General Chat on a Difficult Query- WHY Game Break?

[KrielMaster]

+=

Two of the most active threads on the forum are currently discussing more or less the same thing.
"My Players are making it very hard to run my Game"

Insane spell over use.
Player Vs. Player Party TPKs.
Cartoon Quality Role-play with Double-plus-Ungood Ultraviolence.
Blissful Acceptance of Infernal Destruction for a Soul Doughnut {Weapon/Level/minor in-game 'edge'}

We've all seen it. Some of us have done it. My question is WHY?

What in sweet Dhunia's Name makes a player be such a selfish d*@che-bag that they feel it's perfectly OK to railroad or destroy a game, invalidate the hard, real, work that goes into putting together a group, setting up a game that fits everyone's busy lives, spending time/money/effort to come up with a plot, and backstory for PCs, to say nothing of all the OTHER players valuable leisure time?
I realise full well that we'll never 'get to the bottom of this', but I'd really like to discuss, nicely and with proper respect, of course, what drives this kind of thing. It's a trope, a bad joke and a flat-out buzzkill.
So, how come it happens so often as to be a cliché?

[Whimper]

A friend of mine who plays in my IK game explained it like this, when we were discussing his 'munchkin' approach to gaming.

I think it has to do with how people approach D&D. For me D&D is like a video game, but with way more possibilities. If you take one moment to analyze what things I like in D&D and what I like in video games they are very similar (most likely the same).

I like to min/max my character, and only really go after tasks that I know I will succeed in. I like to be the most powerful entity (or group) wandering around. Today (Feb 3rd 2010) I spent two hours playing FFVII, and all I did was increase my characters stats. I am trying to get all my characters to have straight 255s, and attaining that ridiculous level of power is fun for me.

For me, to be completely honest, becoming uber is a large part of why I play games.

He's not a jerk about it, he understands team play, and he doesn't deliberately try to ruin a game's narrative. But he is an engineer, and will always look for the best way to engineer up an ultimately broken combination of class abilities, feats, spells, and equipment. He lives to make the strongest hero in the world, and feels cheated if his game master has to resort to cheating or stacking the deck in order to keep things challenging. He loves playing Infernal Contraption, because that card game gives him the chance to work on perfecting clean, efficient engines of destruction.

Some people would just say, "Bah, if he wants it to be a video game, why doesn't he just play a video game. Kick him out." But I don't think that it's always quite so simple.

[KrielMaster]

Interesting input Whimper.
{I've been LOVING your "Evil Splotch Graphs" over in the other forum btw, fine work}
It's NEVER simple, but does your friend see that his actions have a possibly negative effect on your game as a whole? You say "He's not a jerk about it". I could make a solid argument, I think, {where I interested in starting a LCD/flame interwebz 'debate'- and I'm NOT} that he is, in fact, being a 'jerk'.
He's intentionally exploiting the letter of the rules, at the expense of the spirit of the Game, for 'HIS definition of fun' {being 'uber'}. He didn't actually supply a reason beyond "That's what makes it fun for ME" {emphasis, mine}.
Now, admittedly it's a hobby activity {for me again, also} but it is a shared one.
If you asked him, would he stop? Or would he seek another table? Is it really that important to a player to sate a personal enjoyment goal over, let's say for example, good role-play?

[The_Gun_Nut]

Well, the first question I have is: Is he actually ruining the fun for the other players?

The second question is: Is he doing something that you couldn't work around if you really wanted to?

I pride myself on the ability to shift gears in running a game. When I have crafted something special and the PC's blatantly ignore it, I toss something else out that could attract their attention. Having a player make his character just the way he wants it (crazy uber mensch) and integrating it into the game is fun for me.

The only time it truly becomes problematic is if the campaign or setting simply doesn't call for what the character wants. Then I will take the player aside and work with him to make something he/she will like that will actually work well with the game and the party.

Note that this doesn't just mean combat monsters or munchkins in a RP game, but heavy drama roleplayers in a more lighthearted game as well. I find working a player's concept into the game to be highly satisfying.

[demongg]

One of the players (and friend) in my IK game says nearly the exact same things as the engineer example (mentioned up-thread) does. He PLAYS the game as a 'power fantasy' - PERIOD. He says (and said again JUST last night, post-game at dinner) how he goes through life... a student, job-less, without big prospects, no girlfriend, few social things/friends, etc.... beyond game-time fun.

He wasn't complaining (these are HIS choices afterall) but it's just the type life and person he has chosen to be in general.
With that fairly average normal life he continued...

In real life he's never been agressive, been bullied as a kid, and overall follows ALL of society's rules - being nice when he doesn't want to be, sucking up to people in charge, not breaking laws, not lashing out at the grocery store clerk when they piss him off... not killing people (he's sort of a closet nihilist), etc.....


POINT being - he "deals" with all that in his real life (he says) SO... when he comes to game, he comes with a wish for power fantasy. He comes looking to exploit, if not break or cheat the rules at every chance SIMPLY to BE the biggest, baddest thing walking in the game.

