Unskilled players affecting attendance, what to do?


Pathfinder Society

101 to 150 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

BretI wrote:
I came in pretty late. I actually got a crayon to color in the dice so you could tell high from low. The dice didn't survive though, they became spheres and then gremlins would frequently take them away. I'm still not sure why.

I hated those dice. But they were a step up from the chits while they lasted.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

I still have some crayon-colored dice.

All the dice I got when I first played just had indentations for the numbers, no ink or paint in them. So I would run through them with pencil to make them more readable (except for the black d8 I had). But, yes, also, I'd use red crayon for the low numbers on my d20s so I could tell them from the high numbers, because two-digit numbers weren't a thing on dice.


Ha! I have a few of the old crayon orange and red dice, though they have white paint inside the numbers so they can be read, ahh, memories (those original black box dice still roll well, even 25 years later!)

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BretI wrote:
I came in pretty late. I actually got a crayon to color in the dice so you could tell high from low. The dice didn't survive though, they became spheres and then gremlins would frequently take them away. I'm still not sure why.

I had a new player at a table with those borrowed from their friend. We were about halfway through the second fight before i noticed the barbarians impossibly bad luck


LOL, i know why, it seems a proven fact, crayon colored dice only bond to one person, and spurn all others (anytime a friend or other player uses those dice of mine, they roll poorly, seems it must be a thing)

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

GM_Beernorg wrote:
LOL, i know why, it seems a proven fact, crayon colored dice only bond to one person, and spurn all others (anytime a friend or other player uses those dice of mine, they roll poorly, seems it must be a thing)

Well, it was more a matter of the player only being able to roll as high as a nine, since neither myself nor that player were familiar with a red blue thing that had long ago vanished into the sands of time.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

I have these greenish marble dice that always rolled really bad. Then I used them as a guinea pig and painted over their numbers with gold paint. Now I keep rolling high.

Truly the dice gods are pleased.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Andrew Christian wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
kinevon wrote:
graypark wrote:
Jessex wrote:
Just so you're aware, in the real old days there were no D10's. The first polyhedral dice sets were D4, D6, D8, D12 and D20 (although tbh the D20 was numbered 0 to 9 twice so it sort of was a D10).
Dice? If only we'd been so fortunate. We had to settle for numbered chits in tiny Tupperware bowls!
You had tupperware? We used teacups...
You had chits? You didn't just pick numbers and depending on how close your number was to the GM's, that's how successful you were?
Chits?! We stabbed ourselves with our pencils and the random blood drops was our roll!

Wait, people don't still do this? Nobody tell my players, please?

Liberty's Edge 3/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

HEY!

Stay on target guys!

This is about unskilled players, not what people use to play with in the "good old days".

Mods, please clean it up a little?

Thank you.

4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Tennessee—Memphis aka Mulgar

Jessex wrote:
BretI wrote:
I came in pretty late. I actually got a crayon to color in the dice so you could tell high from low. The dice didn't survive though, they became spheres and then gremlins would frequently take them away. I'm still not sure why.
I hated those dice. But they were a step up from the chits while they lasted.

I still got some of those dice, lol

Grand Lodge 5/5

James, if you haven't talked to them yet, see if you can get them in at another gameday/venue in your area if you have one. It might help if you can find some like (ish) minded people for them to murderhobo with.

Grand Lodge

Quintin Verassi wrote:
James, if you haven't talked to them yet, see if you can get them in at another gameday/venue in your area if you have one. It might help if you can find some like (ish) minded people for them to murderhobo with.

If they are as bad as you guys say...

1. I wouldnt suggest just asking them to switch venues, unless you want that venue to suffer like the firt one has.

2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

I don't understand your post in the context of this thread.

PvP has not been mentioned, at all.
There has been no hint of such action, at all.
And there have been multiple statements that, despite serious effort, this couple is unwilling to listen or learn, with excuses like, "I've been gaming since before you were born."

