Are the other players irritated too, or are they desensitized to his craziness? Are they all close friends? You might be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, if you play your cards right.
I've had similar experiences, though not anything so severe, though the GM in question runs WoD while I run PF. He always interprets rules in the way that benefits him the most and rarely reads the full text of his spells. It's rarely a problem when I'm running the game because I can shut it down, but if we're both playing in a game run by someone else, especially a newer GM, it's frustrating because the newer GMs don't have as comprehensive a knowledge of the rules and are easier to convince to do something that is clearly not possible for a reason (Enlarge Person is a melee touch spell, a TOUCH SPELL, Jay)
Aye, what's the group consensus of this DM-turned-player?
He is getting some funny looks from them sometimes but I don't think they are as irritated as I am.
I don't think they have ever seen him as a player before. None of them were willing to be GM.
He isn't that bad as a GM. A little controlling and authoritarian, but most of them are.
He and 2 players are fairly close friends. Me an 1 other guy really only know them through this gaming group.
I probably won't quit. I will try to slog through the end of the 2nd module. But after that my 'work schedule' won't give me the time to GM prep for a while. I'm not going to pick up the GM mantle ever again with him as a player.
Your other players may be thinking the exact same thing but aren't saying anything about it because they think it's okay (if you aren't visibly showing that you are upset with him during the game) or they just don't want to raise a fuss.
So, your GM makes a frustrating player, got it. (I've seen many GMs who were good players.)
Glad you talked to him about it.
If you want advice (if you don't, just ignore): perhaps he's the kind of guy who sort of mouths off and vents, then is done. So while he's complained to you about a lot of stuff, he feels like he's emptied himself of concerns and gets back to playing... and doesn't realize how his complaints have stuck with you, which is why he's baffled you're upset. You might want to have another chat with him about it and clarify some boundaries. It's good for a GM to take feedback, but I dig the frustration if he's causing a lot of issues.
Unfortunately, in some cases you may just need to start ignoring him--especially if he really is just venting and then lets stuff go.
Other, unsolicited, ignore or not, thoughts:
He picked the undead heavy module and is upset that his mind magic sorc can't do anything.
Offer him the option of rebuilding his character or sucking it up. You are not responsible for his bad decisions; make that clear.
He complained for 3 straight session (in uncharted wilderness) that there wasn't anyplace to buy gear. So I finally gave in and added a previously unknown city that is not on any map. He decided to save up his money for a bigger purchase later.
If folks are complaining about lack of gear, and there is good reason for it, then I normally write in a treasure cache rather than a town.
Also, I sympathize. I had players for three sessions once talk on and on about all this stuff they were going to do once they got to this city. I planned this massive city adventure, full of all kinds of opportunities for them to get loot, gain allies, roleplay, etc. In this case, the stop in the city was planned, but I really took a lot of time fleshing it out, based precisely upon what I heard the player's saying. They then showed up, did a couple quick things, and decided to leave, ignoring all the other plans they had made prior, and I had nothing planned past the city because I thought it would take a good session or two to get through it all.
The lesson I learned was 1) not to plan based on the player's plans, 2) plan enough to have contingencies, but plan wide rather than deep, and then learn to wing it based on what they decide to do. I also learned that when people complained about not having certain things available to tell them to suck it up, or I would attack them with a pit fiend. ;)
Also, with the gear issues... this is also something that he should be talking about with the players, and the players in general should have been sure they were prepared before they left for other uncharted wilderness. "hey guys, I forgot to buy rations..." is an easily solvable issue.
He doesn't allow rules lawyering when he is GM. Second guess have to wait until after the session. But he is constantly trying weird things that I don't think there is rule about. Then he argues with however I rule it. Even when it is in his favor.
Something you are just going to have to put your foot down on. I don't mind players asking me to double check a rule or correcting me on something, but I expect them to accept a ruling and move on.
I do admit, I have a GM who is a little less versed in the rules than I am and I have a tendency to correct him or ask him to check something. But I also say, frequently, "If this bothers you, I'll stop," and normally he's cool with it, and he even asks me to corroborate on certain calls. I also accept his rulings even if I disagree with him.
I said nearly no house rules except allowing a few build combinations that RAW does not. (Ex: cross-blooded and wild-blooded at the same time.) But he wants house rules about how everything seems like it should work based on the flavor text. House rules that he doesn't use when he is GM.
Definitely something else he needs to suck up or leave. I hope it doesn't have to come to you making that ultimatum.
He casts detect evil, detect magic, detect poison, and every other detect he has on nearly every NPC encountered. But doesn't think it is 'fair' that they don't like having spells cast on them. When he is GM it would have gotten us run out of town.
"You understand this is a roleplaying game, right? The NPCs are part of the roleplaying experience. Suck it up."
You should also be reminding him that each of those spells takes one minute to get running properly.
Thinks he should be able to cast quietly enough to not be heard with a stealth roll. Even though he knows that is not how the rules work. Doesn't allow it when he is GM either.
I DO allow that under certain circumstances, but part of my ruling is also that it slows casting down.
