|
Short version: Got a guy that does a lot of backseat DMing in the game I'm running and kicking him out of the group is not an option that I want to pursue. Suggestions?
Long version: So I'm running a game on Sundays and, I will admit, I don't have as good a handle on the system as I would like. I mean I can play it just fine with no problems but the actual DMing is still something I'm getting used to (CR and loot tables being one of my big problems). Anyway, there's a guy in the group, a friend actually as opposed to some rando we picked up, who has like crazy system mastery. Like I'd not be surprised if I learned that he read all the core books cover to cover. Anyway, problem is, the guy will, with annoying frequency, chime in on things that I'm apparently doing wrong. Like it's getting to "Shut up Wesley" levels here. I don't want to ask him to leave the group, but I am getting friggin' sick and tired of telling him to shut the hell up with his interruptions and rules-lawyering (or setting-lawyering if that's a thing).
I know pulling him aside and having a talk with him is one of the go-to tactics but I was hoping ya'll would have some additional advice.
Obviously, talk to him. Tell him that rules-lawyering to the GM's face is not winning him any friends regardless if he's already your friend, and tell him that he needs to either knock it off or that he can be a GM since he clearly knows so much about the game.
If that doesn't work, you need to buckle down and play without him.
We all get them eventually - and the trick is to use them to your advantage.
We had a rules 'specialist' in the last face to face group I ran - and while I have been playing (and DMing) for years he had a much better deep understanding of the rules than I did. Every so often, I would be challenged on a ruling - and (BH) he was generally right.
If it was at a time when I wanted the game to flow, I would say 'Perhaps - BUT this is how it happens this time.' implying that something mysterious was going on the player / Character didn't understand (and was never going to understand). My rules man knew that I had made a GM ruling and that was that.
At other times, when there wasn't a flow issue, we would all look it up in various books at the same time - and come to a group understanding of the rules. hen everyone sticks with the common interpretation - DM and players. After all, it is a group game where everyone has to be happy and enjoy the sessions.
I would probably still have a chat with the guy so that he knows it is an issue for you. You can also lay out YOUR basic plan to deal with the issue - but be prepared to negotiate for something you can both live with. Be a DM as a leader, rather than a DM as a dictator :)
No matter what anyone says, every 'social' RPG group develops its own table / house rules, and it doesn't matter whether they are exactly as it says in the book or not. It said that in AD&D1 - and I have stuck with it as a core concept of RPG ever since. he most important thing is that everyone has fun.
As usual when it comes to resolving conflicts peacefully: Understand each other's needs. I am pretty sure he wants appreciation for this knowledge while you want appreciation for your GMing. The following might help:
1) If you have a rules question, ask him. That's faster than flipping through books (hence less immersion-breaking) and shows appreciation.
2) If he chimes in with unwanted corrections, consider carefully whether to stick with your ruling or to take his. In many cases such a decision has only limited impact, so you could stick with yours for simplicity or take his for correctness. In doubt take the more party-friendly decision. And try to rule 'correctly' in the future - that also shows appreciation.
3) Speak to him out of character, preferably if nobody else is around - so it won't become a question of status or pride. Pay respect to his knowledge openly, but remind him you are not only a rules judge but also a storyteller - and too much rules discussion hurts the story. He might be afraid of playing the game in a 'wrong' way, clinging to the official rules as a safe anchor. It's an emotional thing, so you can't really fix it with words - it will go away when he experiences slightly off rulings never resulting in anything horrible.
Firstly I would say that the setting is entitely in your control. Sure companies produce books and supplements to provide suggestions for adventure locations and characters but you aren't bound them. If you decide that the river kingdoms are part of Brevoy, that House Thrune has been deposed or that the Red Wizards are Good, then that's your prerogative. Players who use their knowledge of the setting to develop their own characters and backgrounds should let you know in advance, ideally by email, so you can take it into consideration and try and make it work. After all that is a great source of motivations and ideas for you.
Regarding rules lawyering, you acknowledge that you don't know the system as well which is good to know. The good news is that the more you play and the more he "advises" you, the better your knowledge will be. Have a word with him and see if you can both make sure the corrections aren't confrontational.
Unfortunately in Pathfinder it's a lot harder to decide tactics and then look at the rules, because so many choices - like combat maneuvers - stand no chance of working unless you have the right combinations of feats, stats, skills and equipment. You have to decide the tactics in advance then tailor the NPCs or creatures to the tactics. It's one of the main reasons as a DM I prefer 5th ed, where most options are available from the get go. As a DM it is far more liberating.
