Given there are a lot of threads full to the brim with unhappy comments about "Evil wrongbadfun GM's", how about the stoically silent GM fraternity come forward and share your woes.
Spend hours lovingly and painstakingly setting up a great story line, only to have players rolling dice aimlessly and asking when the killing starts?
Players insist on taking CN (code for 'reserving the right to be a jackass at any/every opportunity) and then deciding not to bother helping the local village plot hook?
What happened to you?
I'm always irritated by players that treat the game like a joke. I have no problem with breaking character a bit in game and having a few laughs because of it, but I once had a guy who consistently showed up to the table with characters like "Salazar Bearfister" or "Koro Hellgrazer" (a minotaur). Usually, they were quickly shot down, and on the few occasions I allowed them into the game, they rapidly derailed the campaign.
Also, players that are actively antagonistic. That is to say, those characters that go out of their way to avoid plot hooks because "a good GM should be able to compensate" or "I don't like being railroaded." Players such as this often go out of their way to instigate conflicts with NPCs that are clearly supposed to be helpful.
Characters that want to play villains/sociopaths. Now, I have no problem with evil PCs, but many players cannot distinguish the difference between an antihero and a villain, and fail to realize that the latter simply does not function as a PC in most campaigns. These are the guys that makes assassins that kill for the fun of it, or necromancers that unabashedly flaunt their legions of undead, or otherwise do stuff just because it's edgy.
I used to have a player who would blatantly rip off the other characters, usually in cheezy ways, like a kid stealing the last cookie... when the other players were at the table confronting him about it, he claimed they were 'meta-gaming' and no way they'd have caught him.
He would repeatedly break away from combat leaving the party in the thick of it so he could go ahead and steal choice loot while they were busy. He did it in front of enemies who managed to escape time and time again - because he ignired them to get the loot.
One day those enemies (Rogues) laid a honey trap, they'd seen him act that way before. He walked into it and died.
He accused me of being an 'arbitrary DM' and quit teh campaign and never played with me as a GM again (nor even with the players at the table for 'taking my side').
Geez.
|
My (real-life) players are generally bad at roleplaying (though it has to be said I'm not great). So providing I keep the encounters coming, they are happy, otherwise some of them can zone out a bit. And frankly, the guys are never really in character, nevermind getting out of character, and most stuff ends up geting played for laughs outside combat. And don't even get me started on "So why are we here?"
But we still have a good time, and they generally all show up, so I certainly wouldn't consider them "bad" overall - they just have their little ways.
I've had many an unfortunate mingling of different gaming styles that just did not mix well. I like to run games with a backstory, key npc's, conflicting factions, etc. Two of my long time players want nothing but a sandbox. Any attempt to bring up a story and adventure hook is met with infuriating resistance. Hand-written adventure after adventure tossed in the can, because they went screaming the opposite direction as soon as an actual plot hook arose. Those campaigns are dead and buried.
EDIT: And just to head people off at the pass, I do not put much emphasis on my npc's. Their purpose is to help propel the story forward, that's all. The PC's get the limelight, the action, and the rewards. The npc's are mostly nobles who orchestrate politics behind the scenes. So, when the players want no part of any kind of story, there's no reason to bother with npc's at all, except to read off what loot they had as the players run through town killing them.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only regular gripe about unappreciative players is players who do not respect their own time commitment to a game and in turn respect the amount of time a GM puts into preparing for a session. This manifests in players who constantly cancel out at the last minute or even simply fail to show. I haven't had players like this in my own games in a long time, though I'm in another campaign where some players are having trouble both managing their own commitments and in turn end up inconveniencing the other players who set aside the time to play and the GM (who has precious little time) who took the time to prepare. Why people do not have the balls to simply say, "You know, my life's really crazy right now, I'm going to have to pull out, and sorry for causing you any trouble," I just do not understand.
If you don't want to play, don't. If you don't have time to play, don't say you do.
Once a friend of mine hard me ranting about this and said, "But it's just a game."
I replied to her, "That may be, but it's 'just a game' that I spent several hours this week preparing. Can you give me those hours back?"
My friend: ".... oh."
Similarly qq threads from the other side don't elicit much sympathy either.
I'll be honest, I don't want any sympathy, and this thread isn't about handing out tissues for issues.
