I liked the Shogun miniseries too.
Clearly a person of impeccable taste :)
I'm ok with a GM saying that players can't play X class, but having the NPC's running with it.
I'm OK with it as well because, as DM, I do it. In my Greyhawk campaign, the Scarlet Brotherhood develop a very esoteric form of abilities that they jealously guard from outsiders - psionics. It became one of the reasons they were so worrying - they have powers nobody else has.
But I don't allow my players to have psionics in that campaign.
I'm ok with a GM saying that players can't play X class, but having the NPC's running with it.
If the players were a bunch of traders turning up on the shores of fuedal Japan then they might have had some deadly encounters with Ninja, yet it would be practically impossible for those traders to be Ninjas, nor even remotely likely for the next, oh 600 years?
That true, and in that case I'd agree with you. This complaint sounded more like a case of the GM going:
"You all are natives of ancient Japan. You can't be ninja's because those don't exist. Also there is no magic or spell casters."
"Okay first encouter you have 2 samuri and 5 ninjas"
"Alright second encounter you have 3 ninjas and a 2 magic users."
There a difference between something being inappropriete to the campaign setting and backstory and denying your players the ability to use something that you are abusing left and right. A lot of it comes in how it's presented and why it's the case.
Yeah as long as it is articulated WHY something is a certain way then its all smiles.
That said, some classes just needed to be whacked with the 'no' bat anyhow because they were over the top.
Yeah as long as it is articulated WHY something is a certain way then its all smiles.
That said, some classes just needed to be whacked with the 'no' bat anyhow because they were over the top.
True (frenzied berserker comes to mind), and I think articulation needs a matching presentation to make sellable to a group. I get the feeling that if the GM in question had articulated his reasons then the player in question would have left faster...
I was curious what stories people had about why they quit a particular game. I'm not talking about having to quit because of time or distance reasons but something either in the game or about the game that you became fed up with and quit. Not trying to turn this into a b&~#%ing thread... just seeing what amusing stories others might have about why they quit a game.
So, what was your last straw?
I've left my fair share of games, most of the time because of other players and far less because of dm's. The most resent game was because I could no longer stand the choice of background music. To this day I do my best to never let that person choose what is being played, and if I hear the mortal combat theme one more time!!!!!
I left another game because a player got mad and yelled at me because I didn't want to talk first in every situation. I was playing a barbarian and not a nice one, I had an 8 charisma. So, I would ask where the food was, get shown and walk away, most times I would try to shut up for the rest of the talking; 1. because I was listening and 2. because I felt I was starting to distract from it, I was enjoying role-playing an ass barbarian, and no one would talk if I wasn't. The -2 to diplomacy character should not be the speaker for the group, especially if he's supposed to be a jerk. If I didn't press the party forward the character, a cleric with lots of diplomacy would say nothing! The only time he spoke was in anger to me.If you want to play the diplomatic character speak up, or don't do it.
Though I eventually came back after the player had quit, and played a different, entirely social character... and I retired him after I felt I was jarring the campaign everywhere.. I kept solving things by talking... Amusingly, I eventually (after a death and another retirement), settled on a fighter that did nothing but hit things when combat was on, just so I didn't rule the campaign.
The only time I have ever enjoyed a low magic campaign was when the npc's have low magic also, if they can, but I can't it ends it for me.
Had a game where the npc's could be classes we couldn't, because magic was just coming back to the world, which I'm fine with until the npc's are 2+ higher level than us in classes we can't take and we have a DMPC wizard, which was a class we couldn't play. Though the final straw of that camp was when we went up against something that required +1 magic weapons to even try to damage and we had nothing even close. The dm was surprised at the almost TPK (which the wizard DMPC saved us from). Low magic is fine, though a little boring, just let us play on equal grounds, else we are the NPC's.
Mainly because there is a huge difference between not being allowed to play balors and then encountering them and not being allowed to play duskblades and then encountering them...As already noted: No, there isn't, actually.
We'll just have to agree to disagree, then.
If it makes you feel more comfortable
This bit of snark, however, was completely unnecessary.
I'm ok with a GM saying that players can't play X class, but having the NPC's running with it.
If the players were a bunch of traders turning up on the shores of fuedal Japan then they might have had some deadly encounters with Ninja, yet it would be practically impossible for those traders to be Ninjas, nor even remotely likely for the next, oh 600 years?
You confuse valid reasons with arbitrary restrictions.
It's okay if there is a reason for it, like cultural difference or something being a trade secret or something. Just saying "Core only, because!" and then using other players' options kind of books without any in-game justification is just lazy.
You confuse valid reasons with arbitrary restrictions.
Well I agree the GM didn't do himself a lot of favours by glossing over his reasons - though all he said was 'please core only', doesn't sound like his players asked why etc or put forward an impassioned plea for clemency. So I am giving a little benefit of the doubt over.
The GM might well post up that his players continually pick the same abused and broken classess over and over which was his last straw and wanted them to just play something balanced.
You confuse valid reasons with arbitrary restrictions.
Well I agree the GM didn't do himself a lot of favours by glossing over his reasons - though all he said was 'please core only', doesn't sound like his players asked why etc or put forward an impassioned plea for clemency. So I am giving a little benefit of the doubt over.
The GM might well post up that his players continually pick the same abused and broken classess over and over which was his last straw and wanted them to just play something balanced.
I agree that this is probably the case, more than likely, but until that DM says otherwise we'll never really know.