That said, if he doesn't allow it and you have reason not to, he needs to shut up.
Feels that 'lawful' and 'stubborn' should give him an extra re-roll vs mind effecting spells.
No. Although if the entire group wishes for more flexibility, you could always introduce hero points.
Is upset that I haven't used any of the hooks in his completely illegible scribbled back story. Even though they are trapped in a new land that no one had ever even heard of before. Somehow his archenemy should be here waiting for him.
Apparently I should be enforcing the others to play by their alignments and background personalities. Even though he never did anything like that.
"Would you like to be GM again?"
I'm stopping here. I am sorry, I'd want to punch this guy in the face. I hope you can work it out with him or at best learn to shrug off his whining.
One of my favorite methods with dealing with really strange player requests is to make it a group decision. Taking something like "lawful or stubborn should give a reroll versus mind-affecting" ask the group if they would like to make that a house rule.
If they actually think it over, they will realize it is a very bad idea. Then, they will talk the other player out of it. If they all seem to think it is a good idea, then make sure some of the NPCs are also "stubborn" and thus get a reroll.
Same with detection magics. Put these to a group decision. "Would you guys like to make it a house rule that people can covertly cast divination spells without people noticing that they are casting spells?"
Always make sure to gently remind them that the enemies will be able to do the same. If they don't get the hint, make sure the enemies (especially intelligent ones) use these effects to their fullest.
And always document & date any house rules. If the problem player then complains when an NPC pulls off something that a house rule covered, you can (once again, gently) pull out the house rule list and say "Yeah, back on x date we decided to make it a house rule that blah blah blah."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
- He picked the undead heavy module and is upset that his mind magic sorc can't do anything.
- Feels that 'lawful' and 'stubborn' should give him an extra re-roll vs mind effecting spells.
Ooh, a mind magic sorc who thinks some people should get extra saves against mind magic? I would so mess with him...
"Finally! A chance to charm someone who isn't undead!"
"He fails the save! But wait, I agree with you, he's lawful, he gets a re-roll. Oh! Look! He succeeded! Yes, your rule is superior."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That sounds fun to me. But that kind of passive-aggressive just never seems to result in anything but hurt feelings. Which I'm trying to avoid.
- He picked the undead heavy module and is upset that his mind magic sorc can't do anything.
- Feels that 'lawful' and 'stubborn' should give him an extra re-roll vs mind effecting spells.
Ooh, a mind magic sorc who thinks some people should get extra saves against mind magic? I would so mess with him...
"Finally! A chance to charm someone who isn't undead!"
"He fails the save! But wait, I agree with you, he's lawful, he gets a re-roll. Oh! Look! He succeeded! Yes, your rule is superior."
While I agree that not hurting feelings is important, he's hurting your feelings by being antagonistic. He needs to see that his antagonism is creating a worse game. Especially since he'd argue for a reroll against magic that he specialized in--that's not looking for consistency, that's just attempting to steamroll you.
If he can see that his antagonism is a bad idea without hurting his feelings, that's fine. But if he needs to see his success suffer BECAUSE he's being antagonistic, and it hurts his feelings, then it unfortunately needs to happen.
I think the only time I've gotten to play (in recent memory) was when one of my players wanted to take a second shot at GMing. Why a 'second shot'? Well much like in your case, the first time they tried, everything was doing great until their old high school GM (i.e. the one before me) decided to join in and troll the whole game into dissolution.
So while all GMs don't make bad players, I can certainly appreciate the frustration of being in such a situation. One similarity I've noted is that in both your case and the one we suffered thru, it seems like the former GM wants tons of special exceptions to be made in their case. I suppose you could chalk it up to them being used to having full authority over creative license, but ultimately you have to put your foot down.
Thank them for the stress-test, tell them you're perfectly happy GMing and aren't interested with engaging in system design , and to save any characters requiring lots of exceptions for the next game they GM. If they still don't get it, take them aside and explain that if they don't want to spend the rest of their natural life as 'always the GM never the player', then they need to chill out because they're making you want to not GM anymore.
To underscore this, you can even ask the group as a whole, "So does anyone else feel like GMing so that <old GM> can play, I'm starting to feel burned-out."
The sound of crickets and anxious glances screaming, "Not me!" might be a sobering reality check.
I know it is not all of them. Probably not even most of them. But...
I have only been in this group for a little while. The GM said he had been behind the screen for 3 years now and asked if was willing to GM so he could be a player for awhile. I'm not the greatest at it but sure.
He is driving me BONKERS!
Examples (changed some details so it shouldn't be to recognizable).
...
- He picked the undead heavy module and is upset that his mind magic sorc can't do anything.
- He complained for 3 straight session (in uncharted wilderness) that there wasn't anyplace to buy gear. So I finally gave in and added a previously unknown city that is not on any map. He decided to save up his money for a bigger purchase later.
- He doesn't allow rules lawyering when he is GM. Second guess have to wait until after the session. But he is constantly trying weird things that I don't think there is rule about. Then he argues with however I rule it. Even when it is in his favor.
