I know. I'm just really rattled. I'm former military, for Gods' sake, and I may reenlist at a later date. I shouldn't be letting myself get intimidated like this.
From what I've noticed bad players aren't born they're cultivated. Get yourself one good player and a bunch of newbie players.
The you and good player can help with rules.
Newbie players are great because you can lead them down the path of rules enlightenment and understanding.
Also bad players can be reformed but it will take much more time and effort.
They will go through each stage or grief for each rule you enforce.
DENIAL
ANGER
BARGAINING
DEPRESSION
ACCEPTANCE
A few printouts from the FAQ and these forums can help the process.
Kelsey, you must stand up to your players. they cheat against you because being as timid as you are, they abuse you by forcing thier will against you.
here is my suggestion, take those cheating munchkin PCs and force them to fight each other in the gladitorial arena, and you play the role of the emperor, the spectators, and the guards. when they escape your plan, railroad them with fudged numbers and lusicrously overpowered guards. let them cheat against each other and get into a BS war as you sit there as the emperor eating grapes. (eat real grapes for bonus RP points, especially if they are the kind a Greco Roman Emperor would eat) and talk a lot about a prize, never say what it is, only that it's great, only to reveal when it's too late that the prize is death.
Oh good gravy,
I like this one.Though I would add in a CR 100 character as the end boss for back up insurance.
|
Kelsey, you must stand up to your players. they cheat against you because being as timid as you are, they abuse you by forcing thier will against you.
here is my suggestion, take those cheating munchkin PCs and force them to fight each other in the gladitorial arena, and you play the role of the emperor, the spectators, and the guards. when they escape your plan, railroad them with fudged numbers and lusicrously overpowered guards. let them cheat against each other and get into a BS war as you sit there as the emperor eating grapes. (eat real grapes for bonus RP points, especially if they are the kind a Greco Roman Emperor would eat) and talk a lot about a prize, never say what it is, only that it's great, only to reveal when it's too late that the prize is death.
Oh good gravy,
I like this one.Though I would add in a CR 100 character as the end boss for back up insurance.
i would make all the guards CR 100 and the emperor and executioner CR 1,000 minimum. maybe a CR 1,000 champion named Maximus.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I advise against trying to use a game plot to bring them in line. They sound like they have severe behavioral issues.
Cheating as a GM never solves player cheating.
Bullying as a GM won't solve player bullying.
They need to realize that you control the game, and if you're not enjoying it because they are jerks, you can pack up your game and go home. If they can't be made to understand this, pack up your game and go home.
They will probably elect a new GM from amongst themselves, and once they experience a player-made house-rule collision, they'll realize they didn't deserve you.
Evil Lincoln has a good point.
Leave and let them fight each other,
hopefully they'll learn from it.
Psh. You people are your CRs. Involve the Gods themselves. Or just one. Teleport them to the pit where Rovagug is imprisoned.
Psh. You people are your CRs. Involve the Gods themselves. Or just one. Teleport them to the pit where Rovagug is imprisoned.
Why not the big cheese of Devils, Daemons, or Demons.
Psh. You people are your CRs. Involve the Gods themselves. Or just one. Teleport them to the pit where Rovagug is imprisoned.Why not the big cheese of Devils, Daemons, or Demons.
That Zon-Kuthon (probably misspelled that) guy is pretty nasty.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cheating as a GM never solves player cheating.
Bullying as a GM won't solve player bullying.
I agree! Two Worgs don't make a Wight.
That Zon-Kuthon (probably misspelled that) guy is pretty nasty.Psh. You people are your CRs. Involve the Gods themselves. Or just one. Teleport them to the pit where Rovagug is imprisoned.Why not the big cheese of Devils, Daemons, or Demons.
Yeah, but he's not very proactive. I'm more scared of Rovagug myself. And besides, some people think Zon-Kuthon is all kinds of wicked fun...
Kelsey, in what area do you live? I'm sure someone here on the forums could point you to a few mature and dependable players. Sure beats asking around the game store. From what I've witnessed, the percentage of jerks amongst the kind of people hanging there is too great for me to ever risk recruiting this way without further reference.
|
I have a couple PBPs about to start here.Unfortunately, I LOVE homebrew and house rules to death (which makes my uber-rule PCs especially annoying), so Society play would never work for me.Kelsey,
Move to the Saint Paul, MN area and spend Sunday afternoons in Pathfinder Society with a crowd of 99% decent human beings while you relax, have fun, and enjoy life.I want to repeat an option I mentioned upthread that was never addressed that solves this issue.
Kelsey, I have a question. Have you considered chat gaming (possibly with [or without] a gametable)?
