I know this is some pretty well travelled territory in most regards, but I think we could all benefit from having a place we can all look (If not in a book that those wonderful people at Paizo publish) to see how these scenarios have been handled in the past.
I'd love to see this turn into a repository of successful positive techniques that help DMs and players enhance their games while weeding out so many of the things that can ruin games and friendships.
A note about powergaming. I think that some people will consider this cheating and others won't, so for those of you who do, simply look at this as unbalancing the game.
I'll begin with my scenario, what I've done, and what I'm considering next. I have a player who builds excellent characters. They have depth, goals, personalities, and even when the temptation is there, doesn't metagame. He does, however, build overpowered characters. His characters always outshine everyone else's in combat. My way of handling that is to make small subtle consequences that are a result. For instance, he casts a lot of fire and explosive spells in a house, it collapses. He melts the bad guy and so does the treasure. He kills a PC he is brought to trial.
Now, that isn't my problem. My problem is that he feels it is justified, if not encouraged, to change the rules to suit his needs. This includes making new spells, feats, etc. He does this without my knowledge or consent most of the time.
To his credit, he does try to be as fair as he can with these liberties, but I have found issues with all of his creations to date, and I have only found out about them after he has used them, and not before.
I handled this by pulling him aside and saying that, now that his character is in an immediate danger of dying, that we need to talk about his new character. I told him that I realize that he gets a tremendous joy from finding weird and powerful combinations in the rules, and what while that does unbalance the game, he is an exceptional role-player, and I think that is fantastic. I also told him that I cannot allow him to take any more liberties with the material that is written. That it was cheating to do so, no matter how small and fair he feels his adjustments are. I ended it with saying that while I may not allow whatever it is he is looking at, that he has to tell me, because it is my job as DM to make those calls, and not his.
His response was that every book makes it very clear that the rules are only guides and should be changed to fit what is fun. He doesn't feel this is cheating, and I would love to find a printed definition of what he was doing to say that he is cheating, but I have never seen anyone describe this as a problem.
My next step is, while I would love to reach a perfect understanding with him on this, to just tell him that I am adamant about this, and I will not allow it.
That is my scenario, and I would be very interested to hear all of your opinions on this and other instances of cheating and how you think it is best to solve them.
What books are you allowing? just Pathfinder, Just Paizo, Just WOTC, All 3.5 products please let me know
So 2nd question is he changing how stuff is writen in the book to what he wants?
Uh, yeah, player's making up their own feats/spells/prestige classes/etc. doesn't fly. Not without prior consultation and approval from the DM (me).
It's nice that you've been pretty accomodating to him thus far, but I think you need to gently but firmly "lay down the law" so-to-speak and let him know that from now on that won't do.
The rules are guidelines, but those guidelines are not up to him alone to change, especially without notice.
I have an extra houserule for my games: If we come across a combination of feats, weapons, prestige classes, etc. that create a "broken" or obviously unbalanced combo, I reserve the right to nerf or disallow it.
Thankfully my players aren't looking to exploit the rules.
It sounds like he should take a hand running a game for a while.
Now, that isn't my problem. My problem is that he feels it is justified, if not encouraged, to change the rules to suit his needs. This includes making new spells, feats, etc. He does this without my knowledge or consent most of the time.To his credit, he does try to be as fair as he can with these liberties, but I have found issues with all of his creations to date, and I have only found out about them after he has used them, and not before.
(...)
His response was that every book makes it very clear that the rules are only guides and should be changed to fit what is fun. He doesn't feel this is cheating, and I would love to find a printed definition of what he was doing to say that he is cheating, but I have never seen anyone describe this as a problem.
The DM is the final arbiter of the rules being used in the game. Players don't make house rules. Players may request the DM to add or alter a house rule. They may even insist. They can write new material and ask the DM to allow it. But they cannot play as if that rule is in place if the DM has not agreed to it.
You solve your own problem here:
I also told him that I cannot allow him to take any more liberties with the material that is written. That it was cheating to do so, no matter how small and fair he feels his adjustments are. I ended it with saying that while I may not allow whatever it is he is looking at, that he has to tell me, because it is my job as DM to make those calls, and not his.
Bolded by me, because that is THE answer.
A player may come up with a feat, and run it by the DM, and the DM may find it overpowered and refuse it, or may find it perfectly acceptable, and allow it. Or he may say "Let's see how it plays out" and let it in as written and alter it later. But that is the DM's call, not the player's.
You, as the DM, must veto, on the spot, if necessary, any feat or spell you have not seen and approved ahead of time. If the player is making up the rules as he goes along, you might as well not have any rules at all, in which case you're playing the wrong game.
