Anyone else having a good time right now?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yar.
Anyone else having a good time right now?
Mostly I feel sorry for meibolite (the OP for those who have forgotten) who came here for some advice, and instead got over 100 posts of sidetracking drivel about the semantics of whether or not "plants in a 40' radius" means a) "effects plants that exist within a 40' radius" or b) "modifies any existing plants to cover a 40' radius".
*slow claps*
~P
|
Yar.
Anyone else having a good time right now?Mostly I feel sorry for meibolite (the OP for those who have forgotten) who came here for some advice, and instead got over 100 posts of sidetracking drivel about the semantics of whether or not "plants in a 40' radius" means a) "effects plants that exist within a 40' radius" or b) "modifies any existing plants to cover a 40' radius".
*slow claps*
~P
Well, to be honest, I feel like we took care of that issue in the first two pages.
Most of the stuff he had described was a bad, many people gave advice, then we got off topic admittedly, but again, I feel by the time it happened, the OP's question was more or less answered.
DOH! :)
You lunatics probably scared OP away for good :O
Yeah, I feel kind of bad about that.
|
The OP problem is that he's going to have to make a decision: how much do you really want to play with someone who pre-reads the adventure in order to ruin it? Do you really want to contort yourself to somehow make an adventure work despite a player who is set on sabotaging it?
I think the question answers itself.
I think the question answers itself.
Did the question become self aware, and if so, how and what are the consequences of this stunning turn of events?!
The OP problem is that he's going to have to make a decision: how much do you really want to play with someone who pre-reads the adventure in order to ruin it? Do you really want to contort yourself to somehow make an adventure work despite a player who is set on sabotaging it?
I think the question answers itself.
The player has already thrown wobbly over the choice of game, so it's an easy decision: he said he doesn't like it, so don't invite him.
Try a 15 or 20 point-buy system and limiting the basement score (as suggested above) to 10. It's a game, and games have rules, and the GM is the rules-giver, after all.
Then the character creation is still in the players' hands.
Tasking yourself with character creation is a lot of work, and players want their own guy or gal in the story. There is no solid rule on "How to Roll up a PC", so if you toss in a limited array of numbers, it might check your power-gamer into a more realistic role.
And if he rails against it, remind him that stat-boosting magic items will become available, assuming the town they are in meets the price-point for it. Or the character can go questing for it.
He might even enjoy such a challenge.
(@ The Block Knight- nice threads!)
Wow, this thread blew up quickly in the last 24 hours. Going over it post-by-post now, but just wanted to comment on this.
(@ B.A. Ironskull - Thanks! You too!)
I'll have more on-topic words to contribute shortly, once I've caught up.
Wow it is like Ross wasn't even in here with how you guys go right back to being at each others throats. Please get out of this thread if you are not going to help the OP, petty arguing in loops makes all of you look just as bad as the people you claim to hate or not be like.
On topic: OP has said it is difficult to remove the guy since he has known him for awhile, and honestly while his player/s reading the adventure path sucks, a notepad with some clever editing will fix all his problems. At this point he either needs to make the decision to curtail any problems before they come up (make GM rulings and have them be known before the game starts, write them down and do character audits to be double sure), or make the harder decision and remove this guy from his gaming group.
Ah, so now I see why the thread exploded. Right. Lots of stuff about plants.
Well, I hope Meibolite comes back and is willing to sort through it. We're trying to help Meibolite, really, we are!
So anyway, whew, I tried to blast through it as fast as I could while still digesting every post. With that said, I hope I didn't miss anything because I'm REALLY surprised no one commented on this:
To all the people who say kick him out, i have to agree with Redcelt, the reason its hard to drop him is that we've all been playing together for about 6 years, and its one of those comfortable groups. Its difficult to find players out here especially on the days that we can actually get together.
Did he just develop this problem recently then? Because, if not, what have you been doing to handle it for the past 6 years? You say the group is comfortable but this guy sounds like he takes the fun away from other players when he acts like a jerk and tries to "break the game". I know in some places gamers can be hard to come by, but how did this group come about? How connected are you to this guy? I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around a 6-year dichotomy where this guy's play style interacts with "one of those comfortable groups". Help me understand that and I'll gladly try and give you more specific advice.
Cheers,
Tony
I can understand where you're coming from as I gamed with a guy for five years. Different sort of problem. He read ahead in the AP (Shackled City, for us), and did things that went against his character just to put him in the spotlight for the session. His characters were awful, though, and completely unproductive, so, like I said, different scenario. He finally took a job where he had to move a little bit outside of our gaming range, so he left the group on his own accord. No one ever had the heart to tell him how much we hated gaming with him because he was a good friend outside of our weekly games.
