[M]y group (6 PCs) is really into the story telling and RP, but two of the PCs (the rogue and the sorcerer) are treating it like a video game and just focusing on damage and gold.Well, this is a Role Playing Game. They are just playing it how they want to play it.
I have four specific issues I would appreciate advice on:
1) They speed through encounters. Any time they enter a room- often before I can even describe what's in it (very frustrating!) - they go through their typical routine: they "perceive the room" (not individual things, just a general roll), the sorcerer detects magic and then they both list off whichever knowledges they have that could slightly be related (I.e. there's a statue, so it'll be "I have history, dungeoneering, engineering, geography..." etc. Even if I give them a hint and mention that it has a halo ). If nothing hits for them, they move on and start again. They do this before anyone else gets a chance to say anything or do anything, and they get pissed off if the other players do stuff that doesn't push the game ever forward.
It is a standard action to search for stimuli via perception, therefore they both spend the first round standing at the entrance looking around. Casting Detect Magic is also a standard action.
"I perceive the room" should be followed with, "ok, you use your standard this round to do that. Everyone else, what are you doing." If they try to butt in then you should tell them to wait their turn, and then ignore any and all protests. You want to ask the other PCs what they are doing at this time to get them involved. A way to get around the them listing what knowledge skills they are trained in is to, if the DC is higher than 10, say "everyone trained in and has at least a rank in knowledge [whatever], roll a knowledge check if you want."A survivor (a new PC I was introducing) was burying his friends and called to the PC's for help. These two immediately go search the bodies and the caravan before the other characters get a chance to act.It is roughly a Standard Action to search a corpse without making a perception check to search for hidden items. It is roughly a Full Round Action to loot a corpse, you could claim that it is a Full Round Action PER ITEM (coin purses are considered a single item) to loot it from the body since one has to pick up the item, a move action, and stow it on their person, also a move action. I have a feeling that these guys will have nothing to do if they are just looting bodies while the rest of the party is doing something worth doing.
2) Sorcerer (necromancer)/ alchemist whose turns take forever. He has so many options with spells and potions, and now he's got a familiar and skeletons and a riding dog. His turns are getting out of hand. What can I do to speed them up? (I also don't think he's keeping track of spells per day, but that's a separate issue)
Familiars, Skeletons, Riding Dogs, Hirelings, and all other manner of creatures not directly under his control, E.G. Dominated by him, are controlled by the DM. To speed things up you should control his skeletons. On his turn he can choose to move first or let the skeletons move first. He can give them an oral command, which they carry out to the best of their ability. Keep in mind that they are not the most intelligent creatures, and will likely carry out said orders to the simplest degree possible short of attacking their master. "Kill anything that come past here" translates to them attacking the Riding Dog, the Familiar, and the other PCs because according to the terms he used, and that they never attack their master, they are doing exactly what they were told.
Tell him that he must keep track of his spells. If you catch him not tracking his spell usage then tell him he is going to get a Negative Level each time. Tracking spells is not difficult in any way shape or form. Either do it or don't play a spell caster!3) The sorcerer player will not separate character and player knowledge. A new curse does con damage? Google says it's either this one or this one, here's how we cure...
This is fine, in all honesty. How you deal with this is you force the PCs to make knowledge checks to discover that information, if their PCs don't make the appropriate checks or hire an expert to make the checks for them then they cannot, regardless of what they do, resolve the issue. Basically they can metagame as much as they want, but until they "unlock" the fix they cannot use it. So long as loot is not "planned" and said information is online, if a PC is cursed and drinks a random Remove Curse potion that he found in a dungeon then it works perfectly.
What level are the characters and what's the name of the archetype that the rogue uses?(i am pretty sure we can find it if we have a name)
=/= is not equals because it is the only way to illustrate a slashed = which is the common symbol of not equals.
X /= Z is a way, I think, of writing divide X by Z and set X to that value.
Other than the one that the commonly accepted computer forms of does not equal is either /= or more commonly as found in programming !=?
The reason =/= is commonly used is because "≠" is not an acceptable character on every website, and not everyone knows how to input that character because it's not shown on most keyboards.
|
Other than the one that the commonly accepted computer forms of does not equal is either /= or more commonly as found in programming !=?I don't disagree with your sentiment, but you made me laugh. Noun=/=vowel. Particularly awesome mistake to make while correcting someone. So awesome that I'm certain I've made an equally embarrassing blunder.@ thomas Long
Childish rude stuff.
Snarky smack down stuff.
2nd Edit: Btw, usually the person who leaps to vulgarity and name calling when someone tells them that they're wrong is considered to be the ass. Just food for thought.