In games I run, there are several classes which are available as NPC-only classes, but for, like mentioned above, cultural type things. For example, in Ravenloft's "Champions of Darkness" book, there are multiple NPC prestige classes written as elite servants to the Darklord's, such as the Night Lord PrC. These types of classes are actually fairly weak, but offer in-game mechanics for the Darklord's spies and servants, who gain special abilities tied to their realm and lord.
But simply saying "core only" and then slapping the players with Duskblades is a cheap shot, IMO. There needs to be a better in-game explanation than that.
The GM might well post up that his players continually pick the same abused and broken classess over and over which was his last straw and wanted them to just play something balanced.
If there is something abused and broken, there are three ways to deal with it (well, four, but let's ignore the "pretend it doesn't exist" option for now):
1. The Simple method: That's when you just say "This class or that feat is overpowered, so it no longer exists in my games." There might be some debate afterwards, but in the end, it's probably out of your universe.
2. The "evil" method: That's when you say "what's good for the goose is good for the gander", and you use those broken combos and classes and whatnot on the party, really kick their ass. Is usually followed by "now that we all agree that this is no fun, can we all agree that this stuff should be banned in our games for everyone?"
Option 2 should only be used if players show resistance to option 1 and you think you have to put the foot down as the GM
3. The jerk method: That's when you bar some stuff you find overpowered for the players AND then go right ahead and use it at them, and continue using it at them. This is usually followed by GMs feeling superior because they have showed the players who's the master around here, as well as maniacal laughter and the GM wondering why everyone thinks he's a sorry prick.
If there is something abused and broken, there are three ways to deal with it (well, four, but let's ignore the "pretend it doesn't exist" option for now):
Pretend the "pretend it doesn't exist" option doesn't exist? Clever. :-)
3. The jerk method: That's when you bar some stuff you find overpowered for the players AND then go right ahead and use it at them, and continue using it at them. This is usually followed by GMs feeling superior because they have showed the players who's the master around here, as well as maniacal laughter and the GM wondering why everyone thinks he's a sorry prick.
There is another option, that looks similar to this:
You, the DM, try something new that is broken without really thinking it is broken. After you completely tear the party a new orifice, you say, "hmm, that was a bad idea, lets not use that ever again."
On a tangent, I'm fascinated to see that so far NO ONE has defended the Duskblade class - it's borked and we all know it :P
Lesson 2 for me: Intervene early when an in-game conflict spreads into real life. I let had allowed the situation to fester and even continue past the end of the game session of where it began.Best lesson in the thread.
Well, I try to learn from my mistakes. ;)
There is, of course, also the possibility of an uncomfortable RL dynamic developing external of the game. For example, in the same group/same game one of the players had a crush on another, but she didn't feel likewise. It didn't, however, really spill into the game too much. The only in-game effect was that his character (Paladin) was more helpful to and understanding of the actions of her character (Rogue) than would otherwise have otherwise been the case, which was an RP failure on his part, but it definitely was not a game-breaking impact. Outside the game and in his absence, the girl did tell us stories that the guy tries to go everywhere with her (they are at the same university) - almost stalking-like, even though she has made it perfectly clear that she was not interested. I must say, though, that he never tried anything blatant when we were around and he was actually a nice guy, though apparently a bit desperate, which clearly led to some creepiness when he wasn't around us.
As a DM, since I didn't see any wrongdoing on his part (apart from some RP failures) when I was around, so I didn't do anything - pretty much concluding that it wasn't my business and if she wanted us to interfere she would have asked us to do so. The lady that was playing the character that had a conflict with the rest of the group that temporarily spilled into RL, however, was a DM of the other weekly game we were playing and she did not see it the same way. She was clearly more concerned about it, as she asked me to pretend that the girl and I are girlfriend and boyfriend, so as to get the guy off the girl's back. I politely declined to do this. Nonetheless, she tried to subtly and not sometimes not so subtly insinuate that the girl and I were having a relationship. As you can imagine this was sometimes pretty awkward, but I just pretty much didn't react to it (the girl did the same) and carried on as if it didn't concern me.
I am not sure this really belongs to a last straw or even a bad DM or bad player thread, since the right course of action is really a matter of perspective in this instance. Still, there is your episode of Roman's D&D group dynamic soap opera for today! :D
On a tangent, I'm fascinated to see that so far NO ONE has defended the Duskblade class - it's borked and we all know it :P
I loved playing a Duskblade the one opportunity I had to do so but you have to be in the right kind of group and have the right DM in charge for it to work.
Personally, I wouldn't be so upset if it was a forbidden class for us players and a NPC ended up being one. Just adds to the challenge of the game.
I like the idea of monsters and enemies having powers unavailable to the PC's; it seems to me that it would reinforce the differences between the two sides of the conflict.
I have a simple rule when DMing, anything the npc's/monsters can do the players can do. Of course half my players refuse to think and tend to give me the wtf looks after certain rounds of combat.
As for quitting games, lets see.
Was playing a game for about six to seven months with a group in the 15-18 level range. What character the others or I'm playing doesn't really matter, but we've been functioning as a group well aside from a certain disruptive player who was thrown out due to him yelling at 3am. GM has a bad case of Sephiroth DMPC's, and is very focused on seeing his story play out. So after finishing a major section of the GM's story, we were planning on just doing some crafting and reinforcing our position. The GM had decided he wanted to run us through some areas, campaign was a mash up of Ebberon, Forgotten Realm and other settings regions with a number of changes, so instead of upping the levels of those area's he wanted us each to roll up three new characters who'd be setup into three parties hired by our mains. We did by passing everything with some hilarity and went back to the main party in a race to find the super artifact.