This is a thread serving as a community service for players to be able to stop complaining about their GM for two minutes, read about problem players - possibly recognise their OWN behaviour - and maybe ease down a bit rather than thinking its all about them.
Your rules make good sense.
The hassle is when people don't realise (or accept) they are being jerks.
That's not a gaming issue. that's a people interacting with people issue, the kind of skills one theorectically learns by age 15 or so.
Its a social issue, amplified through the prism of 'gaming'.
My only regular gripe about unappreciative players is players who do not respect their own time commitment to a game and in turn respect the amount of time a GM puts into preparing for a session. This manifests in players who constantly cancel out at the last minute or even simply fail to show. I haven't had players like this in my own games in a long time, though I'm in another campaign where some players are having trouble both managing their own commitments and in turn end up inconveniencing the other players who set aside the time to play and the GM (who has precious little time) who took the time to prepare. Why people do not have the balls to simply say, "You know, my life's really crazy right now, I'm going to have to pull out, and sorry for causing you any trouble," I just do not understand.
If you don't want to play, don't. If you don't have time to play, don't say you do.
Once a friend of mine hard me ranting about this and said, "But it's just a game."
I replied to her, "That may be, but it's 'just a game' that I spent several hours this week preparing. Can you give me those hours back?"
My friend: ".... oh."
Sort of have a similar thing going on in our current Red Hand of Doom PF game. It's a large group, and we sort of knew from the beginning that personal schedules get crazy and there'd be missed nights. Unfortunately, we've actually canceled more often than we've played, but we play when we can. Almost all of us have had things come up, and as a DM, if I'm missing more than one player, I call it for the night. I hate playing catch up, and there's too much going on to constantly fill in missing people.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hate sandbox players. I hate the fact that they vehemently oppose any attempt made by myself to actually get a story in there. I hate it so much that nowadays, i begin first sessions with these words:" I will run a partially sandbox game with plot hooks and a story, whoever cannot fathom the reason why i want a little linearity in the game, and wishes to oppose it can up and leave now".
It actually worked twice. I'd rather have less players then annoying players.
I also hate when they are late or cancel in the last minute. We generally don't bother calling them again if this happens. We invest anywhere from 5-10 hours per week in this game. We don't want to waste our time.
And the worst offenders are the gadget players. Those obnoxious people who bring their iphones and their laptops and other electronical stuff to the table and then fiddle with them, watch youtube clips and check up on facebook. The facebook problem got fixed, i removed the possibility of accesing facebook through my modem, unless i enable it, and i'm gonna turn off youtube soon. I don't have a problem if a player brings a laptop and has pdf books on it.
Getting useful feedback is always frustrating for me.
|
My only regular gripe about unappreciative players is players who do not respect their own time commitment to a game and in turn respect the amount of time a GM puts into preparing for a session. This manifests in players who constantly cancel out at the last minute or even simply fail to show. I haven't had players like this in my own games in a long time, though I'm in another campaign where some players are having trouble both managing their own commitments and in turn end up inconveniencing the other players who set aside the time to play and the GM (who has precious little time) who took the time to prepare. Why people do not have the balls to simply say, "You know, my life's really crazy right now, I'm going to have to pull out, and sorry for causing you any trouble," I just do not understand.
If you don't want to play, don't. If you don't have time to play, don't say you do.
Once a friend of mine hard me ranting about this and said, "But it's just a game."
I replied to her, "That may be, but it's 'just a game' that I spent several hours this week preparing. Can you give me those hours back?"
My friend: ".... oh."
+1
I used to have MAJOR problems with this in college. There is nothing more depressing than giving up four to six hours to prepare for a game, skipping movie nights, etc, only to have one or two players show up. No call/no shows are the worst, and I don't tolerate it any more at my table.
Luckily, most of my friends are now thirty-somethings who spend all week in IT and are willing to blow off just about anything for the sweet escape provided by our bi-monthly game.
I agree with all the others about players not showing up/having no commitment. I one had a player who was always late. We played on Friday nights, and he always said he had to work late. I then suggested to play on Saturdays, since he did not have to work then. It made no difference at all. He was still always late.