So, this section of the posts was someone suggesting trying them at a different venue, with like-minded players, and a response that that would make TPKs even more likely, since the players/PCs in question, despite saying that they are just there for combat and rolling the dice, aren't terribly effective at the murderhobo business.

For a quick recap:
One of them plays a ranged rogue who runs away when injured; and the other plays a druid with an animal companion who claims to be the party healer, but who concentrates their actions and spells on buffing their AC, and doesn't heal anyone else.

Without a strong system mastery, ranged rogues are one attack wonders, who then become fairly ineffective for the remainder of any combat. Hopefully, at least, he isn't playing the halfling rogue who spends the first three rounds of any combat sneaking around to get into 30' of a single target to, finally, get a single crossbow shot off during the entire combat. I played a game with that rogue, and, for most of the scenario, it felt like we had a vacancy instead of the fourth PC.

And, honestly, Druids are fair as out-of-combat healers, since they can use wands, but they are not very effective as in-combat healers, since they can only use memorized Cure spells, not spontaneously cast them, nor do they have anything comparable to a Cleric's Channel Energy ability. And then, insist no one else can play an actual Cleric because they are the party healer? Riiiiight.

Ranged Rogue:
I played a halfling ranged rogue once, in a single scenario, and, even though the scenario was probably the worst possible one for that kind of build, Murder on the Throaty Mermaid, it still illustrated the problems inherent in that kind of build.

As a result, that PC remained a rogue, but became human, and plain vanilla. He has done much better, since, but has run into issues with being a rogue.

Now, he is in the higher tiers, being 9th level, and is starting to see other issues with being a rogue, as any scenario leaning on dealing with a bunch of Barbarians pretty much neuters his damage output.

Silver Crusade 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

Pretty sure Seth's saying that their awful characters are more likely to be killed by the scenario, than to do the murderhobo-ing themselves. Thus they're more likely to be murderhobo'd than to murderhobo. He's not actually advocating PVP.

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
UndeadMitch wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

Pretty sure Seth's saying that their awful characters are more likely to be killed by the scenario, than to do the murderhobo-ing themselves. Thus they're more likely to be murderhobo'd than to murderhobo. He's not actually advocating PVP.

With *that* kind of explanation, it makes sense. The shorthand used made it sound like I'd thought initially.

Though, if death-vagrants are slaughtered by the proper denziens of a given place, have they really been death-vagranted? Or have they been demise-homed?

Shadow Lodge

I will now suggest some inappropriate locations for dealing with problem players.

1) Meat processing plants.

2) Deep, cold rivers.

3) Cement mixers.

4) Corn fields.

5) Construction sights.

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kerney wrote:

I will now suggest some inappropriate locations for dealing with problem players.

1) Meat processing plants.

2) Deep, cold rivers.

3) Cement mixers.

4) Corn fields.

5) Construction sights.

...list continues...

6) Weather decks of naval vessels

7) Sewage treatment facilities

8) Tops of very tall buildings

9) Middle of a busy highway during the evening commute

10) Balers

11) Trash compactors

12) Wood Chippers

Silver Crusade

Kerney wrote:
4) Corn fields.

Corn fields are alright as long as there are no children involved...

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Starfinder Superscriber

Black holes. In principle, no information ever gets back out. (Modulo whatever happens with the black hole information paradox.)

Dark Archive 4/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gary Bush wrote:

HEY!

Stay on target guys!

This is about unskilled players, not what people use to play with in the "good old days".

Mods, please clean it up a little?

Thank you.

Oh my sweet summer child...

Grand Lodge

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
UndeadMitch wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

Pretty sure Seth's saying that their awful characters are more likely to be killed by the scenario, than to do the murderhobo-ing themselves. Thus they're more likely to be murderhobo'd than to murderhobo. He's not actually advocating PVP.

With *that* kind of explanation, it makes sense. The shorthand used made it sound like I'd thought initially.

