|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They feel that to allow the GM to do this would facilitate GM cheating.
I am unfamiliar with this concept. Seriously. They (and maybe you) seem to have the idea that Pathfinder/any-RPG is an us-vs.-them activity. If they want to play something where they can try to "beat" the GM, tell them to go play a computer game. The job of the GM in Pathfinder is to tell a story and create an experience that is challenging yet fun for the players. Nobody ought to be trying to "beat" anyone, not the players beating the GM or the GM beating the players. Fun, F-U-N. It doesn't sound like you're having any of it. Being a GM is tough enough with preping and legitimate rules disagreements. If you're not getting the respect and cooperation you deserve, a) ask one of them to take over GMing for a while, b) walk away and never look back, or c) pee in the soda when no one is around and then see "b" above.
Bottom line - It's a bummer to not have a group to play with. I've been "playing" RPG's for 25 years (wow!); sometimes I've just played 1-on-1 with a friend, sometimes I've just read books and invented characters for years on end, and right now I'm part of two great groups and I play PFS. But it's better to not have a group to play with then to force yourself to play with a bunch of a-holes.
Call off your game for the time being. If one of the players wants to step into the GM's chair, you should welcome the reprieve - sit, play, relax, and watch the new guy squirm! No need for petty revenge when you can watch sweet, sweet comeuppance.
Yes. This sounds sweet.
Decide which members of your last group were actual 'ringleaders' and which of them were merely enabling their more obnoxious brethren. Even if gamers are in such short supply that you had to 'scrape this group together' you can probably think of one player that simply won't be invited when you finally start up your new campaign.
The rogue. Hands down.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Here are some (rather nasty) suggestions for what to do with them.
Medieval Torture (link). It's one thing to tell a player "They torture you"... it's a whole other thing to show them a picture so they can visualize their favorite PC on-a-stick.
The thing about the rogue looking up spells in game is that the players have agreed that the GM is never allowed to prevent players from looking up rules. They feel that to allow the GM to do this would facilitate GM cheating.
This is how I feel right now. I know I should be mature about this. I know I should act like an adult and shut the RP down. I just might. You guys probably are right about it being the best course of action.
That doesn't make me want to slaughter them any less, though.
I think it's worth stopping and working out what you're trying to achieve.
If you're hoping to reform the group, this seems very unlikely to work. Given they think a GM asking players not to look up rules should be forbidden to avoid "GM cheating" I think the likely result is that you'll alienate the only people you currently have any option of playing with - they're going to take anything like this as further evidence of you "doing it wrong", not as a reasonable response to unreasonable behavior.
If you're just sick of it and don't want to play any more, why not tell them that? You can always start up again with whichever players seem most amenable to playing the way you want to run your game.
Overall,, I'd recommend the moral high ground. I can't imagine you'll ever regret it if you cancel the game and wait for "the right group". I can imagine your planned course of action leading to several regrets, not least of it being a reputation for vindictiveness in an area with not many roleplaying opportunities.
Alchemy is right here. Clearly the solution is to kill the players instead.
That depends on your approach to fixing problems, of course.
On another note, perhaps your group should play Paranoia. It's a game in which knowing more than just the basic rules (as a player) is treason.
My thoughts:
As someone pointed out up-thread, everyone is proficient with unarmed strikes. The penalties associated with unarmed strikes isn't non-proficiency penalty, and it's negated by Improved Unarmed Strike that the monk gets as a class ability anyway.
Let the barbarian kill the sorcerer (or try to). The sorcerer is provoking him by casting area-effect spells on him all the time. The barbarian has just cause. It -might- shift the barbarian's alignment from NG/CG to CN, but if the sorcerer routinely assaults him, the sorcerer's death may be justified. Either way, it's the barbarian's decision to assault the sorc.