Because of problems with players not showing up I started Savage Tide with the words: "This is an adventure path. I can only DM this right, and you can only follow the storyline if we play regularly, namely once every 2 or 3 weeks." All the players committed themselves to that. In the beginning it worked well. After a while however, this became once every 4 weeks, then once every 6 weeks, always because of the same 2 players. I then confronted them with it, and said I would have a session once every 2-3 weeks for those who could make it. Then they finally decided they had other priorities and stopped playing. What irritates me, is that they obviously could not make this decision for themselves and I had to make it for them. One of them even tried to convince me to stop DM-ing Savage Tide in favor of a "hack'n'slash" campaign, which he liked better. He knows that I am a great fan of adventure paths, and it was (he said) one of the reasons he joined the game. It turned out he had been lying all the time.
Another problem I had recently, was with a new group. My daughter and her friend wanted to play. They are both 12 years old. The friend had a classmate, who was 15, who also wanted to play. I did not know the classmate, so I said I would run a test adventure in order to see how it went. Luckily I had called it a test adventure. My daughter and her friend were really making an effort to play (and even roleplay) well. The other kid, however, seemed to think that this was World of Warcraft without a computer. He was making inane jokes all the time, was making fun of my daughter's character all the time (silly name jokes), was throwing dice through the room (deliberately, not letting them drop to the floor, which happens all the time) and he was never really in-game. I had a lot of action in the playing session and a fast pace, but he found it boring and hoped it would get more exciting when they were higher level, and why did it take so long to level up? And where were the side quests?
After the session my daughter told me she got so angry that she almost wanted to stop playing, but she didn't, because she liked the adventure so much. Needless to say, this kid will not appear during the next session, when I will continue with the other two.
This is an example of a player spoiling the fun for the other players. That is one of the things which irritates me most about players.
Another one is rules discussions, especially players who think they know the rules better than me when it turns out that they don't. If they do, I am OK with it and stand corrected. But mostly they don't. Usually this happens when their PC is in danger of if a special attack/ability/spell etc. they had, fails. (The one I remember is a player casting darkness on a monster with tremorsense. So I let the monster ignore the darkness. He looked at me accusingly and said: "Is that correct? That monster is way overpowered!" This was a CR6 encounter and the average party level was 8.)
Now I will stop ranting. To be honest, most of my players are OK and some are even very good. I have gotten more rigorous over the years and do not invite problem players back to the table anymore. In the past I kept giving them another chance, and another, and another, until I discovered these players kept the other players (and me) from having fun.
It was nice to have a rant for a while. I should do this more often :-).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious as to why this is a problem so long as they are keeping up with the game and not being disruptive (or is it that they were being disruptive / not keeping up with the game, which to me is a different issue than just using gadgets)?I've been known to text during a game, specifically while the dm is explaining the rules for how a player does such and such an action. I thought it was a decent idea. (I can be a bit of a rules lawyer, but if I don't pay attention to the rules being discussed, I don't lawyer them.)
Because:
1. I spent ten to fifteen hours preparing for the session during the previous week, and when i am describing a wizard's study, you better listen to that, i deserve at least the courtesy of having a player's undivided attention.2. Not paying attention to what is happening at the table is rude, and disruptive, especially if we are in the middle of combat and you wake from a stupor during your turn and ask "what happened?"
3. Fiddling with a cell phone can be annoying and disruptive, especially if the keytones haven't been turned off. Also, it is disrespectful to the GM and other players. It seems like you have something better to do then game with us. And that better thing is the f*****g Youtube or facebook.
4. Same thing with a laptop. I had a player who played wow during our games. I never played with that player again.
A single text message is ok...but if you are constantly texting, then maybe you shouldn't be playing with us. Rather call a pause and go to the other room and call whomever you were texting, have a 5 minute conversation and then ask them not to bother you until you finish with the session.
Also, i just remembered, i hate players who come to the session smelling like something curled up in a corner and died several weeks ago, in a waste disposal facility. If i ask you to shower before sessions, i have a good reason. You have no right to be insulted or angry. You smell, wash.
Stuff
Touché. lol.
|
|
As to the issue of tech at a gaming table, if the party is split, I have no issue with the "off" players using their laptops, phones, etc. I do not expect them to pay close attention to items that their characters are not directly involved with. Additionally, it lends more of a realistic feel if the player does not know what their character does not know or knows only what the other players relay to them. Nothing like having some slightly erroneous information being passed on ...