Upthread it was suggested that this player run a game, but if he does, I'd bet he'd change the rules without telling the players anyway. "Sorry you guys all died, but that guy had a new first level spell I just made up, called 'Win Fight.' Yes, it was available to you, but I didn't tell you because I figured no one would be able to take, it, since it requires the 'Cast Win Fight Spell' feat, which I also made up and didn't tell you about."
As the DM you should decide the pace, what is allowed, etc. and don't let any particular player steam roll you, or make stuff up on the fly. Both the DM and player are responsible to work out this relationship, and if either one can't agree, then one or the other should move on. It may be the case you can't DM for this group, if it will interfere with outside interests.
Or as one suggested, let that player DM for a while, as the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, or so they think.
To be honest i'm surprised you haven't kicked his ass, either out of the game or just kicked it. as a player, i come up with all kinds of crazy ass stuff, but everyone should know you run it by the DM first. as a DM I've come up with all sorts of crazy ass stuff, and have had to balance them after.
the rules are changeable, but to do so without talking to the DM first would be death in any campaign i play, in let alone run. As a fellow player i wouldn't put up with it.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Responsibility gives authority. You've got the responsibility to make sure the game runs smoothly and everybody is having a good time. That means you've got the authority within the game to allow or disallow whatever you want in order to accomplish those goals. The buck stops with you; there's no appeal to a higher authority, not even the rulebook. The flip side of that equation is that with authority comes responsibility; if you're making changes to what's in the rulebook, do your best to let your players know about it so everybody knows what to expect up front.
Ultimately, I think you are going about handling it the right way. Unfortunately, you are probably approaching the point of ultimatum: player either works within the rules you set, or finds another group.
I know this is some pretty well travelled territory in most regards, but I think we could all benefit from having a place we can all look (If not in a book that those wonderful people at Paizo publish) to see how these scenarios have been handled in the past.
I'd love to see this turn into a repository of successful positive techniques that help DMs and players enhance their games while weeding out so many of the things that can ruin games and friendships.
A note about powergaming. I think that some people will consider this cheating and others won't, so for those of you who do, simply look at this as unbalancing the game.
I'll begin with my scenario, what I've done, and what I'm considering next. I have a player who builds excellent characters. They have depth, goals, personalities, and even when the temptation is there, doesn't metagame. He does, however, build overpowered characters. His characters always outshine everyone else's in combat. My way of handling that is to make small subtle consequences that are a result. For instance, he casts a lot of fire and explosive spells in a house, it collapses. He melts the bad guy and so does the treasure. He kills a PC he is brought to trial.
Now, that isn't my problem. My problem is that he feels it is justified, if not encouraged, to change the rules to suit his needs. This includes making new spells, feats, etc. He does this without my knowledge or consent most of the time.
To his credit, he does try to be as fair as he can with these liberties, but I have found issues with all of his creations to date, and I have only found out about them after he has used them, and not before.
I handled this by pulling him aside and saying that, now that his character is in an immediate danger of dying, that we need to talk about his new character. I told him that I realize that he gets a tremendous joy from finding weird and powerful combinations in the rules, and what while that does unbalance the game, he is an exceptional role-player, and I...
I have a player very similar to yours. While he doesn't outright create spells and feats without consulting me as the DM first, he does have a tendency to dig up obscure spells and feat combination's without asking me if I allow them, and he uses item creation feats to create the most cheesy and broken items possible, again without consulting me first.
This guy is also a terrific roleplayer and he's really passionate about the game and his character. He also takes a keen interest in the builds of the other characters in the party to see if they are min-maxed properly and can get personally insulted if another player chooses to play a character, that in his eyes, have a sub-par build.
This in turn has forced me to start to min-max the monsters and npc's I use against them in the game to provide a suitable challenge. Evolving in to a sort of arms race, where we see which side of the screen can deliver the most powerful combos and builds, even though this guy also DM's sometimes and knows he can't compete with the DM in such a fashion.
I have confronted him about these tendencies on several occasions, and it has helped for a while, but he always seems to fall back into his regular patterns after a while, especially at higher levels where the PC's often has ridiculous amounts of gold and resources.
I know this guy is a big fan of over the top anime's and movies and this might influence how he wants to play the game, while I prefer a more toned down, sometimes even gritty style of play. After having played together for years I think we have found a sort of middle ground and while he still optimizes his characters, he doesn't choose the most broken combos and tries to make a character that's effective, yet still powered to the Campaign in question. He gets his "Nova" kicks by DM'ing his own Campaigns which tend to be very high powered, but epic in scope, and he gets to create all sorts of crazy spells and monsters.