Let the monk's need to talk to NPCs even though he's the low charisma character sort itself out. Keep his yelling at the others to shut-up in-character, so the NPCs and the other player characters have to address it in-character. Give him an additional -2 circumstance penalty to the checks for the outburst. (Some NPCs may instead LIKE such an outburst, grant a +2 circumstance bonus where appropriate.) When the NPCs starts reacting to such outbursts, the character's behavior will change.
For your issues with the rogue:
In addition to the "GM is final arbiter" from page 9, there's also this:
GM Fiat: The GM is the law of the game. His reading of the rules should be respected and adhered to. It's easy to get hung up on complicated aspects of the game during play, but the game is never enhanced by long, drawn-out arguments over these complications between players and GM. When complications involving rules interpretations occur, list to the player and make the decision as quickly as you can on how to resolve the situation. If the rule in question isn't one you're familiar with, you can go with the player's interpretation but with the knowledge that after the game you'll read up on the rules and, with the next session, will have an official ruling in play. Alternatively, you can simply rule that something works in a way that helps the story move on, despite the most logical or impassioned arguments from the players. Even then, you owe it to your players to spend time after the game researching the rule to make sure your ruling was fair--and if not, make amends the next game as necessary.
One handy rule to keep under your belt is the Fiat Rule--simply grant a player a +2 or a -2 bonus or penalty to a die roll if no one at the table is precisely sure how a situation might be handled by the rules. For example, a character who attempts to trip an iron golem in a room where the floor is magnetized could gain a +2 bonus on his attempt at your discretion, since the magnetic pull exerted by the floor helps pull the golem down.
Honestly, in my current game we usually look spells up when they're cast, but we're quick about it. Since the sorcerer has a limited spell selection, putting all his known spells (printed from the PRD) in a three-ring binder isn't a bad idea. This will save time on look-ups. For my inquisitor, I keep printouts of any spells he knows from outside the Core Rulebook in a folder so I don't have to carry as many books to the game.
=================================
As for how the Loyalist government will handle the rebels if they're caught, I'd say it depends on the alignment of the Loyalist government.
If you really don't want to play in the campaign anymore, don't kill-off the characters. Just be honest with the players: You're frustrated with the way the campaign is going, you feel as though your GMing is being undermined, and you think the rogue should start a campaign, because you want to play and you're confident that he will make sure the game runs as-written.
If the rogue does start a campaign as a new GM, play in it. Don't be a jerk by questioning everything, but respectfully keep him honest.
I'm completely aware that this isn't actually going to be helpful for quite a lot of people, but as a ex-(cough)powergamer, I've found that simply being better at knowing the rules shuts up most arguments. Half the time, except in cases where it plain just doesn't sound right, my groups just accepts my rulings these days since it's common knowledge that I actually enjoy reading all the obscure rules and theory crafting insane characters (which I rarely bring into a game anymore) to the point where in the game I'm not gming, our gm often just relies on me too keep the rule discussions to a minimum.
The surprise one of our new players had when I casually quoted the line page and rule about scrolls not all being standard actions anymore was priceless.
And when I am gming? It's often a case of "If you wanna be anal about the rules, so will I and i'm BETTER at it than you."
|
Lots of good suggestions here. Something I love with b%~#*y rules-lawyers is that they almost always are by definition the worst at their job since they don't acknowledge the most basic rules about having fun in the game, and countering their arguments shouldn't be difficult by knowing the right rulebook quotes - especially by quoting those about how the DM isn't an entity working AGAINST the players, and how it's ruling is final and irreversible, including during the game so there are no interminable arguments about the rules.
You may also want to say to the rogue player that either he understands that while players always have their word to say in the game if they feel like they aren't having any fun, either he decides to trust your judgement, help as a rules lawyer when asked and stop b@~$@ing around the rules (including by suggesting that you may be "cheating", again, one of the stupidest thing I read on these boards...), either he's free to leave your game, or you'll be pleased to do so yourself, because you don't have any fun anymore being in a game where you are given no respect and players are acting like immature jerks.