At least my player tried to hide the fact that he was reading ahead and had information he shouldn't have. If your player isn't hiding that fact, that's grounds to have a talk with him, give him a warning about how he's ruining the fun for everyone else, and give him one chance to play it straight.
Keep the ability scores manageable, so they all have weaknesses and strengths. You could even give them these numbers, and they may place them where they see fit:
17, 15, 13, 12, 8, 10
Next, an absence of magic item crafting feats will prevent this power gaming milking item creation feats for all they are worth. Take them out.
And put the adventure in a backward region that needs heroes, but which doesn't have magic item marts everywhere.
The focus is less on giant stats, stat boosting or magic items, and now more on adventure. Get out there!
|
|
I would like to point out that objectively, there is nothing WRONG with power gaming, so long as the rules are being followed. If someone wants to make their character as powerful as the rules will allow, they should not be punished for that.
That being said, what becomes a problem is when players break the rules as is the case with the OP's player and when the player does things are against the spirit of the game (Like reading the adventure path).
I will char op to my heart's content, min-maxing my ability scores, feats, weapons, magic items, skills and spells. None of that makes me a bad person or a bad player. But if I cheat, then that's a different story. And it's also an important distinction.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will char op to my heart's content, min-maxing my ability scores, feats, weapons, magic items, skills and spells. None of that makes me a bad person or a bad player. But if I cheat, then that's a different story. And it's also an important distinction.
Having a powerful character is a good thing. Playing that character in such a way as to belittle the other characters, or to deliberately spoil the enjoyment of the other players, is treading perilously close to being a bad player.
|
I would like to point out that objectively, there is nothing WRONG with power gaming, so long as the rules are being followed. If someone wants to make their character as powerful as the rules will allow, they should not be punished for that.
That being said, what becomes a problem is when players break the rules as is the case with the OP's player and when the player does things are against the spirit of the game (Like reading the adventure path).
I will char op to my heart's content, min-maxing my ability scores, feats, weapons, magic items, skills and spells. None of that makes me a bad person or a bad player. But if I cheat, then that's a different story. And it's also an important distinction.
This is why i don't like the use of terms like power gamer, i mean what is a power gamer? I think if you asked 100 people you would get 100 different answers if you got into the details.
To me a power gamer is someone that looks for loopholes in the rules, finds combinations of things that break the spirit of the game, even if the rules allow it.
|
|
I will char op to my heart's content, min-maxing my ability scores, feats, weapons, magic items, skills and spells. None of that makes me a bad person or a bad player. But if I cheat, then that's a different story. And it's also an important distinction.Having a powerful character is a good thing. Playing that character in such a way as to belittle the other characters, or to deliberately spoil the enjoyment of the other players, is treading perilously close to being a bad player.
But that's not power gaming, that's being a douche.
|
|
I would like to point out that objectively, there is nothing WRONG with power gaming, so long as the rules are being followed. If someone wants to make their character as powerful as the rules will allow, they should not be punished for that.It's problematic in some environments, particularly when other players aren't having fun because one player is overshadowing everyone else, or the other players are getting their characters killed in the GM's attempt to challenge the power gamer. I think thinking of the response as "punishment" makes it harder to resolve the real issues it can cause. If one player is having fun and the others aren't because of the way he's playing, something needs to change, and that one player can generally either change or leave (or worse, cause the dissolution of the whole group). This is true whether the one player is being the power gamer, the guy who likes to talk to all the NPCs at length, or the guy who likes to play quirky ineffectual characters.
My problem with that is that you're suggesting their is a way to play the game wrong.
There's nothing wrong with power gaming, being chatty with NPCs or playing a quirky, ineffectual character. I've done all three.
To me it sounds like you are saying that someone should change how they play a game because they're too good at it and have too much fun playing it. To me, that makes no sense.
Having a powerful character is a good thing. Playing that character in such a way as to belittle the other characters, or to deliberately spoil the enjoyment of the other players, is treading perilously close to being a bad player.But that's not power gaming, that's being a douche.
On this we can agree.
My problem with that is that you're suggesting their is a way to play the game wrong.
There is a way to play the game wrong: if you play such that you spoil the fun of the other gamers at the table, you are playing it wrong. The only wrongbadfun is spoiling the fun of others.
|
|
My problem with that is that you're suggesting their is a way to play the game wrong.There is a way to play the game wrong: if you play such that you spoil the fun of the other gamers at the table, you are playing it wrong. The only wrongbadfun is spoiling the fun of others.