I really enjoy playing in his Campaigns, but I still prefer a more down to earth gritty style for my own Campaigns. We both know each others preferences and respect that and most of the time game accordingly, although we both have slip ups sometimes. I might have toned down his characters unfairly on occasions and he still manages to find broken combos sometimes. But after gaming together for years we both know about our tendencies and we're comfortable about speaking about it when it annoys us.
To be honest i'm surprised you haven't kicked his ass, either out of the game or just kicked it. as a player, i come up with all kinds of crazy ass stuff, but everyone should know you run it by the DM first. as a DM I've come up with all sorts of crazy ass stuff, and have had to balance them after.
the rules are changeable, but to do so without talking to the DM first would be death in any campaign i play, in let alone run. As a fellow player i wouldn't put up with it.
+1
I bend my DM's ear all the time because I am a munchkin power gamer extrodinare and LOVE every minute of it. I never, no matter what, ever put something on my sheet that the DM hasn't approved of before hand. Other wise that CHEATING!! plain and simple.Prime example I felt that in the complete mage general wizards got screwed because they didnt have the option of getting anything cool like the magic mutants did by giving up that useless, exp sucking,hostage prone familiar. So I talked with him and I wanted an extra feat in exchange for giving up the animal but he felt it was too powerful so he compromised and by not haveing a familiar I am able to use all meta-magic feats one spell level less, so maximize costs 2 instead of three but a one level bump still costs one. Everyone is happy about that at my table because I can ramp up my damage spells earlier and it helps that party as a whole. Thats what players and DM's should do, find the happy medeium between want and balance.
As a GM, I would NEVER allow a player to create anything, and then use that creation without telling me. It doesn't matter if it's a spell, feat, or magic item. That is cheating, just as penciling in extra XP, or gold, or whatever would be cheating. You can either fix this problem in-game (rustmonster, theft, etc.), or you can fix it outside of the game (talk to him, play without him for a session, etc.).
Now, as far as using printed feats, spells, etc. that work well together in combination... well, I don't have a problem with that. As long as my players are using pre-approved resources, they should feel free to have fun with the combos.
That's the point, after all, to have fun. Everyone wants to show off at some point in the game, even the GM (I like to use cool props). My advice is to not stifle the creativity. Let your players use whatever combos they want, as long as they are from your list of approved sourcebooks.
Whatever you do, do it now. Don't wait, or the problem (and possible resentment) will get worse. Also, be fair. If you disallow a sourcebook for him, disallow it for everyone, including the NPCs.
EDIT: DMs changed to GMs.
Yeah if its not in the books its not going to be used
The only exception is that with switching to Pathfinder we have be converting some things
I would love to find a printed definition of what he was doing to say that he is cheating
I don't think the word cheating is used anywhere, but I'm pretty sure every section where player creations are covered, it is mentioned that it requires assent of the game master.
Also, the introduction section of the game should mention the role of the game master as ultimate arbiter and judge, if he does'nt quite grasp this concept.
If you really want clear references on the DM's final rule on player creations, you could look into the AD&D second edition Player's and Game Master's Handbook if available to you. More specificaly the sections about character class and spell creation. They where very specific there about the "consulting the game master" first.
You do not really need an 'official' ruling in a book to say that is not the kind of game you want to run.
Well, everyone has had fantastic responses to a thread I thought would disappear in the masses quite quickly.
So some people have asked specifics about allowed books, game, etc. We are playing Rise of the Runelords right now using Pathfinder rules. This was meant to be a warm up for everyone as it has been years since they have played. I took up the DM mantle because I enjoy it, and I have not stopped playing in the years that they have.
I was told to only allow the core Pathfinder materials for the game, but I allowed nearly all 3.5 sources to be included. I immediately disallowed Exalted Deeds and Psionics, and quickly Unearthed Arcana.
I got a fair amount of whining for knocking out Unearthed Arcana, but it was a book of house rules, and I didn't like where everyone's characters were going with it in play.
That leaves a huge amount of material for the players to use (and abuse).
Someone brought up an interesting point of letting him DM. He was my first DM and does a surprisingly good job at it. His weakness as a DM isn't that he makes things up, but that he can't seem to make it past a 3rd session in a campaign. The other point about him DMing is that he is entitled at that point to fudge rules to make a more interesting game. I think there is also an assumption that I, or someone else, would give him a taste of his own medicine. While I've considered that, I don't see any positive upshot. He may see how it is from a different perspective, but it would mean being a jerk, which only strains things.
