Why does everyone pick on the paladin?


Advice

51 to 100 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

I'm not sure if I can add anything more that hasn't already been said, but I sincerely hope this situation works out, no matter what the ultimate solution. Yubein, your daughter has a lot of guts just for trying to play such a difficult and, for lack of a better term, baggage-laden class as a Paladin. If my avatar is any indication, I'm a large proponent of the class and always find myself saddened to hear stories like this. While it is true we don't have the GM's side of the coin, there are at the least far more tactful ways to deal with any possible variation of "it's for the story" (if that was even the situation).

I know my words are of little to no help, but I always saw the Paladin class as a representation of man's desire to overcome a base nature and strive toward something more. Becoming a Paladin in my mind was always less of an accomplishment and more of a promise to keep striving, to the end of your days. I wish you and yours the opportunity to move on and the perseverance to keep trying.


Neo2151 wrote:

There is a chance that a father is over-reacting to something that initially upset his daughter.

Again, less likely, but possible. Good enough to take two steps back before slamming this GM we haven't met or heard from.

That chance does exist, but still: The GM made the daughter cry. I assume this thread would never have happened if the GM had made some effort to console the daughter as regards her paladin, so I feel slamming the GM is still appropriate.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Unintentional jerk, is still a jerk.

We all know the Lawful Stupid Paladin, but this did not seem to be the case.

Long time gamers tend to have prejudices to certain classes/build/races/spells. This is something all of us develop, but we must fight against.
This is especially true when it comes to new players. New players have yet to develop these prejudices, and there is no need to press our own upon them.

If you think you don't have any prejudices within the game, think again.

What do you think when you see a fighter with 7 or lower charisma?

What do you expect from the cleric?

What class do you associate with the Halfling?

In the end, you need to remember these prejudices exist.
Be aware, and don't let them ruin your, or anyone else' fun.


Greg Wasson wrote:
Sometimes there are folk that just do not have that..empathy compassion..whatever.

We call people with no empathy or compassion sociopaths. That is a lot worse than being a dick.

In either case he's a person who should not be GMing for a teenager.


Atarlost: People without empathy or compassion are not necessarily sociopaths. They could be people with a form of autism called Aspergers. There are many of those people in the world. There are very few sociopaths.

Also: I would be a bit more considerate in a forum such as this (gaming forum). There are many gamers who are geeks, engineers etc. It has been shown that even if those geeks, engineers etc do not have aspergers themselves they are 4times more likely to have a family member who does.

- Gauss

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

@Gauss: Gamers in what sense? It's a broad term.


Well in my gaming group we have an engineer, a technician, another engineer, a microbiologist, and a one other person who is not involved in the technical sciences.

Every RPG group I have ever been in for about 30years has had the same mix of people. Mostly geeks, nerds, technicians, and engineers of one variety or another.

D&D tournaments I have been to have often been of a similar mix.

Now, while I am not saying 'All gamers are geeks, nerds, technicians, engineers, etc.' I am saying 'many gamers are geeks nerds, technicians, engineers, etc.'.

Every wargaming group I have ever been in has also had a similar mix.

Now, I recognize that with WoW and other MMORPG games the gamer franchise has been expanded to include many many non-traditional gamers. People who are not geeks, nerds, technicians, engineers, etc.

However, I think it is still a safe statement that the PF community is still full of geeks, nerds, technicians, engineers, etc. As a result my statement still stands that many gamers are geeks, engineers etc.

- Gauss


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Are wrote:
Neo2151 wrote:

There is a chance that a father is over-reacting to something that initially upset his daughter.

Again, less likely, but possible. Good enough to take two steps back before slamming this GM we haven't met or heard from.

That chance does exist, but still: The GM made the daughter cry. I assume this thread would never have happened if the GM had made some effort to console the daughter as regards her paladin, so I feel slamming the GM is still appropriate.

You can't really control what makes someone cry, but you can control silly GM Fiat rules. I don't think it is so much that he is a jerk, but simply a bad GM.

Jerks=Don't care about the players.
Bad GM's=Do care, but don't have a clue..

Jerks are always bad GM's, but bad GM's are not always jerks.

PS:I hate GM's arbitrarily taking over characters so I am not defending him, and that might not be the case, but with the info I have that seems to be what is going on. I hope things get better though.


Atarlost wrote:
Greg Wasson wrote:
Sometimes there are folk that just do not have that..empathy compassion..whatever.

We call people with no empathy or compassion sociopaths. That is a lot worse than being a dick.

