Play online, like I do. You can find a lot of cool people online to play with.
I've got a game starting up in a month or two you might enjoy, and I need a couple of people to fill out the group, if you want to try it. I'm new-ish to the game as a whole and GMing in particular, but I try my damnedest to be fair and keep the game interesting.
i cannot do it saturday evenings, from 5-10 PM PST
but any other day of the week is fine.
or hell, so is PBP.
because there are very few other groups in my area. and none of them want an autistic 24 year old anime geek with a 16 year freeform background, an unhealthy obsession with a certain anime inspired line of bullet hell danmaku shooters, and an unhealthy love for both a certain RPG line, and Strategy game line, both by Nippon Ichi Software, and several questionable anime titles involving cute small framed female characters that could pass off for far younger than they are.Seriously though, why DO you play with this guy?
You have nothing but bad things to say about him, find a new game.
Sounds like several of my friends and people I gamed with in high school. I don't have a problem with that. I know plenty of people who like bullet hell and Disgaea and the other Nipon Ichi games and all sorts of anime. That said, its easy to feel like your out of options when you really aren't. I've been through several groups in my area, but I know there are always more and there's likely someone who'd be awesome to play with. I don't stick with the ones I don't like or I feel mistreat me. You make it sound like Stockholm syndrome and your a terrible person. Stop that.
On another note, not everyone leaves their GM, even when they're awful people.
Remember One man's punishment is another man's pleasure.I could see that phrasing going horribly wrong. Personally, I never liked taking glee in a particular player doing badly or in a GM taking glee in that sort of thing. Never sat well with me.
Um...yes did you read the rest of my post though?
What I meant by that statement besides the tongue in cheek reference to BDSM is this...
Player A and Player B are both playing rogues. Player A anbd Player B like to and steal from people. GM being allows this....but both players roll badly and get caught.
Player A crys "You are punishing me"
Player B looks at the situration ans thinks this could be fun to RP and such.
That is why as a GM you should know your player very well.
Damn, if I wasn't running anything already, I'd run a campaign just so you don't have to deal with a+$#&!$s like your GM.
because there are very few other groups in my area. and none of them want an autistic 24 year old anime geek with a 16 year freeform background, an unhealthy obsession with a certain anime inspired line of bullet hell danmaku shooters, and an unhealthy love for both a certain RPG line, and Strategy game line, both by Nippon Ichi Software, and several questionable anime titles involving cute small framed female characters that could pass off for far younger than they are.Seriously though, why DO you play with this guy?
You have nothing but bad things to say about him, find a new game.
Sounds like several of my friends and people I gamed with in high school. I don't have a problem with that. I know plenty of people who like bullet hell and Disgaea and the other Nipon Ichi games and all sorts of anime. That said, its easy to feel like your out of options when you really aren't. I've been through several groups in my area, but I know there are always more and there's likely someone who'd be awesome to play with. I don't stick with the ones I don't like or I feel mistreat me. You make it sound like Stockholm syndrome and your a terrible person. Stop that.
On another note, not everyone leaves their GM, even when they're awful people.
well
a PF group to get the loosely Touhou/Disgaea/Neptunia/La Pucelle inspired ideas off my chest could work.
i will totally RP a nymph blooded puppeteer from the World of Gameindustri whom was once one of Black Heart's Agents and lives the posh lifestyle of a countess. (reskinned fetchling bard.)
or i would gladly do an angel blooded oracle of the goddess "Echidna". mother of monsters and madness. "Lady Schizophrene." angelic agent of madness and lover of aberrations. (Echidna could be Lamashtu's mother or a cultural Rename.)
Well, my game would be based around a crime syndicate, but nobody ever said you can't be a perky, cheerful thief/assassin/kidnapper/extortionist.
It'd utilize my Freeform Class Selection system as well, so you'd have a bit more flexibility in class features, BaB/Skills/HD ratio, and so on.