Anyway, lets move off my specific situation and open it up to yours. What rules or techniques have you all used to bring groups in balance, curb cheating, and make better players? Everyone has rules for dice, what are they? What about modifications to other things to give positive reward or discipline?
I'll offer something. I require that my players write a, "Motivation,"statement. This is a 1 or 2 sentence thing that boils who there character is and is the defining force behind them. I ask that players give me that instead of alignment because I'd rather they think more about their character than that. It helps me track metagaming as well, and if someone is going to pilot someone else they have a good foundation to play their characters off of. It has been very easy to see someone's Motivation statement and translate that to an alignment. It has also been very easy to track which players are struggling with character interactions.
|
Hm.. so the rules are only guidelines? Sounds like it is time for malicious fun. See this level 20 Barbarian? Give him all 20's for ability scores, extra feats, no Armor Class penalty for raging, max hp, and um... spell casting as a wizard in armor with no chance of spell failure while raging!
And then give him appropriate gear for an npc of his level. Here's your BBEG.
My suggestion was not to give him a taste of his own medicine. I find that counter-productive. It would likely alienate the player and cause even more friction.
I suggested he GM since he seems to enjoy creating things. I can not help but wonder if he starts to stumble after the third session because he is more interested in creating something new than seeing things through or if the 'new shiny' simply does not work as well in reality as it did in theory. This is not meant as a criticism of him as I believe I suffer somewhat from this issue (not that I try to create new feats/skills/spells).
If you are new to GMing I would suggest using only the core until you had a good feel for how things interact 'in the field'. Sure, you might get some push back from your players who want to use all those cool options. However, in the end, it is the GM who has to deal with the ramifications.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
You can cut down on a lot of your headache about allowable stuff by making 3 lists as a table rule/houserule of what you will allow or disallow in your game:
1. What's always allowed (PFRPG Core)
2. What's never allowed (Unearthed Arcana, BOED, psionics, in your case)
3. What's allowed by exception, and only with prior GM approval (everything else). If anything you allow turns out to be game-breaking, you reserve the right to ban it and allow the player to pick something else instead (for instance, if they take a feat that you decide to ban, they lose it and can pick a different feat instead).
That way, if there's some wacky stuff out there that somebody wants to use, you at least get a chance to see it first. And you should definitely be up front with your players about the list. Write it down and make sure everybody has a copy, preferably before you begin a campaign, but it's not too late if you already started.
It states specifically int he Spells section that you CAN research new spells, but how long it takes, etc are up to the DM. So he has to tell you ahead of time WHAT he wants to research, and you decide how painful it is to do so.
In the mean time, warn him once more, if he does it again, "rocks fall, you die", and here is a pre-generated character rolled randomly from the NPC generation charts. I have done this. Worked until that character died, then he created another monstrosity, and I kicked him out of the group, at least while I DM. It has to be fun for EVERYONE, and if his fun comes at the cost of all the other players, well, it' just simple democracy at that point.
And it's important to note that "everyone having fun" includes the DM/GM too. It's not just a game for the players.
It sounds to me as if the player doesn't run anything by the DM first because he's afraid the DM will disallow it or nerf it. He's probably got some great combo or build in his head and is wanting to play it so badly, that he just can't risk not being allowed to.
I've been there. I've made a few characters that bent things just a bit, and the DM brought the hammer down on me. It wasn't that what I made was in any way unbalancing, I think it was more that I was sneaking somehting into his campaign without running it by him first. Learned my lesson well, to say the least.
But, it's no excuse. I encourage my players to get creative, come up with all sorts of things not spelled out in the PHB or PFCR, but it's gotta go by the DM for approval.
It sounds to me as if the player doesn't run anything by the DM first because he's afraid the DM will disallow it or nerf it.
Perhaps. But given what the OP wrote about what he does allow (which is quite a lot), I think it is more likely that this player's ex-DMing "I can create anything" mindset is the problem.
He's probably got some great combo or build in his head and is wanting to play it so badly, that he just can't risk not being allowed to.
Maybe. But there is a big difference between combining powerful abilities from multiple books to exploit a 'hole' in the game versus creating NEW feats because you want to. There is nowhere in the book that the player is going to find a paragraph that says "You, as the player, should feel free to create entirely new feats/abilities from scratch and drop them on the DM by surprise".
Personally, if this subject has been discussed with the player in a polite manner before and the message wasn't received... I'd slam him down hard because he is selectively interpreting the books (by ignoring all the 'with your GM's permission' parts), is thinking of his own 'fun' not the group's, and is seriously infringing on the DM's sphere. If the players can rewrite the rules on a whim, then you might as well be playing War on the playground:
"I killed you!"