In either case he's a person who should not be GMing for a teenager.

Wow... I guess I should have added the words " a very strong level of..". Did not wish to even begin to imply that the GM was a sociopath. ( intro to psych some twenty years ago just doesn't begin to give me the chops for that diagnosis from a post :P )

And personally, I have messed up before. It was months later I found out. I was devastated at how unperceptive I was to the situation. If someone had told me at the time, many tears and hurt feelings could have been avoided. Wasn't a game situation, but I guess I expect GM's to be human and make mistakes.

I have yet to meet a perfect person, and in fact have encountered many that have made mistakes. And I have never ever EVER met a perfect GM.

I am saying, talk to the person. Find out if a mistake or not. See if it can be resolved.

Also, as has been said before, we are getting one 'biased' viewpoint without all the facts. As I have stated, it seems like a jerky thing to me, as well. However, I guess I am willing to see if i can be resolved as a win-win. But, I guess it is easier to just say, He is a jerk, quit the game.

It just feels like a kneejerk reaction to me, and does not solve a problem; it is just a way of running away from it.

Greg

EDIT: I keep putting in too many personal details. Sheesh, I should know better :P


wraithstrike wrote:
stuff

Good stuff, wraithstrike.

Greg


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Greg: Is there a GM who has not had tunnel vision from time to time?

- Gauss


Yubein wrote:
Thanks for all the help. I fully intend on helping her resolve this issue. It may be a learning expierience for her and thus a good thing. This was an attack on paladins by the GM. If it were me ....no big deal but why do it to a new player?

The DM's a jerk imo.

But, if you approach him to resolve the issue he could redeem himself, maybe it was just a bad day. But when you do approach him you'll know for sure if he is a jerk by how he responds.

Please let us know, Yubein, how this turns out. We all hope the best for you, and especially for your daughter. (Struck a nerve here with me since I recently started playing with my daughter. If PF brings you closer together do whatever it takes to maintain that, even if you have to be the DM.)


Dad should "have a little talk" with the DM... who is a jerk, btw.

Many DM's just can't handle paladins and the whole alignment thing.

Note that this would not cause a change in alignment and sb nothing a atonement spell can't fix.


This pisses me off so much I don't even know what to say.


@Gauss: Meh. My gaming group consists of two restaurant managers, a nationally syndicated sports writer, and a guy who builds custom guitars (plus some stereotypical geek-types). I wouldn't categorize all gamers.

I highly doubt this GM is a sociopath. He may even be a fairly nice guy. My guess (with very limited info) is that he has a bit of a power trip as GM, that is normally easily handled by adult-experienced gamers. In this instance he became a bit of a bully.


Gauss wrote:

Greg: Is there a GM who has not had tunnel vision from time to time?

- Gauss

No, not me. I never tried to keep giving a player something they did not care for because I thought it was cool. <crosses fingers behind back> :)


The Crusader: I specifically stated that I was NOT saying 'all gamers'. I did state 'many gamers'.

The point was that many gamers are the geek/nerd/engineering/technician types which are 4times more likely to have someone in the family with autism.

- Gauss


Wraithstrike: That isnt what I meant by tunnel vision. I meant that tunnel vision prevented a GM from seeing what his actions did to a player.

Example: GM is normally capable of picking up on what people feel etc. However, during a game the GM does or says something which upsets the Player. Due to GM being focused on the game and not the player (ie: tunnel vision) the GM fails to notice the player getting upset. It explodes into a much larger problem than it had to.

- Gauss


I have a 14 year old little brother and I have to stop myself from doing things as a GM that cause tension instead of fun when we play. It has a lot to do with my little brother coming from MMO's and 4e I think. We all bring different expectations to the table. This GM probably just thinks he's "doing his job" or whatever. I just wish this guy felt that a father and daughter having a good time together was worth more then him getting to push whatever idea he has about how the game is supposed to be.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Famous D&D players include Robin Williams, Jimi Hendrix, and Vin Diesel.


Gauss wrote:

Wraithstrike: That isnt what I meant by tunnel vision. I meant that tunnel vision prevented a GM from seeing what his actions did to a player.

Example: GM is normally capable of picking up on what people feel etc. However, during a game the GM does or says something which upsets the Player. Due to GM being focused on the game and not the player (ie: tunnel vision) the GM fails to notice the player getting upset. It explodes into a much larger problem than it had to.

- Gauss

I think having an open table where players feel free to air complaints helps so that even if the GM's don't catch on the player can talk to him later about it. I put that in my guideline that I hand out before every campaign starts. The ability to come to me and voice concerns has made things a lot better.

