| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to start off by saying I really just prefer playing the game to GMing...I've tried to take my stupid useless encyclopedic knowledge and the unconscious ability to absorb information, rules, and the like and use it as springboard to run games, and it's worked REALLY WELL, but every now and then I want to stop thinking about a whole world and play a character, but, ugh, there's some serious frustration issues.
You see, the group I'm in, our GM is great. He comes up with good stories, can control a table really well, and interjects some decent combat (although he is heavy handed with NPCs and used to Deus Ex us before I started complaining a lot about not being challenged). He also knows the rules very well, but not perfectly, and unfortunately I know it quite more thoroughly than he does.
We're all friends, meet regularly, and have a great time when we do, but man alive do I get bloody frustrated when I hit a wall with him on rules.
For example, the other day, he was unaware that in PF you can sneak attack golems. I didn't mean to push on it, but we were fighting a big one, and I was playing a rogue, and blast it, I sure as heck wouldn't have ever played a rogue if I couldn't sneak attack the stuff you can in PF that you couldn't before.
It's just one example. Trust me, I could go into a few dozens. I'll just say this; I know the rules a heck of a lot better than most people, because I'm mesmerized by the complexity of the system, and really just enjoy reading it. I'm one of those people who just reads something once and it sticks to the back of my head forever to pull out at an obscure time.
Unfortunately I keep automatically correcting people's rules problems before I can stop myself...you know, you just spit it out before you realize it and then go "oops, sorry, nevermind...well, yeah...I mean, technically you CAN draw multiple hits that way as you moved through several squares, and he has combat reflexes...but...you know what nevermind."
When I don't, I'm sitting there miserable because it's just...not right. I wonder if anyone else out there knows what I mean. Anyone the annoying kid when they were in school that corrected the teacher with a smug face? Yeah...nobody likes that guy. But sometimes that guy wants to break the habit, and it's pretty hard when it's automatically ingrained in you.
Especially because I know most people in games hate that guy. It's also pretty hard to immerse yourself in the game and just ENJOY it like you used to when you ARE that guy.
I've tried playing other systems of which I don't know but it's usually a couple days before I know the whole thing inside out, and find little rules exploits, and how I long for the days when I first tried RPGs and had fun with a character. For some reason I have this innate need to make the best version of whatever idea I come up with, and that leads to a thorough read of the books involved, and, well, it's not like before I realize my character is sub-optimal, I modify it, and change everything. I just don't want to -do- that anymore.
I don't want to break into a rolls vs. roles debate...I want to know how you exit the realm of rolls and leave it behind, before their black tentacles pull you back into the dark realm and leave you staring at character concepts asking "A dwarven wizard? What were you thinking?" yet again. How do you personally just let immersion hit and say to hell if the GM is fudging the rolls or doesn't know the book as well as you do.
I mean it's not like a video game where you have a set challenge level; most GMs, especially ours, adjust to party strengths, so logically "optimizing" seems pretty useless when you think about it. But yet I persist.
Has anyone crossed the line?
How did you leave it behind?
|
I just joined a home play with some people I met at PFS, and I enjoyed the first night. When my brother's girlfriend said she would join, there was one thing that both of them wanted me to know: "DON"T HELP WITH OUR CHARACTERS! I know that Acid Splash is cheaper than a Light Crossbow, is easier to hit with than the Crossbow, and does an almost equal amount of damage, but it's my character!" I managed to convince her that her bloodline should not come from a benevolent evil dragon and should be a Copper dragon instead of a Black, but I digress.
Yeah, that was yesterday. Other than that, I enjoyed it. How you may ask? Well...
Make the exact opposite that a character is supposed to do. It evens it up.
My character was a Summoner. The Eidolon was a healer that has 15 for UMD, and the person has 14 HP and does 1d8+4 with the mace. I did a good job with making the exact opposite of where they are supposed to do.
I can't help you with Rules Lawyer-ing your way through a Session. Try distracting yourself with something else, like drinking, eating, looking through the rules, or even coming up with other characters.I came up with an Eidolon that looks like a Pirate Ship once. I really want to see how it does in real life...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My advice is to smile and shut up. If someone is nice enough to run a game for you, shut up and play by the DM's rules. If you don't like it, just run the next adventure. Easy peasy.
If the people at the table (i.e. DM n'the other players) aren't being annoyed by it- then speak up and don't feel bad about it.
If they want you to be quit and stop interrupting. then be quiet and stop interrupting.