He goes out of his way to 'pressure' the DM (me) and other players to get his way (ie. bully) or to hint to allow things to go his way. He pushes rules, he 'misreads' rules, he conveniently 'misremembers' or ignores reading the full paragraph of a rule and comes straight face to the table telling all us other players "THIS is how it is, I'm SURE of it...".


Honestly... after 3 years of knowing/gaming with him, I really still don't know if he is actually 'misremembering' things accidentally, or if he does all that on purpose, or if he's doing it all subconciously/inadvertantly.


He comes to the game to WIN. Period.
He hates "challenges" (so much to tease/taunt me about how I say "it's my job as DM to challenge players"). And he squeals like a little girl (pig?) when he GETS a win/kill on a BIG-BAD, etc...


It's very odd and sometimes confusing to me (and others).
He often-times just doesn't consider other players at the table - just recently ACTING before caring/thinking and actually KILLING another PC with a FLAME STRIKE that he blew up on top of them all (since he'd made he and his followers immune with Energy Protections).....


This...
In my opinion, is simply the way SOME people are. They simply have NO "social cues", no natural charisma, no understanding of other's feelings and how their insensitivity can be problematic for the game that THEY love.
Looking back - I can track multiple times that problems have come up (and destroyed at least one campaign group) that are direct result of HIS inattention, spotlight stealing, bully style, ultimate WIN strategy...

And while the LAST thing he would want as a person or player is to have anything END a great game, that he loves playing weekly... He is SO oblivious to the fact that HIS actions and lack of common courtesy causes these things - he not only can't understand it... he continues to repeat it. EVEN after it's explained to him the problems HIS actions have caused - through those specific individual examples - EACH and every time.



End conclusion.
In my humble opinion - some people just DO NOT GET IT. Are (conciously or not) just selfish people when it comes to "GAME TIME" because it's a 'safe' place to play out ALL the things that they cannot, can NEVER do in real life because they don't have the interest, ability or personal strength to overcome (deal with) the things they go quietly frustrated with daily in real life....

And you can't teach those dogs new tricks.

-kev-

[PG_DocEther]

Hey all. Just started playing in an IKRPG and, of course, I'm seeing a lot of the same. In fact, I see a lot of this from certain players in my group in general.

I think it's really a matter of stopping them before they start. We all have different styles of game mastering, but I've always found that laying down the rules even before character creation goes a long way to coming out with balanced characters.

I'm not a big fan of the D20 system because I feel like it promotes min-maxing, but there are a few ways you can keep players from creating twinked out characters from the get-go.

• Place limits on their Starting ability scores.
• Restrict certain feats / classes that don't fit the story
• Ask for Character information that justifies their feat / class choices.

Beyond that I think a full understading of the rules and their uses against the players is always fair. Someone wants a 7 Charisma because they think it's a "dump" stat? Keep those social rolls coming. Players keep burning through monsters? Have them get to that super-monster all that much faster.

On top of that I would let it fall to the will of the group. In the end it's usually ONE person in a group of four to six that ends up being the meta-gamer ****** bag. Everyone letting him know out of line (politely, if possible) might work to calm his "win" mentality.

[KrielMaster]

Thanks folks, for participating. Keep it coming.
So the consensus thus-far is; Gamer are often social misfits, and thus bring their broken-toy little-big-man issues to the table and monster-whack-a-mole is all OK?
As for technique issues {what? can't you handle it/them, just re-tool and move on.} This is the big kids table and a discussion above that level. The anvil tree blooms every night, and we all here have magnificent GM skills to 'handle' whatever and whoever.
The topic on the table is "Why?" and "is "because I wanna" a good enough reason.
The hobby is 40 years old. People put real time and money into this. {Here.}
Yes, we get a LOT of arrested development cases, soap should be made in the shape of d20's and handed out at Cons/FLGSs. Tropes and clichés exist, and for good reasons, so what does that mean we, as a group, as friends of 'these people' {the 1 in 4} just have to sigh, shrug and re-format our work to suit their habits?
Yes, I'm doing this to foster debate, and lively thought. Please, good folks, carry on...

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

Lots of words...

...after 3 years of knowing/gaming with him...

...you can't teach those dogs new tricks.

Why on earth would you continue to game with someone like that for three years? Why would you even go three gaming sessions?

I do think it boils down to "because I can" for most of these people. Their real lives are unsatisfying for whatever reason, and there are no real consequences for their bad behavior in gaming world, so they flex their d-bag muscle at the game table. Honestly, WoW and games like it are tailor-made for these people, so why do we continue to allow them to ruin gaming groups?

I've been trying to think of any other reason someone might game-break, and I honestly can't. All I can come up with is "I'm a maladjusted social reject who can wield imaginary power any way I want to and not suffer any consequences." It's sad, really. I feel bad for people like that - but I sure as hell don't want to hang out with them on a weekly basis.