Thats good to hear- I actually prefer it as a medium for RP myself.
I'm probably going to be repeating much of what has been said here but-
1. You can't really allow your players to browbeat you and shout you down as GM. At the end of the day, your running the game. You have to stay firm to your rulings and more importantly, you have to be enjoying the game too.
2. No need to put yourself down so much! Not only are you doing the sometimes thankless job of GMing in the first place (and at the end of the day, your enabling your players to play- you are doing them a service, your not forcing them to the table!) your aware the game has problems and your trying to find ways to fix them. Your also willing to ackowledge your own mistakes as well as listen to the kind people on these forums pointing out that your players are all over the place with the rules. Your really not doing that bad of a job so please, no more negativity about yourself it won't help matters.
3. It seems your rules knowledge is a little limited so why not just stick to basics? Reboot the campaign or start a new one using just the core rulebook and core classes, and spend some time learning the rules inside out. Don't just keep dragging on with a game that makes you unhappy; you have to be able to walk away when something thats supposed to be fun is making you unhappy. if the players are truly the problem even then, find new ones.
4. Don't try these in-game tactics and waste your time alienating or creating further conflict with these people, its not going to help anyone. Evil Lincoln made a great post about eight posts up that I strongly agreed with.
Change something.
Change your player base.
Change the game system or its assumptions. One of the tacit admissions of the D&D 3.5 edition design is that it rewards system mastery. Knowledge of the rules gives players a benefit. Lots of players of knowledge with rules creates a game of "Hah! I can break the system more than you can!"
Since your players will argue that they have greater system mastery in Pathfinder until you give in...change the game system.
Minimus has character creation techniques to get players to rein in each other's characters (or make them so blatantly over-the-top that you know you should shift the game to Wuxia-style fantasy where people clobber each other with mountain ranges.)
The game system is short - 2 pages for the player hand out, 4 pages total. If they're demanding you turn in 3 page legal decisions for each rule you change, hand them 2 pages of RPG rules instead and say "We're playing this today. You want something different? Go dig out your books and run something."
Mechanically, it's still built around "Roll a d20, add a modifier, equal or exceed a target number."
From other things you've mentioned, I think that Minimus' play-style focus better fits what you'll enjoy running. It's more explicitly focused on character relationships than "Pick up plot hook from contact. Go on murdering spree. Loot bodies."
Disclosure of Benefit: I wrote and publish Minimus. It's donation-ware. If you find it useful, I hope you send a donation for it.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
I know. I'm just really rattled. I'm former military, for Gods' sake, and I may reenlist at a later date. I shouldn't be letting myself get intimidated like this.Seriously Kelsey, please stop dissing on yourself. Yes you might have trouble asserting yourself and taking a strong stance, but that doesn't make you worthless, nor does it make you genitalia (or a coward, however you view that term.)Yea, I've figured out that level dipping isn't my problem, PCs who aren't following the rules are. They keep overriding my decisions to do things that are 15 different kinds of illegal, and I'm enough of a worthless pussy that I didn't stop them. I just let them yell at me until I backed down and let them have their way.If your players are yelling at you and you're berating yourself, then you should quit running for them, lose the stress and take a lengthy break, and find some adults to play with later on.
Kelsey, what city do you live in? Maybe someone on these boards lives nearby and can let you sit in on one of his/her games. It sounds like you really need some exposure to a gaming group who knows how to play well together to help build up your confidence in the ruleset and DM techniques.
If you live near Cleveland, my group would be glad to have you sit in on a session or two.
-- lots of very good stuff --
Besides reading what Alex wrote, and Evil Lincoln's posts above, I would suggest the following.
1. Know yourself. What kind of game to you wish to DM? One extreme is immersion role playing where combat is incidental and role playing is paramount to the other extreme of kick in door, kill monster, take its stuff and repeat. Once you know that you can figure out where you are going. Based on another of your threads, I am thinking you are leaning towards immersion.
2. Play using the Core Rulebook only and nothing else, other than the bestiary for your monsters. As Alex mentions, and it appears from your posts you are rules lite currently. Not a problem but having all the other books just complicates matters way too much. Myself, I limit my players to Core + APG only just for that reason.
3. Have a method of generating the PCs. Mine is 20 point buy, with only one score less than 10 *after* racial adjustments.
4. Write down any house rules. I have two of them. One concerns hero points (APG only), and the other is about crafting. I suggest no more than half a dozen at most.
5. Tell your current players that you are rebooting the campaign with the above and then run a few modules to get the feel of it. There are several free ones, and the Falcon's Hollow series of modules are just good for starters. If they holler and yell and refuse, then just leave and let them find another DM. If that happens, you could always go back to the hobby shop you mentioned and start over, this time with your sheet in hand which hopefully prevent this problem.