There is no good/bad/right/wrong answer.. just talk to your group about it and see what they think and act accordingly.
-S
My advice is to smile and shut up. If someone is nice enough to run a game for you, shut up and play by the DM's rules. If you don't like it, just run the next adventure. Easy peasy.
Well holy monkey feces why didn't I think of that? Here I am writing out a multiple paragraph thread asking hows and I could've just considered a why which I'm already attempting to do with little success. Man, that's genius in its elegant simplicity.
Now, sarcastic trolling response aside, onto the genuine suggestions, comments, etc.
Jez, its not that the rules aren't being followed altogether, its that many are but those that aren't seem to be a gimping point when they come up.
Zakur that's what happens to me. I make a neco, he rocks, necros are now gimped. I male a rogue, he outshines all, sneak attack now sucks. Sometimes I feel if I'd make a fighter heavy armor and martial weapons would be banned. I'm kidding, but you get the point.
Tirq, I suppose I could try that, but then why would I be gaming instead of doing said other activity in the first place?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry about being a prick, but its like you read the title, judged me and spit out a canned result. I WANT to stop. Im trying. Im asking for tips on how otheds who DON'T have the "ah screw it" personality types how they did it. Its like when someone asks "how do I make a good controller? I want to be a witch," and someone replies "by playing a wizard."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Get Found! Story:
(Adapted from my ale-addled mind.)
The story comes from Robert Fulghum (of All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarden).
Robert was watching children in his neighborhood play a game of hide and seek. Recalling his youth, Robert remembers a kid who was *really* good at hiding, so good, no one could find him. The kid hid so well that eventually the rest of kids gave up trying to find him.
Seeing the kids playing outside, Robert saw one kid hiding in a great spot, no one would find him. In fact, it looked like the other kids were about to give up trying to find him. (yeah yeah yeah...maybe this was before the time of "olly olly oxen free free free" rules were put into the official Hide&Seek players guide v1.2)
Recalling his experience from his youth, Robert yelled to the kid to "Get Found!"
The point of PFS *isn't* about hiding so no one can ever find you or having an AC so high that no one can hit you or doing 100 DPR or casting a persistent heightened Stone to Flesh with a DC of 7 gazillion...
...it's about interactions in a social environment playing a common pastime.
In fact, PFS is more like a game of Sardines than Hide & Seek. I'd rather be hiding, laughing, giggling, and trying to keep quiet with a bunch of friends than hiding alone.
If you're not building your character to both interact, help, and rely on other players, you may be playing wrong.
Get Found, you!
-Pain
Unfortunately I keep automatically correcting people's rules problems before I can stop myself...you know, you just spit it out before you realize it and then go "oops, sorry, nevermind...well, yeah...I mean, technically you CAN draw multiple hits that way as you moved through several squares, and he has combat reflexes...but...you know what nevermind."
This is me. thegreenteagamer, I'm in the same boat as you. It's an almost uncontrollable impulse to correct whatever mistake has been made or whatever misunderstanding comes up. What really sucks about it is that half the time the other person is dead set that they are right, and they take the correction as an attack. Anecdote: I play with a GM that is convinced that 1) swarms take 50% damage from area of effects (instead of +50%) and 2) fractions are always rounded up. I've tried to bring it up multiple times (avoiding the issue during sessions), but the GM is dead set against it.
I have found that forcing the issue when you run, then quoting the rulebook verbatim when it's questioned can resolve the issue, at least for the short term, but this can be considered antagonistic. However, if even this doesn't work, a reevaluation of whether or not that person is worth playing with is warranted.
It really depends on the group dynamic, though. If the group in general acknowledges whatever rule is in question, the mistake usually ends up corrected.
tl;dr: I feel you, bro. Just do what you can.
I almost never correct the GM. On occasion I'll blurt out something but before I get the whole sentence out, my automatic "you're the GM" disclaimer comes out.
If I have a real issue with what happened I'll take it up with the GM outside of the game, usually over email.
Usually if I start to say something the GM will say "what?" Even then I'll usually say "nothing, I'll email you later" unless I think it's something really potentially troublesome to the other players characters.
To me its all about first principles. The first principle of gaming is "we're here as a group to have fun." Since I have faith that the folks who GM for my games are sincerely trying to do their best to make the game fun for the group, I just generally let them do what they think works and address later if I still care enough about it hours after the gaming session is over.
We do have a real rules lawyer in our group who takes his role as the "rules expert" very seriously and who will pull out the rule book every time he feels a rule is being violated.
