What is the point of this thread?
First I will tell you what I am not doing.
I am not telling anyone how to run their games.
I am not saying you have to cater to powergamers(whatever you think that means) or snowflakes.
I am saying that when you put out an invite for a game that you should(I am suggesting) be very clear about what you expect from players.
As an example if I list a game I will at the least list character creation rules with the sources permitted for use at a minimum. Normally I take it a step farther and have a campaign guide with houserules that you can download. I also let players know that their characters can die. That why they know not to play as if they will be protected by the GM.
As a GM instead of using words such as rules lawyer and power gamer, you can go into a deeper explanationn. You can say "Do not question the rules during the game. We can discuss it after the game." You can also say "I don't like it when players only bring up an incorrect rule if it benefits them" depending on what your definition of a rules lawyer is.
As for power gaming, one person's super character is someone else's standard character or even subpar character. It is much more beneficial to say something like, do not push your AC to 55 by level 10. That way if you say no powergaming people will know what your standard is.
TLDR: Give players clear descriptions of what you want in a game. It helps everyone, and less people(you and the players) will spend needles time playing together before finding out you are not compatible. This is just advice, and it is not intended to offend anyone.
PS: No, I have not kicked myself out of an incompatible game recently, but these terms are tossed around, and I see it as bad communication, especially with the lack of house rules listed, and the very bare character creation rules on various sites.
PS2: No, I did not forget other gaming terms. I just used those two because they seem to be the most popular ones.
I am experiencing a flase perception that your post is actually a response to an earlier post in this thread, instead of being the first post. I know it isn't true, but I can't shake the feeling...
As for the content, its solid stuff. I shall paraphrase, boiling it down to a few things: people in a gaming group should communicate so that their wishes are known, everyone should accept that language is flawed and be ready to explain if necessary, allow others to have fun in their own way so that you can also have fun in your own way, and it is better to find out early on that sometimes gamers are not compatible.
Good advice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that the most important balance is balance between the players. You can always make the environment or enemies more challenging.
But it's no fun if the other characters are overshadowing you.
|
I feel that the most important balance is balance between the players. You can always make the environment or enemies more challenging.
But it's no fun if the other characters are overshadowing you.
This - and also, it's no fun for the DM. I have run alternately for a party of only Fighters and only Monks. I very quickly made things appropriate. (Not even necessarily reducing CR - but the Fighter party found themselves facing a lot of bruisers and fewer mind-affecting creatures, while the Monks were just the opposite.)
But when I have to run for a Conjurer, a Barbarian, an Elemental Sorcerer, and a hardily unoptimized Rogue (Rapier and Crossbow. Just, really?) - well, things goes to hell real quickly. You're left with either A) Unchallenged players, B) A player sitting on the sidelines, or C) The rest of the party having to spend most of their turns reviving the rogue. It added a new level of difficulty for everybody for all of the wrong reasons.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Pretty solid advice--clear communication is basically the #1 best strategy for just about any social interaction if you everyone on the same page.
I'm curious, though. You have some examples of undesirable behaviors from "rules lawyers" and "power gamers." But I've never been particularly clear on what people mean by "special snowflake." Mostly I just see it used to mean, "the things you like are less conventional than the things I like, and I don't like that."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty solid advice--clear communication is basically the #1 best strategy for just about any social interaction if you everyone on the same page.
I'm curious, though. You have some examples of undesirable behaviors from "rules lawyers" and "power gamers." But I've never been particularly clear on what people mean by "special snowflake." Mostly I just see it used to mean, "the things you like are less conventional than the things I like, and I don't like that."
The 9 intelligence Half-Drow Wizard, who fights with a Dire Flail, that he is not proficient with, and revels in his angst, going on long speeches about his tortured past, and accepts only healing spells from arcane sources, as he distrust the gods. He is just so flavorful.
That, is a special snowflake.
Ooh! Great villain! Particularly for the long winded part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The 9 intelligence Half-Drow Wizard, who fights with a Dire Flail, that he is not proficient with, and revels in his angst, going on long speeches about his tortured past, and accepts only healing spells from arcane sources, as he distrust the gods.
^^^This is so my next build.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, it's someone who goes out of their way to make their character not a team player?
Not exactly. But they almost never wind up being one.
It's someone who tries to make their character so unique to the point of uselessness or simply the point of being very irritating.
Communicate, communicate, communicate.
What I try to do is make notes about whatever stray thought comes through that the players should know about. There is nothing more frustrating for the GM or the players than the GM to remember "Oh yes, I was going to tell you that blah is WAY overpowered/underpowered and I wanted to change it."
Make that note when you are looking at it. I keep 3x5 and 5x8 cards handy so I can jot down notes to later transcribe into documentation for the players. I find that if I can point them to something written down, it ends a lot of arguments and communication issues.
I am a bit crazy about notes and keeping records of what is going on, what is and isn't working, and so on. That way if I determine that the rogue, for example, is overpowered and kicking everyone's butt I can look over why this is happening. Otherwise I'll forget what I was going to do.
I also encourage my players to talk to me face to face, email, text, whatever to tell me what is or isn't working or what they'd like to see or not to see. Even if I disagree, the lines of communication are open.
This is excellent advice in general, for a very simple reason: There is no objective, accepted definition of most of these terms, so you aren't actually communicating when you use them.
If you tell your players, "no rules lawyering", what exactly do you mean? What is it that you don't want them to do? Figure that part out, and then just tell them not to do that.
Rinse and repeat.
I admit I tend to make 'special snowflakes' a lot. I guess the uselessness part depends on how far you take it. My most recent was a Goblin Alchemist using the blazing torchbearer archetype...great fun! He could really make that torch shine! He was also a pretty decent cook and no slouch with his bombs, so he was at least as far from useless as he was from optimized.
A long, long time ago (in a galaxy pretty much right here) there was a long-running meme (not that anyone would have called it that at the time) that there were four types of roleplayers: the Real Man, the Real Roleplayer, the Loon, and the Munchkin. A lot of negative stereotypes can be lumped into the Munchkin; but the special snowflake is hands-down the Loon. :P
In that article the Munchkin was regarded as believing themselves to be a Real Man or a Real Roleplayer, and never really catching on that they were, in fact, a munchkin. I guess the point here is that labeling negative stereotypes, like power gamer or rules lawyer, kinda just leads to the actual power gamers and rules lawyers thinking "Pft! That's not me!"
TL;DR: I agree with the OP and I am a special snowflake.