Careful Thomas, that is almost a very Fruian-esque response to being criticized. ;)
there's always !(X == Y)
So my problem is this: most of my group (6 PCs) is really into the story telling and RP, but two of the PCs (the rogue and the sorcerer) are treating it like a video game and just focusing on damage and gold.
I have four specific issues I would appreciate advice on:
1) They speed through encounters. Any time they enter a room- often before I can even describe what's in it (very frustrating!) - they go through their typical routine: they "perceive the room" (not individual things, just a general roll), the sorcerer detects magic and then they both list off whichever knowledges they have that could slightly be related (I.e. there's a statue, so it'll be "I have history, dungeoneering, engineering, geography..." etc. Even if I give them a hint and mention that it has a halo ). If nothing hits for them, they move on and start again. They do this before anyone else gets a chance to say anything or do anything, and they get pissed off if the other players do stuff that doesn't push the game ever forward.
A great example is, in the last session, I had the characters run into a caravan that had been attacked the night before. A survivor (a new PC I was introducing) was burying his friends and called to the PC's for help. These two immediately go search the bodies and the caravan before the other characters get a chance to act.
2) Sorcerer (necromancer)/ alchemist whose turns take forever. He has so many options with spells and potions, and now he's got a familiar and skeletons and a riding dog. His turns are getting out of hand. What can I do to speed them up? (I also don't think he's keeping track of spells per day, but that's a separate issue)
3) The sorcerer player will not separate character and player knowledge. A new curse does con damage? Google says it's either this one or this one, here's how we cure it. A monster that is made of stone? It's probably this one and it had DR and about 60 hp.
4) Rogue player gets upset if she doesn't get new loot after every session, or when something bad happens to her character. Specific example: she gets pissed at me when she fails her save against mummy rot, even though I let her know that moving around the mummy to get sneak attack damage would provide it an attack of opportunity.
Treating it as a video game is a bit of a deal breaker if the rest want to role play. They will always break suspension of disbelief for the rest. This IS mandatory to address by talking it over with them and kicking them if they won't try role playing. Not to put down their video game play style but in 4 vs 2 I will side with the 4 because it's far easier to run with 4 players than just 2.
1- Looting the bodies before you can even finish the description is very unethical toward the others as well. If they can't share then kick them on that alone.
As for speeding through the encounter? How does that mesh with the sorcerer taking too long?
2- He needs to pace himself, learn to expedite his own attacks, and work with others. A turn timer is a good way to do this and you stand there looking pretty if your timer runs out while you are looking up your stuff. You very quickly learn to plan ahead.
3- Penalize him every time he metagames. Docking his XP for cheating is fair and a good way to force him back on track if he won't change this on his own. If he is SO crazy about getting a few more silvers than others from looting he will be truly upset by docked XP.
4- This is possibly good. If she is upset at what happens in game then she cares about what happens in game. Just grow a bit of a thicker skin when she rants about her curse or whatever, and smile inside knowing she is getting involved in the game in her own way. Also this is more typical in younger players... not sure her age but I would take it as a good thing.
1- Economy of action. They can only do one thing at a time. One skill, one check, etc.
2- Three minute egg timer. I'm looking to acquire an magic eight ball to resolve disagreements.
3- So many GREAT ideas here!
4- I truly hope this person is under 12, less they have missed the brutality of everyday life.
This thread makes me glad for my main group's play-style. We use the internet all the time, often looking things up for the GM or handing him the tablet or the iphone. Us players make a separation from what we know in real life (so to speak) as opposed to what our characters know. But thruout the night when it comes to "what's the difference between dazed and stunned again?" "what was that fine point about grapple effect?" "Is my spell rounds or minutes per level?" we would all be lost. We'd have to *gasp* start rifling thru books again!
Please take that above as another confirmation of differing player styles and I'm sorry those two are bumming your game. The trick is for players to adapt to the group and plenty of posters have given you great ideas to address that. I'll just say that going around the table when out of initiative things are going on and doing so fairly consistently one player at a time works well for a group I play with where there's a real mix of assertive and shy players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(snip)
I must vigorously protest the idea of docking XP. That's penalizing the character for the actions of the player; you should never try to solve an obvious player issue by taking it out on the character. It will not work, and just raise tensions.
|
I'm gonna agree with others. You don't have power gamers on your hands, you might have the beginning of munchkins.
Also, never award cheating. If you run the games at your place and the cheater refuses to stop cheating, then change your wifi password, and don't let him use it. If it persists, tell him that he needs to find someone else to game with, because you will not game with cheaters.
The rogue sounds a bit trickier, but I'd say no third party stuff and let her know that the dice fall as they may.