I am working on him to get him to chill a bit.
Some fairly simple solutions: Intentionally make some 'poor' decisions when building characters. Give your wizard a 15 Intelligence and put the 18 into Charisma. Give your rogue Weapon Proficiency (halberd). Take Step Up (;P). Maybe even create a plain poorly optimized or jack-of-all-trades PC.
If you create weaker characters, you may be able to learn how to enjoy them, and the GM won't have to nerf them.
Now, that may not help too much. And the fact is that the GM's decision to gimp your necromancer and rogue was simply unfair. Unless you exploited something the designers probably didn't intend, your characters were legitimately created. If the GM's encounters are getting owned, he simply needs to create different encounters.
I suggest you talk to him about that. Tell him it makes you feel defensive when he alters how your characters work.
I'm a bit tired, so this post may not be very lucid. The point of this thread isn't the GM's changes, but your need to optimize and rules lawyer. That's what your post talks about. So let's stick to that.
There isn't much you can do about rules lawyering. If you see a mistake being made, point it out. Rules are made to be followed. If it's a house rule, though, then it is also made to be followed, and you need to be able to accept that.
I already offered the only real solution to optimization: don't optimize. Make flawed characters. If it helps, try to create your character with roleplaying in mind, and only think about classes and suchwhat afterward. Try mixing up the order of stats designing--assign abilities before classes, based on your ideas. Pick equipment before everything else. In other words, just do things in a nonstandard way.
Okay, hope that made sense. Time to catch some 'z's. Gotta catch 'em all...
FAKE FAKE FAAAAAAAAKE EDIT: Okay, hang on. One more thing. Annoying your fellow players is bad. Saying, "actually, they get multiple AoOs against you" annoys them. But it's also bad to drive yourself crazy. You know all this, that's why you're making the thread--you don't want to have to hold it in all the time, but you also don't want to annoy your friends.
I think the best response is to act just as surprised as the others. Instead of talking like you're the only sane gamer in the room, who wisely remembered the rules on flanking, say it as if you aren't sure, then look it up.
Or maybe that's a bad idea that'll just seem patronizing. ;-;
Well, just never make a stink about it. Mention it once at most, without looking it up. If they think they're right, don't get out the book and prove them wrong. Do that later.
The only exception is when it's important. If a misinterpreted rule means death for a character or the like, get out the book, and be quick about it! Nothing's more embarrassing to a GM than finding out later he killed a PC by mistake. Believe me, I know.
OKAY SLEEP TIME.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to say that some character optimization is bad, but as a bit of therapy to counteract concerns of extreme character optimization, try this: Roll up a character using the "classic" straight 3d6 method beginning with Strength and progressing straight through to Charisma, then imagine who that character is and build from that concept.
Now play a character using the straight 3d6 method, but to avoid totally hopeless characters use the rerolling rules found on page 8 of the Player's Handbook. These rules were not transferred to Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Addressing the role playing vs optimization question, I have found that the two are orthogonal, not mutually exclusive.
My answer has been to build the concept first. Then optimize the concept. The trick is to come up with concepts that encourage the role play aspect more than the roll play aspect.
I try to do this by building truly interesting characters that I care about as I would care about a character in a fiction novel. Build a backstory before you start building your mechanics. Make the mechanics fit the backstory. Then optimize the heck out of it. If you do it "right" then you'll be optimizing non-optimal builds so that you end up with very playable characters doing unusual things.
I talk about my archer druid a lot. Archer druids are decidedly non-optimal, but I've done everything I can to make her as good an archer as I can. The result is a surprisingly functional archer who is also a druid and has a very interesting backstory and personality. I look forward to playing her not because she's going to open some serious cans of whoopass every encounter, but because she will offer extremely interesting role playing situations, AND she contributes her share in combat.
My witch is a flamboyant cajun voodoo master. His second best stat is charisma. He's a gambler, womanizer and very, very ambitious. He makes plans. He conspires with his comrades and seeks out opportunities to make deals and manipulate townsfolk to his advantage. He holds grudges. He builds alliances. The vast majority of his game play has nothing whatsoever to do with his combat abilities. Combat is a secondary thing, and he deliberately avoids combat if possible. He's also a drug addict and a narcissist. And if there's one thing he loves, it's a good party.
Now, when it comes to combat, I have done what I can with what he has left to optimize combat as much as possible, but optimizing his scheme-hatching comes first.