That said, once they become the "on" players, or the group is not longer split, then yes, I do expect all players' attention.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As to the issue of tech at a gaming table, if the party is split, I have no issue with the "off" players using their laptops, phones, etc. I do not expect them to pay close attention to items that their characters are not directly involved with. Additionally, it lends more of a realistic feel if the player does not know what their character does not know or knows only what the other players relay to them. Nothing like having some slightly erroneous information being passed on ...
That said, once they become the "on" players, or the group is not longer split, then yes, I do expect all players' attention.
I'm a little nonstandard when I GM. I always do everything in front of everybody. When one group of PCs is separated from the other group of PCs, the "off" players are still right there, listening in on everything. I'll even give them NPCs to play, if it comes to that. I and my players love it, because it even gives them the opportunity to attack the other PCs without fear of reprisals, I can kill off a bunch of player-controlled characters with impunity if I feel like it, and everyone gets to enjoy the action.
Sometimes, I'll even run full cut scenes involving NPCs only, usually the sort of event like the before-the-opening-credits part of a television series, when the NPCs first meet the problem and get gruesomely slaughtered. The way I see it, the players are just as much an audience as they are controllers of the main characters, and they should get the chance to enjoy the show to the fullest.
I don't like the actively antagonistic PC--you know, the one competing with the others. I find that just playing everything out in the open really frustrates that sort of antagonist, becuase they'll typically try to rush off alone to do their sneaky anti-other PC stuff, and they don't like that the full glare of the other players is right there. So, it's an added bonus of the style. The antagonist doesn't last long in the game.
Also, my view on texts at the table is that if the texter to the player can't care enough to show up in person, like the rest of us, the texter can wait. But I always defer my attention to those physically present above and beyond anyone who calls--that's just being polite.
And the worst offenders are the gadget players. Those obnoxious people who bring their iphones and their laptops and other electronical stuff to the table and then fiddle with them.I'm curious as to why this is a problem so long as they are keeping up with the game and not being disruptive (or is it that they were being disruptive / not keeping up with the game, which to me is a different issue than just using gadgets)?
I've been known to text during a game, specifically while the dm is explaining the rules for how a player does such and such an action. I thought it was a decent idea. (I can be a bit of a rules lawyer, but if I don't pay attention to the rules being discussed, I don't lawyer them.)
Why? Because people being distracted by something always underestimate the disruption they cause. If you're at a job meeting, even glancing quickly at a text message on your phone is obvious to the others at that meeting, and many employers now consider that "being disruptive" to the meeting. We're social animals, the slightest hint that we're not focused on what is happening is obvious to all... and will ruin a good atmosphere very quickly. DMing is a crowd activity, you put in great effort to make a good offering, to read the players, to ignite interest. Distractions cuts you completely out of that process. So, no, it IS a problem and a big one. Whether you're doing it with a laptop, or endlessly fiddling with rulebooks, or texting, you're NOT PRESENT.
There is another factor too. Even if all the above were untrue, distraction would still be a lousy idea. The reason is that once you share your focus with something else, your dynamics change. Doing the bare minimum required of you during a session isn't too hard... but you are just doing the bare minimum. You can claim you're doing all you need by deciding who you will attack when it's your turn, and going through those motions, but PARTICIPATING is more than that. You need to be actively committed to the game. Otherwise, there is a problem.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
<Threadjack>To Digress to the other side of spectrum for just a second: I am one of those players whose schedule changes often, even to the point of me showing up, sitting down and my cell phone rings, and I depart; BUT I let the DM/judge know that ahead of time. He understands. When I do play, usually I bring a gesture of appreciation for his/her hours of prep and storyline effort, plus often his hosting as well. I don't expect (and state it publicly) XP nor favortism with food/drink that I bring and share. It is just my thanks for the brief respite from my RL.
[And really, what the big deal about XP? Isn't it about the game, the fun, the social gathering amongst others of our kind?]
As a side note: The other reason for the food/beverage is I can't stand the cheapest/greasiest/stale/rotgut alcohol the others rarely bring and grudgingly share. No thanks. Life is too short for cheap beer, and I've failed multiple fortitude saves vs food poisoning. Ain't gonna happen again.
</Threadjack>
Now back to your original rant.
|
|
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
|
|
Your table, your rules. I've no problem with that. I'll adhere to the law regarding illegal substances as well. As for most other things, I believe moderation is key, be it Smoking/Alcohol/Eating/Gadget distractions/sexual innuendos/attempted humor etc. Some of the complaints above were of socially challenged(hygiene), me-first mentality or poor judgment.