"No you didn't - I've got a neutronium shield on!"
"Yeah, well I've got neutronium-piercing bullets!"
"Nuh uh!"
|
|
I had my biggest headache recently when I allowed my palyers carte blanche to do anything in PFRPG but most knew to do so within reason. However, I had two who saw thier characters as a set of stats as opposed to characters and did a lot of crazy stuff. One guy was a Barbarian Elf who was raised by humans but not raised by them (his words not mine) so he got himself some of the human bonuses and elven ones without any of the drawbacks of either. The other player played an elf who was raised by dwarves with the same thing. At first I thought these guys would have excellent role playing oppurtunities but their characters were as deep as one's avavtar in a video game. It caused more headaches for me as these guys were also notorius "rules lawyers" and tried to over-rule any decision that I made that went against. Long story short, I created an indepth campaignthat I could not finish because these two were taking the fun out of it for me as a DM.
Point being is that I know what recursive.faults is going through.
I had my biggest headache recently when I allowed my palyers carte blanche to do anything in PFRPG but most knew to do so within reason. However, I had two who saw thier characters as a set of stats as opposed to characters and did a lot of crazy stuff. One guy was a Barbarian Elf who was raised by humans but not raised by them (his words not mine) so he got himself some of the human bonuses and elven ones without any of the drawbacks of either. The other player played an elf who was raised by dwarves with the same thing. At first I thought these guys would have excellent role playing oppurtunities but their characters were as deep as one's avavtar in a video game. It caused more headaches for me as these guys were also notorius "rules lawyers" and tried to over-rule any decision that I made that went against. Long story short, I created an indepth campaignthat I could not finish because these two were taking the fun out of it for me as a DM.
Point being is that I know what recursive.faults is going through.
Sorry mang, you need to sack up and learn a wonderful word- No.
Even at the table, if they try and surprise you with something, you say no. If they keep arguing, make it clear that the rest of the party is going to continue gaming, with or without them, but that right now, THEY are holding up game. It's basically like raising children, except you can excommunicate gamers from your table.
Then again, I am a control freak DM. BUT I turn away players (all in their 20s and 30s, long time gamers. I'm 34.) because I run fun, fast, interesting games.
recursive.faults - Off topic, but if you are doing RotRl, I would suggest one minor change. Keep giants a separate creature type, rather then a subtype of humanoids.
You can cut down on a lot of your headache about allowable stuff by making 3 lists as a table rule/houserule of what you will allow or disallow in your game:
1. What's always allowed (PFRPG Core)
2. What's never allowed (Unearthed Arcana, BOED, psionics, in your case)
3. What's allowed by exception, and only with prior GM approval (everything else). If anything you allow turns out to be game-breaking, you reserve the right to ban it and allow the player to pick something else instead (for instance, if they take a feat that you decide to ban, they lose it and can pick a different feat instead).That way, if there's some wacky stuff out there that somebody wants to use, you at least get a chance to see it first. And you should definitely be up front with your players about the list. Write it down and make sure everybody has a copy, preferably before you begin a campaign, but it's not too late if you already started.
+1 with a bullet, and not a sling bullet either. Forget the "he's great roleplayer but he makes these characters see..", those players are great RPers when they get to run their dream PC. Take them out of their element and they whine like babies.
Charlie hit it out of the park. YOU are the GM! If they don't like it, tell 'em to hit the road. Seriously. You obviously consider this a serious enough problem to post here, so take control.
It was said somewhere that the power gamer is the DM's best friend. They are predictable, their motivations are clear and they crave one reward: Power. (3.5 PH2 maybe?)
I mostly agree with the statement, although they can be a PitA as well, as I know through experience. Despite their often "glory-hound" tendencies, they add fuel to the fire of an adventure and often provide much needed momentum for the party when more passive players stall and sputter.
It is the GM's responsibility to balance those tendencies by actively engaging other players and rewarding only those aspects of the offending player's behavior that enhance the other players' experience.
I allow (often encourage) players to play creatively and push the boundaries. New spells? Why not? Your character is playing with the very laws that govern reality. New feats? of course.. Paizo and co. can't think of everything.
Implementing rules without the DM's consent or knowledge is disingenuous at best, cheating if you don't want to put too fine a point on it.
When we RP, we agree to a set of rules that keep the game from being 'cops and robbers' and when we decide to implement rules without letting our group know, we devolve to a playground mentality.