I'm in a game where the GM doesn't know the system as well as me and I am that 'backseat GM'.
However at the start I said I wouldn't nit-pick or speak up during the game unless a player or GM was misinterpreting a rule which would gain an unfair advantage or cause the death of a PC and explain why it was wrong.
After a session I would give a 'what I would have done' for a BBEG encounter to help the GM with tactics and spell usage.
He is learning the nasty things I with my characters and using them with his NPCs.
But as everyone has said, just talk with them.
I'm my group's primary GM, but we're currently shuffling things up, and another person is GM'ing. He's easily the second-most studied in the system after me, and also has the most experience GM'ing after me. And yet, I've found it alarmingly hard to resist the almost reflexive "actually, the book says..." response to him or the other players misunderstanding a rule or spell. Thankfully, I've held my tongue more times than not, because I know I'm not the GM right now, and it's up to him to adjudicate the rules, and if he wants to use me as a quick-reference, he's free to do so, and he has a couple times. So far, no one has implied that I'm overstepping my boundaries when I do occasionally blurt out a correction against my will, but it is very possible that it's gotten annoying for some by now.
My point is: I get where you're coming from, and you're definitely justified in saying something. However, he could very well not realize what he's doing is inappropriate, and is just doing it because it's in his nature (assuming he used to GM).
I play in a game where I could be the "backseat GM" but I never made a habit of jumping in and correcting because it irritates me when someone does it and I am GM'ing! In a few instances where silence began to rein and there was some confusion about a rule I would speak up, but otherwise I stay engaged in the action/story. The GM and I eventually developed an unspoken arrangement where he knows that he can give me a look if he can't remember a detail or a specific ruling and I'll chime in, but otherwise it's his show.
I hope you can create a similar spoken arrangement with this player who is also a friend by finding the politest way possible to say "if I need your help, I'll ask for it."
I usually ask the other rules lawyer at the table to look stuff up for my while I'm DMing.
It lets me keep things flowing smoothly, and it keeps him busy.
It there's a dispute, I either refer him to the relevant FAQ or make a ruling and tell him we can discuss it later.
When I'm the player, I usually keep quiet unless the DM (not the other rules lawyer) asks. I learned my lessons about backseat DMing long ago.
|
Just to say it again, because it can't be advised enough, talk with him. OUT OF GAME.
.
This is important, Why are you the DM?
Did you convince everyone you should do it and they reluctantly agreed?
Does the group need someone, and they wrangled you?
Are you guys just taking turns?
Because this really affects their perception of you as DM. There's a difference if you weaseled your way behind the DM screen and if you just agreed to help because they needed someone.
.
.
.
.
But as for suggestions,....
Maybe an approach like, "We're going to stick with this way now because I designed the encounter this way, unaware of the rule, and the encounter works based on my design -- I can change it in the future."
Or another way, "We're going to stick to this way now to keep the game going smoothly -- I can correct it in the future, but I'm not stopping the game for this adjustment, accurate as it may be."
.
.
.
.
Or another approach, tell the group you guys are going to to do a more theater-of-the-mind approach.
Throw away the battlemat and minis and DM the sessions closer to diceless roleplay. Design the session less rules-dependent and more ROLEplay. Don't use Crunch that often.
.
.
.
.
Another thing you may consider is to DM a couple sessions with another system or a modified Pathfinder system. This is something I strongly recommend to a new-to-the-rules or unaware-of-the-rules player who really wants to DM.
A few years ago one of our players really wanted to try her hand at DMing but did not know the rules. Was intimidated by our knowledge and experience, even. We all KNEW she could come up with a fun adventure and wanted to encourage her. While my friends recommended her to DM a Pathfinder module while we would help with rules, I told her to make up something unique and just go with it. She settled on designing a 'down the rabbit hole' / Wonderland adventure where she made pre-gen PCs based on the little experience she had, and made up rules based on that. She told us about the PCs and explained what they could do, teaching us her rules mechanics, and we played. It was a great session. I think the funnest moments were the ones where she just made something up completely improvisationally. And because we were out of our element with the rules we accepted them. More importantly, because she wasn't bound by the rules she was really able to use her creativity and had the freedom to make it great.
|
|
Just to say it again, because it can't be advised enough, talk with him. OUT OF GAME.
.
This is important, Why are you the DM?
Did you convince everyone you should do it and they reluctantly agreed?