I'd be hesitant to allow guns, though it could be interesting to have enemies with firearms so I'm flexible on that too.
800 a month would be nice to make I'll admit.
considering that Rent can eat up 1,000$ USD or more on it's own, and a week's groceries are 500$ USD or more assuming you live the starving college student diet. if i lived alone, my debt would multiply each month and that isn't factoring a car, insurance, gas, or my medical requirements.
i'm lucky i live with my overworked accountant mother, whom seems to be the only thing keeping a certain Semi-Big west coast Grocery company even close to functioning.
Where the heck do you live? New York City? Perhaps an island where everything needs to be imported (thus driving up the prices to pretty much everything)?
Around where I live you can get a roof over your head for as little as $300/month (or $600 for a halfway decent apartment) with food costing maybe $50/week for one person.
Holy crap. I don't spend $500 on groceries a month for myself. Rent is $1050 down here in Florida, but I have roommates.
800 a month would be nice to make I'll admit.considering that Rent can eat up 1,000$ USD or more on it's own, and a week's groceries are 500$ USD or more assuming you live the starving college student diet. if i lived alone, my debt would multiply each month and that isn't factoring a car, insurance, gas, or my medical requirements.
i'm lucky i live with my overworked accountant mother, whom seems to be the only thing keeping a certain Semi-Big west coast Grocery company even close to functioning.
Where the heck do you live? New York City? Perhaps an island where everything needs to be imported (thus driving up the prices to pretty much everything)?
Around where I live you can get a roof over your head for as little as $300/month (or $600 for a halfway decent apartment) with food costing maybe $50/week for one person.
middle of nowhere, on the furthest edges of Sacramento county from civilization. where rent is ridiculous and groceries are overpriced.
plus, being diabetic, i have to deal with special dietary and medical needs. those special needs drastically ramp up my grocery prices.
@Rabingdork: Food, I agree, but rent can get pretty expensive even in small cities. I was looking at apartments here in Tallahassee recently and about as cheap as I could find WAS $800 a month in any place that would be worth living.
Sure you can go cheaper if you wanna head over to Cracktown, but...
Ah okay. That makes a bit more sense. Yeesh.
Food, I agree, but rent can get pretty expensive even in small cities. I was looking at apartments here in Tallahassee recently and about as cheap as I could find WAS $800 a month in any place that would be worth living.
Sure you can go cheaper if you wanna head over to Cracktown, but...
That's true. Down here in Melbourne, I was able to find some places as low as $550, but they are either A) in Meth-ville or B) they require you to make 3x as much as the rent if you live alone. So yeah, shit's nuts. Sadly, I just barely clear $1000 a month so I had to stick with roommates. Although my roommates are pretty rad.
Well, my game would be based around a crime syndicate, but nobody ever said you can't be a perky, cheerful thief/assassin/kidnapper/extortionist.
It'd utilize my Freeform Class Selection system as well, so you'd have a bit more flexibility in class features, BaB/Skills/HD ratio, and so on.
I'd be hesitant to allow guns, though it could be interesting to have enemies with firearms so I'm flexible on that too.
oblivious yet perky, cheerful, and clumsy angel blooded enforcer/bandit/kidnapper whom plays the role of a beatstick and flanking buddy. pretends to be a holy knight, and effectively does a good job of pretending to be a paladin. (Actually a godless Angelkin paladin of C/N alignment whom gains divine powers through mimicry.)
Wow this thing is still rolling a week later? whats been going on? and why are we talking about rent payment?
you can blame me for mentioning my lack of income as an excuse for why it is difficult to find localized PF groups.
... and THIS is why I love this forum. The thread begins as "GM's can be real JERKS! Stop it!", devolves into "No, the players are dumb" and the retort: "No, they're not!" but somewhere in the middle of it all, the little Rose of Spanish Harlem that is Lumi blooms into a cool, niche online game that accepts her altogether.
