|
I agree with the people complaining about sidebar conversations during the game, but only so far.
The game is a social event. Yes, as DM I put work in. But the players are setting aside their personal time as well to be there. If they want to spend time socializing, it is not unreasonable to let them.
I had many nights in Afghanistan where the game never started due to us BSing. And I was perfectly fine with that. I play with friends, and I run the game for them as much as myself.
I'm not saying let them have social hour and to hell with the game. Merely pointing out that you should be reasonable about how you handle it. Anyone screaming at me is NOT my friend and not someone I will continue playing with. Some of you may have read my last experience with such a person.
Talk to your friends about the balance, don't let it bottle up inside.
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.
Once again Mr. Fishy's fish-wisdom is sound and perfect.
All hail the fish-wisdom!
When a player totally gives up on his character and just wants it to die. Pouts about how lousy it is or how unfun it is in the meantime. Makes a replacement character long before the current character dies (an inevitability with that attitude I find).
This particularly gets my goat when they don't come to me to talk about ways of fixing it. If a character is truly unfun for some reason, I would sooner let them do a small mid-game redesign than to let them just switch characters.
There's a player at our game who insists on playing 2nd edition Neutral to the letter. An example:
There is a group of Elk. Our party, being primarily good-aligned characters, walks right on by them since they're just innocent animals and we don't need to hunt them.
'To preserve the balance,' our True Neutral Wizard takes a potshot at them with a magic missile. We call him on it, and he insists that it was because he had to maintain the neutrality of the party by doing things that everyone in the party had opted not to do.
I've taken to calling it True Stupid, to go with Lawful Stupid and Chaotic Stupid.
This is something I've come across too. Sometimes we have to get a player's attention several times just to get him to roll to open a door!!!
The thief thing is really annoying too. Stealing the most valuable loot while the rest of the party is still fighting.
I am new to the game (a few weeks)and hours have been spent on discussing old campaigns. I've wanted to get up and walk out sometimes.
|
|
I've taken to calling it True Stupid, to go with Lawful Stupid and Chaotic Stupid.
Some people call it Stupid Neutral.
I like to point out that the only perfect balance is 0 to 0. :)
|
I've taken to calling it True Stupid, to go with Lawful Stupid and Chaotic Stupid.
Some people call it Stupid Neutral.
I like to point out that the only perfect balance is 0 to 0. :)
I don't know if I could resist being even more blunt.
"Oh, you're playing Herp Derp then? Okay, as long as we're on the same page."
"No it's all about Balance!"
"I understand! HURRRR DURRRR, I gotcha covered man!"
I blame Mordenkainen.
Also, identical avatars always make me do a double take.
I aim to confuse!
*salute*
I absolutely hate it when players argue the laws of physics with me.
Huzzah!
Physics? Really? Ok. What *are* the Weight/Drag/Lift/Thrust specs for a Medium Red [/i]DRAGON[/i]
Physics? Really? If I *whip* my wand of MAGIC Missiles towards the target do I get a damage bonus?
Physics? Really? Since it's all based in reality it is only reasonable that my ELF is the only one that can make a Cloak of Elvenkind.
Physics? IT'S A FANTASY GAME.
If you want realism go dig up Phoenix Command and play alone.
GNOME
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!"
Amen to that. This kind of player has killed my campaigns before. In a newer game we're playing, he has already started pulling this routine and the rest of the table jumped him, basically demanded he take his stuff, go back to town and retire. I was so proud.
While I have no tolerance for total optimization and find it a waste of time (I know, Blargh is coming on fast toward this thread for the smashing!!!), I am actually even more annoyed by those who actively make their characters suboptimal. And we're not talking slightly suboptimal either. To top this off: This type of player ALWAYS fights to the best of their ability ANY suggestion that they improve their character, even if it's the direction they claim their vision of their character is.
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.
This wouldn't work for every game out there, but in a World's Largest Dungeon campaign I played in, when a PC died, if the player's don't revive them(or have no intentions of reviving them) the dead PC's body disappears, gear and all.
For a twist, we ran this game like it was a kind of game show/reality show, where the dungeon was this big challenge and the PC's were contestants. The DM added a shop at the beginning of the dungeon, ran by a weird guy who somehow "owns" the dungeon, and acts partially as "host" of the show. We suspect there's a lot more to this character...
Anyone ever play Smash TV? Kinda like that.
There's a player at our game who insists on playing 2nd edition Neutral to the letter. An example:
There is a group of Elk. Our party, being primarily good-aligned characters, walks right on by them since they're just innocent animals and we don't need to hunt them.