TL:DR version... when it comes to role playing vs roll playing, in my experience it's all about the character development. Create interesting characters with a strong backstory, powerful personalities and long-term plans, and role playing happens more or less automatically.
Reading his posts, the OP doesn't mention power gaming as a problem, he is using it as a comparative, so the advice about weakening a character seems misguided. It seems more like the inability to let a misplay of the rules go, regardless of the consequences. Whether a player was saved or killed (or whatever example) because a rule was misplayed doesn't matter; what matters is that the rule wasn't followed exactly. For me, it's almost a neurotic compulsion that I play the rule a close to exactly correct as possible. It's something that even I find somewhat annoying about myself, but it's something I feel I MUST do. (I hope I'm not derailing the OP's thread too much.)
|
I know what you are taking about. I have come to accept that I will not mix well with every table. I find most people do not care about the details. If interjecting those details adds too much time that can be a problem when time is important. Especially in a timed setting like Path Finder Society Organized Play.
In home campaigns, I choose not to play in groups who would rather play fast and loose. They may have fun doing it that way but I do not. Why should I ruin their fun or let myself get frustrated? I have decided not to play with home groups who are not willing to take the time to check the right way. In a home campaign, you can pick up next game where ever you left off, so no big deal about losing some time.
In society play, time is very important. I have tried to keep silent more and more often when I(as a player) see other players flub. At least I do not think they are trying to cheat. I sincerly believe they are mistakes. I make mistakes also. It may sound like I am compromising my values. The way I see it, I am adapting to the field. As good as a home campaign can be, organized play also has great value to me.
When I gm organized play, I try to enforce everything I know. This can teach players the correct rule and lead them to avoid making those mistakes again when you play alongside them. Hearing this from a gm seems to be more respected and better accepted than from anoter player. Leading by example seems to work best by a sargent, not a private. Too many people do not like being corrected. They don't care about learning how to do things right, especially when it makes them look bad in front of others.
If I am unsure, I am more often trying to stop looking up the rules and changing to stating that I am unsure and will hand wave it. Before moving on, I ask if the players want to interject. Almost always, people are happy to move on. Doing this several times an eveing can save a a great deal of time. That may be the difference between finishing a timed event with full gold, xp, favors, ect or getting boned out of somthing or having to stay 6 hours for what should be a 4 hour event. That can be really big when gaming on a school/work night.
I somtimes disagree with a judge. Come to think about it, I rarely recall an organized play game where I disagreed about a rule and one of the players was killed. Not such a big deal then. I recall many more times where I disagreed with rules in home games and either the problem resulted in enough deaths to end the campaign or enough argument reversed a pc death. I scratch my head at how odd that is.
I really admire gms who will listen to a disagreement. I also feel, it may somtimes it is better to finish it after the combat or game. It may be hard to accept the professional advice in the books that say don't bother to argue because you will bge right and wong the same amount of time. I find that very hard to accept because I am right way more often. Think of it, most people do not care about the fine details, they just want to play forward and do what they want without ever looking it up. I also try to realize I do not have as tight a grasp on PF as I did with 3.5. Switching from 3.5 to PF BETA and the PF hardcover in less then 6 montyhs really did a number on me. I dropped from being right at least 90% of the time down to about 70%. I like to think that I have gotten back up to around 80% but even then, I am still wrong 20% of the time myself.
As much as I hate to suggest that we segment the fanbase more. Somtimes we need to adapt or find another group. This may be how fast and loose you are with the rules compared to going at a slug pace getting everything right. It is the same as needing to find a group that does not bore you with too much roll or role style.
I am that guy also. I feel your pain bro, but most people I have played with don't mind being correct, and if I am wrong I don't mind being corrected. I guess what am saying is that sometimes it is ok to be "that guy".
|
@thegreenteagamer
Maybe you should give your friend a game or two free of your authority, sometimes people react negative on others bossy behavior. If he does mistake, let him. I do same thing all the time to my friends, but I cant control myself when I see common starting mistakes or such. My patience is also limited for people who don't listen to me, especially people who think they know something which they didn't even bother to read or study.
Yet I am still new to PF, maybe I am just being arogant and egocentric, who knows.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know how you run NPCs without letting your DM knowledge influence how they act, basing their actions off the NPCs knowledge and views?
Do that with your rules knowledge. Compartmentalize your mind, putting that knowledge outside of your 'player knowledge' in your 'DM knowledge' compartment.