Main part found the artifact winning the day but of course the GM made it a pyrrhic victory. Well GM decides were going to switch parties again and he wants only diplomatic PC's with no focus on fighting. We ask if we can use some of the side party members we made, he says no. So for the fourth time that month we would have had to make new characters. I dropped out, turns out the game was still heavy combat, only no ones able to stand up to it now.
Walked from a large scale store Star Wars game that involved 4 GM's and 6 faction tables after the the head GM decided my character had to die. Always fun having people 'teleport' onto a start ship and attempt to kill you. Though before anyone says oh god massive game, note it ran very well and the GM's were in constant communication with heavy interaction between the tables.
As a GM I've quit only once as the games either finish, sometimes in ways I didn't expect or because the group can no longer get together. The one I actively quit from though was part way in a campaign I'd been running for 12 years with the same core players over 5 different parties with a mix of old and new characters. At a time five months previously I'd finally become fed up with our groups power gaming rules lawyer and thrown him from the game. He'd become too disruptive and my random things to keep him quiet were no longer doing the job anymore.
Well the rest of the players became worried about him stating he might commit the old big S, so could we please allow him back in. Or that's what they told me when they reinvited him without checking in with me. I rolled with it for about two weeks with the notion they were going to control his outbursts or I was kicking him again. Yeah, no one controlled him but me and privately I was constantly hearing how they were already tired of his crap and disliked hanging out with him. So I made a simple call him or me, they chose him and I stopped showing up.
3. The jerk method: That's when you bar some stuff you find overpowered for the players AND then go right ahead and use it at them, and continue using it at them. This is usually followed by GMs feeling superior because they have showed the players who's the master around here, as well as maniacal laughter and the GM wondering why everyone thinks he's a sorry prick.
There is another option, that looks similar to this:
You, the DM, try something new that is broken without really thinking it is broken. After you completely tear the party a new orifice, you say, "hmm, that was a bad idea, lets not use that ever again."
If the GM doesn't think it is broken, then this is not really an option for dealing with broken stuff. It is a situation that leads to the discovery that something is broken.
And it's not similar to three because you didn't know it was broken, so you didn't forbid the players to use it AND then go and use it on them.
It is exactly situation 3 if you try something new (which wasn't an issue for players so far because you're using it for the first time and the characters are in the middle of a campaign and so have had not chance to get the new stuff even if they wanted), see it's broken, tell the players that you ban it for being broken, and then keep using it.
Pretend the "pretend it doesn't exist" option doesn't exist? Clever. :-)
If there is something abused and broken, there are three ways to deal with it (well, four, but let's ignore the "pretend it doesn't exist" option for now):
Seemed appropriate. And so deliciously ironic.
Hmmmmmm... Irony!
Well the rest of the players became worried about him stating he might commit the old big S, so could we please allow him back in
Oh, wow, real friends.
Wait, let me rephrase that:
Ow, wow, "real" "friends".
So the guy might have issues in his life big enough to commit suicide over being thrown out of a game, and all they can think of is "let's get him back?"
That's just dealing with symptoms. Never a good idea in the long run. You have to get help for people like that, or get them to get help for themselves.
I don't want to insult your GMing skills, but I doubt you're so good at it that otherwise perfectly happy people will kill themselves over not being allowed to play.
I think the best part is that they didn't ask you before doing this, didn't try to get him to fit in better, and then whined about what a hassle it is hanging out with him.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[In Mechwarrior, of all things]
DM: Okay, so you head off to the bar.
PLAYER 4: Are there any hot girls there? I want to #$*& them!
ME: [Laughs at Dead Alewives reference.]
PLAYER 4: ...
DM: ...
ME: Oh, wait, you were - that was totally serious, wasn't it?
On a tangent, I'm fascinated to see that so far NO ONE has defended the Duskblade class - it's borked and we all know it :P
There's nothing to defend - Duskblade is a fine class with relatively few problems and it's incredibly well balanced. People who disagree are objectively wrong.
I don't want to insult your GMing skills, but I doubt you're so good at it that otherwise perfectly happy people will kill themselves over not being allowed to play.
No offense taken I don't even think I'm that good, and I know he's got problems. Guy tries to play in as many games as he can find, going so far as to drive 30-40 minutes by interstate to get his fix.
As for my own GM skills all I can say is I've never had a player walk, or quit due to anything I'm doing in game or any way I've run the game in the last twenty years.
Guy tries to play in as many games as he can find, going so far as to drive 30-40 minutes by interstate to get his fix.
My Saturday game, if it's not at my place, involves a one-hour-drive....
|
I have a few stories myself.
In a 3.5 FR game we had a player who was also the cleric who insisted that the party not rest and heal up after encounters. It seemed to bother him that the group would want to replensih their spells and supplies. To the point that eventually he rewrote all his spells to not have any that included any healing. Which ended up being his last game as he was having issues with another player too at the time. To make matters worse he ignored any attempts to reach him by phone or email to come to the game. Expecting the DM to beg him to come back. That lasted all of one week with the DM and his cleric meet his demise on an alter of Lolth
Playing in my very first 4E game. Have you ever played with a group that has played toghther for a long time and assumes everyone is supposed to act like they do. Picture that. You had to roleplay like them. Agree with them and act like them. I stayed at first because the SM did run a good game. Except he was also one of those Dms who tended show favoritism toward his girlfriend. More than once she went into dangerous situations that should have ended up with her characters dead (she played two of them). Add to that she insisted on giving a barbie childlike voice to both pcs it was driving me nuts. It got to the point I had to laugh out loud or go insane whenever I played with her.