Though, if death-vagrants are slaughtered by the proper denziens of a given place, have they really been death-vagranted? Or have they been demise-homed?

Yes, what UndeadMitch said.

13. Hog trough

Liberty's Edge 3/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

You guys are certainly a helpful bunch, aren't you?

BTW, I am likely old enough to be a sweet granddad and not a child, thank you.. :)


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:


2. Sounds like their characters are more like get-murderhobo'ed, since theyve been a part of multiple tpks. :P

Just a gentle reminder that PvP is against PFS rules, and hinting or suggesting that someone's characters could face this sort of fate for inexperience or poor social skills is very much not cool.

Let's help folks learn, grow, and become better people and gamers. It is possible!

It's almost like these problem players have found a backdoor method to PvP, having caused several TPKs...

Grand Lodge

Gary Bush wrote:

You guys are certainly a helpful bunch, aren't you?

BTW, I am likely old enough to be a sweet granddad and not a child, thank you.. :)

At this point the main issue of the thread has been addressed and the VO of the area is working on fixing the situation.

If off-topic or tangentially-related topics in a thread bother you, I suggest you dont read the thread, as they are the nature of the internet.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

You are likely correct Seth but I am hopeful to see what the resolution is so having to shift through all the non-related posts does get a little tiresome.

One of the reasons this thread is of interest to me is because I too played D&D in my youth and just now returning to pen-and-paper so I can empathize with this couple.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Considering this isn't a closed topic and we are still awaiting the results I also agree these posts should be cleaned up by moderators. It bothers me that this has to happen so frequently. Just make an Off-topic forum thread and call it PFS banter or something.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When you're waiting for your viewing of the car crash you will experience lots of traffic.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

It is unlikely that the resolution will be posted here (as is not typical) especially so if the decision is punitive.

Silver Crusade 5/5

Ragoz wrote:
Considering this isn't a closed topic and we are still awaiting the results I also agree these posts should be cleaned up by moderators. It bothers me that this has to happen so frequently. Just make an Off-topic forum thread and call it PFS banter or something.

There are other forums here?

Liberty's Edge 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ragoz wrote:
Considering this isn't a closed topic and we are still awaiting the results I also agree these posts should be cleaned up by moderators. It bothers me that this has to happen so frequently. Just make an Off-topic forum thread and call it PFS banter or something.

Moderators don't usually delete off topic posts. Not sure I'd want to participate on a forum where just a little bit of fun gets moderated either.


you should both have a talk with them about how to better optimize their characters as well as build the best/ most optimised character you can. if they are a joy to play with and the only downside is they cant do squat in combat its time for you to shine. the worst thing thatll happen is that they dont like you being OP in which case itll trigger a conversation where you can help make them better and promising to downplay your character a bit. best case they see how awesome your guy is, take an interest, and either go on their own to improvement or ask you how to improve. in either case it seems like everyone will be better.

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Please don't drag this down into an optimization/roleplay false dichotomy thread.

It didn't seem like that was the issue in this scenario? It doesn't take *much* to move from sub-optimal to decent without being the best of the best.

Also, G? With that apparent sort of ego-display, it might make entrenched folks dig in a bit more and hold the line rather than explore options?

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Generally you can go grargy or off topic but not both.

Sovereign Court

G-Zeus wrote:
you should both have a talk with them about how to better optimize their characters as well as build the best/ most optimised character you can

As posted in the thread already, members of the lodge have tried teaching them how to play better.

It went nowhere and was dismissed with poor attitude.

Silver Crusade 5/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Generally you can go grargy or off topic but not both.

I choose...

...
...
...
Off-Topic!

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Christian wrote:
Ragoz wrote:
Considering this isn't a closed topic and we are still awaiting the results I also agree these posts should be cleaned up by moderators. It bothers me that this has to happen so frequently. Just make an Off-topic forum thread and call it PFS banter or something.
Moderators don't usually delete off topic posts. Not sure I'd want to participate on a forum where just a little bit of fun gets moderated either.