Any time you see something being run incorrectly, ask yourself 'Is it worth stopping the game to correct this?'
More often than not, I find the answer is 'no'.
I am also this guy. I played DDM competitively for several years, and part of the process of learning that game meant learning all the differences between it and regular D&D. For a while it made me and the other guy who played with me the primer experts in the group.
As with any issue, talking to the group is usually a good start. Like asking the GM between sessions if it's okay if you can point out rules clarifications as long as you can do it within X amount of time.
A second bit is a little bit of phraseology to add to your clarifications, point out that what you're saying is RAW, but you're fine with a different ruling from the GM. Then, after the session is over, you can revisit it, perhaps bringing a little more ammunition to your case (cross-referencing, faq posts, etc), saying the reason you prefer the RAW rule, but be willing to compromise and perhaps ask to modify your character if it's concept breaking.
The Gamemastery Guide suggests that players who know the rules really well help their fellow players and GM to learn. Perhaps if you hold in the blurt until later, except when it's really crucial? You might have better success holding back if you know you're going to say it later.
For example when I first started GMing I had one player who tended to blurt rules, and would assume I had gotten something wrong in every situation. When he blurted, it really annoyed me because he did it constantly. However he would once in a while (very rarely) say things between sessions instead. Those moments I really appreciated, as it helped me learn.
At least in my experience the only issue I've had with someone correcting me on rules is when they do it in the middle of gameplay and it's not extremely important. That just breaks the flow. If they can hold off until afterwards it's far less annoying, and can actually be helpful.
You know how you run NPCs without letting your DM knowledge influence how they act, basing their actions off the NPCs knowledge and views?Do that with your rules knowledge. Compartmentalize your mind, putting that knowledge outside of your 'player knowledge' in your 'DM knowledge' compartment.
Any time you see something being run incorrectly, ask yourself 'Is it worth stopping the game to correct this?'
More often than not, I find the answer is 'no'.
I'd say TOZ hit it on it's little head. Evil man TOZ :) One other thing, when I play it's the DMs / GMs game. Not mine. If his rules are different. That's fine. They're still the rules. Unless you're playing a PFS game which requires a strict PF rules set. Just let them handle the world and you handle your chaacter. I DM pretty much exclusively these days but when I play I want to let go of the controls and experience what's happening.
|
|
I mean, technically you CAN draw multiple hits that way as you moved through several squares, and he has combat reflexes
Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.
So technically you cannot make more than one AoO on an opponent due to movement out of threatened squares, even with Combat Refelxes. Just wanted to point that out.
Wow let me just say how much I sympathize with you. While the previous argument of the gm is letting you win is valid, we want to win on OUR terms, call it selfish call it what you will, but if I know the rules say I can do X, im freaking doing X if I want to, if the GM would like to outlaw X before the campaign; more power to em but taking my sneak attack damage away or changing the way bombs work AFTER I've started playing said class imho I have a right to be perturbed. That said, I consider myself lucky that every player at my gaming table has a book and at least half of us will pull them out the instant any rule we have not memorized comes into play. The best advice I can offer to you is remember that someone else is taking their time to run a game for you, but also remember that you have a right to play your character to RAW.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you really want to fix the obessive behavior, try the following prescription:
First, tell the GM your concern, about the general issue and not wanting ot be "that guy."
Second, whe you see a rule being "broken," write down the rule and the page # reference on a post-it. Slip it to the GM, as you willhave discussed beforehand. If the GM doesn't think it's a problem, he can make the change right there. If he wants to look it up for himself, goto three.
Third, if the GM wants to look it up for himself, accept that you are not the GM, this time and play through. Never ask for "do overs."
Writing it down is important, because it gets it out of your head, but doesn't slow down play with a rules argument. Accepting the Gm's ruling is important, because if you want to play, as you say you do, then you have to make the compromise and let him be wrong sometimes.
If you really can't do this; if letting a rule stand that is wrong is too much, then, as a GM, let me beg you: don't be a player. Leave the table. Stick to GMing. Everyone will be happier, you included.
In 3.5 you did not need to consciously optimise your character to have an outrageously unbalanced character - you only needed to play a Druid. So those who have played a 3.5 druid know the struggle not to outshine the rest of the party. The way I did it was to pick a secondary roll for the character which is on balance with the rest of the characters, and only use the big-guns when I saw the look of distress on my GM's face right before he had to make the decision about whether to Deus Ex the party out of the inevitable total party kill. At those moments, it's fine to break out with the gargantuan elephant stampede that wipes out the army of evil that is about to engulf the party.
|
I'd like to second the motion presented by Doram: perhaps you are just meant to be a GM after all. I know the feeling of wanting to play and yet being required to GM. It's not always as much fun, for sure. But if you're having a hard time going along, if it really bothers you that rules are being implemented improperly, then maybe you're on the wrong side of the table.
