiggy, what about my favorite charisma skills -- bluff, intimidate, disguise? Those all seem rather roguish to me.

Hmm

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Hmm wrote:
Jiggy wrote:


As for CHA usually being a dump stat, the same is true for rogues. There's no built-in reason for the rogue class to invest in CHA; the only reason to do so is for CHA-based skills, which is also true for all the other CHA-dump classes.

You cite higher CHA as a reason that rogues are good at UMD, but what's the reason for a rogue to have a higher CHA in the first place? To invest in UMD. I really really really hope you can see the circularity there.

Now Jiggy, what about my favorite charisma skills -- bluff, intimidate, disguise? Those all seem rather roguish to me.

Hmm

The point is that they have nothing to do with the rogue class, beyond being class skills—and that's something that's shared by the classes he's trying to contrast against. That is, he looks at two classes who each only interact with CHA as a function of their class skill list, then declares that one will typically have higher CHA than the other.

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. :/


If we use the hammer, anvil, arm combat guide, I'd say the rogue is a hammer, the mage is something of an anvil. So I can't really see why the anvil cares that the hammer is doing hammer things. But then again I've settled more into the idea of mage-types being control/summon types first, blasters secondary.

Now, if the player is being an A+#&%*~ (player, not player char) about hogging all the glory and dumping on the other players for being deadweight, then I'd reach over and smack her in the back of the head. if not, you really need to get to the issue of why the mage feels they MUST do OMFG level of 'damage'.

Shadow Lodge

A Fighter can also be roguis, he can also have high charisma, umd and be the party face if he wants. Skills are usually a very poor balancing factor.


Hmm wrote:
Jiggy wrote:


As for CHA usually being a dump stat, the same is true for rogues. There's no built-in reason for the rogue class to invest in CHA; the only reason to do so is for CHA-based skills, which is also true for all the other CHA-dump classes.

You cite higher CHA as a reason that rogues are good at UMD, but what's the reason for a rogue to have a higher CHA in the first place? To invest in UMD. I really really really hope you can see the circularity there.

Now Jiggy, what about my favorite charisma skills -- bluff, intimidate, disguise? Those all seem rather roguish to me.

Hmm

Doesn't really change his basic point. The only reason the Rogue has reason to invest in Cha is for skills. The only reason any class, save the small handful that have abilities based on Cha, have to invest in Cha is for skills.

Grand Lodge

The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.

Try to list specifics when making such claims.


Melkiador wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.
Try to list specifics when making such claims.

Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy. A Rogue's only advantage over other classes in those areas is that they have more skill points to throw around, but if a Paladin, Sorcerer, Oracle, etc., chooses to pick up Diplomacy or another Cha-based skill, then they'll do it better. Or a Wizard, Magus, or other Int-based class decides they want to be skill monkeys, and they'll do the entire job as well as or better than the Rogue.

Or someone brings an Investigator and the Rogue cries.


I would say something like, if they want to be the big focus through the whole game then play a video game or find a GM that does single player games. The key is everyone gets moments at different times. For people saying they need system mastery, then that would probably make the rogue see everyone as overpowered and feel useless to the group. As a GM, you are doing fine by building encounters around the players.

Sorta off topic: This reminds me of reasons why I walk out of pre made adventures. One person finds the ultimate "I kill the BBEG" item and everyone else is now just the support crew to taxi them there. Being the sidekick is boring when the game focuses on whoever got the maguffin of ultimate power. By building encounters with a different focus on what players can be strong at that moment is a good thing. Rotate who gets to shine and sometimes, SOMETIMES, it is actually good story telling to make someone feel weak and useless in a moment. Like, the guy stomping through all enemies comes across an opponent that can totally wipe the floor with him. Then one of the other party members takes him down since said enemy built himself up to beat the biggest threat, not the others.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.
Try to list specifics when making such claims.

Social skills, Stealth, Assasination, theft, and many others.

This has been gone over, a nearly uncountable number of times.

There is no role, action, specialty, or theme, that cannot be done better, by another class, than the Rogue.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

the thread's hit it, the Rogue-thread singularity, there is no returning.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
the thread's hit it, the Rogue-thread singularity, there is no returning.

Unless we can find an infinite bookcase...


kestral287 wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.
Try to list specifics when making such claims.
Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy. A Rogue's only advantage over other classes in those areas is that they have more skill points to throw around

This is not really correct at all. How many other classes can roll twice on these checks and take the higher? Even a luck cleric fails on that account, as most of these checks take longer than 1 round.