I know laughing at the DMs girlfriend is never a good thing and I was one game away from quitting when he booted me out. He tried to blame my lack of knoeledge about the rules yet he kept askling his players for information about the rules. My lack of roleplaying yet his other best friend just sat on his rear end and did nothing but role dice to hit things in the game. And he could not be even bothered to tell me in person or with a phone call but by email. We ran across each other at the flgs in our area and he tried to say hello and I just walked away.
Another one was in a Pathfinder game a few months ago where the DM expected you to show up at all times and even had a minumum, amount of times you had to show up or he kicked you out. It happens like everybody that I was sick. One time I caught the flue and two weeks later a gastro. Both times I called 2-3 days ahead of time to let the DM. While I'm not asking the DM to show up and hold my hand I did expect a little compassion. At the very least "get better we will see you next game". Not "look I'm kin of busy preparing for the next game so if you don;t ,mind I have to let you go". On top of that he liked creating encounters where we would always survive by the skin of our teeth. Where at least 2-3 memebers of a 5 person party would either be unconccious or need healing all the time. We would get an easy fight once in a blue moon yet it felt like a constant slugfeast.
Plus he beleived in the very slow method of gaining levels. Were talking about playing a year to a year and half or real time before gaining a level. Which while annoying would be okay except that when you add the above fights in the mix it felt to me at least my character never accomplished anything. I was going to have to leave because my work scedhule was changed drastically so I could no longer play on the day we usually did. I told the DM I would try to get it changed and he seemed fine with it in public.
Yet when I go home I received an email telling me that I was no longer in the game because I missed too many games. Apparently I had to drop everything includind having a life outside of gaming to be in his game. I nmade an effort to show up yet he expected me to have an empty schedule every week for 12 hours to go to his game. I'm sorry but if I am too sick to show up for work I'm not going to show up to your game. Espcially with a raging gastro. That I did not roleplay enough. I made a Elven Ranger who took the ranger speciality and I told the DM he was the quiet silent type. He gets the job done and that is enough for him. Somehow to the DM that translated into the oppsote. Either way I could not get my work schedule changed and I would have had top drop out anyway yet evcen then he seemed to resent the times I had to work on the days of the game. I'm not going to lose my job so that I can show up to the game.
It almost soured me on the gaming as a whole.
Last is that I may have to find a new group to run games for. The group I have is a really great gaming group and outside of the game we are friends yet lately they seem to be coming off at least in gmae as a bunch of crybabies. All they want to do is kick butt kill mosnters and take no names. Which is good except that sometimes it happens to them too and that they don't like so much. Maybe because I used to make the fights too easy or maybe they just want to win all the time. I have tried tlaking to them about it except it keeps falling on deaf ears. I can't always run encounters that favor the players all th time. Not to mention while I like D&D I want to run other rpgs and they seem very resistant to anything but D&D.
wow; talk about control freaks; shesh; nice that you called several days ahead when sick; whew
In a 3.5 FR game we had a player who was also the cleric who insisted that the party not rest and heal up after encounters. It seemed to bother him that the group would want to replensih their spells and supplies. To the point that eventually he rewrote all his spells to not have any that included any healing. Which ended up being his last game as he was having issues with another player too at the time. To make matters worse he ignored any attempts to reach him by phone or email to come to the game. Expecting the DM to beg him to come back.
Seems like he was basically begging to be thrown out. Maybe he wanted to go, but didn't like the idea that it was him who said "I'll leave the group", so he acted contrary in the hope that you guy would throw him out, enabling him to be mad at you or something.
Another one was in a Pathfinder game a few months ago where the DM expected you to show up at all times and even had a minumum, amount of times you had to show up or he kicked you out.
So far, so good. I also expect people to either play or don't. I don't want the session to be a fall-back for them, something they can waste time when everything else fails - I left groups for such behaviour.
I maintain that if you commit to a game, you'll show up regularly. If you can't make it, I expect to hear about it early, in case this will result in the game to be cancelled, something I won't do on short notice just like that.
And if you miss games for trivial reasons several time, you're out. It happens faster if you don't notify the rest in time. Or at all.
It happens like everybody that I was sick.
This is, of course, an exception. It's not like you were planning this, or that you just can't be arsed to show up. If someone's sick, he's sick. Doesn't matter if he's sick 10 times in a row (well, it does matter, it's bad and I'll worry about him. I just mean that this won't earn you bad marks), or if he won't call until shortly before the game (sickness and injury often strike unexpectedly).
One time I caught the flue and two weeks later a gastro. Both times I called 2-3 days ahead of time to let the DM. While I'm not asking the DM to show up and hold my hand I did expect a little compassion. At the very least "get better we will see you next game". Not "look I'm kin of busy preparing for the next game so if you don;t ,mind I have to let you go".
What an a!*@%@#. Well, I'd say good riddance, I wouldn't want to play with such a sociopath, anyway.
Apparently I had to drop everything includind having a life outside of gaming to be in his game.
Well, the sickness thing aside: It is quite annoying if someone is there only occasionally.
Of course, if it's something predictable, like you have a work schedule that means you won't be able to make it to the game every other week or something like this, it's something else - I wouldn't consider you to be a core player in this instance, but you'd be welcome nonetheless if you were there. I just wouldn't count you as a player when determining if I had enough players to play, since you're not there all the time.