It just...gives you that warm fuzzy feeling doesn't it? Like, no matter how bad it gets out there, it's not really THAT bad?
Alright, sorry for the bleeding heart crap. Carry on with the shenanigans...
Um...yes did you read the rest of my post though?
I did, just that words don't convey perfectly over the internet.
It'd utilize my Freeform Class Selection system as well, so you'd have a bit more flexibility in class features, BaB/Skills/HD ratio, and so on.
Oh, can I see?
Weren't we talking about GM's punishing their players instead of talking things out? Weird. Looks like more positive energy going around, if that matters.
Oh, can I see?
Yeah. It needs a bit of playtesting (hence its use), but I had a thread and here's the Google Doc.
You can thank Byrdology for some of that, he and others have been a big help.
And I do need another player, by the by...
Oh, can I see?
Yeah. It needs a bit of playtesting (hence its use), but I had a thread and here's the Google Doc.
You can thank Byrdology for some of that, he and others have been a big help.
And I do need another player, by the by...
having issues with the Docs. Doc won't open.
And I do need another player, by the by...
The link didn't like me, but I'd be interested. Shouuld probably move this sort of chat into a private chat instead of Hijacking RD's thread though.
Send me your e-mail, I'll share it. I have it set to "anyone with the link can view" though, that's weird.
And yeah, move to PMs and/or I'll start a Discussion thread for it in Online Campaigns for anyone who's interested.
Send me your e-mail, I'll share it. I have it set to "anyone with the link can view" though, that's weird.
And yeah, move to PMs and/or I'll start a Discussion thread for it in Online Campaigns for anyone who's interested.
sounds awesome.
Stupid link not working; someone ought to make that link look really stupid in the next combat scene, just to teach it a lesson.
(Comment redacted by poster)
SCP reference!
i'm lucky i live with my overworked accountant mother, whom seems to be the only thing keeping a certain Semi-Big west coast Grocery company even close to functioning.
This is better suited for another forum, please.
Why give a hint, when you can give clear communication?And it does go both ways. EVERYONE has to be mature and friendly for it to work. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
Of course you did. It's right there in your thread title - this, to you, is a GM-only problem. They are 'punishing' players (how exactly I have no idea) for all slights real and imagined.
Really this is just another of your "extreme" views (lol) to get people upset...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
His title says "To all the GMs out there who punish", not "All GMs punish".
The former carries a lot of context you have missed, namely "There are some GMs out there who unfairly punish their players, this is directed at you".
That's important.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately there are human beings out there who enjoy hurting others. This might be bullying, or perhaps the hurter were themselves victimized in some way and are lashing out; perhaps its merely a cry for attention. There are many reasons for this behavior; too many for this post. Still, it is a fact that there are purposely hurtful people in this world.
Some of these human beings use subtle means to hurt people, and in that they only lash out when they themselves feel threatened, annoyed or otherwise impugned. Of these, some play these games. Of those that play, some are GMs.
This is fact. I'm not going to debate "punish" nor am I going to lay out what mannerisms or behaviors to look for. I'm not even going to say whether or not it's right. I'm only saying it is.
I was one of these folks. My story is that I was the youngest in a big family; I was also physically the smallest among mostly boys. I grew up with essentially no voice in a loud house. Being a GM gave me a voice.
As I got better through my youth, my stories got better as did my games. By the time I hit high school I was the GM everyone wanted to run their games. This was the downslide though. I was drinking a cocktail of feelings of insignificance coupled with the insane ego of adolesence fueled by the ravings of my friends who, frankly, just didn't know any better.
I was on a roll; my stuff didn't stink. Everything I ran came up aces. Unfortunately there were those foolish players who thought they should have a say in my games. It was MY game after all; they were just the lucky so-and-so's living in it. I'd drop traps, spells and fiat situations like guard captures and trumped up charges and such for reasons as minor as I didn't like powergamers or they didn't enjoy my background music.