Of course we do have many "I do all the work so I make all the rules, players be damned" GM's, and if a player comes from that type of table it might make him hesitant to speak up.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Famous D&D players include Robin Williams, Jimi Hendrix, and Vin Diesel.

OMG dude please don't miss the forest for the trees. He never said everyone who plays DnD is a geek, he said many DnD's have that Geek/Tech/Engineer type of mind. He's not saying it to stereotype he's making an insightful point about the possibility that the GM in question isn't a jerk, he may be unable to pick up on social cues due to a condition like Aspergers.


While I'm always loathe to say "find another group" due to knowing how hard it is to find a reliable group, its likely that this is where its going. At least go through the motions trying to resolve the disagreement, but its IMHO only an even chance of improvement.

Now being primarily a GM I have to say that its often hard to come up with plot hooks and situations that are interesting, and for some the paladin's code is just too much to pass up. Morally ambiguous plotlines and tension for the paladin is actually good stuff after all. But 9/10 what ends up happening is some hamfisted GM inflicts a railroaded storyline on some unsuspecting player. That's the good intentioned version of the "paladin falls" The not good intentioned one is the GM isn't mature enough about things, and thinks that the LG mentality is something to be fought against, and goes out of their way to degrade it.

As you can see, neither option, the hamfist or the would be anarchist are particularly good to play with. Which is why I've said its unlikely to be beneficial in the long run to continue playing with this GM. While there are plenty of good GM's out there, they can be hard to find, or are running full tables already.


wraithstrike wrote:
Are wrote:
Neo2151 wrote:

There is a chance that a father is over-reacting to something that initially upset his daughter.

Again, less likely, but possible. Good enough to take two steps back before slamming this GM we haven't met or heard from.

That chance does exist, but still: The GM made the daughter cry. I assume this thread would never have happened if the GM had made some effort to console the daughter as regards her paladin, so I feel slamming the GM is still appropriate.

You can't really control what makes someone cry, but you can control silly GM Fiat rules. I don't think it is so much that he is a jerk, but simply a bad GM.

No, but you can control your own reaction to that person crying, and attempt to do something about it. That's why I said "if ... had made some effort to console the daughter".

***

One little thing, though: There is a chance that the GM actually followed the advice of others in making the new young player the focus of the story, but simply went about it in the wrong way, and had no idea how to handle the ensuing situation.


Wraithstrike: I do the same thing. Still hasn't stopped the occassional problem. Of course, I imagine if I don't do that there would be the not-so-occassional problem. :D

Grimmy: Thank you.

I was also pointing out the insensitivity of stating someone is a sociopath when the number of people with Asperger's far outweighs the number of Sociopaths out there. The definition people often use as criteria for a Sociopath applies to Asperger's as well. He might as well have called people with Asperger's sociopaths.

/Gets of the soapbox

- Gauss


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's often a better solution then "find another group". I would love to hear that this had been resolved more smoothly then that.


Ah. I was associating the labels with his perceived "lack of compassion/empathy". Not with your stats about aspergers.

Understood.

Grimmy wrote:
I have a 14 year old little brother

What's the GM equivalent of a "noogie"?


Are: Do you know how to console a 14yr old girl crying? Cause I certainly don't. I do not have children. My attempts would have probably made it worse. If I were the GM I would have let the father deal with it and then tried to pick up the peices afterwards.

- Gauss

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I only mentioned those three as a random factiod to remind people of the vast, and varied scale of different kinds of Tabletop RPG players.

Anything else you believe was implied is unintended.


Still just a regular noogie I think!


The Crusader: No problem. :) Thanks for responding.

- Gauss


This thread just touched a nerve with me because my little bro is the same age. I think he tried to get me to play since he was seven when he found my old books in a closet at his moms house. I never made time to do it until last year and if I waited any longer I might have never got to spend this quality time with him. I think for the sake of a father whose 14 yo daughter actually wants to play a game with him at that age, this GM should leave all the dumb $h!t at the door.


Gauss wrote:

Are: Do you know how to console a 14yr old girl crying? Cause I certainly don't. I do not have children. My attempts would have probably made it worse. If I were the GM I would have let the father deal with it and then tried to pick up the peices afterwards.

- Gauss

No, I don't. But, succeeding at consoling probably wouldn't have been necessary. Showing the father that I cared enough to attempt it would likely have avoided a thread like this, since the father would have realized that I realized that I'd made a mistake and would be willing to rectify that mistake.