Of course, if "having a life outside of gaming" means you will often go to the cinema, or have a nice day with the family when the fancy strikes you, or stuff like that, then I will give you a choice: Be there for the game or not play.
It's not as if the play dates aren't negotiable - The group must decide something that works for everyone. But once something is decided, I expect to keep that date free. It's like being in a football club or something. You won't miss training sessions on a whim to go have an ice cream, either... RPGs are more than an enjoyable waste of time: They're a social activity, with other people's time being wasted if someone doesn't treat it seriously.
Don't get me wrong: I don't want to imply that you meant to be like that. I just want to make my position clear. I did encounter people like that: They'd come to the session if nothing else presented itself. And they'd cancel 30 minutes into the game, meaning that there were people sitting there waiting for them to show up, and then having to see what they'd do with the time they kept free for this.
I think this thread is fairly theraputic....
Another one was in a Pathfinder game a few months ago where the DM expected you to show up at all times and even...
I'm glad KaeYoss posted, so I don't look like quite as much of a control freak . . . ;)
I understand your point in this post, but I have to say, as a GM, I have to be able to count on people to show up or I can't do my part to make sure everyone else is having fun.
That having been said, I wouldn't say its a matter of "kicking out" someone that can't show up regularly as much as its a matter of going to them and saying, "I know this is a game, and you have more important things going on in your life right now, but if don't have the free time, I may have to see if we can find someone that does have the free time for this."
I actually have a former player of mine that I'm on pretty good terms with to this day that I had to have this conversation with.
one of the players had a crush on another, but she didn't feel likewise. It didn't, however, really spill into the game too much. The only in-game effect was that his character (Paladin) was more helpful to and understanding of the actions of her character (Rogue) than would otherwise have otherwise been the case, which was an RP failure on his part, but it definitely was not a game-breaking impact. Outside the game and in his absence, the girl did tell us stories that the guy tries to go everywhere with her (they are at the same university) - almost stalking-like, even though she has made it perfectly clear that she was not interested. I must say, though, that he never tried anything blatant when we were around and he was actually a nice guy, though apparently a bit desperate, which clearly led to some creepiness when he wasn't around us.
As a DM, since I didn't see any wrongdoing on his part (apart from some RP failures) when I was around, so I didn't do anything - pretty much concluding that it wasn't my business and if she wanted us to interfere she would have asked us to do so. The lady that was playing the character that had a conflict with the rest of the group that temporarily spilled into RL, however, was a DM of the other weekly game we were playing and she did not see it the same way. She was clearly more concerned about it, as she asked me to pretend that the girl and I are girlfriend and boyfriend, so as to get the guy off the girl's back. I politely declined to do this. Nonetheless, she tried to subtly and not sometimes not so subtly...
Just to clarify: I don't think either my approach (ignore it) nor the other DM's approach (interfere) is wrong. They are merely different (though she could have at least chosen a different type of interference!) and based on disparate assumptions on my part and hers.
I think this thread is fairly theraputic....
That's for sure! It is also entertaining... in the 'I can't stop looking at the car crash' kind of way... :o
Here is another story with the same group:
I was playing a wizard and we were playing 3.5E in Forgotten Realms. I rolled a high Intelligence, but low Strength, low Dexterity and fairly low Constitution. I also had very poor luck in dice. As a result, in fights, I was often unconscious for about as much time as conscious - the enemies were smart and targetted me, which is fair.
Anyway, as the brain of the party (being an intelligent wizard and all), I frequently devised various cunning and entertaining plans for achieving party goals that tended to involve the whole group, as well as the use of my spells. These plans almost invariably failed, often for rather arbitrary reasons, and some players were rather frustrated at that. When we didn't succeed with our plan, some major NPC would usually show up and save us and often also accomplish what we set out to do.
We eventually arrived in Waterdeep, where one of those major Forgotten Realms NPCs was Lady Lairal (spelling?). She gave us some missions and like other major NPCs, she also bailed us out once or twice.
During one of our meetings, where we discussed various topics, Lady Lairal told us, among other things, about her identical twin sister, who was very frivolous and promiscuous. Apparently, she attended a lot of parties; bedded a lot of men and just generally gave Lady Lairal a bad name. She complained that she has to 'catch her' and 'tell her off' frequently and that it is annoying.
Some time later (a few weeks later both in game time and in real time), we were coming back around midnight from a scouting mission in one of the city sectors. It was a day when the city was celebrating something (I no longer remember what). Remembering that part of our conversation with Lady Lairal, I asked the DM whether we are passing by any major parties. She said yes, so I said I am on a lookout for a Lady Lairal lookalike and asked her to tell me if I see her. Well, see her I did!
I decided to have some fun and simultaneously 'aid' Lady Lairal in her predicament. So I used spells (no longer remember which ones, but I think Alter Self and some others were involved, though the details are not importan) to assume Lady Lairal's form and asked the rogue to help me approximate her likeness even better, which she did. Then I tried to enter the party and dance my way towards Lady Lairal's sister. Anyway, I reached her and took her aside and basically told her that she shouldn't do that - that getting drunk and bedding numerous man is bad for the reputation, etc. It was done in an entertaining way and the rest of the group was almost literally rolling on the floor with laughter.
Anyway, as usual, my plan went wrong and the real Lady Lairal showed up... so there were 'three Lady Lairals' present. I explained the situation, but she was not amused. She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magic (technically speaking I couldn't recover it - I could use the spells already memorized, but not regain any after sleep/meditation/memorization). So essentially I became a 7th level wizard with low strength and low dexterity and fairly low constitution without any spells...