This should leave you enough breathing space to make the other players understand that the game is made to be FUN, and that the GM is here to help everyone attain this (which could even include cheating, yes, for example by reducing the impact of an enemy attack on a Pcharacter), not to be another player dedicated to make everyone fail by every means attainable.
Instead of killing them off, just leave or kick the rogue if discussion isn't enough to make everyone revize their opinion.
Or, like I said before, give them the link to this thread. Show them how far you were going to send the game because of their insufferable behaviour ; and how people reacted to it. Then once everyone is able to see how childish and stupid they were to push you so far, maybe you'll be able to start again on new grounds and make the major battle a real, interesting plot hook instead of a way to calm your nerves and punish their foolishness with even more immaturity - as relieving it could have been. What do have you to lose by showing them how normal people react to the kind of things they do in your game ?
If the rules lawyers want to play at this little game of "what is RAW", there are people more knowledgeable here able to deal with any accusation or excuse they could have found for making the game bad.
No kidding, again, the idea of players being coercited as a group against the "evil cheating DM" really amazes me, like, really.
|
This is what you do if you want to get back at them, let them start the big fight, let them get to moments before the big boss battle. Then stop the campaign right there.
NO CLOSURE FOR THEM!!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Even better : send them a mail to tell them you stop being the GM for such jerkitude RIGHT NOW.
And do not play with them until they amend their ways and grovel with excuses before you.
BARBARIAN WILLING TO RENT SERVICES OUT FREE OF CHARGE, THOUGH AM NOT SMASHING FELLOW BARBARIAN. GUY AM DOING NOTHING WRONG, CASTY AM JUST JERK.
TAKE TWO, MAYBE THREE ROUNDS. AM NEVER SEE IT COMING.
Just to clarify this issue, I'm pretty sure all characters are proficient with unarmed strikes. Check the weapons section of the core book.
Pulled from here: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weaponsSimple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons
Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.
Its on Page 141 of the Core rule book if your players need to see it with their own eyes.
.
+ heres a suggestion.
try catching thier childish activities on camera. a camera phone works just as well.
+1 to this.
If having them watch a history of their arguments over the pettiest little things dosent shut them up... im not sure anything will.
Irrespective of how badly the players interact with you and whether the group is ever going to function in a way that you enjoy being part of it, the characters deserve to die.
Seriously, a sorcerer who deliberately targets another party member? If they can't cooperate with each other then why on earth would they be adventuring with each other? Ask the questions "What Would Conan Do?" - he'd kill the stupid sorcerer, glare meaningfully at the rest of the party and get on with his task at hand.
Perhaps you should arrange it so half the party is on the loyalist side and the other half the rebels and then they can happily kill each other as that seems to be what they really want to do.....
But, less tongue-in-cheek (and assuming you don't just ditch the whole group), you can set them up for a potential TPK without without just waving your DM wand and saying "you all die during/after the battle". Design the next session such that if they cooperate with each other and stop being knobs they have a reasonable chance at winning/surviving. If they actually do try to cooperate but still fail you can have them be captured. Set it up so if they cooperate while captured they have a chance of escaping, but if they don't then the executioner's axe will be used.
It's not immature to set a party up for a TPK a party provided it's not a forgone conclusion and the party has a reasonable chance to survive through smart play. Any encounter could be considered as a potential TPK - the whole aim of the game is to cooperate to overcome challenges and have fun while doing so.
A few other thoughts....
- do you think the group would improve if the rogue was gone? Is he close friends with other players? i.e. could you just say "sorry Rogue, you are too disruptive on the group, you are no longer welcome"?
- ensure casters have print outs of all their spells at hand, so no interrupting combat to look up books
- if there is a dispute during combat tell the "disputer" that it can be discussed after combat, but you are not interrupting play again. DM's say is final during combat.
- following on from that, players can't question other character's actions. i.e. if the rogue has a problem with the how the sorcerer's spells are being adjudicated then tell him/her to "play their own character". Only the player concerned can raise an issue about their character. If the rogue persists just say you can discuss it after the session and then move on.