[Whimper]

So the consensus thus-far is; Gamer are often social misfits, and thus bring their broken-toy little-big-man issues to the table and monster-whack-a-mole is all OK?.

I'd hardly call it a consensus. I mentioned a fellow who was an engineer, and enjoyed creating min/maxed characters because it was like solving a puzzle for him.

DemonGG mentioned an emotionally retarded social misfit who used D&D as a way to get back at the world, all while ruining it for everybody else involved.

Please don't equate these two players, nor use either of them as examples of the gaming community as a whole.

[The_Gun_Nut]

Your sample size is two. That is insufficient to make serious comments regarding millions of people.

For me, and many of my friends who play, making a character that is actually competent at their profession is important because they can make the numbers/mechanical contributions to the game. This, of course, has little to do with the role-playing part of the game, which we do just fine, thankyouverymuch.

I've seen some people's rationale as to why they would make a character that wasn't as useful or potent as others (something about roleplaying hardship or some crap), and to me it doesn't hold water. Make a character, and make them able to do something other than winge about their tough breaks. If you make a master thief, for example, they can winge about their tough breaks in the context of being forced to be a criminal.

Unless someone is running a round-table cry-fest, the characters your group makes will need to be able to do something about someone doing something somewhere in the city/nation/world. RPG's often have an element of problem solving to them, and the ability to actually solve said problem is important. It's only if the player is making a truly disruptive character, which has little to nothing to do with munchkining really, that steps need to be taken.

[Lamarkii]

Unfortunately most of my gaming is now PbP, but I've run into similar situations and what I've seen that works is not to punish bad play but reward good play. Positive things happen to the good roleplayers and the poor ones soldier along gaining experience but not achieving everything they could.

Have I seen it work? Yes, to an extent. In one game, we have a very creative power gamer who has the ability and sometimes flashes of brilliant play that lets you know he can be salvaged. But, he often reverts into the large blunt instrument style that the other players hate. The game has evolved to a point that his character is not put into situations where he can execute his power and he's had to take a back seat to other players. I think the message is getting through as he's trying to promote actions taken by other players.

Would this work in a face to face environment? Not sure, as you have all the emotions right in front of you. With PbP you have time to sit back and think and get over the emotions of the moment. Especially if you limit the frequency of the posts.

Lamarkii

[Killj0y]

I was playing in a gaming group that for want of a better word could be called unconventional. They were a LARP group that for whatever reason didn't want to play with the big boys (camarilla).

This should have been my first clue. What transpired is a massive clusterfark of off the wall concepts, people playing characters against type and a lot of people who felt that their snowflake was prettier than all the other snowflakes.

Example: in a Mage the Asencion game one of the characters was being played as a 10 year old child psychic fomori. Something you frequently only see as antagonists in werewolf games.

Several other players felt the need to show up with characters that were broken beyond the ability to contribute meaningfully to the game without having someone rewrite their personality or drasticaly alter them emotionally or physically.

It turns out that a lot of this was the fault of the storytellers being permissive in a group of people who had no previous experience playing in some of these systems.

Sure, in the IK you could play a bardic/gun mage Iron Lich infernalist warcaster with bonded firestorm magelocks but generally that's not the kind of charater you get to START with on your first game.

Even if you have a "normal" character concept and aren't playing beyond type that isn't to say that you can't find the exact wrong thing to do at any given moment.

There is always a litany of people who kill mouthy NPC's, steal from party members and wander the world starting fires and generally being anti-social. I think that much like the internet, the players start doing this and continue doing this because there are no reprocussions or it exsists in an atmosphere of permissiveness.

Slippery slope and all, when you start your day killing bandits, killing city guards and beggars isn't that much of a stretch.

[PG_DocEther]

The topic on the table is "Why?" and "is "because I wanna" a good enough reason.

I think we all know the why's at this point. Is there any good reason for going for the game break? No, never.

For me, and many of my friends who play, making a character that is actually competent at their profession is important because they can make the numbers/mechanical contributions to the game. This, of course, has little to do with the role-playing part of the game, which we do just fine, thankyouverymuch.

It's only if the player is making a truly disruptive character, which has little to nothing to do with munchkining really, that steps need to be taken.

I'm not going to disagree that your characters shouldn't be good. In fact, in a game like D&D, they need to be in order to get through the adventures you give the players.

But there comes a point were the min-maxing and the power gaming just become too much. A player shouldn't be taking out the challange of the game, or making the GM come up with outlandish scenarios to deal with these twinked out characters.

Now, what I have to say next might be taken as some to be a little "below the belt". It's opinion, of course, so feel free to disagree.

The D20 system is one of the worst systems to allow a power game to play in. The mechanics of the game reward the min-max play style. Player Characters quickly progress in power to a point were the world around them posses little threat.

And I don't think any of that is a problem is you say "no" to your players, but it really is a game system were you need to have firm controle.

[The_Gun_Nut]

I think we all know the why's at this point. Is there any good reason for going for the game break? No, never.