Good luck!!
-- david
Papa.DRB
I don't want it. Imagine a Wisdom Sorcerer (there is an arcana that allows this) with a level of Monk. Imagine a Druid with a level of Monk, for that matter. Imagine a Wizard with a level of Crossblooded Sorcerer. I want none of these things. So, how do I ban this in a way that does not overstep my bonds as GM?
These things normally make the character weaker. That druid monk one is an example.
The druid would have higher AC with armor than trying to pump that wisdom modifier.
I don't want it. Imagine a Wisdom Sorcerer (there is an arcana that allows this) with a level of Monk. Imagine a Druid with a level of Monk, for that matter. Imagine a Wizard with a level of Crossblooded Sorcerer. I want none of these things. So, how do I ban this in a way that does not overstep my bonds as GM?These things normally make the character weaker. That druid monk one is an example.
The druid would have higher AC with armor than trying to pump that wisdom modifier.
Yes. The issue was the way the players were acting and not following the RAW and my inability to make them follow to the RAW. Their level dip builds were all completely illegal.
There is nothing wrong with house rules. I use them all the time and I let the players know up front. House Rules are nice when you are trying to custimize your own setting. I have done human only PCs with no multiclassing allowed, and with less magic items allowed in the game (typically the magic item limit kicks in at the higher levels and may be a little higher than normal at the low levels). Do I do it because I am a jerk, no because I want to do a Lovecraftian/Howard like setting of about 1000 BC.
And I also do standard Golarion setting also with wealth by level pretty darn close to the book. Players can be quite cleaver about getting wealth at times.
Why are you wasting your time providing an environment for their fun when they completely ignore your own? Someone else can be their whipping-GM.
|
|
I don't want it. Imagine a Wisdom Sorcerer (there is an arcana that allows this) with a level of Monk. Imagine a Druid with a level of Monk, for that matter. Imagine a Wizard with a level of Crossblooded Sorcerer. I want none of these things. So, how do I ban this in a way that does not overstep my bonds as GM?These things normally make the character weaker. That druid monk one is an example.
The druid would have higher AC with armor than trying to pump that wisdom modifier.
the trick is wildshape, keep wis to AC, become a large or huge creature, and you can FoB while in animal form (monks can attack with ANY part of their body, but you couldn't add natural attacks to the mix)
if you buff wis to the max, you're ac is just as good as with armor, plus it stacks with bracers of armor, and all your druid buffs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not think GM = Militaristic Authority
However, if you were giving your friend a ride, would you let them dictate how you drive?
I can't stress this enough.
The next time a player interacts with you, imagine if you were acting that way to a senior non-com, or even a commissioned officer, and ask what the result would be.
If the answer is 'UCMJ action', I think you know how you should react as a DM.
You mean I can lock them in the brig? I wish I'd known that earlier.
Yea, I've figured out that level dipping isn't my problem, PCs who aren't following the rules are. They keep overriding my decisions to do things that are 15 different kinds of illegal, and I'm enough of a worthless pussy that I didn't stop them. I just let them yell at me until I backed down and let them have their way.I don't want it. Imagine a Wisdom Sorcerer (there is an arcana that allows this) with a level of Monk. Imagine a Druid with a level of Monk, for that matter. Imagine a Wizard with a level of Crossblooded Sorcerer. I want none of these things. So, how do I ban this in a way that does not overstep my bonds as GM?I love doing this. I make it work flavor wise. I'm currently playing a "Paladin" with 2 Levels of Paladin and X Levels of Sorcerer.
If I were in your campaign, and you banned/nerfed/etc a level or two dip, I wouldn't be in your campaign.
Well, if your decisions are generally accepted interpretations of the rules, then if I were a player in your campaign, I'd support cracking down to what you say fully. :)
KK here!
So now you have plenty to think about....
plenty to mull over as it were....
"Stop arguing with TOZ! You will be subject to UCMJ or UCMKJ*"
Uniform Code My Kender Justice
|
I can't stress this enough.
The next time a player interacts with you, imagine if you were acting that way to a senior non-com, or even a commissioned officer, and ask what the result would be.
If the answer is 'UCMJ action', I think you know how you should react as a DM.
Post restriction and extra duty? Combined with being smoked until your arms fall off?
I think I may have to adopt this GMing style...
Always fun to take someones words literally I guess.
You have to admit it is tempting, if unrealistic.
From all the many posts of yours regarding DM vs Player issues, I think it's somewhat clear that perhaps PF isn't the system for you.
