Been reading lots of threads of things players do to make you crazy. Thought I would add one of my own just to vent a bit. Please comment and add your own.
I absolutely hate it when players argue the laws of physics with me. Not rules-lawyering, which I can at least respect but it sends me into a murderous rage when I get into an argument with a player who is clearly trying to go outside of the rules to gain an advantage.
For instance...called shots (even though they do not exist in pathfinder). We have all had that player who says "I take steady aim and shoot him in the eye," and argues with you when you don't award him a critical for telling you where he aims. And does not understand that the rules compensate for called-shots by assuming that you are always aiming for the area that is most vulnerable.
Player: "But what about snipers in Iraq? They shoot people in the head all the time."
DM: "Apart from the fact that they are using high powered sniper rifles, the average level one warrior has about 10 hit points so, logically speaking they would usually die in the first hit."
Player: "But what about a dragon. It's so big. It's eye is like huge. You should be able to just shoot it's eye, the rules suck."
DM: "Well, by that rationale then the dragon could just land on you since it is faster than you and it is too big for you to run out from under it."
Player: "I could shoot it in the eye as it's coming down."
DM: "Ok here is a perfect example. See this golf ball? I am aiming at your head (throws) but I don't always hit it since you are shielding your face with your arms and moving your head around. Some hit (throws another) your sternum, or (throws another) your neck....
Been reading lots of threads of things players do to make you crazy. Thought I would add one of my own just to vent a bit. Please comment and add your own.
I absolutely hate it when players argue the laws of physics with me. Not rules-lawyering, which I can at least respect but it sends me into a murderous rage when I get into an argument with a player who is clearly trying to go outside of the rules to gain an advantage.
For instance...called shots (even though they do not exist in pathfinder). We have all had that player who says "I take steady aim and shoot him in the eye," and argues with you when you don't award him a critical for telling you where he aims. And does not understand that the rules compensate for called-shots by assuming that you are always aiming for the area that is most vulnerable.
Player: "But what about snipers in Iraq? They shoot people in the head all the time."
DM: "Apart from the fact that they are using high powered sniper rifles, the average level one warrior has about 10 hit points so, logically speaking they would usually die in the first hit."
Player: "But what about a dragon. It's so big. It's eye is like huge. You should be able to just shoot it's eye, the rules suck."
DM: "Well, by that rationale then the dragon could just land on you since it is faster than you and it is too big for you to run out from under it."
Player: "I could shoot it in the eye as it's coming down."
DM: "Ok here is a perfect example. See this golf ball? I am aiming at your head (throws) but I don't always hit it since you are shielding your face with your arms and moving your head around. Some hit (throws another) your sternum, or (throws another) your neck....
Tell them you will allow it for one session. Take all called shots against them. Then after their characters are dead say "That is why". Then start the real game.
Optimize, use anything other than PFRPG core book
Tell them you will allow it for one session. Take all called shots against them. Then after their characters are dead say "That is why". Then start the real game.
Good suggestion, however, I prefer whipping golf balls at them. To each his own ;)
Optimize, use anything other than PFRPG core book
Don't say the "O," word! I can already hear the trolls approaching.
"Optimization is good roleplaying,"
"If you can't optimize you shouldn't be playing Pathfinder."
"Blargh smash!"
Good suggestion, however, I prefer whipping golf balls at them. To each his own ;)
Tell them you will allow it for one session. Take all called shots against them. Then after their characters are dead say "That is why". Then start the real game.
LoL. I would just explain to them why. Players often think of what happens to monsters, instead of how it(what they are begging for) can work against them. Once I explain the effect in the other direction they often change their minds.
I'd have to go along with the arguing physics thing...from a different slant. I hate playing with people who know (or even worse, think they know) martial arts...and then try to argue about all the things they could do that their character coudln't and blah blah blah...
This and people who will not work with the DM as far as character motivation. The guy who's character background is "my parents died, in an orc raid, so I hate orcs. Other than that, I like to kill stuff and take stuff, and practice getting better and killing and taking stuff." and then gets frustrated when I ask them what their doing durring time in town, and they set there with their thumbs up their noses while the rest of the party furthers goals and role plays....
"I search the hallway!"
"Ok, there's no trap-"
"Ok, now I search for loot!"
"Um, can I finish describing it? Theres a desk to the side-"
"I SEARCH THE DESK FOR TRAPS!"
"I just said. There weren't any. There's a desk to the side with no drawers, and a the walls are decorated with pillars-"
"I rolled a 15 on my search roll. Do the pillars have traps?"