Just remember that the simplest solution is almost always the best solution for implementation, and going overly sophisticated on fixing your problem might show how smart you are but will likely be completely ignored a few sessions down the line.
As a general rule I ban 3PPs unless I specifically use them myself in the content I make. I implore you to disallow 3PPs as well, and allow free retraining to anyone using them to whatever they wish. This isn't to say 3PPs are all bad, as some people will vehemently postulate, but all too often these products are made to either not be used by the PCs or to be balanced with themselves and other 3PP in-house products.
Just ban the MAC address of the person who is cheating. No reason to change your password.
As I've stated above, if someone is cheating then the PC has to make skill checks to gain said player knowledge. If they do not, then they cannot succeed, in any capacity, to alleviate their issues, E.G. Curses. However, by consulting a knowledgeable character, E.G. a cleric, they might uncover the knowledge that they need to be able to "unlock" the ability to cure their ailments.
Let me just say, it is important to NOT solve this via in game trickery. This is just going to create a DM vs Player atmosphere which will make things worse.
What he said, just for emphasize.
(snip)I must vigorously protest the idea of docking XP. That's penalizing the character for the actions of the player; you should never try to solve an obvious player issue by taking it out on the character. It will not work, and just raise tensions.
Oh I assure you when I was younger I used this to great effect. It absolutely works; especially so in cases where a player is trying to "get ahead" of his fellow players. Any XP reward or penalty system often has a dramatic effect on game play in competitive groups or with competitive players. You will quickly see players avoiding the behavior that leads to penalties and frequently attempting the behavior that leads to bonuses.
That said there is a time and place to use it. For example if you have an unmotivated player then all you will do is cause that player to fall behind. It only tends to work in cases where people are actively trying to get that extra bit to "get ahead". Also this wouldn't work for a cooperative group... but then why would you ever want to implement it in a group that's already playing well together?
Did the 3pp and archetype for the rogue ever get mentioned? It's probably something that isn't all that bad when you consider what else he could be playing.
Our group is similar to Epicfail's in that we're always looking things up via phone or tablet. I can see banning them if you've got some clown who can't keep focus and disrupts everyone else, though, but there are usually better solutions.
Did the 3pp and archetype for the rogue ever get mentioned?
Not yet, i asked the OP but he hasn't yet replied.
Did the 3pp and archetype for the rogue ever get mentioned? It's probably something that isn't all that bad when you consider what else he could be playing.
Our group is similar to Epicfail's in that we're always looking things up via phone or tablet. I can see banning them if you've got some clown who can't keep focus and disrupts everyone else, though, but there are usually better solutions.
Players at my table uses tech devices to maintain character sheets and look up rules occasionally. I've never had a big problem with it. If I found out someone was looking up monster stat blocks or diseases/poisons/curses we would have a problem. Of course the problem would immediately be solved by whatever they were looking up being polymorphed into the lawful-evil GM equivalent of whatever I had originally thrown at them.
Hmm... It seems that your slashing weapon is no longer as effective as it was just moments ago. All of the fresh cuts on the zombies begin to spray pus like the anime scenes from kill bill. You need to make a reflex save. Oh. 26? Sorry, you fail. You become sickened and now you need to fort save. Oh, 31? You fail, you have been infected with the "cheaters be b$#*!es disease." It works like geas, except that instead of following a quest you have to stop cheating.
|
Ban them from the table until they've spent at least 4 months doing nothing but reading literature and playing puzzle and adventure games from the 1980s and 1990s. If they can't manage that assignment and come back with wider eyes, they're not worthy of your game.
While they're off doing that, you can stage a subplot wherein the rest of your players fight off a fleet of Vogons intent on destroying your campaign world to make way for a hyperspace bypass because it's "more efficient and organized, and we don't see what use this stupid little planet is doing here, anyways."
Also, in response to some earlier posts: "Power gamer" IS definitely a legitimate term I've heard used to refer to people like this, though the term's use as such is not universal.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
(snip)I must vigorously protest the idea of docking XP. That's penalizing the character for the actions of the player; you should never try to solve an obvious player issue by taking it out on the character. It will not work, and just raise tensions.Oh I assure you when I was younger I used this to great effect. It absolutely works; especially so in cases where a player is trying to "get ahead" of his fellow players. Any XP reward or penalty system often has a dramatic effect on game play in competitive groups or with competitive players. You will quickly see players avoiding the behavior that leads to penalties and frequently attempting the behavior that leads to bonuses.
Sorry, that's just passive-aggressive and immature. You have a problem with someone, don't be a weasel. Talk it out like adults.