Does the group need someone, and they wrangled you?
Are you guys just taking turns?
Because this really affects their perception of you as DM. There's a difference if you weaseled your way behind the DM screen and if you just agreed to help because they needed someone.
.
.
.
.
But as for suggestions,....Maybe an approach like, "We're going to stick with this way now because I designed the encounter this way, unaware of the rule, and the encounter works based on my design -- I can change it in the future."
Or another way, "We're going to stick to this way now to keep the game going smoothly -- I can correct it in the future, but I'm not stopping the game for this adjustment, accurate as it may be."
.
.
.
.
Or another approach, tell the group you guys are going to to do a more theater-of-the-mind approach.Throw away the battlemat and minis and DM the sessions closer to diceless roleplay. Design the session less rules-dependent and more ROLEplay. Don't use Crunch that often.
.
.
.
.
Another thing you may consider is to DM a couple sessions with another system or a modified Pathfinder system. This is something I strongly recommend to a new-to-the-rules or unaware-of-the-rules player who really wants to DM.A few years ago one of our players really wanted to try her hand at DMing but did not know the rules. Was intimidated by our knowledge and experience, even. We all KNEW she could come up with a fun adventure and wanted to encourage her. While my friends recommended her to DM a Pathfinder module while we would help with rules, I told her to make up something unique and just go with it. She settled on designing a 'down the rabbit hole' / Wonderland adventure where she made pre-gen PCs based on the little experience...
I actually volunteered to DM, both because I enjoyed the first few games I ever ran (back in 3.5) and that I know I am inexperienced and that I need some first hand experience to get better. Also that pre-made adventures just sort of rub me the wrong way (Not saying they're bad just...it feels weird).
Most of the problems seem to arise with the judgement calls I make as DM, loot distribution, and CR, and less about my running encounters or plots I'm giving the players. Granted I'm not really in favor of giving the PCs all the tools they need to win an upcoming fight (like conveniently giving them a +4 Sword of Dragon Slaying before a dragon boss for example) so that's something I get lectured at for...
But yes, I'll talk with him in private next time there's an outburst. Let'em know that yes, I will make mistakes, and if it's blatantly against the rules, then by all means correct me TACTFULLY (hell I might just ask him to raise his hand). But judgement calls and setting fluff stuff can wait until after the game or during break.
I've done this in the past with a DM who had moved over from 3.5 so got confused sometimes, and the rest of the table had never played before so when he said things like 'make a spot check' and the table would go silent whilst everyone else frantically scanned their sheet for 'spot' and then I'd reply 'we're playing pathfinder' and just wait for him to click xD.
The only other time I would chime in was when he was making rulings up that were clearly homebrewed and made up in the moment with a very anti player mentality (he had a habit of in his own words 'being a dick'). For example a player in character flipped the bird at an archer that shot them, he decided that was a full round action and they lost their turn.
soooo ... what exactly is it you're doing that he's calling your out on? You're saying loot distribution and CR but that could be anything from being a couple grand under WBL to receiving a masterwork longsword at level 10 as their best weapon...
|
|
I've done this in the past with a DM who had moved over from 3.5 so got confused sometimes, and the rest of the table had never played before so when he said things like 'make a spot check' and the table would go silent whilst everyone else frantically scanned their sheet for 'spot' and then I'd reply 'we're playing pathfinder' and just wait for him to click xD.
The only other time I would chime in was when he was making rulings up that were clearly homebrewed and made up in the moment with a very anti player mentality (he had a habit of in his own words 'being a dick'). For example a player in character flipped the bird at an archer that shot them, he decided that was a full round action and they lost their turn.
soooo ... what exactly is it you're doing that he's calling your out on? You're saying loot distribution and CR but that could be anything from being a couple grand under WBL to receiving a masterwork longsword at level 10 as their best weapon...
Well with the CR, I have trouble sorting out what is a balanced encounter for the party (also compounded by the fact that LIKE AN IDIOT I allowed Path of War without 100% reading it and one guy rolled up a Warder). Like the PCs are lvl 5 right now and the encounters I have planned for next session range from CR 3 to CR 7. I'm probably gonna get crap for one or two of the encounters being too tough.
Treasure-wise, my issues seem to be a balance issue of what is too much or too little. Personally I'm in favor of "Well this loot here makes sense given the location and context so let's put it here" but that tends to bite me in the butt when the piece of loot is worth like 4k and all the PCs had to do was walk into a room and search around for a bit. As stated before I'm kinda new to the mechanical side of DMing what with balanced CRs and loot tables so I have the Treasure By Encounter stuff to help me out.