As an alternative, perhaps you could take over as GM for a while - a few months or so. During that time make sure to help educate the other players, tactfully, about technical issues that have arisen before. You could make it a habit to quote the rules out loud, for instance, so that everyone knows what the deal is. It won't seem antagonistic if the GM does it. Or when you know certain encounters are coming, have the proper sections of the rules marked so you can pull it out without having to truly look it up (even if you know that section from memory, look it up anyway). Then when you're on the other side of the table once more, quoting the rules or looking things up won't seem so out of place.
As a GM myself, I appreciate it when players point out anything I'm doing wrong. I admit that it hasn't happened for a number of years, but that's only because I look things up at the slightest provocation. I encourage my players to do so as well. Consistency is key to running a fair game. Two of my players also GM for other groups and have both knowledge and speedy fingers when referencing the books.
And as for changing class features because of a min/maxed character...that's an aberration. It should never happen. I doubt I could continue at a table where the GM nerfed class features when they finally became good. A good GM should design encounters to be challenging for the players without being overwhelming. The encounters are my responsibility and I know what the players have to work with. If the encounters are too easy, I bump it up a notch, I don't penalize players who know the rules. Of course, every table is different. My table is full of min/maxers - I figured most everyone played that way. If I got angry at them because they crushed an encounter that was supposed to be challenging, well, that would just be stupid. That would be my own fault for misjudging the relative strength levels.
In any event, think about going back to being a GM. It sounds like you may be happier in that seat.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know how you run NPCs without letting your DM knowledge influence how they act, basing their actions off the NPCs knowledge and views?
Do that with your rules knowledge. Compartmentalize your mind, putting that knowledge outside of your 'player knowledge' in your 'DM knowledge' compartment.
Any time you see something being run incorrectly, ask yourself 'Is it worth stopping the game to correct this?'
More often than not, I find the answer is 'no'.
I agree with one tiny little caveat.
If you know how the rules work and make decisions based on that knowledge but your GM doesn't play by the rules you know it gets very frustrating as you do things you expect to work but don't. It's like learning the layout of a room by stubbing your toes.
I'm not sure there is a good fix for it beyond just mapping out what your GM thinks is the rules and adjusting appropriately.
I'm the group's PF encyclopedia, if its something confusing or that want to clarify they ask me, I usually solve it for them since I was their first dungeon master, I sometimes rules lawyer but I merely tell them what the rules does or a better way to interpret it,I always tell the DM "this is the rule for situation X, you can follow it or ignore it, its up to you".
So far so good I think :p
|
|
As a player, I've run into this issue often, simply because I liked reading and using the rules more than my GM. This can be very frustrating at times.
Now I've stopped playing and I run two tables - and the experience as a somewhat-frustrated player tought me to listen to player feedback (this even goes beyond rules) and let them tell me how it works or should work.
I know the rules pretty darn well. Two of my players know them pretty darn bloody well to the point of being encyclopedic - so I stand corrected when they comment on my game. This makes it more fun for everybody.
This player knowledge works very well the other way as well - when another player wants to do something I just don't know how to run, I ask one of the encyclopedic players to explain the mechanics to us all, (they'll eagerly look it up if they don't know it by head!). After hearing him out, all the players decide if we think that rule is fun, or if we need a quick house rule. Everybody gets their say, we all have fun.
My tip to your GM is to simply use the available player encyclopedia. It's superuseful. It takes him 10 seconds to put away his pride and go from "I'm the GM, I know the rules, STFU" to "with this guy on the table I never ever need to open the books anymore during play - that's frikkin great".
|
|
I have a guy in my group that reads and re-reads the The Inner Sea World Guide. he knows about ever nation and all the plots and how fractions interact with other nations... which is great.
But I do not have the time to read as much so when I DM him I tend to stay more generic and not use specific groups too much or else he comments on how it would not really work that way or why would that fraction be doing this and so on... He does it with other GM's as well.
He DM's and his games are fun with all the info... i tend to get lost in them as I do not know as much as he does and miss out on why something is so important (which is obvious to him but not to me) lol.