Given that my usefulness was already limited before the magic-use restriction (considering how well my plans usually went and how effective I was in combat) most of the players were not very happy about this and some later told me they were about to quit the game only not doing so because I took it calmly and kept the repercussions within the game.
Anyway, I multiclassed to a Psion (maybe the Erudite variant - my memory is not clear on this), so I began using psionics instead of magic. There were still those 7 wizard levels without spells, but I tried to be creative with my new psionic powers. :)
Difference between a good gm and bad gm is the story of how you could or would or things you would have to do to remove the curse. Good gm would run it into a great story; a bad gm would just stick you with it with no recourse.
She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magic
Just like that? No duration? No "Come back in a week and maybe I'll lift the curse"?
I'd have walked there and then, after giving the GM a piece of my mind.
She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magicJust like that? No duration? No "Come back in a week and maybe I'll lift the curse"?
I'd have walked there and then, after giving the GM a piece of my mind.
Agreed. Especially since the character in question, Laeral Silverhand Arunsun, is "good hearted, radiant, and kind" and is renowned throughout Waterdeep for her fair nature and vested interest in making things go smoothly.
The story you relate, Roman, is a case of the GM playing the F-U card, in my book.
I try not to put show stoppers in my game; like death scarabs and all that instant stuff; though I have used them at appropriate times; there are always options. I even have a dungeon all ready to go in case the party dies; or a character dies and wants to go through the afterworld as a spirit and try to get back to the living; always lots of options; problem is; most players think to one dimensionally; but most of my players catch on; levels upon levels of depth of playing; that is the goal.
I even have a dungeon all ready to go in case the party dies; or a character dies and wants to go through the afterworld as a spirit and try to get back to the living
That would be a kickass level of hell/purgatory, DOOD. What's the dungeon like?
I try not to put show stoppers in my game; like death scarabs and all that instant stuff; though I have used them at appropriate times; there are always options. I even have a dungeon all ready to go in case the party dies; or a character dies and wants to go through the afterworld as a spirit and try to get back to the living; always lots of options; problem is; most players think to one dimensionally; but most of my players catch on; levels upon levels of depth of playing; that is the goal.
I tend to do much the same, where no encounter or situation has only one method of resolution. My Star Wars Saga game was a prime example of this - each encounter, each situation, had multiple methods of escaping. I always included an Environmental, Combat, and Diplomatic method of escaping each encounter. It meant more work for me in pre-game prep, but once my players caught on that they could defeat the War Droids by dropping the ceiling on them, or by plugging the Astromech into the nearby computer terminal and opening a nearby airlock to flush the droids into space, so on and so forth, they really got into it. Once they realized that they didn't always have to fight their way out of things, their enjoyment of the game really got a lot larger and the game improved all around for everyone.
I've never ... walked away from a game, nor have I ... asked a player to leave if I was DMing. ... I've found that just about everything can be worked out if people just talk about it or work to solve it rather than up and leaving. ... I'm willing to be pretty flexible if others find their fun in play styles that are different from mine. ... I've played campaigns I don't particularly like for months at a time because others were enjoying it and I don't want to kill their buzz. ... I've also swallowed my tongue on numerous occasions when DMs make wrong or stupid decisions rather than disrupting the game with a long argument.I'd contacted the Vatican in reference to your possible canonization. They reminded me that you ain't dead yet ... but it's the thought that counts, right?
At the other extreme ... I hadn't played in years, yet walked away from a campaign some weeks ago after but a single four-hour session upon realizing that the DM was hopelessly mousy and incapable of effectively overseeing the game. When you're a five-foot nothin' female, you'd better have an authoritative voice and an iron fist 'neath that tiny velvet glove, or anarchy's likely a brewin'. Add to that her relative unfamiliarity or perhaps lack of facility with 3.5 mechanics (despite years of playing experience), and a storyline that grabbed me not in the least ....
I've gotten too old to waste my time when I'm not having a good one.
Didn't realize I was coming off as so preachy, but I stand by what I wrote. I was writing in reaction to a lot of posts that indicated people being pretty whiny and or having an attitude of "my way of the highway". For me, any day gaming is fun, and I'm willing to put up with a lot just to have those precious few hours each week. Walking away from a game seems extreme to me, in all but the most extreme cases.
That said, there are certainly some horror stories in this thread and others that would make me walk, such as the ones involving not just poorly qualified but misogynistic or borderline sociopathic DMs and players.
Yours, however, ain't one of those. For me, a struggling DM needs help and support, not players walking away. It's a tough job, and I have sympathy for anyone willing to take it on. And it's a bit harsh to judge a storyline based on one 4-hour session. Worst comes to worst, and the DM and the story doesn't improve, I probably just suggest someone else take over DMing or that we run a different campaign.
She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magicJust like that? No duration? No "Come back in a week and maybe I'll lift the curse"?
I'd have walked there and then, after giving the GM a piece of my mind.
Agreed. Especially since the character in question, Laeral Silverhand Arunsun, is "good hearted, radiant, and kind" and is renowned throughout Waterdeep for her fair nature and vested interest in making things go smoothly.
The story you relate, Roman, is a case of the GM playing the F-U card, in my book.
Of course, Laeral is also incredibly powerful, and in a position of authority within the city. Someone impersonating her would likely be viewed with extreme suspicion, to say the least. Not the brightest move this wizard ever made. Still, if this curse were anything more than temporary, it would be an overreaction on her part, given her character. On the other hand, good thing it wasn't her husband, the Blackstaff, who discovered it. He likely would have just blasted the PC into nothingness on the spot for presuming to impersonate his wife. Not known for his patience with adventurers.