The other stuff he's calling me out on are DM judgement calls and disagreements with setting fluff (We're running a custom setting that we both helped write up). I've used the phrase "Yes [name], I DO know what I'm doing so shut up" more times than I care to think over the last few sessions regarding those two issues. The rest is nitpicking and general interruptions which tend to elicit most of the "Shut up Wesley" responses.
Tell everyone that the setting you're in is your own if that's true. If you told every the setting was Golarion or the forgotten realms or some other already made setting then he's right that you're messing that up.
Same with the other rules, this game has a LOT of rules, and the assumption is that they will be true unless "official houserule" is made to change them.
Personally my advice, especially if wanting to avoid talking to him, Is do you homework! Look up the rules and stuff beforehand so you DON'T get things wrong and then there's nothing for him to fix.
Otherwise make a public announcement saying that you are no longer playing Pathfinder, but a game similar to Pathfinder where anything you get "wrong" per pathfinder rules is actually the new rule, at least for that moment.
Like saying you're playing Pathfinder and then doing stuff wrong is basically considered cheating to many people, so he's correcting you so you play fair.
Well with the CR, I have trouble sorting out what is a balanced encounter for the party (also compounded by the fact that LIKE AN IDIOT I allowed Path of War without 100% reading it and one guy rolled up a Warder). Like the PCs are lvl 5 right now and the encounters I have planned for next session range from CR 3 to CR 7. I'm probably gonna get crap for one or two of the encounters being too tough.
Okay well may I suggest that CR is in general not that helpful of a tool, it can give you a ball park figure but it is generally better in my opinion to consider what your PCs to hit and DCs are and the saves they target and what their AC is. Compare that with the monsters saves, to hit and AC and think, is this a reasonable thing for them to fight?
If you're consistently making encounters too difficult that would irritate me.
Treasure-wise, my issues seem to be a balance issue of what is too much or too little. Personally I'm in favor of "Well this loot here makes sense given the location and context so let's put it here" but that tends to bite me in the butt when the piece of loot is worth like 4k and all the PCs had to do was walk into a room and search around for a bit. As stated before I'm kinda new to the mechanical side of DMing what with balanced CRs and loot tables so I have the Treasure By Encounter stuff to help me out.
Wealth by level on the other hand is actually quite useful and if you're going to ignore it in favor of your version of verisimilitude you should probably inform your players of that.
Actually if you're getting WBL wrong that might be why your finding CR is off, CR assumes appropriate WBL.
You also talked about loot tables before, I strongly advise abandoning them, they're annoying and can swing between getting items that are kind of too strong for what level the PCs are too completely useless. Which is annoying.
The other stuff he's calling me out on are DM judgement calls and disagreements with setting fluff (We're running a custom setting that we both helped write up). I've used the phrase "Yes [name], I DO know what I'm doing so shut up" more times than I care to think over the last few sessions regarding those two issues. The rest is nitpicking and general interruptions which tend to elicit most of the "Shut up Wesley" responses.
I mean if you co-wrote the setting with him and then keep getting things in the setting wrong, if that was me it would drive me absolutely mad xD maybe check your setting knowledge with him before the session to see if you're forgetting something.
DM judgement calls are a different matter, unless you're either being consistently a dick or way to generous he is probably just having trouble letting go of being the DM and you just need to tell him to stop.
|
|
Well with the CR, I have trouble sorting out what is a balanced encounter for the party (also compounded by the fact that LIKE AN IDIOT I allowed Path of War without 100% reading it and one guy rolled up a Warder). Like the PCs are lvl 5 right now and the encounters I have planned for next session range from CR 3 to CR 7. I'm probably gonna get crap for one or two of the encounters being too tough.
Okay well may I suggest that CR is in general not that helpful of a tool, it can give you a ball park figure but it is generally better in my opinion to consider what your PCs to hit and DCs are and the saves they target and what their AC is. Compare that with the monsters saves, to hit and AC and think, is this a reasonable thing for them to fight?
If you're consistently making encounters too difficult that would irritate me.
Treasure-wise, my issues seem to be a balance issue of what is too much or too little. Personally I'm in favor of "Well this loot here makes sense given the location and context so let's put it here" but that tends to bite me in the butt when the piece of loot is worth like 4k and all the PCs had to do was walk into a room and search around for a bit. As stated before I'm kinda new to the mechanical side of DMing what with balanced CRs and loot tables so I have the Treasure By Encounter stuff to help me out.Wealth by level on the other hand is actually quite useful and if you're going to ignore it in favor of your version of verisimilitude you should probably inform your players of that.