I'm not going to disagree that your characters shouldn't be good. In fact, in a game like D&D, they need to be in order to get through the adventures you give the players.

But there comes a point were the min-maxing and the power gaming just become too much. A player shouldn't be taking out the challange of the game, or making the GM come up with outlandish scenarios to deal with these twinked out characters.

Now, what I have to say next might be taken as some to be a little "below the belt". It's opinion, of course, so feel free to disagree.

The D20 system is one of the worst systems to allow a power game to play in. The mechanics of the game reward the min-max play style. Player Characters quickly progress in power to a point were the world around them posses little threat.

And I don't think any of that is a problem is you say "no" to your players, but it really is a game system were you need to have firm controle.

I have never found min-maxing or power-gaming to be a problem in any of my games. My players generally know, or have learned, that whatever they do, or could do, I can end their psychotic episodes with a single sniper shot in the IK's. And it doesn't take an extremely high level sniper to do so.

Generally, in any game I run, my players have learned that there are consequences to their actions. This, I think, is the core of the problem many people face when they have players who they feel "munchkins out" or power-games or min-max's their characters and then become abusive. I think it is a GM's responsibility to bring the consequences of their actions forward, and then, when their character is no longer in the game and everyone else is still playing and having fun, the abusive player will either realize what it takes to actually play in my game, or they leave.

The ones that learn to get along with others are welcome in my game. The ones that leave out of some strange sense of spite are not. I point out both options to them, and make them choose what kind of player they want to be.

Oh, also, I am someone who is able to, shall we say, "ultra-optimize" a character. I don't practice it much; I run games far more often than I play them, and rarely need to do so even when playing. But, while I'm not the best out there, my players know that if they can dream it, I can achieve it.

D20 isn't any more or less prone to abuse than any other system. It's just that, with the preponderence of options available due to MASSIVE 3rd party material or just plain crazy WoTC material, there are more instances of abuse available. If someone is going to abuse a system, they will do so regardless of system used. D20 is just the most available one out there right now, so sheer numbers of players will dictate the visibility of instances of abuse. Point value systems are waaaay more ripe for abuse, for example, than D20 ever dreamed of.

[CorporateSellout]

I've only played in a few RPG's of late because we've had a couple of "those people" in our local gaming group and every game started becoming a mass of chaos trying to keep up with their wild exploits or devolved into a series "rules lookup" standstills. I have to say though that even in my limited experience I'd have to agree with Lamarkii's post:

I've run into similar situations and what I've seen that works is not to punish bad play but reward good play. Positive things happen to the good roleplayers and the poor ones soldier along gaining experience but not achieving everything they could.

I'd be very hesitant to, as some others have suggested, just take out extra "punishment rage" on the game-breaker. From their perspective, a DM threatening their character with unforseen dangers and inexplicable bad luck just seems like one more challenge for their ultimate god-like being to overcome. Their uber-competitive instincts kick in and before long their trying to (in person or in character) overthrow the DM himself claiming advantages from the rules themselves. The end result, at least imo, tends to be just a power struggle between the "poor, picked-on powergamer who doesn't get a fair shake" and the "evil, iron-fisted, hate-fueled DM" responsible for this whole mess.

[KrielMaster]

awesome stuff guys, thank you... as I said, Thus-far, to address the "your sample size is 2" issue- my sample size is much much larger... and this convo adds to it.
Your 'engineer guy' and 'PC smash! munchkin', are to use the phrase, just more snowflakes on the drift. they honestly have more in common than you say.
I also agree with the point that d20 is no more or less abusable than any other system. I disallow most 3rd party and secondary WoTC materiel.
As for the Storyteller system; one of the points I made while helping ref the World Trade Center game in NYC {which was non-Camarilla but had contact with them, and ran quite long and well} was "All 'secret origin' stories are either "My Sire didn't touch me enough as a fledgeling!" or "My Sire touched me too much as a fledgeling!". That system's pathos driven concept definitely attracted/rewarded "most brokenest doll" types, both in and out of character. Case in point "Cleavage Majesty"
ie; in VtM LARP any marginally hot girl in a corset or bustiere WILL be treated as if they have the Merit; Majesty, whether it's on the sheet or not.

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

Well... nice cleavage IS pretty majestic.

[PG_oninofro]

