I fully agree with you!
It seems to be just one guy, and always the same?
If that guy keeps reading the adventures you run and then complains you make changes, and doesn't shut up about it, kick him. He's obviously ruining your fun.
What he wants is to play a pen&paper videogame as you called it, but with a walkthrough. Tell him to get lost and don't look back.
It's absolutely your right as GM to make changes you think are needed/fun/whatever to any published adventure, and frankly it's damn rude to read the adventures in advance so you know whats going to happen and can prepare.
Best you make thigns clear to new players though "No you can't just rest in a dungeon after you slaughtered half its population and expect noone to stumble upon them and go looking for you" or "No you just won't feel tired 15 minutes after waking up from a 8 hour sleep and you can't sleep again for another 8 hours" etc.
a player tells you what is in a module and how it will play out? isn't it "normally" the other way around?
I will kindly direct you in the way of the thread "most evil thing a GM can do", pick 2 or 3 or ALL, and do those to that players character.
No, ... I just hope that "such" players won't ruin RPGs for another 15 years, you really got the worst there.
p.s. as you seem new to these forums, "edition war" = 99% of 4th Ed comments are frowned upon, better leave it at that, we all know what 4th is, and why we are here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That player, and others like him, are the exception, not the rule. Any player who tells the DM how the adventure is supposed to go is missing the entire point of the game, and has no place in a roleplaying game.
I hope that didn't discolor your opinion of modern gaming in general. It certainly has changed over the years, but don't let one bad apple spoil the bunch.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't let back-seat drivers rattle your confidence. Unless you're running PFS (or other league) scenarios, you're under no obligation to ref a module as written. I can think of a few pretty good reasons NOT to. Anyway, if I had a player who had been metagaming so hard as to actually read the modules and gripe about it afterward, I'd do whatever I could to mess with their head on general principle.
You might find, as I did, that since the advent of 3e-3.5e-4e some players have a real sense of entitlement. I've encountered one or two at the gaming table though it seems they mostly show up online. Don't let that throw you; just find some players who respect the preparation, organization and hard work it takes to ref a fun game.
Zo
Unfortunately, yes.
Just take a look around even these forums. You'll see RAW (rules as written) arguments for just about everything, even when common sense dictates that RAW is wrong.
It seems a lot of people have forgotten about the other golden rule that "The GM is always right."
Don't fret too much though! Mostly it's D&D/Pathfinder that you'll find these RAW junkies. Other RPGs don't have the issue quite as much (in fact, the newest edition of Legend of the Five Rings is being heavily promoted as "L5R Your Way." In other words, here's what we intended, but whatever you want to rule is technically correct! It's such a huge breath of fresh air in the gaming community!)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is this what playing rpg's has come to ? Not so much as an rpg but just a fancy boardgame as it appears he thinks it should be ? What has happened to the creative license that I learned to run games with ? Part of being a dm/gm is keeping the flow going and adjusting on the fly if need be, changing the story arc as characters act/react in the game world, the so-called outside of the outside of the box as my mentors back then would say. Has the way 4th plays really tainted noobs as to how rpg's in my opinion are meant to be played?
I'm with you on the argument as a whole. To run something "as written" would demand that the players act as expected, which they usually don't and shouldn't do either. The text is a framework to aid the game not to dictate how is to play out. I find that Pathfinder is the most fun when you ignore the rules.
But i must object to the last paragraph. You're talking about one guy, or at least that's the sense i'm getting. One guy that is obviously a "problem player". I don't think that RPGs has come to his standard. There are plenty of players that don't expect the same, or even want the same.
I also don't think that 4E has "really tainted noobs as to how rpg's in my opinion are meant to be played". 4E is a fine game in which roleplay can exist and thrive. Just like Pathfinder and a ton of other RPGs.
|
Unfortunately, yes.
Just take a look around even these forums. You'll see RAW (rules as written) arguments for just about everything, even when common sense dictates that RAW is wrong.
It seems a lot of people have forgotten about the other golden rule that "The GM is always right."