- try an egg timer for each player's in-combat actions. I wouldn't set it at 6 seconds, perhaps 10-15. If they don't act in that time then they lose their turn or delay. If the rogue interrupts and impacts another player's ability to declare their action in the allotted time then they will tell the rogue to shut up - thereby effectively helping you shut the rogue up.
We have had similar issues in the past within my group, we're of the same age group and our solution was the GM telling those involved he didnt want to GM for them if this style of play was to continue. Players checking rules is fine by me, if and only if, it affects gameplay at the time and is a matter of character life or death. I expect my players to know all the rules that are relevant to their character including spells if they are casters so they arent looking up their own abilities every 2 minutes within a session.
If they take issue with one of your calls tell them of 5 very important rules
RULE 1: GM HAS FINAL SAY IN ALL RULES QUERIES.
RULE 2: IF ITS COOL IT CAN HAPPEN
RULE 3: GM IS ALWAYS RIGHT ITS THEIR WORLD AND CAN MOD IT FROM THE BASE RULES
RULE 4: GM HAS FINAL SAY IN ALL RULES QUERIES.
RULE 5: BRIBERY IS MOST ACCEPTED
It's the rogue who stops the game to check every single spell, and I tried to stop it, but all the players agreed that the GM has no authority to do this.
And criminals have just agreed that the police has no authority to apprehend criminals. People have agreed that the government has no authority to demand taxes.
See what's wrong with all three statements?
They can "agree on" whatever they want. The GM still has all the authority over what he can or cannot do in the game. The players only have the authority to ask for fair treatment (overruling obstructionist players is fair treatment) or, if they think the GM isn't doing a good job, they can leave.
Again: Just boot them out. Doesn't sound like this is fun for you. Why run a game that is stressing you out instead of being relaxing?
If ever there was a moment for 'Rocks fall, everyone dies...who's up for a board game?'...its this one. Jesus Christ these people are crazy. They dont want a dm, in fact I have no idea what they want besides more time in crazy town.
My table has had conflicts, but generally they are resolved relatively quickly, mostly because we are actually friends and you know...like eachother. I simply dont understand the impulse to roleplay with people you wouldnt want to spend time with otherwise.
The campaign is over. Period.
No need to pull a TPK to make the point.
You need to take back control. You need to conduct a 'Read Them the Riot Act' session.
The 'Reading Them the Riot Act' Session:
You need to prepare for the session, mentally and emotionally. You are going into this session with the goal of setting boundaries and limitations and taking back control as the DM. Emotions are going to get high and there is going to be confrontation, so accept that. Accept also that the game group could very well be over. Accept all of this and you will be able to keep you emotions in check and avoid being drawn into personal attacks on the others.
Show up for the session without your gaming material (there will be no game tonight). This should be noticed by the others and will set the stage for what will follow.
State the campaign is over and why it is over (this is where you can rant but do it without being overly emotional or angry. The more you stay to the facts and avoid ad homenem attacks, the better).
Then state that IF there is going to be new campaign, some things need to change. Tell them what WILL change or it will be no game. It is your way or the highway. Tell them the table rules you will be implementing for behaviors allowed and not allowed at the game table and the consequences for non compliance. Further state the game table is not the place for one man upmanship, posturing or expressing their insecurities with passive aggressive behavior. Everyone respects each other. Period.
Tell them if they don't like it, there is the door (assuming the game is at your place) and don't let the door hit them on the ass on the way out.
If any player starts to belittle you or whatever during the 'dressing down' session, tell them they have crossed the line and throw their ass out and they are not welcome back until you get an apology and a commitment to follow the table rules.
Assuming you still have people beside yourself in the room after this, tell them they have until the next game session to reflect on what you said during your rant and what changes will happen and whether they want to make a game of it or not.
Now gather up your stuff, wish them a good night and leave without further comment or escort them to door if it is your house.
Show up for the next session and see who you have left, if anyone. If you do, just remind them that they have agreed to the the rules of the table and that any deviation of those rules will mean the plug will be pulled on the campaign or the offending player will be barred from the game table until such time as they can follow the rules.