- I said nearly no house rules except allowing a few build combinations that RAW does not. (Ex: cross-blooded and wild-blooded at the same time.) But he wants house rules about how everything seems like it should work based on the flavor text. House rules that he doesn't use when he is GM.
- He casts detect evil, detect magic, detect poison, and every other detect he has on nearly every NPC encountered. But doesn't think it is 'fair' that they don't like having spells cast on them. When he is GM it would have gotten us run out of town.
- Thinks he should be able to cast quietly enough to not be heard with a stealth roll. Even though he knows that is not how the rules work. Doesn't allow it when he is GM either.
- Feels that 'lawful' and 'stubborn' should give him an extra re-roll vs mind effecting spells.
- Is upset that I haven't used any of the hooks in his completely illegible scribbled back story. Even though they are trapped in a new land that no one had ever even heard of
A while back there was a poster here that said he would not put up with the things he does as a GM, but he does them anyway just because he can. Your GM/player may be one of those people. -->"It is fair if I do it, but not if you do it."
I have had to roll my dm tentacles of interference in when I play. Just... don't get angry or argue, just play the character.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... take them aside and explain that if they don't want to spend the rest of their natural life as 'always the GM never the player', then they need to chill out because they're making you want to not GM anymore...I will have to decide if I want to be that blunt about it or if I want to just avoid being GM ever again.
On the one hand, I really would like for him to understand what a problem he has been. Then the situation might improve.
On the other hand I have serious doubts that it will result in anything but hurt feelings and eventually me looking for another group.Anyway, thanks for letting me rant for a bit. I will go back to my regular account and see if I can at least bear through to the end of the module.
Sounds like you need a "round 2" of discussions with him. You sound so bloody worried about hurting his feelings, meanwhile he's trampling yours with no end in sight.
What he is doing is not ok. It will not simply get better. You need to put your foot down and be blunt with this person.
OP: Whether you are blunt or eloquent, at least remember that you aren't merely standing up for just yourself. If prior experience with my own friends is any indicator, a guy like this problem GM-turned-player could end up sinking the entire group. Assuming the other players are at least enjoying themselves, consider that they are quite possibly expecting you, as the current GM, to step-up on their behalf.
In any event, good luck and let us know how it goes.
|
He's been a GM for the last three years, and that will have shaped the way he approaches the game. I generally DM for my group, but occasionally I am a player. I remember the last time that it took a while to get used to being a player again, and the loss of control that goes with it. But I also mellowed and got used to it after a few sessions. So hopefully it should get better as he gets used to being a player and you get used to GM'ing for that group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We've got the same interesting kinds of dichotomy happening all the time at our table.
B always gives every other gm a hard time about how they could run their campaign better, so we put him in charge and he voluntarily stepped down because he felt like he 'lost his gm mojo'
D loves running campaigns where all the players are storming the beaches of normandy with a spoon.... your characters find themselves naked. on a ship... thats sinking. you are chained up in the lower decks... go! ^_^ But when he is a player he immediately gravitates to the classes races and gear that is as badass as the system allows
Z says he likes games with plots and puzzles to solve but in play he likes solving all problems with the nuclear option and maximum carnage...
I'm so used to the dichotomy I hardly consider them the same persons when they switch gears back and forth from the player to the gm chair.
Ha, lost his gm mojo.
Sounds like what they want to see isn't what they want to play. I ran a politics game for years, and I always wanted to play (but always the bridesmaid, never the bride). It did get me thinking though, would I play the intrigue and try for trickiness, or would I just try the military steamroll option always possible in the game? I would certainly game it hard and use all I knew.
I think some dms like to run games, and they have the fun, but they want that great sense of power and dominance when they play. So power gaming and item questing is high on their declared actions. They are getting it out of their system if you will.
We have a bit of this issue at times, our group has three people that are capable of Gming. At any given time two of us are rotating who runs on which game day to give the other a break. Thankfully most of the time we don't run into problems like these.
Our issues is new players have at least three different people capable of answering a rules question without turning to the book, and often times there will be a little variation.
Good luck with your problems, and remember falling cows are always an option.
One of the best ways to keep players (regardless of their DMing history) aware of their actions is to record the session (audio at least).
Then, after a few days or a week, play it back to them. Play back the part of the night that you took issue with. Let them listen.
This is a two-edged sword because in searching for the part that you want the player to hear, you have to listen as well and you have to be willing to accept that it may have not gone they way you thought it was going when you were in the moment.
Caveat: Do NOT secretly record your sessions; not only is that terrible thing to do but in many states it is illegal (California law example). Our group started recording because we wanted a permanent (as permanent as .wmv and .mp3 files can be) record of our game sessions and everyone was on board with it and the recording device is always placed in plain view.
|
I would boot that guy from the group. But i guess that is not an option for you.
The best way to solve this IMO, is to have a confrontation in private with him, but be polite, and also be no-nonsense.
His answer will tell you everything you need to know.
If he is venting, he can go vent somewhere else.
I have had a similar situation to what the OP described. But not quite that extreme. I don't want to get into the details, but will say that I just about gave up and quit the group entirely.
After a while the issue person calmed down and things have been much better.