Of course, Laeral is also incredibly powerful, and in a position of authority within the city. Someone impersonating her would likely be viewed with extreme suspicion, to say the least. Not the brightest move this wizard ever made. Still, if this curse were anything more than temporary, it would be an overreaction on her part, given her character. On the other hand, good thing it wasn't her husband, the Blackstaff, who discovered it. He likely would have just blasted the PC into nothingness on the spot for presuming to impersonate his wife. Not known for his patience with adventurers.She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magicJust like that? No duration? No "Come back in a week and maybe I'll lift the curse"?
I'd have walked there and then, after giving the GM a piece of my mind.
Agreed. Especially since the character in question, Laeral Silverhand Arunsun, is "good hearted, radiant, and kind" and is renowned throughout Waterdeep for her fair nature and vested interest in making things go smoothly.
The story you relate, Roman, is a case of the GM playing the F-U card, in my book.
He's mellowed out a lot since getting married, though. Spend a day as a frog and wash the walls of the Arunsun estate and he'd call it even.
My point being that after the PC's were explicitly told by Laeral that her sister was out there impugning her good name (And since when does she have a party girl twin? All of her sisters are pretty respectable!) and the PC said "Hey, I see a way to get in good with Lady Arunsun!" and had a good intent behind his (admittedly poorly thought out) actions... And then she basically puts the banhammer on him for trying to do something helpful, with no way out and no way of repenting or otherwise "making it good"?
That's just the GM pushing the FUVM button.
Of course, Laeral is also incredibly powerful, and in a position of authority within the city. Someone impersonating her would likely be viewed with extreme suspicion, to say the least.
She's also a good judge of character. She'd have seen the good intention behind the deed and would not have been so harsh.
The Blackstaff, maybe, but Laeral is a caring woman. She'll be all for second chances.
After all, she never did anything much about her twin, except tell this wizard about it. A person who curses you to be nothing for something harmless like this (the guy didn't sully her name or anything, after all) would have done something about her sister long ago. Maybe a curse that she looks different or everyone knows who she is.
Still, if this curse were anything more than temporary, it would be an overreaction on her part, given her character.
It's an overreaction even then. One I might forgive the GM if it wasn't permanent, but it would cause comment.
On the other hand, good thing it wasn't her husband, the Blackstaff, who discovered it. He likely would have just blasted the PC into nothingness on the spot for presuming to impersonate his wife. Not known for his patience with adventurers.
Not known to break laws, either. He's unscrupulously lawful. He wouldn't kill anyone for this. Especially since he's not a misogynist and knows his wive can handle herself.
Plus, depending on how much that GM goes with canon, Khelben is stone dead forever.
Wait, Brian: You think crappy GMs need second chances, but a player who did something someone could consider less-than-appropriate deserves to have his character rammed in the back entrance without even the courtesy of a lube?
You hate players, do you? :P
DMing can be a very difficult and thankless role, but there are a LOT of DM's who won't accept any help either. Some DM's really have a god-complex and feel like any adjustment you suggest is taking their baby right out of their hands.
I DM for some players who are a heck of a lot more experienced than I am, so I try to always keep my games open to suggestions. I've tripped up on multiple occasions, and when something falls flat the first thing I do is admit the mistake, and talk out a solution with the group. It's a lot harder in practice, but in the end it makes for a much more comfortable gaming environment.
Since my story appeared to garner some interest, I will try to provide clarifications, as well as some additional details. I will try to be as fair as possible in the assessment - which I think I can be, given that the rest of the group was much more upset over losing their arcane caster than I was upset myself.
She cast a curse (some sort of spell) on me as a punishment for 'irresponsible use of magic' that prevented me from usng magicJust like that? No duration? No "Come back in a week and maybe I'll lift the curse"?
I'd have walked there and then, after giving the GM a piece of my mind.
Yeah, just like that - the duration was permanent, though the curse was eventually lifted.
Agreed. Especially since the character in question, Laeral Silverhand Arunsun, is "good hearted, radiant, and kind" and is renowned throughout Waterdeep for her fair nature and vested interest in making things go smoothly.
The story you relate, Roman, is a case of the GM playing the F-U card, in my book.
Thank you for clearing up the spelling (we only heard it pronounced). It must have indeed been her, since she was also described as compassionate and kind by the DM and she did mention Khelben Blackstaff as her husband.
Of course, Laeral is also incredibly powerful, and in a position of authority within the city. Someone impersonating her would likely be viewed with extreme suspicion, to say the least. Not the brightest move this wizard ever made. Still, if this curse were anything more than temporary, it would be an overreaction on her part, given her character. On the other hand, good thing it wasn't her husband, the Blackstaff, who discovered it. He likely would have just blasted the PC into nothingness on the spot for presuming to impersonate his wife. Not known for his patience with adventurers.
She was indeed described as very powerful (as also evidenced by her ability to cast the curse/spell).
He's mellowed out a lot since getting married, though. Spend a day as a frog and wash the walls of the Arunsun estate and he'd call it even.
My point being that after the PC's were explicitly told by Laeral that her sister was out there impugning her good name (And since when does she have a party girl twin? All of her sisters are pretty respectable!) and the PC said "Hey, I see a way to get in good with Lady Arunsun!" and had a good intent behind his (admittedly poorly thought out) actions... And then she basically puts the banhammer on him for trying to do something helpful, with no way out and no way of repenting or otherwise "making it good"?