If I had to deal with gamers like that, I would give them something in game along the lines of "a pack of Pit Fiends suddenly appears and attacks (problem players)." By all means, they should be dead, but a tall, ominous figure looms over their soon-to-be corpes, and presses the blunt end of his three-pronged pitchfork into their foreheads, branding them with an unmistakeable sign of evil, saying that they have been warned. If the players continue such unacceptable behavior, he appears again, and transports them to Hell, or some such place. And guess what! He even has his own CR 39 stat block!
I forgot to mention that the brand healed them to 1 hp stabilized.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I repeat my previous post, directed and Wandering MessEnger.
|
(snip)I must vigorously protest the idea of docking XP. That's penalizing the character for the actions of the player; you should never try to solve an obvious player issue by taking it out on the character. It will not work, and just raise tensions.
But the player controls the characters actions. Since the player is not there to actually role play, responding to the players actions (not the characters) is more appropriate. Otherwise, they can use the same argument you are making to continue to ruin the game for others because it is their character doing it and not the player. This can just as easily create a player vs DM atmosphere as any of the other suggestions that were shot down.
I've docked exp before and the players learned. There is something substantially more significant to the learning process and behavioral changes when a player is affected directly vs a character (in situations like this). Ultimately it is all about sending a message. Will the character or player change their behavior in a way that you want based on you, the gm, taking this action? Is the player to slow to realize that the negative in game effects are because of their actions? If so, do you keep 'punishing the character' in hopes that the player will make the connection they clearly don't see all at the cost of the campaign and other peoples fun? There is a time and place for targeting a player. You may not like it but it is a social game and that means that all tools that impact the experience should be considered.
I repeat my previous post, directed and Wandering MessEnger.
I don't think that's passive-aggressive, or immature. If someone is using Third-Party resources, then I, as GM, will use Third-Party resources as well. It's not like it's hurting the other four, and I think it's a perfect role-playing opportunity. It might be a little heavy for THOSE players' actions, except that all bets are off when you start metagaming to the point of looking up information during an encounter.
I repeat my previous post, directed and Wandering MessEnger.I don't think that's passive-aggressive, or immature. If someone is using Third-Party resources, then I, as GM, will use Third-Party resources as well. It's not like it's hurting the other four, and I think it's a perfect role-playing opportunity. It might be a little heavy for THOSE players' actions, except that all bets are off when you start metagaming to the point of looking up information during an encounter.
You are having a "pack of pit fiends" show up to attack the characters to try and force the players into playing differently instead of talking to the players, or at least using an natural/in-storyline punishment method.
So are you just... attacking these players with the pit fiends without warning? Without telling them you have issues with how they're playing?
If they're not going to respond well to calm and rational discussion about their playstyle they're not going to respond well to "rocks fall and you die". The more sensible option for dealing with this sort of player to me would be to dismiss them from the game if they can't or won't clean up their act. Then you're the responsible DM looking to ensure that the table is as fun as it can be by removing disruptive behavior, not the asshat DM who drops CR 36 enemies on players when they do something you don't like.
Always remember that, as the DM, if you do something that the players view as completely unfair that there is a possibility that they will switch DMs without you knowing.
It is entirely possible that if you do something your two gamers find appalling that they might decide to start a game themselves and try to bring your players over to their game.
The point is that you don't want to dock their XP. It seems like a good plan on paper, but the reality is that you then have to award them that XP back for good roleplaying if you're a DM worth one's salt.
Your offending PCs sound like they're just trying to keep the ball rolling. They want to advance, see the end of the story, and become more powerful in the game world in as short an amount of time as possible. This is partially what you want your PCs to be doing.
Also, don't just drop random CR (it doesn't matter anymore) monsters that the PCs cannot defeat on them for arbitrary and contrived reasons. That is something that teenagers might put up with, but older people will just usurp your position of DM in response--and rightfully so.--
Give your power gamers more responsibility if they are bored. Throw in clerics of Pharasma who divvy out quest rewards. Have these clerics be watching the PCs. The PCs who act in honorable ways are given rewards while players who do not are not given this bonus. The Clerics simply say that Pharasma does not approve of their actions in how they treat the dead or something.
The point is that positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement. Reward people for doing what you want, and don't reward them for doing what you don't want them to do.
Remember: Pathfinder is a co-operative game. You have your two "gamers" who want to win, your 4 "roleplayers" who want to do this or that. Add in rewards for roleplaying, such as RP experience, and your gamers will start roleplaying.
Another bit that is extremely useful is splitting the party. Just adjust your encounter CRs accordingly.
Basically, when you resort to "cheap" tactics as a DM to force players to do what you want then they've already won. Some easy tactics are books with Explosive Runes on them. Since the items on the body are "unattended" they'll all be destroyed by the explosive runes. This forces the PCs to take each item off of the body and put them aside to cast detect magic on them one by one to ensure they are not trapped. Don't include an explosive rune item each encounter since you don't need do, make it random so it becomes a more effective deterrent.