On the other hand we have a veteran player who DM alot of our games and knows nothing at all about Golarion and mixes up the basics (game info and rules) which frustrates even me... So I know your pain from both sides.
This comes up in our home group, though less so than it used to. We've been playing in a long running campaign for several years with the same players and GM. Three of the players including me are very rules-savvy - we don't necessarily optimise/minimax to squeeze the maximum advantage but like the OP we know the rules backwards and forwards. The ref and one of the other players know the rules well enough to be sure they're right when a point comes up. The final two players don't and don't care that much just wanting to play. The rules are ambiguous enough that particularly in the first couple years play would be regularly suspended for up to an hour while exactly how a specific rule should be implemented was debated. This could get increasingly bitter with parallels for the various positions being sought, page numbers being referenced and sentences read with different emphasis; a couple such points still lead to harsh words if someone accidentally raises it again. Inevitably these points would come up when it was extremely important how it was interpreted. Sadly, the ref is so fair minded that he is unwilling to say 'alright, the rule may say what you think it says, although I still disagree, but I'm going to run it this way anyway'. And like most of us he isn't willing to simply bow to our superior knowledge. As the years have gone by this has got to be less of a problem - partly we've had the debates and come to conclusions, partly the ref has caught up in his knowledge but I think mostly we've all got bored of the struggle and as long as a character death isn't on the cards we just let it go past if someone gets the rules wrong.
To answer the OP's original question the first thing I would do is ask the GM at your table. Warn them that you know the rules as well as you do and ask how they'll feel about occasional corrections. Agree a non-verbal signal (e.g. raised finger) so that they can call on you if they wish - the very act of making a signal rather than 'blurting' may cause you to decide that it's too trivial to bother with. Check things in the rules before you speak so that a) your input is slowed down and b) you aren't coming across as 'I know best' and c) you can read RAW rather than filter through your memory and d) you might find you are wrong. No, really, this does happen. In our group last session one of the 'just play' players pointed out that Combat Reflexes allows you to take an AoO when flatfooted. None of us knew that. She got a standing ovation and looked smug for the rest of the evening.
|
|
Let me start by saying I haven't read all the replies but here are my thoughts.
Having someone like you at the table is "GOLD"
this is the truth from my perspective. I am not very rule orientated and frankly hate people correcting me but still done correctly your kind is the most valuable asset at the table if you play your cards right.
Its all about communication, after all everyone at the table is there for the fun including the master (who I might add aren't the enemy). I like playing but really love mastering and having someone that can advise on the rules as we go along is really cool. Don't ever change it - but instead of being annoyed by the masters lack of rule knowledge (he just rolled a natural 1 that poor bastard).
As the example of the backstab rule - then try to choose your wording instead of busting out "Damn you are wrong", roll high on diplomacy and come up with "I seem to recall that these foul creatures are in fact able to backstab" he the master goes "nah this can't" then go with it for that encounter and have a talk about it when a natural break occurs.
Players and masters are a team, a team to make the most fun out of it so go for the team work approach.
|
|
As the example of the backstab rule - then try to choose your wording instead of busting out "Damn you are wrong", roll high on diplomacy and come up with "I seem to recall that these foul creatures are in fact able to backstab" he the master goes "nah this can't" then go with it for that encounter and have a talk about it when a natural break occurs.
Players and masters are a team, a team to make the most fun out of it so go for the team work approach.
THIS. Sometimes how you say something is as important as what you're saying. I see this all the time. You could be handing out the meaning of life (42), but if you're arguing or getting in a shouting match in the middle of a game nobody will listen.
Not everyone is rules proficient or *cough* obsessive as others. Advise, don't tell, and you'll be fine. Keep clear communication open.
And yes you probably should DM at some point if just briefly. The fastest way for someone to learn the correct rules is to show them in action.
I sometimes had that problem, and the GM listened, I said I wasn't 100% sure, and the GM either stayed with his ruling, or took what I thought was the rules.
When we were too immersed and it was a minor nuisance I said nothing.
Last time I GMed, I had someone who corrected me a lot, and after checking the rules 2-3 times in a pause, I accepted most of what he said, and houseruled the rest to my convenience.
So yeah, if that kind of player isn't welcome, you just need to shut up and play the game the GM gives you; but a lot of GMs like that kind of player, it saves them the time to look up rules or invent houserules.
The rest of the players just have to accept that in such a "conflict" RAW is not always the winner and there are a lot of little "houserules" that won't be explained beforehand.