That's just the GM pushing the FUVM button.
Yes, she did explicitly tell us about her 'problem sister'. I am not terribly familiar with Forgotten Realms lore, so I cannot answer your question where the party girl twin came from. As you can probably tell, my Forgotten Realms knowledge is more or less limited to what the DM told us (which was some years back now) and what I gleaned from some computer games set in the setting. The DM, however, did seem to be very familiar indeed with the setting and I was under the impression that she would avoid 'unofficial' alterations of major NPCs, so I would guess (especially judging by her negative reaction to 4E changes to FR - particularly the killing-off of the major NPCs) she wouldn't have just made up a party twin sister for Lady Laeral unless she already exists in Forgotten Realms lore (not that it really matters in this case).
She's also a good judge of character. She'd have seen the good intention behind the deed and would not have been so harsh.
The Blackstaff, maybe, but Laeral is a caring woman. She'll be all for second chances.
After all, she never did anything much about her twin, except tell this wizard about it. A person who curses you to be nothing for something harmless like this (the guy didn't sully her name or anything, after all) would have done something about her sister long ago. Maybe a curse that she looks different or everyone knows who she is.
It's an overreaction even then. One I might forgive the GM if it wasn't permanent, but it would cause comment.
Not known to break laws, either. He's unscrupulously lawful. He wouldn't kill anyone for this. Especially since he's not a misogynist and knows his wive can handle herself.
Plus, depending on how much that GM goes with canon, Khelben is stone dead forever.
Yes, the intention of the act was good, albeit admitedly in a bit mischievous way (which was in my wizard's character - to do good, although a bit mischievously) and yes no sullying of Lady Laeral's character occured - in fact, it seemed to be working and the partying twin sister was most likely going to shape up for at least this one party until Lady Laeral showed up...
About the permanence of the curse, yes, it was permanent (as in not having a set duration), but it was eventually lifted. The curse prevented me from regaining spells. I could, therefore, use the spells I already had memorized prior to the casting of the curse (I still had some prepared, but not very many, as we were just returning from a mission when this happened), but once the spell was expended it could not be regained. Also, casting one of the spellz I still had in my memory would result in me having to make a saving throw with a pretty high DC or permanently lose a level.
I think the DM, however, eventually recognized the effect the curse would have on the game, as the party practically lost its only arcane caster. When we next leveled I took a level of Psion, as the curse only affected arcane magic. I could, therefore, with some creativity at least provide some arcane-like support to the party. Still, as you can imagine, the effectiveness of a 1st level Psion in supporting the party was rather limited and the party was not pleased at this. The DM did learn and eventually let my wizard/psion get some bonus psion levels (2 bonus levels to be precise), so in the end I ended up officially 2 levels above the party (if counting the 7 wizard levels).
I did use two of my memorized spells during the entire time of the curse, when the situation was critical for the party. Surprisingly, given both my usual dice luck (or lack thereof) and the considerable DCs, I rolled well and made both of my saving throws. I did, however, voluntarily relinquish the 2 wizard levels as if I failed the saves, which brought me back to the normal party level (that was in fact the reason I relinquished them). The curse was lifted about two sessions after I used the second spell, which happened to be invisibility cast on the party fighter in order to save him from a precarious situation. The 'unselfish' use of the second spell despite knowing the consequences was cited as the reason for Lady Laeral's lifting of the curse, which I guess was thematically appropriate (though the use of the first spell was also unselfish and knowing the consequences).
So in the end, I think the DM did learn and my character was un-nerfed. Yes, being unable to use my primary abilities (spells) was unpleasant and lasted a while and the players/party ware/was not too happy about it, but it did end well.
The dungeon you get depends upon the mythos, as you expect it would; the Greek and Eyptian were the easiest to do as there is a lot of source material; for the Summerian I made it a lot darker; borrowed from Dante and added my own ideas of hopeless torture. Once you get into any hell; it is way hard to get out; so mostly you start the dungeon in line; standing in line. So this is where alignment really comes in as each person sees it different; are you going into the maw of a giant demon; or are you in line to get weighed on a scale; or any of many things. Hehe; was fun to do.
anyway; dont want to get sidetracked from Last Straw; but hehe; this dungeon would definately be you last straw in a manner of speaking.
I even have a dungeon all ready to go in case the party dies; or a character dies and wants to go through the afterworld as a spirit and try to get back to the livingThat would be a kickass level of hell/purgatory, DOOD. What's the dungeon like?
|
|
When I meant having a social life its not like I would wait until the last minute to tell the DM nor do it on a constant basis. Or use the game as an excuse to attend when nothing is avaliable. We all have our share of birthdays, weddings, dinner engagements to attend. Sometimes it ends up being one after the other. I once had to go to three weddings in a row. Not by choice either. I just happened and I had to go to all 3. The problem with the Pathfinder DM is that we played for almost 9-11 hours at a time. When your young and do not have a family or a job yeah you can commit to that. When you get older you have to balance your gaming commitments with your job and your family. Saying that if you cannot commit all the time do not game is imo a cop-out. Sure it is easy to say you will commit all the time. Life sometimes throws a few curve balls. I work with the public and I am very careful to not get to close to sick people yet sometimes it is unaviodable. And of course you just have to have those heroes who need to go to work sick and contimiante everyone else.
I was able to show up most of the time. And other I could not. I made sure to let the DM know well ahead of time. Having players cancel on me when I run a game has taught me to hate that. Still thinking about it now nothing would have satisifed him short of living and breathing D&D every weekend. Which is something I cannot and will not do.