And that I understand, but people are implying that you can do such a thing just by being GOOD at the game.
Imagine as an analogy: We are all playing a game of Risk. I am significantly better at Risk than everyone else. Why am I the a#!&&!# when I win the game?
It just seems silly to me to blame someone for being too GOOD at a game.
Too lazy to read everything but...
1) Has he said he's read the AP?
If no, continue to 2
If yes, say you don't want to have any players who've already read the AP as players.
2) If you were to ask him if he's read the AP, and he said no, would you believe him?
If no, why are you playing with someone who you don't even trust?
If yes, then you don't have to worry about that part of the equation any more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just have a problem with the notion that it's "creative". It's not, it's the opposite of creativity to reinterpret and argue about *rules*. Creativity would be to lob a rock or -better yet- an insult at someone to lure them into chasing you into a hedge maze or garden or something and *then* cast your entangle spell. Creativity would be to drape a white sheet over your head, cast faerie fire on yourself and scare away the NPC by pretending to be a ghost. Rules lawyering is what you do when you fail to be creative.
|
|
As I said above, looking at it as "blame" is not productive. If you always win at Risk, people may not want to play with you. They're under no obligation to play Risk with you. If you do play Risk so well and want to play with a group of people who don't play Risk so well, perhaps you should volunteer to take a handicap. Bragging about how good you are at Risk and getting annoyed at them for not playing with you is not the way to get people to play Risk at you; in fact, they may not want to play any games with you.Imagine as an analogy: We are all playing a game of Risk. I am significantly better at Risk than everyone else. Why am I the a*&~@@~ when I win the game?
It just seems silly to me to blame someone for being too GOOD at a game.
Whoa, who said anything about bragging?
My point is this: If you never play with people who are better at the game than you are, how are you going to improve yourself?
When I first started playing table top games, I sucked. I didn't know any of the rules or how to make good characters.
I learned because the people who I played with were better than me and knew what they were doing. Now I'm pretty good.
I mean, I get the point, I do. And I try to make sure that everyone has fun. To be honest, I spend most of my time GMing anymore, so that's my time priority most of the time.
I just feel like punishing someone for being good at a game is not the right way to go about doing things.
If the OP is still reading this post with all the trolling, I empathize that it's tough to dump players after you've been together a long time. Unless you're ready to exclude him, there are good strategies to apply:
1. Some poster mentioned that he makes a support character, eg. healbot, bard, etc.
2. Have a group collaboration character making party. Where he shows his work and everyone shares opinions. Potentially without time to crunch, it won't be as broken. If it comes pre-built, he can spend his time offering suggestions to the other players.
3. Reward things that you want to happen more often with Hero Points, XP, or GM bonus goodies, eg. specific magic items. For example, reward backgrounds that explain character builds, campaign integration, and direction of role-playing. Reward role-playing over roll-playing. Reward innovative solutions as opposed to the alternatives prepared for in the AP.
4. Reverse the AP if he's read it. If certain NPCs were villains, make them potential allies and vice versa. Run the second set of NPCs as is, so he doesn't know who he can trust.
5. Be politely firm on Rule 0, "I understand that trick (potted plant entangle) works in your games, but not in this one."
cheers
When power gamers focus excessively on purchasing magic items and their accumulation for all the body slots, or production for the same effects, the game suffers. This is bad, this is a negative. Shopping is not furthering the plot, crafting is not doing heroics. For the power gamer, the stats and their power matter most. That is why they are power gamers.
Npcs, other pcs, I've seen concern for these go right down. The power matters, that becomes all. I've also noticed whatever their alignment is listed as, power gamers often seem to be playing neutral evil. In game morality doesn't matter, the power gamer is a selfish murderous hobo. And don't you try to tell them otherwise. They are role-playing damn it! Or a gutted shell of it anyway with the flesh chewed away to make room for only themselves.
There is also another problem connected to this, that I have found. No one likes their character dying, but power gamers can be offended by real challenges or being defeated. They can also be offended by other pcs that have a similar strength to one of theirs, which they see as their area, their thing which shouldn't be done by other players (I do the most damage! I'm the barb, that is how it should be). They can also become flaky and leave if a game is hard. They don't want to lose, they want power and to laugh at everything else that is weak (perhaps they are closer to CE than NE?). Saw one power gamer leave a game as his char was sent off to execution for knocking off npcs. They are surprisingly fragile because they are obsessed with increasing their power. When their char is weakened or on the way out, they become highly moody.