That was my whole point. An attempt to console likely would have avoided the entire thread, hence an attempt to console probably wasn't made, hence the father (and we) can be considered justified in not showing too much sympathy for the GM.

(also: note that in my first post I said "as regards her paladin". Even something like "okay, I'll try to fix this" would have likely sufficed at avoiding this thread.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gauss wrote:
Do you know how to console a 14yr old girl crying?

I'd start by giving her back her Smite Evil's.


Are: Again, it is situational. We dont know if they just left the game or not. Odds are, not, and thus the GM should have had the opportunity. But, it is possible the chance was never given.

- Gauss


Sure, that's possible. I've made an observation considering a possible "non-jerk" explanation myself in this thread.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Gauss wrote:

Are: Again, it is situational. We dont know if they just left the game or not. Odds are, not, and thus the GM should have had the opportunity. But, it is possible the chance was never given.

- Gauss

I'm with you. There just isnt enough information to judge the situation (those who have had experience with jerk DMs will probably react to the OP by saying he's a jerk, those who have never seen one in action will probably assume he isnt). There have been enough threads on the forums over the years where one side of the story turns out to not be the full picture.

.
"He's a jerk" isnt terribly helpful advice anyhow. Even if it makes the OP feel better/justified. "Talk to the DM" is useful, no matter what the motivation behind the change of alignment was. It can hardly make things worse and might make things better.


I'm hoping they can solve the issue. And that the girl will play again. It's not often that teenagers want to play RPG (or anything else, actually) with their parents.

Isen't that the age where "parents are the devil"? IMHO, the GM has a chance to do two great things:

a) Bring in a new player to our beloved hobby

and, mostly important

b) Make a daughter want to spend hours playing a game with her father (a game without special effects, mind you!).

I really hope they can work out the situation. I know we may be misjudging the GM, but it's not exactly rare to see a GM being a prick to Paladins.

I say: Just let the girl Smite that Evil!


Lemmy: It is true Paladins can be a difficult class to play if the GM is not on board. In the game I GM the paladin is a newbie so I suggested she acquire a Phylactery of Faithfulness asap. And even before she had it we kinda 'assumed' she had it.

- Gauss


A good GM won't coerce or trick a paladin into falling. That's metagaming. If they fall from grace, it's by player's choice, or it's a temporary thing that's part of a quest. "Destroy this dark and cursed weapon to atone and regain the Light." I doubt this GM had such a thing in mind.

I have a paladin who managed to fall from grace at level 2, right after contracting lycanthrope and walloping some captured thug who was helpless. We deemed he was a brash young man, and could atone through some minor quest, for the entertainment of the group. No big deal. "Stop executing captured thugs." etc.


Alright...I guess I'm a little late to this, but I've read my fair share of this thread, and Gauss is pretty much spot on with just about everything that he says.

Firstly, he is right in saying that the GM is (or is not) a dick; we have no clue as to what actually happened aside from what the OP stated, nor do we even have first-hand experience as to the situation. All we know is what the OP told us, and that's all you have to go on. The GM could be a very decent dude (and slightly misunderstood), or he could be a major dick. We don't know that.

Secondly, I agree in his statement, that you shouldn't just kick the man over a single thing that he did. Am I saying that the guy is right or shouldn't have just done that action? No. Am I saying that jumping to conclusions based off of an action that was (most likely) poorly thought out is an acceptable approach to handling a situation? Good gods, no. Such brash acting is something a Fallen Paladin would have done to lose his divine power.

Thirdly, there is a very simple way to fix this. The GM I play with is very understanding, and abides to the RAW quite well; he houserules and implements 3.X+ books, but the players (and GM) know that such materials are also available for them to use. If we find RAW that contradicts his statements and/or shows the action a player does is actually completed in another manner (that isn't so junky), he would alter it accordingly.

The proposal? Argue the RAW. The most important concepts of a GM is acceptable interpretation, and logical understanding, and if you provide proof, and cite it down to the T, it can technically only be revoked by the GM's statement. If the GM is truly a decent character and not a complete dick (like all you other guys make him out to be), his response in the matter is what would truly determine his views and personality, and whether he is what you guys truly make him out to be, or if you guys are just blowing smoke over missing/confused information.

If he says "Well, I had this happen because I hate that girl and her character is broken, and I hate broken characters!", then yes, he is a dick and you should play with others who aren't such a**holes. If he says "I did it because the storyline requires the events to happen; there is a way around this, but it's something that I believe the Paladin should find out for herself," then it's obvious that he's not that much of a dick, that he wants the player to be more ambitious and concerned about the other concepts of the Paladin, primarily the character focusing on those who are at first scorned by the Light, being able to be put on the Path to Redemption.