'To preserve the balance,' our True Neutral Wizard takes a potshot at them with a magic missile. We call him on it, and he insists that it was because he had to maintain the neutrality of the party by doing things that everyone in the party had opted not to do.
I've taken to calling it True Stupid, to go with Lawful Stupid and Chaotic Stupid.
But this can be so much fun...
Just set them up with a group of good-aligned ogresses hungry for some SM-action, and since none of the others have reason to join the fun, he will be bound to (and do I have to add that being bound will be the least of his worries...)
A few definitions.
Optimizer A player that builds a character to be good at something. Combat being a common focus.
Muchkin A player who builds a character with intent to disrupt a game. The offending character can be OVER optimized or very under powered.
Power Gamer A player who uses system mastery to make a efficient character [see optimizer].
Munchkins and optimizers are different.
I had a player who was constantly trying to slip stuff past -- such as three actions in a turn instead of two, moving 7 squares instead of 6, etc. -- as if that would get him anything, and then getting very upset and taking it as being picked on if things didn't go well. This, combined with wanting his character to be all things (he was prone to making rogues, playing them as tanks, and getting upset when they got splattered the first time the monster got a full attack), made for some pretty frustrating sessions.
My other personal gripe is having a table full of people who when asked, "What do you do?" respond with, "I don't know, what are we supposed to do?" What am I, conductor on the campaign railroad?
-The Gneech
|
|
Player: "But what about snipers in Iraq? They shoot people in the head all the time."
The game totally supports this. Snipers have rogue levels (the skill required to accurately aim for a vital point), their targets are unaware of them and thus denied dex bonus to AC (and thus vulnerable to sneak attacks) and their sniper rifles are special equipment that increase the range allowed for ranged sneak attacks tremendously.
If the player wants to play a rogue crossbow sniper (IIRC there's a feat somewhere to double sneak attack distance to 60'?) he totally can -- but he has to invest his character in the idea. You can't just expect your average soldier to pull off shots like that, even if you get them a fancy sniper rifle.
Awesomeness
This is an excellent idea. Any idea where I could find a good Ogress SM brothel in the course of the Kingmaker AP?
@Trinam your a bad man...with goblin oil boys?
@Trinam your a bad man...with goblin oil boys?
Goblins or Kobolds. Bugbears if they have them.
Oh, but don't tell me if it'd be a spoiler. Our DM hates it when we read up on the AP's spoilers.
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.
this is priceless. :-)
why is this person still in the group? he sounds totally disruptive.
|
|
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.
I played a half-orc barbarian awhile back named Thokk, the Enduring. Reasoning? Because "Thokk endure." He had the Endurance feat, even, lol.
Is something like that alright? I know the people in my group liked it, but Id like an outsider's opinion.
Mr. Fishy hates when the player says or does something stupid and then gets mad went it bites them. Don't be a dumbass.
NPCs are your friends not your slaves. Npcs also are not stupid they can hear you ploting on them.
Thokk is a strong name. Mr. Fishy played a barbarian named Grogg.
As long as the name fits the character its a good name.
Spike the Dwarf dog, a kolbold barbarian named Baby [named by a PC], Shiny a malformed creature that only said one word [NPC].
|
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...
Odraude, thank you for sharing this. We wonder why we cannot atract people to the hobby and then we get 2 great players this sort of thing happens. How far a little civility goes, and a remembrance that EVERYONE at the table is there for a good time.
Are these friends of yours pbp players? I am going to be starting a game at the start of the year and would eagerly offer them a seat at the virtual table if wanted.
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...
Odraude, thank you for sharing this. We wonder why we cannot atract people to the hobby and then we get 2 great players this sort of thing happens. How far a little civility goes, and a remembrance that EVERYONE at the table is there for a good time.
Are these friends of yours pbp players? I am going to be starting a game at the start of the year and would eagerly offer them a seat at the virtual table if wanted.
I know Joanna doesn't play alot online and I think Dougie might be a bit tied up with another game we are in and work.
|
|
I know Joanna doesn't play alot online and I think Dougie might be a bit tied up with another game we are in and work.
No worries. Run it by them and if they want to be involved in a new Pathfinder pbp game around the start of the New Year they are welcome. If no, then I am sure there will be no end of takers. :)
I will put my email in my profile so you can contact me directly and we can let the thread get back to what it is about... :)
|
|
This is why I like new players so much... You really get a chance to start them off right. I usually do not start with a rulebook at all. I ask them what sort of fantasy character they would like to play. if you can imagine it we can build it or start you off right so eventually tyou are playing.