I cannot imagine the Rules Forum without a succubus in a grapple in it.

5/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
It is unlikely that the resolution will be posted here (as is not typical) especially so if the decision is punitive.

That being said, I think we all would benefit from some general guidance about how to handle situations where a player or two are causing good players to stop attending sessions.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Southwest

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The first step is always the same, confirm that this really is a problem. Sometimes our own "stuff" makes us see issues where they don't exist. Talk to others and get confirmation.

A step that follows this is always the same as well and it is talk to the ones causing the problem. Be kind. Be unemotional. Do not argue. Be very specific about particular incidents and the problems they cause. People argue more over generalities and less over the specific instances.

If you have the ability set consequences and timeline in which the behavior needs to be changed.

Then you just need to stick to the timeline and consequences if they choose not to change.


We've had a similar problem that was easily fixed.

When [problem player] complained about being targeted by enemies for no reason, we ignored all whining comments and told him to mark the damage. He didn't, but the GM kept track of [problem player's] HP behind his screen. When [problem player] ran out of hit points, the DM informed him he was unconscious/dead. When he asked people to heal him, nobody did. In game terms, they decided that the character was a liability to the group and they couldn't afford to have him along.

[Problem player] got ticked off and refused to play with anybody from that group. He moved to a different table and played there until he refused to roll a skill check everyone else had to roll. The GM acted like his character refused to do it (hide) and the guard saw him standing out in the open. When [problem player] got mad at the GM because "his character wouldn't have stood out in the middle of the courtyard. He would've hidden, but didn't need to roll a hide check because it's nighttime." Yeah. The GM had the guards try to arrest him, he ran (a dwarf fighter in full plate), and the guards attacked him. The rest of the group didn't come to his aid (for similar reasons as the previous group - his presence put everyone else in danger), he got mad at the players for being 'traitors', he got ticked at the GM for not making them help him, and he complained to the store owner about the GM.

He stopped playing with everybody from that table as well.

After a similar situation with other players and a different GM, he threw a fit one day and stormed out of the event, vowing to never come back and promising he would tell everyone he knew 'what really goes on here.'

When he left the store, everybody cheered!

Nobody was trying to make his experience negative, but in a game setting, the GMs never let him get away with anything, and played out the games depending on what he did/didn't do according to the rules. When the group saw what the character was doing, they reacted the way any group would react if someone were putting them all at risk - leave him to the dogs.

It's been 6 months and we haven't seen him since then, and I think everybody there is better off without him there.


Probably should've taken the guy aside after the first incident, but I guess hindsight is 20/20.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

6 people marked this as a favorite.

ccgfarmer,

I'm sure that worked to drive away the problem player. I'm sure that sort of experience would drive anybody away. But it also probably gave him a bad impression of the exclusionary gaming group. Maybe he has friends, or an on-line presence. If so, I'll bet that you lost a couple of good players who will believe him when he says he had a miserable experience.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Life experience chiming in here from work

It used to be that you'd have to find ten 'good' reviews to make up for every 'bad' review.

With the advent of the Internet, the vocal minority has skewed even more dramatically, and now *one* person can have the effective voting strength of two hundred.

We may have six hundred customers in a day (that's an exceptionally conservative estimate, major grocery chain store).

Out of those, we may receive ten 'feedback' reports (You know the type, the ones at the bottom of the receipt saying 'tell us how we're doing'?).

Now a customer has a negative experience and by GOD they're going to let everyone know. So one of those 'feedback' reports is going to be scathingly negative.

Perception is crucial.

When the only feedback that the office is getting is negative, and someone is wound up over being mistreated (whether it's a natural consequence of their actions or not), the immediate onus falls not on the aggrieved party -- obviously not, they took the time to fill out the survey, after all -- but on us in the retail establishment to 'make things right'.

And that's if the individual in question is responding 'in-house' via the method of survey feedback.