Before a game/campaign begins, sit down with the group and discuss what your expectations are of the game. Make sure those basic ideals are understood. Then listen to what their basic expectations of the game are. If there is room for negotiation and agreement, move forward. If there isn't, do not start it with that composition of players. Outline in simple but clear terms that while their greatest concern boils down to the awesome-itude of their character, your concern as a game admin is to create and maintain a challenging and engaging environment for their character as well as the rest of the group. On top of that, you have to write the basic story that gives them purpose and a chance to shine while simultaneously maintaining the game environment. If they cannot acknowledge this, do not start the game. The game admin's fun is derived from the engaging experience and the overall storytelling process. While individual players and their characters can move this forward or even take it in unforeseen directions, their job isn't to monkey wrench it. Their job is to explore the character and have fun within a group. If they cannot accept this, boot them out.
You may find yourself running fewer games but they will all be higher quality and highly desired games when you do so.
Whimper's friend is at least honest about what he wants. This doesn't mean he's good... rather, honest. If his enjoyment trumps all the players and/or the person running the game, yeah he is better of playing a videogame. His investment is abstract thought in order to achieve some form of abstract reward; to be the bestest in a fictitious setting. So let him pursue that with all the ups and downs, consequences (good and bad) that go along with it. As a character escalates, so too will the game world's response (again possibly in the positive and negative ways). If an engineer cannot see this then they are hiding their frustration behind a guise of rationality while claiming a "victim" status. The player wants their character to have prestige X... make them earn it and struggle to keep it. I'd like to point out the specific of character level and reputation (a quantifiable measure that, for example, an engineer can appreciate). As you level, you can fame/notoriety. I can't recall the page number but it's somewhere around Level 11 to 14 your name is akin to a legend (hercules, conan, Castor & Pollox, Robin Hood, Christopher Walken, Me). People are going to be gunning for him as an ally or an adversary or anything in between. Throw challenges at the character that aren't solved by the simple "rocks fall people die" response. If the character's response is "well I stab things so stabby stabby" make him live with the consequences of breaking the law. He may be Billy Bad-rump but I bet his character would crumble at the casting of Feeblemind...
Anyways, I've seen gamers like this before. Give them to me for a month and you'll either get a better gamer or I'll have removed a problem from the shared table...

[PG_oninofro]

awesome stuff guys, thank you... as I said, Thus-far, to address the "your sample size is 2" issue- my sample size is much much larger... and this convo adds to it.
Your 'engineer guy' and 'PC smash! munchkin', are to use the phrase, just more snowflakes on the drift. they honestly have more in common than you say.
I also agree with the point that d20 is no more or less abusable than any other system. I disallow most 3rd party and secondary WoTC materiel.
As for the Storyteller system; one of the points I made while helping ref the World Trade Center game in NYC {which was non-Camarilla but had contact with them, and ran quite long and well} was "All 'secret origin' stories are either "My Sire didn't touch me enough as a fledgeling!" or "My Sire touched me too much as a fledgeling!". That system's pathos driven concept definitely attracted/rewarded "most brokenest doll" types, both in and out of character. Case in point "Cleavage Majesty"
ie; in VtM LARP any marginally hot girl in a corset or bustiere WILL be treated as if they have the Merit; Majesty, whether it's on the sheet or not.

That's just sexually repressed boys thinking with mini-brain. I miss playing VtM... it was fun. Especially when the pretty girls got all goth'd up and tried to seduce my character in order to get something.

"Don't you think I'm pretty?" *leans over and/or licks lips*

"Sure. You're aesthetically pleasing. Why am I here?"

"Oh I just want us to be friends..." *adjusts tight skirt*

"Why?"

"But... I'm pretty..." *bats eye lashes*

"You certainly are and if I was still alive, I'd likely be your next meal but I miss eating goddamn cheeseburgers more than the idea of sex you're trying to sell. Waste my time again and you'll see why I do not enjoy the company of my fellow predators..."

"ST!!!!! He isn't playing his character right!!!!"

...

[The_Gun_Nut]

...
"You certainly are and if I was still alive, I'd likely be your next meal but I miss eating goddamn cheeseburgers more than the idea of sex you're trying to sell. Waste my time again and you'll see why I do not enjoy the company of my fellow predators..."

"ST!!!!! He isn't playing his character right!!!!"

...

Cheeseburgers. Priceless.

[KrielMaster]

Oninofo- I feel I know thee.
feel the nerd-love, bro.

[Har'adoon]

This is exactly why I spent years filtering through gaming friends until I found my perfect group. All of my players are 25-30yrs old, they are all well-read and educated and most importantly they all understand the concept of role-playing is to play a "role" not a "roll".

I also have a house rule that I have been using for several years that they all said has made a huge impact in the way that they play. Players in my games don't track their own HP's...I do. When a player is hit and takes damage instead of giving them a number which they then subtract from their total I give them a description of the hit and the resulting wound. What I found (as both a DM and a player) is that when a player knows what a mob generally hits for they start to do the math in their head to try and plan out how many more rounds they have before they need to think about buggering out. Once they fall into that mindset it becomes less role-play and more just plain ole "game".

For example:
5th level Fighter Character takes 8 damage: "The zealots blade manages to just graze your upper arm, near the shoulder. There is a light spray of blood that splatters across your armor but then the pain fades into the background as the adrenaline takes over. If this is all they have you feel like you could do this all day."

or the other end of the spectrum...

5th level Fighter gets down to around 15-20% HP's remaining: "You can still feel the first Zealots dagger stuck firmly in the back of your left thigh. What's left of the arrow that was sticking out of you gut is still in there, grinding against something that makes every move send waves of pain throughout your body. The edges of your vision are starting to wobble between purple and red and you're certain that when this fight started it was mid-summer, which makes the chill creeping into your arms and legs very confusing.