I never outright murdered anyone's character. That's how I justified it. I never just simply dropped a ceiling on anyone or swallowed them whole or fired off a disintegration beam from an errant beholder. I merely pulled some shenanigans that took them out of the game for a bit like paralyzation or something. Sort of like putting the player in time out. But at least I wasn't a Killer GM.
Then came 3rd edition. This was the first crack in my armor. I resisted it for months, even though I was actually AT Gen Con that year and bought a Player's Handbook. When I wouldn't run 3e my buddies went to another friend who would. Suddenly I had competition.
Then I got on board. I began putting together a campaign. Unfortunately months off my game and using a new system proved daunting; I stumbled over rules, I choked for inspiration at the table. I filled in the gaps with WoD games and Marvel Super Heroes; 2 games I already knew and were "safe." But my friends had seen behind the veil.
My games all began imploding. I'd start something, run it for a few sessions, and then fights would break out between me and the players. I figured it was their fault, for not seeing my greatness. But as game after game dropped, I tried swapping out players, trying different personality configurations. The outcome was always the same; I had no stable game.
I did something I hadn't done in nearly a decade at that point: I talked to my players. I remember it clearly. I'd been venting to one buddy off and on about it and he was getting fed up, so he said I should just get it all off my chest once and for all. So I got a "game day" together but essentially just arrived at this guy's apartment and spent a couple hours just sitting in his dining room, laying it out there and getting feedback.
I was a crappy GM. Yep, my friends ACTUALLY said that to me. One of the guys there was one of the more vocal ones in HS in saying I was awesome; now I was crappy. I was shocked, and wanted to just get up and leave. But I stuck it out, and here's where I feel like I turned a corner.
My players told me they didn't like my pettiness. They described how it seemed like every time they wanted to give me some input on my games or playstyle I had an answer for everything; that it was never MY fault for a bad session. Meanwhile they then noticed that anyone that spoke up lagged in party items, cool scenes or just general in-game fulfillment.
I vented my frustrations as well; I was still getting the hang of 3e and the pacing was WAY different from the older editions. I was obviously off my games and that was a tough pedestal to fall from. I agreed to be a player for a while. That was a good education. I kept other systems' games going and slowly crawled back to 3e.
I learned to hear the players and consider them as equals. I also learned that in never killing anyone they figured the games didn't matter so their in-character behavior got even worse. I didn't take that to mean I should start murdering them; rather I should give honest fights and roll out in the open, letting the chips fall where they may.
3e became 3.5. I heard about this new batch of folks putting out excellent work in Dungeon magazine. I moved a couple states away from my old gameing group. My game was in fugue for a long while. Then I found Pathfinder.
Mechanically it fixed a lot of what I was ham-handedly trying to houserule. It also gave a lot of poweropenly to the players, while still maintaining a GM to facilitate things. THIS was the mechanical expression of my new gaming style. I've devoured this system ever since.
Its been about 9 years since I started trying to be more moderate a GM. Its still a bumpy road from time to time and there will ALWAYS be players who disrupt things for whatever reason. But I TALK to them now. What they're doing that bothers me, vice-versa, and whether or not my game is right for them. I've cycled through 3 different gaming groups, taking players from here and there and cobbling together a game. This patchwork wasn't assembled out of spite but rather in laying myself and my game out there for my players and giving them the choice to either enjoy it or not.
I've made it a point to communicate with my players. This seems to have made a difference in my games.
Thanks for sharing that.
His title says "To all the GMs out there who punish", not "All GMs punish".
The former carries a lot of context you have missed, namely "There are some GMs out there who unfairly punish their players, this is directed at you".
That's important.
Huh - and *I* didn't say it was all GMs either or that the OP said that. Just that, to Ravingdork,, this is a GM-only problem.
Now I've posted twice in this thread - I need a shower.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This post is too heavy for me to follow... So I'll just leave this here and walk away~
I find that even if a player "really deserves it", I never need to punish them. They'll do it for me, and then blame me for it.