I'd have to go along with the arguing physics thing...from a different slant. I hate playing with people who know (or even worse, think they know) martial arts...and then try to argue about all the things they could do that their character coudln't and blah blah blah...
I hear whipping golf balls at them takes care of this problem as well.
This and people who will not work with the DM as far as character motivation. The guy who's character background is "my parents died, in an orc raid, so I hate orcs. Other than that, I like to kill stuff and take stuff, and practice getting better and killing and taking stuff." and then gets frustrated when I ask them what their doing durring time in town, and they set there with their thumbs up their noses while the rest of the party furthers goals and role plays....
Yeah, sometimes these saps just sit there and whine insisting that you get to the "action," while everyone else is having a swell time.
"I search the hallway!"
"Ok, there's no trap-"
"Ok, now I search for loot!"
"Um, can I finish describing it? Theres a desk to the side-"
"I SEARCH THE DESK FOR TRAPS!"
"I just said. There weren't any. There's a desk to the side with no drawers, and a the walls are decorated with pillars-"
"I rolled a 15 on my search roll. Do the pillars have traps?"
"You find a trap. It kills you. No save."
Talk about other characters they have played in other campaigns or other systems.
They even sometimes list what that character would have done in the current encounter.
Current encounter party 2nd level fighting a bunch of goblins. Player goes on how his 14th level fighter could mow through these guys using X Y and Z. "He could probably do it blind folded with one arm tied behind is back. These goblins are punks."
I really dislike when players get into a heated debate or argument about something not being done at that point in time.
"No way dude you cannot teleport into the top of a tree, it is swaying and therefore is not in the exact same place, so you do not know where the top branch really is. You may be able to dim door up there with a chance of missing... The DM could just up the risk on the precentile roll."
Oh yeah they are both 1st level and fighters in the current game.
This also goes for discussion/arguments about comic books, card games, video games, etc.
Word. OOG conversation sucks.
Optimize
Likewise, I hate when players sub-optimize.
"My PC is a commoner with 7 Con who flees at the onset of anything violent or scary! He has no reason whatsoever to be an adventurer. Aren't I awesome? I'm thinking outside the box!"
Well, speaking as a player and not a GM...
One thing I hate is another player who wastes everyone's time. Either by telling one story after another that has nothing to do with anything going on, or by arguing every point of the story and rules.
Another thing I hate is another player who is hyper-critical of the GM. Geez, it's a really tough job that hardly anyone wants, give 'em some slack folks!
What I love in other players is teamwork. Folks who are ready (even eager) to help others get them most of their characters and the time in the game. Thank the gods I have found a few ppl like that from time to time.
Making fun of me or anyone else at the table. I used to have this one guy that played the class clown. Great guy, always had a good joke to tell, but just couldn't turn it off. SO when I am hamming it up trying to entertain the group he can't stop cracking jokes.
GM: "The lich looks down at you, two burning orange pinpoints where his eyes once were. 'You have meddled in my affairs for the last time...
Player: *chuckes
GM: ...soon you will join your predecessors in the vast dark abyss...
Player: *chuckles
GM: ...erm, and you will scream my name for all eternity."
Player: "Ha ha, dude, that's what she said! You are so gay."
Character names. Yep, I realize it is just a game and all but I want players who are somewhat serious about their characters.
I hate character names that are stupid or a play on words, a pun, a joke, a sexual innuendo or cribbed from the latest movie you have seen.
Samurai or ninja called Long Wang, fighters called Bob the Fighter or Shrek the Magnificent, etc. drive me nuts. You might think you are being coy or clever or cheeky but trust me, it gets old really fast.
If you picks a stupid name, expect your 'Bob the Fighter' to join the rest of the 'Bob the Fighter' character sheets in my 'killed characters' folder.
Optimize, use anything other than PFRPG core bookDon't say the "O," word! I can already hear the trolls approaching.
"Optimization is good roleplaying,"
"If you can't optimize you shouldn't be playing Pathfinder."
"Blargh smash!"
AGREED!!!
I have though of putting 'optimized' characters on the slow track balanced characters on the medium track and hindered characters on the fast track for XP
Or changing pt buy for people I know 'optimize'
Hmmm Blurg the Barbarian you have 15 pt buy
Gimp the Gimpy Rogue you have 25 pt
Or have the for SAD classes they get 15 pt buy
2-3 AD get 20 pt and
Super MAD characters get 25 pt buy
I hate it when my players try to tell me "No, that monster can't do that." Who's running this game anyway? I actually only have one player who does that, and he's a DM for other games during the week, so what it is is two Alpha-Males trying to assert dominance.