My point was that there are Appreciative Players out there, and providing an personal example of appreciative expression. In yet another example, the group(before DM moved away) I was in also pooled thier money and purchased CastleWall DM Screen with dice tumbler for his BDay.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
Um, I would. As long as folks don't go to excess, then no issue. When you go for 10-14 hours in a session, a few drinks spread over that window is not a big deal. Now downing a fifth on the other hand ...
My biggest peev is the player who is too attached to their PC. PC deaths happen, it is inevitable at some point. This is the reason for Raise Dead, Resurrection, etc. A player who throws a fit when their character dies ticks me off to no end.
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
I agree for the most part. I don't mind if a player drinks a beer or two, but since we play at my house and I don't drink at all, they have to bring it them-selves and take it with them when they leave. Related to that is that I don't have any beds for drunk people, so don't think you can get smashed and expect to sleep it off at my place. We almost always end at the same time, which mean that the drinkers will have a rough idea of when to stop drinking.
Since it is my house I don't allow anything illegal to happen there, so no Pot. I don't care how stupid people think the law is or how harmless pot smoking is suppose to be, if I suspect that someone is high or planning to get high they are told to leave. I teach for a living and the school system tends to be less than approving of teachers getting arrested for drug use. Also I'm a total Narc and have called to police about a former player that kept talking about where he would go to get drugs.
Needless to say I don't host many parties.
However on the main topic; My biggest pet peeve is when a player makes a character that run directly counter to the stated theme or mood of the game. Nothing quite ruins the dark and gritty mood I'm trying to create than the loud mouth gnome.
Also the player that comes to me when no one else is around and asks for special treatment or additional character opinions drives me crazy. If you want something ask in front of everyone else. I don't play favorites.
I haven't had much trouble with electronic devices at the table but I can imagine how agitating that would be.
|
I second the irritation with drunk players. I don't mind a beer or two, as I enjoy that myself, but don't how up already drunk, or try to get the GM drunk so you can abuse his impaired judgement. Honestly, I have more trouble with problem players as another player than as a GM, since handling them isn't my call.
People who can be grown ups with alcohol is fine, 'desparate teenagers' (even 40 year old ones) are never pleasant though.
A single text message is ok...but if you are constantly texting, then maybe you shouldn't be playing with us. Rather call a pause and go to the other room and call whomever you were texting, have a 5 minute conversation and then ask them not to bother you until you finish with the session.
blah text rant
This drives me nuts, mostly because I've been guilty of it. I have a basic, numberpad cell, not one of those fancy ones with the built-in keyboard or touch screen. So, I hate texting. My wife? Texts her butt off on a daily basis. I'd be at gaming, and she'd send me text after text after text, dumb stuff like "I'm bored." To which I respond "I'm not, I'm busy. ttyl."
It got so bad I had to sit her down and talk to her about it. She asked me one morning after gaming "So, how'd the game go last night?" My response: "I wouldn't know! I was answering your texts all night and missed everything." She got the hint. Unless it's an emergency, I just don't respond. Worst part? She's a gamer too. She's heard my rants about people doing it at the game table, I figured she'd know better.
edit/addendum: While we're on the subject, a new kind of annoying player has sprung to mind in a game I recently started. It's sort of a reminder of how different other groups can be and the comfort zone of familiar players is. I have a new player whom I've never gamed with before, who I think I've met outside of gaming once or twice maybe(friend of a friend of a co-worker type thing).
This player just sort of does as he pleases, makes changes to his character on the fly, plays with gadgets whenever it's not his turn, etc. I didn't get on him over showing off his iPad, because those nights there were lots of side-conversations happening that were equally distracting. But, whenever a new gaming supplement comes out, he makes changes to his character to add any new options he likes, without saying anyhting to me(the DM) first, such as adopt archetypes, change feats, etc. Now, we're early enough in the campaign, that if someone wants to make a change I'd probably allow it(everyone's 2nd level), but this guy took it upon himself to simply rebuild his character on his own time. Maybe I'm overreacting, I dunno.
|
|
texting thing
The thing about wives is that they don't think that the rules apply to them. I mean, my wife is a semi-gamer...and she sometimes plays with me. And she gets really pissed off when somebody texts. But does it stop her from drowning me in texts when i am away form home gaming? Hell no. She has a rate of at least 50 texts per session. And on occasions when i brought it up and asked her not to text me so much because it is distracting me, well she started to pout and withheld sex because she thought i was being mean and unfair. I can deal with her, but this behavior was really annoying. That is until she went on several sessions with her friends and i texted her so much that my fingers hurt. She stopped texting me during sessions pretty much after that.