The best example is the juggernaut mentality: They get to an encounter that was never meant to be a fight, charge in, die, and complain that I put them up against something unreasonable and throw a fit.
Usually, if you try to explain to the same person that it wasn't meant to be combat encounter, or that monsters aren't born to bleed XP, they'll argue "That's stupid!" or "But I'm a (class)!"
Am I the only one, as a GM, that wonders where self preservation has gone in the minds of players?
I'm guessing MMO type games are the leading culprit, though really anything with a respawn/reload option is at fault.
Players forget that fighting isn't the only option - or that they can retreat if needed, depending on the foe.
So many people value their total scores and combat ability over character depth, that it actually depresses me sometimes.
I've never been a book reader, but D&D (then Pathfinder) is what gave me my love for a deep story, and the ability to see one through.
These are the types of people who often "deserve punishment".
They are also the type of people who, given a world filled with creatures of varying power, will eventually punish themselves.
Yeah, I understand that. Assuming they will be able to take everything, that all encounters are combat encounters, and that they will take it without too much trouble. It is a piece of the pie of player entitlement, and the funniest example I have was the following:
Party are pirates, they are on a medium sized pirate ship, they have a few small ships along for the ride. They decide to attack a heavy Chelaxian convoy, including warships (it is a very late in the game prize, you take it when you are ready). Now they know it is filled with pikemen and soldiers, they can see them. They still go to board. They take a thrashing, other members of the party desert, and one guy tries to solo the whole ship with him and a few men.
He dies, run through from all sides.
He quits game.
As a player, I try to really pay attention to whether we can take something, or whether we can not. I've done the last stand, and also run from combat a bit, back to help and reinforcements for instance. I have played with some harsh dms, so that while it can involve a lot of punishment can encourage thinking and discretion, so you don't get ganked by 20 goblins at level 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's discretion...then there's punishment.
Your first level party is low on resources, wandering through a series of rough-hewn caverns. You've encountered several lone vermin, traps and a couple of mites. You spy one last crude plank door, behind which you hear obvious loud celebrating in the cartoonishly squeaky voices of the mites. You have yet to find ALL the villagers you were sent after and those you HAVE found say that the mites joked that the remaining victims were to be "had for dinner!"
Discretion: you make your way back to the saved villagers, rally them with Diplomacy, arm them as best you can with found weapons, and then make for the door; upon opening it you surprise 6 mites, a mite ranger 2 leader and several Fire Beetles about to dine on the wriggling villagers. Combat ensues where the last of your resources hold the mites at the bottleneck of the doorway while the leader flees.
Punishment: you make your way back to the saved villagers; to your horror the one spider you missed has bitten or driven off all of them. After a brief melee with it you realize it was sent here by the celebrating mites...mites who've followed you to this rear cavern. You are surrounded by 3 mites at each exit with your backs against the wall. Amid the pint-sized horrors also buzz three Fire Beetles, each somehow bearing a load of heavy stones in a net ready to drop them on you. In the rear the largest of them, a mite ranger 2 leader sneers "awlright crue; DE-SSERT!"
Even worse would be that the spider just happened to single out a particular PC (the one w/the shirt that MOST annoys the GM) and bites them repeatedly, living long enough to successfully deliver 3 doses of it's poison and effectively making their melee attacks worthless for the upcoming fight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread has shown amazing longevity. I'm impressed with the residual rage and clever non sequiturs. I never would have expected it to last through the weekend.
Rocks fall; everyone dies.
Now go do something constructive, for pity's sake.
Yeah, I understand that. Assuming they will be able to take everything, that all encounters are combat encounters, and that they will take it without too much trouble. It is a piece of the pie of player entitlement, and the funniest example I have was the following:
Party are pirates, they are on a medium sized pirate ship, they have a few small ships along for the ride. They decide to attack a heavy Chelaxian convoy, including warships (it is a very late in the game prize, you take it when you are ready). Now they know it is filled with pikemen and soldiers, they can see them. They still go to board. They take a thrashing, other members of the party desert, and one guy tries to solo the whole ship with him and a few men.