Hopefully, they will 'get it' and you will have much more pleasant game sessions.
I'm not sure laying down the law with these jokers is going to help until they've got some real respect for the DM's role and the crap DMs have to put up with from obnoxious players. If you're interested in continuing to game at all with these guys (and I'm not sure I would be at this point), I think your best bet is to tell them you won't DM for them. It's someone else's turn. Then sit back and let the new DM suffer the slings and arrows of the rest of the obnoxious players until they are fed up. Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary.
And in this case, I would not pay the new DM back with his own coin. Be a good player, model good behavior. Maybe he'll learn something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They feel that to allow the GM to do this would facilitate GM cheating.I am unfamiliar with this concept. Seriously. They (and maybe you) seem to have the idea that Pathfinder/any-RPG is an us-vs.-them activity. If they want to play something where they can try to "beat" the GM, tell them to go play a computer game. The job of the GM in Pathfinder is to tell a story and create an experience that is challenging yet fun for the players. Nobody ought to be trying to "beat" anyone, not the players beating the GM or the GM beating the players. Fun, F-U-N. It doesn't sound like you're having any of it. Being a GM is tough enough with preping and legitimate rules disagreements. If you're not getting the respect and cooperation you deserve, a) ask one of them to take over GMing for a while, b) walk away and never look back, or c) pee in the soda when no one is around and then see "b" above.
I agree, though I vastly prefer (a).
The players seem to have their own rules that the GM is supposed to play by. I fear that one of their rules is that all challenges should be easy, so they would also declare a Total Party Kill as GM cheating. My own way of forestalling this is to give them plenty of forewarning.
Have the leader of the rebellion meet with the party and explain to them that the rebels are outmatched. He is relying on them to take out the loyalist leadership fast enough to throw the loyalist forces into disarray. Otherwise, the rebels will lose. Have the leader emphasize how vital and dangerous their mission is, that it will challenge their abilities to the utmost.
Then the players will (a) try their utmost and succeed, (b) try their usual halfwit tactics and fail to kill the leadership quickly, or (c) run away before the battle.
If they do rally and play well, that means they are teachable.
If they don't rally and fail, let them escape. If they run, let them escape. Then tell them, "Your characters walk away into the sunset, departing this land. Behind them the rebels are slaughtered. Everyone who knew them is dead. You are on your own. Okay, guys, I need a break from being the GM. I have given your characters a clean break from the past, so it will be easy for the new GM to start the new adventure. Which of you wants to be GM?" If no-one steps up, the campaign is over. The players won in the sense that their characters are still alive, but it is no victory to brag about.
|
Because that's what's going to happen. I'm very angry with this group, and it's going to show when the fighting ends.
Why are you angry with them? If I was your player and thats your attitude of whats going to happen regardless of how cunning or not the plan was, I wouldnt bother showing up. Ever.
edit: I see its out of character stuff and your taking it out in character. Pretty much been covered, best advice is:
I have something to say to Kelsey MacAilbert and his/her party: Grow up. All of you. Including you, Kelsey.Trying to win by going through the rules with the fine-toothed comb? Bullying the GM into not doing his/her job? And, on the other side: playing the same silly game by killing off the party?
I have been playing & DMing this game for almost 40 years now. I have found you can NOT solve a OOC problem IC. Killing their characters will not solve the problem, in fact, it will make things worse. Lots of other good advice here, such as from Black Moria. Sit down with them, explain that D&D is a game, and a game must be fun for everyone, and you’re not having fun. Explain why. Ask for suggestions.
All right. I tried to calm down and be the adult here. I really did. I sat down and talked with the PCs about how getting into fights every rule session isn't fun and needs to stop, and that certain in game character behaviors are disruptive. Somehow, I got an agreement from the PCs to try and play nice, and I agreed to try and work with them.