Obviously, this is something you must discuss with your GM about, and having your daughter with you will probably help you with convincing him your case. If I were DM, I would most likely say something along the lines of the latter, since the most important thing about this game is to have fun and enjoy it with your fellow players/DM, not quarrel over senseless degradation. If he is truly stubborn about his ways, then finding another group to play with (that is better than the previous) is a sound suggestion.

I hope this helps your situation...


The Crusader wrote:

@Gauss: Meh. My gaming group consists of two restaurant managers, a nationally syndicated sports writer, and a guy who builds custom guitars (plus some stereotypical geek-types). I wouldn't categorize all gamers.

I highly doubt this GM is a sociopath. He may even be a fairly nice guy. My guess (with very limited info) is that he has a bit of a power trip as GM, that is normally easily handled by adult-experienced gamers. In this instance he became a bit of a bully.

Mine is a CFO, a Lawyer, a Money Laundering investigator, a elevator repairman , a chemist ...and a computer programmer.

And I give props to the girl for playing a difficult class in what is apparently a rather mature way.

Sovereign Court

I'm a 14 year old boy myself and I play pathfinder with my father's friends and their kids. My little brother plays a paladin of Iomedae and is the party leader. I like to pick on his paladin but that usually means my characters get executed by the aristocratic oracle of Sarenrae. If I were the father I would ask the GM what his intentions were and to give the paladin back her powers as soon as possible. But leave walking away from the table as a last resort (mostly because gaming is a lot of fun and can be done with a parent for large amounts of time and still be fun). As for the graveknight, it was probably evil but it's sword might have had the effect of making you one step more chaotic. If you do have to leave the game, pathfinder society can be a lot of fun if you can find any locations near you. As for tunnel vision I know it can be hard, I ran a season 0 pathfinder society scenario (dnd 3.5 rules) and had to convert it to pathfinder on the go for 7 teenagers in 3 and a half hours and I didn't realize that one of the players was getting bored/frustrated until he killed a npc that was trying to save the party. So what the GM did was human and congratulations on playing a paladin as a first timer.

Sovereign Court

And as for the name of the thread; Why does everyone pick on paladins?
1. Paladins are cool and everyone wants to play one so we sometimes belittle them to make them seem like our equals.
2. Paladins are a pain in the butt because of being a protector of the innocent and the law.
3. Most paladins I've seen move at 20 or less and can't stay on top of a horse so they're kinda funny watch.
4. People have an instinct to not like the person who tells them what to do, aka the party leader, a niche the paladin fits so perfectly.
5. Some players simply can't role play lawful good well enough to be a paladin for very long.


Good points!

Sovereign Court

Grimmy wrote:
Good points!

Thank you, and those reasons are why I tried and failed miserably as playing a paladin. Then again though, it might have something to do with the fact that the other characters were going insane and I was playing a super lawful xenophobic dwarven stonelord paladin of the Shadow Lodge.

Liberty's Edge

I understand the visceral reaction to the situation, for sure. When someone makes one of my younger siblings cry, I don't just want to hurt that person, I want to UNMAKE them. That is how it makes me feel, and I can only imagine how much more that would be amplified by the parent-child bond. However, as a GM, a player, a friend, and a person, I would like to think that when I make a mistake, even one that badly hurts someone's feelings, the baseline assumption is not that I did it because I was specifically trying to slight, humiliate, or harm someone. I don't think any of us would intentionally sit down at the table with someone we knew to be 100% cruel, capricious, and utterly indifferent to the suffering and pain of others, even those closest to them. I don't want to sit here making excuses for this person I've never met and never will, but I'll throw my support to the group that suggests talking to the GM. Real, open communication is surprisingly difficult to achieve, because half the time we don't even realize why we're doing something until we closely examine our actions and their motivations. The GM may have hostilities he's not even aware of, and be as surprised to realize them as anyone else.

I can see how the OP would want to choose carefully in this situation, because not only is he trying to resolve the problem at hand, he is at least somewhat setting the tone for the rest of his daughter's RP experiences, and certainly setting a standard in conflict resolution. When someone does something that you find hurtful, what do you do? Quietly take the abuse? Resolve it diplomatically? Take your ball and go home? Deck the guy?