He dies, run through from all sides.
He quits game.Part of the problem here may be that in D&D/PF, saying "it is filled with pikemen and soldiers" doesn't really tell you anything.
What level is the party? What level are those soldiers? Do the players/PCs have any reason to know? If you know they're all 5th level and the players are assuming they're 1st level mooks - assumption clash.On top of that, how many is "filled with"? 20? 50? 200?
Basically a troop transport. Over 100 troops vs a handful of boarders, none of which were level 9. Their crew took heavy casualties from ranged before they boarded. Explained they were elite. Even if the Chel marines were level 1, they still wouldn't have won, too overwhelmed in the action economy, too much armour, too many attacks.
A boat larger than yours, filled with more soldiers than yours, with superior ranged and melee capabilities, is not something you take with a rapier charge by a few heroes.
Also punishment: you make your way back to the saved villagers, rally them with Diplomacy, arm them as best you can with found weapons, and then make for the door; upon opening it you surprise the few remaining mites who have just finished devouring the villagers. Combat ensues where you easily overpower them. If only you'd come sooner.
That is kind of funny.
Players forget that fighting isn't the only option - or that they can retreat if needed, depending on the foe.
There's another thread floating around here somewhere that aptly describes why running away is almost NEVER a viable option in Pathfinder.
I'll see if I can dig it up.
Really, the only time retreat is an option is if you see the enemy before it sees you and determine you can't take that and just leave.
I mean, yeah, "I make a Kn. Planes check on that guy."
"It's a Balor."
"Lolno."
Might happen sometimes, but generally if you wanna run away it's gonna be against something you could conceivably have taken down, but crappy rolls, surprises, bad organization, etc. screws you.
And by then it's too late for everyone except the Teleporters and MAAAAYBE the Monk if he gets out early.
By the time you see the balor, the balor DEFINITELY sees you. Good luck getting away from a teleporter.
|
Seriously though, why DO you play with this guy?
You have nothing but bad things to say about him, find a new game.
Lumi said earlier, and I quote
"because we don't have many groups that can tolerate my akward character design methods."
Which says to me "Because I demand they accept my playstyle, most GM's don't want to play with me"
So I ask again,
Is it only elitist when people make you adapt to them, and not when you make them adapt to you?
If you aren't willing to be flexible, it's rather hypocritical to expect flexibility from others...
|
|
Our best GM set up a room with a series of swords in a stones, one of which said in 10 different languages more or less "Don't remove this sword, or great evil will be released!"
Of the six people in the party, 5 of them could read at least one of the languages. One couldn't.
Through this particularly hard dungeon, the group got separated (our fault) and 2 of the remaining 3 who made it to this particular room were incapacitated.
Rather than waiting for us to recover, or waiting for the rest of the group to arrive, the one person who couldn't read the writing, who happened to be the only one that made it, pulled all of the swords in the room from all of the stones.
4 levels of war campaign ensued.
Were we "punished" by our GM? Nope. We were rewarded with one of the most fun campaigns any of us had ever played. The room was intended as a series of puzzles to be solved that would eventually lead to a quest that would teach us how to safely remove the evil held in place by that sword. He didn't intend for us not to be able to read the writing, 5 of us could have read it if we made it to the room.
But we didn't, and so when we pulled the sword, the logical consequences of our actions ensued.
If your GM deviates from logical consequences to personally "get" you, that isn't cool.
If you and your party do things that would logically lead to bad things happening in the game world, intentionally or not, and the GM has those bad things happen, that is the GM doing exactly what they are supposed to do.
Actions should have consequences. If we felt like the great evil we unleashed was a punishment for taking the sword that was labeled "Don't remove this" we would be right. Punishment/consequence, Elevator or Lift, same thing, different words.