With this conversation I wonder... Why do we put up with this for so long at the table? If my friends came to my house and pocketed the silverware, spit on the floors and insulted my kids They would be shown the door very quickly, but here we are at the table and we tolerate all sorts of obnoxious behavior. I am just not sure why.
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. this is priceless. :-)
why is this person still in the group? he sounds totally disruptive.
I was wondering that too... until I noticed that he falls asleep halfway through the session. That should reduce his disruptiveness a bit.
Unless he snores.
I'll confess I used to have a problem with falling asleep during games, but most of the time these were games that didn't start until around midnight, went until maybe 3-4am, and were scheduled after playing a full game at another friends house prior. Ah, the good ol' days...
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.
This [sigh]...
Does my fekking nut in! You design a character sheet with players in mind - highlighting key values and areas... which they instantly and consistently forget... Know your character and know your sheet...
C'Mon Man!!!
|
|
- 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.
Player doesn't know system all that well, nor does she put all that much time into maintaining their character's bits & bobs apart from when she's actually at the table in play, yet consistently picks the most rules- and reference-intense classes available (clerics, wizards, etc). Memorizes the same set of spells set up for her by the DM at each level, save when she gets frustrated by their lack of usefulness for the arising situation & hands her sheet to another player to ask them to make up a list.
In the end our DM started counting her as 3/4 or 2/3 CL for purposes of setting up encounters due to this (ex: we're getting ready to go stop an evil cleric from opening a gate to the Abyss and escaping with a magic doohickey that helps power the seals that keep Tar-Baphon imprisoned at Lastwall. Fails to memorize Dimensional Anchor until pointed out to her).|
|
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.
I think there's a fine line to tread, here - I find little issue with people who make characters that are effective at their chosen purpose; this is just common sense. The players who tend to epitomize the munchkin optimizer stereotype, for me, are those that declare they can no longer play a certain class/use a certain build or weapon in PF because it's been 'ruined' due to some tweak in the rules, or that they just can't see themselves making a character without the benefit of some non-core/3.5ed feat (Monkey Grip, whatever). That sort of statement makes it clear that the experience for them isn't about making an effective, believable, layered character but one that is simply mathematically effective without concern to flavor/fluff/etc.
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.I once made a one-shot character named Icosa Hedron. Nobody got it. :(
I once made a PC who worked for a revolutionary government in Galt, which then got overthrown, so she had to flee Galt, and would undoubtedly have been caught and executed, but for a brave rescue managed by a group of Andorans. Led by a mysterious masked figure, this group managed to smuggle my character (along with several other Galtan fugitives) to Andoran, which otherwise would have refused these fugitives entry.
I named my character Armandia Just. I wonder if any of the other players got the reference?
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.
Indeed. The last session that I ran the players had just finished an intense battle with a group of wights. After the battle they just decided to up and go back to town to rest, right there on the spot.
DM: "I will sell you a hint but it will cost you 1000 gold, but I assure you once I say it you will think that the 1000 gold was worth it."
Players: "Uhhh. Ok." *start marking gold off of their character sheets.
DM: "Hint. Loot the bodies, cast detect magic."
Players: "Oh geez. So obvious. True, true."
When a player totally gives up on his character and just wants it to die. Pouts about how lousy it is or how unfun it is in the meantime. Makes a replacement character long before the current character dies (an inevitability with that attitude I find).
This particularly gets my goat when they don't come to me to talk about ways of fixing it. If a character is truly unfun for some reason, I would sooner let them do a small mid-game redesign than to let them just switch characters.
Now that sounds like you've been talking to my DM.
If I get low stats that just sux I make a paladin and have him charge valiantly into battle against overwhelming odds and die heroicly.Then again sometimes true accidents do happen when you fail a spot check, get attacked,crit'ed, lose initative get attacked again and are dead.
Just because your not sorry your charecter with less than good stats is shark food doesn't mean you did it on purpose. All roles were out in the open and a failure often results in charecter death.
You sound like a reasonable DM but what about other DM's that are like "well just play what you got"?
I hate when players talk about their hit points in character.
"help me cleric, I've got only 15 hp left!"
I had a player who would used the cure "adjective" to convey what he wanted, as in:
"help me cleric, I'm critically wounded" (i.e. need a cure critical wounds spell)
While it got old relatively fast, at least it wasn't bluntly disrupting...
'findel
You probably RP with my brother in law.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!"