Actually if you're getting WBL wrong that might be why your finding CR is off, CR assumes appropriate WBL.
You also talked about loot tables before, I strongly advise abandoning them, they're annoying and can swing between getting items that are kind of too strong for what level the PCs are too completely useless. Which is annoying.
...
The other stuff he's calling me out on are DM judgement calls and disagreements with
In my defense with the CR thing, I only threw one encounter at the party that they couldn't handle, and his character died via that encounter (CR 5 Deathweb vs a party of lvl 4s. He opted to scout ahead through unknown terrain and was stupid trying to escape it. Went to a wall instead of the much higher ceiling. Two-shot him) Everything since has been pretty balanced and I'm not going more than 2 higher than the PC's APL as a rule of thumb.
Loot-wise, also doesn't help that nobody is giving me a solid wishlist that I can work into the encounters. As for the tables, they're more along the lines of "This creature should have loot equal to about this much gold for its CR" to give me an idea for a budget.
And the headbutting over the setting fluff is pretty minor compared to the "are you sure you know what you're going" nitpicking. I'm mostly sticking to areas that I either wrote myself or had a major hand in creating. And I don't think the judgement calls are unfair either way, but rather gets the player's jimmies rustled when I make a judgement that favors story over the strict letter of the rules.
Also there was some pushback about me putting his character in a catatonic state for the duration of a session that he wasn't there, but what the heck else was I supposed to do?
Talk with him out of game (in private), you'll probably be able to work something out. Use his rules knowledge as an advantage -- he can look things up for you or remind you of things, but only if that does not drag down gameplay. In other words, don't be afraid to say "You may be correct, but we're doing it this way for now for the sake of keeping things moving."
For CR: figure out what challenges the party and what doesn't, then use that as your base. If a CR 5 is deadly for a party with APL 4, then ignore the normal CR guidelines and skew things lower. If CR 5 is a cakewalk, then skew things higher. It also varies a lot by what monsters and how many monsters there are -- CR is only a ballpark figure.
In my defense with the CR thing, I only threw one encounter at the party that they couldn't handle, and his character died via that encounter (CR 5 Deathweb vs a party of lvl 4s. He opted to scout ahead through unknown terrain and was stupid trying to escape it. Went to a wall instead of the much higher ceiling. Two-shot him) Everything since has been pretty balanced and I'm not going more than 2 higher than the PC's APL as a rule of thumb.
Well, sounds good to me. Encounters can become way more lethal or way more weaker than expected - even experienced GMs can't always predict this. Because a player can potentially come up with anything, from a stroke of genius down to some suicide move.
Loot-wise, also doesn't help that nobody is giving me a solid wishlist that I can work into the encounters. As for the tables, they're more along the lines of "This creature should have loot equal to about this much gold for its CR" to give me an idea for a budget.
That's actually wealth by level (WBL) through the backdoor. At least if you (in average) hand out standard treasure for each encounter (including those without fights).
Also there was some pushback about me putting his character in a catatonic state for the duration of a session that he wasn't there, but what the heck else was I supposed to do?
As far as I know, there is no perfect universal approach to absent players. I tried to make up reasons, but after a while they simply were not there, period. Now it's up to the players to come up with an explanation - if they need one at all.
I've got mixed feelings about this.
If I'm playing and a DM forgets something important that I don't, that impacts on me. For instance, if a bad guys casts a spell, and my PC uses Spellcraft to identify it, and I realize the range category is one that means it can't do what it's doing... that's a problem.
Seriously. The game I'm playing is Pathfinder. I make my choices in terms of feats, skills, magic items, class choices and actions based on the rules of the game. I don't mind monsters and items having abilities I just don't know about, but when I successfully identify something and it works differently than what's in the book, that's disruptive to me.
In those circumstances, I generally won't stay silent. It's an honest mistake, and the DM can re-work the round, but it's not right for the players to be subjected to mistakes that are fatal.
I'm not saying call out every error, but certainly the ones that actually impact the outcome... yeah. Because I'm not having fun if I'm being killed by inflict light wounds from a hundred feet away by a caster who doesn't have Reach Spell, and is taking damage from being on fire but doesn't make a concentration check because... oops, forgot, and he's standing in an antimagic field.