Let me start by saying that while I don't consider myself in the optimizer camp, I've come to appreciate that point of view more and more. Players want to have cool AND effective characters. I get that. I also get that you can have an optimized character who's got a solid RP background.
BUT...I've got a player I've been gaming with for about 3 years, and it just gets more and more frustrating, the attempts he makes to min-max. Notice I didn't say "optimize". He DOES do that, and he's very good at it, constantly challenging me to make encounters more intelligently. That's not what I have a problem with.
What he does is look through old 3.0 and 3.5 material and constantly harangue me to let him use it to make his character even more uber. At the very start of the latest campaign, I said "NO outside material. Pathfinder only". About two weeks in, he asked me if he can use stuff form a wizards splat book (3.0). I said "No, no outside material." He's asked me three times since then about the SAME material! He's basically ignoring what I say and hoping if he pushes long enough, I'll give.
I've messaged him that, in fact, this is getting old. I don't enjoy being ignored when I have to make a ruling on something I already stated; it's killing the fun for me. Not sure what sort of advice I expect; I know I really only have two choices. Either keep with the status quo and stick to my guns, or dump the guy and find some new gamers.
Any thoughts?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stick to your guns.
In my campaigns I clearly state what material is allowed and what is not. If someone wants to bring something in from the outside, I will look at it, but the expectation going in is that the answer will be "no."
If he is not accepting "no" the issue isn't really a game issue, it's a social interaction issue.
Don't cave. Explain that isn't the game you want to play.
He'll get it eventually.
Kick him out of the group. He doesn't want to listen, he doesn't get to play.
The problem is the precedence you set if you let him port something in. The other players might feel slighted, as they probably would have other material they would have requested as well.
I'm guessing that if his focus is so much on min-max'ing on what his character is and isn't able to do, then his focus is clearly not on "roleplaying" his character.
If this guy does bring meaningful roleplaying contributions to the campaign (and doesn't sit there and whine to the other players about all the things their character can't do) then I'd say just send him an e-mail, telling him where you are... something like: "I am starting to get unfocused and am not enjoying running the campaign as much as I used to, due to your constant requests for outside material. Please stop this, as I would prefer not to stop the campaign due to being unfocused." (Of course what you don't have to say, is by saying 'stop the campaign', you really mean 'stop the campaign for you, because I'm booting your whining butt out').
As all of us can appreciate, with gamers you meet a variety of personalities... and the whiner is a common one... heck there was even a time I probably fit that category... but at least I understood that no meant no. Its always good to try to work with the varied personalities... it is a great character building challenge you will use constantly in life :) But I do think that the time to draw the battle line is near.
Rando, the bottom line is that you have a social problem, not a game problem.
The only way to resolve this is to get the player in question to stop doing something that you have told him you don't appreciate.
There are lots of ways to try to influence people ranging from threats to bribes. But appealing to their better human nature is usually the best way.
I would try to sit down with the player and take this out of game terms entirely and make it a discussion about promoting a more socially positive environment.
"Look, what you are doing is making the game not fun for the rest of the group. It would be much better for everyone if you accepted that this is not something that I want to do. Since I am the one running the game that is interfering with my fun. If not doing this will ruin your fun, then we are at an impasse. But since my game involves more people than just you, if we can't resolve the impasse any other way, we'll have to resolve it by not inviting you to play with the group any more. I don't want that? Do you?"
Actually, he's not a "bad" role player; he spends quite a bit of time on minor details of his character, almost as much as time as min-maxing. He just has a LOT of spare time on his hands.
I've been on the whiner end myself, but even from that point of view, you have to accept the DM's ruling. I've had stuff denied to me; you rethink and move on. I doubt there's any DM who will allow everything every player wants for their character, and if there is, I don't want to be in that game!
Thanks for the opinions. I've sent him a message letting him know it needs to stop; if he doesn't take it to heart, I'll probably drop the campaign (he's one of only two players) and focus on my other group for a while. Maybe I can even be a player in someone's game, for once.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Knock 200 experience points every time he asks you. :D
The min/maxer in him will eventually kick in and he'll stop asking...
Ultradan
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.
If he's a good player with that one flaw, that's hard to deal with. Maybe come to a compromise. If he's not a good player, ask him to stop and go from there.
See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.
Thanks, good advice. I don't see how the player could feel unfulfilled in any way, considering the use he's made out of available rules and everything the character's accomplished; I'll give it some thought however.
Knock 200 experience points every time he asks you. :D
The min/maxer in him will eventually kick in and he'll stop asking...