(This is all coming from a player's perspective)
We have a guy in our current group that absolutely drives me up the wall. I mean, he seriously drives me [expletive deleted] nuts. It's probably because he doesn't actually care about the game, but here are a couple examples of him "in action."
- Player practices Zen Rolling. He often doesn't even consult his character sheet, and instead spouts off random skill checks or attack rolls. "Oh, I got a 47 knowledge (local). Do I know anything?"
- Player doesn't actually know what's on his character sheet. We once went the length of a 2 year campaign with him as our party bard. He never cast spells, he never used his skills, and he only ever used inspire courage when the whole group reminded him to. In fact, his only autonomous action was to fire a crossbow from the flank.
- Suffers from "always right" syndrome. Focuses on tiny, inane details that don't pertain to the plot in any reasonable fashion and then speaks over other players when they attempt to move on. Further, if multiple opinions arise in the group, he continues to speak louder until the rest of the group relents.
- Loves to pursue "awesome ideas" despite being completely awful in a mechanical sense. Refuses to listen to ideas that would allow him to play said idea in an efficient manner. For example, this guy really wanted to multiclass Celestial Sorcerer & Infernal Sorcerer because he thought it would be an awesome roleplaying concept. He ignored ideas of an Aasimar Infernal Sorcerer or Tiefling Celestial Sorcerer, and instead wanted to basically take sorcerer twice. The DM had to veto it by the rules to shut him down.
- Fails to stay awake past 10pm, despite the fact that we've been meeting for 4 years now and the sessions always run roughly 8-midnight.
- Constantly attempts to retcon situations to place himself at an advantage. "Well I would know that because I placed a listening coin in the thief's pocket before he escaped."
That list seriously goes on and on.
|
I hate it when my players try to tell me "No, that monster can't do that."
This is my number one hate. Even had a player pull out the Monster Manual to show me why he was right and my monster was wrong and that even using 'advancement rules' the monster isn't right! He went all sorts of red and yelled when I calmly explained I didn't use the advancement rules and I have just created the 'new' monster. Apparently under the latest editions of D&D is it's not in the book it shouldn't be in the game <sigh>.
He's no longer playing with us now...
OptimizeLikewise, I hate when players sub-optimize.
"My PC is a commoner with 7 Con who flees at the onset of anything violent or scary! He has no reason whatsoever to be an adventurer. Aren't I awesome? I'm thinking outside the box!"
AKA - Crafty Wimp TM.
I guess it all boils down to arguing wtih the GM in general. Because if you are arguing with the GM it either implies:
A) The GM is not knowledgeable enough to properly adjudicate the situation
or
B) The GM is lying, cheating, bending the rules to make the game harder than it should be
or
C) The GM is an idiot and will let me get away with anything that I want because he has no backbone
Of course I listen to legitimate gripes. If I accidentally made an AOO when I should not have and you point that out I will give you your hit points back.
Just want to put this one out there. I know that I am a pretty good GM. My players have said as much and keep coming back for more. One of the things that makes me a good GM is that I don't take any of the s~%% that I see people complaining about on these message boards. I have found that most players (perhaps unconsciously) will go through a process of feeling-out their GM to see what he will let slide.
90% of the time I politely put my foot down. Players rarely act up at my table since they know if they cross the line then I will make them look foolish in front of their peers. And, cmon, we all know what crossing the line is.
The question that I am building up to is "If the GM is a little heavy-handed does it lead to a better game?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Optimize, use anything other than PFRPG core bookDon't say the "O," word! I can already hear the trolls approaching.
"Optimization is good roleplaying,"
"If you can't optimize you shouldn't be playing Pathfinder."
"Blargh smash!"
AGREED!!!
I have though of putting 'optimized' characters on the slow track balanced characters on the medium track and hindered characters on the fast track for XP
Or changing pt buy for people I know 'optimize'
Hmmm Blurg the Barbarian you have 15 pt buy
Gimp the Gimpy Rogue you have 25 pt
Or have the for SAD classes they get 15 pt buy
2-3 AD get 20 pt andSuper MAD characters get 25 pt buy
I have to say that the above three posts are examples of a player type that grinds on my nerves. I honestly dislike players that feel the need to judge and punish those that "optimize" their character for a certain role, whether it be for combat or social interactions. I can understand a dislike of people who use loopholes and twisted rules logic, but those are munchkins and are in a different boat completely. Here are two stories of two players that were optimized for their role and were punished unfairly.