If the player decides to continue fighting at that point...hey not everyone always makes it back to the inn :/

[KrielMaster]

WELL done, sir. excellent chops.

[PG_oninofro]

Cheeseburgers. Priceless.

It's true. The character I was playing was ridiculously young (all things considered) holding onto aspects of mortal life. So much more fun to play than the "woe is me... eternal monster... beast I am lest beast I become... I was there when Europe learned the value of the decimal y'know..."

Oninofo- I feel I know thee.
feel the nerd-love, bro.

lol Unlikely. It was many years ago and many found what I played to be annoying. LOL

[Gladwin]

This is exactly why I spent years filtering through gaming friends until I found my perfect group. All of my players are 25-30yrs old, they are all well-read and educated and most importantly they all understand the concept of role-playing is to play a "role" not a "roll".

I believe this is the best answer to the question. Be picky about your gamers and stick with them. It has been acknowledged that some people are beyond repair. So don't try to fix what cannot be fixed. Might sound harsh, but I believe role playing is a cooperative game first and foremost. If the team you're working with doesn't work, change the team.

I also have a house rule that I have been using for several years that they all said has made a huge impact in the way that they play. Players in my games don't track their own HP's...I do. When a player is hit and takes damage instead of giving them a number which they then subtract from their total I give them a description of the hit and the resulting wound. What I found (as both a DM and a player) is that when a player knows what a mob generally hits for they start to do the math in their head to try and plan out how many more rounds they have before they need to think about buggering out. Once they fall into that mindset it becomes less role-play and more just plain ole "game".

For example:
5th level Fighter Character takes 8 damage: "The zealots blade manages to just graze your upper arm, near the shoulder. There is a light spray of blood that splatters across your armor but then the pain fades into the background as the adrenaline takes over. If this is all they have you feel like you could do this all day."

or the other end of the spectrum...

5th level Fighter gets down to around 15-20% HP's remaining: "You can still feel the first Zealots dagger stuck firmly in the back of your left thigh. What's left of the arrow that was sticking out of you gut is still in there, grinding against something that makes every move send waves of pain throughout your body. The edges of your vision are starting to wobble between purple and red and you're certain that when this fight started it was mid-summer, which makes the chill creeping into your arms and legs very confusing.

If the player decides to continue fighting at that point...hey not everyone always makes it back to the inn :/

This... this is nice!! You got some tips to make this work smoothly? I think it would be hard to keep coming with good descriptions. Or at least varying descriptions enough to keep it interesting.

[JollyFather]

I also have a house rule that I have been using for several years that they all said has made a huge impact in the way that they play. Players in my games don't track their own HP's...I do. When a player is hit and takes damage instead of giving them a number which they then subtract from their total I give them a description of the hit and the resulting wound. What I found (as both a DM and a player) is that when a player knows what a mob generally hits for they start to do the math in their head to try and plan out how many more rounds they have before they need to think about buggering out. Once they fall into that mindset it becomes less role-play and more just plain ole "game".

For example:
5th level Fighter Character takes 8 damage: "The zealots blade manages to just graze your upper arm, near the shoulder. There is a light spray of blood that splatters across your armor but then the pain fades into the background as the adrenaline takes over. If this is all they have you feel like you could do this all day."

or the other end of the spectrum...

5th level Fighter gets down to around 15-20% HP's remaining: "You can still feel the first Zealots dagger stuck firmly in the back of your left thigh. What's left of the arrow that was sticking out of you gut is still in there, grinding against something that makes every move send waves of pain throughout your body. The edges of your vision are starting to wobble between purple and red and you're certain that when this fight started it was mid-summer, which makes the chill creeping into your arms and legs very confusing.

If the player decides to continue fighting at that point...hey not everyone always makes it back to the inn :/

I have mulled every now and then this idea but have never implemented it. You just gave me a bust to go ahead and try it.

Thank you.

Best regards,

JF

[hellfate]

In my group everone generally tries to keep the game fun for the rest, unless that would require us do something out of character. For instance if im playing i sociopathic halfling rogue who kills for the sake of killing, not his companions but ANYONE ELSE, then when an npc mouths off i start rolling dice. Since i'm playin in character, and my Gm was aware of the character concept ahead of time and oked it, He lets me know if i REALLY dont want to do that. He also comes up with interesting ways to scare my character off so that i dont have to break character.
One of the problems we have really had with bad players is that a couple get really whiny and quit, we had one guy who tried 3 different characters in one campaign because he didnt like them and quit playin for a week or 2. Another problem is that we have 1 person who really hates anything combat related, the rest of us love it. So as long as hes not the gm(we usually take turns when a campaign ends we switch dms) we get a fair amount of combat, he gets kinda pissy and whiny cause he feels worthless cause his character is very skill based and not combat based. NVM the fact that any time we arent in combat hes doin a larger share of the work because he generally has the higher stats and skill for that sort of stuff( and because he likes it and hates combat we let him do most of that stuff). However even then he starts throwing a fit like a 5 year old everyonce in awhile cause his character cant do anything in combat, even after its pointed out that he rolled that character not us. I tend to look at a character that isnt doin what i designed him to do as a challenge. I try to find ways to improve them or even change there style a bit, slowly to get to where i think they should go.
TBH i think we have more problems also cause we tend to run LARGE groups, avg size is around 7 people plus gm.
We also take the role of player control amongst ourselves not solely putting it on the dm, if someone is making a character that overshadows all the others then we approach them and say "hey man that awfully powerful, but really its gonna make all of us feel kinda worthless, so could u play something less godlike" and the players say yes because we are a tight knit group and in general want the overall group to have fun not just ourselves.