I was thinking about ways to make your non-roleplayers roleplay more.
Remove 2 CR APL encounters from every dungeon. Instead award this XP as RP experience where appropriate.
Add the treasure of these two removed encounters to a different encounter's treasure. You can do this by changing the monsters so they drop more or less loot, or you can just remove encounters filled with monsters that provide no loot.
RP XP can be gained at any time during a level. If the PCs do not take advantage of the RP XP of a level then that XP is "saved" for when they do qualify for RP XP. They gain the RP XP of the lowest level that they have saved.
So, if A and B do not RP much, yet C, D, E and F do, then A and B will be behind C, D, E, and F in terms of XP.
The PCs are level 3 and A and B have not taken advantage of their RP XP at all. However, A and B start roleplaying. Each scene where in they RP they gain XP first of their cut of a CR 1 encounter, then of the second CR 1 they are entitled to, then of CR 2, and CR 2 again, and finally CR 3 and CR 3 again.
This ensures that they are able to advance without RP, but by RPing they advance sooner. This ensures they are never able to jump ahead of or fall permanently behind the rest of the party.
Agree^^
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless your sessions are very short the rogue is right about loot. There should be loot after most encounters. Keeping loot in line with the tables in the gamemastering section is extremely important in Pathfinder because a substantial amount of character ability comes from magic items.
This is MMORPG garbage. That's exactly the attitude the OP is having trouble with.
This is MMORPG garbage. That's exactly the attitude the OP is having trouble with.
Unless your sessions are very short the rogue is right about loot. There should be loot after most encounters. Keeping loot in line with the tables in the gamemastering section is extremely important in Pathfinder because a substantial amount of character ability comes from magic items.
Actually, in the good MMOs of the past character level was more important than gear, and getting OP gear early meant that you've be severely under prepared and struggling to stay alive when said gear stopped being godly.
Wealth should go by what is stated in the game mastering section, but did you know it is also based on the standard of the enemy? None, Half, Standard, Double Standard and Triple Standard all designate the internal difficulty of a monster within the CR system. Monsters relatively easy for their CR are at None, while monsters epic for their CR are at triple. For example: Skeletons and Zombies are set to None, while Dragons are almost all at triple standard considering they are some of the most formidable foes in the game.
In Pathfinder the amount of Gold a character has is actually very important to character power, but it varies as some classes, such as Fighters or Rogues, are very dependent on their gold, while others, such as Clerics or Wizards, are very dependent on their class abilities.
The easier fix is to set up a loot system that effectively auto-loots defeated enemies in a room after any combat encounters or traps have been defeated.
MMORPG garbage is here to stay, and it isn't going to just magically disappear. Embrace change and the aspects that bring new members into your community.
Not everyone plays the same way or should play together. In my home game we just had a bard enter combat with two tower shields wielded. He also attempted tree climbing among other things. I laughed. I cried. The group is eager to find a replacement since having hardness 5 or 10 and a shields worth of HP is rather difficult for encounters appropriate for third level characters.
FYI - shield bonuses don't stack.
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not everyone plays the same way or should play together. In my home game we just had a bard enter combat with two tower shields wielded. He also attempted tree climbing among other things. I laughed. I cried. The group is eager to find a replacement since having hardness 5 or 10 and a shields worth of HP is rather difficult for encounters appropriate for third level characters.FYI - shield bonuses don't stack.
The penalties on the other hand...
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
MMORPG garbage is here to stay, and it isn't going to just magically disappear. Embrace change and the aspects that bring new members into your community.
*I wave my hand*
"By the power of Gygax, I invoke my power as Dungeon Master and hereby revoke and eschew the 'MMORPG garbage' that has invaded our beloved roleplaying game.""I do hereby resolve to keep an eye on WBL, but only as a background concern and a general guideline to keeping players competitive versus the CR system of the game. Players are there to play their characters, not master a system that is the GM's concern."
"I do hereby pledge to challenge and entertain players with rich environments, intriguing story, dynamic and interactive encounters both malevolent and benign, and choose to encourage said players to adopt such an expectation that is wholly above and apart from the static themeparkeyness into which MMORPGs have evolved."
"I will be the provider of adventures, not the overseer of a tabletop looting and leveling video game."
*I bow respectfully to my peers and colleagues on this forum*
|
|
The point is that you don't want to dock their XP. It seems like a good plan on paper, but the reality is that you then have to award them that XP back for good roleplaying if you're a DM worth one's salt.