Accept what the GM has to say in game. Bring up any issues out of game, preferably in private.
Optimizing - I've used some very optimized characters (thanks to the guides here) and I always find they're extremely boring to play. It's way too easy to use those characters in the groups that I'm in. I've gone not just entire sessions, but several sessions (at around 4 hours each) in a row without taking a single point of damage before thanks to some of those builds. BORING! I have a lot more fun with bizarre, off-the-wall characters who are heavily unoptimized (i.e. Gnome Two-Weapon Fighter who specialized in Intimidation). Sure, you die more, but you end up with some seriously hilarious role-playing scenarios that you just wouldn't get with an optimized character.
Rules - As a fairly new player, I quite like it when others bring up rules issues as it helps me learn the game. If something seems off to me, I'll usually look it up and bring it up w/ the DM, but I recognize that he has the final say in matters, so if he disagrees or decides to make a judgment call that is different from how I interpreted the rules, that's okay with me. As a player, I just want consistency and fairness.
I want to start off by saying I really just prefer playing the game to GMing...I've tried to take my stupid useless encyclopedic knowledge and the unconscious ability to absorb information, rules, and the like and use it as springboard to run games, and it's worked REALLY WELL, but every now and then I want to stop thinking about a whole world and play a character, but, ugh, there's some serious frustration issues.
You see, the group I'm in, our GM is great. He comes up with good stories, can control a table really well, and interjects some decent combat (although he is heavy handed with NPCs and used to Deus Ex us before I started complaining a lot about not being challenged). He also knows the rules very well, but not perfectly, and unfortunately I know it quite more thoroughly than he does.
We're all friends, meet regularly, and have a great time when we do, but man alive do I get bloody frustrated when I hit a wall with him on rules.
For example, the other day, he was unaware that in PF you can sneak attack golems. I didn't mean to push on it, but we were fighting a big one, and I was playing a rogue, and blast it, I sure as heck wouldn't have ever played a rogue if I couldn't sneak attack the stuff you can in PF that you couldn't before.
It's just one example. Trust me, I could go into a few dozens. I'll just say this; I know the rules a heck of a lot better than most people, because I'm mesmerized by the complexity of the system, and really just enjoy reading it. I'm one of those people who just reads something once and it sticks to the back of my head forever to pull out at an obscure time.
Unfortunately I keep automatically correcting people's rules problems before I can stop myself...you know, you just spit it out before you realize it and then go "oops, sorry, nevermind...well, yeah...I mean, technically you CAN draw multiple hits that way as you moved through several squares, and he has combat reflexes...but...you know what nevermind."
When I don't, I'm sitting there...
I really can understand you. I have the same "problem" there. Regardless of what I play, my PC quickly tends to be seen as one of the if not *the* most powerful character. However, I managed to get it somewhat in check or at least alter the perception of it. Here is how I did it:
#1 - I realized that it does not matter how strict others adhere to the rules. If others do not care that they provide cover when you attack that opponent with a reach weapon and they stand in between you, you can still play it that way. At our table(s) we usually state our bonuses and how we calculate them, and I just mention the cover *for my character* (as a minus) in there. Sometimes others pick it up and then apply it. If the DM says "Oh well, ignore that for now", OK, then it is an instant houserule and I comply.
#2 - this is the biggie: Play support characters. Classes like bards, clerics, buffers, healers etc. make everyone else feel good. If the other PCs hit, are rescued or resist better because of you, it is hard to gimp you. The DM can only scale up encounters, which will make the party need you even more.
That is if you like those kinds of characters. I do, or let's say I realized I do, so it was fine with me :-)
|
I resemble this problem...sort of.
I, too, tend to run games, and, when I do not, know more about the rules than any GMs I play under. I also optimize my characters, at least as much as concept permits, quite a bit more than most. But I don't have this problem.
Why? I am known for all of the above, and for being helpful. The combination means that when I mention we're doing a rule wrong and I comment, the response is usually "Oh, okay." and we then do the rule right, with no big discussion necessary. And when the other players make characters (whether I'm the GM or not), I help them to optimize in all the little ways you can without changing concept in the least. And so the characters are more effective, and the rules are followed and everyone is happy.
So basically, I make it based on reputation. How do you get this kind of reputation? I dunno, I just did it by running games most of the time, and by being all helpful. But it's certainly handy.
Obviously, this doesn't really apply at con games or the like, but I can usually just chill out for those, it's not like I have all that much invested in them after all.