Don't fret too much though! Mostly it's D&D/Pathfinder that you'll find these RAW junkies. Other RPGs don't have the issue quite as much (in fact, the newest edition of Legend of the Five Rings is being heavily promoted as "L5R Your Way." In other words, here's what we intended, but whatever you want to rule is technically correct! It's such a huge breath of fresh air in the gaming community!)
Ehrm... this is not something related to RAW vs RAI, despite the title.
|
|
I am done dealing with him and if he shows and starts again with the "as written" I will tell him to leave if he doesn't like the way I run games as I've got a waiting list that keeps growing and growing of people asking me if spots have opened up.
There's your solution right there. The people waiting in line will appreciate a chance to take his place. I think you're long past the point of that, really, and kicking him to the curb *before* the next session (Via phone call or something. Not telling him until he shows up would be rude!), and calling someone on the waiting list to take his spot, seems quite reasonable.
There have always been rules-lawyers and the like, all the way back in 1st edition. You can find them in poker and chess and football and every other sort of game, it's hardly unique to D&D, or 'edition X' D&D. Some people are just bad sports, or get a little disgruntled when the perfect plan they've concocted in their head doesn't survive contact with the enemy. (Self included. I'm not immune to getting annoyed when things I've spent hours or even *months* on for a game just arbitrarily don't work.)
Yeah, I played in a pathfinder module game with such a player. So it is Korvosa, and we are attacked by some type of medium-sized pie monster at low levels. We didn't know much about it, apart from its delectable taste but someone had summoned it and it was a problem to deal with.
So this extremely angry and obnoxious player starts asking "is that in the adventure path?" He keeps asking this, and no the pie doesn't kill the party, we triumph (mmm pie). Later on, the dm changes a few more things, makes the plot less predictable, gives us some abberation foes, odd npcs. This guy keeps asking is it in the adventure path, is it in the books?
You try, as another player to explain the game is whatever the dm makes and introduces, but some people, they just don't get it. I know that guy reads the modules and of course, he wants it to go as predictable and as authentically as possible.
Me, I just want some pie. The dm, he just refused to defend himself, his eyes were very judgmental though.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
You have 7 people in your group and one is reading the adventure and then complaining that you are running it wrong?
Kick him out. There is no reason to accept someone who is effectivly cheating. Even if you couldn't replace him you would have 6 people left.
Regarding your experiences. I ran some games in game shops recently and some of these kids had huge three ring binders of crap they downloaded off torrent. None of them actually bought the rules while we sat in our local game store! So I required that you had to own or have physical possession of any rule books you wanted to use. Oh how they complained. But relented after I lectured them on not supporting the game store they were playing in.
They hated all my house rules but I refused to take any crap about it. I can ran my game how I saw fit. Once they played about a dozen sessions they mostly fell in line.
So my advice is to stick to your guns. Run the game you want to play. Eventually, the players will conform.
Don't let back-seat drivers rattle your confidence. Unless you're running PFS (or other league) scenarios, you're under no obligation to ref a module as written. I can think of a few pretty good reasons NOT to. Anyway, if I had a player who had been metagaming so hard as to actually read the modules and gripe about it afterward, I'd do whatever I could to mess with their head on general principle.
You might find, as I did, that since the advent of 3e-3.5e-4e some players have a real sense of entitlement. I've encountered one or two at the gaming table though it seems they mostly show up online. Don't let that throw you; just find some players who respect the preparation, organization and hard work it takes to ref a fun game.
Zo
Online gamers that then come to dnd, and people who are incredibly entitled and don't like a real challenge as a part of their personality.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would kindly advise this player that he is making the game less fun for you and the other players and that he has been replaced by someone else who wants to play.
If players go take a look at the module and then say that you are not running it "as written," here is a tactful response:
"I didn't know that you have played through or run this module before. kudos to you for spotting that it was the basis for this part of the game. I used that module as a springboard from which to launch my campaign ideas and I have made some much needed modifications to fit the needs of the game and campaign. As I'm sure you can understand, I use written adventure material as a time saving/life balance resource, but I make changes to them to keep them fresh and fit the campaign."