And the worst offenders are the gadget players. Those obnoxious people who bring their iphones and their laptops and other electronical stuff to the table and then fiddle with them.I'm curious as to why this is a problem so long as they are keeping up with the game and not being disruptive (or is it that they were being disruptive / not keeping up with the game, which to me is a different issue than just using gadgets)?
I've been known to text during a game, specifically while the dm is explaining the rules for how a player does such and such an action. I thought it was a decent idea. (I can be a bit of a rules lawyer, but if I don't pay attention to the rules being discussed, I don't lawyer them.)
Playing the game is not all that different from attending a dinner party.
It's a question of mutual respect and showing other people that, what goes on elsewhere is of no interest at the moment.When I GM, I sometimes call a break, so the smokers can go outside and smoke, the texters can text and the GM can explain/work something out with a player.
I HATE when people sit and text during game - it's a mood spoiler and rude. I will not have it at my table.
GRU
And the worst offenders are the gadget players. Those obnoxious people who bring their iphones and their laptops and other electronical stuff to the table and then fiddle with them.I'm curious as to why this is a problem so long as they are keeping up with the game and not being disruptive (or is it that they were being disruptive / not keeping up with the game, which to me is a different issue than just using gadgets)?
I've been known to text during a game, specifically while the dm is explaining the rules for how a player does such and such an action. I thought it was a decent idea. (I can be a bit of a rules lawyer, but if I don't pay attention to the rules being discussed, I don't lawyer them.)
Why? Because people being distracted by something always underestimate the disruption they cause. If you're at a job meeting, even glancing quickly at a text message on your phone is obvious to the others at that meeting, and many employers now consider that "being disruptive" to the meeting. We're social animals, the slightest hint that we're not focused on what is happening is obvious to all... and will ruin a good atmosphere very quickly. DMing is a crowd activity, you put in great effort to make a good offering, to read the players, to ignite interest. Distractions cuts you completely out of that process. So, no, it IS a problem and a big one. Whether you're doing it with a laptop, or endlessly fiddling with rulebooks, or texting, you're NOT PRESENT.
There is another factor too. Even if all the above were untrue, distraction would still be a lousy idea. The reason is that once you share your focus with something else, your dynamics change. Doing the bare minimum required of you during a session isn't too hard... but you are just doing the bare minimum. You can claim you're doing all you need by deciding who you will attack when it's your turn, and going through those motions, but PARTICIPATING is more than that. You need to be actively committed to...
THIS! You said is so much better than I could -
GRU
In the games I play in we tend to finish a campaign, then advance the timeline anywhere from 10 years to a couple of generations. Players are given....
Boot them and go to old game - sounds awesome!
GRU
|
And don't even get me started on "So why are we here?".
It's even more amusing, when the PCs are in the middle of some inhospitable terrain.
Cos, if you're going to question why you're climbing a jagged, icy mountain, that's the sort of question that'd make more sense at the bottom, rather than halfway up."Remind me again, why are we stuck in quicksand, being bitten by army ants, in the Bog of Despair?"
"I know there's a reason I've been following you all for ten days in the Blistering Desert of Nightmare Mirages, past the bleached bones of the thousands who came this way before us, but I forgot."
For bonus points, have it happen when asked a direct question by an NPC.
"Why are we travelling to The Pain Pits of the Dread Torturers? Never heard of them.
Oh, you're saying that's we are now? I wondered why I was tied up.
No, I don't know what we came for. Sorry."
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
We often have a beer while playing, and that works well - nobody gets drunk, as that would ruin the game. Of course, we are all in our 40's so that might have something to do with it...
GRU
|
|
I've had many an unfortunate mingling of different gaming styles that just did not mix well. I like to run games with a backstory, key npc's, conflicting factions, etc. Two of my long time players want nothing but a sandbox. Any attempt to bring up a story and adventure hook is met with infuriating resistance. Hand-written adventure after adventure tossed in the can, because they went screaming the opposite direction as soon as an actual plot hook arose. Those campaigns are dead and buried.