It's just as easy to hop on a blog, website, forum, etc, and blast a company and do even MORE damage.

While a group may feel 'great' for having dealt with a problem player by 'driving them off', it not only gives a bad impression, but it serves as negative advertising for the next event in the venue. And that does NOT go away.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I am not sure that players and potential players driven away by a problem player have only glowing praise when that happens.

Reputation works both ways.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ccgfarmer wrote:
Story time

This sounds a little passive-aggressive myself, but I guess you all got what you wanted. However, most would agree bad behavior is better handled out of the game. It can often save a lot of grief and hard feelings. Not everyone has the same expectations or plays the game the same way. Its not my/our place to tell you how to handle issues in your lodge, but if the description is 100% accurate, there may have been some better ways to approach the player that could have saved the relationship. YMMV

2/5

Chris Mortika wrote:

ccgfarmer,

I'm sure that worked to drive away the problem player. I'm sure that sort of experience would drive anybody away. But it also probably gave him a bad impression of the exclusionary gaming group. Maybe he has friends, or an on-line presence. If so, I'll bet that you lost a couple of good players who will believe him when he says he had a miserable experience.

As opposed to destroying an entire lodge? Game rules need to be enforced, if people don't want to make skill checks or whatever, there needs to be consequences. That was the point of this entire thread actually.

When you don't let these players cheat and ignore rules, they leave on their own eventually.

I don't agree with other players not healing this individual (if he brings his own wand of CLW), I think that is malicious and he does have a grievance (it ignores the PF rule to cooperate and is jerk behavior). However, with regards to hiding, I'm pretty sure that this individual did the same thing a number of other times and the group DID help him out. Finally they said 'no'. This is what happens.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I believe it is important for everyone, not just the GM, to speak up and talk to players who are "bad". If someone feels they were treated poorly than there is very little I can do to change that except to cave to their wishes.

Problem Players are bullies in their own way but it is important not to be a bully back.

A difficult situation. Shows that PFS is, first and foremost, a social game. And just like society at large, there are going to be people who just don't want to follow the same rules the rest of us do.

Shadow Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Southwest

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I find that problem players are selfish.

This selfishness corrodes and destroys the communal nature of gaming.

This is why the community needs to police itself so that bad actors have a chance to choose to change or to leave.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Eric Brittain wrote:

I find that problem players are selfish.

This selfishness corrodes and destroys the communal nature of gaming.

This is why the community needs to police itself so that bad actors have a chance to choose to change or to leave.

It has to be more than just 'police'.

It has to be a proactive outreach to bring others 'on board'.

Reactive 'police' adjustments are part of the corrosion indicated here. " 'x' player is being a jerk for 'y' action, therefore we should perform 'z' action in response/retaliation."

The hardest thing in any social environment is 'bringing the horse to water and getting to want to drink on it's own', so to speak.

It's difficult, to say the least, but we should try to anticipate the needs of our fellow gamers, and mark out the boundaries of reasonable behaviour. If we've laid out the cards on the table, the rules have been posted, everyone understands that gaming is a *privilege* not a right, then a polite and affirming society can form from that.

How can this be done, without sacrificing personal health, enjoyment, and community is probably one of the hardest tasks a person could manage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
...And there have been multiple statements that, despite serious effort, this couple is unwilling to listen or learn, with excuses like, "I've been gaming since before you were born." So....

I keep seeing this. I tried to ignore it, but the grammar nazi in me feels someone is being maligned unjustly. The post actually says

Quote:
... with “They have been playing this game longer then I have been alive and they know what they are doing.” It seems....

My emphasis. It isn't the couple making this claim, it is someone else. A third person. Maybe they have made the claim, but that is not in the information we have been given. Also those 'multiple statements' are all from the same (likely reliable) source.

I still have crayoned d20 & d4s, I use it mostly when newbies are at the table. :)

101 to 150 of 155 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Unskilled players affecting attendance, what to do? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.