Player One: Player one was a guy named Douglas that was content with playing fighters and rangers in Pathfinder. Doug wasn't big into magic or being a skill monkey and he wasn't too into NPC interactions at first. However, Doug was very into solving mysteries, tracking bad guys, and saving the day. His ranger, Marion, was a powerhouse in combat and would use his great bow skills, animal companion, and great teamwork tactics to help his team defeat several baddies. He would shell out massive damage with his high strength and composite bow and completely decimate targets, while his wolf companion flanked with the ally rouge to give him sneak attacks. Whenever someone was attacking his friends, Marion would instantly switch to that enemy and defend his ally to the teeth. Outside of combat, his tracking skills and perception were an asset to the team. Marion was a teamplayer and was always there to help. Needless to say, many of his compatriots were happy with his abilities. Except for one.
One player, named Jack, abhorred combat and would rather have an entire game of social interaction than the balance they had right now. He was angry that Douglas's character was doing so much damage and accused him of being a munchkin. He always made bitter remarks during combat, even though the ranger would save Jack's life on many occasion (considering Jack would rarely contribute to the fight). The GM also disliked Douglas's ranger because he was destroying the encounters he was throwing up. Instead of adapting to the ranger's power with better tactics or different monsters, he instead punished Doug by giving him less XP because "Marion was attacking from afar like a coward" while Jack got full XP even though nine times out of ten, he was off hiding somewhere. Doug also never got magic items while Jack would get many. Finally, the ranger would "miss" often, even though he would roll fairly high on his d20. In the end, Doug felt ostracized by the GM and Jack and so he chose to leave. I (a fighter) and the cleric left with him because of the unfair treatment Doug got just because he made his character well. Mind you, Doug only used what was allowed by the GM (Pathfinder Core Rule Book and APG) and this was point buy. I believe his only negative was in Charisma (8) but he still roleplayed well as a gruff soldier of the wilderness.
Player 2: Player 2 was a girl named Joanna. She loved playing DnD and loved playing elf bards. Joanna was more of a social interactive player than a combat player, so she put more points into Charisma, Diplomacy, Bluff, etc. Her bard, Elandria, was still effective in combat, but she was optimized for social things. Elandria got us into several roleplaying opportunities, and while she was our face, Joanna was never the diva. Everyone got their chance to RP and almost everyone was having fun. As for combat, there was a couple times where she talked our way out of combat and actually gave us good rewards for doing it. We were also more sneaky with our missions, using infiltration more often than frontal attacks. But, there was always still a good barnburner at least once per game.
One player, named Archie, did not like her character and thought she was ruining the fun of the game with her diplomacy bypassing combat "all the time" (in reality, we had combat at least once per game and they were always good). He argued that this was Dungeons and Dragons, not Diplomacy and Drawnout out conversations (never said he was clever) and her "twinked" character was making the game too boring. When it was Archie's turn to GM, it went downhill from there. Suddenly, every NPC was offended by Elandria on first impression (elf racism was the reason). She would fail Diplomacy checks almost all the time, even with decent rolls. Anyone that she failed against would straight up attack her and me (barbarian) and the favored soul would do our best to protect her wherever we went to in Elf-Haterstan. The last straw was when we walked into the capital and the guards imprisoned her and were going to execute her because she was "a dirty leaf-ear". At that point, Joanna left the table in tears and the rest of us followed, never playing that game again. Mind you, she only used stuff from the PHB. Nothing else, even though we were allowed to use the plethora of splat books from 3.5.
Both of these players optimized their characters to be good at what they did without bending rules or finding a random feat in some random book. They both were also well liked by some member of the group for what they brought to the table. However, because people judge them to be "munchkins", "twinks", "optimizers", "cheesebeards", or whatever derogatory name you wish to mention, a game was ruined and a player was lost. Douglas plays Pathfinder still with a much better GM, while Joanna has only recently become comfortable with roleplaying with other people.
In the end, we all have different playstyles and it drives me nuts when people feel the need to finger-point and judge others playstyles that aren't negatively impacting the game or the players. Shouldn't matter if you are an optimizer or not, only if everyone is enjoying the game and having a good time.
Be cool to each other.
What drives me nuts is players to who take an alignment to the extreme.
Another thing -- players who like to trot out this argument:
"It's not me being a dick and ruining the game, it's my character being a dick and ruining the game. So don't blame me!"
Players that sleep during the game session.
Players that are slowing down the game, for whatever reasons.
Players that are late or missing at the game session.