Several things I want to say to you but it is difficult to do multiple quotes on this tablet.
So, docking exp doesn't cause problems (but being a social game any action taken to address a problem can make it worse). It is one of many possible solutions to solving them. Every DM has their line in the sand somewhere. Yours is much further back than mine. Mine goes to the end of the desert. That's OK. If rocking exp works and the player changes his behavior-awsome. If the players behavior change results in actual and better rp and you reward good role play (or just want to in their case) then go for it!
But I sense that the underlying feeling here is that docking exp may be an immature approach since it punishes the player. However, rewarding said player for doing what everybody already should be doing is little different. Again, what tool and tactic any given DM uses to solve a problem is based on that specific situation and those particular players. What may not fit 99.9% of your games might work in 70% or 80% of someone else's. Try not to undervalue an idea you dislike or disagree with. Each have their merits.
For the record, I've both docked exp (and not docked it) and rewarded good role playing and given no rewards for good role playing. I have done what ever worked best for the situation at hand.
I would also like to replace your use of the phrase 'older players will just' with 'more mature players will just' as maturity is the factor being discussed (age and maturity are not the same thing or even intrinsically related).
I am not sure that I want to embrace something that is clearly not productive to the environment (mmorpgs). The features of mmo's hurt elements of tabletop gaming when applied to tabletop games. Rather than embrace that, I'd rather focus on being a great teacher, tolerant person and awesome gm who can make the mmorpger appreciate the tabletop experience more than the video game. I feel that embracing the mmorpg aspect would only serve to make tabletop gaming infinitely worse and slowly but surely kill the experience for everyone.
*edit* almost everything else you've said seem like fine ideas, though.
MMORPG garbage is here to stay, and it isn't going to just magically disappear. Embrace change and the aspects that bring new members into your community.
*I wave my hand*
"By the power of Gygax
Wait. What?
Ok, so let me get this straight, you invoke the name of a guy who has been dead for years to support a flimsy argument that basically just says, "I don't want to work with new people, their ideas, or teach them ways that will be more fun in the long term" while simultaneously ignoring the bulk of my posts and taking out a single snippet that you can make some sort of claim upon? Shame on you.Since we are invoking dead people's names as frivolously as people do religious figures:
May Gygax look down upon you, as he attended conventions like crazy to introduce people to D&D throughout the years. He did what he could to convince people to join his game and discover its wonder.
So, if you're going to invoke Gygax then you've better try to live up to that invocation.
A good DM has a strong grasp of Adventure, Mechanics, and Roleplay. You can make claim that your adventures are orgasm worthy, but if the mechanics are ignored then people are going to get bored. Go write a book. Your roleplay might be fantastic, but without mechanics you should just go RP on a forum without the game aspect. If your mechanics are fantastic but you don't RP or have an adventure then the players will get bored.
It is a triad, and you need all three.
MMOs are mechanic and adventure heavy, but they lack in RP.
Books are Adventure and Roleplay (on the end of the reader reading into the personality of the characters) heavy, while lacking Mechanics.
TTRPGs need to be at least competent in all three.
If you run into players who are incompetent in one area then you need to teach them how to be competent in those areas. I have already stated my ideas on achieving that, but there is also the question of asking the player "would your character do that?" It works like a charm.
The point is that you don't want to dock their XP. It seems like a good plan on paper, but the reality is that you then have to award them that XP back for good roleplaying if you're a DM worth one's salt.So, docking exp doesn't cause problems (but being a social game any action taken to address a problem can make it worse). It is one of many possible solutions to solving them. Every DM has their line in the sand somewhere. Yours is much further back than mine. Mine goes to the end of the desert. That's OK. If rocking exp works and the player changes his behavior-awsome. If the players behavior change results in actual and better rp and you reward good role play (or just want to in their case) then go for it!
But I sense that the underlying feeling here is that docking exp may be an immature approach since it punishes the player. However, rewarding said player for doing what everybody already should be doing is little different. Again, what tool and tactic any given DM uses to solve a problem is based on that specific situation and those particular players. What may not fit 99.9% of your games might work in 70% or 80% of someone else's. Try not to undervalue an idea you dislike or disagree with. Each have their merits.
For the record, I've both docked exp (and not docked it) and rewarded good role playing and given no rewards for good role playing. I have done what ever worked best for the situation at hand.
I would also like to replace your use of the phrase 'older players will just' with 'more mature players will just' as maturity is the factor being discussed (age and maturity are not the same thing or even intrinsically related).
I am not sure that I want to embrace something that is clearly not productive to the environment (mmorpgs). The features of mmo's hurt elements of tabletop gaming when applied to tabletop games. Rather than embrace that, I'd rather...