If this is really becoming a problem at the game table, print out a standard reply on little slips of paper and just hand one to a player anytime they say that this isn't rules as written. Over time it may even become a game table joke for your group.
The game that I run is also running into a bit of the 15 minute workday issue. I have a mix of people who are new and have been playing for a while. I have been very lax on the 15 minute workday, but last session one of the party magic users posited that he wants to rest, the rest of the party wants to continue on. It looks like the 15 minute workday may come to an end for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get it. why play if there's no challenge, or if you know the story already? you might as well go and read a book.
And people wonder why I run all my campaigns from my own custom-built campaign world, use my own custom-built monsters, have my own custom-built magic spells and effects.
However, if I was running a module I would start the campaign saying "I am using a published module as a GUIDE because I've been too busy with real life to create my own world. But I will deviate from that module whenever I feel like it, I will modify treasure, encounters, goals, NPCS, plot and story line. So even if you find out what module I am using, it won't do you much good to try to read through it to gain any sort of advantage, and will just make me laugh if you complain that I'm not sticking to it."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There have always been rules-lawyers and the like, all the way back in 1st edition.
But most of the stuff the original poster is hearing complaints about (e.g. PCs should be magically protected while they rest, monsters in another room shouldn't be able to join in the battle, the GM shouldn't be able to adjust difficulty levels, etc.) has nothing to do with rules lawyering or things being "as written".
It's just whining about how the game is too hard.
Is this what playing rpg's has come to ? Not so much as an rpg but just a fancy boardgame as it appears he thinks it should be ? What has happened to the creative license that I learned to run games with ?
Most of those complaints I've never heard before in any edition of the game, so I don't think it's a matter of things changing over time. I think you just have one player with a screwy idea of how tabletop RPGs work.
Having said that, I personally have been guilty of criticizing a GM for putting in an encounter that I thought was too hard compared to the "original" encounter from the module. I'm ashamed to admit it, but it's true. However, I probably would have done the same 20-25 years ago, so it's not a matter of edition in my case.
Plain and simple reading a head in a module is cheating of the worst kind. Next campaign you run make it clear any cheating will be dealt with harshly,
I was started in a AD&D gaming system where even opening a door could kill you. my DM was a cold hearted monster who would throw in red dragons. just because our ECL was 7 didn't mean we followed the chart.
so if you suspect a player is reading a head have the monsters cr boosted by +5 and only attack him and then do awful things to his corpse.....Awful things.
When I read the title, I thought this was gonna be a RAW discussion. That's not even the case, rather you're talking about players who clearly have an idea about how they want the game to be run.
That's not how it works at all.
Players and DMs should work together, so that everyone is getting the game that they want. But in the end, if the module gets tweaked or if baddies end up being a little tougher tonight, that's the DM's call to make. I'm no good with people so I have no idea how to tell this one guy to eff off. Well I 'spose you could just say that, now couldn't you?
When our current DM stepped up to the plate, one of the first things he asked us was how we felt about random encounters and safe places to lay up. He wanted to make sure everyone was okay with adventuring in a world where not every encounter was guaranteed to be level-appropriate and that we were aware that you sometimes have to run and hide.
Maybe that's what you need to do. Maybe you need to sit 'em down and explain that you run a dynamic setting and that adventuring is a good way to get dead if you're not careful or lucky (or both.)
|
Plain and simple reading a head in a module is cheating of the worst kind. Next campaign you run make it clear any cheating will be dealt with harshly,
I was started in a AD&D gaming system where even opening a door could kill you. my DM was a cold hearted monster who would throw in red dragons. just because our ECL was 7 didn't mean we followed the chart.
so if you suspect a player is reading a head have the monsters cr boosted by +5 and only attack him and then do awful things to his corpse.....Awful things.
Guilty and proud. I do not care what level players are when decorating my world. I do when balancing encounters but not decoration.