That said, I have no problems with such small things like that. It helps them further meet the character concept that they think they will find fun.
I have to agree with this. If you truly are having the issues you describe in your post then you either need to find a new group or find a new game. One with very concrete rules with very little wiggle room.
Either that or let someone else DM. The DM should have ultimate say. At my table its a rule. What I say goes. If you disagree then bring it up after the game and we can discuss it... as long as you realize I still have final say.
If they don't like it I can easily find people who will. Good DM's are hard to find.
...
Good DM's are hard to find.
I can agree with that.
You know - I just want to express how proud I am of this community for how supportive and candid you have been regarding this. It is yet another validation as to why I choose Paizo. :)
Pfft, I ain't no hoity-toity officer's candidate...
Heh, didn't work out too well for me, either.
Yes. The issue was the way the players were acting and not following the RAW and my inability to make them follow to the RAW. Their level dip builds were all completely illegal.
.
Greetings Kelsey!
A few suggestions:
If you choose to recruit a new group of players, start off by making sure that they understand your GMing style, and what sort of campaign you plan on running. Then talk to them individually about what they want to get out of the gaming experience. This should help you connect with more compatible players.
When running a game with new players, you should start the campaign at first level.
In addition, you should always go over the player's characters with them at each level. That way you know if they're doing everything correctly, and know their capabilities for planning your adventures. :D
Also, it's good to have the players give you and idea of their plans for their character. If you know in advance that Player X wants a sorcerer/monk/arcane archer, you can discuss it and make sure that they understand what the effects are really going to be.
Just my 2cp worth, take it or leave it as you see fit! :D
Wait a minute, does anyone really have a problem of people playing full caster classes, then shooting themselves in the foot by dipping, let along garbage classes like monk?
What the heck am I reading? This thread is bananas.
Wait a minute, does anyone really have a problem of people playing full caster classes, then shooting themselves in the foot by dipping, let along garbage classes like monk?
What the heck am I reading? This thread is bananas.
Monk + druid +raw = Meh combination. You'll only regret it every other level.
Monk+ druid+ some severe cheese in misreading the rules= very powerful melee character.
I guess I should be grateful I had supportive players when I started GMing. At least none of the few rules they deliberately fooled me on were game breaking in any way. Mostly just a spell or two they told me worked better than they should have.
One of the things you can use to your advantage is that you are willing to run games. Often I have been able to shut down the most uncooperative player by simply threatening to stop running the game if they didn't behave. The other bit that could prove helpful is to reread every section of the rules that came up in play that day. You learn a lot better when you have fresh real life experience to draw upon. Or maybe I am just weird wanting to curl up in front of a nice fire with a rulebook.
The other bit that could prove helpful is to reread every section of the rules that came up in play that day. You learn a lot better when you have fresh real life experience to draw upon. Or maybe I am just weird wanting to curl up in front of a nice fire with a rulebook.
I'm going to start doing that. It's a good idea.
One other thing I've occasionally used to deal with bullies at the table. I bring a (non rulebook) book with me. When they start yelling, I pull out the book, start reading and tell them 'let me know when you're ready to start playing again.' It gives me something to hide behind, something to concentrate on other than the people yelling and if absolute worst comes to worst, something to use as a shield vs fists and thrown items.
That may just be me though.
|
As GM you control things
So as a House Rule you could stop it.
The rule could be
1) You can ONLY take one Class
2) You can take two base classes, but they have to be near equal to each other (no more than 2 levels difference)
3) You can dip, but only for a prestiage class.or as Malignor posted above where they need to find a teacher of that class.
Maybe it would have the right effect to allow multiclassing only to a character's favoured class or a prestige class. If they want to level dip, they can
- take the one-or-two-level class as their first class, or
- give up their favoured class bonus for the class in which they have most of their levels, or
- play a half-elf.
|
|
As a whole bunch of other people have already commented, the problem being discussed isn't level dipping so much as it is players who are being obnoxious. Quite a few people have already provided excellent advice on dealing with obnoxious players, so I'll just throw in my two cents on House Rules and multiclassing.
I think that if you're going to DM, you should generate House Rules for how your campaign is going to be run. This does not have to be some sort of exhaustive multi-volume compendium that covers every possible contingency. It need be little more than a one page sheet that merely lists the name of the campaign (if applicable), the rules set you will be using, and which of the books within that rules set will be considered canon. The other thing that needs to be laid out is that rule #1 (The DM is always the final arbiter of how things work within the game) is in full effect. If a player wants to use a resource that isn't in the list of canonical sources, the DM will listen to the request. But the default answer is "no" unless the player can present an exceptionally compelling argument and the DM can obtain his own copy of said resource at a minimal cost.