[Killj0y]

Audience: How do you deal with players who try to break the game?

Gabe: Lie to them. Rob them. Drive them mad. Concoct impossible scenarios whose only outcome is their death.
And then, when their eyes glisten with shame and rage, drink their tears.

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

In my group everone generally tries to keep the game fun for the rest, unless that would require us do something out of character. For instance if im playing i sociopathic halfling rogue who kills for the sake of killing, not his companions but ANYONE ELSE, then when an npc mouths off i start rolling dice. Since i'm playin in character, and my Gm was aware of the character concept ahead of time and oked it, He lets me know if i REALLY dont want to do that. He also comes up with interesting ways to scare my character off so that i dont have to break character.

But why would you play a character like that to begin with? And why would your companions be okay with it? If you're playing a character that has to be intimidated into not murdering everyone (and by the way, you're already breaking character by arbitrarily making exceptions for your party), then that makes the game entirely about your party either being accessories to your bloodthirsty mental illness or trying to stop you from indulging it. Sound like game-breaking to me.

[jarredmcgee]

i've got this problem with the younger players in my two circles
i'll start with my youngest brother
he's currently playing a 17 yr old rogue type in a modern style game about zombie survival
he's the least combat oriented character in the small group
but he's got the most "social" skill set
so i tend to run two or three combat sessions followed up by a social session
this makes him feel that playing as a charismatic rogue is as valuable as the strong man barbarian type or the well rounded fighter type (these are achetypes not the actual classes of the characters)
and after every session i will speak with him for about 15 minutes and let him know how he's faring and where he's looking to take his character and how it's useful to play as he does.
since i've started doing that his attendance has gone up(he had missed nearly half the sessions), he's questioned my rule less, and he's become very excited about where his character may end up as opposed to a sullen uninterested kid. he's now looking to bridge the combat gap and become a leader of men. which still lets him enjoy his "social" abilities
the other players who fall into this patern are the sons and daughters of my thursday night group's leader (he's not always gm in fact we switch that up every two months)
for the most part it's not to bad. but they are always the first to prepose whole sale murder and pillage. which their father often agrees to "we're killing evil heathens after all it's not out of character". i've not really found a way to deal with this as his kids often refuse to play when i gm. as i'm more strict on the whole murder thing. i have tried the whole inspirational character speech about how we must not devolve into the monsters we battle lest we lose our righteousness etc etc. i usually get a yeah whatever they're evil they deserve to die, leave no enemy behind you lest they rise up again, and my favorite you're not lawful good why should you care.
so it really depends on how much influence you can bring to bear. as well as the influences they've had.

i will admit however every once in awhile it's nice to play the bigest badest thing in town.
i once played a troll adept in shadow runner who was an ex pit fighter named kataklysm
who would leap into mobs of enemy's swinging a big axe and screaming death metal lyrics. i was scary, big, nearly indestructible and half insane. it was a blast.

so as to why sometimes it's more fun to be a ***** mixer than to be a team player
and besides look at most of the heroes out there that the kids will emulate.
wolverine being perhaps the most commonly referred to. emulation without understanding.

[hellfate]

But why would you play a character like that to begin with? And why would your companions be okay with it? If you're playing a character that has to be intimidated into not murdering everyone (and by the way, you're already breaking character by arbitrarily making exceptions for your party), then that makes the game entirely about your party either being accessories to your bloodthirsty mental illness or trying to stop you from indulging it. Sound like game-breaking to me.

The one time i played a character like that....i wasn't so bloodthirsty that i attacked random people for absolutely no reason. I generally left everyone alone unless they got mouthy then i would threaten, then i would start attacking. Why it was ok with everyone was because it was funny...i was a crazy little halfling that talked smack like a barbarian but actually did VERY LITTLE damage. I played it more for the humor aspect. I also treated my party members as if they were henchmen, once again it was for humor, and the group i was with at the time got a huge kick out of it. In a serious game i would never play a character like that.

[The_Gun_Nut]

Like hellfate said, it's a matter of playstyle for the group. For that game it was completely OK. I imagine that for other games he's played in, his character was nothing like that. And it was suitable for that particular game.