Yes, that's a problem.
Do you introduce one hook at a time, or present multiple simultaneous hooks?
Even in a sandbox, the GM has to present some kind of events or prevailing situations that are outside the ability of the locals, and need PC involvement. Players who consider this as railroading really have no business being at the table.
|
|
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
I sometimes think adventure writers must have been on something.
|
|
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
We always drink, we play in the pub.
|
|
Another problem I had recently, was with a new group. My daughter and her friend wanted to play. They are both 12 years old. The friend had a classmate, who was 15, who also wanted to play. I did not know the classmate, so I said I would run a test adventure in order to see how it went. Luckily I had called it a test adventure.
That would bring up warning bells with me.
A 12-year old has a classmate, who's 15?That sounds like he's been kept back 2 years. Doesn't sound like someone who'd be good in an environment that requires paying attention, math, reading, writing and imagination.
He probably goofs off the same way in class, too.
|
|
And the worst offenders are the gadget players. Those obnoxious people who bring their iphones and their laptops and other electronical stuff to the table and then fiddle with them.I'm curious as to why this is a problem so long as they are keeping up with the game and not being disruptive (or is it that they were being disruptive / not keeping up with the game, which to me is a different issue than just using gadgets)?
I've been known to text during a game, specifically while the dm is explaining the rules for how a player does such and such an action. I thought it was a decent idea. (I can be a bit of a rules lawyer, but if I don't pay attention to the rules being discussed, I don't lawyer them.)
It drives me crazy when people misuse the gadgets. My laptop is vital to my GMing, and I don't want the useful and helpful gadget gamers to be given a bad rep by the facebook fiends!
My group is split on this one. I keep my laptop use to e-books, note taking, and, when Gming, background music. Paper is my bane. I couldn't game without the laptop. I've got a player, though, who has a habit of playing the BDF in every game, including the intrigue and mystery laden games (most games are like that with our group), then watches youtube videos and plays flash games when he can't hack and slash. The worst part is he can't be confronted about it, because he roleplays his BDFs to the hilt, but that's all he'll ever play, and the one time we called him on it, it's supposedly my fault if I and the rest of the group want an intrigue game and he's bored with it...so he's a gadget fiend and unappreciative of the complex plots the rest of my group demands.
Sadly, it's one of those "friends outside of the game" situations, so if I stop inviting him, it causes drama in my group of friends, and I'll lose his S.O. as a player at the very, very least.
Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
Seconded. I almost quit the game right then and there. The GM was inconsistent - she allowed one player to roll his way past complex social scenes, then made me roleplay a similar scene and I couldn't get three words in without the whole group finding something terribly funny.
Gaming on a few (light) drinks really helps though. My group has a problem with analysis paralysis, and I'm the worst of them. As long as we don't overdo it, a little "liquid courage" keeps us from forgetting that we're supposed to be the big d*** heroes in the end.
I've had many an unfortunate mingling of different gaming styles that just did not mix well. I like to run games with a backstory, key npc's, conflicting factions, etc. Two of my long time players want nothing but a sandbox. Any attempt to bring up a story and adventure hook is met with infuriating resistance. Hand-written adventure after adventure tossed in the can, because they went screaming the opposite direction as soon as an actual plot hook arose. Those campaigns are dead and buried.Yes, that's a problem.
Do you introduce one hook at a time, or present multiple simultaneous hooks?
Even in a sandbox, the GM has to present some kind of events or prevailing situations that are outside the ability of the locals, and need PC involvement. Players who consider this as railroading really have no business being at the table.
I would try different approaches. Sometimes, they'd overhear a rumor of something bad happening near X place, sometimes they'd happen to be witness to some horrific crime, and I would gauge how they handle it. The only times I could really get them on board, is when something horrible and unavoidable happened directly to them. But even then, they'd hurry up and shove through the adventure just to get it over with.