Don't think I'd actually do this (ten years ago I might have), but it's fun to contemplate nonetheless.
|
Allowing out side material is not a bad thing. There are many things from 3.0, 3.5, and RD party material I allow in my game. They are each taken on a case by case. I do not allow hole books and what not. There are hole books iv banded mostly books they put out at the end of 3.5. Some of them are very very broken. All of this needs out in the open before the characters are made. That way every one knows what is available to them. If all the other characters where made with Pathfinder only. All characters need to be made the same way. Just let him know it's a balance problem if you let him take out side feet's. With the other players not haven the same option to do so.
I probably allow 60% of the splat feet's from 3.5. And about 75% of the RD party material for pathfinder. Dose not mean you need to. What you need to do is set the rules for character creation out before the first character is made.
There are books by 3rd party publisers that Paizo. Has no interest in doing any time soon. So they fill in well with the group. Some of the ones that stand out are Phantasia zoological Volume I: Cats, Dogs & Horses by 4 Wind games. I just like the option of having different kinds of animal companion then Dog, Small Cat, and Horse.
Sometimes the only way to get the type of game you want to play is to run it.
I'd suggest he GM a game that allows the players to use all the sources he's been asking you to allow. If it goes well and everyone has fun, then maybe he can talk someone else into GMing a game in that same style that he can then play in.
What you need to do is set the rules for character creation out before the first character is made.
Which is exactly what I did in saying "no outside material". I'm not the best at catching gaping exploit loops in the rules. I know this. So, I rely largely on the rules being a coherent, well play-tested whole. I feel Pathfinder is pretty good at that, but it wasn't written with every single Wizards book in mind.
The player in question, OTOH, is VERY competent at finding and exploiting loopholes. He does well enough with the Core rules. If I allow him to min-max using any material ever published for 3.x, I may as well shut my campaign down right now. No one else owns as much of it as he does, and no one cares so much about exploiting things that, while maybe RAW in 3.x, were never RAI, and are certainly neither in Pathfinder.
I stand by my ruling; Pathfinder rules only. I allow pretty much anything with the pathfinder logo on it, though admittedly I haven't seen much Pathfinder materials produced by 3rd Party. There's plenty of flexibility within Pathfinder to create both diverse and optimized characters. I don't see any need to look back at 3.x.
Stick to your guns, you pretty much did everything right and this guy seems to be acting like a spoiled brat throwing a tantrum.
Allowing out side material is not a bad thing.
Yes and no.
There is a lot of 3.0 / 3.5 material that is outright broken or unbalanced. Third party material also has the same rules imbalance issues.
Now, if a GM has a lot of time on their hands, yes they could consider outside material on a case-by-case basis. They can try to analyse the impact of the new material... but if they miss something or it turns out that the material they allow over powers the character, then it can ruin the campaign -- I know this, I as a GM did this and the character became far too powerful many levels later.
Some GM's just want to focus on the story and not on researching, balancing and weighing supplimental rules. Its makes a GM's job so much easier just to say "Core rules only" and then they can get on with planning the session.
Often you can give the character a special power / gift / ability, through introducing a special magic item. You can stick charges on it or limit its uses daily if you fear it could be abused. Ultimately, if it proves to be too powerful, well there's a variety of ways you can take it away from them.
|
Let me start by saying that while I don't consider myself in the optimizer camp, I've come to appreciate that point of view more and more. Players want to have cool AND effective characters. I get that. I also get that you can have an optimized character who's got a solid RP background.
BUT...I've got a player I've been gaming with for about 3 years, and it just gets more and more frustrating, the attempts he makes to min-max. Notice I didn't say "optimize". He DOES do that, and he's very good at it, constantly challenging me to make encounters more intelligently. That's not what I have a problem with.
What he does is look through old 3.0 and 3.5 material and constantly harangue me to let him use it to make his character even more uber. At the very start of the latest campaign, I said "NO outside material. Pathfinder only". About two weeks in, he asked me if he can use stuff form a wizards splat book (3.0). I said "No, no outside material." He's asked me three times since then about the SAME material! He's basically ignoring what I say and hoping if he pushes long enough, I'll give.
I've messaged him that, in fact, this is getting old. I don't enjoy being ignored when I have to make a ruling on something I already stated; it's killing the fun for me. Not sure what sort of advice I expect; I know I really only have two choices. Either keep with the status quo and stick to my guns, or dump the guy and find some new gamers.
Any thoughts?
Do not acknowledge the question. When you tell him "no" he believes there still might be a chance because you are responding to him. You simply need to ignore the question and pretend he did not ask it. If he asks you why you are ignoring him, you tell him once that you answered that question and you are not going to respond to it again. Ignore any future questions about the material and any inquires why you are ignoring him. He knows the answers.