It lasted about five minutes. The rogue and the barbarian got into an argument, which the sorcerer, monk, and I tried to break up, and it ended with the sorcerer getting smacked by the rogue (not in character, if you get my drift) and the cops getting called. I've just about had it. I tried to make it work, and it didn't.
I'm not going to GM or play for a while. I really don't feel like it. I'm going to concentrate on some homebrew stuff I wanted to get done while I reflect on what I did wrong running this campaign. Needless to say, the campaign is over. I'll probably be willing to RP with the sorcerer and monk again once I decide it's time to go back to playing (they behaved a lot better in this last session, and I get the impression they realized they were being idiots and wanted to change that), but I've had it with the rogue and barbarian. They paid lip service to acting better, but made no effort to do it. The barbarian was bad enough, but this goes double for the rogue. Smacking another player goes way too far.
Well s&~!. I'm really sorry things turned out that way, I mean there's been times i've WANTED to smack a player (for instance, my friend arguing that shapeshifter and wild stalker can both be taken as ranger archtypes, and that his dragonrider class which allows him to give up hunters bond for the dragon mount progression can still be done despite wild stalker removing hunters bond "because they said divine bond on the skill. I'll give that up quite happily").
But that's just too far. Try googling role playing groups in your area, you'd be surprised what you'd find.
Wow.
I mean... Wow. That is just...
All I can say is stay strong. Took me some seven years before I found a good group and if I could do it I know you can too.
Where are you from? What countrie? If you're from the US check the Gamer Connection part of the forum, make a new thread there. Might find a new group.
If you were Brazilian I would invite you to my table.
Where are you from? What countrie? If you're from the US check the Gamer Connection part of the forum, make a new thread there. Might find a new group.
The US. I may move out of state soon, though, and like I said, I feel take taking a break from active RPing for a while and working on my homebrew stuff.
Does that include your PbP you were preparing?The US. I may move out of state soon, though, and like I said, I feel take taking a break from active RPing for a while and working on my homebrew stuff.
Where are you from? What countrie? If you're from the US check the Gamer Connection part of the forum, make a new thread there. Might find a new group.
Unfortunately, yes. I really, really feel like taking a break right now. After tonight, I'm not sure I should be GMing anything.
In my opinion you made an excellent choice. You've been clear about what you want, given people a chance to participate in that and then called an end to it when it just didnt happen. You've also preserved your options (in that you can start up again with just the monk and sorceror if you want, you can reconvene everyone after a break or you can make a fresh start with a new group having accumulated more experience and presumably learned to spot such behaviour as it starts in the future. Had you pursued the "You all die" path - all the players would be able to play the victim.
The moral high ground pays off in the long run, in my experience, even if you dont get the immediate satisfaction of upsetting those who upset you.
Guess you better go break the news to those guys in the recruitment thread.
Best of luck on your time off and recovery process. If you ever wish to talk, you have my email address in another thread.
Thanks. For now, I have my homebrew campaign setting and this to work on. If I put my back into it (and I do feel like working to take my mind off things) I can have an alpha for the superhero system out tomorrow.
|
|
You did the right thing. If the rogue player was the kind of people you have to call the cops on, it only confirms that he was the crazy rotten apple that I guess every roleplayer has to see at least once in a while.
I hope this bad experience will not derail you too long from the hobby, there are still a lot of people having weekly fun with it, and you seem to at least have two players left mature enough to grow up and become good players.
I hope this bad experience will not derail you too long from the hobby
Yeah. I mean, sure, there are a lot of a##@***s in this hobby, but that's mainly because there are a lot of a%#~+!!s everywhere. On the other hand, there are also a lot of great people in this hobby.
It sucks that you seemed to have met one of the worst (though, if you go seek one of those "worst RPG experience you have had" threads here or anywhere RPGs are discussed, you will find some cases that make yours sound like a picnic. I'm not even joking.)
I guess the best advice anyone can give you is that when you start playing again, look for "warning signs" and next time pull out earlier. That way, frustration doesn't build up and the likelihood of having a RPG burn-out is decreased.