I would have them run across a rampaging Bulette at level 2 if I thought it added to the story. Just because you can see it does not mean I intend for you to fight it. The crossing guard is not meant to be an appropriate level encounter for the jaywalking kid about to get hit by a bus. It is meant as a deterrent. The world, whether earth, Oerth, Faerun, Galorian, etc should not be assumed to be an ECL=CR world.
Slight derail but back on track. OP- Kick him. Not even the Oracles of Delphi knew if a burrow in Scotland was supposed to be a pony.
I've never, not once, to the best of recollection, ever run a module as it was written. That includes ones that I've written, as well as one I ran back when I participated in the RPGA.
I can't think of a group i've played with or dm'd for that wouldn't laugh that guy out of the room. The DM can do whatever he wants with the adventure, it's just a guideline.
The only time I can think it might even matter, and I only say might because i've never done it myself, is if it's part of some official pathfinder function. Maybe there are stricter operating guidelines if it's official.
But even then, I can't imagine they wouldn't give a GM more freedom. GM's are like the tanks and healers of an mmo, while the players are dps. At least in my area.
And I mean that in a desire to do those roles, not skillset, ego, or anything else.
I also thought from the title the OP was going to be talking about rules, but that isnt the case, it's about adventures. And honestly, no one in my group would ever think to question what happens in a game even when im using a module or ap, because thats just my starting point. I improvise alot, because I have no idea what my players are going to do, and no adventure writer will ever have a case for everything.
If a player said 'thats not how it's written' I would kindly explain to them that I am the dm, and while they control their players I control everything else. And to just assume that if I say something that isnt written in am module, they should just assume an invisible pen controlled by my imagination is constantly making little changes to the adventure, because it is, both based on my ideas as they come up and based on what the players do.
I think that you should explain this players what's a RPG :) Seriously, it's not a joke. Or stop using modules, so they can't tell you this.
Tell the player in question that you've used the adventure/module as a foundation, but you've elaborated upon it in order for the adventure to make more sense to you and to adapt to the unique dynamics of your group. GMs are supposed to change their plans in response to situations that arise during play. That's what a good GM does. Feel free to explain this, and if the player still has issues with this perhaps he should find another game.
There have been people like this around since the first published adventures hit the market. I think we hear about them more now because we're a lot better connected and have an easier time sharing our problem player experiences.
I think there may be some new trends suggesting a greater sense of player entitlement on some issues - in all RPGs and not just D&D and that may increase the severity of this particular case. But I don't think this particular strain of it is new.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a way for him to play an adventure as written.
Tell him to roll up a character that is featured in his favorite fantasy series (TV or book) and to watch/read that series whilst role-playing the character's lines and actions, as they are portrayed in the series. Now he has an adventure that follows what is written, I guarantee it!* And he won't be annoyed by a GM's actions, because he won't even need one!
Heck, I bet he'll really love not having to worry about building his character at all, since every encounter is precisely tailored to provide the perfect amount of challenge for his character.
*shows that are based on books are excluded from this guarantee.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
new trends suggesting a greater sense of player entitlement on some issues
God but I hate that phrase and all the negativity that it conjures forth. This isn't about players feeling entitled, rather it's about them having one idea of how the game should be run while the DM is operating under a different set of expectations.
What needs to happen is they all need to talk about what's working and not working and then come to an understanding. That's not entitlement, it's called working it out.
To the OP:
Just do what some friends and I do: change things in the adventure and throw the player off track. Change the name of a NPC. Change some of the monsters. Move around some of the hallways in a dungeon. Make it face South instead of East.
We do this, so that multiple DM's can potentially run the same adventure and it be a different experience each time. I do it because I can't be bothered with memorizing every single specific detail, and just use published adventures as a lengthy book of suggestions. I twist and contort everything I run so that it fits my group's style and pace better.
This would be especially fun when doing an adventure this problem player is confident he knows the solutions to. Add NPC's, take others away, make the dungeon map a mirror image and run it backwards. Go nuts!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have your favorite Gargantuan dragon drop a ship on his character's noodle from 200 feet up. It's the only way to be sure.