Docking XP is fine so long as the PCs have a chance to make that XP back through RP. Sure, its only stuff like 50 xp or so, but it is strong negative reinforcement. You minus well have bent the player over your knee and spanked them. Now while some players would find actually doing that to their enjoyment, most players don't. It can also lead to losing players as has happened in games I've been in where the DM docked people XP. It put an end to it, but sometimes it just put an end to the person bothering to show up.
I am always going to support positive reinforcement. Perhaps Docking them and then awarding them in the same session. Punish X, while Rewarding Y.
Perhaps you've encountered a greater degree of players than I have, both sufferable and insufferable. ^_~
You are having a "pack of pit fiends" show up to attack the characters to try and force the players into playing differently instead of talking to the players, or at least using an natural/in-storyline punishment method.I repeat my previous post, directed and Wandering MessEnger.I don't think that's passive-aggressive, or immature. If someone is using Third-Party resources, then I, as GM, will use Third-Party resources as well. It's not like it's hurting the other four, and I think it's a perfect role-playing opportunity. It might be a little heavy for THOSE players' actions, except that all bets are off when you start metagaming to the point of looking up information during an encounter.
Of course not. You should never Deus Ex Machina, especially to hurt the players. Make it a part of the campaign. It could be an interesting experience for the whole party. Who can say they met the Devil and walked away?
So are you just... attacking these players with the pit fiends without warning? Without telling them you have issues with how they're playing?
If they're not going to respond well to calm and rational discussion about their playstyle they're not going to respond well to "rocks fall and you die". The more sensible option for dealing with this sort of player to me would be to dismiss them from the game if they can't or won't clean up their act. Then you're the responsible DM looking to ensure that the table is as fun as it can be by removing disruptive behavior, not the asshat DM who drops CR 36 enemies on players when they do something you don't like.
Reread my post, would you? You don't make them fight, just injure the targets. Their not supposed to fight, and they shouldn't try to. Introduce him, do what you need to do, and go from there. It's also a CR 39 enemy AND the Pit Fiends.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Always remember that, as the DM, if you do something that the players view as completely unfair that there is a possibility that they will switch DMs without you knowing.
It is entirely possible that if you do something your two gamers find appalling that they might decide to start a game themselves and try to bring your players over to their game.
At the point this happens, the two are causing problems for the other four, and are absolutely welcome to find another DM.
Taku, the reason I'm taking umbrage with your attitude is it leads to a great MMORPG experience (yay, I killed a CR3 encounter, let's see what CR3 treasure is pooped out!), but a crappy RPG one.
If the guards on the outside of the keep are the first encounter as you attack it, are they going to be carrying all their loot with them? Common sense indicates it's probably locked in a trunk in the guardhouse, not in their pocket while on duty. But the rogue in the OP example might be disappointed she stabbed them both in the kidneys and nothing dropped.
Also, remember WBL is a guideline. It's game mastering advice. You can run well above or well below, whichever you choose, just adjusting your expectations for power level (and encounters) accordingly. This is true in groups with min/max'd characters or ones that are not - it's because of this variability that GMs are encouraged to make adjustments and appropriate choices.
I like the Gygax invocation, especially since his version was 3d6 rolled 6x...
Kwauss, don't get my wrong, Gygax is great, but using him to try and win an argument is sort of like invoking Jesus or Muhamad to try and win an argument.
MMORPGers become TTRPGers if they are given enough time. They are focusing on the mechanical side because that is what they are comfortable with, know, and understand.
I completely ignore WBL and use my own take on the Treasure System. This ends up with the PCs having less than WBL, but more than it if they take item creation feats, which is part of the game that I heavily encourage.
I have always used Positive Reinforcement over Negative Reinforcement since it is simply far more effective. This isn't even an argument in psychology: Positive Reinforcement > Negative Reinforcement every single time.
If you want your PCs to start doing something then heavily reward that action. They then begin doing said action repeatedly. If you want them to stop doing an action then stop rewarding it.
If a DM wants to discourage Min/Maxing then have lots of skill checks and little combat, or "skill combat" encounters. The problem with most campaigns in Pathfinder and with most DMs is that they don't deal with the underlying issues that cause Min/Maxing and "MMORPG-esque" behavior. If your module consists of "kill the enemies, loot the room, find the thing to allow you to advance into the next room" then you shouldn't complain when people do exactly that.
Lets look at Second Darkness for a bit. Second Darkness starts off catering to Min/Maxed characters. It is a town segment where Saul takes care of all of the important checks, and then the second part leads to the party being on an island. Ok, pretty straight forward. However, in the later parts skill checks are required to not die, and if you fail them then you meet an unfortunate end regardless of how powerful you are. Some DMs will rule that these "you fail skill check, you die" moments can be fought out or end with some sort of penalty, but it boils down to the same aspect: the PCs who are Min/Maxed will be less well off than the PCs who have a wider range of what they can do.