Other than that, a break from the game is probably a good idea.
while I reflect on what I did wrong running this campaign.
I haven't sit in on you guys, but you mentioned one guy getting physical and the cops having to be involved. That means it's very, very possible (likely, even) that you did nothing wrong. Some people are just impossible.
|
|
In my opinion you made an excellent choice. You've been clear about what you want, given people a chance to participate in that and then called an end to it when it just didnt happen. You've also preserved your options (in that you can start up again with just the monk and sorceror if you want, you can reconvene everyone after a break or you can make a fresh start with a new group having accumulated more experience and presumably learned to spot such behaviour as it starts in the future. Had you pursued the "You all die" path - all the players would be able to play the victim.
The moral high ground pays off in the long run, in my experience, even if you dont get the immediate satisfaction of upsetting those who upset you.
I think just from a practical standpoint being a killer DM wasn't the right way to go about it.
Being petty is fun, but it usually doesn't solve problems. If you wiped them out, it makes the players think the problem is with you, not them.
I still don't know the details (nor do I really want to), and there's usually always 2-sides to a story. But clearly stating the issues and addressing the problem is good. Now you have a better understanding of what the problem ultimately was.
I might invite my players to peruse the Paizo boards but not as a place to look for vetos on my GM decisions. This is not what the place is for.+1. I will also add they would abide by my rules or find a new GM. I give my players 30 seconds to prove me wrong. If they can't do it they have to research it out of game. They can even come here. Inviting you people here might not be a bad idea.Wow, you certainly do have a LOT of problems. But, in my experiencing, punishing the player characters doesn't fix anything with the players.
Your best recourse is to take the group aside, let them know how much this kind of behavior is pissing you off and making the game un-fun. Maybe hang a little warning over their heads of how dangerous it is to piss the DM off.
Start looking for another group incase things go sour, and if they continue to do so, start dropping the bombs on their asses and see if they shape up or just get more pissy.
Edit: if you have more by all means feel free to continue. The Paizo boards are as good a place to vent about game issues as anywhere else and you've got awesome people (like me *coolface*) here to listen and offer ideas in return.
My point was that it is a good place to do research. If the GM goes against the grain(rules) then they(the players) have to decide how much they like house rules.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
... while I reflect on what I did wrong running this campaign. ... Smacking another player goes way too far.
I once was physically assaulted by a player during one of my games. He leaped over the coffee table we were using, pummeled me in the face, and had to be restrained before he stopped and calmed down.
Did he do it because I was a horrible GM? No, he did it because he was emotionally unstable and had issues with an obsession of always winning.
You did nothing wrong. Sometimes you just have a party you are not compatible with. Other times the people playing are going to end up finding no one wants to play with them because of how badly they treat people.
What is unfortunate is when a horrible player convinces a GM to stop playing and that the issues the party had were their fault.
Feel free to take your break, but the only thing you did wrong was letting the madness to last as long as it did. Next time, you will know the warning signs and be able to put a stop to it long before arguments come to blows.
As for the rogue, they screwed themselves. Once word gets out that he hit another player during an argument, he will find few people will allow him to sit at their table.
I'll just chime in and agree that anyone who takes a game so seriously that they would get real-world violent over it has serious issues.
I've often marveled at people like soccer hooligans and other sports fans who go on a rampage when their team loses (or even wins).
I remember being in Denver when the Broncos won the Superbowl. There were fires, an overturned car, cops and teargas. And they'd WON!
Such emotional attachment to anything as inconsequential as a game, presumably played just for fun, is disturbing.
I'll add that I agree with others here that your only mistake was not ending the game sooner. You were hoping to salvage it, and get the players to play like mature adults. They simply weren't that.
Don't be discouraged. Most people can sit at a table, roll dice, and enjoy an adventure without acting like spoiled children if things don't go their way. You just had an impossible group. I pity any GM who has the rogue at their table. Kick him out for good, and take as long a break as you like.