Grand Lodge

RumpinRufus wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.
Try to list specifics when making such claims.
Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy. A Rogue's only advantage over other classes in those areas is that they have more skill points to throw around
This is not really correct at all. How many other classes can roll twice on these checks and take the higher? Even a luck cleric fails on that account, as most of these checks take longer than 1 round.

Inquisitor, Bard, and Witch.


RumpinRufus wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
The Rogue actually sucks at a number of things, that thematically, many people associate the Rogue doing well.
Try to list specifics when making such claims.
Bluff, Intimidate, Diplomacy. A Rogue's only advantage over other classes in those areas is that they have more skill points to throw around
This is not really correct at all. How many other classes can roll twice on these checks and take the higher? Even a luck cleric fails on that account, as most of these checks take longer than 1 round.

Skills are spread out between the team, but I guess we can use the good old Bard for comparison.

Bard Versatile Performance for Sing (Bluff and Sense Motive) or Oratory (Diplo and Sense Motive). Bard buddy is gonna be rolling over you early on unless your Rogue has equally high Cha, then by level 10 he's gonna have that double dipped Skill Focus for at least +6-+10 over little Rogue. I dunno about you, but I'd rather take a +10 over a reroll. Buddy Bard will also be cranking out Knowledge checks, have powerful spells that make him better at doing Rogue stuff like sneaking, killing, or persuading.

TL;DR In Pathfinder you aren't "good" at something till you have a class feature or access to an option that actually makes you better at something than some schlub with skill points.

Rogues are bad at sneaking.
Rangers are good a sneaking. Why? Favored Terrain.

War Priests are bad at Sense Motive.
Inquisitors are good at Sense Motive. Why? Stern Gaze

Rogues are bad at talking to people.
Bards are good at talking to people. Why? Charisma focused class, versatile performance stacking, double dipping Skill Focus, and spells.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I think 1d20+1d6 is actually on average better than reroll and take highest. investigator get's average of 14, rogue get's average 13.8 or something if i'm not mistaken. :P i know, i AM splitting hairs, but it's still slightly better, if only amusingly and not effectively.

but that's base versus a specialty rogue I believe. A specialty investigator get's a d8 right? making it 15 average over 13.8

also, let's not forget a investigator is going to be pushing INT if he's being the support monkey.

Grand Lodge

Still, I put a congrats towards this hardcore Rogue fan.

Creating not only a viable build, but actually having moments in the spotlight.

That takes some serious dedication, and system mastery.

Well, and some poorly built fellow PCs, along with the right kind of encounters.


Rogues are the only class that can disarm magical traps, I believe.

Grand Lodge

ShroudedInLight wrote:
Rogues are the only class that can disarm magical traps, I believe.

Nope.

In fact, there is even a trait that grants that ability.

They are not even the best at it.


You forgot to mention that it is a campaign trait.

Campaign traits are exclusive to a specific campaign without a GM's explicit permission.

Grand Lodge

It was reprinted in Ultimate Campaign.

Also, the Aram Zey's Focus spell gives you it.

Then there is the Investigator, Slayer, and a mass of archetypes.


Guess I stand corrected. I feel like the Rogue class needs to be updated or rewritten to give it something it excels at. That used to be sneak-attack but that was handed out to quite a few people. They do not excel at any one thing BUT lack the Bard's ability to be the Jack of All Trades.


ShroudedInLight wrote:

Guess I stand corrected. I feel like the Rogue class needs to be updated or rewritten to give it something it excels at. That used to be sneak-attack but that was handed out to quite a few people. They do not excel at any one thing BUT lack the Bard's ability to be the Jack of All Trades.

You asked for a rogue rewrite?


Rogue is getting a Rewrite in Pathfinder Unchained. As are the Barbarian, Summoner, and Monk. Not the Fighter though, unless they give him some really good Fighter only feats we can see him going right down the hole as still worse than Monk.


Well, technically, ShroudedInLight, they still are the best at sneak attacking, as Slayer and the other classes that get it don't get as much...okay, there's ninja, but really, it's practically a rogue archetype, so really...

...oh, dangit Vivisectionist, wtf, why do you have to ruin all of my arguments?!


Why would they redo barbarian? It's the only pure martial that even comes close to closing the M-C disparity gap.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

It was reprinted in Ultimate Campaign.

Also, the Aram Zey's Focus spell gives you it.

Then there is the Investigator, Slayer, and a mass of archetypes.

Unless I am missing something, it is not in Ultimate Campaign. I can't find it in there anyways. In fact I think the players guide it is from came out after Ultimate Campaign.

51 to 100 of 117 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Help! Inequality in the Group: Players outshining others during play. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.