Players that are telling jokes in a critical in-game moment.
Players that don't play as a team.
Players that believe that D&D is a PCs vs GM game, instead of a PCs working with GM game.
I've got a co-PC (ie a PC in a game I also PC in) that reads ahead in the AP book. He denies it of course, but he slips knowlege that he shouldn't have just often enough to give it away.
Same player also likes reading the Bestiary during combat. When we yell at him to put it away, or if it's a monster custom to the AP, he brings out his smartphone and reads the stats put up on d20pfsrd. Always says he's checking email or somesuch. Interesting how his boss has a tendancy to email him the specific material needed to bypass the DR...
Nothing kills the tension more than when my character is arguing about how we're deadly low on spells/health and need to rest or retreat, and then he turns to us, smiles, and assures us that his god has told him that the next room is safe to go into.
Drives me up the wall!
I've got a co-PC (ie a PC in a game I also PC in) that reads ahead in the AP book. He denies it of course, but he slips knowlege that he shouldn't have just often enough to give it away.
Same player also likes reading the Bestiary during combat. When we yell at him to put it away, or if it's a monster custom to the AP, he brings out his smartphone and reads the stats put up on d20pfsrd. Always says he's checking email or somesuch. Interesting how his boss has a tendancy to email him the specific material needed to bypass the DR...
Nothing kills the tension more than when my character is arguing about how we're deadly low on spells/health and need to rest or retreat, and then he turns to us, smiles, and assures us that his god has told him that the next room is safe to go into.
Drives me up the wall!
As a GM, I would ask such a player if he would like to run the AP, since he seems to like to read it so much.
Oh, I almost forgot: I would outright kill his PC and kick it out of my game, unless he read the AP before knowing that I was about to run it.
What gets me steamed:
As a GM or player- talk of World of Warcraft. I can't stand it!
Player assuming they know the monster's/enemy's AC
Talking while I read/describe the area/enemy/etc
Player's taking phone calls in the heat of battle and leaving the rest of the group instead of calling the person back.
Players constantly complaining about how this and that sucks about their character/NPCs
Players trying to figure out their damage or whatever dice roll and another player plays for them
This one really gets me- players that want to kill their PC (whether I'm the GM or not)
I know there's more things out there that bug me, but that's all I can think of right now.
This one really gets me- players that want to kill their PC (whether I'm the GM or not)
Now why would someone try to do that? You don't have to kill your PC if you don't like it, you can just make another one and let your former PC leaves the party...
...oh I get it now. Those kind of players want to kill their PCs so that the party can keep their gears, am I right?
If someone try to do it in one of my game, the party will find the brand new PC naked, with no equipment, not even a single copper piece on him. ;D
Changing character should not be a way to augment the party's wealth.
Spellcasters who have to look up every spell every time they use one - "magic missile, that is 1d4+1 per level, right?". Even when you suggest they make a reference sheet with spell stats, they don't.
Spellcasters who can't remember spell DCs or even remember the simple formula for calculating DCs. "DC is caster level plus int bonus. Right?" See point about making reference sheet above....
Melee types who don't have their BAB, bonuses, damage, etc written down clearly on their character sheet.....
Players with messy character sheets who take ages to find anything.....
Players who don't plan their action in combat while other players are having their turn. And then spend ages trying to find something on their character sheet when it is their go.....
Archers with multiple attacks per round who have to calculate all their bonuses to attack and damage every single round because they have not written it down.....
Basically any player who doesn't have key stats, bonuses etc clearly written on their character sheet for quick reference.
People playing thieves (or rogues as they are now known) and trying to steal stuff from the dead foes before the party knows what was found every time. I could handle it if it was just once in a while, but to do it after every fight.
Also players of thieves/rogues (yes again) who complain that the wizard's house they had broken into had defenses to keep people from robbing it. >_<
I suppose next time it should be something like...
You enter a 10' x 10' room, you see an orc guarding a chest. The orc is elderly, asleep and has a ear trumpet lying on the floor beside him so you are pretty sure he's hard of hearing. Oh, wait, I'll save you the trouble of walking over and coup-de-grace-ing him; he falls off his chair and impales himself on his own sword.
Optimizers.
Some people just have no consideration for the fun of others (the DM included).
Oh, gods, can we please stop with this? Every time someone brings up "optimizers" it devolves into an argument where everyone ends up confusing munchkins & optimization and nothing gets accomplished.
And yes, blanket statements are a logical fallacy.