I am slightly bemused by the number of people referring to the daughter as a "little girl." I started gaming when I was 14, and certainly didn't think of myself as a little girl. Did you guys think of yourselves as "little boys" at 14? Maybe I'm the oddball here... OP Dad is obviously excused from from this because a daughter is always going to be "his little girl" in her father's eyes. :)

That being said, there is some very obvious situated power going in to even the most egalitarian of gaming groups, and that is magnified when we have the added factors of an older dude and a younger lady. Keeping the exploitation of this power in check is absolutely reasonable and just. So many times I hear someone complain, "Why can't we get more young people/females/whatever to game?" And I'm like, "Ummm...we have some of those playing now, but you keep on doing your level best to make them deeply regret that choice..."

Silver Crusade

Courtney! wrote:

I understand the visceral reaction to the situation, for sure. When someone makes one of my younger siblings cry, I don't just want to hurt that person, I want to UNMAKE them. That is how it makes me feel, and I can only imagine how much more that would be amplified by the parent-child bond. However, as a GM, a player, a friend, and a person, I would like to think that when I make a mistake, even one that badly hurts someone's feelings, the baseline assumption is not that I did it because I was specifically trying to slight, humiliate, or harm someone. I don't think any of us would intentionally sit down at the table with someone we knew to be 100% cruel, capricious, and utterly indifferent to the suffering and pain of others, even those closest to them. I don't want to sit here making excuses for this person I've never met and never will, but I'll throw my support to the group that suggests talking to the GM. Real, open communication is surprisingly difficult to achieve, because half the time we don't even realize why we're doing something until we closely examine our actions and their motivations. The GM may have hostilities he's not even aware of, and be as surprised to realize them as anyone else.

I can see how the OP would want to choose carefully in this situation, because not only is he trying to resolve the problem at hand, he is at least somewhat setting the tone for the rest of his daughter's RP experiences, and certainly setting a standard in conflict resolution. When someone does something that you find hurtful, what do you do? Quietly take the abuse? Resolve it diplomatically? Take your ball and go home? Deck the guy?

I am slightly bemused by the number of people referring to the daughter as a "little girl." I started gaming when I was 14, and certainly didn't think of myself as a little girl. Did you guys think of yourselves as "little boys" at 14? Maybe I'm the oddball here... OP Dad is obviously excused from from this because a daughter is always going to be "his little girl" in her...

No, but most people thought of us as little boys, so it balanced out.

I won't say it's the case here, simply because I don't have first hand knowledge, but I do know of at least one case of a close friend I have. He used to have a DM who was, well, killer. When most people talk about killer DMs they are talking about DMs who try to put too much challenge into something, usually in a misguided attempt to make the game more fun, since, to them, a challenge IS fun.

That did not apply to this guy. He put them in the tomb of horrors. Admittedly, not the real tomb of horrors, the diluted 2nd edition verion, but it was still deadly enough for a handful of 4th level adventurers, since he worked in some of his own traps.

Right there, in his notes which he left behind in a huff after the game, had been a note. "Room 12, the party dies."

The players only managed to escape a room that was slowly filling with blood, had a gigantic fan-blade popping out of the floor, and slowly crushing and closing walls, was because they had an indestructible bag they had enchanted a while back, into which they had placed the Orb of Annihilation from earlier in the dungeon. It ate a hole in the wall. The DM got pissy and left, they saw his notes, and years later, it still took me a good year and a half to convince my friend to try D&D again.

There are GMs out there who genuinely do enjoy being dicks. They're rare, but they happen. Not saying this is the case here, but I'm not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility.

Liberty's Edge

ArianDynas wrote:
No, but most people thought of us as little boys, so it balanced out.

Touché. :)

ArianDynas wrote:
There are GMs out there who genuinely do enjoy being dicks. They're rare, but they happen. Not saying this is the case here, but I'm not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility.

Definitely. GMs (and players) that take pride in how unfun they can make a game session seem to have missed the memo on what the point of playing actually is, and I (mostly) politely avoid those folks whenever I recognize them for what they are. I was just suggesting that if you're friends with someone, and have willingly chosen to associate with them, presumably they possess some redeeming features and needn't be tossed on the scrap heap as the absolute first option to resolving a conflict.

Of course your example is a possibility, and you should never feel obligated to hang out with someone who conducts himself in an abusive way. I know I sometimes feel more protective of others than of myself, and it's possible the OP overlooked some bad tendencies the GM had for a long time, but was unwilling to continue ignoring them once his daughter got involved.

51 to 100 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why does everyone pick on the paladin? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.