If you need to be REALLY sure, it's a pirate ship with a reasonably full powder magazine, cannon and of course screaming pirates. All the collateral damage should ensure a fiery, messy and thorough demise. ^__^
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The OP is reminding me of all the reasons I insist on interviewing players personally before they're invited to the table. My free time is extremely valuable to me. I'd sooner have no players, and no game, rather than spend hours interacting with people I don't particularly like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, Charles Bronson is way cooler than those game dorks you hang out with!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer Clint Eastwood.
Shut up, you guys, or you'll chase away the GOOD players, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that's a line in some movie. "He's a good man -- but he's not a particularly good person."
Youy make "Flying spiders" it is a custom creature you design to completely destroy you player and when he complains you just say something about the Aura or energy of you character has attracted the creature.
this idea actually comes form a fun game I was dming it was castle ravenloft and the whole party was basically magic users. so I made magic addicted flying spiders. who would see magic users has a burning beacons and attempt to grapple the. then once they were pinned they would lay eggs in there face that would hatch to a spider swarm. it is still talked about today. I didn't do it to be a jerk but it works in this situation, a paladin slaying neutral construct that lays eggs in the paladins face demonic eggs.
Thats not how it was written?
Pffft the 'module as written' is like the little instruction manual that comes in stuff from Ikea. They are simply the 'manufacturers recommendations'.
How you actually build it is up to you :)
|
|
I like these types of threads because a lot of times gms dont have anyone to ask when players are railroading them.If he doesnt like your version hes free to find another dm that runs one his way.Let one player railroad you into doing things will eventually cost you your group as it will stop being fun for them.
"Part of being a dm/gm is keeping the flow going and adjusting on the fly if need be, changing the story arc as characters act/react in the game world, the so-called outside of the outside of the box as my mentors back then would say. Has the way 4th plays really tainted noobs as to how rpg's in my opinion are meant to be played ?"
So this is the new edition wars thread. :D
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a number of rules in place in my campaign to deal with such issues.
One rule is that no one is to read through any module or AP being run by me or be immediately ejected from the game for the duration of that adventure or AP. Now I don't doubt that sometime in the 37 years I have been DMing that someone in my group has secretly read into a module that I have been running but they certainly, very cleverly, haven't made me aware of it.... except once.
A player decided to argue with me about something and basically, short of confessing he had the module, revealed so much of what was going on and how I deviated from it ... that only an idiot would conclude he had not read the module. For which he got kicked to the curb for the duration of that aspect of the campaign.
I also have rules about how disputes are resolved in regard to rules or campaign issues. You can argue why such and such up to point then I make a decision and the matter is closed ... as in don't keep arguing the point or bringing it up session after session. Kicked to the curb for those how wish to push on that point.
By your own admission, you have a 'waiting list' of people who want to get into your game, therefore, the way ahead for you is clear.
Tell your group that you will not tolerate anyone acting on pre-knowledge gained by reading the module. Next person who mentions or even hints of something about the plot, argues that what you did is not in the module, or even tries anything that smacks of him/her knowing what is coming up get to do a timeout for the rest of the adventure.
Where upon, you address the player in question, and tell him that what has been happening ends right now and if he doesn't like it, there is the door...
Life is too short to deal with people with egos and issues at the table.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm very up-front about changing modules. When I ran "Skinsaw Murders" with my group, I think 2/3 of them had played it before -- but it sure turned out a lot different that next time! One of the players even congratulated me on changing it enough that it was hard to identify as the same advanture, so it was fresh and interesting the second time through.
Even if I don't change things much, my players tend to be very good about humoring me: houstonderek once admitted "I ran this adventure a few months ago, but no worries -- I can turn that part of my brain off for now." The game still went well.
I think that one of the reasons this works is that I let the characters' actions and decisions drive the story, instead of the other way around. I've run one adventure I wrote with 3 different groups now, and it ran like a completely different adventure each time -- even I had no idea how things would turn out. That's half the fun for me as a DM -- to see where the players will take the ball that's been hiked to them and run with it.