One complaint I got from one of those two players, an honest to god complaint, was that we were doing "too many adventures." He complained that there was always something going on, when all he wanted to do was hang out in town and kill some time. I shook my head in disbelief, thinking back to all the adventures we didn't do, due to their running away and/or sandbagging...
|
|
It drives me crazy when people misuse the gadgets. My laptop is vital to my GMing, and I don't want the useful and helpful gadget gamers to be given a bad rep by the facebook fiends!My group is split on this one. I keep my laptop use to e-books, note taking, and, when Gming, background music. Paper is my bane. I couldn't game without the laptop. I've got a player, though, who has a habit of playing the BDF in every game, including the intrigue and mystery laden games (most games are like that with our group), then watches youtube videos and plays flash games when he can't hack and slash. The worst part is he can't be confronted about it, because he roleplays his BDFs to the hilt, but that's all he'll ever play, and the one time we called him on it, it's supposedly my fault if I and the rest of the group want an intrigue game and he's bored with it...so he's a gadget fiend and unappreciative of the complex plots the rest of my group demands.
Sadly, it's one of those "friends outside of the game" situations, so if I stop inviting him, it causes drama in my group of friends, and I'll lose his S.O. as a player at the very, very least.
The solution is veryu simple...turn off wireless and connect your laptop to the modem via a LAN cable. And say you've got only one. Or ban face/miniclip and other offending sites on your modem.
|
|
I would try different approaches. Sometimes, they'd overhear a rumor of something bad happening near X place, sometimes they'd happen to be witness to some horrific crime, and I would gauge how they handle it. The only times I could really get them on board, is when something horrible and unavoidable happened directly to them. But even then, they'd hurry up and shove through the adventure just to get it over with.
One complaint I got from one of those two players, an honest to god complaint, was that we were doing "too many adventures." He complained that there was always something going on, when all he wanted to do was hang out in town and kill some time. I shook my head in disbelief, thinking back to all the adventures we didn't do, due to their running away and/or sandbagging...
Sounds like they should be playing Animal Crossing.
|
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
I can see certain reasons to forbid drinking (underage players being the most important) or if another player really has a problem (recovering alcoholic, or just unable to control themselves) but otherwise someone sipping a beer while they play is hardly a cause for alarm. Sure, if they're sitting there pounding back bottles of Mad Dog or shots of vodka, it's pretty clear that they're just not going to be into the game very much.
Smoking is at least something that might directly bother those around you, and it's less about the nicotine than the smoke itself, especially if you're at a non-smokers house or you're at a table predominated by non-smokers.
Illegal substances are right out, of course, for the very fact of their illegality and it could get everyone involved in trouble.
Of course, if I'm at someone's house and they request no booze, then I understand. But I've been at plenty of tables where the fact that someone had a couple of beers was hardly an issue.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I'm a laptop GM too, but I can definitely sympathize with the no electronics crowd. Having a player play WoW at your table is really annoying.
My pet peeves from players:
inconsistent attendance
mood-breaking
not paying attention during box text (then asking me a million freakin questions that you WOULD HAVE KNOWN THE ANSWER IF YOU HAD PAID ATTENTION)
breaking the game, either mechanically or by running away from plot
being intoxicated at the table (a little alcohol is fine. smoking up or being shitcanned drunk is not)
not reading your own spells/feats/special abilities, then getting upset when it doesn't work the way you thought it did, because you didn't read the whole thing
cheating via dice shenanigans or deliberately faulty record-keeping
What GM in their right mind would allow any alcohol on the gaming table? Except of course cleaning alcohol to wipe the table. Some people argue that beer is ok, but i explicitly forbid any form of drinking on my sessions. Forbidding pot or other narcotics goes without saying. Ever tried to play with a baked GM/Players? Not fun. In the least bit.
My group routinely drinks beer and wine at our games. In the 3 years we've been playing it hasn't been an issue. We're an older group, no one drives drunk, so maybe we're not the norm?
|
|
Well, i generally have issues with alcohol in any form. My father is an AA member and has been sober for over five years. Life before that was...hell. Anyway, i have no problem with beer in moderate amounts, especially because i know that some of my players can drink A LOT. However, anything having more then 6% ethanol is not welcome at my table.
|
|
I think it's really a reasonability guideline:
Illegal activities are out. Illegal activities at other people's homes are completely out, to the point of if you have to ask, no game for you, and get out before the police are called.
Getting drunk: very bad form, sign of disrespect. Disrespect doesn't get you far.
Moderation and responsibility: acceptable.
Host's house, host's rules.
Really, all this is just the same sort of politeness that we all offer each other whether it's a game, a barbecue out back, watching sports, a social function, a party, anything, really. We're all socializing, just in different ways.
A game is no different.