The other comment with regards to House Rules is that the more the DM's campaign varies from what the default assumptions of the rules set are, the more time the DM should put into his House Rules to make sure that the players can understand what is going on with his variant. For example, if somebody just wants to run standard Pathfinder set in Golarion with minimal variations then the House Rules can be minimal. If the DM is running his own custom home brew setting then he should put more time and effort into his House Rules.
Lastly, multiclassing in general. After thinking about it for a while I decided on, "No player character can have levels in more than three classes including prestige classes." One of the things that we have lost sight of is that in the time periods generally modeled by fantasy role playing games one's "class" was not one's "job". One's "class" was in effect their entire way of life. Also, the fact that social mobility tended to be a lot more limited also played a part in that as well. If you were the son of a peasant farmer you probably weren't going to be able to get the equivalent of several year's economic output from the farm to go buy heavy armor to practice being a fighter in, to say nothing of all the weapons that you'd have to get training in to become proficient with them. That's assuming that the laws of the land would even allow a peasant to possess such weapons to begin with.
However, to partly counterbalance that and to make things easier for all concerned given that some players will want to multiclass, and that some multiclass combinations can yield some lovely synergies (as well as to reduce "suspension of disbelief" problems for how so and so just picked up such wildly different skills and abilities from what he had been doing before) I make the "ultimate" sacrifice. :-)
Quite simply I have player characters start out at 2nd level, with 1,000 gp worth of gear, no more than 500 gp of which can be spent on any one item. That way somebody who wants to run a multiclass character can start with a multiclass character. Thus nobody has to wonder why the fighter can now cast arcane spells when he takes his heavy armor off (or why the fighter was always running around in light armor to begin with). If that particular character were simply progressing from Fighter 1 to Fighter 2, then one doesn't have to wonder how/why his skills and abilities increased, he was practicing that stuff all along. If he were to go from Fighter 1 to Fighter 1/Wizard 1, that's the sort of thing that can't be easily explained away in the course of an adventure. But if all characters start at level 2, then the guy with the multiclass character has nothing that needs to be "explained". The character was that way all along.
So, that's my rather extended two copper pieces on it in the hopes that somebody may have found that to be helpful.
|
You know - I just want to express how proud I am of this community for how supportive and candid you have been regarding this. It is yet another validation as to why I choose Paizo. :)
No problem, we're paid by Paizo after all !
You know - I just want to express how proud I am of this community for how supportive and candid you have been regarding this. It is yet another validation as to why I choose Paizo. :)No problem, we're paid by Paizo after all !
LOL yeah - I want to believe too :P
|
|
You know - I just want to express how proud I am of this community for how supportive and candid you have been regarding this. It is yet another validation as to why I choose Paizo. :)No problem, we're paid by Paizo after all !
You meant to say 'we pay Paizo' that's why we... Hang on.
What level dips do make sense, ie a backstory would be acceptable?
What level dips do not make sense, ie a backstory is unacceptable?
OR What ones just plain feel wrong to the DM?
DM:
"No you can not be a rogue/paladin, that is stupid!"
I'l admit.... I have always hated when people dip into wizard. Anything that's supposed to take a lifetime to learn... such as manipulating the arcane writings into universe changing effects... things that wizards spend YEARS in the tower under strict tutelage and apprenticeships...
I hate THAT dip...
Monks, Monks I have no issue with. Basically a first level monk dip is anyone who had a little hand to hand training.
Sorcerer... Sorcerer is FINE. in fact i have a 12th level rogue who took a dip in sorcerer around level 5. Mutant bloodline powers don't need training... they just HAPPEN :)
As for the real issue at hand... I agree with everyone here. Just stop playing with this group. I don't think they can be 'fixed' I don't think you will have any fun TRYING to 'make this work'...
Find a new group. Honestly, I don't think I could game with people I don't like 'as people' and this group sounds like lousy PEOPLE.
As to the OP, play into higher levels.
Up to 10th level or so, the dips are attractive.
At higher levels, the dip's relative cost increases a lot.
Can't get better rage powers?
Can't get better fighter-only feats?
Ranger can't Hide in Plain Sight?
Can't have EVERYBODY Smite w/ you?
Can't get Greater Mutagen?
And for Spellcasters, it's always a non-issue. They may get 'strange' powers, but those powers spread out the PC's strength not enhance their main power. Even if they get a DC boosting ability, they've given up better spells to get...better spells (w/ fewer uses and less chance of penetrating SR).
So, if somebody wishes to MC dip, show them the cost at the higher levels of the campaign. It may shake them out of it.
And if not, it really is no sweat.