</rant>
Here is a recent one. I am running a home-brew campaign in which I am trying to develop the storyline around the PC's and thier back stories and motives. There is a base plot, but hopes to alter the overall concepts to fit the party.
Last session, the whole party had to undergo questioning in a Zone of Truth. One of the party made a Will save to resisit and passed it. He then answered the questions. When I asked DM to player if he was actually bluffing, he refused to tell me. He honestly said that it was none of my business. In my mind, and maybe it is just me, but no player has the right to decide whether such a thing is or is not the DM's business.
Oh, and I also HATE when players declare an action in combat but then have NO IDEA the rules that govern whatever CMB or spell are.
- The armchair general whom directs all other players in and out of combat, but blames failure on all other players, and doesn't listen to other people's advice.
- The player who doesn't understand why NPC's don't like them when the character is a huge, scarred and blood-covered barbarian. Dude, you're scary; if you wanted to be pretty and likeable, don't use Cha as a dump-stat
Solutions:
- Permanently silenced rooms to have some encounters in, and the players are not allowed to speak when their characters are silenced.
When players over rationalize actions of their characters or explain to me why there motives are the way they are... repeatedly.... about pointless s%+#.... and are overly aggressive... to npcs... just because they want to play "NO my johnson is bigger".
Hush and play the game, if you want people to know your motives say them in character, dont rationalize outside of character because its annoying.
|
|
(This is all coming from a player's perspective)
- Player practices Zen Rolling.
- Player doesn't actually know what's on his character sheet.
- Suffers from "always right" syndrome.
- Loves to pursue "awesome ideas" despite being completely awful in a mechanical sense.
- Fails to stay awake past 10pm
- Constantly attempts to retcon situations to place himself at an advantage.
I have every one of those, spread out amongst three players.
And to add:
- Spends most of the game session looking at unrelated stuff on his laptop. Sometimes he's browsing the web, sometimes he's looking up rules (he's a rules lawyer) which are unrelated to the current game. Because of him, I've been debating banning laptops at the table.
- Continues rules discussions long after I have settled the issue, often disrupting the game in the process.
- Gets upset whenever things aren't going his way. He frequently has bad luck with the dice in combat, or sometimes it's just the NPCs (or other players) doing something that somehow invalidates his planned action.
Edit: I have to add people who constantly check who has the higher skill bonus before deciding who should attempt something.
Here's one that aggravates me a bit, although I've found it's mostly a new player thing. Attempting to use what amounts to a 'depth first search' to infer what my various factions and NPCs are doing. Here's how it goes. You start investigating, asking questions, etc, and you terminate any line of inquiry where you perceive that the GM is winging things (i.e., you look for areas of detail and extended preparation). Most mystery plots as published are very vulnerable to this metagamy approach unless your GM is VERY good at deception. The heavier your system as opposed to being 'rules light', the better that technique works. Its less a problem in simulationist type games than narrative ones, but it's still an issue when your NPCs plots leak information through such metagame channels.
Oh yeah - I've had this guy. If he perceived (even wrongly) that I was 'winging it' he would do his best to make sure the other players stopped whatever they were doing to get back to the 'real' adventure. he never really believed that the 'real' adventure was what they were feeding me and I was building on it - often on the fly but it was just as 'real' as anything I might have written down before the session. His constant refrain was "This isn't where he (pointing to me) wants us to go." He never believed me when I said I didn't want or need them to go anywhere.
About the only other thing that drives completely bats**t insane is having cell phones on (and in use) while we are playing.
I have actually quit the group that had both of these problems (I had handed the DM reins over to another player before hand then my wife and I bailed)
Yeah, the cell phone thing gets on my nerves something fierce. There is nothing more annoying than a player getting an "important," call from someone in the middle of a session. It is akin to talking on a phone during a movie.
One of my players, god love him, gets five calls a game. I would be angry but they are actually from work and family who keep tabs on him constantly. Poor guy.
Just want to put this one out there. I know that I am a pretty good GM. My players have said as much and keep coming back for more. One of the things that makes me a good GM is that I don't take any of the s%!* that I see people complaining about on these message boards. I have found that most players (perhaps unconsciously) will go through a process of feeling-out their GM to see what he will let slide.The question that I am building up to is "If the GM is a little heavy-handed does it lead to a better game?"
The "Get a Stick and Hit a B*!&* Method of DMing", Mr. Fishy's personal favorite.
Mr. Fishy does not care if you disagree, make a reasonable request and you might get it.
Throw a fit and Mr. Fishy will calmly give you directions to hell and an invition to kiss his tailfin on the way out.