It works well, but be certain you are polite.
I would just say "What did I say last time, and the next time you think to ask me think about the answer you got before that. From this point on that question will be ignored, and any question about outside material is always assumed to be a no, unless otherwise stated."
When he ask again pretend like you don't even hear him or hold up the piece of paper with the word "no". Better yet give him the piece of paper, and tell him to read it every time he is about to ask. If he ask anyway tell him to read the paper.
This is probably jerkish, but I would tell him to "Read the paper" with a big grin on my face.
|
The problem with allowing outside material, even on a case-by-case basis, is that it obligates all the other players, who might not want to otherwise, to look into random old books for things to improve their characters in order to keep up with the curve.
There is no obligation. The other players may perceive that they should, but there is no 'must' in that statement. 'I must' is a mistaken player's view of party balance.
|
|
See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.
This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
My say "no" was because the of constant asking. I do agree that a "why" should be discussed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What you need to do is set the rules for character creation out before the first character is made.Which is exactly what I did in saying "no outside material". I'm not the best at catching gaping exploit loops in the rules. I know this. So, I rely largely on the rules being a coherent, well play-tested whole.
You should sit the player down and explain this fact to him. Don't leave until he understands where you're coming from.
Now for a horror story.
A few years ago my friend and DM loaned my his dungeon magazines so I could run the Age of Worms adventure path.
He asked me if he could play a phycic with telekenesis from a green rhonin 3rd party book.
Trusting in his judgement, I let him play it.
It broke my game.
The class was overpowered, and I lacked the experience to counter it. After the disasterous session I gave up on DMing until now.
True story.
See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
The GM said no. That's all that matters.
The GM said no. That's all that matters.See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
No its not. The GM should allow for his players to understand why he operates the way he does. It not only improves inter-group relations, but if any of the players decides to put on the GM hat they are being educated well in advance.
|
|
The GM said no. That's all that matters.See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
You decided to grow a backbone all of a sudden?
You decided to grow a backbone all of a sudden?The GM said no. That's all that matters.See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
Yep. I finally left my gaming group.
Then again, it might just be the computer.
No its not. The GM should allow for his players to understand why he operates the way he does. It not only improves inter-group relations, but if any of the players decides to put on the GM hat they are being educated well in advance.The GM said no. That's all that matters.See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
The GM already did explain things. Several times. The player can either listen or leave.
No its not. The GM should allow for his players to understand why he operates the way he does. It not only improves inter-group relations, but if any of the players decides to put on the GM hat they are being educated well in advance.The GM said no. That's all that matters.See if you can figure out why he wants to do it first of all. If it's because he feels unfulfilled somehow, try and satisfy those issues.This.
I am saddened by all the above "just say NO" knee-jerk reactions. Taking the time to better understand what the players really want out of their RPG experience will make it more fun for everyone.
In this case it appears the GM did all that. He laid out the ground rules and said what he would accept and would not. When the player approached him he listened, then said "no" and explained why.
The issue here is not some hard-ass GM mandate. The issue here is that AFTER all the discussion and explanation the player keeps asking.
I am saddened by the knee-jerk "just say yes" reactions to the "no" that was already explained.
I did not see the part where he explained why, but if he did explain why then the GM should stick to his guns.
I know I really only have two choices. Either keep with the status quo and stick to my guns, or dump the guy and find some new gamers.
Any thoughts?
The question hasn't been whether or not to allow the outside material.
The consensus has pretty much been to explain to the guy why you feel the way you do (I am assuming that you pretty much already have). If you explain why and he still persists then you pretty much have to let him go, especially if he continues to ignore you. While I would hesitate greatly to just throw away a 3 year gaming buddy, if he is incapable of even talking it out then its probably time to let him go.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Be zen, dude.
In general, it's much easier to change your own behaviour than it is to change that of someone else. It's up to you how you react to your player. You can get angry, you can feel your authority is being challenged, or you can choose not to.
Here's how.
"Jerry's being an idiot again. Must be Tuesday."
Just respond with a brief "still no" and move on. It doesn't have to upset you that he keeps asking. He's just Jerry. It's what he does. It's like getting mad at the sky for being above the ground.
It's not about respect. It's not about authority. It's not about your skill.
So seriously, take a moment, and decide that when Jerry inevitably asks, you're not going to get upset. This isn't like getting punched in the face... it doesn't intrinsically need to hurt. Shrug your shoulders and move on.
@Anguish +1