The most important aspect to remember is that the mechanics of any RPG exist to support the RP and the Story. You can argue it is crappy for CR3 encounters to pop out CR3 treasures, but that is one of the expectations of the game.
If I kill a dragon I expect a CRX*3 treasure horde. If I kill a skeleton I expect no treasure because skeletons don't drop any major treasures.
The guards will be carrying "NPC Gear" which is roughly equal to Double Standard, so yes, they are actually carrying their treasure on them in the form of the items they have on them. That is what NPC gold goes towards.
To parry your argument: NPCs don't "drop" treasures, they instead have what is on them. If you kill an NPC you get his gear, not some arbitrary item with his gear dissolving away. This is why it is recommended that you don't send hordes of NPCs because the PCs will end up with more gold than they should.
The hypothetical guards will likely have some jewelry on them in the form of ear, finger, lip or nose rings, and possibly piercings of some sort. Maybe while stripping the guard the PCs realize he has a Prince Albert, and then joke about the submissive guard for a few weeks.
Point is that the guard is likely going to be putting his free money in potions of cure light wounds to keep himself alive if he actually has to do his duty against people who fight back. If there are lycanthropes or fey he is probably going to have an oil which allows his weapon to bypass that DR.
If he has less than 50 gp, we'll assume 49.99 gp, then he likely will have 4 Platinum, 9 Gold, 9 Silver, and 9 Copper since most services don't have a money changer right next to them. If he wants a pint of ale after work he has to drop 2 copper on it instead of having to give someone a silver who may or may not have copper to make change with (think a ferryman.)
The concept of "drops" is an entirely contrived system that is endemic to MMORPGs.
On top of that most of the time in dungeons that are really exciting, the PCs aren't getting treasure along the way. Traps don't have treasure. If the enemies all have None in their Treasure then they offer no treasure either. The PCs get to the end of a death trap dungeon and find a treasure horde guarded by some horrible lovecraftian abomination which also has no treasure, but that is ok since the entire dungeon's treasure is right there, behind the monster.
|
|
@Taku, the gygax invocation was actually pretty good. It only said it didn't want the mmorpg garbage ruining an otherwise great thing. It said nothing about being closed minded, not welcoming new players, etc.
In fact, he pretty much promised to be the best gm he could be and craft a wonderful experience for his players while making sure they expect that from him.
You seem to have completely misses his point and probably misread his statement; or maybe I did.
Also, positive reinforcement is fine but negative has its place. Being burned by a fire teaches you infinitely more than whatever positive reinforced version of 'fire is dangerous' ever could. Just because something is displeasurable doesn't mean it is invalid. Negative reinforcement is needed where applicable. I have seen, first hand, the woes that some with an environment of -only- positive reinforcement. It is incredibly unnatural, it is problematic for the reinforcer and the people receiving only positive reinforcement have a tendency to be a terrible combination of ignorant and spoiled. I worked for a center that believed in positive reinforcement only and if you do it successfully, the targets are essentially oblivious to manipulation and often have difficulty developing empathy and other base common sense and intellectual faculties.
I don't believe in it. I firmly stand behind natural responses combined with premeditated responses. In this way organic development takes place alongside manufactured development: to do this, you use both positive and negative reinforcement where needed or when it naturally takes place.
(snip)I must vigorously protest the idea of docking XP. That's penalizing the character for the actions of the player; you should never try to solve an obvious player issue by taking it out on the character. It will not work, and just raise tensions.But the player controls the characters actions. Since the player is not there to actually role play, responding to the players actions (not the characters) is more appropriate. Otherwise, they can use the same argument you are making to continue to ruin the game for others because it is their character doing it and not the player. This can just as easily create a player vs DM atmosphere as any of the other suggestions that were shot down.
I've docked exp before and the players learned. There is something substantially more significant to the learning process and behavioral changes when a player is affected directly vs a character (in situations like this). Ultimately it is all about sending a message. Will the character or player change their behavior in a way that you want based on you, the gm, taking this action? Is the player to slow to realize that the negative in game effects are because of their actions? If so, do you keep 'punishing the character' in hopes that the player will make the connection they clearly don't see all at the cost of the campaign and other peoples fun? There is a time and place for targeting a player. You may not like it but it is a social game and that means that all tools that impact the experience should be considered.
Thank you Dark Immortal. The tactic works and it isn't passive aggressive at all. It is typically used in DIRECT RESPONSE to a failure of talking to the offender to get any change.