Weakness is also something power gamers leap upon. If you join a power gaming group and you are not a power gamer, the weaker pc faces mockery and being told that they are not playing the game right. Your DPR is weak, your character is s~$!. Happened to a friend just recently, the poor guy.
Add to this a really high-strung attitude (ah! you are telling me what to do, I'll kill your character with my spells) and it leads to a lot of pain. Defenders of power gaming need to take a long hard look at themselves for power gaming is dodgy sh*t. Power gaming is one of the bigger problems facing this hobby, and it is warping it as well, the power gamers are growing.
Selfishness, greed, bitterness, no respect for others, the power gamer is a sad creature.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
5. Be politely firm on Rule 0, "I understand that trick (potted plant entangle) works in your games, but not in this one."
cheers
when someone thinks something will work, because they want it to, because it's worked in other games, or because they think it's the awesomest idea in the world, they can take it poorly when you say it fails. If you are feeling kind, say 'I don't think that's going to work how you think it will...do you want to do something else?' Give them a chance to rethink and save face. :)
Face. It sure is a big thing in games.
Needs more pots.
|
|
I just feel like punishing someone for being good at a game is not the right way to go about doing things.Again, people have pretty much nigh unlimited right to play with or not play with whoever they want to. If they choose not to play with someone because they're a powergamer, that's their choice. It's not punishment, it's just reality.
But we're not talking about things like choosing not to play with someone. We're talking about things like taking away power from a legitimately built character because it's somehow too good.
That's what doesn't make sense to me.
If you are at a table with 4 people, and three of them have weak characters and one has a strong character, why is it that the person who made the strong character has to tone their character down because everyone else has a weak character? Why not make the other three character's strong? Or heck, play the game as is and realize that it's not a freaking communist society where everyone is equal?
I try very hard not to dominate the table and let everyone participate and often offer my assistance if someone needs help selecting powers for their character. I don't see why If I create a crafty wizard or an immortal paladin or a mighty fighter that I must now nerf myself because other people aren't as combat effective as I am, or don't have as many skills as I do, or aren't as interested in RP as I am.
Mmm power gamers are quick to say a char or concept is mechanically weak, which becomes paired to wrong for them. You are doing the game wrong, you are playing it wrong, you should get this and take this.
A barb/wizard that doesn't concentrate on beefing int high may be considered woefully weak in spellcasting, but it may great fun to play and make the whole party laugh along at the antics of the scholar with anger issues.
To agree with pros, being better at character creation and knowing the mechanics doesn't make you better at role-playing, it makes you better at pushing your powerful char on the setting of the world. Power is being concentrated upon here.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Step out of your close-minded group, then you'll see who's a minority. This is the first time I see someone not allowing a plant to be used for Entangle. Not realizing it can be done, sure. But specifically not allowing? Never.
That is from under Aiming a Spell in the Area of Effect section. This explains more clearly why the plant idea and ImperatorK's concept is just wrong all around.I don't see which part is even relevant here.
Ok, I don't think that using an alias is helping your argument IX. It is called using a sock puppet and makes you look like you have to be dishonest to make your point. Although I don't agree with your interpretation of entangle, I do think you have a right to believe how you want. Just please don't try to make it look like people agree with you when it is just your alias.
I just feel like punishing someone for being good at a game is not the right way to go about doing things.Again, people have pretty much nigh unlimited right to play with or not play with whoever they want to. If they choose not to play with someone because they're a powergamer, that's their choice. It's not punishment, it's just reality.But we're not talking about things like choosing not to play with someone. We're talking about things like taking away power from a legitimately built character because it's somehow too good.
That's what doesn't make sense to me.
If you are at a table with 4 people, and three of them have weak characters and one has a strong character, why is it that the person who made the strong character has to tone their character down because everyone else has a weak character? Why not make the other three character's strong? Or heck, play the game as is and realize that it's not a freaking communist society where everyone is equal?
I try very hard not to dominate the table and let everyone participate and often offer my assistance if someone needs help selecting powers for their character. I don't see why If I create a crafty wizard or an immortal paladin or a mighty fighter that I must now nerf myself because other people aren't as combat effective as I am, or don't have as many skills as I do, or aren't as interested in RP as I am.
I liked your mid-point. It even heads into Nietzschean territory on democracy being the tyranny of the weak over and controlling the strong. Perhaps a dm does not want such a power gap opening between players, indeed maybe a power gamer will have to rein it in for the benefit of the group. I've heard such communist ideas on the group before the individual before, but I more back the individual. Power gaming though, I've had some awful experiences and seen some terrible players, so I don't back them.