Possibly, if your brother-in-law is a composite of several people I've known over the years. :-)
I have an "assumes the worst" player. Overall he is great, puts time and effort into his character background, concept, etc. He tends to play either rogues or sorcs, characters with out much resilience.
When monsters come after his cahracter it's instantly jump to "OMGWEERGUNNADIE"...
Case in point, he was playing a sorc that used CON for a dump stat, and the party was trudging through a swamp looking for an orc encampment. I threw stirges at them. After seeing what they did in one round, he exclaims "OH GREAT I'LL BE DEAD IN 5 ROUNDS AWW JEEZ.." etc. He didn't know they were full in 4 rounds, and left.
No faith in the DM <sigh>...
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.
Ok DQ but what about when the players just roll low?
Search is only a skill for a few charecters and if nobody has the skill then the group really isn't going to find anything with a DC 30 at 8th or 9th level.
This was not an exageration just something I remembered from a module.
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.Ok DQ but what about when the players just roll low?
Search is only a skill for a few charecters and if nobody has the skill then the group really isn't going to find anything with a DC 30 at 8th or 9th level.
This was not an exageration just something I remembered from a module.
There's a huge difference between rolling poorly and not rolling at all.
That's probably what annoys me the most. When players just give up because they don't think they can possibly succeed at something. Particularly considering that they've got a chance at rolling a 20 (slim though it may be) I'm far more likely to give something to a player that tries, even when the odds are well against him/her than to one who complains about not having a chance and won't bother to give it a shot.
It's a roleplaying game. Use your imagination. If you can't think of the best way to do something, just come up with something and roll with it. Worst case scenario, I say it doesn't work and you're back where you started.
There's just nothing worse than having a player complain at the end of the night, "I would have tried 'x' to solve 'z' but I didn't think it would work."
Come to think of it, I'm irritated by this kind of attitude outside of gaming too.
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.Ok DQ but what about when the players just roll low?
Search is only a skill for a few charecters and if nobody has the skill then the group really isn't going to find anything with a DC 30 at 8th or 9th level.
This was not an exageration just something I remembered from a module.
1. What I mean is they don't say things like, "I check to see what's in the closet," or "I check down the other corridor where the dripping sound came" etc. or "Hey, I bet those two cloakers sitting up there refusing to come down but calling us names are guarding something..." It's not about rolling dice, it's about exploring and being descriptive with your actions and not just always rushing to the next scene. I have to have a chat with them about this.
2. The party is 18th level--high enough level, with experienced enough players to know better. Even if I was asking them to roll, I believe the rogue's Perception before rolling is +28, and I might be remembering a lower number than it actually is, and the Ranger and the Cleric's bonuses are more than respectable. (The Eldritch Knight's response is, "What's Perception?" but he has other skills.) But you still have to actually say, "I'm looking for something," before I'm going to ask you to roll (and with as high Perception modifiers as they have, all they usually have to do is say, "I'm looking for something" and we can skip the roll entirely).
Complain they have no treasure but then also never take any time to search for any. They seem to think I should just lay it out all over the floor unprotected.Ok DQ but what about when the players just roll low?
Search is only a skill for a few charecters and if nobody has the skill then the group really isn't going to find anything with a DC 30 at 8th or 9th level.
This was not an exageration just something I remembered from a module.
1. What I mean is they don't say things like, "I check to see what's in the closet," or "I check down the other corridor where the dripping sound came" etc. or "Hey, I bet those two cloakers sitting up there refusing to come down but calling us names are guarding something..." It's not about rolling dice, it's about exploring and being descriptive with your actions and not just always rushing to the next scene. I have to have a chat with them about this.
2. The party is 18th level--high enough level, with experienced enough players to know better. Even if I was asking them to roll, I believe the rogue's Perception before rolling is +28, and I might be remembering a lower number than it actually is, and the Ranger and the Cleric's bonuses are more than respectable. (The Eldritch Knight's response is, "What's Perception?" but he has other skills.) But you still have to actually say, "I'm looking for something," before I'm going to ask you to roll (and with as high Perception modifiers as they have, all they usually have to do is say, "I'm looking for something" and we can skip the roll entirely).
AAHHH! now I better understand what you were saying, and yes I let my own experiance with my DM color me just a little.
He's notorious for saying before we even roll "you don't find nuthin" then when we roll low he won't let us aid one another or if he does he gets mad when we take forever in game time to try and find stuff.We only have one theif and he only ever takes 1 level in it so it's him or nothin. Our only salvation comes from the magic item compendium and all the neat little gadets in it.
Thanks for the explanation, by 18th level they shouldn't miss a copper peice 10 miles away.