Having characters, or games, that behave like this all the time would be dull. Eventually, all the fun would fizzle out of the game. But done properly, these games can be tons of fun for as long, or as short, as they last.

[hellfate]

Indeed that is the only time ive played a character like that. Usually my characters are a lot more in depth, but i try to stay in character when possible which can be annoying to the rest of the group. For instance in one game, my character hated this empire, he had various good reasons to hate them( at least from his perspective). He would have nothing to do with anyone who worked with the empire and would almost always agree to do anything that hurt it. This did become a small issue occasionally but we found ways around it that wouldnt betray my characters personality and wouldnt hurt the group.

I find that from a roleplaying aspect you have to balance fun and overall enjoyment for the group with playing your character. If your character is going to ruin the overall fun then its not a good character to play. It doesnt matter if it does this by personality(sociopathic or paladin style) or by game mechanics. The point of these games is group enjoyment. Therefore everyone has to work together to make the game fun.

Dont get me wrong there are times when Fissures in the group can be fun as well. We once had a Huge party that basically split itself apart, the neutral or good players on one side and the lawful evil players on the other, We only had two humans playing and there was a powerful magical creature that could only be killed by a human, or it could be controlled by a human. The lawful evil cleric/monk wanted to control it and half the group sided with him. My character wanted to destroy it since there was a very limited time limit to do it in before it became invincible, the other half sided with me. We spent a whole session wiht the other group trying to kill us off and it ended being a betrayal by one of them to our side that turned the tables and we forced them to take oathes that they would give it up. It was very interesting because no actual pvp combat happened....and eventually it all worked out. It was fun for everyone because it was an unexpected twist in the story, and we all acted accordingly.

[KrielMaster]

Audience: How do you deal with players who try to break the game?

Gabe: Lie to them. Rob them. Drive them mad. Concoct impossible scenarios whose only outcome is their death.
And then, when their eyes glisten with shame and rage, drink their tears.

yeah. Thank you Penny Arcade...

[iknowinternet]

Sometimes, the fact that they can't see the d20 you're rolling behind the screen lets you get away with everything. If somebody breaks the game, have the game just NOT BREAK.

When I GM'd, I saw the sessions as storytelling and creativity first, and combat second. Unfortunately, one of the members played a Dwarf barbarian (in retrospect, I should have made him justify that much more) with stupid STR and a maul that would just take out everything in one hit. So I constructed combat scenarios that didn't play to his strengths, but played to the strengths of the other PCs, like a Splinter-Cell-esque neck-breaking spree for the party Scout. As long as the rest of the party couldn't rely on him and his stocky little dwarf legs to do everything, and had to pick up some of his slack, they ended up all working together much better.

[blackseven]

I agree with the thrust of this thread that a noticeable minority of the gaming population acts in way completely contrary to RPG assumptions, like cooperation among the PCs and not being a jerk to others (unless cleared ahead of time).

However, I don't agree with the people who seem to argue that one who likes the mechanical side of RPGs is automatically suspect when it comes to the "story" or roleplaying side of RPGs. There is obviously a correlation, but to argue causation, I take as a slight. The Stormwind Fallacy is fairly common, but needs to be pointed out everytime it comes up. I linked one apparance of it above, but I'll quote:

The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.

Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.

Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse roleplayer if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically roleplayed better than an optimized one, and vice versa.

Also, on a slightly lighter note, I notice the IKRPG book (I only have Vol. 1) is missing a "Page 5." Intentional?

[Killj0y]

different games, the RPG came first so it lacks the in your faceness that characterizes the minis.

I think the Stormwind Fallacy is actually an unnecesary offshoot Corollary of the Gearscore Fallacy.

The idea that simply because you have high quality gear means you know how to play your class when it has been proven conclusively that a good player will succeed no matter what he's wearing.

Based simply on population of servers the Gearscore sees far more indiviudal diagnosis than the lack of good RP on stormwind.

[blackseven]

Gearscore appears to refer mostly to MMORPG types? Stormwind is referring to pen and paper RPGs.

"Stormwind" has nothing to do with WOW (in its name) and is coined after the guy who first formulated it.

Honestly, it was first coined on a D&D forum, and meant optimization of a character as a whole, not just gear.

[Kaptain Von]

I'm picky about who I play games with in the first place. If everyone around the table has the same objectives in being there, the conflict of interests that results in 'broken' games doesn't arise in the first place. I don't particularly mind running for or being in a group of power-gaming Sun Tzus of the battlemat, as long as I know that's what they're there for in advance (although my style of GMin' ain't too well suited to that sort of thing). Mind you, I have stopped games after a couple of sessions when it's apparent that the group aren't going to work well together, and it's always tricky: sometimes people aren't as switched on about what they want as they think they are, and they don't see a conflict of interests or don't see that conflict as a thing to be avoided rather than worked through. I'd rather abort something that's meant to be fun than needlessly stress over it.

[The_Gun_Nut]

That's always a wise decision, Kap. Stay aware of what you players want, and stay flexible.